Economic restructuring and renewal depends not only on effective policies, but also on the right data to forge those policies. A recent concern voiced not just by economists and investors but by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party itself has called into question some of the data on which the government bases its decisions. Whether the figures are reliable is hard to determine, but greater transparency in the process is greatly needed.

As the Bank of Japan forges ahead with a stimulus program in hopes of reigniting the economy, its methods of determining consequences is extremely important. Insufficient or unclear data mean that the effects are not fact-based but ideologically driven. The same applies to the consumption tax hike planned for April 2017, as well as other indicators for recessions and growth. In all those areas, understanding the consequences of government actions depends on verifiable, reliable and openly published data.

Though the quality of the government's data has been rapped in the past, recently that criticism has focused on a number of substantive issues. For example, last year, the first reports on GDP showed a recession in the third quarter. However, revised data released weeks later showed growth. Which one was right? Over the last decade or so, quarterly GDP figures have been revised by an average of 1.7 points. That may not matter much to the armchair economist, but the difference is significant and affects many other decisions.