Why Data is Critical to Governance

In Accelerating India’s Development, Karthik Muralidharan says:

“The centrality of data for governance is seen by noting that the very origin of the word ‘statistics’ comes from its crucial role in managing the affairs of the state.”

But India’s data systems are outdated. They are designed to track national progress, not for supporting day to day governance. The focus is on measuring visible inputs (how many schools?) rather than harder to measure outcomes (quality of education). The actual citizen’s experience is barely measured (was the service easy or convenient?).

 

Even worse, any data that is gathered is by the respective departments themselves. Who have a vested interest in making themselves look good. And who may not have the right data analysis or statistical skills anyway.

 

The lack of investment in our measurement infrastructure thus has many consequences: (1) money is spent on the wrong policies, (2) a focus on easily measured inputs instead of harder to quantify outcomes, (3) lack of timely feedback on policies.

 

The good news though is that in the digital age, data gathering isn’t expensive like earlier times. Tablets can be used, where the software can filter the relevant questions based on answers to the first questions. Location tagging can serve as a check to ensure the data collectors actually went to the designated areas. And software can crunch the findings quickly. Further, data can be collected more frequently via random checks – faster feedback allows the government to see how the policy is faring, and spot patterns (works in some districts but not others).

“Technology has dramatically reduced the cost and increased the speed and reliability of data collection.”

 

In theory, governments could change the focus on outcomes rather than inputs and intent. Depending on the scheme, end user feedback could be sought via smartphone apps or websites. Nested supervision could be added as a check, where schools could self-check first, but a block level officer could cross-check some data at random, and the district officer could cross-check the block level data randomly. Even if individuals lack the capability to spot discrepancies, software could be purchased for such purposes.

 

Muralidharan makes an interesting point on the optics problem. Even a genuine official or politician would worry whether the data would make him look bad and affect his promotion or re-election. Why take that risk?

“(The politician should) focus public attention on the improvements rather than the poor initial outcomes.”

If the improvements are palpable, the outcome could speak for itself.