The hundreds of indicators discussed cover GDP; accumulation and consumption; balance of international payments; state budgets; import and export of goods; labour productivity; investment and construction; and much more.

The main social indicators for the whole country include population, labour, education, science and technology, and health and living standards.

“The submission of an indicator framework for enactment would need huge brainstorming and efforts from authorities at all levels. Such indicators are of great importance as they are the foundation for the government to manage the economy, sectors, and localities,” Anh said at a consultation workshop in Hanoi last week.

Currently, there is no unified and comprehensive set of indicators and assessments for government agencies and the prime minister to decide on goals for the country’s 5-year and annual socioeconomic plans for key economic regions and localities.

“This has caused great difficulties for leaders, managers, and policymakers to supervise, assess, and monitor socioeconomic development,” Anh said.

Besides that, many qualitative goals need to be studied and quantified with specific norms to make it more favourable to supervise and assess results of the implementation of resolutions and plans on annual and 5-year development.

Data-based management

Aware that designing such an indicator framework is complicated, the MPI has submitted a detailed document on the indicators with content that must be clarified.

In addition to the content on the necessity for and direction of the indicator framework, other content has been mentioned, such as principles for making the framework, appendices, and its outline, as well as the number of norms used and systems for ministries, sectors, and localities.

At present, the number of indicators needed remains unfixed.

To ensure the comprehensiveness of the assessment framework, the MPI has relied on goals and norms carved in many important documents, including Party resolutions and the Socioeconomic Development Plan for 2021-2025.

Presently, ministries and sectors have also been building sets of their own indicators to evaluate performance results, or in areas they are interested in. For example, some use the Administrative Reform Index, which evaluate annual performance in ministries and provinces.

Meanwhile, the Satisfaction Index on Public Administrative Services measures the happiness of people and organisations with the services offered by state administrative agencies to assess the quality of public administrative service provision.

In addition, the Digital Transformation Index tracks related annual results across the country; and the Business Regulatory Reform Effort Assessment Index aims to classify and rank business regulation reform efforts and promote related activities.

Except for the latter framework on business reform, which is implemented online, the other sets of indicators aim to assess the annual performance of ministries, agencies, and localities, and are not indicators for general direction or operation. “This is a gap that needs further investigation and analysis,” Anh said.

Lam Dinh Thang, director of Ho Chi Minh City’s Department of Information and Communications, said that the city had applied high technology to assess its socioeconomic performance.

“By late 2022, the city has begun to operate an online governance platform for its People’s Committee. The platform, for the committee’s management and direction, is now in its first phase,” Thang said.

The first phase includes four systems used for following socioeconomic norms: supervising the settlement of public complaints and proposals; overseeing the settlement of administrative procedures; the provision of public services for people; and supervising the directions of the People’s Committee.

For example, the system of overseeing the settlement of administrative procedures and the provision of public services for people will connect all data resulting from the processing process in handling administrative procedures and providing public services from departments and localities throughout the city. It will automatically collect information and make accurate evaluations to help leaders of the city, districts, and sectors monitor and provide public services.

Fresh proposals

Highlighting the need for a unified indicator framework, Prof. Nguyen Quang Thai, chairman of the Vietnam Economic Association, said that the agencies and leaders must gradually shift from a traditional direction such as time-consuming phone calls or paper-based dispatches to data-based direction and management.

“Having accurate and reliable information ensures the effectiveness and efficiency of the policies,” Thai said. “A bottom-up tracking, monitoring, and reporting system automatically linked through the IT system will increase accountability of individuals and operating agencies, avoiding the tendency to take reasons for avoiding responsibility. Traditional methods of direction and management currently do not respond promptly to reality.”

He also suggested a unified indicator framework and operating information system be built up as soon as possible to serve state agencies and leaders in administration.

“This is an unprecedented product, so it is necessary to develop a new system. The active and proactive participation of all the stakeholders and parties is a decisive factor in the usefulness and feasibility of the governing information framework,” Thai noted.

Le Tuan Anh, deputy director of the Department of General Affairs under the General Statistics Office, said that the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI) is consulting on a draft indicator framework for the administration of government agencies.

Source: VIR