Asia · edition 2021

Afghanistan 2021: strong rules, weak disclosure

Afghanistan's strongest dimension is enabling environment; its weakest is data publication. The framework is not yet translating evenly into practice.

93 indicators 24 procuring entities 4 dimensions

Overall ITI score

50.1/100

Global average: 44.2

First edition

The ITI score

Afghanistan enters the index at 50.1 of 100

5.9 points above the global average. Enabling environment carries the score; data publication holds it back.

The 2021 baseline

50.12021

View as table

Edition	Overall ITI score
2021	50.1

Score by dimension, 2021

Enabling environment79.5

Capacities and processes59

Citizen participation61.3

Data publication20.5

Dashed marks show the global average.

Inside the four dimensions

Where the score comes from

Enabling environment

79.5/100

Strongest area:Access-to-public information law · Right to request public information +6 more100

Weakest area:Infrastructure data disclosure standard0

Explore 3 sub-areas

1.1Legal framework and digital tools79.5

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory framework100

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sector80

1.1.3National digital information tools54

Capacities and processes

59/100

Strongest area:Information officer profile93.3

Weakest area:Knowledge about the transparency data standard in the infrastructure sector13.3

Explore 5 sub-areas

2.1Institutional capacities60.4

2.1.1Basic knowledge50.8

2.1.2Digital capacities70

2.2Institutional processes58

2.2.1Procedures to disclose information80.2

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose information53

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosure37.9

Citizen participation

61.3/100

Strongest area:Online form for consultation or requests84.2

Weakest area:Citizen participation in infrastructure projects42.5

Explore 2 sub-areas

3.1Participation practices61.3

3.1.1Participation opportunities58.5

3.1.2Use of information by citizens63.6

Data publication

20.5/100

Strongest area:Procurement process · Contract type +1 more60.4

Weakest area:Project reference number · Project owner +28 more0

Explore 6 sub-areas

4.1Disclosure practices20.5

4.1.1Project identification0

4.1.2Project preparation0

4.1.3Execution contract procurement39.2

4.1.4Supervision contract procurement0

4.1.5Execution contract implementation58.3

4.1.6Supervision contract implementation0

Procuring entities

How 24 procuring entities compare

Scores run from 62.9 to 16.5, with a median of 46.7.

0Leading80 to 100

2Strong60 to 79

13Developing40 to 59

9Weak0 to 39

#
1	Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livstock (MAIL)	62.9	84.3	92.2	25.8
2	Ministry of Public Works (MoPW)	62.2	89.6	82	25.8
3	Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE)	56.1	70.6	67.1	36.6
4	Capital Region Development Authority (CRIDA)	56.1	74.9	61	36.6
5	Afghanistan Urban Water Supply and Swerage Corporation (SUWSS)	55.8	70.2	72.7	32.7
6	The Operation and Support Office of the President for National Development (OSOPND)	55.8	64.3	74.5	36.6
7	Ministry of Urban Development and Land (MUDL)	55.2	73.5	88.5	18.3
8	Civil Aviation Authority of Afghanistan (CAA)	55	68.9	65.1	36.6
9	Afghanistan Railways Authority (ARA)	51.9	65.1	58	36.6
10	Kabul Municipality	51.3	50.1	81.6	33.3
11	Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (MoCIT)	50.2	60.4	57.8	36.6
12	Afghanistan Telecom Regulatory Authority (ATRA)	48.6	71.6	65	18.3
13	National Water Regulatory Affairs Authority	46.7	78.4	77	0
14	Da Afghanistan Breshna Sherikat	45.2	49.3	53.2	36.6
15	Ministry of Public Health (MoPH)	42.9	58.5	60.5	18.3
16	National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA)	39.5	53.2	24.9	36.6
17	Ministry of Education (MoE)	39.1	61.5	56.8	8.4
18	Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development (MRRD)	36.6	45	83.3	0
19	Ministry of Hajj and Religious Affairs (MoHRA)	36.5	48.6	48.8	18.3
20	Energy Services Regulation Authority (ESRA)	25.2	48.3	33.2	0
21	Mazar Municipality	24.7	37.3	46.8	0
22	Herat Municipality	23.9	35.3	46.1	0
23	Kandahar Municipality	22.3	29.6	47.8	0
24	Nangarhar Municipality	16.5	26.9	28.2	0

Entity dashboard

Inspect one entity in depth

Choose an entity

Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livstock (MAIL)

Ranked #1 of 24 entities

62.9PE ITI score

Capacities and processes25.3 above average84.3

Citizen participation30.9 above average92.2

Information disclosure5.3 above average25.8

Ticks mark the average across all 24 entities.

Full detail The complete 93-indicator breakdown

National ITI ScoreScore50.1

1Enabling environmentDimension79.5

1.1Legal framework and digital toolsVariable79.5

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory frameworkSub-variable100

1.1.1.1Access-to-public information lawIndicator100

1.1.1.2Right to request public informationIndicator100

1.1.1.3Sanctions over non-compliance with access to public information mandatesIndicator100

1.1.1.4Organisation guaranteeing the sanctionsIndicator100

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sectorSub-variable80

1.1.2.1Proactive publication of information on public procurement processesIndicator100

1.1.2.2Proactive publication of information on public infrastructure projectsIndicator100

1.1.2.3Infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator0

1.1.2.4Infrastructure data disclosure standard proactively published as open dataIndicator100

1.1.2.5Organisation responsible for the infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator100

1.1.3National digital information toolsSub-variable54

1.1.3.1Centralised digital information platformsIndicator60

1.1.3.2Easy access to information in digital information platformsIndicator60

1.1.3.3Infrastructure projects geographic information system (GIS) platformIndicator40

2Capacities and processesDimension59

2.1Institutional capacitiesVariable60.4

2.1.1Basic knowledgeSub-variable50.8

2.1.1.1Knowledge about the access-to-information lawIndicator67.5

2.1.1.2Knowledge about transparency initiatives in the infrastructure sectorIndicator37.5

2.1.1.3Knowledge about the transparency data standard in the infrastructure sectorIndicator13.3

2.1.1.4Knowledge about sanctions due to non-compliance on the access-to-public-information lawIndicator69.2

2.1.1.5Knowledge about different data categoriesIndicator66.7

2.1.2Digital capacitiesSub-variable70

2.1.2.1Computer equipmentIndicator82.5

2.1.2.2Connectivity to the internetIndicator73.3

2.1.2.3Institutional websiteIndicator86.7

2.1.2.4Information systems for infrastructure projectsIndicator50

2.1.2.5Use of digital information systemsIndicator43.3

2.1.2.6Infrastructure open data publicationIndicator56.7

2.1.2.7Visualisations based on infrastructure projects dataIndicator65

2.2Institutional processesVariable58

2.2.1Procedures to disclose informationSub-variable80.2

2.2.1.1Procedures for the publication of informationIndicator60

2.2.1.2Responsibilities for disclosureIndicator85

2.2.1.3Information officer profileIndicator93.3

2.2.1.4Information officerIndicator92.5

2.2.1.5Follow-up mechanisms on information requestsIndicator70

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose informationSub-variable53

2.2.2.1Internal policy for information publicationIndicator40.8

2.2.2.2Disclosure training programmeIndicator48.3

2.2.2.3Identification of limitations for publishing informationIndicator70.8

2.2.2.4Plan to mitigate limitations for publishing informationIndicator16.7

2.2.2.5Bureaucratic barriers to publish informationIndicator58.3

2.2.2.6Documentation of non-compliance and sanctionsIndicator75

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosureSub-variable37.9

2.2.3.1Level of disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator45.8

2.2.3.2Level of investment represented by disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator30

3Citizen participationDimension61.3

3.1Participation practicesVariable61.3

3.1.1Participation opportunitiesSub-variable58.5

3.1.1.1Institutionalised citizen participationIndicator52.5

3.1.1.2Permanent and inclusive citizen participationIndicator53.3

3.1.1.3Citizen participation in infrastructure projectsIndicator42.5

3.1.1.4Citizen attention officeIndicator77.5

3.1.1.5Online form for consultation or requestsIndicator84.2

3.1.1.6Awareness of participation opportunitiesIndicator60

3.1.2Use of information by citizensSub-variable63.6

3.1.2.1Centralised citizen complaintsIndicator70.8

3.3.2.2Requests and responses of access to informationIndicator74.2

3.3.2.3Institutional response capacityIndicator66.7

3.3.2.4Institutional use evidenceIndicator50

3.3.2.5Citizens use evidenceIndicator74.2

3.3.2.6Evidence of joint projectsIndicator53.3

3.3.2.7Improvements as a response to citizen participationIndicator62.5

4Information disclosureDimension20.5

4.1Disclosure practicesVariable20.5

4.1.1Project identificationSub-variable0

4.1.1.1Project reference numberIndicator0

4.1.1.2Project ownerIndicator0

4.1.1.3Sector and sub-sectorIndicator0

4.1.1.4Project nameIndicator0

4.1.1.5Project locationIndicator0

4.1.1.6Project descriptionIndicator0

4.1.1.7PurposeIndicator0

4.1.2Project preparationSub-variable0

4.1.2.1Environmental impactIndicator0

4.1.2.2Land and settlement impactIndicator0

4.1.2.3Contact detailsIndicator0

4.1.2.4Project budget and date of approvalIndicator0

4.1.2.5Funding sourcesIndicator0

4.1.3Execution contract procurementSub-variable39.2

4.1.3.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator36.3

4.1.3.2Procurement processIndicator60.4

4.1.3.3Number of firms biddingIndicator0

4.1.3.4Contract typeIndicator60.4

4.1.3.5Contract titleIndicator60.4

4.1.3.6Contract priceIndicator47.9

4.1.3.7Contract start dateIndicator50

4.1.3.8Contract durationIndicator50

4.1.3.9Contractor(s)Indicator26.3

4.1.3.10Contract scope of workIndicator0

4.1.4Supervision contract procurementSub-variable0

4.1.4.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator0

4.1.4.2Procurement processIndicator0

4.1.4.3Number of firms/individuals biddingIndicator0

4.1.4.4Contract typeIndicator0

4.1.4.5Contract titleIndicator0

4.1.4.6Contract priceIndicator0

4.1.4.7Contract start dateIndicator0

4.1.4.8Contract durationIndicator0

4.1.4.9Contract firm/individualIndicator0

4.1.4.10Contract scope of workIndicator0

4.1.5Execution contract implementationSub-variable58.3

4.1.5.1Variation to contract priceIndicator58.3

4.1.5.2Reasons for price changesIndicator58.3

4.1.5.3Variation to contract durationIndicator58.3

4.1.5.4Reasons for contract duration changesIndicator58.3

4.1.5.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator58.3

4.1.5.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator58.3

4.1.6Supervision contract implementationSub-variable0

4.1.6.1Variation to contract priceIndicator0

4.1.6.2Reasons for price changesIndicator0

4.1.6.3Variation to contract durationIndicator0

4.1.6.4Reasons for duration changesIndicator0

4.1.6.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator0

4.1.6.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator0

Afghanistan 2021: strong rules, weak disclosure

Afghanistan enters the index at 50.1 of 100

Where the score comes from

How 24 procuring entities compare

Inspect one entity in depth

Compare this country with others