Relations between statistical systems and national institutions in charge of development: an analysis of available data in ten West and Central African countries.
1- Relations between NSS and national institutions in charge of development: an historical perspective
1.1. After independence:
The period following independence was marked in many countries by the implementation of National Economic and Social Development Plans. These included a significant quantitative aspect, because target figures were identified for both overall and sectorial objectives, as were resources to be mobilised for each sector. At the same time, the new States established civil services, including statistical services, whose collaboration with Plan services was essential. The international community, especially France, emphasised implementation of statistical systems, especially in supporting the National Accounting services, which benefited from technical assistance for many years. Training of statistical managers in Africa was another component of this approach with, as from 1962, founding of the European Training Centre for Economic Statisticians of Developing Countries (CESD) supported by INSEE and the European Community. From 1975, the training took place progressively in Africa, with the founding of ENSEA (L'Ecole Nationale de la Statistique et de l'Analyse Economique) in Abidjan, IAMSEA (Institut Africain et Mauricien de Statistiques et d’Économie Appliquée) in Kigal, ISSEA (Institut Sous-régional de Statistique et d'Economie Appliquée) in Yaoundé and ENEA (École nationale d'économie appliquée) in Dakar. These efforts have not however made it possible to establish national statistical institutions sustainably capable of informing political decision makers, which was their sole objective at the time.
1.2. Structural adjustment:
The difficulties encountered by a significant number of developing countries, especially the degree of their indebtedness, and the progressive weakening of the planning model (undermined especially by its highly voluntary character and the scant attention paid to economic and social mechanisms), led to implementation of structural adjustment policies, aiming to re-establish the macro-economic basis of development in the 1980s. The increasing involvement of the Breton Woods Institutions (BWI) also included a statistical aspect, owing to the need to closely manage the macro-economic and macro-financial data. The 1990s’ structural adjustment approach was questioned owing to the "mixed" results in growth and development. It was also due to strong reactions in certain countries to the social shock the adjustment policies produced, especially when they greatly weakened the State’s hold on the economy, shrank public services and liberalised prices and foreign trade. Despite the interest of data production, statistical institutions were not spared structural adjustment. As civil services were downsized (voluntary departures), hiring was frozen and real wages cut, the National Statistical Systems (NSS) weakened, to lose high-level managers and operating resources.
1.3. 1999-2000, a turning point:
The late 1990s brought a new development for the NSS, and with it, fresh hope. The international community in fact formulated a new “consensus” on development. Two things had contributed to the structural adjustment approach being put into question: (i) sometimes serious social fallout tied to reform of the State’s role in development, with increasingly more visible urban poverty; (ii) failure of the concerned countries to approve the adjustment policies, which caused the structural adjustment to most often seem imposed externally, especially by the BWI, viewed as speaking for the rich countries. The BWI therefore formulated a new approach around the struggle against poverty and a participative way of proceeding; nevertheless, the foundations of the recommended policies (growth fuelled by market mechanisms and free trade) were not put into question. Development aid in this new context was closely tied to preparing a strategy to fight poverty on a cooperative basis, such strategy including target figures, and mobilising resources to achieve them. The heads of state meeting at the United Nations headquarters adopting the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in September 2000 brought formal confirmation. This new approach would have major consequences for the NSS. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) were effectively based on a usually quantitative and qualitative poverty profile, and included target figures, by sector (especially for health and education, key MDG areas.) The PRSP included tracking/assessment requirements which called for data provided, if possible, annually. MDG tracking had the same requirements. The NSS were therefore called upon to provide the references for the PRSP, to support decisions on target figures and to provide needed tracking information. Results-Based Management (RBM) became fashionable and underlined that decisions, especially on development, could be taken only on the basis of precise knowledge of the original situation and assessment of the proposed measures’ impact. During the same period (1999) a movement at the level of the international community arose to promote a NSS reform. The founding in 1999 of the Paris21 Partnership, brought about especially by the World Bank, and supported by the systems of the UN, EU and several important donor countries, manifested an ambition to reform the NSS and adapt them to development needs linked to the PRSP and MDG. The reform framework was defined during international conferences bringing together the world statistical community, especially the Marrakech Conference in 2004, which saw the adoption of the approach based on the National Strategy for the Development of Statistics (NSDS). Here again, the participatory approach plays an essential role, and user participation in defining data content is strongly affirmed. Since then, the NSDS has established itself as the NSS benchmark. The concomitance of these reforms of methods for managing development and the NSS was not coincidental. The 2005 Paris Declaration on Development Aid completed this evolution and focused on developing country accountability. It is a converging movement to promote management based on results and production systems, and required data distribution. This movement is facilitated by distribution of information technologies and their extraordinary potential. In addition, decision makers are increasingly demanding as to decision system governance, transparent pubic management and accountability. The MDG and the PRSP are spurring renovation of statistical systems. The stakes were high for poor, indebted countries: the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative, and then the Mid and Long Term Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI, 2005) were based on preparation of the PRSP and monitoring of its implementation, leading to preparation of dashboards for indicators for annual tracking reports. 33 countries out of 35 having met HIPC and MDRI conditions saw their debt, including multilateral debt, greatly reduced. Nevertheless, developing country access to international community resources continues to be based on anti-poverty strategy tracking. The Extended Credit Facilities (ECF) of the IMF are examples. Requests sent to the NSS have not altered since PRSP and MDG implementation. New challenges have appeared especially in connection with information requests concerning areas NSS cover poorly or not at all: governance in all its aspects (political, economic, social, cultural), the environment and climate change. Technically speaking, multiplying data sources (“Big Data”), and data access requirements (“open data”) have renewed discussion on how data is produced and distributed, and have brought out new players.
The major NSS challenges over the past 15 years have without a doubt led to system changes. Questionnaires sent to workshop participant countries have improved understanding of the state of the relations between two central players in data production and use: the NSIs on the one hand and the institutions in charge of development on the other.
2- Characteristics of NSS surveyed
Disparities among the means available to the NSS is striking. In fact, the data collected concerns central data production and distribution institutions. Information is not available on public producers of statistical information as a whole (including the information-producing ministries and public agencies). This gap is due especially to poor NSS integration and the absence of programming for public producers overall.
We note that resources available in 2013 go from $ EU 370,000 to $ EU 29.5 billion, and that the number of employees varies from 57 to 2,374! Of course, a large part of the differences is owing to different country sizes, populations of which vary from 540,000 to 174 million. If one considers four countries with comparable populations, there nevertheless remain large discrepancies: from $ EU 2.1 to 10.5 million and from 109 to 466 employees. The central statistical structures’ expenses per inhabitant is on average around $ EU 0.20. Neither the population nor the GDP per inhabitant reflected the differences. They may be explained by what has been inherited historically, different structural adjustment impacts and public policies more favourable to the NSS. Data show that there is room for choices in statistical policy, with some countries having preserved or developed central statistical structures are much better equipped than others. We do not have information allowing us to show that the less well-equipped countries’ central statistical structures benefit from expanded statistical services at the ministry or agency level. Finally, information is missing to show a link between available means and the amount and relevance of statistical information.
Available information shows that all countries, except one (with very little dependence on external financing), usually are very dependent on external financing for extensive surveys and censuses. Some surveys are completely financed by development partners (technical and financial partners).
All countries, except one, indicate that resources budgeted for the NSS have stagnated or regressed since 2010.
The NSS are facing three main constraints: (i) insufficient equipment and operating means; (ii) little or no employee motivation; (iii) lack of qualified human resources. All the NSS mention these constraints.
Half the respondents mention insufficient political support for statistics. If we add that the lack of personnel is mentioned by only two of the structures, one can only conclude that the main constraint is employee qualification and management.
Statistical institutions complain about the lack of qualified, specialised personnel and the poor motivational levels describe a significant number of NSI employees. This suggests that remuneration is thought insufficient to keep qualified employees and that work conditions (equipment, operating means) are inadequate.
Out of the ten countries surveyed, six have specific and regularly updated websites.
National Accounting data production was tested. Three countries declared that they had 2013 data (probably provisional data). One of the countries prepares quarterly accounts (the last quarter available is the 4th quarter 2013). Three countries have Accounts for 2011 or 2012. The data most overdue was for 2009. The base years for the Accounts are very old for three countries: 1987, 1995 and 1996. Most of the countries use the 1993 SNA, but two indicate they use the 2008 NSA. One can estimate from the data supplied, that the National Accounts generally reflect the technical constraints in effect.
3- The NSDS (National Strategy for the Development of Statistics)
All countries surveyed subscribe fully to the NSDS process. Seven countries are implementing their first generation of strategy. Two countries are respectively in the implementation of a second and third generation strategy. Among the countries which implement or have implemented their first generation NSDS, three are in in the phase of preparing the second generation. The countries surveyed therefore have less experience with the strategy.
The success rates observed are judged poor for five of the nine countries, and satisfactory (60% and above) for three of them.
The status of the NSDS in the countries’ development process is satisfactory overall. All countries, except one, declare that there is a formal partnership between the NSS and the structure in charge of development and that statistics continue to be a priority in the development process. The structures responsible for development confirm this viewpoint. However, in three countries, the NSDS is not included in the Development Plan. Five countries (two of which have the NSDS fitted into in the Development Plan) do not have financial programming corresponding to NSDS objectives. The lack of financial programming concerns therefore half of the countries observed.
4- The users:
The information shows that data users are now included in NSDS preparation. This is the case for all countries studied, reflecting one of the essential aspects of the process, which should be participative. Outside the preparation context, user involvement is minimal. Sometimes it is mentioned in connection with user representative participation on the NSI Board of Directors or the Statistical Council. The only voluntary processes intended for user involvement concern the press. Three countries have taken initiatives in this area. They have created networks of correspondent journalists for the NSI, and have organised training to understand statistical information for the press. This means that two thirds of the countries considered do not have a highly developed communications policy. No initiative is mentioned to include the private sector and civil society organisations as data users.
5- The national development institution viewpoint
All countries surveyed have reference documents describing a mid-term development strategy and institutions responsible for its preparation, implementation and tracking/assessment. Three countries have kept the titles directly from the PRSP. Some are part of the long-term development process, influenced by that prospective, intended to be performed step by step. All the countries have set quantitative objectives, and determined target figures to reach (for example: reduction of poverty incidence; lowering of maternal mortality; electrification rate, etc.). For that they need a reference describing the last available year before the strategy document’s drafting. For that they have turned to the data producers. The NSI are one source, as well as the sectorial ministries. The development structures indicate that the NSS have been involved in the strategy preparation process. This association, mentioned by all countries, except one, may be more or less close. Certain reference data lacked to establish the basis of the development document, but that is due not only to shortcomings of the NSI.
With the target figures are adopted, all countries created lists of indicators to track strategy implementation. The NSI are not always the main partner to create the list of indicators needed to track development. Three countries mention a close collaboration with the NSI. One indicates that the list of indicators has been defined without consulting the NSI.
The development management structures indicate that they prepare the annual reports on strategy implementation. For that they need data, which is not always available. Six countries declare that “some” or “certain” indicators are obtained satisfactorily. Two countries have a very negative view of the NSS, described as incapable of providing the necessary data. Two countries underline that the available information is good.