Next steps on Indicators, based on briefing for NGOs by Stephan Schweinfest, Director of UN Statistics Division

On Monday 20 April  Stephan Schweinfest, Director of the UN Statistics Division (UNSD), accompanied by Francesca Perucci gave a briefing for NGOs.

First Francesca Perucci spoke on the transition from the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) to the sustainable development goals (SDG) indicators, including the work of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group (IAEG).

Recapping on the outcome of the political negotiations in March on the approval of the Statistical Commission roadmap, it should be noted that the Statistical Commission is in charge of the process. It is therefore a technical, not a political process. They also require more time than originally thought and are aiming at a draft by Dec 2015. 

It was also agreed there will be a ‘limited number’ of global indicators. In this regard the earlier request by Co Facilitators to Statistical Commission was for 3-5 indicators per target. In addition to global (limited number) of indicators, there will be sectoral, regional and national monitoring (for which the latter will need a larger number of indicators). Global indicators must be internationally comparable, while national indicators may be specific for any country. However, ideally, there will be a link between national and global indicators. 

As the Statistical Commission only meets annually, the IAEG on SDGs has been set up to do the necessary work – it will be similar in some respects to the IAEG on MDGs. Its role will be to:

• Formulate the global indicators
• Continue engagement and advice in the years to come.

Currently the status of the IAEG is as follows:

• Now that the political negotiations have accepted the IAEG in principle, the Chair of the Statistical Commission has signed off on the revised terms of reference (ToR).
• A core set of countries (27) has been discussed including geographical distribution and discussions are currently are taking place with the regions as to who will represent each region.
• The 27 countries at the core are to define the modalities of the group (the ‘how’).
• UN agencies who are repositories of data sets will form the IAEG secretariat 
• The first meeting of IAEG is tentatively planned for 1-2 June.
• The aim is for discussions, documents and information to be transparent (including webcast meetings, website with background documents). It will be analogous to IAEG on MDGs and Friends of the Chair and aims at transparency, tapping into all available knowledge. UNSD has suggested open process via google docs. 

Possibilities for NGO input (Deadline 26 April 2015)

The basis for the IAEG work will be the technical report (the responses by National Statistical Offices to the Survey of the Statistical Commission). See posting on website of 15 April (Technical Report of the Bureau of the UN Statistical Commission – further comments). This will be the starting point. All parties, including NGOs, are invited to comment. UNGLS takes all comments and works it into a synthesis for IAEG. See posting Post-2015: Stakeholder views on indicators - deadline 26 April. 

The deadline for comments is 26 April. 

UNSD will also create a dedicated site and space for communication with NGOs. Member States, however, through their National Statistical Offices (NSOs), will have to approve how to engage with NGOs, which is expected to become clear in two to three weeks. There might be opportunities for a limited number of interventions perhaps in IAEG, which will mean that there could be a call to NGOs to coordinate and organize among themselves (eg through collective or thematic statements). In some way, however, there will be room at the table. The meeting of the Expert group, which preceded the Statistical Commission meeting, provides a good blue print as to how NGOs are expected to engage with the IAEG. 

Stephan Schweinfest also noted that the Co Facilitators have writing to the Statistical Commission calling for a broad and open process, with the understanding that civil society would be engaged. Furthermore, UNSD plans to continue holding briefings for NGOs. It is expected that the next one will be held in the second half of May (possibly between 22 and 26 May, after the May political negotiations and prior to PGA meeting/event).

Q and A

Questions from civil society organizations (CSOs) included how to avoid ‘business as usual’ in engaging with CSOs. The issue of how to include data collected by CSOs, was also raised (with reference to the ‘data ecosystem’ of multiple entries). On this, UNSD said that global indicators must be comparable internationally, and be valid not only for some 30 countries but for some150 countries. This should, however, not be a criterion for ignoring any CSO reporting. 

Indigenous group representatives also noted that indigenous peoples should not solely be qualified as a vulnerable group (and included in the latter) but also be included in other groups, with adjusted indicators. UNSD referred to the World Forum of Data, planned for early 2016, as a forum to discuss issues like data coming from entities other than NSOs.

Regarding NSO ratings in the survey, a ‘C rating’ would not mean automatic disqualification but it would mean the need for further discussion, consideration and possibly/probably adjustment.

CSOs raised the issues on how ageing, indigenous groups and other marginalized groups (such as the dalit) and children in vulnerable situations could be included in the indicators. Some groups are not surveyed, while others, including women over 49, and girls under 15, are not counted under the current proposed indicators. There were questions as to what disaggregation by age really means if groups are still excluded.  It was also announced by CSOs that a sign-on letter will be sent to the Statistical Commission calling for CSO engagement, including suggestions on how this could be done.

On another point, the UNSD said that while the survey was based on the ‘more mechanical approach of two indicators per target’, as a starting point,  this could be a subject that the IAEG might revisit. There may be multiple cover indicators (meaning indicators covering multiple targets), and that work to identify these was already starting.

Stephan Schweinfest said that some degree of flexibility was needed for emerging issues, and that the framework, methodology and data capacity would need to be developed to adjust to a developing world. Francesca Perucci supported his comments pointing out that the attention was being paid to the issue of ageing, and that it was now finding its way into adjusted data collection. This takes time, however, and requires capacity at national level.