Good afternoon from Paris, and thank you very much for the invitation to provide some input for you. I'm Duncan Millard, the chief statistician at the International Energy Agency, and former chief statistician of the Department of Energy & Climate Change in the U.K.
I hope to bring some international and national experience to try to answer, firstly, the five questions you've asked me, and then, obviously, to contribute to any follow-up questions.
To start, one of the points was about the benefits of energy statistics and I think they need to be very clear to everybody. These days, energy underpins all social and economic activity. Therefore, the need for energy security, the need to understand energy, and the need to properly understand where energy comes from for businesses, investors, and the public are all very clear.
The need for energy data is also expanding. Maybe some time ago we were just looking at energy security and perhaps production, but now, increasingly, we're looking at the growth of renewables, energy efficiency, prices, and investment. This is perhaps particularly so in a country such as Canada where the data we discovered shows that energy relates to about 7% of GDP and about 18% of exports; and for consumers, energy and transport spending is around 6% of total household expenditure. So energy is very important there.
Energy is also very important for Canada in the international context. Again, using our global data, we can see that Canada is the second-largest producer of hydro, fourth-largest producer of crude oil, fourth-largest gas producer, sixth-largest nuclear producer, and seventh-largest wind producer. It's very clear that energy is very important to Canada and all Canadians.
The next question was about meeting user needs. It's very clear that the users have a variety of needs, but they also have a variety of needs to get the data. There will need to be different dissemination strategies used, and we're discovering an increasing use of social media as a means of getting information to consumers.
Overall, with energy information, you can think of the energy balance as being the fundamental framework for it, bringing together the production, transformation, and final use of all energy types in a framework where the interactions between them all can be understood and data quality can be improved through an energy balance.
Linked to that, this data is supported by information on energy prices, RD and D, and also bespoke policy monitoring, and it's worthwhile just saying a little thing about the role of the statisticians in policy-making.
If you think about a normal policy development cycle, you can think about the step of understanding the need for a policy, and one of the questions might be, is there a policy gap or is there an information gap? You can think of the development of policy and starting to appraise ideas in terms of how the outcomes of a policy might be monitored, and what the baseline is for moving that data forward. You can think about preparing for delivery and the potential need to undertake a pilot of the policies and put in place the policy and monitoring framework. Then, of course, there is the final stage, during and after the policy is running, the need to monitor and evaluate the policy. Thus, a very important question is the extent to which statisticians and energy data are being used effectively in policy-making.
The next question raised was around gaps in energy data. Of course, I'm not in the position to answer a question on gaps from the perspective of the Canadian government or the Canadian people, but perhaps I can make a few reflections from the point of view of the IEA.
We've been working very closely with colleagues in Statistics Canada and NRCan for many years to try to improve data, and we're very grateful for their continuing support in working with us. We do note potentially two larger issues, firstly around timeliness. Our deadline for data is September, and often our colleagues in Canada are not able to meet that. Other countries aren't either, but we just note that. I don't know if that's the same issue in relation to information for Canadians.
There's also the issue that I'm sure you're all very familiar with about confidentiality, where data exists but ultimately it has to be estimated because of statistics laws that are in place.
There are a number of other issues. There are some issues around data weaknesses where we notice specific issues about our electricity supply and demand, or notice a growth in distribution losses. Again, if that is a genuine trend, it's a policy area that might need to be addressed.
There are potentially some survey gaps. Most notably, a concern for us would be the non-reporting in some aspects of the oil industry. There are also some issues about comprehensiveness of data. One small example here would be that we're not currently able to get a breakdown of the combustible fuels used for electricity generation on a monthly basis.
We also know that going forward there's an increasing need for data. If I look globally at what the needs are—and I'm sure they also apply to Canada—there's an increasing need for energy-induced data, for understanding how and why energy is being used and not just that it is being used; there are the challenges of off-grid generation and of energy consumers increasingly being producers of electricity; but there are also opportunities around open data and digitalization.
Then there's thinking about some best practices for data systems. A very clear point to emphasize here is that we deal with many countries with many different models, and there is no one best-fit model, but there are some common features that feature in the ones that are the most effective.
It's perhaps first worth thinking about the Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics, a very good document endorsed by the UN, which also talks about the need for data and the importance of the independence of statistical functions in terms of methodology and dissemination, but also about the need for coordination across ministries and other organizations to achieve the best practice data.
We note that generally data systems that are good are focused, they collect only the data needed, they maximize the use of that data so that it's collected once and used often, they use administrative data where available, they have a proper legal basis not only covering reporting and dissemination to an agreed timetable but a published legal basis so that everybody can understand. There are resources there—statistical work can cost money, and these are properly resourced. Also we see that they are ones that review their methodology. Statistical methodology and approach has to change as the market changes: surveys need to be reviewed, and the best ones will continuously do that.
Systems that work along those principles are generally able to meet the data needs of the users, and user feedback is of course very important.
I'll offer perhaps just a couple of words on sharing data across government. This is an area we work on with many countries, and it is seen as an important area. Canadians perhaps are like many citizens of the world and would view government as a single entity. They may appreciate, of course, the difference between the provincial government and the national government, but to many citizens, from what we understand, government is one organization. There's a certain understanding, though, that maybe there should be decent co-operation among government departments and ministries.
Of course, some data needs stronger protection. Tax and health data are two examples of this. There are, however, many examples in which data can be shared either at an aggregate level or an anonymized record level and can thereby really boost the understanding and the ability to produce more comprehensive energy data. Such systems often require memoranda of understanding between ministries to achieve this, but generally those that use them achieve a reduced burden on business and a reduced burden on households to comply with data.
Finally, I was asked to make some recommendations or offer some thoughts. I should start with a very important point. Globally, Canada has a very strong reputation for overall statistics. We're also very keen to see visibly—visibly to us—the strong co-operation that we see between the various parties.
If I think, however, from where we are and from our understanding of the data, about some of the issues that could be coming forward and therefore some of the recommendations we might propose, it's first to understand the user needs—what data are needed at the national, provincial, and federal levels—and then how to assess the data availability from all sources, including administrative data, and then to do a data map of the way the data meets the users: are there any gaps in the data, or are there areas of duplication?
Then, you need to think about the clear responsibility of who is doing what. That clarity is very important. It should again help avoid any duplication, or help identify the gaps. It's often the case that some sort of governance structure across senior representatives of the ministries or agencies involved can be helpful in bringing everybody together. In the Canadian situation, it would likely include the provinces as well.
Our stress would be to focus on improvements in data rather than the structures of organizations. We would like to think of all parties involved as being part of an “energy statistics Canada”, with everybody involved in the production of data to meet the users' needs across Canada and internationally.
Naturally, we in the IEA are very happy to continue to provide support, technical advice, and any other assistance that would be of use to Canada in helping you improve the energy data you have.
I hope that was helpful. I'm delighted to answer questions.