The Financial Crisis Survey (FCS), an initiative of the Private Sector Development Vice-Presidency of the World Bank Group, provides a quick, short, and cost-efficient evaluation of the impact of the 2008 global financial crisis on private companies in European and Central Asian countries.
For this study, researchers contacted the same companies interviewed in 2008-2009 Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Surveys (BEEPS), also referred to as 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys (ES). Manufacturing and services private sector establishments were surveyed for 2008-2009 BEEPS. The original data also served as a baseline for comparisons because it referred mostly to fiscal year 2007, thus measuring the pre-crisis scenario.
The Financial Crisis Survey was designed to follow up the same firms every six months during the financial crisis. The first round of FCS took place in June-July 2009, the second wave - in February-March 2010, and the third round was implemented in June-July 2010. Six countries - Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Turkey - participated in all three waves. Companies from Kazakhstan were surveyed only in the second round.
This research was conducted in Turkey in February-March 2010 as part of the second round of The Financial Crisis Survey. Data from 606 establishments from private nonagricultural formal sector was analyzed to quantify the effect of the 2008 global financial crisis on companies in Turkey.
Researchers revisited establishments interviewed in Turkey Enterprise Survey 2008. Efforts were made to contact all respondents of the baseline survey to determine which of the companies were still operating and which were not. From the information collected during telephone interviews, indicators were computed to measure the effects of the financial crisis on key elements of the private economy: sales, employment, finances, and expectations of the future.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
The primary sampling unit of the study was the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must make its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.
Regions covered were selected based on the number of establishments, contribution to employment, and value added. In most cases these regions were metropolitan areas and reflected the largest centers of economic activity in a country.
The manufacturing and services sectors were the primary business sectors of interest. This corresponded to firms classified with International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) codes 15-37, 45, 50-52, 55, 60-64, and 72 (ISIC Rev.3.1). Formal (registered) companies were targeted for interviews. Services firms included construction, retail, wholesale, hotels, restaurants, transport, storage, communications, and IT. Firms with 100% government ownership were excluded.
Producers and sponsors
1152 establishments that participated in Turkey Enterprise Survey 2008 were contacted for The Financial Crisis Survey. The implementing contractor received directions that the final achieved sample should include at least 650 establishments.
Stratified random sampling was used in Turkey Enterprise Survey 2008. Three levels of stratification were implemented: industry, establishment size, and oblast (region).
For industry stratification, the universe was divided into 5 manufacturing industries, 1 services industry -retail -, and two residual sectors. Each manufacturing industry had a target of 160 interviews. The services industry and the two residual sectors had a target of 120 interviews. For the manufacturing industries sample sizes were inflated by about 33% to account for potential non-response cases when requesting sensitive financial data and also because of likely attrition in future surveys that would affect the construction of a panel.
Size stratification was defined following the standardized definition for the rollout: small (5 to 19 employees), medium (20 to 99 employees), and large (more than 99 employees). For stratification purposes, the number of employees was defined on the basis of reported permanent full-time workers. This seems to be an appropriate definition of the labor force since seasonal/casual/part-time employment is not a common practice, except in the sectors of construction and agriculture.
Regional stratification was defined in 5 regions. These regions are Marmara, Aegean, South, Central Anatolia and Black Sea-Eastern.
The Turkey sample contains panel data. The wave 1 panel "Investment Climate Private Enterprise Survey implemented in Turkey" consisted of 1325 establishments interviewed in 2005. A total of 425 establishments have been re-interviewed.
Given the stratified design, sample frames containing a complete and updated list of establishments for the selected regions were required. Great efforts were made to obtain the best source for these listings. However, the quality of the sample frames was not optimal and, therefore, some adjustments were needed to correct for the presence of ineligible units. These adjustments are reflected in the weights computation.
The source of the sample frame was twofold. Universe estimates were taken from the TOBB database which contains a full list of establishments in manufacturing sectors. TOBB refers to the Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey. Universe estimates for service sectors were taken from the Statistical Institute of Statistics (SIS) with additional information based on SIC code from the Turkish Studies Institute (TSI). Comparisons were made between estimates in TOBB and SIS to establish that the two sources are comparable and hence can be used side by side.
The quality of the frame was assessed at the onset of the project. The frame proved to be useful though it showed positive rates of non-eligibility, repetition, non-existent units, etc. These problems are typical of establishment surveys, but given the impact these inaccuracies may have on the results, adjustments were needed when computing the appropriate weights for individual observations. The percentage of confirmed non-eligible units as a proportion of the total number of contacts to complete the survey was 43% (2811 out of 6458 establishments).
Survey indicators were estimated through the use of sampling weights of the 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys adjusted by non-response in each wave of the Financial Crisis Survey. Therefore the results are still representative of the nonagricultural private economy within each country.
For 2008-2009 Enterprise Surveys three sets of assumptions were considered while computing weights:
a- Strict assumption: eligible establishments are only those for which it was possible to directly determine eligibility.
b- Median assumption: eligible establishments are those for which it was possible to directly determine eligibility and those that rejected the screener questionnaire or an answering machine or fax was the only response. Median weights are used for computing indicators on the www.enterprisesurveys.org website.
c- Weak assumption: in addition to the establishments included in points a and b, all establishments for which it was not possible to finalize a contact are assumed eligible. This includes establishments with dead or out of service phone lines, establishments that never answered the phone, and establishments with incorrect addresses for which it was impossible to find a new address. Note that under the weak assumption only observed non-eligible units are excluded from universe projections.
Dates of Data Collection
Data Collection Mode
Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]
Data Collection Notes
Private contractors conducted the Financial Crisis Survey on behalf of the World Bank. Due to sensitive survey questions addressing business-government relations and corruption-related topics, private contractors are preferred over any government agency or an organization/institution associated with government, and are hired by the World Bank to collect the data.
Each establishment's senior managers were interviewed over the phone. The interview time was expected to last a maximum of twenty minutes. The survey was conducted in the local languages.
The following survey instrument is available:
- Financial Crisis Survey Questionnaire
Data entry and quality controls are implemented by the contractor and data is delivered to the World Bank in batches (typically 10%, 50% and 100%). These data deliveries are checked for logical consistency, out of range values, skip patterns, and duplicate entries. Problems are flagged by the World Bank and corrected by the implementing contractor through data checks and callbacks.
Confidentiality of the survey respondents and the sensitive information they provide is necessary to ensure the greatest degree of survey participation, integrity and confidence in the quality of the data. Surveys are usually carried out in cooperation with business organizations and government agencies promoting job creation and economic growth, but confidentiality is never compromised.
Aggregate indicators based on Financial Crisis Survey data are available to the public at https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/FinancialCrisis/
Firm-level data is also available to the public free-of-charge. In order to access the firm-level data, users must agree to abide by a strict confidentiality agreement available through Enterprise Analysis Unit website by clicking on "External users register here" at https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/Portal
Where necessary please site the source as "Enterprise Analysis Unit - World Bank Group https://www.enterprisesurveys.org"
Disclaimer and copyrights
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.