This document provides guidelines for the preparation, review, and analysis of statistical data submitted by Participants to the Kimberley Process. It establishes procedures to ensure data is analyzed in a uniform, coherent, and transparent manner to identify any irregularities or anomalies that could indicate conflict diamonds are entering legitimate trade. Key aspects include templates for Participants to submit production, trade, and certificate data; principles for analyzing recent and historical data by weight, value, and unit price; and processes for reporting findings to Participants and making responses publicly available. The objective is to have a standardized approach for reviewing Participant data to fulfill the Kimberley Process's goal of preventing conflict diamonds.

1. AD 02/2013
1
Kimberley Process
WORKING GROUP ON STATISTICS
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION FOR THE GUIDELINES FOR THE
PREPARATION, REVIEW
AND ANALYSIS OF KP STATISTICAL DATA
As set forth in the Working Group on Statistics’ Terms of Reference and Annex III of the
Kimberley Process Certification Scheme core document, the KP` recognizes that reliable and
comparable data are an essential tool for the implementation of the Certification Scheme,
particularly for identifying any irregularities or anomalies that could indicate conflict
diamonds are entering legitimate trade. These statistics are made available for expert analysis
by interested parties and by the Participants, individually or collectively.
This administrative decision serves as guidance to the members of the Working Group on
Statistics and is the update of the internal methodology used to conduct annual statistical
analyses of all Participants and the rough diamond trading entity of Chinese Taipei.
Appendix I of this Administrative Decision places the review and analysis of statistical data
in the context and for the purposes of the KPCS in a uniform, coherent and transparent way.
The Kimberley Process welcomes this effort and requests the WGS Chair to provide updates
on its progress.
Approved by Plenary in Johannesburg, November 2013

2. AD 02/2013
2
Kimberley Process Working Group on Statistics
Guidelines for the Preparation, Review and Analysis of KP Statistical
Data
1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................3
2. General Principles................................................................................................................................3
3. Data Preparation and Submission, Statistical Tables for Participants .................................................4
3.1 Data Preparation and Submission ..................................................................................................4
3.2. Preliminary and Final Statistical Tables for Participants..............................................................5
4. Data Review and Analysis...................................................................................................................6
5. Follow-up to Data Review and Analysis .............................................................................................8
6. Further Work........................................................................................................................................9
Annexes ...................................................................................................................................................9
Annex 1. Rough Diamond Statistics Template for Submissions.........................................................9
Annex 2. Template of Statistical Tables Used for Summarizing Production and Trade Statistics......9

3. AD 02/2013
3
1. Introduction
Annex III of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS) core document affirms that
“[…] reliable and comparable data on the production and the international trade in rough
diamonds are an essential tool for the implementation of the Certification Scheme, and
particularly for identifying any irregularities or anomalies that could indicate that conflict
diamonds are entering the legitimate trade”
and commits Participants, inter alia,
“to make […] statistics available to an intergovernmental body or to another appropriate
mechanism identified by the Participants for (1) compilation and publication on a quarterly
basis in respect of exports and imports, and (2) on a semi-annual basis in respect of
production. These statistics are to be made available for analysis by interested parties and by
the Participants, individually or collectively, according to such terms of reference as may be
established by the Participants”.
The Terms of Reference of the Kimberley Process Working Group on Statistics (WGS)1
,
entrust the WGS with
“[…] The expert analysis of the data both by Participants and by the Working Group
supported by a high level of expertise on the diamond trade from within the Working
Group, participating organisations and the Diamond Experts Working Group; and
[…]The preparation of reports on progress and issues for presentation at the Plenary
meetings through the Chair of the Kimberley Process.”
This document has been prepared by the WGS in order to place the review and analysis of statistical
data in the context and for the purposes of the KPCS and to conduct this review and analysis in a
uniform, coherent and transparent way.
2. General Principles
The objective of the annual review and analysis of the rough diamond trade and production data
submitted by Participants is the identification of irregularities or anomalies, which could indicate that
conflict diamonds are entering the legitimate trade.
This exercise should be guided by the following principles:
1
Adopted at the Sun City (2003) meeting

4. AD 02/2013
4
1. The data review and analysis is based on statistical information submitted by
Participants in accordance with their obligations under the KPCS. These data are then
tabulated in a number of standardized tables summarizing production and trade for each
Participant.
2. Data are analyzed with particular attention to the most recent calendar year. A comparison of
statistical data for the previous three calendar years should be included.
3. Weights (carats) will provide the basis for analysis and comparison. An analysis based on
values (USD) is susceptible to market variations but is nonetheless recommended for
inclusion. Finally, examinations of unit prices, (value/weight, USD/carat) is also
recommended.
4. The analysis of each KP Participant’s data is summarized in a Statistical Analysis Report.
This report should include an executive summary with questions or issues to be addressed by
the Participant reviewed and possible recommendations for follow-up measures or actions.
More detail on the questions or issues in the executive summary should be given in the main
body of the report. The Statistical Analysis Report is submitted to the Chair of the WGS who
forwards it to the Participant under review with a copy to the Participant who prepared the
report.
5. Based on their knowledge of their own statistical data and of their diamond industry,
Participants reviewed are expected to address the identified questions or issues, or to
comment on the findings reported, in responding to the WGS Chair, within two months after
receiving the Statistical Analysis Report. They are also expected to make any necessary
changes to the KP Rough Diamond Statistics website and address issues that require follow-
up, if necessary.
6. Statistical Analysis Reports should be made available to any Participant or Observer once the
Participant under review has had two months to respond. Reviewed Participant responses are
also made available.
7. In their responses, reviewed Participants are encouraged to provide the methodologies used to
compile their submitted statistics, if requested. Information on production capacity,
stocks/stockpiles, or diamond processing activities or statistics for periods preceding the
implementation of the KPCS could be useful additional information.
8. Obvious and serious irregularities and anomalies should be reported immediately to the Chair
of the WGS and should not necessarily wait for completion of the Statistical Analysis Report.
9. All data derived from the KP Rough Diamond Statistics website or from reports prepared by
the WGS should be shown as sourced from the KPCS.
3. Data Preparation and Submission, Statistical Tables for
Participants
3.1 Data Preparation and Submission
Each Participant is required to submit to the Chair of the WGS, in standardised format, their
aggregated rough diamond trade and certificate count data (exports and imports) on a quarterly basis,
and their aggregated rough diamond production data on a semi-annual basis.
Trade statistics for weight (in carats) and value (in USD) should be provided by trade type (import or
export) as follows:

5. AD 02/2013
5
 for exports; by destination, origin (mining), and relevant Harmonized System
classification code (HS code) 7102.10, 7102.21, or 7102.31
 for imports; by provenance, origin (mining), and HS code.
The number of KP certificates should be provided by provenance, for imports and by destination, for
exports.
The production statistics should be provided by value (in USD) and weight (in carats).
The standardised format for submitting production, trade and certificate count data to the Chair of the
WGS is given in Annex 1 - Rough Diamond Statistics Template for Submissions.
The data format requirements are in line with Annex III of the Kimberley Process Certification
Scheme Core Document. Only data received in the required format and verified and published by the
data-owning Participant are considered to be in compliance with statistical requirements. Instructions
on verifying and publishing statistical data can be found in the KP Rough Diamond Statistics, Website
User Manual accessible at https://kimberleyprocessstatistics.org/.
Participants are expected to ensure the accuracy and completeness of data prior to submission to the
KP Rough Diamond Statistics website. The deadline for data submission is three months after the end
of the reference quarter for trade and certificate count data and the reference semester for production
data2
. Subsequently, all statistical data will be checked by the WGS for compliance with obligations
under the KPCS with regard to completeness and correct format. Shortcomings will be addressed
with the Participant concerned. Within two weeks after the deadline for submission, the Chair of the
WGS will notify all Participants who have not submitted complete statistical information to the KP
Rough Diamond Statistics website for the reporting period. Within three weeks after the deadline for
submissions, the Chair of the WGS will report cases of non-compliance to the KP Chair, with copy to
the WG Chairs, the non-compliant Participant and all members of the WGS3
. Participants will be
given prior notification of their standing and an opportunity to address their situation should they be
statistically non-compliant and prior to the letter sent to the KP Chair reporting this.
3.2. Preliminary and Final Statistical Tables for Participants
Within two weeks after the deadline for data submission, the Chair of the WGS will place preliminary
statistical tables in the Participant only section of the KP Rough Diamond Statistics website,
(https://kimberleyprocessstatistics.org/). These tables will be prepared in accordance with the
templates in Annex 2.
2
Administrative Decision (revised), adopted at Sun City, in 2003
3
In accordance with the November 8, 2005 Guidelines for the Participation Committee with respect to
Statistical Non-submission

6. AD 02/2013
6
Upon posting of the preliminary statistical tables, Participants should examine their data submitted up
to and including the current reference period to ensure that they are complete and accurate. If this is
not the case, Participants are requested to correct their data (both for the current and the previous
reference periods) within four weeks from the deadline for data submission. All corrections to the data
should be done in the KP Rough Diamond Statistics website. Corrections entered by Participants will
be included in the next update of the statistical tables.
Participants should also examine how their data compare to those reported by their trading partners. In
case of limited trade, it may be possible to reconcile discrepancies on the basis of the aggregated data,
already published. Otherwise, partner Participants will have to reconcile their data after
communicating to each other their transaction level data. This exercise may take longer than two
weeks.
Final statistical tables will be generated for each Participant no later than six weeks after the reporting
deadline for the reference period in question. These tables will form the basis of the annual statistical
analysis for each Participant. Participants will be notified of the availability of the preliminary and
final statistical tables in the KP Rough Diamond Statistics website by the Chair of the WGS.
4. Data Review and Analysis
Within two weeks after the uploading of the final statistical tables for the previous calendar year, the
Chair of the WGS will convene a teleconference of WGS members to consult with them on the
allocation to WGS members of the statistical analysis of the data of Participants. This allocation is
done in the interest of time and in order to avoid duplication of effort and to ensure the analysis of
data of all Participants. This allocation does not preclude further analysis of statistics by individual
members of the WGS.
Data analysis should seek to identify patterns of irregularities or anomalies that could indicate a
breach of the closed KP rough diamond trading network. Such patterns include:
1. For producing Participants, exports minus imports exceed production, in weight (carats),
substantially and inexplicably. Similarly, for non-producing Participants, exports exceed
imports substantially and inexplicably. This data examination is done for yearly and semester
or quarterly data for producing or non-producing Participants. N.B. Stockpiles from previous
years may explain some of the increase, and therefore the change in net inventory (in table 1
of the generated statistical tables) from previous years should be taken into consideration.
2. Irreconcilable trade statistics, i.e., exports (in weight and/or value) from Participant A to
Participant B do not balance with corresponding imports by Participant B from Participant A
for a particular period. Similarly for KP certificate counts. This data examination is done for
yearly and quarterly data.

7. AD 02/2013
7
The analysis should include an examination for large increases or decreases over time (i.e.,
compared to the earlier five years) in the following statistics:
3. For producing Participants, consider yearly exports - imports - production; for non-
producing Participants, consider yearly exports – imports. Consider primarily weight and
optionally value.
4. Yearly quantities exported, yearly quantities imported. Consider total exports (and
imports) i.e., for the three HS codes merged, and optionally each HS code. Optionally
consider yearly values of exports and imports.
5. For producing Participants, the yearly weight of production. Optionally consider yearly
value of production.
6. The unit price (USD/per carat) in production, exports or imports. For trade, consider total
trade (the three HS codes merged), and optionally each HS code separately.
As a rule of thumb, reviewers/analysts will flag changes or discrepancies in [1-6] for further
examination, if they exceed 25%. Depending on data particularities, they may choose to
adopt a different threshold in conducting their analysis. If so, they will justify their choice in
their Statistical Analysis Report.
The analysis is not primarily interested in changes in the trading patterns among partner
Participants. For this reason, the exports and imports of the reviewed Participant in 1, 3, 4,
and 6 above are aggregated over all its partners. Zooming into the trading partners of the
reviewed Participant is made in case the aggregated exports or imports in 1, 3, 4 and 6
present large increases or decreases.
For producing Participants, the reviewer should examine
1. If there is evidence that the method for valuation of production is independent of the valuation
of exports and
2. What is reported as Country of Origin (mining) for exports. On the whole, it is expected that
producing Participants are exporting rough diamonds mined in their territory. This is
especially relevant for exports of HS code 7102.10. N.B. This cannot currently be made from
data in the Participant Statistical Tables section of the KP Rough Diamond Statistics website
because exports are not currently reported by country of origin (mining). The reviewer will
have to examine the data in section Statistical Analyses and Database; View /Download
Database Tables.
The reviewer is also encouraged to comment on the consistency of the average dollar/carat value with
a predominantly kimberlite or alluvial source for production.
The computer-based detection of the first three of the following issues will be addressed in the future.
For the time being, the reviewer/analyst of trade data should be aware and report any of the following
that may signify data entry or data quality issues:
1. Do certificate counts, or weights, or values traded appear in duplicate?
2. For exports, is destination to non-Participants reported? Similarly, for provenance from, in

8. AD 02/2013
8
imports.
3. For exports, do the same destinations appear in certificate counts, weights and values?
Similarly for provenance from, in imports.
4. The presence of anomalously high unit prices (USD/carat) for HS code 7102.21 (industrial
diamonds) or anomalously low values for HS code 7102.31 (gem diamonds), may point to
incorrect HS coding.
The WGS member allocated the analysis of the data of KP Participant will prepare a report to present
findings on the above considerations. The report will include sections on production, trade (exports
and imports) and mirror statistics and a summary section with the most important findings.
As the data submitted by Participants may evolve in time, the Statistical Analysis Report should state
explicitly the date version of data analyzed. The WGS member (i.e., the KP Participant) that was
allocated and has prepared the data analysis of the Participant reviewed will be indicated in the report.
The date of preparation of the report will also be indicated.
In special situations, or upon request of other KP working bodies, in addition to KP data available on
a Participant, the following could be examined:
 Inconsistencies between the reported production of the Participant to the KPCS, its production
capacity or historical production, and production reported in other available sources if such
data are available;
 inconsistencies between the trade reported to the KPCS by the Participant and its trade
reported in other available sources
Results will be brought to the attention of the Participant under review for comment and /or action.
5. Follow-up to Data Review and Analysis
The Chair of the WGS will relay the report prepared Participant reviewed and will ask for a reply with
comments and explanations as deemed necessary. The reply should be sent within two months. After
the response of the Participant under review, the Chair of the WGS may ask the reviewing Participant
for a summary on the work conducted so far, including possible recommendations for follow-up
measures or action, and may use this within the KPCS as he/she sees fit.
The Chair of the WGS may choose to ask the group to discuss irregularities and anomalies identified
in the data review and analysis process and explore possible explanations for irregularities and
anomalies, including seeking further information from the Participant concerned.

9. AD 02/2013
9
6. Further Work
Section 3 of this document summarizes descriptive statistics that, when examined appropriately, can
provide assurance on the compliance of Participants with statistical requirements and the successful
operation of the KPCS. The WGS welcomes and encourages the preparation and presentation of other
approaches (inference statistics) as a complement to the statistics summarized in section 3.
The WGS will cooperate with the Working Group of Diamond Experts (WGDE), and other Working
Groups of the KP to continue to address the issue of differences in Participant’s methodological and
statistical practices with a view to harmonising, as much as possible, Participants’ practices pertaining
to KP statistical information, particularly in fields such as validity of certificates, value on certificates
or determination of dates for reporting purposes.
The WGS will review and update this document, two years after its adoption.
Annexes
Annex 1. Rough Diamond Statistics Template for Submissions
Annex 2. Template of Statistical Tables Used for Summarizing Production
and Trade Statistics