The sun beats down on a small community hall in Lagos, where a group of women farmers gathers. They are here to report their harvest yields, but the official forms only ask for the name of the 'head of household.' Their labor, their decisions, their losses from flooding—none of it finds a box to check. This scene, repeated across Nigeria, is at the heart of a new call for change on International Women's Day 2026.
Advocacy group Media Rights Agenda (MRA) has issued a direct appeal to the Federal Government. They are urging the creation of what they term 'gender-responsive information systems.' The demand is not for a new ministry or a one-off survey. It is a fundamental shift in how the nation collects, analyzes, and uses data about its people.
'When a woman's work is invisible in the data, she becomes invisible in the budget,' explains one MRA researcher, pointing to agricultural subsidies often directed to male landholders. The group argues that current systems, from national censuses to local health registries, frequently use categories and methods that obscure the distinct experiences of women and girls. A policy designed using such flawed data is, by definition, built on a partial picture.
This call for better data comes against a backdrop of persistent gender gaps in education, economic participation, and political representation. Without accurate, disaggregated information, advocates say it is impossible to measure the true scale of these disparities or to craft solutions that actually work. A national poverty alleviation program, for instance, might miss its mark if it doesn't understand which household members control resources and who faces the greatest barriers.
The MRA's push extends beyond just counting women. They envision systems that capture qualitative realities: time spent on unpaid care work, access to digital tools, experiences of gender-based violence in public spaces, and participation in community decision-making. This kind of nuanced information is crucial for moving beyond broad-stroke policies to targeted interventions.
Building these systems presents significant challenges. It requires training data collectors, redesigning questionnaires, and ensuring privacy and security, especially for sensitive information. It also demands a sustained commitment to funding and political will, priorities that can easily be sidelined. Critics might argue the focus should be on direct action, not more data collection.
However, proponents counter that in an era of big data and algorithmic decision-making, the stakes have never been higher. If artificial intelligence tools for loan approvals or public service allocation are trained on biased historical data, they will simply automate and amplify existing inequalities. A gender-responsive system would seek to identify and correct these biases at the source.
The Federal Government has not yet issued a formal response to the MRA's International Women's Day appeal. The group says it will be watching for concrete commitments in upcoming policy frameworks and budget allocations. Their next step is to convene a workshop with statisticians, gender experts, and community organizers to draft model guidelines for what a truly responsive system should look like.
