How to improve the UK's statistics: our response to the Lievesley Review

An independent review of the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA) was published in March this year. We welcome its call for the UKSA to address gaps in official statistics, but urge the UKSA to ensure its response meets the needs of all statistics users - particularly groups that are currently under-represented.

A lot depends on our statistics system. Banks and businesses use economic statistics like GDP to plan and forecast; researchers use social statistics to understand our society; and journalists and MPs use all these numbers to hold the Government to account.

So it’s important that someone makes sure the stats system running well. This is the job of the UK Statistics Authority (UKSA), which has a duty in law to make sure that official statistics serve the ‘public good’.

Professor Denise Lievesley CBE recently led an independent review of UKSA, to see how well it was meeting this goal. The review expresses concerns about the number of people who can’t currently get the statistics they need - worries we have had at CfPD for some time. (See e.g. our recent submission to the Office for Statistics Regulation, and our work on data gaps.)

We therefore welcome the review’s proposal for a Statistical Assembly that will set the statistical agenda, in consultation with a wide range of users.

But we still have an outstanding concern. Most of the statistical system still relies on ‘passive’ user research methods - traditional consultations that ask people to send in a response - or discussions with other government bodies or other well-known users.

If the Assembly takes this form, then it may only benefit well-connected groups, or those with the connections and time to take part. (Put bluntly, the Bank of England and government bodies are already very good at getting their needs met, and charities and journalists are much less likely to engage.)

Some users of statistics, like the media and third sector groups, have little spare capacity to find and respond to such consultations, and are unlikely to even identify as ‘statistics users’. This is a risk for UKSA, given its duty to ensure that statistics serve the public good.

So we recommend that UKSA identifies how it will gather user needs from outside its usual engagement base. This should include a realistic plan to identify needs from organisations with limited spare capacity. UKSA should explore using modern proactive user research methods, participatory techniques like citizen panels, and desk research to identify unmet need for statistics.

You can read our full response here. If you’re interested in this work, please get in touch: contact@centreforpublicdata.org.