In 2010 Ghana announced a
60% increase in GDP estimates and Nigeria may soon follow suit. But how
can the economies of these African countries seemingly grow overnight?
The answer is in the maths.
To calculate GDP in countries where data is sparse like Ghana
or Nigeria, government agencies select a "base year" - a year when
unusually good data on the economy is available. They then add on the
extra data they collect each year to get a rough idea of economic
growth.
In 2010 Ghana changed its base year from 1993 to 2006, and
this led to a jump in GDP and the conclusion that, in previous
estimates, about $13bn (£8bn) of economic activity had been missed. As a
result, Ghana was upgraded from a low-income to a lower-middle-income
country.
Nigeria is widely expected to announce a change in its base
year from 1990 to 2008, although it won't be clear until the
calculations are done what exactly this will do to GDP figures.
"When there are big structural
changes in an economy the base year can quickly become outdated and
that's exactly what happened in Ghana," says Todd Moss, development
scholar and blogger at the Center for Global Development in Washington.
"The services sector basically exploded and the way they were
calculating it they were assuming the services sector was still quite
small so they were grossly underestimating Ghana's growth and economic
activity."
Political interference was partly to blame for the slow
rebasing of the Ghanaian economy. Until 2000 most institutions were not
independent enough to be able to put out their own views and their own
data, argues Sydney Casely Hayford, a business and financial analyst
from Ghana.
Ghana finally rebased in 2010, in part because of pressure from the IMF and the World Bank.
But are the figures now reliable?
Sydney Casely Hayford, who has
been studying the development of Ghana's economy over the last 10 years,
says the GDP figure could still be out by between 10-20%.
"Until we are able to go in and do a proper quantification of
the informal economy in this country it is uncertain exactly what
degree of variation we have in our GDP figures.
"The figures are better but they are still wrong.
"We've settled into a particular lethargy. Now that we've
been able to come to the 60% adjustment we've left it there and we are
not looking to see how we can refine that and make sure that it is
accurate consistently, so I think there is a little bit more work that
can be done."
But what impact do poor statistics actually have?
Morten Jerven, author of Poor
Numbers: How We Are Misled by African Development Statistics and What to
Do about It, says they can have tangible consequences.
"These kinds of statistics are vital to international
organisations and non-governmental organisations that for instance
provide aid to Ghana. Now Ghana is a middle-income country it is
according to that statistic not eligible for concessional lending from
the World Bank for instance," he says.
But GDP figures are not the only useful measure of economic activity,
argues Todd Moss. Other indicators such as mobile phone ownership, the
sale of bicycles or other consumer goods and even lights at night can
all play a part.
So who is to blame for the bad statistics?
"In many countries the statistical office is like an orphan.
I've encountered cases where the minister is not even aware that the
statistical office is under his ministry," says Shanta Devarajan, The
World Bank Chief Economist for Africa.
But, the revision of the figures seen in Ghana, and due soon
in Nigeria, should be interpreted as good news overall says Devarajan.
"It is a sign of progress that we have more up-to-date statistics."
No comments:
Post a Comment