Statistics, Knowledge and Policy
Antoine Simonpietri
PARIS21
October 12, 2006
PARIS21
The Partnership in statistics for development in the 21st Century
(PARIS21) was established in November 1999 as a international
partnership of policymakers, analysts and statisticians.
PARIS21 is served by a small secretariat hosted by the Development
Cooperation Directorate of OECD in Paris, France.
PARIS21 Objective
 Promote a culture of evidence-based policy making (EBPM) in all
countries, and especially in developing countries,
 Improve effectiveness in reducing poverty and achieving the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs).
 PARIS21 helps to achieve this by stimulating more effective dialogue
and greater demand, availability and use of better statistics.
 PARIS21 is focussing its efforts on assisting all low-income countries to
design, implement, and monitor a National Strategy for the
Development of Statistics (NSDS) by 2006 – with a view to starting to
implement them by the following year and producing better national
statistics by the time of the next Millennium review in 2010.
What does evidence-based policy-making mean ?
Evidence-Based Policy-Making means that public policy decisions are
informed by careful and rigorous analysis using sound and transparent
data.
Statistics are needed to:




Analyze present situation and key issues
Inform programme design and policy choice
Monitor policy implementation
Evaluate policy impact
Policy making and good statistics
The production and dissemination of good statistics does not automatically
lead directly to the adoption of a specific policy.
This is because :
 Different types of (equally sound) data may have different
implications for policy.
 Different types of analysis based on the same data can have
different policy implications
 There is no guarantee that a majority vote on a policy decision
will be consistent with the evidence.
 Good statistics are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for EBPM.
Why is evidence-based policy-making desirable?
In a democracy, EBPM is desirable:
 To ensure the transparency of policy-making
 To enhance the accountability of policy-makers
Transparency
 Important on grounds of equity and efficiency
 Equity: citizens have the right to know how and why decisions are taken
which affect their lives. This is an essential part of good governance.
 Efficiency provides private firms and households with some assurance
when taking rational personal and business decisions – thereby
promoting the efficiency of capital markets which in turn contributes to
faster economic growth.
Accountability
 Many types of accountability operate in a robust democracy. All require
good data to be effective.
 MPs are regularly accountable to the electorate
 Executive branch of government is (in principle) accountable to MPs
(legislature)
 Senior civil servants accountable to Ministers
 Junior civil servants accountable to senior civil servants
 Between elections, the media and civil society organizations provide
other mechanisms through which segments of the electorate hold the
Government to account.
What are some alternatives to evidence-based
policy-making ?





Power and influence of sectional interests
Corruption
Political ideology
Arbitrariness
Use of anecdotal evidence
Why the urgency to improve evidence-based policymaking ?
 Need to track progress towards the MDGs and monitor advances
towards the targets of Poverty Reduction Strategies in HIPCs in IDAeligible countries.
 Rapid development of technically-sophisticated and data-demanding
methods of policy analysis:
 Wide range of microeconomic and macroeconomic models
using quantitative data.
 A variety of participatory techniques based on the collection of
qualitative information.
Why the urgency to improve evidence-based policymaking ?
 Costs of making faulty public policy decisions in the poorest countries
have increased in recent years as a result of changes in the level and
allocation of foreign aid.
 Advances in ICT, such as the Internet, mobile telephony and FM radio
stations, have weakened the control exercised by governments over the
production and dissemination of information. This has led to a broader
and more intense dialogue with the private sector and civil society.
Use of EBPM
Analyze present situation and key issues
 Assess key socio-economic problems and constraints
 Evaluate existing policies with regard to these problems and constraints
 Identify the disconnect between policy and reality
Use of EBPM
Inform programme design and policy choice
 Importance of spatial information: disaggregated poverty maps, satellite
information on deforestation/ agriculture frontier
 Empirical research shaped design of PROGRESA (Mexico):

Cash transfers paid to mothers

Larger grants paid to female pupils than to male pupils for
secondary school
USE of EBPM
Monitor Policy Implementation
 Monitor key indicators to see if on-track
 Failure to disclose monitoring information by policy-makers can make a
bad situation worse
Use of EBPM
Evaluate Policy Impact
 Measuring policy impact is more methodologically and informationally
demanding than monitoring policy implementation.
 Evaluation involves attributing causation, which requires that the effects
of a policy be isolated and quantified. This can only be done rigorously if
an appropriate counterfactual is identified.
 The ideal experimental context for an evaluation is where subjects are
randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.
Use of EBPM
 Random evaluation of PROGRESA undertaken by IFPRI which showed
that the interventions had a significantly positive effect on human capital
formation among children in target group.
 PROGRESA extended to urban areas in 2001-2002.
 Delay in evaluation may lead to discontinuation of programme before
results of evaluation are complete, e.g.. PACES in Colombia
How to promote evidence-based policy-making ?
 Acknowledge and measure differences in statistical capacity among low
income countries.
 Develop a country typology to identify strategic priorities.
 Elaborate a National Strategy for the Development of Statistics (NSDS)
What is a National Strategy for the Development of
Statistics (NSDS)?
 NSDS is a product and a process to ensure that better statistics and
statistical analyses are available and used by national and international
decision-makers and civil society.
 An NSDS is a strategic approach to planning statistical capacity building
across the entire national statistical system (NSS), encompassing data
production, analysis and use, and all actors in the system, including line
ministries.
 An NSDS will provide a vision for where the NSS should be in five to ten
years and provide a robust framework and action plan for building the
statistical capacity to meet both current and future data needs.
 The NSDS approach looks at statistical capacity building through a
development and management lens; and looks at development policy
and best management practices through a statistical lens - all in pursuit
of better development outcomes.
What is a National Strategy for the Development of
Statistics (NSDS)?
A process which
 provides an assessment of the current status of the National
Statistical System (NSS)
 sets out the objectives for improving the NSS over a 5-10 year period
 outlines the actions required in the short-and long-term to achieve
these objectives
What is a National Strategy for the Development of
Statistics (NSDS)?
A process which
 is consultative and participatory in order to:
• mobilize support
• build ownership
• obtain political commitment from all stakeholders to reform and
improve the statistical system
 builds on what already exists including GDDS, SDDS, Data Quality
Assessment Framework (DQAF), Statistical Master Plans (SMP), and
Multi-annual Integrated Statistical Programmes (MISP).
 is integrated into development and national poverty reduction policies,
such as the PRSP
Some Essentials of NSDS
 High-level political support and leadership
 Identification of user needs and data gaps and weaknesses
 Review of existing statistical production and analysis, capacity, legal
and institutional framework and coordination arrangements
 Setting priorities and strategies
PARIS21 Regional Programmes
 Baseline assessments
 Regional workshops
 Advocacy at country level
 Facilitating technical and financial support
 Consolidating partner efforts
 Reporting on progress
NSDS Programme in Latin America
 Some 10 regional workshops already held in Central America and the
Andean Community since 2002.
 Central American countries presented their finalised NSDSs to int’l
community.
 Andean Community countries to pursue strategic development/NSDS
approach.
Funding Central American NSDSs
Country Data
Action Plan Costs
Funding
Duration
(years)
Population (*)
GDP (**)
Statistical
capacity
building (*)
Statistical
operations (*)
National
contribution and
others (*)
Additional funding
to be sought (*)
TOTAL (*)
Costa Rica (2007-2011)
5
4.02
18.00
1.29
17.24
9.87
8.66
18.53
El Salvador (2005-2009)
5
6.00
11.40
2.79
28.46
27.59
3.66
31.25
Guatemala (2007-2009)
3
12.97
19.10
0.28
20.40
15.37
5.31
20.68
Honduras (2006-2010)
5
6.98
10.80
7.10
25.77
2.98
29.89
32.87
Nicaragua (2006-2010)
5
5.47
4.00
14.09
29.79
17.28
26.59
43.88
Panama (2006-2011)
6
3.30
14.70
5.33
9.52
9.52
5.33
14.86
30.88
131.18
82.62
79.44
162.06
COUNTRY
TOTAL
(*) millions
(**) billions
Conclusions
 EBPM is not just a slogan. It has essential for the design, monitoring
and evaluation of sound policies.
 There are many examples of how, when and where the use of good
statistics has improved economic policy-making and led to better policy
outcomes (and vice-versa). Investment in good statistics can provide
high social returns.
 There are reasons to promote EBPM now, namely, monitoring of MDGs,
need to evaluate aid effectiveness.
 The elaboration of an NSDS can contribute to a more coherent national
statistical system, responding to priority needs of statistical users and
policy-makers.
THANK YOU
www.paris21.org