Measuring Governance in the
post-2015 framework: choices
and criteria
Governance Week Cairo, November 2012
Joachim Nahem
Oslo Governance Centre, UNDP
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
Presentation overview

Measurement & the post-2015 agenda:

What do we know ?

Possible approaches

Measuring governance and the post-2015 agenda



Process
Key messages from the consultation to date
Possible criteria for selection
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
What do we know?: mandate
SDGs should:
•
•
•
•
•
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
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
What do we know?
Multiple UN & inter-governmental initiatives related to
measurement:





Open Working Group (inter-governmental post Rio)
Sub-task team of UN Task Team on measurement &
monitoring (preliminary work under way)
UN SG Executive Committee on Peace and Security
(ECPS) Working Group on measurement of democracy
and democratic governance
Regional initiatives – eg SHaSA in Africa, governance,
peace and security statistics led by AUC
International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and
Statebuilding Working Group on Indicators (OECD
Secretariat)
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
Governance indicators ‘mushrooming’
Political
Terror Scale
Polity
Global
Competitiveness
Index
CPIA
Press
Freedom
Survey
Freedom in the
World
1974 76
78
80
International
Country Risk Guide
82
84
86
Global Accountability
Report
Indicators
Institutional
of Local
Profiles Database
Democratic
World
Governance
Governance
Assessment
Democracy
Index
Human Rights
World
Indicators Gender
Democracy
Empowerment
Audit
Weberian
Measure
Comparative State
Failed
Project
State Failure
States Index
Civil Society
Dataset
Countries at the
Index
Crossroads
Women in
Press
Index of Parliament
Freedom
Index of
Economic
Index
Human Rights
Freedom
CIRI
Human Rights
Open Budget
Global
Commitment to
Databse
Index
Corruption
Index of
Development
Barometer
Democracy
Rule of Law
Journalists
Governance Economic
Integrity Index
Index
killed
Matters Freedom of Bertelsmann Global Peace
the World Transformation
Index
BEEPS
Index
Governance
World Values
Opacity
and
Survey
Corruption
Index
Democracy
Perceptions Bribe Payers
GAPS in Workers’ Processes
Index
Index
Rights
88
90
92
94
96
98
00
02
04
06
08
Possible approaches to measurement
framework

Global goal(s), with global targets and global indicators,
similar to existing MDGs.

Global goal(s), with global targets and national
indicators.

Global goal(s), with regional targets and regional or
national indicators.

Global goal(s), with national targets and national
indicators.
Source: UNDP(2012) “Measuring Democracy and Democratic Governance in a post-2015 Development
Framework.” Discussion paper available at: http://gaportal.org/
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
Measuring governance in the post-2015
framework

/
UNDP/OHCHR Expert Consultation on ‘Governance and
Human Rights: Criteria and Measurement Proposals for a
post-2015 development agenda’.

Held in New York, 13-14 November 2012. 40 invited experts
participated (UN, Member States, national statistical offices,
Academia, Civil Society)

Part of UNDP/OHCHR led global consultation on governance
and human rights in the post-2015 agenda
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/governance

Meeting:docs http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/277879
Summary & report forthcoming
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
Key messages (non-official):






Governance IS measurable within a global development
framework
‘intrinsic’ vs ‘instrumental’ approaches.
Development & measurement frameworks ‘do’ a number of
things, choice of goals, targets & indicators affected by
purpose.
Choices in levels of measurement might allow politically more
sensitive elements to be inserted into the framework (eg a
global goal with nationally-defined targets).
Integration of global governance issues throughout the
framework (not just a stand-alone MDG8 type),
Disagreement about the type of data (official vs other)
sources of data
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
Key messages – criteria
Criteria for choice of goals, targets & indicators:
•
Democratic legitimacy
•
Moral & cognitive salience
•
Consistent with international law
•
Clarity & simplicity
•
Action-oriented
•
Universally applicable
•
Reflects equality
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre
Thank-you!
Please sign-up and join the e-discussion (including on
measurement) THIS WEEK at:
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/governance
/
United Nations Development Programme
Oslo Governance Centre