# **Table S2. Description of SPI Dimensions**

|Dimension|Brief Description|
|---|---|
|Dimension 1.1: Data<br>use by national<br>legislature|Not included because of lack of established methodology. In principle it may be<br>possible to utilize websites of national legislatures but this will require further work and<br>assessment.|
|Dimension 1.2: Data<br>use by national<br>executive branch|Not included because of lack of established methodology. There are some usable data<br>sources (as used by (PARIS21 2019)) but gaps in data across countries have prevented<br>full adoption.|
|Dimension 1.3: Data<br>use by civil society|Not included because of lack of established methodology. There are some usable data<br>sources with good coverage, for example from social media but more data is required to<br>help assess and allow for likely biases between and within countries.|
|Dimension 1.4: Data<br>use by academia|Not included because of lack of established methodology. We have not been able to<br>find usable data sources with global coverage on which a new methodology could be<br>developed.<br>Five measures usefulness or reliability of country produced measures for international<br>organizations have been included. First, on comparability of poverty estimates for the<br>World Bank reporting on international poverty usingthe Poverty and Inequality Portal|
|Dimension 1.5: Data<br>use by international<br>organizations|(PIP). Second on usable surveys for statistics on child mortality for theUN Inter-<br>agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation. Third on accuracy of debt reporting as<br>classified by the World Bank (Source: World Bank WDI metadata). Fourth, on<br>availability of safely managed drinking water data for use byWHO/UNICEF Joint<br>Monitoring Programme.Fifth, on labor force participation data for use by ILO. While<br>these data sources provide only a partial coverage of data used by international<br>organizations, they do provide an indication of the performance of the national<br>statistical system.|
|Dimension 2.1: Data<br>releases|SDDS/e-GDDS subscription. This indicator is based on whether the country subscribes<br>to IMF SDDS+, SDDS, or e-GDDS standards. The source is the IMF Dissemination<br>Standards Bulletin Board. This is a reliable data source but we recognize that it is a<br>proxy for the concept we are seeking to capture rather than a direct measurement.|
|Dimension 2.2: Online<br>access|ODIN Open Data Openness score (Jamison Crowell et al. n.d.). This is a well-<br>established data source with good country coverage, which scores countries based on<br>whether indicators are available online in a format that is machine readable, in a non-<br>proprietary format, downloadable, with metadata available and terms of use. Scores<br>range from 0-1. For more details, consult theODIN technical documentation|
|Dimension 2.3:<br>Advisory/ Analytical<br>Services|Not included because of lack of established methodology. This could be a new<br>indicator of the number of non-recurring products on NSO website (ad<br>hoc/experimental rather than regular releases). The indicator is the number of products<br>found. No established source exists for this indicator.|
|Dimension 2.4: Data<br>access services|NADA metadata. This indicator checks whether NADA microdata cataloging is<br>available for surveys produced by NSO. NADA is an open source microdata cataloging<br>system, compliant with the Data Documentation Initiative (DDI) and Dublin Cores<br>RDF metadata standards. Source: NSO websites.|

39