Informal meeting of the Plenary to hear about progress in the development of the Global Indicator framework for the SDGs pursuant to para 75 of Resolution 70/1.

In Sept adopted 2030 Agenda for SDGs, one of the items left for finalization during 70th session including the indicators. The Statistical Commission is tasked with overseeing development of a framework and IAEG – SDGs has been formed to develop indicator framework and list of indicators for monitoring of the goals and targets at the global level. It is also asked to conduct its work in an open, inclusive and transparent manner. The framework will be simple but robust. It will be adopted by Statistical Commission, then ECOSOC and then the General Assembly. 

John Pullinger, Chair of the Stat Com: confirmed that they are on track according to the agreed mandate and schedule. He referred to the international agencies that have provided important advice and said that countries that are not members of the Group participated actively as observers, together with experts from civil society, academia and the private sector. Important mandate communicated through the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The IEAG on SDGs will respect the balance of the Agenda. There are three groups of indicators – those with general agreement; those with some unresolved issues; and those that required more in-depth discussion. The second meeting was held in Bangkok, following which there was consensus on the vast majority of the indicators and the next steps to be taken. They reached agreement on indicators that do address each of the goals and targets on indicators, in accordance with their mandate. Out of 225 indicators, 160 are green, which means that there are no serious concerns expressed by the members and there is sufficient clarity on the way they will be implemented. The remaining 65 are grey, which means that there are methodological and conceptual issues that remain to be clarified. Exact formulation will be finalized after further research has been conducted. Plans for this process will be agreed by the IAEG members who will also seek inputs from the relevant international agencies. In  the coming weeks the IAEG members will finalise the green indicators and develop their work plan for the grey indicators which will also be included in their report. The meeting also agreed to conduct one more brief consultation  which closed on 9am Sartuday 7 November. 

The colour coding does not reflect the level of development of the indicators, but rather the degree of consensus. The IAEG will continue to use the ‘tier system’ which has three levels: established methodology exits and data is widely available; methodology which has been established but for which data is not easily available; internationally agreed methodology not yet developed.

Vision in the 2030 Agenda is ambitious and transformational and Member States pledged that no one would be left behind. As a statistical community they understand their role in supporting this level of ambition. The IAEG agreed on a statement on data disaggregation to support the principle of the 2030 Agenda. (See: IAEG-SDGs sets work plan for finalizing indicators)

Effective monitoring of the 2030 Agenda will be a significant challenge for the National Statistical Offices (NSos), (see para 64(g)) and will require significant scaling up for many NSOs. This has been discussed by the Statistical Commission High-level Group (HLG). They will need to put in place an implementation plan to ensure that NSOs can gather the data necessary for monitoring.

Brazil said that the IAEG will report back to the process, now the General Assembly. They have concerns about the process is too rushed. He stressed the delicate balance between the political coherence including its universal, inclusive and transparent nature and technical consistency. They are concerned that the IAEG should not re-interpret the targets. It is not business as usual and civil society is concerned that their contributions be taken on board.

He expressed concern about color-coding with regard to poverty indicators, which are green. On SDG 1 they are concerned by the World Bank decision to Revise the poverty line to $1.90, which should not relate to the work on the SDGs. He noted the deadline of 20 November for making observations about the indicators and said that there should be enough time for the process, even if it is not ready by March 2016.

Nigeria was concerned about the green indicators and asked for clarity on  the way forward, as well as the methodology. He stressed the political oversight and the political balance in the adoption of the agenda. While being universal it should respect the policy space of countries. There are some targets on which countries have reservations. Nigeria made reservations on 3.7 and 5.6 and wanted to know the way forward with regard to these.

Kenya (Ambassador Kamau) said that the briefing was timely and that his delegation is pleased at the progress that has been made and that they appreciate the efforts of the Statistical Commission to reach out to countless other individuals from civil society and other sources. This looks to a promising outcome to which they look forward.

He welcomed the reassurance that this is an open, inclusive and transparent process, because this is imperative to get the outcome to which they all aspire. The indicators are where the rubber meets the road when it comes to implementation of the 2030 Agenda.

It is important that Mr Pullinger and his team not forget that this is indeed statistical and technical process and they have been the mandate to carry out the process. There is however the political oversight by this Group, by the General Assembly and ultimately by the High-level Political Forum, as well as ECOSOC at some point. Even as make process therefore it is imperative that they share not just a briefing but a more specific sharing of information, maybe even some preliminary set of indicators that might give comfort to those in the political line as a sense of what is happening on the technical line.

It would have been useful if these kinds of meetings are organized in a manner so that they get some kind of outcome that allows them to consult among themselves. Ultimately these indicators will have to receive the blessings of the General Assembly through its subsidiary systems ie the ECOSOC and HLPF.

He appreciated the reminder that they are pursuing this three-tier system in establishing the methodology, recognizing that some of the targets are new and different. 

On the idea of no-one being left behind, it is important that the Statistical Commission does not only look at it from an individual perspective but also it is about no nation(s) or no region. The sensitivity should therefore also reach out to nations and regions. 

He was pleased that there was another interactive process before the meeting in March. They should not be afraid of a difficult political process. They can only go so far technically and that such political issues should be dealt with by political process. He also referred to the platform for capacity-building.

Holy See commended the progress so far and its openness. They hope for continued political oversight by States as primary implementers. They had expressed serious concern about 5.6 indicators, which had received a green rating before the October IAEG meeting, even though they contain language that does not represent hard-won political balance. While appreciate the three-day consultation, it is not enough to make sure concerns are not only recognized but met. They request further information n on the green indicators that are still being challenged.

Colombia said that the meeting in Bangkok had been positive, but were concerned about working with ECOSOC and before such a formal presentation they requested a more interactive dialogue. They also asked for information on the grey indicators, recognizing that there were political concerns as well as technical concerns and asked for further information. The Economic Commissions and regional organizations could also have an interaction with the IAEG. 

Mr Pullinger’s response included:

• That it would have been better to have had a report, but wanted to give timely feedback
• On the delicate between technical consistency and political coherence, they are absolutely focused on the precise task as given to them and it is not their job to interpret the goals and targets. They have to do it in a different way from the MDGs. Many people are interested and providing information. 
• They still have until 20 November to make sure concerns are flagged and the specific three-day consultation, but their road-map says that they have to report in March what they are calling in some cases “indicators 1.0”, which is their starting point. The IEAG will continue to operate and will continue to give expert advice to the Statistical Commission for as long as is necessary.
• The green indicators are green because the IAEG members have reached a consensus, but many need significant further work and are at different levels of methodological maturity at the moment. They will move them forward as quickly as possible but in some cases it will be challenging
• On 5.6 and 3.7, they recognize the particular sensitivity and particularly mentioning the comment by the Holy See, the wording in the target is very carefully balanced after significant discussion. Their job is to absolutely not to reinterpret that, but to try to translate it faithfully into an indicator that will command respect. If they have precise comments from delegations that indicate where they have not got that quite right yet, they must receive them and they will reflect those concerns in their report to the Statistical Commission, which will then go forward to the political process for adoption. So they want to make sure that they are dedicated to the right task but some of these, and particularly those ones, are really going to be difficult to get it right. So they will be doing their best from a technical point of view but this is one example where the interaction between the technical and political process is very necessary and they appreciate and respect that 
• Once the Statstical Commission comes up with its report, it will go to ECOSOC 
• On the issue of no nation or region being left behind, they are seeking to respect the architecture of the broader process. There is a role for regions, where there are parallel discussions
• He referred to the issue of capacity-building which is being looked at by the HLG to help some countries step up to the process
• On target 5.6 he asked the Holy See to make sure that the IAEG heard their views on the green light being a little too early and there is till time for the basis on which they have come to their conclusions to be amended if they can work out a technical way for it to work. But the test is to respect the delicate balance struck in the wording of the target
• They have a process for involving ECOSOC, but there is primarily a technical process with political input between now and the Statistical Commission. This will be considered and adopted by ECOSOC 
• On the grey indicators, they do not yet have a technical consensus but some will still be grey in March as they are very new.