like to welcome welcome everyone. Uh my

name is Vincent Russo. I'm with the US

Bureau of Labor Statistics in in the US

and uh welcome you to this side event

for the 55th session of the statistical

commission. The topic uh uh the theme

today is classifying our world recent

developments in international

statistical classifications.

Uh I'm I'm here today on on behalf of uh

Andrew Hancock who chairs the UN

committee of experts on international

statistical classifications.

I'm a member also of the the bureau of

that uh that committee and you will see

uh in in the five presentations today

some of the work that the the committee

has uh has done and reviewed over over

the last year and we're very uh uh

excited to be able to present quite a

quite a a variety of themes as well on

on a variety of different domains. So um

so we are eager to to share with you uh

uh some of the highlights that will of

of uh um classifications that will come

before the statistical commission. I'll

note too that the uh all of the

presentations and the the background

documents for

uh uh related to these topics are on the

UND website and the and the the

background documents are on the

statistical commission's website and the

um uh through available through UNSD.

The the the presentations of today's

presentations are also available there

as well.

I will um I will begin with a

presentation on the standard

international energy classification.

Give me just a moment to bring up that

presentation.

Okay.

So the the standard international energy

classification is embedded within the

international recommendations for for

energy statistics. it is it is the the

third chapter in in that and the uh CEK

as I'll I'll refer to it is a

multi-purpose classification and it is

uh intended to be relevant

internationally and and cover all the

products that are needed to give uh a

comprehensive view of of energy

production transformation and con and

consumption. So it serves quite quite a

lot of different purposes and uh it also

is essential for facilitating comparison

internationally in in energy statistics.

It it also helps uh provides a a

hierarchical system for for organizing

and coding that data.

The revision process was very much a a

global effort. We had representatives

from 14 different countries and 11

international organizations that

provided expertise and perspective

during this during this revision. Uh

that the team that the task team met met

regularly and uh we also had smaller

group discussions on on specific topics

with with subject matter experts. Uh so

it was uh very extensive uh

consultation.

The the review the revision began in uh

2022. So it's we're we're four years

into it and uh pleased to be in position

to present to the statistical commission

the the CX 2.0 in in uh in in the next

month or so. We are still uh we had

targeted last to last uh statistical

commission the previous commission in

2025 as our as our target but we needed

some some additional time and uh so

we're we're presenting it now.

The consultation the initial

consultation that we conducted a few

years ago resulted in 18 issues. uh we

picked up a few more along the way but

uh these these were the issues that

emerged from that initial consultation.

uh some of them were interrelated as

well and not all of them necessarily

resulted in changes to to the

classification but you will see that

there's generally an emphasis on

improving coverage of renewable sources

um and and uh distinguishing between

renewable non-renewable uh energy and

fuels

in terms of the the structure and and

some of the key changes in the in in the

from a high level we uh CK will remain a

four-level structure. So there's

sections, divisions, groups, and classes

at at the lowest level.

You'll see that we expanded the number

of sections at the top level of the

structure from 10 to 12. So this

necessitated changing the the coding

pattern to introduce alpha alpha numeric

uh uh uh characters and so sections are

now identified by by letters. And this

is similar similar type of um rubric as

we see in in the ISAC classification of

of uh of of industrial activities.

the uh the number of classes

significantly expanded from 52 classes

to 159. So there's quite a bit more more

detail in in the structure and my goal

today is to highlight some of those key

key changes.

You'll see that there were changes in in

bofuels both the solid bofuels and

liquid and gaseous bofuels.

Um this was driven um particularly in

the case of solid bofuels uh by a desire

to align and improve our alignment with

the FAO data collection tools. Um so

they contributed significantly to the

disagregation of our solid bofuels and

we also uh saw quite a bit of an

expansion in our detail for liquid and

gaseous bofuels as well.

We uh also addressed waste and I'll show

in u the next slide some some details

there. We also have uh significantly

disagregated electricity and heat to

focus more on uh the sources of of of

energy used for to produce heat and

electricity. And we also introduced some

new categories, new sections, uh, one

for cold and one for hydrogen and

derived synthetic fuels.

So, I'll go into a little bit more

detail on on some of these highlights.

For waste, the uh original CX 1.0 you

know, really had just had only two

categories for for waste, industrial and

municipal, and neither one of them

really uh captured the essence of waste

as an energy product per se. So, in the

in the revision, we now disagregate

waste by uh uh in in in two two ways.

First, between uh waste that's used

directly as an energy source. So solid

postconsumer waste and industrial

products that are directly consumed for

for energy and then a second category

for energy products that are derived

from from waste and and byproducts. So

two two different uh a different

orientation of of the waste category

oriented more closely around the uh the

energy characteristics. And then within

these two two categories we have uh uh

broken out by biogenic and nonbiogenic

material. So this gets at uh the renew

excuse me the renewable non-renewable

uh concept a little bit there. So it's a

a ve very different orientation for uh

the treatment of waste within within the

CK

for oil and oil products. We also saw

some uh additional changes here. Notably

we are discontinuing the use of the

reference of conventional crude oil in

in the title. we now refer to just oil.

Uh the the conventional concept really

was was more subjective and um so now

we're referring in in different ways to

uh to the different types of of oil. So

we have an expansion of the crude oil

types here

and you'll see under under D2 here crude

oil is now broken out into uh five five

different categories roughly uh in order

of um of um process and degree of

processing. So starting with bitamin

which is uh more of a crude crude

product going uh down to synthetic crude

oil which is obviously a much more

significantly processed product.

We also eliminated the uh there was a

there was a section a separate section

in C 1.0 for oil shale and oil sands. Uh

oil shale has now moved under oil and

oil sands uh were removed because it it

is uh not really recognized as an energy

product per se. Is more of a a geologic

condition and uh it is the the oil sands

are really not produced or or uh or

consumed in in that sense. They're just

uh uh pro further processed

uh into the uh the bitamuin is the is

the product that comes out of oil sands

and then electricity we have quite uh

quite a big expansion of uh electricity

within CK. Previously there was just a

single category for electricity. It is

now broken out into uh seven different

divisions that uh are aligned with the

sources. So we have non non-combustible

renewable combustible renewable and

fossil fossil fuels waste nuclear

synthetic and so forth. So it's uh quite

quite a significant expansion of the

coverage and and by type of source for

for electricity.

And all with even with all these

categories, countries are are uh uh

still uh can still align and compare

electricity at a top level across across

the uh statistics because electricity

remains a a a section unto itself.

Just to get a little bit closer look

here at some of the particular changes.

You can see here how in the case of uh

electricity from non-combustible

renewable sources, division G1 is broken

out into uh uh the again by by source of

the renewable energy hydro tide

essentially marine marine sources, wind,

solar, geothermal

and even within those categories at the

at the lowest level at the class level

in the case of solar It is further

broken out by uh solar from

photovalttaic sources and uh between and

electricity from solar thermal sources.

So quite quite a significant expansion

uh of of classes here to facilitate

analysis of renewable and non-renewable

sources which is uh important for for

policy makers. And I'll note that heat

is broken down in uh largely along the

same lines here. heat had been again a

single uh uh section without any

disagregation and it is also now broken

out in the same way.

We had also a request uh to expand our

our coverage of charcoal and to to meet

uh this is response to a request from

the African Energy Commission and we

have disagregated charcoal now into lump

charcoal which is basically unprocessed

and charcoal briquettes which are more

highly processed form form of uh of

charcoal. And uh this was an important

distinction for uh for many countries

that that see significant production of

of charcoal.

One of the new categories that we

introduced in this revision is for coal.

There was there was some mixed sentiment

about about adding coal uh which is

conceptually the uh concept conceptually

the absence of heat. uh but it was de

deemed really important for for some

regions to include in the in the

structure and cold will be broken out by

in in two ways primary cold and

secondary cold and these these concepts

will be elaborated in the explanatory

notes.

We also introduced a new section for

hydrogen and derived and synthetic

fuels. This uh reflects some uh

innovations that have uh the the

occurred in the energy space. This is uh

still a very highly evolving area and uh

with the introduction of these

categories, CK remains up to date with

with current uh current developments and

uh as we've seen a lot of interest again

in in policy terms uh and and and uh um

policy

u u

providing advantages to to production of

these types of of of fuels. So we want

to be able to reflect that in in in the

data and measure measure those

developments.

One of the main goals of this revision

of CX was to improve alignment with the

uh CPC, the uh central product

classification.

And we were able to make some changes in

uh in both CC and CPC because these

these revisions were happening uh they

overlapped. There was a significant

overlap between these two revisions. So

in some instances we were able to make

changes in CPC to improve alignment with

CK in the area of coal and u uh split

split split coke and semi coke of coal.

So some uh some some product areas, but

we also were able to make changes in CK

to improve alignment with with CPC in uh

in the areas of Pete and uh some some of

the the gaseous uh forms of energy.

the we weren't able to fully align uh

and as we went through the CK revision

process that it was um it became

apparent that CK was still necessary as

a as a standalone classification because

the needs of energy statistics were were

distinct and uh we saw this in the case

of waste where the previous version of

CK aligned with CPC because there were

these breakouts for industrial and

municipal but But that didn't really

mesh with the uh requirements for for

energy statistics.

The global consultation was conducted uh

last year in uh July to September of

last year and the uh responses were

overwhelmingly positive uh in terms of

the support for for the structure and we

were pleased with the geographic

representation of of the responses as

well.

for the next steps. The uh hope and

expectation is that the statistical

commission will endorse the CX structure

in in a few weeks and then in the the

task team will will remain active to

complete the correspondence tables uh to

align with uh the previous version of CK

and also the new version uh recently

approved version of the CPC and writing

the explanatory notes and guidance notes

are uh are are still remain to be a

significant effort there. So, uh there's

there's work that remains but the the

structure is largely uh largely complete

or is complete really.

So, with that I will I will pause and um

see if there's any any questions

and you can put those into the chat.

Okay, I'm not seeing any any chatter

there. Uh so we have

several other pre presentations. So I

think maybe we will we will move on and

uh I will like to welcome them. Let me

stop sharing my screen.

So that I may may welcome Claudia Kappa

to present on uh

the UNICEF's uh new classification for

the international classification of

alternative care of children. So you can

see we have quite the committee deals

with quite a diverse set of of topics

and uh we we enjoy uh moving on from

sometimes from the economic statistics

to some of the uh the the the social

ones which are uh quite quite novel. So

welcome Claudia. Nice to see you.

>> Likewise. Thank you very much uh Vincent

and good morning, good afternoon, good

evening everyone. It's my pleasure to be

on this webinar and I want to express on

behalf of UNICEF our gratitude to the

committee of experts for giving us the

opportunity to present and for assisting

us through the development of this

classification. So let me start by

giving you a little bit of a background

about the development of this

classification.

Starting with the rationale,

uh as we know uh children in alternative

care are frequently missing in official

statistics

and this for a number of reasons uh that

were highlighted in a number of

documents that were really critical to

set the mandate for UNICEF to do uh this

classification.

First, the Conference of European

Statisticians back in 2022 in the

guidance note that was issued on

children statistics clearly highlighted

the need to have operational definitions

that can assist countries in the

collection of data on children in

alternative care. things that was also

stressed out in the uh data care

initiative which is a joint initiative

from Euro child and UNICEF that really

aimed at reviewing the current data

landscape on children in alternative

care. So currently there is no

international approved standards for

collecting data on children in

alternative care and the I care that I'm

presenting today was developed in

response to this need and gap that was

clearly highlighted by uh member states

in developing this classification. As I

mentioned earlier, we greatly benefited

from the feedback that was provided to

us by the uh the the expert group on

statistical classification and we try to

develop the classification according to

the UN statistics division principle

related to statistical classification.

It's a process that started

approximately in 2024.

So we are uh now uh a year and a half

into this process. We started with the

preparation of a draft that we uh we um

shared for then consultation. We were

lucky to to build on the expertise of a

number of different experts. In

particular, the first draft was drafted

with inputs from about 30 child

protection and child care experts and

academics from different countries in

the world. This document then in

February of 2025 was was sent out for a

global online country consultation with

national statistical authorities, line

ministry and regional organizations.

This country consultation process

involved over 40 different uh national

statistical offices and took place

between May and June of 2025.

This was then followed by a

multi-country pilot which involved nine

countries that were invited also to

participate in a workshop that took

place in Florence in in October and then

the draft classification was reviewed by

the UN committee for uh statistical

classification and hopefully will be uh

presented to the statistical commission

in March for consideration.

I just wanted to take a moment to

acknowledge the variety and the number

of statistical offices that join us

express interest in joining us in the

development of this classification. You

see here the 40 countries and

institutions that express interest in

being part of this consultative process

with countries that are in statistical

office involved being those who played a

particularly active role in reviewing

the various draft of the classification

but also in participation in

participating in the pilots. Just to

name a few, I really would like to

express my gratitude to the National

Institute for Social Protection of

Serbia

and uh the uh Turkish Statistical

Institute, the uh Central Bureau of

Statistics of Latvia, the General

Authority of Statistics of Saudi Arabia

and so on and so forth. And I just

mention a few just to give you also a

sense of the diversity of expertise and

ge geography that we're all uh really uh

committed to uh providing inputs to the

classification. Let me now go into the

definitions and a little bit on the

structure of the international

classification of alternative care for

children.

Starting with the definition, the

definition of alternative care that we

landed on refers to the care of a child

by persons person or persons other than

the parents when the parents is or are

unable or unwilling to care for their

children or abandon or relinquish the

child or the children. So alternative

care can be formal or informal and might

be provided on a short basis or

long-term basis. So as you can see the

there are different elements to this

classification that have to be

considered in consideration of the

different type of arrangements and

practices that exist in countries all

over the world. So there are at least

three key elements of the definition.

First of all, the care of a child refers

to meeting the children's needs

uh including physical, cognitive and

social, emotional needs. Plus, there is

an element of protecting children from

danger, violence and exploitation. This

has to be an ongoing process that can be

uh deployed over a short period or a

long period. But this ongoing element of

the care is critical is really critical

to meet children's needs.

Then obviously the definition is built

on the uh concept of parents who refer

to those who contributed biologically to

creating a child who legally acquire

parental status.

And a critical component of this

definition is the lack of ability to

care for a child. And this lack of

ability can be the result of personal

conditions including death for instance

or illness as well as contextual

conditions, poverty, natural disaster.

And obviously this take into

consideration the fact that parents

might have the means, knowledge and

access to services but they are still

unable to uh take care of a child.

The unit of classification is the

alternative care arrangement. So it's

not the child. Why? Because a single

child might have several different

alternative care arrangement over a

certain period of time. So the unit of

classification is the alternative care

arrangement. But of course then when

aggregating these numbers, these numbers

can be aggregated at the care

arrangement level or also at the

individual child level depending on the

type of calculations and numbers we are

aiming to produce. The alternative care

arrangement refers to the selection of

caregivers and a care setting for a

child in need of alternative care.

Then we further go down the road by

defining caregivers

and care settings because as you can see

these are the two elements that are

critical to define the parameters of an

alternative care arrangement.

So one thing that I also wanted to

mention is that the classification also

define the parameter and the boundaries

of what is included and what is not. But

obviously this require much more

conversation and the classification is

up on the website of the statistical

commission uh where it can be accessed

in a stra.

Just a quick overview of the structure.

There are three levels. First first

degree first level uh categorization,

family based alternative care,

residential uh based alternative care

and independent living. And under each

one of these individual level one

category, there are level two category

that are displayed here. There are three

for each one of the level one category

with additional definitions provided as

well as taxonomies that give an

illustration of some concrete

manifestations.

The classification also include

disagregating variables that are

classified in tiers. The only

indispensable variable is considered the

age of the child of the individual while

in care because this will allow us to

distinguish between children and adult.

Then we have a tier 2 level of of

disagregation which is considered

minimum and include a number of

variables including for instance the

disability status of the child, the

parental status of the child for

instance as well as characteristics that

pertain to the caregivers, the care

arrangement or the facilities in case of

residential care. So as you can see

here, these are illustrated in orange.

And then you have additional

uh um uh variables that would be good to

have for analytical purposes, but

they're not considered critical.

And I want to conclude with obviously

some consideration related to the goals

for implementation. We know that putting

out a classification is not the end of a

process. is actually the beginning of an

even more important one which has to do

with the uptake of the classification

and the integration to statistical

systems. Obviously, we expect this

implementation to be gradual. So, I was

told by those in the expert group who

have been doing this work for a long

time that I'm I'm in for a long road.

So, it's going to be 20 30 40 years uh

right depending on the different

classification they're still in place.

So we are up for it and we understand

that obviously

this will be a gradual and phase process

of integration depending on the maturity

of the system each country the national

capacity and resources and the level of

prioritization. Many countries have

different uh levels of

institutionalization for instance of

children. So alternative care

arrangement vary significantly across

country and so are the political

obviously commitment and the policy

framework. So we understand that there

has to be obviously gradual process of

integration and to support countries in

this integration. Obviously, we plan to

prepare a number of different tools to

support the IARE implementation from

outreach and advocacy campaign all the

way to technical documents like manual

templates and tools that can be uh

instrumental to support countries who

are willing to integrate the

classification into their system. So

more to come obviously but we have you

we we uh we start with submitting the

classification next month in a month and

in a few days hoping that obviously it

will be well received by member states.

I want to complete my presentation

thanking you again for your attention

thanking the expert group for the

possibility to present and I will be

more than happy to answer any question

you might have. Thank you.

Uh, Winston, I'm sorry you're mute.

>> Thank you, Julian. Um, thank you,

Claudia, for for the presentation. And,

uh, I'll monitor the chat here for for

any questions for for Claudia's uh, uh,

excellent presentation and important

work.

Um but let's uh

I don't see any questions at the moment.

So uh maybe we'll then move on to our

next presentation on the statistical

classification of dying places. And uh

for that I welcome Barbara Barbara

Gomech for uh from from Portugal to to

present on uh this very innovative

classification here uh to meet a uh an

important data need on on uh for the

social analyses.

Welcome Barbara.

>> Thank you Vincent. Can you hear me okay

and see the slides just to confirm.

Okay.

>> Thank you.

Uh it's a great pleasure to be here with

you today to present uh the

international classification of dying

places. We call it ICP. Uh the

classification was developed as part of

a research project uh called EOL in

place and of life in place. Uh which is

funded by the European Research Council.

Um the host institution is the

University of Quimbra in Portugal and

I'm the principal investigator of of the

project.

um the the dying places is the concept

at the heart of the ICP. It's a key

metric about life's end. Uh as the

global burden of serious health related

suffering leading to death um e

escalates around around the world in all

world regions, the question of where

people die and where people receive end

of life care is crucial um to ensure

that support and services including

paliotative care are in place where they

ought to be. So dying places really

comprise two things. They comprise the

places of death and the places of care

at life's end.

A a key question um uh which is central

to to this issue is whether we uh

societies and health systems are failing

to provide choice on this matter. We

know from over uh 200 studies that home

is the most common preferred place for

end of life care and for um as place of

death for both patients and their family

members uh facing life uh threatening

conditions. Um and the second choice is

often uh hospice facilities or

paliotative care facilities.

um these preferred places can be places

where people are if uh the the right

support is available to them. However,

the reality is different. We know that

most people die in hospitals in many

countries of the world. We know this

based on death certificates and or death

that registration information

which are monitored which is monitored

by the OECD um and also is analyzed in

research.

In our study um in our project we looked

at this information for 35 countries uh

and uh we found the categories used to

uh record place of death uh varied

widely. In the slide you see the sheer

number of categories used across

countries and 12% uh of all deaths we

looked at from 2012

to 2021

were considered illdefined. So this

means that for 12% of deaths we don't

know where the person died. Um, this

demonstrates a a clear need and clear

potential to do better.

In the UL in a place project, we aim to

develop a pioneering international

classification of dying places very much

grounded on what these places mean for

individuals and most importantly to

patients and to their families. Uh, it's

a five-year project. It started in 2022.

It ends this year. uh and we had our

first meeting and shared the first draft

of the classification

uh with the UN statistics division um

and Andrew Hancock, chair of the

committee of experts in 2024

uh last year. We then presented to the

uh committee of experts um who approved

the classification and recommended

submission to the statistical commission

for endorsement. So I'm really delighted

to be here today presenting a a decide

event ahead of the commission uh session

in March.

The ICP was developed based on evidence

produced by the project. Um and to do

that we produced we analyzed uh

mortality statistics. We systematically

reviewed the literature and we conducted

a series of studies in four contrasting

countries uh which are flagged in the

slide. So the US, the Netherlands,

Portugal and Uganda and we analyzed

health policy documents. We interviewed

key stakeholders. We followed over time

a small number of families of patients,

adults and minors with life-threatening

conditions and their family members over

time as the disease progressed towards

death uh to be able to understand and

capture diversity in end of life

pathways. We also conducted a mortality

followback survey with bereaveved

relatives looking back at the last

months of life of their loved ones. And

more recently, we conducted focus groups

with key stakeholders internationally

and nationally um to establish the

content validity of the ICP.

Uh the ICP has a hierarchical structure.

It includes seven chapters. uh dwelling

or doicile, health or care facility,

other facility, vehicle, outdoor and uh

two residual chapters which are called

elsewhere and unknown. Uh and each of

the the the chapters with the exception

of the residuals have then subcategories

and some subcategories further um are

further specified specified in in in sub

subcategories as well. Um in addition to

the chapters and categories we defined

uh qualifiers which add important

information about the places. Uh and you

see here in in the middle of the slides

the first qualifier is an important

subjective qualifier. It tells us it

allows us to know whether the place was

regarded by the person as their home.

Answer options being yes, no and don't

know. And they apply to the two first

chapters. The second qualifier is the

most common qualifier. It applies to all

chapters except residuals

um and asks if the place was a person's

workplace or school. And then some of

the chapters have specific qualifiers as

well in particularly uh chapter B health

or care facility and chapter D vehicle.

So I'll just briefly go through the the

chapters with you with some images as

well to make them um more visual. Uh

chapter one is called dwelling or

doicile and we subdivided it into

individual and collective uh and with a

residual category called other dwelling

or doicile. Um and you can see for

example if you look at individual we

then made the distinction between uh the

person's own residence or the residence

of others which is an important distin

distinction for people for example that

move uh to um the h the home of a family

member at the end of life to to be able

to receive uh care by them.

Chapter B uh is health or care facility

and in here you see some specification

important specifications as well. So for

example within hospital we specified

some locations for example emergency

department um this is a place where um

which is rarely captured in a place of

death categories which we saw in uh the

four the 35 countries we analyzed. only

three had emergency department as place

of death. Uh 13% of all deaths in

Portugal take place in emergency

departments for example. The other

countries that used um this category

were the US and and South South Africa.

uh but you then see other places in this

chapter including long-term care

facilities or nursing homes, paliotative

care facilities, hospice facilities and

primary care settings as well. Uh in the

qualifier fires I would highlight some

as well. Uh they allow us to understand

whether uh the person was in the

pediatric or in a psychiatric setting.

Uh whether uh the person was in a

corridor or a waiting area for example.

Chapter Captures other facilities. These

are places where people go or stay but

not to receive care and they comprise

places such as uh hotels, recreational

or cultural facilities, um schools and

uh sports facilities for example amongst

others.

Chapter D. Uh they allow us to identify

whether the person was or is in a

vehicle. And in here we felt it was

important to specify ambulances.

And in the qual qualifiers you you also

see that we ask whether the person uh

was being transports transported to or

from a health or care facility.

Chapter E comprises outdoor open air

spaces like the streets, the the sea, uh

forests or desert for example among

others. And then the two uh last

residual categories.

So the ICP was shared uh um with over

200 people from 61 countries uh with

whom we consulted. Uh we did two

face-to-face consultations, one in

Elsynia, one in uh Gabon in Botswana.

The latter as part of the African uh

palative care conference. We also did

several online consultations involving

statistical agencies involving

associations of patients, associations

of informal carers. Um and we um we

share the classification with the

participants. We asked them about to

consider translation issues, the

appropriateness to their culture. Um we

also presented them with case um case

studies and asked them them to apply the

classification and share their

experience with us. The overwhelming

majority said that the ICP is fit for

purpose as international standards um

and they would use uh and recommend uh

others to use the classification.

In this slide you see the strengths of

the classification as written by the

people uh participating in the

consultations. The most important is

comprehensive which indicates the ICP is

exhaustive. Other characteristics are

the clarity, the standardization,

uh the simplicity, but also the detail

and the logic of coding as well were

highlighted. People valued the

usefulness to improve care and the

policy utility saying uh it allows

individuals to exercise their right and

it fits most communities.

So thinking about implementation and

maintenance of the ICP, we see two

target utilizations. The ICP can be used

uh in administrative data about deaths

and care to improve this data. And in

here we are thinking specially about

death certificates and clinical records.

Uh secondly uh the ICP can also be used

in surveys to generate statistical data

and we have used that um in the

mortality followback survey of bereaved

relatives that we're we have um

conducted as part of the UL in place

project. Uh statistical agencies are

central to both these uh utilizations.

So we're really pleased uh to be able to

engage um 37 U statistical agencies in

our consultation uh who helped us

improve um the classification as well

into what it is now the its final forum.

Uh we uh foresee that the ICP will be

regularly updated as new places emerge

uh uh that are relevant for death and

dying globally. Um and we see that uh as

an opportunity to improve it in the

future learning with implementation

uptake the challenges but also the

successes and the lessons learned.

Several people have have helped shape

the ICP so far. The participants in our

studies and consultations and we thank

them. uh the advisory boards uh which

includes Andrew Hancock uh

representatives of international patient

and career organizations, leading

researchers, policy makers, all of our

research team members contributed to the

ICP. Uh we deeply thank the UN um

committee of experts and the statistical

division and we now thank you too.

Thank you, Barbara, for that. I I shared

this with uh with with Barbara when when

this first came on the agenda for the uh

committee of experts that when I when I

first saw I thought, "Oh, this is

interesting about geography and maybe

places that are depopulating and and uh

and you know, maybe dying places." But

um I was uh so I was happy to see that

that it was actually quite quite quite a

different thing. So if you were uh

perhaps others had that had that same u

reaction when they first saw it. So we

see quite a bit of quite a quite a

variety of of topics come through. So um

there uh I'm just looking at there's one

one comment uh from uh from from Salem

um

asking about uh some correspondence from

um from last month about the about the

structural suggestions there. So um I'll

I'll let Barbara have a look at that. Um

if you can can you see that Barbara?

>> Yeah I can see that and thank you very

much. We we considered quite carefully

all the suggestions and actually

we made four changes and one of them was

coding improvements and thank you so

much for the suggestions uh Salem which

we we followed. Uh so I'm I'm happy to

uh reply to your email with with the

feedback as well. Um you can see that as

well in the report uh that we submitted

as part of the platform for the event

but I'll reply to you. Thank you.

>> There's also a question uh from from Don

in Ireland about the uh the engagement

process and you know were were families

engaged uh you know who families

experiencing end of life situations

um and or bereaveved families. You can

comment on that. Yes, we did both. We

actually engaged uh associations

um with a focus on international

associations of of patients and and

families uh and national in the in our

four target country countries but we

also uh conducted research directly with

the patients and with with uh with the

family members uh in our qualitative

serial interviews and through the

mortality followback survey. So yes, we

did both. Thank you.

>> Thank you for those questions. Um I

think let me just make sure. Yeah,

that's it. Um all right, let's turn now

to trade statistics uh and the changes

that are uh the revision process for the

EBOPS, the extended balance of payments

classification. And for this, I'll turn

it over to Nancy Snider from UNSD.

Hi, Nancing.

>> Sorry about my mute there. Um, okay,

great. Um, can you see my screen that

I'm sharing?

>> We do. Uh, just if you want to if you

can get it. There you go. Great.

>> Okay, great. Um, thank you. Hi everyone.

Uh, my name is Nancy Snyder. I'm from

the UN statistics division in the trade

statistics section and I'll be walking

you through the revision to the extended

balance of payments uh 2026

classification. It's called EBOPS for

short. So you'll hear that a lot through

the presentation. Um here's just an

outline of some of the topics. We'll go

through sort of a background on what

Ebops is and uh what the revision cycle

is typically based on, the objectives

and guiding principles that were used

for this current revision, the structure

of the new EBOPS itself, main changes

from the previous version Ebops 2010 and

the global consultation

uh that was conducted for Ebops which is

also part of the publication of the

manual statistics on international trade

and services 2026 which is also being uh

submitted as a background document to

the statistical commission. Um I'm also

making this presentation um on behalf of

the trade uh the task team on

international trade statistics which is

part of the UN committee of experts on

business and trade statistics. Uh that

task team is chaired by Christina Neves

from Portugal and Hussein from Morocco.

So we thank them for their leadership

during this uh revision process.

Okay. So what is EbOPS? Uh some of you

may know that it serves as the basis uh

to collect, compile and disseminate

international trade and services

statistics. Um so it is published as

part of the internationally agreed upon

framework presented in the manual on

statistics of international trade and

services MSITS for short. Um, EPOPS is

also really an extension of the services

components that is presented in uh the

international monetary funds uh balance

of payments manual. Uh so it is an

extension with added granularity from

those services components. EBOPS also

serves as a bridge between these

macrolevel BPM components and the more

detailed products in the central product

classification or CPC.

Um, here's just a really brief snapshot

of what Ebots looks like. Uh, there's

actually 17 main components, but as you

see, it goes down um into uh some detail

uh for each category and um really does

uh include a lot of uh extra granularity

in this revision versus the previous

EBOPs 2010 version.

Okay. So, why is EbOPS being revised? So

uh EBOPS follows the revision cycles of

the other macroeconomic statistical

frameworks especially the system of

national accounts SNA and the BPM

updates. So accordingly uh EBOPS was uh

revised this time to fully align with

the recent revisions in those frameworks

um in particular the seventh edition of

BPM BPM 7 for short and the 2025 SNA.

So, EPOPS 2026 is fully consistent with

the BPM7 standard service components.

Um, but it does introduce further

subcategories as I'll be uh showing in a

bit. Um, and again as I mentioned the

task team on international trade

statistics under the UN committee of

experts on business and trade statistics

developed EBOPS 2026 as part of the

MSITS uh 2026 drafting process which is

being submitted as a background

document. At its annual meeting last

year, uh the UN committee of experts on

international statistical

classifications approved Ebops 2026 as

an international statistical

classification which we are happy about.

And just to note the past versions of

Ebops 2002 and Ebops 2010 are also in

the family of international

classifications.

Um and also importantly in relation to

the CPC

um as a new recommendation MSIT 2026 is

recommending um that compilers compile

statistics on international trade and

services in both EBOPS 2026 and CPC

version 3 as a longer term goal. Again

sort of acts like a bridge between macro

components and these micro CPC uh

products. So, EB Ebops 2026 aligns with

CPC version 3 to the extent possible.

It's worth noting EBOPS is not purely a

product classification. There are some

transactorbased items such as travel

which of course would be conducted by

international visitors um construction

and goods and services supplied by

government um which can be crosscutting

uh in nature. Um so if the CBC is

updated uh there may be minor updates uh

to Ebops along the way. Major revisions

to CPC will of course result in u more

uh updates to Ebops.

So what were the objectives and guiding

principles in this revision process? Uh

first needed to adapt to the new first

level BPM 7 breakdowns. also adding

additional granularity and visibility on

specific items especially that were

important for SNA purposes and uh policy

relevant items. Uh so what does that

mean? Uh we added a new international

property product on data and databases.

Um and this improved alignment with the

SNA and facilitates classification of

the international transactions and IP

products into different end uses into

capital formation intermediate

consumption and final consumption and of

course all the above was done keeping an

eye on the CPC and ensuring alignment.

So here's just a snapshot of the BPM7

services components uh to give you an

idea of all the different service

categories that are covered. Um and

again Ebops is a disagregated

sub subsystem of the BPM7. Um and it

does share all these same 17 uh main uh

BPM 7 components. Um so from the

previous BPM 6 version uh BPM 7 now has

um new first level splits. It breaks out

telecommunications

uh services from computer and

information services

um and also splits of other business

services um into several different

items. We have professional management

consulting services, uh technical and

other business services for instance,

and there's a new main component for

non-financial intermediation services.

Um for those of you familiar with uh

EBOPS 2010, this was formerly called

trade related services, but now it's its

own uh separate category.

Uh so several of the components did not

see a change in structure or scope and

these are listed here. Um manufacturing

services, maintenance and repair

services, transport, insurance and

pension, telecommunication services,

research and development services,

operating leasing and government goods

and services. So this helps align uh

with the previous classification to the

extent possible. But these are the items

that do have some change in structure or

scope even um and additional breakdowns.

So this is travel uh construction

financial services charges for the use

of intellectual property computer and

information services professional

professional management consulting

services non-financial intermediation

technical and other business services

and personal cultural and recreational

services. Um so I'm going to go through

some of these key changes that we'd like

to highlight. Um so importantly for

financial services um there's a enhanced

detail and granularity which is meant to

align with the CPC version 3 breakdowns

covering brokerage investment banking uh

credit related advisory and custo

custody services. Um and so these are

also further split into explicitly

charged services as well as implicit

services on loans and deposits. That was

formerly called uh FISM financial

intermediation services indirectly

measured. It's kind of a mouthful. Um

but now it's called implicit services on

loans and deposits. For intellectual

property charges, there is a new

category for license to reproduce or

distribute data and databases. Again,

this is to better align with BPM7, SNA,

and CPC.

And as I mentioned, it provides an

alternative breakdown by end use for

national accounts purposes.

So, computer and information services,

this component was split off from

telecommunications as its own category.

um and it covers computer software and

there is an of which line item for

software originals. It also identifies

cloud computing and IT infrastructure

provisioning services separately. Um and

trying to keep up with the times uh the

crypto asset validation and mining

services um are included here under

computer services but they are not

separately identified but they are

covered in this category. uh the news

agency services has also uh been merged

into other uh information services. So

the non-financial intermediation uh

category again this is a split um in the

BPM seven main categories it used to be

under other business services uh

formerly called trade related services

and uh this breakdown is fully in line

with CPC and this category includes

things like uh fees and commissions uh

for intermediation of goods services and

non-produced assets

There's also um complimentary groupings

presented as part of EbOPS 2026. So for

various analytical purposes, compilers u

may wish to aggregate transa

transactions on some of these uh areas

of particular interest that are listed

here. And um for each of these

complimentary groupings, we've compiled

a list of the services and possibly

goods that um would uh be included in

each of these items. So it might draw

from um service or goods items um from

different sections of EBOPS uh to come

up with these complimentary groupings.

Um so there was um a lot of technical

discussions among uh the task team on

international trade uh statistics TTITS

um over the past couple of years through

various meetings and consultations

um and the task team recently did

complete the draft MSIT's 2026

publication which includes EBOPS 2026 as

part of it in an annex. This was

circulated for global consultation in

October 2025

and happy to report that the results

from that global consultation were

overwhelmingly positive especially

regarding the additional granularity

that Ebops 2026 presents and the white

cover version of MSITS 2026 including

EBOPS is uh is being submitted as a

background document uh this year at the

statistical commission.

So the way forward uh we have given

thought to the implementation of uh

MSITS and EBAS 2026. Um importantly, um

there is an inter agency task force on

capacity building on international trade

statistics which is comprised of

international organizations

um especially OECD and world trade

organization which will be leading that

up. Um they will coordinate um the

implementation and capacity building uh

but it will be also delivered and

facilitated by members of the task team

at international trade statistics. So

here's just a listing of what we plan to

deliver. Um the preparation of live

compilation guidance notes uh for MSIs

and Ebops that will be available

dynamically online. Uh interactive

e-learning courses which we're actually

working on developing now. Regional

training workshops, technical assistance

missions, um preparation of related

complimentary technical materials and

sharing of country practices. Uh for

those that might not be aware, there's

an online um global repository of

country practices uh provided by the UN

Committee of Experts on Business and

Trade Statistics. Um and we're hoping to

add a lot of good country examples and

best practices there.

So that is all I oops that's all I have

for today. Um you can reach out with any

questions or always contact us here at

tradestat.org.

Thanks. I'll pass it back to you

Vincent.

Thank you, Nancy. Um

I'll just check the chat here and then

and uh the there was so for you you may

remember last year the the CPC was uh

was endorsed the revised CPC was

endorsed by the the the statistical

commission and we can um there's a lot

of references to alignment with with CPC

there and and uh we uh seems a a good

time to mention that we're still we're

working on the uh uh some of the

correspondences correspondence for that

in uh in UNSD and uh that that will be

uh be the the the background

documentation is available on the UNSD

website for uh for highlighting the

changes in in that version of of CPC.

So, um, okay. I don't see any comments

that have gone unressed in the

um in the in the chat. So, let's move on

then to our final presentation on the

classification of statistical activities

uh by Sean Jerry uh as as we know him.

Uh I'll pass it over to you Jerry.

Uh thank you Vincent and hello everyone.

Let me share my screen here up on my

presentation.

So my name is Le Yes like pronounced by

Vincent

Jerry and I thank you Vincent try

yes try and uh uh I work at the United

Nations division and it's good to see

like so many people here like uh are

interested in classification so as CSA

is the last uh for today but not the

least uh classification of statistical

activities. it. Uh uh this is the

outline of my presentation on the CSA.

As some of you are like are probably

familiar with CSA but for those that

like are not yet familiar what is CSA?

CSA classification of statistical

activities is an analytical

classification that can be used to

classify statistical activities such as

data collection, processing,

dissemination,

capacity development, statistical

events, working groups. Yes. In short,

everything that the national statistical

office is doing. Yes. In the like in

their scope of work. And what uh uh can

uh the CSA do? Uh the classification of

statistical activities uh can be used as

a reference leading to better

harmonization in structuring information

across

about activity of like statistical

organizations

uh at the national level, regional level

and even at a global level for

dissemination of websites uh and for

publications etc.

uh for example uh the very uh website of

USD uses the CSA to organize the

classification. We have like on our

website the international family of

classifications that organizes like more

than 100 classifications by the

categories of the CSA. So in short we

are using CSA. CSA is a classification

that can be used to classify

classifications.

Interesting.

So uh at this moment uh US uh we are the

current custodian of CSA responsible for

this like uh maintainment maintenance

and update.

As a matter of fact uh we coordinated on

the uh last uh update process of the CSA

from CSA 2.0 zero to 2.1 which was

mandated by the statistical commission

at his 56 session in March 2025

due to the user needs uh for specific

domain which uh which I will touch upon

later.

The update process was carried out by

the Bureau of the United Nations

Committee of Experts on International

Statistical Classification in close

collaboration with the expert grouped on

uh food security and nutritional uh data

and statistics.

And uh this uh latest version of CSA CSA

version 2.1 was developed by the UND.

Yes. As the custodian as the designated

custodian in response to user request

for a more prominent place in its

structure for food security and

nutrition. And the proposal for change

was jointly prepared by the Food and

Agricultural Organization. the uh United

Nations Children's Fund and World Health

World Health Organization. Some of the

experts are already here with us.

And uh what has been changed uh from CSA

2.0 to CSA 2.1.

The major change is a new category, a

new statistical activity with the code

511.

And this is about the food security and

nutrition. This was like a newly created

at the second level in CSA 2.1

and uh it has like a two lower

categories, two child categories at a

third level uh with a code 51101

uh with a description of food

availability and access and uh with a

code uh 5102

with a description with a code

descriptor uh dice and nutrition. And

this new categories, this three new

categories

uh like was also like uh uh uh

supplemented by the expert notes uh uh

in the different part of the category to

clarify uh this is a concept to move uh

away from the uh relevant content from

agriculture to this new category on food

security. So because uh the user

feedback was that uh food security is a

distinct concept uh like uh from uh

agriculture. So uh we updated the

aspirate nodes to exclude food security

and nutrition from the existing category

for agriculture with the code uh 20321.

And also yes uh after uh we made this

changes uh we propose those changes what

uh are the uh like uh users feedback. So

this latest revision uh this latest

version of CSA 2.1 is a limited update

other than the uh changes that um I

mentioned in the previous slide no like

uh major changes in other part of the

CSS structure. The score change is

strictly confined to the standalone

categories and the 511 as introduced

before and uh we also checked with the

users with all our like stakeholders uh

from the national statistics offices all

over the world. We conducted a global

consultation last year from April to May

and all the national statistical offices

were invited to review and comment on

this uh pro uh new draft CSA and the

proposed changes.

Uh okay. So uh uh the result was like a

positive overall positive a total of 82

responses from 69 countries and nine

international organizations

and over 90% of respondents they uh

approved the change they agreed with the

new CS structure uh this uh uh level of

uh uh percentage is quite high and over

the 96 even better of the respondents

agreed with the proposed changes from

CSA 2.0 to CSA 2.1. So yes, we are on

the a right track. So this is a quite a

positive feedback

and also uh approximately uh 47.6%

of the respondent indicated their office

has either used or evaluated CSA in

their work program. uh about half of

them right we hope the other half uh can

also catch on and start using the CSA

and over 52% of respondents indicated

that their office has planned to adopt

the CSA in their future work the UN

website of the international family of

classification is organized according to

CSA this is a like a example on the use

case of the CSA demonstrating its power

and usefulness and you can click on it

and take a

and also key amount key comments and

follow-up actions uh that we received

from the global consultation general

agreement with the changes as mentioned

before and uh following the global

consultation the aspirate note for the

newly created uh statistical activities

on food security and nutrition and

subcategory was was updated to improve

it clarity incorporating feedback

received on these categories

Uh these are the changes uh uh and you

can see the full draft of those like

changes and as we notes uh in the draft

uh CSA uh manual CSA 2.1 manual that we

submitted uh and is now published on the

UN UND website as a one of the

background documents for the upcoming

UNCC

and uh also other comments uh as usual.

uh we we received a v variety of

comments on like uh and suggestion how

to like improve the CSA. Uh yes, we

acknowledge receipt and we thank those

who like uh commented uh on the CSA

uh nevertheless uh since the update we

have the mandate uh to update the CSA uh

to redress uh uh to address the user

needs remember on food security uh we uh

this update of of CSA 2.1 is quite

limited it's limited to the inclusion of

the new domain on food security and

nutrition and uh other concepts uh other

like comments and suggestion. What or or

uh we uh acknowledge receive them and

but then uh we uh didn't consider them

for this round. Uh uh instead they will

be documented

and to be included in the future

research agenda. If like we have to uh

like launch the process for the next

round of CSA revision, we will like open

them like uh to uh for consideration by

by the relevant experts.

So uh where are we now and what are we

going to do? Uh last year uh the United

Nations Committee of Experts on

International Statistical

Classifications UNCCIS

approved uh the CSA uh uh version 2.1 as

its uh annual meeting in November 2025

and recommended uh its submission to the

United Nations Statistical Commission

for adoption and uh you can see the

relevant approval process prepared by

Vincent again who is here uh with

And uh also at the white cover edition,

the draft version of CSA 2.1 uh now

submitted to the United Nations

Statistical Commission for endorsement

at the 57th session in March 2026

as you can see on the website for the

UNC as one of the background documents.

These are the links. So if you're

interested uh you can check with them is

on the draft uh the latest draft of CSA

2.1 on the development process. Yes. And

also on the summary of the global

consultation and uh on the approval

process uh for CISA by the uh committee

committee of experts

and yes that's all. Thank you. Back to

you Winston.

Sorry about that. Thank you Jerry uh for

for that presentation and to to all our

presenters today. Uh we had over over

150 participants at uh at one point

here. So I think that that speaks to the

the the high level of interest in in

statistical classifications. And you

know we we we we we

must recognize that the the

classifications are are foundational for

statistical generation.

Without classifications we just we just

don't have the the framework for for

understanding data for being able to

compare data across uh across uh the the

regions of the world. uh and and uh so I

think the the motto of the the

statistical commission is is very

appropriate here. Better better data

better lives and and you don't get

better data without a good good

foundation. So uh and then and the the

classifications are are essential to

that. So uh kudos to the the um the the

work that uh uh that's been that went

into the the classifications that we saw

here today. And uh I I put in the chat

the link to the agenda for the

statistical commission and and and it

does have these these documents or

documents related to these

classifications but but also also

others. So um kudos to uh to to Barbara,

Claudia, Nancy, Jerry. Thank you very

much for for for all this. Um, I think

with that I don't I don't see any

additional questions here. Uh,

Julian, did you have anything uh you

want to finish with or?

>> Yeah. Uh, thank you so much once again

also for Winston for moderating the

meeting and again from the UND side as a

secretary. We are also quite looking

forward for the continued collaboration

and your support active support in order

to advance the work on the international

statistical classification. Thank you

all once again.

>> So back to you Vincent. Okay.

>> All right. Thank you. Thank you everyone

and uh we look forward to uh to seeing

you again soon. Take care.

>> Okay.

Bye

>> bye.

>> Thank you everyone. Bye bye.

>> Thank you all. Bye.