Translating priority thematic areas
into goals, targets and indicators and
engaging in the intergovernmental
process
Jack Cornforth and Farooq Ullah
Part 1
Update on the SDGs
Process
Sustainable Development Goals
SDGs set to replace MDGs when they expire at end of 2015
What will this new set of global goals look like?
At Rio+20 States agreed that they should be:
• Action-oriented
• Concise and easy to communicate
• Limited in number
• Aspirational
• Global in nature and universally applicable to all
countries while taking into account different national
realities, capacities and levels of development and
respecting national policies and priorities.
The Universality Dilemma
What do we mean by ‘universal’?
• SDG framework norms and principles are relevant to all nations,
irrespective of economic, social or environmental contexts, so
the goals will apply to all countries
But global goals don’t easily translate to national contexts because
of different, starting points, capacities, priorities etc.
• So to be useful for all countries (and to create national
ownership) global goals will be adapted into targets and
indicators that reflect national contexts.
Challenge:
• Ensuring coherence between broad global goals and widely
differing national contexts
Open Working Group on SDGs
• Group of UN Member States currently working on a
report proposing a set of SDGs, including targets and
indicators
• Recently published 19 focus areas the goals should
address
• Currently discussing
possible goals and targets
under each of these focus
areas
• Not yet discussing
indicators
New Post-2015 Process
• OWG report, along with other inputs exploring
options for new global goals (HLP report, UNDG
consultations, ICESDF report, etc.) to feed into
UN Secretary-General’s synthesis report
• This will be foundation for new
intergovernmental process to agree Post-2015
Development Agenda
– Starts in September 2014
– Culminates in global summit in 2015
Part 2
Exploring Sustainable
Development Priorities
Group Activity
List as many sustainable development
thematic areas or issues they that are
important in your country or region
OWG Focus Areas
How do yours
compare to
the OWG’s 19
focus areas?
Would you
change your
list as a
consequence?
Prioritising Exercise
Now try to choose a list of 10 priority areas
When doing so you should consider:
– Balancing the three dimensions of SD
– Mutual benefits and trade-offs
– Thematic areas that could address
multiple issues
– Prioritisation Vs combination
Part 3
Goals, targets and
indicators
Goals, Targets and Indicators
The OWG is expected to translate its 19 priority areas
into:
• A concise list of global goals (8-12)
• A number of targets under each goal, likely to be set
or chosen by national governments to best suit their
individual needs and priorities
• A set of indicators, likely to be common for all
countries to enable comparability
Goals, targets and indicators are commonly used terms
in discussions on Post-2015, but are we be confident
about they mean and would look like in practice?
Goal Definitions
OWG: Expresses an ambitious, specific and
actionable commitment
(other characteristics listed earlier – e.g. action-oriented,
concise, aspirational, etc.)
HLP: As above, but adds that it should always start
with a verb/action
SDSN: an ambitious commitment that presents a
single challenge with great impact. It should be
universal, comprehensive, operational, and easy to
understand
Target Definitions
OWG: Specific, measurable objective whose
attainment will contribute in major way to
achieving one or more goals
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Aspirational yet attainable
Evident link between target and goal
Speak to all relevant stakeholders
Nationally relevant, adaptable
Time-bound
Evidence-, science-based
Adjustable
– as science advances
– if countries choose to raise level of ambition
Target Definitions
HLP: Quantified sub-components that will
contribute in a major way to achievement of goal.
Should be an outcome variable.
Specifies level of ambition of each country; may be
universal in specific circumstances.
SDSN: A specific, measurable, attainable, timebound outcome that contributes to the
achievement of a goal. It should be defined at
global and national levels to reflect each country’s
ambitions and capacities
Indicator Definitions
OWG: Not yet discussing indicators
HLP: Precise metric from identified databases to
assess if target is being met (often multiple
indicators are used)
SDSN: A meaningful, simple, and quantifiable
metric used to assess progress toward meeting a
target. It should be easily and quickly measurable
and should allow for disaggregation
Example GTIs
Goal: Ensure Effective Learning for All Children
and Youth for Life and Livelihood (SDSN)
Target
All children under the
age of 5 reach their
developmental potential
through access to quality early
childhood development
programs and policies.
Ensure that all youth
transition effectively into the
labour market.
Indicators
Source
Proportion of children receiving at least
one year of
a quality pre-primary education program
UNESCO,
UNICEF,
World Bank
Early Child Development Index (ECDI)
UNICEF
Percentage of young people not in
education, training, or employment
ILO
Tertiary enrollment rates for girls and boys
UNESCO
Part 4
Defining and Prioritising
Targets
The Integrating Approach
Initially focusing on targets, rather than goals
This “bottom-up” approach:
• Asserts that priority goals will be easier (and quicker) to
establish if you focus on the targets first …
• Enables the granularity of interlinkages to emerge,
therefore making eventual goals more effective
• Means that discussions will not be boxed into sector
perspectives from the outset
• Provides a key entry point for other constituencies, e.g.
private sector, to recommend specific targets
Key Considerations for Target Setting
1. Ensuring that they are well designed and
well-defined targets
2. Methodologically select and prioritise
possible target options
3. Think about implementation and
measurement considerations
Criteria for designing well-defined targets
• Quantitative: aims for a specific value (numeric, rate of
change or absolute – e.g. ‘zero goals’)
• Time-bound: specifies the year of attainment (preferably
uniform across targets, and with a common baseline
year)
• Ambitious: aspires to a greater improvement than what
would otherwise be expected in the absence of the
development agenda
• Attainable: does not suppose unrealistic progress in the
time allotted
• Policy relevant: has a clear relationship to the goal(s) to
which it contributes – and results or trends can inform
policy responses
Criteria for selecting and prioritising possible targets
• Transformational: achieving the target is an essential “must
have” to meeting one or more goals
• Supports multiple dimensions of sustainable development:
clearly links to the three dimensions of sustainable
development (economic, social, environmental), and
potentially can support achievement of more than one goal
• Results-oriented: aims for an outcome, not an input or output
(e.g. literacy rate compared to years spent in school)
• Reflects existing commitments: incorporates and is otherwise
consistent with current international agreements (e.g.
Convention on Biodiversity or Hyogo Framework for Action) as
appropriate
Implementation and measurement considerations
• Disaggregated (or able to be disaggregated) amongst sub-groups:
information on a target could be assessed by gender, race, ethnicity
or other divisions to ensure that progress is shared evenly
• Defined (or able to be defined) at the country level: can be specific
to a location or tailored to local circumstances
• Based on available data: sources of information are known and
data can be collected to assess progress, taking into account varying
technical capacities
• Incorporating new data: leverages advances in metrics and data
collection technologies
• Comparable to a baseline: the starting point is known and defined
• Assessed globally: data from many countries can be aggregated to
assess global progress
• Cost-effective: costs do not outweigh benefits of collecting needed
data
Part 5
Measuring what Matters
and Engaging
A Data Revolution?
• MDGs saw huge increase in data quantity and
quality
• But many gaps remain
• Momentum for a ‘data revolution’
• To provide new quantitative and qualitative data
• But requires political will and accelerated action,
• And must empower all stakeholders
Disaggregated Data
Much support for universality within countries:
• SDGs should address national-level inequalities
• Account for the poorest and most marginalised to
ensure ‘no one is left behind’
Using disaggregated indicators to distinguish between
different societal groups
EG by:
• Wealth quintiles
• Geographical location
• Sex
But is there sufficient capacity and resources to do this?
Exercise - Using Indicators in Practice
1. What sub-categories would you
disaggregate this indicator into to make it
meaningful and to help ensure that ‘no
one is left behind’?
2. What do you perceive to be the
barriers/challenges to collecting this
information and processing/using the
data so it is useful for policy makers?
Other Discussions on Targets and Measurement
What other forums than the OWG are currently
discussing target setting and monitoring progress?
• Friends of the Chair Group on Broader Measures of
Progress (FOC)
• Sustainable development Solutions Network ‘Indicators
for SDGs’
• Stakeholder-led initiatives, e.g.:
o Independent Research Forum (IRF2015)
o Thematic clusters (UN MGs)
o Beyond 2015
o Measure What Matters
Recommendations for further engagement
• Identify who is leading on post-2015 in your capital
• Become involved in/start inter-departmental
conversations on Post-2015 and SDGs
o Are ‘key’ departments aware of these discussions and what
they will likely mean for their work (budgeting, planning,
monitoring etc)?
• Contact/connect with your UN Mission in NY
• Engage in round two of UN DG consultations on
implementation
• Participate in stakeholder-led initiatives (e.g. Measure
What Matters campaign)
Do you have any remaining
questions or comments regarding
anything we have discussed today?
Thank you!
www.sustainabledevelopment2015.org
www.stakeholderforum.org
e-mail:
jcornforth@stakeholderforum.org
fullah@stakeholderforum.org