Introduction

Events over the past year have suggested that all is not well in the Indian statistical system which serves as a backbone of planning. At the centre of it all, was the National Statistical Commission (NSC). It all began when a report, prepared by a committee appointed by the NSC, showed that under the new GDP series, the economy had grown at a much faster pace under the UPA, than previously estimated. A few months later, P C Mohanan, acting chairman of the NSC, and J V Meenakshi, Professor at the Delhi School of Economics, resigned from the NSC, protesting against the decision to not publish the NSSO’s employment survey. The results of the survey showed that unemployment in India had surged under the NDA. Then, a few weeks ago, another report by the NSSO showed that a large number of companies in the MCA21 database — which is integral to estimating GDP under the new series — either couldn’t be traced or had closed down or were operating in different sectors. This warrants a relook at the manner in which the MCA21 database is used for estimating GDP.

The major issues with Indian data standards

• Path of embarking on the evidence-based approach is not without obstacles: With evaluative studies varying in quality, there are doubts on which ones should be relied on and in what manner should a set of studies on a particular issue be appraised.

• Ethics:  Data collection is increasingly being done by contractual employees and for-profit organisations. Supervising them and ensuring their honesty remains challenging. A report in The Guardian in 2017 noted declining trust in official statistics around the world and argued that it damages democracy by jeopardising public knowledge and public argument.

• Employment: Absence of data on district-level employment for decentralised planning, data on circular migrant workers; the working and living conditions of women labour.

• Official data and post-truth politics: According to some political analysts and scholars, post 2014, in the age of post-truth politics there has been instances of manipulating and distorting data by the government. Post truth politics is evoking public emotions and deviation from facts and details of policy

• Faulty sampling frames: Identifying respondents and sample selection is poor o Survey designs, questionnaires are inappropriate in many instances. For instance The RBI adopts inflation targeting approach to maintain price level-monetary policy. This approach is based on data on inflations expectations of individuals The reliability and validity of the data is a big question as ASER reports highlights extremely low mathematical skills of Indians.

• Delay/ Sporadic nature of Release of Data: There is no strict process of monitoring for release of data. o Delay in publishing data is a persisting problem. However, there has been improvement in recent years

• Discrepancy in data: Lack of uniformity in data across government agencies is a major concern o For instance there is data contradiction on jobs as recently EPFO estimated that 3.68 million jobs were generated till November of fiscal year 2018- much higher estimation than that of other agencies

• Quality/ Accuracy of data is another concern: In 2011, commerce secretary admitted that India’s export figures for the April–October period were inflated by US$9.4 billion due to a misclassification of certain items and data entry errors. o There has also been question over the accuracy of the Index of Industrial Production o Allegations that NSS systematically underestimated household consumption

• Infringement of privacy by the government’s data-collection machinery

Steps taken by government

• On May 23, while the nation was waiting to witness the outcome of one of the largest parliamentary elections, the Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation (MOSPI) issued an order concerning the merger of two large government organs.
• The National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) will be merged with the Central Statistics Office (CSO) – to create an entity called the National Statistical Organisation (NSO).
• The chief statistician has indicated that one major justification for joining the NSSO and CSO is that it will bring about administrative ease. But, one does not know the effectiveness of such an ease when a data generator and user are the same simultaneously.

Centralisation of data?

• With the merger of both bodies, one gets the impression that access to data from the NSSO is primarily for official use by the MoSPI and perhaps the NITI Aayog. After all, this merger will enable government agencies including the NITI Aayog to get a quick hand on the information system – for use or abuse.
• Secondly, centralisation of data in the ministry can become a hurdle for quick and timely release of the data for public research and debate

Conclusion

While the nation talks of accountability and transparency in the process of development and governance, it appears to be gearing towards greater centralisation and administrative convenience, particularly in the area of statistical information generation. It also remains to be seen whether the government agencies will get sufficient time to digest and use the rich data being generated by the NSSO. 

Living in the age of e-governance and digital ecosystems spread across the human life, data has become the core variable in guiding government policy. A credible, reliable and meaningful data can mean a lot in making e-governance a fulcrum for good governance and planned economic development of the country. Thus, India needs to bring both structural and functional sanctity to its databanks to ensure its developmental objectives.