Local statistics is a key tool for analysing and making decisions by authorities at all levels on recovery and development. Local statistics data is the basis for information support of local development management, restoration of territories and infrastructure, spatial development planning, development and monitoring of local strategies, plans, programmes of social and economic development, and evaluation of the effectiveness of local policies.
In order to conduct a comprehensive study of data needs at the local level and develop a concept of municipal statistics and a relevant draft law, a team of experts from the Centre for Innovations Development, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, Drohobych City Institute, with the support of the USAID GOVERLA Project and the assistance of the Ministry of Development, Communities, Territories and Infrastructure of Ukraine, surveyed nearly 600 territorial communities. The full text of the study is available here.
The survey results showed that 46.9% of territorial communities need additional data. This need is more pronounced among rural (51.3%) and urban communities (47%). The share of urban communities that are not satisfied with the available data is 26.7%, which is almost twice as high as in rural communities (14.3%).
| LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH THE NEED FOR DATA BY TYPE OF COMMUNITY | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Answer options | Percentage of responses,% | including by type of community | ||
| urban | settlement | rural | ||
| Completely satisfied, there is enough data | 33,5 | 26,3 | 30,9 | 43,5 |
| We need more data | 46,9 | 47,0 | 51,3 | 42,2 |
| Not satisfied, no data available | 19,6 | 26,7 | 17,8 | 14,3 |
| Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
The survey also revealed that the highest level of satisfaction with the information needs of communities is in the areas of local budgets (65.1%), education (59.2%) and culture (56.3%). At the same time, the most acute information deficit is observed in the areas of foreign economic activity (49.7% of dissatisfied respondents), science, technology and innovation (46.1%), and the labour market (36.8%).
Communities try to meet most of their data needs on their own through primary accounting. 77 per cent of communities keep primary data records at the community level, but only 6.5 per cent at the settlement level. Centralised sources, such as oblast administrations, the State Statistics Service, and central authorities, provide only about 40% of the data needs of communities.
Fig. 2 Sources of data used by ATCs for their needs by local development areas/sections of statistics
At the same time, at the settlement level, ATCs carry out primary accounting mainly in the areas of demography, housing, education, culture, healthcare, and social protection. At the level of starosta district – mainly in the field of demography.
| AT WHAT LEVEL OF DETAIL DO DIFFERENT TYPES OF TGS CARRY OUT PRIMARY REGISTRATION? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Answer options | Percentage of responses, % | including by type of KH | ||
| urban | settlement | rural | ||
| Territorial community | 77,0 | 80,4 | 78,5 | 71,9 |
| Starosta district | 2,8 | 1,9 | 3,1 | 3,3 |
| Settlement | 6,5 | 4,3 | 4,7 | 10,6 |
| We do not carry out | 13,7 | 13,4 | 13,6 | 14,2 |
| Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Fig. 3 At what level of detail do CCs carry out primary accounting by local development areas/sections of statistics?
Data availability also varies significantly by area. Communities rated the availability of data on local budgets the best (88.2% of “good” and “very good” ratings), education (83.2%) and healthcare (81.3%). The worst situation is with access to data on science, technology and innovation (70% of “poor” and “very poor” ratings), foreign economic activity (63.5) and the labour market (55.3% ).
Fig. 4 CCs’ assessment of the level of data availability by local development areas/sections of statistics
Thus, the study has revealed significant problems with the access of territorial communities to the data necessary for effective local development management, namely
- uneven provision of data in different areas;
- lack of data in the context of individual communities;
- limited access to administrative data;
- refusals to provide information at the request of communities;
- lack of primary data at the community level;
- lack of up-to-date and dynamic data in community strategic documents;
- lack of transparency in the methodology of data collection through surveys;
- inconvenient formats of available data.
The existing problems with access to data significantly reduce the ability of communities to carry out high-quality strategic planning, monitor development, and attract investment. Overcoming them requires systematisation of data collection and provision at the central level, with clear rules for territorial communities to access information through official channels.
The following conclusions can be drawn from the study:
- State regional policy requires official statistics at all levels. The survey revealed a lack of systematic information at the level of communities and territories.
- 64.5% of territorial communities (TCs) are dissatisfied with the quality of data. Urban and settlement ATCs with a larger population are most in need of additional data.
- The level of satisfaction with the data needs of ATCs varies by oblast. The best situation is in the areas with the greatest powers of local authorities, and the worst is with data on population, environment, economy, labour market and innovation.
- CCs solve data problems on their own through requests, use of registers and IAS. Requests to the State Statistics Service meet only 16.4% of the needs.
- Half of the urban CCs carry out primary accounting, but the quality of data is low due to the lack of unified forms.
- The efficiency of data management depends on the human and technical capacity of communities. Many CCs still use paper-based data management.
- The absence of a unified data collection system worsens the quality of decision-making by local authorities and limits access to funding programmes.
- The structure of the Local Statistics Indicator System is proposed, taking into account Eurostat recommendations and survey results.
- The TSGs point to the need for a single responsible institution to ensure the methodology of collection and access to statistical indicators. The most frequently mentioned CEBs are the State Statistics Service, the Ministry of Digital Transformation and MinRegion.