Uganda
Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes: Data Module, Response by the Authorities, and Detailed Assessment Using the Data Quality Assessment Framework

This Report on the Observance of Standards And Codes (ROSC) on data module for Uganda provides an assessment of Uganda’s macroeconomic statistics against the recommendations of the General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) complemented by an assessment of data quality based on the IMF’s Data Quality Assessment Framework. This ROSC data module contains the main observations covering four macroeconomic data sets, namely national accounts, the consumer price index (CPI), government finance statistics (GFS), and balance of payments (BOP). It also provides an overview of the dissemination practices compared with the GDDS.

Abstract

This Report on the Observance of Standards And Codes (ROSC) on data module for Uganda provides an assessment of Uganda’s macroeconomic statistics against the recommendations of the General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) complemented by an assessment of data quality based on the IMF’s Data Quality Assessment Framework. This ROSC data module contains the main observations covering four macroeconomic data sets, namely national accounts, the consumer price index (CPI), government finance statistics (GFS), and balance of payments (BOP). It also provides an overview of the dissemination practices compared with the GDDS.

Acronyms

1968 SNA

System of National Accounts 1968

1993 SNA

System of National Accounts 1993

BPM5

Balance of Payments Statistics Manual, fifth edition

BOP

Balance of payments

BOU

Bank of Uganda

COICOP

Classification of Individual Consumption by Purpose

CPI

Consumer Price Index

DQAF July 2003

Data Quality Assessment Framework, July 2003 version

DSBB

Dissemination Standards Bulletin Board

GDDS

General Data Dissemination System

GFS

Government finance statistic

GFSM 1986

A Manual on Government Finance Statistics, 1986

GFSM 2001

Government Financial Statistics Manual 2001

IFMS

Integrated Financial Management System

IMF

International Monetary Fund

ITRS

International Transactions Reporting System

MFPED

Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development

NA

National accounts

ROSC

Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes

SUT

Supply and use table

UBOS

Uganda Bureau of Statistics

UNHS

Uganda National Household Survey

I. Overall Assessment

1. This Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes (ROSC) data module contains the following main observations covering four macroeconomic datasets: national accounts, the consumer price index (CPI), government finance statistics (GFS), and balance of payments (BOP). Within the available budget, the Ugandan authorities produce macroeconomic statistics with a strong emphasis on quality. They attach much importance to coordination across statistics, aiming at removing possible differences. The Uganda Bureau of Statistics Act, 1998 (Statistics Act) provides the legal basis for official statistics including national accounts and price statistics. The Statistics Act does mention BOP, but does not explicitly mention GFS. However, it does give the Uganda Bureau of Statistics the possibility to mandate other agencies to compile statistics. Because of this, it is seen as the legal basis for the agencies producing these statistics as well. In some key areas within the same datasets assessed, Uganda is not following most recent international standards, but plans are in place to improve this. In real sector, external sector statistics, and government finance statistics, usefulness of statistics suffers from limited coverage or lacking source data. In particular, this affects the national accounts that do not adequately cover agriculture, and the CPI that does not cover rural areas. GFS are limited to budgetary central government and local government. For the real and external sector, this is largely an issue of inadequate resources, which is also the cause for delays in publication, most notably for BOP statistics and GFS in the Bank of Uganda’s publications. Notwithstanding delays in publications as noted, statistical programs are user oriented, which promotes the serviceability of the statistics. Data dissemination increasingly uses agencies’ websites, which are informative but could usefully be further developed.

2. Section II provides a summary assessment by agency and dataset based on a four-part scale. This is followed by staff recommendations in Section III. Uganda started posting its metadata on the Dissemination Standards Bulletin Board (DSBB) on May 22, 2000. Appendix I provides an overview of Uganda’s dissemination practices compared to the GDDS. The authorities’ response to this report and a volume of detailed assessments are presented in separate documents.

3. In applying the IMF’s Data Quality Assessment Framework (DQAF July 2003), the remainder of this section presents the mission’s main conclusions. The presentation is done at the level of the DQAF’s quality dimensions, by agency for the first two dimensions and across datasets for the remaining four.

4. Prerequisites of quality and assurances of integrity:

  • The Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), as empowered by the Statistics Act, has primary responsibility for official statistics. UBOS stresses coordination with other data producers and users, which it ensures through a Coordination Unit that has set up coordinating committees. Resources are not sufficient to meet the planned developments, including much needed expansion of source data. UBOS is not certain of its resources because it has no clearly identified position in the government budget.Demand is all-important in deciding the data collection program, and management strongly promotes quality awareness. The Statistics Act provides for the independence of the UBOS Executive Director. Measures are in place to promote transparency, although UBOS does not advise the public of prerelease of some of its data within government. A Code of Conduct (Uganda Government Standing Orders 1992) exists for civil servants that staff are acquainted with.

  • No specific legal documents directly mention the responsibility of the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MFPED) to compile and disseminate GFS. However, Section 21 of the Statistics Act states that UBOS can mandate authority to an institution to compile and publish specific statistical data. UBOS relies on the MFPED to compile and disseminate GFS data. Data are protected under the Oath of Secrecy (Uganda Government Standing Orders 1992). The Public Finance and Accountability Act, 2003 assigns the responsibility to collect, compile, and disseminate data on Uganda’s public finances to the MFPED. Data sharing and coordination with various data collecting agencies is satisfactory. Available resources meet present needs of most fiscal data programs. Changes in data collections follow demand, and the MFPED fosters quality awareness.

  • UBOS has also mandated compiling and publishing BOP statistics to another institution, namely, the Bank of Uganda (BOU). The Bank of Uganda Statute, 1993 assures confidentiality of reporters’ data, although the BOU also uses these data for supervision. Resources are not entirely adequate to meet needs and may be the cause for delays in publication. The BOU has limited ability to collect information from nonfinancial institutions. The BOU has an advisory committee following its data relevance, and management stresses the need for accurate statistics. The BOU rigorously upholds integrity of its statistics, and statistical considerations are the base for the choice of source data and design of data collection. The BOU promotes transparency of its statistical procedures and staff’s awareness of ethical guidelines. The BOU has been very receptive to technical assistance advice from the IMF and has made good progress in implementing the recommendations.

5. Methodological soundness is uneven within each of the four assessed datasets. The national accounts do not follow up-to-date international standards and have a limited scope, but use international classifications and a generally correct base for recording. The CPI conforms broadly to international standards but also has a limited scope. The index covers six urban areas but excludes rural areas. The GFS follow A Manual on Government Finance Statistics, 1986 (GFSM 1986), and migration to the Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001 (GFSM 2001) has started. The statistics do not cover all the financial activity of government. The BOP statistics follow international standards although some statistics depart from definitions, scope, and classifications.

6. Accuracy and reliability differ across datasets. The CPI and the GFS have a sound underpinning with data, while the national accounts and the BOP statistics suffer from gaps. Most importantly, for the national accounts the coverage of agriculture is wanting.

7. Serviceability is generally adequate. Periodicity meets requirements, and the national accounts and the CPI are also timely. GFS and BOP statistics, however, suffer from delay in publication. All three agencies actively promote consistency, although in GFS an adjustment line is needed to match overall deficit/surplus. Publications include a note signaling revisions, except for the national accounts. Usefulness of the data is an important consideration for all three agencies.

8. Accessibility of data is adequate across datasets but not of metadata. In addition to hard copy publications, data are available through the agencies’ websites. Detailed data are available on demand. Metadata are available only through the IMF’s DSBB, and are not all up-to-date.

II. Assessment by Agency and Dataset

9. Assessment of the quality of four macroeconomic datasets—national accounts, consumer price index, government finance, and balance of payments statistics—was conducted using the DQAF July 2003. In this section, the results are presented at the level of the DQAF elements and using a four-point rating scale (Table 1). Assessments of the prerequisites of data quality and the assurances of integrity (Dimensions “0” and “1” of the DQAF) are presented in Tables 2ac. For each dataset, the assessment of methodological soundness, accuracy and reliability, serviceability, and accessibility (Dimensions “2” to “5” of the DQAF) are shown in Tables 3ad.

Table 1.

Uganda: Data Quality Assessment Framework (July 2003)—Summary Results

Practice observed: current practices generally in observance meet or achieve the objectives of DQAF internationally accepted statistical practices without any significant deficiencies.Practice largely observed: some departures, but these are not seen as sufficient to raise doubts about the authorities’ ability to observe the DQAF practices. Practice largely not observed: significant departures and the authorities will need to take significant action to achieve observance. Practice not observed: most DQAF practices are not met. Not applicable: used only exceptionally when statistical practices do not apply to a country’s circumstances.
Table 2a.

Uganda: Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—Uganda Bureau of Statistics

Table 2b.

Uganda: Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—Ministry of Finance, Planning

and Economic Development

Table 2c.

Uganda: Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—Bank of Uganda

Table 3a.

Uganda: Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—National Accounts

Table 3b.

Uganda: Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Consumer Price Index

Table 3c.

Uganda: Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Government Finance Statistics

Table 3d.

Uganda: Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Balance of Payments Statistics

III. Staff’s Recommendations

10. Based on the review of Uganda’s statistical practices on four datasets, discussions with the three data producing agencies, and survey responses from data users (see Appendix III of the Detailed Assessments volume), the mission has the following recommendations. They are designed to increase further Uganda’s adherence to internationally accepted statistical practices and would, in the mission’s view, enhance the analytical usefulness of Uganda’s statistics.

Cross-cutting recommendations

  • Strengthen the mandate for the BOU and the MFPED for collecting, compiling, and publishing their respective datasets; provide for a sound legal basis for data sharing among data-producing agencies; and for strengthened reporting requirements.

  • Undertake a review of data dissemination practices, addressing, in particular, provision of current and comprehensive descriptions of sources and methods.

  • Develop sound revision policies and practices, and make them known to the public.

National Accounts

  • Give UBOS its own budget line, and have its budget subject to parliamentary approval.

  • Give UBOS a budget sufficient to effectively implement the activities outlined in its five-year plan.

  • Undertake an agriculture census supplemented by annual sample surveys.

  • Undertake economy-wide business survey at least every five years, supplemented by annual sample surveys.

  • Develop separate estimates for the finance industry.

  • Release national accounts in news release format with accompanying text on economic performance and reason for revisions.

Consumer Price Index

  • Expand and update the coverage of the index to cover the rural areas.

  • Update the reference and weights base as soon as possible to 2003–2004.

Government Finance Statistics

  • Compile and disseminate GFS data for extrabudgetary central government and the National Social Security Fund.

  • Disseminate budgetary central government operations and local government data in the GFSM 2001 format.

  • Consolidate and disseminate GFS data for central government and general government.

  • Improve the accessibility of data by (1) releasing data on a more timely basis; (2) providing contact points, and (3) advising availability of additional series.

  • Migrate to the GFSM 2001.

Balance of Payments Statistics

  • Ensure adequate resources with a view to improving balance of payments data.

  • Complete the planned conversion of balance of payments statistics into BPM5, resolving existing problems with definitions, scope, and classifications.

  • Improve the accuracy and timeliness of source data by strengthening the ITRS, and providing for better integration of the ITRS in the balance of payments compilation process.

  • Refine the surveys frameworks, including those for the private capital flows survey to reduce respondent burden, while maintaining the information required.

  • Improve trade data by incorporating the results of the Survey of Informal Cross Border Trade and greater use of partner country data sources for verification purposes.

  • Improve dissemination media and format by launching a separate BOP statistics publication with a greater level of detail.

  • Develop new source data and estimation techniques to ensure coverage in the BOP statistics of the following components: (1) export of freight and import of passenger transportation; (2) compensation of employees; (3) direct investment abroad; (4) the portfolio investment, assets; and (5) financial derivatives.

APPENDIX

Table 4.

Uganda: Practices Compared to the GDDS Coverage Periodicity, and Timeliness of Data

Italics indicate encouraged categories

Dissemination as part of a high-frequency (e.g. monthly) publication.