This article was written by Rehana Thowfeek, a Director of Arutha.
Data is the bread and butter of all economists and researchers. Government, or rather public, data is a key source for many analyses on policy that we look at. Public data, while essential for research purposes, is of pivotal importance for the enforcement of the social contract between the people and the Government.
While political parties constantly talk of ‘data-driven decision-making’ and even bringing in new technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), the reality remains that the Sri Lankan State is unbelievably primitive in its data collection and management. It neither collects sufficient data, nor is it well-managed or made accessible.
Why does data matter?
Government data is technically public data, except in a few instances where the data may be sensitive due to issues of national security. For the most part, this data should be easily accessible and available. However, the State acts as though it ‘owns’ this data and is afraid of what the people will use it for.
Data is a key part of the transparency and accountability problem that is rampant in Sri Lanka. Access to this public data allows concerned citizens to understand how the Government is functioning, how decisions are made, what decisions are made, and how public resources are allocated. Without data, it is very difficult to hold Government and elected officials accountable for their policies and actions.
The transparency and accuracy of public data is an important contributory factor to good governance. Collectively, the research community has experienced many difficulties in accessing and using public data. There are a variety of problems faced by researchers, which I will explain in this article.
The following uses Government data and public data interchangeably.
- Accessibility
Accessing Government data became a lot easier after the passage of the Right to Information (RTI) Act in 2016. The RTI is a pivotal piece of legislation that promotes people’s access to information, which aids in combating corruption and promoting citizen engagement, accountability, and proper governance. Under the RTI Act, every public authority in Sri Lanka must have an information officer to handle RTI requests for that agency.
Once an RTI request has been received, the RTI officer must acknowledge the receipt of the request. Within 14 working days of receipt of the request, the RTI officer must decide if the information shall be granted, and if so, the officer must furnish the requested information within another 14 days. So, considering everything, it can take up to 28 working days to receive information requested under the RTI Act, provided the request is not rejected.
While the RTI Act has paved the way for better access to information for citizens, it is not always possible to access information under it. In some instances, public authorities do not have the details of the information officer to whom RTI requests can be directed on their websites. In other instances, RTI requests remain unacknowledged within the stipulated time frame.
There are also instances under which RTI requests are rejected. Grounds upon which an RTI request can be rejected are stipulated in the act and a few reasons can be as follows: if the information requested is personal information which could invade the privacy of a private person; if the information requested can jeopardise national security, its territorial integrity, or the defence of the country; or if the information requested can cause harm to the economy.
The burden of proving that the information falls within such grounds lies with the public authority. However, these reasons are sometimes used arbitrarily by information officers to deny the data request, even though it is abundantly clear that the data requested does not fall within these grounds.
As there is no central data repository of information, it is sometimes unclear which public authority may actually have the information one requires, given the multiple levels of government that exist. The outcome of this can be that information that could have been obtained with one RTI request directed to a central body must instead be obtained for instance with over 300 RTI applications to individual Local Government bodies.
Whether this complexity is by default or by design, it makes access to information harder to accomplish in reality. This can discourage people from using the RTI Act to seek out the information they wish to have.
While the RTI has made access to information easier, the number of calls one must make to follow up on data requests is a hazard of the researcher’s job. We have been passed from person to person over the phone, or been instructed to call a different person, or been instructed to call another day as the relevant person is unavailable on many occasions.
Another accessibility problem is the cost of obtaining the data. While some data can be obtained free of charge, there is certain data that you would need to pay for. For example, survey data of the national survey datasets such as the Labour Force Survey, Household and Income Expenditure Survey, etc. can be obtained at a cost (except for certain types of requesters such as university students or lecturers who get it free).
They can run up to Rs. 100,000-300,000 per dataset, which is quite hefty. Even detailed datasets from Customs can only be obtained with payment. Gatekeeping access to this data with such a steep fee can limit the research usage of the data, which defeats the entire purpose of data collection.
2. Availability
While accessibility is an important precursor, the availability of data is another issue altogether. There is limited visibility of what kind of data is collected and collated by the public authorities, so interested parties must make a best guess as to what data may be available when making a request. This limited visibility makes the process of obtaining data longer than it should be.
The availability of data is linked to ways in which data is collected. For example, if we were to request a breakdown of the number of PAYE taxpayers in Sri Lanka by tax bracket, the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) would not be able to furnish this information as it does not collect the tax bracket or salary information of individual PAYE taxpayers. The information is collected from employers in aggregate.
In other instances, availability is tied to more practical issues. For example, the website of the Department of Census and Statistics (DCS), the apex body for national data in Sri Lanka, is often inaccessible due to server issues. Imagine our surprise when we found out recently that the data archives at the DCS were no longer available due to an issue they were having with their server. Such a problem would be catastrophic in any other country but Sri Lanka.
Having stringent data management procedures to back up and store data is vital. In some instances, data is stored by local authorities in physical paper formats. But how can they store thousands of files forever? In some instances, they simply don’t.
Files are simply destroyed every five years, meaning that data is lost forever. Such files can be converted to electronic formats and stored safely. Digitising data is an extremely pressing matter within the Government that has failed to get the adequate attention and resources it deserves.
3. Recency
For some public authorities, the data available is outdated. Publicly available data such as performance reports and annual reports are not updated regularly, although annual reports must be published within six months of the start of the year. Publishing such reports seems almost voluntary for public authorities.
This delay is not limited to annual reports. The latest Demographic and Health Survey available is for the year 2016. The latest Census of Population and Housing available is for the year 2012. The latest Economic Census available is for the year 2013/’14. The latest Census of Public and Semi-Government Sector Employment available is for 2016. All of this is arguably extremely important information – information that even the Government cannot make policy without. However, such important information is sometimes almost 10 years out of date.
While many political parties claim to make data-driven decisions, how can important policy decisions pertaining to health, education, or economic activities be made without up-to-date data on these indicators?
4. Standardisation
Data standardisation is the process of converting data into a common format so that users can process and analyse it. We find the lack of data standardisation to be a major problem with Government data. Often, even in agencies that replicate the same information, the data is not standardised into one format.
Data is stored in a variety of formats (as excel sheets, word documents, or on physical paper), variables have different names, and data is missing (either blank or denoted with a variety of symbols). This makes it extremely difficult to match data from different sources to form a cohesive universe of data to do any analysis on. Researchers often spend an inordinate amount of time cleaning bad data, which is tiresome and discouraging.
Along with digitisation of data collection, stringent data standardisation procedures must be implemented to improve the overall sanctity of Government data.
5. Accuracy
The accuracy of Government data is another important factor. While the scrutiny on top-line indicators like GDP, employment, and inflation is strong, the scrutiny of less important indicators (at least in a macro sense) is limited.
I was once involved in a project collecting data from certain education and training institutions. Firstly, the data was stored on excel sheets on one person’s computer and not on a cloud accessible to all the staff. Secondly, when we pointed out some inaccuracies in the data, they merely went and edited the document!
There was no investigation as to where the inaccuracy occurred. Was it at the data entry point? Was something missing? How can data be changed arbitrarily without risking the integrity of the whole data set? Observing this made us doubt the accuracy of the data the institutions maintained. These were key education and training figures that would inform resource allocation in the sector – yet this was how the data was treated and managed.
Even in top-line figures, there is a credibility issue. As we had written a few weeks back, we find that the recent unemployment figures fail to adequately capture the true reality of the Sri Lankan labour market. In such instances, in addition to string data collection and management processes, the methodology alone should be subject to continuous and rigorous scrutiny to ensure that it accurately reflects reality.
The people and their data
Understanding how public resources are allocated, which affects our own lives, well-being, and safety, and which contributes to shaping our views and opinions on government is another reason why Government data is important. Without access to Government data, it is difficult to participate in public debates on policy and to advocate for necessary policy changes.
Robust Government data can also contribute significantly to better decisions on individual lives, communities, and society. This can be anything from what the demographic trends are, what industries are growing rapidly, what export markets are growing rapidly, and what products are demanded globally. Such data can spur innovation, create new economic opportunities, and lead to more sustainable and inclusive economic growth. Unfortunately, however, this data is sometimes a decade too old to be of any use to either the Government or an individual.
All in all, the state of Government data in Sri Lanka is extremely dubious. Digitisation of all the data collected and held by public authorities should be a pressing policy reform in the medium term. It will not only lead to more accurate and widely accessible data, but also help Sri Lanka address its massive transparency and accountability problem. Investment in digitisation will be significant but is a vital necessity for better decision-making both on the part of the electorate and the elected officials.
Leave a Reply