UN-NGLS and DESA-DSD Consultation on Indicators for the SDGs


1	GOAL 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	Andrew Griffiths	Sightsavers	Indicators will need specific reference to persons with disabilities on the targets on poverty eradication; Governments must report on social as well as economic equity in poverty eradication;	Form submission
3			Zoe Gray	International Agency for Prevention of Blindness	To ensure no one is left behind the indicators to capture poverty reduction must be disaggregated to account for groups at risk of exclusion in poverty reduction and development, including persons with disabilities.
4		General	Polly Meeks	ADD International	We consider it particularly important that disability be included throughout Goal 1, in particular Targets 1.1. and 1.2. People with disabilities are recognised to be over-represented among the chronically poor (see, for example, DFID's recent Disability Framework); and to be under-served by poverty reduction efforts (see e.g. Groce N, Disability and the Millennium Development Goals, UN, New York, 2011).. In addition we recommend the following specific indicators:  Poverty eradication indicator: The percentage of households with persons with disabilities living on less than US$1.25 per day compared to the percentage of households without persons with disabilities living on less than US$1.25 per day.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TazeXmX5bFczV4d0VHMHdLNk0/view
5	Target 1.1: By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere, currently measured as people living on less than $1.25 a day	1.1 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	The disaggregation of data by age and sex will allow us to monitor progress for young men and women against this indicator.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
6	1.1.1: Proportion of population below $1.25 (PPP) per day disaggregated by sex and age group	1.1.1 Amendment	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	Percentage of population below $1.25 (PPP) per day, disaggregated by age to capture the child poverty rate	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
7		1.1.1 General Comment	Fabio Palacio	International Movement ATD Fourth World	ATD Fourth World has found that this indicator, although potentially useful as a measure of monetary poverty, is too low to protect people from the most damaging aspects of poverty and, also too low to be of any relevance in developed countries. We thus welcome the World Bank’s initiative to revise this indicator.	http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf
8		1.1 General Comment and New Proposed Indicator	Polly Meeks	ADD International	We consider it particularly important that disability be included throughout Goal 1, in particular Targets 1.1. and 1.2. People with disabilities are recognised to be over-represented among the chronically poor (see, for example, DFID's recent Disability Framework); and to be under-served by poverty reduction efforts (see e.g. Groce N, Disability and the Millennium Development Goals, UN, New York, 2011).. In addition we recommend the following specific indicators:  Poverty eradication indicator: The percentage of households with persons with disabilities living on less than US$1.25 per day compared to the percentage of households without persons with disabilities living on less than US$1.25 per day.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TazeXmX5bFczV4d0VHMHdLNk0/view
9		1.1 New Proposed Indicator	Kimberly DeRose	Child and Youth Finance International	Percentage of children and youth covered by national social protection programs. Percentage of children and youth below $1.25 per day.	https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YFCKapHGn08bv7575CZiaLlBPocX_0_heWpL6uQSkDM/edit
10		1.1 New Proposed Indicator	Elaine Geyer-Allély	WWF International	Measurement of the health and well being of communities directly dependent on ecosystem goods and services. Data Sources: see Biodiversity Indicator Partnership Rationale: Ecosystem services and other non-marketed goods make up 50-90 percent of the total source of livelihoods of poor rural households worldwide – the “GDP of the poor” (TEEB, 2010). An indicator is needed to reflect the link between poverty and vulnerability to biodiversity loss as one important dimension of the multiple dimensions of poverty. Relevant to: Target 2.4, target 3.2, target 13.1, goal 14, goal 15	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
11	Target 1.2: By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national denitions	1.2 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	The disaggregation of data for both proposed indicators by age and sex will allow us to monitor progress for young men and women.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
12	1.2.1: Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) disaggregated by sex and age group	1.2.1 Amendment	Gabriele Weigt	German NGOs and DPOs	This indicator should also be disaggregated by disability.	Form submission and http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf
13		1.2.1 General Comment	Fabio Palacio	International Movement ATD Fourth World	This indicator makes a significant leap away from a solely income-based conception of poverty and moves the international community towards a more multidimensional approach. It is extremely important that this indicator be implemented as widely as possible. That being said, we recognize that it misses some of the qualitative aspects of poverty like exclusion and discrimination.	http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf
14		1.2.1 Amendment	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	Proportion of children (under 18) living in multidimensional poverty, disaggregated by geographical location, sex, disability and care status of the child.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
15		1.2.1 Amendment	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	[Amend Indicator]: Proportion of children (under 18) living in multidimensional poverty, disaggregated by geographical location, sex, disability and care status of the child. Rationale: Child poverty must be measured with at least one standalone indicator. On the one hand, it is time to explicitly recognise that poverty affects children disproportionally everywhere – nearly half of the world’s population living in poverty is under 183 76,5 million children are living in poverty4 development to their full potential, child poverty carries irreversible damages to both individuals and the society, with high chances that poverty is perpetuated across generations. Moreover, child poverty hits children without parental care hardest. In most countries, children and youth who have temporarily or permanently lost the care of their parents5 of their life, too often with dramatic outcomes for their survival and healthy development. Disaggregation of the indicator by care status of the child would improve public authorities’ knowledge of their child population and help better target aid to the most in need. Methodology and Data Source: The most promising measures of child poverty are the Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA) utilised by UNICEF Office of Research6 Both measure monetary poverty and multidimensional deprivations simultaneously, which is relevant to track children’s deprivations across multiple dimensions. MODA carries the advantage of taking the child as the unit of analysis, rather than the household. This is crucial to ensure that progress is measured against all children, including those living outside of the household, and to account for the fact that children experience poverty differently from adults, especially with regards to developmental needs. MPI can provide similar accuracy if it is disaggregated by age and if additional modules are developed to measure individual-level child poverty8 under the Demographic Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS)	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view
16	1.2.2: Proportion of population living below national poverty line, disaggregated by sex and age group	1.2.2 Amendment	Gabriele Weigt	German NGOs and DPOs	This indicator should also disaggregated by disability.	Form submission and http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf
17		1.2.2 Amendment	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	Proportion of population living below national poverty line, disaggregated by geographical location, gender, age group.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
18		1.2.2 Amendment	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	[Amend Indicator]: Proportion of population living below national poverty line, disaggregated by geographical location, sex, age group Rationale: From the former MDG Indicator we know that worldwide more than 1.2 billion people are still living with less than $1.25 a day. Out of them, about 569 million are under 189 proposals to replace the $1.25 threshold for the poverty line with a modified MDG indicator setting the poverty line according to national thresholds based on average daily consumption or income per person per day. Here disaggregation of the indicator by urban and rural areas is relevant to account for differences in cost of living. It is also particularly significant to identify the sex and the age of the head of the household. From SOS Children’s Villages’ experience working with some of the poorest families and communities worldwide, households headed by women or by children and young people who lost parental care are most likely to experience extreme poverty. An example are child-headed households, common in some parts of Africa, where children who have lost parental care are left alone with the responsibility of caring for their siblings, and with enormous economic security issues that may force them into child labour and other forms of exploitation. Methodology and Data Source: Data from SOS Children’s Villages’ programmes suggest that poverty is a leading risk factor for family breakdown. Worldwide, severe economic conditions do not allow children to be looked after within their household. As a result, children from poor households are abandoned or separated from their parents, who are no longer able to care for them. In this sense, data collected through household surveys like for the former MDG indicator are insufficient to capture the situation of some of the poorest and marginalised – who live out of the household. We propose integration of household surveys with data from Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), administrations and NGOs.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view
19		1.2 New Proposed Indicator	Susan Brown	WWF	Measurement of the health and well being of communities directly dependent on ecosystem goods and services. Data Sources: see Biodiversity Indicator Partnership Rationale: Ecosystem services and other non-marketed goods make up 50-90 percent of the total source of livelihoods of poor rural households worldwide – the “GDP of the poor” (TEEB, 2010). An indicator is needed to reflect the link between poverty and vulnerability to biodiversity loss as one important dimension of the multiple dimensions of poverty. Relevant to: Target 2.4, target 3.2, target 13.1, goal 14, goal 15	https://www.dropbox.com/s/d4scjiq53ec99sg/WWF_SusanBrown_Suggested%20indicators.xlsx?dl=0
20	Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable	1.3 General Comment	Andrew Griffiths	Sightsavers	We welcome the inclusion of disability in these indicators. We need to see this level of disaggregation across the board, and especially in Target 1.2.	Form submission
21		1.3 General Comment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Point of emphasis - it is critical that any indicators relating to social protection go beyond social protection system coverage and include reference to social protection floors.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
22		1.3.1 General Comment	Fabio Palacio	International Movement ATD Fourth World	Social Protection: None of these indicators received a feasibility rating of ‘A’ although they were rated as at least suitable and highly relevant. ATD Fourth World prioritizes social protection as perhaps the most vital policy to poverty eradication. Furthermore, in line with the language of target 1.3, whichever target can be prioritized to measure social protection, it should be disaggregated by income.	http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf
23	1.3.1: Percentage of population covered by social protection floors/systems, disaggregated by sex, with break down by children, unemployed, old age, people with disabilities, pregnant women/new-borns, work injury victims, poor and vulnerable, including one or more of the following: a) Percentage of older persons receiving a pension; b) Percentage of households with children receiving child support; c) Percentage of unemployed persons receiving unemployment benefits; d) Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving disability benefits; e) Percentage of pregnant women receiving maternity benefits; f) Percentage of workers covered against occupational accidents; and g) Percentage of poor and vulnerable people receiving benefits	1.3.1 Amendment	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	[Section (b) of 1.3.1]: Percentage of households with children receiving child support Suggested Amends: Percentage of children covered by social assistance programmes ensuring basic income security (Target: “substantial” - amend to say “all poor people”) Rationale for amends: Prefer language in FFF because it ties income security directly to the child “Substantial” is neither a SMART target nor is it sufficiently ambitious if we are trying to eradicate extreme and reduce relative poverty by half by 2030	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
24		1.3.1 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Given high levels of youth unemployment (higher than overall unemployment), having the indicator of % of unemployed receiving unemployment benefits disaggregated by age (as well as by sex) would be useful in order to monitor progress.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
25		1.3.1 Amendment	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	Many children live outside of the household worldwide. They are among the poorest and forgotten. To make sure they are covered too, we suggest next to indicator 1.3.1 a measure of the number (or %) of children receiving support from the social protection system when the parents are unable to care for them. [Amended Indicator]: Percentage of population covered by social protection measures, disaggregated by sex, with breakdown by children, unemployed, old people, people with disabilities, pregnant women/new borns, work injury victims, poor and vulnerable people. Rationale: Social protection measures have proven to be effective in reducing poverty and inequalities10, allowing a life of dignity for the most at-risk and contributing to progress under several MDGs. However, half of the world’s population still lacks social protection coverage11. According to ILO definition12, social protection coverage includes the following ten elements: medical care, sickness benefits, and protection of disability, old age, survivor, maternity, children, unemployment, employment injury, and general protection against poverty and social exclusion. Methodology and Data Source: Administrative data; ILO Social Security Inquiry (SSI)13 and WB ASPIRE database14
26		1.3.1 Amendment	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	[Amended Indicator]: Percentage of children receiving support from the social protection system when the parents are unable to care for them, disaggregated by sex, age group and care status. Rationale: The case for a specific indicator tracking social protection for children whose parents are unable to care for them is compelling. Existing welfare policies do not sufficiently address the needs of the most vulnerable children and families. Child labour or other forms of exploitation and up to 18,000 child deaths a day could be prevented through adequate social protection15. Moreover, social protection measures often miss out children who cannot rely on the family for care and protection, being the family the traditional target unit for child allowance and other support schemes. Especially in the lowest-income countries, children growing up in vulnerable families or alone or in alternative care programmes, receive the sole support of local charities, volunteers, NGOs and other non-state actors. However, the state is the duty-barer when it comes to address the rights and development needs of children, as stated in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child16. A measure of progress in this realm can allow uncovering social protection gaps and moving towards more child-sensitive social protection, reflecting the target 1.3 intentions: “...by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable”. Methodology and Data Source: Integration of administrative data sources with information from non-state actors supporting children and their families locally. SOS Children’s Villages, for example, tracks benefits for children through family development plans, individual child development plans and a programme database. UNICEF could also contribute with ad hoc modules for the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), which already provides some interesting information in this sense, like indicator 6.7 of MICS5 named “inadequate care” and indicator 8.13 of MICS5 named “children’s living arrangements.
27	Indicator 1.3.2 Average social protection transfers as % of income / or poverty line	No specific input received			No specific input received
28		1.3 New Proposed Indicator	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	• Percentage of children receiving support from the social protection system when the parents are unable to care for them, disaggregated by gender, age group and care status.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
29	Target 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinance	1.4 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	The disaggregation of data for both proposed indicators by age and sex will allow us to monitor progress for young men and women	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
30	1.4.1: Proportion of population/households with access to basic services (to be defined) by sex and age group	1.4.1 Amendment	Fabio Palacio	International Movement ATD Fourth World	Social Protection: None of these indicators received a feasibility rating of ‘A’ although they were rated as at least suitable and highly relevant. ATD Fourth World prioritizes social protection as perhaps the most vital policy to poverty eradication. Furthermore, in line with the language of target 1.3, whichever target can be prioritized to measure social protection, it should be disaggregated by income.	http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf
31		1.4.1 Amendment	Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign	Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal	“Basic services” should include “cultural services and resources”	Form submission and Culture2015goal campaign: “Recognizing the role of culture to strengthen the un post-2015 development agenda: Proposals on Indicators”, February 2015. Available at http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf
32		1.4.1 Amendment	Gabriele Weigt	German NGOs and DPOs	Should be disaggregated by disability.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/a/ncdhr.org.in/file/d/0B26uftM42xzVNFRCSzFWZ28xemc/view?usp=sharing
33	1.4.2: Proportion of adult population with tenure that is legally recognised and documented or perceived as secure, by sex and age group	1.4.2 Amendment	Elaine Geyer-Allély	WWF International	Should be reformulated to “measure the percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure rights to land, property, and natural resources” to clearly recognize the direct link between multi-dimensional poverty and access to natural resources.	Form Submission and https://drive.google.com/a/wwf.panda.org/file/d/0B4xFEl-c1puRWER1YW81eW44SUE/view?usp=sharing
34		1.4.2 Amendment	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	Percentage of vulnerable families having access to services supporting them to secure and optimize economic resources and have control over land, property and inheritance.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
35		1.4.2 Amendment	Indra-Jeet Mistry	WWF	This indicator is important and should be reformulated to measure the percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure rights to land, property, and natural resources. This formulation more clearly recognizes the direct link for many vulnerable populations between multi-dimensional poverty and access to natural resources.	Form Submission
36		1.4.2 Amendment	Luca Miggiano	Oxfam	1. Percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure rights to land, property, and natural resources, measured by a. percentage with legally documented or recognized evidence of tenure, and b. percentage who perceive their rights are recognized and protected This land rights indicator can be defined as follows: 1a (number of women with legally documented or recognized evidence of tenure / number of women) x 100, and similarly for men, and IPLCs. 1b (number of women who perceive their rights are recognized and protected / number of women) x 100, and similarly for men (with overview where appropriate also at IPLCs’ level).	https://www.dropbox.com/s/xzvgl1f4wwyo8wv/post2015_landrightsindicators_10marchb.pdf?dl=0
37		1.4 New Proposed Indicators	Kimberly DeRose	Child and Youth Finance International	CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of children and youth (independently) using financial products and services CYFI Proposed Indicator: Percentage of financial institutions who are providing child and youth-friendly products and services CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of youth that have taken a loan to invest in an income generating activity. CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of children and youth who have access to internet CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of National Youth Strategies that implement policies protecting the economic rights of children and youth	https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YFCKapHGn08bv7575CZiaLlBPocX_0_heWpL6uQSkDM/edit
38		1.4 New Proposed Indicator	Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign	Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal	- Proportion of men and women with access, within 30 minute walking distance, to basic cultural services and resources (libraries, community centers, arts centers, museums, local heritage preservation centers, etc.) as means of empowerment and of human development. [Our proposal] - Access to selected cultural community infrastructures (museums, libraries, media resource centers, exhibition venues dedicated to the performing arts) relative to the distribution of the country’s population in administrative divisions immediately below State level. [Taken from UNESCO (2014), UNESCO Culture for Development Indicators. Methodology Manual (Paris: UNESCO), available at https://en.unesco.org/creativity/node/1918]	Form submission and http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf
39		1.4 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	(a) Dimensions that could be measured: - Recognition and enforcement of legal rights to use, control and transfer land , property and other assets - Availability of affordable housing and land - Access to basic, affordable services - Access to affordable and fair credit and financial resources Indicator: 1. Proportion of women and men without secure tenure and with secure tenure (measured by the percentage with and without legal documented rights to their house); the percentage who do not fear arbitrary eviction. Possible alternative indicators: 1. Proportion of household heads possessing documents as evidence of legal or legitimate access to their houses and/or land over the total population (Sietchiping (2012), The World Bank - Gender Equality data and statistics (revised)) 2. Citizens' perception about security of tenure related to land, housing or other assets (Communitas) 3. Number of homeless people per 100,000 population (Global City Indicator) Comments (Linkages, disaggregation and sources): Linkages: Goal 11.1 Disaggregation by: Gender of household head, level of income, urban / rural To be Developed ((TBD); not readily available).	Form Submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
40		1.4 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Proportion of the urban population in the lowest quintiles that spends more than 30 per cent of its income on accommodation Possible alternative indicators: 1. Housing price to income ratio: ratio between the median price of house premises and the median household income per year. 2. Land price to income ratio: ratios between the median price of 1 square metre of highly-developed, developed and raw land and the median household income per month (UNHABITAT (2004),) Comments (Linkages, disaggregation and sources): Linkages: goal 11.1 Disaggregation by: Urban / rural, level of income (TBD not readily available)	Form Submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
41		1.4 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Proportion of the population in the lowest quintiles that spends more than [xx per cent] of its income on basic services (water, sanitation, energy, education, health, transport) Linkages: Goal 11.1; Disaggregation by: Gender, urban / rural, level of income TBD (not readily available). Sources: Proposed by UNSDN (London, 2014) TBD. Note that this indicator does not appear to be readily available internationally. It could be computed from income/expenditure household surveys	Form Submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
42		1.4 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Percentage of adults with an account in a formal financial institution Comments (Linkages, disaggregation and sources): Linkages: Goal 8.10 Disaggregation by: Gender, urban / rural, level of income Sources: The World Bank - Global Financial Inclusion Database http://datatopics.worldbank.org/financialinclusion/ Comments: Indicators on access to basic services can be linked to other goals: Goal 6 for access to safe and affordable drinking water, and adequate and equitable sanitation in the home; Goal 7 for reliable and modern energy services, Goal 3 for education (e.g.: ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education), Goal 4 for health (e.g.: ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health care service), Goal 11.1 for access to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services.	Form Submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
43		1.4 New Proposed Indicator	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	Percentage of vulnerable families having access to services supporting them to secure and optimise economic resources and have control over land, property and inheritance Rationale: From direct experience working with vulnerable families in particularly difficult and marginalized contexts worldwide, SOS Children’s Villages has witness the sustainable impact of economic empowerment of vulnerable families and communities through income generation programmes (including micro-credit, income monitoring services, business start-ups and counselling) on their ability to become self-reliant and provide quality care to their children18 improves the standards of living of men and women, but importantly prevent thousands of unnecessary separations of children from their family. Worldwide, the majority of the children placed in alternative care have at least one parent alive. However, the distrust of parents in poverty results in funds being spent on foster care and other alternative care arrangements, rather than on supporting a child’s family of origin. Social workers are under enormous pressure to reduce any elements of risk, which leads to a disproportionate number of children from families living in poverty being removed by the authorities and put into the care system due to “neglect”19 Granting equal right to economic means enables individuals and families to enjoy fundamental rights and assume their responsibilities towards their children. Access to economic resources and basic services not only Access to economic resources and basic services not onlyimproves the standards of living of men and women, but importantly prevent thousands of unnecessary Worldwide, the majority of the children placed in alternative care have at least one parent alive. However, the distrust of parents in poverty results in funds being spent on foster care and other alternative care arrangements, rather than on supporting a child’s family of origin. Social workers are under enormous pressure to reduce any elements of risk, which leads to a disproportionate number of children from families living in poverty being removed by the authorities and put into the care system due to “neglect”19 Granting equal right to economic means enables individuals and families to enjoy fundamental rights and assume their responsibilities towards their children. Methodology and Data Source: Integration of administrative data sources with information from non-state actors supporting families and children locally. SOS Children’s Villages, for example, collects information on financial and economic services provided to families in our programmes.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view
44		1.4 New Proposed Indicator	Elaine Geyer-Allély	WWF International	Percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure rights to land, property, and natural resources, measured by a. percentage with legally documented or recognized evidence of tenure4, and 1b. percentage who perceive their rights are recognized and protected Data sources: Data sources described in https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/secure-and-equitable-land-rights-post-2015-agenda-key-issue-future-we-want Rationale: Proposal from a coalition of organisations and combining suggestions from UN Women, IFAD1, UNEP2, and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). Strengthening land rights for women, indigenous peoples and local communities supports realization of development objectives related to poverty alleviation, food security, advancing women’s empowerment, and environmental stewardship. Relevant to targets 2.3, 5.a, goals 10, 11, 15.	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
45	Target 1.5: By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters	1.5 Amendment	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	Suggested Amends: This should be disaggregated by all social and economic groups. Replace indicator with: Percentage of representation of children, women, low- income and marginalised groups in national and local DRR decision-making bodies Rationale for Amends: Children are often invisible in times of humanitarian crisis. It is good that UNSC have included an indicator for health and educational facilities but it will not capture the impact on children themselves. Neither of the indicators measures the building of resilience only on measuring vulnerability. Including an indicator that directly addresses building resilience is important	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
46	1.5.1 Number of people affected by hazardous events by sex	1.5.1 Amendment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	This targetinclude sex but not age; UNHCR Population statistics provides data on people of concern by age groups including age 60+ [http://bit.ly/1J0ILDy]	Form submission
47		1.5 Amendment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	The percentage of people over 60 who are affected by hazardous events is extremely high. Ignoring the age and disability factors is not acceptable. Add: Number of training facilities for the health workforce.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
48		1.5.1 Amendment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	[Amend]: Number of people affected by hazardous events by sex and age and persons with disabilities.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
49	1.5.2 Proportion of health and educational facilities affected by hazardous events	1.5.2 Amendment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	If educational facilities could be specified by level (incl. secondary, tertiary, vocational) this indicator could become more relevant to measuring youth progress	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
50		1.5.2 Amendment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	[Amend]: Number of health and educational facilities that can withstand hazardous events.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
51		1.5 New Indicator Proposed	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Dimensions that could be measured: - Improving resilience of poor and vulnerable groups of populations to disasters and environmental impact - Improved resilience to other shocks Proposed: Proportion of housing units built on hazardous locations (per 100,000 housing units) Comments (Linkages, disaggregation and sources) Linkages: 11.5, 11.b and 11.1 (safe housing) Disaggregation by: urban / rural, cities/municipalities (TBC; indicator does not appear readily available).	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
52		1.5 New Indicator Proposed	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Proposed: Losses from natural disasters, by climate and non-climate related events, by urban/rural (in US$ and lives lost) Comments (Linkages, disaggregation and sources) Linkages: 11.5 and 11.b and 11.1 (safe housing) Disaggregation by: urban / rural, cities/municipalities (TBC). It does not appear like data is disaggregated at this level, but as the data is recorded by disaster event, in which case, it is localised, it could be tracked back to a certain area. Comments: Link with targets 11.5 and 11.b., 12. Additional indicators could be considered that look at capacity of local governments and poor and vulnerable communities to react to and cope with natural disasters. These are not currently available (in a way that is internationally comparable). a. % change in proportion of women and individuals from marginalised sections represented within local and government decision-making bodies b. % of national and local annual budgets committed to reducing disaster risk and building resilience c. % of municipalities/districts with risk reduction and resilience plans d. % of schools with climate resilience and DRR mainstreamed into curricula.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
53	Meangs of Implementation 1.a Ensure signicant mobilization of resources from a variety of sources, including through enhanced development cooperation, in order to provide adequate and predictable means for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, to implement programmes and policies to end poverty in all its dimensions	No input received			No input received
54	Indicator 1.a.1 Resources mobilized and spent for poverty reduction, including government, private sector and development partners	No input received			No input received
55	Meangs of Implementation 1.b: Create sound policy frameworks at the national, regional and international levels, based on pro-poor and gender-sensitive development strategies, to support accelerated investment in poverty eradication actions	1.b General Comment	Gabriele Weigt	German NGOs and DPOs	As persons with disabilities are overrepresented among those living in absolute poverty, the indicators which will de developed need to be disaggregated by disability.	Form submission and http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf
56		1.b General Comment	Renaude Gregoire	SSA Social Justice Office	Policies and programs to overcome poverty developed in consultations with Indigenous peoples.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/vie
57


1	GOAL 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	CLAUDIO SCHUFTAN	PHM	Another thoroughly missed focus is one on food sovereignty as a replacement for calls for food security; we are beyond the latter.	Form submission
3		General	Renaude Gregoire	SSA Social Justice Office	We need stronger indicators: Percentage of total areas for sustainable agriculture (rural/urban) Percentage of farmers who have rights to use, sell, save and exchange farm- saved seeds. We agree with the indicator suggested by CAFOD: "Number of smallholder farmers with enhanced food, water & energy security". (see: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/fr/node/342354)	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/view
4	Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficent food all year round	2.1 General Comment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Data need to be disaggregated in order to determine whether the target, which addresses all people, is achieved or not.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
5		2.1 General Comment	Jennifer Thompson	International Coalition for Advocacy on Nutrition	The rushed mechanical process and a premature limiting of indicators to a fixed number meant that the proposed indicators had serious omissions which now need to be addressed, including on nutrition. The need for a manageable number of indicators overall should not jeopardise having the best indicators. / The most stark omission is on child undernutrition with no indicator on wasting in the technical report. Wasting is in the Goal 2 target (“achieve the World Health Assembly (WHA) 2025 Global Nutrition Targets on stunting and wasting”) and therefore should be an indicator (Rome based agencies have said ‘the prevalence of wasting is an indicator of acute malnutrition that “should be used along with the stunting indicator”). ‘Prevalence of wasting (low weight-for-height) in children under 5’ should be included from now. / In addition to stunting and wasting, there is wide consensus that all 6 WHA targets are needed to address maternal, infant and child nutrition. These indicators are a priority countries have endorsed as a set and are committed to report on. As WHO states ‘including them in the SDG Framework would be the logical step and not create additional reporting burdens. WHO already provides methodological support including reporting on progress ’. The provisional indicator list only had 2 of 6 Global Nutrition target indicators – ‘Prevalence of Stunting (low height-for-age) in children under 5’ and ‘Proportion of overweight children under 5’. To end malnutrition in all its forms we recommend adopting the 6 WHA global targets on maternal & child nutrition i.e. including wasting and also: % of children < 6 months old who are fed breast milk alone (Goal 2 Target 2.1 or Goal 3, 3.2) % of women of reproductive age (15-49) with anemia (Goal 2 Target 2.2 or Goal 3, 3.1) % of infants born low birth weight (Goal 2, Target 2.2 or Goal 3, 3.2) We also recommend indicators on both dietary diversity & budget allocation for nutrition (MoI). On dietary diversity (Goal 2 Target 2.1): ‘The proportion of women, 15-49 years of age, who access and consume at least 5 out of 10 defined food groups’. On MoI (Goal 2 Target 2.2a): ‘% of national budget allocated to nutrition’. The UN Standing Committee on Nutrition supports all above 8 indicators. There are additional nutrition indicators of significance. We recommend a WASH indicator: ‘Incidence of diarrhoea in children under 5, caused by water-borne diseases, poor sanitation, and poor hygiene practices’.	Form Submission and https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzVf6C5dqAAeamRuUV8wY0dUUlE/edit
6	2.1.1 Prevalence of Undernourishment (PoU)	2.1.1 General Comment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Current proposed indicator(s) will not always show that target has been achieved. E.g. without disaggregation, Indicator 2.1.1 will not demonstrate if the target is being achieved.	Form submission
7		2.1.1 Amendment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Prevalence of Undernourishment (POU) by gender, age and persons with disabilities.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
8		2.1.1 Amendment	Lars Vogelsang	Global2015	Prevalence of Food Inadequacy (FAO). This indicator refers to a “normal physical activity level” and is therefore more realistic and appropriate than the Prevalence of Undernourishment (PoU) which assumes a “sedentary lifestyle”. “Many poor and hungry people are likely to have livelihoods involving arduous manual labor.” (FAO: The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012, p. 12 [box 1]) Therefore, the Prevalence of Food Inadequacy should replace PoU, or at least be used together with PoU. Rating: the same as PoU (BAA), or better (even more relevant). Data: FAO: Food Insecurity Indicators. 2014. (http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/ess/foodsecurity/Food_Security_Indicators.xlsx).	Form submission and http://www.global2015.net/factsheets/
9		2.1.1 General Comment	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate this indicator as it addresses key points that will resolve difficulties with consuming nutritious food and enable sustainability and self-sufficiency among farmers.	Form submission
10	2.1.2: Prevalence of population with moderate or severe food insecurity, based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES).	2.1.2 Amendment	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Redrafts: Prevalence of population, by gender, age and persons with disabilities with moderate or severe food insecurity, based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES).	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
11		2.1.3 New Proposed Indicator	Lars Vogelsang	Global2016	Number of deaths from undernutrition: This indicator shows the severity of undernourishment, and therefore adds high relevance. Estimates of deaths due to undernutrition originating in childhood were released by the GBD study, Black et al. and the WHO. The GBD study provided data for 21 regions and will regularly provide updates, likely also for the country level. There is collaboration between the WHO and the GBD study, which could be extended to deliver data for the UN SDG monitoring. However, as of now, no data is available on the health impacts of undernutrition that occurs in people from five years onwards. Rating: For the above-mentioned reasons, the rating should be at least similar to Indicator 2.1.1 (BAA).	Form submission and http://www.global2015.net/factsheets/
12		2.1.3 New Proposed Indicators	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	(a) Dimensions that could be measured: - Ensuring food security through adequate production and consumption chains - Ensure access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food among poor and vulnerable people including infants (b) Proposed indicator: 1. Access to drying, storage, and processing facilities Linkages: Goal 1. Disaggregation by: To be determined. Sources: Proposed by UNSDSN (2014). This indicators needs to be developed as it is currently unavailable 2. Percentage of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption in urban and rural areas Linkages: Goal 1; Goal 8 Disaggregation by: urban / rural Sources: MDG Indicator; FAO (Food security) http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/D/FS/E. Disaggregation available here: http://faostat3.fao.org/download/D/HS/E	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
13	Target 2.2: By 2030, end all forms of malnutrition, including achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, and address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and older persons	2.2 General Comment	Sabrina de Souza	Action Against Hunger \| ACF International	A clear example is child undernutrition, which did not include an indicator on wasting under Target 2.2. Wasting in children under-five should be included as an indicator: • As an explicit target of the SDG framework a quantifiable wasting indicator is vital in order to monitor progress towards achieving Target 2.2. •The expert consensus is that wasting (measured by low-weight-for-height) and stunting (low-height-for-age) are superior measures to underweight (low weight-for-age), as they are able to capture the complexities and the multiple dimensions of undernutrition, as well as consequences for health and development. • A stunting indicator is insufficient on its own to provide a comprehensive overview on progress made on malnutrition as a whole. Although both stunting and wasting share similar causes, they manifest differently. Therefore, a stunting indicator is unable to measure the prevalence of wasting. A wasting indicator must be used along with stunting since the absence of stunting alone does not necessarily mean the absence of malnutrition. • An indicator on wasting meets all UN statistical criteria for indicator selection: relevance, methodological soundness, measurability and understandability. • Wasting is already a universally agreed indicator. In 2012, 194 Member States of the WHO agreed upon six global targets to improve nutrition. The selected indicators included one on wasting, which is measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound. • WHO and Rome-based UN agencies have called for wasting to be an indicator, stating the prevalence of wasting is an indicator of acute malnutrition that “should be used along with the stunting indicator.” •The process of gathering data on wasting is already established. Introducing a SDGs indicator on wasting would not add an additional burden in regards to establishing any new data collection process. The WHO is committed to supporting countries on this indicator, including in the SDG framework. We propose the inclusion of an indicator that measures the “prevalence of wasting (low-weight-for-height) in children under 5 years of age.”	Form submission
14		2.2 General Comment	Ben Hobbs	Generation Nutrition	• The purpose of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) indicators is to help measure progress towards the goals and targets of the SDGs. Wasting in under-fives has already been included at the target level (in proposed Target 2.2). Therefore, we are very surprised that wasting prevalence does not appear in the set of indicators proposed by the UNSC for Target 2.2. This is a major omission which should be rectified. It is crucially important that states are left in no doubt as to the necessity of measuring progress on this central element of Target 2.2. • Stunting should not be considered as a proxy measure of wasting rates; though there are links between the two, they are distinct types of undernutrition and many children who are wasted are not stunted and vice-versa. • Data on wasting prevalence is already being routinely collected by Ministries of Health and therefore its inclusion as an indicator would not pose any additional reporting burden on countries. • Acting on wasting will also have an impact on efforts to bring down under-five mortality generally and improve child health. Generation Nutrition is also in favour therefore of including an indicator – under Goal 3 on health - on access to treatment for children suffering from severe wasting. The Report does not propose any such indicator. If no such indicator is to be added under Goal 3, then it becomes doubly important to include a prevalence measure for wasting as an indicator under Target 2.2."	Form submission and http://www.generation-nutrition.org/sites/default/files/post2015_childmalnutritiontargets_generationnutrition_sept2014_01_0.pdf
15		2.2 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	The disaggregation of data for ‘children under 5 years of age’ should be disaggregated by sex to allow us to monitor progress for young boys and girls. The disaggregation of data for ‘adolescents’ should be disaggregated by sex to allow us to monitor progress for both, adolescent boys and girls. The disaggregation of data for ‘’pregnant and lactating women” should be disaggregated by age to allow us to monitor progress for young women.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
16		2.2 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Target lacks specific indicator to measure malnutrition in adolescent girls. The two currently proposed indicators look only at under 5 age group, which can be indirectly indicator for later years. The 3rd indicator for this target proposed by the TST cluster “Women dietary diversity score” could be useful, provided data be disaggregated by age (could possibly be recommended as national and/or regional level indicator, if not included in the global ones) Similarly SDNS proposed indicators if disaggregated by age could serve similar purpose.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
17		2.2 General Comment	Jennifer Rigg	1,000 Days	Nutrition sets the foundation for human health and sustainable development, yet levels of malnutrition remain unacceptably high. One out of every two people on the planet is undernourished, micronutrient deficient, obese or some combination of all three. Malnutrition is also a serious drain to economic productivity and an enormous impediment to human progress as the impacts of poor nutrition are far- reaching, cutting across generations. There is broad consensus around a set of priority nutrition indicators for the new SDG framework. First, the SDG framework should include—at a minimum—indicators measuring all six global nutrition targets that were unanimously endorsed as priorities for action by 194 Member States as part of the 65th World Health Assembly (WHA). The WHA targets are based on strong scientific evidence and reflect a universal agenda to address multiple, interconnected forms of malnutrition. Second, an indicator on women’s minimum dietary diversity provides a much-needed, scientifically validated, measurement of diet quality and food consumption, reflecting the role of agriculture and food systems in promoting the health and wellbeing of people. Finally, as noted in the Global Nutrition Report, ensuring strong accountability in this area requires the measurement of national budget spending on nutrition.	Form submission and http://www.thousanddays.org/resource/priority-nutrition-indicators-for-the-post-2015-sustainable-development-framework/
18	2.2.1 Prevalence of Stunting (low height-for-age) in children under 5 years of age	2.2.1 Amendment	Gabriele Weigt	German NGOs and DPOs	Children with disabilities tend to be at special risk to be malnourished. Their under-five mortality rate is much higher in comparison to children without disabilities. We therefore recommend to disaggregate the indicator by disability.	Form submission and http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf
19		2.2.1 Amendment	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	[Amend]: Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years old. Linkages: Goal 1; Goal 2.2 Disaggregation by: urban / rural Sources: DHS/MICS compiled by UNICEF: http://data.unicef.org/nutrition/malnutrition	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
20	2.2.2 Prevalence of overweight children under 5 years of age	2.2.2 General	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	We support inclusion of an indicator on child obesity	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view?usp=sharing
21		2.2.2 Amendment	Priya Kanayson	NCD Alliance	Prevalence of overweight and obesity in children under five years and in adults	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2vPeriaLvgXX0ZkMGgtTDN2cDA/view?usp=sharing
22		2.2.2 Amendment	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	[Amend]: Prevalence of underweight in children under 5 years of age Linkages: Goal 1; Goal 2.2 Disaggregation by: urban / rural Sources: DHS/MICS compiled by UNICEF: http://data.unicef.org/nutrition/malnutrition Comments: Food security has a growing presence in regional and local government policies.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
23		2.2 New Proposed Indicators	Jennifer Rigg	1,000 Days	We applaud the inclusion of nutrition in 17.2.2, stunting as 2.2.1 and overweight <5 as 2.2.2 for target 2.2, however, it is imperative to add: Percentage of children less than six months old who are fed breast milk alone (no other liquids or food) Prevalence of wasting (low weight-for-height) in children under 5 Percentage of women of reproductive age (15-49), including pregnant women, with anaemia Percentage of infants born low birth weight (< 2,500 g or 5.5 lbs) Percentage of women, 15-49 years of age, who consume at least 5 out of 10 defined food groups Percentage of national budget allocated to nutrition	Form submission and http://www.thousanddays.org/resource/priority-nutrition-indicators-for-the-post-2015-sustainable-development-framework/
24		2.2 New Proposed Indicator	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Add: Proportion of population aged 60 and over who are undernourished/suffer from malnutrition. Target 2.2 Target also refers to older persons – it is therefore necessary to have an indicator that includes people over 60.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
25		2.2 New Proposed Indicator	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	Number of deaths from undernutrition This indicator shows the severity of undernourishment, and therefore adds high relevance. Estimates of deaths due to undernutrition originating in childhood were released by the GBD study, Black et al. and the WHO. The GBD study provided data for 21 regions and will regularly provide updates, likely also for the country level. There is collaboration between the WHO and the GBD study, which could be extended to deliver data for the UN SDG monitoring. However, as of now, no data is available on the health impacts of undernutrition that occurs in people from five years onwards. Rating: For the above-mentioned reasons, the rating should be at least similar to Indicator 2.1.1 (BAA).	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
26		2.2 New Proposed Indicator	Priya Kanayson	NCD Alliance	% of total daily energy intake from saturated fats; and % of total daily energy intake from protein in adults	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2vPeriaLvgXX0ZkMGgtTDN2cDA/view?usp=sharing
27		2.2 New Proposed Indicators	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	The indicators should build on the established WHA targets as a comprehensive set of targets or as one indicator of maternal and child nutrition:  Reduction in the number of children under five who are stunted  Reduce and maintain childhood wasting  No increase in childhood overweight  Reduction in low birthweight  Reduction of anaemia in women of reproductive age  Increase the rate of exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months We welcome the Rome Based Agencies endorsement of WHA targets. However, we are concerned about the absence of the other WHA targets. Utilising the existing WHA targets would be efficient and effective. Without inclusion of all 6 WHA targets aspects of the proposed SDG target 2.2 would not be measured, including nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and wasting in children. We recommend the six WHA targets be treated as a comprehensive set of targets or as a single indicator that delivers on maternal and child nutrition.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view?usp=sharing
28		2.2 New Proposed Indicator	Elaine Geyer-Allély	WWF International	Percentage change in per capita protein consumption relative to 2015 baseline Listed as complementary national indicator 3.26 by the SDSN, this indicator should be elevated to a global indicator and widened to refer to general protein intake. It is an indicator that is relevant to both health and environmental issues and also has global relevance: it can be used to measure overconsumption in affluent communities and underconsumption in vulnerable communities. Relevant to Targets 3.4, 6.1, 6.2	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
29		2.2 New Proposed Indicator	Lars Vogelsang	Global2016	Number of deaths from vitamin A and zinc deficiencies Number of deaths from maternal iron-deficiency Target 2.2 mainly strives to “end all forms of malnutrition” by 2030, but the indicators cover only a part of the topic. Data is available from Black et al. and the GBD study, taking into account vitamin A defi- ciency and zinc deficiency. The target also strives to “address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women”, but no indicator refers to this. Data is available on maternal iron deficiency (fetal growth restriction) (Black et al. 2013, 427, 430–431; GBD study, 2228, 2238, 2241, 2243–2245, 2250). These micronutrient deficiencies (“hidden hunger”) are already taken into account in the newly proposed Indicator 2.1.3 (number of deaths from undernutrition). However, due to the methodology of risk attribution, the figures cannot be added or subtracted. The overlap should be stated in a note attached to the indicator. However, if such overlap should be avoided, there should be a note provided to Target 2.2 stating that vitamin and mineral deficiencies, including maternal iron-deficiency, are already taken into account in Indicator 2.1.3. Rating: the same as the other indicators (BAA).	http://www.global2015.net/factsheets/
30	Target 2.3: By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and shers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment	2.3 Amendment	Cornie Huizenga	Partnership on Sustainable Low Carbon Transport	[Amended]: "By 2030 double the agricultural productivity and the incomes of small-scale food producers, particularly women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, [access to basic services, including transport], other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets, and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment" Related Targets: 9.1, 3.8, several SDG 4 targets (access to education), 6.1 Proposed Indicators: Measurable today; Main Indicator: - Rural Accessibility Index (RAI) - Proportion of the rural population living within two kilometers of a road, motorable trail or other appropriate infrastructure providing all-year access for sustainable transport (desired achievement:100% achievement of local access targets, monitoring the poorest and remotest quintiles). Measurable in short term; Main Indicator: - Indicator to assess presence of a conducive regulatory environment for rural transport (e.g. in-country expert panels)	http://slocat.net/sites/default/files/annex_2_-_indicators.pdf
31	2.3.1 Value of agricultural production per hectare (measured in constant USD/hectare, disaggregated for the two lowest quintiles of countries’ farm size distribution, as well as for female-headed smallholder producer households)	2.3.1 General Comment	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate this indicator as it addresses key points that will resolve difficulties with consuming nutritious food and enable sustainability and self-sufficiency among farmers.	Form submission
32		2.3.1 Amendment	Arjan van Houwelingen	World Animal Protection	Measuring the value of agricultural production in calories (nutritional value) rather than USD strengthens the link to the core objective of food security but also may allow for a better measure of the productivity potential of the underlying resource base (soil, water, nutrients). A similar argument could be made for target 12.3, proposed indicators 1 and 2.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3qLzppTM6pCOWJmeEI2a2tWd3M/view
33		2.3 New Proposed Indicator	Arjan van Houwelingen	World Animal Protection	Indicator Suggestion: Livestock Total Factor Productivity This target focuses attention on small scale food producers as these are not only the main producers of food worldwide but also, at present, most inefficient in terms of resource use. The indicator proposed is based on a modification of the Malmquist Productivity Index adjusted to take into account livestock specific technical assumptions. This method has been widely used to measure and compare industrial productivity within sub-sectors and between countries. This indicator would help to derive a productivity index for the livestock sector, disaggregated for livestock species and countries. Proposed Lead Agency: FAO Indicator Suggestion: Veterinary services density in rural areas This target aims to double productivity through providing small-scale farmers and livestock holders secure and equal access to productive resources. As outlined in the recently adopted Principles for Investments in Agriculture and Food Systems (CFS 41) animal health and welfare are a prerequisite to sustainably increasing productivity as well as food quality and safety. Moreover, as 75% of all emerging infectious diseases are zoonotic, enhancing animal health through greater access to veterinary services is an essential step to reducing the spread and costs of communicable diseases. Proposed Lead Agency: OIE	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3qLzppTM6pCXzlhei1zNW1Mb00/view
34		2.3 New Proposed Indicator	Elaine Geyer-Allély	WWF International	- Improved landscape livelihoods, measured as farmer/producer income or assets. See: CIFOR - Improved supply of food and other products from land use, measured as quantity or value by category (here the value of forest products can be a sectoral sub-indicator). See: CIFOR - Proportion (area) of common land under the tenure of indigenous peoples and local communities that is legally recognized, secured, documented, and protected, and that guarantees equitable access and use to women and men (UNEP) Data sources: Data sources described in https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/secure-and-equitable-land-rights-post-2015-agenda-key-issue-future-we-want Rationale: Proposal from a coalition of organisations and combining suggestions from UN Women, IFAD1, UNEP2, and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). Strengthening land rights for women, indigenous peoples and local communities supports realization of development objectives related to poverty alleviation, food security, advancing women’s empowerment, and environmental stewardship.	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
35		2.3 New Proposed Indicator	Luca Miggiano	Land Rights Policy Advisor, Oxfam	Considering the transformative aspirations of the Post-2015 Agenda, we also support a second complementary indicator under Target 2.3 and 15c that tracks progress on a critical aspect of tenure: common lands. Proportion (area) of common land under the tenure of indigenous peoples and local communities that is legally recognized, secured, documented, and protected, and that guarantees equitable access and use to women and men (UNEP)	https://www.dropbox.com/s/xzvgl1f4wwyo8wv/post2015_landrightsindicators_10marchb.pdf?dl=0
36	Target 2.4: By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality.	2.4 General Comment	Michael Bergöö	Biovision / Millennium Institute	Target 2.4 is very complex as it includes many elements of sustainable food systems, which have conventionally been contradictory (increase in productivity and production vs. maintain ecosystems). Therefore emphasis must be put on indicators that measure agricultural practices that are proven to do both - increasing productivity while maintaining ecosystems. That is why we propose for your consideration New Proposed Indicators 2.4.2 and 2.4.3.	https://www.dropbox.com/s/aizrdbxovcpyw19/Biovision%2BMillennium%20Institute_SuggestedInput_SDGsIndicators_2.3-2.4_BV-MI.xlsx?dl=0
37	2.4.1 Emissions of greenhouse gases in agriculture (per hectare of land and per unit of output, separately for crop and livestock sectors)	2.4.1 General Comment	Arjan van Houwelingen	World Animal Protection	Measuring greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture per hectare of land rather than per unit of output is more likely to capture the true full system environmental cost of agricultural production. It will also more likely lead to better outcomes for livestock production systems that favour good animal welfare.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3qLzppTM6pCOWJmeEI2a2tWd3M/view
38		2.4.1 General Comment	Michael Bergöö	Biovision / Millennium Institute	We support the 2.4.1 Amendment above, as proposed by Arjan van Houwelingen (World Animal Protection). Also focusing on land would allow better comparability across different livestock holding approaches.	https://www.dropbox.com/s/aizrdbxovcpyw19/Biovision%2BMillennium%20Institute_SuggestedInput_SDGsIndicators_2.3-2.4_BV-MI.xlsx?dl=0
39	2.4.2 Absolute levels of emissions in relevant sectors and sub-sectors.	2.4.2 General Comment	Michael Bergöö	Biovision / Millennium Institute	We do not understand the added-value of indicator 2.4.2 when it comes to the effective implementation and monitoring of target 2.4	https://www.dropbox.com/s/aizrdbxovcpyw19/Biovision%2BMillennium%20Institute_SuggestedInput_SDGsIndicators_2.3-2.4_BV-MI.xlsx?dl=0
40		2.4 New Proposed Indicator	Emily Auckland	Bioregional	i) Nitrogen use efficiency in food systems (the tonnage of nitrogen in harvested crops divided by the tonnage of nitrogen in fertiliser used to grow those crops) ii) Nitrogen balance in food systems (the amount of input nitrogen minus the amount of output nitrogen). This is a very wide-ranging target, and multiple indicators are required to cover the breadth of unsustainability of food production systems – including freshwater over-abstraction and pollution, soil erosion, biodiversity loss and habitat destruction and declining genetic diversity in agriculture.We propose these two indicators because over use and careless use of nitrogen fertilisers is damaging soils, water courses, groundwater and coastal waters, posing risk to human health and contributing to air pollution while adding to greenhouse gas emissions. Together they give useful information on how efficiently nitrogen is being used and how much surplus nitrogen is being released into the environment by agriculture. These indicators require development, but many developed nations are already collecting the necessary data and estimates could readily be made for many nations through a sampling approach	https://www.dropbox.com/s/4b69zmbaeagcmhl/Bioregional-Emily_Submission%20to%20UNGLS.xlsx?dl=0
41		2.4 New Proposed Indicator	Michael Bergöö	Biovision / Millennium Institute	"Percentage of agricultural area under sustainable agricultural practices" This indicator for measuring progress under target 2.4 is proposed by FAO. We support this indicator because it is directly linked to the target, particularly to the aspects of sustainable production, adaptation to climate change and improvement of land and soil.	Targets and Indicators for the Sustainable Development Goals and the Post-2015 Development Agenda. A Contribution by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). May 2015. (not yet electronically available) -Input available at: https://www.dropbox.com/s/aizrdbxovcpyw19/Biovision%2BMillennium%20Institute_SuggestedInput_SDGsIndicators_2.3-2.4_BV-MI.xlsx?dl=0
42		2.4 New Proposed Indicator	Michael Bergöö	Biovision / Millennium Institute	"Percent of farmland under crop rotation, mulching, agro-forestry, free-range livestock systems, and other agro-ecological standards" This indicator aims at capturing the implementation of resilient sustainable agricultural practices. On a global level data availability is currently limited to certified organic agriculture, and partially, to conservation agriculture. Additional efforts in data collection are thus necessary (for example in national agricultural census) and currently progressing at the internatoinal level.	Background Paper for the High Level Roundtable on Food and Nutrition Security through Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems in the Post-2015 Development Agenda. BV/MI. 17 March 2014. http://www.biovision.ch/fileadmin/pdf/sdgs/6_2014_03_17_SDG_agriculture_background_paper.pdf -Input available at: https://www.dropbox.com/s/aizrdbxovcpyw19/Biovision%2BMillennium%20Institute_SuggestedInput_SDGsIndicators_2.3-2.4_BV-MI.xlsx?dl=0
43		2.4 New Proposed Indicator	Elaine Geyer-Allély	WWF International	- An indicator about diversity of cultivators would reflect diversity of food sources which can help bolster resilience to climate change, natural disasters etc) and also improve nutrition. Data sources: FAO and national bureau of statistics and agricultural departments Relevant to Target 6.6, target 13.1, goal 15 - An indicator about diversity of cultivators would reflect diversity of food sources which can help bolster resilience to climate change, natural disasters etc) and also improve nutrition. Data sources: FAO and national bureau of statistics and agricultural departments Relevant to Target 6.6, target 13.1, goal 15 -Annual change in forest area and land under cultivation. Modified MDG Indicator Relevant to Target 6.6, target 13.1, goal 15	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
44	Target 2.5: By 2030, maintain the genetic diversity of seeds, cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and their related wild species, including through soundly managed and diversified seed and plant banks at the national, regional and international levels, and ensure access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, as internationally agreed.	No input received			No input received
45	2.5.1 Ex-situ crop collections indicator	No specific input received			No specific input received
46	2.5.2 Number/percentage of local breeds classified as being at-risk, not-at-risk, and unknown-levels of risk of extinction.	No specific input received			No specific input received
47		2.5 New Proposed Indicator	Elaine Geyer-Allély	WWF International	Diversification of crops harvested and diversity of animals in production. Data sources: FAO	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
48		2.5 New Proposed Indicator	Susan Brown	WWF	Diversification of crops harvested and diversity of animals in production. Data sources: FAO	https://www.dropbox.com/s/d4scjiq53ec99sg/WWF_SusanBrown_Suggested%20indicators.xlsx?dl=0
49	Means of Implementation: 2.a Increase investment, including through enhanced international cooperation, in rural infrastructure, agricultural research and extension services, technology development and plant and livestock gene banks in order to enhance agricultural productive capacity in developing countries, in particular least developed countries	2.a General Comment	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate this indicator as it address key points that will resolve difficulties with consuming nutritious food and enable sustainability and self-sufficiency among farmers.	Form submission
50	2.a.1 Agriculture Orientation Index for Government Expenditures
51	Means of Implementation: 2.b Correct and prevent trade restrictions and distortions in world agricultural markets, including through the parallel elimination of all forms of agricultural export subsidies and all export measures with equivalent effect, in accordance with the mandate of the Doha Development Round
52	2.b.1 Evolution of potentially trade restrictive and distortivemeasures in agriculture	2.b.1 Amendment	Priya Kanayson	NCD Alliance	Trade negotiations that routinely assess sustainability impacts, including on food security, health, and equity	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2vPeriaLvgXX0ZkMGgtTDN2cDA/view?usp=sharing
53	Means of Implementation: 2.c Adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning of food commodity markets and their derivatives and facilitate timely access to market information, including on food reserves, in order to help limit extreme food price volatility	No input received			No input received
54	2.c.1 Indicator of (food) Price Anomalies (IPA)	No specific input received

1

GOAL 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning
opportunities for all

Comment Category:

General,
Amendment,
or
New Proposal

Name of Contributor

Organization Name

What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?

Source

2

General

Marcela Ballara

Red Educacion Popular entre Mujeres America Latina y el Caribe REPEM LAC

The Post-2015 Education Goal refers to adult education, literacy and the acquisition of skills relevant to the job market. If history repeats itself, this reference to adult education won’t be sufficient in guaranteeing that adult education is prioritized, because the targets tends to marginalize adult education by prioritizing youth education
The new Post-2015 Agenda must face the fact that he MDGs’ agenda targets were not met. This is why the actual debate focuses on the necessary steps so this situation does not repeat itself in 2030. Concerning education, and more specifically, adult education, the contributions and commitments to be implemented are not merely a political and technocratic concern for the education agenda follow-up. We must create conditions that enable exercising the right of education for all, including adults, specially indigenous and rural women. Increase investments adult education and literacy statistics addressing women , to effectively monitor the agenda

1. Adult education, is an integral part of the right to education, since it is a universal right. The difficulty of implementing the right to adult education is the backdrop of the current discussions about developing the new Post-2015 Agenda.
2. Addressing the right to education , contribute to creating favourable conditions to exercise this right, along with providing all individuals with diverse knowledge to allow to develop their ability to contribute to the development of society, and especially, to establishing peace, to responsible citizenship and to sustainable development.
3. Following UNESCO to “ensure quality an equitable lifelong education and learning by 2030” requires equal access to quality education including putting at the center lifelong learning demands to support sustainable development.
4. For this purpose adult literacy should be prioritized within adult education to ensure equitable access to skills and tools relevant to the job market and in life, and to provide everyone with relevant quality education. A humanist and progressive approach to adult education as a fundamental human right, as defended by civil society, should not focus its approach solely on economic issues.

We are concerned about the narrowing down of the education targets to mainly children and youth living aside to only 3 Targets the adult education with no mention to lifelong learning . Adult education plays a catalyzing role in socioeconomic progress. Adult education and lifelong learning specially addressed to woman and indigenous women is essential in reaching multiple socioeconomic and cultural goals. Adult education is necessary to attain other human rights, and the few and very narrow target with no desegregation by age, sex, rural/urban and ethnic group , jeopardize the transformative change that the Member States consistently called for during the Open Working Group negotiations. The post 2015 document should include an approach specific to lifelong education.

It is also imperative that targets on education acknowledges access to essential information and education on sexual and reproductive rights to the achievement of gender equality and women’s empowerment. This include also through adult education by submitting realistic and binding measures to ensure its progress. Defending the universality of the right to education must ensure that adults, especially women are fully recognized as right- bearers.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30miZcgelAESDUwaTFLclNtaVU/view?usp=sharing

3

General

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Global Campaign for Education submission on Post-2015 Indicators and Monitoring and Accountability.

The present document is an extract from a joint policy briefing on Post 2015 on Education jointly prepared by the Global Campaign for Education, Education International and International Council of Adult Educators. The Global Campaign for Education (GCE) is the world’s largest education network with a presence in 100+ countries. This document proposes some principles for indicators development for the education goal and proposes some education global and thematic indicators, especially for those indicators that have received a low rank in the UN Statistics Commission Report. We feel it is important to look at global and thematic together to ensure a complete seamless framework. The full document may be viewed at http://campaignforeducation.org/en/campaigns/education-post-2015

3. Ensure strong, relevant and comprehensive indicators
[...] It is essential that the process of indicator development allows space for civil society participation at all levels (global, thematic, regional and national); the global and thematic indicators should be developed in tandem.
In most countries education statistics are collected by the Ministry rather than the National Statistics office, which means that civil society has a key role to play in broadening the scope of the proposed education indicators and pushing for indicators that are rights-based and transformative.

We are calling for the indicators for the post-2015 education goal and targets to:
• Drive national action, not just provide for international benchmarking: It is essential to prioritize indicators that are understandable by finance ministers and have the potential to drive decisions to finance the implementation of policies that will contribute to achievement of SDG targets.
• Be in line with existing human rights obligations and thus include structure, process and outcome indicators. A rights-based indicator framework evaluates the enjoyment of rights by rights-holders as well as the extent to which states fulfil their obligations as duty-bearers; strong governance systems and processes are essential to ensure that outcomes are achieved.
• Include a rights-based definition of quality education: This means that education must be not only ‘available’ and ‘accessible’ for all but also ‘acceptable’ and ‘adaptable’. From a human rights perspective, the issue of learning outcomes in education must go beyond acquiring literacy and numeracy skills. Quality education develops learners’ personalities, talents and abilities to live full and satisfying lives in their societies.
• Address issues of educational inequality and include equity in all forms (especially those already part of the SDG education targets).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

4

Target 4.1:

By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes

4.1
Amendment

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

Data for indicators under this target should be disaggregated by age and sex. It will be important to apply gender analyses to seek to measure progress (or lack there of) of closing gender gaps in proficiencies and completion rates. If data to be further disaggregated by residence (rural/urban), social- economic wealth quintiles, and/or other levels of disaggregation, to provide useful tool in ensuring the equitable approach (as per target’s definition) be tracked. Data for these indicators is disaggregated by sex – will be important to apply gender analyses to seek to measure progress (or lack there of) of closing gender gaps in proficiencies and completion rates (as per indicator proposed for 4.5) If data to be further disaggregated by residence (rural/urban), socialeconomic wealth quintiles, and/or other levels of disaggregation, to provide useful tool in ensuring the equitable approach (as per target’s definition) be tracked. (as per indicator proposed for 4.5)

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf

5

4.1
Amendment

Gabriele Weigt

German NGOs and DPOs

Children with disabilities are less likely to start school and have lower rates of staying and being promoted in school than their peers without disabilities. Therefore it would be highly relevant to disaggregate both indicators by disability.

Form submission
and
http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf

6

4.1.1:
Percentage of children who achieve minimum proficiency
standards in reading and mathematics at end of: (i) primary (ii)
lower secondary

4.1.1
Amendment

Antonia Wulff

Education International

Relevant learning outcomes should be broader and understood as those defined by national policy and standards, and may go beyond reading and mathematics, though important, are not sufficient indicators of quality.
Modified Indicator: Percentage of children who achieve minimum proficiency standards in core subjects as nationally defined: (i) primary (ii) lower secondary;

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=2

7

4.1.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amends
Revise indicator to literacy and numeracy so can use a holistic assessment tool (such as EGRA-EGMA). Include whether government has shown commitment to reform classroom practices and improve student’s learning.

Rational for Amends:
Danger that this indicator reduces ‘quality education’ to just learning outcomes in reading and maths. Reading often reduced down to fluency, whereas literacy enables scope for assessing ‘comprehension’. Need to ensure minimum proficiency is not just about mechanics, but about application of skills.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

8

4.1.1
Amendment

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Percentage of children who achieve minimum proficiency standards in nationally defined domains at end of: (i) primary (ii) lower secondary*

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

9

4.1.1
Amendment

Matthew Simonds

International Trade Union Confederation

Relevant learning outcomes should be broader and understood as those defined by national policy and standards, and may go beyond reading and mathematics, though important, are not sufficient indicators of quality.
Proposed Indicator 1: Percentage of children who achieve minimum proficiency standards in core subjects as nationally defined: (i) primary (ii) lower secondary

Form submission
and
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf

10

4.1.1
Amendment

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

Quality of learning outcomes should be beyond being able to read and proficiency in mathematics. We should be able to measure cognitive and foundational as well as non- cognitive/transversal/'21st century' skills’ not only what is easy to measure and quantify.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

11

4.1.1
Amendment

Edgardo Bilsky

United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)

% of boys and girls who achieve proficiency across a broad range of learning outcomes, including in mathematics by the end of primary and lower secondary schooling cycle (based on credibly established national standards)

Possible alternative indicators:
% of children who reach minimum benchmark in grades 4-6 (TIMMS/PIRLS) 2. % of adolescents who reach minimum benchmark in grade 8 (TIMMS/PIRLS)

Linkages:
Disaggregation by: to be confirmed.
Sources: Proposed by UNSDSN/UNESCO; Note that proficiency standards will only be available for a group of countries. In fact, there is OECD PISA data for 65 countries: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/pisa-2012- participants.htm

Comments: extracted from EFA-GMR Education for All Global Monitoring Report, Proposed post-2015 education goals Complementary indicators: Quality standards of infrastructure in schools and process indicators (e.g. interactive skills of teachers) could be considered but they are unlikely to be available (as internationally comparable indicators) and are harder to measure. For quality of infrastructures for water, sanitation and hygiene see Goal 6.

Form submission
and
http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf

12

4.1.2:
Completion rate (primary, lower secondary, upper secondary)

4.1.2
Amendment

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

Transition rate from one level of education to another level of education is important to ensure that none is left behind to complete full cycle of education. Moreover, all indicators must be disaggregated by disability, gender, race and ethnicity, and socio-economic status) to monitor equity in education provision.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

13

4.1.2
Amendment

Fabio Palacio

International Movement ATD Fourth World

Must be disaggregated by income because in all countries, children from low income families have decreased access to education.

http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf

14

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Polly Meeks

ADD International

The percentage of schools that are accessible to children with disabilities;
percentage of children with disabilities in need of accessible teaching and learning resources who have regular access to such resources;
percentage of teachers receiving in-service training each year on inclusive education.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TazeXmX5bFczV4d0VHMHdLNk0/view

15

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Fiona Bradley

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions

• Proportion of public libraries providing public Internet access.
o Data collected in relation to WSIS Statistical Indicators for Target 4 (‘Connect all public libraries, museums, post offices and national archives with ICTs’), Indicator 4.1

Form submission
and
http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq/topics/libraries-development/documents/libraries-post-2015-development-agenda.pdf

16

4.1
New Proposed Indicators

Mari Ullmann

Plan International

• Primary to secondary transition rate of boys and girls.
• Completion rate of boys and girls (primary, lower, secondary, upper secondary)
• Gross intake ratio to the last grade (primary, lower, secondary)
• Gender parity rates (primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary school)
• Out-of-school rate of boys and girls (primary, lower secondary)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view

17

4.1
New Proposed Indicators

Antonia Wulff

Education International

This target requires an indicator on the necessary measures at system-level to ensure access, quality and equity.
Proposed Indicator: Legislation and financing to guarantee free education for i) 9 years ii) 12 years;

Participation as well as completion rates at primary and secondary level neccessary are important measures of equitable access to education and the basis for any further education.
Proposed Indicator: Participation rates (primary, lower secondary, upper secondary)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=2

18

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Edgardo Bilsky

United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)

Although the proper implementation and monitoring of the whole set of targets proposed by the OWG under this goal allows an urban/rural disaggregation, we are focusing only on indicators proposed under target 4.1 and 4.2 to show the feasibility of monitoring this goal from a local perspective and to highlight the need to underline the share of national and subnational expenditure and its distribution among territories to measure efficiency in public allocation. UN Habitat (City Prosperity Index, 2014) proposes to “localize” the following index in urban areas: means of years of schooling, literacy rate, gross enrolment rate in higher education.

Dimensions to be measured:
- Coverage of primary and secondary education
- Free and equitable access to primary and secondary education
- Quality of primary and secondary education

Indicator:
Gross enrolment ratio: the number of children enrolled in a level of education (primary or secondary), regardless of age, expressed as a percentage of the eligible official school-age population corresponding to the same level of education in a given school year

Possible alternative indicators:
1. Net enrolment ratio in primary school (UNESCO)
2. Out of school children and adolescents (thousands) (UNESCO)
3. Equitable Secondary School Enrolment (UN Habitat, CPI, 2014)

Linkages:
Disaggregation by: gender and by level of education readily available. Geographical location (region, urban/rural) not readily available from internationally comparable data sources. That said for NET enrollment ratio in primary education (only for this level of education) UN Habitat has data disaggregated by slum and shelter deprivation: http://www.devinfo.info/urbaninfo/
Sources: UNESCO (UIS, WIDE). Also World Bank WDI and UN Habitat.

Form submission
and
http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf

19

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Edgardo Bilsky

United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)

Educational attainment of the population aged 25 years and above: Mean years of education

Linkages:
Disaggregation by: gender, by geographical location (region, urban/rural), by age group, wealth and ethnicity.
Sources: UNESCO (WIDE database)

Form submission
and
http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf

20

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Edgardo Bilsky

United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)

Public expenditure on education as % of total government expenditure

Possible alternative indicators:
Total public expenditure on education as % of GDP

Linkages:
Disaggregation by: level of education (primary, secondary) readily available. Level of administration (central, regional, local), geographical location (region, urban/rural), and by purpose of expenditure (salaries, teaching material, etc.) not readily available from internationally comparable data sources.

Form submission
and
http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf

21

4.1
New Proposed Indicators

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Our proposed Thematic Indicators:
1. Countries with legislation to guarantee at least nine years of free compulsory education (primary, lower secondary, higher secondary)
2.Countries with legal framework setting minimum school quality standards (primary, lower secondary, higher secondary)
3. % schools complying with these standards (primary, lower secondary, higher secondary)
4. Gross Intake rate at the last grade (primary, lower secondary)*
5. Attainment rate (primary, lower secondary, upper secondary)
6. Out-of-school rate (primary, lower secondary)*
7. Participation rate (primary, lower secondary)*
8. Percentage of over age children enrolled by grade (primary, lower secondary)*
9. Mean Years of Schooling (disaggregated to understand extent of inequality)*
10. Average out of pocket expenses per child (Primary, Lower Secondary, Higher Secondary), *

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

22

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Kimberly DeRose

Child and Youth Finance International

Number of children who have received financial education in primary and/or secondary education.

Form submission
and
http://goo.gl/uKKlNz

23

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Kimberly DeRose

Child and Youth Finance International

Ratio of male and female students in primary and secondary schools

Form submission
and
http://goo.gl/uKKlNz

24

4.1
New Proposed Indicator

Kimberly DeRose

Child and Youth Finance International

% of male and female graduation rates

Form submission
and
http://goo.gl/uKKlNz

25

4.1
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

Primary and Secondary Education:
1. What could be measured from a right to education perspective
 The enjoyment of free primary and secondary education of good quality without discrimination
 States’ effort to comply with their obligation to provide free and compulsory primary education, or to ensure that a detailed plan is in place within two years of ratification of the treaty that set forth a specific timeline for fulfilment of the right as quickly as possible.
 States’ effort to comply with their obligation to progressively provide free secondary education
 States’ effort to comply with their obligation to guarantee primary and secondary education of good quality

2. Suggested right to education indicators
 Percentage of children enrolled in education disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Percentage of children that complete primary education disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Percentage of children enrolled in secondary education disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Percentage of children that complete secondary education disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Number of out-of-school children disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Countries with a legal framework guaranteeing 9 years of free and compulsory basic education
 Countries with a legal framework setting a minimum age for entering employment no less than the age at which compulsory education ends and no lower than fifteen (structural indicator)
 Countries with a legal framework setting minimum education standards (structural indicator)

3. Available data
 UIS provides the data for the outcome indicators, disaggregated by sex.
 States have to report regularly on the implementation of the right to education to UNESCO 44 and to UN treaties bodies187, and are requested to report about the legal framework guaranteeing the right to free and compulsory education. UNESCO Database on the Right to Education provides available education laws, including laws, policies and provisions related to primary and secondary education.

4. Comments It is most difficult to measure the enjoyment of quality education, particularly cross-nationally as it requires qualitative data. The TAG suggests pupil teacher ratio and the percentage of children who achieve minimum proficiency standards in reading and mathematics, which is very reductive. A wider structural or process indicator that addresses the breadth of learning is particularly important in this area. The existence of a legal framework is not enough to guarantee the full implementation in practice but allows for remedies through legal or quasi-judicial mechanisms when there are violations.

Form submission
and
http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

26

Target 4.2:

By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education

4.2
General Comment

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

These indicators and progress toward target are expected to have positive impact on measures against other indicators under this goal

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf

27

4.2
General Comment

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

Indicators should reflect the disaggregation by sex already mentioned in the target. Additionally the qualifier for “ready” need to be clear and not imposed.

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf

28

4.2.1
Early Childhood Development Index

4.2.1
General Comment

Renaude Gregoire

SSA Social Justice Office

We support this indicator:
"Early Child Development Index"
(SDSN, Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the SDGs, Revised working draft (Version 7), March 20, 2015, p. 26)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/view

29

4.2.1
Amendment

Antonia Wulff

Education International

Should monitor equitable access to early childhood education and care, from 0 to compulsory school age.
[Amended Indicator]: Participation rate in early childhood development, care and pre-primary education (one year before the official primary entry age).

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=4

30

4.2.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
Replace ECDI with the tool that MELQO produces (which is largely based on SC’s IDELA tool).

Rational for Amend:
ECDI is a lower quality measure tool for school readiness than others available. Also only really used in 50 countries currently, is incorporated into MICS so only every 3 years. Also largely based on parent reporting of child development, rather than assessing child’s development directly.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

31

4.2.1
Amendment

Matthew Simonds

International Trade Union Confederation

The indicator should monitor equitable access to early childhood education and care, from 0 to compulsory school age.
Participation rate in early childhood development, care and pre-primary education (one year before the official primary entry age)

Form submission
and
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf

32

4.2.2
Participation rate in organized learning (one year before the
official primary entry age)

4.2.2
Amendment

Gabriele Weigt

German NGOs and DPOs

Pre-school education is of high importance for children with disabilities. Therefore this indicator should be disaggregated by disability.

Form submission
and
http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf

33

4.2.2
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
Revise ‘participation rate’ to ‘attendance and/or completion rate’, ideally completion.

Rational for Amend:
Participation rate is unclear – what does ‘participation’ look like?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

34

4.2.2
Amendment

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

“Organized learning” is very vague. Monitoring attendance in pre-primary is much more concrete and thus measurable. It also allows for data desegregation. We suggest the following rephrase: “% of children attending at least one year of pre-primary education” (disaggregated by disability, gender, race and ethnicity, and socio-economic status).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

35

4.2
Amendment

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

[Amend]: Participation rate in one year of pre-primary education (one year before the official primary entry age)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

36

4.2
New Proposed Indicator

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Proposed Global Indicator:
% of teachers in pre-primary education who are qualified according to national standards #

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

37

4.2
New Proposed Indicator

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

We believe that talking about the ECCE Index does not provide an indication of the nature of change and the index hasn’t been fully tested out in the first case. Instead we suggest including a target on availability of trained teachers in early childhood education institutions.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

38

4.2
New Proposed Indicator

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Include indicator on parenting?
‘Ensure that all parents have access to early childhood development information to optimally support their children’s early stimulation’.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

39

4.2
New Proposed Indicators

Mari Ullmann

Plan International

• Net enrolment ratio (pre-primary)
• Percentage of children under 5 years experiencing responsive, stimulating parenting in safe environments
• Percentage of girls and boys aged 24 months and above who attend a quality early learning/care and education program

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view

40

4.2
New Proposed Indicators

Claudia Arisi

SOS Children's Villages

Sustainable development starts with protecting childhood. International human rights frameworks grant children special attention, recognizing their special vulnerability. However, in the technical report there is a very weak focus on children.

While we invite you to consider our proposal of indicators (see submitted link) for greater focus on children, here we note:
Indicators for T. 4.2: We support inclusion of UNESCO and SDSN's indicator: % of children under 5 experiencing stimulating parenting in safe environments

Indicators to add:
- Percentage of children under 5 years experiencing responsive, stimulating parenting in safe environments
- Percentage of parents or other primary caregivers with sufficient financial resources to support the child’s access to quality education, disaggregated by age, gender and care status of the child.
- Percentage of caregivers who are providing age-appropriate care and offer affection to the child

Rationale:
A child’s upbringing has an enormous impact on his or her cognitive, emotional and social development.
One the one hand, the socio-economic status of parents affects children’s readiness for school at different ages/grades. Experiencing poverty for at least half of childhood is linked with an increased risk of school failure. On the other hand, millions of children live without their biological parents. By only focusing on the traditional definition of parenting, which is easier to measure given current data availability, a large portion of the most vulnerable child population will continue to be missed by international efforts to improve their access to services and support, which in turn creates the risk that these children will continue to lag behind the general population in terms of child development. Hence attention should be paid to caregivers, understood as both biological parents and caregivers in formal and informal alternative care arrangements as specified in the UN Guidelines on the Alternative Care of Children

Methodology and Data Source:
Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS). Consider also integrating information with data collected by non-profit organisations providing direct care services in coordination with the child protection and other administrative authority at the local/regional/national level. SOS Children’s Villages, for example, monitors the care situation of children and their family of origin in its programmes, and can help collect new and

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view

41

4.2
New Proposed Indicators

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Thematic Indicator to consider:
- Countries with legislation guaranteeing at least one year of free pre-primary education
- Countries with a legal framework setting minimum quality standards for ECCE provisioning
- % Preschools complying with these standards (R/U) #
- % of ECCE institutions that do not charge fees or levy indirect costs. #
- Percentage of children under age 5 who are developmentally on track in the following areas: language/literacy, numeracy, physical, socio-emotional and cognitive domains *
- Percentage of children under age 5 attending an early childhood education programme *

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

42

4.2
New Proposed Indicator

Matthew Simonds

International Trade Union Confederation

The target requires an indicator on the necessary measures at system-level to ensure equitable access.
Proposed Indicator: Legislation and financing guarantee at least one year of pre-primary education

Form submission
and
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf

43

4.2
New Proposed Indicator

Antonia Wulff

Education International

This target requires an indicator on the necessary measures at system-level to ensure equitable access.
Proposed Indicator: Legislation and financing guarantee at least one year of pre-primary education.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=3

44

4.2
New Proposed Indicator

Fiona Bradley

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions

• Proportion of public libraries providing public Internet access.
> Data collected in relation to WSIS Statistical Indicators for Target 4 (‘Connect all public libraries, museums, post offices and national archives with ICTs’), Indicator 4.2

Form submission
and
http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq/topics/libraries-development/documents/libraries-post-2015-development-agenda.pdf

45

4.2
New Proposed Indicators

Edgardo Bilsky

United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)

1. Gross enrolment ratio in early childhood care and education (ECCE): Total number of children enrolled in early childhood care and education programmes, regardless of age, expressed as a percentage of the population in the relevant official age group

Possible alternative indicators: Under-six years’ old population who are enrolled on first stage education programs. These programs might either be financed by the local government or by the central government (UN Habitat, CPI, 2014)

2. Percentage of new entrants to primary education with ECCE experience: number of new entrants to primary grade 1 who have attended some form of organized early childhood care and education (ECCE) programme for the equivalent of at least 200 hours, expressed as a percentage of total number of new entrants to primary grade 1.

Linkages: Disaggregation by: gender (readily available) and geographical location (region, urban/rural) (not readily available from internationally comparable sources web databases) Sources: UNESCO

Comments: Quality of pre-primary is more difficult to measure. See http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/140724-Indicator-working-draft1.pdf (Indicators 35 and 36). There is an
Early Child Development Index (ECDI) that could be sourced from MICS surveys.

Form submission
and
http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf

46

4.2
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

Early Childhood:
1. What could be measured from a right to education perspective
 As developed in part I, pre-primary education does not constitute a right under international law. However, the Moscow Framework for Action and Cooperation: Harnessing the Wealth of Nations calls for the development of legal frameworks and enforcement mechanisms that are conducive to the implementation of the rights of children to early childhood care and education from birth. The States’ obligation to adopt such a legal framework could be measured.
 Also equality between men and women in pre-primary education183 should be measured according to Article 10 of the Convention for the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women. The enjoyment of pre-primary education by marginalised groups should be also measured.

2. Suggested right to education indicators:
 Countries with a legal framework guaranteeing the rights of children to early childhood 183 Equality in access to, in and through education. 42 care and education, including one year of free and compulsory pre-primary education (structural indicator)
 Percentage of teachers in pre-primary education who are trained (process indicator)
 Percentage of children attending at least one year of pre-primary education disaggregated by184 sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles185 (outcome indicator)

3. Available data: States have to report regularly on the implementation of the right to education to UNESCO and to UN treaties bodies. As such they could be requested to use these to report on the existence / status of a national legal framework guaranteeing the right to early childhood care and education, including one year of free and compulsory pre-primary education. UNESCO Database on the Right to Education186 provides available education laws, including laws and provisions related to early childhood care and education. UNESCO Institute for Education (UIS) provides data on enrolment in pre-primary education, disaggregated by sex and on the percentage of teachers in pre-primary education.

4. Comments: There is no international legal obligation to adopt a legal framework guaranteeing the right of children to early childhood care and education, or an obligation to provide one year of free and compulsory pre-primary education. There is only disaggregated data by sex. Other disaggregated data by other prohibited grounds of discrimination would be needed. The availability or not of such disaggregated data could be an indicator. The existence of a legal framework is not enough to guarantee the full implementation in practice but allows for remedies through legal or quasi-judicial mechanisms when there are violations.

http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

47

4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to aordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university

4.3
General Comment

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

Data for indicators for this target needs to be disaggregated by sex to reflect the target. It will be important to apply gender analyses to seek to measure progress (or lack thereof) of closing gender gaps in access . Very important to qualify “quality” through appropriate indicators. Data for this indicator is disaggregated by sex – will be important to apply gender analyses to seek to measure progress (or lack thereof) of closing gender gaps in access (as per indicator proposed for 4.5) The indicator is inadequate to measure quality aspect. Ensuring this element does not get overlooked, national and/or regional indicators may be considered to seek to measure quality

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf

48

4.3.1
Enrolment ratios by level and type of education (TVET and
tertiary)

4.3.1
Amendment

Claudia Arisi

SOS Children's Villages

Enrolment ratios don't measure educational outcomes. It is relevant to know % of young adults who are in employment related to their vocational or tertiary education.

[Amended]: Percentage of young adults who are in employment related to their post-secondary or tertiary education (cumulated per year), disaggregated by sex, care status, disability, rural/urban location.

Rationale:
Indicators on access to education programmes should be complemented with some measure of the contribution of those education programmes to improve the life chances of people. For this, we suggest considering the indicator to assess whether post-secondary and tertiary education, including vocational training, equip young people with the necessary skills to find jobs in the labour market and start an independent life.

Methodology and Data Source:
Administrative data. Ad-hoc surveys could be developed to follow-up on former students’ career.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view

49

4.3.1
Amendment

Gabriele Weigt

German NGOs and DPOs

Indicator should be disaggregated by disability.

Form submission
and
http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf

50

4.3.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
Change to ‘gender parity index for enrolment’. Need to state exactly what the ratio will consist of – it is ratios of male and females that have completed required level of education to enter TVET (for e.g.) to the number of males and females that are actually attending TVET?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

51

4.3.1
Amendment

Marcela Ballara

Red Educacion Popular entre Mujeres America Latina y el Caribe REPEM LAC

Enrolment ratios by level and type of education formal and non-formal (TVET and tertiary) AAA*

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30miZcgelAESDUwaTFLclNtaVU/view?usp=sharing

52

4.3
New Proposed Indicators

Kimberly DeRose

Child and Youth Finance International

CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of technical, vocational and tertiary education training programs, including university, available for young people
CYFI Proposed Indicator : Number of job opportunities created for young people
CYFI Proposed Indicator : % of male/female graduates from technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YFCKapHGn08bv7575CZiaLlBPocX_0_heWpL6uQSkDM/edit

53

4.3
New Proposed Indicators

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Thematic Indicators to add:
- Countries with legal and policy frameworks for TVET which include clear provisions to guarantee non-discrimination and support access to students from low income backgrounds
- % of TVET institutions meeting national standards #
- Tertiary gross enrolment ratio *
- Participation rate in technical-vocational programmes (15-24 year olds) *
- Participation rate in formal and non-formal education and training (25-64 year olds) *

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

54

4.3
New Proposed Indicator

Verity McGivern

HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)

Number of third-age/life-long learning centers for men and women over 60.
Lifelong learning, reflected in Goal 4, does not stop at tertiary education. There should be an indicator to include learning for men and women over 60. It is not clear whether “adult” includes people over 60.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view

55

4.3
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

1. What could be measured from a human rights perspective
 The enjoyment of the right to upper secondary education and tertiary education without discrimination
 The enjoyment of the right to receive vocational training and retraining, including apprenticeships, advanced vocational training and recurrent training
 States’ effort to comply with their obligation to take steps to ensure progressively free secondary and tertiary education, including technical and vocational education
 States’ effort to comply with their obligation to ensure marginalised groups have access to secondary and tertiary education, including technical and vocational education.

2. Suggested right to education indicators
 Upper secondary education net enrolment rate disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Tertiary education net enrolment rate disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Percentage of young and adults receiving vocational training and retraining, including apprenticeships, advanced vocational training and recurrent training, disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, income/wealth deciles (outcome indicator)
 Countries with education policies providing grants at upper secondary and tertiary education, including technical and vocational education, for students from low income families (structural indicator)
 Countries with legal framework for technical and vocational education and training, including provisions to guarantee non-discrimination (structural indicators)

3. Available data
 UIS provides data for most of the outcomes indicators (disaggregated by sex)188
 States have to report regularly on the implementation of the right to education to UNESCO and to UN treaties bodies, they are requested to inform about the measures taken to introduce free secondary and higher education as well as to implement technical and vocational education and training. UNESCO Database on the Right to Education provides available education laws and policies, which can inform about the existence of grants and legal framework for technical and vocational education and training.

4. Comments Technical and vocational education is a type of education within secondary and tertiary education and there can be blurred boundaries in reporting. The growth or decrease of enrolment rate in this type of education cannot inform about the level of enjoyment. The existence of a legal framework is not enough to guarantee the full implementation in practice but allows for remedies through legal or quasi-judicial mechanisms when there are violations.

http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

56

4.4 By 2030, increase by [x] per cent the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship

4.4
General Comment

Verity McGivern

HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)

This target puts an age limit on education contradicting the stated goal of lifelong learning for all; EUROSTAT publishes participation rate in education and training among people age 25-64.

Form submission

57

4.4.1
Participation rate in formal and non-formal education and
training in the last 12 months among 25-64 year-olds

4.4.1
Amendment

Marcela Ballara

Red Educacion Popular entre Mujeres America Latina y el Caribe REPEM LAC

[Amend]: Participation rate in formal and non-formal education and training in the last 12 months among 25-64 year-olds disaggregated by sex , ethnicity, rural/urban BAB

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30miZcgelAESDUwaTFLclNtaVU/view?usp=sharing

58

4.4.1
Amendment

Verity McGivern

HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)

[Amend]: Participation rate in formal and non- formal education and training in the last 12 months, by gender, age and persons with disabilities.
It is not clear why the age range of 25-64 is chosen, when the goal clearly states “lifelong learning opportunities for all”.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view

59

4.4.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
Does not correspond with target – should be testing skills enhancement. If not testing skills enhancement, then change ‘participation’ to ‘attendance’. Include ‘parenting’ skills. Must also be linked with the youth/adult literacy rate below (target 4.6).

Rational for Amend:
Participating does not automatically correspond to increased skills. ‘Participation’ rates very subjective – if not testing skills enhancement, then just measure attendance. Parenting skills often under-valued formally.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

60

4.4.2
Percentage of youth/adults who are computer and information literate

4.4.2
General Comment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

It’s not possible to be computer-literate without being able to decipher letters and numbers. General confusion over what being ‘information-literate’ means?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

61

4.4
New Proposed Indicators

Kimberly DeRose

Child and Youth Finance International

CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of youth enrolled in skill training classes, workshops and/or programs to become more employable
CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of youth employed after gaining skills from classes, workshops and/or programs
CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of pupils who have received specific entrepreneurship education
CYFI Proposed Indicator: Number of young people who have started their own enterprise
CYFI Proposed Indicator: Pupil to computer ratio in primary and secondary education.
CYFI Proposed Indicator: Percentage of technical and vocation training facilities available in country
CYFI Proposed Indicator : Number of national curricula that include and entrepreneurship learning component in primary and secondary schools

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YFCKapHGn08bv7575CZiaLlBPocX_0_heWpL6uQSkDM/edit

62

4.4
New Proposed Indicator

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Countries with legal framework for technical and vocational education and training, including provisions to guarantee non-discrimination (structural indicators)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

63

4.4
New Proposed Indicator

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

Participation in non-formal education of younger youths below the age of 25

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf

64

Target 4.5:

By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in vulnerable situations

65

4.5.1
Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top wealth
quintile] for all indicators on this list that can be disaggregated

4.5.1
Amendment

Mari Ullmann

Plan International

[Amend]: Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top wealth quintile and other characteristics including disabilities where possible) for all indicators on this list that can be disaggregated

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view

66

4.5.1
Amendment

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

[Amend]: Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top wealth quintile, race/ethnicity and disability] for all indicators on this list that can be disaggregated

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

67

4.5.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggest Amend:
Explicitly include disability as key group. Consider adding ‘displaced children’ to include EiE.

Rational for Amend:
Need explicit reference to narrowing the gaps between most and least advantaged groups – then forms ground to establish interim stepping stone targets. Needs to explicitly highlight some key groups that we MUST ensure we get disaggregated data for on access and completion rates – specifically gender and disability.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

68

4.5.1
Amendment

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

Parity indices must also include race/ethnicity and disability. The target suggests that these are to be included.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

69

4.5.1
Amendment

Zoe Gray

International Agency for Prevention of Blindness

The indicator (4.5.1) on gender parity and access to education must be disaggregated by disabilities, in order to adequately measure the target.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByNrusvkCGCLWWVKdTVOZE9NYVk/view?usp=sharing

70

4.5
New Proposed Indicator

Sifisosami Dube

Gender Links

Under Goal 4, there is need to include an indicator for inclusion of gender equality education in curricula at all levels of education.

71

4.5
New Proposed Indicators

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

- Countries with laws, policies and resourced plans that ensure the enjoyment of the right to education for all marginalised groups, without discrimination and with equal opportunities
- % primary students taught in their mother tongue *
• Per child state expenditure on education. (Primary/ Lower Secondary/ Upper Secondary) #

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

72

4.5
New Proposed Indicator

Claudia Arisi

SOS Children's Villages

Number of children out of school, disaggregated by age, gender, care status, disability, and belonging to a minority group.

Rationale:
The “number of children out of school” measures the number of school-aged children out of school.
Particular attention should be paid to children in vulnerable situations, so disaggregation should cover children in emergencies (e.g. conflict, natural disaster), but also explicitly include children who lost parental care, children with disabilities, girls and children from ethnic or religious minorities.

Methodology and Data Source:
The “number of children out of school” is a UNESCO indicator.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view

73

4.5
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

Equity:

EFA SC Target 1,2 and 4: … with particular attention to gender equality and the most marginalised
EFA SC Target 3: …with particular attention to girls and women and the most marginalised

1. What could be measured from a human rights perspective
 The enjoyment of the right to education without discrimination and with equal opportunities
 States’ effort to comply with their obligation to ensure the right to education of everyone without discrimination and with equal opportunities (States’ obligations to identify marginalised groups deprived of the right to education and to take the appropriate measures to guarantee address it)

2. Suggested right to education indicators
 Countries that collect credible and comprehensive disaggregated data by prohibited grounds of discrimination related to the enjoyment of the right to education (process indicator)
 Outcome indicators189 for relevant target disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, wealth/income deciles
 Countries with law and policies (that are implemented / resourced190) to ensure the enjoyment of the right to education of marginalised groups without discrimination and with equal opportunities (structural indicator)

3. Available data
 UIS provides data for most outcome indicators, disaggregated by sex
 There may not be available data regarding countries collecting disaggregated data but States could be requested to provide such information, notably when reporting to UNESCO or to UN treaty bodies
 States have to report regularly on the implementation of the right to education to UNESCO and to UN treaties bodies and are requested to inform about the measures taken to ensure the enjoyment of the right to education of marginalised groups without discrimination and with equal opportunities. UNESCO Database on the Right to Education provides available education laws and policies, which can inform about the existence of such measures towards marginalised groups

4. Challenges/comments Disaggregated data should be collected nationally according to the specific context. However disaggregated data on the ground of sex, disability, rural/urban and wealth quintiles should be globally comparable. The existence of a legal framework is not enough to guarantee the full implementation in practice but allows for remedies through legal or quasi-judicial mechanisms when there are violations.

http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

74

Target 4.6:

By 2030, ensure that all youth and at least [x] per cent of adults, both men and women, achieve literacy and numeracy

4.6
General Comment

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

Data for indicators for this target needs to be disaggregated by sex to reflect the target. In addition staggered disaggregation by different age groups within ‘youth’.

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf

75

4.6.1
Percentage of youth/adults proficient in literacy and numeracy
skills

4.6.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
Revise to ‘% youth/adults who can demonstrate basic literacy/numeracy skills’. Place particular emphasis on importance of women’s literacy.

Rational for Amend:
What does being ‘proficient’ mean? Too vague. Need to define ‘basic skills’ – but at least this is clearer. Improving women’s literacy is proven to have big positive impact on children’ attendance and performance at school – big positive externalities.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

76

4.6.1
Amendment

Marcela Ballara

Red Educacion Popular entre Mujeres America Latina y el Caribe REPEM LAC

[Amend]: Percentage of youth/adults proficient in literacy and numeracy skills by age , sex, ethnicity BAA

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30miZcgelAESDUwaTFLclNtaVU/view?usp=sharing

77

4.6.2
Youth/adult literacy rate

4.6.2
Amendment

Fabio Palacio

International Movement ATD Fourth World

Must be disaggregated by income because in all countries, children from low income families have decreased access to education.

http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf

78

4.6.2
Amendment

Marcela Ballara

Red Educacion Popular entre Mujeres America Latina y el Caribe REPEM LAC

Youth/adult literacy rate by age, ethnicity, rural/urban AAA

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30miZcgelAESDUwaTFLclNtaVU/view?usp=sharing

79

4.6
New Proposed Indicators

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Participation rate in literacy programmes (% illiterate 25-64 year olds)

Countries with legal or institutional frameworks which make access to literacy and lifelong learning a fundamental right and provide for an operational framework for its implementation.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

80

4.6
New Proposed Indicator

Kimberly DeRose

Child and Youth Finance International

Percentage of youth and adults able to demonstrate proficiency in personal financial literacy and money management

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YFCKapHGn08bv7575CZiaLlBPocX_0_heWpL6uQSkDM/edit

81

4.6
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

Literacy and numeracy:

1. What could be measured from a human rights perspective
 The enjoyment of the right to fundamental education without discrimination
 States’ effort to comply with their obligation to encourage or intensify literacy programmes on a basis of equality of men and women

2. Suggested right to education indicators
 Youth/adult literacy rate on a 3 or 5 point spectrum (e.g. no literacy / low / functional / good / excellent) disaggregated by sex, disability, rural/urban, wealth/income deciles (outcome indicators)
 Percentage of women and men participating in literacy programmes (outcome indicators)
 Countries with legal or policy framework guaranteeing fundamental education or promoting literacy programmes (structural indicator)  Countries with assessment systems that accurately track progress on literacy and numeracy, alongside a broad range of other learning outcomes (process indicator).

3. Available data
 UIS provides youth/adult literacy rate disaggregated by sex
 States have to report regularly on the implementation of the right to education to UNESCO and to UN treaties bodies and are requested to inform about the measures taken to encourage or intensify literacy programmes. UNESCO Database on the Right to Education provides available education laws and policies, including laws and policies promoting fundamental education and literacy programmes.

4. Comments Percentage of women and men participating in literacy programmes may not be available globally but it would be a good indicator.

Form submission
and
http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

82

Target 4.7

By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and nonviolence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development

4.7
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
Revise indicators that assess whether these areas are included in national curriculums and then move to national level to assess progress. Rather than 15 and 13-year olds, maybe we should refer to secondary school graduates’ instead.

Rational for Amend:
Unclear why is it 15-year and 13-year old respectively? It’s unrealistic and even problematic to test children in such deeply- culture specific fields. Do we know if such a subject is currently taught in all the nations which will adopt the SD goals? Rather, it would be better to set up an indicator to see if the government shows any commitment to enhancing sustainable development education. An example, a number of countries in which sustainable development is part of the national curriculum.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

83

4.7.1
Percentage of 15-year old students showing proficiency in
knowledge of environmental science and geoscience

4.7.1
Amendment

Matthew Simonds

International Trade Union Confederation

[Amend]: The target requires an indicator on the integration of sustainable development across education systems.
Education for sustainable development is incorporated in education policy and curricula

Form submission
and
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf

84

4.7.2
Percentage of 13-year old students endorsing values and
attitudes promoting equality, trust and participation in governance

4.7.2
Amendment

Jordi Pascual

Culture Committee, United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)

A reference to “values and attitudes promoting... cultural diversity” should be added to this indicator.

Form submission
and
http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf

85

4.7.2
General Comment

Fabio Palacio

International Movement ATD Fourth World

This indicator addresses tolerance in schools and children’s views on governance. Young people living in poverty are often excluded from an early age in schools. This leads to lower performance in school and, in some cases, lower attendance. Furthermore, incapacity to address problems at school can translate to decreased civic activity. Although this indicator and its partner are both based on “multi-country assessment studies”, only the first one is considered feasible. This indicator can yield important information regarding young peoples’ experiences at school and in civic life.

http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf

86

4.7
New Proposed Indicator

Rineke van Dam

Countdown 2015 Europe

Proportion of young people (10-24) who demonstrates desired level of knowledge and reject major misconceptions about sexual and reproductive health, including HIV and AIDS (modified MDG indicator, school based surveys)
 We recommend the inclusion of an indicator that reflects the sustainable lifestyle, human rights, gender equality and promotion of a culture of non-violence components of target 4.7 through using the suggested indicator as a proxy indicator for comprehensive sexuality education (CSE). CSE is central to enabling individuals to safely and responsibly navigate their sexuality and relationships, and empowers them to be active members of their community. It tackles misconceptions about gender equality and aims to equip children and adolescents with the skills they require to realise sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. This indicator is outcomes focused, but reflects the process of CSE that would need to take place to achieve this knowledge outcome.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Nr9sCL0vxncWg2SWE5c2NwYTA/view?usp=sharing

87

4.7
New Proposed Indicator

Antonia Wulff

Education International

Education for sustainable development is incorporated in education policy and curricula

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=1

88

4.7
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

1. What could be measured from a human rights perspective
 The enjoyment of the right to quality education - through the acquisition of knowledge, skills, values and attitudes to establish sustainable and peaceful societies, including through global citizenship education and education for sustainable development.
 States’ efforts to comply with their obligation to ensure quality education – through the development of a curriculum aiming at teaching knowledge, skills, values and attitudes to establish sustainable and peaceful societies, including through global citizenship education and education for sustainable development.

2. Suggested right to education indicators The enjoyment of the right to quality education is difficult to measure, particularly cross-nationally, this is the reason why we suggest to measure States’ obligations using structural or process indicators. We suggest:
 Countries with curriculum aiming at teaching knowledge, skills, values and attitudes to establish sustainable and peaceful societies, including through global citizenship education and education for sustainable development (process indicator)
 Countries with national assessment systems that include tracking of representative qualitative data on the outcomes of education on citizenship and sustainable development (process indicator)

3. Available data States have to report regularly to UNESCO on the implementation of the Recommendation concerning Education for International Understanding, Co-operation and Peace and Education relating to Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and are requested to provide such information.

4. Comments The existence of such curriculum is not sufficient to guarantee in practice the acquisition of such knowledge, skills and values but it is a good indicator of the will of the State to achieve this target.

http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

89

4.7
New Proposed Indicators

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

Data for this indicator needs to be disaggregated by sex to reflect the target. In addition staggered disaggregation by different age groups with in ‘youth’.

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf

90

4.7
New Proposed Indicators

Aashish Khullar

Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International

Suggestions for including an indicator for comprehensive sexuality education have been circulated, but did not get reflected in the eventual indicators. Could be considered though for national/regional level indicators (in order to capture progress in “education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles etc.” Consideration could be given to the following indicator and data source suggested in the Goal group: Percentage of schools that provide life-skills based HIV and sexuality education within the previous academic year (Data source: EMIS Annual School Census or school based survey).
Also these indicators have been proposed, but did not get included:
 Percentage of people responding positively to:
 Important child qualities: tolerance and respect for other people (Data source: World Values Survey)
 Percentage of people responding positively to: women have the same rights as men (Data source: World Values Survey).
 Percentage of students, aged 10-24 years, who demonstrate desired knowledge levels on the transmission of HIV and reject major misconceptio ns about HIV and AIDS (Data source: school-based survey)
 Percentage of education institutions that provide human rights education consistent with the World Programme for Human Rights Education, and monitoring consistent with OHCHR Human Rights Indicators: A Guide to Measurement and Implementation.

https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf

91

4.7.3
New Proposed Indicator

Marcela Ballara

Red Educacion Popular entre Mujeres America Latina y el Caribe REPEM LAC

Percentage of adults by age, ethnic group , rural/urban participating in formal and non-formal education for sustainable development , human rights, global citizenship towards contribution to sustainable development.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30miZcgelAESDUwaTFLclNtaVU/view?usp=sharing

92

4.7.3
New Proposed Indicators

Kimberly DeRose

Child and Youth Finance International

- Percentage of youth who have received global citizenship education, particularly economic components such as financial, life skills and entrepreneurship education.
- Percentage of youth that have awareness of their own rights and responsibilities
- Percentage of youth aware and capable of managing personal finances

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YFCKapHGn08bv7575CZiaLlBPocX_0_heWpL6uQSkDM/edit

93

4.7.3
New Proposed Indicator

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Percentage of teaching hours dedicated to education for sustainable development / global citizenship education/human rights and peace #

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

94

4.7.3
New Proposed Indicators

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

- Countries where human rights education, peace, global citizenship and education for sustainable development incorporated in education policy and curricula
-Percentage of schools that provided life skills-based HIV and sexuality education #
-Countries implementing the framework on the World Programme on Human Rights Education (as per UNGA resolution 59/113)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

95

4.7.3
New Proposed Indicators

Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign

Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal

- Percentage of instructional hours dedicated to arts education in relation to the total number of instructional hours in the first two years of secondary school (grades 7-8).
- Percentage of staff in primary and secondary education with specific training in artistic or cultural disciplines.
- Percentage of primary and secondary public schools which have a library.
- Percentage of the population having participated at least once in a going-out cultural activity in the last 12 months.
- Global Cultural Participation Index (and related indicators).

Form submission
and
http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf

96

Means of Implementation:

4.a Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all

97

4.a.1
Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii) drinking
water; and (iii) single-sex sanitation facilities (as per the WASH
indicator definitions)

4.a.1
Amendment

Gabriele Weigt

German NGOs and DPOs

Although “disability” and “inclusive” are mentioned in the target these are not clearly reflected in the indicator, it should be rephrased. Therefore “accessible for children with disabilities” should be added.

Form submission
and
http://www.bezev.de/fileadmin/Neuer_Ordner/Post2015/Assessment_Indicators.pdf

98

4.a.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
Replace with SCI’s Quality Learning Environment indicators. Include ‘equitable access’ to ensure facilities are inclusive and accessible for children with disabilities. Include indicator to assess ‘safe and non- violent’ – such as whether there is code of conduct on addressing violence and discrimination in schools (including gender- based violence).

Rational for Amend:
The three selected criteria are not globally appropriate or sufficiently comprehensive. Both of these elements are needed to match ‘inclusive’ and ‘safe’ language in the target.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

99

4.a.1
Amendment

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

Proposed Global Indicators:
Percentage of schools with access to
(i) electricity; (ii) drinking water; and
(iii) single-sex sanitation facilities (as per the WASH indicator definitions) (iv) adapted infrastructure and materials for people with disability (v) adequate pedagogical materials and learning facilities #
Percentage of students experiencing corporal punishment, bullying, sexual abuse and discrimination *

Proposed Thematic Indicator:
28.Legal framework defining minimum norms and standards for safe learning environments
29.Countries where there are mechanisms in place to investigate complains pertaining to discrimination and other violations of the right to education.
30.Percentage of schools built since 2015 with a disaster resilient location, design, and construction. #
31.Percentage of schools with (i) electricity and (ii) internet access for pedagogical purposes #
32.Percentage of schools with adapted infrastructure and materials for people with disabilities #
33. Number of attacks on students, personnel and institutions

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

100

4.a.1
Amendment

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

This indicator requires additional aspects to bring it in closer alignment with the target. Needs to include: “(iv) adapted infrastructure and materials for people with disability (v) adequate pedagogical materials and learning facilities”. The current indicator reduces “facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all” to drinking water, electricity and toilets. This leaves out the most critical aspects pertaining to quality and equity - everything related to the classroom environment. Inclusion and safety need to be reflected in the indicator.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

101

4.a.1
General Comment

Ross Bailey

WaterAid

 Retain Indicator 4.A.1
> Note that the inclusion of this indicator is reliant on the measurement of our proposals for including an indicator on access to WASH in extra household settings.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4rWv_IfTKYhSV9xMXNmRnBKMVE/view?usp=sharing

102

4.a.1
Amendment

Zoe Gray

International Agency for Prevention of Blindness

Indicator should reflect the stated intent of capturing inclusiveness and accessibility in terms of disability.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByNrusvkCGCLWWVKdTVOZE9NYVk/view?usp=sharing

103

4.a.1
New Proposed Indicator

Claudia Arisi

SOS Children's Villages

Percentage of pupils/students experiencing bullying or discrimination in education settings, disaggregated by perpetrator (peer or teacher), and by sex, age, care status, disability, ethnicity of the pupils/students

Rationale:
Whether perpetrated by teachers or other children, the effects of violence on a child can be devastating. A study on violence in schools in the UK showed that 16-year-olds bullied at school were twice as likely to be without education, employment or training, and to have lower wage levels at the age of 23 and 33, than those who were not bullied25. The family background of a child is often related to bullying and discrimination. In our programmes we have witness difficulties in integration in class of children without parental care, especially of those living in alternative care settings or child-headed households. They are often victims of discrimination, which adds stress on the emotional and psychological instability related to the loss of parental care.

Methodology and Data Source:
This is a UNESCO indicator with a few modifications from the original formulation, which is: “Percentage of students experiencing bullying“. The proposed reformulation, including disaggregation by perpetrator and the specification of ”education settings”, aims at measuring both peer to peer violence (like bullying) and adult to pupil/student violence in other educational settings besides the school, such as after school or youth clubs or detention and correction facilities, etc. SOS Children’s Villages also proposes disaggregation of the indicator by care status, to account for the heightened risk of bullying and discrimination faced by children without parental care described above.

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view

104

4.a
New Proposed Indicators

Matthew Simonds

International Trade Union Confederation

- Legal framework defining minimum norms and standards for safe learning environments
- Pupil-qualified teacher ratio
- Pupil per classroom ratio

Form submission
and
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf

105

4.a
New Proposed Indicators

Mari Ullmann

Plan International

• Percentage of students who feel safe at school and traveling to and from school
• Percentage of girls and boys who experience corporal punishment in schools
• Number of children killed in schools by disasters, with no children killed by disasters in schools built after 2015
• Percentage of gender responsive education sector plans
• Percentage of education sector plans that address school related gender-based violence
• Percentage of schools that are physically accessible and have the necessary teaching and learning resources for children with visual and hearing impairments.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view

106

4.a
New Proposed Indicators

Antonia Wulff

Education International

Requires indicators on the necessary measures at system-level to ensure safe and effective learning environments:
Legal framework defining minimum norms and standards for safe learning environments;
Pupil-qualified teacher ratio;
Pupil per classroom ratio

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=1

107

4.a
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

1. What could be measured from a human rights perspective
 The enjoyment of the right to education in a safe and non-violent environment which is child, disability and gender sensitive
 States’ efforts to comply with their obligation to ensure that education is delivered in a safe and non-violent environment which is child, disability and gender sensitive

2. Suggested right to education indicators The enjoyment of the right to education in a safe and non-violent environment which is child, disability and gender sensitive may be difficult to measure cross-nationally, this is the reason why we suggest to measure States’ obligations using structural or process indicators. We suggest:
 Countries with legal framework banning corporal punishment in school (structural indicator)
 Countries where there are mechanisms in place to complain for violence received in schools (structural indicator)
 Countries with legal framework defining the minimum norms and standards for a safe and non-violent environment (structural indicator)

3. Available data States have to report regularly on the implementation of the right to education to UNESCO and to UN treaties bodies, and could be requested to provide such information. UNESCO Database on the Right to Education provides available education laws, which could also provide such information.

4. Comments The minimum norms and standards for a safe and non-violent environment would vary from country to country, so the cross-national comparison would not be accurate. The existence of a legal framework is not enough to guarantee the full implementation in practice but allows for remedies through legal or quasi-judicial mechanisms when there are violations.

Form submission
and
http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

108

Means of Implementation 4.b:

By 2020, expand by [x] per cent globally the number of scholarships available to developing countries, in particular least developed countries, small island developing States and African countries, for enrolment in higher education, including vocational training and information and communications technology, technical, engineering and scientic programmes, in developed countries and other developing countries

4.b
General Comment

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

The proposal is not appropriate from a human rights perspective because international human rights law does not include reference to such scholarships, so we would not suggest any indicators.

Form submission
and
http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

109

4.b.1
Volume of ODA flows for scholarships by sector and type of
study

4.b.1
Amendment

Antonia Wulff

Education International

The expansion element of target 4.b requires a comparison with total ODA to education: Total volume of ODA directed to education; Percentage of total ODA to education directed to scholarships

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=2

110

4.b.1
Amendment

Matthew Simonds

International Trade Union Confederation

Replace proposed indicator 4.b.1 with:
Total volume of ODA directed to education
Percentage of total ODA to education directed to scholarships (by sector and type of study)

Form submission
and
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf

111

Means of Implementation 4.c:

By 2030, increase by [x] per cent the supply of qualied teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries, especially least developed countries and small island developing States

112

4.c.1
Percentage of trained teachers by level of education according
to national standards

4.c.1
Amendment

Antonia Wulff

Education International

Indicator 4.c.1 should capture the target’s reference to ‘qualified teachers’ as well as teacher training: Percentage of trained and qualified teachers by level of education according to national standards. Teacher training is a continuum based on the life-long learning approach and includes both pre- and in-service training: Percentage of teachers that receive free continuous professional development and support

Form submission
and
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1APH_r97kxGRUYxSWxDWjF4YlU/view?pli=3

113

4.c.1
Amendment

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

We welcome an indicator on teachers but believe it should measure the ‘Percentage of trained and qualified teachers by level of education according to national standards’.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

114

4.c.1
Amendment

Faiza Shaheen

Save the Children

Suggested Amend:
This isn’t strong enough – needs to align with Muscat Agreement language – so amend to ‘% of by qualified, professionally- trained, motivated and well-supported teachers’.

Rational for Amend:
Match the education community’s proposed language.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view

115

4.c.1
Amendment

Fabio Palacio

International Movement ATD Fourth World

This indicator must be disaggregated by income because in all countries, children from lowincome families have decreased access to education.

http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf

116

4.c
New Proposed Indicator

Matthew Simonds

International Trade Union Confederation

Teacher training is a continuum based on the life-long learning approach and includes both pre- and in-service training.
Percentage of teachers that receive free continuous professional development and support

Form submission
and
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf

117

4.c
New Proposed Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

Means of Implementation: teachers
1. What could be measured from a human rights perspective States’ efforts to comply with their obligation to guarantee the right to quality education ensuring teachers are well qualified, professionally trained, motivated and well supported.

2. Suggested right to education indicators
 Countries with legal framework regulating the status of teachers (structural indicator)
 Percentage of teachers qualified according to national standards (by level and category) (process indicator)
 Percentage of teachers trained according to national standards (by level and category) (process indicator)

3. Available data
 States have to report regularly on the implementation of the right to education to UNESCO and are requested to inform about the laws and policies that regulate the status of teachers.
 According to the TAG process indicators are available

4. Comments The existence of a legal framework is not enough to guarantee the full implementation in practice but allows for remedies through legal or quasi-judicial mechanisms when there are violations.

Form submission
and
http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf

118

4.c
New Proposed Indicators

Mari Ullmann

Plan International

• Percentage of teachers with fluency in the teaching language
• Percentage of teachers who live in the community of the school where they work

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view

119

4.c.1
New Proposed Indicators

Anjela Taneja

Global Campaign For Education

- Countries with legal framework regulating the status of teachers.
- Percentage of teachers that receive free continuous professional development and support #
- % teachers trained on pedagogy, positive discipline, inclusive education, child rights and gender equality approaches
- % teachers receiving salary below national average wage. *#
- Teacher attrition rate * #

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_hsIz0eh3vRRGY2aDhueTFMaEU/view?usp=sharing

120

4.c.1
New Proposed Indicator

Maria Vlahakis

Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)

Indicator on the ‘Ratio of qualified teachers to children’ (disaggregated by disability, gender, race and ethnicity, and socio-economic status) to show inclusiveness in terms of breath of teachers and teacher / children ratio for marginalised groups of learners.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view

121

New Proposed Means of Implementation Target for Education Finance
and Associated Indicators

New Proposed Means of Implementation Target
and Associated Indicators

Delphine Dorsi

Right to Education Project

Means of Implementation: finance

EFA added SC Target 7: By 2030, all countries allocate at least 4-6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or at least 15-20% of their public expenditure to education, prioritizing groups most in need; and strengthen financial cooperation for education, prioritizing countries most in need.

1. What could be measured from a human rights perspective
 States’ efforts to comply with their obligations to use the maximum of their available resources to ensure the full enjoyment of the right to education.
 States’ efforts to comply with their obligation related to international assistance and cooperation

2. Suggested right to education indicators
 Countries allocated at least 4-6% of the GNP to education
 Countries allocated at least 15-20% of their public expenditure to education
 Total Official Development Assistance (ODA) to education
 Total ODA to basic education
 Percentage of total ODA to education in low-income
 Percentage of total ODA to basic education in low-income countries

3. Available data According to the TAG, these data are available.

4. Comments The groups more in need will vary from country to another country and the share of the budget allocated to such groups will vary from country to country depending of the specific context.

Form submission
and
http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf


1	GOAL 7: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	Renaude Gregoire	SSA Social Justice Office	We support this indicator : "Fossil fuel subsidies" (SDSN, Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the SDGs, Revised working draft (Version 7), March 20, 2015, p. 28) We support this indicator : "Spending on energy services" (see: CIGI/ KDI, Post-2015 Development Agenda : Goals, Targets and Indicators, p. 47) We agree with these indicators suggested by Tool Kit On Gender Equality Results and Indicators (page 24): "Number of training and awareness activities targeted at women and men on energy efficiency, safety and conservation..." "Number of schools and health and other community facilities using clean energy sources for heating and other uses." Percent of industries and institutions with public corporate report on clean and renewable energy transition. We have to add an indicator about non-carbon energy.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/view
3		General	Sarah Wykes	CAFOD	The post-2015 framework requires sufficiently ambitious targets to bring about meaningful change and indicators that are fit for purpose and ensure progress is tracked through clear milestones. An inclusive consultation process on the indicators is needed. For the Energy SDG, current binary definitions of access (e.g. having/not having a household electricity connection; cooking with non-solid/solid fuels) do not tell us if communities have the range of household, community and productive services needed for development or if these services are good quality, reliable, affordable and safe enough to be usable. The Global Tracking Framework of the SE4ALL initiative is designed to measure progress across the range of energy service attributes including quality, affordability, safety and reliability. Regarding the renewables and energy efficiency targets (7.2 & 7.3) these must incentivise sufficient action by 2030 to prevent dangerous global warming and support the global transition to socially inclusive, low carbon development. Research indicates an annual global rate of improvement in energy intensity (energy/unit GDP) of at least 4.5% is required, along with at least 45% of final energy use globally coming from renewable energy.	Form submission and http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/24154/173542/file/Energy%20SDG%20Indicators%20briefing%20Mar%202015.pdf
4		General	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	The increase in energy supplies required to achieve universal access should not increase the threat from climate change. It is estimated that achieving universal access to energy by 2030 would only increase current global energy demand by an estimated 1% and CO2 emissions by 0.6%. (Source: International Energy Agency. 2011. Energy For All: Financing access for the poor. In: World Energy Outlook 2011. IEA, Paris). 2. The renewables and energy efficiency targets must incentivise sufficient action by 2030 on climate change and support the global transition to socially inclusive, low carbon development. To prevent dangerous global warming, research indicates an annual global rate of improvement in energy intensity (energy/unit GDP) of at least 4.5% is required, along with at least 45% of final energy use coming from renewable energy globally To have a reasonable chance of not exceeding 1.5ºC warming, the current fossil fuel-based energy sector has to fundamentally change with the aim of reaching decarbonisation by 2050.	http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-energy-sdg
5	Target 7.1 By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services	7.1 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Suggested these indicators be disaggregated by age, sex and location, thereby allow for tracking progress for youth	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
6		7.1 General Comment	Rita Poppe	Hivos	Regarding Energy SDG 7, Target 7.1 on access, new ways of defining and measuring energy access are crucial if this target is to result in poverty reduction and development benefits. Communities require a range of energy services for their development, from household services, community services and energy for productive activities. Current binary definitions of energy access (e.g. having or not having a household electricity connection) do not tell if communities have energy services that are good quality, reliable, affordable and safe enough to be usable. The Global Tracking Framework developed for the SE4ALL-initiative takes an innovative multi-tier approach to defining access and has been designed to measure progress across the range of usable energy service, including quality, affordability, safety and reliability. For this reason, the indicators for target 7.1 should support adoption of the multi-tier approach.This means that the equity dimension of access can be tracked, ensuring that “no-one is left behind”. In addition, any target for universal access must include a minimum level of meaningful access so that progress can be measured towards this target. For household, productive and community uses, GTF tier 3 should act as the minimum level of access that can produce real development impact1. GTF tier 4 should be the minimum level of access for cooking, given new evidence from the World Health Organisation on the devastating health impacts of indoor air pollution from cooking. We welcome the inclusion of a target for ensuring universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services – though this formulation should include “sustainable” and “safe” services to avoid potential conflict with the aims of the overall Energy SDG or other climate and health-related SDGs and targets. However, new ways of defining and measuring energy access are crucial if this target is to result in poverty reduction and development benefits. Communities require a range of energy services for their development, from household services, community services such as health clinics and schools and also energy for productive activities such as farming and running micro/small businesses. Current binary definitions of energy access (e.g. having or not having a household electricity connection and cooking with non-solid or solid fuels) do not tell us if communities have energy services that are good quality, reliable, affordable and safe enough to be usable. The Global Tracking Framework developed for the Sustainable for Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative takes an innovative, “multi-tier” approach to defining access and has been designed to measure progress across the range of attributes of a usable energy service, including quality, affordability, safety and reliability. For this reason, the indicators for target 7.1 should support adoption of the multi-tier approach. This will mean that the equity dimension of access can be tracked, ensuring that “no-one is left behind”. In addition, any target for universal access must include a minimum level of meaningful access so that progress can be measured towards this target. For household, productive and community uses, GTF tier 3 should act as the minimum level of access that can produce real development impact1. GTF tier 4 should be the minimum level of access for cooking, given new evidence from the World Health Organisation on the devastating health impacts of indoor air pollution from cooking2.	Form submission and https://www.hivos.org/sites/default/files/energy_in_post-2015.pdf
7		7.1 General Comment	Sarah Wykes and Rita Poppe	CAFOD and Hivos	The indicators for this target should support such a multi-tier approach that will ensure “no-one is left behind”. In addition, any target must include a minimum level of meaningful access so that progress can be measured. For household, productive and community uses, GTF tier 3 should act as the minimum level of access. GTF tier 4 should be the minimum level of access for cooking, given new evidence from the WHO on the devastating health impacts of indoor air pollution from cooking. Tier 3 for household electricity comprises a low but adequate level of electricity which is affordable, reliable and available for eight hours a day, a package of energy services including lighting, phone charging, radio and television and an electric fan, food processing applications or a washing machine. For productive uses, Tier 3 would allow for the use of, for example, a sewing machine, a drilling machine or a potter’s wheel. For cooking, Tier 4 would mean at least the use of a stove which either uses non-solid fuel, or a very high-quality biomass stove which is well-vented.	Form submission and http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/24154/173542/file/Energy%20SDG%20Indicators%20briefing%20Mar%202015.pdf
8	7.1.1: Percentage of population with electricity access (%)	7.1.1 Amendment	Sarah Wykes and Rita Poppe	CAFOD and Hivos	Percentage of population (%) with access to electricity of at least Tier 3 of the Global Tracking Framework.	Form submission and https://www.hivos.org/sites/default/files/energy_in_post-2015.pdf
9		7.1.1 Amendment	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Percentage of population with access to electricity at tier 3 of the Global Tracking Framework (year on year percentage change). (NOTE: Same as CAFOD proposal) Rationale: New ways of defining and measuring energy access are crucial if this target is to result in poverty reduction and development benefits. Communities need a range of energy services for their development, from household services, community services such as health clinics and schools and also energy for productive activities such as farming and running micro/small businesses. WWF suggests using the The Global Tracking Framework developed for the Sustainable for Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative that takes an innovative, “multi-tier” approach to defining access and has been designed to measure progress across the range of attributes of a usable energy service, including quality, affordability, safety and reliability. Data source: IEA	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
10	7.1.2: Percentage of population with primary reliance on non-solid fuels (%)	7.1.2 Amendment	Sarah Wykes and Rita Poppe	CAFOD and Hivos	Percentage of population (%) with access to clean and efficient cooking fuels and technology of at least Tier 4 of the Global Tracking Framework.	Form submission and https://www.hivos.org/sites/default/files/energy_in_post-2015.pdf
11		7.1.2 Amendment	Jessie Durrett	Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves	For the indicators, the Alliance suggests revising the indicator on cooking under Goal 7 to read “Percentage of households primarily using clean and efficient cooking fuels and technologies” to most accurately reflect the issue and align the Post-2015 Agenda with ongoing international efforts.	Form submission
12		7.1.2 Amendment	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Percentage of population with access to a modern cooking solution of at least Tier 4 of the Global Tracking Framework (year on year percentage change). (NOTE: Same as CAFOD proposal)	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
13		7.1 New Proposed Indicators	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	We present examples of indicators for target 7.1, which seeks to make access to modern energy systems universal. It is important to understand spatially where access is insufficient – often in poor informal settlements as well as isolated rural contexts. Although this is an area where some local governments may not have competence, some local authorities are energy service providers, and all have a role in spatial planning, which affects access. Local authorities also have responsibility for air pollution which is due, in part, to energy consumption. (a) Dimensions to be measured: - Access to affordable energy services (to be developed) - Access to reliable energy services - Access to modern energy services (b) Proposed indicators: 1. Percentage of population with access to reliable electricity Possible alternative indicators: Percentage of households that are connected to electricity with continuous supply from the grid. (UN Habitat, CIP, 2014) Linkages: Goals 1, 3, 5, 9, 11 and 12. Disaggregation by: urban/rural and often by administrative authority. 2. Percentage of population dependent on solid fuels for cooking Linkages: Goals 1, 3, 5, 9, 11 and 12. Disaggregation by: urban/rural. Comments: Data for slums/municipalities may require census data/administrative data as household survey often not representative to disaggregate information for these detailed geographies. The SDGs are more ambitious that the current Sustainable Energy for All Framework in that it includes affordability and reliability considerations. At the moment, indicators only allow for binary measures of access to energy services (whether a household has access or does not have access), but does not include considerations of quality and affordability. The latter are under discussion.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
14		7.1 New Proposed Indicators	Priya Kanayson	NCD Alliance	Rates of adult and child disease burden and injuries (deaths and DALYs) attributable to household air pollution from the incomplete combustion of biomass fuels and coal for cooking and heating Rates of adult and child disease burden (deaths and DALYs) attributable to outdoor air pollution in both urban and rural settings	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2vPeriaLvgXX0ZkMGgtTDN2cDA/view?usp=sharing
15	Target 7.2 By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix	7.2 General Comment	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Although targets 7.2 and 7.3 on renewables and energy efficiency, respectively, are framed as global targets and not included below as examples, many local areas can also affect the amount of renewables sources and energy efficiency, for example through procurement, land use and enforcement of building codes. In fact, many local areas, particularly big cities, take a number of measures to decarbonise through promotion of use of renewable sources and energy efficiency. Indicators for this target could include the share of renewables in total energy use particularly in urban areas (already included under Goal 11, proposed by UN Habitat - CPI Indicators Guide, 2014); total energy and industry related emissions and implicit incentives for low-carbon energy in the electricity sector.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
16	7.2.1 Renewable energy share in the total energy final energy consumption (%)	See comment in Row 15			See comment in Row 15
17	7.2.2 Enabling legislation and framework for renewable energy production established by 2020	7.2.2 Amendment	Sarah Wykes	CAFOD	From the report Measuring What Matters in the Energy SDG: Our suggested indcators for 7.2 • Proposed Indicator 1: Renewable energy share in the total energy final energy consumption (%). • Proposed Indicator 2: % change from last year, collected at national level then aggregated. The renewables and energy efficiency targets must incentivise sufficient action by 2030 on climate change to prevent dangerous global warming, and support the global transition to socially inclusive, low carbon development. Research indicates an annual global rate of improvement in energy intensity (energy/unit GDP) of at least 4.5% is required, along with at least 45% of final energy use globally coming from renewable energy. Target 7.2 must integrate this level of ambition and there must also be an indicator to track progress on meeting the target.	Form submission and http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/24154/173542/file/Energy%20SDG%20Indicators%20briefing%20Mar%202015.pdf
18		7.2 New Proposed Indicators	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Percentage share of solar, wind and geothermal energy in final energy use and percentage change from last year, collected at national level then aggregated (NOTE: Similar to CAFOD proposal) Rationale: The renewables and energy efficiency targets must incentivise sufficient action by 2030 on climate change and support the global transition to socially inclusive, low carbon development. To prevent dangerous global warming, research indicates an annual global rate of improvement in energy intensity (energy/unit GDP) of at least 4.5% is required, along with at least 45% of final energy use coming from renewable energy globally . Target 7.2 must integrate this level of ambition of renewables and there must also be an indicator to track progress on meeting the target	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
19	Target 7.3 By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency	7.3 General Comment	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	The rate of primary energy intensity improvement (a proxy for energy efficiency) could also be considered. Note that UNSDSN (Urban SDG Goal 11, 2014) also suggests the inclusion of indicators on motor vehicle fuel economy of all (new and in-use) Light Duty Vehicles.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
20		7.3 General Comment	Esmee Russell	End Water Poverty	While target 7.3 of the MDGs has increased access to water and sanitation - the greatest increase has been among the upper economic quintiles. Vulnerable and marginalised individuals and communities still lack access to this fundamental human right.	Form submission
21	7.3.1: Rate of improvement in energy intensity (%) measured in terms of primary energy and GDP	7.3.1 General Comment	Helen Dennis	Christian Aid	We support the proposed indicator 1, although this could also be measured in terms of market exchange rates (MER). As with the target for increasing the share of renewables, an indicator is also required to track progress.	http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/24154/173542/file/Energy%20SDG%20Indicators%20briefing%20Mar%202015.pdf
22	7.3.2: Composite Energy Efficiency Improvement Index built up of sub-indicators measuring transport energy efficiency, industrial energy efficiency, power generation energy efficiency, buildings energy efficiency and agricultural energy efficiency	7.3.2 Amendment	Lina Dabbagh / Sarah Wykes	Climate Action Network (Lina Dabbagh)/ CAFOD (Sarah Wykes)	We support the proposed indicator 1. As with the target for increasing the share of renewables, an indicator is also required to track progress. Recommend: • Indicator 1: Rate of improvement in energy intensity (%) measured in terms of primary energy and GDP. • Indicator 2: % change from last year, collected at national level then aggregated. Finally, the Global Tracking Framework offers a ready-made and robust tool for measuring progress on all 3 energy targets, so long as there are appropriate adjustments to the SE4ALL renewables target to bring it into line with the level of action required for climate protection.	http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-energy-sdg
23		7.3.2 Amendment	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate this indiactor as it keeps all parties accountable, ensures compliance with the indicators, and the ability to live on earth harmoniously while enforcing human rights.	Form submission
24	Means of Implementation: 7.a By 2030, enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology, including renewable energy, energy efficiency and advanced and cleaner fossil-fuel technology, and promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy technology	7.a General Comment and New Proposed Indicators	Helen Dennis / Lina Dabbagh / Rita Poppe / Sarah Wykes	Christian Aid (Helen Dennis) / Climate Action Network (Lina Dabbagh) / Hivos (Rita Poppe) / CAFOD (Sarah Wykes)	The inclusion of “cleaner fossil fuel technology” is inconsistent with a coherent framework incentivising the shift to sustainable energy globally, and should be excluded from the target and indicators. The most meaningful way of measuring progress on all the 3 targets under SDG7 would be to have indicators on: • Total global investment in renewables and % change from previous year. • Total global investments in energy efficiency and conservation and % change from previous year. • % of national research & development spending on renewables and energy efficiency and % change from previous year.	http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/24154/173542/file/Energy%20SDG%20Indicators%20briefing%20Mar%202015.pdf
25		7.a General Comment	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	The inclusion of “cleaner fossil fuel technology” is inconsistent with a coherent framework incentivising the shift to sustainable energy globally and should be excluded from the target and indicators.	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
26	7.a.1 Improvement in the net carbon intensity of the energy sector (GHG/TFC in CO2 equivalents)	No specific input received			No specific input received
27	7.a.2 Amount of Foreign Direct Investment and Financial transfer for these purposes	No specific input received			No specific input received
28	Means of Implementation: 7.b By 2030, expand infrastructure and upgrade technology for supplying modern and sustainable energy services for all in developing countries, in particular least developed countries and small island developing States	7.b General Comment and New Proposed Indicators	Helen Dennis / Lina Dabbagh / Rita Poppe / Sarah Wykes	Christian Aid (Helen Dennis) / Climate Action Network (Lina Dabbagh) / Hivos (Rita Poppe) / CAFOD (Sarah Wykes)	The most meaningful way of measuring this target would be to have indicators on: • Total international development and climate finance spent on renewables & energy efficiency and % change from previous year. • Total international development and climate finance spent on decentralised energy solutions and % change from previous year.	http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/24154/173542/file/Energy%20SDG%20Indicators%20briefing%20Mar%202015.pdf
29	7.b.1 Rate of improvement in energy productivity (the amount of economic output achieved for a given amount of energy consumption).	No specific input received			No specific input received
30	7.b.2 Percentage of international cooperation projects being implemented to facilitate access to clean energy	7.b.2 Amendment	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Percentage of international development and climate finance spent on renewables & energy efficiency This indicator should track more than international cooperation and include ll internatinal development and climate finance. We need about $US 1.5 - 2 trillion annually for energy efficiency and renewables combined in period 2015 - 2040 (IEA, 2015) to have a chance to avoid 2 degree global warming and while in parallel funding for incumbent fuels declines. We are far from that. Presently world finances fossil fuels and nuclear infrastructure with more than $US 1.2 trillion while RES and efficiency receive much less than half of that. Data Sources: UNFCCC, GCF, Bloomberg/BNEF and REN 21	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0


1	GOAL 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts*	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	Renaude Gregoire	SSA Social Justice Office	Supported Indicators: "Total carbon dioxide emissions" "Greenhouse gas emission" "Trend in ecological footprint and / or related concepts" "Change in land use" (see: CIGI/ KDI, Post-2015 Development Agenda : Goals, Targets and Indicators, p.56-57)	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/view
3	Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries	13.1 General Comment	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Targets under goal 13 are not easy to operationalise. This goal was the subject of heated debate in the Open Working Group and the result did not include a target for climate change mitigation, under the understanding that these negotiations are taking place under the UNFCCC. There are significant crossreferences to Goal 11 as cities are focal points of energy use and carbon dioxide emissions. In particular, there is a huge opportunity for those urban areas that have not been built yet to have new infrastructure that is climate proof (UNSDSN, Urban SDG 11). Examples of indicators are included for Targets 13.1 and 13.2; note that in both cases indicators are already included under Goal 11. Under this goal disaggregation could also be included for rural areas. (a) Dimensions to be measured: - Resilience - Adaptive capacity (b) Proposed indicators: 1. Percentage change in people killed or injured after disasters in a given time period Linkages: Goal 1, 2 (particularly target 2.4), 6, 11, other targets in 13. Disaggregation by: urban / rural, cities/municipalities. (TBC). It does not appear like data is disaggregated at this level, but as the data is recorded by disaster event, in which case, it is localised, it could be tracked back to a certain area. Sources: Proposed by UNSDSN (London, 2014). Data available at: UNISDR and http://www.emdat.be/database Comments: In addition to the core indicators listed above, there are a number of additional ones that could be developed that have not been included as there exist scant sources to produce them. More details available in Twigg (2007); Jones and Bahadur (2013); Brooks, Aure and Whiteside (2014); Silva et al. (undated); UNISDR (undated). Target framed at country level, but also applicable to local areas.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
4	13.1.1 # of countries that report having progressed from a perceived low to an intermediate or from an intermediate to a high level of adaptive capacity in relation to a two-degree world	13.1.1 Amendment	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	Regarding indicator 1. “it has been argued that national indicators fail to capture many of the processes and contextual factors that influence adaptive capacity, and thus provide little insight on adaptive capacity as the level where most adaptation will take place.”1 Also it is important to take into account that the capacity to adapt to climate change is not evenly distributed within nation and must be differentiated within countries.2 It is unclear what criteria/metrics would be used to evaluate whether a country has moved from a lower to a higher range of adaptive capacity. More clarity on the evaluative framework to be used to measure progress within this indicator is required in order to make it operational. A clear baseline and indicative definitions of “low”, “intermediate” and “high” would be required for each country. In addition, quantitative approaches for assessing adaptive capacity need to be complemented with qualitative approaches to capture the full complexity and the various tangible and intangible aspects of adaptive capacity in its different dimensions.3 Furthermore, the indicator needs to take into consideration the gap between emission reduction action and the emission reduction trajectories that are necessary to limit warming to below 1.5 degree to ensure that the level of adaptation support rises commensurately if mitigation action is lacking. Finally, we recommend that a 1.5 degree limit to global warming should be used as the ceiling here, in order to avoid the worst effects of climate change.	Form submission and http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-climate-change-sdg
5	13.1.2 # of casualties and amount of economic losses	13.1.2 Amendment	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	We welcome the inclusion of indicators for strengthening the adaptive capacity of all countries to climate-related hazards and natural disasters. In its work the Statistical Commission should also take into account the contributions from technical bodies under the UNFCCC, in particular the Adaptation Committee and other expert group The meaning of this indicator 2, is unclear. Does it refer to the casualties and economic losses from all “climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries” or primarily to losses from all climate-change related disasters? Does it include all climate change impacts including slow-onset events? How would it plan to look at the attribution of damages, to climate change or only climate variability? In terms of a comprehensive assessment of damages, which is important, there is no adequate data basis yet available, why for example the UNFCCC Loss and Damage Mechanism will undertake work in this regard. Measuring economic losses in general is suited to impacts that are linked to market transactions and directly affect GDP. However, non-economic losses or indirect losses or expenses, e.g. on ecosystems, health, biodiversity and gender inequality are more difficult to measure. In addition, it is not clear if this indicator measures progress on achieving the target to increase adaptive capacity. Losses can just be smaller because less events have occurred in a particular region, but this is not an expression of a change in adaptive capacity. To make this indicator relevant, countries would need to agree on what to measure. **As one example the basic indicator from MDG7: CO2 emissions, total, per capita and per $1 GDP (PPP) is completely missing in this set of new proposed indicators. There is also no indication as to progress towards the aim of staying below 2 or 1.5 degree of warming.	Form submission and http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-climate-change-sdg
6		13.1.2 Amendment	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Noneconomic and economic loss and damage resulting from extreme weather and slow onset events (in dollars). UNFCCC Measured 1 and 3-5 years after the disaster to capture both, immediate and longer-term impact.	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
7		13.1 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	(a) Dimensions to be measured: - Resilience - Adaptive capacity (b) Proposed indicators: Percentage change in economic losses (as % of GDP) in a given time period Linkages: Goal 1, 2 (particularly target 2.4), 6, 11, other targets in 13. Disaggregation by: urban / rural, cities/municipalities. (TBC). It does not appear like data is disaggregated at this level, but as the data is recorded by disaster event, in which case, it is localised, it could be tracked back to a certain area. Sources: Proposed by UNSDSN (London, 2014). Data available at: UNISDR and http://www.emdat.be/database	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
8		13.1 New Proposed Indicator	Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign	Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal	Suggested indicator: Percentage of national and local climate change strategies that consider the role of cultural aspects in the promotion of environmental sustainability.	Form submission and http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf
9	Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning	13.2.1 Amendment	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	The indicators fail to measure what impact the policies and planning has, which ought to be the desired outcome of the goal and target. In particular, the indicators fail to address the issue of the goal objective: Take urgent action to combat climate change. We would suggest to have a disaggregated approach here, which distinguishes between mitigation-related and adaptation-related strategies (including those who address both in combination) and disaggregate information on if the area’s most prone to risk have been included.	http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-climate-change-sdg
10	13.2.1 # of countries which have formally communicated the establishment of integrated low-carbon, climate-resilient, disaster risk reduction development strategies (e.g. a national adaptation plan process)	13.2.1 Amendment	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	[Amended]: % of countries which have formally communicated the establishment of integrated low-carbon, climate-resilient, disaster risk reduction development strategies at different levels of government (e.g. a national and local adaptation plan process)	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
11		13.2.1 Amendment	Omoyemen Lucia Odigie-Emmanuel	Centre for Human Rights and Climate Change Research/ Gender Justice and Sustainable Development Network	To be added: # of countries which have formally reviewed their nationally policies, strategies and planning in order to mainstream and indicate climate change measures.	Form submission
12		13.2 New Proposed Indicator	Rosanna Marie Neil	Sustainable World Initiative	Carbon Footprint (production and consumption approaches)	Email
13		13.2 New Proposed Indicators	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Dimensions to be measured: - Climate change national policies, strategies and planning (a) Proposed indicators: - Total amount of GHG/CO2 emissions per capita / CO2 intensity (and by sector Linkages: Goal 11 Disaggregation by: municipalities/districts; sector Sources: UNFCCC Comments: Data sources to be reviewed and indicators developed. Non-SMART target difficult to operationalise and mostly include ‘process’ type of indicators. There is also a question of the extent to which this type of indicators is effective in driving change. (b) Proposed indicators: - Percentage of municipalities/districts with climate change mitigation/adaptation; risk reduction and resilience plans [to be developed] 1. Number of sector/departmental strategies (e.g. water, transport, energy) with climate resilience and disaster risk reduction mainstreamed [to be developed] Linkages: 1, 2 (2.4), 6, 11, other targets in 13. Disaggregation by: Municipalities/district level, TBD. Sources: N/A. Limitations: Data not readily available. Indicator needs to be developed to collect disaggregated data along these lines. (c) Proposed indicators: -Percentage/number of national and local annual budgets committed to with climate change mitigation/adaptation, reducing disaster risk and building resilience [to be developed] Linkages: 1, 2 (2.4), 6, 11, other targets in 13. Disaggregation by: Municipalities/district level, TBD. Sources: N/A. Limitations: Data not readily available. Indicator needs to be developed to collect disaggregated data along these lines.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
14		13.2 New Proposed Indicator	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	Proposed: Total amount of GHC/CO2 emissions per capita /CO2 intensity (and by sector) – (disaggregated by geographic area).	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
15		13.2 New Proposed Indicator	Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign	Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal	Proposed (same as 13.1): “Percentage of national and local climate change strategies that consider the role of cultural aspects in the promotion of environmental sustainability.”	Form submission
16		13.2 New Proposed Indicator	Lars Vogelsang	Global2020	Rate of improvement in carbon productivity (the amount of economic output achieved for a given amount of CO2 emission) The target strives to integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning, the success of which would result in a gradual improvement of the ratio between real GDP and carbon dioxide emissions. GDP should be expressed in constant international dollars (in order to adjust for inflation). This indicator is similar to Indicator 7.b.1 (rate of improvement in energy productivity). It does not imply a requirement to reduce CO2 emissions; instead it provides room for economic growth and development. The indicator is outcome-oriented and would complement input-related Indicator 13.2.1. Rating: ABA. The similar Indicator, 7.b.1, is rated BBA, but for both indicators feasibility is good.	http://www.global2015.net/factsheets/
17		13.2 New Proposed Indicator	Emily Auckland	Bioregional	i) National consumption based carbon footprints ii) National carbon footprints for key sectors, including industry and commerce, transport, public services and housing. These are total, global CO2 emissions associated with a nation’s consumption (including emissions occurring outside its borders but attributable to its imports, but excluding those emissions from within its borders attributable to exports). Some developed nations already report on this – see, for example, www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uks-carbon-footprint	https://www.dropbox.com/s/4b69zmbaeagcmhl/Bioregional-Emily_Submission%20to%20UNGLS.xlsx?dl=0
18	Target 13.3: Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning	13.3 General Comment	Omoyemen Lucia Odigie-Emmanuel	Centre for Human Rights and Climate Change Research/ Gender Justice and Sustainable Development Network	To be added: # of countries which have integrated climate change education in their community civic education, media and nationally orientation	Form submission
19		13.3 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	An indicator on integration of mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning into education curricula should to have impact on youth development (for those with access to education). Age- (and sex-) disaggregation of data will allow for monitoring progress for young men and women	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
20	13.3.1 # of countries that have integrated mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula	13.3.1 Amendment	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	This indicator is a good first step to measure target 13.3. The indicator could however be strengthened by giving greater importance to the second part of the target “improve (…) human and institutional capacity”. It will be not only to include the issues of climate change in the school curricula but also to train teachers and professors to enable them to explain climate change causes and effects in a comprehensive manner.	http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-climate-change-sdg
21	13.3.2 % of population with increased knowledge on climate change, disaggregated by sex and age	13.3.1 Amendment	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	We suggest adding qualitative approaches to measuring climate change knowledge and institutional capacity such as evidence of government capacity and coordination mechanisms or human capacity to respond to climate change related issues including adaptation, mitigation and resilience building.	http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-climate-change-sdg
22	Means of Implementation: 13.a Implement the commitment undertaken by developed-country parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to a goal of mobilizing jointly $100 billion annually by 2020 from all sources to address the needs of developing countries in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation and fully operationalize the Green Climate Fund through its capitalization as soon as possible	13.a General Comment and New Proposed Indicators	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	Climate finance should be specifically marked and tracked in order to assure that it is predictable and additional to resources provided towards existing aid commitments (such as the 0,7% target) or to current flows where these aid commitments are already being met. Also, the $100 billion commitment does not start in 2020, but should be reached by 2020 (scaling-up from current levels), which is why the measurement of the indicator should not only begin in 2020. Measuring the public finance increase within the 100bn would be a more effective approach. It is important to take into account the UNFCCC Standing Committee on Finance work in this regard, which in 2015 is mandated to further work on the question of “mobilisation”, which is not yet defined and therefore also difficult to measure. The GCF-related indicator goes far beyond what the target indicates, because it would measure the extent to which national finance would sustain programmes funded by the GCF. This is inappropriate. Better indicator would be to measure:  Amount of public finance provided by developed countries in a given year, disaggregated into grants, concessional loans, non-concessional loans and other flows (to be specified) and disaggregated by sector (adaptation, mitigation, REDD+, crosscutting, other).  Amount of additional private finance flows mobilised in a given year, disaggregated into flows mobilised through the provision of public finance, through policy interventions and through other means (to be specified) and disaggregated by sector (adaptation, mitigation, REDD+, cross-cutting, other).  Amount of finance disbursed by the Green Climate Fund, in a given year, disaggregated into grants, concessional loans, and other flows (to be specified) and disaggregated by sector (adaptation, mitigation, REDD+, cross-cutting, other).	http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-climate-change-sdg
23	13.a.1 Mobilized amount of USD per year starting in 2020 accountable towards the USD 100 billion commitment	13.a.1 Amendment	Caribbean Policy Development Centre and Robert Bakiika	Caribbean Policy Development Centre and Environmental Management for Livelihood Improvement Bwaise Facility (EMLI)	Should be edited to indicate that USD 100 billion is to be mobilized by 2020 NOT after 2020.	Form submission
24	13.a.2 % of GCF funded projects finalized and sustained afterwards through national funding to produce climate neutral solutions	13.a.2 Amendment	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	Should be edited to indicated committed funds as opposed to only national resources which once again places the burden on developing countries	Form submission
25		13.a.2 Amendment	Robert Bakiika	Environmental Management for Livelihood Improvement Bwaise Facility (EMLI)	Should be edited to reflect the UNFCCC language i.e. Financial Mechanism. Green Climate Fund is part of the financial entities under the convention finance mechanism. Other entities such as Global Environment Facility (GEF), Adaptation Fund and others MUST be reflected.	Form submission
26	Means of Implementation: 13.b Promote mechanisms for raising capacity for effective climate change-related planning and management in least developed countries, including focusing on women, youth and local and marginalized communities	No general comments received			No general comments received
27	13.b.1 # of LDCs that are receiving specialized support for mechanisms for raising capacities for effective climate change related planning and management, including focusing on women, youth, local and marginalized communities	13.b.1 Amendment	Lina Dabbagh	Climate Action Network	Just looking at the number of LDCs does not address the purpose of this target. A way of quantifying the support would be more adequate. We suggest adding % of women, youth and local and marginalised communities participating in climate change related planning, training and management bodies/mechanisms.	http://www.climatenetwork.org/publication/can-briefing-paper-measuring-what-matters-climate-change-sdg


1	GOAL 16: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	Klaus Lehn Christensen	Nonviolence International	We still see plenty of gaps related to measuring progress on the Goal 16 Targets. [...] In order to truly make Goal 16 about promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, Nonviolence International in cooperation with the Global Movement for a Culture of Peace is proposing that the Program of Action (PoA) for a Culture of Peace be used as a guideline for developing indicators under Goal 16 because of it’s comprehensiveness on these issues. The GA Resolution (53/243 A) and subsequent PoA of a Culture of Peace, was adopted by consensus by the General Assembly back in September 1999. Its role as the historical link between The Vienna Declaration on Human Rights and the MDGs should be recognized. And in cooperation with the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) we would like to propose a second source of inspiration from the Program of Action (PoA) to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects, which was adopted in 2001. The strength and importance of this PoA is its comprehensiveness on this issue as well as having been verified by its extensive real world application. Furthermore, it has been politically reaffirmed at the highest level with the Security Council resolution on small arms (26 September 2013), and finally in December 2014 with the adoption of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which currently has been ratified by 66 national parliaments. Our overall assessment of the survey responses from some Member States, not all, included in the Statistical Commission’s report, is that it is unnecessarily negative, not taking into account existing capacities for measuring the proposed indicators. Our message is that Goal 16 is measurable. On a global scale we already have plenty of experience of measuring these issues that we think should be included in the indicator framework. In the following, we present and support indicators already effectively in use, such as the ones applied by Global Peace Index, Small Arms Survey, SIPRI, and Saferworld. However, we still see plenty of gaps related to measuring progress on the Goal 16 Targets. We also present new indicator proposals in the following. They also include qualitative indicators based on surveys that reflect how local people on the ground feel. While recognizing the multidimensionality of policy goals, we argue that it should not imply that we should be aggregating fundamentally different things as it may produce questionable result. At this early stage of the indicator framework, we advocate that there is a need for developing additional indicators that can help decision makers, not least National Statistical Offices (NSOs), decide on a qualified, comprehensive indicator framework. To that end, we strongly encourage stakeholders to actively use the PoA for a Culture of Peace as a guideline for your work with developing Indicators.	https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2pF9xzLTkYZNFhWV1pPa0FKS0U&authuser=0
3		General	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	- Overall, the report is not very positive for G16, but also across the framework. Nonetheless, it is clear that the G16 indicators will need more work and engagement. - Many Member States are calling for a limited number of global indicators. However, setting artificial limits on number of global indicators at this stage when the technical work on indicators is in its early stages might actually undermine Member States desire to ensure all goals and targets are treated equitably as some targets might not be measured effectively at the indicator-level. [N.B. When considering G16, best practice strongly suggests use of basket of indicators: if number of indicators is limited, very restricted space to advance this approach]. We should be pushing for the highest ambition - even if it takes 14 years for most member states to develop capacities to measure an ambitious framework that would be a good result for our community. We should not only be pushing for what we can monitor today, but what we want to be monitoring comprehensively by 2030. Of course we need some indicators and baselines to start, but if we start with low ambition we’ll move very slowly, and we’ll be having this conversation again when we’re all 15 years older. - Many Member States have also endorsed use of indicators that measure progress towards multiple targets. However, we need to think carefully about this. The risk is that indicators that measure multiple targets don't actually measure said target(s) (meaning certain targets could simply fall off the agenda) or could have the effect of creating perverse incentives. Other key messages: - Goal 16 is measurable. We have plenty of experience of measuring these issues. - The report makes clear it is initial thoughts, not comprehensive and "have not been endorsed by national experts". - NSOs are generally conservative and cautious. We need to ensure that the ambition of the SDGs is communicated to them and that they are in turn ambitious. - NSOs generally draw on administrative data, only a few have started polling people on experiences and perceptions – this has implications in terms of how they assess the indicators. - "Feasible” under what conditions? Did they ask NSOs if this is feasible today, with their existing budgets and capacities? - Finally, the limited capacities of NSOs only support the case for building partnerships with third parties: international organisations, private companies, NGOs, who collect data.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
4		General	John Romano	TAP Network	As the world looks beyond 2015, the principles of transparency, accountability and participation are critical in the design, implementation and monitoring of our progress towards sustainable development. Nowhere is this more important than when thinking about the indicators that will be selected to set a baseline for where we are at currently, and to measure advances to where we want to be in 2030. In the current framework, Goal 16 is the centerpiece for these principles. Its targets address peace, access to information and justice, open and effective institutions and decision-making, and fighting corruption and illicit flows, among other areas. Yet these issues go beyond Goal 16, and are inherently interconnected to the achievement of all other SDGs. Evidence from across the world - including in countries in the global north and south - shows that it is feasible to measure targets under Goal 16 through official and third party data. A wide variety of data currently exists from reliable sources that have been collected for a number of years and at multiple levels, including administrative information from governments and third party data from the UN and other multilateral institutions, civil society organizations, research institutions, academia and the private sector. This is true, for example, when it comes to corruption and bribery, access to birth registration and other forms of legal identity, access to information, illicit financial flows, budget transparency, levels of violence, access to justice, rule of law, accountability and citizen participation. For Goal 16, this is a unique opportunity to change the way data is collected on transparent, participatory and accountable governance and institutions, as well as on wider issues related to peaceful and inclusive societies. It would mean moving beyond a piecemeal approach to a more comprehensive data collection and monitoring process.	http://tapnetwork2015.org/our-work/sdg-goal-16-indicators/
5		General	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	• Despite low ratings in the survey, the targets proposed under Goal 16 are measurable. Indicator mapping exercises demonstrate that official and third-party data do exist today for Goal 16 which allow for global-level monitoring of country progress on these targets.	Form submission
6		General	Peter Chapman	Open Society Justice Initiative	Particularly for Goal 16, we would encourage the Statistical Commission to explore the use of baskets of indicators. Progress towards justice and safety themes can be non-linear and difficult to track through administrative data alone. We share the negotiator’s desire to avoid overburdening states with data collection, but baskets of indicators across targets and Goal 16 offer the opportunity to capture varied experiences.	Form submission
7		General	Bill Orme	Global Forum for Media Development	Excerpts from the Report: Monitoring Access to Information in the SDGs: Indicators, Issues and Practical Solutions In the entire set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets proposed by the Open Working Group, draft Target 10 of draft Goal 16 is the sole provision that would explicitly require UN members to provide the information that would show if the new global goals are on track to being met – or not. The inclusion of a clear ‘access to information’ commitment in the SDGs has been consistently supported by civil society participants in post-2015 consultations as well as by the UN’s expert advisors on the new global goals, including in the reports of the Secretary General’s High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons and Independent Expert Advisory Group on the “Data Revolution for Sustainable Development.” The civil society coalition co-organized by the Global Forum for Media Development and Article 19 offered a set of ‘illustrative indicators’ for freedom of information and media in the SDGs, based on international data sets and normative assessments already used in the UN and elsewhere in the international intergovernmental system (vi). How can ‘Access to Information’ be measured? Such an assessment must of necessity be multidimensional, examining compliance by governments with their affirmative responsibility to provide the public with information that should be in the public domain; the objective ability of ordinary people to get and use that information, electronically and otherwise; and the overall legal and political environment for the open public exchange and analysis and discussion of that information and its implications for national and global development. These are interlocking, mutually reinforcing conditions for ensuring genuine public access to information, and necessarily include different kinds of indicators, from the quantifiable to the analytical. The June 2014 suggestions from the GFMD-Article 19 civil society coalition for ‘illustrative indicators’ for freedom of information and media in the SDGs reflected this interdisciplinary complexity, yet were based on data sets and normative assessments now used in the UN and broader intergovernmental system. As noted, the coalition further suggested that UNESCO be tasked with coordinating the monitoring of these indicators for the post-2015 agenda. There are three core categories of available indicators that could be used to monitor progress towards freedom of information in the context of the SDGs 1) Access to information: Constitutional and/or statutory guarantees of public access to public-sector information Legal requirements for governments to provide public access to official information are widely seen as a minimal and easily verifiable indication of compliance with an access-to-information target in the post-2015 SDGs. Most UN member-states have already adopted such legislation, most during the past decade; many others have proposed laws that are now under consideration. 2) Affordable, effective Internet access: moving to universality This is not only measurable, but is in fact already measured for the Millennium Development Goals, by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU)ix. The ITU is an active member of both the UN’s MDGs-monitoring Expert Inter-Agency Group (EIAG) and its Working Group on 'Monitoring and Indicators' for the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda, which is co-chaired by DESA and UNDP. There is broad agreement among UN expert advisors that a target of basic Internet access for all people by 2030 is logistically and economically attainable. Universal Internet access is seen as essential not only for the proposed access-to-information target of draft SDG 16, but for tracking and achieving all the proposed new goals, both nationally and globally. To be truly accessible in the 21st century, information must be available online to all people, openly and affordably. That applies to all information, both governmental and nongovernmental, including official statistics and other public-sector records; independently reported news; academic research; civil society data and analysis; and the full range of exploration and expression in the arts and sciences. People must also have access to the requisite Internet tools to gather and share and discuss all this information from all these sources if an SDG ‘access to information’ target is to be meaningful. That is the new baseline for informed civic engagement in the digital age. Internet access is also now essential for public education, public health, environmental protection and individual and national income generation – all core components of human development. Mobile phone penetration and Internet usage data – collected and updated annually by the International Telecommunications Union – provides a good statistical proxy for measuring the availability and affordability of public access to online information. The MDGs already include such metrics as the final entries in their own set of indicators, under Goal 8, which track the per capita number of fixed-telephones, mobile phones and Internet users. Between 2000 and 2014, the percentage of people worldwide with regular Internet access increased eightfold, to more than 40 percent, while the share of people with mobile phones rose from less than 10 percent to an astonishing 95 percent, the ITU reported. Yet those global figures disguise wide national and regional variances, with most less-developed countries falling far below those international medians. Closing that digital divide will require the kinds of additional resources and policy shifts that global development goals are designed to catalyze. What more to measure in the digital realm? While fixed-line telephone service may no longer be a significant development indicator, broadband and ‘smart phone’ use and access are likely to remain relevant for many years to come. More important will be data tracking the expansion of fiber-optic cable and high-speed satellite services and per capita online data consumption. As technology continues to evolve, the optimal metrics for measuring online information access will also inevitably change; indicators selected for the SDGs should explicitly authorize and indeed encourage continual innovation in these measurement tools by the ITU and other specialized multilateral agencies. 3) Press freedom and protection of journalists: UNESCO’s role Press freedom is a precondition for public access to information. Without independent media dissemination and debate and analysis, information from governments and others - including data directly pertinent to the proposed SDGs - would not even reach most people in world, much less be considered both significant and credible. And that requires a media environment where journalists can operate safely and openly, without fear of legal persecution or physical attack. The UNESCO-IPDC Framework for Media Development Indicators These UN-endorsed guidelines (xvi) for the development and protection of independent news media may be the most useful tool of all for assessing access-to-information progress in the SDGs. The indicators are comprehensive and universal yet can be tailored to different national circumstances. They do not lend themselves to artificially arithmetic rankings. In keeping with the principle of universality that is guiding the SDGs process, all countries can find areas for potential improvement highlighted by these media development indicators. This ‘framework’ was developed with support from other UN agencies and unanimously endorsed by the UNESCO-IPDC governing body of UN member-states and has already been used for voluntary national media assessments in more than a dozen countries. The UNESCO-IPDC Framework is also available to guide UN country teams in their support for independent media associations and related civil society institutions; government regulatory bodies for broadcast media; election commissions; journalism training projects; and general assessments of democratic governance. UN Action Plan on Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity Endorsed by the UN Chief Executives Board on 12 April 2012, with UNDP and UNESCO sharing responsibility for its implementation, the Plan of Actionxvii aims to create a “free and safe environment for journalists and media workers, both in conflict and non-conflict situations, with a view to strengthening peace, democracy and development worldwide.” It includes a UN inter-agency mechanism to coordinate support for the safety of journalists and assist countries in developing legislation “favorable to freedom of expression and information.” Most important, in the context of the SDGs, the annual reporting to the Secretary-General already required by this UN initiative can readily be incorporated into the annual monitoring process for the post-2015 Goals. And it should. As the UN’s post-2015 advisers have stressed, public access to information is essential to the SDGs, and that cannot be achieved without independent media and guaranteed freedom of expression and inquiry. ### - Bill Orme, UN Representative, GFMD (November 2014)	Form submission and http://gfmd.info/en/site/news/720/GFMD-Policy-paper-released--Monitoring-Access-to-Information-in-the-SDGs-Indicators-Issues-and-Practical-Solutions.htm
8		General	Martin Edwards	Seton Hall University - Center for UN and Global Governance Studies	As work moves forward to complete the proposed Sustainable Development Goals, a working list of preliminary indicators for each of the goals recently circulated online. This list of indicators was developed by the UN Statistics Division and was shared with National Statistics Offices. Rather than talk about each of the goals and their indicators in detail, I will build on my previous discussions of the Governance SDG, which is Goal 16. As with the previous work, I will focus more on the expressly political elements of Goal 16, and put aside the peace and violence components of the goal. There are four points worth noting: 1) Official Statistics Have Their Limits. Some of the public commentary on SDG 16 recognized an important issue at the outset. Many of the things that Goal 16 is intended to measure, namely measures of a state’s degree of transparency and accountability, do not have their basis in official state statistics. It is not hard to understand why this is the case. Even if national level measures of these concepts existed, some states would most certainly not release them. One of the findings of academic research on variations in levels of country transparency is that democratic regimes are more transparent, which is a finding that is robust across studies, measures, and model specifications. As a result, some of the proposed indicators for some of the targets under Goal 16 (namely 16.3, 16.6, and 16.7) rely on public surveys that do not exist in many countries. These will need to be constructed, and there are financial implications for this, of course. But the larger point remains that our measures for these targets (Promoting rule of law and ensuring equal access to justice; Developing effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels; and Ensuring responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels) are based not on actual measures of these phenomena, but on perceptual measures of citizens of these phenomena. Responsiveness, transparency, and accountability will become what citizens think they are. Given that we live in a world in which state power is used to oppress as well as create, the danger of this becoming a largely semantic exercise is a real one. 2) Paths not taken in indicator development. It is worth contrasting this approach with one articulated by Mary Hilderbrand in a paper developed for the Copenhagen Consensus Project. Many of the indicators proposed in this paper are based on existing measures developed elsewhere. The World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators, Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, Freedom House country ratings, and data from the CIRI Human Rights Data Project are all included as possible indicators in addition to country surveys. As I note elsewhere, many additional indicators in this area exist, and many have been developed by academics in their own empirical research. While relying on indices developed elsewhere may produce political problems (in that the UN Statistics Division would be largely endorsing already existing measures not developed by countries themselves), they do bring with them several important correctives. Not only are they are more likely to be impartial, but they might also bring us closer to actually measuring the concepts we’re trying to study. This is important in light of my next point. 3) The dangers of conceptual slippage. One of the things that was genuinely exciting about the High Level Panel Report was its insistence on the importance of good governance as a development necessity: Responsive and legitimate institutions should encourage the rule of law, property rights, freedom of speech and the media, open political choice, access to justice, and accountable government and public institutions. This theme was restated in the Secretary General’s Synthesis Report: We also know that participatory democracy, free, safe, and peaceful societies are both enablers and outcomes of development. And herein lies a problem. The proposed indicators are not measures of political freedom or participatory democracy. In their stead are measures of state capacity. This is not necessarily a bad thing, since we know that stronger states are less prone to state failure. But from the standpoint of those advocating greater transparency and accountability, this is a case of overpromising and underdelivering. We will not know from the surveys for the indicators noted above whether countries are more or less free or whether there are actual choices at the ballot box. 4) The Coming Challenge. The inherent limits of these proposed indicators invite both reflection and strategy. Our goal should be to get the indicators we need for the world we want. Even if we are left in a world of “second best” indicators for Goal 16, the challenge is to use other pieces of information from sources not referenced in the proposed list of indicators to call attention to their shortcomings. This is where many of the organizations that develop these indicators can play an important role to speak truth to measures.	Form submission and http://blogs.shu.edu/unstudies/2015/03/09/proposed-sdg-indicators-and-governance-rule-of-law-or-simply-rule/
9		General	Renaude Gregoire	SSA Social Justice Office	We support this indicator: "Rate of population displacement due to violence" (see: CIGI/ KDI, Post-2015 Development Agenda : Goals, Targets and Indicators, p. 41) According to the UN Strategic Results Framework on Women, Peace and Security 2011-2020 ( July 2011), we support these indicators: Percent of "women among mediators, negociators and technical experts in formal peace negociations" and "women’s participation in official observer status, at the beginning and the end of formal peace negociations." Add the indicator suggested by Indigenous Peoples Major Group: "Legislative provisions ensuring implementation of FPIC before any development project that may affect IP lands, territories and natural resources. -Number of participatory impact assessment reviews implemented by extractive industries and major developments with IPs communities " (See: page 13, http://www.stakeholderforum.org/fileadmin/files/SD2015%20Position_Paper_IndigenousPeoples.pdf) We need to present human rights indicators for migrants and their families. As part of a transformative agenda for the post-2015 era for victims of human trafficking, we suggest the indicator : Percent of national and transnational human trafficking victims received protection, support and assistance. Add the indicator: Percent of military expenditure as a proportion of total national expenditure. We support this indicator: "Proportion of border enforcement personnel following codes of conduct and having received human rights training"	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/view
10	Target 16.1: Signicantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere	16.1 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	If data for the SD proposal indicators could be disaggregated by age it would allow for youth specific analysis The 3rd TSD cluster indicator that did not get included, could be recommended for consideration for national and/or regional level (while ideally ensuring disaggregation of data to allow for youth relevant analysis)	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
11	16.1.1 Homicide and conflict-related deaths per 100,000 people	16.1.1 Amendment	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	[Amended Indicator]: Homicide and conflict-related deaths per 100,000 people (disaggregated by age, sex and cause)	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
12		16.1.1 Amendment	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	[Amended Indicator]: Violent injuries, deaths and homicide rates (per 1,000,000 habitants) Linkages: 11.7 Disaggregation by: homicides by gender/ injuries by type, sex and age/geographical breakdowns TBC (Some disaggregated data for most populous cities) Sources: Interpol, UN Crime Trends Survey, UNODC, WHO Mortality Database. Limitations: Data partially available.
13	16.1.2 Percentage of the adult population aged 18 and older, subjected to violence within the last 12 months, by type (physical, psychological and/or sexual)	16.1.2 General Comment	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Percentage of the adult population subjected to physical, psychological or sexual violence within the last 12 months. Through focusing on violence aside from death, this ‘objective’ indicator is relevant to the target as a broader measure of personal security and social peacefulness. Data for this indicator can be gathered through victimisation surveys. For example, the International Crime Victimization Survey has been conducted in 80 countries. Nonetheless, to date, these studies have not been consistent in coverage and are only conducted every five years. Another household survey with questions on gender-based violence is the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS). Modules on violence within DHS surveys need to be requested by host governments, so significant capacity would need to be invested to produce annual, global datasets. Definitional differences between countries would also need to be addressed. The universal use of this indicator is therefore feasible but challenging.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
14		16.1 New Proposed Indicator	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Reduce by x% the number of violent deaths and ensure people from all social groups feel safe.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
15		16.1 New Proposed Indicators	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Homicides per 100,000. As a widely used ‘objective’ indicator that draws on administrative records from law enforcement and public health authorities, this indicator can be used as one source for the ‘x%’ in Target One. Intentional homicide is usually defined as the unlawful death purposefully inflicted on a person by another person, though specific definitions can vary between contexts. It generally does not include homicides judged to be a “legal intervention” (i.e. at the hands of security services), conflict deaths, and may not include deaths in some crisis situations. UNODC currently produces annual data for 219 countries and territories annually. However, its data largely rely on reporting by authorities and gaps exist at this level. For example, in 2012, 70 countries did not collect any homicide data. This means that existing data in some cases rely on estimates created using WHO household survey data. As such, this indicator will require further development despite its evident feasibility. Total number of deaths from armed conflict. This ‘objective’ indicator can also be used to measure the ‘x%’ of target one. While it could be combined with indicator 1.1 to aggregate deaths per 100,000, there is also a case for keeping it separate in order to allow for differentiation between types of violence within and between countries.20 There are few existing official data sources on conflict deaths, but a number of organisations currently collate global data on conflict deaths using different definitions and methodologies. For example, the Uppsala Conflict Database Program (UCDP) draws on media reports, other secondary sources and experts to count battle-related deaths in conflicts where more than 25 people are killed (it also collates data on “one-sided violence” and “non-state violence” which could feasibly be included). However, reliance on events data reporting currently used for collecting data on armed conflict risks missing deaths that go unreported. Furthermore, deaths from some forms of conflictrelated violence – such as riots – may be omitted due to definitional boundaries. Significant efforts will need to be made to harmonise definitions and sources, make them more comprehensive, and improve methods of data collection. Nonetheless, in general, this is a feasible indicator for universal use. Number of people per 100,000 displaced due to violence. This indicator would add a further measurement of a country’s level of peacefulness. UNHCR collects data on numbers of refugees while the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) collects data on global levels of internal displacement from national governments, international organisations and the media. While global data have been published annually since 2008 by IDMC for 161 countries, country-specific data are currently restricted to displacement from natural disasters – and therefore are not displayed graphically here. Given that the administrative records on displacement due to violence are held by a number of governments, UN agencies and NGOs, getting timely and accurate data for this target would require harmonisation and partnerships rather than significant capacity building. This makes the indicator relatively feasible for universal use. Number of police and judicial personnel per homicide. Through measuring the number of personnel, this indicator can help illustrate the state’s capacity to prevent, investigate and adjudicate cases of homicide. Nonetheless, the indicator does not measure the quality of this capacity. Furthermore, increases in capacity – especially as measured in personnel – may not always correlate with reductions in homicide or wider peacefulness in society. Indeed, increasing the number of personnel may be driven by the state’s response to an increase in violence. As such, this indicator would need to be used carefully and be validated alongside other indicators. Nonetheless, the indicator is relatively feasible given that UNODC already collects relevant annual data on police and judicial personnel as well as homicide rates for a number of countries.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
16		16.1 New Proposed Indicator	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Percentage of people who report that they feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live. This perception indicator is a direct measure of people’s sense of security. It may not always be comparable between contexts: for example, people living in highly insecure areas may become habituated to violence and underestimate threats while those living in safer environments may inflate risks on the basis of media reporting or rumour. Furthermore, mainstream global perception surveys do not always have data from the most fragile contexts and/ or are affected by political restrictions on what they can ask. This indicator is being used by some NSOs, but is also collected on a global basis through Gallup’s annual World Poll, which covers 95% of the world’s population. Alternatively, the indicator could be packaged into other household or victimisation surveys in the future and could be used universally with little difficulty.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
17		16.1 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Proposed Indicator: Refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) caused by conflict and violence Linkages: N/A. Disaggregation by: By territory of residence (or refugees by country / territory of asylum), location of residence (within country), country of origin (refugees), gender, age and population type. Sources: UNHCR. Comments: For the target to be SMART it requires clarification of what ‘significantly reduce’ means.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
18		16.1 New Proposed Indicators	Klaus Lehn Christensen	Nonviolence International	We support the proposal by IANSA for the following indicator for this target: - Investment in peace education leading to reduction in desire to use Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW), measured as a) Money invested, and b) Number of peace education programs (quantitative, data source - IANSA) Based on Strengthening Action No. 16 of the PoA laid out in Resolution 53/243 regarding a culture of peace, we propose three indicators already implemented in the work of the Global Peace Index: - Level of internally organized conflict (qualitative, data source Economist Intelligence Unit) - Volume of deaths from organized conflict (international), (quantitative, data sources International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) / Armed Conflict Database (ACD)). - Number of internal and external conflicts fought (quantitative, data source Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP)) Also based on the same Strengthening Action No. 16, we are also in support of a proposal by Saferworld for thefollowing indicator under this target: - Percentage of people who report that they feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live (qualitative, data source heads of household surveys)	https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2pF9xzLTkYZNFhWV1pPa0FKS0U&authuser=0
19	Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, tracking and all forms of violence against and torture of children	16.2 General Comment	Klaus Lehn Christensen	Nonviolence International	We support the proposal by IANSA for the following indicator for this target: - Number of community and traditional leaders involved in the fight to end child abuse, exploitation and trafficking (quantitative, data source International Action Network on Small Arms IANSA)	https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2pF9xzLTkYZNFhWV1pPa0FKS0U&authuser=0
20		16.2 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	The indicators need to be very comprehensive, and needs to take into account actual reductions, and under reporting. First indicator of direct relevance to monitoring youth development progress Number of trafficking victims is likely to include disproportionately large number of young people., compared to other age groups SDSN indicator could be recommended for consideration as national and/or regional level indicator	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
21	16.2.1 Percentage of young adults aged 18-24 years who have experienced violence by age 18, by type (physical, psychological and/or sexual)	16.2.1 Amendment	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	This ‘objective’ indicator captures a specific type of violence against children, being reported by adults retrospectively. Sexual violence affects children across the world and measuring its prevalence would indicate progress against the wider objective of the target as a whole. Data on violence against children is only currently being collected every five years or so in a handful of DHS and UNICEF’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS). However, with sufficient investment, data for this indicator could be collected through these existing tools and methodologies more frequently and/or through individual surveys. This makes it a feasible but challenging indicator.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
22	16.2.2 Number of victims of human trafficking per 100,000 people	No specific input received			No specific input received
23		16.2.1 New Proposed Indicators	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	Percentage of young women and men aged 18-24 years who experienced sexual violence by age 18 Additional indicator: Percentage of children aged 1-14 years who experienced any physical punishment by caregivers in the past month Rational for Amend: While this indicator captures only one of the gravest forms of violence against children rather than being inclusive of all forms, it can be considered a proxy indicator that reflects a key aspect of the change we want to observe in order to achieve the target of elimination of VAC. It is universally relevant and has recently been high on political agendas. Again, refers to only one specific form, but it is the most widespread, and socially accepted, type of violence against children and will provide a good indication of children’s overall exposure to violence. It is universally relevant.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
24		16.2.1 New Proposed Indicators	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	ADD: • Percentage of young women and men aged 18-24 years who have experienced sexual violence by age 18 • Percentage of children aged 1-14 years who experienced any physical punishment by caregivers in the last month	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
25		16.2 New Proposed Indicators	Elinor Milne	Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children	We suggest that indicators on prohibition and elimination of violent punishment of children be included under target 16.2 (“End abuse, exploitations, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children”) of the proposed Sustainable Development Goals. We suggest these two indicators: 1. Number of countries which have prohibited all corporal punishment of children, including in the family home. 2. Percentage of children aged 1-14 years who experienced any physical punishment by caregivers in the past month. Violent punishment of children, in the family home and other settings of their lives, is the most common form of violence against children, and clear baselines for measuring progress towards its prohibition and elimination have been developed. These indicators are therefore both very relevant and easily feasible. Please see the paper linked to below for more detail.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw8hHssF1uCEUXM5U2JINkFzM3c/view
26		16.2 New Proposed Indicator	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Percentage of children aged 1–14 years who experienced any physical punishment by caregivers in the past month. This ‘objective’ indicator focuses on a more specific type of violence against children – and the most common one. As such, it arguably presents the best picture of the exposure of children to violence. Relevant data has been collected in a small number of low- and middle-income countries since 2005 through DHS and MICS surveys. While standardised and validated approaches to gathering data for this indicator exist, it would still require harmonisation of national household surveys and use in a far greater number of countries on an annual basis. Moreover, given that it directly measures young children’s exposure to violence, collection of data for this indicator must be sensitive and would be challenging in some contexts where honest responses are hard to attain. As such it is a feasible but challenging indicator for universal use.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
27		16.2 New Proposed Indicator	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	Sustainable development starts with protecting childhood. International human rights frameworks grant children special attention, recognizing their special vulnerability. However, in the technical report there is a very weak focus on children. While we invite you to consider our proposal of indicators (see submitted link) for greater focus on children, here we note: We ask to monitor the yearly reduction in the number of children who are separated from their families because of violence, abuse or neglect. Proposed Indicator: Yearly reduction in the number of children who are separated from their families because of violence, abuse or neglect Rationale: Violence against children does not take place only in conflict contexts. It mostly occurs in those settings that are meant to provide children with care and protection, like the home. For example, a study of SOS Children’s Villages found that in Uruguay an estimated 55% of children enter alternative care as a result of domestic violence; in Lithuania 72% of children are placed in alternative care due to neglect or use of physical or psychological violence. In this respect, state investment in family strengthening programmes is crucial to prevent violence against children, and indicator 22 should be used as an outcome indicator, to track progress on a yearly basis. Methodology and Data Source: Information can be collected through administrative data from local authorities like child protection and social assistance offices. NGOs can help UN agencies collecting information in contexts where administrative data are not available.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view
28		16.2 New Proposed Indicator	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	Percentage of children aged 1-14 years who experienced any physical punishment by caregivers in the past month Rationale: Between 80% and 98% of children suffer physical punishment in their homes, with a third or more experiencing severe physical punishment resulting from the use of implements31 the most common type of violence against children, and provides a good indication of children’s overall exposure to physical violence. The term “caregivers” broadens the scope since children can be exposed to violence from a variety of actors charged with their care, and leaves space for the potential future development of methodologies and data collection tools for gathering information about the use of physical punishment in settings other than the home. Methodology and Data Source: The indicator is a collective proposal of the main child-focused agencies (CFA). There is an existing, standardized and validated measurement tool (the CTS) that is widely accepted and that has been implemented in a large number of countries. Data has been collected for more than one point in time from several countries.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view
29		16.2 New Proposed Indicators	Bob van Dillen	MADE - Migration and Development Network	- Increase in number of bilateral and regional agreements that engage countries of origin in measures to prevent human trafficking - Increase in number of governments and companies screening supply chains for forced labour and child labour and reporting on it - Increase in number of prosecutions of organized trafficking syndicates and traffickers, with stiffer sentences - Increase in number of countries with laws, programmes and budgets that specifically support identification, differentiation and referral for assistanceand protection to refugees, asylum-seekers and others in need of international protection; women; children; victims of torture, trauma, human trafficking and violence—including migrants in crisis situations and transit - Increase in number of countries implementing protection-sensitive training for law enforcement personnel on the complexities of human trafficking, mixed migration flows and the human and labour rights of migrants regardless of immigration status - Increase in number of civil society organizations (including shelters) that have access to public funding and protection for their migrant protection and assistance activities	https://www.dropbox.com/s/ladx2mva4hub952/MADE_Bob%20Dillen_SDG%20Indicators%20Migartion%20Targets.xlsx?dl=0
30		16.2 New Proposed Indicator	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	Number of countries with a multi-sector, costed and budgeted national plan of action for prevention and response to violence against children Rationale: The indicator aims to ensure that all children are afforded the right to protection from violence and abuse by 2030. It provides an indication of States’ response and commitment to implement plans and actions to prevent and respond to violence against children. Methodology and Data Source: The indicator is a collective proposal of the main child-focused agencies (CFA). Although no mechanisms to consistently measure such indicators currently exist, global monitoring can encourage States to translate into action their policy commitments as stated in signed/ratified international agreements.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view
31	Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all	16.3 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	16.3 SDSN indicator could be recommended for consideration as national and/or regional level indicator	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
32	16.3.1 Percentage of people who have experienced a dispute, reporting access to an adequate dispute resolution mechanism	16.3.1 Amendment	Matthew Simonds	International Trade Union Confederation	Percentage of people who have experienced a dispute, reporting access to an adequate dispute resolution mechanism and effective remedies	Form submission and http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf
33		16.3.1 Amendment	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	Assessment: While the indicators suggested by the UN Statistical Division could be pertinent, we believe our suggested indicators are more comprehensive and policy-responsive. The rule of law and justice are essential for their own sake, but also highly relevant to accountable fiscal governance—a prerequisite for the achievement of sustainable development. As also suggested by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN)iv, an indicator on compliance with recommendations from the international human rights monitoring mechanisms is key for ensuring policy coherence between sustainable development and human rights. We also highlight that this indicator is relevant for targets across the SDG framework. CA/CESR illustrative indicators: Share of government tax laws, budgetpolicies, public procurement and social service delivery subject to public and judicial oversight and review. Effective access to independent and responsive justice systems by all, in particular people living in poverty. Existence of an independent audit agency or other oversight body which carries out regular audits that are published in full. Level of implementation and enforcement of judicial decisions, in particular for tax fraud and tax evasion. Compliance with recommendations from the Universal Periodic Review and UN Treaty Bodies. Examples of methodologies, data sources: Open Budget Survey. European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (Europe only). The World Justice Project Rule of Law Index. Open Budget Survey. OHCHR; UPRInfo; Universal Rights Index	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
34	16.3.2 Percentage of total detainees who have been held in detention for more than 12 months while awaiting sentencing or a final disposition of their case	16.3.2 Amendment	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	Assessment: While the indicators suggested by the UN Statistical Division could be pertinent, we believe our suggested indicators are more comprehensive and policy-responsive. The rule of law and justice are essential for their own sake, but also highly relevant to accountable fiscal governance—a prerequisite for the achievement of sustainable development. As also suggested by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN)iv, an indicator on compliance with recommendations from the international human rights monitoring mechanisms is key for ensuring policy coherence between sustainable development and human rights. We also highlight that this indicator is relevant for targets across the SDG framework. CA/CESR illustrative indicators: Share of government tax laws, budgetpolicies, public procurement and social service delivery subject to public and judicial oversight and review. Effective access to independent and responsive justice systems by all, in particular people living in poverty. Existence of an independent audit agency or other oversight body which carries out regular audits that are published in full. Level of implementation and enforcement of judicial decisions, in particular for tax fraud and tax evasion. Compliance with recommendations from the Universal Periodic Review and UN Treaty Bodies. Examples of methodologies, data sources: Open Budget Survey. European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (Europe only). The World Justice Project Rule of Law Index. Open Budget Survey. OHCHR; UPRInfo; Universal Rights Index	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
35		16.3 New Proposed Indicators	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	- Number of people who voice confidence in the judicial system Percentage of people who voice confidence in the judicial system This perception indicator gathers people’s views on the judicial system – and is potentially a proxy of their confidence in the rule of law more widely. When used alongside other measures of justice, perception indicators can provide a validation of whether people believe that the justice system is fair and effective. Data are currently collected on this indicator through polling of individuals. For example, Gallup’s World Poll, which has extensive coverage from 2006, currently asks people about their confidence in the judicial system and courts. This indicator is restricted to perceptions of the formal judicial system but could feasibly be expanded to include views of the informal justice sector too. It could also be broadened through a focus on the rule of law. - World Justice Project combined score for effective criminal justice and access to civil justice World Justice Project combined score for effective criminal justice and access to civil justice This ‘objective’ indicator could provide a broader picture of justice in a country because it draws on a wide range of sources. The World Justice Project (WJP) collects global data on the rule of law under nine key areas, including measures of criminal justice effectiveness and access to civil justice. A score (where 0 = worst and 1 = best) is based on seven sub-factors for the former and nine sub-factors for the latter. Data are drawn from public polling and expert surveys of legal professionals. Data have been produced in waves since 2009; the number of countries covered has increased to 99. While the wide number of factors measured adds strength to this indicator, this also makes it complex and reliant on subjective weighting. Nonetheless, the approach used by the WJP could inform the global indicator framework’s focus on justice and should be seriously considered given the complexity of this target. Furthermore, the WJP has started collecting data on three sub-factors of informal justice: data gaps exist alongside challenges for cross-country comparison, but this promising and relatively unique approach may merit consideration as it develops in the future. - Number of professional judges or magistrates per 100,000 Number of professional judges or magistrates per 100,000 This capacity indicator measures differences in the ratio of judicial sector personnel to citizens. As such, while it may not measure outcomes for people and would need to be used alongside other indicators, it is potentially useful in assessing changes in the formal judicial system’s capacity to provide access. Data on this indicator is currently collected on an annual basis through the UNODC’s Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (UN-CTS). Coverage is currently limited, especially amongst developing countries, and only 64% of reporting countries have consistently provided data for more than six of the ten years currently covered. Definitional discrepancies are another challenge. Addressing these issues would not be insurmountable if the indicator was to be used on a universal basis. Nonetheless, a significant problem is that it does not measure the capacity of informal justice or dispute mechanisms, which may be widely used in some contexts.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
36		16.3 New Proposed Indicator	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Other indicators for consideration and/or further development: - Total untried/pre-trial persons held per 100,000 This ‘objective’ indicator demonstrates how effectively a formal judicial system is administering justice and the extent to which it minimises the time spent on remand by those awaiting trial. Because it might demonstrate speedy but unjust administration of justice, it could only be used alongside other indicators and likely requires further testing. UNODC collects national administrative data on this indicator, as do some regional bodies. Methodological and definitional discrepancies exist between countries and the data do not include how long people have been held in detention, a variable that would improve the indicator’s quality. Data are already available for 118 countries between 2003–12, though only a minority of states reported every year. Though relatively feasible, universal use of this indicator would require harmonisation of approaches and significantly higher reporting rates. - Percentage of people who have experienced a dispute and report that they had access to an adequate dispute resolution mechanism This ‘objective’ indicator directly captures the target’s intended outcome. Importantly, it is worded in a way that could cover both formal and informal justice mechanisms. When used alongside capacity and perception indicators it would greatly contribute to a rounded picture of progress. No known global data sources are currently available for this indicator. Nonetheless, it could be integrated into existing or new surveys. This makes it a feasible but challenging proposal for future development.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
37		16.3 New Proposed Indicators	Ryan Kaminski	United Nations Association of the USA	Goal 16 has exigent relevance for the attainment of all the SDGs as improvements in rule of law have the potential to reduce private investment risk and cost, ultimately catalyzing trillions in new investment flows. This presents a key opportunity to empower billions by building sound, mutually-reinforcing regulatory and fiscal environments that can channel new investments while also reducing capital costs. “An economy with an efficient bureaucracy and rules of governance that facilitates entrepreneurship and creativity among individuals, and provides an enabling atmosphere for people to realize their full potential, can enhance living standards and promote growth and shared prosperity,” confirms the World Bank Group. Acknowledging the preliminary efforts of the UN Statistical Commission technical report on the indicators, the follow guiding principles should inform the development of indicators under Goal 16 moving forward: -Identifying indicators that measure the economic dimensions of Goal 16 and particularly, Target 16.3; -Aligning the ambition of the Open Working Group outcome document, including Goal 16, with a feasible, suitable, and relevant measurement framework; -Leveraging existing global-level, robust knowledge and data platforms relevant to Goal 16; and -Identifying Goal 16 indicators with crosscutting value for Goals 16, 17, and other proposed SDGs. Three proposed indicators,explained in detail in the UNA-USA global indicator submission paper, for 16.3 employing this criteria include: -World Bank’s Doing Business “Ease of Doing Business” aggregate annual score. -Derived aggregate score of the World Bank’s Investing Across Borders (IAB) annual scores. -Rate of compliance with binding resultant judgments of bilateral and multilateral investment treaty disputes. The UN Foundation has partnered with BNY Mellon, one of the world’s leading financial institutions, as well as global legal and consulting firms White and Case (LLP) and Deloitte to identify indicators that measure the link between Goal 16 and the economics of sustainability. Goal 16 has exigent relevance for the attainment of all the SDGs as improvements in rule of law have the potential to reduce private investment risk and cost, ultimately catalyzing trillions in new investment flows. This presents a key opportunity to empower billions by building sound, mutually-reinforcing regulatory and fiscal environments that can channel new investments while also reducing capital costs. “An economy with an efficient bureaucracy and rules of governance that facilitates entrepreneurship and creativity among individuals, and provides an enabling atmosphere for people to realize their full potential, can enhance living standards and promote growth and shared prosperity,” confirms the World Bank Group. This document includes a package of three suggested global indicators for Target 16.3 for consideration and review by the Virtual Network of Stakeholders for the Development of Indicators on Peaceful Societies, Justice and Institutions for Sustainable Development Goal 16; the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs); and others interested in robust global indicators. The guiding principles that inform this package of indicators include:  Identifying indicators that measure the economic dimensions of target 16.3;  Aligning the ambition of the Open Working Group outcome document, including Goal 16, with a feasible, suitable, and relevant measurement framework;  Leveraging existing global-level, robust knowledge and data platforms;  Identifying gaps in the February 2015 draft global indicators of the UN Statistical Commission; and  Identifying indicators with crosscutting value for Goals 16, 17, and other proposed SDGs. Report: Advancing the Rule of Law, Economic Growth, and Human Dignity: -See chart in link.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzczdMJCJD7LWVVwbFNObENqS3c/view
38	Target 16.4: By 2030, signicantly reduce illicit financial and arms ows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen assets and combat all forms of organized crime
39	16.4.1 Total volume of inward and outward illicit financial flows	16.4.1 General Comment and Amendment	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	This ‘objective’ indicator measures illicit financial flows (IFFs), which are a central aspect of this target. Data on illicit outflows from developing countries are currently collected by Global Financial Integrity (GFI). GFI identifies gaps in trade and balance of payments data from several sources, including the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, UN trade data, the United States Department of Commerce and European trade statistics. GFI accepts possible flaws in the data it draws on and believes that its estimate of outflows is conservative. Furthermore, data is not currently produced for 33 developed countries and several developing countries. To show a fuller picture of global flows, data on estimated inflows of IFFs would also need to be created. Nonetheless, the data produced by GFI – or at the very least the approach it uses – could be feasibly integrated into the indicator framework on a universal basis. IFFs could also be assessed as a percentage of GDP and/or split between trade mispricing (the majority of IFFs) and other types of illicit flows. This indicator could also be triangulated with indicators on corruption under target five. Finally, the existence of this data means that the wording of the target itself could be quantified.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
40		16.4.1 Amendment	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	N.B. many indicators under this target will also be relevant to targets under Goal 17 Assessment: We welcome the measurement of illicit financial flows (IFFs) as an indicator that is relevant to measure 16.4 but also some targets under goal 17, including 17.1 and 17.3. We also support the proposal to undertake further work to develop an indicator on illicit financial flows. Rather than trying to estimate the volume of flows, another budding method looks at the risk factors for the different types of IFFs. For example, % of trade within multinational companies (MNCs), % of trade with tax havens, % of GDP held offshore, etc. Some of this data is available already, some is already estimated, and some would be more readily available with public country-by-country reporting. The IFFs measured should include those relating to trade mis-invoicing, transfer mispricing and other tax abuses. We also propose several policy-sensitive indicators to complement these. Note that the SDSN proposed as an indicator 'Assets and liabilities of BIS reporting banks in international tax havens (as per OECD definition), in US$'. We consistently support Bank for International Settlements (BIS) data being made public for all jurisdictions (not just in tax havens however defined), which using it as an indicator presumably could lead to. However, the OECD represents only a small portion of countries, and its definition of international tax havens is not comprehensively accepted, so other indicators will be needed. This proposal also misses an important opportunity to support measureable indicators on stolen asset recovery - another important venue to restore fiscal space for sustainable development. CA/CESR illustrative indicators: Volume of inward and outward illicit financial flows – to include those related to trade misinvoicing, transfer mispricing and other tax abuses, Indicator of risk/vulnerability to illicit financial flows, Beneficial ownership: Share of companies (and legal arrangements including trusts and foundations) for which beneficial ownership is known and publically registered, Overall financial secrecy, Tax information exchange: Share of international trade and recorded financial flows that takes place between jurisdictions with automatic exchange of tax information, as well as the number of countries covered by automatic information exchange, Share of stolen assets returned to source country. Examples of methodologies, data sources: Global Financial Integrity provides compellingestimates, but eventually consensus methodologies will need to be developed, administered by the appropriate international institution. Financial Secrecy Index Open Company Data Index. Financial Secrecy Index. OECD Global Forum on Information Exchange. World Bank’s Stolen Asset Recovery programme is imperfect but a good start.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
41		16.4 New Proposed Indicators	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	- Signature, ratification and reporting on implementation of the UN Arms Trade Treaty This capacity indicator relates to reducing illicit and irresponsible arms flows. The UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which was agreed by the UN General Assembly in 2013 and entered into force in December 2014, obliges States Parties to take actions to reduce irresponsible arms transfers, including those which may enter the illicit market. 130 states have signed the ATT and 64 have so far ratified it. The indicator would monitor whether a state has signed, ratified and reported on its implementation of the treaty. Future reporting could provide a source of useful data for this target. See Table 5 on next page. - Drug-related crime per 100,000 population The production, sale and transfer of illicit drugs makes up a considerable proportion of activities related to transnational organised crime and so this ‘objective’ indicator would show a key dimension of the violence associated with it. UNODC collects data on a range of drug-related crimes through its surveys of member states and their administrative data. Given that drug-related crimes have to be reported to authorities before member states can report on them to UNODC, considerable gaps may exist in this data – and it could be affected by heavy-handed approaches to drugs. Victimisation surveys may prove useful alternative sources of data for this indicator. It would be feasible to use this indicator. - Combined value of trafficking of arms, natural resources and drugs as a proportion of GDP Relative to its GDP, this ‘objective’ indicator would help asses whether flows of illicit goods from, to, or through a country are increasing or decreasing. UNODC already collects and analyses data on drug trafficking trends, including seizures, price and purity of illicit drugs. However, the quality of this data is often reliant on member state reporting. Second, changes in data on the value of seizures of illicit goods may reflect changes in the capacity of either law enforcement agencies or traffickers themselves. Finally, data on illicit flows of arms and natural resources are less developed than is the case with drugs. Nonetheless, a concerted effort to address some of these challenges, using the lessons learned from measuring illicit drug flows, could make this indicator feasible in the future.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
42		16.4 New Proposed Indicator	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Other indicators for consideration and/or further development: - Business perceptions of the cost of organised crime This perception indicator is based on a survey of businesses, asking whether they believe organised crime imposes costs on business in their country. While this is a restricted perspective, its specific focus may be more revealing than generalised assessments. A weakness is that the indicator does not focus on transnational organised crime. Data are currently collected for this indicator through the World Economic Forum’s Global Competiveness Report (WEF-GCR). 14,000 executives across 144 countries were polled on this question for its latest 2014–15 report. Data have been collected since 2005. As such, this indicator would be feasible for universal use with some expansion of coverage. In order to gather people’s views on the presence of organised crime in their country or community, the indicator could also be relatively feasibly integrated into polling of the general public or into crime victimisation surveys. - Recovered stolen assets as a percentage of illicit financial flows This indicator would measure how well a country is doing in recovering the proceeds of corruption and other illicit assets held overseas. As a percentage of illicit financial outflows in a given year – excluding trade mispricing – the indicator would demonstrate successes in proportion to the challenge. Nonetheless, it would need to be recognised that these flows include more than the proceeds from corruption; even when large assets are recovered they will only represent a small proportion of illicit outflows. Some countries currently maintain their own asset recovery databases. As part of the Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (STAR), the World Bank and UNODC currently host the Asset Recovery Watch (ARW), which compiles, systematises and publishes information about completed and active asset recovery efforts around the world. Focused only on the proceeds of corruption, the ARW mainly draws its data from media sources and thus should not be considered comprehensive. With sufficient political will and openness, this indicator could be further developed on a universal basis.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
43		16.4 New Proposed Indicator	Klaus Lehn Christensen	Nonviolence International	So far, only one indicator for target 16.4 has been proposed, and that ONLY refers to measuring illicit financial flows, NOT arms flows. Measuring illicit arms flows is critical. IANSA notes that tracking when arms trade goes from being legal to illegal is already done through the International Tracing Instrument (ITI), developed under the framework of UN’s SALW Program of Action, which is possible because this PoA also instructs that weapons be marked during production. Thus IANSA proposes the following indicators for this target based on what is already measured by the ITI. Indicator proposals - National implementation of the International Tracing Instrument (ITI) - Measuring actual illicit arms flows through national reporting on ITI - Signature, ratification and reporting on implementation of the UN Arms Trade Treaty - Number of weapons and ammunition stockpiles (quantitative, data source Small Arms Survey / national monitoring) We also propose the following indicators for this target already implemented by Global Peace Index: - Ease of access to small arms and light weapons (qualitative, data source Economist Intelligence Unit) - Volume of transfers of major conventional weapons, as recipient (imports) and supplier (exports), (quantitative, data source Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) Arms Transfers Database and EIU)	https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2pF9xzLTkYZNFhWV1pPa0FKS0U&authuser=0
44	Target 16.5: Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms	16.5 General Comment	Klaus Lehn Christensen	Nonviolence International	Indicator proposal Recalling the existence of stringent declaration of assets and accountability laws, IANSA also proposes the following indicator for this target: - National action taken on Auditor General's Report by Parliament through Public Accounts Committee (quantitative, data source IANSA)	https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2pF9xzLTkYZNFhWV1pPa0FKS0U&authuser=0
45		16.5 General Comment	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Amend: Reduce corruption by x%, ensure that those involved are held accountable, and guarantee transparency and access to information	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
46	16.5.1 Percentage of population who paid a bribe to a public official, or were asked for a bribe by these public officials, during the last 12 months	16.5.1 General Comment	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Percentage of people who have paid a bribe in the last 12 months This indicator could present a relatively ‘objective’ picture on the prevalence of bribery in a country and could provide data for the ‘x%’ in the target. However, while it would measure how often people confront corruption in their everyday lives, it would not measure the scale of corruption in financial terms or necessarily capture corruption in specific areas, for example at political levels. Data on this indicator have been collected in Gallup polls in the past and variations are found in the World Values Survey. Transparency International collects data on experiences of paying bribes during engagement across eight public services within its Global Corruption Barometer (GCB) poll, which covered 107 countries in 2013. It would be feasible to use this indicator universally with a number of existing sources to draw on, though coverage would need to be widened.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
47		16.5.1 Amendment	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	Assessment: We welcome the inclusion of an indicator on corruption, but advocate for more comprehensive indicator(s) to a) measure everyday people's perception of how their governments manage public resources for sustainable development and b) track the permissive environment which facilitates corruption. We would urge that special attention is paid to ensure that the whole community (especially those most marginalized) are counted in these perception surveys, rather than just a select group of business people or academic experts. CA/CESR illustrative indicators: Reported rates of corruption in basic public services and social policies, Perception of fairness and equity of fiscal policy and tax morale, Ease by which a jurisdiction can facilitate corruption. Examples of methodologies and data sources: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer and Corruption Perception Index; The World Justice Project (absence of corruption); World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators (control of corruption). Regional Barometers e.g. Latinobarómetro, Afrobarometer, Eurobarometer. Financial Secrecy Index, Financial Action Task Force assessments.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
48		16.5.1 Amendment	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	It is recommended that priority is given to indicator 16.5.1 since this one is broader in focus and could also cover information from business leaders as being part of the population. Rational for Amend It is important that population/household surveys used to measure suggested indicator 1 are designed to capture the perceptions of children.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
49	16.5.2 Percentage of businesses that paid a bribe to a public official, or were asked for a bribe by these public officials, during the last 12 months	16.5.2 Amendment	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	Assessment: We welcome the inclusion of an indicator on corruption, but advocate for more comprehensive indicator(s) to a) measure everyday people's perception of how their governments manage public resources for sustainable development and b) track the permissive environment which facilitates corruption. We would urge that special attention is paid to ensure that the whole community (especially those most marginalized) are counted in these perception surveys, rather than just a select group of business people or academic experts. CA/CESR illustrative indicators: Reported rates of corruption in basic public services and social policies, Perception of fairness and equity of fiscal policy and tax morale, Ease by which a jurisdiction can facilitate corruption. Examples of methodologies and data sources: Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer and Corruption Perception Index; The World Justice Project (absence of corruption); World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators (control of corruption). Regional Barometers e.g. Latinobarómetro, Afrobarometer, Eurobarometer. Financial Secrecy Index, Financial Action Task Force assessments.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
50		16.5 New Proposed Indicator	Klaus Lehn Christensen	Nonviolence International	Indicator proposal Recalling the existence of stringent declaration of assets and accountability laws, IANSA also proposes the following indicator for this target: - National action taken on Auditor General's Report by Parliament through Public Accounts Committee (quantitative, data source IANSA)	https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2pF9xzLTkYZNFhWV1pPa0FKS0U&authuser=0
51		16.5 New Proposed Indicators	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	- Open Budget Index Score Focusing on an important aspect of governance, this capacity indicator would help measure transparency and access to information in a country. The International Budget Partnership (IBP) currently scores countries using its Open Budget Survey Tracker. Information is gathered through a standard questionnaire completed by researchers drawing on official documents and interviews. Produced every two years since 2006, the last survey included 100 countries. As well as requiring improvements in coverage and time-liness, this indicator could be challenged on the basis of subjectivity. Nonetheless, it demonstrates the feasibility, in principle, of measuring transparency of and access to information about government budgets. - Percentage of people who believe that corruption is widespread throughout the government in their country This perception indicator captures people’s views of corruption within their own countries. It only focuses on government corruption – potentially overlooking the private sector. As with some other perception indicators, rumours of corruption, the level of media coverage or secrecy on the issue, and other perception-shaping factors in a country would impact on this indicator in a way that may not reflect actual levels of corruption. Nonetheless, it could serve as a useful complement to other ‘objective’ or capacity-focused indicators. Furthermore, it should be noted that comprehensive hard evidence of corruption is extremely challenging to collect. Data on this issue are currently gathered through Gallup’s World Poll and Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, demonstrating the high feasibility of this indicator.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
52		16.5 New Proposed Indicators	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Other indicators for consideration and/or further development: - Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) Score This perception indicator is based on assessments of countries collected by various institutions as well as surveys of experts. Nonetheless, it presents some of the same challenges as indicator 5.3. While it can be argued that drawing on multiple sources increases the reliability of the indicator (a minimum of three data sources are used), the indicator faces some of the common challenges associated with composite indices (e.g. weighting between data sources, impact of omission of some data sources). The indicator already has a wide coverage, including 175 countries in 2014, and could be adopted fairly easily as a universal indicator for this target. - World Bank Control of Corruption Score A subset of the World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) This composite index score has been collected for 215 economies since 1996. It provides a potentially rich source of information: 32 data sources are currently used to form the WGI scores, drawing from surveys of households and firms, commercial information providers, NGOs, and public sector organisations. The number of data sources used in each year for different countries varies and the indicator as a whole suffers from the same challenges as other composite indicators. While these problems are not insurmountable, the same data sources would need to be used in all contexts to allow for comparison between countries and over time. Its established use by a multilateral institution, however, makes it a feasible option.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
53	Target 16.6 Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels	16.6 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Indicators should take into account the perception of young people. Indicator on primary expenditures may require advocating for ensuring “youth” is considered a sector It is unfortunate to note that the TST cluster proposal to the SD for this indicator calls for “disaggregation by sector and by users by sex”, and does not specifically include ‘age’ here. Second indicator on satisfaction with public services, should be analysed from perspective of services that are of particular relevance to youth, e.g. education	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
54		16.6 General Comment	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	Suggested Amend: Even if suggested indicator 1 provides an important perspective on the effectiveness of institutions, it is recommended that indicator 2, which captures real change due to work of effective institutions, is considered the primary indicator for this target. Rational for Amend: It is important taht population/hosuehold surveys used to measure suggested indicator 1 are designed to capture the perceptions of children.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
55		16.6 General Comment	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Targets 16.6 and 16.7 are particularly important as they complement Goal 11 on cities and human settlements, which does not include a governance dimension. Target 16.6 Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels (a) Dimensions to be measured: - Effective, accountable and transparent institutions (b) Proposed indicators: 1. Open data: government budget data publicly available at all levels (national and subnational) Possible alternative indicators: Openness in both the formulation and execution of budgets. Indicator TBD. Possible options: 1) from perception/opinion surveys (example from Afrobarometer R5) 2) Adapt Open Budget surveys and Index for local governments 3) UNHABITAT Linkages: None. Disaggregation by: level of government and region (urban/rural). Sources: open budget index, national data Limitations: Data only available at country level 2. Public advertising of all government procurement (national and subnational) Linkages: None. Disaggregation by: level of government and region (urban/rural). TBC. Sources: National data [difficult to check availability as it will depend on different governments’ statistics] 3. Trust in local government institutions: Percentage of people saying that they trust/ have confidence in national and sub-national governments Possible alternative indicators: 1. Percentage of respondents saying that they trust their taxes/local revenue are well spent. Indicator TBD from perception/opinion surveys (e.g. Afrobarometer R5). 2. Percentage of respondents saying that information is provided to citizens on (local) government decisions or that local government decisions reflected their priorities. Indicator TBD from perception/opinion surveys (example from SLRC). Linkages: None. Disaggregation by: gender, age, place of residence and region (also depends on sampling procedure and survey size). Sources: Perception /opinion surveys (e.g. World Value Surveys, Afrobarometer, LatinoBarometer, Gallup World Poll, etc.). Limitations: Data partially available, cross country comparability difficult, survey questions would need standardization. 4. Citizen satisfaction with local public services: Percentage of people 'very satisfied' or 'fairly satisfied' [to be developed] Linkages: None. Disaggregation by: gender, age, place of residence and region (also depends on sampling procedure and survey size) Sources: WHO, perception surveys (Afrobarometer R5). Limitations: Data partially available, cross country comparability difficult, survey questions need standardization. Data available for services in general – particularly health – would need to further develop for other services often provided at local level. Comments: Note that these targets are difficult to operationalise and as a result indicators rely on subjective information, which is not readily available in a standardised form across countries.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
56	16.6.1 Actual primary expenditures per sector and revenues as a percentage of the original approved budget of the government	16.6.1 Amendment	Claire Schouten	International Budget Partnership	This is difficult to assess when fiscal reports are not produced and made available. It is also difficult to define ‘primary expenditures’ and ‘sector’ Suggested Indicator: Regular reporting on budgeted vs. actual revenues and expenditures, disaggregated by type of revenue and by sector/sub-sector	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8AANUUMzfiTQ2NJS1pPdjdyMTg/view?usp=sharing
57	16.6.2 Proportion of population satisfied with the quality of public services, disaggregated by service	16.6.2 General Comment and Amendment	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	Assessment: We welcome an indicator on public satisfaction with service delivery. Given the different levels of federalism and decentralization in different countries and mixed experiences of fiscal decentralization, for targets 16.6 and 16.7 we suggest context-independent indicators measuring the quality and transparency of fiscal institutions at the national and local levels. These key fiscal governance process indicators are essential to ensuring participatory, equitable and legitimate outcomes that serve the most marginalized. CA/CESR illustrative indicators: Performance and accountability of public financial management. Public satisfaction with service delivery. Examples of methodologies; data sources: World Bank Service Delivery Indicators available though imperfect.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
58		16.6.2 Amendment	Claire Schouten	International Budget Partnership	A source of information can be performance data in countries that have performance budgeting, and consider public participation and service distribution: where are the services going? Are they going to the parts of the population that needs them, the region that needs them the most? This is also a measure of effectiveness.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8AANUUMzfiTQ2NJS1pPdjdyMTg/view?usp=sharing
59		16.6.2 Amendment	Fabio Palacio	International Movement ATD Fourth World	Proportion of population satisfied with the quality of public services, disaggregated by service ATD Fourth World has found that the quality of a service can sharply influence peoples’ propensity to use them. So for example, a woman who relayed the story of being mistreated by doctors at a health center is less likely to return to a health center during future pregnancies. It is critical that people are able to weigh in on the quality of the services that are available to them. Again, this target should be disaggregated by income.	http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf
60		16.6.2 Amendment	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	• Proportion of population satisfied with their access to and the quality of public services, by sex, age, wealth, location/region, and disability	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
61		16.6 New Proposed Indicator	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	Percentage of people saying that they trust/have confidence in national and sub-national governments (disaggregated by different levels of government)	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
62	Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels	16.7 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Indicators should take into account the perception of young people, and their direct inclusion through initiatives such as national youth councils, and their role in governance. It is unfortunate to note that the first SD indicator as proposed by the TST cluster calls for disaggregation of data for this indicator “by sex, language, ethnicity, religion, race, region or caste, disabilities and populations whose livelihoods or common natural resources are affected by decisions concerning largescale investments or public infrastructure”, BUT leaves out ‘age’. Ensuring insertion of ‘age’ will require dedicated advocacy efforts. For the second indicator If data for these indicators could be disaggregated by age it would allow for youth specific analysis As for regional level indicators, recommendations could be made to consider indicators more specific to youth participation, including: Number of countries with national youth councils Number of countries that consult with young people in national development plans Number of countries with fully funded youth policies And for national and/or regional level: Percentage of parliamentarians under 35.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
63		16.7 General Comment and Amendment	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	Given the different levels of federalism and decentralization in different countries and mixed experiences of fiscal decentralization, for targets 16.6 and 16.7 we suggest context-independent indicators measuring the quality and transparency of fiscal institutions at the national and local levels. These key fiscal governance process indicators are essential to ensuring participatory, equitable and legitimate outcomes that serve the most marginalized. CA/CESR illustrative indicators: Provision of sufficient political and financial support to ensure effective participation of women and other disadvantaged sectors of the population in decision-making at all phases of fiscal policy cycle, at all levels from local to global. Share of tax and budget laws and policies subject to periodic, participatory gender equality and human rights analyses, and public expenditure tracking. Examples of methodologies; data sources: There are many excellent resources and guides to gender and equality budgeting.v Many resources can be found on the IBP website. World Bank Service Delivery Indicators available though imperfect.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
64	16.7.1 Diversity in representation in key decision-making bodies (legislature, executive, and judiciary)	16.7.1 General Comment	Matthew Simonds	International Trade Union Confederation	How do you define diversity of representation? It is important to also assess whether elections are free and fair.	Form submission and http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf
65		16.7.1 General Comment and Amendment	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	Suggested indicator 1 only covers diversity in representation in key decision-making bodies and not the crucial element of the wider population’s participation in decision- making. In view of this, it is recommended that suggested indicator 2 is considered the primary indicator for this target. Rational for Amend: The indicator should also track to what extent children believe decision-making is inclusive and responsive.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
66	16.7.2 Percentage of population who believe decision-making at all levels is inclusive and responsive	16.7.2 General Comment	Fabio Palacio	International Movement ATD Fourth World	Participation is not merely a means to an end (e.g. poverty reduction). […] It is a fundamental right to which individuals are inherently entitled by virtue of their humanity. –UN Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights Participation is another issue that is most effectively captured through people’s perceptions. This is the only indicator that measures non-gendered participation. Many countries collect important data on citizens’ perceptions of participation. Further, a number of countries worked with the UNDG to hold national level consultations on participation. These yielded powerful qualitative data that could complement this indicator.	http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf
67		16.7 New Proposed Indicator	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Add: Percentage of decision-makers by sex, age, and persons with disabilities. It is necessary to disaggregate data, especially since Goal 16 refers to “for all”.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
68		16.7 New Proposed Indicators	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Targets 16.6 and 16.7 are particularly important as they complement Goal 11 on cities and human settlements, which does not include a governance dimension. Dimensions to be measured: - Responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative Proposed indicators: Voter turnout (%) in national and local elections Linkages: N/A. Disaggregation by: N/A. Sources: potentially increasing coverage of IDEA Voter Turnout data to cover local elections. Limitations: Data not readily available. While some regional datasets may be available, e.g. African elections database, standard procedures for data collection and reporting need to be ensured for cross-country comparability.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
69		16.7 New Proposed Indicators	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Proposed Indicator: Number of countries with legislation that promote citizen participatory mechanisms within local governments Participatory budget process Linkages: N/A. Disaggregation by: N/A. Sources: TBD (Proposed in UNHABITAT Urban Indicators). Limitations: Data not readily available. Comments: Note that these targets are difficult to operationalise and as a result indicators rely on subjective information (some of which is not readily available in a standardised form across countries. Another possible indicator of inclusive institutions it the proportion of seats held by women in local councils. It has been excluded from here as it is already under Goal 5. Indicators on participation in planning and budgeting (e.g. public audit, social audits, public hearings) could be considered, but data availability an issue.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
70		16.7 New Proposed Indicator	Claire Schouten	International Budget Partnership	Indicator “Legislatures conduct public hearings at the enactment and evaluation of the budget and government reports on how inputs were taken into account” IBP comments: There is growing consensus that public participation in budgeting is an essential component of any public finance management system and decision-making process. This consensus is affirmed by the High Level Principles on Fiscal Transparency issued by the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency (GIFT), endorsed by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 67/218. This consensus is also supported by the International Monetary Fund, which recently included public participation as an indicator in its revised Fiscal Transparency Code, and by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which has similarly included public participation in its Principles of Budgetary Governance.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8AANUUMzfiTQ2NJS1pPdjdyMTg/view?usp=sharing
71		16.7 New Proposed Indicators	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	• Proportion of the population who report participation in and influence over decision- making processes of government at the local and national levels, by gender, age, wealth, location, and disability • Diversity in representation (by age, gender, region and social groups) in state institutions (legislature, government, military, and judiciary) compared to national distribution • Provision of sufficient political and financial support to ensure effective participation of children, adolescent girls and boys, and young women and young men, as well as other marginalized sectors of the population, in decision-making at all phases of fiscal policy cycle, at all levels from the local to the global. • Share of tax and budget laws and policies subject to periodic participatory gender equality and human rights analyses, and public expenditure tracking	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
72		16.7 New Proposed Indicator	Adjmal Dulloo	Post-2015 Volunteering Working Group	Number of Supportive policies and legislation for civic engagement, including volunteerism.	https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YWNYdKSM6KYZ-Ne53LmGvrtZpGMrE__j5ZecJBb_kkY/edit
73		16.7 New Proposed Indicator	Klaus Lehn Christensen	Nonviolence International	National implementation of affirmative action laws (quantitative, data source IANSA)	https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2pF9xzLTkYZNFhWV1pPa0FKS0U&authuser=0
74		16.7 New Proposed Indicators	Kimberly DeRose	Child and Youth Finance International	Percentage of children and young people accessing and receiving Global Citizenship Education Number of countries with integrated national youth organization/association representing the opinions of youth at the policy level with a formal consultative process to include the voices of children and youth throughout the country Number of countries with a governmental authority primarily responsible for youth Number of national and international bodies that have youth representatives and permanent positions for these representatives, not just advisory level positions Number of children and youth actively involved in all levels of decision making in political economic and public life	https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YFCKapHGn08bv7575CZiaLlBPocX_0_heWpL6uQSkDM/edit#
75		16.7 New Proposed Indicators	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	1.Voter turnout (%) innational andlocalelections 2. Number of countries with legislation that promote citizen participatory mechanisms within local governments (e.g. participatory budget, referendum, open consultations, etc) Alternate: Participatory budget process Note that these targets are difficult to operationalise and as a result indicators rely on subjective information (some of which is not readily available in a standardised form across countries. Another possible indicator of inclusive institutions it the proportion of seats held by women in local councils. I t has been excluded from here as it is already under Goal 5. Indicato rs on participation in planning and budgeting (e.g. public audit, social audits, public hearings) could be considered, but da ta availability an issue. [For 56 pages report, please check link.]	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
76		16.7 New Proposed Indicators	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	- World Bank Voice and Accountability Score This indicator is a subset of the World Bank’s WGI which establishes an aggregate score drawn from numerous sources. It could be used as an ‘objective’ indicator as it seeks to capture perceptions of citizen participation in governance as well as wider political freedoms. Countries are ranked from -2.5 (worse) to +2.5 (best). As noted, the number of data sources used in each year for different countries varies and the indicator as a whole suffers from the same challenges as other composite indicators. It does, nonetheless, merit consideration as a universal indicator with relatively wide coverage and frequency of production, produced by a multilateral institution. - Percentage of population who believe that they can influence policymaking in their country This perception indicator would reflect people’s views on the essence of the target and is potentially the optimal way to measure influence. It is also worded in a way that would be more universal than indicator 6.a below, which would be restricted to countries that hold elections. While there are currently no known global data sources for this indicator, it would be feasible to add it into existing global polls or national surveys. The indicator might require that survey questions outline or define the different types of policy-making processes to which the question applies. - Diversity in representation (by sex, region and social groups) in state institutions (legislature, government, military, and judiciary) compared to national distribution This capacity indicator would measure how well institutions of governance reflect the make-up of the national population and hence, potentially, infer levels of representativeness and participation in decision-making by different social groups. There are currently no existing global data sets for this indicator, though it has been proposed as a common indicator for the New Deal process in conflict-affected states, and variations of it may exist in other countries. It would be challenging but still feasible to make this a universal indicator using administrative and census data.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
77		16.7 New Proposed Indicator	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Other indicators for consideration and/or further development: - Percentage of people who have confidence in the honesty of elections This perception indicator reveals how honest people believe elections are in their country, providing important complementary data to information on whether elections are held and levels of participation in them. However, with around 120 electoral democracies in existence around the world, the universality of this indicator is questionable. Global data is already collected through the Gallup World Poll and could be gathered nationally, as it already is in 20 African countries participating in the SHaSA process. This means that it is a feasible indicator. - Percentage of people who report participating in a political process in the past year This ‘objective’ indicator would measure people’s participation in political decisions and would be applicable in most countries despite differences between political systems. However, while applicable to different levels of decision-making, a clearer definition of what a political process is may be required. Another limitation is that while people may be able to participate in political processes, they may choose not to – so the indicator could reflect apathy rather than ability to participate. This indicator would not measure influence, and there are no known global data sources for this indicator, although the World Values Survey does already poll people on their participation in some forms of political action (such as demonstrations and protests). Data could feasibly be gathered through surveys. It would, however, be difficult to gather meaningful responses to this question in countries where opportunities for political participation are already low. - Percentage of people who have voiced opinion to a public official in last month While this ‘objective’ indicator is less comprehensive than indicator 6.b, it would be a partial reflection of people’s ability to engage with officials and, as such, potentially be relevant to the target. Nonetheless, the indicator faces some of the same problems as 6.b For example, it may reflect political apathy and does not capture influence on decision- making. Its strength is that data for this indicator is already gathered in the Gallup World Poll, meaning that it could be feasibly used as a universal indicator with little difficulty.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
78	Target 16.8: Broaden and strengthen the participation of developing countries in the institutions of global governance	No input received			No input received
79	16.8.1 Percentage of voting rights in international organizations of developing countries	No specific input received			No specific input received
80	Target 16.9: By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration	16.9 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	The indicators should in fact operationalises ‘for all’ regardless of any status, and stress that this means no discrimination on any on grounds. Progress in birth registration will contribute to youth development in terms of public services accessible to young people as these individuals come of age	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
81	16.9.1 Percentage of children under 5 whose births have been registered with civil authority	16.9.1 Amendment	Claudia Arisi	SOS Children's Villages	[Amended Indicator]:: Percentage of children in alternative care facilities whose births are not registered with civil authority Rationale: Monitoring progress towards universal birth registration ensures greater awareness among authorities of the national and local child populations, which is crucial to improve service planning and development. Moreover, specific attention to children in care is essential to ensure that the state governs alternative care facilities and monitors alternative care providers. This helps reducing the risk of harm for children who cannot stay with their parents: uncontrolled placement of children in institutions, for instance, can hinder the physical development of the child’s brain32, or involve child exploitation and abuse. Methodology and Data Source: Information should be collected through administrative data.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4tJLqQXCz6xbGcxemh4SW9JS0U/view
82		16.9.1 Amendment	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	Percentage of children under 5 whose births have been registered with civil authority, by gender, age, wealth, location/region, and disability	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
83		16.9 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Proposed indicators: 1. Coverage of birth registration (also found as completeness of birth registration in WDI) Linkages: N/A. Disaggregation by: sex, place of residence (rural/urban), region and household wealth quintile (also depends on sampling procedures and survey size). Sources: WDI, UNICEF (based on national civil registration data, census or household surveys e.g. MICS). Limitations: See indicator 98 UNSDSN (July, 2014). Note that registrations systems in some countries are notorious for being incomplete. Data complemented with household survey information.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
84	Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements	16.10 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	This indicator will allow for monitoring of resources allocated to youth Indicators should ensure that the ‘access’ is actually child and and youth friendly. In addition special reference to youth and child rights need to be taken into account.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
85		16.10 General Comment	Mandeep Tiwana	CIVICUS	In relation to proposed Target 16.10, with its focus on protecting “fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements,” it would be worthy to also measure the existence of enabling policies and practices with regard to the freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly. The current emphasis on attacks on journalists, associated media personnel and human rights advocates needs to be buttressed by an evaluation of legislation and official policies dealing with registration of civil society organisations, their ability to organize public meetings, raise resources from domestic and international sources and operate freely in general.	Form submission
86	16.10.1 Percentage of actual government budget, procurement, revenues and natural resource concessions that are publicly available and easily accessible	16.10.1 Amendment	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	Both indicators should remain since they measure different parts of the target. Indicator 1 The indicator should reflect government budget “and spending” and it should also measure timeliness of information being made publically available. Rational for Amend: Indicator 1 Crucial that the indicator does not only focus on budget allocations, but also on public access to information on actual spending. It is also crucial that information is made available in a timely manner to ensure that the public can engage in public processes based on relevant information.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
87		16.10.1 Amendment	Claire Schouten	International Budget Partnership	Bundling these elements together makes it difficult to measure their public availability and accessibility as a percentage. On budgets, there should be publication of at least 5 budget documents, providing breakdowns according to expenditure allocated and spent towards each of the SDGs (Executive's Budget Proposal, Enacted Budget, Year-End Report, Audit Report and Citizens Budget) Suggested Indicator: Percentage of budget documents, off-budget revenue documents, procurement and natural resource contracts that are publicly available and easily accessible.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8AANUUMzfiTQ2NJS1pPdjdyMTg/view?usp=sharing
88		16.10.1 Amendment	Beth Fredrick	Advance Family Planning, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for Population and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health	Public access to information, particularly on governments budgets and financial revenues, is critical for advocates and others working to help achieve all SDG targets. Suggested Change: Percentage of budget documents, off-budget revenue documents, procurement and natural resource contracts that are publicly available and easily accessible.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzocWXSMyEwHMVFvMU9HNFdHak0/view
89	16.10.2 Number of journalists, associated media personnel and human rights advocates killed, kidnapped, disappeared, detained or tortured in the last 12 months	16.10.2 Amendment	Faiza Shaheen	Save the Children	We suggest that this indicator is replaced with the following indicator “ Extent to which the rights to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly and access to information are guaranteed in law and practice”. How these fundamental freedoms are guaranteed in practice could be tracked through perception-based surveys. The legal guarantee of these rights could be measured by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights through data provided by states and non-states actors as input to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council. Considering that the UPR is a universal review of the human rights records of all UN Member States, it has the potential to collect information on the protection of these fundamental freedoms in all countries. Information collected through the UPR process could be supplemented by information collected by relevant UN Human Rights Council special procedures, including the Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Peaceful Assembly and Association, the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression and the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders. Information related to the UPR could also be complemented by information submitted by states and non-state actors to the UN human rights treaty bodies, including the Human Rights Committee overseeing implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Committee on the Rights of the Child overseeing implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Rational for Amend: The suggested indicator provides a too narrow measurement of protection of fundamental freedoms. It would measure the more extreme violations of media freedom and freedoms of expression, but would not measure the realization of international agreed standards on the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly and the freedom of the media in less extreme situations. For example, civil society, journalists, associated media personnel and human rights advocates could face serious challenges in relation to fundamental freedoms, including harassment, difficulties in registering civil society organizations and securing funding for human rights activities, without being kidnapped, killed, detained or tortured. The new suggested indicator 2 should also track to what extent children have their rights to expression, association, peaceful assembly and access to information guaranteed.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1GAs2aA_AjDLXg1WjhHYjFnZ28/view
90		16.10 New Proposed Indicators	Matthew Simonds	International Trade Union Confederation	Additional proposed indicators: Number of assemblies, strikes or demonstrations held during the reporting period and, where applicable, proportion of applications to hold assemblies, strikes or demonstrations granted/ refused/receiving no response within X weeks during the reporting period, by type of assembly and grounds of decision Number of arrests of demonstrators/trade unionists, and proportion of arrests leading to detention of longer than X, criminal charges or conviction of a criminal offence	Form submission and http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf
91		16.10 New Proposed Indicators	Bill Orme	Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD) GMFD is a Brussels-based international coalition of more than 200 national, regional and international nongovernmental organizations specialized in journalism training, press freedom advocacy, media law and ethics, and other aspects of independent media support.These indicators were developed in consultation with other international civil society groups specialized in freedom of information and expression, as well as with UNESCO and other UN agencies and advisors with expertise in this field.	Proposed Indicator 1: Monitoring the adoption and implementation of constitutional, statutory and/or policy guarantees and mechanisms for public access to information As suggested by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) and UNESCO in earlier presentations to the UN Technical Support Team (UN TST), this highly pertinent and measurable indicator would assess the existence and implementation of constitutional, statutory and/or policy guarantees for public access to information. A majority of UN member states have already adopted such legal guarantees, and many others are currently considering relevant legislation and implementing actions in the field. UNESCO, within its mandate for the right to freedom of expression, which includes the corollary of the right to freedom of information, already monitors progress and issues in this area through its existing submissions to the UPR and regularly issued research reports on World Trends on Freedom of Expression and Media Development. Proposed Indicator 2: Implementation of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, as mandated by the UN Chief Executives Board and monitored by UNESCO in compliance with recent General Assembly and Security Council resolutions on the protection of journalists and independent media This proposed indicator for SDG 16.10 would formally incorporate into the SDGs monitoring framework the regular progress reports by UNESCO on the implementation of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity, which was adopted by the UN Chief Executives Board on 12 April 2012, in accord with Security Council Resolution 1738 of December 2006; UN General Assembly Resolutions 68/163 of December 2013 and 69/185 of December 2014; and Human Rights Council Resolutions 21/12 of September 2012 and 27/5 of September 2014, among other relevant United Nations resolutions, declarations, and conventions on the protection of journalists and independent media. Led by UNESCO, the UN Plan of Action draws on normative and programmatic support from UNDP, DPI and the UNHCHR, among other UN agencies and offices. It marks the first effort to systematically bring the UN family of agencies together with other relevant stakeholders to address the worsening situation of the safety of journalists, media workers, and social media producers, and of the culture of impunity surrounding the crimes against them. The Plan of Action is informed and complemented by UNESCO’s continuing global reports on media trends and issues and the national media surveys carried out through the UNESCO-IPDC Media Development Indicators Framework. As emphasized in the Riga Declaration, adopted by consensus at the 2015 UN World Press Freedom Day commemoration in Latvia, the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity “are directly relevant to implementing the proposed Sustainable Development Goal 16,” particularly the SDG 16.10 target ensuring public access to information. The Riga Declaration called on UNESCO to continue “highlighting the importance of freedom of expression, public access to information and the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity within the post-2015 development agenda processes” and “coordinating the implementation of the UN Plan of Action throughout the UN system.”	https://www.dropbox.com/s/2wxv9lm9cz8i2i3/Global%20Forum%20for%20Media%20Development_SDG%2016.10%20Indicators%20-%20%20GFMD%20%28May%202015%29%20copy.docx?dl=0
92		16.10 New Proposed Indicators	Kate Donald / Helen Dennis	Center for Economic & Social Rights (Kate Donald) / Christian Aid (Helen Dennis)	Assessment: As proposed by SDSN, we support an indicator on the right to information, including legal guarantees. Given the prominence of public budgeting as an essential tool for sustainable development, we urge explicit inclusion of the right to budget, resource and other information critical for civil society to hold their governments to account to their SDG commitments. We argue for a comprehensive and specific indicator on corporate reporting as a useful tool for corporate accountability to the sustainable development commitments. To be an effective sustainable development partner, civil society cannot constantly live under threat of harassment or intimidation, which too many face today. An indicator on civil society space would help to expose the extent of this problem, and create pressure for its remediation. CA/CESR Proposed indicators: - Existence and implementation of a national law and/or constitutional guarantee on the right to information. - Share of government tax laws (including tax exemptions), budget policies, public procurement, social service delivery information and corporate lobbying activities made publicly available in a common, open, machinereadable, detailed, timely and accessible standard. - Share of large companies publishing independently-verified, integrated reporting of impact on human rights and sustainable development, including profits, tax and royalty payments on a countryby- country and projectby- project basis, full transparency in public procurement, corporate political donations and lobbying activities. - Enabling environment for civil society. Examples of methodologies; data sources: As a matter of public record, the existence of passage of legislation would not be difficult to measure, and various bodies exist (including National Human Rights Institutions) which could monitor the implementation of such legislation. See also the Global Right to Information Rating, which measures the overall strength of the legal framework on right to information in a given country. Open Budget Index. Civil Society Enabling Environment Index.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
93		16.10 New Proposed Indicators	Fiona Bradley	International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions	The proposed indicators 16.10.1 and 16.10.2 are not appropriate as they do not capture the intention of target 16.10 nor address access to information. As outlined in the Lyon Declaration on Access to Information and Development, to fully realise access to information, everyone needs access and skills to effectively use information. Information intermediaries such as libraries have the skills and resources to help governments, institutions and individuals communicate, organise, structure and use information and data for development. We suggest the following indicators for 16.10: • Literacy rate of Youth and Adults, urban and rural literacy rate > Literacy is a basic requirement to access information in all formats. Existing literacy data is collected annually by UNESCO Institute for Statistics • Existence of a comprehensive law and legal regime that ensures the right of access to information from public bodies, based on international standards. >Data is collected by UNESCO, with support from UNDP, UNODC, OHCHR • Media and Information (MIL) competencies >Data from the Global MIL Assessment Framework developed by UNESCO	Form submission and http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq/topics/libraries-development/documents/libraries-post-2015-development-agenda.pdf
94		16.10 New Proposed Indicators	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	• Existence and implementation of a national law and/or constitutional guarantee on the right to information • Percentage of public documents on government expenditures (planned and spent), procurement, revenues, and natural resource concessions that are publicly available and accessible in adequate formats.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzjjbGqEnI5yLWxjcWVOd19WdFk/view
95		16.10 New Proposed Indicators	Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign	Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal	We suggest the following indicators for this target: “Literacy rate of youth and adults; including urban and rural literacy rate”; “Existence of a comprehensive law and legal regime that ensures the right of access to information from public bodies, based on international standards”; and “Media and Information (MIL) competencies” Suggested indicators Existence of a comprehensive law and legal regime that ensures the right of access to information from public bodies, based on international standards. 26: Legal regimes which ensure compliance with international standards on freedom of expression, association and assembly. 27: Percentage of libraries that regularly provide specific training sessions on media and information literacy competencies to support users’ access to and use of information.	Form submission and http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf
96		16.10 New Proposed Indicators	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	- Percentage of people who can express political views without fear The Gallup World Poll collected data on this indicator across many countries in the past, demonstrating its feasibility. Alternatively, in order to focus more on behaviours, a variant of this indicator would measure the percentage of people who feel free to join any political organisation they want (Afrobarometer currently collects data on this indicator). Nonetheless, political restrictions could obstruct efforts to gather data for either indicator in some contexts: if people already fear expressing political views, some may be less likely to respond honestly to polling or other forms of survey. It would be crucial that those conducting surveys are perceived to be independent. - Combined scores for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and association This ‘objective’ indicator would draw from the Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI) Human Rights Data Project, which annually rates the level of government respect for a variety of internationally recognised human rights. Primarily drawing on data from Amnesty International and US State Department Reports, scores for 15 human rights are made by CIRI, ranging from 0 (no respect for a right) to 2 (full respect for a right). Scoring based on a limited set of sources creates risks of subjective bias and/or overlooked data. Furthermore, the current sources used would likely meet strong opposition from some member states. Nonetheless, and despite some significant data gaps, CIRI has provided annual information for about 202 countries from 1981 to 2011, demonstrating the universal feasibility of this indicator. - World Press Freedom Index Score This ‘objective’ indicator speaks directly to a specific aspect of the ‘freedom of expression’ component of the target. Compiled by Reporters Without Borders, the index reflects the degree of freedom that journalists, news media and ‘Internet’ citizens enjoy in each country, and the efforts made by the authorities to respect and ensure respect for this freedom. Drawing from experts surveys and reviews of administrative data, a range of criteria are assessed to form a composite score (0 = best, 100 = worse). The index has been compiled since 2002 in 180 countries, demonstrating comprehensive coverage. Despite suffering from the same challenges as other composite indicators and drawing on subjective expert data, the existence of this indicator demonstrates that it is feasible to measure press freedom in a way that takes into account issues such as media pluralism and independence, respect for the safety and freedom of journalists, and the legislative, institutional and infrastructural environment in which the media operate. - Existence of legislation for freedom of expression, media, association and peaceful assembly While it does not measure their enjoyment, this capacity indicator would assess whether laws exist to ensure freedoms of expression, media, association and peaceful assembly. A range of potential data sources exist. For example, UNESCO currently assess the media environment through expert surveys currently covering 11 countries. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) releases annual reports on freedom of expression, though they are not countryfocused. The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of human rights has involved 192 countries to date, though only a limited number are reviewed annually. With coverage of 160 countries and territories in 2015, Amnesty International’s annual reports contain information on legislation related to human rights. While feasible, it will be challenging to draw these and other sources together to produce quantified data that is comparable across time and between countries.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
97	Means of Implementation: 16.a Strengthen relevant national institutions, including through international cooperation, for building capacity at all levels, in particular in developing countries, to prevent violence and combat terrorism and crime	16.a General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Perception indicator in TST cluster submission that was not included in the SD proposal could be recommended for regional and national level (ideally ensuring disaggregation of data to allow for youth specific analysis)	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
98	16.a.1 Percentage of requests for international cooperation (law enforcement cooperation, mutual legal assistance and extraditions) that were met during the reporting year	No specific input received			No specific input received
99	16.a.2 Existence of independent national human rights institutions (NHRIs) in compliance with the Paris Principles	No specific input received			No specific input received
100		16.a New Proposed Indicator	Sunil Suri	Saferworld	Strengthen relevant national institutions, including through international cooperation, for building capacities at all levels, in particular in developing countries, for preventing violence and combating terrorism and crime.	Form submission and http://www.saferworld.org.uk/resources/view-resource/891-measuring-peace-from-2015-an-indicator-framework-at-work
101	Means of Implementation: 16.b Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development	No general comments received			No general comments received
102	16.b.1 Proportion of the population reporting and perceiving to be discriminated against directly and/or indirectly, and hate crimes	16.b.1 General Comment	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate Indicator this indicator as it keeps all parties accountable, ensures compliance with the indicators, and the ability to live on earth harmoniously while enforcing human rights.	Form submission
103	16.b.2 Proportion of the population satisfied with the quality of public services, disaggregated by service	No specific input received			No specific input received


1	GOAL 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	Claire Schouten	International Budget Partnership	Budgetary indicators are critical for developing effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. They are also vital for ensuring responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. They are essential for Goal 17, meaning they are necessary for the institutions, means of implementation and global partnership required to achieve the SDGs.	Form submission
3		General	Tetet Lauron	CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness (CPDE)	Civil society can and should play an essential role in monitoring the SDGs including through institutionalized participation at all levels, connecting local realities to global policy debates, and in promoting new paradigms for social transformation and development justice. Civil society and proportional representation from the G77 countries in the expert group is necessary and crucial.	Form submitted
4		General	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Goal 17 of the Post-2015 agenda focuses on implementation and partnerships. This necessitates a process (and progress) perspective; and since progress in any of the developing nations will depend highly on how all members of the society collaborate, the social capital issue comes into the limelight. With this, the question must be raised if decisions on a collective level, as they will have more impact than those taken on the individual level, should become part of a monitoring process. Almost all of the targets in this part of the agenda fall within the domain of international cooperation and support. For instance, target 17.1 relates to support for improving domestic capacity for tax and other revenue collection including better monetization of respective natural resources, and the pertinent indicators are Total Tax/GDP and Total Tax Per Capita. Both indicators are rated AAA, meaning that they are deemed to be feasible, i.e. methodology exists and data are available; to be suitable, i.e. there is a common understanding on what the indicators express; and to be relevant, i.e. they aptly label the target. But neither can be used to estimate whether a tax system is fair and equitable, nor will the indicators exhibit if taxes are paid as levied and if the tax system has changed. This is where a process indicator would come into question. Also, there is a systemic relation between what citizens believe to be a fair tax system and responsive government, i.e. connecting tax payments to the supply of public goods (Bird et al. (2006). So a composite indicator would have to be applied here which mirrors both tax income and good governance. Beyond that, still, the support that this target asks for is not revealed through the two indicators Tax/GDP and Tax Per Capita. Similarly, for targets 17.2 through 17.5 as well as 17.9 (on development assistance, additional financial resources for developing countries, debt financing, investment agreements and implementation support), the pertinent indicators measure the achievements the pertinent indicators measure the achievements i.e. the impact of the assistance but they do not measure the process nor noting choices made for implementation which might be the culprit in poor performance. This critique is also valid for targets 17.10 through 17.12 on trade development and targets 17.6 through 17.8 referring to technology transfer. Also, if we look at the very general expression of target 17.13, it may be questioned if GDP can really measure whether global macroeconomic stability and policy coordination and policy coherence have been brought about. It does neither reflect the level of wellbeing of the citizens and their respective consumption capability, nor the reduction of system risks and vulnerability. Targets 17.14 and 17.15 concern international agreements; concluding such agreements will certainly promote sustainable development as well as poverty eradication, and what the corresponding indicators would have to show is if this effect has been achieved. The same applies to targets 17.16 and 17.17 on (global) partnerships. A partnership issue may as well be found in targets 17.18 and 17.19 on building adequate statistical foundations for measuring progress on sustainable development. This would not be possible without a concerted action of national and international bodies, for which, again, an indicator is needed that monitors the progress. Annex II gives a wider overview of the targets catalogued above; it lists the deficiencies of the indicators and gives some suggestions for improvement. The list reveals that the systemic aspect inherent in the capability approach, in measuring capacity building, and in the concept of social capital are not sufficiently accounted for in the indicators. A good example is targets 17.6 through 17.8 which refer to technology transfer. The indicators provided at this stage would suffice to determine if the targets have been reached. But other than transfers of financial funds, technology proliferation needs absorptive capacity, experimental spaces and partnerships at local, regional and national levels between industries, research facilities and government authorities as well as employee training and strategic adaptations of educational curricula. This build-up of networking, institutional capabilities and social capital must be monitored – progress should be measured and reported. One issue which seems to require more encouragement (and which highlights the concern of this contribution) is the statistics on partnerships. The indicators on partnerships (targets 17.16 and 17.17) were rated as non-feasible and of low relevance. However, progress in any part of 10 the world requires concerted action through partnerships – no industry, no country can “go it alone” today. For these issues, all the ingredients are needed that have been enumerated within the three approaches exhibited in this contribution: Capabilities on a collective level for SD readiness, capacity building and social capital. So, it makes much sense to have statistics on partnerships; and beyond just tallying the numbers of partnerships and PPP projects, indicators should be put in place which measure if there is sufficient social coherence in a nation’s society to allow for small- and large-scale partnerships. The indicators should as well reveal if there are shifts in the collective capabilities towards higher acceptance of SD objectives and if enough capacity has been grown to comprehend and to successfully handle multi-lateral partnerships in research, trade and industry.	http://bardy.eeurope.de/cms/filemaster/publications/Sytem_Perspective_on_SDG_Indicators.pdf
5	Finance Target 17.1: Strengthen domestic resource mobilization, including through international support to developing countries, to improve domestic capacity for tax and other revenue collection	17.1 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Cannot be used to estimate whether a tax system is fair and equitable, if taxes are paid as levied or if the tax system has changed. Indicators do not monitor the support effort Suggestion: Find composite indicator which captures tax equity and good governance Measure the support effort	Form submission
6	17.1.1 Total Tax/GDP	17.1.1 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Cannot be used to estimate whether a tax system is fair and equitable, if taxes are paid as levied or if the tax system has changed. Indicators do not monitor the support effort Suggestion: Find composite indicator which captures tax equity and good governance Measure the support effort	Form submission
7	17.1.2 Total Tax Per Capita ($ value)	17.1.2 General and New Proposed Indicator	Kate Donald	Center for Economic & Social Rights	Assessment: We welcome using tax to GDP ratio to measure OWG target 17.1 on strengthening domestic resource mobilization. We have proposed this indicator and a few others that would be useful complements. So as to avoid perverse incentives which could drive regressive taxation and deepening income inequality, these indicators should be interdependent with others on the progressiveness of the tax system, and explicitly linked with goals and targets around tackling inequality. We would also suggest an indicator to put a spotlight on sufficient resources for sustainable development, as also proposed by SDSN (SDSN 95: ‘Domestic revenues allocated to sustainable development as percent of GNI, by sector’). 'Revenue' could be an overly restrictive term so we would suggest a broader focus on revenue and public expenditure. CA/CESR Proposed indicators: Tax to GDP ratio (Note that we would be very wary of the inclusion of this indicator unless it is explicitly linked to complementary indicators on the progressivity of tax regime.) Potential vs. actual tax revenue (tax effort) Capacity of public revenue authorities - to be developed. Amount of domestic revenue and public expenditure on sustainable development goals (this can be compared with existing minimum spending benchmark commitments where they exist for each goal). Example of methodologies, data sources: World Bank, World Development Indicators, OECD, Eurostat, IMF, others, Tax Administration Diagnostic Assessment Tool Scores, World Bank Development Indicators	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
8		17.1 New Proposed Indicators	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	For goal 17 we have included as an example Target 17.1, which focuses on strengthening domestic resource mobilisation. This includes the fiscal capacity of local governments, as they are ultimately responsible for the implementation of many of the goals. (a) Dimensions to be measured: - Fiscal capacity of local governments (b) Proposed indicators:  Local governments revenues and expenditures as % of total government revenues and expenditures Linkages: N/A. Disaggregation by: national level/further disaggregation TBC, currently not readily available. Sources: WB (fiscal decentralisation indicators), IMF (GFS database), both based on national accounts. Limitations: Data partially available. Indicator is an aggregation of subnational data but presented at national level. Currently indicator not reported for each subnational administrative/political unit.  Tax revenue (percentage of total subnational revenues and grants) Linkages: N/A Disaggregation by: national level/further disaggregation TBC, currently not readily available. Sources: WB (fiscal decentralisation indicators), IMF (GFS database), both based on national accounts. Limitations: Data partially available. Indicator is an aggregation of subnational data but presented at national level. Currently indicator not reported for each subnational administrative/political unit. Comments: The first indicator measures vertical imbalance - the degree to which subnational governments rely on central government revenues to support their expenditures. The fiscal flows to, from and among different levels of government can be used to assess some aspects of fiscal decentralisation. The GFS is the best international source for fiscal flows with consistent definitions across countries and years, however, it is not particularly focused on decentralisation issues and subnational data is limited to about 2/3 of countries (out of 149 in total). It allows for differentiation between state or provincial and local governments, but no data is currently available for analyzing dispersion among subnational regions. GFS revenues can be broken down into tax and non-tax revenue, intergovernmental transfers and other grants. It is difficult to assess the degree of autonomy that subnational governments have in raising revenue (e.g. how much is collected through shared taxes versus piggybacked taxes versus locally determined taxes). Shared taxes appear as subnational revenue, although the subnational government has no autonomy in determining the revenue base or rate, since the GFS reports revenues based on which level of government ultimately receives the revenues. This indicator does not distinguish what proportion of transfers is conditional versus general purpose, and the GFS data do not provide this information. Both indicators aim to measure local financial capacity for resource mobilisation.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
9		17.1 New Proposed Indicator	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	Indicator 17.1.3 (added): Local governments’ revenues and expenditures as % of total government revenues and expenditures (Source International Monetary Fund, GFSY database).	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
10	Finance Target 17.2: Developed countries to implement fully their official development assistance commitments, including to provide 0.7 per cent of gross national income in official development assistance to developing countries, of which 0.15 to 0.20 per cent should be provided to least developed countries	No general comments received			No general comments received
11	17.2.1 Net ODA, total and to LDCs, as percentage of OECD/Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors' gross national income (GNI)	17.2.1 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Appropriate use and impact of the assistance should also be monitored Suggestion: Determine ODA targets aligned to Busan Declaration and its fit with national conditions Monitor the decision making process and fulfillment of ODA targets	Form submission
12	17.2.2 Proportion of total bilateral, sector-allocable ODA of OECD/DAC donors to basic social services (basic education, primary health care, nutrition, safe water and sanitation)	17.2.2 Amendment	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	[Amended]: Proportion of total bilateral, sector-allocable ODA of OECD/DAC donors to basic social services (basic education, primary health care, nutrition, safe water and sanitation) to support the “localization” of the SDGs.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
13	Finance Target 17.3: Mobilize additional financial resources for developing countries from multiple sources	17.3.1 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Reducing the cost of remittances does not suffice to ease overseas transfers Suggestion: Determine other means that remove blockage for funds transfers	Form submission
14	17.3.1 Cost of remittances	17.3.1 Amendment	Kate Donald	Center for Economic & Social Rights	Assessment: Choosing this [cost of remittances] as the sole indicator severely undermines decades of progress in defining innovative financing for development. In A Post-2015 Fiscal Revolution, we find that a range of complementary domestic and global commitments to resource mobilization could together unleash at least US$1.5 trillion per year in additional, stable and predictable public funding.vi The idea presented here is an initial proposal; we would welcome working with others to develop an innovative new indicator to measure this target. CA/CESR Proposed indicators: Amount of additional, predictable and untied finance available in national budgets for sustainable development financing.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
15	17.3.2 Cost of remittances in the top tier of high-cost corridors	17.3 New Proposed Indicator	Renaude Gregoire	SSA Social Justice Office	We support this indicator: "Official development assistance, net private grants and domestic revenues allocated for sustainable development" (SDSN, Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the SDGs, Revised working draft (Version 7), March 20, 2015, p. 32)	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/view
16	Finance Target 17.4: Assist developing countries in attaining long-term debt sustainability through coordinated policies aimed at fostering debt financing, debt relief and debt restructuring, as appropriate, and address the external debt of highly indebted poor countries to reduce debt distress	17.4 General	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate this target to resolve inequality gap.	Form submission
17		17.4 General	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	The HIPC Initiative is nearly completed Suggestion: Explore means to prevent HIPCs from falling into debt traps again	Form submission
18		17.4 Amendment	Kate Donald	Center for Economic & Social Rights	Assessment: Unsustainable and/or unjust debt burdens can affect more than just the HIPC eligible countries, so this indicator does not pass the ‘universality’ test. As the UN General Assembly has agreed, there is a need for a comprehensive international debt workout mechanism to enable any country facing debt crises to resolve the problem fairly, in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Foreign Debt and Human Rights. Any indicators must therefore look beyond the HIPC program to both a mechanism that covers all odious debt, and the outcomes from such a mechanism. Measureable indicators on volumes of odious debt are another important avenue for restoring fiscal space for sustainable development. CA/CESR Proposed indicators: Establishment of a comprehensive debt workout mechanism; Volumes of debt relief provided under this mechanism. Volume of odious debt forgiven	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
19	17.4.1 Total number of countries that have reached their Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC) decision points and number that have reached their HIPC completion points (cumulative)
20	17.4.2 Debt relief committed under HIPC initiative
21	Finance Target 17.5: Adopt and implement investment promotion regimes for least developed countries	17.5 General Comment	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate this Target to resolve inequality gap.	Form submission
22	17.5.1 Adoption/Implementation of sustainable development orientated targets by new or existing investment promotion agencies & 17.5.2 Number of policy changes in investment regimes incorporating sustainable development objectives	17.5.1 & 17.5.2 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Including SD orientated targets and changing investment policies may still conceal institutional deficiencies and other SD policy weaknesses Suggestion: Connect SD targets to targets that monitor institutional capacities and development	Form submission
23	Technology Target 17.6: Enhance North-South, South-South and triangular regional and international cooperation on and access to science, technology and innovation and enhance knowledge sharing on mutually agreed terms, including through improved coordination among existing mechanisms, in particular at the United Nations level, and through a global technology facilitation mechanism when agreed upon	17.6 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Progress on this target likely to disproportionately benefit young scientists and technological staff, compared to older age groups.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
24		17.6 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Technology proliferation needs absorptive capacity and experimental spaces; if they are missing, exchange programs will fail Suggestion: Measure absorptive capacity and progression on institutional readiness	Form submission
25	17.6.1 Access to existing patent information (creation of a patent database)
26	17.6.2 Number of exchanges - Exchange of scientists and technological staff
27	Technology Target 17.7: Promote the development, transfer, dissemination and diusion of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries on favourable terms, including on concessional and preferential terms, as mutually agreed	17.7 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Progress on this target likely to disproportionately benefit young people in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, compared to other age group	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
28		17.7 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	STEM investment as a percentage of GDP or per capita may not reveal whether sufficient innovative entrepreneurial conditions exist Suggestion: Indicators to include innovation-commercialization linkage and supportive mechanisms	Form submission
29	17.7.1 Total STEM Investment/GDP
30	17.7.2 Total STEM per capita ($ value)
31	Technology Target 17.8: Fully operationalize the technology bank and science, technology and innovation capacity building mechanism for least developed countries by 2017 and enhance the use of enabling technology, in particular information and communications technology	17.8 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Progress on this target likely to disproportionately benefit young people, compared to other age groups	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
32		17.8 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	ICT is fundamental for economic efficiency and productivity but only produces value if integrated into workforce Suggestion: Indicators to include information technology literacy and workplace adoption	Form submission
33	17.8.1 Internet penetration	17.8.1 Amendment	Fiona Bradley	International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions	We can measure increases in use of ICTs (info and communication tech) through indicators including: • Numbers of individuals using the Internet o existing data collected annually by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) in the World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators Database • Numbers of individuals owning a mobile phone o existing data collected annually by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) in the World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators Database	http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq/topics/libraries-development/documents/libraries-post-2015-development-agenda.pdf
34	17.8.2 Quality of internet access (bandwidth	17.8.1 & 17.8.2 Amendment	Fiona Bradley	International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions	IFLA supports indicators 1 & 2 for this target, but they need to be more nuanced to adequately measure access to ICT (info and communication tech): Numbers of individuals using the Internet • Collected annually by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Numbers of individuals owning a mobile phone • Collected annually by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU)	Form submission
35	Capacity Building Target 17.9: Enhance international support for implementing eective and targeted capacity-building in developing countries to support national plans to implement all the sustainable development goals, including through North-South, South-South and triangular cooperation	No general comments received			No general comments received
36	17.9.1 Number (share) of national plans to implement SDGs approved by governments by end of 2016 compared to by 2020.	17.9.1 Amendment	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	[Amended]: Number (share) of national and local plans to implement SDGs approved by governments by end of 2016 compared to by 2020.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
37	17.9.2 Substantial increase in capacity built through south-south cooperation
38		17.9 New Proposed Indicators	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	(b) Proposed indicators: 1. % of ODA supporting sub-national government programmes, urban and rural infrastructures[to be developed] Sources: OECD Limitations: Data not currently available 2. Share of ODA to decentralisation support and subnational government Linkages: N/A. Disaggregation by: country. Sources: OECD (Creditor Reporting System). Limitations: Data only available by country. Comments: A more specific indicator needs to be developed that tracks Official Development Assistance (ODA) funds that reach local governments. This should include OECD-DAC and non-DAC donors. See also proposed SDSN (July, 2014) indicators 104, 105 and 106.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
39	Trade Target 17.10: Promote a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization, including through the conclusion of negotiations under its Doha Development Agenda	No inputs received			No inputs received
40	17.10.1 Stock of potentially trade-restrictive measures in WTO members
41	17.10.2 Worldwide weighted tariff-average: a. MFN applied and preferential, b. Applied to Devd/Dvg/LDCs, c. Applied by Devd/Dvg/LDCs, and d. By main sectors
42	Trade Target 17.11: Significantly increase the exports of developing countries, in particular with a view to doubling the least developed countries’ share of global exports by 2020	No inputs received			No inputs received
43	17.11.1 Monitoring the evolution of developing countries export by partner group and key sectors. Such as: a) Exports of high technological content as proportion of total exports, b) Labourintensive exports as proportion of total exports (pro-poor exports), and c) Export diversification (by product; by market destination)
44	17.11.2 Value of non-oil exports from LDCs that are derived from sustainable management of natural resources
45	Trade Target 17.12: Realize timely implementation of duty-free and quota-free market access on a lasting basis for all least developed countries, consistent with World Trade Organization decisions, including by ensuring that preferential rules of origin applicable to imports from least developed countries are transparent and simple, and contribute to facilitating market access	No inputs received			No inputs received
46	17.12.1 Average tariffs faced by developing countries and LDCs by key sectors
47	17.12.2 Preferences utilization by developing and least developed countries on their export to developed countries
48	Systematic Issues; Policy and Institutional coherence Target 17.13: Enhance global macroeconomic stability, including through policy coordination and policy coherence	17.13 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	Can GDP really measure global economic stability and policy coherence? Suggestion: Indicators to include good governance, system risk and resilience	Form submission
49	17.13.1 GDP
50	17.13.2 Current account surplus and deficit/GDP
51	Systematic Issues; Policy and Institutional coherence Target 17.14: Enhance policy coherence for sustainable development	17.14 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	The indicators just score the number of countries which joined agreements Suggestion: Indicators to include how the agreements are implemented and whether enforcement mechanism is deployed	Form submission
52		17.14 General Comment	Kate Donald	Center for Economic & Social Rights	Assessment: Policy coherence for development cannot by any means be reduced to IMO or other pollution frameworks and conventions. A more adequate way of measuring policy coherence would be the existence of sustainable development impact assessments across all relevant policies. Impact assessments are critical to knowing and proving the extent to which one's own country's policies and practices (e.g. corporate accountability, environment, trade, investment, aid, tax, migration, intellectual property, debt, monetary, and financial regulation) have negative spillover effects on other countries. Examples from the Netherlands and Ireland show that the methodologies are available to measure the negative spillover effects of corporate tax policies, and similar assessments are available for trade and investment. We urge this to become a standardized practice across major economies—in line with their obligations under the UN Charter and applicable international (and EU) law. This is potentially relevant to targets 17.1, 17.2 and 17.3.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
53	17.14.1 Number of countries that have ratified and implemented relevant international instruments under the IMO (safety, security, environmental protection, civil liability and compensation and insurance)
54	17.14.2 Number of countries with multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder coordination mechanisms in place for a coordinated implementation of chemicals and wastes conventions and frameworks
55		17.14 Proposed New Indicator	Kate Donald	Center for Economic & Social Rights	CA/CESR Proposed indicators: Existence of human rights and sustainable development impact assessments of policies (e.g. corporate accountability, environment, trade, investment, aid, tax, migration, intellectual property, debt, monetary, and financial regulation), particularly on developing countries. Examples of methodologies and data sources: Robust methodologies abound in this area. The IMF's "Spillovers in International Corporate Taxation" is one, followed by the impact assessment developed by the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, "Analysing effects of Dutch corporate tax policy on developing countries." The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food also developed a methodology for assessing the impact of trade and investment agreements and policies.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/downloads/CA_CESR_indicators_UNstats.pdf
56	Systematic Issues; Policy and Institutional coherence Target 17.15: Respect each country’s policy space and leadership to establish and implement policies for poverty eradication and sustainable development	17.15 General Comment	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate this target to promote accountability.	Form submission
57		17.15 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	The indicators are given a non-feasibility ranking; this demonstrates a wrong view on how international fiscal cooperation effects SD Suggestion More explication is needed on the issue which might revert the rating of the indicators	Form submission
58	17.15.1 Number of countries signing on for sharing of fiscal information
59	17.15.2 Automatic transfer of financial information
60	Systematic Issues; Multi-stakeholer partnerships Target 17.16 Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multistakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and nancial resources, to support the achievement of the sustainable development goals in all countries, in particular developing countries	17.16 General Comment	Brendan Guy	Natural Resources Defense Council	Proposed indicators for this target should include the establishment and resourcing of a multi-stakeholder partnership platform at the national level.	Form submission
61		17.16 General Comment	Maria Vlahakis	Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)	VSO Comments: We would support an indicator here that helps to capture the role of civil society organisations (including volunteers) to global partnerships to sustainable development in mobilising and sharing knowledge and expertise. Just measuring changes in number of multi stakeholder partnership participants doesn’t help us to understand the distinctive contribution of civil society which is crucial.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view
62	17.16.1 Changes in the number of multi-stakeholder partnerships participants active in developing countries	17.16.1 General Comment	Nadja Wolfe	World Youth Alliance	The importance of the participation of developing countries in the development process cannot be overstated. For development to be truly successful, it must be driven by those it is designed to benefit. Approximately half of Member States participated in the survey, and developed countries are over-represented in the list (Annex 3). While all Member States have an important role to play, the targets and indicators matter most where the need is greatest. Therefore, we ask that before the list is finalized, additional efforts are made to seek input from developing nations, including additional time and translation to facilitate their full participation.	Form submission
63	17.16.2 Classification and trajectory of the above in terms of: a) Nature of partnership, b) Region: Global, regional, c) Objectives: Sharing technology, expertise etc. and d) Country type (where partnership is active)		Peter Chapman	Open Society Justice Initiative	Finally, civil society has an important role to play in assessing progress and the framework should elevate their, and people’s, experiences. Baskets of indicators will be a helpful tool to elevate people’s experiences and perspectives. These indicators should draw on existing sources of data while simultaneously encouraging NSOs, other government agencies and civil society to use, and strengthen the collection and use of, new sources of data. Data collected for each indicator should be disaggregated as much as possible to help governments to design better policies, identify inequalities, and focus development efforts on those who need them most.	Form submission
64		17.16.1 Amendment	Robert Bakiika	Environmental Management for Livelihood Improvement Bwaise Facility (EMLI)	[Amended]: "% of multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries equipped with technical and financial support".	Form submission
65		17.16 Proposed New Indicator	Adjmal Dulloo	Post-2015 Volunteering Working Group	Proposed Indicator: Number of full-time equivalent volunteers mobilized through multi-stakeholder partnerships	https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YWNYdKSM6KYZ-Ne53LmGvrtZpGMrE__j5ZecJBb_kkY/edit
66	Systematic Issues; Multi-stakeholer partnerships Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships	17.17 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	The indicator should monitor ‘meanfingful’ engagement of youth organizations and networks in the context of partnerships.	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/youth-targets-indicators_across-the-sdgs.pdf
67		17.17 General Comment	Mandeep Tiwana	CIVICUS	Under this proposed target, in relation to encouraging and promoting “effective public, public-private, and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resource strategies of partnerships,” it would be relevant to measure the existence of enabling policies and practices with regard to civil society participation in legislative and official decision making processes. The current emphasis on measuring the number of public-private partnerships (PPPs) does not evaluate the quality of official engagement with civil society.	Form submission and http://civicus.org/eei/
68	17.17.1 Number of PPP projects
69	17.17.2 Number of PPP projects implemented by developing countries	17.17.2 General Comment	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	Generally indicators relating to target 17.17 needs to be enhanced - The only suggested indicator is the number of PPP projects. This reduces the goal to a promotion of private sector involvement in development activities. This does not express the idea of Goal 17;17. The present indicator will not measure civil society partnerships. Moreover, it completely ignores the need to measure the effectiveness of partnerships. Effectiveness can be measured by sustainability and also an indication can be formulated which examines the number of civil society partnerships established.	Form submission
70		17.17.2 General Comment	Maria Vlahakis	Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO)	VSO comments: Under this target we think it would be relevant to measure the existence of enabling policies and practices with regard to civil society participation in legislative and official decision making processes. The current emphasis on measuring the number of public-private partnerships (PPPs) does not evaluate the quality of official engagement with civil society. An enabling environment for civil society and civil society’s ability to engage in multi-stakeholder partnerships are measurable and have been monitored through several sources of data, including the Enabling Environment Index, Enabling Environment National Assessment, CSO Sustainability Index, Freedom in the World Survey, NGO Law Monitor, and dedicated monitoring efforts by the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation and the CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness. Several organisations including CIVICUS are in the process of further refining their methodologies to measure the extent of civic freedoms and enabling environment for civil society. Additionally there is a risk that this indicator can create perverse incentives for privatization of service delivery. For example they could have negative implications on the education sector given that it is the prime responsibility of the state in delivering education and the past poor track record of a large number of PPPs in delivering equitable quality education.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Z8A0T20FQ_aXhvdTh1NllKNkk/view
71		17.17.2 Amendment	Robert Bakiika	Environmental Management for Livelihood Improvement Bwaise Facility (EMLI)	Should be edited to read "# of partnerships adhering to the Rights Based Approach in Developing Countries"	Form submission
72	Systematic Issues; Data, monitoring and accountability Target 17.18: By 2020, enhance capacity-building support to developing countries, including for least developed countries and small island developing States, to increase signicantly the availability of high-quality, timely and reliable data disaggregated by income, gender, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability, geographic location and other characteristics relevant in national contexts	17.18 General Comment	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	Similarly, the indicators related to target 17.18 do not sufficiently measure the target. Measuring institutional arrangements will not measure a significant increase in availability. An indicator which measures increases in the production of publicly available statistics by SIDS, developing countries and least developed countries; disaggregated as described in the target. Additionally, there has to be an indicator measures the increase in capacity building resources available to these countries.	Form submission
73		17.18 General Comment	Andrew Griffiths	Sightsavers	This target should have an indicator on the ability of national statistical offices to successfully disaggregate data	Form submission
74	17.18.1 Number of countries that have national statistical legislation (that [a] enshrine statistical independence; [b]mandate data collection; and [c] secure access to national administrative data)	17.18.1 General Comment	Naiara Costa	Beyond 2015	The categories of disaggregation are not developed. The IEAG-SDGs should start from the categories proposed in the Open Working Group report for this target	Form submission
75		17.18.1 General Comment	Roland Bardy, Raymond Saner and Lichia Saner-Yiu	Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND), Geneva	What is missing is an approach that relates macro-level indexes to the micro level Develop macro-micro linkages in SD indexes and incorporate disaggregated data at regional / national level and connect this to public goods usage	Form submission
76	17.18.2 Number of countries that have formal institutional arrangements for the coordination of the compilation of official statistics (at international, national and regional level)	17.18.2 Amendment	Kate Shea Baird	Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments	[Amended]: Number of countries that have formal institutional arrangements for the coordination of the compilation of official statistics (at international, regional, national, subnational and level)	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
77		17.18 New Proposed Indicator	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	Add: Number of countries that have disaggregated data by income, gender, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability, geographic location and other characteristics relevant in national context. It is not sufficient to have capacity and institutional arrangements. It is crucial to ensure that data collected are disaggregated in order to under-stand specific needs.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMz3_19XnxHcHVuVzU5eUVfcEU/view
78		17.18 New Proposed Indicator	Lars Vogelsang	Global2015	Indicator 17.18.3 (new) Additional indicator: Overall level of statistical capacity (WB) The two indicators cover activities to enhance capacity-building, but not the resulting capacities. Data for low and middle-income countries is available through a composite indicator developed by the World Bank. Rating: the same as the other two indicators (AAA).	http://www.global2015.net/factsheets/
79	Systematic Issues; Data, monitoring and accountability Target 17.19: By 2030, build on existing initiatives to develop measurements of progress on sustainable development that complement gross domestic product, and support statistical capacity-building in developing countries	17.19 New Proposed Indicator	Adjmal Dulloo	Post-2015 Volunteering Working Group	Proposed Indicator: Number of countries that have implemented the 2008 System of National Accounts and developed satellite accounts on non-profit institutions and volunteering	https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YWNYdKSM6KYZ-Ne53LmGvrtZpGMrE__j5ZecJBb_kkY/edit
80		17.19 New Proposed Indicator	Emily Auckland	Bioregional	i) Number of nations (and proportion of UN member states) that report regularly (at least once every three years) on the full suite of chosen SDG indicators. ii) Number of nations (and proportion of UN member states) that report on > 66% of the chosen indicators. All of the proposed SCP indicators complement GDP and, taken together, measure progress towards sustainable development. The two indicators proposed for this target will shed light on whether nations are increasing their statistical capacity to measure and report on progress.	https://www.dropbox.com/s/4b69zmbaeagcmhl/Bioregional-Emily_Submission%20to%20UNGLS.xlsx?dl=0
81	17.19.1 Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (Nordhaus/Tobin)
82	17.19.2 Gross National Happiness


1	Category: Civil Society Engagement, Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups, Human Rights, Sustainability, Policy Coherence, Data, Number of Indicators, Cross-cutting Approach, Indicator Framework, Other	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2	Civil Society Engagement	Adjmal Dulloo	Post-2015 Volunteering Working Group	- The people-centred approach of the SDGs are not properly reflected in the technical report and we believe that there should be more focus on the means by which citizens contribute to sustainable development on a daily basis. As stated in the SG’s synthesis report, volunteerism is a powerful and cross-cutting mean of implementation and as such we believe that the contribution of volunteers to the SDGs should be measured. - We know that the elaboration of the SDG indicators is a technical and political process. However, as the post-2015 development agenda aims to be universal and inclusive, we truly believe that civil society must be included, in their discussions and then in their implementation. Their concrete knowledge of sustainability and their experience in collecting and measuring data should be drawn upon, specifically their expertise in collecting dissagregated data. - We also believe that there is a need to go beyond what is easily measured. When measuring change, we should not only focus on numbers but even more so on the actual transformative change in communities. Attention should be paid to qualitative indicators which can show the transformative dimension of the framework, in particular the positive change of society (social wellbeing, social cohesion, etc), as we will not be able to truly assess progress without them. We should measure what is needed, so that we don’t fall into the trap of just doing what is measurable.	Form submission
3	Civil Society Engagement	Tetet Lauron	CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness (CPDE)	Civil society can and should play an essential role in monitoring the SDGs including through institutionalized participation at all levels, connecting local realities to global policy debates, and in promoting new paradigms for social transformation and development justice. Civil society and proportional representation from the G77 countries in the expert group is necessary and crucial.	Form submitted
4	Civil Society Engagement	John Romano	TAP Network	The onset of a data revolution since the inception of the MDGs provides an opportunity to develop an indicator framework to monitor Goal 16 - and all the SDGs - that draws on official as well as third-party data sources, including data produced by the UN and other multilateral institutions, civil society organizations, research institutions, academia and the private sector. Efforts to promote innovation through accessible technology that supports participatory monitoring and data collection, where all citizens are empowered to collect and use data should be supported. In particular, governance institutions and processes that take into account and address the barriers to participation faced by the world’s most marginalized people - including women, persons with disabilities and all vulnerable groups who are supposed to benefit from the SDGs - must be strengthened. While national statistical systems will continue to play a key role, a multi-stakeholder approach offers several benefits: · It would help to respond to the reality of limited official data sources for some of the targets and help improve data availability. As the UNSC Friends of the Chair Group has argued, “the necessary data revolution is a joint responsibility of Governments, international and regional organisations, the private sector and civil society”. · It is widely accepted that meeting the new goals will require deeper partnerships involving diverse stakeholders – for example leveraging the potential of the private sector and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). The indicator framework is no different. · When it meets standards of data quality and comparability, third-party data can supplement and validate data produced by NSOs. This will help create a more accurate picture of progress.	http://tapnetwork2015.org/our-work/sdg-goal-16-indicators/
5	Civil Society Engagement	Arthur Lyon Dahl	International Environment Forum	The UN should organize a process with UN task managers for each SDG, as was done for Agenda 21 after UNCED, to improve existing indicators and fill gaps in the targets covered. Other partners (UN agencies, OECD, CSOs) could be responsible for indicators in their areas of competence that are beyond the capacity of national statisticians or need further development. Some international NGOs (Transparency International, etc.) and research centers (Earth Institute etc) already produce useful indicators in complement to official indicators. For higher level integration, UNDP could harmonize all economic indicators, UNEP EMG environmental indicators and the World Bank social indicators. The highest integration would be in the Sustainable Development Report. A broader stakeholder process should encourage complementary indicators at national and local levels, so that the top-down SDG process is supported by a bottom-up response of local communities and the public to the SDGs. The statisticians cannot do it all by themselves. Indicators are also needed to assess development at the individual level and the role of governments and other institutions in facilitating individual progress and well-being (Dahl 2014). This also would capture the ethical dimensions of justice and equity more effectively than national averages. Such indicators would complement the collective measures in the SDG indicators and give the process a more human face.	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3qLzppTM6pCXzlhei1zNW1Mb00/view
6	Civil Society Engagement	Eve de la Mothe Karoubi	UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network	SDSN supports many of the important conclusions from the UNSC report, namely the call for a concise indicator framework. SDSN has been working to develop an integrated, comprehensive set of SDG indicators for more than 18 months. Our proposal, "Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the SDGs", was informed by two global public consultations, as well as extensive dialogue with leading experts from National Statistical Offices (NSOs) UN agencies, as well as academics, civil society, and private sector representatives. During this process, we moved from an initial long-list of over 900 indicators to a concise set of 100 global monitoring indicators, which can comprehensively track all 169 OWG targets. In addition, the UNSC report provided recommendations on a roadmap for developing indicators and recommended the establishment of a multi-stakeholder process, via an Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs). As outlined in the report, we urge the IAEG to engage a broad range of civil society, academia, and experts, from outside of the UN system.	Form submission and http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/150320-SDSN-Indicator-Report.pdf
7	Civil Society Engagement / Data	Eva Sandis	NGO Committee on Migration	We endorse the formation of the Indicators as a technical process to be handled by the Statistical Commission and the IAEG--with input at all stages from Civil Society. We strongly urge adoption of the provisional or similar global Indicators for Targets 5.2, 8.8, 10.7, 10c, and 16.2 (all migration related). We urge consideration of Indicator Indexes. for example for 10.7 (safe, orderly, regular migration). We call for the disaggregation of Indicators by migratory status. We support the adoption of additional Indicators for regional, national, and thematic monitoring.	Form submission
8	Civil Society Engagement / Data	Beth Fredrick	Advance Family Planning, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for Population and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health	While the post-2015 indicator framework must capitalize on existing measurement systems and existing data, new indicators will be needed. There is a need for investment in new data collection and indicators development to fill critical gaps and to ensure rights-based measurements that will make a difference in people’s lives and draw connections among various goals and targets. The indicator framework should not be perceived as a discrete agreement to be adopted at a single point in time; there must be scope for further elaboration of it in the coming years. Civil society should also be included in Global Monitoring Groups and funding should be made available to ensure adequate representation from the Global South. Transparency One of the experiences and lessons learned from Advance Family Planning is that it is very difficult to monitor resources and progress as governments currently do not publicly report on investments in pursuit of the goals, and how these resources were raised and expended. Without this data, we cannot analyze whether development goals, such as the SDGs, are well planned, monitored and achieved. The success of national frameworks based on the SDGs depend on the active engagement and accountability of subnational governments. Focusing on the national level alone ignores the roles and resources of regional and provincial government leaders. By addressing the devolution of governance, the SDGs can set a firmer foundation for long-term sustainability of development policies and programs. Indicators At a minimum, data should be disaggregated on the basis of age, sex, gender, geography, income, disability, race and ethnicity and other factors as relevant including to monitor inequalities. The number of indicators should not be arbitrarily limited. All targets require indicators and may require multiple indicatotrs. Making data freely accessible, transparent, and user-friendly will be essential for implementers and advocates at national and local levels. Budgetary and expenditure data are crucial for developing effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels. They are also vital for ensuring responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels, including subnational levels.	Form submission
9	Civil Society Engagement/ Number of Indicators	Mari Ullmann	Plan International	Plan International urges the Commission to be more ambitious in its recommendations for what can be achieved by 2030 and go beyond what is being measured currently. Many of the indicators proposed in the technical report seem to address the most expedient concepts of complex SDG targets, rather than the most transformative aspects. In other cases, the indicators simply do not address critical concepts within the targets. The ratings compiled in the report do not necessarily reflect the feasibility of measurement or the many indicators that are already being measured by a variety of organizations and institutions worldwide. Instead of relying solely on official experiences, the discussion on indicators should take advantage of a broader range of global expertise and capacity, and engage statistical experts drawn from academia and civil society. In order to achieve a transformative post-2015 agenda for all, especially boys and girls, adolescents, and young people, Plan makes the following recommendations. • The number of indicators selected for global tracking should not be limited arbitrarily. Indicators selected for global tracking should be the most transformative and indicative of progress toward the relevant target. • Qualitative indicators must be incorporated, including structural, process, and outcome indicators. • The indicators should facilitate people on the ground to directly participate in the process of measurement of progress, from design, collection of data, and analysis and communication of the results.	Form submission
10	Civil Society Engagement / Data / Number of Indicators	Fabio Palacio	International Movement ATD Fourth World	Through participatory research, ATD Fourth World has identified three key principles for an indicator framework that adequately captures sustainable development among people living in poverty in both high and low income countries: 1) Visibility and Invisibility- It is important to acknowledge that people living in extreme poverty have vastly different experiences than the rest of the population. They are often left out of survey data and thus, their progress is hidden in national averages and censuses. It is important to disaggregate by income as comprehensively as possible so as to render their experience visible. 2) Participation- People living in poverty have the most immediate insights on their own experiences with sustainable development policies. For this reason, it would be beneficial for policy makers and other stakeholders to work with people living in poverty to devise indicators that reflect their own progress. Further, data collected by organizations that work closely with these populations should be included in the final indicator framework. 3) Beyond Quantitative Data, Beyond Official Statistics- People’s experiences are not always quantifiable without taking a person’s perceptions on a situation. Issues like discrimination, participation, and inclusion are most often best captured by qualitative data or perception-based indicators. In order to fully capture the experience of poverty, these kinds of data need to be included in an indicator framework. Number of indicators In internal discussions, and reflected in their report, the statistical commission has expressed its reluctance to implement an indicator framework that contains too many indicators. Of course, there are many targets for which data is sparse or non-existent. However, the commission’s initial focus on a ‘limited number’ of indicators should be immediately problematic for Member States. By limiting indicators from the start, certain hard-fought targets will lose their capacity to be monitored. Alternative: instead of arriving at a limited number of indicators at the beginning of the process, the commission should identify all the necessary indicators and plot the countries for which adequate data exist. Once the gaps are delineated, it will be easier to build statistical capacity in a targeted effort, to fill in necessary gaps. States and other development partners can fill in gaps according to their indicator priorities as time passes. The statistical commission’s assessment was made from the perspective of official statistics. Too many of NSO responses (especially on feasibility) were based on whether their national systems could collect or analyze. However, enormous swaths of global data are collected and analyzed by other development actors. It is no coincidence that no subjective indicators received grades of ‘A’ for feasibility, or that qualitative data was not mentioned in the report, and this shows the limiting nature of a the business-as-usual approach to data collection. Alternative: instead of focusing on the limits to feasible data collection and analysis at NSOs and by NSSs, the statistical commission should map the number of partners at the national level who collect data and crosscheck the data they collect with the gaps in data they face in their countries. In this regard, states must make an important step to go beyond official statistics (or to make non-official statistics official). The IAEG on the Data Revolution recommended a World Forum for Sustainable Development Data, which would be very well placed to help blend data sources. These alternatives will help build participation at all levels of data collection and monitoring, building capacities, ownership, and accountability at the national level. Make up of the IAEG-SDGs and its High Level Group are two critical aspects of the IAEG that could vastly enhance its work with respect to the previous two recommendations. Firstly, on membership, there is no space given to civil society to sit on the panel. Many organizations that work closely with people living in poverty also have statistical experts who could bridge the gap between the technical work that needs to be realized and the real experiences of people who need to benefit from post-2015 policies. Further, civil society representatives could better identify ongoing data collection efforts being carried out at the regional, national, and sub-national level by civil society organizations of all kinds. This will be critical in filling in data gaps, at least until NSS capacities are adequately built. The UN Statistical Division, which will serve as the secretariat for the IAEG-SDGs, should benefit from the great participatory work being done by UN Division for Sustainable Development. UNSD should develop mechanisms for consultation at all levels to ensure that feedback from other stakeholders with interest and information on data collection and indicator development can establish communications with the IAEGSDGs.	http://4thworldmovement.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ATD-Response-to-Indicator-Framework-Long.pdf
11	Civil Society Engagement/ Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups/ Data	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	As the Major Group of Children and Youth, we acknowledge the importance of the indicators to measure the Sustainable Development Goals. A strong indicator framework is needed for us to understand progress made against the commitments and to identify gaps in the implementation. It also ultimately links to strong monitoring and accountability regarding the Post-2015 agenda - issues that have been called upon as crucial by young people from the outset of the discussions on Post-2015. We agree with the UN Statistical Commission that this is a technical process which requires time and needs to be conducted in stages, and although we understand the need for a dialogue with the political process, we call for the indicators to not be politically negotiated. It is crucial to recognise children and young people’s role and participation in all stages of SDGs, hence also in the identification of the indicators and monitoring & review mechanisms, and support children and young people’s inclusion that so far has been championed throughout post-2015 process, from consultations to for example the recent UNSG Synthesis Report. What is measured, counts. Children and Youth people want to count and be counted. These are our key recommendations: 1. Process: We agree with the UN Statistical Commission that this is a technical process which requires time and needs to be conducted in stages. We understand the need for a dialogue with the political process and intergovernmental negotiations on the goals and targets, but indicators should not be politically negotiated. Further, research and development of the indicator framework should remain open after the UN Statistical Commission meeting in 2016. The indicator framework should not be perceived as a discrete agreement to be adopted at a single point in time; there must be scope for further elaboration of it in the coming years. 2. Role of Civil society: We acknowledge the leading role of national statistical offices in developing the indicator framework to ensure national ownership. However, we also want to stress the importance of collaborating with civil society, in particular children and young people and their organisations, around this area. Civil society has a great deal to offer, particularly with respect to the development of indicators for targets that resist quantitative measurement. At the global level, this could mean giving civil society a formal role in, or clear ways to contribute to, the work of the Inter-agency Expert Group on the Sustainable Development Goals (IAG-SDGs) and the High-level group (HLG) that will provide strategic leadership for the SDG implementation process. This will be important not only for the development of indicators, but also in the following years. Civil society should be engaged to be able to share experiences, encourage good practices and to identifying missing indicators and gaps along the way. Including civil society in this process is not only necessary at the global level but also at the national level. Governments and National statistical offices should guarantee the involvement of civil society in the national indicator setting, data collection and monitoring of the SDGs, and ensure their voices are heard. Finally, we are calling for a balanced regional representation in those new bodies, and funding should be made available to ensure meaningful representation from the Global South. 3. Data disaggregation: Although most stakeholders seem to agree on the need for data disaggregation, we are calling for a platform for further discussion and work on this. Only including a preamble which states that all indicators will be disaggregated ‘where appropriate’ or ‘where possible’ will not be sufficient. The need for disaggregated data is paramount. For example, today, 50% of the world‘s population is under 25 and young people represent the largest generation in history. At the same time, many young people are experiencing challenges with finding employment, and children and young people, specially the most vulnerable, can’t access resources to assist them with issues related to health, education and inequality. In order to address these global issues and the risks associated with them, policymakers, decision makers and civil society must be armed with good quality, readily accessible and disaggregated data on children and youth. Currently this data is lacking globally, and there is inconsistency in how data is disaggregated, and how young people are defined. We call for data disaggregation by gender, and by age in five-year intervals, which is crucial to understand key demographics such as adolescent girls and early childhood. Investing in resources and capacity building for disaggregating data is essential to ensure we have the right data to make the right decisions for a sustainable future. 4. Beyond official statistics and data: Single indicators are often not enough to measure a target. There is a need to not only measure the objective situation, but also gather information on people’s perceptions on certain issues (perception-based indicators). Only then we will be able to state if progress has been made or not, and if we are on the way to achieving the commitments made. Asking people what matters to them most and their opinions of change will also help stimulate public debate and is essential for holding decision-makers to account. Qualitative data should be an essential part of the new indicator framework. Innovations in data collection can, and are already, producing this kind of data, through for example participatory monitoring and research, which is a great way to engage citizens in monitoring and data collection. Further, if the post-2015 framework is to be truly transformative, it must harness the unique ways children and young people are generating data. These data, and the means through which they are created, also offer limitless opportunities for how the development agenda more broadly is owned by the next generation, and should hence be considered in this discussion. The indicator framework should therefore: o Build on existing data: The post-2015 indicator framework must capitalize on existing measurement systems, and make effective use of existing data. o Include new indicators and data: There should be room for the development of new indicators to better capture information on areas where data is already being collected (e.g. health including sexual and reproductive health and rights, gender equality, early childhood care and development, education). Further, there will be a need to develop new indicators and ways to measure ‘newer’ areas such as inequality, discrimination, inclusive and responsive governance and means of implementation. Finally, the indicator framework should be understandable to the wider public to also enhance communication between policy makers and their constituency. 5. Global and national level indicators: In order for us to be able to compare progress against the SDGs, which is a universal agenda, the SDGs need to have universal indicators that can be shared across countries. Throughout the development of the SDGs, policy and decision-makers and civil society alike, have been calling for an ambitious, inclusive and long-term agenda. We recognise the capacity constraints of member states, but hope that with substantial financial and capacity building support, and with the involvement of civil society and private sector, we can also aim for a strong, effective and ambitious indicator framework. 6. Open, accessible data and role of children and young people in monitoring SDGs: Further, the role of civil society and citizens, in particular young people and children organizations and youth organisations, in the actual monitoring process, needs to be acknowledged. All children and youth organisations should be empowered to monitor and implement the Sustainable Development Goals, through access to good quality, open, timely data and information accessible and understandable by children. Evidence shows that generating real-time data that can contribute to children young people’s ability to monitor implementation and communicate findings can be an effective and immediate method of promoting accountability. Availability and access to data are essential components of inclusive, effective development. 7. Capacity building: Based on the discussions and feedback from the UN Statistical Commission, we agree on the need for capacity building of national statistical offices to be able to meet these new expectations. Further, it is also important to recognise the need to match this by a concerted and comprehensive effort to build the capacity of the stakeholders who can help generate and use this data. Civil society organisations and citizens, especially children and youth, are often ill equipped to collect, analyse, interpret and manage data effectively. This impedes their ability to undertake evidence-based actions including policy development, advocacy, and decision-making. These standards should be relevant, fit for purpose, and translatable for the most basic community operations, such as small grassroots youth organisations, to ensure no one is left behind in the ‘data revolution’. Finally, there is an urgent need to concretize financing and capacity-building mechanisms to put this into practice, in particular in developing countries. Innovative financing to fund the data revolution should not come at the expense of the building the capacity of the state to collect data, but complement this.	Sources: • Walker, D. and Pereznieto, P. with Bergh, G. and Smith, K. (2014) Partners for Change: Young people and governance in a post-2015 world. London: Overseas Development Institute, for Plan UK and Restless Development. Available here. • Stefanoni, S., Beales, S et. al (2014) “Leave No One Behind”: A discussion paper on options for integrating youth and older people into the post-2015 development framework. Available here. • Rodríguez Takeuchi, L. and Hine, S. with Chávez, C. (2015) Asking people what they think: Using perceptions data to monitor the post-2015 agenda. London: Overseas Development Institute. Available here. • Harper, C., Nowacka, K., Alder, H., Ferrant, G. (2014) Measuring women’s empowerment and social transformation in the post-2015 agenda. London: OECD and Overseas Development Institute. Available here. • UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda (2013) Statistics and indicators for the post-2015 development agenda. https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/mgcy-position-paper-on-indicators-for-the-sustainable-development-goals-f.pdf and https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
12	Civil Society Engagement/ Data/ Number of Indicators	Rineke van Dam	Countdown 2015 Europe	As Countdown 2015 Europe, a consortium of 15 SRHR organizations from 12 European countries advocating for global sexual and reproductive health and rights, we would like to emphasis that the identification of indicators should not be politically negotiated in detail amongst UN member states, and should be, as indicated in the UN Statistical Commission’s technical report, a technical process. We would like to emphasis the importance of inviting and including civil society to provide input into the process of the development of indicators, including in identifying, developing, reviewing and monitoring indicators for the coming years. We see it as a major strength that the UNSC’s technical report does not discuss a maximum number of indicators. Focus should be on identifying the right indicators that comprehensively reflect the objectives of each of the targets of the post-2015 framework, rather than on focusing rigidly on a specific number of indicators that is decided beforehand. We would like to emphasize the importance of disaggregated data across all indicators. At a minimum, data should be disaggregated on the basis of: gender, sex, age (including 10 to 14), geographic location and income. Disaggregation should be specified for each indicator and core factors of disaggregation should be consistent across the framework. Protection of the confidentiality of data collected is key. While the post-2015 indicator framework must capitalize on existing measurement systems and existing data, new indicators will be needed. There is a need for investment in new data collection and indicators development to fill critical gaps and to ensure truly rights-based measurements that will make a difference in peoples’ lives and create a transformative change. We emphasize the importance of a continued process, also after a set of SDG indicators has been decided upon. The constantly evolving data landscape must be taken into account and the process of developing indicators should be seen as ongoing rather than ending at a particular finite point. In the new indicator framework, the importance of investments in the capacity of national statistics offices must be a priority.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Nr9sCL0vxncWg2SWE5c2NwYTA/view?usp=sharing
13	Civil Society Engagement / Data / Number of Indicators	Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign	Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal	Through participatory research, ATD Fourth World has identified three key principles for an indicator framework that adequately captures sustainable development among people living in poverty in both high and low income countries: 1) Visibility and Invisibility- It is important to acknowledge that people living in extreme poverty have vastly different experiences than the rest of the population. They are often left out of survey data and thus, their progress is hidden in national averages and censuses. It is important to disaggregate by income as comprehensively as possible so as to render their experience visible. 2) Participation- People living in poverty have the most immediate insights on their own experiences with sustainable development policies. For this reason, it would be beneficial for policy makers and other stakeholders to work with people living in poverty to devise indicators that reflect their own progress. Further, data collected by organizations that work closely with these populations should be included in the final indicator framework. 3) Beyond Quantitative Data, Beyond Official Statistics- People’s experiences are not always quantifiable without taking a person’s perceptions on a situation. Issues like discrimination, participation, and inclusion are most often best captured by qualitative data or perception-based indicators. In order to fully capture the experience of poverty, these kinds of data need to be included in an indicator framework. The following analysis of the Statistical Commission’s submission to Member States of March 2015 is based on these principles. Dangerous ‘CBB’ ratings: The following indicators represent important social and economic aspects of poverty that are not measured in any other indicators. This section attempts to emphasize their importance while highlighting the number of countries that currently have data. ‘Political Guidance’ from MS to the SC- Some Key Elements Number of indicatorsIn internal discussions, and reflected in their report, the statistical commission has expressed its reluctance to implement an indicator framework that contains too many indicators. Of course, there are many targets for which data is sparse or non-existent. However, the commission’s initial focus on a ‘limited number’ of indicators should be immediately problematic for Member States. By limiting indicators from the start, certain hard-fought targets will lose their capacity to be monitored. Alternative: instead of arriving at a limited number of indicators at the beginning of the process, the commission should identify all the necessary indicators and plot the countries for which adequate data exist. Once the gaps are delineated, it will be easier to build statistical capacity in a targeted effort, to fill in necessary gaps. States and other development partners can fill in gaps according to their indicator priorities as time passes. Harness the data revolution by blending data sourcesThe statistical commission’s assessment was made from the perspective of official statistics. Too many of NSO responses (especially on feasibility) were based on whether their national systems could collect or analyze 11 See background document to the indicators as submitted by the UN Technical Support Team. However, enormous swaths of global data are collected and analyzed by other development actors. It is no coincidence that no subjective indicators received grades of ‘A’ for feasibility, or that qualitative data was not mentioned in the report, and this shows the limiting nature of a the business-as-usual approach to data collection. Alternative: instead of focusing on the limits to feasible data collection and analysis at NSOs and by NSSs, the statistical commission should map the number of partners at the national level who collect data and crosscheck the data they collect with the gaps in data they face in their countries. In this regard, states must make an important step to go beyond official statistics (or to make non-official statistics official). The IAEG on the Data Revolution recommended a World Forum for Sustainable Development Data, which would be very well placed to help blend data sources. These alternatives will help build participation at all levels of data collection and monitoring, building capacities, ownership, and accountability at the national level. Make up of the IAEG-SDGs and its High Level Group There are two critical aspects of the IAEG that could vastly enhance its work with respect to the previous two recommendations. Firstly, on membership, there is no space given to civil society to sit on the panel. Many organizations that work closely with people living in poverty also have statistical experts who could bridge the gap between the technical work that needs to be realized and the real experiences of people who need to benefit from post-2015 policies. Further, civil society representatives could better identify ongoing data collection efforts being carried out at the regional, national, and sub-national level by civil society organizations of all kinds. This will be critical in filling in data gaps, at least until NSS capacities are adequately built. The UN Statistical Division, which will serve as the secretariat for the IAEG-SDGs, should benefit from the great participatory work being done by UN Division for Sustainable Development. UNSD should develop mechanisms for consultation at all levels to ensure that feedback from other stakeholders with interest and information on data collection and indicator development can establish communications with the IAEGSDGs.	Form submission and http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf
14	Civil Society Engagement / Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	Naiara Costa	Beyond 2015	• Several references to the post-2015 agenda as only a “development” agenda. It must be clear that this is a sustainable development agenda and the elaboration of indicators must take this seriously into account. • Positive that disaggregation was described as “feasible with strong effort” and the need to “ensure disaggregation of indicators and to include a human rights dimension to the indicator framework. • The report focuses very much on the feasibility, relevance and suitability of indicators but makes no mention to the principle of non-regression. • The approach for a limited number of indicators must support, not undermine, the interdependency between Sustainable Development Goal areas. • The report did not properly emphasize the need for broader measures of progress beyond GDP. • Unless availability, accessibility, “shareability” and inclusivity of data is also understood to refer to citizens this does not live up to the ambitions that the ‘data revolution’ can contribute to accountability towards people on the ground. • The inclusion of qualitative indicators is also crucial to allow for reaching out to the most vulnerable and marginalized. • We welcome the commitment to a universal set of indicators but we are concerned that the indicators proposed so far do not capture the entirety of the ambition of the SDGs. • The report is not clear on how civil society and non-governmental experts could be able to engage on the development of the national-level indicators. There is no clarity about how society will engage in the work of the IAEG. • The ‘bottom up’ approach to data is missing from the report, excluding the voices of the poor and marginalized. • We were concerned that feasibility was considered based on the current resources and expertise only of national statistical offices rather than national statistical capacities. We should not only be pushing for what we can monitor today, but what we want to be monitoring comprehensively by 2030. • The final set of global indicators will need to be proofed from a universality perspective. • Participation is critical – the ambition of the post-2015 data revolution will only be achieved if the capacities of the NSOs are supplemented with the collaboration with other actors, including civil society organizations.	Form submission and http://beyond2015.org/sites/default/files/Final%20-%20B2015%20key%20comments%20to%20the%20UNSC%20Report%20-%20March%2023%202015.pdf
15	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups	Sifisosami Dube	Gender Links	Gender equality: It is commendable that the UN Statistical Commission has come this far in developing and rating indicators which are a framework for implementing and achieving the targets for the SDGs. However, as gender equality movements, we are disappointed that there are roughly about 35 gender sensitive indicators developed so far yet gender cuts across all the SDGs. The issue of food security which is of great importance especially in the Southern African region has to be viewed with a gender lens to address the gaps of vulnerable groups including women. The indicators need to push for strong constitutional provisions for women to be in decision making positions otherwise without this women in decision making will always remain low.	Form submission
16	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	Polly Meeks	ADD International	The SGDs contain nine explicit references to persons with disabilities. The disability community recommends maintaining these explicit references of persons with disabilities. - Maintain the explicit references to persons with disabilities in line with the Report of the Open Working Group (on inclusive education, employment, reducing inequalities, inclusive cities, disaggregation of data by disability status). Any technical proofing of the targets happen, we recommend the additional references in the targets related to (1) poverty eradication; (2) access to universal health coverage and (3) empowerment of women with disabilities, including ending all forms of violence. I strongly recommend that the global indicator framework disaggregates data by disability across all goals and targets. - We call for indicators to be disaggregated by disability throughout the indicator framework, in line with the principle that no target should be considered met unless it is met for all groups, and in line with the goals of the data revolution.
17	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	Verity McGivern	HelpAge International (with contributions from Stakeholder Group on Ageing)	This commitment to leave no one behind gives clear guidance for indicators which should be both based on existing data sets and on aspirational future sets reflecting the Commission’s recognition of possible “future refinements as data sources and methodologies improve”. There are key indicators where older people must be prioritised from the outset. These must include healthy life expectancy at 60 and social protection floors. For several of the proposed indicators, it is feasible to use or extend current internationally available data to ensure coverage for older people: 1.Linking indicators & targets Age disaggregation in the goals and targets is inconsistent despite age featuring in 9 proposed goals and numerous targets, alongside references to “for all”, “all” and “lifelong. 2. Determining achievement Current proposed indicators will not always show that target has been achieved. 3. Clarifying age It is insufficient to treat all people 65+ as one cohort. The UNDESA has recommended disaggregation as follows: 0-5 years; 6-14; 15-24; 25-59; and then in 5 year bands. Data must at least be disaggregated into age cohorts of 49-60, 60-70 & 70+.	Form submission
18	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	Zoe Gray	International Agency for Prevention of Blindness	International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness (IAPB) welcomes the consultation on the Technical Report. The indicators will need more work and development if they are to measure success in line with ‘goals and targets will only be considered met if met for all groups’ and thus avoid repeating the mistake of the Millennium Development Goals. This will require disaggregation across the targets and significantly bolstering statistical capacity at country level to adequately disaggregate for groups at risk of exclusion, including persons with disabilities.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByNrusvkCGCLWWVKdTVOZE9NYVk/view?usp=sharing
19	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	Mahesh Chandrasekar	Leonard Cheshire Disability	We welcome the report's commitment to the principle of ‘leave no one behind’. We acknowledge the constraint of limiting global level monitoring of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to a small number of indicators. However, in order to ensure the SDGs are inclusive of people with disabilities and truly transform the development agenda, Leonard Cheshire Disability calls for the final global indicator framework to: 1. Disaggregate data by disability across all goals and targets. 2. Include additional indicators and more references to persons with disabilities in the global indicator framework, in order to monitor the impact of the SDGs on persons with disabilities. We recommend the inclusion of the following specific indicators: o Ratio of persons living on less than US$1.25 per day who are disabled. o The percentage of schools those are accessible to children with disabilities. o Proportion of children with disabilities in need of assistive devices, adapted curricula, and appropriate learning materials who have regular access to such resources. o The percentage of teachers receiving in-service training each year on inclusive education o Proportion of persons with disabilities who use government-supported health care as compared to total population Furthermore, as technical proofing of the indicators is completed we recommend additional references to persons with disabilities in the indicators regarding empowerment of women (including participation, access to sexual and reproductive health, and ending all forms of violence), poverty eradication and, health. 3. Ensure that all references to accessibility in the goals and targets are interpreted in line with the definition of access as elaborated in Article 9: Accessibility of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD)	Form submission and https://www.leonardcheshire.org/sites/default/files/Feedback%20to%20SDG%20Indicators%20Leonard%20Cheshire.pdf
20	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	Polly Meeks	ADD International	Participation of people with disabilities in the process of developing of indicators as well as measuring the progress of SDGs. At the same time, supporting DPOs for their capacity building to collect data.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TazeXmX5bFczV4d0VHMHdLNk0/view
21	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	Corann Okorodudu	Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues	The framework for the indicators needs a specifically articulated data disaggregation principle, including a broad diversity of vulnerable social groups, and placed strategically at the beginning of the indicators to be applied to all sustainable development goals and targets. We recommend the following four principles. I. Data Disaggregation. Indicators are required to assess the attainment of each sustainable development goal and target by all groups (as relevant), including age, gender, race/ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban residence, national origin, migratory status, language, and religion. II. Reducing Inequalities and Discrimination. We support the recommendation of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights calling for “identifying strong indicators that measure the reduction of inequalities, the elimination of discriminatory laws, policies and practices, and equity in global governance of development”(22 April 2015). III. Race/Ethnicity Disaggregation. Given its cross-cutting nature, the indicators for all relevant goals and targets (especially Goals 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,10, 11, 12, 13, and 16) shall include a disaggregation of data based on race and ethnicity. IV. Human Rights Compliance Data. Indicators should include the use of data from the existing mechanisms for monitoring compliance with human rights standards, especially the periodic reviews of the Human Rights Council and ICERD. The Review of the SDGs should focus on monitoring these types of data as central to assessing progress in the reduction of racial/ethnic inequalities and discrimination within States.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/a/un-ngls.org/file/d/0B497AOt1SEyTMjNkMi1wQmU0eUE/view
22	Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups / Data	ATTAH BENSON	COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE INITIATIVE -(CERI)	Specific attention needs to be give to women, children and persons with disabilities. Water and Sanitation should be seen as human rights issues in view of their importance to human survival. We recommend to use LDCs as base line rather than developed countries.	Form submission
23	Human Rights	Delphine Dorsi	Right to Education Project	According to the Right to Education Project, the post-2015 development agenda should incorporate a human rights perspective. Specially on the education agenda, the goal and targets that States will politically commit to should not undermine their existing legal commitments to realise the right to education under international human rights law. For this reason, we strongly encourage the use of right to education indicators to measure the progress made by States towards achieving the post-2015 education goal and targets, which give a much fuller account of the progress made by States. While traditional development indicators evaluate education as a basic human need to be checked against development goals, right to education indicators aim to measure the extent to which individuals (rights-holders) enjoy their rights and States (duty-bearers) fulfil their legal human rights obligations. The proposed indicators related to the education goal and targets are only outcome indicators. The inclusion of process and structural indicators to complement the proposed outcome indicators will give a fuller account of the actual progress made by States in achieving the post-2015 education goals. Moreover, structural and process indicators could help to measure difficult concepts – such as the quality of education, and to monitor global targets when national targets differ from country to country – such as specific measures to be adopted to target marginalised groups. For instance, measuring the achievement of minimum proficiency standards in reading and mathematics - as suggested - is not sufficient to measure the quality of education. An indicator that would look at the adoption of laws, policies and minimum standards on quality education or the existence of a national curriculum and assessment system that values diverse learning outcomes would enable to measure more comprehensively the quality of education. Generally, we suggest to include indicators that look at the laws and policies put in place to achieve the education goal and targets. For more details on the proposed right to education indicators related to each targets, see the paper "Applying Right to Education Agenda to the Post-2015 Education Agenda".	Form submission and http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/RTE_Applying_RTE_Indicators_to_the_Post_2015_Agenda_2015.pdf
24	Human Rights	Kate Donald	Center for Economic & Social Rights	We call for ambition in the design and selection of the indicators, with transformative potential, relevance and human rights impact as the guiding principles, not 'feasibility' as narrowly judged by NSOs. Unfortunately, many of the indicators rated low for 'feasibility' by NSOs are for precisely those areas that are most vital to human rights enjoyment. And in fact many of these indicators are not at all unfeasible; they are already being measured by civil society groups and/or official bodies (e.g. debt relief, illicit financial flows, women's unpaid care work). The report illustrates starkly why the involvement of civil society organisations (including human rights organisations) in the process of setting post-2015 indicators is so vital. As discussed at a UN side-event organized by the Post-2015 Human Rights Caucus in April (see http://cesr.org/article.php?id=1692) human rights enjoyment is measureable, and human rights organizations (and international organizations like the OHCHR) have long experience of human rights monitoring which must be taken into account.	Form submission and http://cesr.org/article.php?id=1686
25	Sustainability / Cross-cutting Approach	Nicholas Schoon	Bioregional	We set out some proposals for indicators required to monitor progress in moving towards sustainable consumption and production (SCP). Our proposals draw on civil society experience of implement SCP. Our suggestions for some simple key criteria for these chosen SDG indicators, including those relevant to SCP; are: • Outcome-focussed. In general, the indicators should measure whether desired outcomes are achieved rather than on whether policies, regulations and processes are put in place. • Established. Ideally, the indicators need to already be established and understood, and in use in several nations – even if not yet used by many national statistical offices. If a chosen indicator is relatively new and not yet widely in use, the data which underpins it must already be being collected in some countries. However, there may be a need for a limited number of new indicators if progress cannot be measured by established indicators, in which case the Inter Agency and Expert Group can resolve such issues. • Multi-level. The indicators need to apply primarily at the national/state level, given that member state governments have lead responsibility in implementing the post-2015 agenda, goals and targets. However, governments will not be able to achieve the Goals on their own. There must also be maximum scope fordisaggregated and aggregated indicators so higher and lower levels can use these to report their own progress, from regional groups of nations through to individual enterprises, local and regional governments and even at the level of individual people and households. • Regularly and widely reported on. Nations should be able to commit to reporting on them annually without time lags of many years, although biennial and triennial reporting may be appropriate for some indicators. That means committing sufficient resources to gather and analyse the data, with support to build capacity for data gathering and analysis capabilities of all nations. • Universal. They should be universal – every chosen core SDG indicator should be useful, meaningful and viable for every member state. Supplementary country, region and sector-specific indicators can be developed and adopted if stakeholders find them useful in pursuing sustainable development. Indicators for sustainable consumption and production While Goal 12 is to “ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns”, SCP is cross cutting through the range of proposed Sustainable Development Goals with many of their targets making a strong contribution to it. Based on a broad definition of SCP which is concerned with unsustainable under-consumption as well as over-consumption, we have argued that 65 of the 169 targets contribute to SCP to an important degree. Of these, 30 have a particularly strong, clear and direct link to SCP.Through an initial analysis, we propose the following indicators to track progress on those targets that we judge are most strongly linked to shifting towards sustainable consumption and production.Most of these indicators comply with the criteria set out above, although for some of them further development work is needed and only a minority of nations are currently collecting the necessary data.Our approach has been to propose one indicator for each of the targets most closely linked to SCP which fits most closely with the criteria set out above, because it would not be helpful for each target to have numerous adopted global indicators. However, a small number of these targets are so wide ranging and cross cutting in nature that we felt it was appropriate to propose two or more indicators. We also propose that a few targets could share an indicator which matched both of them well.Over the coming year we intend to develop our recommendations further in consultation with governments and civil society experts. What is Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) and why does it matter? SCP means a global economy which delivers sustainable development and ends extreme poverty, all within the capacities of our one planet and meeting the needs of future generations.It means an end to the chronic and widespread under-consumption of life’s basic necessities which leaves more than a billion people with too little for dignity, decency, comfort and safety – a situation which is incompatible with sustainable development. It also means an end to careless overconsumption of resources which, mediated through increasingly long and complex global supply chains, are changing the climate, polluting and drying out river catchments, mining groundwater, fouling the air, soil, sea and freshwater and destroying forests and other ecosystems we all depend on. If people everywhere, and future generations, are to have the chance of a good quality of life we need to consume with more care and less waste. As well as changing patterns of consumption, SCP requires equally large changes in the way we produce goods and services. We need a more circular and resource efficient economy which cuts waste, boosts reuse and recycling, switches to low and zero carbon energy sources and radically improves the efficiency with which we use energy, water, land, sea and raw materials. This approach makes good sense for business and individuals, creates jobs and boosts the global economy. Bioregional is an international charity which works with partners around the world on sustainable consumption and production in the communities in which we live and through products and services. We call our approach One Planet Living. Bioregional is Focal Point for Sustainable Consumption and Production for Beyond 2015, a global civil society coalition of over 1,000 organisations. Bioregional is Global NGO Focal Point for the UN 10 Year Framework of Programmes and member of the Sustainable Building & Construction Programme Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Committee.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3TuklREyGz6V0VtNFBUV1RTaGs/view?usp=sharing
26	Sustainability / Policy Coherence / Cross-cutting Approach	Arjan van Houwelingen	World Animal Protection	We urge that the IAEG/SDGs apply the following three considerations to their process: Sustainability: The Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals seeks to inspire a new approach to global development that embeds all three dimensions of sustainability: economic growth, social progress and environmental protection. We are concerned that the proposed preliminary list of indicators fails to capture the essence of sustainability and is too much based on the more traditional approach to development and largely focused on measuring the economic or social dimensions in isolation from each other. We hope that you will be able to suggest indicators that fully capture or at least hint at the concept of sustainability. Integrated approach: The debate around the Sustainable Development Goals has emphasized that a sustainable development approach should lead to the eradication of a strictly sectoral or ‘silo’ approach to development. We would strongly urge you to favour indicators that cut across targets and where possible cut across goals. Targets 1.5, 2.4, 11.5, and 13.1 all highlight the need for enhanced resilience to climate change and disasters. Developing a single indicator that captures resilience and applying such a single indictor to all four targets would help to further the integrated approach that the sustainable development goals seek to foster. Policy coherence: 2015 will see the culmination of multiple global policy frameworks that seek to influence global strategic policy. The UN Member States have rightly insisted that all efforts be undertaken to ensure that there is coherence in terms of the policies promoted by these various frameworks. In this regard, we strongly urge you to take the outcomes of the Sendai conference on the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction into account during your considerations. For example: The Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction seeks to prioritise the reduction of disaster-related economic losses and, in this regard, has adopted the argument that to achieve this action, the protection of livelihoods and productive assets at all levels will be required. Measuring the disaster-related loss of productive assets will provide an indication of both the ‘stock’ and ‘flow’ values of economic activity. Unfortunately, the relevant indicators in the list of proposed preliminary indicators (target 1.5, proposed indicator 2 and target 11.5, proposed indicator 2) suggest that economic losses can best be captured through the level of destruction of physical infrastructure (i.e. measuring the ‘stock’ value only). Our proposal to measure livestock losses would have the added advantage of allowing for a focus on the poorest people in society as these are usually also those most vulnerable to disasters.	Form submission
27	Sustainability / Data / Cross-cutting Approach	Elaine Geyer-Allély/ Indra-Jeet Mistry	WWF International	WWF welcomes the “Technical report by the Bureau of the United Nations Statistical Commission (UNSC) on the process of the development of an indicator framework for the goals and targets of the post-2015 development agenda” and appreciates the challenging task ahead to develop a robust monitoring mechanism for the Post-2015 agenda that allows progress to be assessed at global and national level. We look to the guidance of the Friends of Chair group on broader measures of progress to ensure that the Post-2015 indicator architecture matches the ambition of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While the preliminary proposal of indicators for the Post-2015 agenda is a good starting point, significant additional work is needed. We support the drive for a limited set of indicators, however this must support, not undermine, the interdependency between Sustainable Development Goal areas. WWF offers a few preliminary suggestions: ► Increase the number of indicators that link outcomes in different goal areas, to actively drive interdisciplinary, inter-ministerial collaboration for systems-based approaches to national development planning, implementation and monitoring. For example, Proposed Indicator 2 for Target 1.4 is important and should be reformulated to “measure the percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure rights to land, property, and natural resources”. This reformulation more clearly recognizes the direct link between multi-dimensional poverty and access to natural resources for many vulnerable populations. ► Enhance creative clustering across traditional sectors within the Inter-Agency and Expert Group-SDG to foster systems-based perspectives and approaches. The Post-2015 monitoring framework must break new ground with some new and strategically placed indicators that make explicit the interlinkages between environmental, social and economic outcomes. For instance, twenty-five of the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (BIP) indicators measuring progress towards the global Aichi Biodiversity Targets (adopted by 194 CBD Parties), are crosscutting and could be used as indicators of progress across the SDGs framework. ► Balance measures of efficiency with sustainable ecological burden: Numerous indicators are proposed to measure the efficiency of resource use (e.g. water). However, experience has shown that a focus on efficiency is not enough to ensure that resource use stays within ecologically sustainable boundaries. Indicators for the Post-2015 agenda must strike a balance between combining efficiency with sustainable ecological burden at relevant levels (e.g. watershed, river basin, resource stock, total pollutant load). ► Make some space for innovation: Recognising the significant data challenges SDG monitoring will pose, the Post-2015 agenda indicator architecture has real potential to take a long stride forward towards a new way of measuring development progress. More investment is needed in designing indicators for measuring progress beyond GDP to include equally important measures of progress such as wellbeing and healthy ecosystems. Indicators that incorporate natural capital accounting and biodiversity data into national strategies and assessments of national economic performances would help in this regard.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/a/wwf.panda.org/file/d/0B4xFEl-c1puRWER1YW81eW44SUE/view?usp=sharing
28	Data	Claire Schouten	International Budget Partnership	The International Budget Partnership (IBP) and civil society organizations around the world support the Expert Group’s agreement to define an integrated monitoring framework, reflecting global, regional and national indicators, ensure disaggregation (following the ‘no one left behind’ principle), and build on the Millennium Development Goals’ experience and lessons learnt. One of the experiences and lessons learnt of the MDGs is that it is very difficult to monitor resources and progress as governments currently do not publicly report on investments in pursuit of the goals, and how these resources were raised. Without this data, we cannot analyze whether development goals – the MDGs or the SDGs alike – are well planned, monitored and achieved. The table in the link below provides suggestions on existing indicators as well as a new one on participation. Endorsed by the UN, IMF, OECD and the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency, including member states, international financial institutions and non-governmental organizations, budget participation principles apply to public policy decision-making and should be integrated in the monitoring and indicators framework. To enable participation, there should be legislation and mechanisms in place; information, including on the purpose for engagement, shared well in advance; and governments should report on how inputs were taken into account. We suggest the indicator that legislatures conduct public hearings at the enactment and evaluation of the budget.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8AANUUMzfiTQ2NJS1pPdjdyMTg/view?usp=sharing
29	Data	Priya Kanayson	NCD Alliance	Indicators for the SDGs should be: global, provide comparable and reliable data, and allow for disaggregation by age, sex, location, level of income, etc. Indicators should be considered on the criteria of feasibility, suitability, and relevance. To support coherency in monitoring, the NCD Alliance supports indicators for the NCD-specific target to be drawn directly from the WHO Global Monitoring Framework on NCDs. Additionally, because policies in other sectors contribute to the growing burden of NCDs and ill-health, it is also critical to develop a framework with health- and NCD-sensitive indicators beyond the health goal. The mapping exercise below suggests possible global indicators to measure the NCD-related impacts and outcomes of other proposed SDGs and targets, namely goals 2, 3, 7, and 11. This exercise was done in consultation with our network, and attempts to capture suggestions that accurately represent the views of our network. The intention is to use this table as a reference during the course of developing indicators and as countries develop their own targets and monitoring frameworks after September.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2vPeriaLvgXX0ZkMGgtTDN2cDA/view?usp=sharing
30	Data	Andrew Griffiths	Sightsavers	We believe that the targets need to be measured in full; data should be disaggregated, beyond age and sex, and should enable progress for persons with disability to be assessed; there should be internationally comparable indicators in order to track global progress; and all countries should use the agreed indicators. To ensure no target is considered met until met by all groups, indicators need to be disaggregated by disability across the indicator framework: (...) unless a clear rationale can be established, all indicators should be disaggregated by gender, disability, age and income quintile – this should be a progressive agenda for statistical analysis in line with the principles of a data revolution.	Form submission
31	Data	Lori Johnston	Southeast Indigenous Peoples' Center	There is a dearth of data for Indigenous Peoples, especially for indigenous women. 'Disaggregation of data' implies that the data exists. Indigenous Peoples, due to safety, language, cultural, and political issues, are not necessarily represented in government or NGO surveys. The MPI and other indices are inadequate because of lack of relevance to indigenous concepts of development and non-financial development methods.	Form submission
32	Data	Peter Chapman	Open Society Justice Initiative	The UN Statistical Commission should evaluate the feasibility, suitability and relevance of individual indicators as well as how global indicators can work together—along with national measures—to present holistic pictures of progress. The technical report looked at specific indicators in isolation and did not base ratings on how indicators could work together. The framework should try to measure progress through administrative, experiential or perception and objective or structural indicators: • Administrative data: Improving access to justice and safety requires sustained government effort. Indicators which are based on administrative data will be important in presenting government effort and inputs. • Experiential data: Concrete improvements in the lives of the most vulnerable lies at the heart of the ambition for the SDGs. The framework can begin to respond to this by incorporating experience and perception indicators that capture real experiences of people. Through such tools, people’s experience can be central to overall assessments of progress. • Objective and structural data: Government effort does not always translate to immediate outcomes. Instead, progress can be measured by indicators designed to capture objective assessments of progress towards justice targets.	Form submission
33	Data	Tetet Lauron	CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness (CPDE)	The SDG indicators should pay attention to the relational dynamics between policy-making at the local, national, and international levels while offering pathways for alternatives that veer away from conventional development paradigms and that recentre human wellbeing, social equity, and environmental sustainability. The statistics we select should measure transformation. We can measure: - growing wealth inequalities between countries and between people; - how much of the world’s wealth sitting in offshore bank accounts; - whether a country provides living wages; - the ratio between labour share and profits. We could even measure the time it takes the world’s richest person to gain what a Bangladeshi garment worker will earn in a year We should measure policies, not just outcomes, such as - public investment in care services - military spending and compare it to versus public health spending; - taxes paid by corporations and by the wealthy; - interest in loans paid by developing countries; - how many trade agreements are subject to human rights and gender audits. This SDG indicators should also measure progress in the realization of the Right to Development, not just by monitoring progress within countries but in terms of the extra-territorial impacts of policies adopted by governments and the impacts international institutions and agreements at country level. For instance, how much do tax havens inhibit domestic resource mobilization in other countries? To what extent do free trade agreements undermine social and environmental goals.	Form submission
34	Data	John Romano	TAP Network	What type of data sources do we need? In order to inform these different types of indicators, we need to draw on a wide range of data that monitors state-society relations, based on the following three pillars: · Administrative data (data collected by official bodies) focusing on the coverage, effectiveness and efficiency of relevant governance processes (e.g. % of registered births, % of publically available procurement tenders). · Surveys (experiential, factual, perception) collected by official and third parties, including those that capture the experiences and perceptions of all citizens in relation to key governance processes, as well as the effectiveness of public institutions (e.g. bribery, quality and coverage of service delivery). · Expert assessment (data collected from experts by third parties such as UN, World Bank, research institutions and civil society organizations) focusing on relevant governance processes and issues. (e.g. on access to information by UNESCO, on perceptions of levels of corruption by Transparency International, on budget transparency, accountability and participation by the International Budget Partnership). While indicators for which there is existing data should be prioritized, there may be especially relevant and feasible indicators where no data has been collected or where it is limited to a few countries. For example, we need globally-comparable data on whether people feel that they can participate in and influence decision-making (target 16.8). While data gaps such as these will need to be filled, there is a strong foundation of existing approaches and methodologies that can be drawn on; all of the target areas have precedence of measurement. National statistics agencies and other stakeholders must not shy away from also developing new ways of capturing data, for example drawing on new technologies or citizen-generated data. Innovation and partnerships with a range of third-party stakeholders will be critical if this is to be achieved.	http://tapnetwork2015.org/our-work/sdg-goal-16-indicators/
35	Data / Number of Indicators	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	Caribbean Policy Development Centre	We note that some Member States are calling for a limited number of indicators. We agree with an approach which seeks to carefully map out all that is required as opposed to setting an artificial limit at this juncture. Indicators must be sensitive to national and regional specificities of countries, particularly SIDS, where data collection is an ongoing challenge and subject to ongoing capacity building.	Form submission
36	Data / Number of Indicators	Helen Dennis	Christian Aid	We welcome this report as an initial contribution to the emerging discussion on indicators and we are pleased that it has not been constrained to a more limited overall number of indicators (e.g. 100) in the way that the SDSN report had been. It is our view that initial exploration of indicators, particularly given the complexity and multi-dimensional nature of some targets must be open to a number of different options and not reduced down, especially at such an early stage. It is likely that there will be a need for a range of different indicators - including those measuring perceptions and changes in social norms, and process indicators - and these should all be on the table at the outset. On the 'ABC' survey, we note that the 70 countries responded and therefore more work needs to be done to reach out beyond these member states. Christian Aid would also like to stress that a low grading on feasibility should not be reason to exclude a proposal - these measures will guide development policy and practice for the next 15 years and it is important not to limit ambition at this stage. Finally, as a general point, we would also urge the UNSC to consider how methodologies which have been developed outside of the national statistical offices (e.g. by academics or NGOs - such as the Financial Secrecy Index) can be helpful for the SDGs. Christian Aid is particularly interested in indicators which will enhance environmental sustainability within the new development agenda, and have made specific recommendations on climate and energy (see joint paper below). We have also published a longer paper with CESR (see link below) to put forward appropriate indicators for fiscal policy targets in the SDGs. Finally, we are also undertaking further work on gender indicators which we hope to feed into the Commission's work.	Form submission
37	Number of Indicators	Matthew Simonds	International Trade Union Confederation	The limitation of indicators to two per target presents a major challenge for adequately monitoring the commitments and corresponding set of targets under the SDGs.	Form submission and http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf
38	Number of Indicators / Cross-cutting Approach	Ross Bailey	WaterAid	WaterAid recognizes the UNSC's technical report on indicators. We would like to raise the following points: 1. Whilst accepting that the indicators agreed should not be greater than national capacity, we have significant concerns that insufficient debate has gone into the exact number. There is no rationale for limiting the indicators to two per target and no formal discussion took place within the General Assembly to instruct this. Two indicators are no less arbitrary than four or six. 2. We recognize the importance of manageable process to selecting indicators but urge the UN Statistical Commission to focus on selecting sufficient indicators to represent the ambition of the targets proposed by the Open Working Group. 3. Finally, whilst we welcome the inclusion of country offices in reviewing the indicators, it is important that the future feasibility of indicators is understood. Analysis and proposals for indicators WASH determines outcomes under other goals Achieving access to water, sanitation and hygiene will also play a key role in achieving many other targets across the framework. In particular, this includes Goal 2 on Nutrition, Goal 3 on Health and Wellbeing, Goal 4 on education, Goal 5 on gender equality and Goal 11 on cities and human settlements. WaterAid welcomes the inclusion of indicators for WASH within the UN agencies and specialised entities preliminary proposals for goals other than Water and Sanitation. The framing of these are a model for the aspiration of an integrated sustainable development agenda.	Form submission and https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4rWv_IfTKYhSV9xMXNmRnBKMVE/view?usp=sharing
39	Cross-cutting Approach	Cornie Huizenga	Partnership on Sustainable Low Carbon Transport	The third IGN session, along with the UNSC technical report on indicators, has confirmed that transport, based on its inclusion in targets and indicators across a range of SDGs is expected to play a substantive role in the post-2015 development agenda. It can be argued that among major sectors (e.g. energy, and water) the mainstreaming of transport across a wide range of SDGs exemplifies best the cross cutting nature of the post-2015 development agenda called for in the deliberations. SLoCaT recommends a number of additions and modifications to these indicators, including the following: • Number of premature deaths from road related air pollution by 2030 compared to 2010 (with desired achievement of 50% reduction from 2010 baseline) • PM10 and/or PM2.5 from passenger vehicles (with desired achievement of 70% reduction from 2010 baseline) • Proportion of households within 500 meters of good quality affordable public transport accessible by dedicated walking and/or cycling facilities • Travel times by traveller type and purpose • Fuel economy in all new light duty vehicles by 2030, and in all light duty vehicles by  2050, from a base year of 2005 (desired achievement: double fuel economy) • Zero emission vehicle share of light-duty 4- wheel and motorised 2-wheel vehicle  sales worldwide by 2030 (desired achievement: 20%) • Motor vehicle fossil fuel subsidies by 2020 (desired achievement: 100% phase-out of  fossil fuel subsidies) SLoCaT's proposed indicators are detailed further in the 'Summary of Proposed SDG Indicators on Sustainable Transport'.	Form submission and http://slocat.net/sites/default/files/annex_2_-_indicators.pdf
40	Cross-cutting Approach	Fiona Bradley	International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions	We have primarily focused on indicators related to target 16.10, 9c and 17.8 in our response however we would also support indicators which reflect the contribution and measurement of access to information as a cross-cutting means to achieve the goals. Increasing access to information and knowledge across society, assisted by the availability of information and communications technologies (ICTs), supports sustainable development and improves people’s lives. Over 500 library, development and ICT organisations agree, and have signed The Lyon Declaration on Access to Information and Development (www.lyondeclaration.org). The signatories call upon the Member States of the United Nations to make an international commitment to use the post-2015 development agenda to ensure that everyone has access to, and is able to understand, use and share the information that is necessary to promote sustainable development and democratic societies.	Form submission
41	Cross-cutting Approach	Thomas Elmqvist	Stockholm Resilience Center	1. Scalability. There is a need to develop indicators that are scalable, i.e. are of relevance at the local scale but possible to aggregate to national scales and further. This is necessary for many reasons; it is an efficient way by which people e.g. in urban areas, local and indigenous people and their organisations can actually make crucial contribution to the collection of data and to get feedback on actions and engage in the endeavour of fulfilling the SDGs until 2030. 2. Continuity and synergies with existing processes and reporting systems. Avoid double work by synchronize the indicators with existing indicators developed in already existing Multilateral Environmental Agreements, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and its Aichi Targets. These are indicators that countries already report on why it is important not to create parallel reporting and cause increased workload. 3. Indicators that are of integrated character develop indicators that capture more than just one issue. It could for instance be indicators of social-ecological character that capture both social and ecological aspects. An example of an indicator the fulfil several of these criteria’s is Soil Organic Matter, a crucial factor and precondition for food production. Many countries have data series of soil organic matter, data could easily be collected at local levels, and it signals clearly development from both an environmental (trend of the healthiness of the soil) and a social aspects (what is the trend of food production).	Form submission
42	Cross-cutting Approach	Vivienne Nathanson	British and World Medical Associations	All of the areas under discussion can be considered under the rubric of Social Determinants of Health – all contribute to the health and wellbeing of populations and individuals. The Social Determinants of Health demonstrate a gradient within countries between the wealthiest, best educated and healthiest, down to the least educated and least financially well off. Those same gradients exist between countries. Access to health care does little to improve the global health and wellbeing expectation of those low on the gradient, but improving many of the other factors does. Action based on cooperation and collaboration between different sectors are essential. Indicators will help to measure improvements in health and wellbeing expectations. Measuring access to education for girls, also measures future health for the girls, and for the children they will carry and the families they will care for. It may be a marker of access to reproductive rights, the absence of child marriage, and child labour and an Indirect measure of access to potable water – girls are often removed from school to fetch water. An overall theme of improving the social determinants will improve many of the major goals and encourage cross silo working. It will focus on all people and is appropriate globally and not only in a minority of countries. Understanding the social determinants encourages innovation and collaboration between sectors which have historically worked separately.	Form submission
43	Indicator Framework	John Romano	TAP Network	What does the indicator framework need to tell us? An indicator framework needs, at a minimum, to tell us the following: 1. What the starting point is (baseline) 2. What progress has been made towards meeting targets at national and global levels, particularly for vulnerable and marginalized groups. 3. Whether the targets have been met at national and global levels, and for all groups. The framework should include the most appropriate, relevant and statistically robust indicators possible to transparently and meaningfully monitor progress. Indicators must draw on timely data sources that can signal whether a target is on or off track and use methodologies that are open and can be verified. What type of indicators? The global indicators for the SDGs should be determined through a broad and inclusive process that assess whether they: · are relevant for and representative of the target in question; · can capture the different elements of the goal; · can be universally measured and monitored; · can be aggregated to assess global progress; · can provide for disaggregated-level data where appropriate, in line with SDG target 17.18 (e.g. income, sex, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability, geographic location and other characteristics relevant in national contexts); No single indicator can in every context tell a fair, full and rounded story of progress on its own. This is especially the case with regards to complex issues of peace, governance and justice. Where possible, a more accurate picture of progress can be achieved through combining and balancing different types of indicators under individual targets. These different types could include: ·inputs (e.g. the amount of government spending on a country’s judiciary) · process (e.g. judicial appointment through competitive exam). · outputs (e.g. the number of judges and paralegals per 100.000 people) · outcomes (e.g. reduction in people experiencing case backlog) · impacts (e.g. increased public trust and confidence in the judiciary)	http://tapnetwork2015.org/our-work/sdg-goal-16-indicators/
44	Other	Jean-Philippe Thomas	ENDA Tiers Monde	Due to the fact that the rating gives more 2/3 (near 70%) BBA, BBB, CBB for the proposed indicators, it’s seems very unrealistic, in particular for LDCs countries, to maintain all these indicators or it’s necessary to put in place a “statistic Marshall plan” for these. We think that the criterion “feasibility” is a key criteria to decide whether to maintain this indicator. If an indicator is relevant but not feasible, it’s not necessary to introduce them in the table indicators. We have to select relevant and feasible criteria.	Form submission
45	Other	Bill Orme	Global Forum for Media Development	The Commission should take into account the recommendations of the UN-supported Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN), which drew on proposals from many civil society groups.
46	Other	Nadja Wolfe	World Youth Alliance	We recommend translation and easy, fast access to report/ future ressources, as those countries most in need of assistance are also those most likely to lack resources for quick turnaround and translation.	Form submission


1	GOAL 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	Sifisosami Dube	Gender Links	Goal 9 does not have any gender sensitive indicator at all; what industrialisation can be advanced if there is no inclusiveness? Small scale industries some which are run by women should be tracked through an indicator. Similarly, access to capital which is skewed between men and women should be highlighted as an important indicator.	Form submission
3		General	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	None of the in goal 9 incorporate the environmental or social dimensions in the indicators. This is not in line the there pillars of sustainable development.	Form submission
4	Target 9.1 Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all	9.1 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	If data be disaggregated by age (and sex), useful analyses could be done to track youth portion in the overall measurement	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
5	9.1.1 Percentage share of people employed in business infrastructure (consultancy, accounting, IT and other business services) in total employment	No specific input received			No specific input received
6	9.1.2 Transport by air, road and rail (millions of passengers and tonkm and % population with access to all season road)	No specific input received			No specific input received
7		9.1 Amendment	Cornie Huizenga	Partnership on Sustainable Low Carbon Transport	[Amended Indicator]: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including rural, regional and trans-border infrastructure and services, to support improved logistics, economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all Related/Linked SDG and Targets: SDG 17, Target 17.11. Measurable today/ Main Indicators: Logistics Performance Index (LPI) (desired achievement: 80% of countries to achieve rating of 3.5) ; Rail and airline passenger data ; Data on trade volumes by air/sea Supportive Indicator: Delays at border crossings for goods. Measurable in short term/ Main Indicators: Volume and value of transborder land-based trade as a share of total trade4 ; Volume of transborder person volumes by land based modes of total international passenger volumes	http://slocat.net/sites/default/files/annex_2_-_indicators.pdf
8		9.1 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Many Member States see this goal as a pre-requisite for growth and industrialisation and a goal that is complementary to Goal 11 on making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. As centres of economic activity, cities require adequate and future-proof infrastructure to develop their full economic potential. This goal is also relevant in strengthening links between rural-urban areas, supply chains and improving the productivity of rural areas. The infrastructure deficit in poorer countries is significant with sizeable investments required in sustainable transport, energy, water and ICT. The specific characteristics of the infrastructure deficit and its spatial manifestation are context specific and developing an appropriate response requires articulation between different levels of government. Below we include examples of indicators for Targets 9.1 and 9.c, trying to capture types of infrastructure which are not covered under other targets (e.g. water, sanitation and energy are all included under other goals). Dimensions to be measured: - Quality of infrastructure - Reliability of infrastructure - Resilience of infrastructure - Equitable access Proposed indicators: Access to all-weather road : percentage of rural population with access within 2 km distance to road Linkages: Goal 2 and 8. Disaggregation by: Rural areas. A few examples for countries' subregions; perhaps could be further disaggregated.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
9		9.1 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Proposed indicators: Passenger-kilometres by various land transport modes in major national and regional corridors Linkages: Goal 2, 8 and 11. Disaggregation by: Regional corridors.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
10		9.1 New Proposed Indicator	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Number of infrastructure projects incorporating strategic environmental and social impact assessments	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
11		9.1 New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Cost of national and regional freight per ton-km Linkages: Goals 2, 8 and 11; Disaggregation by: TBC Comments: Non-SMART target as it does not define what ‘quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient’ infrastructure means. Note that ‘affordability’ should also be factored in by looking at costs of transport. However, this is currently not measured on a comparable basis. See Starkey (2013) ‘Assessment of a possible post-MDG rural transport indicator’, Evidence on Demand, for more details.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
12	Target 9.2 Promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and, by 2030, signicantly raise industry’s share of employment and gross domestic product, in line with national circumstances, and double its share in least developed countries	No general input received			No general input received
13	9.2.1 MVA ( share in GDP, per capita, % growth)	No specifc input received			No specifc input received
14	9.2.2: Manufacturing employment (share of total employment and % growth	9.2.2 Amendment	Matthew Simonds	International Trade Union Confederation	We are not aware of a readily available indicator but it will be important to assess the sustainability dimension of this target by measuring: Employment in environmental activities and percentage of establishments using green technologies	Form submission and http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/wtumg_indicators_document_19.03.pdf
15	Target 9.3 Increase the access of small-scale industrial and other enterprises, in particular in developing countries, to financial services, including affordable credit, and their integration into value chains and markets	No general input received			No general input received
16	9.3.1 Percentage share of (M) small scale industries' value added in total industry value added	No specifc input received			No specific input received
17	9.3.2 % of (M)SMEs with a loan or line of credit	No specifc input received			No specific input received
18	Target 9.4 By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use effciency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities	9.4 General Comment	Lars Vogelsang	Global2020	Rating for the indicators under this target may be better than CBB and BBB, respectively, since data is available for material intensity at the global and regional level, and for energy intensity (or for energy productivity) at all levels.	http://www.global2015.net/factsheets/
19	9.4.1 Intensity of material use per unit of value added (international dollars)	No specifc input received			No specific input received
20	9.4.2 Energy intensity per unit of value added (international dollars)	No specifc input received			No specific input received
21		9.4 New Proposed Indicator	Emily Auckland	Bioregional	Scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas emissions or CO2 emissions (GHG Protocol of WBCSD, WRI) per unit of output and per unit of final sales in key manufacturing and service sectors. Greenhouse gas emissions or CO2 emissions per unit of product and per unit of sales correlate with overall resource use efficiency and represent a critical environmental impact – climate change due to fossil fuel combustion. GHG/CO2 footprinting for individual companies and for industrial and commercial sectors is more advanced than other types of resource exploitation/impact footprinting. The necessary data is being collected in many developed nations, with major corporations already reporting their Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions – see www.ghgprotocol.org/about-ghgp/users	https://www.dropbox.com/s/4b69zmbaeagcmhl/Bioregional-Emily_Submission%20to%20UNGLS.xlsx?dl=0
22	Target 9.5 Enhance scientic research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all countries, in particular developing countries, including, by 2030, encouraging innovation and increasing the number of research and development workers per 1 million people by [x] per cent and public and private research and development spending	9.5 General Comment	Aashish Khullar	Major Group for Children and Youth- Children and Youth International	Young people are expected to benefit from increase in R&D as they will have important role to play in the ongoing development of this sector	https://childrenyouth.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/chldren-and-youth-specefic-sdg-indicators-mapping.pdf
23	9.5.1 Research and development expenditure and employment	No specifc input received			No specific input received
24	9.5.2 Percentage share of medium and high-tech industry value added in total value added	No specifc input received			No specific input received
25	Means of Implementation: 9.a Facilitate sustainable and resilient infrastructure development in developing countries through enhanced nancial, technological and technical support to African countries, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States	No general input received			No general input received
26	9.a.1 Annual credit flow to infrastructure projects (in International Dollar)	No specifc input received			No specific input received
27	9.a.2 Percentage share of infrastructure loans in total loans	No specifc input received			No specific input received
28		9.a Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Dimensions to be measured: - Investments in sustainable and resilient infrastructures - Technological and technical support Proposed indicators: Percentage of total international public finance commitments in African countries, LDCs, LLDCs and SIDs (particularly from ODA and international public funds through concessional long-term loans) in sustainable basic infrastructures (e.g. drinkable water and sanitation, including sewage, drainage and flood control systems, transportation, energy, waste management, including waste-water, communication) Linkages: Goals 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17. Disaggregation by: TBD but not available at local level Sources: OECD DAC, IFM, WB.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
29	Means of Implementation: 9.b Support domestic technology development, research and innovation in developing countries, including by ensuring a conducive policy environment for, inter alia, industrial diversication and value addition to commodities	No general input received			No general input received
30	9.b.1: Aggregate value of all support mechanisms for technology and innovation (in International Dollar, % of GDP)	No specifc input received			No specifc input received
31	9.b.2 Aggregate value of expenditure on diversification and value addition policy related instruments and mechanisms (in International Dollar; % of GDP)	No specifc input received			No specific input received
32		9.b New Proposed Indicator	Jordi Pascual, on behalf of the #Culture2015Goal campaign	Global Campaign #Culture2015Goal	Suggested indicator: Number of countries which have implemented a national strategy for the development of the creative industries.	Form submission and http://www.culture2015goal.net/images/yootheme/culture2015/def/Indicators_ENG.pdf
33	Means of Implementation: 9.c Signicantly increase access to information and communications technology and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet in least developed countries by 2020	No general input received			No general input received
34	9.c.1 Fixed and Mobile broadband quality measured by mean download speed	No specifc input received			No specific input received
35	9.c.2 Subscription to mobile cellular and/or fixed broad band internet (per household/100 people)	No specifc input received			No specific input received
36		9.c New Proposed Indicator	Edgardo Bilsky	United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG)	Dimensions to be measured: - Access to ICT - Affordability of ICT services Proposed indicators: Mobile/Fixed broadband subscriptions per 100,000 inhabitants Linkages: 9.1, 8. Disaggregation by: Data only reported at the national level but possibly available at more disaggregated level. Sources: International Telecommunication Union, World Telecommunication/ICT Development Report and database, and World Bank estimates. Limitations: Would need to be developed for sub-national areas. Comments: Non-SMART target as it does not define what ‘significantly increase’ means. Note that we are not aware of measures of affordability of access to ICT. Costs and affordability considerations could be factored in, but currently unlikely to be available on a consistent basis.	Form submission and http://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/localization_targets_indicator_web.pdf
37		9.c New Proposed Indicator	Fiona Bradley	International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions	IFLA supports indicators 9.c.1 and 9.c.2, together with additional indicators to recognise the essential role of public access to ensure that 9.c can be achieved: Number of broadband subscriptions (per 100 people) • Collected annually by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Cost of fixed broadband subscriptions as a percentage of monthly Gross National Income (GNI) • Collected annually by International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and UN Broadband Commission Proportion of public libraries with broadband Internet access • Data collected in relation to WSIS Statistical Indicators for Target 4 (‘Connect all public libraries, museums, post offices and national archives with ICTs’), Indicator 4.1 Proportion of public libraries providing public Internet access. • Data collected in relation to WSIS Statistical Indicators	Form submission


1	GOAL 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development	Comment Category: General, Amendment, or New Proposal	Name of Contributor	Organization Name	What is your feedback regarding the UN Statistical Commission's technical report on indicators?	Source

2		General	Tui Shortland	Nga Tirairaka o Ngati Hine	Improve eel populations, particularly long fin females for customary and commercial interests; - Improve habitat appropriate for eels; Support local established and new customary and commercial fishermen; Advocate for law, policy and eel management to local and central government, industry and the public	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bxr-D96hXf-YdTdkdy12MjhiZGM/view?usp=sharing
3		General	Param Maragatham	ESF	Elevate All targets and indicators of Goal 14 to ensure nutritious food is delivered to humanity, wastage is eliminated, and earth lives longer.	Form submission
4		General	Arthur Lyon Dahl	International Environment Forum	A comparison of indicators for ocean and coastal issues from the technical report, SDSN and Global Ocean Commission (Dahl 2015 cited below) shows little overlap between indicator sets and a large potential for new policy-relevant indicators that is beyond the present capacity of national statistical services. This gap should be filled with other processes to develop and test indicators that might ultimately be integrated into the SDG set.	Form submission and http://yabaha.net/dahl/papers/Dahl2015d.html
5		General	Arjan van Houwelingen	World Animal Protection	All targets in Goal 14 demand action to preserve and improve the health and productivity of marine and coastal ecosystems. We would suggest that an indicator measuring the abundance/health of marine top predators could be a very accurate proxy indicator of the natural outcome of a healthy, biodiverse and productive marine habitat. Target 14.1 to 14.7 Indicator: Incidence/Health of marine top predators Monitoring the health and welfare of marine animals at higher trophic levels – at both the individual and population level (for example, whales, seals, turtles and large fish) – can provide a good barometer of ecosystem health and an early warning system to highlight any problems. It allows monitoring of trends in health and productivity caused by anthropogenic impacts (e.g. bioaccumulation of pollutants). If steps are taken to protect top marine predators from poor health and welfare caused by people, benefits can be achieved across their ecosystem/habitat, safeguarding ocean biodiversity and improving productivity. Proposed Lead Agency: IUCN	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3qLzppTM6pCXzlhei1zNW1Mb00/view
6	Target 14.1: By 2025, prevent and signicantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution	14.1 General Comment	Arjan van Houwelingen	World Animal Protection	Amount (tonnage) of litter washed ashore and/or deposited on coastlines disaggregated by litter composition Disaggregation of litter data will be essential to using the indictor proposed in terms of determining what actions are required on a global scale to reduce marine pollution and prevent the addition of new litter. Proposed Lead Agency: UNEP/FAO	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3qLzppTM6pCXzlhei1zNW1Mb00/view
7	14.1.1 Fertilizer consumption (kg/ha of arable land)	14.1.1 Amendment	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Percentage reduction in land based pollution (nitrogen, phosphates, sediments) and associated area, depth and duration of anoxic periods and/or algal blooms	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
8	14.1.2 Metric tonnes per year of plastic materials entering the ocean from all sources	14.1.2 Amendment	Renaude Gregoire	SSA Social Justice Office	We support the indicator suggested by Global Ocean Commission: "Micro-plastics concentration in seawater" (See: http://www.globaloceancommission.org/news/global-ocean-commission-proposes-elements-of-indicators-for-the-un-sustainable-development-goal-on-ocean-and-seas/)	https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7TLMC1RI0uZZ0lnZ281Q2ttb2s/view
9	Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid signicant adverse impacts, including by strengthening their resilience, and take action for their restoration in order to achieve healthy and productive oceans	No input received			No input received
10	14.2.1 Percentage of coastline with formulated and adopted ICM/MSP plans	No specific input received
11	14.2.2 Ocean Health Index	No specific input received
12	Target 14.3: Minimize and address the impacts of ocean acidication, including through enhanced scientic cooperation at all levels	No input received			No input received
13	14.3.1 Average marine acidity (pH) measured at agreed suite of representative sampling stations	No specific input received
14	14.3.2 Coral coverage	No specific input received
15	Target 14.4: By 2020, eectively regulate harvesting and end overshing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore sh stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological characteristics	14.4 General	Antonio Garcia Allut	Fundación Lonxanet	We are surprised by the absence of action against Illegal and destructive fishing, which is however mentioned in the text of the Target itself. A robust indicator could be the number of countries ratifying and Party to the FAO Agreement on Port State Measures (PSMA).	Form submission and https://fundacionlonxanet.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/briefing_ny_eng1.pdf
16	14.4.1 Fish species, threatened	No specific input received
17	14.4.2 Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable limits	No specific input received
18	Target 14.5: By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientic information	No general input received			No general input received
19	14.5.1 Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable limits	No specific input received			No specific input received
20	14.5.2 Coverage of protected areas	14.5.2 Amendment	Antonio Garcia Allut	Fundación Lonxanet	We miss a reference to the different types of MPAs. In how many of them do artisanal fishers participate their management? We also note that there is no reference to High Seas MPAs.	Form submission and https://fundacionlonxanet.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/briefing_ny_eng1.pdf
21	Target 14.6: By 2020, prohibit certain forms of sheries subsidies which contribute to overcapacity and overshing, eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and refrain from introducing new such subsidies, recognizing that appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for developing and least developed countries should be an integral part of the World Trade Organization sheries subsidies negotiation	14.6 General Comment	Antonio Garcia Allut	Fundación Lonxanet	About the two indicators proposed for Target 14.6: the issue of subsidies is of special concern to the artisanal fishing sector, because they distort the markets. What is proposed here is confusing. We need optimum transparency, and to distinguish between different types of subsidies. Those that facilitate the development of good practices are useful. Those that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing are disastrous.	Form submission and https://fundacionlonxanet.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/briefing_ny_eng1.pdf
22	14.6.1 Dollar value of negative fishery subsidies against 2015 baseline	14.6.1 General Comment	Elaine Geyer-Allély / Susan Brown	WWF International	Clarification: negative fishery subsidies are those that contribute to either overcapacity or overfishing	https://www.dropbox.com/s/fq1aovktxfrs18x/WWF_Elaine%20Geyer_%20Suggested%20indicators_NGLS%20EGA.xlsx?dl=0
23	14.6.1 Dollar value of negative fishery subsidies against 2015 baseline	14.6.1 Amendment	Emily Auckland	Bioregional	Value of fisheries subsidies, as a proportion of revenue from fisheries. This indicator requires development, but some data is already being collected and reported on. The OECD reports on government financial transfers to fisheries, but its database only covers 19 nations – see http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=FISH_NLD. See also www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/note/join/2013/513978/IPOL-PECH_NT%282013%29513978_EN.pdf	https://www.dropbox.com/s/4b69zmbaeagcmhl/Bioregional-Emily_Submission%20to%20UNGLS.xlsx?dl=0
24	14.6.2 Legal framework or tax/trade mechanisms prohibiting certain forms of fisheries subsidies	See above comment
25	Target 14.7: By 2030, increase the economic benets to small island developing States and least developed countries from the sustainable use of marine resources, including through sustainable management of fisheries, aquaculture and tourism	No input received			No input received
26	14.7.1 Fisheries as a % of GDP	No specific input received
27	14.7.2 Level of revenue generated from sustainable use of marine resources	No specific input received
28	Means of Implementation: 14.a Increase scientic knowledge, develop research capacity and transfer marine technology, taking into account the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission Criteria and Guidelines on the Transfer of Marine Technology, in order to improve ocean health and to enhance the contribution of marine biodiversity to the development of developing countries, in particular small island developing States and least developed countries	No input received			No input received
29	14.a.1 Number of researchers working in this area	No specific input received
30	14.a.2 Budget allocated to research in the field of marine technology	No specific input received
31	Means of Implementation: 14.b Provide access for small-scale artisanal fishers to marine resources and markets	14.b General Comment	Antonio Garcia Allut	Fundación Lonxanet	Indicators for Target 14b are of special interest for us; what is proposed does not appear acceptable. To certify a fisheries is expensive and we are a low income sector. We cannot but express our surprise that this certification criteria would apply to us but not to industrial fishing.	Form submission and https://fundacionlonxanet.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/briefing_ny_eng1.pdf
32	14.b.1 By 2030, X% of small scale fisheries certified as sustainable; Y% increase in market access for small scale fisheries	See Comment in Row 30
33	14.b.2 By 2030, increase by X% the proportion of global fish catch from sustainably managed small scale fisheries	See Comment in Row 30
34	Means of Implementation: 14.c Ensure the full implementation of international law, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea for States parties thereto, including, where applicable, existing regional and international regimes for the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and their resources by their parties	No input received			No input received
35	14.c.1 Adoption of a legal framework and number of associated court cases	No specific input received
36	14.c.2 Number of countries implementing either legally or programmatically the provisions set out in regional seas protocols	No specific input received