Governance: Linguistic inclusion & data

To what extent do relevant laws, regulations, policies, and guidance ensure linguistic inclusion with regard to data?

DefinitionsResearch GuidanceQuestion sub-componentsIndicator Justification

Definitions and Identification

This indicator investigates linguistic inclusion in key data practices. Countries may have various language situations. Some countries have no single predominant language, but rather communities use many different languages. In others, one or two languages predominate, and speakers of other languages may be few and scattered. In every country, however, linguistic inclusion matters. Linguistic inclusion is relevant for linguistic minorities of longstanding as well as for more recent immigrants, who may include, for example, refugees, migrants, foreign workers, and others.

Helpful terms to know:

• An official language is a language formally designated—by constitution or law—as the language of government. A country may have one official language, such as Angola (Portuguese) or Lithuania (Lithuanian), a few official languages, such as Canada (English and French), or many official languages, such as Bolivia, which has 36.

• Some countries do not designate an official language at all, but rather have instead a de facto official language as the working language of government. In Argentina, for example, Spanish is the de facto official language. In the United States, English is. In Bosnia and Herzegovina there are three de facto official languages: Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian.

• Countries may also formally designate—by constitution or law—some languages as national languages; this is typically done to recognize a language's importance in the country or the country’s history. A country may designate both official and national languages. Unlike official languages (and de facto official languages), designating a language as a national language does not denote it as a working language of government.

• Regional languages may include languages that have been formally designated as having co-official status—meaning that in that specific region government also uses the regional language(s) as working languages of government. In India, for example, Assamese is a co-official language in the state of Assam.

Fundamentally, this indicator assesses to what extent the government enables individuals and communities to use their own language in data communications, collection, and publication.

Examples

• The Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation, in Article 70, recognizes German, French, Italian, and Romansh as the country's official languages, ensuring that all citizens can access government information and services in their preferred language. The National Language Law further strengthens this commitment by mandating that public administration provide information and services in the official languages based on the region's linguistic composition. Article 2 of this law highlights the importance of promoting linguistic diversity, requiring government entities to publish official information in all official languages, thus ensuring inclusivity for all linguistic groups.

Some countries may have frameworks that explicitly address linguistic inclusion in data communications, collection, or publication. For example, a national statistics office may be required to provide translation or interpretation services when collecting data. Or a data portal may have a mandate to publish datasets and accompanying materials in specific languages.

Other countries may have a broader framework that specifies the languages that government must make information and services available in, which can be inferred to apply to data communications, collection, and publication. For example, this may include laws that mandate government information be published in multiple languages; policies that recognize an individual’s right to request government services in their own language; or regulations that require the provision of interpretation or translation for essential services. In this circumstance, you’ll need to spot check that the broader framework is indeed being applied to data concerns in practice and explain in the relevant summary box.

Note: when assessing the comprehensiveness of linguistic inclusion, use the list of languages for your country provided by your regional coordinator.

Starting points

• Search:

  • Government websites for "language rights," "language policy," and similar terms.

  • Government websites for “translation,” “interpretation,” and similar terms.

• Consult:

  • Government officials who serve in communications roles.

What to look for?

Look for evidence that can answer the following questions:

• Is there a framework that formally designates official languages or are there only de facto official languages? Are there co-official regional languages?

• Are there laws, policy, or guidance that explicitly address linguistic inclusion with regard to data? Are there laws, policy, or guidance that implicitly cover such linguistic inclusion, and if so, do spot checks confirm that these are being followed with regard to data?

• Does the framework address the languages which communications about data matters—such as breach notifications, the provision of consent, etc.—must be available in?

• Does the framework address the languages the government uses for collecting data? Validating data with members of the public? For example, do national statistics offices, census bureaus, or other agencies have translation or interpretation mandates that apply to collecting data from members of the public?

• Does the framework address the languages in which the government publishes data and data tools? For example, are there requirements that data portals and other digital public infrastructure be accessible in languages reflecting those used in the country or region?

• Does the framework only address “official,” “national,” or (in regions) “co-official” languages, or does it cover rights and responsibilities related to linguistic inclusion more broadly?

Show/hide supporting questions

Existence

• Are there laws, policies, or regulations requiring linguistic inclusion in any form? For example, laws that mandate the publication of government information in multiple languages; policies that recognize an individual’s right to request government services in their own language; or regulations that require the provision of interpretation or translation for essential services.

  • No.

    Supporting questions: In the absence of a legal framework, are there alternative norms or customs that play this role in the country? If so, please explain.

  • They are being drafted, or are not yet implemented.

    Supporting questions: Please provide brief details. Which languages are covered? Are there notable languages in the country that are not covered? (Please refer to your country’s language list provided by your regional coordinator.)If the framework exists only in draft form, please provide the date of any relevant drafts.Please provide a URL(s) for where evidence can be found.

  • They exist and are operational.

    Supporting questions: Please provide brief details. Which languages are covered? Are there notable languages in the country that are not covered? (Please refer to your country’s language list provided by your regional coordinator.)Please provide a URL(s) for where evidence can be found.

• Extent of existence:

• How comprehensive, in terms of jurisdiction, is the coverage of the framework assessed for this question? (The framework covers one or more localities, but there are many other localities without such a framework, or with a framework of a lesser quality., The framework covers one or more localities and is representative of the kind of frameworks that can be found for all, or most, localities., The framework provides national coverage.)

  Supporting questions (conditional)

  If The framework covers one or more localities, but there are many other localities without such a framework, or with a framework of a lesser quality. or The framework covers one or more localities and is representative of the kind of frameworks that can be found for all, or most, localities.: Which locality or localities does this framework cover?

  If The framework covers one or more localities, but there are many other localities without such a framework, or with a framework of a lesser quality. or The framework covers one or more localities and is representative of the kind of frameworks that can be found for all, or most, localities.: Please explain your response.

  If The framework covers one or more localities, but there are many other localities without such a framework, or with a framework of a lesser quality. or The framework covers one or more localities and is representative of the kind of frameworks that can be found for all, or most, localities.: Please provide supporting URL(s) as necessary.

• Existence summary:

• Please summarize your answers to the preceding existence sub-questions, including the extent of existence. [Open Text] Drawing on the research you have conducted and the evidence you have gathered for this section, describe what you have found (or not found) when answering the existence sub-questions for this indicator.

  Supporting questions

  Please provide the URL(s) for the evidence that supports the summary provided.

Elements

• Rights and responsibilities:

• The framework requires linguistic inclusion with regard to communications about data matters. (No, Partially, Yes) For example, can members of the public receive breach notifications, provide consent for data sharing, access and correct data, etc. in their preferred language. For countries where a broader linguistic inclusion mandate can be inferred to apply to communications about data matters, spot check how it applies in practice; answer “Partially” for spot checks that do not find linguistic inclusion in practice; answer “Yes” for spot checks that do.

  Supporting questions (conditional)

  If Partially: Please explain your “Partially” response.

  If Partially or Yes: Which languages are covered?

  If Partially or Yes: Are there notable languages in the country that are not covered? (Please refer to your country’s language list provided by your regional coordinator.)

  If Partially or Yes: If you have conducted spot checks, please provide relevant URLs.

  If Partially or Yes: Please indicate which section of the framework refers to this issue.

• The framework requires linguistic inclusion with regard to data collection. (No, Partially, Yes) For example, translation or interpretation mandates that apply to national statistics offices, census bureaus, or other agencies that collect data from members of the public. For countries where a broader linguistic inclusion mandate can be inferred to apply to data collection, spot check how it applies in practice; answer “Partially” for spot checks that do not find linguistic inclusion in practice; answer “Yes” for spot checks that do.

  Supporting questions (conditional)

  If Partially: Please explain your “Partially” response.

  If Partially or Yes: Which languages are covered?

  If Partially or Yes: Are there notable languages in the country that are not covered? (Please refer to your country’s language list provided by your regional coordinator.)

  If Partially or Yes: If you have conducted spot checks, please provide relevant URLs.

  If Partially or Yes: Please indicate which section of the framework refers to this issue.

• The framework requires linguistic inclusion with regard to data publication. (No, Partially, Yes) For example, mandates that data portals and other digital public infrastructure be accessible in languages reflecting those used in the country or region. For countries where a broader linguistic inclusion mandate can be inferred to apply to data publication, spot check how it applies in practice; answer “Partially” for spot checks that do not find linguistic inclusion in practice; answer “Yes” for spot checks that do.

  Supporting questions (conditional)

  If Partially: Please explain your “Partially” response.

  If Partially or Yes: Which languages are included?

  If Partially or Yes: Are there notable languages in the country that are not covered? (Please refer to your country’s language list provided by your regional coordinator.)

  If Partially or Yes: If you have conducted spot checks, please provide relevant URLs.

  If Partially or Yes: Please indicate which section of the framework refers to this issue.

• The framework explicitly covers rights and responsibilities related to languages other than those formally designated “official” or “national." (No, Partially, Yes) If you are assessing a regional framework that is representative of regional frameworks across the country, for this sub-question please assess for languages other than those formally designated “official,” “national,” or “regionally official.” If you are assessing a country that only has a de facto official language (rather than any formally designated “official” or “national” languages), please assess for languages other than that de facto official language.

  Supporting questions (conditional)

  If Partially or Yes: Please explain your response.

  If Partially or Yes: Please indicate which section of the framework refers to this issue.

• Provisions for implementation quality:

• The framework empowers agencies and officials to communicate about, collect, and publish data in ways that support linguistic inclusion. (No, Partially, Yes) For example, a framework might establish or resource offices to make digital public infrastructure more linguistically inclusive, grant an agency sanction powers for noncompliance, etc. For countries with only a broader mandate that empowers an agency with regard to linguistic inclusion, look for reports on the agency’s activities to spot check whether it has engaged with data communications, collection, or publication; answer “Partially” for spot checks that do not find linguistic inclusion in practice; answer “Yes” for spot checks that do.

  Supporting questions (conditional)

  If Partially or Yes: Please explain your response.

  If Partially or Yes: Please indicate which section of the framework refers to this issue.

• The framework requires a verification process regarding communicating about, collecting, and publishing data in ways that support linguistic inclusion. (No, Partially, Yes) There are many different kinds of verification processes. Some processes are automated, some involve direct human review, some combine the two. For example, in some cases, a dedicated agency or official has the authority to conduct audits to verify compliance. For countries with only a broader mandate that requires verification of linguistic inclusion, look for performance reports to spot check whether verification processes have engaged with data communications, collection, or publication; answer “Partially” for spot checks that do not find linguistic inclusion in practice; answer “Yes” for spot checks that do.

  Supporting questions (conditional)

  If Partially or Yes: Please explain your response.

  If Partially or Yes: Please indicate which section of the framework refers to this issue.

• Elements summary:

• Please summarize your answers to the preceding element sub-questions. [Open Text] Drawing on the research you have conducted and the evidence you have gathered for this section, describe what you have found (or not found) when answering the element sub-questions for this indicator.

  Supporting questions

  Please provide the URL(s) for the evidence that supports the summary provided.

Linguistic inclusion is critical to making data practices more equitable, making data meaningfully available, and producing high quality data.

The languages used for communicating about data issues—which can range from providing consent to receiving breach notifications, from seeking correction or redress to providing feedback on data catalogs—affect how well the people involved can participate. Similarly, in data collection, the language or languages used have consequences for both meaningful consent and data quality. In data publication, the languages in which data and its accompanying tools and materials are published affect who can use that data.

Grounded in the recognition in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that humans are “born free and equal in dignity and rights” regardless of their language and the assertion of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities that people belonging to linguistic minorities have the right to, among others, use their own language in public and private “freely and without interference or any form of discrimination,” this indicator examines to what extent the government enables individuals and communities to use their own language in data communications, collection, and publication.