Technical Report of the Bureau of the UN Statistical Commission – further comments

As we approach the forthcoming intergovernmental negotiations on the post-2015 development agenda, it might be useful to give further consideration to the Technical Report of the Bureau of the UN Statistical Commission. 

At the outset it should be noted that this is a ‘working draft’. It also states clearly that time is required to develop a “robust and high-quality indicator framework” and that the Commission has endorsed a roadmap for the development and implementation of indicators with a target date for endorsing the global indicator framework at its 47th session in 2016.

A further important point is that the Inter-agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) that will develop the proposal for the indicator framework, will consist of “national statistical offices, and, as observers, the regional and international organizations and agencies. The Commission, moreover, is looking for feedback from Member States during the intergovernmental negotiations that will provide “broad political guidance” for its work in this area. This clarifies the roles, as they see them, of the national statistical offices, the UN system and also the intergovernmental negotiating body.

It should be noted that the national statistical offices of 70 countries participated in the assessment of the feasibility of the list of proposed preliminary indicators that was circulated before the 46th session of the Statistical Commission. This they consider to be a high response rate given the limited time available and the processes of consultation that they would deem to be necessary. 

In rating the proposed provisional indicators, 50 (16 per cent) were given a AAA rating; 39 (13 per cent) were rated BAA; 28 (9 per cent) received a BAA rating; 86 (28 per cent) were rated BBB; and 95 were given a CBB rating, meaning that they were considered difficult even with strong effort. A fourth question found 20 out of 23 indicators feasible for disaggregation beyond age and sex. 

In its decisions, as set out in Annex 1, it should be noted that the Commission emphasized that the global indicator framework should only contain a limited number of indicators, striking a balance between reducing the number of indicators and policy relevance, building on MDG experience and taking account existing conceptual indicator frameworks. They stressed that the list to be put before the upcoming intergovernmental negotiations is only a preliminary list. And hey endorsed both the IAEG-SDG and the high-level group (HLG) to provide strategic leadership for the SDG implementation process which would be under the auspices of the Statistical Commission.

These are all important points that should be kept in mind during the intergovernmental negotiations on the post-2015 development agenda next week and by civil society organizations that wish to make suggestions on global indicators.