Draft resolution on indicator framework at 48th session of the UN Statistical Commission

Stefan Schweinfest, Director of the UN Statistics Division (UNSD), held a briefing on 15 February for UN Member States on the upcoming 48th session of the UN Statistical Commission (UNSC) from 7-10 March 2017. The most important item under discussion was the proposed draft resolution on the global indicator framework for the sustainable development goals (SDGs) to the included in the report to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

The 47^th session in 2016 adopted a decision on the global indicator framework “as a practical starting point” but the process by which it was transmitted to the General Assembly through the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to the General Assembly is open to legal challenge and therefore a formal draft resolution will be before the UNSC.

The UNSC uses a different process from other Commissions in adopting resolutions, insofar as the zero draft, which has been developed by a subgroup consisting of the Co-chairs of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on the SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) and of the High-level Group (HLG), has been sent to the members of the Statistical Commission (normally the Chief Statisticians of Member States) for comment. It is now being revised based on the comments received and will be sent out again for comment this week. The discussions therefore usually take place before the session starts. While concern was expressed in the briefing that the document was long (ie 13 paragraphs, Schweinfest said that they had used it for a 700-page document on Systems for National Accounts.

During the question and answer session, some Member States asked whether it would be easier just to include it in the report or to have a procedural resolution. The proposed draft resolution, however, appears to be the way for the UNSC to fulfil its role as set out in paragraph 75 of the A/RES/70/1 Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

While some of the indicators are considered controversial, Schweinfest made it clear that the UNSC members are not considering questioning them. What is problematical for them as professional statisticians is that they cannot now measure some of them and in this regard, there will be opportunities for refinement in 2020 and 2025. Meanwhile, following the World Data Forum that took place in Cape Town in January 2017, there are issues related to big data and geo-spatial data which is not collected by National Statistical Offices (NSOs) but by private entities. There is a need, therefore, to work out public- private partnerships, as to how NSOs can get access to this relevant information.

For the members of the Commission the challenge will be getting the balance right between the technical and political as it must stay technical, but work in a political space.

See below for a report on the briefing.

General remarks

The first session of the UNSC was held 70 years ago in 1947. All documents are available on the unstats.UN.org website.

There will be over 80 side events, some of which may be closed, although most are open. Some 120 – 140 countries attend the Commission, usually at Heads of the NSO level. There has only once been a vote. The session opens at 10.30 in General Assembly Hall, for the first time, starting with a historical reflection. It will then move to Conference Room 4. There will be eight formal sessions and an exhibition related to the first World Data Forum that was held in January in Cape Town, with 1400 people attending.

The expected outcome is that the report will contain a number of decisions and hopefully a draft resolution to ECOSOC on the indicator framework for the SDGs.

Resolution on indicator framework

The UNSC does not normally adopt resolutions, although every couple of years there is a draft resolution to move forward concerns, which are mostly technical eg on censuses or account, for the ECOSOC to consider.

This year, however, a draft resolution is being developed on the indicator framework, insofar as the General Assembly gave the UNSC the responsibility to develop such framework for subsequent adoption by ECOSOC and itself. The process, according to Schweinfest, was “straining the machinery” of the UNSC, insofar as the SDGs require a large number of indicators in comparison with the MDGs and include a number of things that cannot currently be measured. It will be a draft resolution to ECOSOC who will then move it to the General Assembly in compliance with the requirement. It is proposed that the door will be kept open for refinement in 2020 and 2025, in order the UNSC to ensure sufficient stability and not to “shoot themselves in the foot.”

The draft resolution would adopt the indicator framework as developed by the IAEG-SDGs and on which there is general agreement, with a number of refinements and the provision to conduct revisions in 2020 and 2030. Given the broad scope of the 2030 agenda and the large number of indicators, it stresses the need for capacity-building, collaboration and transfer of technology. There is also an element in the resolution related to data flow and role of international organizations, and country estimates in accordance with the 2006 ECOSOC resolution, by which they can only be used if no other information is available and they have consulted with the country, etc.

The zero draft was worked on by the IAEG-SDGs Co-chairs and the High-level Group and sent to all Chief Statisticians in early February. The UNSD has received 47 country comments on the draft, none of which indicate red lines or were “show-stoppers”, which is now undergoing a revision, with a second version expected for circulation early in the week of 20 February. Chief Statisticians should reach out to their Governments and contact their respective permanent missions in New York to ensure linkages between the technical and political levels. Schweinfest felt that all issues being negotiated should be solvable, while being mindful of political sensitivities.

Questions and responses

In response to a call for clarification on NGO registration, Schweinfest said that the standard procedures should be in place.

Canada – said that it useful to hear that the comments on the draft resolution have been generally in support and that it looks as if it will go forward without difficulty. Is such a resolution really required, as a regular session report would go through for adoption and something could have been included in it. Did they have to move in this direction?

Schweinfest – replied that the UNSC had adopted the formulation on the indicator framework in 2016 “as a practical starting point”. However, it started a whole legal debate on compliance with the mandate and the process was questioned. Chief Statisticians felt that in addition to the indicators, they should be making a statement of professional honesty of what an indicator framework means, ie it is a long list of indicators. Gradually there was a move towards a resolution being a vehicle of communication from the Statistical Commission through ECOSOC to the General Assembly, as being an honest statement of what they have to do to get to what is really wanted ie good data. The framework is just the means.

Uruguay – asked when the updated version of the text would be circulated and how they are going to work on it, ie through the UNSC, or otherwise will there be a little negotiation, as it could be problematical on the political side. She was not talking about negotiating the indicators. The draft resolution is quite long and a procedural one might be much better. She pointed out that as a developing country, her Government was concerned about the need for capacity building.

Schweinfest –pointed to the advantage for the UNSC in having negotiations ahead of time. Their preferred methodology is the one that they are using in working with the relevant subgroups. This briefing was important given the political sensitivities and there will be follow-up briefings.

He reiterated that the revised version should be available the week of 20 Feb. It will be send out to see if there are any issues that require any sort of negotiations. He hoped that they could move quickly to a consensus.

Netherlands (?) – pointed out that his Government does not provide instructions to its NSO as it is independent. Any resolution crafted by the UNSC will have to be negotiated through the ECOSOC and General Assembly. It might be preferable to table a procedural resolution, while leaving substantive issues to regular working methods, integrating them in the narrative report of the session.

Schweinfest – noted that different countries have different arrangements recognizing the independence and consultation mechanisms of NSOs.  It was important to have good communications as the draft resolution is a “double resolution”, first for the Commission and then as an instrument of the ECOSOC, ie it is first technical and then political. No one wants a draft resolution that will be reopened, therefore for it to sail through, good communication is needed between the two.

Uncoupling the resolution is in hands of the Member States. The UNSC would prefer everything to be together. This is a compact draft resolution: more words mean more possibilities for danger. What they have now is “plan A”. Advice will be needed if it becomes difficult. Advice for the technical delegations is critically important – they need a crash course on diplomacy…

Schweinfest in response to another question said that they UNSC was using its standard procedure, ie to consult globally, and not really negotiate. In the session, the Chair introduces the agenda item and says what the UNSC is invited to do. There is no procedural requirement on a draft resolution. Although 13 paras might be considered difficult, the UNSC has used the same procedure for a 700 page document on Systems of national accounts. Once the draft resolution hit the floor, the aim is that it is adopted by consensus.

He reaffirmed that it is a “draft resolution” and will be put forward to ECOSOC. The proposed 2020 and 2025 revision dates are a technical recommendation from IAEG-SDGs.

Singapore – asked about the process for the ECOSOC and the General Assembly and about the scope for “tweaks” when ECOSOC and/or the General Assembly consider it.

Schweinfest – confirmed that the UNSC should adopt the draft resolution, and then sends it straight through to ECOSOC, having had the benefit of prior advice to stop accidents along the way. Technically it will be a draft resolution, and ECOSOC can do what it sees fit with it.  He didn’t know whether the UNSC would have anything to say about it being moved on to the General Assembly. His concern was to comply with the 2030 Agenda and guidance will needed for its subsequent adoption from the Secretariat and legal advisers.

India – asked about the role of the 24 Members of the Commission and the use of consensus.

Schweinfest – answered that procedural steps are important and that the UNSC would be using its standard practice. The subgroup had initiated the draft; are looking at comments received; and are preparing the second version. All NSOs will have a second look and will probably raise the bar a little. Real objections differ from looking for creative ideas to improve. Consensus doesn’t mean everyone is happy but it involves every country that is in the room. The UNSC always works until everyone is happy. It has only been forced into a vote once in 2005. They will continue with a joint reading until everyone is happy. The draft resolution will be part of the report.

Venezuela –said that the text does not go as far enough. In her country the National Statistical Institute is independent, so they have to go through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on UN issues, ie statisticians and politicians working together. To accelerate reaching a consensus, she asked if it would be possible to send next draft of the text to include the Permanent Missions to speed up the process.

Schweinfest said it was a practical proposal and that he didn’t see problems. He recognized the need to move forward. There should be as much time as possible.

(The UNSD serves as Secretariat for the UNSC, as well as the Secretariat of the IAEG-SDGs, which has been developing the indicator framework. Francesca Perucci is the Deputy Director.)