Ngo's Worldwide

How do you envision/see your
Thematic Areas of Interest of organization participating in the indicator

Name: Position: Organization: Email Address: Type of Organization: Your Organization framework and monitoring of the SDGs?
Food, nutrition and agriculture,
Nutrition Policy and Non-Governmental Health, Nutrition Policy and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Manuel Claros Advocacy Manager 1,000 Days manuel@thousanddays Organization Advocacy outreach
Environment and Climate

Change, Food, nutrition and
agriculture, Gender, Governance,
peace and security, Health,
Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
International Advocacy Action Against Hunger | ACF G.Tarman@actionagainst Non-Governmental Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Glen Tarman Director International hunger.org.uk Organization Financing, Humanitarian action Advocacy and outreach
Economic Growth, Education,

Gender, Governance, peace and
security, Health, Human Rights,
Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Deputy Director of Policy Non-Governmental Urbanization, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Polly Meeks and Influencing ADD International polly.meeks@add.org.uk Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach
kzorzi@adfinternational.o Non-Governmental
Kelsey Zorzi UN Counsel ADF International rg Organization Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
Education, Gender, Governance,
peace and security, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Africa Network Campaign on Non-Governmental Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Limbani Nsapato Regional Coordinator Education for All (ANCEFA) lnsapato@gmail.com Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach
Economic Growth, Poverty and
Inequality, Development
Engagement and African Foundation for Non-Governmental Financing, Diaspora/migrants and
Stella Opoku-Owusu Capacity Manager Development (AFFORD) stella@afford-uk.org Organization development; job creation Advocacy and outreach
MANAGER, Environment and Climate
AGRICULTURE MICHELLE.NUTTING@A Change, Food, nutrition and Data producer/collector, Indicator
MICHELLE NUTTING SUSTAINABILITY AGRIUM GRIUM.COM Private Sector agriculture development, Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Education, Gender, Human
Chiara Giordano Advocacy officer AIDOS c.giordano@aidos.org Organization Rights, Poverty and Inequality Advocacy and outreach

security, Human Rights, Poverty
and Inequality, Information and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Communication Technologies for development, Data analysis and visualization,
Development, Policy and Advocacy and outreach, Production of annual
dhanaraj.thakur@webfou Non-Governmental Regulation in the ICT sector, data (i.e., Affordability Report, Open Data
Dhanaraj Thakur Research Manager Alliance for Affordable Internet ndation.org Organization Internet Affordability Barometer)
Data producer/collector, Indicator
Associate Director, Non-Governmental Gender, Human Rights, Poverty development, Data analysis and visualization,
David Scamell Sexual Health and Rights American Jewish World Service dscamell@ajws.org Organization and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Senior Advisor,
Campaigning on
International
Development and Human savio.carvalho@amnesty. Non-Governmental Gender, Governance, peace and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Savio Carvalho Rights Amnesty International org Organization security, Human Rights outreach, Monitoring progress.
Deputy Director,
Communications & Non-Governmental
Sharon Rainey Advocacy Amref Health Africa rainey@amrefusa.org Organization Health Advocacy and outreach

Energy, Environment and Climate
Human Rights, Poverty and
Inequality, Urbanization,
Development Financing, Water & Data producer/collector, Indicator
Jack MOSS Executive Director AquaFed Jack.Moss@AquaFed.org Private Sector Sanitation development, Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Human Rights, Human Rights for
N. Paul Divakar ADRF, Chiarperson Asia Dalit Rights Forum pauldivakar@ncdhr.org.in Organization Dalits Advocacy and outreach
Economic Growth, Energy,

peace and security, Human
Asia Pacific Forum on Women Law Non-Governmental Rights, Poverty and Inequality, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Tessa Khan Programme Officer and Development tessa@apwld.org Organization Development Financing outreach
Education, Environment and
Asia South Pacific Association for Climate Change, Gender, Human Data producer/collector, Indicator
Programmes and Basic and Adult Education Non-Governmental Rights, Poverty and Inequality, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Cecilia V. Soriano Operations Coordinator (ASPBAE) thea.aspbae@gmail.com Organization Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
Climate Change, Gender,
Asian Disaster Reduction and Non-Governmental Governance, peace and security, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Mihir Joshi Coordinator Response Network (ADRRN) mihir@seedsindia.org Organization Health, Urbanization development, Advocacy and outreach
Education, Food, nutrition and
Associated Country Women of the Non-Governmental agriculture, Gender, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Dr Sam L J Page U.N. Administrator World sam.p@acww.org.uk Organization Human Rights development, Advocacy and outreach
Association camerounaise pour la
prise en charge des personnes intergen_acamage@yaho Economic Growth, Human Rights, Indicator development, Advocacy and
PAULETTE METANG PRESIDENT Agées (ACAMAGE) o.fr Poverty and Inequality, AGEING outreach
Economic Growth, Environment

and Climate Change,
Governance, peace and security,
pierre- Health, Human Rights, Poverty
alain.roche@developpem and Inequality, Urbanization, Indicator development, Data analysis and
ROCHE President ASTEE ent-durable.gouv.fr Academia water visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Education, Gender, Human
Non-Governmental Rights, youth sexual and Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Malgorzata Kot coordinator ASTRA Youth info@astra.org.pl Organization reproductive health and rights visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Project Coordinator, Non-Governmental Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Raisa Anna Philip Policy Research Bachpan Bachao Andolan raisa@bba.org.in Organization Education, Gender, Human Rights outreach
Strategy and Advocacy Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Nina Joyce Consultant BDN Global Suisse njoyce@bdnglobal.org Organization Health outreach
Non-Governmental Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Etenesh W/Agegnehu Executive Director Berhan Lehetsanat eteneshhn2@gmail.com Organization Education, Health, disability outreach, service provider

Steering committee Non-Governmental Inequality, Urbanization,
Liam Sollis member Beyond 2015 UK liam.sollis@plan-uk.org Organization Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
Gender, Health, Poverty and
carol.welch@gatesfounda Inequality, Development
Carol Welch Senior Program Officer Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation tion.org Foundation Financing Advocacy and outreach
Research Fellow in the j.beqiraj@binghamcentre.
Rule of Law & Associate Bingham Centre for the Rule of biicl.org & Governance, peace and security, Indicator development, Data analysis and
Dr Julinda Beqiraj & Senior Research Fellow Law, British Institute of l.moxham@binghamcentr Human Rights, Access to justice visualization, Advocacy and outreach,
Lucy Moxham in the Rule of Law International and Comparative Law e.biicl.org Independent research institute and the rule of law Research, events and/or training

agriculture, Health, Poverty and
Policy and nicholas.schoon@bioregi Non-Governmental Inequality, Urbanization,
Nicholas Schoon communications manager Bioregional onal.com Organization Sustainable development Advocacy and outreach
Programme Director sonja.eichborn@blue21.d Non-Governmental agriculture, Health, Poverty and
Sonja von Eichborn Unfairtobacco.org BLUE 21 e.V: e Organization Inequality Advocacy and outreach

agriculture, Governance, peace
and security, Health, Human
Rights, Poverty and Inequality,
Bond Disaster Risk Reduction Development Financing, Disaster Indicator development, Advocacy and
Lucy Pearson Co-chair Working Group lucy.pearson@gndr.org Network Risk Reduction outreach
Brazilian Campaign for the Right to andressa@campanhaedu Non-Governmental Education, Gender, Human Indicator development, Advocacy and
Andressa Pellanda Communication Officer Education cacao.org.br Organization Rights, Poverty and Inequality outreach
Climate Change, Health, Poverty
Global Strategic Bremen Overseas Resarch and Non-Governmental and Inequality, Urbanization, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Maren Heuvels Management Development Association heuvels@borda.de Organization Water & Sanitation development, Advocacy and outreach
CAAR (Canadian Association of Non-Governmental Change, Food, nutrition and
Delaney Ross Burtnack President & CEO Agri-Retailers) delaney@caar.org Organization agriculture Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Energy, Environment and Climate
Diego Martinez-Schütt policy analyst post-2015 CAFOD dmartinez@cafod.org.uk Organization Change, Poverty and Inequality Advocacy and outreach

peace and security, Health, Advocacy and outreach, local level
Human Rights, Poverty and implementation of programs to achieve the
Senior Advisor for Policy trawe@care.org, Non-Governmental Inequality, Urbanization, SDGs, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Tonya Rawe and Research CARE mkihunah@care.org Organization Development Financing development
Non-Governmental
Hannah Loryman Senior Policy Officer CBM UK hannahl@cbmuk.org.uk Organization Poverty and Inequality, Disability Advocacy and outreach

agriculture, Urbanization,
Director of Policy & Non-Governmental Development Financing, Water, Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Kate Levick Regulation CDP kate.levick@cdp.net Organization Forests outreach, Data platform provider
Non-Governmental
Nelida Cespedes General Secretary CEAAL ncespedes@tarea.pe Organization Education Popular Education
CEAG - Environmental Education Education, Environment and Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Monica Osorio Simons Directora Center of Guarulhos ceag@terra.com.br Private Sector Climate Change, Health outreach
Gender, Human Rights, Poverty
Director, Human Rights in Center for Economic and Social Non-Governmental and Inequality, Development Indicator development, Data analysis and
Kate Donald Development program Rights kdonald@cesr.org Organization Financing visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Education, Gender, Health,
Center for Family and Human Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Indicator development, Data analysis and
Stefano Gennarini Director of Legal Studies Rights (C-Fam) stefano@c-fam.org Organization Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental
Meera Shah Global Advocacy Adviser Center for Reproductive Rights mshah@reprorights.org Organization Gender, Health, Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
Change, Urbanization, Cultural
Prof.Santosh Ghosh President ( Hony) Centre for Built Environment sghoshcbe@gmail.com professional society development Indicator development, Comments

agriculture, Gender, Health,
Centre for Community Economics Human Rights, Poverty and
and Development Consultants Non-Governmental Inequality, Development Indicator development, Data analysis and
Sharad Joshi Secretary Society (CECOEDECON) cecoedecon@gmail.com Organization Financing visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Change, Gender, Human Rights,
Director and Professor of Centre For Development Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Indira Hirway Economics Alternatives indira.irway@cfda.ac.in Academia Development Financing development

President-Centre for agriculture, Gender, Governance,
Human Rights and peace and security, Health,
Climate Change Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Omoyemen Lucia Research/Member- Centre for Human Rights and rightsandclimatechangere Non-Governmental Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Odigie-Emmanuel WMG/Member-TAP Climate Change research search@gmail.com Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach, Follow up and review
lumink@crtnepal.org/lumi Non-Governmental Energy, Environment and Climate
Lumin Kumar Shrestha Acting Executive Director Centre For Rural Technology, Nepal nkumar@gmail.com Organization Change, Gender, Health Advocacy and outreach

Leader of the working minahmohseni@gmail.co Non-Governmental Inequality, Development Indicator development, Advocacy and
Mina Hennum Mohseni group on global health Changemaker m Organization Financing outreach
Child and Youth Finance kimberly@childfinance.or Non-Governmental security, Human Rights, Poverty Indicator development, Advocacy and
Kimberly DeRose Youth Coordinator International g Organization and Inequality outreach
Childcare Network Switzerland / e.fischer@netzwerk- Non-Governmental Climate Change, Health, Poverty
Eliane Fischer Project manager Swiss Committee for OMEP kinderbetreuung.ch Organization and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
sstevenson@childfundalli Non-Governmental development, Data analysis and visualization,
Sarah Stevenson UN Representive ChildFund Alliancd ance.org Organization Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and
Anke Verheij Youth Advocate CHOICE for youth and sexuality anke@choiceforyouth.org Organization Inequality Advocacy and outreach

hdennis@christian- peace and security, Health,
Senior Adviser, Poverty aid.org, Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality,
Helen Dennis and Inequality Christian Aid jvillani@christian-aid.org Organization Development Financing Advocacy and outreach

Development Financing,
marginalized/particularly
Christoffel-Blindenmission sarah.meschenmoser@c Non-Governmental vulnerable groups, e.g. persons Indicator development, Advocacy and
Sarah Meschenmoser Advocacy Officer Deutschland e.V. bm.de Organization with disabilities outreach
Non-Governmental maternal and newborn health,
Claudia Ravaldi Founder and President CiaoLapo Onlus info@ciaolapo.it Organization stillbirths Advocacy and outreach
bjarne.pedersen@cleanai Non-Governmental Environment and Climate development, Data analysis and visualization,
Bjarne Pedersen Executive Director Clean Air Asia rasia.org Organization Change, Air Quality Advocacy and outreach

Climate Change, Urbanization,
Target 11.2 By 2030, provide
access to safe, affordable,
accessible and sustainable
transport systems for all,
improving road safety, notably by
expanding public transport, with
special attention to the needs of
those in vulnerable situations,
Non-Governmental women, children, persons with Indicator development, Advocacy and
Carl Emerson-Dam Campaign manager Climate Change Centre Reading info@cccrdg.org.uk Organization disabilities and older persons outreach, Education

Maria Elena Urbano Coalicion Colombiana por el marieelenaurbano@gamil Non-Governmental Climate Change, Governance, Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Dorado Coordinadora Nacional derecho a la educacion .com Organization peace and security, Human Rights outreach
Economic Growth, Food, nutrition
Head: Land and Columbia Center on Sustainable kaitlin.cordes@law.colum and agriculture, Human Rights, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Kaitlin Cordes Agriculture Investment bia.edu Academia sustainable investment outreach
Columbia Law School Human risa.kaufman@law.colum Human Rights, Poverty and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Risa Kaufman executive director Rights Institute bia.edu Academia Inequality, access to justice outreach
and Climate Change, Food,
nutrition and agriculture, Gender,
Commonwealth Association of dcurrie@goldcoast.qld.go Non-Governmental Governance, peace and security, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Dyan Currie President Planners v.au Organization Urbanization outreach
Commonwealth Medical Trust Non-Governmental
Marianne Haslegrave Director (Commat) mh@commat.org Organization Health Advocacy and outreach
Development, United Nations
Human Settlements Programme
(UN-Habitat)  Dr. Eugenie L.
Birch, Lawrence C. Nussdorf
Professor of Urban Research &
Education | Chair, Graduate Group
in City Planning, University of
Pennsylvania, Co-Director, Penn
Institute for Urban Research, and
Chair, UN-Habitat’s World Urban
Campaign  Dr. Shlomo Angel,
Adjunct Professor of Urban
Planning and Senior Research
Scholar, New York University Stern
Urbanization Project  Dr.
Martino Pesaresi, Scientific Leader,
European Commission’s Joint
Research Centre (JRC), Global
Security and Crisis Management
Unit  Rafael Tuts, Urban
Planning and Design Branch and
Acting Coordinator, Housing and
Slum Upgrading Branch, UN- Indicator development, Advocacy and
Habitat  Andrew Rudd, Urban outreach, In accordance with its mission, the
Environment Officer, Urban Secretariat of the Communitas Coalition will
Planning and Design Branch, UN- be involved in the activities marked above.
Habitat  Group of Member The core partners of Communitas, members
States Friends for Sustainable of its Advisory Committee, as well as the
Cities  UN Statistics Division in organizations which collaborated in the 3
the Department for Economic and June technical seminar will continue their
Social Affairs (DESA)  UN Energy, Environment and Climate activities in data production/collection, the
Research Director, Sustainable Development Change, Food, nutrition and establishment of monitoring systems and the
Communitas Coalition for Solutions Network (SDSN)  agriculture, Gender, Governance, implementation of the SDGs (subnational and
Sustainable Cities in the Global Task Force of Local and peace and security, Health, local authorities, UN Habitat); as well as data
New UN Development Regional Governments  World Human Rights, Poverty and analysis and visualization (European
Agenda; Senior Fellow, Urban Campaign Urban SDG Non-Governmental Inequality, Urbanization, Commission ERC, New York University Stern
James Goldstein Tellus Institute Campaign jgold@tellus.org Organization Development Financing Urbanization Project).
Education, Energy, Environment

Community Based Water Governance, peace and security,
Monitoring Network of Monarch adri.flores.diaz@gmail.co Health, Human Rights, Poverty Data producer/collector, Indicator
Adriana Flores-Díaz Member Butterfly Biosphere Reserve m Multiactor Network and Inequality, Urbanization development, Data analysis and visualization

and security, Health, Human Data producer/collector, Indicator
Sustainable Consumption Non-Governmental Rights, Consumer protection, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Ian Fenn Project Coordinator Consumers International ifenn@consint.org Organization digital access and rights Advocacy and outreach

Poverty and Inequality,
Cordoba Academy for training Urbanization, Development Indicator development, Advocacy and
Abdelghani Bakhach manager education and development cated.eu@gmail.com Private Sector Financing outreach
bhanson@costadelmar.co Environment and Climate
Bud Hanson Strategic Partnerships Costa del Mar m Private Sector Change, Consumer Goods Supporting NGO efforts
Countdown 2015 Europe/IPPF Education, Gender, Health,
European Human Rights, Poverty and
Advocacy Project Advisor Network/EuroNGOs/ASTRA Non-Governmental Inequality, Development Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Raffaela Dattler (IPPF European Network) Network rdattler@ippfen.org Organization Financing outreach

development, Data analysis and visualization,
Advocacy and outreach, Involvement of other
National Human RIghts National human RIghts Institutions through
Birgitte Feiring Programme Manager Danish Institute for Human RIghts bife@humanrights.dk Institutions Human Rights the global network of these
Non-Governmental Economic Growth, Human Rights,
Maren Hemsett Director Debt Justice Norway slug@slettgjelda.no Organization Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
Department of Family Medicine;
Department of Obstetrics and
Gynecology, University of Gender, Health, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Dr. Katherine Gold Assistant Professor Michigan, USA ktgold@umich.edu Academia Inequality development, Data analysis and visualization
Head of External andrew.palmer@devinit.o Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Andrew Palmer Relations Development Initiatives rg Organization Development Financing development, Data analysis and visualization
Non-Governmental Economic Growth, Health, Indicator development, Data analysis and
DENJOY VICE CHAIR DITTA denjoy@cocir.org Organization Development Financing visualization
DSW (Deutsche Stiftung Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Human Rights,
Katrin Erlingsen Advocacy Officer Weltbevoelkerung katrin.erlingsen@dsw.org Organization Poverty and Inequality Indicator development
DCDD is a coalition of 14
organisations/institutional
members and individual expert Economic Growth, Education,
members who support the Gender, Health, Human Rights,
rights based approach to Poverty and Inequality,
disability in development, and Urbanization, Development Data producer/collector, Indicator
Dutch Coalition on Disability and underline the concept of Financing, marginalized groups, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Lieke Scheewe Coordinator Development www.dcdd.nl dcdd@dcdd.nl inclusion. including persons with disabilities Advocacy and outreach
Dutch Youth Ambassador Human Rights, Poverty and
Lotte Dijkstra SRHR Dutch Youth Ambassador SRHR lotte@yasrhr.com youth ambassador Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Technically a NGO, however
science operations are based in Environment and Climate
Director of Policy and Stockholm Resilience Center Change, Food, nutrition and Indicator development, Data analysis and
Usman Ahmad Mushtaq Global Strategy EAT Initiative usman@eatforum.org (Academic Institution) agriculture, Health visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Network Coordinator Non-Governmental
Natalie Kontoulis (interim) End FGM European Network nkontoulis@endfgm.eu Organization Gender Advocacy and outreach

Non-Governmental Inequality, Urbanization, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Al-hassan Adam International Coordinator End Water Poverty endwaterpoverty.org Organization Development Financing, Water Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Gender, Human Rights, Equality, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Shelby Quast Director, Americas Office Equality Now squast@equalitynow.org Organization VAW, discrimination outreach
Change, Gender, Human Rights,
matilda gennvi matilda.gustafsson@erics Poverty and Inequality, Indicator development, Advocacy and
gustafsson sustainability director ericsson son.com Private Sector Urbanization, education outreach
Economic Growth, Governance,
peace and security, Poverty and
Inequality, Development Data producer/collector, Indicator
Alex Erskine MD and Founder Erskinomics Consulting Pty Ltd alex@erskinomics.com Private Sector Financing development, Data analysis and visualization

Climate Change, Food, nutrition
and agriculture, Gender,
EU-CORD Network - European Governance, peace and security,
Christian Organisations in Relief alexander.gentsch@eu- Network of Non-Governmental Health, Human Rights, Poverty
Alexander Gentsch Advocacy Officer and Development cord.org Organizations and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Economic Growth, Human Rights,
Policy and Advocacy Non-Governmental Development Financing, Financial
Bodo Ellmers Manager Eurodad bellmers@eurodad.org Organization Architecture Advocacy and outreach
Membership and Events European Association for the Non-Governmental Education, Human Rights, Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Raffaela Kihrer Officer Education of Adults (EAEA) raffaela.kihrer@eaea.org Organization Poverty and Inequality outreach
Change, Governance, peace and
Policy Officer, UN & stephanie.beecroft@yout Non-Governmental security, Human Rights, Poverty
Stephanie Beecroft Global Affairs European Youth Forum hforum.org Organization and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
marion@excisionparlonse Non-Governmental
Schaefer President Excision, parlons-en! n.org Organization Gender, Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
Executive Development Centre - mariam.shoaib@gmail.co Education, Gender, Women's Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Mariam Shoaib Program Manager University of Lahore m Academia Empowerment outreach, Free Employability Skills Courses

Rights, Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Faculty of Law, Queen's University, Development Financing, Tax development, Data analysis and visualization,
Kathleen Lahey Professor Canada kal2@queensu.ca Academia Policies Advocacy and outreach, policy development

and security, Human Rights,
Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Ocean
Kai Kaschinski Chairman Fair Oceans | IntKom e.V. fair-oceans@gmx.info Organization policy Advocacy and outreach

corbalan@fairtrade- Non-Governmental Inequality, Development Indicator development, Advocacy and
Sergi Corbalán Executive Director Fair Trade Advocacy Office advocacy.org Organization Financing outreach
Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Human Rights, Indicator development, Data analysis and
Amy Boldosser-Boesch Interim President Family Care International aboldosser@fcimail.org Organization Poverty and Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental
Rauha Haufiku FAWENA fawena@moe.gov.na Organization Education, Gender Advocacy and outreach
Scientific staff member,
section I 1.2 International Federal Environment Agency of Energy, Environment and Climate
Ms Claudia Kabel Environmental Protection Germany Claudia.kabel@uba.de Academia Change, Health, Urbanization Indicator development
Federation of African Engineering Non-Governmental nutrition and agriculture, Indicator development, Data analysis and
M van Veelen Past President Organisations martin@iliso.com Organization Urbanization, Infrastructure visualization
gwhyte@fertilizercanada. Non-Governmental Change, Food, nutrition and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Garth Whyte President and CEO Fertilizer Canada ca Organization agriculture outreach
Non-Governmental Food, nutrition and agriculture, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Roger Mathisen Technical Advisor FHI 360 / Alive & Thrive rmathisen@fhi360.org Organization Gender, Health, Human Rights outreach
Change, Gender, Health, Poverty Data producer/collector, Indicator
R.Clarke@fiafoundation.o Non-Governmental and Inequality, Urbanization, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Richard Clarke Researcher FIA Foundation rg Organization Development Financing Advocacy and outreach

ENRICO enricocampagnoli@ilsass NGO representing private RE Inequality, Urbanization,
CAMPAGNOLI FIABCI IOC President FIABCI o.it sector Development Financing SD promoter
Specialist, International Finnish Youth Cooperation Non-Governmental Education, Poverty and Inequality,
Venla Kokko Advocacy Work Allianssi venla.kokko@alli.fi Organization Youth Indicator development
forodakarhonduras@gmai Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Aminta Navarro Herrera Coordinator Foro Dakar-Honduras l.com Civil Society Instance Education, Gender, Human Rights visualization, Advocacy and outreach

peace and security, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Human Rights, Poverty and development, Data analysis and visualization,
Manager, Global Foundation Center (on behalf of Inequality, Urbanization, Advocacy and outreach, capacity building and
Lauren Bradford Partnerships SDG Philanthropy Platform) lbr@foundationcenter.org Philanthropy Development Financing, data knowledge sharing

security, Poverty and Inequality,
Non-Governmental Development Financing, Indicator development, Data analysis and
Danilo Piaggesi Managing Director Framericas mgr@framericas.org Organization Knowledge economy visualization, Advocacy and outreach, Training
Non-Governmental Health, Poverty and Inequality, Advocacy and outreach, implementation
Yvona Tous Policy Advisor Framework Convention Alliance tousy@fctc.org Organization international law monitoring

philippe.guettier@partena agriculture, Governance, peace
riat-francais-eau.fr, and security, Human Rights,
melisa.cran@partenariat- Non-Governmental Urbanization, Development Indicator development, Data analysis and
Philippe Guettier General Director French Water Parnership francais-eau.fr Organization Financing, Water visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Change, Health, Human Rights, Indicator development, Advocacy and
nathalieseguin@fanmexic Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, water outreach, monitoring and evaluating the
Nathalie Seguin General coordinator Freshwater Action Network Mexico o.net Organization management and WASH implementation of SDG
Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Vince Blaser Director Frontline Health Workers Coalition vblaser@intrahealth.org Organization Health outreach
Advocacy and outreach, Currently setting upp
a monitoring institution - Global Centre for
Elin Fabre Advisor/Coordinator Future of Places elin@futureofplaces.com Umbrella of all above Urbanization, public space Public Space
Sinead Andersen Senior Manager Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance sandersen@gavi.org Public Private Partnership Health Advocacy and outreach

Inequality, Urbanization, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Shaila Shahid Team Leader Gender and Water Alliance, GWA shaila.shahid@gwapb.org Global Network Development Financing outreach
gemmamehmed@gmail.c Non-Governmental Food, nutrition and agriculture,
Gemma Mehmed Campaign Assistant Generation Nutrition om Organization Health Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Gabriele Weigt Coordinator German NGOs and DPOs weigt@bezev.de Organization Disability outreach

Global Alliance for Clean jdurrett@cleancookstoves Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Jessie Durrett Program Associate Cookstoves .org Organization Development Financing outreach
anjela@campaignforeduc Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Anjela Taneja Head of Policy Global Campaign for Education ation.org CSO network Education outreach

Change, Food, nutrition and Data producer/collector, Indicator
agriculture, Governance, peace development, Data analysis and visualization,
mathis@footprintnetwork. Non-Governmental and security, Poverty and Advocacy and outreach, evaluation
Mathis Wackernagel President Global Footprint Network org Organization Inequality, Urbanization frameworks
agriculture, Gender, Human development, Data analysis and visualization,
Advisor - Indigenous mrinalini.rai@globalforest Non-Governmental Rights, Development Financing, Advocacy and outreach, Monitoring and
Mrinalini Rai Peoples and Gender Global Forest Coalition (GFC) coalition.org Organization biodiversity Evaluation
Global Forum for Media Non-Governmental Human Rights, Access to Indicator development, Advocacy and
Bill Orme UN Representative Development bill.orme@gmail.com Organization Information outreach
cbaudot@ghadvocates.or Non-Governmental Food, nutrition and agriculture,
Baudot Advocacy officer Global Health Advocates France g Organization Health, Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
President and Executive Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Christine Sow Director Global Health Council csow@globalhealth.org Organization Gender, Health outreach
Global Health Technologies abennett@ghtcoalition.or Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Ashley Bennett Policy Officer Coalition g Organization Health, Development Financing outreach
Advocacy and Education, Gender, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Communications Global Initiative to End All Corporal elinormilne@googlemail.c Non-Governmental Human Rights, Violence against development, Data analysis and visualization,
Elinor Milne Coordinator Punishment of Children om Organization children Advocacy and outreach
priyanka@globalmarch.or Non-Governmental Economic Growth, Education, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Priyanka Ribhu Officer in Charge Global March Against Child Labour g Organization Gender, Human Rights outreach
agriculture, Health, Poverty and
Global Network for Neglected michelle.brooks@sabin.or Non-Governmental Inequality, Water, sanitation &
Michelle Brooks Policy Director Tropical Diseases g Organization hygiene Advocacy and outreach

Global Network of Civil Society Human Rights, Poverty and
Organisations for Disaster Inequality, Development Data producer/collector, Indicator
Lucy Pearson Advocacy Coordinator Reduction lucy.pearson@gndr.org Network Financing, Disaster resilience development, Advocacy and outreach
ines.globaloceancommisi Independent high level
Ines de Agueda Communications officer Global Ocean Commission on@gmail.com commission Ocean and high seas governance Advocacy and outreach
Center for Global Safe Water,
Sanitation, and Hygiene at Emory
University, Centre for Health
Enhancement and Social
Development, Coca-Cola,
Community Water and Sanitation
Agency, Ghana, Concern Universal,
End Water Poverty, Environmental
Camps for Conservation
Awareness, FHI 360, GBCHealth,
German Toilet Organization, Global
Public-Private Partnership for
Handwashing, Global Soap Project,
HELVETAS, International Scientific
Forum on Home Hygiene, IRC,
IRSP, Kenya Water and Sanitation
Civil Society Network, Plan
International UK, Practical Action,
Raleigh International, Reckitt-
Benckiser, Sanergy, Simavi,
Soapbox Soaps, Tanzania
Association of Environmental
Engineers, Terre des hommes
Lausanne, Triangle Generation
Humanitaire, The Hunger Project,
Sanitation and Hygiene Applied
Research for Equity Consortium
(SHARE), Togolese Red Cross,
Unilever Village Water, WASH
Advocates, WASH Ambassador for
Nigeria, Water for People, Water for
South Sudan, WaterAid,
Welthungerhilfe, Women
Environmental Programme,
Nigeria, Water Supply and Education, Food, nutrition and
Acting Secretariat Sanitation Collaborative Council agriculture, Gender, Health,
Hanna Woodburn Director Wherever the Need hwoodburn@fhi360.org Coalition Response Water, sanitation, and hygiene Advocacy and outreach
Goshen Free Medical Assistance dr_ Non-Governmental
Ephraim, Ime Joshua CEO Association ephraim@yahoo.co.uk Organization Health Advocacy and outreach
Plants Operation
Yasser Alabbasi Manager GPIC yarahim@gpic.net Private Sector Food, nutrition and agriculture Advocacy and outreach

Public Policy Affairs carvalho@globalreporting Non-Governmental Inequality, Urbanization, Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Patricia Carvalho Coordinator GRI .org Organization Development Financing outreach
Senior Public Policy Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Alanna Galati Associate Guttmacher Institute agalati@guttmacher.org Organization Health, government policy outreach
Director Global Affairs Non-Governmental Data producer/collector, Indicator
Daniel Petrie and Advocacy Habitat for Humanity International dpetrie@habitat.org Organization Urbanization, Housing development, Advocacy and outreach

Development Advocacy jeanne.battello@handicap Non-Governmental Urbanization, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Battello Manager Handicap International .be Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach

Development Financing, whole Data analysis and visualization, scientific
Jessie Lydia Henshaw scientist HDS systems design science eco@synapse9.com Research Organization system design and planning principles
n.sharples@healthpovert Non-Governmental Health, Human Rights, Poverty Indicator development, Advocacy and
Natalie Sharples Senior Policy Advisor Health Poverty Action yaction.org Organization and Inequality outreach
Health Priorities in Post-2015 dheiberg@globalhealth.or Indicator development, Advocacy and
Danielle Heiberg Advocacy Manager Taskforce g Task Force Gender, Health, technology, R&D outreach
Director, Livable Cities HealthBridge Foundation of Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Kristie Daniel Program Canada kdaniel@healthbridge.ca Organization Urbanization outreach
Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality,
Dinh Dang Hai Senior Project Officer HealthBridge Vietnam hai@healthbridge.org.vn Organization Urbanization Advocacy and outreach
malcala@icpdtaskforce.or The Task Force is an
g; independent advocacy
sgreen@icpdtaskforce.or mechanism with a mandate Indicator development, Advocacy and
Maria Jose Alcala Director, Secretariat High-Level Task Force for the ICPD g from UNFPA Gender, Health, Human Rights outreach
Education, Health, Human Rights,
michela.costa@hopeandh Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Child
Michela Costa Head of Advocacy Hope and Homes for Children omes.org Organization Protection Advocacy and outreach
mary.healy@human- Gender, Human Rights, Violence
Mary Healy Executive Director Human Dignity Foundation dignity-foundation.org Foundation against Children Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental
Shantha Barriga Director Human Rights Watch barrigs@hrw.org Organization Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
Consultant, Post - 2015 Economic Growth, Energy, Health,
Consultations for john.drexhage@gmail.co Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
John Drexhage Extractives Industries ICMM and IPIECA m Private Sector Inequality development, Advocacy and outreach
Noëlle Garcin Secretary General IDAY-International ngarcin@iday.org Organization Education, Health, Human Rights outreach
Consortium of 28 disability and

development non-governmental
organisations (NGOs),
mainstream development Economic Growth, Gender,
NGOs and disabled people's Health, Human Rights, Poverty
organisations (DPOs) and Inequality, Urbanization,
supporting disability and Development Financing, Data producer/collector, Indicator
development work in more than Marginalised groups, including development, Data analysis and visualization,
Marion Steff (IDDC) Policy Advisor IDDC msteff@sightsavers.org 100 countries around the world. persons with disabilities Advocacy and outreach
David Gustafson Director, CIMSANS ILSI Research Foundation dgustafson@ilsi.org Research institute agriculture, Health development
Indedependent consultant,
formerly with Statistics Norway,
International Labour Office and Governance, peace and security,
Retired labour Norwegian Directorate of Retired labour Human Rights, Poverty and
Eivind Hoffmann statistician/economist Immigration eho@udi.no statistician/economist Inequality Indicator development
Indigenous and Frontier Non-Governmental agriculture, Health, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Sundaram Seshadri Coordinator Technology Research Centre - IFTR seshadri@iftr.in Organization Inequality outreach
Nathan Borgford- Institute for Governance and nborgford- Non-Governmental Change, Governance, peace and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Parnell Law Fellow Sustainable Development parnell@igsd.org Organization security, Development Financing outreach
Institute for Reproductive and Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Human Rights, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Nguyen Thi Hoai Duc Director Family Health rafh@hn.vnn.vn Organization Poverty and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Charity - Uniting 40 different Indicator development, Advocacy and
Alexander Heazell Chair Intenational Stillbirth Alliance alex_heazell@talk21.com Stillbirth Organisations Health, Poverty and Inequality outreach
Internaitonal Council of AIDS melissa@nomadcode.co Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Human Rights, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Melissa Ditmore Advocacy Advisor Service Organizations m Organization Development Financing outreach
IAPB is a membership
organization with over 200
members worldwide working to
promote eye care for everyone Education, Health, Human Rights,
everywhere and ensure those Poverty and Inequality, rights of
International Agency for the with irreparable vision loss marginalised: persons with Data producer/collector, Indicator
Zoe Gray Advocacy Manager Prevention of Blindness zgray@iapb.org achieve their full potential disabilities development, Advocacy and outreach
Jennifer Garrett Advocacy Specialist International AIDS Vaccine Initiative jgarrett@iavi.org Organization Health outreach
International Alliance for Non-Governmental development, Data analysis and visualization,
Ann Keeling President and CEO Responsible Drinking akeeling@iard.org Organization Health Advocacy and outreach
International Association for Media Data producer/collector, Indicator
Researcher / Vice- and Communication Research aimeevegamx@yahoo.co Gender, Media and development, Data analysis and visualization,
Aimée Vega Montiel President (IAMCR) m.mx Academia communication Advocacy and outreach
DrJudyK@aol.com, Change, Gender, Health, Human
International Association of walterreichman@gmail.co Non-Governmental Rights, Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Judy Kuriansky Main NGO representative, Applied Psychology m Organization Psychology development, Advocacy and outreach
Sustainable Development International Association of Public Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Philip Turner Manager Transport (UITP) philip.turner@uitp.org Organization Urbanization, Transport outreach
Helene Ramos dos International Bar Association helene.santos@int- Non-Governmental Data producer/collector, Indicator
Santos UN Liaison- Senior Fellow Human Rights' Institute bar.org Organization Human Rights development, Advocacy and outreach

cschouten@internationalb Non-Governmental Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Claire Schouten Senior Program Officer International Budget Partnership udget.org Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach
International Center for Not-for- Non-Governmental Indicator development, Data analysis and
Margaret Scotti Legal Associate Profit Law mscotti@icnl.org Organization civil society law visualization
Food, nutrition and agriculture,Data producer/collector, Indicator
Research Uptake International Centre for Diarrhoeal martijn.pakker@icddrb.or Gender, Health, Poverty and development, Data analysis and visualization,
Martijn Pakker Manager Disease REsearch, Bangladesh g Health research Institute Inequality, Urbanization Advocacy and outreach
International Council for Adult oficina@icae.org.uy, Non-Governmental Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Maria Graciela Cuervo Program Officer Education secretariat@icae.org.uy Organization Education, Gender, Human Rights outreach
and agriculture, Gender, Health,
Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Pierre Théraulaz CEO International Council of Nurses ceo@icn.ch Organization Inequality outreach

obartha@ida- Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Orsolya Bartha Senior Advisor International Disability Alliance secretariat.org Organization Inequality, Urbanization development, Advocacy and outreach
Climate Change, Governance,
Non-Governmental peace and security, Poverty and
Arthur Lyon Dahl President International Environemnt Forum dahla@bluewin.ch Organization Inequality Advocacy and outreach

Manager Development International Federation of Library Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Indicator development, Data analysis and
Fiona Bradley Programmes Associations and Institutions fiona.bradley@ifla.org Organization Inequality, Urbanization visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Director, Public Affairs, International Federation of International Business

Communications & Global Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Association (official consultative Indicator development, Advocacy and
Mario Ottiglio Health Policy Associations (IFPMA) m.ottiglio@ifpma.org status with ECOSOC) Health, Poverty and Inequality outreach

International Fertilizer Industry Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Charlotte Hebebrand Director General Association (IFA) chebebrand@fertilizer.org Industrial NGO Development Financing development, Advocacy and outreach
International Justice Mission omartens@ijm- Non-Governmental Inequality, violence against the
Olga Martens Advocacy & Campaigning Germany deutschland.de Organization poor, justice systems Advocacy and outreach
Global Policy & Technical International Land Coalition, Global s.battistelli@landcoalition. International network/coalition Inequality, Land right and Land Data producer/collector, Indicator
Stefania Battistelli Support Secretariat org of members Governance development, Advocacy and outreach

Director of International Health, Human Rights, Poverty Data producer/collector, Indicator
Advocacy, New York International Movement ATD Fourth cristina.diez@atd- Non-Governmental and Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Cristina Diez Office World fourthworld.org Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach
Education, Governance, peace

and security, Human Rights, Data producer/collector, Indicator
International Network on Migration rodolfocordova@gmail.co Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Rodolfo Cordova Secretary of Organization and Development m Organization Development Financing, Migration Advocacy and outreach
Project manager - Non-Governmental security, Urbanization,
Edouard BOINET International cooperation International Office for Water e.boinet@oieau.fr Organization Development Financing Data producer/collector
International Planned Parenthood Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Heather Barclay External Relations Federation hbarclay@ippf.org Organization Gender, Health outreach
International Plant Nutrition Non-Governmental Change, Food, nutrition and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Terry Roberts President Institute troberts@ipni.net Organization agriculture outreach
and security, Health, Science
International Strategy and Non-Governmental Diplomacy and Humanitarian Indicator development, Data analysis and
Sarah Cho Associate Director Reconciliation Foundation sarahasone@gmail.com Organization Assistance visualization, Advocacy and outreach
International Water Resources Non-Governmental
Tom Soo na Association soo@iwra.org Organization Water Resources Indicator development
Director, Communications lhoemeke@intrahealth.or Non-Governmental

Laura Hoemeke & Advocacy IntraHealth g Organization Gender, Health Advocacy and outreach
Investigaciòn e Intervencion Non-Governmental Education, Gender, Poverty and
gladys Añorve Añorve Presidenta Educativa AC gladysanorve@gmail.com Organization Inequality Data analysis and visualization
kristina.sperkova@iogt.or Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and
Kristina Sperkova President IOGT International g Organization Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Health, Human Rights, Poverty
Sara Heine Deputy Secretary General IOGT-NTO sara.heine@iogt.se Organization and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental development, Data analysis and visualization,
Barbara Crane Executive Vice President Ipas craneb@ipas.org Organization Gender, Health, Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
islandsustainabilityallianc Environment and Climate
e@gmail.com; Change, Governance, peace and
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS imogenpuaingram@gmail Non-Governmental security, Health, Human Rights, Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
IMOGEN P INGRAM Secretary=Treasurer Inc. ("ISACI") .com Organization Chemicals & Wastes outreach
Member, Board of Japan Council on Education for suzukik@staff.kanazawa- Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Katsunori Suzuki Directors Sustainable Development u.ac.jp Organization Education outreach
Gender, Health, Human Rights,
Japan Organization for Poverty and Inequality, Sexual
International Cooperation in Family Non-Governmental and Reproductive Health and Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Masako Fukushima Advocacy Group Staff Planning (JOICFP) mfukushima@joicfp.or.jp Organization Rights visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Gender, Health, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Amy Tsui Professor Johns Hopkins University atsui@jhu.edu Academia Inequality development, Data analysis and visualization
Policy Analyst - Security Non-Governmental security, Human Rights, Interfaith Indicator development, Data analysis and
Galymzhan Kirbassov Development Nexus Journalists and Writers Foundation g.kirbassov@gyv.org.tr Organization and Intra-faith Affairs visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Economic Growth, Poverty and
Non-Governmental Inequality, Development Indicator development, Data analysis and
Tim Jones Policy Officer Jubilee Debt Campaign, UK tim@jubileedebt.org.uk Organization Financing visualization, Advocacy and outreach
ashley@jubileescotland.o Non-Governmental Inequality, Development
Ashley Erdman Campaign Director Jubilee Scotland rg.uk Organization Financing, debt & sustainability Advocacy and outreach
Kamla Nehru College, University of development, Data analysis and visualization,
Sanjay Marale Assistant Professor Delhi maralesanjay@gmail.com Academia Education Advocacy and outreach

Advocacy and Policy Non-Governmental Inequality, Development
Jouni Nissinen Officer (Post-2015) Kepa Finland jouni.nissinen@kepa.fi Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach
peace and security, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Head of External Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Clean development, Data analysis and visualization,
Emrah Akgül Relations Kimse Yok Mu emrah.akgul@kym.org.tr Organization Water, Children Advocacy and outreach
josanjak@landallianceinc. Non-Governmental Indicator development, Data analysis and
Jolyne Sanjak Executive Director Land Alliance, Inc. org Organization Land Rights visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Sr. Director of Research, Non-Governmental Indicator development, Data analysis and

Diana Fletschner Monitoring and Evaluation Landesa dianaf@landesa.org Organization Gender, Poverty and Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Education, Gender, Human
Latin American Campaign for the Non-Governmental Rights, Poverty and Inequality, Indicator development, Data analysis and
Camilla Croso General Coordinator Right to Education (CLADE) camcroso@gmail.com Organization Development Financing visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Change, Human Rights, Poverty
Finance for Development Non-Governmental and Inequality, Development Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Patricia Miranda Responsible Latindadd patmiranda@gmail.com Organization Financing outreach
LSE IDEAS International Drug Human Rights, Poverty and
John Collins Coordinator Policy Project j.collins@lse.ac.uk Academia Inequality, Drug Policy Indicator development
Policy and Advocacy Gillian.Huebner@wearelu Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Gillian Huebner Director Lumos mos.org Organization Inequality outreach
Economic Growth, Gender,

Health, Human Rights, Poverty
and Inequality, Development
governance@madenetwo Financing, Migration, diaspora,
Bob van Dillen Coordinator Post-2015 MADE rk.org Global CSO Network refugees Advocacy and outreach
Inequality, Development Indicator development, Data analysis and
Philip Goldman President Maestral International pgoldman@maestral.org Private Sector Financing, Child protection visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Gender, Human Rights, Poverty
Coordinator, Education Major Group of Workers and Trade and Inequality, Development Data producer/collector, Indicator
Antonia Wulff and Employment Unions antonia.wulff@ei-ie.org Major Group Financing, Decent work development, Advocacy and outreach
Making It Work Project Making It Work Global gender and LFENU@handicap- Gender, Health, Gender based Indicator development, Data analysis and
Luisa Fenu Manager disability initiative international.org violence visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Director of Policy and Non-Governmental
Philippa Lei Advocacy Malala Fund philippa@malalafund.org Organization Education Advocacy and outreach
o.williams@malariaconsor Non-Governmental Food, nutrition and agriculture, Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Oliver Williams Advocacy Officer Malaria Consortium tium.org Organization Health, Poverty and Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Senior Manager, Policy bethan.cobley@mariesto Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Reproductive Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Bethan Cobley and Partnerships Marie Stopes International pes.org Organization Health and Rights outreach, Implementer of SDGS

Technical Advisor, Non-Governmental Change, Urbanization, Disaster Indicator development, Advocacy and
Loy Rego Resilience and the SDGs MARS Practitioners Network regoloy@gmail.com Organization Risk Reduction and Preparedness outreach, promoting national action on SDGs
Head of AAU- health
Access team, General Médecins Sans Frontières - mit.philips@brussels.msf. Non-Governmental
Philips M. direction OCB Doctors without Borders org Organization Health feedback & reality check
Change, Gender, Health, Human
Celine Paramunda Medical Mission Sisters celine@mmsmission.net Major Group Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
Multidimensional Poverty Peer john.hammock@gmail.co Indicator development, Advocacy and
John Hammock Director Network m south south network Poverty and Inequality outreach, capacity building and education
National Campaign for Dalit Human Non-Governmental security, Human Rights, Poverty Indicator development, Data analysis and
Beena J Pallical National Co-ordinator Rights beena@ncdhr.org.in Organization and Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach

Development Financing, Access
Non-Governmental to Justice is the framework Data producer/collector, Indicator
National Center for Access to Organization based at through which we work in all of development, Data analysis and visualization,
David Udell Executive Director Justice at Cardozo Law School udell@yu.edu Academic Institution these areas Advocacy and outreach
National Union of Tenants of Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Indicator development, Advocacy and
C. W. Enwefah [Mr] Executive Secretary Nigeria info.nutn@yahoo.com Organization Inequality, Urbanization outreach

pkanayson@ncdalliance. Non-Governmental Inequality, Urbanization, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Priya Kanayson Advocacy Officer NCD Alliance org Organization Development Financing outreach
Bhakta Bahadur Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare Non-Governmental security, Health, Human Rights, Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Bishwakarma National Chairperson Organization (NNDSWO) nndswo@wlink.com.np Organization Poverty and Inequality outreach

Newcastle University, Institute for Inequality, Urbanization, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Shona Smith Research Coordinator Sustainability sustainability@ncl.ac.uk Academia Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
Change, Urbanization, Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Kunlé Adeyemi Principal NLÉ Kunle@nleworks.com Private Sector Development Financing visualization
Non-Governmental Education, Health, Poverty and
Patrik Sulik President NOM Slovakia patrik.sulik@nom.sk Organization Inequality Advocacy and outreach
STATE PROGRAMME mritunjay_chandra@rediff Environment and Climate
MRITUNJAY OFFICER NRMC INDIA PVT LIMITED mail.com Private Sector Change, Gender Advocacy and outreach
Stefanie Brodie, Dana NSF Research Coordination Energy, Food, nutrition and
Boyer, Joshua Sperling, Young professional Network on Sustainable Cities agriculture, Poverty and
E. Kellie Stokes, and researchers and PhD 'Ph.D., Postdoc, Early-Career' s.r.brodie@gmail.com Inequality, Urbanization, Indicator development, Data analysis and
Alisa Zomer students Working Group (corresponding) Academia Sustainability visualization, Science and research
Non-Governmental Data producer/collector, Indicator
Adrijana Visnjic Jevtic President OMEP Croatia omephr@gmail.com Organization Education development, Advocacy and outreach
on behalf of individuals from Indicator development, Data analysis and
MamaYe Evidence for Action visualization, Advocacy and outreach,
Eleanor Hukin Technical Advisor programme, Options Consultancy e.hukin@options.co.uk Programme Health Accountability
Advocacy Officer for on behalf of the International jennifer.thompson@conce Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Jennifer Thompson Hunger Coalition for Advocacy on Nutrition rn.net Organization Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach

Senior Programme hady@onefamilypeople.o Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality,
Hadiatou Diallo Manager OneFamilyPeople rg Organization Sport.music and drama Advocacy and outreach
dierdre.williams@openso
Dierdre Williams Senior Program Officer Open Society Foundations cietyfoundations.org Private foundation Education Indicator development
Governance, peace and security, Indicator development, Data analysis and
peter.chapman@opensoc Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and visualization, Advocacy and outreach, Funder
Peter Chapman Program Officer Open Society Justice Initiative ietyfoundations.org Organization Inequality of monitoring
Non-Governmental Education, Gender, Health, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Oliver Chantler External Affairs Manager Orchid Project oliver@orchidproject.org Organization Human Rights outreach

Organisation Mondiale de Non-Governmental Inequality, Early Childhood Data producer/collector, Indicator
Jane Murray Executive Member l'Education Prescolaire (OMEP) UK drjmmurray@gmail.com Organization Development development, Advocacy and outreach

Overseas Development Institute Urbanization, Development Indicator development, Advocacy and
Emma Lovell Research Officer (ODI) e.lovell@odi.org.uk Think Tank Financing outreach

Policy Advisor, Post-2015 luca.miggiano@oxfamnov Non-Governmental Development Financing, Land Data producer/collector, Indicator
Luca Miggiano Indicators Lead Oxfam ib.nl Organization Rights development, Advocacy and outreach
International Advocacy Non-Governmental
Allison Doody Associate PAI adoody@pai.org Organization Gender, Health, Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
paola_ballon@hotmail.co Non-Governmental Health, Poverty and Inequality, Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Paola Ballon Senior Researcher Partnership for Economic Policy m Organization Labour outreach
The Post 2015 Working Group

consists of approximately 40
partners from different
Partnership constituencies.
Further information on the
group and related outcomes
can be found at
www.who.int/pmnch/post2015/e
n/. The group perspectives are
drawn from a position
statement on indicators
developed by the working group
and endorsed by over 150
partners. This statement can (members of the Post 2015 working group
be found here: engage in indicator development; data
Post 2015 Working Partnership for Maternal, Newborn http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2 analysis and visualization; and advocacy and
Group Joint statement and Child Health (The Partnership) pmnch@who.int 015_draft_indicator.pdf?ua=1 Gender, Health, Human Rights outreach)
Change, Poverty and Inequality,
Partnership on Sustainable Low cornie.huizenga@slocatp Non-Governmental Urbanization, Development Indicator development, Data analysis and
Cornie Huizenga Secretary General Carbon Transport artnership.org Organization Financing, Transport visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Senior Product Food, nutrition and agriculture,
Development Policy Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Poverty and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Claire Wingfield Officer PATH cwingfield@path.org Organization Inequality outreach
Change, Gender, Health, Human
Senior Advisor for Non-Governmental Rights, sexual and reproductive Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Sono Aibe Strategic Initiatives Pathfinder International saibe@pathfinder.org Organization health and rights outreach
cschuftan@phmovement. Non-Governmental security, Health, Human Rights,
claudio schuftan member steering council people's health movement org Organization Poverty and Inequality critique
Advocacy and outreach, legal equality in
Jeanne Sarson co-founder Persons Against Non-State Torture twin2@eastlink.ca Human Rights Defender Education, Gender, Human Rights criminal codes
Peruvian Campaign for the Right to Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Madeleine Zuniga National Coordinator Education madzuniga@cpde.org.pe Organization Education outreach
amanda.lundy@plan- Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Amanda Lundy Advocacy Advisor Plan International international.org Organization Inequality outreach
Manager of Global Planned Parenthood Federation of Non-Governmental
Jennifer Vanyur Advocacy America jennifer.vanyur@ppfa.org Organization Gender, Health, Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
Planning 4 Sustainable mattmcintyre@planning4s Change, Governance, peace and Indicator development, Data analysis and
Matt McIntyre Director Development d.com Private Sector security, Urbanization visualization
nchapman@policycures.o Non-Governmental Data producer/collector, Indicator
Nick Chapman Director of Research Policy Cures rg Organization Health development

Health, Human Rights, Poverty Data producer/collector, Indicator
Post-2015 volunteering Working coline.peyre@france- and Inequality, Urbanization, development, Data analysis and visualization,
James O'Brien Chair Group volontaires.org International Task Force Global partnership Advocacy and outreach
Economic Growth, Energy, Food,
Astrid.WalkerBourne@pra Non-Governmental Urbanization, Disaster Risk Indicator development, Advocacy and
Astrid Walker Bourne Practical Action cticalaction.org.uk Organization Reduction outreach
PROGRAMA UNIVERSITARIO DE
DERECHOS HUMANOS DE LA Food, nutrition and agriculture,
HUMAN RIGHTS UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL lauraelisaperez@yahoo.c Health, Human Rights, Poverty
LAURA ELISA PEREZ RESEARCHER AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO om.mx Academia and Inequality Indicator development
sandra.vermuyten@world Poverty and Inequality, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Sandra Vermuyten Head of Campaigns Public Services International -psi.org Major Group Development Financing outreach
Non-Governmental Environment and Climate Data producer/collector, Indicator
Richard Fuller President & CEO Pure Earth / Blacksmith Institute fuller@pureearth.org Organization Change, Health, Toxic Pollution development, Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental agriculture, Governance, peace
Monica Camacho Adviser Rainforest Foundation Norway monica@rainforest.no Organization and security, Human Rights
Realizing Sexual and Reproductive Non-Governmental Education, Gender, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Marisa Viana Executive Coordinator Justice Alliance (RESURJ) mviana@resurj.org Organization Human Rights development, Advocacy and outreach
Regional network for yourth and rajanocoordination@gmai Non-Governmental
Valerio Ussene General Cordinator Adult Education Advocacy l.com Organization Education, Gender Advocacy and outreach
marcela.ballara@gmail.co Non-Governmental Education, Gender, Human Indicator development, Advocacy and
Marcela Ballara Advisor REPEM m Organization Rights, Poverty and Inequality outreach
Indicator development, Advocacy and
outreach, We're also working with a network
Governance, peace and security, of young accountability advocates, who are
Policy and Research sarahh@restlessdevelop Non-Governmental participatory decision-making and developing their own national indicator
Sarah Haynes Coodrinator Restless Development ment.org Organization accountability frameworks, to track progress of the SDGs
Policy Advocacy Officer anushree.shiroor@results Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Anushree Shiroor (Nutrition) RESULTS UK .org.uk Organization Development Financing outreach
Julia Hall Senior Consultant RMS julia.hall@rms.com Private Sector Change, Disaster risk Advocacy and outreach
Rural Area Development Non-Governmental nutrition and agriculture, Gender,
Rajendra Adhikari Chairman Programme (RADP) radp.rajendra@gmail.com Organization Poverty and Inequality, WASH Indicator development
Conflict and Security twheeler@saferworld.org. Non-Governmental Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Thomas Wheeler Advisor Saferworld uk Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Education, Health, Stillbirth,
Rebekah Gray Research Coordinator Sands New Zealand rebekah@sands.org.nz Organization community support Advocacy and outreach
Post-2015 Advocacy r.white@savethechildren. Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Rosanne White Adviser Save the Children org.uk Organization Inequality outreach

Eve de la Mothe eve.delamothekaroubi@u Development Financing, Data and Indicator development, Data analysis and
Karoubi Manager SDSN nsdsn.org Academia monitoring visualization, Advocacy and outreach
HAMILTON F. LEITE Real Estate Companies
JR. DIRECTOR SECOVI-SP hl@hamiltonleite.com.br Association Urbanization, Real Estate Advocacy and outreach
SHORE and Whariki Research
Professor Sally Centre, Massey University, NZ. A Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Casswell Director WHO Collaborating Centre s.casswell@massey.ac.nz Academia Health visualization, Advocacy and outreach
Director, Global atianna.scozzaro@sierrac Non-Governmental

A.Tianna Scozzaro Population & Environment Sierra Club lub.org Organization Environment and Climate Change Advocacy and outreach
Education, Health, Human Rights,
Non-Governmental Marginalised groups, including development, Data analysis and visualization,
Marion Steff Policy Advisor Sightsavers msteff@sightsavers.org Organization persons with disabilities Advocacy and outreach
Signatory organizations: United

Nations Foundation, Plan
International, Girl Effect, CARE,
International Women's Health
Coalition, Girls Not Brides, World
Association of Girl Guides and Girl
Scouts, European Parliamentary Economic Growth, Education,
Forum, International Center for Environment and Climate
Research on Women, Advocates Change, Gender, Governance,
for Youth, FHI360, Equality Now, Several partners from civil peace and security, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Manager, Girl Declaration Mercy Corps, Let Girls Lead, society listed as signatories, all Human Rights, Poverty and development, Data analysis and visualization,
Stephanie Oula Joint Advocacy Group International Rescue Committee soula@unfoundation.org NGOs Inequality Advocacy and outreach
luigi.demartino@smallarm Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
De Marttino Luigi Senior Researcher Small Arms Survey ssurvey.org Organization Inequality development, Data analysis and visualization

Change, Gender, Governance,
Professor Emerita of peace and security, Health,
Psychology & Africana Society for the Psychological Human Rights, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Studies, Rowan Study of Social Issues; Psychology Inequality, Urbanization, Mental development, Data analysis and visualization,
Corann Okorodudu University Coalition at the United Nations okorodudu@rowan.edu Major Group Health; Racism & sexism Advocacy and outreach
carlo.angelesm@gmail.co Non-Governmental Climate Change, Gender, Human Indicator development, Advocacy and
Carlo Angeles Executive Director Somos el Presente m Organization Rights, Youth outreach
Education, Human Rights,
SOS Children's Villages Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, child Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Claudia Arisi Advocacy Advisor International claudia.arisi@sos-kd.org Organization protection and care outreach
Climate Change, Food, nutrition Advocacy and outreach, Different
Other Stakeholder (within the and agriculture, Gender, Health, organisations within the Stakeholder Group
Network Advocacy and Stakeholder Group on Ageing verity.mcgivern@helpage. Major Groups and Other Human Rights, Poverty and will take on different roles according to their
Verity McGivern Communications Officer (posted by HelpAge International) org Stakeholders grouping) Inequality expertise
Professor Chris Barker Statistics Without Borders of the chris.barker@barkerstats. Non-Governmental Education, Health, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
& Gary Shapiro Statistics Without Borders American Statistical Association com Organization Inequality, statistics visualization

Project Coordinator Change, Food, nutrition and
Oliver Taherzadeh (on (Sustainable agriculture, Gender, Human
behalf of SEI Consumption & oliver.taherzadeh@sei- Non-Governmental Rights, Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
International) Production Group) Stockholm Environment Institute international.org Organization Urbanization development, Data analysis and visualization
Lemya Musa Mohamed Urban Development Sudanese Environment Non-Governmental Health, Human Rights, Poverty Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Idris Specialist Conservation Society secs1975@yahoo.com Organization and Inequality, Urbanization outreach
Non-Governmental Indicator development, Data analysis and
Dyuti Researcher Swadhikar dyuti.ailawadi@gmail.com Organization Poverty and Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach
erica.lessem@treatmenta Non-Governmental
Erica Lessem Director, TB/HIV TAG ctiongroup.org Organization Health, Human Rights Advocacy and outreach
ben.alsdurf@tballiance.or Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Ben Alsdurf External Affairs Manager TB Alliance g Organization Health, innovation outreach
Humanitarian Policy timothy.ingram@tearfund. Non-Governmental Environment and Climate Indicator development, Advocacy and
Timothy Ingram Officer Tearfund org Organization Change, Poverty and Inequality outreach

Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Galina Angarova Policy Advisor Tebtebba angalya@gmail.com Major Group Financing Advocacy and outreach
Director of Global Data producer/collector, Indicator
Partnerships & Non-Governmental development, Data analysis and visualization,
Lia Colabello Community Engagement The 5 Gyres Institute lia@5gyres.org Organization Environment and Climate Change Advocacy and outreach
m.a.lange@cyi.ac.cy; Energy, Environment and Climate
Prof. Dr. Manfred A. Active Vice President of futureearth.mena@cyi.ac. Change, Food, nutrition and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Lange Research The Cyprus Institute cy Academia agriculture, Health development, Data analysis and visualization
Senior Director, Environment and Climate
Stewardship and Non-Governmental Change, Food, nutrition and
Lara Moody Sustainability Programs The Fertilizer Institute lmoody@tfi.org Organization agriculture Advocacy and outreach
coordinator sustainable The Hague University of Applied security, Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Helen Kopnina business programme Science h.kopnina@hhs.nl Academia Urbanization outreach
Non-Governmental Gender, Governance, peace and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Betsy Walters Program Officer The International Legal Foundation bwalters@theilf.org Organization security, Human Rights development, Advocacy and outreach
Health, Human Rights, Poverty
Caroline@MiracleFounda Non-Governmental and Inequality, Child Rights, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Caroline Boudreaux Founder The Miracle Foundation tion.org Organization Children, Orphans outreach

a collaborative partnership agriculture, Gender, Health,
between 17 UK organisations Poverty and Inequality,
actively engaged in NTD Marginalised groups, including
research and implementation persons with disabilities caused
and in advocating for effective by neglected tropical diseases
Chair, Influencing The UK Coalition against Neglected aparna.barua@sabinfoun sustainable NTD control through blindness, elephantiasis,
Aparna Barua Working Group Tropical Diseases dation.org.uk programmes. hydrocele etc. Advocacy and outreach
theatreofsolutions@gmail. Non-Governmental development, Data analysis and visualization,
Magaji Founder/CEO Theatre of Solutions com Organization Education Advocacy and outreach
Research & Policy isabel.bottoms@track0.or Non-Governmental Energy, Environment and Climate Indicator development, Advocacy and
Isabel Bottoms Engagement Track 0 g Organization Change, Poverty and Inequality outreach
Professor Emeritus and
Director of TRANSNUT, TRANSNUT (WHO CC), Department
WHO Collaborating of Nutrition, University of Montreal, helene.delisle@umontreal Food, nutrition and agriculture, Indicator development, Data analysis and
Hélène Delisle Centre Canada .ca Academia Health, Urbanization visualization
Governance, peace and security, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and development, Data analysis and visualization,
Craig Fagan Head of Global Policy Transparency International cfagan@transparency.org Organization Inequality Advocacy and outreach

Transparency, Accountability & Inequality, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
John Romano Coordinator Participation (TAP) Network romano@wfuna.org Coalition of NGOs Financing Advocacy and outreach
Climate Change, Gender, Health,
Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and
Modi NTAMBWE Secretary General TRK asbl mntmabwe@gmail.com Organization Inequality, Urbanization Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Ulises Marquez Programm Officer UCI-Red ulises@ucired.org.mx Organization Education, Gender, Human Rights outreach

Inequality, Urbanization, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Kate Shea Baird Programme Officer UCLG k.shea@uclg.org Major Group Development Financing development, Advocacy and outreach
maternal and newborn health,
Jillian Cassidy Co Founder Umamanita jillian@umamanita.es charity organization stillbirths Advocacy and outreach
TIMOTHY DENIS UNESCO Chair in Youth and Adult ireland.timothy@gmail.co Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
IRELAND Coordinator Education m Academia Education, Human Rights outreach
United Nations Association of rkasenene@una.or.tz, Non-Governmental Health, Human Rights, Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Robert Kasenene Deputy Secretary General Tanzania info@una.or.tz Organization Development Financing outreach
Economic Growth, Governance,
United Nations Association of the Non-Governmental Development Financing, Rule of Indicator development, Advocacy and
Ryan Kaminski Program Manager USA (UNA-USA) rkaminski@unausa.org Organization law outreach
Rosaura Galeana Coordinadora de Cuerpo Education, Gender, Human
Cisneros Académico Universidad Pedagógica Nacional galeacis@gmail.com Academia Rights, Poverty and Inequality Data producer/collector
Professor, International Indicator development, Data analysis and
Pauline Rose Education University of Cambridge pmr43@cam.ac.uk Academia Education visualization
Researcher; acting on
behalf of the World Young
Anja Leist, PhD/Laura Leaders in Dementia University of Luxembourg/Simon Network of Dementia Education, Health, Poverty and Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Booi, PhD(c) (WYLD) Fraser University anja.leist@uni.lu Researchers Inequality outreach
lorna.turnbull@umanitoba Human Rights, Poverty and Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Lorna A Turnbull Dean, Faculty of Law University of Manitoba .ca Academia Inequality outreach
Director, Oxford Poverty & peace and security, Health,
Human Development sabina.alkire@qeh.ox.ac. Human Rights, Poverty and Indicator development, Data analysis and
Sabina Alkire Initiative, OPHI University of Oxford uk Academia Inequality, Well-being visualization

Professor of Global peace and security, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Health and Social Human Rights, Poverty and development, Data analysis and visualization,
Zoe Matthews Statistics University of Southampton Z.Matthews@soton.ac.uk Academia Inequality, Urbanization Advocacy and outreach

Inequality, Development
Financing, Environmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Pamela Puntenney Co-Chair UNSD Education Caucus pjpunt@umich.edu Major Group Education outreach
Governance, peace and security, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Non-Governmental Health, Poverty and Inequality, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Ammar Malik Research Associate I Urban Institute amalik@urban.org Organization Urbanization Advocacy and outreach
Edison Paul Tabra Change, Governance, peace and Data producer/collector, Advocacy and
Ochoa Lecturer USIL etabra@alumni.unav.es Academia security, Human Rights outreach
Co-Chair of the working
Tanja Abubakar- group on health at Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Funkenberg VENRO VENRO working group on health t.funkenberg@tdh.de Organization Health outreach
tranhuyanh59@gmail.co Change, Poverty and Inequality,
Tran Huy Anh Senior Member Vietnam Association of Architects m Professional Organization Urbanization Advocacy and outreach
Gender, Governance, peace and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Global Policy and Non-Governmental security, Human Rights, Poverty development, Data analysis and visualization,
Priya Nath Advocacy Advisor VSO priya.nath@vsoint.org Organization and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Head of Human Rights hannah.neumeyer@wash Non-Governmental Gender, Health, Human Rights,
Hannah Neumeyer Team WASH United -united.org Organization Poverty and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Sr. Communications and Water Supply and Sanitation UN hosted collaborative Human Rights, Development Data producer/collector, Indicator
David Trouba Outreach Officer Collaborative Council (WSSCC) david.trouba@wsscc.org partnership Financing development, Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Indicator development, Data analysis and
Ross Bailey Advocacy coordinator WaterAid rossbailey@wateraid.org Organization Poverty and Inequality visualization, Advocacy and outreach
birgit.dederichs@welthun Non-Governmental and agriculture, Poverty and Indicator development, Advocacy and
Birgit Dederichs-Bain Senior Policy Advisor Welthungerhilfe gerhilfe.de Organization Inequality outreach
Vice President, Global barb.span@westernunion Poverty and inequality, Indicator development, Advocacy and
Barbara Span Public Affairs Western Union .com Private Sector development financing outreach, data producer
security, Human Rights, Poverty
Policy & Advocacy abigail@womankind.org.u Non-Governmental and Inequality, Development Indicator development, Advocacy and
Abigail Hunt Manager Womankind Worldwide k Organization Financing outreach
Gender, Poverty and Inequality,
Women Access Trust Organisation Non-Governmental Urbanization, Development
Esther Rphraim Managing Director Of Nigeria nnwcs@yahoo.co.uk Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach
Expo 2015 project. A project

funded by Italian Ministry of Economic Growth, Education,
Foreign Affairs and Economic Energy, Environment and Climate
Cooperation, Fondazione Change, Food, nutrition and
Mondadori and Expo 2015 agriculture, Gender, Health,
Nicoletta Ferro Senior researcher Women for Expo nicletferro@hotmail.com Milan Poverty and Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Sehnaz Kiymaz International Advocacy Women for Women's Human Rights Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Bahceci Consultant - New Ways skiymaz1@gmail.com Organization Gender, Human Rights outreach
Women in Europe for a Common

Future, African Ministries Council
on Water, BORDA, Sustainable
Sanitation Alliance, Women's Major Energy, Environment and Climate
Water and Sanitation Group, Women's Environmental claudia.wendland@wecf. Non-Governmental Change, Gender, Health, Human Indicator development, Advocacy and
Claudia Wendland Specialist Programme, GWA eu Organization Rights, water and sanitation outreach
nschroeder@womenthriv Non-Governmental Gender, Poverty and Inequality,
Noel Schroeder Deputy Director Women Thrive Worldwide e.org Organization Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
Women's Environment and Non-Governmental peace and security, Human Indicator development, Advocacy and
Eleanor Blomstrom Program Director Development Orgranization eleanor@wedo.org Organization Rights, Urbanization outreach
Women's Global Network for Non-Governmental
Lara Cousinis Advocacy Officer Reproductive Rights (WGNRR) lara@wgnrr.org Organization Gender, Health, Human Rights Advocacy and outreach

Inequality, Urbanization, development, Data analysis and visualization,
Sarah Gold Program Associate Women's Major Group sgold@iwhc.org Major Group Development Financing Advocacy and outreach
saifuddin1209@gmail.co Non-Governmental Change, Gender, Health,
Mr. Saifuddin Ahmed Executive Director Work for a Better Bangladesh Trust m Organization Urbanization Advocacy and outreach

Akisha Townsend Non-Governmental Development Financing, Animal Indicator development, Advocacy and
Eaton Senior Policy Advisor World Animal Net akisha@worldanimal.net Organization Welfare outreach
nutrition and agriculture, Health, Data producer/collector, Indicator
Head, Strategic Policy houwelingen@worldanim Non-Governmental Poverty and Inequality, Animal development, Data analysis and visualization,
Arjan van Houwelingen and Public Affairs World Animal Protection alprotection.org Organization Welfare Advocacy and outreach
mary_ostrowski@america Non-Governmental
Mary Ostrowski Member World Chlorine Council nchemistry.com Organization Health Indicator development

Project Coordinator, Post- Rights, Poverty and Inequality, Data producer/collector, Indicator
2015 Development Non-Governmental Urbanization, Development development, Data analysis and visualization,
Adam Fishman Agenda World Resources Institute afishman@wri.org Organization Financing Advocacy and outreach

peace and security, Health, Data producer/collector, Data analysis and
Tamara Tutnjevic Senior Policy Adviser tamara_tutnjevic@wvi.org Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and visualization, Indicator Development,
Gorman Child Protection World Vision , arelys_bellorini@wvi.org Organization Inequality Advocacy and outreach
Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Nadja Wolfe Director of Advocacy World Youth Alliance nadja@wya.net Organization Inequality, Youth outreach
WorldWIDE Network Nigeria: Change, Gender, Governance,
Women in Development and worldwidenigeria@yahoo. Non-Governmental peace and security, Poverty and Data producer/collector, Indicator
Dr. Mrs. IFY OFONG National Coordinator Environment co.uk Organization Inequality development, Advocacy and outreach
Manager, Policy and Non-Governmental agriculture, Governance, peace development, Data analysis and visualization,
Elaine Geyer-Allély Sustainable Development WWF egeyer-allely@wwfint.org Organization and security Advocacy and outreach

DRR & Emergencies elizabeth.harrison@ycarei Non-Governmental Human Rights, Poverty and
Lizz Harrison Advisor Y Care International nternational.org Organization Inequality, Urbanization Advocacy and outreach
Internal Communication Non-Governmental Indicator development, Advocacy and
Anna Johansson Dahl Officer YouAct Anna@youact.org Organization Gender, Health, Human Rights outreach
Carmen Campero Young and adult people education redepja@yahoo.com.mx Data analysis and visualization, Advocacy and
Cuenca Founder and member Network y ccampero2@gmail.com Network Education, Gender, Human Rights outreach
Policy Programme Non-Governmental development, Data analysis and visualization,
Dr Noëlle Kümpel Manager Zoological Society of London (ZSL) noelle.kumpel@zsl.org Organization Environment and Climate Change Advocacy and outreach
Target 1.1: By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all
people everywhere, currently measured as people
Organization: living on less than $1.25 a day
1,000 Days The use of stunting as a headline, crosscutting indicator
would also allow for an approach to ending extreme
poverty (Goal 1) that:
• is focused on the most vulnerable and marginalized;
helps ensure increased and equitable access to food,
health, water and sanitation and other basic necessities
• promotes action and progress in a range of sectors:
food security and agriculture, health, education, early child
development, WASH, gender equality and economic
growth
• helps measure a person’s physical and developmental
well-being
• preventing stunting reduces the risk of cardiovascular
diseases and obesity as adults (Goal 3, target 3.4)
ADD International We recommend this indicator be disaggregated by

disability.
A senior director at The World Bank recently said that “we

will not be able to achieve our primary goal of eliminating
extreme poverty by 2030 unless we aggressively address
the disability agenda” (Maninder Gill, speaking in
December 2014:
http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/speech/2014/12/03/the-
world-bank-groups-approach-to-tackling-disability).
Our proposed indicator also addresses target 10.2

Asia Dalit Rights Forum 1 Disaggregated data on age, sex, disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, social origin, religion and economic and other
status
2 Poverty Measurement on Human Poverty Index 1 and
2
Asia Pacific Forum on Women Law Reject $1.25 PPP as measurement of extreme poverty. No
and Development developed country accepts a measurement of poverty of
less than ten dollars PPP a day & the poverty line is also
measured above $1.25 PPP in Asia Pacific. $1.25 is not an
amount that allows even a minimum quality of life—it is not
enough to secure sufficient food, housing, healthcare and
education, let alone to live a life of dignity. We advocate a
multidimensional poverty index that includes, inter alia,
access to education, healthcare, and security of tenure.
Asian Disaster Reduction and
Response Network (ADRRN)
Association camerounaise pour la Large part of Older people are extremly poor. They should
prise en charge des personnes have a particular attention
Agées (ACAMAGE)
Bachpan Bachao Andolan Additional Indicator: Proportion of children employed in
worst forms of child labour vis a vis unemployment.
Rationale:Economic exploitation of children forms a cyclic
relationship with poverty as it deprives them of education
and hence access to secure employment in the future tying
them down to their situation of vulnerability. It also denies
an adult access to employment and fair wages. Thus this
can function as an effective tracker for poverty. There are
168 million child labourers across the world, 5.5 million of
who are in worst forms of child labour, the cause and
consequence which is poverty.
Beyond 2015 UK
Bond Disaster Risk Reduction

Working Group
CAFOD
CBM UK Percentage of persons with disabilities living below $1.25

(PPP) per day. As recognised in the Outcome document
80% of people with disabilities are poor. It is important that
people with disabilities are counted under this indicator to
avoid them being excluded from progress.
CEAG - Environmental Education That governments, especially Latin American (Brazil) have
Center of Guarulhos functionalism structures or much leaner administrative
machinery without any extra benefits with better rules for
distribution of amounts collected from taxes and that tax
reform can encourage the private sector thus ensuring
employability, as well as investments in education that
really empower people so they do not depend on any
government to build their own destinations.
Centre for Community Economics

and Development Consultants
Society (CECOEDECON)
Centre For Development My comments are for engendering SDG indicators in
Alternatives critical areas in
Goal - 1
Goal - 5.4
Goal - 7
Goal - 8
Goal - 13
Centre for Human Rights and Indicator for measuring poverty is too low. In reality people
Climate Change research living on $2 live in conditions of extreme poverty even in
areas where definition of poverty is very low. Indicator must
take into consideration global, national and local context.
Child and Youth Finance Proposed Indicator: Number of children and youth moved
International out of extreme poverty
CHOICE for youth and sexuality 1.1.1 Proportion of population below $1.25 (PPP) per day
disaggregated by sex, civil status, education level, and age
group
Christian Aid
Christoffel-Blindenmission In order to eradicate poverty, urgent action is needed

Deutschland e.V. where persons with disabilities are concerned. Indeed,
considering an incidence of disability of 20%, the vast
majority of which located in developing countries, it is
factually impossible to achieve poverty eradication ‘for all
people everywhere’ without the inclusion of persons with
disabilities. Therefore, disaggregation of this target by
disability is vital. Suggested indicator: ‘Percentage of
persons with disabilities living below $1.25 (PPP) per day’.
Columbia Center on Sustainable
Investment
Commonwealth Association of Supported

Planners
Danish Institute for Human RIghts
Dutch Coalition on Disability and In order to eradicate poverty, urgent action is needed
Development www.dcdd.nl where persons with disabilities are concerned. Indeed,
EAT Initiative New Proposed Indicator: Income of smallholder farmers

and fishing communities against national poverty lines
There are 1.4 billion poor people living on less than
US$1.25 a day. One billion of them live in rural areas where
agriculture is their main source of livelihood (IFAD, 2013).
Smallholders form a vital part of the global agricultural
community, yet they are often neglected. Smallholders
manage over 80 per cent of the world’s estimated 500
million small farms and provide over 80 per cent of the food
consumed in a large part of the developing world,
contributing significantly to poverty reduction and food
security (IFAD, 2013). An indicator that monitors the
income of smallholder farmers serves to track SDG 1.2 to
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 definitions. Disaggregation Sex,
household income Primary Data Source FAO, WB and
NSOs Tier I: Methodology exists, data widely available.
However, some data gaps do exist and need to be
mapped.
ericsson
European Youth Forum
Faculty of Law, Queen's University,

Canada
Fair Trade Advocacy Office
FHI 360 / Alive & Thrive
Foundation Center (on behalf of

SDG Philanthropy Platform)
French Water Parnership
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance
German NGOs and DPOs Disaggregated by disability: e.g. Percentage of persons

with disabilities below $1.25 (PPP) per day
Global Network of Civil Society

Organisations for Disaster
Reduction
Handicap International To eradicate poverty, urgent action is needed where

persons with disabilities are concerned. Indeed,
HDS systems design science Separate goals and indicators distract from and conflict
with the one essential goal. The one essential goal is
design planning to result in sustainable cultural
development of whole societies, which will necessarily take
place differently for each one.
Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential

goal, of design and planning for cultural growth for whole
societies.
Health Poverty Action As a general note, we are concerned about the lack of
ambition regarding disaggregation of data - in particular by
ethnicity. This is already possible within many of the
existing data sources aligned with the indicators suggested
by the IEAG. Any indicators which rely on DHS, MICS or
Household Survey Information can be disaggregated by
ethnicity as these surveys already contain questions
pertaining to ethnicity or proxies such as language. In this
response we do not offer comment on the indicators
themselves, but instead highlight where opportunities to
disaggregate by ethnicity exist within the suggested
indicator (s) or where it is especially important that means
to do so are developed. For target 1.1 disaggregation by
ethnicity is possible within household survey DHS or MICS
data sources
Hope and Homes for Children
IDDC In order to eradicate poverty, urgent action is needed

where persons with disabilities are concerned. Indeed,
Indigenous and Frontier It is impossible for one to achieve this if the world
Technology Research Centre - IFTR Governments work like what is done now. With the
paradigm shift in the way poverty or resources are
visualized it requires a global plan for eradicating poverty.
This requires macro as well as micro plans for Country,
Province, area and villages which are to be treated
according to the resources, requirements, manpower,
knowledge availability, poverty levels and indicators,
Government regulations, production and supply chain
linkages, economic indicators and money values.
Institute for Reproductive and I agree with it

Family Health
International Agency for the To avoid the failings of the MDGs and ensure inclusion of
Prevention of Blindness marginalized groups such as persons with disabilities it is
absolutely essential that poverty measures are
disaggregated. To make a significant impact on poverty
reduction it will be essential to target persons with
disabilities and as such measurement of success must
account for persons with disabilities. Proposed indicator:
‘Percentage of persons with disabilities living below $1.25
(PPP) per day’.
International Council of Nurses
International Disability Alliance Recommended indicator: Percentage of persons with

disabilities below $1.25 (PPP) per day
International Fertilizer Industry

Association (IFA)
International Land Coalition, Global
Secretariat
International Movement ATD Fourth $1.25 (PPP) per day is too low to protect people from the
World most damaging aspects of poverty and, also too low to be
of any relevance in developed countries. Thus ATD Fourth
World welcomes the World Bank’s initiative to revise this
indicator (See background document to the indicators as
submitted by the UN Technical Support Team)
International Strategy and should be able to capture by the major racial, ethnic groups
Reconciliation Foundation in different regions
IOGT International
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS -Poor people often use highly hazardous pesticide
Inc. ("ISACI") formulations rather than safer alternatives.Hazardous
pesticides impact differently on the life quality of women,
men and children and other vulnerable groups, interacting
directly or direction with their health and the surrounding
environment
Johns Hopkins University Acceptable
Kamla Nehru College, University of

Delhi
Kepa Finland Reduction in proportion of people living on less than $2 a

day (disaggregated by key groups).
Comment => The level of ambition is not sufficient. The

target should be to eliminate
poverty at $2 (PPP) a day.
Kimse Yok Mu The impact of corruption and lack of strong governance on

poverty should be addressed in the targets
Land Alliance, Inc.
Landesa
Lumos
Maestral International Poverty reduction and economic growth depend on human
capital. The inter-generational cycle of poverty will not be
addressed unless children's education and health status
improves. Violence, abuse, and neglect of children heavily
compromise their ability to attend or perform in school,
affect their health status including HIV risk, and
compromise their cognitive and social development.
Surveys show that these issues are not marginal, but
highly prevalent. Keeping the related indicator in Topic 16
is critical to achieving 1.1 over time.
MARS Practitioners Network
Médecins Sans Frontières - Although the $1.25 threshold is used by many as indicator
Doctors without Borders for extreme poverty, it is questioned how well it reflects /is
linked to factors of poverty and obstacles to human
development. The threshold of $ 5 might be more realistic.
Definitely use household surveys to assess indicator.
Multidimensional Poverty Peer
Network
National Union of Tenants of Target 1.1

Nigeria Poverty, in all forms, is a ubiquitous factor that cannot be
eradicated from humans, but can be practically alleviated
or reduced through pro-poor policy framework. To give
effect to this, Target 1.1 may be re-framed as follows – By
2030, reduce extreme poverty for all people everywhere,
currently measured as people living on less than $1.25 a
day. The phraseology, if re-framed as suggested, will make
practical the realization sense of the Target.
NCD Alliance
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 1.1 By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people
Organization (NNDSWO) everywhere, currently measured as people living on less
than $1.25 a day.
1 Disaggregated data on multiple dimension index (MDI)
inclusive of – age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity,
origin, religion or economic or other status and rural-urban
divide.
2 Poverty Measurement on Human Poverty Index (HPI–
1 – for Developing Countries) or Human Poverty Index – 2
(HPI-2 for OECD countries)
NRMC INDIA PVT LIMITED definition of poverty should be more clear and can't be
decided in terms of money
OneFamilyPeople General Comment: Persons with disabilities are not
specifically mentioned target in all the target in Goal 1.
Please see our recommendations in the ensuing targets:
:
By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people
everywhere especially those with disabilities, currently
measured as people living on less than $1.25 a day
Organisation Mondiale de
l'Education Prescolaire (OMEP) UK
Overseas Development Institute
(ODI)
Oxfam
Partnership for Economic Policy To eradicate poverty we state the importance for age
disaggregation in the poverty indicators. This is essential
for monitoring child poverty as part of the SDGs. To
measure and monitor poverty and in particular child poverty
we suggest to complement the $1.25 a day poverty
threshold with national poverty lines.
Pathfinder International
people's health movement My comment does not pertain to any target:
The consultation triggered some out of the box thinking in

me. In general Iprefer following annual process
benchmarks in the progressive realization of HR as
monitored by public interest CSOs acting as watchdogs.
see below #
Out of the box thinking about measuring what we treasure:

a contribution
Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City
We must acknowledge:
• Indicators will be used by technical experts and not by
claim holders --and this defeats our ultimate purpose.
• Yes, we can raise our voice to say that HR are
measurable, but to what avail?
• Yes, governments will adopt HR indicators (or any
other) if, and only if, politically acceptable to them; not
otherwise, even if the UN says so.
• Inequality and HR violations are a policy choice by
commission more than by omission.
• Yes, this is early still in the process but, in the end, my
crystal ball tells me we will NOT win whatever we feed into
the indicators discussions. (you agree?)
• Whatever post 2015 HR indicators we will get, will fall
way short from what we expect. (contd)
Planning 4 Sustainable
Development
Practical Action There needs to be space for setting of locally-specific

urban poverty lines. $1.25 per day is below an extreme
poverty line in many urban contexts.
PROGRAMA UNIVERSITARIO DE It is necessary to have indicators consistent with

DERECHOS HUMANOS DE LA international human rights covenants that establish
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL adequate standard of living for everyone, and go beyond
AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO the use of a poverty line so restricted ($ 1.25) that
recreates inequality. Global guidelines should be
established to redefine a value that considers the
satisfaction of a basic floor of necessities, not just food.
Public Services International
Regional network for yourth and I think it is fair to say "to reduce..." and not to erradicate, as
Adult Education Advocacy it means to end. In 15 years extreme poverty will not be
erradicated. But it can be reduced. Experiences from the
MDG as showen that there are many facotrs like climate
change, natural desasters, HIV, governance issues,etc
wich are strong barriers for the efforts to erradicate the
extreme poverty at global, regional and at local.
RMS
Save the Children INCLUDE:
Percentage of population below $1.25 (PPP) per day

(disaggregated to capture the child poverty rate)
Sightsavers In order to eradicate poverty, urgent action is needed

where persons with disabilities are concerned. Indeed,

Scouts, European Parliamentary
Forum, International Center for
Research on Women, Advocates
for Youth, FHI360, Equality Now,
Mercy Corps, Let Girls Lead,
International Rescue Committee
Society for the Psychological Disaggregated by age, gender, race, ethnicity, indigenous
Study of Social Issues; Psychology identity, income, disability, rural/urban residence, national
Coalition at the United Nations origin, and migratory status.
Stakeholder Group on Ageing We cautiously support age-disaggregation of poverty data,

(posted by HelpAge International) but there must be due consideration of underlying
assumptions.
There are major limitations in analysis of old age poverty

using household survey data. The results are strongly
influenced by assumptions (specifically equivalence scales)
about which there has been limited analysis in developing
countries.
Measurement of indicators 1.1.1. and 1.2.1 should include

sensitivity testing using alternative equivalence scales to
those used as default. There is a substantial body of
international literature showing that adjusting equivalence
scales can lead to widely diverging results in terms of
relative poverty of different age groups. In the meantime,
there has been little exploration of what are the most
appropriate equivalence scales to use outside higher
income countries. Sensitivity testing will confirm whether
trends are consistent regardless of changes to these
assumptions.
Stockholm Environment Institute

Swadhikar 1 Disaggregated data on multiple dimension index (MDI)
origin, religion or economic or other status and rural-urban
divide.
2 Poverty Measurement on Human Poverty Index (HPI–
1 – for Developing Countries) or Human Poverty Index – 2
(HPI-2 for OECD countries)
Tearfund
Tebtebba Existence of special measures to overcome poverty of

vulnerable groups including women, children, indigenous
peoples, ... within national poverty reduction measures
The Hague University of Applied In the present formulation of SDG’s the wide-spread
Science concern about the health, welfare, human rights, fighting
poverty, and preventing disease is accepted as 'noble'.
Poverty, remarkably, is often seen not as a symptom of
greater ills, such as desire for economic growth,
unsustainable methods of production and consumption and
population growth, but as a cause of unsustainability,
intimately married to ethics. In a critical perspective,
poverty is the SYMPTOM of economic growth imperative
and high population growth. Having all people lifted out of
poverty without fixing or radically changing the system of
global industrial capitalist production will mean more
consumption and greater crisis of resources.
The Miracle Foundation
Transparency International In tracking this indicator, it would be critical to look at how

corruption impacts its achievement. The relevant target and
indicator should be drawn from target 16.5 given the strong
and proven inter-linkages between corruption, governance
and poverty:
-
http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/good_governanc
e_end_poverty_now
-
https://www.transparency.org/files/content/feature/2014_M
DGs_Statistical_Annex.pdf
-
http://www.transparency.org/images/uploads/feature/MDG_
infographic_hi-res.jpg.
TRK asbl We have to make sure that the working poor are at some
point captured in some place people still are in extreme
poverty even when earning these 1.25 Dollars
UCLG
United Nations Association of We think that it is important to also look at the % change in
Tanzania "income per capita" as a way to extrapolate the broader
picture. Are we seeing a positive or negative change in
poverty/ income levels. We are comfortable with this being
added as part of the broader analysis of the current
proposed indicator version, but would welcome stand-alone
write-up on this.
University of Manitoba
University of Oxford
Urban Institute
USIL I think it is utopic. It must included in each policy of each

country. A complete supervision is needed to do. I think it is
important to create a relevant way to comply.
WaterAid
Welthungerhilfe We believe that this indicator only cements inequality and
is no longer tenable. A decent life is not possible 1.25 or 2
USD a day. And to lift people from extreme poverty into
poverty is - under human rights aspect - also a peculiar
target. This target in its present form does not achieve any
change for a more appropriate standard of living. Simply
increasing the amout would also only be a continuing
exercise. We recommend to the expert committe to refer
back to the many excellent publications about measuring
poverty in a broader and more suited way.
Women Access Trust Organisation The accepted measure for PPP, is too low for survival if we
Of Nigeria consider the dollar conversion rate of some nations; where
there has been substantial currency depreciation against
the dollar. As a s result of the depreciation, inflation rate
has gone up 100%+.
These nations have the bulk of the extreme poor
population of the world.
I suggest that the PPP measure should be $150 a day
Women for Expo
Women for Women's Human Rights

- New Ways
Women's Environment and
Development Orgranization
Women's Major Group 1.1.1 Proportion of population below $1.25 (PPP) per day
disaggregated by sex, civil status, education level, and age
group
World Animal Protection
World Chlorine Council The members of the World Chlorine Council believe that
chlorinated drinking water can help end poverty by
reducing waterborne illness, thereby improving health so
that people can better work toward their education and
employment goals. This target is therefore linked to targets
under Goal #6.
World Resources Institute
WorldWIDE Network Nigeria: social protection floors should be used, and targets for
Women in Development and women and children more specific and detailed.
Environment
WWF WWF suggests disaggregating this data by sector of
activity or employment to highlight trends for individuals
dependent on natural resource use (fishers, etc.) who are
often among the poorest.
Y Care International
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 definitions
We suggest this indicator be disaggregated by disability, in

light of evidence that disability is associated with higher
multi-dimensional poverty in many countries (e.g. Disability
and Poverty in Developing Countries: A Multidimensional
Study, Sophie Mitra, Aleksandra Posarac, Brandon Vick,
World Development Volume 41, January 2013, pp 1-18)
1. Gender budgeting to ensure separate and specific
allocations and implementation of programmes for women
especially for socially disadvantaged groups.
Disaggregation of this indicator must be done by gender;

age; migration status; and geographic location at a
minimum. A relevant policy indicator is the difference in a
country between the minimum wage and a living wage. The
right to a living wage is based on ILO Conventions 95 and
131, ILO Recommendations 131 and 135, and article 23 of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
1.6.1 % of time poor women and men (time use survey
can easily provide these data)
time poverty is an important dimension of poverty, and the

poor trapped in time poverty, cannot access the usual pro-
poor measures easily (The World Bank 2006, UNDP 2011).
Unless time poverty is addressed by reducing time stress,
poverty cannot be eradicated.
1.2.1 Proportion of population with income of less than $10

per day
1.2.2 A multidimensional poverty index that includes, inter
alia, access to education, healthcare, energy, and security
of tenure
1.2.3 Percentage of workers receiving a living wage,
disaggregated by sex, migration status, disability, age
Same at 1.1. Persons with disabilities need to be targeted

in order to reach the most marginalised and half the
proportion of people living in poverty. We suggest data
disaggregation by disability.
Supported

The suggested indicator for this target does not ensure the
measurement of all dimensions of poverty. Within the
European Union, the Europe 2020 targets in relation to
poverty measure those in and at risk of poverty and social
exclusion through sub-indicators on income poverty,
material deprivation and low work intensity. Measurement
of the proportion of men, women and children of all ages
living in poverty must go beyond income poverty to include
other dimensions.
Suggested Indicator 1.2.1: Edit suggested indicator to
include employment status
“Proportion of population living below national poverty line,
disaggregated by sex, age group and employment status”
Persons with disabilities need to be targeted in order to
reach the most marginalised and half the proportion of
people living in poverty. We suggest data disaggregation by
disability.
societies.
Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible within household

survey DHS or MICS data sources.
The recommended sources for this target and related

indicators are household-based surveys, including MICS
and DHS. UNICEF has proposed the proportion of children
living in multidimensional poverty. We recommend
combining social and economic indicators to most
effectively identify and target the children most vulnerable
to multidimensional poverty. For instance, children living
outside of family care/households are arguably amongst
the most poor (multidimensional), but are not captured
through household-based surveys. We recommend
including percentage of children living outside of
households.

Its very much possible by targeted approach where skill
based training can be imparted to selected men, women
and school pass outs so as to empower people to start
earning income immediately after their schooling. This
needs countrywide plans to identify human resources for
the set of jobs to be accomplished to improve the economy
of the region, province, country. That could be agriculture,
industry, service, Government etc. More than arts and
science degrees, Governments should consider promoting
polytechnics, technical institutes for imparting skill based
training to the above.
It is difficult to achieve
Indicator 1.2.1: Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
disaggregated by sex and age group was not retained as
suggested indicator in this proposal.
This indicator was considered very relevant in the previous
framework and 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
retained and implemented as widely as possible. That
being said, we recognize that it misses some of the
qualitative aspects of poverty like exclusion and
discrimination. ATD Fourth World in collaboration with the
University of Oxford is carrying out a participatory research
to identify with people living in poverty the dimensions of
poverty that are more relevant in their lives and to propose
how measure them.
Essential is reconciling the differences with the definition

and indicator of poverty across
Too complicated a definition and it requires tracking 3
populations independently. It would be easier to track the
proportion of households or the proportion of populations
living in poverty...
This target is not essential because target 1.1 is sufficient.

The recommended sources for this target and related
indicators are household-based surveys, including MICS
and DHS. UNICEF has proposed the proportion of children
living in multidimensional poverty. We recommend
combining social and economic indicators to most
effectively identify and target the children most vulnerable
to multidimensional poverty. For instance, children living
outside of family care/households are arguably amongst
the most poor (multidimensional), but are not captured
through household-based surveys. We recommend
including percentage of children living outside of
households.
We agree with others who have noted that appropriate and
protective family care for children is (i) an important
contributor to national poverty reduction and growth efforts;
and (ii) is not a marginal issues, given the high levels of
orphan-hood from HIV, TB, malaria and other causes, as
well as other drivers of placing children outside of family
and community care. This issue of safe, appropriate and
protective family somehow needs to be de-politicized and
captured for the rest of the SDG strategies to work.
We want to reiterate the importance of including a global
and national Multidimensional Poverty Index as a headline
figure for Target 1.2, and using such an indicator to monitor
poverty-related SDGs and ensure no one is left behind
after 2015.
As African Statisticians directed by Strategies for
Harmonization of Statistics in Africa (SHaSA) have
emphasized, the global MPI reflects SDGs 1-8 and 10, and
puts indicators from these SDGs into a headline poverty
figure that reflects deprivations directly without PPPs –
things like malnutrition or a lack of clean water.
The MPI, unlike one-by-one dashboards, is the only
proposed indicator to show the various simultaneous
deprivations people are suffering. It can identify those who
experience many acute deprivations at the same time – the
poorest of the poor.
Because it illuminates overlapping deprivations, an MPI
gives incentives for integrated policies that address
interconnected deprivations together.
Rigorous academic research underlies the MPI.
Indicator 1.2.2
Given that the linkage between people living in poverty and
the slum-dwellers’ population is explicit from the universal
viewpoint and from the concept of slums as a poverty trait.,
we suggest that Indicator 1.2.2 of this Target be modified to
– proportion of population living below national poverty line
including, in particular, the fraction of population living in
slums and number of slums that are upgraded by social
infrastructure and services provision. It is evident that in
excess of 25 percent of urban population currently lives in
slums, hence slum-upgrading becomes an essential
approach to poverty reduction.
The NCD Alliance proposes the following indicator:

Percentage of household income spent on out of pocket
NCD care. It requires careful definition of what is OOP
expenditure, eg, should include travel to facilities, loss of
work income, etc., not just direct medical fees. Research
shows the indirect costs exceed the direct costs, and are
not compensated by insurance. Alternative versions are
possible, such as degree of impoverishment caused by
OOP NCD costs, or number of poverty cases created. But
these are less readily at hand.
correct
Comment: Persons with disabilities are not specifically

mentioned in this target.
We therefore recommend that:

By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men,
women and children of all ages including those with
disabilities living in poverty in all its dimensions according
to national definitions
To reduce the proportion of men, women and children living
in poverty in all its dimensions we strongly suggest to use
multidimensional poverty measures that reflect the
overlapping disadvantages that people living in poverty
experience across the different areas of their lives,
disproportionally affecting children. In recent years new
and innovative multidimensional poverty measures have
emerged and should be used to complement monetary
poverty estimates at the global level and disaggregated by
age and gender
• True, if only feasibility is assessed, the hardest
indicators will fall off.
• MS will not diligently enough make the needed
transformative changes to monitor progress on the
progressive realization of HR.
• NSOs will hardly be willing/able to deal/act upon with
what we are asking for. It is not enough to just
disaggregate data. Moreover, MS are facing real capacity
issues on this.
• Pressures from public interest CSOs and social
movements are thus a must. Locally!
Yes, business as usual is an inadequate path to follow and

the call ought to be for a more radical transformation.
Therefore, we need alternatives; here is one:

Let us start by acknowledging that numerical indicators do
not fully capture the HR situation. If we agree on this, we
are looking at the challenge in front of us from wrong angle.
Why? Because indicators may be difficult to come about,
among other, because they are so terribly context specific.
And what will this mean? They will always be narrow
conceptually in the eyes of some of us. (contd)
Not definable. what marks 'living in poverty'. If it is those

below $1.25 then target 1.1...well its already eradicated by
2030!
We need to ensure that national poverty lines vary so that

urban poverty is accurately measured. A single poverty line
nationally is usually set at a point which would still
represent extreme poverty in an urban context.
Methodologies for "multidimensional" poverty measurement

emphasize the importance of including the human rights
approach as the basis for poverty conceptualization. The
overall indicator for this goal should promote the inclusion,
on a global level, measures to guarantee economic, social,
cultural and environmental rights.
INCLUDE:
Proportion of children (0-17) below national poverty line

Proportion of children (0-17) in multidimensional poverty
RATIONALE:
Data must be made available at country level to monitor

income- and multi-dimensional poverty among children,
and the characteristics of children in different forms of
poverty.

Disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous
identity, income, disability, rural/urban residence, national
origin, and migratory status.
We cautiously support age-disaggregation of poverty data,

but there must be due consideration of underlying
assumptions.
There are major limitations in analysis of old age poverty

using household survey data. The results are strongly
influenced by assumptions (specifically equivalence scales)
about which there has been limited analysis in developing
countries.
Measurement of indicators 1.1.1. and 1.2.1 should include

sensitivity testing using alternative equivalence scales to
those used as default. There is a substantial body of
international literature showing that adjusting equivalence
scales can lead to widely diverging results in terms of
relative poverty of different age groups. In the meantime,
there has been little exploration of what are the most
appropriate equivalence scales to use outside higher
income countries. Sensitivity testing will confirm whether
trends are consistent regardless of changes to these
assumptions.
On Indicator 1.2.2: As for the previous target, the indicator

is largely specified by the target under which is sits.
However, the proposed indicator is problematic because
national poverty lines are not comparable. Also, it would be
easy for a government to ‘game’ this indicator.
Nevertheless, it may be the best possible because there
are real differences in conditions between countries, and it
does allow countries to determine meaning of poverty in
the national context.
1) Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) disaggregated by
sex with break down by age, children, unemployed,
persons with disabilities, pregnant women/new-borns,
indigenous peoples and other disadvantaged groups.; 2)
Proportion of population living below national poverty line,
disaggregated by sex with break down by children,
unemployed, old age, persons with disabilities, pregnant
women/new-borns, members of indigenous peoples, and
other disadvantaged groups
To explain above, See also film Schooling the world
(http://schoolingtheworld.org/resources/essays/)
The makers of the film Schooling the World have asked the
World Bank how it accounts for the cash value of having a
network of grandparents and aunts and cousins to help
with child care, for example, or of living in a place with
clean water, clean air, and a beautiful natural environment.
The honest answer from the Bank was that it simply
doesn’t account for those things. So from the standpoint of
the World Bank, a family living on their own farm in an
idyllic valley in the Himalayas, with plenty of food, clothing,
and a beautiful house, may be “poorer” than a family
working in sweatshops and living in a slum in Mumbai.
What is wrong with this view of poverty? What other factors
should be accounted for to create a true assessment of
quality of life?
Indicator 1.2.1: The Miracle Foundation calls for

disaggregation and adequate representation of orphans
and vulnerable children, including those living on the street
or in program/institutional/orphanage care, in the surveys
utilized to measure the indicator.
For this there should be national definitions of poverty first

the indicator would be then the existence of such a
defenition at national levels
Data need to be available big challenge in Africa !
Target 1.2. Suggested: include geographical location (not
only sex and age group): Here disaggregation of the
indicator by urban and rural areas is relevant to account for
differences in the cost of living.
We stress our preference for a Multidimensional Poverty
Index disaggregated by sex and age group (and by
location or residence)
A Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) should be a
Tier 1 SDG indicator to measure Target 1.2. National MPIs
should also be reported.
The SDGs emphasise interconnections. A Global MPI is

built from unit-record data and shows who suffers
deprivations in several poverty-related SDGs at the same
time (joint distribution).
A Global MPI has been published since 2010 in UNDP's

Human Development Reports. Detailed information is
available from the Oxford Poverty and Human
Development Initiative, University of Oxford, which co-
developed and estimates the current Global MPI. A post-
2015 Global MPI will be modified to include final SDG
indicator definitions data permitting. National MPIs, whose
design reflects the national definitions of poverty, should be
tier 2 indicators.
The current Global MPI identifies as poor, people who are

deprived in one-third of ten weighted indicators related to
education, health and living standards. The Alkire Foster
method (JPubE 2011) is used to create the measure. Since
2010 217 national and 1362 subnational MPIs have been
published for 117 countries, drawing on global and national
surveys.
It is a good point but i find some problem: how to regulate
migration problem. Actually occidental countries are
restricting the entry of migrants to their territories. So this
problem is a relevant problem to tackle to reach target 1.2.
I suggest that the MPI indicator should include:
Environmental health. This will be based on the degree of
environmental degradation which can easily be measured
using specific indicators.
1.2.1 Proportion of population with income of less than $10
per day
No developed country accepts a measurement of poverty

for their citizens of less than ten dollars PPP a day, and
most have poverty lines that are much higher than that. In
the Asia Pacific region, the poverty line is also measured
above $1.25 PPP a day. This is because $1.25 is not an
amount that allows even a minimum quality of life—it is not
enough to secure sufficient food, housing, healthcare and
education, let alone to live a life of dignity.
1.2.2 A multidimensional poverty index that includes, inter

alia, access to education, healthcare, energy, and security
of tenure
1.2.3 Percentage of workers receiving a living wage,

disaggregated by sex, migration status, disability, age
The members of the World Chlorine Council believe that
chlorinated drinking water can help end poverty by
reducing waterborne illness, thereby improving health so
that people can better work toward their education and
employment goals. This target is therefore linked to targets
under Goal #6.
Yes, but also not below international definitions. Definite

measurement indicators should also be included.
A multidimensional approach to poverty better reflects the

intent of this target than the proposed indicator. In addition,
because people in low- and middle-income communities
disproportionately experience the burden of poor
environmental quality, poverty in living standards, including
“poverty in environment of good quality” (related to noise,
pollution, and crime) should be included here alongside
more standard MPI components as outlined in the
European Commission report “Monitoring multidimensional
poverty in the regions of the European Union”
(https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/default/files/mpi_report_onlin
e.pdf). Alternatively, the indicator for target 3.9 (deaths and
illness from hazardous chemicals, pollution and
contamination) could also be combined here with other MPI
components to better capture some of the environmental
dimensions of poverty.
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
We welcome the inclusion of the specific ‘percentage of

persons with disabilities receiving benefits’ as part of the
indicators on this target, but we recommend that data be
disaggregated by disability across the board in all social
protection schemes. We recommend the following
indicators: e.g. Percentage of persons with disabilities
covered by social protection; or Percentage of persons with
disabilities receiving benefits.

1. Presence of a comprehensive law that eliminates the
practice of child labour and due machinery for effective
implementation of the same
2. Necessary measures to curb impunity, in cases of child
labour
2. Percentage of reported cases of child labour to
increase by 50% 3. Number of released Child labourers
increased by 50%
3. Percentage of conviction rate in instances of reported
cases to increase by 80%.
4. Introduction laws and mechanisms for elimination of
traditional practises of discrimination based on descent and
work
5, Effective implementation of aws and mechanisms for
elimination of traditional practises of discrimination based
on descent and work
6. Percentage of reported cases of discrimination and
violence based on descent and work to increase by 50%.
7. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases under
laws prohibiting discrimination and violence based on
descent and work to increase by 80%.
We agree that the existence of an appropriate social

protection system including floor should be measured
against the requirement for a universal social protection
floor based on ILO Recommendation 202.
OP lack social protection mainly in developping countries.
Something must be done
Revise Indicator to include, "i) Percentage of children

rescued from situations of economic exploitation who have
received compensation/ rehabilitation package, ii)
Percentage of girls who were married before the legal age
provided with safe havens and social and economic
rehabilitation packages" in categories listed in the indicator
as the basis of tracking social protection.
Rationale:Sustainable solution to poverty can only be

aimed at through universal access to education to all
children who have been denied such access. Children in
situations of labour and marriage are two important social
groups vulnerable to poverty. Action to free them from such
situations must be complemented with social protection like
shelter, access to education etc. to ensure rehabilitation
and thereby break the cycle of poverty.
Relevance: The indicator does not capture the complexity
of the target or its equity of rights ambitions. It would be
possible to add additional indicators or to add a subjective
indicator related to intended outcome for example – poor
and vulnerable groups feel they have rights and access to
services and resources to support their livelihoods;
Aptness: Indicator does not capture whether access and

rights are meaningful, it would be possible instead to use
an indicator relating to realisation/ use of rights/access;
Disaggregation: only by gender and age although the

target highlights other “poor and vulnerable” groups;
Preference: Target indicates a preference, but this is not

captured in the indicator which is only quantitative;
Transformative: Indicator is not transformative but could be

made more so through an indicator on empowerment or
perception of vulnerable group.
Agree that as per the suggested indicators that people with
disabilities should be covered by the indicator. Suggest the
alternative wording of 'Percentage of persons with
disabilities covered by social protection' or 'percentage of
persons with disabilities receiving benefits'
1.3.1 Percentage of population covered by universal social
protection floor that includes basic education and health
packages, by age, sex, economic status, origin, place of
residence, disability, and civil status (widows, partners in
union outside of marriage, divorced spouses, orphan
children) and other characteristics of relevance for each
country
While welcoming the inclusion of the specific ‘percentage

of persons with disabilities receiving benefits’ as part of the
indicators on this target, we would highlight the importance
of disaggregating data by disability across the board in all
social protection schemes and programmes, in order to get
an accurate picture of the situation of persons with
disabilities when it comes to social protection. We suggest
the following indicators: e.g. Percentage of persons with
disabilities covered by social protection; or Percentage of
persons with disabilities receiving benefits
Supported

Part g) of the suggested indicator, referring to percentage
of poor and vulnerable people receiving benefits, is unclear
and should be specified. If the target is to ensure
substantial coverage of the poor and vulnerable,
measurement of minimum income and social security
ceilings should also be included, for example through the
addition of "percentage of people eligible to receive
minimum income, where such schemes exist".
The suggested indicators for parental protection (ILO:
Percentage of women receiving maternity benefits at
childbirth; WB: Percentage of pregnant women receiving
maternity benefits) are not right-based (benefits versus
entitlements), not focused on gender equality
(discriminating male primary caregivers) nor child focused
(focusing on pregnancy period or birth rather than the first
infant period). A proposed indicator would be “Percentage
of primary caregiver receiving parental entitlement until 18
weeks from childbirth or beyond” or a more policy oriented
indicator such as “Ratification of ILO convention 183 with
the subsequent parental protection recommendations”.
Parental protection indictors could alternatively be placed
under Target 8.5.
Suggested Indicator 1.3.1: Edit suggested indicator to

include percentage of women AND men receiving benefits
at childbirth
“Percentage of population covered by social protection
floors/systems, disaggregated by sex, composed of the
following: a) Percentage of older persons receiving a
pension; b) Percentage of households with children
receiving child support; c) Percentage of working-age
persons without jobs receiving support; d)Percentage of
persons with disabilities receiving benefits; e) Percentage
of women and men receiving maternity benefits at
childbirth; f) Percentage of workers covered against
occupational injury; and g) Percentage of poor and
vulnerable people receiving benefits”
Disaggregated by disability: e.g. Percentage of persons
with disabilities covered by social protection; or Percentage
of persons with disabilities receiving benefits
We welcome the inclusion of the specific ‘percentage of

persons with disabilities receiving benefits’ as part of the
indicators on this target, but we would highlight the
importance of disaggregating data by disability across the
board in all social protection schemes and programmes.
Suggested indicators: Percentage of persons with
societies.
The IAEG should explore ways to disaggregate this

indicator by ethnicity

persons with disabilities receiving benefits.
This could be achieved by
1) Provide free education (schooling till polytechnics /
training institutes) to all children born from now onwards
2) Create jobs to help the passing out children from the
above
3) Promote farm based income through efficient exchange
of commodities from farm gate to food plate
4) Strengthen Panchayat Raj (Village Administration) and
promote micro governments with all portfolios in all villages,
taluks, etc.
5) Provide assistance to old people through free food,
clothing and shelter through CSR or Government
programmes
It is difficult to say yes
IAPB welcomes the inclusion of the ‘percentage of persons

with disabilities receiving benefits’ within the indicator on
this target. However to gain a holistic picture regarding
persons with disabilities and social protection, we suggest
the additional indicator: ‘Percentage of persons with
disabilities covered by social protection’.
Indicator 1.3.1 f) should include illness and disabilities,

e.g.work related depression or those healthcare workers
who suffer from physical and psychological impact after
contracting Ebola at their workplace. Working women
should receive appropriate support during pregnancy and
lactating period so that they can continue breastfeeding
and maintain their health and that of their children.
Indicator 1.3.1 b) needs to consider support to those
children who lost parents who may not be included in the
household survey.
Recommended indicators:
Percentage of persons with disabilities covered by social
protection; or
Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving benefits

Components a) to f )of the social protection should be
disaggregated by income to measure progress on different
quintiles and make sure that the poorest populations are
benefiting.
countries.
Not too sure if this fully captures the complex dimensions

of the poor in developing countries. The indicators
presented here seem more suitable for developed
countries. Those who are under poverty are likely to have
less access to social welfare systems and policy
interventions.
This needs a numerical target...implementing national
systems could be as many as 1 to 200+ and "substantial
coverage" needs a definition
The word Social Protection Systems needs to be specified.

for e.g.
1. Insurance
2
3
4
a) At the very minimum, a country should show progress in

the key elements of ILO Recommendation 202 on
nationally-defined social protection floors, as follows:
• All older persons receive an adequate pension
• Those in working age in need of social protection receive

appropriate support, including mothers, the unemployed
and persons with disabilities
• All children receive appropriate support

All workers are covered against employment injury
• Universal access to essential health service
• Reduce to zero the number of people impoverished
because of out-of-pocket health expenses.
b) Minimum x% of GDP allocated to social protection and

core social services.
Consider 'universal' social protection systems, in light of
recent UN and World Bank statements on the sector.
Clearer than 'for all.' Floors is unclear except to technical
experts. Social welfare (non-cash forms of services such
as social work) is critical for strengthening families and
communities, and for poverty reduction. Consider
"Implement universal and nationally appropriate social
protection and social welfare systems providing income
security and access to essential services to a substantial
proportion of the poor and vulnerable by 2030."
Suggest to include indicator on % of people benefitting

from upfront payment or reimbursement of heath
expenditure costs?
Indicator 1.3.1
Draft Indicator of this Target is unclear of type of benefit for
the poor/vulnerable and for pregnant women. In this
context, free maternity care is more appropriate for
pregnant women while economic empowerment is suitable
for the Poor if vulnerable people is severed from the
context and combined with Marginalized people. Besides,
the indicator did not include youth, nursing mothers and
displaced people, being groups that require social
protection most. In general, we suggest that the indicator
be modified to – expectant/nursing mothers receiving free
maternity care (f) workers covered against industrial
accidents (g) poor people receiving economic
empowerment (h) young persons that are gainfully
employed, (i) marginalized/vulnerable people socially
integrated, (j) displaced persons receiving relief aid or
resettled and (h) potentially evicted persons protected
against unlawful forced-evictions.
1. Presence of a Comprehensive law that eliminates the
practice of child labour and due machinery for effective
implementation of the same with necessary measures to
curb impunity, imposes fiscal and legal penalties on erring
industries, officials and which outlaws middlepersons.
2. Percentage of reported cases of child labour (under
given laws) to increase by 50% and number of released
Child labour increased by 50%
3. Percentage of conviction rate in instances of reported
cases of child labour to increase by 80%.
4. Introduction and implementation of laws and
mechanisms for elimination of traditional practises of
discrimination based on descent and work (untouchability,
devadasi, manual scavenging, bonded labour, witch
hunting).
5. Percentage of reported cases of discrimination and
violence based on descent and work to (under given laws
prohibiting such practices) increase by 50%.
6. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases under
laws prohibiting discrimination and violence based on
descent and work to increase by 80%.
Comment: Persons with disabilities are not specifically

mentioned in this target.
We therefore recommend that:
Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems

and measures for all persons with disabilities and those
without, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial
coverage of the poor and the vulnerable especially those
living with disabilities
Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems

and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve
substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable,
including pregnant women, infants and children.
Therefore, creating ‘instances’ to follow and monitor set
benchmarks of processes pointing towards the progressive
realization of HR we must! And this must be done with CS
acting as watchdogs, not relying on the UN and MS
anymore. We have to ‘run our own show’. What comes to
mind are a sort of annual brief ’shadow reports’ written from
the claim holders’ perspective. Only this will makes
monitoring eminently political --the way it is supposed to
be! Why? Because it is the perceptions as
seen/experienced by claim holders what ultimately counts.
What I suggest is for us to come up with/design a

standardized reporting form(at) on 2 pages containing a
bulleted short narrative description of progress, stagnation
or retrogression not necessarily using indicators. The form
will have standard subtitles and would be used globally for
comparison purposes.
The report will allow, pretty much at a quick glance, to find
out why MS are falling short of their commitments. It will
also allow to differentiate between inequalities of access
from inequalities of results and will cover both CPRs and
ESCRs. (contd)
not self explanatory...will not translate to people well
We strongly support the ILO proposal to include all the

suggested components in the indicator for this target.
1.3.1 - COMMENT: Endorse ILO alternative text. Do not
endorse WB proposal.
1.3.1 - COMMENT and PROPOSAL (wording): All
references to “occupational injury” must state “occupational
disease and injury”. The two disorders are quite distinct in
the International Classification of diseases, and, critically,
they have very different timing implications for the
appearance of the disorder.
AMEND INDICATOR 1.3.1:
Percentage of population covered by social protection

floors/systems, disaggregated by sex and age, composed
of the following (...)
Rationale: Data must be made available at country level to

monitor income- and multi-dimensional poverty among
children, and the characteristics of children in different
forms of poverty.
Average social protection transfers as % of income / or

poverty line; average child benefit(s) as a share of
average/median household income or poverty line;
RATIONALE: A single general indicator for measuring the

adequacy of social transfers will conceal the varying levels
of support different age groups receive - even in most
developed welfare states child benefits are a very small
fraction of support elderly people receive. Therefore there
is a critical need to measure how adequate the support is
that children receive in terms of social transfers.

1.3.1 Percentage of population covered by social protection

floors/systems composed of the following: a) Percentage of
older persons receiving a pension; b) Percentage of
children receiving some form of public support; c)
Percentage of working-age persons without jobs receiving
support; d)Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving
benefits; e) Percentage of women receiving maternity
benefits at and after childbirth; f) Percentage of workers
covered against occupational injury; and g) Percentage of
poor and vulnerable people receiving benefits.
Data on social protection measures for all vulnerable
groups disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,
indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban
residence, national origin, and migratory status.
The Stakeholder Group on Ageing supports the alternative

text being supported by the ILO under 1.3.1.
We welcome the focus on a package of benefits reflecting

that coverage of the poor and vulnerable will only happen
through a social protection system/floor that covers a
variety of life cycle risks.
The ILO proposal is also achievable with current systems

of data collection, while gaps can be filled by improvements
which are feasible in a matter of years. The number of
countries included in the ILO Social Security Inquiry is
already high, and limitations are mainly linked to countries
not reporting administrative data that often does exist at a
national level.
We do not support the proposal by the World Bank which –

at most – should be a supplementary indicator to that
proposed by the ILO.
Coverage is not an adequate measure. The effectiveness

of social protection should not only be measured by
whether poorer people are receiving transfers, but by
whether social protection has effectively prevented people
from falling into poverty in the first place.
1) Percentage of population covered by social protection
floors/systems, disaggregated by sex with breakdown by
age, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and local
communities.
Just ‘solving’ poverty by making sure that everybody is
‘plugged into’ the global economy will only exacerbate
present challenges – a deeper and perhaps more radical
understanding and ethical analysis is needed. According to
more critical sources, the root causes, not symptoms
should be treated. For example, stopping climate change
by halting the use of fossil fuels is far more effective in the
long term than increasing referring to resilience and
adaptation. The 15th goal of SDG to ‘halt biodiversity loss’,
among other objectives formulated within the same aim in
terms of ‘management’ and ‘sustainable use’ becomes all
but impossible.



Target 1.3. include location and youth: 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
I assume my ideas given at target 1.2
a. Indicator 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
Our commentary: As the right to a remunerated maternity

leave is a crucial contribution to improve families’ /women´s
child care capacities (immediate factor that influences
malnutrition) it should not be listed as an optional, but as a
necessary part of social protection systems (see indicator
1.3.1 e) “Percentage of pregnant women receiving
maternity benefits”).
I suggest that at every point that the poor and vulnerable

are mentioned the phrase ' including street children '
should be added in bracket. These children do not live in
homes and the indicators are disaggregated using sex, age
and residence.
Street children are likely to be left out if not mentioned
specifically.

country
country
There is mounting evidence that social protection systems

contribute significantly to reducing the prevalence and
severity of poverty, to curtailing inequalities, and to creating
sustainable and equitable societies. Yet 75-80% of families
today have no access to social protection. The obligation to
provide universal social protection was recognized by
governments in the outcome document of the High-Level
Plenary Meeting of the GA on the MDGs, Keeping the
Promise (Para. 70(g); and is reiterated in Rio+20 Outcome
Document, The Future We Want (2012), para. 156 and ILO
Recommendation 202: Recommendation concerning
National Floors of Social Protection (2012), which
recommends that Members establish social protection
floors as a fundamental element of their national security
systems
How do we measure what is substantial coverage of the
poor? We need to introduce measurable benchmarks.
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
This target specifically mentions persons in vulnerable

situations, which includes persons with disabilities. They
are especially vulnerable to being denied access to basic
services and economic resources. Therefore, persons with
disabilities should be clearly stated
1. Mechanism to identify and track migrants and their
livelihoods
We disagree with proposed indicators that limit

measurement to agricultural land and to formal land
ownership and don't measure land-grabbing. Instead, we
propose indicators that measure the percentage of women,
men, indigenous peoples, and local communities with
secure rights to land, property, and natural resources
measuring percentage with legally documented or
recognized evidence of tenure; and who perceive their
rights are recognized and protected.
It is also critical to include a measure of concentration of
land ownership to address the phenomenon of land-
grabbing which has resulted in diminishing land available to
local communities. E.g.percentage of arable land accessed
by smallholders; existence of safeguards to prevent land-
grabbing including requirement of free prior & informed
consent; percentage of agreements relating to natural
resource concessions that are publicly available. These
proposed indicators apply to targets 1.4, 2.3 & 5.a.
[current suggested indicator: Number of deaths, missing
people, injured, relocated or evacuated due to disasters
per 100,000 people.]
The indicator focuses solely on human losses and does not
consider social, environmental, economic and cultural
losses that are also severely affected by extreme shocks
and disturbances. The current indicator is only reflective of
Sendai Framework’s first global target: “substantially
reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming to lower
average per 100,000 global mortality between 2020-2030
compared to 2005-2015.” The current indicator is not
reflective of the other targets such as the reduction of
affected people, reduction of economic losses, reduction of
damages to critical infrastructure, and others stated in SF-
DRR.
ODI has a proposal on this and it links to other indicators

such as social protection (from SDG target 1.3), resilient
agriculture (2.4), early warning for health risks (3.d),
capacity for climate change (13.3), and policies and plans
for CCA (11.b). See
http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-
assets/publications-opinion-files/9780.pdf
In addition, OP must enjoy their rigths as well as every

human rignths. The convention on their rignths is well come
Create some kind of international law obliging all banks
who want the right to work have to compulsorily provide
micro-credit lines to the weakest populaçãos, since they
are not created instruments for applicability, the longed
practice of microcredit remain only in theory
Proportion of the population living in households with

access to basic services; disaggregated by sex, age and
disability.
Proportion of the population living in households with

access to productive resources.
Share of women having decision making power over

resources accessible to the household.
Proposed indicator: Number of children (under 18)
receiving appropriate financial services.
1.4.1.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

disabilities should be clearly stated.
The indicators proposed significantly narrow the scope of
this target. In particular, limiting the land-oriented indicator
to ownership, women, and agricultural land ignores: (1) that
ownership is often not the appropriate way to discuss land
security and tenure; (2) the importance of ensuring that
men also have secure land tenure; and (3) that many
livelihoods are dependent on natural resources aside from
agricultural land. A more appropriately aligned indicator
would be the one suggested by UNEP: "Percentage of
women, men, indigenous peoples and local communities
with secure tenure rights to individually or communally held
land, property and natural resources"
Supported
The proposed indicators fail to address aspects related to

collective land rights, control over natural resources and
the range of assets mentioned in the target.
Basic services should include access to broadband internet
services as what UPU has suggested
If access to basic services is to be measured, further
definition of the term is needed. This indicator could be
broken down into sub-indicators for different basic services,
or the different rights and resources mentioned in the
target. The suggested indicators do not measure a large
part of the target (e.g. economic resources, new
technology and financial services). The second suggested
indicator regarding share of women among agricultural
landowners is very specific, considering that other parts of
the target would not be measured if these two indicators
are taken forward.
Gender equal rights to economic resources cannot be

attained without measuring total earnings, transfers, and
all other amounts received by individuals and their
households.
New Suggested Indicator 1.4.3:
“Total income by household and individual by quintile, with

individual disaggregation of it by sex and age group.”
Rationale: Gender equal rights to economic resources

cannot be monitored without identifying both capital and
income rights. Degree of access to basic services, land
rights or ownership, finance, and technology is not
meaningful without some reference to relative exercisable
economic power. Economic rights include not just
ownership, control over, or inheritance of property, but also
include access to all forms of incomes and transfer
payments. A total income measure for individuals and their
households would provide a starting point for collecting
comprehensive economic resources data. It would also
provide a basis for then identifying the composition of total
income for purposes of monitoring the poverty and gender
effects of basic services, social benefits, and other forms of
support in other targets.
Suggested Indicator 1.4.1: basic services should be
defined and outlined within this indicator and could refer to
many sub topics i.e health (vaccinations, medical
practitioner) technology (phone and internet) etc.
“Proportion of the population living in households with
access to basic services”
Suggested Indicator 1.4.2: this indicator should be
expanded to recognize indigenous people and written as a
percentage of women and men and indigenous peoples
and subsequently changed from “Share of women among
agricultural land owners by age and location (U/R)” to
“Percentage of women, men and indigenous people out of
total agricultural land owners by age and location (U/R)”
We support the suggested indicator : « Proportion of the
population living in households with access to basic
services ».
As we highly recommend having CROSS CUTTING

indicators, we suggest a disaggregation of the indicator
that includes the proportion of the population having
access to safely managed- water services and safely
managed sanitation services, which are the indicators used
in target 6.1 and 6.2
We support UNICEF's inclusion of access to basic vaccines

as a key component of basic services as outlined in the
target.
Specific mention of persons in vulnerable situations, which

includes persons with disabilities. As persons with
disabilities are especially vulnerable to being denied
access to basic services and economic resources they
should be clearly stated.
societies.
For the first proposed indicator: "Proportion of the

population living in households with access to basic
services."Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible within
household survey DHS or MICS data sources.
For the 2nd proposed indicator "Share of women among

agricultural land owners by age and location (U/R)" the
IAEG should explore ways to disaggregate this indicator
by ethnicity.

For this Governments should start working
1) Efficiently and Transparently
2) Take stock of resources available in all parts of the
Country
3) Identify common lands / private lands and efficiently
manage common lands by properly leasing out for various
activities according to market rates and levy the cost every
year and in turn use the proceeds to help poor and
marginalized
4) Provide all basic amenities to all including road, water,
power, knowledge connectivity from Government and allow
people to live happily in their villages (places of origin)
5) Tax Cities dwellers more and give more sops for people
opting to live in villages
6) Protect Natural Resources through participatory
management with local people and provide maximum
security and help to them in achieving the desired targets.
ICN agrees that the basic services of the Suggested

Indicator “Proportion of the population living in households
with access to basic services” need to be defined and
would like to stress the essential importance of access to
health and education services to eradicate poverty.
IFA supports the FAO proposal for indicator 1.4.2. Land

tenure is important for smallholder empowerment,
particularly for women smallholders
Secure land rights for all are a critical component of a
transformational agenda of the Post-2015 Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and targets. Leveraging
decades of extensive expertise, a broad coalition of global
and national organizations, civil society, and experts,
including the United Nations Environment Program
(UNEP), the Women’s Major Group (WMG), the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and
the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network
(SDSN), recommends the following Land Rights Indicator.
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 indicator fully tracks the agenda’s land rights content

developed through months of inclusive negotiation and
consultation and satisfies the request in the recently
finalized UN declaration that global
indicators maintain the level of ambition of the agenda
(Para. 75).
Indicators under this target should be disaggregated by

income to have information about access to services for
those more in need.
biases may exist due to racial, ethnic, religious reasons in

some developing countries
Again a very complex target. It would be preferable to find
a summary condition for the text "equal rights...including
microfinance". Something like, "...ensure that all men and
women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have
equal rights to productive and dignified lives."
Ensure all men and women, particularly poor and
vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources and
other means of wellbeing especially control over land and
other forms of property.
The global indicators must cover both social services and
economic resources. It is unacceptable to prioritize one
over the other. There is an alternative to reduce numbers of
indicators by using one indicator across targets. The
current indicator proposal includes a measure of land that
only agricultural land. This is not acceptable. It leaves
behind land users in urban areas and forests. It also refers
only to ownership. This leaves out use rights or other types
of rights to land. Secure tenure covers ownership and is
universal. A better choice: Percentage of women, men,
indigenous peoples and local communities with secure
tenure rights to individually or communally held land
[measured by (i) percentage with legally documented or
recognized evidence of tenure; and (ii) percentage who
perceived their rights as recognized and protected] Covers
2.3, 5.a, 11.1 and 15.a.
Targets 1.4, 2.3, and 5.a see secure land rights as

foundational and cross-cutting to the agenda, which to live
up to its full intent must include a meaningful and universal
land rights indicator. The current indicator leaves behind
millions by limiting its scope to:
• agricultural land, ignoring those who live in the forest,
practice nomadic pastoralism, live in rural areas without
engaging in agric. production, and the urban poor
• ownership, ignoring those who cannot own land
because they live in countries where the State owns the
land (e.g. China and Vietnam); reside on communal land
(e.g. under customary tenure in Africa, indigenous peoples
in Latin America, Tribal communities in India); or cannot
afford to own land but need secure use rights
• a gender ratio among right holders, ignoring those who
do not have secure rights.
See http://landpost2015.landesa.org/resources/land-rights-
an-essential-global-indicator-for-the-post-2015-sdgs/ for an
indicator that is universal and feasible.
under 1.4.1.: basic services should include access to
health pofessional at birth, basic vaccines... A point tonote
is that the optimal range of vaccines to include should be
defined by updated schience and evidence, not be limited
to what basic package available at pesent in country -
many countries did not upgrade their vaccine offer to what
is recommended and proven to reduce mortality (children,
women and others).
Basic services should preferably also include an indicator
of swift treatment for common illness for children, as
different factors play for curative care.
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. Disaggregated data on access to aggregate capital

assets
2. Disaggregated data on access to agricultural land and
homestead land for all landless households.
3. Disaggregated data on access to non-land assets per
household.
4. Disaggregated data on access to guaranteed
employment with living wages for all households.
5. Targeted budgeting for inclusion of socially
disadvantaged communities in infrastructure and industrial
development.
By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the

poor and the vulnerable particularly those living with all
forms of disabilities, 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 micro finance
Indicator 1.4.2. We support the indicator on secure land
rights for women, men, indigenous peoples as proposed by
UNEP, IUCN, and SDSN (i.e. tracking documentation, plus
perceptions). Other proposals on the table are problematic,
as they reduce the scope of targets 1.4, 2.3, 5.a. A land
rights indicator cannot be limited to “ownership”, which is a
concept not legally relevant in many countries, and should
use instead “secure tenure rights”; it should mention
“indigenous peoples and local communities” as most of the
land in the world, particularly forests, is held under
collective arrangements; it cannot be limited to “agricultural
areas” as this would not cover many of other services land
provide (we therefore suggest to simply use the
disaggregation rural/urban); it should be accompanied by a
complementary measurement on perception over tenure
security, to be gathered through household surveys (i.e.
Have you experienced over the last year fear of
dispossession over your land or house?). The indicator
proposed is consistent with international agreements, and
considered feasible by the Global Land Indicator Initiative.
Because numbers are not enough to measure human
rights, the two-pager will cover the qualitative data we need
to measure, e. g., it will report on acts of discrimination,
violence…. It will include private sector violators/violations.
It will better assess/measure the political commitments
being made or not made.
(I’d compromise for a three pager….) (end) (see # below)
all men and women need to be empowered to have a say

on future use of their lands. Developed and developing
countries all have examples of individual/group rights being
thwarted by dominant government approvals of resource
extraction activities
Adult educatio (literacy). Iqual rights can be achived if
people youth and adults remain iliterate. Ilitaracy means
less acess to information and less acess to oportunities of
health services, housing, etc.
AMEND INDICATORS TO INCLUDE:
Percentage of children receiving a child or other social

grant (disaggregated as possible by poverty status, wealth
quintiles, disability, race/ethnicity/ gender and location)

1.4.1 Proportion of the population with access to basic

services. Basic services to be defined but should include:
antenatal care (access to health professionals at birth),
basic vaccines, access to primary and secondary
education, improved water source, improved sanitation,
electricity and social security
NOTES: It is important that we not limit our measurements

on who is accessing basic services to those living in
households. Often the most vulnerable and with the
greatest need for these basic services are young people
living outside of households
Data on access to economic resources disaggregated by
age, gender, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
disability, rural/urban residence, national origin, and
migratory status.
In agreement with UNEP: Access to insurance is equally

important as access to microfinance. The indicator should
therefore capture access to insurance as one of the
services which are to be defined.
and natural resources, measured by
protected

1) indicator on basic services should be disaggregated by
income and geographical location. Need to define basic
services: water & sanitation, transport, energy, health,
education, energy (electricity), waste collection, cultural
services, New technology
2) proposed indicator on land tenure is too limited (share of
women among agricultural land owners). It doesn’t take
into consideration insecure land tenure in urban and rural
areas.
Proposed amendment: Proportion of adult population with
tenure that is legally recognised by sex, age group, income
level and location (u/r)
indicators:
1. Proportion of household heads possessing documents
as evidence of legal or legitimate access to their houses
and/or land (this includes legal rights to use, control and
transfer) over the total population disaggregated by sex,
age, level of income and location (Sietchiping (2012), The
World Bank - Gender Equality data and statistics (revised))
2. Number of homeless people per 100,000 population
(Global City Indicator)
We recommend for the consideration of Indicator text

looking at access to financial services, particularly loans
and micro-finance, especially among vulnerable and
marginalized populations.
Proposed text:
Extent and coverage of loans and micro-finance scheme*

targeting poor/ marginalized/ vulnerable populations
*These can be both public and private. This indicator would

require that there information on financial services at this
level is reported and centralized.
New Suggested Indicator 1.4.3: “Total income by
household and individual by quintile, with individual
disaggregation of it by sex and age group.”
Rationale: Gender equal rights to economic resources

cannot be monitored without identifying both capital and
income rights. Degree of access to basic services, land
rights or ownership, finance, and technology is not
meaningful without some reference to relative exercisable
economic power. Economic rights include not just
ownership, control over, or inheritance of property, but also
include access to all forms of incomes and transfer
payments. A total income measure for individuals and their
households would provide a starting point for collecting
comprehensive economic resources data. It would also
provide a basis for then identifying the composition of total
income for purposes of monitoring the poverty and gender
effects of basic services, social benefits, and other forms of
support in other targets.
“Suggested” indicator on access to basic services should
be disaggregated by urban/rural. “Basic services” should
be defined. This indicator measures “access” but not the
“affordability” of basic services. An alternative indicator
could measure “the proportion of the population in the
lowest quintiles that spends more than [x percent] of its
income on basic services (water, sanitation, energy,
education, health and transport),” as proposed by UNSDN.
Although data in support of this is not currently available
across country contexts, this indicator could be computed
from income/expenditure household surveys.
“Suggested” indicator on share of women who are property
owners should not be limited to agricultural land as these
pronounced disparities are prevalent in urban areas as
well. We suggest replacing this indicator with more general
indicator on proportion of adult population with tenure rights
(formal or customary) as suggested by UNEP (without the
proposed changes from IFAD and FAO, limiting this
indicator to agricultural contexts). The broader indicator will
also be necessary to support Target 11.1 on housing and
slums.
A point to resolve is the problem between business and

human rights. in other words how regulate investment right
to explote minerals, gas, and petroleum and respect
property rights of natives people. This is important because
an adecuated regulation about them could decrease the
poverty level and permit to reach an equal rights.
WaterAid supports both indicators but particularly the 1st

indicator which refers to basic services. This should be
understood to include WASH access and necessitates the
measurement of hygiene under target 6.2
Basic services should be defined to also include: improved
and upgraded Environment; this is beyond sanitation
It should also include : Primary Health Care; this is beyond
immunization
Evidence suggests that microfinance services are not

enough and that sometimes they can even harm women, if
not accompained by guiding institutions and bodies . So we
would suggest not to mention "microcredit "but to refer to a
"fiancing infrastructure" to boos entrepreneurship.
Support indicator suggested by several organizations that
captures gender equality and progress of all people’s on-
the-ground rights to land, property, and natural resources.
This land rights indicator further aligns with priority
indicators issued by the Global Land Indicators Initiative,
and supported by the Global Donor Working Group on
Land.

and natural resources,
measured by
protected
1.4.1.Percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples, and

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
How do we measure this ownership and control over land
and property inheritance, particularly where communities
hold on to their tradition, despite government policies?
WWF believes Indicator 1.4.2 “Proportion of adult
population with tenure that is legally recognised and
documented or perceived as secure, by sex and age
group” is important and preferable to the proposed
indicator “Share of women among agricultural land owners
by age and location (U/R)”. We would propose as broad a
consideration of tenure as feasible to include tenure/use
rights over natural resources, including access to wild
capture marine fisheries. In addition, this indicator should
be disaggregated not only by sex and age group, but also
to provide information on trends for indigenous/ethnic
peoples, as per the proposal by UNEP: “Percentage of
women, men, indigenous peoples and local communities
with secure tenure rights to individually or communally held
land, property and natural resources”.
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
We recommend this indicator be disaggregated by

disability.
A UN global survey of persons living with disabilities found
only 20% could evacuate immediately without difficulty in
the event of a sudden disaster event. Source: UNISDR:
http://www.unisdr.org/archive/35032
We expect the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk

Reduction, which includes commitments on disability
disaggregation, will catalyse an improvement in data
disaggregation in this area.

assets
household.
development.
The focus of this indicator is insufficient for measuring the
resilience of the poor and their exposure and vulnerability
to climatic, environmental, economic and social disasters
and events. Firstly, resilience is not measured through this
indicator. As such, there is no measurement of whether the
resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations has
increased. In addition, the UNSD indicator does not
account for the likely increase in climate impacts that will
take place and, similarly, does not account for isolated yet
severe climatic events that could result in significantly
skewed measurements. With no indication of how many
are exposed to climatic, environmental, economic and
social events, the indicator will not provide a
comprehensive picture of the resilience of the poor.
Suggested Indicators:
i. Percentage of population with increased resources,

improved governance, stronger social safety nets and
access to/availability of systems and services for
responding to climate-related related extreme events and
other economic, social and environmental shocks and
disasters, by age, sex, income and location
The suggested indicator is focused purely on human losses

which is highly unlikely to provide a real stimulus for
increasing resilience, which is multidimensional and is
addressed by strengthening capacities to absorb,
anticipate and adapt to shocks and stresses. Currently,
there are no off-the-shelf indicators for resilience, so a new
index needs to be developed.
ODI has developed 1 proposal for how this might work: see
assets/publications-opinion-files/9780.pdf. This would be
composed of 3 parts – identifying a) resilience capacities
and seeing if they have delivered b) resilient outcomes
despite c) hazards. This would be feasible because the
vast majority of the input to this would come from other
targets within the SDGs framework, such as indicators on
social protection (from SDG target 1.3), resilient agriculture
(2.4), early warning for health risks (3.d), capacity for
climate change (13.3), policies and plans for CCA (11.b).
And so on. Thus this proposed index would be
measurable, verifiable and not require much more from
National Statistical Offices.
The focus of this indicator is insufficient for measuring the
resilience of the poor and their exposure and vulnerability
to climatic, environmental, economic and social disasters
and events. Firstly, resilience is not measured through this
indicator. As such, there is no measurement of whether the
resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations has
increased. In addition, the UNSD indicator does not
account for the likely increase in climate impacts that will
take place and, similarly, does not account for isolated yet
severe climatic events that could result in significantly
skewed measurements. With no indication of how many
are exposed to climatic, environmental, economic and
social events, the indicator will not provide a
comprehensive picture of the resilience of the poor.
i. Percentage of population with increased resources,
disasters, by age, sex, income and location
Percentage of deaths from persons with disabilities among

all deaths due to disasters
Percentage of injured persons with disabilities among all

injured due to disasters
Target specifically references those in vulnerable situations

and therefore disability should be reflected. People with
disabilities are disproportionately affected by disasters and
extreme events.
Number of people forced into migration due to the disaster;

disaggregated by sex and age.
Increase in the proportion of female dependent households

due to the various affects of disaster leading to women
being forced to accept increased responsibilities.
1.5.1 Number of initiatives that engage the most
marginalized and vulnerable groups, including women, girls
and others, in disaster-preparedness, adaptation and
resilience initiatives at local, national and regional levels.
Preferred indicators:
1.5.1 Percentage of population exposed to climatic and
environmental events by age and sex;
Comment: We have slightly adapted proposal 1.5.1 to
focus on exposure to risk and this is similar to the indicator
proposed by UNEP.
and: Percentage of population with increased resources,

disasters.

situations, which includes persons with disabilities. Persons
with disabilities are more likely to be adversely affected by
disasters, either because of gaps in DRR policies or lack of
accessibility of facilities such as shelters and evacuation
routes. In order to obtain meaningful data of those in
vulnerable situations, disaggregation by disability is
necessary. Suggested indicators: Percentage of deaths
from persons with disabilities among all deaths due to
disasters; Percentage of injured persons with disabilities
among all injured due to disasters (interlinked with 11.5).
Supported
Appropriate city and regional planning can help minimise
the impact of these events and help build resilience for
when events occur.

New Proposed Indicator: Income of smallholder farmers

and fishing communities against national poverty lines
Agriculture serves as a valuable source of income,
contributing to poverty reduction. The productivity of
smallholder agriculture and its contribution to the economy,
food security and poverty reduction depend on the services
provided by well-functioning ecosystems, including soil
fertility, freshwater delivery, pollination and pest control. As
climate change is expected to disproportionately affect
smallholder farmers, it will have significant effects on
development, economic growth and livelihood in these
regions. An indicator that monitors the income of
smallholder farmers serves to track SDG 1.5 to 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. Disaggregation Sex,
household income Primary Data Source FAO, WB and
NSOs
Tier I: Methodology exists, data widely available. However,
some data gaps do exist and need to be mapped
Specific mention of persons in vulnerable situations, which

includes persons with disabilities. Persons with disabilities
are more likely to be adversely affected by disasters, either
because of gaps in DRR policies or lack of accessibility of
facilities such as shelters and evacuation routes. To obtain
meaningful data of those in vulnerable situations,
disaggregation by disability is necessary. Suggested
indicators: Percentage of deaths from persons with
disabilities among all deaths due to disasters; Percentage
of injured persons with disabilities among all injured due to
disasters.
societies.

Every Government, states to have National Disaster
Preparedness groups and train as many volunteers in
vulnerable areas to step into rescue in times of crisis.
It is difficult to realize
ICN proposes a modification to Indicator 1.5.2 “Proportion

of health and educational facilities affected by hazardous
events”: Proportion of health and educational facilities that
are able to continue providing services after hazardous
events or Proportion of people who maintain access to
health and educational services after hazardous events.
Percentage of deaths from persons with disabilities among
all deaths due to disasters
Disaggregation by income will allow us to know how much
different quintile of the population are affected by climate-
related extreme events and other economic, social and
environmental shocks and disasters.
"Total per capita (aged 15+ years old) pure alcohol
consumption within a calendar year in liters"
Socio-economically exposed people are less able to avoid
adverse consequences of their behavior due to a lack of
resources. Using alcohol policy measures, such as raising
taxes on alcoholic beverages may reduce overall
inequalities through more substantial health impacts on
socio-economically disadvantaged populations. People
with lower levels of income are more responsive to alcohol
price increases
Wordy... we don't need to say everything! Consider "By
2030, strengthen the resilience and reduce the vulnerability
of those at risk of economic, social and environmental
shocks and disasters."
Getting this mother resilience indicator fit for purpose will

help protect many more SDGs; avoiding periodic reversal
of national MDG gains from natural/technological disasters.
The suggested indicator focuses on human impacts,

ignoring livelihood, asset & economic losses & psycho
social impacts, in indicator 1.5.2. For this target to stimulate
reform in resilience building systems, we must measure
inputs, multidimensional system building initiatives & their
quality. This requires composite measurement of resilience
capacities (absorbing, anticipating & adapting), hazards
(shocks & stresses) & development (including disaster)
outcomes. Numerous efforts are underway, including
Indonesia 7 sub indicators for this target & ODI’s proposed
Composite Resilience Capacity Index. Majority CRCI input
would come from other SDG indicators e.g. on social
protection (1.3), resilient agriculture (2.4), early warning for
health risks (3.d), capacity for climate change (13.3),
policies and plans for CCA (11.b). Such an index would be
feasible, measurable & verifiable & not impose additional
burden on NSOs.
1.5.1. The indicator of people affected (details cfr by

UNISDR- to be adapted to local context) expressed both as
absolute figures and as rate is preferred. In fact the Goal
should be refocused on the second part 'reduce exposure
and vulnerability'. Would propose to drop the resilience
term as its definition is as well open for political
intrpretation and vague.
1.5.2. Possibility to include also health staff affected by
hazardous evnts and notonly heath facilities.
UNIDS indicator proposed is not linked with people or
community level. Use household level as level of
measurement: nber of household impoverished/lost goods
OHCHR: 'durable solution' too vague and open for
interpretation, especially in relation to resilience.
Indicator 1.5.1
Considering that People living in slums are more
susceptible to economic, social and environmental
cataclysm and should, as such, form the ore nucleus of
Target 1.5 indicator, we suggest that indicator 1 of the 1
Target be modified to proportion of population including,
especially, slum-dwellers’ population, affected by
hazardous events such as flood, fire and epidemic
disasters etc.
assets
household.
development.
By 2030, build the resilience of the poor especially those

with disabilities 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
which is unlikely to provide a real stimulus for increasing
resilience-which is multidimensional+is addressed by
strengthening capacities to absorb, anticipate+adapt to
shocks+stresses. Currently,there are no off-the-shelf
indicators for resilience.A new index needs to be
developed.See 1 proposal from ODI:
www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-
opinion-files/9780.pdf This would be composed of 3 parts–
identifying a) resilience capacities+seeing if they have
delivered b) resilient outcomes despite c) hazards.This
would be feasible as the vast majority of the input would
come from other targets in the SDGs framework,e.g.
indicators on social protection (SDG target 1.3), resilient
agriculture (2.4), early warning for health risks (3.d),
capacity for climate change (13.3),policies+plans for CCA
(11.b)etc.Thus this proposed index would be
measurable,verifiable+not require much more from
National Statistical Offices
Indicator 1.5.1. The suggested indicator is focused on

human losses which is highly unlikely to provide a real
stimulus for increasing resilience, which is multidimensional
and is addressed by strengthening capacities to absorb,
index needs to be developed. ODI has developed a good
example of how it may look like: see
Suggest "By 2030, build the resilience AND HEALTH of the

poor..." to show more integration across sectors
#:
What has for long surprised and frankly annoyed me is that
I fail to see the application of the HR framework understood
and applied as calling for member states --in an open and
participatory way-- sequentially do the following:
1. Prepare a long term progressive realization plan that

includes 10 years+ goals to be realized in the sector.
2. Define the specific processes that will eventually lead
to achieve the same.
3. Break down the application of these processes for
what needs to be done the first and the second year of the
plan.
4. Participatorily set benchmarks for what needs to be
achieved by the end of years 1 and 2.
5. Arrange for public interest civil society to --at the end
of year 1-- monitor achievement and shortcomings of
benchmarks for year 1.
6. Based on the above findings --at the beginning of year
2-- participatorily set the benchmarks for end of years 2
and 3 (modifying those originally set for year 2 as needed).
7. At the end of year 2, civil society organizations again
monitor achievements and shortcomings for that year.
(contd)
Given that building / structure life is usually 30-60 years,

and that development controls cannot be retrospective,
'building resilience' by 2030 may not be achievable by this
time. There could be planning mechanisms invoked to this
end by 2030
The current indicator is the number of people affected by
hazardous events, disaggregated by age and sex. While
this is an important indicator to measure the impact of
shocks and disasters, it clearly does not address resilience
building and vulnerability reduction.
We suggest a three-step approach to develop an indicator:
1. Need to understand the capacity of poor and vulnerable
to adapt, learn and adjust;
2. Understand level of existing exposure to shocks and
stresses;
3. Improvements in development outcomes (as measured
by other SDGs) are not negatively impacted by shocks
For any disaster related indicators we advise not to use the
number of deaths and losses, but change to ‘number of
expected deaths, expected number of people affected and
expected economic losses (relative to GDP)' and measure
using a likely disaster scenario or a combination of events
along with their likelihoods’. Tokyo has announced a similar
approach, with its plan to halve earthquake casualties over
the next ten years and assessing this based on a scenario
with a 70% likelihood within the next 30 years:
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs/AJ2
01504010060
If an indicator is measured by national loss databases, it
will give a misleading impression of success or failure
because a few years or decades of catastrophe experience
do not give a clear indication of the level of risk. The 2010
Haiti earthquake claimed 200,000+ lives yet for 100+ years
prior to this devastating event, earthquakes in Haiti had
claimed fewer than 10 lives. We could get around this issue
by using the expected number of deaths / losses based on
likely scenarios, without the need for disasters to take
place.
1.5.1 Proportion of population resilient/robust to hazards

and disasters
Data on measures to build the resilience of the poor and to
reduce their exposure to climate-related economic, social,
and environmental extreme events, disaggregated by age,
gender, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
migratory status.
Change UNISDR proposal to: Proportion of population

resilient/robust to hazards and climates by age and sex
(proposed by UNEP)
We back the UNEP proposal in principle as long as it is

disaggregated by age as this indicator looks at resilience
rather than loss and because it broadens the scope of the
measurement beyond disasters to hazards.
We are not able to fully endorse because we have not

been able to access UNEP’s technical paper to identify
feasibility of accessing this data. The measurement
approach would require definitions of hazards and climatic
stresses to be clear in addition to having clearly identifies
resilient population targets.
We are aware of ODI’s work to develop a composite index

to fully measure resilience. We support this as long as it
can be disaggregated by age.
This indicator requires more consensus and support in its

development. Unlike other SDG areas, resilience in a very
new area to measured and as such agreed and established
measuring methodologies are still in development.
This is an important target, but the proposed indicators

make untenable assumptions, e.g. that reducing physical
vulnerability increases resilience. Furthermore, much of this
issue resides at the community/society level (incl.
governance and planning capacity) rather than the
‘personal’ level – elements not captured with the proposed
indicators. Parameterisation of indicators requires bridging
of quantitative with quantitative data (cf. 11.4 Cultural
heritage). SEI is potentially well placed to provide expertise
in this area. On 1.5.1: Estimating the No. of people affected
by hazards is challenging. There are both direct and
indirect effects that results from hazards. E.g. flooding in a
mega-city can have impacts to economic activities in cities
even in other countries. Therefore, the scope and definition
of ‘people affected by hazard’ needs to be carefully
considered. ‘Number of policies, plans and financial
mechanisms developed at national and sub-national
scales’ and information on the adoption of soft measures
(e.g. flood zoning, incentives, tax exemption, insurance,
building codes) could be used to measure resilience.
1) Percentage change in GDP derived from the use of

common land and natural resources by women and men
who are members of indigenous peoples and local
communities.; 2) Percentage and distribution of benefits
derived from the use of common land, natural resources,
and ecosystem services retained by the women and men
who are members of indigenous peoples with tenure over
those resources.
or
1.5:. Percentage of people living in or within x distance to
uncontrolled dumpsites and other “hot spots” emitting and
releasing hazardous chemicals by sex with a breakdown by
children, pregnant women/new-borns, unemployed,
persons with disabilities, members of indigenous peoples.
Indicator 1.5.1: The Miracle Foundation suggests further
refinement to include the number orphaned in the indicator.
country Risk assessment and management and

prepareadiness capacity to be also measured
We think it is important to also track the number of
hazardous events. Perhaps an important question to ask
will be the classification of these events as we lend
relevance to the current proposal under this para.
Proposed Text:
Number of "hazardous events"* by country, region, global
*As classified
It is a good principle but i question how to obligate to
states. My experience is that signing a treaty looks is
fullfilment.
1.5.1 Number of initiatives that engage the most
marginalized and vulnerable groups, including women, girls
and others, in disaster-preparedness, adaptation and
resilience initiatives at local, national and regional levels.
1.5.2 Proportion of health and educational facilities and

energy infrastructure that can withstand hazardous events.
UNHCR Population statistics provides data on people of

concern by age groups, including age 60 and over
(http://popstats.unhcr.org/Default.aspx)
Such a new index must include a measurement of the

ability to avoid losses, including both the stock (physical
assets, including livestock) and flow (lost income due to
lack of physical asset) aspects of loss.
Moreover, as close to 75 % of the world’s poorest people

largely depend on animals for their income and food
security and as the poorest are also the most vulnerable to
disasters, a focus on animals in measuring disaster
resilience is essential in determining whether disaster risk
reduction measures are effective and reaching those most
in need.
WRI recommends that “affected persons” be considered

according to the already-established metric, rather than the
breakdown in the new suggested indicator. It is also
important to keep the disaggregation by age and sex,
which has been removed from the suggested indicator. We
therefore also proposed that disaggregation by age and
sex be re-included.
WWF supports the suggested indicator: “Number of

deaths, missing people, injured, relocated or evacuated
due to disasters per 100,000 people”, and the UNISDR
definition of disaster as a "serious disruption of the
functioning of a community or a society involving
widespread human, material, economic or environmental
losses and impacts, which exceeds the ability of the
affected community or society to cope using its own
resources." Disaggregation of disasters by type of event
(storm, erosion, climate related, rising sea levels, habitat
destruction) would provide valuable policy guidance.
Target 1.a: Ensure significant 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
Budget indicators should request portions of funding

allocating to reaching persons with disabilities.
1.a.1 Resources mobilized and spent for gender-sensitive
poverty reduction, including government, private sector and
development partners

Supported

societies.

Need political will and fair and transparent operations to
achieve this
It is wonderful idea.
ICN supports the proposal by UNICEF to specify spending

on essential services (education and health) to address the
major poverty determinants in addition to monitoring the
spending on programmes directed to already poor people.
No comments
Wordy. Consider "Coordinate and mobilize diverse
development resources to implement programmes and
policies to end poverty, especially in lower income
countries."
As sufficient resources will be imporant, proposition to

present indicator as the financing gap between current
level and estimated level needed for health plan.
Or total per capita expenditure on health per year and then
disaggregate as domestic, international, population's
contribution and/or the existing gap in health expenditure
per capita per year.
Not just a variety of sources but also funds that combine
multi-sectoral sources for integrated programming
8. Based on the above findings --at the beginning of year
3-- participatorily set the benchmarks for end of years 3
and 4 (modifying those originally set for years 3 as
needed).
9. At the end of year 3, civil society organizations again
monitor achievements and shortcomings for that year.
10. At the end of year 3, after the monitoring, call for a
participatory review of how far along the processes have
come to reach the long term (10 years+) progressive
realization goals originally set. Make adjustments as
needed and set benchmarks for years 4 and 5.
11. Years 4, 5 and 6 and thereafter do the same as in
years 1, 2 and 3.
12. Year 6 carry out a second general review as done at
the end of year 3.
13. Continue with the same scheme until the completion of
the 10 years+ period originally chosen.
This I see as the real serious approach to work by the letter

and spirit of HR --and I have yet to see this considered,
much less applied. I have written about this before, but
have received little, if any, feedback. I here invite such
feedback. (end)
Funding sources need to be 'amalgamated' based on

thematic programming at the international level. Too many
sources of adhoc funding prevails
Target 1.a.: interesting suggested indicator: Share of total
overall government spending (incl. subnational) on
programs aimed at the bottom 40% of population of the
country (%)
It is esencial to implement the principle of solidarity
between states. A recommendation about its practice could
be excellent.
Target 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
Proposed indicator: Number of poverty eradication
strategies that specifically target children and youth.
Supported
The proposed indicator fails to address the gender-

sensitivity aspect of the target
We believe it is important that indicators under this target
do not only monitor political commitments but also cover
implementation, such as government spending. We agree
with the proposed modified indicator by the World Bank
[“Share of government recurrent and capital spending
going to sectors that disproportionately benefit women,
poor and vulnerable groups (%)”] : but believe that
measuring of government spending should include
expenditure made by public contracting authorities. Public
procurement should serve not only to obtain the cheapest
products and services. It should serve to achieve societal
goals, as put forward by UNEP Sustainable Public
Procurement Initiative and the 2014 EU Directive on public
procurement, inter alia. Adding public procurement as an
indicator should reinforce the “policy coherence” between
the policy objectives of a State and the purchasing power it
has as buyer of products and services. Linked to goal 12.
societies.
Strengthening agricultural and rural based industries and
enacting laws to protect rural human labour oriented
services, products will enormously help in achieving this.
Very good strategy for improving gender equality,poverty

reduction
ICN suggests measuring the proportion of government

spending on programmes/initiatives under such policy
frameworks that benefit women, poor and other vulnerable
groups to support accelerated investment in poverty
eradication actions. Although ICN supports the suggested
indicator, we consider that environment is not the only
sector to be invested.
Indicators seem to be incomplete relative to measuring the
effects on gender.
Here "Create" can refer to as many as 1 framework to more
than 200. It's not an achieved target but rather a process.
No comments
Consider replacing "actions" with "strategies"
Should focus on inequity reduction in all outcomes, service

provision etc.
Particular mention of 'proportion of households for which
health expenditure is poverty inducing'.
Create sound policy frameworks at the national, regional
and international levels, based on pro-poor, gender and
disability-sensitive development strategies, to support
accelerated investment in poverty eradication actions
SUGGEST FOR INCLUSION/NEW INDICATOR:
a) Spending on essential services (education, health, social
protection) as % of total government spending
1.b.1 Number of national action plans that support

accelerated investment in actions that eradicate poverty
and include gender responsive budgeting and policies
DATA SOURCES: Country research

Number of national action plans, strategies or other
measures to achieve the ends of the UNDRIP developed in
consultation with Indigenous Peoples
A solidarity policy among nations is recommended.
mention also the possibility og giving a voive to women to
establish their own agenda.
WWF supports the suggested indicator “Number of national
action plans related to multi-lateral environmental
agreements that support accelerated investment in actions
that eradicate poverty and sustainably use natural
resources.”
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
Organization: sufficient food all year round
1,000 Days Ending hunger without addressing malnutrition is insufficient
to end poverty in all its forms. Ideally, these targets should be
measured by the set of core indicators that track the six World
Health Assembly (WHA) nutrition targets unanimously
endorsed by 194 WHO member states in 2012, and by an
indicator of Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women.
Prevalence of Undernourishment (PoU) was an MDG
indicator, but as FAO and IFAD state in the current proposal, it
“presents several limitations as an indicator for the new and
more ambitious target,” “does not allow for disaggregation by
population groups” and “is not sufficiently sensitive to detect
very low levels of undernourishment.” PoU is a measure of
calories, which does not adequately measure hunger or
nutrition.
We propose ADDING: Prevalence of wasting (weight for
height) among children under five years of age, disaggregated
by sex & Women’s dietary diversity [percentage of women,
15-49 years of age, who consume at least 5 out of 10 defined
food groups].
Action Against Hunger | ACF

International
ADD International We recommend that this indicator be disaggregated by
disability.
Research on disability and nutrition has found that “Nutrition

and disability are intimately linked: malnutrition can directly
cause or contribute to disability, and disability can lead to
malnutrition” (source: Malnutrition and Disability: Unexplored
Opportunities for Collaboration, N Groce et al, Paediatrics and
International Child Health, Apr 2014, 34(4): 308-314).
AGRIUM
Asia Dalit Rights Forum 1. Centralised public distribution system focusing on basic
nutrition requirements.
2. Percentage of socially disadvantaged HH having access
to urban poverty schemes.
to rural poverty schemes.
Asia Pacific Forum on Women Law
and Development
Associated Country Women of the

World
Beyond 2015 UK
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation We support Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women (MDD-W),
defined as the percentage of women, 15-49 years of age, who
consume at least 5 out of 10 defined food groups and
Prevalence of wasting (weight for height) among children
under five years of age, disaggregated by sex.
MDD-W reflects a key dimension of high-quality food

consumption with adequate micronutrient content. It helps
track the well-being of women, a vulnerable group often last to
eat and last to eat nutritious food. It is scientifically validated
by multiple partners (including UN entities) as an indicator for
micronutrient adequacy, and Demographic Health Surveys
provide potential sources of data.
Wasting is a well-established measure that reflects acute

malnutrition, a result of insufficient food intake and/or
infectious diseases. It reflects both hunger and nutrition for
children five and under, another vulnerable population.
Using these indicators will demonstrate a commitment to

leaving no one behind, because it views hunger and nutrition
through the lens of vulnerable groups, and better reflects the
ambition of target 2.1.
Bioregional
CAAR (Canadian Association of
Agri-Retailers)
CAFOD
CARE None of the indicators measures quality of food (“safe,

nutritious food”). Indicator 2.2.1 may imply access to food but
not to safe, nutritious food. Indicator 2.1.2 may provide robust
indications of food insecurity within limited timeframes (i.e. at
the height of the hunger season), but not throughout the year.
CARE suggests two additional indicators:
Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS), as an appropriate
indicator of household access to a variety of foods, an
important determinant of diet quality. Source: Not currently
collected in any widespread survey (common in some bilateral
M&E)
Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding among infants 0-5 mts:
The target specifically refers to infants, and prevalence of
exclusive breastfeeding would indicate infants’ access to safe,
nutritious food. Source: DHS or MICS surveys.
CARE suggests disaggregation by income quintiles, rural &
urban populations, landless, and social & livelihood groups.
Linkages with 3.2; 5.1, 5.5, 6
CEAG - Environmental Education - Creating legislation requiring all governments to ensure daily
Center of Guarulhos and quality food for all students especially elementary school.
- Find legal ways that meet the rules of health and hygiene so
that no food is discarded as waste of hundreds of thousands
of restaurants worldwide, becoming destined to foundations or
assists institutions.
Centre for Built Environment
Centre for Community Economics Prevalence of undernourishment; disaggregated by sex,

and Development Consultants income, disability, age
Centre For Rural Technology, Nepal
Christian Aid
Christoffel-Blindenmission This target specifically mentions persons in vulnerable

Deutschland e.V. situations, which includes persons with disabilities. Research
on disability and nutrition has found that “Nutrition and
disability are intimately linked: malnutrition can directly cause
or contribute to disability, and disability can lead to
International Child Health, Apr 2014, 34(4): 308-314). It should
therefore be disaggregated by disability.
Investment

Planners Appropriate city and regional planning can assist in the
protection and development of food security and sustainable
agriculture.
Danish Institute for Human RIghts The proposed indicator fails to address the “access to food
aspect of the target 2.1. and seems more adequate for
monitoring target 2.2. Also, the indicator does not allow for
disaggregation and thus does not relate to the poverty and
vulnerability aspects of the target
Dutch Coalition on Disability and This target specifically mentions persons in vulnerable
Development www.dcdd.nl situations, which includes persons with disabilities. Research
EAT Initiative Supporting a Proposed indicator: "Prevalence of population
with moderate or severe food insecurity, based on the Food
Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)"
New Proposed Indicator: "Dietary Diversity Score"
DD is a proxy indicator for micronutrient adequacy of diets
and hence is important to end hunger. Positive dietary
diversity scores have been positively correlated with adequate
micronutrient density of complementary foods for infants and
young children and micronutrient and macronutrient adequacy
for children, adolescents and adults in LICs. In particular,
women of reproductive age that are consuming at least five
out of ten food groups have greater likelihood of meeting their
micronutrient needs than those consuming foods from fewer
groups. Hence this indicator addresses target 2.1 by 2030, to
end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the
poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to
safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year. Disaggregation
Age, sex, household incomes, education, urban/rural,
geographic location Primary Data Source FAO/WHO Tier II:
Methodology Exists, data not easily available
Federation of African Engineering

Organisations
Fertilizer Canada
FHI 360 / Alive & Thrive The suggested indicator of undernourishment rate is not well-
known and could be replaced with a more common household
food security index indicator and the wasting rate in children
under 5 if not included under Target 2.2. Considering the
focus on infants in the overall target, it is paramount to also
include the following indicators already available through
MICS, DHS and national surveillance systems: Exclusive
breastfeeding under 6 months; Continued breastfeeding at 1
year; Minimum acceptable diet. See more:
http://www.unicef.org/nutrition/files/IYCF_Indicators_part_III_c
ountry_profiles.pdf


Generation Nutrition
Global Health Advocates France Indicator: "Governmental budget line tracking an increase in
resources for nutrition."
Rationale: The lack of baseline for nutrition spending is one of

the biggest obstacles in measuring the impact and efficiency
of nutrition policies within countries. In order to ensure a
proper accountability and to monitor the achievement of the
nutrition-related SDGs, national budget lines should feature
resources dedicated to nutrition interventions.
Global Health Council Comments:
Needs to include nutrition indicators; Percentage of
undernourished is limited as indicator; Proposed targets under
2.1 are not strong enough and don’t reflect ambition to end
hunger and malnutrition for all people, including vulnerable
groups of women and children; Recommend adding language
to include prevalence of wasting and women’s dietary
diversity.
Handicap International Specific mention of persons in vulnerable situations, which

includes persons with disabilities. Research on disability and
nutrition has found that “Nutrition and disability are intimately
linked: malnutrition can directly cause or contribute to
disability, and disability can lead to malnutrition” (source:
Malnutrition and Disability: Unexplored Opportunities for
Collaboration, N Groce et al, Paediatrics and International
Child Health, Apr 2014, 34(4): 308-314). It should therefore be
disaggregated by disability.
HDS systems design science Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential goal,
of design and planning for cultural growth for whole societies.
Health Poverty Action The IAEG should explore ways to disaggregate both
proposed indicators by ethnicity
IDDC This target specifically mentions persons in vulnerable

situations, which includes persons with disabilities. Research
ILSI Research Foundation This target will be especially challenging to achieve due to the
increasing impacts of climate and freshwater availability
changes on food systems. We at the ILSI Research
Foundation Center for Integrated Modeling of Sustainable
Agriculture & Nutrition Security (CIMSANS) are working to
incorporate nutrition into existing integrated models, such as
IMPACT, by collaborating with nutrition experts from
academia, modeling experts from CSIRO and IFPRI, and
interested private sector organizations. We’d welcome the
opportunity to convene broader collaborations with additional
partners in order to strengthen understanding of the
connections between human nutrition outcomes and the
adoption of sustainable agricultural practices – thereby better
informing adaptation decisions intended to achieve this target.
Indigenous and Frontier 1) Implementation of Sustainable Food Societies and teach

Technology Research Centre - IFTR people on efficient and sustainable use of natural resources.
2) Moving slowly from paper based economy to product based
economy
3) Encourage growth / make available nutritional supplements
/ foods in every villages
Institute for Reproductive and I agree with it however I afraid we cannot achieve by 2030
Family Health
Internaitonal Council of AIDS

Service Organizations
International Centre for Diarrhoeal There is a need to Increase investment in technology

Disease REsearch, Bangladesh development to improve nutrition outcomes for all people, in
particular children under five and pregnant & lactating mothers
.
International Fertilizer Industry Crop yield is a parameter that contributes to achieving food
Association (IFA) security and sustainable agriculture. As such, it should be
introduced as an indicator for Goal 2.
International Plant Nutrition

Institute
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS Agriculture is the largest user of pesticides, and so an
Inc. ("ISACI") important exposure path for persistent organic substances
that threaten human health and the environment
Johns Hopkins University Acceptable.
Kamla Nehru College, University of No comments

Delhi
Kepa Finland
Land Alliance, Inc.
Marie Stopes International See PMNCH's recommendation -

http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2015_draft_indicator.pdf
Médecins Sans Frontières -

Doctors without Borders
National Union of Tenants of
Nigeria
NCD Alliance
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 1. Centralised public distribution system focusing on basic
Organization (NNDSWO) nutrition requirements.
to urban poverty schemes.
to rural poverty schemes.
Newcastle University, Institute for
Sustainability
on behalf of the International We support IFAD and FAO’s proposal for the inclusion of the
Coalition for Advocacy on Nutrition Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women (MDD-W) indicator, but
suggest that it could equally fit and be appropriate under
target 2.1. The ambition to end hunger is welcome as is the
direct linkage it makes between achieving an end to hunger
and the importance of addressing/ensuring nutrition. Current
measures that look at dietary energy supply are incomplete
and insufficient to address increasing burdens of malnutrition
globally. As such, including WDD indicator under this target
would reflect the ambition of the target. Women and children
are particularly vulnerable to malnutrition. This indicator is a
key dimension of a high quality diet with adequate
micronutrient content as well as reflecting the role of
agriculture and food systems in promoting the health and
wellbeing of people. It could also be included as an indicator
under target 2.1 as the indicators currently listed do not get at
the vision of the target—year round access to safe, nutritious
and sufficient food for all people, especially poor and
vulnerable.
OneFamilyPeople Persons with disabilities are not mentioned in targets dealing

with vulnerability. We therefore recommend the following
targets below:
By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in

particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations
especially those with disabilities, including infants, to safe,
nutritious and sufficient food all year round
Partnership for Economic Policy To ensure the achievement of this goal there is a need for
age/gender disaggregation
Practical Action
PROGRAMA UNIVERSITARIO DE Food security scales are the most appropriate synthetic
DERECHOS HUMANOS DE LA indicator that captures all aspects of access to food (quality
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL and quantity) in a feasible and valid indicator. Also they
AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO constitute direct measures of peoples’ food insecurity
experience, conceptually consistent with human rights’
approach.
RESULTS UK The IFAD and FAO recommend the inclusion of a Minimum

Dietary Diversity for Women (MDD-W) under target 2.2. We
recommend this indicator definitely be included either under
target 2.1 or 2.2. Globally, most countries face one or more
forms of malnutrition. Women and children unequivocally face
the greatest burden of malnutrition. Individuals should not just
consume enough calories to fill their stomachs but should
consume a diverse set of foods capable of preventing
micronutrient deficiencies which affect growth, development,
immunity, and functionality. Micronutrient deficiencies such as
anaemia affect over 2 billion people globally, around 40%
pregnant women, and nearly 1 in 2 children under the age of
five. Poor quality diets are also resulting in rampant growth of
overweight and obesity. An indicator on women's dietary
diversity is reflective of a high quality diet with adequate
micronutrients whilst reflecting the role of agriculture and food
systems in promoting health and well-being. Thus, this
indicator is vital for ensuring women’s and children’s health
and development.
Save the Children
Sightsavers This target specifically mentions persons in vulnerable

situations, which includes persons with disabilities. Research
Society for the Psychological Data disaggregated by age, gender, race, ethnicity,
Study of Social Issues; Psychology indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban residence,
Coalition at the United Nations national origin, and migratory status.
Stakeholder Group on Ageing Indicator 2.1.2: Change to: Prevalence of population, by

(posted by HelpAge International) gender, age and disability status, with moderate or severe
food insecurity, based on the Food Insecurity Experience
Scale (FIES).
The indicator must capture the target’s emphasis on

vulnerability in the indicator.
Stockholm Environment Institute General: It would be worth considering whether a link to ‘safe
water’ could be integrated (or linked) to the suggested
indicators under this target. This is because safe water is
essential to ensure safe nutrition (with sickness a key driver of
malnutrition). On 2.1.2: Does ‘ensuring access to food’
assume ownership over the means of production? I.e. could
the indicator be extended to provide, in addition to food
groups consumed, information on access to food by source
(i.e. domestically produced vs imported) which could be
important when understanding the multi-dimensional drivers of
food insecurity. Additionally, further disaggregation of this
indicator would help to identify gender/age/regional disparities
in food security.
Tebtebba 2.1: Consumption of diverse locally-produced food

(Biodiversity International, resilience indicator)
The Cyprus Institute
The Hague University of Applied see points about poverty above as well as points about
Science population growth below - basically, without considering
environmental sustainability and human population (and
particularly the leading causes of unsustainability) growth
addressing world hunger becomes meaningness in the long
term
The Miracle Foundation Indicator 2.1.1: The Miracle Foundation calls for
disaggregation and adequate representation of orphans and
vulnerable children, including those living on the street or in
program/institutional/orphanage care, in the surveys utilized to
measure the indicator.

TRANSNUT (WHO CC), Department Dietary diversity is an appropriate indicator of diet quality as
of Nutrition, University of Montreal, well as food security (the qualitative dimension), particularly
Canada when assessed among women. However, as shown in several
studies, it is more relevant as indicator of food security in low
income and rural settings. In urban and nutrition transitioning
settings, higher dietary diversity may be associated with a
more atherogenic diet. The food groups (9 or 10???) should
not include separate ingredients (sugar, fat...) but only foods
(or beverages). Dietary diversity does not reveal anything
about the extent of consumption of highly processed, high
energy-density products associated with obesity and related
NCDs. Therefore, other dietary indicators are needed to
assess NCD risk (see under Goal 3).
Transparency International
TRK asbl Will require to be able to measure the capacity in rural area to
feed themselves or improve their agricultural productivity
USIL It is a good predisposition but we need to revise good and real
data about the possibility to reach this purpose by 2030.
Welthungerhilfe Proposed Indicator 1: Prevalence of Undernourishment (PoU).
Proposed Indicator 2: Prevalence of population with moderate
or severe food insecurity, based on the Food Insecurity
Experience Scale (FIES)
Commentary: in accordance with the FAO/SOFI "State of

Food Insecurity in the World" it should read: Prevalence of
undernourishment, Number of people undernourished (FAO)
Not the %age of hungry people but the absolute number

should the reference in accordance with the principle of 'leave
no one behind'
The human right to food has to be realized for each and
everybody.
Women Access Trust Organisation

Of Nigeria
Women's Major Group 2.1.1 Prevalence of Undernourishment (POU) by gender, age

(10-64+) and persons with disabilities.
FAO Voices of the Hungry. Food insecurity among people of

all ages (http://www.fao.org/economic/ess/ess-fs/voices/en/)
(duration of the project tbc)
2.1.2 Prevalence of population, by gender, age and persons

with disabilities with moderate or severe food insecurity
Based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)

World Animal Net Suggested Indicator: Prevalence of food borne illness.
Food safety and nutrition is increasingly being recognized as
crucial to food security.
World Vision Proposed Indicator 1: Although a ‘wasting’ indicator has not

been included under Target 2.1 this indicator has the potential
to capture it. Clearer inclusion of wasting would be preferred.
Proposed Indicator 2: It is critical to prioritize a
consumption/dietary diversity indicator such as the FCS in the
indicators, as it captures empirically how much and which
foods are consumed. This helps to address the issues of
‘access’ to nutritious foods, as well as ‘utilization’. As such, it
is better aligned to more recent research that shows ‘diet
diversity’ indicators are more accurate measures of ‘hunger’,
and can capture within country variations when disaggregated
by sex, age, etc and measured at sub-national levels.
WorldWIDE Network Nigeria:

Women in Development and
Environment
WWF
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
All WHA nutrition targets need to be included. In addition to
stunting and wasting, it is vital to add and elevate exclusive
breastfeeding [percentage of children less than six months old
who are fed breast milk alone (no other liquids or food)] as a
tier 1 top priority. This indicator is already used to track the
WHA target on breastfeeding, and could also feed important
data into targets 2.1, 3.2 and 3.4. We urge you to prioritize
breastfeeding as it also supports economic growth, poverty
eradication, health, obesity prevention, education and WASH
goals. Evidence shows that breastfeeding is positively
associated with IQ, educational attainment, and improved
income as adults [1]
[1] Victora C et al. (2015). Association between

breastfeeding and intelligence, educational attainment, and
income at 30 years of age: a prospective birth cohort study
from Brazil. Lancet Glob. Health 2015; 3: e199–205
We hereby provide additional information to the previous

submission of ACF International.
- Including prevalence of wasting in children as an indicator is
one of the most emblematic ways to show the commitment to
‘leave no one behind’ – counting the children most at risk of
illness, starvation and death from malnutrition’s most
dangerous form shows they literally do count (not doing so
would call this pledge in the Declaration seriously into
question).
- The UN Standing Committee on Nutrition supports a wasting
indicator in the Post 2015 Development Agenda.
- The technical monitoring framework should be aligned with
what has been politically agreed at target level and Target 2.2.
includes wasting in children.
- As the global indicator framework is to “address all SDGs
and targets” and preserve the ambition targets contained, the
ambition on wasting in Target 2.2. can only be preserved by
inclusion in the framework.
1. Disaggregated data of prevalence of mal-nutrition among
socially disadvantaged groups onage, sex, disability, race,
caste, ethnicity, social origin, religion and economic and other
status
2. Disaggregated data on prevalence of anaemia among
socially disadvantaged groups on age, sex, disability, race,
status .
3. Disaggregated data on prevalence of stunting among
status
4. Disaggregated data on prevalence of overweight among
status
5. Disaggregated data on prevalence of calorie intake
among socially disadvantaged groups on age, sex, disability,
race, caste, ethnicity, social origin, religion and economic and
other status
We support Prevalence of stunting (height-for-age) among
children under five, which should be disaggregated by sex.
This is a well-established, methodologically sound indicator
that reflects chronic malnutrition, and is widely supported
across the nutrition community.
We also support Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding (EBF)

in the first six months. Well-established evidence shows that
in countries of every income level, breastfeeding is a critical
intervention in promoting child health and development, both
physical and cognitive. Breastfeeding provides all the
nutrients an infant needs to grow normally within the first six
months of life. Breastfeeding is also proven to protect infants
from a wide range of diseases. Breastfeeding has additional
long term benefits including protection against obesity and
some non-communicable diseases among lactating mothers
as well as in their breastfeeding children, which is particularly
relevant for middle and high-income countries.
These are our top priority indicators though ideally nutrition

would be tracked using all six WHA nutrition targets and MDD-
W.
Indicators for this Target should address nutritional status,
while indicators for target 2.1. should address food as a factor
that influences nutritional status. Thus, indicators for Target
2.1 should include dietary diversity, including for women,
dietary adequacy and quality for infants, and prevalence of
exclusive breastfeeding. CARE supports the suggestions for
indicators for overweight and wasting as well as for anemia
among girls/women of reproductive age. It is best to
disaggregate this last to pregnant/non-pregnant girls/women,
and overweight should be measured among all age groups.
CARE suggests disaggregation by income quintiles, rural &
urban populations, landless, and social & livelihood groups.
Linkage w/ 3.2, 5.1, 6.1, 6.2
Prevalence of stunting (height for age <-2 SD from the median
of the WHO Child Growth Standards) among children under
five years of age, with data disaggregated based on income
and sex
Supported
While the target refers to under-five stunting and wasting, as

well as the particular needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and
lactating women and older persons, the indicator intends to
measure food insecurity. Not a strong congruence. The
indicator would seem better placed under target 2.1.
New Proposed Indicator (NPS): "Dietary Diversity Score"
Dietary diversity is a proxy indicator for micronutrient
adequacy of diets. In particular, women of reproductive age
that are consuming at least five out of ten food groups have
greater likelihood of meeting their micronutrient needs than
those consuming foods from fewer groups. Hence this
indicator is directly relevant to address the nutritional needs of
adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women in target 2.2.
Disaggregation Age, sex, household incomes, education,
urban/rural, geographic location Primary Data Source
FAO/WHO Tier II
NPS: Micronutrient deficiencies of iron [zinc, iodine, vitamin A,
folate, vitamin B12 and vitamin D if nationally measurable and
applicable]
Addressing the “hidden hunger” of micronutrient deficiencies
is instrumental to end hunger and improve nutrition. Iron is
part of a safe, nutritious and sufficient diet, is instrumental to
end malnutrition and to address the nutritional needs of
adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and older
persons. Disaggregation: as above. Data Source WHO,
NSO’s Tier I
The indicators under this targets needs to be aligned with the
six indicators in the WHO global nutrition targets: Childhood
stunting rate, anemia rate in Women of Reproductive Age,
Percentage of low birth-weight, Exclusive breastfeeding under
6 months, childhood obesity rate and childhood wasting rate.
The anemia and exclusive breastfeeding rate could
alternatively be captured under Target 2.2. See more:
http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/nutrition_globaltargets2025/
en/
Suggested Indicator 2.2.1: Suggest adding in wasting and

overweight components to read as follows
“Prevalence of stunting (height for age <-2 SD from the
median of the WHO Child Growth Standards), prevalence of
overweight (weight for height >+2 SD from the median of the
WHO Child Growth Standards) and prevalence of wasting
(weight for height <-2 SD from the median of the WHO Child
Growth Standards) among children under five years of age”
We support the suggested indicator “Prevalence of

undernourishment” and call for a disaggregation measuring
the % of malnourished children due to repeated diarrhea and
intestinal infections.
• Reducing wasting in children under-five features in Target
2.2. It is critically important to measure progress towards all
elements of the target, including wasting. Therefore, we
recommend the inclusion of an indicator on the prevalence of
wasting in under-fives.
• A wasting indicator will help ensure attention is given to a
condition that affects 51 million children under five and which
is responsible for over one million deaths a year.
• Wasting is already one of the six 2012 World Health
Assembly global targets on nutrition. UNICEF also supported
its inclusion in its comments on the draft set of indicators.
• A wasting indicator meets all of the criteria for a “good”
indicator, identified by the Expert Group Meeting in February,
as it is methodologically sound, measurable, accessible,
relevant, timely and internationally comparable. National,
regional and global data are accessible via the UNICEF-World
Bank-WHO ‘Joint Estimates’ and the WHO’s Global Database
on Child Growth and Malnutrition.
Suggested target: By 2030 reduce stunting by at least 50%,

wasting to less than 4%, anaemia in women and girls of
reproductive age by at least 60% and address the nutritional
needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women.
Rationale: If we welcome the inclusion of stunting and wasting

the level of ambition of the target is still too low. It is aligned
with the WHA target for 2025 instead of the SDG deadline of
2030. Targets on stunting and wasting should be aligned with
the projection of the agreed WHA 2025 wasting target
extended to 2030 and the Every Woman Every Child stunting
and anaemia target for 2030.
Indicator 1 Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years

of age
Indicator 2 Prevalence of wasting in children less than 5
years of age.
Indicator 3 Prevalence of women of reproductive age with
anaemia.
Indicator 4 Percentage of children receiving exclusive
breastfeeding for the six first months of life.
Rationale: These indicators measure each element featured in

the target and are in line with the measurement unit of the
target.
Recommend modifying:
• Prevalence of stunting (height for age <-2 SD from the
median of the WHO Child Growth Standards) among children
under five years of age, disaggregated by sex
• Prevalence of overweight (weight for height >+2 SD from the
median of the WHO Child Growth Standards) among children
under five years of age, disaggregated by sex
Recommend adding:
• Exclusive breastfeeding among 0-5 month olds
• Prevalence of anaemia (Hb = 11 g/dl) among women of
reproductive age
Comments:
• Indicators would not register malnutrition among people
living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA), and PLWHA on treatment
require enough nutrition to benefit from treatment.
• An indicator on exclusive breastfeeding could feed data into
targets 2.2 and 3.2. Should be prioritized as it supports
breaking the cycle of poverty, improves health, and
contributes to education and WASH. Evidence shows that
exclusive breastfeeding is positively associated with IQ,
educational attainment, and improved income as adults.
Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential goal,

1) Promoting traditional food systems along with modern
supplements for addressing (only) critical areas of
requirement.
By 2030, the situation nutrition for under 5 years of aged and

nutrition for adolestion and pregnant and lactation actually
improve
Disaggregate to address malnutrition among People living
with HIV. The indicators proposed would not register
malnutrition among PLWHA, and PLWHA on treatment require
enough nutrition to be able to benefit from treatment.
Research, in particular Southern research, is not limited to
agricultural research. Innovations in health need to be
culturally appropriate, affordable and accessible. This also
includes the development of technologies, diagnostics,
treatment and systems to address the nutritional needs of
those most vulnerable and in need
ICN strongly supports the indicator to measure the overweight
both in children and adults. The indicators to monitor all forms
of malnutrition should be in line with the six global nutrition
targets of the comprehensive implementation plan on
maternal, infant and young child nutrition adopted by WHA.
Social protection systems should be implemented to ensure
appropriate support for women during pregnancy and lactating
period so that they can maintain their health and continue
breastfeeding.
ICN feels the need to have another indicator on human
resources to ensure universal access to seamless and
comprehensive services in primary health care settings to
promote healthy diet (including exclusive breastfeeding for the
first 6 months and appropriate infant feeding) and physical
exercise and to prevent malnutrition. This should include not
only nutritionists but also school teachers with appropriate
training and healthcare workers such as nurses including
school nurses, occupational nurses and community/public
health nurses.
2.1.1 Number of countries implementing and enforcing the
Codex Alimentarius or equivalent national standards related to
reducing chemical contamination in food.
2.1.2 Levels of hazardous pesticides and industrial chemicals
in food.
2.1.3 Number of countries that have taken action to identify
and replace highly hazardous pesticides.
2.4.7 Accident rate involving poisoning by chemicals /

pesticides[hemdator10]
2.4.8 Number of farmers trained in integrated farm

managementsystem[hemdator11]
Isn't this redundant with what the SDG aims to do, i.e., be an
internationally agreed target?
This target resembles with the target no 2.2 and may be

removed with some modifications in 2.2
See PMNCH's recommendation -
2.2.1. propose only use of national HH surveys. In order to

capture issues of inequity within countries, targets and
indicators need to be specified beyond average country level.
This is especially important for malnutrition, as the situation is
often inhomogeneous.
2.2.2: [Prevalence of wasting (weight for height <-2 SD from
the median of the WHO Child Growth Standards) among
children under five years of age]
Include also MUAC < 125 mm and oedemas in the indicator
Include severe wasting (weight for height <-3 SD or MUAC <
115 mm or oedema)
Suggest to have indicators on services availability (e.g. nb of

functioning ATFCs/ITFCs/CMAM health workers / population)?
Indicators 2.2.1 and 2.2.2
Indicators 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 of this Target are not
comprehensive enough to measure the attainment of the
Target, hence, additional indicator is suggested to make the
Draft Indicator stronger and effectual. To this end, we suggest
that the indicator be reframed as: proportion of population,
disaggregated by children under 5 years and older persons of
over 60 years including the sick, prisoners, expectant/nursing
mothers, newborns and the homeless etc that are
undernourished and vulnerable to hunger or malnutrition.
The NCD Alliance proposes the following: 2.2.1. Prevalence of

stunting under 5 years; 2.2.2. Prevalence of obesity and
overweight in children under five years, adolescents, and in
adults; and, 2.2.3. % of total daily energy intake from
saturated fats; and % of total daily energy intake from protein
in adults.
The indicator measuring obesity is not sufficient to measure

progress in ‘ending all forms of malnutrition', and have
suggested it be expanded to also include overweight (another
form of malnutrition). Being overweight or obese increases the
risk of at least ten cancers and other NCDs - it is therefore
important for it to be measured. Significant proportions of
populations worldwide are overweight, contributing to the
global NCD epidemic. We also recommend that the
prevalence of overweight and obesity be measured across
more populations (children under 5, adolescents and adults)
in order to adequately capture what is included in Target 2.2.
1. Disaggregated data of prevalence of mal-nutrition among

socially disadvantaged groups on the axis of age, sex
disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or
other status and rural-urban divide.
2. Disaggregated data on prevalence of anaemia among
3. Disaggregated data on prevalence of stunting among
4. Disaggregated data on prevalence of overweight among
5. Disaggregated data on prevalence of calorie intake
among socially disadvantaged groups on the axis of age, sex
To end malnutrition in all its forms, we recommend building
and expanding on existing World Health Assembly (WHA)
global targets on maternal and child nutrition. All six WHA
targets are based on evidence on what is needed to
comprehensively address maternal, infant and child nutrition.
These indicators (stunting, wasting, anaemia, breast feeding,
low birth weight, and childhood overweight) are already a
priority selection from a broader range of relevant indicators.
WHO is already providing methodological support including
reporting on progress and these indicators are currently being
used to measure progress towards the WHA targets, thus
avoiding any additional reporting burden.
We strongly support UNICEF in their proposal to include

indicators on exclusive breastfeeding (this could also be
included under target 3.2), the prevalence of stunting and
wasting in children under 5 years of age, the prevalence of
overweight in children under 5 and the prevalence of anaemia
among women of reproductive age. These are consistent with
the WHA nutrition targets unanimously agreed in 2012.
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 children with intellectual
disabilities,adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women
and older persons
It is essential to measure all components raised in the goal.
Particularly on malnutrition, it is necessary to monitor
overweight and obesity, not only for children under 5 years
old, but for teenagers and adults.
The WHA in 2012 set out six targets on nutrition for 2025.
Leaving any of these targets out of the SDG indicators would
reduce global commitment to meet them. We support
UNICEF’s recommended indicators on stunting, wasting,
exclusive breastfeeding, anaemia and overweight. Globally,
161 mn children are stunted, while 51 mn children are wasted,
and this threatens their survival, physical and cognitive
development, educational achievement and earning potential.
Further, growing numbers of overweight and obese children
are putting them at risk of early setting in of NCDs. Anaemia in
women puts them at high risk of maternal mortality (~20%
maternal deaths are attributed to anaemia), and increases the
risk of low birth weight, still birth, and anaemia in children. The
world is making poor progress on anaemia. It is hence crucial
that governments are held accountable, and take steps
towards addressing anaemia. Indicators on anaemia and
Exclusive breastfeeding will also contribute to targets 3.1 and
3.2 respectively, and thus can be included there, while an
indicator on overweight will also help achieve target 3.4.
As with our previous submission, in order to end malnutrition

in all its forms, we recommend building and expanding on
existing World Health Assembly (WHA) global targets on
maternal and child nutrition. These indicators (stunting,
wasting, anaemia, breast feeding, low birth weight, and
childhood overweight) are already a priority selection from a
broader range of relevant indicators. WHO is already
providing methodological support including reporting on
progress. Without inclusion of all six 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.
2.2.1 Adolescent wasting as assessed by considering body
mass index (BMI) and calculating BMI for age
DATA SOURCES: WHO or UNICEF
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: WHO or UNICEF
TIER: Tier I
NOTES: Adolescent girls in poor countries face a high risk of

anemia and malnutrition, which can have long-term
consequences for their health and that of their children.
In many cases, girls living in poverty and food-insecure

households eat only after male family members.
Data for these groups disaggregated by age, gender, race,

ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban
Indicator 2.2.1 Add Prevalence of malnutrition measured by

Middle Upper Arm Circumference in adults 60 and older
See Nutrition interventions for older people in emergencies:

http://www.helpage.org/download/5181155ea9b5c
Older persons are explicitly targeted and must be measured.

Middle upper arm circumference (MUAC) is the best and
easiest to implement tool to assess the nutritional status of
older people.
Indicator 2.2.2 Add Prevalence of obese persons age 60 and

older measured by waist circumference
Obesity is related to morbidity and mortality in older age.

Waist circumference is a good measure of morbidity and
mortality related to obesity.
On 2.2.2.: Whilst a focus on children is valid, the indicator
needs to be extended to include the adult population (either in
terms of obesity rates, or calorific intake per person). The
issue of wider over-consumption of food is important to
capture as it can interact with food security in other areas.
General: It would be possible to introduce another indicator
under this target which considers economic access to good
nutrition. For example, the trends in price of key fruits and
vegetables could be used. See report and related data
sources: http://www.odi.org/rising-cost-healthy-diet


Although allegedly addressing all forms of malnutrition,
nutrition-related NCDs (obesity, as well as diabetes,
hypertension, CVD and some cancers) are neglected. If the
intention is to exclude this dimension of malnutrition, it should
be stated clearly. Otherwise, relevant nutrition indicators and
surveillance systems addressing NCD risk factors should be
suggested. WHO Stepwise surveys could provide relevant
indicator data, whether on biomarkers of risk (overweight; high
blood pressure...) or on diet and lifestyle (see also under Goal
3).
indicators for rural
It is a good predisposition but we need to revise good and real

data about the possibility to reach this purpose by 2030.
Proposed Indicator 2.2.1: Prevalence of Stunting (low height-
for-age) in children under 5 years of age.
Proposed Indicator 2.2.2: Prevalence of overweight children
under 5 years of age.
Commentary: The two suggested outcome indicators (2.2.1

Stunting and 2.2.2 overweight children) are highly relevant,
but not sufficient to measure Target 2.2 which refers to ALL
forms of malnutrition, and, apart from stunting, mentions
explicitly wasting and the nutritional needs of adolescent girls,
pregnant and lactating women and older persons.
The indicators should cover all six WHA (World Health
Assembly) global targets for improv¬ing maternal, infant, and
young child nutrition by 2025 endorsed by the WHO member
states in 2012.
That means that the WHA targets on reduction of anaemia in
women of reproductive age, low birth weight, exclusive
breastfeeding, and wasting should also be included. All these
targets refer to the 1.000 day-window of opportunity and are
crucial to reduce malnutrition. Also, the indicators, so far, don´t
measure at all the nutritional needs of older persons as
referred to in the target.
Include as one of the core modules in the FSMS surveys

associated household questionnaires: Income security. This is
different from source of income.
The indicator here will be the sustainability of the source of
income
2.2.1 Adolescent wasting as assessed by considering body

mass index (BMI) and calculating BMI for age), by sex and
age (10-14 and 15-19)
WHO/UNICEF
BMI can be a better measure of malnutrition than Anemia due

to the numerous factors that can contribute to anemia besides
malnutrition (such as menstruation, low iron, etc.).
2.2.2 Anemia prevalence among women of reproductive age

(Percentage of women ages 10-49 screened for hemoglobin
levels who have a level less than 12g/dl (pregnant women
less than 11g/dl)), disaggregated by age parity, reproductive
status (pregnant, lactating), trimester of pregnancy, severity of
anemia, socioeconomic status.
Population-based health surveys
This indicator is a robust and reliable means for measuring

progress toward addressing the nutritional needs of
adolescent girls, and pregnant and lactating women.
Supportive of both proposed indicators. But point out to
Missing key aspects:
-prevalence of wasting (low weight for height) in children
under 5 years of age
-percentage of women of reproductive age (15-49) with
anemia ( a broad based indicators that speaks to women’s
equitable access to health, food, etc. as well as a critical for
maternal health)
Percentage of children less than six months old who are fed
breast milk alone (no other liquids or food)
-Percent of children receiving full immunization
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 fishers, 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
1. Disaggregated data on the number of farmers/ small-
scale entrepreneur from socially disadvantaged groups age,
sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, social origin, religion and
economic and other status respect annual turn over.
It is also critical to include a measure of concentration of land
ownership to address the phenomenon of land-grabbing
which has resulted in diminishing land available to local
communities. E.g.percentage of arable land accessed by
smallholders; existence of safeguards to prevent land-
grabbing & forced eviction including an enforceable
requirement of free prior & informed consent; percentage of
agreements relating to natural resource concessions that are
publicly available. These proposed indicators apply to targets
1.4, 2.3 & 5.a.
Rural women need training in literacy, crop management,

bookkeeping and financial management to access markets
and compete with men. An indicator is needed to measure the
number of women who attend FAO's Farmer Field Schools.
Indicator 14. should count the number of female agricultural
extension workers per 100 farmers.
Indicator 2.12 should disaggregate women and men farmers
with crop insurance.
We support Value of production per labor unit (measured in
constant USD), by classes of farming/pastoral/forestry
enterprise size, disaggregated by male and female-headed
households for each class of enterprise size.
This indicator is an appropriate measure of progress against
target 2.3 as it reflects both productivity (of labor) and rural
income (because labor productivity of farming/ pastoral/
forestry enterprises provides a proxy for rural income).
Labor productivity captures the diversified nature of
smallholder farms, whether the value comes from farming
crops or tending livestock, which is critical to understand more
accurately whether small-scale food producers are
experiencing improvements in productivity and income. This
indicator must include a definition of enterprise class that
effectively captures the group of small-scale producers in a
given country. A national average would not provide a
meaningful picture of smallholder progress on productivity or
income. Surveys such as the LSMS-ISA and/or FAO’s
proposed Agricultural Integrated Surveys (AGRIS) could, if
adapted and scaled, be used to track this indicator.
CAAR recognizes the importance of providing global farmers
with science based information on the International 4R
Nutrient Stewardship framework (Right Source @ Right Rate,
Right Time, Right Place ®) for management of nutrients. This
framework ensures the protection of the environment, the
production of safe food for consumers and the productivity of
producers. Global food security will never be realized without
the use of commercial fertilizers, and the industry’s 4R
Nutrient Stewardship program provides the foundation for
responsible use of these essential plant nutrients.
CAAR recommends that the UN Post 2015 Sustainability

goals support and promote this internationally recognized
program as a solution to help increase agricultural productivity
in developing countries.
Indicators should apply a Gross Margin calculation to all

production costs, incl. a valuation of household members’, &
women’s, labor. Access to/ownership of land & productive
resources should be measured quantitatively & qualitatively:
who benefits from/makes decisions about crop, livestock,
value added products & income earned from their sale.
Indicator 2.3.1 should address production also for pastoralists
& fishers & take into account costs of inputs & labor. CARE
supports disaggregation by livelihoods (fishers, farmers,
pastoralists, etc), quintiles of farm size, female-headed
smallholder producer households, & income quintiles. CARE
suggests indicators for access to financial services, market,
climate & weather information, extension services, training on
sustainable & resilient agricultural practices, crop/livestock
insurance, & diversity of income sources, including access to
wage labor. Links w/ 1.4, 1.5, indicators in 5, 6, 10, 12, 13, 14,
15.1, 15.3
Indicator1 : Increase in the area of land having facility of
irrigation.
Promote micro-irrigation system (MIS) for high value crops,
veggies and fruits. With water resources shrinking, maximum
use of available source of water in agro-sector can be
achieved through integration of MIS in agro-practices/irrigation
system
Indicator 2: Percentage of people capacitated by government,

I/NGO and other development organization regarding agro-
practices and marketing approach
Comment: Smallest administrative unit of countries should
make provision of capacity building trainings and workshops
related with new agro-practice and market development for
agro-products. Here government can co-ordinate with private
organizations and I/NGOs
Here, too, although the target discuss the importance of
access to land and productive resources, the indicator chosen
does not focus at all on the underlying suggested means for
achieving the target. An indicator such as the one suggested
by UNEP for Target 1.4 would also likely help in moving
towards this target as well.
Supported
The indicator is not as specific with respect to types of

occupation as the target is and does not emphasize the
equality aspect. The indicator does not address the crucial
aspects of secure and equal access to land and other
productive resources. Hence there is only weak
correspondence with the target.
A more adequate indicator would focus on “Status and trends
in traditional occupations”. Traditional occupations is a
concept in international law (under, e.g. ILO Convention No.
111) and can be informed by labour statistics. This indicator is
already adopted as one of the official indicators for monitoring
implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD).
NPS: "Income of smallholder farmers and fishing communities
against national poverty lines."
There are 1.4 billion poor people living on less than US$1.25
a day. One billion of them live in rural areas where agriculture
is their main source of livelihood (IFAD, 2013). Smallholders
form a vital part of the global agricultural community, yet they
are often neglected. Smallholders manage over 80 per cent of
the world’s estimated 500 million small farms and provide over
80 per cent of the food consumed in a large part of the
developing world, contributing significantly to poverty
reduction and food security (IFAD, 2013). An indicator that
monitors the income of smallholder farmers serves to track
SDG 2.3 to double the agricultural productivity and incomes of
small-scale food producers and as a proxy indicator to build
the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations
and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related
events. Disaggregation Sex, household income Primary Data
Source FAO, WB and NSOs, Tier I
There is an upper limit of what can be achieved as a crop

yield, depending on climate, growing conditions and soil
conditions. The doubling of income should recognise this
ceiling, and reaching the ceiling before doubling should not be
considered a failure.
Fertilizer Canada recognizes the importance of providing
global farmers with science based information on the
International 4R Nutrient Stewardship framework (Right
Source @ Right Rate, Right Time, Right Place ®) for
management of nutrients. This framework ensures the
protection of the environment, the production of safe food for
consumers and the productivity of producers. Global food
security will never be realized without the use of commercial
fertilizers, and the industry’s 4R Nutrient Stewardship program
provides the foundation for responsible use of these essential
plant nutrients.
Fertilizer Canada recommends that the UN Post 2015

Sustainability goals support and promote this internationally
recognized program as a solution to help increase agricultural
productivity in developing countries.
Agricultural productivity is highly dependent on water and land

resources. We suggest using the following indicator: « Water
and/or Crop Land Productivity of small-scale food producers
». Where in areas where water resource is available in limited
quantity, Crop Water Productivity should be taken into
account. In areas where water is abundant, Land Crop
productivity should be taken into account.
The target specifically reference indigenous peoples. The
IAEG must explore ways to disaggregate this indicator by
ethnicity. Failure to do so will undermine the target.
It is possible if more regional / local food are given importance
and the foods are allowed to be moved from one place to
another place without difficulty.
Agricultural commodities (not value added products) should
not carry any taxes if transferred inside the country.
Aggregate farmers / indigenous people / family farmers /
fishers / forest gatherers / under an umbrella
Maybe 2030 the agricultural productivity and income maybe

have some improvement, especially indigenous people
Too long, especially if one has to remember all the targets.
May need to be shortened
a) Crop yield gap (actual yield as percentage of attainable

yield).
b) Cereal yield growth rate.
c) Number of agricultural extension workers per 1000 farmers
[or share of farmers covered by agricultural extension
programs and services].
d) Annual change in degraded or desertified arable land
(percentage or ha).
e) Livestock yield gap (actual yield as percentage of attainable
yield).
f) Increase in income of small-scale food producers.
g) Increase in Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index.
h) Nitrogen and phosphorus use efficiency in food systems.
i) Share of women and men with legally recognized evidence
of land tenure.
=>
b) Tracks long-term increase.
c) Does not distinguish between levels of training between
extension workers or the effectiveness of reaching farmers.
e) Increased yields should not come at the expense of animal
welfare.
It is important to measure progress to the content of this target
related to land as a primary resource. Secure access to land
is vital for small farmers and investors alike to motivate
investment and productivity. The indicator proposed below
and mentioned in my comment on 1.4 will address this
content in 2.3:
Percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples and local

communities with secure tenure rights to individually or
communally held land [measured by (i) percentage with
legally documented or recognized evidence of tenure; and (ii)
percentage who perceived their rights as recognized and
protected]
1. Disaggregated data on the number of farmers/ small-
scale entrepreneur from socially disadvantaged groups on the
axis of age, sex disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion
and economic and other status and rural-urban divide with
respect annual turn over.
In order to accurately measure and review the impacts of
Targets 2.3 data require disaggregation by geographic
location in order to monitor changes in land-use and food
production rates in urban as well as rural areas. However,
whether urban agriculture will fall within the indicator
framework for Target 2.3 will depend on the definition of the
small scale producer, an issue highlighted by IFAD and FAO
on p. 13 of the proposed indicators. The focus on food
security has, until recently, been overwhelmingly on rural
problems and on issues of food availability at a global and
national scale. Urbanisation has brought with it the
urbanisation of poverty and now, many low-income urban
populations are equally at risk of poverty and food insecurity.
Indeed, the UN itself acknowledges the food security and
malnutrition issues associated with this urbanisation of
poverty (United Nations Standing Committee on Nutrition
August 2013).
By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of

small-scale food producers, in particular women,persons with
disabilities, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists
and fishers, 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
2.2. CONTD: We strongly support UNICEF in their proposal to
include indicators on exclusive breastfeeding, the prevalence
of stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, the
prevalence of overweight in children under 5 and the
prevalence of anaemia among women of reproductive age.
These are consistent with the WHA nutrition targets
unanimously agreed in 2012. The development of indicators
and data systems for the SDGs must include recognition of
the importance of early and exclusive breastfeeding in the first
6 months.
Data on agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale
food producers in these groups disaggregated by age,
gender, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migratory status..
Indicators should focus towards low-productivity systems.
Since goals are universal, the proposed indicators may
promote already high-productivity (but environmentally
destructive) agriculture. Care should therefore be taken that
outcomes of the proposed indicators do not undermine those
under 2.4 around environmentally sound production. An
additional concern is whether to emphasise an increase in
income, or a move out of agriculture. If productivity is
increased, farmers may acquire more land, ultimately leading
to fewer farmers. Inclusion within indicators of the last two
aspects of the target would be useful as value-added products
and non-farm employment can help counter-balance effects of
increased productivity. If the main purpose of indicator/target
is to enhance economic value of production for smallholders,
we agree with IFAD & FAO proposals to value production by
labour unit, rather than by hectare. Access to local markets
may also be an important aspect, but is not captured within
proposed indicators. ‘% of agricultural production sold
domestically’ (or within x Km of production) may be a useful
indicator.
2.3: 1) Status and trends in traditional occupations (CBD

indicator); 2) percentage of women and men with secure
rights to land; 3) Area of land legally recognized under the
tenure of indigenous peoples and local communities (ILC,
OXFAM, etc); 4) Recognition of customary tenure regimes
within national legal frameworks in line with international
human rights standards and the Committee on World Food
Security's Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible
Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests.
In tracking this target, it would be critical to look at how
and hunger. For example, stable well-functioning institutions
that enforce rule of law are highly and inversely correlated
with starvation rates.
-
https://www.transparency.org/files/content/feature/2014_MDG
s_Statistical_Annex.pdf.
-
http://www.transparency.org/images/uploads/feature/MDG_inf
ographic_hi-res.jpg.
-
http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/land_and_corruptio
n_a_global_concern (for links between corruption and land).
Excellent point. It is neccessary to establish a framework to

supervise the fullfilment of this point. An international experts
commision is recommended.
Proposed Indicator 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)
Commentary: There should be an indicator measuring the

income of small farmers. Agricultural productivity is measured
already in a number of indicators. This sole focus on
increasing rural productivity could wrongly project the target of
reducing rural poverty (structure).
There is need for financial literacy education and one of the

indicators should be increase in savings culture which can be
easily monitored.
Another proposal is waste management. One of the indicators
will be the number of new platforms and markets created to
enhance value addition and food chain supply respectively.
We support the amendment to indicator 2.3.1 proposed by
Arjan van Howelingen (World Animal Protection). We would
suggest also considering water usage per calorie .
Use calories rather than constant USD to measure value of

production
Target 2.3’s main focus is on productivity with improved

incomes being a derivative of improved productivity. Hence,
measuring production through measuring the number of
calories produced rather than the constant USD these calories
represent is a more direct and more accurate indicator. Also,
measuring production in calories allows for the relative
inefficiency of certain food production systems (i.e. grain-fed
industrial livestock production) to become visible.
Moreover, adding ‘per hectare of land’ to the indicator would

allow for land degradation and therefore the sustainability of
food production to be captured.
What about making improved and high yielding seeds and

seedlings available to rural women, and other extension
services.
WWF supports the suggested indicator amended to include
Fisheries in the classes of enterprise: “Value of production per
labour unit (measured in constant USD), by classes of
farming/pastoral/forestry/fisheries enterprise size”. Fisheries
are included in the Agriculture Orientation Index and should
be explicitly mentioned. The indicator should be
disaggregated by size, gender and ethnic/indigenous groups.
We suggest an additional indicator “% credibly certified
sustainable production (as defined by ISEAL
http://www.isealalliance.org/our-members ) of overall
production”, with data from FAO and ISEAL/Credible
certification schemes. An increasing body of literature shows
the positive impacts of credible schemes, e.g. farmer outreach
and increased yields/reduced inputs compared to
conventional production, protection of areas of High
Conservation values from conversion. This indicator would
also inform 2.3, 2.5, 6a, 8.4, 12a, 14.1 & 14.2.
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
The proposed indicator refers to environmental sustainability
and omits economic and social sustainability. An indicator to
measure sustainable agricultural practices will need to
consider the economic feasibility of achieving environmental
goals and social factors, foremost the ability meet food and
fibre demands. Nutrient management practices for
sustainable agriculture that are science based, designed on a
simple framework that can be implemented globally and
applied for site specific conditions have been developed as
the 4R Nutrient Stewardship System by IPNI. We would
recommend the use of 4R Nutrient Stewardship as a means
of measuring sustainable agriculture practices for nutrient
management.
1. Percentage of agricultural area owned by socially

disadvantaged groups on age, sex, disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, social origin, religion and economic and other status
index under sustainable agricultural practices.
Does not capture all of the target; it fails to measure increases
in agricultural productivity and production rates, or to
recognize the need for sustainable agricultural practices to be
those 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”. It neglects to account for
changes in area of land available for agricultural use globally.
We agree with UNSD indicator, provided the definition of
sustainable agricultural practices incorporates qualities
defined in the target. We suggest that productivity and
production are measured via the following indicator.
Suggested Indicator:
i. Rate of agricultural productivity and production from

agricultural land (represented as a proportion of global land
use) that is farmed using sustainable food production systems
and resilient agricultural practices (considered to help
maintain ecosystems; strengthen capacity for adaptation to
climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other
disasters; and progressively improve land and soil quality)
The suggested priority indicator has changed since the first
set of proposals. However, t is very difficult to see how nations
and stakeholders could agree what constitutes “sustainable
agricultural practice” across the world, given the huge
diversity of national and local capacities and context - defining
sustainable agricultural practice is too complex and contested
to be a useful basis for a global indicator. So we continue to
favour our proposed two alternative indicators: “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)”
Improved nutrient management is delivered through the
incorporation of a 4R Nutrient Stewardship Plan into the farm.
4R Nutrient Stewardship: Right Source @ Right Rate, Right
Time, Right Place® is a universal science-based program
developed by the International Plant Nutrition Institute. The 4R
program is solidly based in sustainable agriculture and seeks
to balance nutrient management decisions within a framework
of economic, social, and environmental goals.
• Right Source: Ensure a balanced supply of essential
nutrients
• Right Rate: Decisions based on soil nutrient supply and
plant demand
• Right Time: Decisions based on the dynamics of crop
uptake, soil supply, nutrient loss risks, and field operation
logistics
• Right Place: Address root-soil dynamics and nutrient
movement, and manage spatial variability within the field to
meet site-specific crop needs and limit potential losses from
the field.

program as a solution to ensure sustainable food production.
We suggest that productivity and production are measured via

the following indicator.
i. Rate of agricultural productivity and production from
agricultural land (represented as a proportion of global land
use) that is farmed using sustainable food production systems
and resilient agricultural practices (considered to help
maintain ecosystems; strengthen capacity for adaptation to
climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other
disasters; and progressively improve land and soil quality)
Indicators should measure the array of complex processes in

the target and the social, economic, and environmental
aspects of sustainability. CARE supports IFAD/FAO’s
suggested indicator of percentage of agricultural area under
sustainable agricultural practices, including agroecology.
CARE supports disaggregation by different livelihoods
(fishers, farmers, pastoralists, etc), quintiles of farm size,
female-headed smallholder producer households, and income
quintiles. This indicator should be linked to measures of
productivity and profitability. Particular linkage with 2.3, as
access to resources, information and markets influences
sustainability, resilience and adaptive capacity. CARE
supports IUCN’s suggestion for an indicator on sustainable
use of biodiversity. Measures of GHG emissions are more
appropriate for goal 12. This target links to all targets within
Goal 2, given the focus on food systems. Links w/ 1.4, 1.5,
5.1, 5.5, 5a, 5c, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6b, 10.1, 12, 13, 14.2
As well as in Brazil, that all the world's governments pay
monthly, mainly smallholders and farmers, for "environmental
services" when they fail to use part of their land to preserve
springs that are found there.
Urban agriculture in cities can provide food security, enhance

environment improvement,provide employment to poor people
and
help climate resilience in cities.
Indicator:1 Government certification issued for farmers

involved in organic farming (certification for organic products)
Indicator 2: Types and frequency of climate resilient agro-
practices like tunnel farming process, organic fertilizer
production, drip/sprinkler irrigation system, etc
Comments: Here the countries which do not have provision
for certification for organic products first has to make provision
of certification so that organic product get separate market to
compete with chemically cultivated foodstuffs
Preferred indicator: Percentage of agricultural land that is

farmed using resilient agricultural practices (considered to
increase productivity and production, help maintain
ecosystems, strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate
change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other
disasters and progressively improve land and soil quality); and
rate of agricultural production from agricultural land farmed
using such resilient agricultural practices
Supported
NPS: "per capita animal protein consumption and per capita
land requirement for animal protein consumption."
This indicator can be applied to track progress towards
consuming less energy intensive food in countries where a
reduction in red meat consumption is a major goal. Given the
different nutritional and environmental impacts of consuming
white or red meat this indicator will draw parallels between the
health and environmental concerns of resource intensive
animal protein. Dis: Age, sex, household income, urban/rural,
type of animal protein. Source: FAOSTAT Data methodology:
24-hour dietary recalls, national dietary surveys, Tier II
NPS: Carbon emissions from agricultural land use (tons per

hectare per year) Please refer to target 12.2 for description.
NPS: Consumptive greenhouse gas emissions from diets in

tCO2eq per year. An indicator that measures GHG of dietary
consumption patterns will highlight the deeply interconnected
relationship between food consumption and GGH. Dis:
Household incomes, urban/rural Source NSO’s, UNFCCC,
UNEP, WHO, FAO Tier III: Methodology and data collection
baseline needs to be developed.
Improved nutrient management is delivered through the
incorporation of a 4R Nutrient Stewardship Plan into the farm.
4Rs promotes the application of the scientific principles of
crop nutrition in combination with best available local and
regional evidence to improve the site-specific management of
nutrients. The 4Rs are based in sustainable agriculture and
seek to balance nutrient management decisions within a
framework of economic, social, and environmental goals.Right
Source: Ensure a balanced supply of essential nutrients; Right
Rate: Assess and make decisions based on soil nutrient
supply and plant demand; Right Time: Assess and make
decisions based on the dynamics of crop uptake, soil supply,
nutrient loss risks, and field operation logistics; Right Place:
Address root-soil dynamics and nutrient movement, and
manage spatial variability within the field to meet site-specific
crop needs and limit potential losses from the field. Fertilizer
Canada recommends that the UN Post 2015 Sustainability
program as a solution to ensure sustainable food production.
Agricultural productivity is highly dependent on water and land

resources. We suggest using a « Water and/or Crop Land
Productivity », where in areas where water resource is
available in limited quantity, Crop Water Productivity should be
taken into account. In areas where water is abundant, Land
Crop productivity should be taken into account.
As highlighted in a new report the ILSI Research Foundation
co-authored for the UK Global Food Security Programme,
“Extreme Weather and Resilience of the Global Food
System,” there is an increasing risk of a multiple breadbasket
failure being caused by extreme weather – due to climate
change, dwindling land and water resources, and increasing
demand. That report calls for improvements in modeling, as
well as a number of risk-mitigation actions. More resilient
practices is one option, but current modeling methods are
insufficient to confidently prioritize the relative merits of
adopting particular on-farm practices vs. other potential policy-
level actions, such as establishing new regional approaches
to food and seed movement in response to localized
crop/seed failure. Given the very large but still uncertain
economic and human costs of such food system shocks,
investments in improving the underlying modeling
methodology for quantifying and building resilience are
urgently needed.
1) Reduction in chemical fertilizers

2) Efficient use of human wastes
3) Use of solar power
4) Promotion of small implements to help small family farming
communities
5) Better community managed irrigation systems
6) Maintenance of water bodies through community
participation
7) Efficiency local recycling of farm wastes
8) Conservation of soil carbon through use of lesser
nitrogenous fertilizers
9) Promoting dryland agricultural crops than water loving
crops
10) Reduction in sugarcane cultivation globally
11) Inculcate the mixed farming ideas to farmers instead of
monocropping
By 2030, I believe there will have some improvement in

agricultural practises
ICN supports the suggested indicator “Percentage of
agricultural area under sustainable agricultural practices” in
order to be more comprehensive and to enhance the link with
the Target 3.9 “By 2030, substantially reduce the number of
deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water
and soil pollution and contamination.” Farmers should be
encouraged to produce healthy products without using
unnecessary antibiotics and chemical products.
IFA values the FAO consultation on this indicator. The

definition of sustainable land management or sustainable food
production systems should embrace the wide range of
agricultural practices and give particular focus on sustainable
intensification for both small scale and large scale
agricultures.
We agree with FAO and IFAD that "Percentage of agricultural
area under sustainable agricultural practices" is more
appropriate than the proposed 2.4.1 and 2.4.2. There could
be food security consequences of focusing on emissions as
this would not take into account the increase in carbon
sequestration that productive agriculture provides by
producing more underground biomass and preventing
conversion of fragile ecosystems to farming.
Proposed indicator: Percentage of agricultural area under

sustainable agricultural practices.
This sounds like a worth while indicator, but what defines a

sustainable agricultural practice? Who determines what is
consider sustainable and how will it be measured? There are
numerous ways to characterize sustainable agriculture, but it
would be important with this indicator to recognize that should
include all the dimensions of sustainability (social, economic,
and environmental) and not just focus one part of
sustainability. Appropriate nutrient management is a key
component of sustainable food production. The 4R Nutrient
Stewardship approach (i.e. apply the right source of plant
nutrient, at the right rate, at the right time, and in the right
place) advocated by the global fertilizer industry is one of the
essential tools in the sustainability of agricultural and food
production systems.
2.4.1 Number of countries with operational evaluation and
registration systems for pesticides.
2.4.2 Number of countries where national policy supports
integrated pest management.
2.4.3 Number of countries with mechanisms for integrated
vector management (IVM) national strategies, and
appropriated mointoring and evaluation
2.4.4 Proportion of obsolete pesticides disposed of in an
environmentally sound manner.
2.4.5 Number of countries effectively implementing and
reporting on the requirements of the Basel & Rotterdam
Conventions.
2.4.6 Proportion of biopesticides to chemical pesticides

registered for use in agriculture[
2.4.7 Accident rate involving poisoning by chemicals /

pesticides.
2.4.8 Number of farmers trained in integrated farm

management system
Same comment as with 2.3
Need to be simplified
a) Number of producers that have received extension services

for composting or other biological methods to improve nutrient
values in soil.
b) Increase in the market share of certified organically
produced agricultural products.
c) Percentage of farmland under crop rotation, mulching,
agro-forestry, freerange livestock systems and other agro-
ecological standards.
d) Share of protein crops for food and feed grown in own
country compared to import.
=> c) Requires improved data collection.

d) The idea is to encourage the usage of other, domestic,
protein-rich crops
instead of soy bean.
The proposed indicator wrongly capsizes the two dimensions
of the nuanced target where both sustainability & resilience
characterize food production & agriculture practices,
contributing to triple wins of increased production, improved
land & system productivity, ecosystem renewal & adaptation
to climate & disaster risks. The work done in several regions
in Asia on living with floods, recognising the value of good
floods, promoting drought & saline tolerant varieties, & taking
advantage of heavier rainfall to plant a second crop bear
testimony to the need to systematize knowledge sharing. We
need two indicators here, a) resilient & adaptive agriculture, &
b) sustainable land management. The CGIAR & regional
institutions ( e.g. MRC, ICIMOD, IIRR,ADPC, RIMES, iGAD )
have done work on both . MPN is happy to work with these
institutions & contribute to support the research work needed,
and more importantly work with countries in implementation of
this target.
We recommend consideration of food losses and food waste
indicators.
1. Percentage of agricultural area owned by socially

disadvantaged groups on the axis of age, sex disability, race,
caste, ethnicity, origin, religion and economic and other status
and rural-urban divide under sustainable agricultural
practices.
This is excellent.
Highly complex target with numerous parameters. Need to
define sustainability in that it doesn’t exceed social, economic
and ecological limits
Agricultural practices resilient to what? Natural shocks and
stresses or to social and economic shocks as well?
Change current proposal by FAO to: Proportion of farmers,
disaggregated by smallholding and large holding, sex and
age, who are implementing resilient agricultural practices.
This could be measured alongside the % of agricultural area

under sustainable agricultural practices to give a more
accurate picture of agricultural and food system resilience.
However sustainable agricultural practices would need to be
clearly defined (e.g. including access to extension services
and appropriate irrigation and agricultural inputs) and include
resilience variables.
We do not support the current proposition to measure

resilience of food systems in terms of percentage of
agricultural area under sustainable agricultural practices as it
does not reflect the resilience of producers and small holder
farming and because this data cannot be disaggregated.
On 2.4.1.: Assume ‘emissions of greenhouse gases in
agriculture’ would primarily make use of modelled results as
field measurements would be difficult. How reliable are these
likely to be? The alternative indicator proposed by IFAD/FAO
appears to be relevant at the national level, but it is not clear
how this could be meaningfully standardised for international
comparison purposes, as the definition of ‘sustainability’ would
be open to much interpretation. Nutrient use efficiency is also
an important indicator of productivity. On 2.4.2: WB raises an
important point about the transferability of production. It will be
important, therefore that indicator 2.4.2 is used only as a sub-
indicator to 2.4.1. so that any production-output changes in-
country are taken into account/understood. General: There is
a need to define ‘sustainable agricultural practice’. Ostensibly,
the proportion of land area and agriculturally commodity
production under sustainable certification (i.e. organic,
Fairtrade, Rainforest alliance) could be modelled. Indicators
need to be split by each crop.
The suggested indicator does not provide information

information on what the characteristics of sustainable
agriculture and the practices that need to be employed to
qualify sustainable practices. IUCN provides a helpful
suggestion that could serve as an alternative measure of
sustainability in agriculture.
The focus of the indicators is on reducing emissions. What is
lacking is an indicator on resilience. The challenge will be to
increase productivity and availability, without increasing the
emissions - this is mainly for developed countries..
Commentary in short: The indicators re 2.4 (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) are in its present form not
sufficient and should be completed by an indicator on
sustainable agricultural practices, which increase agro
biodiversity, improve soil quality and thereby contribute to
resilience.
Percentage of forests used for cropland.
Percentage of freshwater used for agriculture.
Tons manure per hectare.
Tons methane per hectare.
World Animal Protection fully endorses the proposed
indicators suggested by UNISDR.
In our opinion the sustainability of food production systems is

determined by the extent to which the food production
systems are resilient to the effects of climate change and
natural disasters. Therefore the degree to which countries will
be able to prevent agricultural loss caused by disaster will
determine its resilience level and eventually the sustainability
of food production.
As close to 75 % of the world’s poorest people largely depend

on animals for their income and food security and as the
poorest are also the most vulnerable to disasters, a focus on
animals in measuring disaster resilience is essential in
determining whether disaster risk reduction measures are
effective and reaching those most in need.
We note that it may be difficult to reach consensus on which

agricultural practices are considered to be sustainable, and
suggest that this be defined. Some of the other indicators (i.e.
2.4.1 and previous proposals) may be easier to count, as
these are more specific and clearly defined. We therefore also
recommend 2.4.1 as one important indicator of sustainability
in agriculture. It would also be useful to count absolute GHG
emissions (not only just emissions per hectare of land or unit
of output) because the overall emissions number is most
directly relevant to climate change.
How about providing small and cottage like equipments for

fruits, vegetables and other food stuffs preservation,
processing and packaging to reduce waste during harvest
seasons.
WWF supports the suggested indicator. In addition, this target
indicator should be informed by the amended indicator
proposal for Target 6.4 “Percentage of change in water use
efficiency over time”. This would address interlinkages and
adequate understanding of the water aspect of resource-use
efficiency in agriculture. It should also inform target 14.2 and
be informed by target 14.2 indicators.
Target 2.5: By 2020, 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
These are good indicators for the maintenance of local breeds,
etc., but indicators should measure small-scale farmers’ access to
and use of local breeds. Protection of breeds often results in their
‘maintenance’ in research stations rather than on farms, while
commercial companies are more successful at reaching farmers
through unregulated markets. An indicator of actual use – the
extent of cultivation of local, indigenous crops or breeds and
ability of small-scale food producers to utilize genetic resources
without negative social, environmental or economic impacts –
should be measured, rather than simply preservation of genetic
resources. Links w/ 1.4, 5.1, 5.5, 5a, 5c, 15.6
Supported
The proposed indicator does not address the second part of the
target, related to access and benefit-sharing as well as traditional
knowledge. These issues should be addressed based on
internationally agreed rights and principles as reflected in the UN
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), CBD
and the related Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing.
Hence, cross-reference should be made to the proposed indicator
under target 15.6. on the adoption of legislative, administrative
and policy frameworks for the implementation of the Nagoya
Protocol
NPS: "Mean Species Abundance (MSA) in food production
systems"
MSA provides an aggregate measure of both the number of

species, and for each species group, the number of species
required for key ecological functions. Mean Species Abundance
tracks ecosystem resilience and is a suitable indicator for SDG
target 2.5 to 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.
Source: Based on the GLOBIO model, MSA uses relations
between pressures and impacts on species abundance. MSA has
been used in various assessment reports amongst which UNEP's
GEO, Convention on Biological Diversity’s Global Biodiversity
Outlook 2 and the OECD Environmental Outlook. Tier I:
Methodology exists, data widely available. However, some data
gaps do exist and need to be mapped.
Suggested Indicator 2.5.1: Better describe suggested indicator to
be written as
“Number/percentage of local crops and breeds, and their wild
relatives, classified as being at-risk, not-at-risk, and unknown-
levels of risk of extinction per the Ex Situ Crop Collections
Enrichment index”
Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential goal, of
design and planning for cultural growth for whole societies.
Develop / promote regional seed banks / genetic stocks by
Government / private non profits and allow them to share the
benefits among the farming communities.
More NGOs should be promoted to work on seed banks
Networking of NGOs working in this aspect locally, regionally,
nationally and globally.
It is difficult to realize a modern agricultural technical in Vietnam

To be simplified and very short, may be in one line.

Any indicator proposed under this target should link meaningfully
with the Aichi targets under the CBD and not duplicate effort.
Indicator 2.5.2 is more relevant to the target than the suggested

indicator. We suggest to adopt indicator 2.5.2 or an amalgamation
of the two as proposed by UNEP: "Number/percentage of local
crops and breeds, and their wild relatives, classified as being at-
risk, not-at-risk, and unknown-levels of risk of extinction"
Prevalence of livestock from traditional breeds.

Target 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
This target explicitly focuses on extension and thus the
indicator is appropriate. However, it is not clear to what extent
these investments are inclusive, or reach those farmers in
greatest need. It is possible to measure an increase in the
agricultural sector that can be pinned to this investment. Yet,
such an increase may, in fact, reflect only an improvement in
sub-sectors that are already profitable or those that may not
benefit small farmers, such as enhanced commercial exports.
Thus, it is not clear how this indicator will improve food
security for the poor and vulnerable. Target and indicator
should link to 2.3 and 2.4 measurement of small-scale food
producer access to these resources and their use or adoption
to support resilience, sustainability, and adaptive capacity.
CARE also suggests measurement of the extent of investment
targeted to populations, particularly small-scale food
producers, in the lowest two economic quintiles. 1a, 5.5, 10,
13.a
Supported
Suggested Indicator 2.a: Suggested indicator could be further
elaborated but unsure of suggested text to add to current
iteration
“The Agriculture Orientation Index (AOI) for Government
Expenditures”
It is good idea
IFA suggests “number of rural advisors per one thousand
farmers”. Rural advisors should not be limited to
governmental extension; advisors from the private sector and
NGOs should also be taken into account. This would be an
effective measure of efforts to improve knowledge transfer to
smallholder farmers and enhance productivity of their farms.
This data should be relatively easy to collect on a country
basis
No comments
a) Increase in funding of agricultural extension services.

b) Increase in funding invested in rural infrastructure.
c) Increase in investment in agricultural and forestry producer
organizations.
d) Increase in processing of agricultural products in LDC’s.
e) Share of public budget spent on agriculture.
=>
a) Does not say anything about quality.
b) According to studies, the most efficient investments are
tertiary roads, small bridges and small dams.
d) An increase in the processing of agricultural products in
LDC’s may be one way to address youth unemployment.
Why is there not a more specific indicator/target combination
for investment, such as doubling or tripling? What is the
benchmark of the indicator? A key difficulty with the suggested
indicator is that ‘Agriculture’ contains forestry, fishing and
hunting in addition to true agriculture. Thus, high levels of
Gov. support for hunting activities may lead to a ‘good’ AOI
result, when investment in true agriculture is actually low. Can
the indicator therefore be disaggregated so that the
contribution of the different groups present can be
determined? Information could be added under this
indicator/target to include data on government subsidies to
the agricultural industry, and trade barriers. Private-sector
investment is currently not captured by the suggested
indicators, but could be an important source of finance.
commision is recommended. Besides a implementation of
solidaroty policies is necessary.
Target 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
Target and indicators should be linked to Target 2.3 and 2.4
measures of access to markets, especially among small-scale
food producers, and profitability of small-scale food
production. Links w/ 1b, 10
Trade-related indicators should not only focus on trade
restrictions and distortions. Indicators should also measure
changes in trade which have improved market access for
poorer countries and delivered in terms of sustainable, less
volatile/vulnerable livelihoods, strengthening the stability of
commodity markets, reducing their volatility. As paragraph 30
of the revised outcome document reads "States are strongly
urged to refrain from promulgating and applying any unilateral
economic, financial or trade measures not in accordance with
international law and the Charter of the United Nations that
impede the full achievement of economic and social
development, particularly in developing countries"
Suggested Indicator 2.b: Suggested indicators/could be
improved as not clear but not sure how. Other orgs to define.
Will this be one or two indicators, this is not clear?
“Percent change in Import and Export tariffs on agricultural
products”
“Agricultural Export Subsidies”
I agree with it
Goal 2 is to achieve improved nutrition and promote
sustainable agriculture therefore the indicator should measure
trade negotiations that have impact assessment on health and
sustainability in order to ensure relevant actions (preventing
trade restrictions, eliminating agricultural export subsidies,
etc.) are not to promote exports of unhealthy products but to
help better nutritional status of people and sustainable
agriculture.
This is framed negatively, to prevent dysfunctional situations.
Suggest stating it more positively, e.g., trade-friendly or free
trade.
First line is sufficient.
We recommend: 2.b.1. Trade negotiations that routinely
assess sustainability impacts, including on food security,
health, and equity
It is neccessary to establish a framework to supervise the
fullfilment of this point. An international experts commision is
recommended. Besides a implementation of solidaroty
policies is necessary.
Percentage of agricultural research and extension bodies
incorporating sustainability principles and best practices into
research and services.
Target 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
This indicator should be measured at different levels in
different markets throughout a country, and at different times
of year to take into account seasonal variation. Indicator
should also be used before and after measures are put in
place to capture impact of those new measures on market
functionality. In addition, Cost of Diet should be used as a way
of identifying not only volatility in grain markets, but in markets
for other foods as well, such as fruits, vegetables, animal
foods, pulses and fats.
Supported
I agree with it
May be made simple and clear.
a) Increase in funding for value chain management for basic

food commodities (storage, cool/cold chain).
b) Increase in investment on timely access to market

information for producers.
On 2.c.1. Suggestion related to this indicator is also to make
use of mobile SMS/social media data to identify incidences of
rapid changes in food prices.
commision is recommended. Besides a implementation of
solidaroty policies is necessary.
Suggested Indicator: Food Waste Loss (FWL )
Target 3.1: By 2030, reduce the global maternal mortality ratio
Organization: to less than 70 per 100,000 live births
1,000 Days
ADD International
Amref Health Africa
Asia Dalit Rights Forum 1. Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births especially among
disadvantaged groups.

prise en charge des personnes
Agées (ACAMAGE)
ASTRA Youth
Bachpan Bachao Andolan
BDN Global Suisse 100% of births assisted by a skilled birth attendant
disaggregate indicator by cause of maternal death, age of mother,

ethnic group and location
Beyond 2015 UK
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation We support Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births and Proportion
of births attended by skilled health personnel. These are both MDG
indicators, and align with the indicator framework used by UNFPA in
their State of the World Population reports to monitor progress
against select ICPD goals. They are also core indicators for the
Global Strategy for Women and Children’s Health (the indicators for
the new Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescent’s
Health have not yet been developed). Skilled health personnel at
birth is an important indicator to track for target 3.1 as a critical
factor driving down maternal mortality, and one that may more
quickly reflect progress than maternal mortality rates. Including the
indicator in the global framework could help to drive global and,
fundamentally, national attention and resources to this important
issue. It also reflects progress on quality health care services.
Tracking these two measures for maternal health is important both
because of injustice and equity gaps, but also because investing in
mothers has lifecycle and multigenerational development and
poverty impacts.
BLUE 21 e.V:
CBM UK
CEAAL
CEAG - Environmental Education

Center of Guarulhos
Center for Family and Human All proposals to measure progress on this indicator have so far
Rights (C-Fam) been underwhelming. Maternal Health was a major focus of the
MDGs and one of the goals on which least progress was made.
Much work was done on MH, but the indicators proposed so far are
even less ambitious than those used during the MDG period. The
indicators used during the MDGs should be the baseline on which
to build gains in maternal health.
Agencies that have made proposals have failed to suggest the

critical indicators necessary to make this target a reality, namely:
1. Access to antenatal care (MDG Indicator)

2. Access to skilled birth attendants (MDG Indicator)
3. Access to emergency obstetric care (NEW)
4. Access to adequate nutrition throughout the first 1000 days of
life, as measured from conception (NEW)
5. Access to water and sanitation (NEW)
There is no excuse for backing down from the critical investments

needed to make pregnancy and childbirth safe for mothers and their
children by 2030. This is an area where we cannot afford to be
stingy or economical.
Center for Reproductive Rights Proposed indicator 3.1.1: Percentage health care providers trained
in respectful sexual and reproductive health care.
Rationale: The right to be free from preventable maternal mortality
and morbidity is central to women’s right to life, right to health, and
the right to be free from discrimination. In order to fulfill these rights,
the state is responsible for ensuring increased access to sexual and
reproductive health information and services.
Date source: country studies

Changemaker
CHOICE for youth and sexuality 3.1.1 Maternal mortality per 100,000 live births disaggregated by
causes of death including unsafe abortion, pre-eclampsia and
eclampsia, hemorrhage, sepsis, hypertensive disorders, HIV
related, hemorrhagic, and prolonged or obstructed labor and further
disaggregated by age, income, disability, geographic location, race
and ethnicity
3.1.2 Proportion of health facilities that provide care for
complications related to unsafe abortion or, where it is not against
the law, that provide safe abortion.
3.1.3 Adolescent birth rate (10-14, 15-19)
Christian Aid
Christoffel-Blindenmission
Deutschland e.V.
CiaoLapo Onlus Indicators to track targets 3.1 and 3.2 require the inclusion of
stillbirth rate (SBR) – stillbirths per 1000 births - in addition to
maternal mortality ratio, under-5 mortality rate and neonatal
mortality rate. SBR is a marker of equity and quality care in
pregnancy and childbirth. It is a core indicator in the Every Newborn
action plan, which the World Health Assembly endorsed in 2014
after wide consultation. Efforts to prevent stillbirths will also prevent
maternal and newborn deaths and improve health outcomes for a
child through their lifecourse. The SDGs should focus on the
biggest, most inequitable conditions. There are 2.6 million stillbirths
each year, deaths in the last 12 weeks of pregnancy, with half
occurring at the time of birth, and there has been little progress to
reduce stillbirths in most countries (Lancet Stillbirth Series, 2011). It
will be critical to measure in every country in order to accurately
track progress for women’s and children’s health.
Clean Air Asia
Commonwealth Medical Trust

(Commat)
Community Based Water

Monitoring Network of Monarch
Butterfly Biosphere Reserve
Countdown 2015 Europe/IPPF We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1. However
European we would like to suggest the following:
Network/EuroNGOs/ASTRA • Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births ADD: by cause of
Network death. The addition of ‘cause of death’ will reflect how data is
reported at global level by WHO, according to the five leading
maternal mortality causes – postpartum hemorrhage (PPH),
infections, high blood pressure (pre-eclampsia and eclampsia),
complications during delivery, and unsafe abortion.
Sources of data: This data is already being collected bi-annually at
global level for all Member States from vital statistics, household
surveys, health facility data, censuses and modeling, with global
monitoring by the Maternal Mortality Expert and Inter-Agency group
led by WHO with UNFPA, UNICEF, the World Bank and UNDESA.
Danish Institute for Human RIghts While the emphasis on skilled health personnel have strong human
rights relevance, there may be a need to supplement this indicator
to also address the complementarity with traditional birth
attendants, as e.g. enshrined in UNDRIP, art. 24.1..
Department of Family Medicine;

Department of Obstetrics and
Gynecology, University of
Michigan, USA
DITTA
DSW (Deutsche Stiftung We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1. However
Weltbevoelkerung we would like to suggest the following:
• Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births ADD: by cause of
death. The addition of ‘cause of death’ will reflect how data is
maternal mortality causes – severe bleeding, infections, high blood
pressure (pre-eclampsia and eclampsia), complications during
delivery, and unsafe abortion.
Dutch Coalition on Disability and

Development www.dcdd.nl
Dutch Youth Ambassador SRHR 3.1.1 Maternal mortality per 100,000 live births disaggregated by
and ethnicity

End Water Poverty
ericsson
European Association for the

Education of Adults (EAEA)
Family Care International We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1 however
we would like to suggest the following recommendation:
Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births ADD: by cause of death.
The addition of ‘cause of death’ will reflect how data is reported at
global level by WHO, according to the five leading maternal
mortality causes– severe bleeding, infections, high blood pressure
(pre-eclampsia and eclampsia), complications during delivery, and
unsafe abortion. Sources of data: This data is already being
collected bi-annually at global level for all Member States from vital
statistics, household surveys, health facility data, censuses and
modeling, with global monitoring by the Maternal Mortality Expert
and Inter-Agency group led by WHO with UNFPA, UNICEF, the
World Bank and UNDESA.
Federal Environment Agency of

Germany

Framework Convention Alliance
Freshwater Action Network Mexico

Frontline Health Workers Coalition
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance
German NGOs and DPOs

Global Alliance for Clean
Cookstoves
Global Health Advocates France Indicator 1 Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.
Rationale: This indicator measures each element featured in the

target and is in line with the measurement unit of the target.
Indicator 2 Percentage of women having 4 or more antenatal

care attendance during their pregnancy and benefiting from skilled
birth attendance.
Rationale: Lack of skilled birth attendance and antenatal care are

one of the leading causes of maternal mortality.
Global Health Council Modify 3.1.1 to include disaggregated by causes of death (inc.
unsafe abortion, pre-eclampsia and eclampsia, hemorrhage,
sepsis, hypertensive disorders, HIV related, hemorrhagic, and
prolonged or obstructed labor) and further disaggregated by age,
income, disability, geographic location, race and ethnicity.
Includes unsafe abortions which more closely reflect how common
unsafe abortion is in a country, and how significant it is as a public
health problem. Measures one of the most off track MDGs and
additions will provide important information about maternal death.
Modify 3.1.2 to include proportion of health facilities that provide
care for complications related to unsafe abortion or, where it is not
against the law, that provide safe abortion.
Should also measure provision of modern method of contraceptive
to women receiving abortion care and availability of trained staff
and supplies to perform safe abortion and post-abortion care.
Measures one of the leading causes of maternal death.
Global Health Technologies Recommended indicator: [Complementary national level indicator]

Coalition Number of new health technologies registered by the National
Regulatory Authority and/or recommended by national guidelines
(Disaggregated by SDG target [disease or health priority])
Rationale: The first global registration of a new health technology
by a stringent regulatory authority is an important measure of global
health R&D progress. But access to—and likely impact of—new
health technologies is also dependent on them being registered and
recommended for use in the countries in which they are most
needed. A reporting framework would need to be developed to
allow disaggregation according to the SDG targets, but data should
be readily reportable to national statistical offices (NSOs) from
National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) and health agencies.
Global Initiative to End All Corporal

Punishment of Children
Global Network for Neglected
Tropical Diseases
Goshen Free Medical Assistance Women who are of child bearing age need to be targeted and
Association trained in schools especially TERTIARY institutions.
The training should be made interactive to give them an oppprtunity
to ask questions for better understanding.
Another way of locating the women of child bearing age is through
the religious and traditional leaders especially in the rural
communities.The third area of catchment is the open market place
through the trade union leaders.
Guttmacher Institute
Handicap International
HDS systems design science Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential goal, of
Health Poverty Action For both proposed indicators - disaggregation by ethnicity is
possible within household survey DHS or MICS data sources.
Health Priorities in Post-2015 Recommended indicators:
Taskforce
• [Global indicator, nationally collected] Number of new health
technologies registered by the national regulatory authority and/or
recommended by national guidelines (disaggregated by SDG target
[disease or health priority]).
• [Global indicator, nationally collected] National Regulatory
Authorities participating in harmonized registration initiatives based
on internationally recognized policies and standards; sharing
regulatory policies, legislation, guidelines, and information on
registered products.
Comment: Both are cross-cutting and address Targets 3.1, 3.2, 3.3,
3.4, and 3.7. Registration of global health technologies for specific
health needs is an important measure of global health R&D
progress and access to health technologies is dependent on them
being registered and recommended for use. A reporting framework
would need to be developed to allow disaggregation according to
the SDG targets, but data should be readily reportable to national
statistical offices (NSOs) from National Regulatory Authorities
(NRAs) and health agencies.
HealthBridge Foundation of
Canada
HealthBridge Vietnam
High-Level Task Force for the ICPD - The Suggested Indicators are fully supported. Disaggregation
by several critical factors is strongly recommended, including:
cause of death (as reported by WHO according on the leading
causes – severe bleeding, infections, blood pressure, delivery
complications, unsafe abortion); age (by 5-year sub-groups,
including 10-14 and 15-19); and income, location, race, ethnicity,
etc., to capture how progress reaches poorest, rural areas,
minorities, other factors of exclusion.
- Skilled birth attendance is a key health sector intervention for
reducing maternal deaths. This indicator should be disaggregated
by age of mother, location, education level, income, etc., to track
how services reach the most vulnerable and marginalized - as
captured through the household surveys used to monitor this
indicator.
IDDC
Indigenous and Frontier It needs networking among global Governments to workout plans to
Technology Research Centre - IFTR achieve this.
Institute for Governance and

Sustainable Development
Institute for Reproductive and I am not sure by 2030, the global maternal mortality ratio less than
Family Health 70 per 100,000 live births because in under-developed and
developing contries, MMR is still high
Intenational Stillbirth Alliance Please see response to 3.2 below. The investment required to
reduce maternal mortality is also likely to reduce neonatal deaths
and stillbirths. We believe it makes no sense to include two out of
three of these indicators. By including the 2.7 million stillbirths each
year, most of which occur in low and middle-income countries,
interventions to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality are much
more likely to be cost-effective.
Internaitonal Council of AIDS 3.1.1 Maternal mortality per 100,000 live births disaggregated by
Service Organizations causes of death including unsafe abortion, pre-eclampsia and
and ethnicity.
The Civil Society Working Group on HIV would be very pleased to
see HIV included.
International Agency for the

Prevention of Blindness
International AIDS Vaccine Recommended indicator: [Complementary national level indicator]

Initiative Number of new health technologies registered by the National

International Alliance for
Responsible Drinking
International Association of
Applied Psychology
International Association of Public

Transport (UITP)
International Centre for Diarrhoeal

Disease REsearch, Bangladesh
International Council for Adult

Education
International Disability Alliance
International Federation of
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and
Associations (IFPMA)
International Movement ATD Fourth Maternal mortality is correlated with income. In order to measure
World progress on women who are the furthest behind, this indicator must
be disaggregated by income.
International Planned Parenthood We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1. However
Federation we would like to suggest the following:
IntraHealth
Investigaciòn e Intervencion
Educativa AC
IOGT International
IOGT-NTO
Ipas Ipas supports the two Tier 1 indicators already proposed; we also
support the recommendation by UN Women (wherever possible)
that maternal deaths be disaggregated by cause.
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS
Inc. ("ISACI")
Japan Organization for We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1.
International Cooperation in Family However we would like to suggest the following:
Planning (JOICFP)
· Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births ADD: by cause of

Johns Hopkins University I would advocate for "By 2030, eliminate maternal mortality globally"
rather than have a numeric target like 70 per 100,000. The latter
suggests that a country with an MMRatio near 70 could just sit out
continued efforts to reduce maternal mortality risk.
Delhi
Kepa Finland a) Maternal mortality rate by cause of death.
b) Maternal morbidity rate due to unsafe abortion.
c) Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel.
d) Maternal mortality ratio.
e) Antenatal care coverage.
f) Unsafe abortions per 1000 women of reproductive age.
=>
b) Captures those births where women have experienced a range
of negative health conditions that have been caused or
exacerbated by pregnancy or birth; this offers a more complex
picture of health care outcomes than simply measuring mortality.
c) MDG indicator. Measuring this MDG indicator is important to
keep track on the unfinished MDG business.
d) MDG indicator. Disaggregation by age, geographic location and
income level is essential to measure equitable progress within
societies.
f) Country studies: sub-regional estimates by WHO/Guttmacher.
LSE IDEAS International Drug

Policy Project
Lumos
Maestral International
Malaria Consortium
Marie Stopes International To add:
by cause of death. Reflecting how data is reported at global level by
WHO according to the five major causes of maternal mortality
(severe bleeding, infections, high blood pressure (pre-eclampsia
and eclampsia), complications during delivery and unsafe abortion.
To add: Unsafe abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age
In addition to PMNCH's recommendations -

Médecins Sans Frontières - Indicator 3.1.1

Doctors without Borders Global MM is not enough, because it will hide inequity within the
global figure. It needs to be disagregated by Country and Region.
Agree with UNWOMEN about disaggregation by cause of mortality.
Indicator 3.1.2
We support WHO's proposal on percntage of birhs attended by
skilled birth attendants. However we don't see any suggestion on
what the proportion target is that we should reach by 2030. Good
indicator as combines information about access to health care,
availability of services and availability of trained staff
MM definitely to measure by household surveys and not modelling.
Medical Mission Sisters As an organization committed ot health and healing the following
are our comments.
3.1.1 Maternal mortality per 100,000 live births disaggregated by

causes of death (including unsafe abortion, pre-eclampsia and
related, hemorrhagic, and prolonged or obstructed labor) and
further disaggregated by age, income, disability, geographic
location, race and ethnicity
Data Source: Country studies, sub-regional estimates by

WHO/Guttmacher at least every 5 years
Provides measure of how many women die as result of pregnancy

and child birth. This includes unsafe abortions which more closely
reflecting how common unsafe abortion is in a country, and
therefore how significant it is as a public health problem; could be
calculated without information on how many abortions occur under
safe conditions. Possible weakness: This indicator might shift the
focus from increasing safely to restricting access, which could
increase the proportion of unsafe abortions and the rate of unsafe
abortion while making it even harder to measure unsafe abortions.
National Union of Tenants of
Nigeria
NCD Alliance
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 3.1 By 2030, reduce the global maternal mortality ratio to less than
Organization (NNDSWO) 70 per 100,000 live births.
1. Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births especially among
NOM Slovakia
on behalf of individuals from
MamaYe Evidence for Action
programme, Options Consultancy
on behalf of the International

Coalition for Advocacy on Nutrition
OneFamilyPeople
Oxfam
PAI PAI supports the proposed indicator 3.1.1, however would like the
following added “, disaggregated by cause of death” This indicator
measures one of the most off track MDGs and the additions will
provide important additional information about maternal death.
Information the maternal mortality ratio is already being collected at
the global level.
PAI supports proposed indicator 3.1.2
PAI recommends an additional Indicator: “Proportion of health

facilities that provide care for complications related to unsafe
abortion or, where it is not against the law, that provide safe
abortion services”. This measures one of the leading causes of
maternal death. Providing abortion and post-abortion care is
essential to reducing maternal deaths. Many countries have
liberalized abortion laws, however it is not always available,
accessible, safe or affordable.
Partnership for Maternal, Newborn
and Child Health (The Partnership)
Partnership on Sustainable Low

Carbon Transport
PATH Recommended indicator: [National indicator, nationally collected]
Number of new health technologies registered by the national
regulatory authority and/or recommended by national guidelines
(disaggregated by SDG target [disease or health priority]).
The first global registration of a new health technology by a
stringent regulatory authority is an important measure of global
health R&D progress—and access to health technologies is
dependent on them being registered and recommended for use.
Recommended indicator: [National indicator, nationally collected]
National Regulatory Authorities participating in harmonized
registration initiatives based on internationally recognized policies
and standards; sharing regulatory policies, legislation, guidelines,
and information on registered products.
Effective national regulatory authorities speed up introduction and
uptake of new health technologies.
Pathfinder International We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1 however
● Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births ADD: by cause of
death.
Plan International
Planned Parenthood Federation of We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1 however
America we would like to suggest the following recommendation: Maternal
deaths per 100,000 live births ADD: by cause of death.

Policy Cures Recommended indicator:
[Complementary national level indicator]:
- Number of new health technologies registered by the National

Practical Action
DERECHOS HUMANOS DE LA
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL
AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO
Pure Earth / Blacksmith Institute
Realizing Sexual and Reproductive An indicator for this target would be more effective if we measure
Justice Alliance (RESURJ) the causes of maternal mortality. We suggest the following:
Maternal mortality per 100,000 live births disaggregated by causes
of death (including unsafe abortion, pre-eclampsia and eclampsia,
hemorrhage, sepsis, hypertensive disorders, HIV related,
hemorrhagic, and prolonged or obstructed labor) and further
and ethnicity
Data Source: Country studies, sub-regional estimates by

WHO/Guttmacher at least every 5 years
RESULTS UK In addition to the proposed indicators on maternal deaths and

skilled birth attendance, we propose an indicator on anaemia in
women of reproductive age (also recommended by UNICEF under
target 2.2). In 2011, 29% (496 million) of non-pregnant women and
38% (32.4 million) of pregnant women aged 15-49 years were
anaemic, and anaemia in pregnant women puts them at a higher
risk of maternal mortality. Roughly 20% of maternal mortality can be
attributed to anaemia.
Sands New Zealand Indicators to track targets 3.1 and 3.2 require the inclusion of
Save the Children AMEND INDICATOR 3.1.1 TO:

Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births disaggregated by all social
and economic groups
RATIONALE: Indicator must be disaggregated to allow

measurement of progress among all social and economic groups.
AMEND INDICATOR 3.1.2 TO:

Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel
disaggregated by all social and economic groups

SHORE and Whariki Research

Centre, Massey University, NZ. A
WHO Collaborating Centre
Sierra Club We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1 however
● Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births ADD: by cause of death.

unsafe abortion.

Sightsavers
Signatory organizations: United 3.1.1 Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.
International, Girl Effect, CARE, Additional disaggregations: by causes of death (including unsafe
International Women's Health abortion, pre-eclampsia and eclampsia and other hypertensive
Coalition, Girls Not Brides, World disorders, hemorrhage, sepsis, HIV related, hemorrhagic, and
Association of Girl Guides and Girl prolonged or obstructed labor)
Forum, International Center for DATA SOURCE: CRVS, household surveys, censuses, health
Research on Women, Advocates facility data, RAMOS, confidential enquiries, modeling
Mercy Corps, Let Girls Lead, NOTES: Maternal mortality is the second leading cause of death of
International Rescue Committee girls aged 15-19 and 70,000 adolescents in developing countries
die annually of causes related to pregnancy; the risk of maternal
death for mothers under age 15 in low-and middle-income countries
is double that of older females. The addition of ‘cause of death’ will
reflect how data is reported at global level by WHO, according to
the five leading maternal mortality causes and will assist in the
development of programmes and interventions that will address the
leading causes of death, ensuring more effective implementation of
the target.
Society for the Psychological Data on maternal mortality ratio disaggregated by age, race,
Study of Social Issues; Psychology ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban
Coalition at the United Nations residence, national origin, and migratory status..
Stakeholder Group on Ageing
(posted by HelpAge International)
TAG
TB Alliance Recommended indicator: [Complementary national level indicator]
Number of new health technologies registered by the National

Tebtebba
The Hague University of Applied Reducing mortality is certainly certainly an admirable aim. Yet, such
Science an aim does not consider the long-term effects of population
growth. It is not empirically proven that all countries follow the low
mortality - low fertility progression, as demographic transition theory
assumes. Indeed, in developing world improvements in medicine
and public health have led to a sharp drop in mortality rates and
have accelerated population growth rates to unprecedented levels.
But fertility rates remain high; much human potential remains
unrealized, and economic development is stalled. Agricultural
intensification can go some way towards restoring a balance
between food production and population, but there are limits
beyond which intensification cannot go (as UN report Our Common
Future in 1987 has stated).
The average number of children in Niger is 7 per woman, despite
lower mortality rates (http://kff.org/global-indicator/total-fertility-
rate/). Long-term effects need to be considered

The UK Coalition against Neglected
Tropical Diseases
TRANSNUT (WHO CC), Department

of Nutrition, University of Montreal,
Canada
Transparency International In tracking this target, it would be critical to look at how corruption
impacts its achievement. The relevant target and indicator should
be drawn from target 16.5 given the strong and proven inter-
linkages between corruption, governance, health and well-being.
For example, widespread bribery is associated with higher maternal
mortality. Lower maternal mortality is associated with increased
public access to information.
-
https://www.transparency.org/files/content/feature/2014_MDGs_Stat
istical_Annex.pdf.
-
http://www.transparency.org/images/uploads/feature/MDG_infograp
hic_hi-res.jpg.#
TRK asbl indicator : cause of maternal mortality

UCI-Red
UCLG
Umamanita Indicators to track targets 3.1 and 3.2 require the inclusion of
UNESCO Chair in Youth and Adult

Education
United Nations Association of
Tanzania
University of Luxembourg/Simon
Fraser University
University of Southampton The Suggested Indicators are excellent (MMR and SBA) and
provide accountability continuity from failed MDG5. MMR should be
disaggregated by several factors including cause of death (severe
bleeding, infections, blood pressure, delivery complications, and
unsafe abortion). There is an argument for SBA to be included in
the UHC package under 3.8.1. As long as it’s either in 3.1 OR 3.8.1
it’s OK (it’s a very important indicator). If SBA is moved to 3.8.1 we
would recommend including instead under target 3.1 a morbidity
indicator for childbearing women e.g. either
1) “Obstetric Fistula Prevalence”. (See
http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/prh/rh_indicators/specific/of/numb
er-percent-of-women-living-with-of )
or
2) Total Disability Life Years Lost (DALYs) to reproductive ill health
in women of reproductive age as a percentage of all DALYs lost
(see AbouZahr, C and Vaughan JP (2015), Assessing the burden of
sexual and reproductive ill-health: questions regarding the use of
disability-adjusted life years. Bull World Health Organ vol.78 n.5
Geneva Jan. 2000)
USIL I follow this target but it does not a way to promote and support
abortion policies.
VENRO working group on health We welcome the two proposed indicators under target 3.1. However
we would like to suggest the following:
Vietnam Association of Architects
VSO VSO welcomes 2 suggested indicators for Target 3.1 from the
August 11 Indicator Proposals. Measuring maternal mortality ratio is
essential to monitoring progress on target 3.1 which aims at
lowering the maternal mortality ratio. And skilled birth attendants are
key for lowering the maternal mortality ratio. In addition, the second
indicator is a proxy indicator for the existence of a functioning
health system.
WaterAid
Women for Women's Human Rights 3.1.1 Maternal mortality per 100,000 live births disaggregated by
- New Ways causes of death including unsafe abortion, pre-eclampsia and
related, hemorrhagic, and prolonged or obstructed labor and
further disaggregated by age (with extended age range of 10 -
49+), income, disability, geographic location, race and ethnicity
Women's Global Network for Proposal: Proportion of health facilities that provide care for
Reproductive Rights (WGNRR) complications related to unsafe abortion or, where it is not against
Addresses ICPD consensus that "In all cases, women should have
access to quality services for the management of complications
arising from abortion"; Many countries have taken on reforms on
restrictive abortion laws to enable abortion on request or expand
the legal range grounds for abortion; under comprehensive abortion
care (safe abortion or post-abortion care), the indicator should also
measure provision of modern method of contraceptive to women
receiving abortion care and availability of trained staff and supplies
to perform safe abortion and post-abortion care.
Proposal: Adolescent birth rate (10-14, 15-19).
Age at first birth is strongly linked to maternal mortality (the younger

the mother the higher risk of maternal mortality); Extension of these
data sources to include births to females under age 15 is needed.
Women's Major Group 3.1.1 Maternal mortality per 100,000 live births disaggregated by
and ethnicity
Country studies, subregional estimates by WHO/Guttmacher at

least every 5 years

Country studies
Household Surveys (noted by UNICEF)' ""Data available from

country vital statistics, national surveys, national surveys, and UN
Population Division monitoring and estimates (births generally
available for ages 15-19 only).
Work for a Better Bangladesh Trust
World Animal Net

World Chlorine Council Safe drinking water is essential to maternal and child health.
Chlorinated drinking water helps mothers and children avoid the
debilitating effects of waterborne illnesses such as cholera and
typhoid fever. This target is therefore linked to targets under Goal
#6.
World Youth Alliance
WWF
YouAct We agree with the suggested indicators, but to this indicator
"Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births" add at the end: "by
cause of death, age, income, location, race, ethnicity and other
characteristic"And especially highlight the disaggregation regarding
age. Disaggregation by age subgroups should cover the cohorts of
10-14, 15-19, 20-24, and 25 years and above.Data collection for
10-14 year olds is critical: this group has five times the risk of dying
from pregnancy-and childbirth-related causes than women over
20-especially relevant in contexts with high levels of child,
early and forced marriage.
Young and adult people education

Network
Target 3.2: By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and
children under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming to
reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12 per 1,000 live
births and under-5 mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1,000
live births
Either under 2.1, 2.2 or 3.2, it is vital to add and elevate exclusive
breastfeeding [percentage of children less than six months old who
are fed breast milk alone (no other liquids or food)] as a tier 1 top
priority. We urge you to prioritize breastfeeding as it is extremely
important for newborn survival. Breastfeeding is also proven to
protect infants from a wide range of diseases. In countries where
infectious diseases are a leading cause of death, breastfeeding,
particularly exclusive breastfeeding, has a powerful impact on
neonatal and post-neonatal morbidity and mortality (target 3.2).
Breastfeeding has additional long term benefits including protection
against obesity and some non-communicable diseases (relevant to
target 3.4) among lactating mothers as well as in their
breastfeeding children, which is particularly relevant for middle and
high-income countries.
We recommend that this indicator be disaggregated by disability,

given the barriers that persons with disabilities face in accessing
healthcare (target 3.8 below).
Our proposed indicator also addresses target 10.2.

1. Under-five mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
especially among disadvantaged groups.
2. Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) especially
among disadvantaged groups.
3. Neo-natal mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) especially
We support the suggested indicators Under-five mortality rate
(deaths per 1,000 live births) and Neonatal mortality rate (deaths
per 1,000 live births), which are important proxy indicators of
poverty reduction and also reflect progress on maternal health.
In addition, we urge the addition of an indicator: Full immunization
coverage [all recommended vaccines]. We feel strongly that
immunization coverage should hold an individual place in the global
monitoring framework, and not be left as one of many components
in a composite service coverage indicator. Despite vaccine’s life-
saving potential, one in five children do not have access to the
vaccines they need to protect them against some of the biggest
childhood killers. No other health service has the reach of
immunization, and it is widely considered to be the best proxy
indicator for the strength of a national health system – it includes
multiple contacts with infants in a routine system that depends on
available quality supplies and skilled personnel at the point of
service. Immunization coverage is also one of the most measurable
indicators in health.
Under-five mortality rate for children with disabilities

Proportion of the pregnant women with access to institutional
service deliveries according to WHO protocol.
Proportion of the women with access to skilled female mid wives.

Progress on neo-natal and childhood mortality can only be
meaningful if those rates go down for all children, including children
with disabilities. Disaggregation of under-five mortality rate by
disability is needed in this regard.
Indicators to track targets 3.1 and 3.2 require the inclusion of
We suggest to include the next indicators: Number of effecitive

consultation process to get the citizen opinnion about health issues,
at every municipality or the lowest planning level
Any discussion of neonatal mortality also needs to include
recommendations to reduce global stillbirth rates. The causes of
stillbirth, neonatal mortality, and maternal mortality have enormous
overlap and need to be considered as a group. There are as many
stillbirths as neonatal deaths and lack of a stillbirth reduction goal is
a glaring omission. There is clear and growing data that not only
are stillbirths often highly preventable, there are disparities across
and within countries, stillbirths have profound mental health and
financial impacts on bereaved families, and the experience and
outcomes for families with stillbirth and neonatal death are quite
similar.
Indicator a: The percentage of expectant mothers who survive if
they have antenatal care (including the relevant scans and tests) –
which follows the approved international guidelines.
Explanation
For example, in relation to improving the survival of mothers and
babies - health professionals should be able to identify at risk
pregnancies and complications if expectant mothers have the
required basic ultrasound scans during their pregnancy. This would
then save lives if this is acted upon.
Indicator b: The percentage of premature babies (20 million are

born premature each year) who survive after being put in a baby
warmer/incubator.

3.3.1 Number of new HIV infections, per 1,000 susceptible
population by all age groups, sex, income and key population
3.3.2 HIV prevalence, by age groups, sex, income and key

population
3.3.3 Elimination of laws, regulations or policies that present

obstacles to effective HIV prevention, treatment care and support
for key populations and vulnerable group.
The availability of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) facilities

are critical to the survival of newborn and children under 5 years of
age. Solutions to achieve the target proposed must include
ensuring WASH facilities are present and functioning in households,
schools and health centres.
The target should include the availability of safe water and
sanitation facilities at public places (this includes such places as
social halls, public playgrounds, markets - all public spaces,
including in homes).
Consider including the Early initiation of breastfeeding indicator or a
combined indicator for the recommended early essential new born
care sequencing at birth considering the link with preventable
newborn deaths.
We support the suggested indicator “under-five mortality rate”, and
call for a disaggregation measuring the mortality rate due to
diarrhoeal diseases .
Safe Water and facilities for sanitation and hygiene are critical to
ensure the lives of newborns and children, and end preventable
deaths. It has been recognized that high percentage of mortality
rates of newborns and children under 5 is related to the lack of safe
drinkable water, hygiene conditions and safe sanitation facilities
which negatively impact on people's health and on the environment.
Solutions to achieve the target proposed must include availability of
safe water and sanitation not only in households, schools and
health centers but also in public spaces, public playgrounds,
markets/commercial centres (the information has to be
disaggregated).
We support the WHO position of including an indicator on full child
immunisation under this target. Gavi is calling for the vaccine
indicator to be:
“Reach and sustain 90% national coverage and 80% in every
district with all vaccines in national programmes.”
Immunisation is widely recognised as a critical and practical health

coverage measure.
Immunisation coverage is a universal indicator – every nation
measures it and national data can be meaningfully aggregated to
the global level.
The proposed indicator is multi-purposed and can gauge success
across a number of areas of development including the strength of
health systems, equity, human rights, and child survival.
Disaggregated by disability: e.g. under-five mortality rate for

children with disabilities
Suggested target
By 2030 reduce child mortality to 25 or fewer deaths per 1,000
births, and reduce newborns mortality and still-birth rates to 9 per
1,000 births.
Rationale: All targets should be both achievable and measurable;

meaning that specific and relevant reductions of the number of
deaths should be mentioned not only for under 5 and newborn
deaths but also for still birth cases. Based on international
commitment made with the A Promised Renewed initiative and in
the Every new-born action plan adapted to 2030.
Indicator 1 Under 5 mortality per 1,000 live birth

Indicator 2 Still birth cases per 1,000 live births
Indicator 3 Neonatal mortality per 1,000 live births
Rationale: Indicators measure each element featured in the target

and are in line with the measurement unit used in the target.
• Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel
• “Under-five mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)” and
“Neonatal mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)”
disaggregated by sex
• Exclusive breastfeeding among 0-5 month olds
Recommended indicator: [Complementary national level indicator]

be readily reportable to national statistical offices from National
Regulatory Authorities and health agencies.
Primary health care delivery should be a specification under this
target.
My suggestion for an indicator here should be mapping out the
locations properly and using QUESTIONAIRE assessment to know
1.The availability of professionals for effective delivery
2.Accessibility of the target areas for effective delivery.
The delivery process for new borns is very important.

Avoiding Contamination in the air and general environment is an
indicator.
Dehydration is dangerous at that age.

An indicator should be awareness and use of oral dehydration
therapy
with disabilities. Suggest for disaggregation of under-five mortality
rate also by disability.

For both proposed indicators - Disaggregation by ethnicity is
• [Global indicator, nationally collected] Reach and sustain 90%
national coverage and 80% in every district with all vaccines in
national programs. -- This is meant to address the issue of inequity
as some areas effecting rural populations and deprived urban areas
are more difficult to reach. The indicator is cross-cutting and
addresses Targets 3.2 and 3.8.
• See recommended indicator and comment under Target 3.1 on
registration.
This target specifically mentions persons in vulnerable situations,
which includes persons with disabilities. Research on disability and
nutrition has found that “Nutrition and disability are intimately linked:
malnutrition can directly cause or contribute to disability, and
disability can lead to malnutrition” (source: Malnutrition and
Disability: Unexplored Opportunities for Collaboration, N Groce et
al, Paediatrics and International Child Health, Apr 2014, 34(4): 308-
314). It should therefore be disaggregated by disability.
By now, the quality of maternal and newborn services cannot be
said that by 2030, neonatal mortaly at least as low as 12 per 1000
live births and under-5 mortality at least as low as 25 per 1000 live
births

Recommended indicator: under-five mortality rate for children with
disabilities
This indicator must be disaggregated by income to measure

progress on the lowest quintile and make sure that the poorest
populations are benefiting.
Too long. End the target text after "...under 5 years of age". The
numeric targets can be set by the communities of action.
No comments
a) Postnatal care for mothers and babies within two days of birth.
b) Antenatal care coverage (at least four times during pregnancy).
c) Under-5 mortality xx/1000 live births in all countries.
d) Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel.
3.2 By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and children
under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming to reduce neonatal
mortality to at least as low as 12 per 1,000 live births and under-5
mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1,000 live births.
1. Under-five mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
2. Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) especially
3. Neo-natal mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) especially
Proposed indicator - Percentage of infants born with low birth

weight (<2500g)
Low birth weight is the most commonly used indicator of foetal
growth. It contributes to childhood stunting, impaired cognitive
development, and chronic diseases in later life as well as ending
preventable child deaths, reducing poverty and inequality and
reducing mortality due to non-communicable diseases.
Proposed indicator- exclusive breastfeeding [percentage of children

less than six months old who are fed breast milk alone (no other
liquids or food).
Breastfeeding is important for new born survival. Breastfeeding is
also proven to protect infants from a wide range of diseases. In
countries where infectious diseases are a leading cause of death,
breastfeeding has a powerful impact on neonatal and post-neonatal
morbidity and mortality. Breastfeeding has additional long term
benefits including protection against obesity and some non-
communicable diseases (relevant to target 3.4) among lactating
mothers as well as in their breastfeeding children, which is
particularly relevant for middle and high-income countries
Persons with disabilities are not mentioned specifically in the

targets dealing with vulnerability of person, we have therefore
recommend in the ensuing targets as follows.
By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5

years of age, with all countries aiming to reduce neonatal mortality
and disability to at least as low as 12 per 1,000 live births and
under-5 mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1,000 live births
The Post-2015 Working Group is in full agreement with the
inclusion of newborn and under-5 mortality within target 3.2. The
Group strongly recommends the addition of an indicator measuring
the number of Stillbirths per 1,000 births, as this is marker of equity
and quality care in pregnancy and childbirth. Stillbirth rate is a core
indicator in the Every Newborn action plan, which the World Health
Assembly endorsed in 2014 after wide consultation. Efforts to
prevent stillbirths will also prevent maternal and newborn deaths
and improve health outcomes for a child through their lifecourse.
There are 2.6 million stillbirths each year, deaths in the last 12
weeks of pregnancy, with half occurring at the time of birth, and
there has been little progress to reduce stillbirths in most countries
(Lancet Stillbirth Series, 2011). It will be critical to measure in every
country in order to accurately track progress for women’s and
children’s health.
Recommended indicator: [Global indicator, nationally collected]
Reach and sustain 90% national coverage and 80% in every district
with all vaccines in national programs.
Immunization coverage gauges success across areas of
development including the strength of health systems and child
survival, and district coverage aims to ensure countries reach
underserved populations in remote and deprived urban areas for
greater equity in routine immunizations.
Recommended indicator: Number of new health technologies
registered by the national regulatory authority and/or recommended
by national guidelines (disaggregated by SDG target [disease or
health priority]).*
Recommended indicator: National Regulatory Authorities
participating in harmonized registration initiatives based on
internationally recognized policies and standards; sharing
regulatory policies, legislation, guidelines, and information on
registered products.*
*See rationale in Target 3.1.
Target 3.2, newborn care appears to be missing:

% of newborns receiving care within 48 hours.
Recommended indicator:

Proposed indicator: Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding for the
first six months. Exclusive breastfeeding has the single largest
potential impact on child mortality of any preventive intervention.
Yet, globally, only 38% of infants aged 0 to 6 months are exclusively
breastfed. Sub optimal breastfeeding practices, including non-
exclusive breastfeeding, contribute to 11.6% of mortality in children
under 5 years of age. This was equivalent to about 804 000 child
deaths in 2011. (WHO). The international community has already
committed to increase the rate of EBF in the first six months up to
at least 50% by 2025 at WHA 2012, and its inclusion within the
SDG indicators is necessary to ensure the delivery of this
commitment.

Under five mortality rate (deaths per 1000 live births) disaggregated
by social and economic groups

ADDITIONAL INDICATOR PROPOSED:

3.2.3 Stillbirth rate (deaths per 1000 births) disaggregated by social
and economic groups
RATIONALE: The stillbirth rate is a marker of equity and quality

care in pregnancy and childbirth. It is a core indicator in the Every
Newborn action plan, which the WHA endorsed in 2014. It will be
critical to measure in every country in order to accurately track
progress for women’s and children’s health.
Data on neonatal mortality and under-5 mortality disaggregated by
gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migratory status..
General: How are the number of new-born and neonatal deaths that
the indicators linked to the causes of these deaths? If the SDGs are
intending to reduce these then the causes of deaths (or at least
metrics/categories which cover the most common causes) are also
needed as indicators. It may be that these are covered elsewhere,
but explicit links are needed here e.g. impact of indoor air pollution
on children’s respiratory disease is one example… The indicators
suggested should also be disaggregated by location (rural vs
urban), family income level, and ethnic group.

Nor is it empirically possible to have enough resources to ‘feed’ all

people presently alive on this planet, if everybody was living like an
average American Indeed, in UN’s (1987) earlier formulation, ‘An
additional person in an industrial country consumes far more and
places far greater pressure on natural resources than an additional
person in the Third World’. UN reports in general The UN (2014b)
report takes a somewhat contradictory attitude to population and
environment. On the one hand: "A major driver of the overall
increase in raw material extraction and use is population numbers.
In tracking this target, it would be critical to look at how corruption
linkages between corruption, governance, health and well-being.
For example, higher levels of bribery are related to higher number
of children dying before they even reach the age of five. Better
access and use of information is correlated with the number of
children dying before five.
-
istical_Annex.pdf.
-
http://www.transparency.org/images/uploads/feature/MDG_infograp
hic_hi-res.jpg
indicator : causes of neonatal , and children under 5 mortality

The Suggested Indicators (U5MR and NMR) are excellent – but
both of them should be disaggregated by age still further – so that
we can know early neonatal mortality rate, early childhood mortality
rate, even first day mortality rate (deaths in the first year of life are
very common and this indicator is available for most countries). In
fact instead of expressing this as 2 separate indicators – U5MR
could be included as a single indicator but with mandatory
disaggregation by age especially within the neonatal period. Then
another indicator could be added – we would choose the “stillbirth
rate (SBR) – stillbirths per 1000 births”. SBR is a marker of equity
and quality care in pregnancy and childbirth. It is a core indicator in
the Every Newborn Action Plan, which the World Health Assembly
endorsed in 2014 after wide consultation.
I follow this target but it does not a way to promote and support
abortion policies.
We welcome the inclusion of these two indicators, and call for
disaggregation by sex, location (U/R) and household income.
We welcome the separation of neonatal, infant and under five

mortality rates in these indicators. Focus on neonatal and infant
mortality was neglected in the MDG measures.
Waterborne illnesses are one of the major factors in deaths of
children under 5 years of age. Chlorinated drinking water helps
children under the age of 5 to avoid the potentially deadly effects of
waterborne illnesses. This target is therefore linked to targets
under Goal #6.
Target 3.3: By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis,
malaria and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis,
water-borne diseases and other communicable diseases
1. Number of new HIV infections per 1, 000 susceptible
population (by age, sex and key population).
2. TB incidence per 1, 000 persons per year.
3. Malaria incidence per 1, 000 persons per year.
4. Hepatitis incidence per 1, 000 persons per year
5. Estimated number of new Hepatitis B infection per 100, 000
population in a given year
OP are to be protected
We welcome the indicator ‘Number of new HIV infections per 1000

susceptible population (by age, sex, and key populations’. However,
we are concerned it only focuses on prevalence and does not
address access to treatment or use of prevention services. We
believe measuring treatment compliance is also essential to realise
the current shape of the epidemic. We therefore recommend the
inclusion of an indicator measuring access to treatment: Number of
HIV-infected persons enrolled in antiretroviral treatment (ART), with
disaggregation of data by age and sex. It should also include the
number of pregnant women living with HIV enrolled in treatment, in
order to check HIV prevention in newborns is also realised.
Moreover, prevention of HIV transmission is not accounted for
either in the indicator. We propose an indicator of condom use at
high risk populations, with disaggregation of data.
Relevance: the indicator is a proxy for key diseases of vulnerable
groups, without capturing all elements of health and well-being;
Aptness: the indicator aims to target diseases of vulnerable groups;
Disaggregation: for HIV there is disaggregation including for “key

populations” identifying and focusing on groups most vulnerable to
infection is important as although infection rates are falling over all,
they are rising for some groups, there could usefully be
disaggregation for relevant groups for other diseases, for example
according to socio-economic status;
Preference: the indicator tackles diseases of vulnerable groups:
Transformative: target and indicator are not transformative,

indicator that could involve empowerment of vulnerable group in
assessing services could address this.
We support the suggested indicators Number of new HIV infections
per 1,000 susceptible population (by age, sex and key populations);
TB incidence per 1,000 persons per year; and Malaria incident
cases per 1,000 persons per year. Incidence is the best measure of
impact, and will drive focus on prevention and reduction of cases as
the only effective route to get ahead of these epidemics.
We strongly encourage the addition of an indicator to track progress
towards ending neglected tropical diseases: Number of people
requiring interventions against NTDs as proposed by the WHO.
NTDs are called out specifically in target 3.3, and therefore should
be included at the indicator level. Failure to include NTDs in the
global indicator list would be an enormous mistake given the fact
that NTDs are an early indicator of basic access to health care,
systems are in place to collect relevant NTD data, and
advancements made in the control and elimination of NTDs have
received global support with the passage of the 66th World Health
Assembly Resolution on NTDs in 2013.
This target is universal. To ensure that it is met for all we

recommend:
Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving needed health

services
Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving needed assistive
technologies
Proportion of households with persons with disabilities facing
impoverishing health expenditure
Percentage of persons with disabilities benefiting from health
coverage
population
We are concerned that at present NTDs are not being included in

the global indicator list. Indeed, disabilities caused by NTDs are
often overlooked in prevention efforts. This omission would be a
vast mistake given the advancements made in the control and
elimination of NTDs. We propose the following indicator reflecting
language endorsed by the World Health Organization and the NTD
community: A 90% reduction in the number of people requiring
interventions against NTDs by 2030.
We welcome the HIV indicator under this target. However we are
concerned that it only focuses on transmission, and does not reflect
on the impact that prevention and access to treatment can have.
Therefore, we would recommend continuing to use at least two of
the existing MDG indicators which capture access to ARV and
behavior change related to reducing risk:
Percent of people living with HIV and AIDS receiving antiretroviral
treatment, by sex, age, income quintile. Sources of data:
Information on this MDG indicator is reported annually to UNAIDS
and WHO, disaggregated by age, sex and public/private facility.
Condom use at last high risk sex. Source of data: Collected through
household surveys, such as Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys
(MICS), Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), Reproductive
and Health Surveys (RHS), Behavioural Surveillance Surveys
(BSS), and other nationally representative household surveys.
We welcome the HIV indicator under this target. However it focuses
on transmission, and does not reflect the impact of prevention and
access to treatment. Therefore, we recommend continuing to use at
least two of the existing MDG indicators:
- Percent of people living with HIV and AIDS receiving
antiretroviral treatment, by sex, age, income quintile. Sources of
data: Information on this MDG indicator is reported annually to
UNAIDS and WHO, disaggregated by age, sex and public/private
facility.
- Condom use at last high risk sex. Source of data: Collected
through household surveys, such as MICS, DHS, Reproductive and
Health Surveys (RHS), and other nationally representative
household surveys.

● Percent of people living with HIV and AIDS receiving
antiretroviral treatment, by sex, age, income quintile
Sources of data: This and MDG indicator and information is
reported annually to UNAIDS and WHO, disaggregated by age, sex
and public/private facility.
● Condom use at last high risk sex
Source of data: Collected through household surveys, such as
Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), Demographic and Health
Surveys (DHS), Reproductive and Health Surveys (RHS),
Behavioural Surveillance Surveys (BSS), and other nationally
representative household surveys
This target specifies water-borne diseases, but there are no
associated indicator. An indicator is needed to address this issue.
Quality of water is critical to prevent water borne diseases and treat

some of these diseases. But also access to sanitation help to
create better hygiene condition helping to reduce diseases. Target
3.3 cannot be achieved if the WASH conditions are not guaranteed.
Suggested target
By 2030 end HIV, TB, malaria and neglected tropical diseases and
combat hepatitis, water-borne diseases and other communicable
diseases by averting deaths and preventing new infections with
particular attention given to the most marginalized and people in
vulnerable populations, adolescents, and young people.
Rationale: Ending HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected

tropical diseases is achievable but only if we target these illnesses
in the most vulnerable populations.
Indicator 1 TB incidence per 100,000 person years

Indicator 2 Number of TB deaths per 100,000 person years.
Rationale: Theses indicators are aligned with the WHO
recommendations on the global burden of tuberculosis “Progress,
challenges, strategy and opportunities beyond 2015.”
• Number of people requiring interventions against NTDs by 2030.
• Percentage of people who report discriminatory attitudes towards
people living with HIV, by age and sex.
Comment: Disaggregation by age should be expanded to cover all

age groups-0-14, 15-19, 20-24, 25-49, and over 50-including
capturing vertical transmission in infants as well as younger
adolescents (10-14) – especially relevant in the context of child,
early marriage and forced marriage--and among older persons,
ignored to date in data collection and prevention efforts. Emphasis
is needed on adolescents and youth, including young key
populations, who continue to be among the groups most at risk.
Data is available annually for 158 countries from UNAIDS, WHO.
On data on older persons, UNAIDS published regional and global
estimates of HIV incidence among people 50 and older, though
quality country-level survey data for this age group remains rare as
existing modules often exclude people over 49.

Representing a group of neglected tropical disease (NTD)-related
NGOs, the Global Network for NTDs urges the inclusion of the
following global NTD indicator in the final indicator framework for
the SDGs: Number of people requiring interventions against NTDs
by 2030.
These diseases perpetuate poverty and inequality by causing

blindness, malnutrition, anemia, and disfigurement, impacting over
1.4 billion people and more than 500 million children. Treating NTDs
is extremely cost-effective and contributes greatly to the success of
the broader SDGs with many partners already integrated NTD
treatments into their education, nutrition, and water, sanitation and
hygiene programs.
In addition, global commitments toward the control and elimination

of NTDs continue to increase, such as the adoption of the 2013
World Health Assembly resolution on NTDs and the 2015 G7
“Leaders Declaration” that dedicated two paragraphs to NTDs.
Lastly, easily accessible megadata exists to ensure effective
measurement and accountability.
One of the targets should be to end typhoid fever.
Typhoid fever should be mentioned by name. Many typhoid fever

cases are usually mistaken for Malaria. Sometimes it is mostaken
for Chloroquine resistant Malaria.
Like Malaria, Typhoid fever is fast becoming an epidemic. Some

Malaria cases are made more complicated by Typhoid fever
An Indicator that will help, is to investigate all Malaria patients for
possible typhoid indication. This I believe will
help us to deal with some of the complex Malaria cases.
elimination of NTDs. Proposed indicator- reflecting language
endorsed by the World Health Organization and the NTD

Indigenous peoples and other ethnic minorities may be particularly
susceptible to infection due to lack information and access to health
services.For the 1st proposed indicator "Number of new HIV
infections per 1,000 susceptible population (by age, sex, and key
populations)" The IAEG should explore ways to disaggregate this
indicator by ethnicity. for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th proposed indicators
on incidence of TB, malaria and bepB infection, disaggregation by
ethnicity is possible within household survey DHS or MICS data
sources.
See recommended indicator and comment under Target 3.1 on

registration.
- The Suggested Indicator on new HIV infections should include
disaggregation based on income and location in addition to factors
mentioned; and the full range of age cohorts – 0-9, 10-14, 15-19,
20-24, etc. and 50 and above (in line with recent UN AIDS reports-
HIV and Aging -
http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/20131101_JC
2563_ hiv-and-aging_en_0.pdf and the Gap Report
(http://www.unaids.org/en/resources /documents/2014/. This would,
inter alia, capture mother-to-child transmission, and ensure focus
on adolescents and youth, a group especially at risk.
- Consideration should also be given to an indicator central to
prevention efforts, recalling the MDG indicator on condom use: ‘%
of people who had more than one sexual partner in the past 12
months who report use of a condom during their last sexual
intercourse, by sex, age, income, location, education and marital
status’. Data is available for 174 countries.

It is difficult to say by 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS,
tuberculosis, malaria.... because the control of these disease
cannot, support care and treatment cannot ensure by 2030, we can
end them
3.3.1a Percentage of people who report discriminatory attitudes
towards people living with HIV, by age and sex
Disaggregation by age sub-groups should be expanded to cover all
age groups implicated-- 0-14, 15-19, 20-24, 25-49, and above 50--
including to capture vertical transmission in infants as well as
younger adolescents (10-14) – especially relevant in the context of
child, early marriage and forced marriage--and among older
persons, ignored to date in data collection and prevention efforts
despite their risks. Particular emphasis is needed on adolescents
and youth, including young key populations, who continue to be
among the groups most at risk, recalling that the MDG indicator on
HIV prevalence focused exclusively on 15-24 year olds. Sources:
Data is available annually for 158 countries from UNAIDS, WHO
based on household surveys, surveillance and modelling. Note that
UNAIDS published regional and global estimates of HIV incidence
among people 50 and older in 2013 and 2014.
The current lack of an indicator on NTDs in spite of the fact it is

specified within the target must be addressed, or there is a risk of
holding back significant gains made to tackle these diseases. IAPB
proposes the following indicator reflecting agreed language by the
NTD community and WHO: A 90% reduction in the number of
people requiring interventions against NTDs by 2030


(BSS), and other nationally representative household surveys
Number of alcohol policy measures implemented in National
strategies to reduce AIDS.
Research shows causal relationships between alcohol use and
infectious diseases, such as tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS. Causal
relationships exist between:
- Alcohol consumption and HIV incidences
- Alcohol consumption on HIV/AIDS patients’ adherence to
antiretroviral treatment
- Alcohol use and HIV/ Aids disease progression among patients
who are not yet on antiretroviral therapy.
Alcohol is widely established as a structural driver of both the TB
and HIV/AIDS epidemics.

(BSS), and other nationally representative household surveys
Simplify "By 2030, end the epidemics of communicable diseases,

particularly AIDS, tuberculosis, and neglected tropical ones."
a) New TB cases/100 000/year.
b) TB prevalence.
c) Incidence rate of malaria infections.
d) Proportion of population with HIV infection with access to
antiretroviral drugs.
e) HIV prevalence among population aged 10-24 years.
f) Condom use at last high risk sex.
g) Maternal mortality rate for women living with HIV/AIDS.
h) Percentage of pregnant women living with HIV who are enrolled
in ART lifelong (Option B+). (Suggested by UNFPA.)
We support the inclusion of malaria indicators using the wording as
suggested by the WHO: ‘Number of confirmed reported malaria
cases per 1000 persons per Year’ and ‘Number of adults and
children that have died due to malaria in a specific year, expressed
as a rate per 100 000 population’.

the global indicator list. Over 1.4 billion of the world’s poorest, most
vulnerable people suffer from NTDs, perpetuating a cycle of
disability and ill health and ultimately preventing children from
attending school and adults from productive work.
We believe that failing to include NTDs in the global indicator list

would be a mistake: NTDs are an early indicator of basic access to
health care, systems are in place to collect relevant NTD data, and
efforts in the control and elimination of NTDs have global support
with the 2013 World Health Assembly resolution on NTDs.
We propose the following indicator: A 90% reduction in the number

of people requiring interventions against NTDs by 2030
3.3.1. Number new HIV infections: Although incidence measure

best, question of method. Modelling not adequate.
Household/population based best (even if relatively expensive- we
can increase interval) and disaggreated per age, gender, area and
key population group.
3.3.2. Deahs similar comment on modelling. Efforts needed to
measure a community/population level.
Household surveys for all other indicators in this category
We recommend that the indicator on TB be: TB incidence per
100,000 persons per year and NOT per 1,000. This is in
3.3 By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and

neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, water-borne
diseases and other communicable diseases.
1. Number of new HIV infections per 1, 000 susceptible
population (by age, sex and key population).
2. TB incidence per 1, 000 persons per year.
3. Malaria incidence per 1, 000 persons per year.
4. Hepatitis incidence per 1, 000 persons per year
5. Estimated number of new Hepatitis B infection per 100, 000
population in a given year
We would like to see the inclusion of an indicators for PMTCT
coverage
By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, polio, leprosy,river blindness

elephantiasis, tuberculosis, malaria and otrher neglected tropical
diseases and combat hepatitis, water-borne diseases and other
communicable diseases
PAI welcomes the proposed indicator 3.3.1: Number of new HIV
infections per 1,000 susceptible population (by age, sex, and key
populations), however, it focuses heavily on transmission and not
on treatment or prevention. Inclusion of the following two MDG
indicators is recommended:

treatment, by age, sex and income quintile.
Condom use at last high risk sex

(disaggregated by SDG target [disease or health priority]).*
and information on registered products.*
*See rationale in Target 3.1 comments.

● Percent of people living with HIV and AIDS receiving
antiretroviral treatment, by sex, age, income quintile
● Condom use at last high risk sex
representative household surveys

treatment, by sex, age, income quintile
Condom use at last high risk sex

representative household surveys.

3.3.7 - COMMENT: Endorse WHO replacement proposal. Do not
support original indicator.
3.3.7 - PROPOSAL: (Suggested indicator):
“Degree of implementation of WHO guideline/recommendation on
use of safety-engineered syringes in healthcare settings”
(See Target 3.5 below also)
There should be a specific indicators on new HIV infections that

read as follows: Number of new HIV infections, per 1,000
susceptible population by all age groups, sex, income and key
population.
The indicators should be disaggregated by age sub-groups should

be expanded to cover all age groups implicated-- 0-14, 15-19, 20-
24, 25-49, and above 50--including to capture vertical transmission
in infants as well as younger adolescents (10-14)
Data Source: UNAIDS country offices

3.2 CONTD: Efforts to prevent stillbirths will also prevent maternal
and newborn deaths and improve health outcomes for a child
through their lifecourse. The stillbirth rate is an ideal, sensitive
indicator of high-quality antenatal and intrapartum care. As a
marker of equity and quality care in pregnancy and childbirth,
stillbirth rate is a priority indicator that could feed into targets 3.1
and 3.2 but also links to maternal depression, child
neurodevelopmental outcomes and long-term economic growth,
poverty eradication, and general health.
3.3.1 Number of new HIV infections per 1,000 population
DATA SOURCE: Country owned, internationally consistent

modelled estimates
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UNAIDS,158 countries, Updated

annually
NOTES: Adolescent girls and young women are disproportionately

vulnerable and at high risk for new HIV infections.
PROPOSED INDICATOR: 3.3.2 Percent of people living with HIV

and AIDS receiving antiretroviral treatment
DATA SOURCE: This an MDG indicator and information is reported

annually to UNAIDS and WHO, disaggregated by age, sex and
public/private facility.
NOTES: While we strongly support an indicator on new infections,

we need to continue to measure the impact that prevention and
access to treatment can have. We would recommend continuing to
use at least two of the existing MDG indicators which capture
access to ARV and behavior change related to reducing risk.
Data on these communicable diseases disaggregated by gender,

age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migratory status.
The indicators suggested should also be disaggregated by sex,
location (rural vs urban), family income level, and ethnic group.
Recommended indicator: [Global level indicator, nationally

collected] Number of new health technologies registered by the
National Regulatory Authority and/or recommended by national
guidelines (Disaggregated by SDG target [disease or health
priority])

The world’s, and each country’s, material use is tightly coupled to

the number of inhabitants." On the other hand: "From another
perspective, metabolic rates can be seen as the ‘material
footprint’…. These metabolic rates are more than one order of
magnitude different for different countries…While global resource
use has increased eightfold during the course of the 20th century…
average resource use per capita merely doubled." Further, it is
suggested that resource use and population density may in fact
actually be negatively correlated, stating: "It appears that densely
populated areas and regions, for the same standard of living and
material comfort, need fewer resources per capita [than less
densely populated areas]." (UNEP 2014). While outside of SDG’s
the UN has warned that world population, reached a stage where
the amount of resources needed to sustain it exceeds what is
available, in the case of SDG’s UN seems to exhibit a case of
cognitive dissonance.
As a network of organisations committed to ending poverty and ill
health caused by Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs), The UK
Coalition against NTDs believes the inclusion of NTDs in the global
indicator list will be fundamental to improved health. Over 1.4 billion
of the world’s poorest, most vulnerable people suffer from NTDs,
perpetuating a cycle of disability, ill health and ultimately preventing
children from attending school and adults from productive work.
We believe that failing to include NTDs in the global indicator list

would be a mistake: NTDs are an early indicator of basic access to
health care, systems are in place to collect relevant NTD data, and
efforts in the control and elimination of NTDs have global support
with the 2013 World Health Assembly resolution on NTDs.
We propose the following indicator, endorsed by the World Health

Organization and the global NTD community: the number of people
requiring interventions against NTDs by 2030.

impacts its achievement.. For example, in countries with good rule
of law, more people infected with HIV have access to ARV drugs.
Public sector corruption nevertheless increases the chances of
people having access to ARVs. This may be due to politically or
personally well-connected people gaining higher access to ARV
drugs, thereby increasing inequitable use of limited resources.
-
istical_Annex.pdf
indicator: country investment in health care and for epidemic

alleviation programms
We must also measure efforts to combat NTDs. We are not experts
in this area, but we see that of the 8 indicators proposed thus far,
they are silent on some of the disease burden areas or a measure
on collective actions. An adequate framework with which to inform
framing of this indicator already exists with the WHOs extensive
experience and classification of NTDs.
We will need an additional indicator central to prevention efforts,

recalling the MDG indicator on condom use: “% of people who had
more than one sexual partner in the past 12 months who report use
of a condom during their last sexual intercourse, by sex, age,
income, location, education and marital status”. Data are available
for 174 countries.
abortion policies.
We welcome the HIV indicator under this target. However it only
focuses on transmission, and does not reflect on the impact that
prevention and access to treatment can have. Therefore, we
recommend continuing to use at least two of the existing MDG
indicators which capture access to ARV and behavior change
related to reducing risk:
- Percent of people living with HIV and AIDS receiving
antiretroviral treatment, by sex, age, income quintile. Sources of
data: Information on this MDG indicator is reported annually to
UNAIDS and WHO, disaggregated by age, sex and public/private
facility.
- Condom use at last high risk sex. Source of data: Collected
through household surveys, such as MICS, DHS, Reproductive and
Health Surveys (RHS), and other nationally representative
household surveys.
While we broadly welcome the proposed indicators measuring the

new infections per 1,000 susceptible populations (by age, sex and
key populations) for HIV, TB, Malaria and Hepatitis B, we would like
there to be a clear list here of ‘key / susceptible populations’. This
should include specific reference to sex workers, men who have
sex with men, injecting drug usurers and prisoners. It is only by
acknowledging them as being most susceptible, especially to HIV,
will we bring a focus on assistance for these key groups. These
populations are largely invisible in national statistics therefore
specific efforts must be made to include them to ensure they are
‘not left behind’.
These indicators should be complemented by an indicator that
specifically measures access to treatment as the current
suggestions focus on transmission which will not provide enough
information about what’s needed to end the epidemic.
Potential indicators include: ‘% of people living with HIV and AIDS
receiving antiretroviral treatment, by sex, age, income quintile’ and
‘Condom use at last high risk sex ‘ – both MDG indicators
WaterAid highlights that despite the inclusion of water-borne
diseases in the target, there is no indicator included to measure
this. Given that access to safely managed water will be monitored
and is included under target 6.1, we note that this is a strong
opportunity to interlink two targets.

population by all age groups (0-14, 15-19, 20-24, 25-49, and above
50), sex, income and key population
UNAIDS country offices

population

UNAIDS annual report
We support the new proposed indicator by Arjan van Howelingen

(World Animal Protection) to Target 3.3 regarding veterinary
services density in rural areas. We would suggest also suggest
covering number of stray dogs, as accounting for this factor will
help provide the basis for vaccination and elimination of rabies and
other zoonotic disease.
World Animal Protection fully endorses the proposal by WHO that
one of the indicators focus on neglected tropical diseases -
Number of people requiring interventions against neglected tropical
diseases
Safe drinking water is fundamental to healthy living and well-being.

Chlorinated drinking water helps people avoid the debilitating
effects of waterborne diseases, which, in addition to being
potentially deadly, also render victims more vulnerable to other
diseases. This target is therefore linked to targets under Goal #6.
We welcome the indicator ‘Number of new HIV infections per 1000
susceptible population (by age, sex, and key populations’. However,
we are concerned it only focuses on prevalence and does not
address access to treatment or use of prevention services. We
believe measuring treatment compliance is also essential to realise
the current shape of the epidemic. We therefore recommend the
inclusion of an indicator measuring access to treatment: Number of
HIV-infected persons enrolled in antiretroviral treatment (ART), with
disaggregation of data by age and sex. It should also include the
number of pregnant women living with HIV enrolled in treatment, in
order to check HIV prevention in newborns is also realised.
Moreover, prevention of HIV transmission is not accounted for
either in the indicator. We propose an indicator of condom use at
high risk populations, with disaggregation of data.
Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality
from non-communicable diseases through prevention and
treatment and promote mental health and well-being
1. Probability of dying of cardiovascular disease, cancer,
diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease between ages 30 and 70
especially among socially disadvantaged groups.
We welcome indicator 3.4.2 which should be retained, considering
that tobacco is the single most preventable cause of NCDs. The
indicator should keep the age baseline of 15 years based on the
knowledge about initiation age.
Additionally, 3.4.2 should be disaggregated by sex, age and income
as suggested by UN WOMEN. This particular disaggregation takes
into account the nature of the addictive substance as well as the
vector of disease's marketing tactics (target groups: youth, women,
underprivileged) which are at the core of the global tobacco
epidemic.
Interlinkage: 3.a
Proposed indicator 3.4.1: We recommend this indicator, proposed
by the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network and
supported by the #FundaMentalSDG initiative:
Probability of dying of cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes,
chronic respiratory disease or suicide between ages 30 and 70.
We also recommend to include this indicator:

Prevalence and incidence of Mental Disorder.
"Prevalence" (occurrence at a given time) and "incidence" (number
of new cases) are globally recognized epidemiological measures of
public health. The Global Burden of Disease study makes regular
estimates of the prevalence and incidence and burden of disease
for major mental sufferings. An indicator for mental health is needed
to put this field in line with other health fields where indicators
already exist. Establishing prevalence and incidence as indicators
will probably also contribute to the global community developing
improved registration systems in countries where such registrations
are not found.
.
The indicator does not address the ambition of the target to
promote mental health and well-being. Nor are there any other
indicators under Goal 3 that address the issue of mental health.
This is a serious gap, as the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) explicitly recognises, in article
12.1. “the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest
attainable standard of physical and mental health”.
A complementary, relevant and feasible process indicator could the

“proportion of the overall allocation for public health care that is
allocated to mental health care”.
• Exposure to secondhand smoke, disaggregated by age
Comment: The WHO’s Global Tobacco Surveillance System Data

(GTSSData) covers roughly 177 countries and territories, and
comprises four related surveys, one of which is the Global Youth
Tobacco Survey (GYTS), from which the proposed indicator
language is drawn. In 2004 roughly 168,000 children died from
secondhand smoke globally. Children bear the greatest burden of
years of life lost from secondhand smoke. Pregnant women who
are exposed to secondhand smoke are estimated to be 23% more
likely to experience stillbirth. Pregnant women who are exposed to
secondhand smoke also are estimated to be 13% more likely give
birth to a child with a congenital malformation, and secondhand
smoke contributes to lower respiratory tract infections in infants and
young children.

Stress is a major killer. Dealing with stress will reduce most of the
non communicable diseases.
Indicators
1. Lifestyle change, to include recreation at all levels.
2. Empowerment to help improve financial strength.
3. There should be vacation from time to time. Just a change in
environment.
4. Awareness of the importance of recreation is necessary and
should be made part of the lifestyle change. Recreation can be free.
5. Need to change negative traditional practices like girl and adult
male circumcision.
Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible within household survey
DHS or MICS data sources.

registration.
- The Suggested Indicators omit a key element of the target:
mental health. Mental health issues afflict 1 in 4 people in their
lifetime. Suicide is the leading cause of death globally for
adolescent girls 15-19 years of age. Up to 85% of people with
mental illness in developing countries, and up to 50% in developed
countries, receive no treatment. The following indicator is proposed
to fill this critical gap: Proportion of persons with a severe mental
disorder using services, by sex, age, location and other
characteristics. This indicator is among the WHO’s ‘Global
Reference List of 100 Core Health Indicators’ and is in line with the
World Health Assembly Resolution of 2013,which calls for a 20%
increase in treatment coverage of persons with severe mental
illness.
It is difficult to say that by 2030 could reduce one third premature
mortality from non-communicable diseases because the quality of
services for these diseases are in poor condition

Harmful drinking is a risk factor for three major non-communicable
diseases: cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes. It is also
associated with mental health problems and cognitive deficits linked
with alcohol use disorders (AUDs).
Therefore, indicators around mortality from NCDs also need to
include indicators related to harmful drinking: heavy episodic
drinking (HED), linked with acute injuries; and AUDs and alcoholic
liver cirrhosis, which are indicators of chronic heavy drinking, and
particularly associated with NCDs. Monitoring these two disorders
would complement HED as indicators of alcohol-related harm.
As suggested by UNWOMEN in Version 2 of the indicator
proposals, disaggregation by sex and income is important.
However, given that this particular target covers ages from 30 to 70
years, further disaggregation by more narrow age bands would help
inform progress towards reducing mortality among different age
cohorts, better tracking of premature mortality among younger
groups, and the crafting of appropriate interventions.
Mental health AND well-being can both be measured separately.

Mental health indicators: (1) rates of hospitalization; (2)diagnoses
based on ICD or other accepted international categorizations (USA
uses DSM); (3)drug prescriptions. All are easily obtained in
developed countries, e.g. rates of suicide & youth depression.
Existing surveys and self-report questionnaires can be used or
easily developed. Research on scales are vast in the "The World
Happiness Report." An easy google scholar search reveals much
research about related concepts. Scale examples: OECD; Happy
Planet Index; WHO QOL questionnaire, UNDP 2011 satisfaction
ratings & Human development Index;also http://bit.ly/1VJhcpu &
http://bit.ly/1OsmUrv Part 10, pp.64-70.
NCD related indicators should be in line with the WHO NCD Global
Monitoring Framework.
Indicator 3.4.1 should be under Target 3.a. and suggest including
younger children including those in primary schools. The
assumption that children under 15 years old do not smoke is not
realistic and health education to avoid tobacco use should be
integrated in primary school curricula.
ICN proposes new indicators on mental health such as suicide rate
and functioning national, multisectoral mental health promotion and
prevention programmes. Mental health indicators should be in line
with the Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2020
adopted by WHA.
The currently suggested indicators do not cover measurement of
healthy aging or health of people older than 70 years old. ICN
proposes a new indicator: Proportion of people older than 70 years
old who live autonomously with adequate support.

Alcohol is one of four major risk factors for NCD:s. Since the over-
all NCD-target taken by the WHA (25 % mortality reduction until
2025) is co-relating with the suggested target for NCD in the SDG:s
(33 % mortality reduction until 2030) the alcohol related indicators
for the Global NCD target on total alcohol consumption (APC) ia a
possible indicators also for target 3.4 in the SDG:s.
Promote mental health could easily be a subtarget of its own.
Adjoined to the one for premature mortality makes the target a bit
unwieldy.
Mental health target should be separated and specified.

• The proposed SDGs for the first time specifically target

improving the outcomes of those with NCDs: this is positive.
• We also applaud the SDGs’ call for other objectives that will
directly impact both prevention and treatment of those at risk and
with NCDs (such as achieving universal health coverage, promote
mental health and well-being and strengthen the implementation of
the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in all
countries, support research and development of vaccines and
medicines for the communicable and non-communicable diseases
that primarily affect developing countries, provide access to
affordable essential medicines and vaccines.)
Indicator 3.4.2
Prevention of targeted diseases is not assessed by consumption
rate of tobacco alone, but also of alcohols and “drugs of abuse”.
Chronic intake of alcohols has the potential of corrupting the
acidity/alkalinity of body fluid such as blood. If this occurs,
functioning of body organ such as kidney, liver and heart is or
damaged and this often leads to premature death. Besides, abuse
of consumption of drugs such as benzodiazepine barbiturate,
amphetamine, morphine and methadone etc contributes to
diseases contemplated in this Target. In addition, drinking of water
infected by a specie of worm called “bilharzias” also causes severe
diseases and leads to premature death. We propose that Indicator
be modified to – proportion of population, disaggregated by sex and
age group, that is addicted to tobacco, alcohols, drugs of abuse or
unsafe drinking water or that died of or are suffering from
cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and chronic respiratory
diseases etc.
The NCD Alliance proposes these indicators align with the existing
25 WHO NCD indicators contained in the Global Monitoring
Framework. The indicator measuring tobacco use should also
include exposure to secondhand smoke, disaggregated by age.
Additionally, in order to address mental illness, we propose the

following: :
-Functioning programmes of multisectoral brain health promotion

and prevention in existence;
-Suicide rate per 100,000 population in a specified period (age-

standardized)
1. Probability of dying of cardiovascular disease, cancer,

diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease between ages 30 and 70
especially among socially disadvantaged groups.
By 2030, reduce by one third premature disability and mortality
from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment
and promote mental health and well-being
By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-
communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and
promote mental health and well-being for men, women and children
of all ages.
The Post-2015 Working Group recommends addition of the
following two indicators...
Adolescents and youth considered overweight:
70% of premature adult deaths are due to behaviours begun in

adolescence (Lancet Series on Adolescent Health, 2012). Obesity
is a leading cause of ill health and premature mortality from non-
communicable diseases, and is often generated by behaviours
starting in adolescence. The number of adolescents who are
overweight or obese is increasing in both low- and high-income
countries. The Group strongly recommends including the proportion
of adolescents and youths considered to be overweight under
target 3.4.
Suicide mortality rate:
Suicide is the third highest cause of mortality among adolescents

(WHO Adolescents: health risks and solutions fact sheet, 2014),
and an indicator of intense mental distress: yet it does not currently
feature in the list of indicator proposals. The Group strongly
recommends the inclusion of suicide mortality under target 3.4.

According to the 2012 World Health Assembly, the deficit in the

treatment of mental, neural and substance abuse disorders is
formidable, especially in poor countries. The Assembly
recommended articulate a comprehensive and coordinated
response of health and social sectors in all countries. We propose
to include an indicator that summarizes the coverage and quality of
public mental health services.
Indicators: Proportion of population, at a minimum disaggregated by
age, sex, gender, geography, race, ethnicity, income and disability,
suffering from mental health illness.
Data source: Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Institute
for Health Metrics and Evaluation (http://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-
compare/) (Data available at 5 year intervals from 1990 to 2010.
Future updates expected)
It is not sufficient to have capacity and institutional arrangements. It

is crucial to ensure that data collected are disaggregated in order to
understand specific needs of the population.
Proposed indicator: Prevalence of overweight/obesity. In 2014,

more than 1.9 billion adults, 18 years and older, were overweight.
Of these over 600 million were obese. 39% of adults aged 18 years
and over were overweight in 2014, and 13% were obese
(WHO).Between 2000 and 2013, the number of overweight children
worldwide increased from 32 million to 42 million (UNICEF, WHO,
World Bank 2013). Prevention and control of overweight and
obesity is key to ensure and measure progress on prevention of
NCDs.
3.4.1 Number of suicide deaths per year per 100,000 population
DATA SOURCE: WHO Mental Action Plan 2013-2020
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: WHO
TIER: Tier I or II
NOTES: According to the WHO, self-harm/suicide is now the

leading cause of death among girls aged 15-19 worldwide.
(Add) through access to physical health services and mental health

and psychosocial services and educational campaigns. Data on
premature mortality due to poor physical and mental health,
disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity,
income, disability, rural/urban residence, national origin, and
migratory status.
While we welcome the greater focus on NCDs, 3.4.1 poses a
significant challenge. People aged 60+ account for 75% of deaths
from NCDs in LMICs. Yet the indicator excludes a significant
proportion of these people.
The Stakeholder Group on Ageing does not accept the concept and
implications of ‘premature’ mortality. This risks institutionalizing age
discrimination in the delivery of health outcomes.
If the data sets were in place to support it, an improved indicator

could look like: Proportion of population, by age and sex, dying of
cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory
disease.
An indicator focussed on mortality also neglects prevention, care

and management of NCDs. A broader indicator would be welcome
e.g. Availability and affordability of quality, safe and efficacious
essential NCD medicines, including generics, and basic
technologies in both public and private facilities
IHME’s Healthy life expectancy at 60 should also be considered.
The indicators suggested should also be disaggregated by sex,

location (rural vs urban), family income level, and ethnic group.

More nutrition- related indicators should be suggested. Overweight
in under-5 children is the only indicator of risk of NCDs. However,
the older the children, the higher their risk of becoming obese
adults. Why not then overweight among school children? Nutritional
surveillance in primary schools is recommended. Or else, why not
obesity in women, since they are much more affected than men in
most settings? Besides, BMI data are collected in DHS surveys.
Diet is at the core of prevention and management of obesity,
diabetes, CVD and several cancers. Among the candidate
indicators are those connected with the WHO dietary strategy of
2004 (salt, fibre, fruit and vegetable, trans fat, free sugar
consumption; food marketing to children...), and some of these
indicators could be collected through the food system (highly-
processed foods [energy-dense, nutrient-poor]; salt; trans fat).
MORE RESEARCH IS NEEDED TO DEVELOP APPROPRIATE
FOOD SYSTEM-BASED INDICATORS OF NCD RISK.
Indicator ; country budget for preventive programs

Indicator 3.4.1 Probability of dying of cardiovascular disease,
cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory disease between ages 30
and 70
- World Young Leaders in Dementia call for the indicator of
probability of dying of cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes or
chronic respiratory disease between all ages of 30 and greater be
included.
The Suggested Indicators omit a key element of the target: mental

health. The following indicator can fill this critical gap: “Proportion of
persons with a severe mental disorder using services, by sex, age,
location and other characteristics”. This indicator is among the
WHO’s ‘Global Reference List of 100 Core Health Indicators’ and is
in line with the World Health Assembly Resolution of 2013,which
calls for a 20% increase in treatment coverage of persons with
severe mental illness.
abortion policies.
We support indicator 3.4.2 (Current tobacco use among persons 15
years and over) which should be retained and disaggregated by
sex, age and income as suggested by UN WOMEN. This particular
disaggregation takes into account the nature of an addictive
substance (age) as well as the vector of disease's marketing tactics
(target groups: youth, women, underprivileged) which are at the
core of the global tobacco epidemic.
3.4.1 Proportion of population, at a minimum disaggregated by
age, sex, gender, geography, ethnicity, income and disability, dying
of cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory
disease
suffering from mental health illness
3.4.1 Proportion of population, at a minimum disaggregated by age,
sex, gender, geography, ethnicity, income and disability, dying of
cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory
disease
Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Institute for Health
Metrics and Evaluation (http://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-compare/)
(Data available at 5 year intervals from 1990 to 2010. Future
updates expected).

suffering from mental health illness
3.4.3 Number of suicide deaths per year per 100,000 population

disaggregated by age, sex, gender, geography, ethnicity, income
and disability and marital status
WHO Mental Action Plan 2013-2020

Target 3.5: Strengthen the prevention and treatment of
substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful
use of alcohol
Recommended modification:
Coverage of evidence-based and evaluated interventions for
substance use disorders
Comment: the term substance abuse is not used widely in global

HIV policy. Also, the evidence base for the effectiveness of
interventions to prevent substance abuse is very weak and a lot of
money wasted. So the indicator should endorse evidence-based
and evaluated interventions.
It is very important to do it however it is very difficult to prevent
substance abuse. As I know, the number of drug abuse is
increasing daily, even in adolescent
3.5.1 Coverage of evidence-based and evaluated interventions for
substance use disorders (UNOCD language).
The term substance abuse is not used widely in global HIV policy.
Also, the evidence base for the effectiveness of interventions to
prevent substance abuse is very weak and a lot of money wasted.
So the indicator should endorse evidence-based and evaluated
interventions.
Because they bear the heaviest burden of disease and disability
from harmful drinking, young people are a key target for prevention.
This is addressed in Target 3.5.2, which focuses on those below the
age of 25.
While Version 2 includes a proposal by WHO to include as an
indicator total alcohol per capita (APC), this alone is inadequate as
an indicator of progress. Per capita consumption can neither
differentiate among harmful and non-harmful drinking patterns nor
between young people over and below the legal age limits for
alcohol consumption.
In addition to APC, therefore, two indicators are particularly
important: the prevalence of underage drinking; and heavy episodic
drinking (HED), which is linked with acute outcomes (accidents and
injuries), of more immediate concern for young people than chronic
diseases, which manifest themselves later in life.
A 10% reduction of HED is already called for in the WHO Global
Action Plan on NCDs target on reducing harmful drinking, and
includes separate attention to adolescents and to adults. A
consistent approach within the framework for SDGs is warranted.
ICN supports the indicator on coverage of interventions for the
prevention of substance abuse.

Currently suggested indicator: "Coverage of interventions for the
prevention of substance abuse interventions among people under
25" unfortunately does not provide any relevant information related
to the goal, as prevention interventions are very often the least
effective tools especially if other effective measures (effective
alcohol control policies) are missing. Another reason would be a
problem of measurement of this indicator. Therefore, IOGT
International would like to propose an indicator that would measure
total per capita alcohol consumption.
The main reason for our suggestion is strong evidence of effective
population approaches that suggest that a reduction in per capita
alcohol consumption will reduce both health and social problems
caused by alcohol use. Moreover many countries and WHO
already measure the total alcohol consumption per capita.
IOGT International therefore suggests the following indicator: ” Total
per capita (aged 15+ years old) pure alcohol consumption within a
calendar year in liters,” that is in line with the Global Action plan for
the Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013 - 2020
The indicator on coverage of interventions for prevention among

youth is neither co-relating with the indicators on alcohol in the
global NCD targets nor is it an indicator that is measured today.
Based on the WHO recommendations, regulations on alcohol (on
availability, pricing and marketing) are the most effective
interventions to prevent alcohol related problems. We suggest that
the proposed indicator is replaced with an indicator that is already
measured and could co-relate with the NCD-target as well as the
prosed target for alcohol in the SDG:s is: Total (recorded and
unrecorded) alcohol per capita (APC) (aged 15+ years old)
consumption within a calendar year in litres of pure alcohol
This is a programmatic goal, not an outcome goal. It's like target
2.b. Shouldn't the SDGs just be outcomes-oriented?
It may be possible to set the target value.

This makes no reference to broader issues in drug policy.
Prevention and treatment represent two small facets of the drug
policy spectrum at the expense of more effective, evidence-based,
responses. Harm reduction has produced perhaps the most
effective interventions, especially around HIV, Hepatitis and other
communicable disease prevention, yet no mention.
It also takes no account of broader public health implications,

human rights aspects, gender dimensions, not to mention drug
market violence on population security (see LSE Expert Group on
the Economics of Drug Policy). Prevention has a terrible track
record in terms of implementation.
There is a need to pick some actual metrics and indications:

reducing HIV transmission; reducing incarceration (particularly
among females); reducing the violence associated with illicit drug
markets.
We propose the following indicators: 3.5.1. Percentage of
household income spent on tobacco and alcohol; 3.5.2. Per capita
consumption of litres of pure alcohol among persons aged 15+
The two proposed indicators related to target 3.5 are not well
designed to be a useful tool in following the development in
preventing and treating substance abuse in the context of
development. GAPA will propose as an alternative the inclusion of
an indicator measuring total per capita alcohol consumption. There
is strong epidemiological evidence to suggest that a reduction in
per capita alcohol consumption will reduce social and health
problems caused by alcohol in a population. “Per capita
consumption of litres of pure alcohol among persons aged 15+” is a
good indicator where data is available and being collected by the
World Health Organization.
Total per capita (aged 15+ years old) pure alcohol consumption
within a calendar year in liters
Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse,
including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol, including
their effects on unborn children.
PROPOSAL: (Suggested indicator):
“Degree of implementation of WHO guideline/recommendation on
use of safety-engineered syringes in healthcare settings”
(See Target 3.3.7 above also)
We work in the area of alcohol policy and consider alcohol to be a
very important and under emphasised risk factor, not only for NCDs,
but with important causal links to injuries (eg from violence and
traffic crash) and detrimental effects linked to economic costs and
reduction in human capital.
For this reason we strongly advocate the retention of an indicator of
per capita alcohol consumption. This measure is readily available,
is an indicator used by WHO and has well understood relationship
with alcohol-related harm.
Programmes raising awareness in the public, and in education
systems, of Mental Health issues and Stress-related Disorders,
including drug and alcohol abuse. This campaign should also
address disaster prevention and psychosocial resilience. The
campaign should follow a public health model, to reduce stigma
about mental problems, to highlight psychosocial strengths building,
and to encourage people to seek professional help. Assess
prevention impact by use of data disaggregated by gender, age,
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban
Ministry of health annual Budget for prevention
Good recommendation. But it is necessary to create supervision
and fullfilment policies to examine the work of states.
Target 3.6: By 2020, halve the number of global deaths and
injuries from road traffic accidents
Recommended modification:
Number of road traffic fatal injury deaths per 100 000 population,
disaggregated by age
Indicators
How prepared are NATIONS and communities to handfle
emergencies
What is the state of the highways
Availability and accessibility of health facilities
Availability and attitude of health workers to work.
Given the impact of road traffic injuries on disability, we are
concerned it is not reflected in the suggested indicator which
focuses on fatal injury deaths. We therefore suggest indicator to
cover this aspect and data to be disaggregated.

We agree with the proposed indicator but suggest an enhancement.
We would like to suggest that in addition to measuring fatalities
that non-fatal injuries, which can also result in serious health
impacts, be measured as well as this will better capture the full
burden of the health impact of road traffic collisions. It is also
important to ensure that pedestrian and cyclist injuries and deaths
are disaggregated. Often they are grouped in a category called
“vulnerable road users”. However this category also includes
motorbikes and it would be more accurate to ensure that
pedestrians and cyclists are captured separately. This change
would also help measure the success of target 11.2 as it will be a
good indicator to determine if changes to the transportation
environment have resulted in safer, more equitable streets for
pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore, the indicator would be:
Number of road traffic injuries and fatal injury deaths per 100 000
population (age-standardized
Measuring only fatal injuries does not capture the full burden of the
health impact of road traffic collisions. Non-fatal injuries can also
result in serious health impacts. We suggest the indicator be
amended to include injuries as well as fatalities. It is also important
to ensure that pedestrian and cyclist injuries and deaths are
disaggregated. Often they are grouped in a category called
“vulnerable road users”. However this category also includes
motorbikes and it would be better and more accurate to ensure that
pedestrians and cyclists are captured separately. We would amend
the indicator:
Number of road traffic injuries and fatal injury deaths per 100 000
population (age-standardized)
This is possible only if Governments think of creating efficient and
regular public transportation systems. People with individual
vehicles should be taxed heavily in terms of luxury, environment
and crowding nature of cities.
I hope so however the traffic situation accidents and deaths daily

have been increasing
It would be useful if the suggested indicator could be disaggregated
by transport mode and location.
Since alcohol consumption is one of the major risk factors for traffic
accident, we suggest an alcohol related indicator.
No comments
We propose the following: 3.6.1. Road traffic accidents involving
alcohol;
3.6.2. Road traffic fatalities involving alcohol (% of all road traffic
fatalities);
3.6.3. Number of road deaths due to road traffic injuries; and 3.6.4.
Number of road traffic injuries and fatal deaths per 100,000
population (age-standardized).
For Target 3.6, measuring only fatal injuries does not capture the
full burden of the health impact of road traffic collisions. Non-fatal
injuries can also result in serious health impacts. We suggest the
indicator be amended to include injuries as well as fatalities. It is
also important to ensure that pedestrian and cyclist injuries and
deaths are disaggregated. Often they are grouped in a category
called “vulnerable road users”. However this category also includes
motorbikes and it would be more accurate to ensure that
pedestrians and cyclists are captured separately.
By 2020, halve the number of global deaths, injuries and
disabilities from road traffic accidents
Indicator 3.6.1: Number of road traffic fatal injury deaths per 100
000 population (age-standardized)
Comments:
• An established and important indicator
• Measured on a 2-3 year cycle already in virtually all countries
on a consistent basis
• Priority should be ‘1’ as proposed by WHO
• Disaggregation by sex and age is supported where data
permits and/or by mode of transport (e.g. pedestrian, bicycle, bus
etc). If we were able to get this data by city and by mode, we could
use this a measure of safety and proxy of investment in
infrastructure and policies for pedestrians and cyclists
Data on deaths and injuries from road traffic accidents,
disaggregated by gender age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity,
migratory statu
Why do indicators/targets have a target year of 2020 rather than
2030? What is the target after 2020? The proposed indicator should
be disaggregated by sex, age and location (rural vs urban).
Prevention and national campaign for read and traffic security as
well as legislation on this
Measuring only deaths by road traffic is not enough to let us
understand about impact of road traffic collisions. Injuries can
impact to health and other aspects as well. We recommend that
the indicator of target 3.6 should be added injuries. At the moment
in most statistic data system, the vulnerable road user is grouped of
motorcyclist as well as other non-motorized transportation users
such as pedestrians and cyclists. In case of developing countries
such as Vietnam, we could not consider motorcyclist as vulnerable
road users. Motorcycle is cover more than 80 percent of trips and
they are the reason of accidents for pedestrians and cyclist most of
the time.
3.6.1 Number of deaths due to road traffic accidents, at a minimum
disaggregated by age, sex, gender, geography, race, ethnicity,
income and disability.
Death registration data using ICD 10, civil registration and vital
statistics systems with full coverage, population-based
health surveys with verbal autopsy, Administrative reporting
systems (police reports)
Significant numbers of people are suffering due to non-fatal injuries,

which is a burden for him/herself and their family as well as the total
health system in Bangladesh. Therefore, if only fatal injuries the full
burden of the health impact of road traffic collisions will not be
understood. We suggest the indicator also capture pedestrian and
cyclists separately and not include motorbikes. This change would
also help measure the success of target 11.2 as it will be a good
indicator to determine if changes to the transportation environment
have resulted in safer, more equitable streets for pedestrians and
cyclists. We would amend the indicator: "Number of road traffic
injuries and fatal injury deaths per 100 000 population (age-
standardized)"
Target 3.7: By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and
reproductive health-care services, including for family
planning, information and education, and the integration of
reproductive health into national strategies and programmes
1. Access to nutritional requirement of infants, pregnant and
lactating mother under integrated child development schemes and
programs.
2. Adolescent birth rate (10-14; 15-19) per 1,000 women in that
age group.
3. Access to SRHRs.
We recommend rephrasing the indicator: Percentage of girls and

women of reproductive age (15-19; 20-25; 26-35;36-49 years) who
have made informed choices regarding family planning and modern
contraception methods. The phrasing of an indicator focused on
choice and information allows to collect data on the access of girls
and women to information on these contraception methods, not
only physical access to them. To cover the complexity of sexual and
reproductive health-care services, and therefore properly measure
the progress on ensuring universal access to services, we
recommend an additional indicator: Percentage of girls and women
who have access to safe abortion, gynecological services, HIV/STI
information and treatment, contraception counselling and family
planning services. Collection of these data should be disaggregated
by age, location, income, educational level and other
characteristics.
Revision in existing indicator to read: Adolescent birth rate (10-14,
15-19) disaggregated by perception of access to health care
services and marriages before legal age.
Additional Indicator: Inclusion of sexual health as a part of school

curriculum.
Rationale: Early marriage is often linked to poor awareness of

sexual and reproductive health leading to early pregnancy which
increases the risk of complications during child birth, resulting in
maternal death, mortality of girls aged 15-19 and death or health
issues of the infant.
We support Percentage of women of reproductive age (15-49) who
have their need for family planning satisfied with modern methods;
and Adolescent birth rate (10-14; 15-19) per 1,000 women in that
age group. Met demand for family planning with modern
contraceptive methods is a critical indicator, which best summarizes
the concept of universal access to family planning and reproductive
health, and enjoys broad support. This indicator reflects
volunteerism and informed choice, and prioritizes modern methods
of contraception that are more effective in achieving individuals’ and
couples’ reproductive intentions. The indicator can also be
disaggregated by equity factors such as wealth quintile, age, and
education, thereby putting a spotlight on the need for targeted
policies and programs to assure equity and universal access. Both
indicators are linked with targets on maternal and child health,
quality health services, and in facilitating the transition to smaller
families, open up more time for women to work and break the cycle
of poverty, thereby increasing economic wellbeing of individuals,
families, and nations, and empowering women.
This target calls for integration of comprehensive sexual education
into national education programs, including formal and non-formal
education for children, youth and adults. The following indicators
are proposed:
• Existence of sexual education programs for youth and adults.
• % of public budget allocated to sexual education programs for
youth and adults.

are proposed:
youth and adults.
Delegations voiced reservations in the GA about proposals

purporting to measure access to "abortion," availability of
"comprehensive sexuality education," and "sexual and reproductive
health services" to minors without regard for parental responsibility.
See the comments on 5.6 below for how to deal with this.
"Demand satisfied for contraceptives" did not receive a workable or

satisfactory rating from statistics offices of member states, and for
good reason. It conflates desire to delay childbearing with demand
for contraception.
The survey questions on which this indicator would be based do not

ask women if they desire family planning, but rather, whether they
desire to have children, and at what time. This obscures the
multitude of factors that govern a woman’s choice to use a drug or
device to regulate her fertility over and beyond her desire to
conceive a child or not.
They reduce desire to have a(nother) child to a strict binary. They

ignore reasons for not using contraception such as side-effects (the
most cited reason even where contraceptive prevalence is high),
and religious and moral objections.
Proposed indicator 3.7.1: Whether or not the state has adopted a
national health plan with national protocols for health service
providers that ensure the full range of sexual and reproductive
health information and services are legal and provided without
discrimination.
Rationale: In order to ensure gender equality under the right to
health, states must take positive measures to provide health
information and services that primarily women need.
Proposed indicator 3.7.2: Has the state established and

implemented regulations on conscientious objection at public and
private health facilities.
Rationale: The state has a duty to protect the right to health,
including by regulating public and private actors to ensure their
actions are not infringing on reproductive rights.
Proposed indicator 3.7.3: Individuals consulted or involved in

design, monitoring, and implementation of national health plan,
disaggregated by gender, age, income, disability, geographic
location, race, and ethnicity.
Proposed indicator 3.7.4: Percentage of health care providers

trained in respectful sexual and reproductive health care.
Percentage of women of reproductive age (15-49 years) who have

access to reproductive health-care counseling; disaggregated by
sex, age..
Adolescent birth rate (10-14; 15-19) per 1,000 women in that age
group disaggregated by sex, age.
3.7.1 Percentage of demand met for family planning with modern
contraceptives (Benchmark: 75%) disaggregated by age,
geographic location, ethnicity, race, disability, health status, and
educational level
3.7.2 Proportion of adolescent girls who have received the HPV
vaccine according to current guidelines.
3.7.3 Proportion of health facilities that provide a comprehensive
sexual and reproductive health package of care which include:
Access to information on SRH; modern methods of contraceptives;
maternal health; access to safe abortion and post abortion care;
HIV prevention; STIs and reproductive cancers diagnosis and
prevention; information on assisted reproduction
3.7.4 Proportion of young people who demonstrate desired levels of
knowledge about sexual and reproductive health, including at a
minimum: 1. knowledge of three common types of contraceptive
measures: oral contraceptive (pill), condom, and at least one
longer-acting reversible contraceptive (injection, IUD, implant); 2.
knowledge of two ways to reduce sexual transmission of HIV; a
measure related to gender, power relation, and perceptions of
gender equality
Preferred indicator: Percentage of women of reproductive age (15-

49 years) who have their need for family planning satisfied with
modern methods. AND Adolescent birth rate (10-14; 15-19) per
1,000 women in that age group.
Comment: We support the two suggested indicators.
We welcome indicator 3.7.2 which should be retained.
We suggest replacing indicator 3.7.1 (ABR) with an indicator
measuring access to SRH services, e.g. ‘percentage of women and
girls who have made an informed choice about their contraceptive
method’ (collected by DHS, FP2020). This indicator is more
effective at tracking access to rights-based empowered decision
making, while ABR may have the unintended consequence of
limiting adolescents’ reproductive choice.
If the indicator on ABR remains, we suggest to use 3 age groups:
the risk of 10-14 year olds of dying from childbirth-related
complications is 5 times higher than for women in their 20s, and
childbearing is often rooted in coercion and discriminatory practices,
such as child, early and forced marriage, and sexual violence; 15-
17 year olds account for the majority of unplanned and unwanted
teenage pregnancies; among 18-19 year olds a significant share of
births occurs within marriage and union, thus more likely to be
planned.
We suggest to replace indicator 3.7.1 (ABR) with an indicator
planned.
educational level



measures: oral contraceptive (pill), condom, and at least one
longer-acting reversible contraceptive (injection, IUD, implant); 2.
knowledge of two ways to reduce sexual transmission of HIV; a
gender equality

are proposed:
youth and adults.

If the indicator on ABR remains, we suggest using 3 age groups:

planned.
Recommend:

contraceptives (benchmark 75%) disaggregated by age, geographic
location, ethnicity, race, disability, health status, and educational
level
3.7.2 Proportion of adolescent girls who received HIPV vaccine

according to current guidelines


knowledge about SRH, including at a minimum: knowledge of three
common types of contraceptive measures (oral contraceptive,
condom, at least one longer-acting reversible contraceptive);
knowledge of two ways to reduce sexual transmission of HIV; and a
measure related to gender, power relation and perceptions of
gender equality

% of family planning demand met with modern contraceptives
Adolescent birth rate (10-14 years, 15-17 years, 18-19 years)
% of health facilities that provide a minimum of basic health

services
% of young women and men (aged 15-24) with basic knowledge

about sexual and reproductive health and rights
Whether universal access to contraceptive and other SRH

information and services is included in national policy
% of females who have received the recommended number of

doses of HPV vaccine prior to age 15
% of health facilities that provide care for complications related to

unsafe abortion or, where it is not against the law, that provide safe
abortion (aspirational)

For both proposed indicators disaggregation by ethnicity is possible
within household survey DHS or MICS data sources.
registration.
% of: family planning demand met with modern contraceptives;

births to women under age 20 that were unplanned; health facilities
that provide minimum package of basic health services; health
facilities that provide postpartum, post-abortion and/or HIV services
and also provide contraceptive information, services; women & men
(15-24) with basic SRHR knowledge; women using contraception
who were informed about possible side effects of the method and
how to deal with them, who were informed about other family
planning methods & who participated in the decision to use
contraception; females who received the HPV vaccine before 15
and if country includes HPV vaccination in vaccination program;
health facilities that provide care for complications related to unsafe
abortion or, where it is not against the law, that provide safe
abortion.
- Both Suggested Indicators are very important and should be
disaggregated further (by age subgroups, income, location, marital
status, educational status, and other factors).
- This multi-purpose indicator is strongly recommended for
consideration as an especially meaningful and transformative
option: % of primary health care facilities that provide an essential
integrated package of sexual & reproductive health services (under
development by UNFPA) – a critical gap in existing measurements
for international agreements made 20 yrs ago at the ICPD,
captured in the target, and a cross-cutting enabler of the SDGs as a
whole. Sources: facility based data/health management information
systems. Targets 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.8, 5.2, 5.6.
- % of young people 10-24 with basic knowledge about SRH-
Targets 3.1, 3.3, 4.1, 4.7, 5.1, 5.2 recalling HIV/MDG indicator and
utilizing existing household survey data (on knowledge of
contraception, HIV prevention, non-violent gender relations).
I hope we can ensure qualityw sexual and reproductive health care
services however we have to have great effort and investment with
variety approach
prevention; information on assisted reproduction.


are proposed:
youth and adults.
We support the two suggested indicators and propose a new
indicator: Proportion of countries that have sexual and reproductive
health integrated into national strategies and programmes. This
should include not only health and social programmes but also
other sectors such as education and labour.

planned.

are proposed:
youth and adults.
It is important for a comprehensive package of essential
interventions for "universal access to sexual and reproductive
health-care services" to be defined through expert and inter-agency
consensus within the UN system and monitored in health facilities
at all levels. These interventions have been defined in
intergovernmental agreements since 1994, and are supported by
evidence of their health benefits to women, children and families;
they MUST include CARE FOR COMPLICATIONS RELATED TO
UNSAFE ABORTION AND, WHERE IS IT NOT AGAINST THE
LAW, THAT PROVIDE SAFE ABORTION. In addition to verification
from national health information systems, Ipas and other
international NGOs are conducting national studies that measure
this indicator.


planned.
This target's text can be just "By 2030, ensure universal access to
sexual and reproductive health care, including family planning."
No comments
a) Adolescent birth rate.
b) Laws/policies allowing access to contraceptive and other sexual
and reproductive health information and services without third-party
authorization/notification, including spousal and parental/guardian
authorization/notification
c) Changes in national laws to support expanded access to safe,
legal abortion.
d) Antenatal care coverage.
e) Unmet need for family planning.
f) Contraceptive Prevalence Rate.
g) Percentage of women who have made an informed choice about
their contraception method. (Currently measured by FP 2020, PMA
2020 Survey, DHS.)
h) Available obstetric facilities per 100,000.
i) An indicator to measure universal access and/or restrictions and
stigma. For example percentage of the population who report
discriminatory attitudes towards key populations.
j) Proportion of family planning demand met with modern
contraceptives.
Replace 3.7.1 with Contraceptive Prevalence Rate. CPR has long
been used as a measure of the success of contraceptive
programmes and is easier to calculate and understand (simply
being the proportion of WRA who use contraception) than ‘met
demand’ (which also tries to capture unmet need). CPR is more
feasible to monitor routinely from various data sources as it does
not rely on data on fertility intentions which is required to calculate
‘met demand’ and is difficult to capture accurately.
Include:
• Percentage of primary health care facilities that provide a
minimum package of SRH services as defined by Essential
Interventions, Commodities and Guidelines for Reproductive,
Maternal, Newborn and Child Health
3.7. The target of universal access is not measured by indicator

3.7.1;
3.7.2 We find this indicator a better one to measure target 3.7.
However too vague formulation as "demand satisfied". We think
that the one suggested by WB is to be preferred: "contraceptive
prevalence rate", disaggregated by age groups (especially to know
more about adolescents).
1. Access to nutritional requirement of infants, pregnant and
lactating mother under integrated child development schemes and
programs.
2. Adolescent birth rate (10-14; 15-19) per 1,000 women in that
age group.
3. Access to SRHRs.
Replace 3.7.2 with % Demand satisfied with any method of
contraceptive (either traditional or modern). As an indicator of
universal access to SRH services this must not ignore the
reproductive right (RR) to be informed about all contraceptive
methods. To realise RRs, knowledge & access to services covering
the full range of methods is essential. Evidence (Ross2013) shows
increasing method mix increases use. Focusing on modern
methods is based on the premise they are more effective yet
according WHO FP handbook 2011 some traditional methods are
also classified as effective and have greater efficacy than some
modern methods. Furthermore, effectiveness in terms of preventing
pregnancy is not the only factor people use to select a method.
Evidence in a wide range of contexts (Cambodia-Hukin 2013;
Cameroon-Johnson-Hanks2002; Italy-Gribaldo2009; India-Basu
2005) shows preferences for traditional methods exist amongst
urban, educated, wealthy sub-populations who have knowledge
and access to modern methods, yet choose traditional methods.
Add an SRH treatment indicator.

PAI suggests replacing indicator 3.7.1 (ABR) with an indicator
limiting adolescents’ reproductive choice. However, if 3.7.1 remains
the same, we recommend breaking down the 15-19 age range into
two separate groups: 15-17 and 18-19. Girls aged 10-14 are at a
much higher risk of dying from childbirth related complications and
childbearing for this age group is often rooted in discriminatory
practices such as child, early and forced marriage. Breaking down
the 15-19 to 15-17 and 18-19 may provide more information
whether a pregnancy was planned or unplanned. The majority of
unplanned and undated teenage pregnancies occur in the 15-17
age group. Among 18-19 year olds a significant share of births
occurs within marriage and union, thus more likely to be planned.
PAI also strongly recommends retaining indicator 3.7.2.

The Post-2015 Working Group recommends addition of the
following two indicators...
SRH knowledge among adolescents:
Complications linked to pregnancy and childbirth are the second

cause of death for 15-19-year-old girls globally and more than two
million adolescents are living with HIV (WHO Adolescents: health
risks and solutions fact sheet, 2014). The Group strongly
recommends the inclusion of SRHR knowledge among adolescents
under target 3.7
Proportion of health care facilities in a country that offer a minimum

package of SRH services, with quality of care:
The Group strongly recommends that this is included under target

3.7, with the minimum package derived from “Essential
Interventions, Commodities and Guidelines for Reproductive,
Maternal, Newborn and Child Health”, 2011 led by the Partnership,
WHO and Aga Khan University and endorsed by a broad partner
base.
Suggest "Integration of RH into national strategies and

programmes, and across other development interventions."


planned.
Plan International recommends 3.7.1 to be changed to: 'Percentage
of family planning demand met with modern contraceptives'. This
indicator emphasizes voluntarism and informed choice (rather than
establishes targets for contraceptive prevalence rates or fertility), as
well as the availability of modern methods of contraception, rather
than less effective traditional methods. While alone it is not
sufficient to measure progress toward this target, it is an essential
measure.
Plan International recommends 3.7.2 to be '3.7.2 Proportion of

health facilities that provide a comprehensive sexual and
reproductive health package of care which include: Access to
information on SRH; modern methods of contraceptives; maternal
health; access to safe abortion and post abortion care; HIV
prevention; STIs and reproductive cancers diagnosis and
prevention; information on assisted reproduction'.


planned.

We consider essential to include the indicator suggested by

UNWOMEN and WHO to ensure adolescents’ sexual and
reproductive rights, and monitor the risks of pregnancy in this age
group. In this regard, we should recall the recommendation of
former United Nations special rapporteur on health, Paul Hunt, who
emphasizes that "States must ensure that adolescents are able to
receive information, among other things about family planning and
contraceptives, the dangers of early pregnancy and prevention of
sexually transmitted infections, including HIV/AIDS, also sexual and
reproductive suitable health services" (E/CN.4/2004/49; para. 39).
We also propose an additional indicator that count the number of
abortions, considering the age, place of residence and socio-
economic conditions of women, in order to comply with the
recommendations of WHO (Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy
Guidance for Health Systems, 2003) and the special rapporteur on
health (E/CN.4/2004/49; para. 30), aimed at the public health
systems must ensure safe and accessible abortions to the
population.
Indicator: Proportion of health facilities that provide a
comprehensive sexual and reproductive health package of care
which include: Access to information on SRH; modern methods of
contraceptives; maternal health; access to safe abortion and post
abortion care; HIV prevention; STIs and reproductive cancers
diagnosis and prevention; information on assisted reproduction
Source: National Heath Information systems; DHS
This indicator would reflect the recommendations and lessons

learned from the ICPD Operational reviews on providing the
comprehensive SRH package and keep the commitment beyond
2015. There are information systems already put into place in many
countries as part of the ICPD Programme that could be useful in
collecting data on this indicator.
AMEND SUGGESTED INDICATOR TO:
Percentage of women of reproductive age (15-49 years) who have
their need for family planning satisfied with modern methods,
disaggregated by all social and economic groups
RATIONALE: Important that this indicator is disaggregated by age

as well as wealth, so that access and use of RMNH services by
adolescents can be tracked. Disaggregated data provided by
DHS.

Adolescent birth rate (10-14; 15-19) per 1,000 women in that age
group, disaggregated by all social and economic groups
RATIONALE: Disaggregated data provided by DHS. DHS report on

percentage of teenagers who are pregnant or had a child.


planned.
3.7.1 Percentage of family planning demand met with modern
contraceptives
NOTES: This indicator emphasizes voluntarism and informed

choice (rather than establishes targets for contraceptive prevalence
rates or fertility)

3.7.3 Adolescent birth rate (10-14; 15-19) per 1,000 adolescents in

that age group
Additional disaggregations:
Location of birth (i.e. health facility, home, etc)
NOTES: There must be disaggregation across a wider age group

for adolescent birth rate. Childbearing is often rooted in coercion
and discriminatory practices
3.7.4 Rate of unsafe abortions per 1,000 women aged 10-49

NOTES: Unsafe abortion is one of the leading causes of maternal
death

vaccine according to current guidelines
Data on deaths and injuries from road traffic accidents,

disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity,
migratory status.
Indicators should be further disaggregated by location (rural/urban)
and ethnic group.

collected] Number of new health technologies registered by the
National Regulatory Authority and/or recommended by national
guidelines (Disaggregated by SDG target [disease or health
priority])

Indicator 3.7.1: The Miracle Foundation calls for disaggregation and

adequate representation of orphans and vulnerable children,
including those living on the street or in

Budget allocated to prevention and information centers for youth
and specifically Girls and women
are proposed:
youth and adults.

are proposed:
youth and adults.
1. It is imperative to continue the push for accessible, friendly
sexual and reproductive health information and services for young
people.
Proposed new indicator;
Percentage/ Proportion of young people/ youth (10 - 24 yrs)

accessing friendly sexual and reproductive health services and
information
2. Ensuring access to age appropriate, comprehensive sexuality

education, in congress with national policies and interpretations, is
critical in making sure young people have the information to make
informed decisions on their health. An indicator speaking to access
to Comprehensive Sexuality Education is very much adequate
here.
Proposed Text:
Proportion of Young People Accessing Comprehensive Sexuality

Education
Both Suggested Indicators are v important (add ALL methods to FP

need satisfied). As part of the 2nd Suggested Indicator for v young
adolescents (<16) we suggest including “% of first births to girls
under 16 years” – this has the advantage of being targeted at zero
by 2030*. An additional 2 should be included here (also suggested
by UNFPA):
1) “% of young people 10-24 with basic knowledge about SRH”-
recalling HIV/MDG indicator and utilizing existing household survey
data (on knowledge of contraception, HIV prevention, and non-
violent gender relations).
2)“% of primary health care (PHC) facilities that provide an essential
integrated package of sexual & reproductive health services” – a
critical gap in existing measurements for international agreements
made 20yrs ago at the ICPD, captured in the target, and
accountability follow-on from failed MDG 5b. Sources: facility based
data/health management information systems. *(see Neal et al
(2012) Childbearing in adolescents aged 12–15:New estimates
from Demographic and Household Surveys in 47 countries, Acta
Obst Gyne Scand (Both FP demand and %PHC cd instead be
included in UHC 3.8)
abortion policies.
planned.
We support the proposed indicator on adolescent birth rate with a

focus on pre and post age of consent. However we believe this
should be disaggregated further for 3 age groups in total – 10-14,
15-17 and 18 and 19. The risk of 10-14 year olds of dying from
childbirth-related complications is 5 times higher than for women in
their 20s, and childbearing is often rooted in coercion and
discriminatory practices, such as child, early and forced marriage,
and sexual violence; 15-17 year olds account for the majority of
unplanned and unwanted teenage pregnancies; among 18-19 year
olds a significant share of births occurs within marriage and union,
thus more likely to be planned.
WE also support the suggestions to include a further indicator on ‘%
of women and girls who have made an informed choice about their
contraceptive method’ which is collected by DHS, FP2020. This
indicator is more effective at tracking access to rights-based
empowered decision making, while ABR may have the unintended
consequence of limiting adolescents’ reproductive choice.
educational level (with expended age range of 10 - 49+)
3.7.2 Proportion of young people (including 10-14 year olds) who
demonstrate desired levels of knowledge about sexual and
reproductive health, including at a minimum: 1. knowledge of three
common types of contraceptive measures: oral contraceptive (pill),
condom, and at least one longer-acting reversible contraceptive
(injection, IUD, implant); 2. knowledge of two ways to reduce sexual
transmission of HIV; a measure related to gender, power relation,
and perceptions of gender equality
Proposal: % of demand met for modern contraceptives

(Benchmark: 75%) disaggregated by age, geographic location,
ethnicity, race, disability, health status, and educational level
This indicator is defined as the proportion of sexually active women

of reproductive age (15-49), who use modern contraception, divided
by total demand for contraceptives. This indicator emphasizes
voluntarism and informed choice, as well as the availability of a
range of modern methods of contraception.
Proposal: Proportion of health facilities that provide comprehensive

sexual and reproductive healthcare including: Access to information
on SRH; modern methods of contraceptives; maternal health;
access to safe abortion and post abortion care; HIV prevention;
STIs and reproductive cancers diagnosis and prevention;
information on assisted reproduction.
This indicator would reflect the recommendations and lessons

learned from the ICPD Operational reviews on providing the
comprehensive SRH package and keep the commitment beyond
2015.
educational level


prevention; information on assisted reproduction National Heath
Information systems; DHS
See 4.7.1 for cross-cutting indicator.

WYA has serious concerns about 3.7.2. First, we object to the
indicator in its entirety. Contraception use prevalence does not
provide useful information about overall reproductive health.
If the indicator remains, we note that the inclusion of women under

18 may violate the right of parents to direct their children’s
upbringing in accordance with their values. This right is recognized
in several treaties (ICCPR art. 18, ICESCR art. 13, and CRC art. 5,
14, and 29). Contraceptive use implicates not only medicine but
also values, and thus comes within the scope of parental rights.
Moreover, many countries limit the provision of contraceptives to
adults.. Indicators should not undermine parents’ rights or state
sovereignty. If the age range is left in place, we recommend adding
“as allowed by law” after the ages.
We prefer the formulation “family planning met by modern methods”

as “modern contraceptives” does not include all modern, scientific
methods of avoiding pregnancy.
We recommend rephrasing the indicator: Percentage of girls and
women of reproductive age (15-19; 20-25; 26-35;36-49 years) who
have made informed choices regarding family planning and modern
contraception methods. The phrasing of an indicator focused on
choice and information allows to collect data on the access of girls
and women to information on these contraception methods, not
only physical access to them. To cover the complexity of sexual and
reproductive health-care services, and therefore properly measure
the progress on ensuring universal access to services, we
recommend an additional indicator: Percentage of girls and women
who have access to safe abortion, gynecological services, HIV/STI
information and treatment, contraception counselling and family
planning services. Collection of these data should be disaggregated
by age, location, income, educational level and other
characteristics.

are proposed:

youth and adults.
Target 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage, including
financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care
services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable
essential medicines and vaccines for all
We recommend that this indicator be disaggregated by disability.
Suitable data is already captured through the WHO Model Disability

Survey and Survey on Ageing and Adult Health.
Disaggregation by disability is important for this indicator due to the

risk that persons with disabilities will not be able to access health
coverage equitably. The World Report on Disability (World
Bank/WHO 2011) analysed data from the World Health Survey, and
found that persons with disabilities are twice as likely to find health
care providers' skills and facilities inadequate, nearly thrice as likely
to be denied health care, and four times more likely to report being
treated badly in the healthcare system.
Our proposed indicator also addresses target 10.2.

A crucial piece of achieving universal health coverage is achieving
universal access to health services. The lack of adequate personnel
standing as a major barrier in much of the world. Amref Health
Africa strongly urges an indicator measuring access to health
services:
Consultations with a certified or licensed provider in a health facility

or in the community, per person, per year.
We also recommend this indicator for 3.C, as it has cross-cutting

value. Our reasoning is contained in the comment for 3.C.
1. Comprehensive policy ensuring access to public health

services by disadvantaged groups.
OP needs health coverage, Financial risk protection and so on for

his involvement in development
Relevance: The indicator is a proxy for UHC and financial risk
protection
Aptness: Access targets mostly have quantitative “coverage”

indicators – ie numbers or proportion accessing a service. It is also
helpful to have an additional qualitative indicators for these targets,
to ensure that services are appropriate and of sufficient quality for
all relevant groups.
Disaggregation: Absent, however, it would be relevant to

disaggregate for vulnerable groups to highlight whether there are
discrepancies among populations.
Preference: Indicator uses proxies relevant to vulnerable groups,

targets should be weighted to improve circumstances of
marginalised groups.
Transformative: target and indicator are not transformative,

indicator that could involve empowerment of vulnerable group in
assessing services could address this.
,That all governments take responsibility for regular and ongoing
vaccination of children's population, that in order to be enrolled in
school, is charged of parents or guardians of every child,
mandatory presentation of vaccination vouchers for all vaccines
corresponding to their age properly applied.
3.8.1 Percentage of population disaggregated by age, sex, gender,
geographic location, income, disability, race and ethnicity, with
access to essential quality basic health services including essential
medicines and vaccines
Universal health coverage can only be achieved if persons with

disabilities are included in all aspects (including financial risk
protection, access to quality essential health-care services and
access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines
and vaccines).
Access to health coverage is especially important given the often
higher need of persons with disabilities for health services, as well
as, to avoid disability caused by health issues. Either way,
disaggregation by disability is absolutely necessary to assess the
achievement of Universal Health Coverage. This would be achieved
by measuring the percentage of persons with disabilities receiving
needed health services facing impoverishing health expenditure
and benefitting from health coverage.
Medical technologies must be added besides medicines and
vaccines.
Here is an example:
Indicator: Percentage of people who present at any basic health
care setting are diagnosed using medical technologies.
Explanation
This would measure the precision of diagnosis using medical
technologies when people present with symptoms of diseases such
as communicable and non-communicable diseases. Therefore the
measurement can be 100 people showed symptoms of coughing
and 50 were diagnosed with TB through technologies such as X-ray
and the other 50 were in the clear. The outcome was that treatment
was given to the 50% who had TB.
We are pleased to see both aspects of Universal Health Coverage

(UHC) reflected in the new proposal and strongly encourage you to
ensure both indicators are kept within the framework. Effective
tracking of both components will be vital to the realization of UHC
and the SDGs. Neglecting one of these fundamental aspects of
UHC renders the target redundant. In most countries credible
comparable data on both of these measures is already collected
and the inclusion of both indicators would not produce an additional
reporting burden.

and vaccines for all).
disaggregation by disability is very much needed to assess the
Indicator: 3.8.2; There is a clear need to include an indicator
assessing water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities in
healthcare facilities, as access to WASH facilities are critical to
ensuring healthy live for all.
add indicator on "access to healthcare, which includes access also

via internet "
The indicators to be used depends on the definition of the essential
health care service package. To reduce the number of indicators, an
option would be to reference a comprehensive package of
preventive and curative services that captures many of the
proposed indicators under other targets also defined in WHO
Global Nutrition Targets, Health targets etc.
standing is a major barrier in much of the world. The Frontline
Health Workers Coalition strongly urges an indicator measuring
access to health services:


With vaccines for all in the target the indicator proposed by Gavi
would also fit here
“Reach and sustain 90% national coverage and 80% in every

district with all vaccines in national programmes.”
Disaggregated by disability:
- e.g Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving needed
health
services; ,
- Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving needed assistive
technologies;
- Proportion of households with persons with disabilities facing
impoverishing health expenditure;
- Percentage of persons with disabilities benefitting from health
coverage
Suggested target
With particular attention to the most marginalised and people in
vulnerable situations, by 2030 achieve universal health coverage,
including 100% coverage of essential and quality health services,
and access to safe, effective and affordable essential medicines
and vaccines for all and end all impoverishment due to health
expenditure and out of pocket payments.
Rationale: We welcome the broaden definition of UHC beyond

financial risk protection to include access to health services and
commodities. However, the focus should remain on the most
vulnerable populations. Two aspects of the target – access to
health care and financial risk protection - must work towards the
objective of achieving 100% coverage and ending catastrophic
expenditures due out of pocket payments for health.
Indicator 1 Coverage rate of essential care package
Indicator 2 Incidence of catastrophic health expenditure and

impoverishment due to out of pocket payments.
Rationale: The three components of the definition of financial risk
protection should be measured to monitor financial risk protection.
• Consultations with a trained or skilled provider in a health facility
or in the community, per person, per year. A crucial piece of
achieving UHC is achieving universal access to health services, the
lack of adequate personnel standing as a major barrier in much of
the world. We also recommend this indicator for 3.C.
• Tracer interventions include the following: a) Percentage of
healthcare facilities providing access to safely managed water,
sanitation and hygiene, including menstrual hygiene management
b) Percentage of population with access to sanitation, water and
hygiene at home c) Coverage of the whole package of HIV services
(prevention, treatment, care and support), not just ARV treatment
• Disaggregation is key in this indicator including aging. Older
persons must be included in overall health coverage. Healthy life
expectancy measures quantity and quality of life and can be used
to describe and monitor the health status of populations. HLE can
be used to predict future health service needs, evaluating health
programs, identifying trends and inequalities in accessing basic
service
House to house surveys necessary.
protection, access to quality essential health-care services,
assistive technologies and rehabilitation for all; and access to safe,
effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and vaccines).
higher need of persons with disabilities for health services (both
general and specific, including rehabilitation), as well as, to avoid
disability caused by health issues. Either way, disaggregation by
disability is h needed to assess the achievement of UHC. It cen be
measured by the percentage of persons with disabilities receiving
and benefiting from health coverage.The WHO Disability Action
Plan 2014-2021 contains objectives around access to health care
as well as improving essential rehabilitation service coverage

For both proposed indicators disaggregation by ethnicity is possible
within household survey DHS or MICS data sources.
• See recommended indicator and comment under Target 3.2 on
immunization.
• [National indicator, nationally collected] Percent of population with
access to a health coverage scheme (public or private).
• [National indicator, nationally collected] Out of pocket health care
expenditures and proportion practicing care avoidance (health care
they needed and didn’t get for financial reasons).
Comment:
• Measures progress towards achieving UHC and what is not
covered in UHC benefit schemes.
The evidence correlating HIV risk/prevalence and child protection
concerns and the recent experience of many children being
orphaned by Ebola demonstrate why effective social welfare
systems are an essential part of health systems. Developing social
welfare infrastructure linked to health systems, including referral
mechanisms and case management, is essential to children’s
health, development, education, and protection outcomes.
Given the evidence concerning the poor outcomes across sectors

for children living outside of family care, it is important to recognize
that proposed targets under Goal 3 will not be achieved without
attention to the caregiving environment in which children grow up.
Suggested indicators: Ratio of public social workers (or equivalent)

to population.
The percentage of children living outside of households, including in
institutions.

I agree with this, however, in position of society civil organization,
we could not say that we can do it
geographic location, income, disability, race and ethnicity, and other
factors with access to essential quality basic health services
including essential medicines and vaccines
This indicator is important for PLWHA and groups most vulnerable
to HIV, because it should include access to HIV prevention,
treatment, care and support services. Disaggregation is key in this
indicator including aging. Older persons must be included in overall
health coverage. As a group, health costs increase as one ages.
Ensuring broad universal health coverage equalizes costs across
all members of a nation's society and improves access to heal-care
for people of all ages.
3.8.2 Healthy life expectancy (HLE) at age 60 The current WHO
recommendation for an indicator on coverage of key tracer
interventions is not sufficient, as the tracer intervention for AIDS
only includes ARV treatment. It should be the whole package of HIV
services (prevention, treatment, care and support).
As mentioned in IAPB’s previous submission, measurement of

progress on Universal Health Coverage needs to cover the whole
health continuum (with paper previously submitted on benefit of
using cataract surgical coverage as a part of this).
Further in order to have an impact on equity, that is to reach all
people, assessment of progress needs to incorporate attention to
marginalized groups such as persons with disabilities.
Indicators: this would require measuring the percentage of persons
with disabilities receiving needed health services; facing
impoverishing health expenditure; and benefitting from health
coverage.
Service coverage includes whole continuum of care including
promotion, prevention, treatment, rehabilitation and palliation. The
indicators should be linked to different global action plans and WHA
resolutions e.g. WHA68.15 and WHA67.19. ICN proposes new
indicators/modification: 1) Coverage of promotional and preventive
interventions (e.g. % of pregnant women who had at least four
antenatal care visits, % of women who had postnatal care visit, %
of schools and childcare facilities providing healthy diet, % of
countries that integrated health education component into school
curricula, % of adolescents/pre and post natal women who have
access to mental health promotion services, % of health facilities or
schools with appropriate hygiene and sanitation facilities etc.). 2)
Coverage of palliative care for all who need it. 3) Quality of
healthcare services using validated quality indicators (see examples
in the WHO People-centred and integrated health services: an
overview of the evidence and the “WHO global strategy on people-
centred and integrated health services”.
Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving needed health
services
Percentage of persons with disabilities receiving needed assistive
technologies;
Proportion of households with persons with disabilities facing
impoverishing health expenditure;
Percentage of persons with disabilities benefitting from health
coverage
Comment: These indicators are included in the WHO Disability

Action Plan (http://www.who.int/disabilities/actionplan/en/).
Data for this indicator was collected in past World Health Surveys
(2003-4) and disaggregated for disability. It is currently being
collected and will continue to be collected through the WHO Model
Disability Survey (MDS) and the Study on Ageing and Adult Health
(SAGE). The MDS and SAGE, as the World Health Survey, are both
sample surveys with nationally representative populations and
weighted to the national populations.

standing as a major barrier in much of the world. The Frontline
Health Workers Coalition strongly urges an indicator measuring
access to health services:


Suggest, "Ensure universal health coverage, including..." Ensure is
more enduring and protective than just achieving coverage. Also it
reflects national ownership.
No comments
a) % of national budget’s expenditure on health and health
expenditure per capita.
b) Out of pocket expenditures.
c) Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel.
d) % of individuals in community/facility catchment area reporting
awareness of, access to, and satisfaction with health services
(disaggregated by gender, age, marital status, urban/rural, wealth
quintile).
=>
Universal Health Coverage, UHC, is not just health financing, it
should cover all components of the health system to be successful.
UHC is comprised of much more than just health; taking steps

towards
UHC means steps towards equity, development priorities, social
inclusion and cohesion. UHC maintains and improves health. Good
health allows children to learn and adults to earn. This helps people
escape from poverty and provides the basis for long-term economic
development.
The evidence correlating HIV risk/prevalence and child protection
concerns and the recent experience of many children being
orphaned by Ebola demonstrate why effective social welfare
systems are an essential part of health systems. Developing social
welfare infrastructure linked to health systems, including referral
mechanisms and case management, is essential to children’s
health, development, education, and protection outcomes.
Given the evidence concerning the poor outcomes across sectors

for children living outside of family care, it is important to recognize
that proposed targets under Goal 3 will not be achieved without
attention to the caregiving environment in which children grow up.
Suggested indicators:
Ratio of public social workers (or equivalent) to population.
The percentage of children living outside of households, including in
institutions.
As noted elsewhere, evidence shows the strong linkages between

social welfare and health care services. We cannot achieve an
"AIDS-free" generation unless issues such as sexual abuse and
early marriage are addressed. Suggest an indicator on social
welfare services, such as increasing the ratio of social workers to
the population, as they serve as a focal point for referring clients to
available resources and services.
Malaria Consortium supports the inclusion of the malaria indicator

‘Coverage of tracer interventions’, and approves of the WHO list of
proposed tracer interventions. It is important that this list is
representative.
We support the indicator ‘Fraction of the population protected

against catastrophic/impoverishing out-of-pocket health
expenditure’ in line with the WHO recommendation.
PMNCH's recommendation -
The indicator of protection against catastrophic health expenditure

is only the tip of the iceberg of impoverishing efects of health
expenditure. Moreover foregoing or delaying care is as important,
which is not reflectedin expenditure (no ca => no expenditure.
Proportion of OOP spending for health expenditure is a better
indicator.
The NCD Alliance supports the WHO and World Bank indicator
proposal for UHC tracer indicators.
1. Comprehensive policy ensuring access to public health

services by disadvantaged groups
We think the inclusion of a facility level indicator of care at birth is
vital. We recommend, as per WHO handbook and Countdown to
2015, the indicator: National availability of emergency obstetric
care: basic and comprehensive care facilities. Definition: There are
at least five emergency obstetric care facilities (including at least
one comprehensive facility) for every 500 000 population.
Availability is expressed as a percentage of the minimum
acceptable number of emergency obstetric care facilities.
Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk

and vaccines for all especially against preventable disability
diseases such as polio, and river blindness
3.8.1. and 3.8.2. We strongly support the inclusion of two indicators
for target 3.8 on Universal Health Coverage (UHC). This is because
UHC means all people accessing the quality health services they
need without risk of financial hardship. Indicators to measure
progress towards UHC must capture both dimensions of UHC;
coverage of health services and protection from financial hardship.
However, it is vital that measurement of progress against UHC
builds in equity and universality from the outset, by disaggregation
of data by sex and wealth quintile. Household survey data used
must include data on household income. This is so important,
because the poorest people are often the hardest-to-reach with
services, the most likely to go without healthcare deterred by cost,
and those for whom out-of-pocket payments have the greatest
catastrophic impact (as they consume proportionally more of their
income). Disaggregation of data is critical to ensure this target truly
delivers progress towards UHC and meaningfully combats
inequality therefore.
Recommended indicator: [Global indicator] Reach and sustain 90%
national coverage and 80% in every district with all vaccines in
national programmes.
*See rationale in target 3.2
Recommended indicator: [National indicator] Percent of population
with access to a health coverage scheme (public or private).
This measure demonstrates a country’s progress towards universal
health coverage.
Recommended indicator: [National indicator] Out of pocket health
care expenditures and measure care avoidance (health care they
needed and didn’t get).
Out of pocket health care expenditures would show what is not
covered through UHC benefit schemes. Measurement on care
avoidance shows population that did not have access to care when
it was needed.
Disagree with the comments to measure through household survey
the number of people experiencing impoverishment due to out of
pocket health care expenditures, because this doesn’t capture
people that avoided seeking care they couldn’t afford.
Ideally an indicator around 'essential health care services' would
include the basic facilities that should be available such as safely
managed water and sanitation, and access to energy in health
facilities.
It is necessary to include specific indicators on the coverage of

quality health services as well as free access to medicines,
because in countries with large groups in poverty, it is common to
find records of coverage (affiliation) that are purely administrative
but ineffective.
PROPOSAL: (Suggested indicators):
“Mortality rate”
“Infant mortality”
“Child mortality”
“Cause-specific mortality”
Indicator: Percentage of population disaggregated by age, sex,

gender, geographic location, income, disability, race and ethnicity,
with access to essential quality basic health services including
essential medicines and vaccines
Source: Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Institute for
Health Metrics and Evaluation
Disaggregation is key in this indicator including aging. Older

persons must be included in overall health coverage. As a group,
health costs increase as one ages. Ensuring broad universal health
coverage equalizes costs across all members of a nation's society
and improves access to heal-care for people of all ages.
Coverage of tracer interventions disaggregated by all social and
economic groups
RATIONALE: Tracer interventions should draw from the

recommended indicators in WHO/WB First Global Monitoring UHC
report and the global database that is currently being developed,
some of which may be monitored in other goals and targets.
AMEND INDICATOR 3.8.2 TO: Fraction of the population protected

from incurring impoverishing/catastrophic out-of-pocket health
expenditures
RATIONALE: Monitoring financial protection requires data from

household consumption expenditure surveys - regularly conducted
by national statistics offices. Monitoring financial protection does not
add any additional data collection burden, insofar as the health
expenditure component of the household non-food consumption
data can be disaggregated.
Access to universal physical and mental health coverage and
access to quality physical and mental health care services and
affordable treatments measured by data disaggregated by gender,
ndicator 3.8.1: Change to: Fraction of the population, by age, sex
and persons with disabilities, protected against impoverishment by
out-of-pocket health expenditures.
The WHO recommends an indicator on coverage of tracer

interventions that includes treatment for hypertension and diabetes.
While we would welcome a measure that includes these, the
current data source is population based surveys including DHS and
STEPS. With DHS restricted to people between the ages of 15 and
49 (or 59 for men) and STEPS recommended for people between
the ages of 25 and 64, the data collected for these health
interventions risks being exclusive of people in older age.
Hypertension and diabetes treatment should be included in the

indicator, but alternate data sources and methods of collection
should be identified that ensure data is collected for the age group
most affected by NCDs.
Indicator 3.8.1 should explicitly refer to welfare indicators and to the

level of government engagement in public health. An indicator could
be ‘% of public investment per each dollar‘s worth of
medicine/treatment’.
3.8.: Existence of regulatory provisions allowing access of
indigenous peoples and local communities to traditional health
practices, medicine and knowledge.


Universal health coverage is a critical component. However, it is
important to recognise that delivering all aspects of UHC (including
financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care
services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable
essential medicines and vaccines for all) will only be possible by
addressing the needs of groups, such as people with disabilities,
who are also often most at risk. It is especially important given the
often higher need of persons with disabilities for health services, as
well as, to avoid disability caused by health issues.
Suggested indicators: Percentage of persons with disabilities

receiving needed health services; Proportion of households with
persons with disabilities facing impoverishing health expenditure.
Budget allocated to prevention and information centers for youth

and specifcally Girls and women
Both Suggested Indicators are very important (% pop protected
from OOPS and coverage of tracer interventions) but tracer
interventions need to be defined exactly and adhered to. We
suggest a list including not more than 10:
1) % primary health care facilities that provide an essential
integrated package of sexual & repro health services (if not in 3.7)
2) FP needs satisfied (if not in 3.7)
3) % coverage of functioning Emergency Obstetric and Newborn
Care facilities per population/births/pregnancies (WHO & UNFPA)
4) proportion of pregnant women who access antenatal care (at
least 1 visit and 4+ visits)
5) % women with SBA at birth (if not in 3.1) – this is a follow on from
failed MDG 5b
6) specific maternal interventions – suggest % women with AMTSL
after birth
7) specific newborn interventions – Antenatal corticosteroid use
(ENAP); /Newborn resuscitation (ENAP); Kangaroo mother care &
feeding support (ENAP); Treatment of neonatal sepsis (ENAP),
8) % children fully immunized (GVAP) and treatment of common
childhood conditions
9) NCD related indicator
10) ARV treatment for affected adults/children

We are pleased to see both aspects (coverage of tracer
interventions and financial risk protection) of Universal Health
Coverage (UHC) reflected in the new proposal and strongly
encourage you to ensure both indicators are kept within the
framework. Effective tracking of both components will be vital to the
realization of UHC and the SDGs. Neglecting one of these
fundamental aspects of UHC renders the target redundant. In most
countries credible comparable data on both of these measures is
already collected and the inclusion of both indicators would not
produce an additional reporting burden.
WaterAid notes the inclusion of the indicator on tracer interventions
to monitor Universal Health Coverage. This is a good indicator but
we encourage member states to explicitly state what the tracer
interventions should be in the next round.
The World Bank and World Health Organisation's recent report on

Universal Health Coverage included access to WASH and this
should be understood to be part of the tracer interventions.
We recommend member states to ensure that this indicator maps to

the WHO/UNICEF JMP proposal of 2013 to measure WASH access
in healthcare facilities.


Metrics and Evaluation
(http://ghdx.healthmetricsandevaluation.org/recrd/global-burden-
disease-study-2010-gbd-2010-healthy-life-expectancy-1990-2010)
3.8.2 Healthy life expectancy (HLE) at age 60

Metrics and Evaluation
(http://ghdx.healthmetricsandevaluation.org/recrd/global-burden-
disease-study-2010-gbd-2010-healthy-life-expectancy-1990-2010)
World Animal Protection proposes that one indicator for this target
focus on the key determinant for continued access by all to safe,
effective, quality and affordable essential medicines, notably the
issue of Anti-Microbial Resistance (AMR) – Proposed indicator:
Anti-Microbial Resistance incidence rate
Antibiotics are essential to securing and maintaining the advances

of modern medicine as well as ensuring that national health
systems around the world are affordable. Achieving universal
will therefore require the adoption of antibiotic conservation
measures, including the phasing out of antibiotic use for non-
therapeutic purposes in livestock production. The indicator
proposed is the most effective means of measuring whether such
conservation measures are effective.
Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths
and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil
pollution and contamination
Indicator 1: Population exposed to indoor air pollution levels –
Above WHO guideline (2008, Evaluating household energy and
health interventions A catalogue of methods) and ISO Standards,
Measured against 2012 ISO/IWA references. The sources may be
the administrative documents verified researches.
It is suggested to expand the proposed indicator to also cover
indoor air pollution and rural areas as well as reference it according
to 'mean levels of exposure'.
As a significant number of premature deaths and illnesses are

attributed to air pollution we also suggest adding number of
premature deaths (ambient and household air pollution) as an
indicator. This would also closer align the indicators with the overall
target.
This is a people-centred and human rights-relevant indicator, which
could double as indicator under target 11.6.
In order to be able to achieve this target, it is critical to work
together with solutions for Goal 7 on access to energy and Goal 6
on water, sanitation and hygiene. Faecal pollution, and chemical/
hazardous pollution must be decreased and eliminated if we want
to reduce the number of deaths and illness.
We propose the addition of an indicator on solid waste
management as part of the broader sanitation efforts towards the
reduction of pollution and contamination.
This target specifies reducing the number of deaths and illnesses
from water pollution and contamination; but is not supported by an
indicator. There needs to be an associated indicator.
In order to be able to achieve this target, it is critical to work
together with solutions for Goal 7 on access to energy and Goal 6
on water, sanitation and hygiene. Chemical/ hazardous pollution
must be decreased and eliminated if we want to reduce the number
of deaths and illness related to illnesses from hazardous chemicals.
Most or all of those chemicals are coming from industrial activities.
Indicator should measured percentage of discharged made by
those industries dissagregated by air,water and soil, and by level of
toxicity. And this should be decreasing.
The current indicator 3.9.1 drafted to measure this target is
insufficient. We must consider the effects of both ambient &
household air pollution in all settings to reduce the number of
deaths & illnesses caused by exposure to air pollution. However,
the suggested priority indicator on pollution only measures outdoor
pollution in urban settings.
We recommend simplifying the indicator so that it accounts for air
pollution in urban, peri-urban, & rural settings. The revised indicator
3.9.1 reads “Mean air pollution of particulate matter (PM10 &
PM2.5).” This indicator would be measured by WHO & highly
utilized by policymakers.
The indicator framework must also account for mortality from air
pollution in order to measure against Target 3.9. Therefore, we
recommend including Indicator 3.9.2: “Number of premature deaths
attributable to ambient & household air pollution.” WHO already
measures this indicator as a part of the Burden of Disease.
Health safety and environment training at its most basic level
should be introduced at all levels of education.
Awareness should be created at community level.
Proper adherence to global safety standards should be maintained.
M and E is necessary here to check compliance at domestic as well
as industrial levels.
Governments should identify suitable technologies to address this
issue.
Close down industries that involve in soil, water and air pollution
Facilitate transfer of technologies useful for mankind
Encourage maintain a community based record surrounding an
Industry to periodically monitor, evaluate, review the pollution levels
The indicator for this target should be modified to read "Mean levels
of exposure to ambient air pollution (population weighted)"
Limiting the indicator to just urban areas overlooks a substantial
population suffering from the impacts from outdoor air pollution
exposure. Expanding the indicator to include both urban and rural
areas ensures that all human and environmental impacts referred to
in the target are accounted for.
The annual average or mean is a more specific and reliable
indicator for monitoring the health and environmental impacts which
is not unduly influenced by daily fluctuations or short-term peaks in
air pollution levels.
Weighting annual levels of fine PM by the size of the population in
urban and rural area increases the specificity of this indicator.
The data sources: Global Platform on Air Quality and Health; WHO
Guidelines for Air Quality; WHO’s Global Health Observatory; WHO
Ambient Air Pollution Database in cities
I totally agree with this however it is not easy to realise

The link to 11.2 should be made. Transport and other sectoral
contributions (both local and external sources) should be identified
and the main air pollutants covering major health concern should be
covered.
This target could be under Goal 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 in
order to remember the impact of non-health sectors on health and
to encourage multisectoral actions to promote and protect people’s
health.
ICN supports the indicator suggested by UNEP – Death and

disability from indoor and outdoor air quality, water/sanitation, and
contaminated sites – as the currently proposed indicator only
covers urban outdoor air pollution. There is a need for other
indicators to measure the impact of hazardous chemicals, water
and soil pollution and contamination.
In 2012, WHO, IHME & GAHP estimated 8.9m deaths result from
exposure to polluted soil, water & air. Most of these are in low- &
mid-income countries.
3.9.1 Monitor mean population blood lead levels [and other heavy
metals/chemicals] in children
3.9.2 Monitor concentration of hazardous organic compounds in
human breastmilk
3.9.3 Monitor levels of persistent toxic substances and heavy
metals present in subsistence food supplies such as fish and game
3.9.4 Identification of water sources at the household level that
reliably delivers enough water to meet domestic needs, compliant
with WHO guideline values for Escherichia coli, arsenic and
fluoride, and is subject to a verified risk management plan
3.9.5 Estimate the burden of disease from urban air pollution by
monitoring the proportion of the urban population exposed to
small/fine urban particulates (PM10 or PM2.5) in concentrations
exceeding WHO Air Quality Guidelines
Why not, "By 2030, reduce by half the number of deaths and
illnesses from ..."? Why just "substantially", which is such a relative
term?
It may be possible to set the target value for e.g.

50% reduction in deaths caused due to air pollution
Recommend the following: 3.9.1. Burden of air pollution-related
diseases and injuries; 3.9.2. Household access to modern, low-
emissions heating and cooking technologies; 3.9.3. Mean air
pollution of particulate matter (PM10 and PM25); and, 3.9.4.
Number of premature deaths attributable to ambient and household
air pollution.
Indicator 3.9.1: Population in urban areas exposed to outdoor air
pollution levels above WHO guideline values
Comments:
• An established and important indicator
• Measured directly in many locations already
• Can use satellite imaging and other data in short term to
determine the index
• Transport and other sectoral contributions should be identified
as Tier II indicator where data exist
We recommend a change in wording of the indicator to: Population
exposed to indoor and outdoor air pollution levels (MP10 and
PM2.5) above WHO guideline values.
We also recommend a second indicator here on ‘Number of

premature deaths attributable to ambient and household air
pollution’. This is in line with calls from the Global Alliance for Clean
Cookstoves and Energia. It is already measured by WHO and
therefore does not impose new work on national statistical offices.
PROPOSAL: (Suggested indicators):
“Incidence of occupational disease due to hazardous chemicals in
the workplace”
“Prevalence of occupational disease due to hazardous chemicals in
the workplace”
“Mortality due to occupational exposure to hazardous chemicals”
The currently proposed indicator for this target— Population in

urban areas exposed to outdoor air pollution levels above WHO
guideline values—only concerns general population exposed to
outdoor air pollution, but the target clearly refers to pollution and
contamination of air, water and soil. The proposed indicator is
insufficient even in relation to air pollution, and does not include
mercury, POPs and other trans-boundary air pollutants, or pollution
in water or soil.The WHO and IHME have been collecting data on
deaths and disabilities caused by outdoor and indoor air pollution,
as well as water and sanitation issues, using well-established and
accepted Global Burden of Disease estimates. GBD data is already
being measured in 188 countries using data collected and analyzed
by a consortium of more than 1,000 researchers. It is a tool that can
be used at the global, national, and local levels to understand
health trends over time.
3.9.1 Number of illnesses and premature deaths attributable to
ambient and household air pollution
DATA SOURCE: WHO
NOTES: 4.3 million people die prematurely each year from

exposure to household air pollution
Data for all groups disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,

indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban residence,
national origin, and migratory status
We prefer UNEP’s alternative indicator for target 3.9. However,
emissions in urban areas as the only indicator (plus excluding rural
areas) is insufficient. Target requires monitoring of upstream
activities to reduce emissions of hazardous chemicals. Measure of
chemicals within consumer products also needed. Global average
of ‘No. of restricted chemicals/grand total’ could be an indicator.
‘Hazardous chemicals’ needs clarification. Does it mainly cover
deaths caused by pollution/toxins, or also health outcomes from
drugs/smoking? Further, which air pollutants are proposed?
Particulate matter - soot (black carbon), PM2.5 and ozone all
important to include, e.g. ‘No. of premature deaths attributable to
ambient/household air pollution in urban/rural populations’.
Disaggregating indoor-outdoor air pollution and linked health
outcomes is important but not proposed. Measure of water and soil
pollution not proposed. Satellite observations may be insufficient for
some pollutants, but presence of bioindicators (lichens for air
pollution) and ground-level monitoring may be useful.
The suggested indicator does not narrow down on urban and rural
areas nor includes water and soil pollution which also have impact
on agriculture. In addition, we need to include in the target (and
indicator) health hazards that stem form the concentrations above
recognized limits.
Target 3.9. The indicator proposed will measure only “outdoor air
pollution”. However water pollution and contamination is a greater
source of mortality, particularly for children (support UNEP
proposal)
3.9.1 Mean air pollution of particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) by
geography, disaggregated by sex, age and geography
WHO
3.9.2 Number of premature deaths attributable to ambient and

household air pollution, by sex, age, and geography
WHO
Concentration of coliform bacteria, nitrates, and other contaminants
in waterways.
Prevalence of waterways undergoing eutrophication.
Concentration of particulate matter, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia and
other contaminants in the air.
WWF would support a broader coverage of issues beyond only air
pollution to better capture the intent of this target, for example as
proposed by UNEP: Alternative: Death and disability (disaggregated
by sex and age) from indoor and outdoor air quality,
water/sanitation, and contaminated sites.
Target 3.a: Strengthen the implementation of the World Health
Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in all
countries, as appropriate
We suggest to adapt indicator 3.a.1 to indicator 3.4.2 (age 15 and
older, disaggregated data by sex, age and income).
Furthermore, tobacco taxation is the most effective measure to

reduce tobacco consumption and is central to the implementation of
the FCTC. Progress in tobacco taxation can be measured.
We propose to add as indicator 3.a.2: affordability of cigarettes

(average price of 100 packs of cigarettes as % of GDP per capita).
Data sources: World Bank, country reports to the WHO FCTC or
national Consumer Price Index. The recent WHO report on the
global tobacco epidemic includes a sound database of 160
countries for 2014 and the comparison to data from 2008.
Interlinkages: 3.4, 17.1 (tobacco taxation = domestic financing

resource, see Addis Abeba Action Agenda, paragraph 32 and 77)
Furthermore, the implementation of the WHO FCTC is interlinked

with a wide range of targets, as shown in our infographic at
https://www.unfairtobacco.org/wp-
content/uploads/SDG_tobacco_graphic.pdf
FCA agrees with the proposed indicator on age-standardized
prevalence of tobacco use among persons aged 18 years and
older, but recommends a second indicator to provide more rapid
feedback on policy implementation under the WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC).
The 2015 WHO Global Tobacco Control Report identifies raising

taxes on tobacco as the most effective way to reduce tobacco use,
yet concludes that this measure, fully developed in FCTC Article 6
guidelines, remains underutilized by many governments.
Governments’ policies on tobacco control should be monitored by
examining tobacco prices relative to incomes.
Therefore, we propose tobacco affordability as a second indicator

for target 3a. The tobacco affordability indicator should be defined
as the percentage of GDP per capita required to purchase 100
packs of 20 cigarettes of the most sold brand (or 2000 sticks of the
most smoked product, such as bidis or kreteks, in the small number
of countries where cigarettes are not the most smoked product).
We agree with the proposed indicator on age-standardized
prevalence of tobacco use among persons aged 18 years and
older, but recommends a second indicator to provide more rapid
feedback on policy implementation under the WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The 2015 WHO Global
Tobacco Control Report identifies raising taxes on tobacco as the
most effective way to reduce tobacco use. Yet, this measure, fully
developed in FCTC Article 6 guidelines, remains underutilized by
many governments. Governments’ policies on tobacco control
should be monitored by examining tobacco prices relative to
incomes. We propose tobacco affordability as a second indicator for
target 3a. The tobacco affordability indicator should be defined as
the percentage of GDP per capita required to purchase 100 packs
of 20 cigarettes of the most sold brand (or 2000 sticks of the most
smoked product, such as bidis, in the small number of countries
where cigarettes are not the most smoked product).
Governments should invariably stop advertisements on tobacco
products.
I totally agree with this

Indicator 3.4.1 should be under Target 3.a. and we suggest
including younger children including those in primary schools. The
assumption that children under 18 years old do not smoke is not
realistic and health education to avoid tobacco use should be
integrated in primary school curricula.
ICN proposes a new indicator: Proportion of countries in which the

Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products is in force.
No comments
We recommend consideration of a tobacco tax indicator, such as
tobacco revenue as a % of total government revenue.
Data on tobacco use for all groups disaggregated by gender, age,
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban
residence, national origin, and migratory status
We suggest to adapt the indicator 3.a.1 to indicator 3.4.2 “Current
tobacco use among persons 15 years and over” (disaggregated
data by sex, age and income).
Furthermore, tobacco taxation is the most effective measure to
reduce tobacco consumption and stands at the core of FCTC
implementation. Progress in tobacco taxation can be measured by
an additional indicator. We propose the indicator 3.a.2: affordability
of cigarettes (average price of 100 packs of cigarettes as % of GDP
per capita). Data sources: World Bank, country reports to the WHO
FCTC or national Consumer Price Index. There is already a sound
database of 160 countries for 2014 from the recent WHO report on
the global tobacco epidemic.
Target 3.b: Support the research and development of vaccines and
medicines for the communicable and non-communicable diseases that
primarily affect developing countries, provide access to affordable
essential medicines and vaccines, in accordance with the Doha
Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, which affirms
the right of developing countries to use to the full the provisions in the
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
regarding flexibilities to protect public health, and, in particular, provide
access to medicines for all
OP lack médicine where as this is very important
Availability of health service providers based on local demand
3.b.1 Proportion of people living with HIV with access to HIV treatment, by
age, sex and key population
3.b.2 Proportion of population disaggregated by age, sex, gender,
geographic location, income, disability, race and ethnicity, with access to
affordable essential medicines throughout the life cycle
We welcome the suggested indicator. However it does not address the
dramatic lack of new and effective global health technologies for the majority
of communicable diseases affecting LMIC due to insufficient R&D efforts by
the private pharma industry. We therefore recommend to add the following
indicators:
- Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in R&D for health needs that
disproportionately affect people living in LMIC (Disaggregated by funding
sector, performing sector, country, disease, and product type)
- Number of new health technologies developed that target health needs
that disproportionately affect people living in LMIC (Disaggregated by
disease/ health priority and product type)
and access to healthcare, see 3.8
We support the indicator proposed by WHO but suggest that access to
vaccines is added as vaccines are not medicines.
Proportion of population with access to affordable essential medicines and

vaccines on a sustainable basis.
Even as this is a means rather than a target, an indicator about access to
life-saving medicines would be useful to measure the proportion of people
who access medication or vaccines as compared to the total number of
people who should receive it. A formula could be used for all medicines and
vaccines - the number of people who need it divided by the number of people
with access. All health indicators should be disaggregated by age and
gender.
Recommended indicator: [Global level indicator, globally collected] Public,

private, and not-for-profit investment in R&D for the health needs that
disproportionately affect people living in low- and middle-income countries
(Disaggregated by funding sector, performing sector, country, disease, and
product type)
Recommended indicator: [Global level indicator, Globally collected] Number
of new health technologies developed that target the health needs that
(Disaggregated by disease or health priority and product type)
Global health R&D is fundamental to achieving the health targets of the
SDGs,however the R&D element of target 3.b cannot be measured with any
of the indicators currently being considered by the key groups involved in
developing the SDG indicators. Current proposal are inadequate because
they cannot distinguish R&D that is being done specifically for “diseases that
primarily affect developing countries” from any other type of health research.
For this reason, R&D indicators specific to target 3.b are required.
Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential goal, of design and
planning for cultural growth for whole societies.
Recommended:
• [Global indicator, nationally collected] Public, private, and not-for-profit
investment in R&D for the health needs that disproportionately affect people
living in low- and middle income countries (Disaggregated by funding sector,
performing sector, country, disease, and product type)
• [Global indicator, nationally collected] Number of new health technologies
developed that target the health needs that disproportionately affect people
living in low- and middle-income countries (disaggregated by funding sector,
performing sector, country, disease, and product type)
Global health R&D is fundamental to achieving the health targets and this
measure must be included in the indicator framework. However the R&D
element of target 3.b cannot be measured with any of the indicators currently
being considered by the key groups involved in developing the indicators.
Current proposal is inadequate because they cannot distinguish R&D that is
being done specifically for “diseases that primarily affect developing
countries” from any other type of health research. For this reason, R&D
indicators specific to target 3.b are required.
I agree and I appreaciate very much and how to realise stiil have many
problems to solve
Even as this is a means rather than a target, an indicator about access to
life-saving medicines would be useful to measure the proportion of people
who access medication or vaccines as compared to the total number of
people who should receive it. A formula could be used for all medicines and
vaccines - the number of people who need it divided by the number of people
with access. All health indicators should be disaggregated by age and
gender.

product type)
SDGs, so a measure of global health R&D progress must be included in the
global indicator framework. The R&D element of target 3.b cannot be
measured with any of the indicators currently being considered by the key
groups involved in developing the SDG indicators. Current proposals are
inadequate because they cannot distinguish R&D that is being done
specifically for “diseases that primarily affect developing countries” from any
other type of health research.
The role of Southern-led research and innovation is key in the development
of low-cost innovations which are affordable, accessible and scalable. In
addition, the efficacy and efficiency of health interventions need to be
implemented in the field by southern researchers. The building of Southern
"innovation hubs" will support the scale-up of vaccines and medicines for
both communicable and non-communicable diseases as well as prevention
technologies generated in the Global South.
An indicator to monitor prevalence of antimicrobial resistance could be
considered as it affects access to essential medicines.
The indicator should capture quality of medicines. There is no mention of this

critical aspect in any of the language so far (both in terms of the targets and
indicators).
Way too long, complicated and reflective of special interests.
Target 3.8 may be sufficient.

Propose alignment with target on essential medicines as in the NCD Global
Monitoring Framework.
Support the research and development of vaccines and medicines for the
communicable and non-communicable diseases that primarily affect
developing countries, provide access to affordable essential medicines and
vaccines, in accordance with the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement
and Public Health, which affirms the right of developing countries to use to
the full the provisions in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights regarding flexibilities to protect public health, and,
in particular, provide access to medicines for all including persons with
disabilities.
Recommended indicator: [Global indicator, globally collected] Public, private,
and not-for-profit investment in R&D for the health needs that
disproportionately affect people living in low- and middle- income countries
product type)
Recommended indicator: [Global indicator, globally collected] Number of new
health technologies developed that target the health needs that
(disaggregated by funding sector, performing sector, country, disease, and
product type)
global indicator framework. The R&D element of target 3.b cannot be
measured with any of the indicators currently being considered under other
goals because they cannot distinguish R&D that is being done specifically for
diseases that affect developing countries.
[Global level indicator, globally collected]:

- Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in R&D for the health needs
that disproportionately affect people living in low- and middle-income
countries (Disaggregated by funding sector, performing sector, country,
disease, and product type)
[Global level indicator, Globally collected]:

- Number of new health technologies developed that target the health needs
that disproportionately affect people living in low- and middle-income
countries (Disaggregated by disease or health priority and product type)
Rationale: Global health R&D is fundamental to achieving the health targets

of the SDGs: a measure of global health R&D progress must be included in
the global indicator framework. But the R&D element of target 3.b cannot be
measured with any currently proposed indicators. Current proposals are
inadequate because they cannot distinguish R&D that is being done
specifically for “diseases that primarily affect developing countries” from any
other type of health research.
Indicator: Proportion of population disaggregated by age, sex, gender,
Source: Health Facility Surveys

AMEND INDICATOR 3.b.1 TO:
Proportion of the population with access to affordable, essential medicines
and vaccines
RATIONALE: Added 'and vaccines' to access to medicines.

Much work is required on this indicator. Given that two key areas are covered
by in this target (process: R & D and outcome: greater access to medicines
and vaccines), we recommend two indicators. Essential medicines would be
measured based on the WHO model essential medicines list.
There may be a large degree of overlap with the access component of this
target and 3.8.
3.b.2 NEW PROPOSED INDICATOR:

New medicines & diagnostics that are developed to address Type II and Type
III diseases and the specific unmet health needs of developing countries in
relation to Type 1 diseases.
The proposed indicator could be made more useful by measuring the units of
essential medicines supplied per area or per capita (data should be available
by pharmaceutical producers or government provisions) in relation to the
number of cases of under-treated diseases in each region. An indicator could
aim to quantify that by measuring the units of essential medicines supplied
per area or capita (data should be available by pharmaceutical producers,
charities or government agencies) in relation to the number of cases of
under-treated diseases in each region. The suggested indicator by WHO
makes a similar point but may be more difficult to gather the data.

product type)
product type)
Recommended indicator: [Global level indicator, Globally collected] number
of new health technologies developed that target the needs of people living in
low- and middle-income countries (Disaggregated by disease or health
priority and product type)
global indicator framework. The R&D element of 3.b cannot be measured
with any of the indicators being considered because they do not distinguish
R&D that is being done specifically for “diseases that primarily affect
developing countries” from other health research. For this reason, R&D
indicators specific to target 3.b are required.
Good recommendation. But it is necessary to create supervision and
fullfilment policies to examine the work of states.
We welcome the suggested indicator. However it does not address the
problem of new and effective global health technologies crucially lacking for
the majority of communicable diseases affecting developing countries due to
insufficient research and development efforts by the private pharma industry.
We therefore recommend to add the following indicator:
- Percentage of public expenditure on research and development for
health needs of developing countries (Type II and Type III diseases and the
specific needs of developing countries for Type I diseases) (% GDP)
Moreover, we suggest to include the following indicator to be able to measure
the real adoption of TRIPS flexibilities:
- National legislations that are fully consistent with the safeguards and
flexibilities of implementing intellectual property rights as laid down in the
TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and
Public Health as well as future relevant provisions to secure access to
essential medicines.
3.b. Proportion of population disaggregated by age, sex, gender, geographic
location, income, disability, race and ethnicity, with access to affordable
essential medicines throughout the life cycle
3.b.2 Proportion of population disaggregated by age, sex, gender,

Health Facility Surveys
There needs to be an indicator that measure who are accessing essential

medicines and what kind of supports are provided
Target 3.c: Substantially increase health financing and the
recruitment, development, training and retention of the health
workforce in developing countries, especially in least
developed countries and small island developing States
The proposed indicator (ratio of skilled health workers/population)
should be kept as a secondary indicator for 3.8 and 3.C, but it is not
the best measure of “distribution” of health workers. Amref Health
Africa believes the SDSN Indicator & Monitoring Framework
Indicator 26 (pg 130) better captures improved access to essential
health services, the intention of Goal 3.C:

The indicator is also recommended for 3.8, as it has cross-cutting

value. It captures:
1) Consultations with any licensed health worker. Data collected

under the workers/population ratio only captures doctors, nurses &
midwives, excluding cadres such as community health workers that
provide substantial health services.
2) Measurement of access to health workers. Frequency of visits to

health workers is important in determining whether citizens have
consistent access to a health workforce.
Density and distribution of female health service providers.
3.c.1 Number of training facilities for the health workforce including
in rural areas
the best measure of “distribution” of health workers. The Frontline
Health Workers Coalition, of which FCI is a member, believes the
SDSN Indicator & Monitoring Framework Indicator 26 (pg 130)
better captures improved access to essential health services, the
intention of Goal 3.C:
value. It captures:
Health Workers Coalition believes the SDSN Indicator & Monitoring
Framework Indicator 26 (pg 130) better captures improved access
to essential health services, the intention of Goal 3.C:


value. It captures:


Recommend:
Consultations with a skilled or trained provider in a health facility or

in the community, per person, per year.
Comment: The proposed indicator (ratio of skilled health

workers/population) should be kept as a secondary indicator for 3.8
and 3.C, but it is not the best measure of “distribution” of health
workers. The SDSN Indicator & Monitoring Framework Indicator 26
better captures improved access to essential health services, the
intention of Goal 3.C. The indicator is also recommended for 3.8, as
it has cross-cutting value. It captures: Consultations with any skilled
or trained health worker. Data collected under the
workers/population ratio only captures doctors, nurses & midwives,
excluding cadres such as community health workers that provide
substantial health services; and measurement of access to health
workers. Frequency of visits to health workers is important in
determining whether citizens have consistent access to a health
workforce.
[Global indicator, nationally collected] Percentage of total health

workers routinely tracked by key workforce indicators (including
recruitment, development, training and retention) by national health
workforce information system or registry.
Comment: This measure will encourage countries to gather and

maintain information essential to planning, developing, and
supporting the health workforce.
health financing and development should be handled by the
respective Governments by taking the vaccine / drug producing
companies / houses and allow the economy to circulate within the
country. All drug / vaccine production laboratories should be brought
under non profit companies act where Government should also
have some stakes. This will promote jobs, protection of interest of
citizens and help industries to make moderate profits.
I totally agree and I hope that it can be achieved

in rural areas
This is relevant for HIV prevention, treatment, care and support, as
well as other health issues.
Success on the health goal will be a major predictor of success on

the rest of the Agenda, as health has such a major impact on
poverty reduction. It cannot be overstated the importance of
ensuring increased health financing and an adequate well trained,
well distributed workforce with right mix of skills and specialisms to
achieve this. We welcome the inclusion of a workforce indicator,
and strongly encourage the addition of an indicator on health
financing.
However, the indicator on health worker density and distribution
should be disaggregated by cadre to ensure that the workforce can
be responsive, catering for the breadth of health needs of a
population. As such, the indicator should be aligned with the 2015
Global Reference List of 100 Core Health Indicators indicator on the
health workforce: 'health worker density and distribution by cadre'.
This should include high and middle income countries and be
disaggregated by categories (nurses, pharmacists, physicians, etc.)
and level of qualification (registered nurses, advanced practice
nurses, etc.) of health workers/professions in different levels/areas
(e.g. primary health care, intensive care, mental health, mother and
child health, etc.). For example, there is a severe shortage of
mental health care workers both in high and low income countries
which is essential to achieve the Target 3.4.
ICN supports the WHO proposal - General government expenditure
on health as % of GDP and suggests measuring % of government
expenditure on health in total and on human resources as
equipment and infrastructure are also essential components to
provide quality health services.
ICN proposes a new indicator: proportion of countries that have
human resource planning linked to the population health needs,
health worker production and education/training.
Health Workers Coalition believes the SDSN Indicator & Monitoring
Framework Indicator 26 (pg 130) better captures improved access
to essential health services, the intention of Goal 3.C:


value. It captures:


In 2012, WHO, IHME & GAHP estimated 8.9m deaths result from
exposure to polluted soil, water & air. Most of these are in low- &
mid-income countries.
3.9.1 Monitor mean population blood lead levels [and other heavy
metals/chemicals] in children
3.9.2 Monitor concentration of hazardous organic compounds in
human breastmilk
3.9.3 Monitor levels of persistent toxic substances and heavy
metals present in subsistence food supplies such as fish and game
Simplify, "Substantially increase health financing and the capacity of

the health workforce in developing countries."
No comments
We support the inclusion of the indicators ‘General government
expenditure on health as % of GDP’ and ‘Health worker density and
distribution’, as recommended by the WHO.
3.c.2. We propose to add an indicator on “Government expenditure
on health as a % of GDP (Excluding compulsory schemes and
capturing general government expenditure only)”. This indicator is
not intended to replace the existing one on the number of health
workers; the two indicators must go together. It is however critical
this indicator is added. Focusing on health workers alone is
insufficient without also looking at overall investment in the health
sector. Without including this indicator there is also a risk that
existing indicators on financing healthcare are used to justify
increased investment in insurance schemes, or do not push for the
overall increased investment needed to deliver quality, free
healthcare for all. It is only when public financing is increased to
crowd out out-of-pocket expenditure on health that the
impoverishing impact of out of pocket spending is reduced. It is
important this indicator excludes compulsory schemes as noted
above, as they become de facto voluntary in countries with large
informal sectors where membership cannot be enforced.
Recommended indicator: [Global indicator, nationally collected]
Percentage of total health workers routinely tracked with key
workforce indicators (including recruitment, development, training
and retention) by national health workforce information system or
registry.
This measure will encourage countries to gather and maintain
information essential to planning, developing, and supporting the
health workforce.
COMMENT: Endorse WHO suggested indicators
Indicator: Number of training facilities for the health workforce

including in rural areas
Source: National Heath Information Systems
EDIT PROPOSED INDICATOR: Number of health workers per
1000 population (by categories, geographic distribution, place of
employment)
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL INDICATOR: General government

expenditure on health (per capita, as a share of GDP, share of total
government expenditure).
RATIONALE: Policy guidance is clear on the need to reduce out of

pocket spending and increase public prepaid mandatory funding.
We propose metrics on public expenditure on health as well as
HRH. This is already gathered through National Health Accounts
and data is available for all countries (WHO).
Data on recruitment, development and training of physical and
mental health workforce in developing countries, disaggregated by
gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
A similar indicator could be used here, as that proposed under 3.8
i.e. ‘% of public investment per each dollar‘s worth of
medicine/treatment’.
Budgeting at national level is key so indicator % allocated to this is
key
The Suggested Indicator on health worker density and distribution
is vital. But we also support the inclusion as recommended by WHO
of ”general government expenditure on health as a % of GDP”. This
is a vital ‘means of implementation indicator that cannot be ignored,
and if not here then it must be included elsewhere in the health
goal.

We very much welcome this indicator as it is a good proxy on the
health system of a country and a proxy to people’s access to
universal health coverage as determined by WHO guidelines. We
recommend the focus of it extends to include community health
volunteers who are actively helping to extend the reach and
accessibility of health services around the world and especially in
some of the most marginalised communities. Additionally we
support keeping the WHO suggestion of an additional indicator on
the ‘General government expenditure on health as a % of GDP ‘ .
Both indicators should be disaggregated by geographic distribution,
category (of professional - health cadre)place of employment,
gender etc
in rural areas
in rural areas
National Heath Information Systems

Target 3.d: Strengthen the capacity of all countries, in
particular developing countries, for early warning, risk
reduction and management of national and global health risks
Indicator: percentage of infections responding to first choice
antibiotics, based on a list of such antibiotics agreed.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) cannot be reversed. Efforts are

now directed to slowing the speed with which microbes, especially
bacteria, become resistant to currently effective antimicrobial
medication, and, where there is resistance, to slowing the speed
with which that it spreads globally. Tracking the effectiveness of
therapy against bacterial infections measures the effectiveness of
efforts to reduce AMR.
Identifying conditions, where there is general agreement on medical

management, and recording % that respond to 1st line drugs, and
those which require 2nd or 3rd line drugs, will give an approximate
and useful measure of AMR development, eg Tuberculosis (already
done); epidemic meningitis; postpartum infections (puerperal fever);
pneumonia and post-operative wound infections.
Besides mitigation, adaption to climate change and vulnerability of
countries to the effects of climate change need to be addressed as
well. In our view, the following two indicators that were developed
for monitoring the German national adaption strategy (DAS-
Monitoring) are (adapted to an international scale) appropriate for
Target 3.d (as well as Goal 13):
1.) Heat stress measured by number of hot days/nights or

extremely hot days/nights in combination with number of heat
warnings by weather services
2.) Heat stress in urban areas in relation to national average
These indicators have strong interlinkages with goal 13.

The proposed indicators under target 16.2 would also monitor this
target. There is overwhelming evidence that violent punishment has
a negative impact on the physical and mental health of children and
adults. On the basis of this evidence, nine major international health
professionals’ organisations have issued a statement calling on all
governments to work for the prohibition and elimination of all
corporal punishment (see www.endcorporalpunishment.org).
Prohibiting violent punishment is an essential public health measure
and a key strategy for improving physical and mental health and
other developmental outcomes for children and adults.
Regular blood pressure checks and blood sugar testing are
indicators.
Free and extensive medical checks outreaches
[National indicator, nationally collected] Presence of national health
information and surveillance architecture governing system design
and development.
[National indicator, nationally collected] Percentage of identified
architecture components in place and operational
[National indicator, nationally collected] Percentage of subnational
regions or facilities routinely reporting into national health
information and surveillance system.
Comment: Health information architectures are essential to aligning

information sources, ensuring interoperability of heterogeneous
systems, and minimizing duplication. Once the architecture is
defined it must be implemented as different technology
components. Once defined and implemented, regions and facilities
need to report data into it in order to ensure the information
generated is timely, complete, and consistent.
It is good idea
Include research and innovation generated in the Global South
No comments
Propose: Number of countries in surveillance systems that add salt
intake and obesity data over time.
Recommended indicator: [National indicator] Presence of national
health information and surveillance architecture governing system
design and development
National health information architectures are essential to aligning
different health information sources, ensuring interoperability of
heterogeneous systems, and minimizing duplication of effort and
other inefficiencies in health information systems.
Recommended indicator: [National indicator] Percentage of
identified architecture components in place and operational
Once the architecture is defined, it must be implemented as
different technology components and health information domains.
Recommended indicator: [National indicator] Percentage of
subnational regions or facilities routinely reporting into national
health information and surveillance system.
Once the architecture is defined and implemented, regions and
facilities need to report data into it in order to ensure that the
information generated is timely, complete, and consistent.
COMMENT: Endorse WHO suggested indicators
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
Organization: learning outcomes
ADD International We recommend the inclusion of an indicator to track
access for persons with disabilities to twelve years of free
publicly funded primary and secondary education. (See
also comments under target 4.5 below).
Africa Network Campaign on While supporting most of the proposed indicators, the first
Education for All (ANCEFA) indicator- data provided should be dis-aggregated by
income quintile, gender, race/ethnicity, disability, rural and
urban place of residence. Additional categories may be
identified at the national level.
Per pupil expenditure should be highlighted in the
learning assessment
African Foundation for

Development (AFFORD)
Asia Dalit Rights Forum 1. Legislation available on non-discrimination in
education.
2. Disaggregated data on educational disparity
social origin, religion, region or economic or other status.
3. Disaggregated data on gross enrolment rate at
primary, secondary, higher, college, technical and
professional institutions inclusive of – age, sex, disability,
race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion, language or
economic or other status.
4. Disaggregated data on retention and drop out rates
at primary, secondary, higher, college, technical and
professional institutions inclusive of on multiple dimension
index .
5. School curriculum, pedagogy, text books are
reviewed to ensure they are contextual and positive to the
most marginalised communities.
6. Community level learning spaces and after school
support to children from disadvantaged
Asia South Pacific Association for We support the Global Campaign for Education's (GCE)
Basic and Adult Education submission:
(ASPBAE)
Indicators are cross cutting across the stages and include
educational institutions that cover one last year of pre-
primary,primary and secondary education level:
a. Percentage of schools that are free –(disaggregating

by level) *
b. Enrollment Rate (desegregated by level) *
c. Transition Rate- (desegregated by level) *
d. Completion rate(disaggregated by level) *
Rationale:
As GCE indicated, a central proposition of target 4.1 is
the accomplishment of 12 years of free publicly funded
primary and secondary education; this is similarly the
case for target 4.2 and its proposition of one year free
pre-primary. An indicator that is able to track this
dimension is of paramount importance.

Agées (ACAMAGE)
ASTRA Youth
Bachpan Bachao Andolan Revise Indicator to read: Percentage of children who

achieve minimum proficiency standards in reading and
mathematics at end of: (i) primary (ii) lower secondary
disaggregated by boys, girls and trans-gender.
Revision in existing indicator to read: Out-of-school rate

and number (primary, lower Secondary), by education
status, never enrolled age, gender urban/rural,
retention/dropout, social groups and bottom/top wealth
quintile
Rationale: Children's access to quality education is

imperative to ensure protection of children from all forms
of exploitation and ensuring equality and equal
opportunity. Detailed and in-depth tracking of universal
access to quality education is imperative to achieving this
target. The MDGs also recognised universal access to
education as one of the primary goals.
Brazilian Campaign for the Right to Proposed global indicators
Education 1) % of schools that are free, disaggregated by level (*)
2) Transition rates between pre-primary and primary/
primary and secondary/ secondary and tertiary (*)
3) Completion rate in one year of pre- primary, primary,
secondary and tertiary education (*)
4) Percentage of children who achieve proficiency in (a)
literacy and (b) numeracy skills, at the end of (i) primary
(ii) secondary, according to national standards (*)
Racionale:
A central proposition of target 4.1 is the accomplishment
of 12 years of free publicly funded primary and secondary
education. The principle of gratuity is a pillar of education
human rights treaties and the positive impact of ensuring
free education is incontestable.
We highlight that proficiency levels and methodologies

must be determined at national level, respectful of multi-
cultural and linguistic contexts. We also highlight that
testing should NOT be applied to children smaller than
the last year of primary education.
Bremen Overseas Resarch and

Development Association
CBM UK
CEAAL

Center of Guarulhos
Child and Youth Finance
International
Childcare Network Switzerland /

Swiss Committee for OMEP
ChildFund Alliancd
CHOICE for youth and sexuality 4.1.1 Completion rate at all levels of education (including
but not limited to: primary, lower secondary, upper
secondary, tertiary, and higher level education); data
should be disaggregated by age (including older
persons), sex, gender, income and of place of residence
Christoffel-Blindenmission A central proposition of target 4.1 is the accomplishment
Deutschland e.V. of 12 years of free publicly funded primary and
secondary education; this is similarly the case for target
4.2 and its proposition of one year free pre-primary. An
indicator that is able to track this dimension is of
paramount importance. The principle of gratuity is a pillar
of education human rights treaties and the positive impact
of ensuring free education is incontestable, for all
including children with disabilities.
Besides, there is absolutely no mention of technological

development for children with disabilities as well as
availability of educational aids and appliances on timely
basis which is extremely important for a quality education.
We strongly recommend indicators to cover this aspect.
Coalicion Colombiana por el Tener en cuenta o agregar en el indicador las

derecho a la educacion Competencias Ciudadanas
Si se busca una educación inclusiva, equitativa y de

calidad, que produzca resultados de aprendizaje
efectivos, es necesaria una educación integral que
incluya la formación en valores, ética, política y en
responsabilidad social.
Otro indicador,Porcentaje % de recursos corrientes de la

nación invertidos por estudiante en cada nivel educativo.
En términos de equidad es importante saber cuánto se
invierte de los recursos del presupuesto público de cada
nación por cada estudiante.
Countdown 2015 Europe/IPPF

European
Network/EuroNGOs/ASTRA
Network
Danish Institute for Human RIghts The reference in the proposed indicator to “where data is
available” should be deleted, as target 17.18. explicitly
aims at building capacity for data disaggregation by 2020
DSW (Deutsche Stiftung
Weltbevoelkerung
Dutch Coalition on Disability and A central proposition of target 4.1 is the accomplishment
Development www.dcdd.nl of 12 years of free publicly funded primary and

We strongly recommends indicators to cover this aspect.
Dutch Youth Ambassador SRHR

Equality Now
ericsson
European Association for the

Education of Adults (EAEA)
European Youth Forum The suggested indicator only covers specific learning
outcomes (reading and mathematics) and does not
measure whether a broader set of relevant and effective
learning outcomes have been achieved.
Family Care International
FAWENA
Finnish Youth Cooperation To measure the quality of education, we should include as

Allianssi indicators:
Pupil- teacher (with teacher training certificate)

ratio (by level of education).
Percentage of schools that have parent teacher

associations, School Management Committees
or Community Committees for Education to
ensure community participation, commitment and
ownership.
Public expenditure on education as percentage

of GDP.
We should also measure if resources are used to make

education more inclusive, accessible and equitable by
measuring the % of public spending on education that is
used to:
- support those educational institutions that produce

proficiency levels that are below the national average
- provide services that increase access to education for

disadvantaged groups, such as: transport to schools, free
or low-cost school meals, free counselling services, and
the provision of school assistants to support children and
young people with learning difficulties or special needs, or
whose mother tongue is different than the language used
in the school.
Foro Dakar-Honduras -Percentage of children who achieve minimum proficiency
standards in reading and mathematics at end of: (i)
primary (ii) lower secondary
-Percentage of schools that are free, disaggregated by
level
Foundation Center (on behalf of Suggested Indicator 4.1.2: Indicator should specify/break
SDG Philanthropy Platform) down children/young people further into age groups and
add in a component on completion rate beyond how is
written at present
“Percentage of children/young people at the end of each
level of education achieving at least a minimum
proficiency level in (a) reading and (b) mathematics.
Disaggregations: sex, location, wealth (and others where
data are available)”

Global Campaign for Education We suggest that indicators for 4.1-4.3 be cross cutting
with disaggregation by level (viz. pre-primary, primary,
lower secondary, higher secondary and tertiary).
Indicator:
Percentage of children who achieve proficiency in (a)
(ii) secondary, ACCORDING TO NATIONAL STANDARDS
(*)
This indicator can be disaggregated by income quintile,

gender, race/ethnicity, disability, rural/urban place of
residence. The extent to which gap between first and fifth
income quintile should be assessed. Additional categories
may be identified at the national level.
Proficiency levels and methodologies must be determined

at national level, respectful of multi-cultural and linguistic
contexts. Testing should NOT be applied to children
smaller than the last year of primary education.
Additional logic for this has been listed is the GCE
briefing (pg 2) on
http://campaignforeducation.org/docs/post2015/MEMBER
S%20BRIEFING%20ON%20INDICATORS
%20PROCESS_EN.pdf
Global Health Council

Global March Against Child Labour Revision in existing indicators:
Percentage of children who achieve proficiency standards
in reading and numeracy at end of: (i) primary (ii) lower
secondary, according to national standards.
Out-of-school rate and number (primary, lower

Secondary), by education status (never and ever been to
school), age, gender, urban/rural and bottom/top wealth
quintile
New indicator suggested:

Legislation and financing to guarantee provision of 12
years of free, publicly funded, equitable quality primary
and secondary education, of which at least nine years are
compulsory.
Handicap International A central proposition of target 4.1 is the accomplishment

of 12 years of free publicly funded primary and
HDS systems design science Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential
societies.
Health Poverty Action

High-Level Task Force for the ICPD
Human Rights Watch

IDAY-International Add the following indicators:
- % of children who have never been to primary /
secondary school (*)
- Enrolment rates in primary / secondary (*)
- % of schools that are free, disaggregated by level and
location (urban / rural)
- Transition rates between primary and secondary/
secondary and tertiary (*)
- Dropout rate by grade (*)
- Completion rate of primary and secondary education (*)
- Percentage of children who achieve proficiency in (a)
literacy and (b) numeracy skills at the end of (i) primary
- Number of teaching hours per year per grade in
primary / secondary school
- Teacher and pupil absenteeism rate per year (*)
(*diseggregation by income quintile, gender,

race/ethnicity, disability, rural and urban place of
residence. Additional categories may be identified at the
national level.)
IDDC A central proposition of target 4.1 is the accomplishment


Indigenous and Frontier Respective Government should consider promote private

Technology Research Centre - IFTR participation in setting up educational establishments and
compulsorily educate people of that locality.
Institute for Reproductive and It is good idea and we have to do it for every countries,
Family Health however we cannot ensure to do it due to it is not free in
Vietnam


Transport (UITP)
International Council for Adult

Education

International Environemnt Forum
International Federation of Library

Associations and Institutions
International Movement ATD Fourth ATD Fourth World welcomes the proposal to disaggregate
World suggested indicators for target 4.1 by wealth
International Planned Parenthood

Federation
Investigaciòn e Intervencion
Educativa AC
Japan Council on Education for
Japan Organization for

International Cooperation in Family
Planning (JOICFP)
Johns Hopkins University Drop the text from "leading to...outcomes". If a quality
education is provided, these learning outcomes will
materialize.
Delhi
Kepa Finland Not enough space here for our comments. See the
Finnish NGO Task Force's Position Paper on Post-2015
Agenda, including indicators, pages 16-17:
http://www.kepa.fi/tiedostot/post-2015_ngo-task-forces-
position-paper_web.pdf
Kimse Yok Mu There is no emphasis on ensuring that children of

refugees are provided with the needed skills and trainings
to contribute to sustainable development.
Latin American Campaign for the Central to target 4.1 is the accomplishment of 12 years of
Right to Education (CLADE) FREE primary and secondary education. Also, transition
rates tackle crucial moments of PROGRESSION through
the education systems, where drop out tends to be
concentrated. Furthermore, COMPLETION remains a
core challenge and an unfinished business. Regarding
PROFICIENCY LEVELS, we highlight that methodologies
cultural and linguisticcontexts. Testing should NOT be
applied to children smaller than the last year of primary
education.
For this reason, we propose the following four cross-

cutting indicators for targets 1, 2 and 3:
"(1) % of schools that are free, disaggregated by level; (2)

Transition rates between pre-primary and primary/
primary and secondary/ secondary and tertiary; (3)
Completion rate in one year of pre- primary, primary,
secondary and tertiary education; (4) Percentage of
children who achieve proficiency in (a) literacy and (b)
numeracy skills, at the end of (i) primary (ii) secondary,
ACCORDING TO NATIONAL STANDARDS."
Lumos
Major Group of Workers and Trade Suggested indicator 4.1.1 should have 'according to
Unions national standards' specified at the end of the indicator.
This supports the national-level efforts to build robust
education system, respectful of the country's cultural and
linguistic diversity. Testing must not apply earlier than at
the end of primary education.
On indicator 4.1.2, completion remains a challenge and

this is a core indicator for the education goal. An
additional indicator could be considered on transition
rates: Transition rates between pre-primary and primary;
primary and secondary; secondary and tertiary
The suggested indicators fail to capture whether the

education is free. Add following indicator: % of schools
that are free, disaggregated by
level.
Malala Fund The SDG indicators will drive action on the SDG
commitments. Implementers and duty-bearers will focus
efforts on what will be measured. As such, it is imperative
that the global indicators do not de facto lower the
ambition of the targets with which they are associated.
Any global indicator for this target must measure against
progress at primary, lower secondary AND upper
secondary levels.
Completion remains a core challenge in education. As

such, completion rates at primary, lower secondary and
upper secondary should be measured, alongside
numbers of out-of-school children at each level.

of 12 years of FREE primary and secondary education.
An indicator that is able to track this dimension is of
paramount importance e.g. "number of countries who
constitutionally guarantee free education through upper
secondary level".
Relevant learning outcomes must be defined nationally.

They must enable girls and boys alike to thrive in a 21st
century world and be mindful of context.

NCD Alliance Propose: 4.1.1. Proportion of children completing basic
education;
4.1.2 Proportion of schools that provide separate
sanitation facilities for boys and girls
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 1. Legislation available on non-discrimination in
Organization (NNDSWO) education.
2. Disaggregated data on educational disparity
social origin, religion, region or economic or other status.
3. Disaggregated data on gross enrolment rate at
race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion, language or
4. Disaggregated data on retention and drop out rates
race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other
status.
5. School curriculum, pedagogy, text books are
reviewed to ensure they are contextual and positive to the
most marginalised communities – their culture and
contribution to the nation building.
6. Inclusion of training modules on non-discriminatory
and inclusive education in teacher training curriculum and
practice.
OneFamilyPeople Persons with disabilities are not mentioned in targets

dealing with vulnerability. We therefore recommend the
following in targets below:
By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys including those

with disabilities complete free, equitable and quality
primary and secondary education leading to relevant and
effective learning outcomes
Open Society Foundations This indicator should be disaggregated according to

gender, socio-economic status, rural/urban location and
types of special needs. The indicator to be developed
should leverage existing resources at the national level to
propose initial indicators for monitoring learning outcomes
based on national assessments and nationally defined
standards. The current indicator focuses on the level of
the individual learner without paying sufficient attention to
the learning system that supports the individual learner or
teacher. This quantitative outcomes indicators should be
coupled with qualitative system level indicators in order
to comprehensively monitor education quality. Additional
suggested indicators may be found in four commissioned
papers here:
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/indic
ators-broad-bold-education-agenda
Organisation Mondiale de By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free,
l'Education Prescolaire (OMEP) UK equitable, quality primary and secondary education
leading to relevant, fulfilling, effective life outcomes.
Oxfam 4.1.1. We support the indicator on “Percentage of children

/ young people aged 3-5 years above the official age for
the last grade of each level of education who have
completed that level” as the headline indicator, as
suggested by UNESCO and UNICEF. Target 4.1 is the
core education target, combining the goal of universal
education with the goal of universal minimum learning
outcomes. These two dimensions go hand in hand.
Learning outcomes however cannot be prioritized over
completion of schooling. The risk would be to miss an
important part of the picture – whether children have
equitable access to school and whether they are
completing school. Household surveys already collect
data on the highest grade/year of education completed, in
at least 100 low and middle income countries. Work is
needed to agree on a common indicator methodology
and to extend the coverage especially to more developed
countries. This is expected to take a further 1-3 years
(UNESCO and UNICEF). This indicator is consistent with
the Incheon Framework.
PAI
Partnership for Maternal, Newborn

and Child Health (The Partnership)
Carbon Transport
Peruvian Campaign for the Right to Indicator should state % of children that receive 12 years
Education of free education, disaggregated by income quintile,
gender, ethnicity, mother tongue, rural and urban
population and, disability. Human right to education
implies access to free education to achieve opportunities
for all.
Completion rates of primary and secondary education
give us valuable information about equity and quality
education. Transitional rates between pre-primary and
primary/primary and secondary/secondary and tertiary
education will be very helpful to tackle drop outs that
should be overcome.
Proficiency in literacy and numeracy should be measured
according to national standards and taking care of
multicultural and linguistic contexts.
Plan International Plan International believes that proficiency levels and
methodologies must be determined at national level,
respectful of multi-cultural and linguistic contexts and that
nationally-defined indicators will provide the best
measurement to capture a holistic and rights-based
learning process. We therefore advocate the 3
recommended global-level indicators listed to replace
IAEG suggested indicators for targets 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3.
These 3 recommendations can provide cross-cutting
indicators for targets 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 and align with
those recommended by the Global Campaign for
Education.
% of schools that are free, disaggregated by level

primary and secondary/ secondary and tertiary

secondary and tertiary education
Planned Parenthood Federation of

America
Practical Action
PROGRAMA UNIVERSITARIO DE The proposed indicators do not measure equitable

DERECHOS HUMANOS DE LA access, it is necessary to have disaggregation for
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL relevant target groups, poor and indigenous people, as a
AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO minumum.
Realizing Sexual and Reproductive Indicator: Completion rate at all levels of education
Justice Alliance (RESURJ) (including but not limited to: primary, lower secondary,
upper secondary, tertiary, and higher level education);
data should be disaggregated by age (including older
Source: School surveys; national learning assessments
Regional network for yourth and Including youth and adults. It should be difficult to ensure
Adult Education Advocacy full schooling of girls and boys if aduls and youth remain
illiterarte or without access to education. Because
experiences have showen that girls and boys leadered by
literated father have more chances do not abandoning
school than girls and boys being leadered by a illiterate
fathar or mother.
REPEM
Save the Children AMEND INDICATOR 4.1.1: (% of children who achieve
minimum proficiency standards in reading and
mathematics at end of i) primary and ii) lower secondary;
Disaggregations: sex, location, wealth (and others where
data are available)) Amend from the focus on literacy and
numeracy to use a holistic assessment (such as EGRA
EGMA).
RATIONALE: 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. Recommend
also including whether government has shown
commitment to reform classroom practices and improve
student learning.
Sightsavers A central proposition of target 4.1 is the accomplishment


Signatory organizations: United 4.1.1 Percentage of children/young people at the end of
Nations Foundation, Plan each level of education achieving at least a minimum
International, Girl Effect, CARE, proficiency level in (a) reading, (b) mathematics and (c)
International Women's Health science
Association of Girl Guides and Girl DATA SOURCE: Various international (eg PIRLS, PISA,
Scouts, European Parliamentary TIMSS), regional learning assessments (eg LLECE,
Forum, International Center for SACMEQ, PASEC) national and citizen-led learning
Research on Women, Advocates assessments.
Mercy Corps, Let Girls Lead, GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UNESCO-UIS will form
International Rescue Committee a broad technical group including Member States to
develop and maintain measures.
NOTES: The estimated economic gain from achieving

universal primary education exceeds the estimated
increase in public spending required to achieve it.
Returns on female secondary education can be 15 to 25
per cent higher for women than men.
PROPOSED INDICATOR: 4.1.2 Percentage of out of

school girls and boys
NOTES: Even in countries where education was state-

funded, girls said extra costs associated with schooling –
such as exam fees, books, travel and uniforms were
prohibitive for their families.
This indicator will give us the picture of who must be

targeted so that ‘no one will be left behind.’
Society for the Psychological Data on completion of free, equitable and quality primary
Study of Social Issues; Psychology and secondary education, disaggregated by gender, age,
Coalition at the United Nations race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migratory
status.

Stockholm Environment Institute In addition to disaggregation by sex, and location (U/R),
indicators should be disaggregated by ethnic group.
Tebtebba 4.1: 1) Special measures to ensure equal access to high

quality culturally relevant and accessible education for
indigenous peoples within the national education
strategies; 2) Proportion of young adults (18-24) who are
literate in their indigenous language;3) Special measures
to train bilingual indigenous teachers; 4) Recognition of
the right to learn in mother tongue; 5) Diversification of
curriculum in accordance with cultural and linguistics
characteristics within the national education framework
The Hague University of Applied again, the film Schooling teh World is instructive against
Science irrational exuberance:
schoolingtheworld.org/
The Miracle Foundation Indicator 4.1.2: The Miracle Foundation calls for
and vulnerable children, including those living on the
street or in program/institutional/orphanage care, in the
surveys utilized to measure the indicator.
Theatre of Solutions This target is directly related to the one we proposed in
April 2014 at Crowdicity GPY2015 on the post 2015
development agenda
https://gpy2015.crowdicity.com/post/47024.It states that:
by the year 2030, all UN member states to integrate
Social and Emotional Learning to their education
curriculum. This will guarantee emotional intelligence
which would be hugely responsible for the Relevant and
Effective Learning Outcomes targeted by the SDG.
Social and Emotional Learning among boys and girls
promotes their self awareness, self concept, self esteem
and self efficacy.This is why we have designed a Self
Awareness Ladder to help young people attain these
positive and crucial personality traits for a well rounded
education.
The indicator to monitor progress is the Self Awareness
Index and Self Management Index both of which will be in
the form of questionaires to be administered among
school boys and girls for self or guided reporting to get
feedback on symptoms, behavior or trends on their
emotional intelligence or social and emotional learning.
Transparency International In tracking this target, it would be critical to look at how

corruption impacts its achievement. The relevant target
and indicator should be drawn from target 16.5 given the
strong and proven inter-linkages between corruption,
governance and education outcomes. For example,
public sector corruption is also significantly inversely
correlated with children finishing primary school. Even for
countries with higher capacity to deliver educational
services, public sector corruption adversely affects
children’s chances of completing their primary education.
-
https://www.transparency.org/files/content/feature/2014_
MDGs_Statistical_Annex.pdf.
-
http://www.transparency.org/images/uploads/feature/MDG
_infographic_hi-res.jpg.
TRK asbl Data aggregated by sex , by educational level

UCI-Red
UCLG
UNESCO Chair in Youth and Adult

Education
Universidad Pedagógica Nacional Also adolescents of high school
University of Cambridge It is vital to have separate targets for primary and

secondary - and access and learning for each
Learning needs to be assessed by age (rather than

grade) to ensure inclusion of those out of school
As with all targets, progress needs to be tracked for the

most disadvantaged group (poverty as an overarching
driver, and interacting with gender and other forms of
disadvantage where data are available).
An assessment of potential learning targets, and data

needs, is available in our recent paper here:
http://www.heart-resources.org/assignment/how-can-
education-systems-become-equitable-by-2030/
In terms of enrolment, it is important to ensure data are

available that measures whether children are completing
each level of education. The gross intake rate to last
grade of primary school (which is one of those proposed,
and used for the MDGs) inflates progress and is not a
good measure, as it includes repeaters and other overage
children.
University of Southampton
USIL Excellent, but it must complemented wtih supervision

VENRO working group on health
VSO 4.1 is ultimately about provision of 12 years of free
publicly funded primary & secondary education. An
paramount importance.
We support the Global Campaign for Educations
suggestion here: % of schools that are free, dis
aggregated by level; Transition rates between pre primary
& primary/ primary & secondary/ secondary & tertiary;
Completion rate in 1 year of pre-primary, primary,
secondary & tertiary education; % of children who
achieve proficiency in (a) literacy and (b) numeracy skills,
at the end of (i) primary (ii) secondary, according to
national standards. Transition rates track progression,
where drop out tends to be concentrated, and to an
extent indicate the extent of quality of education
completion remains a core challenge and an unfinished
business that is carried through the EFA& MDG goals
approved in past decades. Proficiency levels &
respectful of multi-cultural and linguistic contexts. We also
highlight that testing should NOT be applied to children
smaller than the last year of primary education.
WASH United PROPOSED INDICATOR: "% of schools with pupils using

safely managed sanitation services with separate toilets
for females and males, including menstrual hygiene
management (MHM)"
NOTES: 'Safely managed sanitation services' should
mean the same as in the indicator for target 6.2 and
should include "safe, separate sanitation facilities, with
water and soap, including accommodation for MHM in
public, private, rural and urban spaces, including schools.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE PROXY INDICATOR: "% of
girls and boys attending secondary school without
missing school days".
RATIONALE: This would serve as a multi-purpose
indicator for targets 4.1 and 6.2, which are
interdependent.
School children, especially girls, miss school due to
inadeuqate school sanitation
(http://www.unicef.org/wash/schools/files/raisingcleanhan
ds_2010.pdf). Girls' higher drop out rates are attributed to
MHM needs. One study reported that over 50% of girls
miss between 1 and 4 days of school per month due to
menstruation (see http://www.wateraid.org/what-we-
do/ourapproach/
research-and-publications/view-publication?id=02309d73-
8e41-4d04-b2ef-6641f6616a4f).
WaterAid

Of Nigeria
Women for Women's Human Rights 4.1.1 Completion rate at all levels of education (including
- New Ways but not limited to: primary, lower secondary, upper
Women in Europe for a Common % of schools with pupils using safely managed sanitation
Future, African Ministries Council services with separate toilets for females and males
on Water, BORDA, Sustainable including menstrual hygiene management (MHM)
Sanitation Alliance, Women's Major OR
Group, Women's Environmental Absenteeism of boys and girls* in secondary school (age
Programme, GWA of 14-16 years)
* data disaggregated by sex
as Multi Purpose Indicator with 6.2
justification: girls miss school or drop school when they

start menstruating if there are no adequate WASH
facilities at school
Women Thrive Worldwide The suggested indicator is adequate.

Women's Major Group 4.1.1 Completion rate at all levels of education (including
but not limited to: primary, lower secondary, upper
School surveys; national learning assessments
World Animal Net
World Chlorine Council In much of the developing world women and girls procure
the family's water, often walking long distances over many
hours per week. Water infrastructure--such as light,
durable PVC pipe--that delivers safe, chlorinated drinking
water to households helps enable women and girls to
focus on education and employment. This target is
therefore linked to targets under Goal #6.
Environment
WWF
YouAct
Young and adult people education Additional indicators proposed:
Network
% of schools that are free, disaggregated by
level
primary and secondary/ secondary and tertiary

* Disaggregated by income quintile, sex, age,

national level, using data of both formal and informal
economy
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
We recommend the inclusion of an indicator to track
access for persons with disabilities to one year of free
pre-primary education. (See also comments under target
4.5 below).
Include an indicator on the countries that have

appropriate legal framework providing for minimum quality
standards for ECCE, and a related indicator on number of
countries complying with the standards.
1. Disaggregated data on early childhood development
services on age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity,
social origin, religion and economic and other status .
2. Disaggregated data on availability of early childhood
development services within one kilometer of the
habitation
3. Availability of nutrition and health care services
including regular health checkups within the early child
hood care programme
4. All early childhood care workers are oriented on non-
discrimination and social inclusion
5. Continuous comprehensive assessment system for
children are present which encourage and support in
primary and secondary school without detention.
6. All countries sign and are signatories to the UN
Convention against Discrimination in Education (1960)
ASPBAE supports the Global Campaign for Education's

(GCE) submission.
Proposed global indicators
1) % of schools that are free, disaggregated by level (*)
Racionale:
This is similarly the case for target 4.2 and its proposition
of one year free pre-primary. An indicator that is able to
track this dimension is of paramount importance. The
principle of gratuity is a pillar of education human rights
treaties and the positive impact of ensuring free education
is incontestable
Transition rates tackle crucial moments of progression

through the education systems, where drop out tends to
be concentrated, and to an extent indicate the extent of
quality of education.
Completion remains a core challenge and an unfinished

business that is carried through the EFA and MDG goals
approved in past decades. To assess this dimension
remains a key priority
% of schools with separate toilets for females and males

including MHM and a budget for operation and
maintenance* (according to WHO guidelines) > applies
for 4.2 as well
% of pupils with safe use of sanitation including MHM in

schools and addition to the teaching curriculum
In order to achieve this goal, there is needed acceptance
and support for quality early childhood education and
care. The Childcare Network Switzerland supports this
through networking between stakeholders and the state
(federal state and states), through Information, further
education, advocacy and its publications such as the
Framework for early childhood education and care and
relied publications on education for sustainable
development, health, integration (migration), social space
and prevention of poverty (www.orientierungsrahmen.ch).
For this goal/indicator it'll be crucial to define "Quality"
and "early childhood" (birth? Age 1-3?) as well as the
"institutions" considered as services for early childhood
education and care.
Considering the scientific evidence of the impact of
breastfeeding on cognitive development and future
learning, the breastfeeding indicators (early, exclusive up
to 6 months and continued up to 24 months) should be
included as a priority 1 indicator under this target.
- Child - educator ratio
-Percentage of children under 5 years of age who are
developmentally on track in health, learning and
psychosocial wellbeing
This indicator can be disaggregated by income quintile,

gender, race/ethnicity, disability, rural/urban place of
residence. The extent to which gap between first and fifth
income quintile should be assessed. Additional categories
may be identified at the national level.

remains a key priority. As stated previously, this is a
cross-cutting indicator.
If there is possibility of an additional indicator, a possibility

for an additional indicator is as follows. Completion is,
however, a better indicator given a choice.
Indicators:

quality of education
societies.
Recognizing that early child development begins in utero,
years before a child enters a (pre-) primary school
environment, and is inextricable from the quality of
caregiving and the home environment, it is essential that
the global monitoring framework attends to the quality of
care experienced by children under 5.
Include suggested Target 4.2.1; the Early Childhood

Development Index (ECDI), including the ECDI indicator
on the percentage of children under 5 experiencing
responsive, stimulating parenting in safe environments.
It is also important to include data on children living

outside of families/household, including in institutions.
Add the following indicators:
- Enrolment rates in pre-primary education (*)
- Ratio of enrolment in private institutions (*) (to check
whether pre-primary education is adequately and publicly
funded)
- Completion rate of pre- primary education (*)
- Transition rate between pre-primary and primary (*)
This could go along with the promotion of educational

institutions where they should be encouraged to have
programmes to help all girls and boys and parents to visit
and take enough training from the educational
establishments.
It is a fundamentant strategy for well-being, however, by

now the lack of quality kindergarten is serious in
developing countries
ATD Fourth World welcomes the proposal to disaggregate
suggested indicators for target 4.2 by wealth
No comments
Not enough space here for our comments. See the
Agenda, including indicators, page 18:
The above-mentioned indicators of PROGRESSION from
pre-primary to primary and also of COMPLETION RATES
in pre-primary are suggested here.
We highlight that learning assesments of children smaller

than end of pre-primary is NOT advisable and can be
detremental. This is stated in General Comment 1 of the
Commitee of the Right of the Child.
Recognizing that early child development begins in utero,

years before a child enters a (pre-) primary school
environment, and is inextricable from the quality of
caregiving and the home environment, it is essential that
the global monitoring framework attends to the quality of
care experienced by children under 5.
Include suggested Target 4.2.1; the Early Childhood

Development Index (ECDI), including the ECDI indicator
on the percentage of children under 5 experiencing
responsive, stimulating parenting in safe environments.
It is also important to include data on children living

outside of families/household, including in institutions.
This is great, but... there is growing evidence of the

impact at these ages of "positive parenting" programs.
Nurture and stimulation of children (let alone abandoning
harmful forms of punishment) plays a huge role in
cognitive development, let alone setting a stronger
foundation for future education performance. This is not
just about being ready for primary school! It is a lifelong
impact. Consider "By 2030, ensure all families have
access to quality early childhood development, parenting
and care, and pre-primary education programs to provide
children a sound foundation for their future development."
On 4.2.1, indices should not be used as they make it
difficult to interpret what has changed over time.
Suggested alternative indicator: % of pre-primary

education that is free
Please note that the indicator proposed under 4.1 covers

the transition rate between pre-primary and primary
education. Free pre-primary education could also be
included under the indicator on % of schools that are free,
disaggregated by level.

1. Disaggregated data on early childhood development
services by age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity,
religion, social origin, region, language, economic or other
status.
2. Disaggregated data on availability of early childhood
development services within one kilometer of the
habitation to ensure its universal reach to all girls and
boys.
3. Availability of nutrition and health care services
including regular health checkups within the early child
hood care programme to ensure children are protected
and any anomaly is identified early.
4. All early childhood care workers are oriented on non-
discrimination and social inclusion
By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys including those

with disabilities have access to quality early childhood
development, care and pre-primary education so that they
are ready for primary education
By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to
quality early childhood care and education that supports
their holistic development.
Indicator should state % of children that receive at least
one year of free pre-primary education, disaggregated by
income quintile, gender, ethnicity, mother tongue, rural
and urban population and, disability. Completion rates of
pre-primary education give us valuable information about
equity and quality education.
Children under 5 years of age should not be tested on
national and even less on international standards.
See consolidated indicator proposal in 4.1
AMEND INDICATOR 4.2.1 Early Childhood Development
Index. Replace ECDI with the tool that MELQO produces
(largely based on Save the Children's IDELA tool)
RATIONALE: 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.
AMEND INDICATOR 4.2.2 Participation rate in organized

learning (1 year before the official primary entry age).
Revise ‘participation rate’ to ‘attendance and/or
completion rate’, ideally completion.
RATIONALE: "participation rate" is unclear

Data access of all boys and girls to quality early childhood
development and pre-primary education, disaggregated
by gender age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity,
income, disability, rural/urban residence, national origin,
and migratory status.

This also applies to our position on target 4.1 above.
Data aggregated by sex ,

Excellent, but it must complemented wtih supervision
Neither 4.2.1 nor 4.2.2 measure quality of ECDC. The
ECDI is not available in a majority of countries.
Support the multi-purpose indicator to address menstrual
hygiene management developed at a working group
meeting on 27. Aug at the World Water Week4, with
experts from AMCOW, WECF, UNESCO, UNSGAB,
UNEP, UNHABITAT, BORDA, WEP, GWA, GIZ, SUSANA:
% of schools with pupils using safely managed sanitation

services** with separate toilets for females and males
including MHM
** based on WHO guidelines, definition of ‘safely

managed sanitation services’ needs to be extended as
follows: “safe, separate sanitation facilities, with water
and soap, including accommodations for menstrual
hygiene management in public, private, rural and urban
spaces, including schools”.
4.3.1 Enrollment and completion ratios by level and type

of formal and non-formal education disaggregated by age
(including men and women over 60), sex, geography,
income level, race, ethnicity and disability
Country data supported by UNESCO
4.3.2 Enrollment ratios of pregnant women and women

with children by level and type of formal and non-formal
education
Education Country surveys

Additional indicators proposed:
Percentage of children who achieve proficiency
in (a) literacy and (b) numeracy skills, at the
end of (i) primary (ii) secondary, according to
national standards
Disaggregated by income quintile, sex, age,

economy
Target 4.3: By 2030, ensure equal access for all
women and men to affordable and quality technical,
vocational and tertiary education, including university
We agree with proposed indicators. However there is

need for tacking of countries with appropriate legal and
policy frameworks and standards for TEVET and Tertiary
education, and also how such frameworks and standards
are being complied with. There is also need to include an
indicator on participation rate of youth and adults that
complete affordable and quality technical, vocational and
tertiary education, disaggregated by income quintile, sex,
age, race/ethnicity, disability, rural and urban place of
residence. Finally the share of TEVT and Higher
education in the education budget should be tracked
1. Disaggregated data on admission, retention and
completion of technical, vocational and tertiary education
leading to gainful employment on age, sex, disability,
race, caste, ethnicity, social origin, religion and economic
and other status .
2. Soft skills and employment-oriented preparations are
included in the technical, vocational and tertiary
education.
3. Affirmative action policies for admission of technical,
vocational and tertiary education are in place.
4. Individual education finance schemes for all Women
and men across multiple dimension index .
Support the indicator but with an amendment :
Enrolment ratios by level and type of education (TVET

and tertiary), including formal and non-formal education
disaggregated by income quintile, sex, age, race/ethnicity,
disability, rural and urban place of residence.
Some OP are ready to tackle this. We should give them a

chance
Proposed global indicators
1) % of schools that are free, disaggregated by level (*)
Racionale:
quality of education.

remains a key priority
• Existence of a national TVET qualifications and
accreditation framework, including.
• Share of public expenditure for TVET and tertiary
education received by the poorest decile of the
population, disaggregated by sex
• Enrolment ratios by level and type of education,
including formal and non-formal education, disaggregated
by income quintile, sex, age, race/ethnicity, disability, rural
and urban place of residence.*
• Participation rate of youth and adults that complete
affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary
education, disaggregated by income quintile, sex, age,
residence.*
* Additional categories may be identified at the national

level, using data of both formal and informal economy.

residence.*

Proposed indicator: Number of children and youth
receiving compulsory Economic Citizenship Education
(which includes a combination of financial, social and
livelihoods education) for employment, decent jobs and
entrepreneurship
Proposed indicator: Number of jobs created for youth by

governments through skills training programs.

education
% de países que implementan educación informal.
Muchos países en sus sistemas educativos ofrecen

educación formal, no formal e informal esta última
destinada a formación de jóvenes y adultos. Seria de
interés conocer las distintas acciones y programas que
se ofrecen.
residence.*

The indicator should only refer to formal education and

training as that is the focus of the target (technical,
vocational and tertiary education). Non-formal education
is important for target 4.4 and should be measured there.
The suggested indicator does not adequately capture
access and affordability.
enthusize should be place on the marginalises women
and men, and person with disabilities
- Percentage of youth not in education, employment

or training (18- to 24-year-olds, disaggregated by
gender).
- Tertiary enrolment and completion rates for the poorest

x% of the population.
- Tuition fees as proportionate to a

person's average annual income in the
country.
- Availability of scholarships.
The percentage of people in a given age-range (eg 25-64
years) participating in education or training in the 12
months prior to being interviewed
% of schools that are free, disaggregated by level (*)

of 12 years of free publicly funded primary and secondary
education; this is similarly the case for target 4.2 and its
proposition of one year free pre-primary. An indicator that
is able to track this dimension is of paramount
importance. The principle of gratuity is a pillar of
education human rights treaties and the positive impact of
ensuring free education is incontestable
societies.
See Target 4.1
We hope so
Disaggregate to discern whether people living with HIV
leave school. This would function as a measure of
discrimination.

•Existence of a national TVET qualifications and
•Share of public expenditure for TVET and tertiary
•Enrolment ratios by level and type of education,
•Participation rate of youth and adults that complete
residence.*
Increased level of education is crucial to get out of
poverty. To understand if one of the main factors for
women to remain in poverty is lack of access to formal
and non-formal education and training it will be necessary
to disaggregate this indicator by income and disability.

residence.*

No comments
Agenda, including indicators, page 18:
We agree with the indicator of enrolment ratios by level
and type
of education (TVET and tertiary (a) participation rate of
15-24 year olds
in TVET and (b) gross enrolment ratio in tertiary
education
Proposed alternative indicator: Enrolment ratios by level
and type
of education (TVET and tertiary (a) participation rate of
15-24 year olds
in TVET and (b) gross enrolment ratio in tertiary
education.
Please note that the indicator proposed under 4.1 covers

the transition rate between secondary and tertiary
education, which is a crucial element of expanding
enrolment.
The target would benefit from a structure indicator along

the following lines: Existence of legislation or national
plans for TVET and tertiary education which include clear
provisions to guarantee non-discrimination and support
for students from low-income backgrounds.
1. Disaggregated data on admission, retention and
completion of technical, vocational and tertiary education
leading to gainful employment by age, sex, disability,
race, caste, ethnicity, social origin, religion, region,
language or economic or other status.
2. Soft skills and employment-oriented preparations are
included in the technical, vocational and tertiary
education.
3. Affirmative action policies for admission of technical,
vocational and tertiary education are in place.
4. Individual education finance schemes for all Women
and men across disability, race, caste, ethnicity, social
origin, religion, region, language or economic or other
status.
By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men

including those with disabilities to affordable, accessible
and quality technical, vocational and tertiary, education,
including university
By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to
affordable, quality technical, vocational and tertiary
education, including university.
Unfortunately, the word "affordable" remains in the
description of this target.
Besides enrolment ratios, we should have disaggregated
information about % of students that complete their
tertiary education, including university studies.
See consolidated indicator proposal in 4.1
Indicator: Enrollment and completion ratios by level and
type of formal and non-formal education disaggregated by
age (including men and women over 60), sex, geography,
Source: Country data supported by UNESCO
Target 4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women

and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational
and tertiary education, including university and life-long
learning
Indicator 4.3.1 Enrollment ratios by level and type of
education formal and non-formal education
Enrolment ratios by level and type of education (TVET
and tertiary). Change to ‘gender parity index for
enrolment’.
RATIONALE: Need to state exactly what the ratio will

consist of – is it 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?
4.3.1 Enrollment and completion ratios of population by
level and type of formal and non-formal education
DATA SOURCE: Country data supported by UNESCO
NOTES: Almost a quarter of young women aged 15-24

today (116 million) in developing countries have never
completed primary school. Girls and women who are
educated are more confident, have more freedom to
make decisions which affect their lives, have greater
awareness of their rights, and have better work
prospects.
Data of equal access to affordable and quality technical,

vocational and tertiary education, including university,
disaggregated by gender age, race, ethnicity, indigenous
identity, income, disability, rural/urban residence, national
origin, and migratory status.
4.3.1 Change to: Participation rate of all adults,

disaggregated by sex and age, in formal and non-formal
education and training in the last 12 months.
We support UNESCO and UNICEF on this alternative

indicator.
Some more clarification is needed here about the
definition of ‘non-formal’ education. Also, non-formal
education is not explicitly mentioned in the target
(perhaps it should be?) which makes a clear definition
imperative if this information is to be provided consistently
for measurement purposes.

population, disaggregated by sex.
residence.*


residence.*

Equal access needs to go beyond gender inequalities,
important as they are. Wealth gaps are far more
pronounced. Our recent analysis using DHS data shows
that fewer than 1% of the poorest half of the population in
many LICs and LMICs access higher education. Just
increasing their level to that of the current HE enrolment
rate of the richest will be a huge challenge.
More specifically, further discussion is needed on whether

to use gross or net rates - net rates would give a better
picture of the current cohort of young people who are
likely to be entering the labour market so this would seem
more appropriate than the current proposal for a gross
rate.

I propose setting up affordable and easily accessible ICT
educational facilities outside formal school settings. This
will enhance online education.
One of the indicators should be regular survey to assess
awareness of the existence and use of such facilities.
education
% of people* using safely managed sanitation services

including menstrual hygiene management (MHM) in
working and learning environments/institutions
* data disaggregated by sex
as Multi Purpose Indicator with 6.2
justification: women and girls miss trainings if there are no

adequate WASH facilities
None of the suggested 4.3.1 indicators measure the

quality of TVET or tertiary education.
4.3.3 Number of third-age/life-long learning centers for
men and women over 60
EUROSTAT publishes participation rate in education and

training among people age 25-64, including age cohort
55-64 (acknowledging that a limit of 64 is also insufficient.
This is included to demonstrate the feasibility of
measuring beyond tertiary education).
In much of the developing world women and girls procure

residence.*

Target 4.4: By 2030, substantially increase the
number of youth and adults who have relevant skills,
including technical and vocational skills, for
employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship
We agree with the indicators , but the following are

additional ones being proposed:
• The percentage of youth and adult people
participating in education and training, including TVET, in
the 12 months prior to being interviewed*
• Existence of legislation or national plans for TVET
and tertiary education, including clear provisions to
guarantee non-discrimination and support for learners
from low-income backgrounds
accreditation framework, that includes recognition of prior
learning
participating in ICT skills development programs in the 12
months prior to being interviewed*
economy
1. Inclusion of training modules on non-discriminatory
and inclusive education in teacher training curriculum and
practice.
2. Anti discrimination legislation, policies and
implementation & motoring mechanisms instituted in all
employment and entrepreneurship regarding recruitment,
remuneration, promotion, career improvement, work
place and supply chain,
3. Disaggregated data on post training employment
opportunities by age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity,
social origin, religion, region, language or economic or
other status.
4. Policies and schemes to improve ones skills and
educational qualifications and enhance ones employment
opportunities are available through out one’s career
especially for Women and men across disability, race,
caste, ethnicity, social origin, religion, region, language or
5. Affirmative action policies for employment and
entrepreneurship are in duly instituted and budget
provisions duly made.
We propose:
Percentage of youth and adults receiving vocational

training and retraining, including apprenticeships,
advanced vocational training and recurrent training
towards decent work
We also support ILO’s suggestion on the skills mismatch

index.
Rationale: It is unclear why ICT skills are being singled

out as an index of this target. We think the proposed
indicator captures the broader (than ICT skills) intention
of the target.
Proposed global indicator
Existence of legislation or national plans for TVET and
tertiary education which include clear provisions to
guarantee non-discrimination and support for students
Racionale:
A structural indicator is best placed to capture progress
made in prioritizing TVET and tertiary education,
especially considering the overcoming of multiple barriers
that impede access to these levels and modalities of
education
learning
economy
Lifelong learning opportunities most extent through life;
for employment purposes in many countries people have
to continue working beyond the age of 64.

learning
economy
entrepreneurship.
Proposed Indicator: Number of jobs created for young

people through skills training programs.
Proposed Indicator: Number of enterprises supported

through education, training and resources for young
entrepreneurs.
examples: programming, user interface, ICT technology
research, ICT deployment, creat webpages, visulization

learning
economy
This target includes non-formal education within it, as

relevant skills for employment, decent jobs and
entrepreneurship can be developed through non-formal
education. Measurement could include participation rates
of youth and adults in non-formal education. If focusing
on measuring outcomes through percentage of
youth/adults with skills, this should not be limited to ICT
skills as many types of skills are relevant for employment,
decent jobs and entrepreneurship. The indicator could
instead be "Percentage of youth/adults with transversal
skills, by type of skill".
- Percentage of students having access to
career counselling.
- Transition rates from secondary to tertiary

education disaggregated by gender.
-The percentage of people in a given age-range (eg 25-
64 years) participating in education or training in the 12
months prior to being interviewed
-Existence of legislation or national plans for TVET and
Indicator: Existence of legislation or national plans for
TVET and tertiary education which include clear
for students from low-income
backgrounds.

that impede access to these
levels and modalities of education
societies.
It's particularly tragic that we are growing populations of

marginally educated people, with hopes and dreams, but
facing ever growing competition.... assuring they mostly
never have things they will be competitive in doing...
Only a whole system view will tell you how to solve that.
- Existence of legislation and national plans for TVET and
guarantee non-discrimination, adapted
training/educational opportunities and support for
youngsters in all situations (from low-income background,
working youth, youngsters with disabilities, etc.)
- Relevance of the training opportunities with regards to
the job market
see Target 1.3
It is good strategy and I hope we can do it

Fostering Southern-led innovation hubs for science and
research will have substantial impact in the retention of
skilled youth and adults. Home-grown innovations will
result in scalable solutions which can lead to affordable
health technologies.
•The percentage of youth and adult people participating in
education and training, including TVET, in the 12 months
prior to being interviewed*
•Existence of legislation or national plans for TVET and
tertiary education, including clear provisions to guarantee
non-discrimination and support for learners from low-
income backgrounds
•Existence of a national TVET qualifications and
learning
•The percentage of youth and adult people participating in
ICT skills development programs in the 12 months prior to
being interviewed*
economy
Indicator 4.4.2 Percentage of youth/adults who are
computer and information literate ( BBB )
Regarding ILO and UNESCO’s proposals and

recognising that the proposed indicators are too narrow
regarding ICT skills, we suggest to use Media and
Information (MIL) competencies, with data from the
Global MIL Assessment Framework developed by
UNESCO.
Additional capacity is required – the indicator framework
exists but additional capacity is required to collect full
data against it.
This indicator can also be used for 5.b2 and 16.10
Increased level of education correlates with better job
opportunities and better salary. To understand if one of
the main factors for youth and adults to remain in poverty
is the lack of access to formal and non-formal education
and training it will be necessary to disaggregate this
indicator by income.

learning
economy
There may be a need to set a target
(All information disaggregated by gender)
Knowledge and skills for employment, decent work and

entrepreneurship
a) Percentage of youth/adults with problemsolving skills.

b) Percentage of youth/adults who are computer and
information literate.
c) Number of countries with career counselling
curriculums/integrated into curriculums/workbased
opportunities.
d) Percentage of students having access to career
counselling.
e) Number of graduates employed within a year.
Participation in higher education
a) Upper secondary education gross enrolment ratio.

b) Tertiary education gross enrolment ratio.
c) Participation rate in technical and vocational
programmes (15- to 24-year-olds).
d) Percentage of youth not in education, employment or
training (18- to 24-year-olds).
e) Participation rate in education and training over the
past 12 months (25- to 64-year-olds).
f) Transition rates from secondary to tertiary education.
We consider a structural indicator is best placed to
capture progress made in prioritizing TVET and tertiary
education, especially considering the overcoming of
multiple barriers that impede access to these levels and
modalities of education.
For this reason, our proposed indicator is: "Existence of

legislation or national plans for TVET and tertiary
education which include clear
for students from low-income backgrounds"
1. Anti discrimination legislation, policies and
implementation & motoring mechanisms instituted in all
employment and entrepreneurship regarding recruitment,
remuneration, promotion, career improvement, work
place and supply chain,
2. Disaggregated data on post training employment
opportunities by age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity,
social origin, religion, region, language or economic or
other status.
3. Policies and schemes to improve ones skills and
educational qualifications and enhance ones employment
opportunities are available through out one’s career
especially for Women and men across disability, race,
caste, ethnicity, social origin, religion, region, language or
4. Affirmative action policies for employment and
entrepreneurship are in duly instituted and budget
provisions duly made.
By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and

adults particularly those with disabilities who have
relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for
employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship
Besides the proposed indicator, it could be useful to know
if countries have national legislation or plans for TVET
and tertiary education that assure non-discrimination and,
particularly, support for students of low-income homes.
Indicator: Percentage of youth and adults in education,
employment or training in the last 12 months by age, sex,
gender, geographic location, ethnicity and disabilities
Source: Country data supported by UNESCO and ILO
4.4.1 Participation rate in formal and non-formal

education and training in the last 12 months among 25-64
year-old disaggregated by sex , ethnicity, rural/urban
Indicator 4.4.2 Percentage of youth and adults who are
computer and information literate
AMEND INDICATOR 4.4.1: Participation rate in formal
and non-formal education and training in the last 12
months among 25-64 year olds.
% of youth/adults who are computer and information
literate.
RATIONALE: 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).
Data on youth and adults with relevant skills including
technical and vocational skills for employment, decent
jobs and entrepreneurship, disaggregated by gender,
status.
Indicator 4.4.1 Change to: Participation rate in formal and

non-formal education and training in the last 12 months,
by gender, age and persons with disabilities.
4.4.2. Change to Percentage of youth/adults by age

group who are computer and information literate.
We strongly agree with the ILO that ICT literacy is too
narrow an indicator to assess suitability for employment,
as it is far removed from most technologies and
vocations. It addresses entrepreneurship obliquely at
best. In a sustainable development context, it is important
to focus on the technical skills that will be needed for a
sustainable economy, including building design, materials
management, electrical engineering and practical
electricity, and repairing and maintaining high-efficiency
devices. We recommend: ‘Number of people enrolled in
apprenticeship schemes (by industry group)’ and/or
‘Number of people enrolled in Continued Professional
Development schemes (by industry group’ might be used.
This information could be obtained via business services,
or government data (especially if such activities are state-
supported). This would also be a good opportunity to
encourage active business-level engagement with the
SDG agenda in the form of indicator data provision and
support. Any adopted indicator should also preferably
consider uptake across SMEs and disaggregate
information by sector, location (U/R), gender and age.

• The percentage of youth and adult people participating
in education and training, including TVET, in the 12
months prior to being interviewed.*
• Existence of legislation or national plans for TVET and
tertiary education, including clear provisions to guarantee
non-discrimination and support for learners from low-
income backgrounds.
learning.
• The percentage of youth and adult people participating
in ICT skills development programs in the 12 months prior
to being interviewed.*

economy.

learning
economy
Ensure to access of all young people and adults who
have relevant skills, including technical and vocational
skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship

One of the indicators should be the existence of platforms
for counseling and to create awareness and acquisition of
relevant skills.
4.4.1 Proportion of youth and adults in formal and non

formal education and training, including computer skills,
disaggregated, by age, sex, gender, ethnicity, rural/urban
place of residence
4.4.2 Percentage of youth and adults in education,
Note: Second indicator can also show us the percentage
of disconnected youth (those not in education,
employment or training)
4.4.1 addresses participation, not skills acquired

(meaning it does not account for the quality of the
education which would lead to skill development). 4.4.2
address one skill of a larger set of 'relevant skills' needed
for employment.
4.4.1 Proportion of youth and adults in formal and non
formal education and training, including computer skills,
disaggregated, by age, sex, gender, ethnicity, rural/urban
place of residence
4.4.2 Percentage of youth and adults in education,

Country data supported by UNESCO and ILO

learning

economy
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
We recommend that this indicator be disaggregated by
disability.
A study of nine countries by the World Bank found that

disability often had a greater impact on access to
education than gender, rural residence, or household
economic status. (Source: D Filmer, 2005, Disability,
Poverty and Schooling in Developing Countries: Results
from 11 Household Surveys, World Bank).
As it is not sufficient for children with disabilities to enroll

in school unless teachers have the capacity to teach
them, we also recommend the following indicator:
‘Percentage of teachers in service who have received in-

service training each year on teaching students with
special educational needs’.
Our proposed indicators also address target 10.2.
We agree with the proposed indicators. Additionally we

recommend that the indicator on aid should read
as:Percentage of total aid to education allocated to
countries with average income of less than
US$2 per capita per day. We also propose that an
indcaor on participation rate to education and vocational
training in formal and non-formal programs
1. Comprehensive policy to address educational
disparity.
2. Disaggregated data on scholarships available at
professional institutions inclusive of on multiple
dimension index.
3. Disaggregated data on educational expenditure rates
professional institutions inclusive of expenditure on
infrastructure, scholarship etc.
4. Specific budget allocation for educational benefits of
socially disadvantaged population.
5. Disaggregated data on degrees acquired by socially
disadvantaged groups at primary, secondary, higher,
college, technical and professional institutions.
Support the proposed indicator with amendment:

Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top
wealth quintile, race/ethnicity and disability] for all
indicators on this list that can be disaggregated
Revise existing indicator to read: Parity indices
(female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top wealth quintile,
social groups and disability) for all indicators on this list
that can be disaggregated.
Proposed global indicator
Existence of legislation or national plans for TVET and
Racionale:
that impede access to these levels and modalities of
education
In order to ensure that this target is met for people with

disabilities we suggest:
Percentage of teachers in service who have received in

special educational needs
• Participation rate to education and vocational training
in formal and non-formal programs
• Completion rate to education and vocational training
in formal and non-formal programs*
economy. Furthermore, the extent to which the gap
between the highest and lowest groups is being closed
(e.g. first and fifth income quintile) should be assessed.

Proposed indicator: % of girls and % of boys receiving
Economic Citizenship Education (which includes a
combination of financial, social and livelihoods
education).
4.5.1 Whether laws or policies discriminate against

women and girls, including pregnant, married, or
menstruating girls in school and vocational training,
including the requirement of third party authorization
4.5.2. Number of girls who leave school due to marriage,
pregnancy and/or menstruation
This target specifically mentions persons with disabilities,
which should automatically trigger disaggregation by
disability (in this instance, e.g. Primary school net
attendance ratio for children with disabilities; Secondary
school net attendance ratio for children with disabilities).
Furthermore, it is clearly not sufficient for children with
disabilities to enroll in/physically have access to school:
indeed access to education for all requires that teachers
have the capacity to teach students with special
educational needs. Suggested additional indicator:
special educational needs’. (Links to targets 4.c, 10.2)
Introducir en el indicador el Índice de Inclusión por país.
Existe el documento elaborado del Índice de Inclusión,

que los Estados lo apliquen para conocer el estado del
arte de la inclusión por país, saber cuáles son las
dificultades y proyectar acciones de mejoramiento


pregnant or married girls in school and vocational
training, including the requirement of third party
authorization
4.5.2 Number of girls who leave school due to marriage,

pregnancy, menstruation, or sexual violence or
harassment
4.5.4 Percentage of schools that have sexual violence

and harassment policies and reporting mechanisms in
place

- (Relative) Parity index: female attainment rate/
male attainment rate.
- Attainment rate of indigenous populations
- (Relative) Parity index: poorest 20% attainment

rate/richest 20% attainment rate.
- Access to education in emergencies: Existence

of different national, district level and school level
preparedness plans to ensure that education in
emergencies responses are rapid and education
opportunities are uninterrupted.
- (Relative) Parity index: percentage of poorest

20% achieving minimum learning outcomes/
percentage of richest 20% achieving minimum
learning outcomes.
- Density of school network
- Percentage of schools that are accessible to disabled

pupils
-Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top
wealth quintile] for all indicators on this list that can be
disaggregated
-Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top
The lack of separate and decent sanitation and menstrual

facilities in schools discourages girls from attending
school full time and forces some to drop out.
The indicator 6.1 and 6.2 on safely managed water

services, safely managed sanitation services in school is
thus a CROSS-CUTTING indicator that helps monitors
target 4.5
- disaggregate indicator for this target for persons

with/without disabilities
(e.g. Primary school net attendance ratio for children
with disabilities;
Secondary school net attendance ratio for children with
disabilities)
- Percentage of teachers in service who have received in-
service training
each year on teaching students with special educational
needs
Indicator:
wealth quintile, RACE/ETHNICITY AND DISABILITY] for
all indicators on this list that can be disaggregated
This indicator is of central importance to an agenda that

has equitable and inclusive education at its heart. In
accordance to target 4.5, emphasis must also be placed
on the indigenous population as well as persons with
disability; thus the importance of disaggregating data for
these two populations as well.
Revision in existing indicator:
Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural,bottom/top wealth
quintile, race/ethnicity and disability) for all indicators on
this list that can be disaggregated
Specific mention of persons with disabilities, which

should automatically trigger disaggregation by disability
(in this instance, e.g. Primary school net attendance ratio
for children with disabilities; Secondary school net
attendance ratio for children with disabilities).
special educational needs’.

societies.
The target specifically refers to indigenous peoples. The

indicators must be disaggregated by ethnicity. Failure to
do so will undermine the target.
This target seeks to ensure that equal education is
universally accessible. In order to measure the inclusion
of persons with disabilities, the indicators, such as school
enrollment, need to be disaggregated by disability, age
and gender. While the proposed indicators mention
disaggregation by gender and age group, they do not
include a call for data disaggregated by disability.
Amend the proposed indicator:
- Parity indices [female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top
wealth quintile, race/ethnicity/language, disability,
working/not working youth] for all indicators on this list
that can be disaggregated

- Existence of legislation and national plans for ensuring
equal access to all levels of education and vocational
training for the vulnerable, as per their specific needs
- Ratio of disable children in special education units vs
inclusive education

It is very good strategy. I hope civil society contribute

effectively
IAPB welcomes the intention to disaggregate this target
by disability (suggested indicators: primary, secondary
school net attendance ratios for children with disabilities).
Further to ensure that education and training is of
sufficient quality to make equal access meaningful will
require that teachers have the appropriate training.
Suggested additional indicator: ‘Percentage of teachers in
service who have received in-service training each year
on teaching students with special educational needs’.

•Participation rate to education and vocational training in
formal and non-formal programs
•Completion rate to education and vocational training in
formal and non-formal programs*
Indicators
- disaggregate indicator for this target for persons
with/without disabilities (e.g. Primary school net
school net attendance ratio for children with disabilities)
- Percentage of teachers in service who have received in-
special educational needs
Comment:
In particular, the indicators for targets 4.5 and 8.5 should
be disaggregated for persons with/without disabilities. In
addition, for target 4.5, an indicator on inclusion is
needed to ensure equal access. It is not enough for
children with disabilities to enrol/attend school - access to
education for all requires that teachers have the capacity
to teach students with special educational needs.
Therefore the following indicator is proposed: ‘percentage
of teachers receiving in-service training each year on
inclusive education’ (this indicator is also linked to targets
4.c and 10.2).
No comments
Equity in access to education
a) (Relative) Parity index: female attainment rate/ male

attainment rate.
b) (Relative) Parity index: poorest 20% attainment
rate/richest 20% attainment rate.
c) Access to education in emergencies: Existence of
different national, district level and school level
preparedness plans to ensure that education in
emergencies responses are rapid and education
opportunities are uninterrupted.
d) Percentage of children and youth with access to
learning environments/spaces.
Wealth
a) (Relative) Parity index: percentage of poorest 20%

achieving minimum learning outcomes/ percentage of
richest 20% achieving minimum
learning outcomes.
b) (Absolute) Range: difference between poorest and
richest 20% achieving minimum learning outcomes.
=>
Enrollment, completion and transition rate (of different
levels of education) of children/young people from most
vulnerable groups or with a disability.
Density of school network.

Our proposed indicator is very similar to the one already
put forward by the NY Interagency Committee. We
suggest, however, to also explicitely name the groups of
vulnerable populations mentioned in the target. In this
sense, our suggestion reads as follows:
"Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top

indicators on this list that can
be disaggregated".
This indicator is of central importance to an agenda that
on the indigenous population
as well as persons with disability; thus the importance of
disaggregating data for these two populations as well.
1. Comprehensive policy to address educational
disparity.
2. Disaggregated data on scholarships available at
race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other
status.
3. Disaggregated data on educational expenditure rates
professional institutions inclusive of expenditure on
infrastructure, scholarship etc.
4. Specific budget allocation for educational benefits of
socially disadvantaged population.
5. Disaggregated data on degrees acquired by socially
disadvantaged groups at primary, secondary, higher,
college, technical and professional institutions.
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
To guarantee equity in education, parity indices should
include ethnicity and disability in all indicators. Indigenous
population and persons with disability are still left behind
even if legislation claims for equitable and inclusive
education.
Plan International, in alignment with the Global Campaign
for Education, strongly supports indicator proposed by
IAEG, which is of central importance to an agenda that
on the indigenous population as well as people with
disability; we therefore call for the indicator to be
disaggregated by indigenous status and disability as well
as the disaggregations listed.
Indicator: Whether laws or policies discriminate against
Source: Country research; School Surveys
Indicator: Number of girls who leave school due to

marriage, pregnancy and/or menstruation
Source: Country research; school surveys

PROPOSED INDICATOR 4.5.1
wealth quintile] for all indicators on this list that can be
disaggregated.
RATIONALE: 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.

special educational needs’. (Links to targets 4.c, 10.2).
pregnant or married girls in school and vocational
training, including the requirement of third party
authorization
4.5.2 Number of girls who leave school due to marriage,

pregnancy, menstruation, or sexual violence or
harassment
4.5.3 The number or percentage of primary and

secondary schools with at least one teacher who has
been trained in comprehensive sexuality education and
who has taught the subject at least once in the last
academic year
4.5.4 Percentage of schools that have sexual violence

and harassment policies and reporting mechanisms in
place
DATA SOURCE: Country data supported by UNESCO
NOTES: Girls and young women are often required to

leave school if they are pregnant, resulting in additional
discrimination and lack of opportunities for single
mothers, rape victims, young married women/girls. It is
essential to document the reason so many girls leave
school during the transition period from primary to lower
secondary school.
Data on gender disparities in education disaggregated by

gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
migratory status.
4.5.1 Parity indices (female/male, urban/rural, bottom/top

wealth quintile, age group, persons with disablilites] for all
4.5: 1) Availability of school materials in indigenous
languages; 2) Accessible school infrastructure for
vulnerable groups including nomadic groups and
indigenous peoples; 3)Access to culturally appropriate
bilingual education based on mother tongue, Including
indigenous languages
Indicator 4.5.1: The Miracle Foundation recommends

disaggregation by parental care status.
• Participation rate to education and vocational training in
formal and non-formal programs.
• Completion rate to education and vocational training in
formal and non-formal programs.*


(e.g. first and fifth income
Also black population, street children, migrants.
This needs to be an overarching target.
Measurement needs to go beyond the current proposal of

parity (ie equal numbers of girls and boys, for example),
to tracking progress for the most disadvantaged group for
each of the indicators.
Kevin Watkins stepping-stones proposal is also relevant

here, as it allows interim targets to be set to ensure there
is a focus on accelerated progress for those lagging most
behind.
See our paper for further information both on the

importance of measuring progress for the most
disadvantaged groups, as well as an illustration of
stepping stones: http://www.heart-
resources.org/assignment/how-can-education-systems-
become-equitable-by-2030/

The word elimination in Target 4.5 needs an indicator to
show the extent of reduction in different areas of disparity

The suggested indicator is adequate.

Country research; School Surveys

Country research; school surveys
In much of the developing world women and girls procure

Target 4.6: By 2030, ensure that all youth and a
substantial proportion of adults, both men and
women, achieve literacy and numeracy
We agree with the proposed indicators. In addition, we

propose the following indicators:
• Existence of effective youth and adult literacy
programs tailored to vulnerable groups, with special
attention to women, migrants, and ethnic groups
• Existence of a national literacy assessment
framework and tools to collect, analyse and share
relevant and timely data on literacy levels and literacy and
numeracy needs
1. Disaggregated data on adult literacy rate on multiple
dimension index
2. Disaggregated data on youth and adult neo-literates
across multiple dimension index .
We propose:
Percentage of the youth and adult population achieving at

least a fixed level of proficiency in functional (a) literacy
and (b) numeracy skills, according to national standards
by gender, age,income, location, ethnicity, disability, caste
and residency (migrants)
Proposed global indicator:
Percentage of the youth and adult population achieving at
least a fixed level of proficiency in functional (a) literacy
(*)
Racionale:
Clear reference to the youth and adult population must be
made, to ensure adequate attention to both populations.
cultural and linguistic contexts
Additional suggested indicators:
• Percentage of the youth and adult population
achieving proficiency in functional (a) literacy and (b)
numeracy skills, according to national standards*
• Existence of national literacy policy and plans,
integrated to the national education system, secured by
public budget, suitable to youth and adults respectively,
with a gender perspective
numeracy needs
* Disaggregated by income quintile, sex, race/ethnicity,
disability, rural and urban place of residence. Additional
categories may be identified at the national level.
Furthermore, the extent to which the gap between the
highest and lowest groups is being closed should be
assessed.

numeracy needs
assessed.
entrepreneurship
4.6.1 percentage of youth/adults proficient in literacy and

numeracy skills by age, sex, ethnicity, urban/rural and
disabilities
numeracy needs
assessed.
-Percentage of the population in a given age group
achieving at least a
fixed level of proficiency in functional (a) literacy and (b)
numeracy skills
-Percentage of the youth and adult population achieving
at least a fixed level of proficiency in functional (a) literacy
Indicators: Percentage of the youth and adult population
achieving at least a fixed level of proficiency in functional
(a) literacy and (b) numeracy skills, ACCORDING TO
NATONAL STANDARDS (*)

cultural and
linguistic contexts
societies.
- Percentage of the youth and adult population achieving
(*)
See Target 1
I hope that by 2030 illiteracu and ilnumeracy are

eliminated
•Percentage of the youth and adult population achieving
proficiency in functional (a) literacy and (b) numeracy
skills, according to national standards*
•Existence of national literacy policy and plans, integrated
to the national education system, secured by public
budget, suitable to youth and adults respectively, with a
gender perspective
•Existence of effective youth and adult literacy programs
tailored to vulnerable groups, with special attention to
women, migrants, and ethnic groups
•Existence of a national literacy assessment framework
and tools to collect, analyse and share relevant and
timely data on literacy levels and literacy and numeracy
needs
assessed.
numeracy needs
assessed.
Restate, "By 2030, ensure that all youth and a majority of
adult men and women achieve literacy and numeracy."
No comments
Proficiency in literacy/numeracy to fully participate in
society
a) Percentage of youth and adults proficient in literacy

skills, disaggregated by gender.
b) Percentage of youth and adults proficient in numeracy
skills, disaggregated by gender.
c) Youth/adult literacy rate, disaggregated by gender.
Participation in literacy/numeracy programmes
a) Participation rate in literacy programmes over the past

12 months (as % of illiterate 25-to 64-year - olds,
disaggregated by gender).
=>
Would be good to have an indicator on functional literacy:
who can use
literacy effectively in life situations and in working life.
made in the indicator for this target, to ensure adequate
attention to both populations. We highlight that proficiency
levels and methodologies must be determined at national
level, respectful of multi-cultural and linguistic contexts.
For this reason, our proposed indicator is:

"Percentage of the youth and adult population achieving
and (b) numeracy skills,
according to national standards".
Attention must also be paid to the limitations of existing
definitions of age groups, i.e. all people above age of 65
often being excluded. We highlight that proficiency levels
and methodologies must be determined at national level,
respectful of multi-cultural and linguistic contexts

1. Disaggregated data on adult literacy rate inclusive of
– age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion
or economic or other status.
2. Disaggregated data on youth and adult neo-literates
across age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, Social
origin, religion or economic status.
By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial

proportion of adults, both men and women particularly
those with disabilities, achieve literacy and numeracy
Indicator should make explicit mention adult as well as
youth population, in coherence with the right to education
for all and the concept of life long learning.
Once again we stress the need of measures according to
national standards.
Indicator: percentage of youth/adults proficient in literacy
and numeracy skills by age, sex, ethnicity, urban/rural
and disabilities
Source: Country data supported by UNESCO
refer to "Relevant literacy", wich offer oportunity for skils

development.
Target 4.6 By 2030, ensure that all youth and adults, both
men and women, reach a proficiency level in literacy and
numeracy sufficient to fully participate in society..
Indicator 4.6.1 Percentage of youth/adults proficient in
literacy and numeracy skills by age , sex, ethnicity
Indicator 4.6.2 Youth/adult literacy rate by age, ethnicity,
rural/urban
AMEND INDICATOR 4.6.1 Revise to ‘% youth/adults who
can demonstrate basic literacy/numeracy skills’
AMEND INDICATOR 4.6.2 Youth/adult literacy rate.

Place particular emphasis on importance of women’s
literacy.
RATIONALE: Improving women’s literacy is proven to

have a positive impact on children’ attendance and
performance at school.
Global comparisons can be complicated because of the
different ways of measuring literacy in surveys. There is a
need for a harmonized and recognized methodology.
Data on literacy and numeracy disaggregated by gender,
status.
4.6.1 and 4.6.2. We recommend fully age-disaggregated

data for adults
strong and proven inter-linkages between corruption,
governance and education outcomes. For example, there
is a positive correlation between increased corruption and
the reduced quality and quantity of education in a country.
Data from 42 countries suggest that the increased
practice of paying bribes is associated with a lower
literacy rate among 15 to 24-year-olds. This correlation
holds independently of a country’s per capita income.
Additional results reveal that higher levels of access to
information — such as on a school’s budget, resource
inflows provided to schools and appointment procedures
for teachers and school administrators — is positively and
significantly correlated with higher literacy rates.
-
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/the_an
ti_corruption_catalyst_realising_the_mdgs_by_2015
• Percentage of the youth and adult population achieving
proficiency in functional (a) literacy and (b) numeracy
skills, according to national standards.*
with a gender perspective.
• Existence of effective youth and adult literacy programs
tailored to vulnerable groups, with special attention to
women, migrants, and ethnic groups.
• Existence of a national literacy assessment framework
and tools to collect, analyse and share relevant and
timely data on literacy levels and literacy and numeracy
needs.

assessed.

numeracy needs
assessed.
All youth and adults

Add creative innovation to literacy and numeracy.
Creative innovation is neither literacy nor numeracy but it
is a type of education.

disabilities

disabilities

numeracy needs

assessed.
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
non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural
diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable
development
We agree with the proposed indicators, and addition of the following:
• Existence of publicly budgeted courses and programmes

dedicated to education for sustainable development, global
citizenship education (including peace and interculturalism), human
rights education and comprehensive sexuality education in non-
formal education
1. School and university syllabus includes SDG Goals, targets and
Indicators.
2. All relevant UN bodies have SDG education Campaigns and
programs
% of teaching hours and availability of public funds dedicated to

education for sustainable development, global citizenship education,
human rights education (as per UNGA resolution 59/113) and
comprehensive sexuality education in formal and non-formal
education
Rationale:
This qualitative dimension of the target is best captured through
assessing the extent to which education systems dedicate teaching
hours to these issues. Public funding is also an indication of the
State’s commitment to promote these concerns.
We recommend the additional indicator: percentage of schools that
provided comprehensive sexuality education in the previous
academic year (disaggregated by age, location, income, gender and
others). We believe provision of comprehensive sexuality education
which encompasses life skills-based knowledge on sexual and
reproductive health is crucial for enabling young people and
adolescents to make informed, responsible choices and exercise
their sexual and reproductive rights. Comprehensive sexuality
education promotes gender equality and provides knowledge on HIV
and STD prevention, contributes to an increased use of
contraception methods and prevention of STD transmission and
unintended pregnancies. Provision of comprehensive sexuality
education is therefore related to the realization of sexual and
reproductive health and rights, and highly contributes to the
reduction of prevalence of communicable diseases such as
HIV/AIDS and other STDs (connected to the fulfillment of targets 3.3.
and 3.7. of the Sustainable Development Goals)
Indicator to be added: Percentage of children and youth receiving

age- appropriate child rights education and legal literacy
disaggregated as age groups 0-15, 15-18
Rationale: While the indicator tracks important components such as

gender equality and human rights which might by extension include
child rights, children should be specifically aware of their rights as
children and related legal rights so that they can be effective
participants in the enforcement of their rights as envisioned in the
UNCRC.
Proposed global indicator:
% of teaching hours dedicated to education for sustainable
development, global citizenship education, human rights education
(as per UNGA resolution 59/113) and comprehensive sexuality
education (#)
Racionale:
assessing the extent to which school systems dedicate teaching
hours to these issues.
Additional suggested indicator:
formal education
That education systems of all governments can include in their

public education policies the dissemination and application of the
principles of the Treaty of Environmental Education for Sustainable
Societies and Global Responsibility, cross way at all educational
levels, ensuring the professional qualifications of teachers
approaches to sustainability practices, along with their students and
their families.
Proposed indicator: Number of children and youth receiving
compulsory Economic Citizenship Education (which includes a
combination of financial, social and livelihoods education) for
employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship.

Economic Citizenship Education (which includes a combination of
financial, social and livelihoods education) through non-formal
education channels.
4.7.1 Percentage of learners by age, sex, gender, ethnicity,

urban/rural participating in formal and non formal education for
sustainable development, social and cultural values, human rights,
non-violence, gender equality, respect for diversity and global
citizenship towards contribution of sustainable development
4.7.2 Proportion of young people and adolescents who demonstrate
desired levels of knowledge about sexual and reproductive health
and human rights, including at a minimum: gender equality and
respect for diversity; knowledge of three common types of
contraceptive measures: oral contraceptive (pill), condom, and at
least one longer-acting reversible contraceptive (injection, IUD,
implant); knowledge of two ways to reduce sexual transmission of
HIV; a measure related to gender, power, and perceptions of gender
equality
Besides the proposed indicator, we recommend the inclusion of an
indicator that reflects the “sustainable lifestyle” and “gender equality”
components included at the Goal through the following proxy
indicator: ‘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). Providing young people with
comprehensive education on sexuality and sexual and reproductive
health is central to enable them to safely and responsibly navigate
their sexuality and relationships and equip them with the skills they
require to realize their sexual health and reproductive rights.
The indicator only addresses a few topics of the range of knowledge

and skills areas mentioned in the target. One key area left out is
human rights, in spite of very explicit requirements in the Universal
Declaration on Human Rights and ICESCR for education to
“strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental
freedoms”. Given the universality of human rights, it will be easy to
identify a selection of human rights topics, against which a fixed level
of knowledge can be assessed, Hence, human rights should be
mentioned specifically in the indicator along with environmental
science and geoscience.
their sexuality and relationships and to equip them with the skills
they require to realize their sexual health and reproductive rights,
and thereby contributes to the overall health and wellbeing.


equality
formal education
The suggested indicator focuses only on a small part of the

knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development.
As sustainable development incorporates the three pillars of social,
environmental and economic wellbeing, measuring knowledge in
environmental science and geoscience only does not capture the
scope of sustainable development.
4.7.1: Besides the proposed indicator for this target, we recommend
inclusion of an indicator that reflects the “sustainable lifestyle” and
“gender equality” components included in the Goal through the
following proxy indicator: Proportion of young people (10-24) who
demonstrate desired level of knowledge and reject major
misconceptions about sexual and reproductive health, including HIV
and AIDS. Comprehensive Sexuality Education is central to enable
individuals to safely and responsibly navigate their sexuality and
relationships, and empower 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
realize sexual health and reproductive rights. This indicator is
outcome focused, but reflects the process of CSE that would need to
take place to achieve this knowledge outcome. Data source:
modified MDG indicator, school based surveys.
- Percentage of schools with recycling

facilities
- 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.
Percentage of 13-year- old students

participating in citizenship education (incl.
climate change adaptation and mitigation and
peace).
- Percentage of girls and boys under the age of 18 that reject racist
and sexist ideas in national value and attitude surveys.
- Percentage of 15- year old students showing proficiency in
knowledge of
environmental science and geoscience
-Percentage of teaching hours dedicated to education for
sustainable development, global citizenship education, human rights
education (as per UNGA resolution 59/113) and comprehensive
sexuality education (#)
Suggested Indicator 4.7.1: Agree with suggested indicator to

measure target but unsure as to how easy to measure and collect
data on this type of knowledge. PISA perhaps but is only one tool
that would need to be used more widely.
“Percentage of 15-year old students enrolled in secondary school
demonstrating at least a fixed level of knowledge across a selection
of topics in environmental science and geoscience. The exact
choice/range of topics will depend on the survey or assessment in
which the indicator is collected.”
The indicator should include the development of national education

programme addressing the critical importance of a new sustainable
paradigm , where the closing of water cycles are respected and
protected.
indicator: % of teaching hours dedicated to education for sustainable
education (#)
The proposed IAEG priority indicator for this target reduces

education for sustainable development (itself translated into only
geoscience) and ignores all the areas covered under the target.
Furhermore, the qualitative dimensions of the target are best
captured through assessing the extent to which school systems
dedicate teaching hours to these issues.
This can be disaggregated by rural and urban location;

disaggregation by province/region is desirable at the national level.
Recommend:
COMPREHENSIVE SEXUALITY EDUCATION:

• Percentage of schools that serve students in the age range of 12-
17 years, in which comprehensive sexuality education is available.
Percentage of 13-year-old students endorsing values and attitudes
promoting equality, trust, participation in governance, gender
equality, global culture, and cultural diversity
% of schools that serve students in the age range of 12-17 years, in

which comprehensive sexuality education is available (aspirational)

- Indicators must be considered for the target’s other critical
elements--human rights, gender, non-violence--such as the following
multi-purpose indicator:% of schools that provided comprehensive
sexuality education in the previous academic year. A critical gap
universally, and top demand of experts and youth worldwide, CSE is
one of the most pressing priorities for the health, well-being and
development of young people, and to complete the MDGs on
poverty, maternal mortality and AIDS. It also responds to various UN
intergovernmental agreements at global/regional levels. Evidence
shows CSE’s effects on delayed sexual debut, fewer sexual
partners, increased condom use and prevention of sexually-
transmitted infections and unintended pregnancies; and is also cost-
effective. It should begin at age 10 to help young adolescents avoid
harmful consequences. This responds to 5 elements of the target
and is a multi-purpose indicator: targets 3.1, 3.3, 3.7, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3,
5.6.
- % of teaching hours dedicated to education for sustainable
education
This is in the hands of respective Government.
I don't think that by 2030 we can sovle skill of education, cultural and
job, all people could learn and have neccessary skill for social
development, especially lifestyles human rights, gender equality,
non-violence... Regarding these issue the strategy should promote
civil society to involve, they can mobilize and educate community
people on this issue
formal education
ICN suggests including health (or environmental impact on health)

and human rights as part of the selection of topics.
Indicator 4.7.1 Percentage of 15- year old students showing
proficiency in knowledge of environmental science and geoscience.
Indicator captures only environmental dimension of target. Research
on values-based indicators (www.esdinds.eu) and values-based
learning (http://iefworld.org/node/665) provide concepts for eventual
extension of this indicator.
Indicator 4.7.2 Percentage of 13-year old students endorsing values

and attitudes promoting equality, trust and participation in
governance.
Research on values-based indicators (http://www.esdinds.eu) and
values-based learning (http://iefworld.org/node/665) provide
concepts for eventual extension of this indicator
Indicator 4.7.2: Percentage of 13-year old students endorsing
values and attitudes promoting equality, trust and participation in
governance was proposed to measure target 4.7. This indicator
addresses tolerance in schools and children’s views on governance,
aspects of education that are not measured in any other indicators.
Young people living in poverty are often excluded or marginalized
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 on has
been retained. As this indicator can yield important information
regarding young peoples’ experiences at school and in civic life, it
should be retained as an indicator for target 4.7.

contribution to sustainable development

formal education
In addition to the presently proposed indicator, we suggest to include
following uindicators that we think somehow measurable;
- clear statement to integrate ESD in national policy/strategy/action
plans;
- Percentage of universities and other higher education institutions
that
run explicit ESD curricula/programmes;
- Percentage of UNESCO ASP schools in the country
- Number of non-formal education institutions that are acknowledged
by
the national government

Too long and complicated
This target apply for many other goals. This is very important target.
Not enough space here for our comments. See the above mentioned
Finnish NGO Task Force's Position Paper on Post-2015 Agenda,
including indicators, page 20:
http://www.kepa.fi/tiedostot/post-2015_ngo-task-forces-position-
paper_web.pdf
assessing the extent to which school systems dedicate teaching
hours to these
issues.
For this reason, our proposed indicator is:

"% of teaching hours dedicated to education for sustainable
education".
Environmental science and geoscience is obviously a poor proxy for
education for sustainable development and we are not in favour of
the proposed solution (across a selection of topics). This could be
replaced by 'a selection of topics in sustainable development, human
rights and global citizenship.
Alternatively, and preferably, focus would be on input: % of teaching

hours dedicated to education for sustainable development, global
citizenship education, human rights education (as per UNGA
resolution 59/113)

1. School and university syllabus includes SDG Goals, targets and
Indicators.
2. All relevant UN bodies have SDG education Campaigns and
programs.
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, disability and gender equality,
promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship
and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to
sustainable development
The form of this indicator rightly confirms that cultures differ in their
vision of what learning content, outcomes, and pedagogy would
promote education for sustainable development and education for
global citizenship. “Values” and “attitudes” are grounded in cultural
beliefs and practices. Given these considerations, the indicator
proposed should support diverse interpretations and policy solutions
for different contexts. While this form of monitoring may be messy, it
provides a richer understanding of rights-based education and
education for sustainable development across and within education
systems. The focus on environmental science and geoscience
proposed here should be complemented with nationally/locally
defined knowledge, skills, values, attitudes and behaviors that can
be assessed in classrooms, schools and communities among a
representative sub-sample of children across country. Additional
suggested indicators may be found in four commissioned papers
here:
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/indicators-
broad-bold-education-agenda
PAI recommends the inclusion of an additional indicator: "proportion
of young people (10-24) who demonstrate desired level of
knowledge and reject major misconceptions about sexual and
reproductive health, including HIV and AIDS." This indicator
addresses the gender equality and sustainable lifestyles
components of the target. While this indicator is outcome focused,
comprehensive sexuality education is key achieving this target.
Comprehensive sexuality education is central to enable individuals
to safely and responsibly navigate their sexuality and relationships,
and empower them to be active members of their community.
Among all the sectors that play critical roles in adolescent health,
education is key (Health for the World’s Adolescents, WHO, 2014).
Complications linked to pregnancy and childbirth are the second
cause of death for 15-19-year-old girls globally and more than two
million adolescents are living with HIV (WHO Adolescents: health
risks and solutions fact sheet, 2014). The Post-2015 Working Group
strongly recommends the addition of the following indicator to
measure the “percentage of schools that provide life skills-based HIV
and continuing sexuality education“.
Suggest to add "sexual and reproductive health" after "sustainable
lifestyles" in the target.
Besides the proposed indicator for this target, we recommend the

“gender equality” components included at the Goal through the
following proxy indicator:
● Proportion of young people (10-24) who demonstrate desired
level of knowledge and reject major misconceptions about sexual
and reproductive health, including HIV and AIDS
Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) is central to enable
take place to achieve this knowledge outcome. Source of Data:
The proposed indicator is far too short for this rich target. We
propose to measure the percentage of teaching hours that deal with
human rights education, education for sustainable development,
and comprehensive sexuality education.
Plan International, in alignment with the Global Campaign for
Education, recommend replacing the suggested indicator with: 4.7.1
% of teaching hours dedicated to education for sustainable
education.
This qualitative dimension of the targets is best captured through the

assertive decision of school systems to dedicate teaching hours on
ESD, GCED and human rights education
Besides the proposed indicator for this target, we recommend the

“gender equality” components included at the Goal through the
following proxy indicator: Proportion of young people (10-24) who
demonstrate desired level of knowledge and reject major
misconceptions about sexual and reproductive health, including HIV
and AIDS.
Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) is central to enable
take place to achieve this knowledge outcome. Source of Data:
We propose to use a structural indicator showing the existence of

the elements incorporated into the goal within the school curriculum.
This type of ordinal indicator is easier to measure in a first step
aimed at establishing knowledge and skills needed to promote
sustainable development and all the topics considered.
Indicator: Percentage of learners by age, sex, gender, ethnicity,
Source: Disaggregated country data; National Education Information
Systems
Indicator 4.7.3. 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.
AMEND SUGGESTED INDICATOR 4.7.1: % of 15- year old students
showing proficiency in knowledge of environmental science and
geoscience. Revise to an indicator that assesses whether these
areas are included in national curriculums and then move to national
level to assess progress.
AMEND INDICATOR 4.7.2: % of 13-year old students endorsing

values and attitudes promoting equality, trust and participation in
governance.
RATIONALE: Rather than 15 and 13-year olds, we would suggest

referring to secondary school graduates instead.
The IAEG-SDGs might also consider setting up an indicator to
gauge if governments show any commitment to enhancing
sustainable development education, such as sustainable
development being a part of the national curriculum.
4.7.1 Proportion of education curricula including material on
sustainable development, sustainable lifestyles, human rights,
gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence,
global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of
culture’s contribution to sustainable development

measures: oral contraceptive (pill), condom, and at least one longer-
acting reversible contraceptive (injection, IUD, implant); 2.
Knowledge of two ways to reduce sexual transmission of HIV; 3. A
gender equality (i.e. belief that a husband/partner is justified in
beating his wife/partner if they refuse sex.
NOTES: This indicator directly measures individual level knowledge

(rather than policy at facility or government level, which may not
translate to individuals) and would be a cross-cutting measure for
target 3.7
Data that all learners acquire knowledge and skills needed to

promote sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human
rights, mental health and psychosocial wellbeing...., disaggregated
by gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
The environmental education literature contains many environmental
knowledge scales, and these could be adapted to develop a globally
applicable knowledge scale, which could also include attitudinal
questions. Additionally, an indicator such as, or equivalent to
‘Coverage of sustainable development, human rights, gender
equality, etc., issues within national curricula’ might be a cheap and
simple metric which acts as a good proxy for the assessment of
acquired knowledge (whilst survey-derived data are potentially more
accurate, these may be comparatively more expensive and difficult
to undertake). It is noted that a similar indicator is suggested under
Target 12.8, and it would seem sensible to utilise a similar indicator
here also. An additional suggestion for a topic of inclusion under the
indicator developed here would be ‘number of schools/students that
undertake programmes to reduce gender-based crimes’.
Factual knowledge of geosciences and environmental issues needs

to be supplemented by a minimal degree of awareness and
acceptance of basic environment ethical values to safeguard
environmental integrity.
• Existence of publicly budgeted courses and programmes dedicated
to education for sustainable development, global citizenship
education (including peace and interculturalism), human rights
education and comprehensive sexuality education in non-formal
education.
Target 4.7. amendment: Percentage of 15 (or 13) year old students

enrolled in secondary school demonstrating at least a fixed level of
knowledge across a selection of topics in environmental science and
geoscience, in human rights, gender equality, and participation in
governance
formal education
This will need national level indicators
Indicators should be considered for the target’s other critical

elements--human rights, gender, and non-violence. We support the
suggestions of UN agencies:
1) “% of schools that provided comprehensive sexuality education in
the previous academic year”. A critical gap universally, and top
demand of experts and youth worldwide, CSE is one of the most
pressing priorities for the health, well-being and development of
young people, and to complete the MDGs on poverty, maternal
mortality and AIDS.
2) The IAEG listed: “Percentage of students experiencing bullying,
corporal punishment, harassment, violence, sexual discrimination
and abuse”.
Excellent, but it must complemented wtih supervision and fullfilment

policies to examine the work of states.
4.7.2 Proportion of young people and adolescents (including 10-14
year olds) who demonstrate desired levels of knowledge about
sexual and reproductive health and human rights, including at a
minimum: gender equality and respect for diversity; knowledge of
three common types of contraceptive measures: oral contraceptive
(pill), condom, and at least one longer-acting reversible
contraceptive (injection, IUD, implant); knowledge of two ways to
reduce sexual transmission of HIV; a measure related to gender,
power, and perceptions of gender equality

equality
Indices created based on data collected in population-based

surveys, to include 10-14 year olds. Most data (aged 15-19 or 15-24)
currently available from DHS and other surveys, allowing for
disaggregation by age and other characteristics.

Percentage of students aged 15 and younger exposed to school

curriculums fostering sustainable development and sustainable
lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of
peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of
cultural diversity and of culture's contribution to sustainable
development.
The suggested indicator is too narrow, with a limited view of ESD
while suggested tools such as PISA need to be revised. WWF
suggests replacing it with “Percentage of 10 and 15-year old
students enrolled in education for sustainable development
demonstrating at least a fixed level of knowledge and skills to argue,
take a stand, and take action for sustainable development across a
selection of topics.” (Source: UNESCO country reports/ ICCS reports
next to be updated 2016). An additional indicator could include:
“Number of countries with ESD integrated in national curricula
(including efforts for entrepreneurial skills for sustainable
development and active participation in other programmes for SDGs)
(Same source as above).
We recommend the additional indicator: percentage of schools that

provided comprehensive sexuality education in the previous
academic year (disaggregated by age, location, income, gender and
others). We believe provision of comprehensive sexuality education
which encompasses life skills-based knowledge on sexual and
reproductive health is crucial for enabling young people and
adolescents to make informed, responsible choices and exercise
their sexual and reproductive rights. Comprehensive sexuality
education promotes gender equality and provides knowledge on HIV
and STD prevention, contributes to an increased use of
contraception methods and prevention of STD transmission and
unintended pregnancies. Provision of comprehensive sexuality
education is therefore related to the realization of sexual and
reproductive health and rights, and highly contributes to the
reduction of prevalence of communicable diseases such as
HIV/AIDS and other STDs (connected to the fulfillment of targets 3.3.
and 3.7. of the Sustainable Development Goals)

formal education
% of teaching hours dedicated to education for

sustainable development, global citizenship
education, human rights education (as per
UNGA resolution 59/113) and comprehensive
sexuality education (#)
# disaggregated by rural and urban location; disaggregation by

province/region is desirable at the national level
Target 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
We welcome UNESCO’s proposal of the indicator,
‘Percentage of schools (primary, lower and upper
secondary) with adapted facilities and resources
designed for those with disabilities’. We suggest that, in
the interests of specificity, the wording be changed to:
Percentage of schools (primary, lower and upper

secondary) meeting (i) the ISO 21542:2011 standards on
accessibility and usability of the built environment and (ii)
other national standards for accessibility by
children/persons with disabilities’
This indicator also addresses target 10.2
We agree with the suggested indicators; however data

should capture disabilities at various levels dis-
aggregated by income quintile, gender, race/ethnicity,
categories
may be identified at the national level
Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii)
drinking water; and (iii) singlesex sanitation facilities (as
per the WASH indicator definitions) (iv) adapted
infrastructure and materials for people with disability (v)
adequate pedagogical materials and learning facilities ;
and sufficient education facilities suited for adults.
Existence of education sector plans integrating responses

for disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and
safety during conflict.
Incidence of violence in schools particularly against girls,

women, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, minority
groups, migrants, lower castes and persons with
disabilities.
Rationale:
Adaptable infrastructure and adequate materials/facilities
are also key for inclusive education. Education facilities
suitable for adult learners also need to be monitored.
Violence against girls, women and other discriminated
groups are prevalent in schools but hardly monitored and
acted upon, thus, the need to monitor whether facilities
are adequate to ensure safe/ nonviolent school
environment.
We suggest an indicator: Percentage of students
experiencing harassment, violence, discrimination and
abuse due to their sexuality (dissagregated by age,
gender, residence, and other characteristics). This
indicator would offer the option to ensure that the target’s
element of providing ‘safe, non-violent and effective
learning environments’ are measured, the omission of
which would constitute a critical gap in this target’s
monitoring. We also suggest another indicator:
Percentage of educational institutions that have specific
rules and guideleices for staff and students regarding
physical safety, stigma and discrimination towards their
sexuality, as well as sexual harassment and abuse. This
would ensure governmental effort in establishing and
enforcing key policies that work towards providing safe
learning environments.
Addition of an indicator: Legislative framework defining

nation specific minimum norms and standards for safe
and child friendly learning environments including, Pupil-
qualified teacher ratio and Pupil per classroom ratio
Proposed global indicators:
1) Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii)
adequate pedagogical materials and learning facilities (#)
2) Existence of education sector plans integrating
responses for disaster risk reduction, climate change
adaptation and safety during conflict
Racionale:
Adaptable infrastructure and adequate materials and
facilities are also known to be key dimensions for
inclusive education, thus the importance of including
these dimensions alongside the others.
The right to education encompasses preparedness for

emergencies and conflicts. Being a universal right,
education must be guaranteed during all times and in all
settings. This is being indicated through an additional
structural indicator.
Percentage of schools (primary, lower and upper

secondary) meeting i) the ISO 21542:2011 standards on
accessibility and usability of the built environment and ii)
children/persons with disabilities
• Existence of sufficient number of education facilities
suited for adults

suited for adults
Proposed indicators need to be adjusted to capture the
non-violent environment in school.
4.a.1 Percentage of schools and out of school spaces in
which comprehensive sexuality education is available to
all adolescents and young people
"4.a.2. Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity;
(ii) Internet for pedagogical purposes (iii) basic drinking
water and (iv) basic single-sex sanitation facilities,
including accommodations for menstrual hygiene
management
and (v) basic hand washing facilities (as per the WASH
indicator definitions)"
4.a.3 Percentage of students who feel safe at school and
traveling to and from school
Since accessibility for persons with disabilities is
specifically mentioned in this target, it is necessary that
the indicator takes it into account. In this spirit, we
welcome the proposal by UNESCO of the indicator
designed for those with disabilities’ for this target. We
would however highlight the absence of any specific
standard. We would suggest the more specific indicator :
children/persons with disabilities’ (Interlinkages with 11.2.,
11.7.)
The indicator should be strengthened to also address the

disability and gender aspects of the target, particularly
with regards to sanitation facilities.
11.7.)

"4.a.2. Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity;

management
indicator definitions)"

internet for pedagogical services is essential.
Internet access to schools is not enough, it must have a
purpose
suited for adults
-Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii)
drinking water; and (iii) single-sex sanitation facilities (as
per the WASH)
-Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii)
adequate pedagogical materials and learning facilities (#)
-Existence of education sector plans integrating
Suggested Indicator 4.a: Suggest including the work

‘computers’ or ‘technology’
“Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii)
technology and Internet for pedagogical purposes (iii)
basic drinking water and (iv) basic sanitation facilities;
and (v) basic handwashing facilities (as per the WASH
indicator definitions)”
- Percentage of schools (primary, lower and upper

secondary) meeting (i)
the ISO 21542:2011 standards on accessibility and
usability of the built
environment and (ii) other national standards for
accessibility by
Indicator: Percentage of schools with access to (i)
electricity; (ii) drinking water; and (iii) singlesex sanitation
facilities (as per the WASH indicator definitions) (iv)
adapted infrastructure and materials for people with
disability (v) adequate pedagogical materials and learning
facilities (#)

these dimensions alongside the others.
The indicator can be disaggregated by rural and urban

location; disaggregation by province/region is desirable at
the national level.
Possible additional indicator is:

safety during conflict

structural indicator.
The proposed indicators under target 16.2 would also

monitor this target. As well as violating children’s right to
respect for their physical integrity and human dignity,
corporal punishment in schools and other education
settings violates children’s right to education, including by
creating a violent and intimidating environment in which
children are less able to learn and by discouraging
children from attending school. Yet violent punishment
remains lawful in some or all schools in 72 states
worldwide, and in day care (such as early childhood care
and education settings) in 145 states. Prohibiting corporal
punishment is vital to creating safe, non-violent, inclusive
and effective schools for all children.
New indicators suggested:
Legal frameworks defining minimum norms and
standards for safe learning environments
Pupil-qualified teacher ratio
Pupil per classroom ratio

specifically mentioned, it is necessary that the indicator
takes it into account. In this spirit, we welcome the
proposal by UNESCO of the indicator ‘Percentage of
schools (primary, lower and upper secondary) with
adapted facilities and resources designed for those with
disabilities’ for this target. We would however highlight the
absence of any specific standard. Suggestion for a more
specific indicator : ‘Percentage of schools (primary, lower
and upper secondary) meeting (i) the ISO 21542:2011
standards on accessibility and usability of the built
environment and (ii) other national standards for
accessibility by children/persons with disabilities’

societies.
- On the Suggested WASH Indicator, its definitional
element of sex-segregated sanitation facilities, essential
to the privacy and safety of girls, should be reflected at
indicator level: “...sanitation facilities (including single-
sex)”.
- Fully support another proposal on the IAEG list:
Percentage of students experiencing bullying, corporal
punishment, harassment, violence, sexual discrimination
and abuse, with suggestions to disaggregate by sex, age,
income, location, race, ethnicity, disability, and other
factors. Girls and boys worldwide experience various
forms of discrimination, harassment, abuse and sexual
violence in schools, whether perpetrated by peers,
teachers or other adults. This indicator offers options to
ensure that the target’s element of providing ‘safe, non-
violent and effective learning environments’ are
measured, the omission of which would constitute a
critical gap in this target’s monitoring, and is among the
proposals of the UNESCO Technical Advisory Group.
School enrollment data may not fully reflect the

accessibility of education for children with disabilities.
Thus, it is essential that the indicators pertaining to
education target 4.a, stating that education facilities must
be child, disability, and gender sensitive include
accessible infrastructure and learning materials to ensure
schools are inclusive.
- Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii)
infrastructure and materials for people with
facilities (vi) school feeding programmes (disaggregate by
rural / urban location)
Add the following indicator:

- Existence of education sector plans integrating

11.7.)
see Target 1.3 and Target 4.1
Certainly, it is a task we have to do right now. Schooll

health issue is neglected for a long time in developing
countries. It is lack of facility, non-violent are still
happened and dissability children are not supported. The
involvment of civil society have significant meaning to
sovle this issue
As accessibility for persons with disabilities is mentioned
in this target, it is essential the indicator takes it into
account. Building on the UNESCO proposal, we suggest
the more specific indicator : ‘Percentage of schools
(primary, lower and upper secondary) meeting (i) the ISO
21542:2011 standards on accessibility and usability of the
built environment and (ii) other national standards for
accessibility by children/persons with disabilities’.
The link to goal 11.2 should be made and the indicators

proposed by UITP will help better than this into account.

suited for adults
Indicator
- Percentage of schools (primary, lower and upper
Comment:
For targets 4.a, 11.2 and 11.7, which refer to accessibility
by persons with disabilities, the indicators can be based
on existing ISO standards for accessibility to buildings or
"minimum national standards of accessibility by persons
with disabilities". The Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities refers to universal design, but
there is not an operational currently used international
definition of accessibility/universal design. Countries tend
to either use existing ISO standards or make their own
assessments of accessible schools, accessible public
buildings, and accessible transport according to national
standards.
Regarding the proposals from WB and UNICEF, the

[percentage of schools with a library] should be included
together with [computers for pedagogical purposes].
suited for adults
No comments
Not enough space here for our comments. See the above
mentioned Finnish NGO Task Force's Position Paper on
Post-2015 Agenda, including indicators, page 21:
inclusive education, thus the importance of
including these dimensions alongside the others. For this
reason, we suggest one indicator for this target is the
following: "Percentage of schools with access to (i)
electricity; (ii) drinking water; and (iii) singlesex sanitation
facilities (as per the WASH indicator definitions) (iv)
disability (v) dequate pedagogical materials and learning
facilities.
However, the right to education encompasses

preparedness for emergencies and conflicts. Being a
universal right, education must be guaranteed during all
times and in all settings. We therefore suggest a second
structural indicator for this target that reads as follows:
"Existence of education sector plans integrating

adaptation and safety during conflict."
these dimensions alongside the others:
(iv) adapted infrastructure and materials for people with

facilities

structural indicator:

safety during conflict
Learning environments that are child-, disability-, and
gender-sensitive will be safer and more inclusive.
Indicators that measure for more specific conditions can
address school-specific barriers that encourage school-
leaving before the full nine years, or that inhibit students’
completion, especially among the most marginalized
populations where opportunity costs are higher. One
nuance that can be included here is single-sex toilets
(rather than general sanitation facilities) as this has
implications for the girls' experience of school as safe and
non-violent spaces. Additional suggested indicators may
be found in four commissioned papers here:
Proposed Indicator 4.a.1: Percentage of schools with
access to (i) electricity; (ii) Internet for pedagogical
purposes (iii) basic drinking water and (iv) basic sanitation
facilities; and (v) basic handwashing facilities (as per the
WASH indicator definitions)
Comments:
• Access to schools by safe/reliable transport is critical
and should be mentioned
• Also, relevant to Target 11.2 and Target 9.1
The indicator should include information about adapted

infrastructure and materials for persons with disabilities
disaggregated by urban and rural residence as well as
adequate pedagogical materials and learning facilities.
With the eminent climate change and the increasing risk
of disasters, as well as the permanent social, political and
war conflicts there should be intersectorial plans to face
these risks and avoid the interruptions of education for all,
with specific care for children and persons with
disabilities.
Proposal 4.a.1 Percentage of schools with access to (i)
electricity; (ii) drinking water; and (iii) basic single-sex
sanitation facilities, including accommodations for
menstrual hygiene management (iv) basic hand washing
facilities (as per the WASH indicator definitions); (v)
disability (vi) adequate pedagogical materials and
learning facilities
Rationale Plan International supports this indicator,

however we have amended language in order to
recognise the multiple barriers to inclusion of
marginalised groups, including girls and children with
disabilities. This includes single-sex sanitation facilities
and adaptable infrastructure and adequate materials and
facilities, which are also key dimensions for inclusive
education.
Proposal: 4.a.2 Percentage of students who feel safe at

school and traveling to and from school
Rationale: Violence in schools is correlated with lower
academic achievement and economic security, as well as
greater long-term health risks.
We recommend a change in proposed indicator to include

reference to ‘safely managed drinking water’, and ‘single-
sex and safely managed sanitation facilities’. This would
bring the indicator in line with the targets under Goal 6. It
would also go a long way to ensuring that education
facilities are designed in ways which enable girls’ equal
participation.
Indicator: Percentage of schools and out of school
spaces in which comprehensive sexuality education is
available to all adolescents and young people
Indicator:
Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii)
Internet for pedagogical purposes (iii) basic drinking water
and (iv) basic single-sex sanitation facilities, including
accommodations for menstrual hygiene management
indicator definitions)
Source: School surveys
Indicator: Percentage of students who feel safe at school

and traveling to and from school
Source: School and household surveys, MICS Ministries
of Education (National Statistical offices); School surveys
AMEND INDICATOR 4.a.1:
% of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii) drinking
water; and (iii) single-sex sanitation facilities (as per the
WASH indicator definitions).
Replace with Save the Children International’s Quality
Learning Environment indicators.
Include ‘equitable access’ to ensure facilities are inclusive
and accessible for children with disabilities.
Include an indicator to assess ‘safe and non-violent’ –
Percentage of students experiencing bullying, corporal
punishment, harassment,
violence, sexual discrimination and abuse.
RATIONALE: Proposal is consistent with indicator 34 of

the Framework for Action of the Post 2015 Education
agenda (draft version 31 March
2015), Annex I (Technical Advisory Group/TAG proposed
indicators). Whereas the current indicator addresses
physical aspects of an enabling learning environment, the
proposed additional indicator addresses social and safety
aspects, in line with the target. Given that the target
covers multiple areas, the two indicators together try to
capture this better than only one.

11.7.).
4.a.1 Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity;
(ii) Internet for pedagogical purposes (iii) drinking water;
and (iv) basic single-sex sanitation facilities, including
accommodations for menstrual hygiene management; (v)
basic hand washing facilities (as per the WASH indicator
definitions); (vi) adapted infrastructure and materials for
people with disability; (vii) adequate pedagogical
materials and learning facilities

4.a.3 Percentage of schools that provide safe, inclusive

and non-violent settings, including through the
development of policies on school-related gender based
violence
NOTES: Girls stay away from school every month due to

the lack of separate and safe facilities where they can
wash themselves and change sanitary cloth or pads
during their periods with privacy, confidence and dignity.
Violence in schools is correlated with lower academic
achievement and economic security, as well as greater
long-term health risks.
suited for adults.

suited for adults
We suggest an expansion to the current 11 August
indicator suggestion so that it reads:
% 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 facilitates.
WaterAid strongly welcomes the inclusion of the indicator
to measure access to WASH. Whilst recognising that this
may take an amount of time to embed, this should be no
disincentive to inclusion.
We note that as the proposal currently stands, the IAEG

are proposing to measure hygiene in schools only. We
believe this may be an overisgh and would underline the
critical importance of measuring it at a household level
and in health care facilities (see comments on target 3.2
and 6.2)

4.a.1 should also address facilities and resources for

those with disabilities.
School surveys
4.a.2. Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity;

management and (v) basic hand washing facilities (as per
the WASH indicator definitions)
School surveys

School and household surveys, MICS Ministries of

Education (National Statistical offices); School surveys
What about ensuring adequate and gender friendly water
and sanitation facilities in all schools.
We suggest an indicator: Percentage of students

experiencing harassment, violence, discrimination and
abuse due to their sexuality (dissagregated by age,
gender, residence, and other characteristics). This
indicator would offer the option to ensure that the target’s
element of providing ‘safe, non-violent and effective
learning environments’ are measured, the omission of
which would constitute a critical gap in this target’s
monitoring. We also suggest another indicator:
Percentage of educational institutions that have specific
rules and guideleices for staff and students regarding
physical safety, stigma and discrimination towards their
sexuality, as well as sexual harassment and abuse. This
would ensure governmental effort in establishing and
enforcing key policies that work towards providing safe
learning environments.
Existence of sufficient number of education facilities

suited for adults
Percentage of schools with access to (i)

electricity; (ii) drinking water; and (iii) singlesex
sanitation facilities (as per the WASH
indicator definitions) (iv) adapted
infrastructure and materials for people with
disability (v) adequate pedagogical materials
and learning facilities (#)
Existence of education sector plans integrating

responses for disaster risk reduction, climate
change adaptation and safety during conflict
# disaggregated by rural and urban location;

disaggregation by province/region is desirable at the
national level
Target 4.b: By 2020, substantially expand 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
scientific programmes, in developed countries and other
We agree with suggested indicators
We support the following suggested indicator, as amended:

• Volume of ODA flows for scholarships [ADD: disaggregated]
by sector and type of study [ADD: and gender to assess the
opportunities that target women and girls] (BBB)
ASPBAE believes that where developed countries offer
scholarships to students from developing countries, these should
preferably not be considered to be part of the core aid
programme.
We suggest prioritizing other indicators that have been spelt out
4.b.1 Percentage of scholarship allocated to women leaders of all
ages in their community for higher education in formal, alternative
level
ICT should be one sector to measure in the indicator
-Volume of ODA flows for scholarships by sector and type of
Study
No proposal. We suggest prioritizing other indicators that have
been spelt out.
Prioritize other indicators. This is not an indicator of progress of
the provision of free, quality education for all in developing
countries.
This could be done in two ways.

1) offering scholarships available to people from developing
countries
2) Promoting more educational Institutions of excellence in all
countries
3) Exchange of experts from Developed to Developing countries
It is good idea for giving scholarship of developing countries

because these countries need to strengthen human resources but
they lack of resources for university.
Target may be essentially set to number of or % of increase in

scholarships.
a) Percentage of young adults (18-24 years, disaggregated by
gender) with access to a learning program.
b) Volume of ODA flows for scholarships.
c) Share of public expenditure on education received by poorest
quintile.
=> Use of ODA for scholarships is questionable; rather support

the
strengthening of local education institutions.
We reccomend prioritizing other indicators mentioned above and
below.
By 2020, substantially expand globally the number of scholarships
available in all countries, in particular developing and 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 scientific programmes.
We agree with this indicator.
Regarding the vocational training element of the associated
target, does the proposed indicator encompass ODA for the
purpose of apprenticeship/training support within companies (and
especially SMEs)? If not, could it be extended to encompass this?
This target is potentially in tension with an overall objective of
poverty reduction, and the current proposal to track progress of
aid spending on scholarships is regressive as it is only the elite
who get access to HE in general, and even more so to such
scholarships.
If it is to be included, it needs to focus on scholarships for the

most disadvantaged (see comments on target 4.3)
Excellent, but it must complemented wtih supervision and

level

level
Country Study and educational facility surveys

Target 4.c: By 2030, substantially increase the supply
of qualified teachers, including through international
cooperation for teacher training in developing
countries, especially least developed countries and
small island developing States
we agree with the proposed indicators, but modify the

indicator on percentage of teachers trained... to read: %
teachers trained on pedagogy, inclusive education, child
rights and gender equality
approaches. There is also need to add an indicator on •
% of qualified teachers and adult educators, in formal
and non-formal education
Support the proposed indicator with an amendment:
% of qualified teachers by level of education according to

national standards.
And and additional indicator:
% of qualified teachers and educators, in ECCE and non-

formal adult education
Rationale:
The use of the term ‘qualified’ is more appropriate as it is
widely evidenced that availability of qualified teachers
directly impacts on quality. There should also be attention
to tracking educators in the non-formal sector of
education ensuring quality education in these
spheres/levels of education - within a lifelong learning
framework.
Proposed global indicators:
1) % of qualified teachers by level of education according
to national standards (*)
2) % of qualified educational planners, practitioners and
professionals by level of education according to national
standards (*)
Racionale:
The use of the term ‘qualified’ is more appropriate, as it is
in accordance to target 4.c. This indicator is a central one,
as it is cross-cutting and represents a quality indicator for
the different levels of education, as it is widely evidenced
that availability of qualified teachers directly impacts the
provision of quality education
• % of qualified teachers and adult educators, in formal
• Existence of national plans and programs for further
education of teachers, including adult educators
•
4.c.1. Number of educational establishments that
incorporate in the regionalized curriculum (at all
educational levels) training on gender equality,
participation and leadership of women and men
4.c.2. The number or percentage of primary and
academic year
(Links to targets 4.5; 10.2)
-Percentage of trained teachers by level of education
according to national standards
-Percentage of qualified teachers by level of education
The training of teacher needs to address the change of

paradigm in the way we see, we use and we relate with
natural ressources. there is a critical urgency to change
the paradigm of sustainability in education. The engineer
approach is not any longer the solution to manage natural
ressources.
Indicators: % of qualified teachers by level of education
according to national standards (*)

that availability
of qualified teachers directly impacts the provision of
quality education
additional indicator: ‘Percentage of teachers in service
who have received in-service training each year on
teaching students with special educational needs’.

societies.
- % of qualified teachers by level of education according
to national standards (*)
- Pupils Teacher ratio (diseggregated by location (urban /
rural))

see Target 4.b.
I hope so
include South-South knowledge transfer
•% of qualified teachers and adult educators, in formal
•Existence of national plans and programs for further
No Comments
Qualified teachers:
a) Percentage of teachers (disaggregated by gender)
qualified according to national standards (by level).
b) Pupil-qualified teacher ratio.
Professionally trained teachers:

a) Percentage of teachers trained according to national
standards (by level, disaggregated by gender).
b) Pupil-trained teacher ratio.
c) Number and type of teacher trainings organized (in
teaching methods, in core subject knowledge, in
emergency curriculum themes, e.g. psychosocial support,
child protection, GCE/peace education, life-skills) (note:
type of teacher training includes both pre-service and in-
service teacher training).
Motivated teachers:
d) Average teacher salary relative to other professionals.
e) Status of school climate and other learning
environment factors associated with teacher motivation.
Well supported teachers:

a) Incidence of in-service training.
b) Public expenditure on education as percentage of
GDP/ total public expenditure.
We reccomend the following language for this indicator:
"% of qualified teachers by level of education according to

national standards"

that availability of qualified teachers directly impacts the
provision of quality education
We welcome the new suggested indicator and particularly
the capturing of the four different levels of education as
well as both pre-service and in-service training, but it
should be specified that this is in accordance with
national standards. It is important to disaggregate
according to urban-rural too.
Having appropriate numbers of trained and competent
teachers in well-funded schools with appropriate learning
space is central to the definition of quality education—not
simply an input to achieve it. However, focus on training
alone is inadequate to meet this target and attending to
the whole-teacher is important. Focus on teacher to pupil
ratios, decent salaries and benefits, teacher evaluation
and performance, adequate support for teachers,
particularly in the early years, and attention to psycho-
social support in contexts of conflict or emergency are
equally important. Additional suggested indicators may be
found in four commissioned papers here:
The indicator should state the percentage of “qualified
teachers”, in coherence with the wording of target 4.c
This is a very important indicator of quality for all levels
and special programs of education, like intercultural
bilingual education for indigenous population and
inclusive education for persons with disabilities.
Proposal: 4.c.1 % of qualified teachers by level of
education according to national standards
Rationale: 4.c.1 In terms of wording, the use of the term

‘qualified’ is more appropriate, aligns with the wording
within the target itself, and captures the multiple elements
listed in the IAEG suggested indicator. The wording ‘by
level of education’ covers ‘pre-primary, primary, lower
secondary, and upper secondary’, so is in fact more
succinct than the IAEG-proposed indicator.
This indicator is a central one, as it is cross-cutting and

represents a quality indicator for the different levels of
education, as it is widely evidenced that qualified
teachers directly impacts the provision of quality
education
Indicator 4.c.1 Percentage of trained teachers by level of
education, disaggregated by age , sex and ethnicity
AMEND INDICATOR 4.c.1:
Amend to align with Muscat Agreement language – ‘% of
by qualified, professionally-trained, motivated and well-
supported teachers’.

(Links to targets 4.5; 10.2).
4.c.1 Percentage of teachers in primary, lower-secondary,
secondary, and higher-secondary with training on gender
sensitive curriculum and pedagogy
4.c.2 Ensure adequate numbers of female teachers at

lower-secondary secondary and higher-secondary
educational levels
NOTES: This indicator measures teaching methods which

are inclusive and promote the learning of adolescent girls;
teachers should be trained on how to address issues
adolescent girls may face in accessing and completing
school, encouraging participation in the classroom, and
supporting the educational needs of female students.The
number of female teachers often drops at post-primary
educational levels. At lower-secondary, secondary and
higher-secondary levels, adolescent girls are more likely
to complete their schooling if there are more female
teachers.
More female teachers reinforces the importance of

education to girls, and potentially provides a figure of
support which girls can approach in school.
Data on the supply of qualified teachers disaggregated by

disability, rural/urban residence, for each
grade/educational level.
and non-formal education.
education of teachers, including adult educators.
We welcome an indicator on teachers but believe it needs
refining. Target 4c talks about “supply of qualified
teachers” therefore measuring the % of teacher
receiving minimum organised training required for
teaching is not enough. In order to monitor whether the
% of qualified teachers are increasing over the time, we
need to monitor % of teachers qualified to be teaching
what they are teaching. For instance, in Nepal we find
many teachers might be trained and qualified for primary
level but often these teachers teach Science or Maths for
which they are not qualified and trained. Furthermore,
data should not only be dis-aggregated by sex, it is
important that such data is dis-aggregated by
locations(rural vs. urban); disability , and socio-economic
status .
We suggest also the ‘Ratio of qualified teachers to
children (dis aggregated by disability, gender, race and
ethnicity, and socio-economic status to show
inclusiveness in terms of breath of teachers and teacher /
children ratio for marginalized groups of learners) ’
There should be a specification for selected indigenous
teachers to work with qualified teachers through the
International cooperation for teacher training in
developing nations. This will help to build capacity in the
indigenous teachers.
academic year
National standards for teacher qualification are not

comparable, and minimum international standards have
not yet ben agreed upon.

academic year
% of qualified teachers and adult educators, in formal and

non-formal education
Existence of national plans and programs for further

% of qualified teachers by level of education

according to national standards (*)

assessed.
Target 5.1: End all forms of discrimination
Organization: against all women and girls everywhere
ADD International
ADF International
AIDOS
Alliance for Affordable Internet

American Jewish World Service
Amnesty International The Expert Group’s recommendations takes a very

limited focus with respect to areas measured by the
proposed indicators. Proposed indicators need to
reflect a more comprehensive analysis of how states
can meet this target. Eg. Consider laws covering all
forms of violence against women, time frame and
coverage of national policy on abortion and foetal
sex-determination, time frame and coverage of
national policy on sexual and reproductive health to
name a few due to restrictions of space/
Asia Dalit Rights Forum 1. Disaggregated data on multiple dimension
index (MDI) on violence against women.

and Development

World
ASTRA Youth We agree on the suggested indicator. We also
suggest an additional indicator measuring the
number of countries with legal frameworks that
promote gender equality and non-discrimination
against all women and girls, in both public and
private spheres. This would measure the legal
foundations of governments that repsect and protect
human rights of women. We could also include the
percentage of girls currently in and out of school per
country (at different age ranges). This measure
would indicate governmental efforts in ensuring a
legal framework in specific countries regarding
gender equality in the education system.
Beyond 2015 UK Relevance: the indicator captures the letter, but not
the substance of the target;
Aptness: UN Women highlight that specific

dimensions to be monitored should include age of
marriage, inheritance and nationality/citizenship;
Disaggregation: It could be useful to add

disaggregation according to experience of most
marginalised groups of women;
Transformative: the target is transformational, the

indicator could be improved to track shifts in attitude
or experience.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
CARE The proposed indicator for this target is the passage

of legal frameworks that address all forms
discrimination against women. While passage of
laws is an important step in promoting gender
equality in many countries, there remains a huge
gap between the adoption of progressive policies
and their implementation/ enforcement, due to
factors such as: the countervailing force of societal
norms and attitudes (shared by public officials
responsible for implementation), low institutional
capacity, weak political commitment and
accountability to women’s needs and the exclusion
of women and girls from decision-making at various
levels. Action to address such barriers is key to any
progress under this target, so beyond tracking
existence of laws, it is critical that this indicator be
framed more comprehensively to monitor existence
of efforts aimed at implementation, including,
allocation of budgets and resources, training and
capacity-building of public officials and development
of frameworks for implementation
CBM UK
Center for Family and Human
Rights (C-Fam)
Center for Reproductive Rights

Centre For Development Concept of Unpaid Work: There are some important
Alternatives differences between the concepts of the unpaid
work in the Global North and in the Global South.
While “unpaid work in the North includes time spent
on unpaid domestic work (household upkeep) and
care work, in the Global South, unpaid work is also
observed within the production boundary, i.e. unpaid
work is performed in unpaid family work,
subsistence production (of goods) and in collection
of free goods, such as water, fuel wood, fodder,
wood for housing, raw material for craft, fruits,
vegetables etc. This unpaid work is also performed
for the household without any direct remuneration to
unpaid workers for the well-being of the household.
This unpaid work also constrains gender equality
badly.
SDG 5.4.3: This wider concept of unpaid work will

have to be reflected in the indicators of SDG 5.4.
This could be termed as SDG 5.3
5.3.1 Weekly time spent on unpaid family work,

subsistence production and collection of free goods
by men and women.
5.3.2 Weekly time spent on total unpaid work

(SNA+non-SNA) by men and women.

International
ChildFund Alliancd
CHOICE for youth and sexuality 5.1.1 Elimination of discriminatory legal frameworks /
policies that discriminate against women and girls,
as identified by the CEDAW Committee (specific
dimensions to be monitored include age of marriage,
inheritance, property rights, nationality, citizenship,
restrictions on work)
5.1.2 Whether or not temporary special measures to
accelerate progress towards gender equality are in
place, as defined by CEDAW.
"5.1.3 Number of countries that have ratified
CEDAW and CRC, fully nationalized their
commitments, and report to the CEDAW and CRC
committees."
Christian Aid Preferred indicator: Whether or not legal frameworks

are in place to promote equality and non-
discrimination on the basis of sex, taking into
account marital status and nationality/citizenship.
Comment: We welcome the suggested indicator with

the amendment from UN Women.
Christoffel-Blindenmission In light of Articles 6 and 31 UN-CRPD the relevant

Deutschland e.V. indicator for this Needs to be disaggregated by
gender and disability to unreval multiple
discrimination of women with disabilities.
Investment

European
Network

Weltbevoelkerung

Dutch Youth Ambassador SRHR 5.1.1 Elimination of discriminatory legal frameworks /

End FGM European Network

Equality Now 5.1.1 Whether or not legal frameworks are in place
to promote equality and non-discrimination on the
basis of sex in line with international human rights
and normative standards.
This includes but is not limited to: nationality and

citizenship, marital status, age, inheritance and
property rights, equal ages of marriage of 18 for
both boys and girls with or without parental consent,
criminalization of domestic violence, criminalization
of FGM, gender quotas for local and national
governments, and whether the constitution provides
for equality on the basis of sex with no exceptions
for religious, ethnic, or other status.
5.1.2 Number of countries that ratified and
domesticated all core international and regional
human rights treaties, including CEDAW and CRC,
that have fully nationalized their commitments and
report to the treaty monitoring committees
5.1.3 Prevalence of customary or legal practices
restricting girls’ and women’s mobility and/or
participation in public spaces
EU-CORD Network - European [Network Member: Tearfund UK] This needs to

Christian Organisations in Relief transcend just legal frameworks, to customary laws
and Development and traditions, and on how legal frameworks interact
with these. As most often it’s not the lack of a legal
framework that pose challenges, but the
counterproductive practices etc that exist. The target
needs to be broken down to reflect what all forms
and everywhere mean. Example: Discrimination in
the work place, public spaces, political spaces and
also discrimination within institutions such as
religion, education etc.
Therefore we propose the following indicator:

Whether or not legal frameworks are in place and
used to promote equality and nondiscrimination on
the basis of sex at different levels of government
administration.
Excision, parlons-en!

Canada

FAWENA especially gender base violence


Cookstoves
Global Health Council Recommend:
Elimination of legal frameworks/policies that
discriminate against women and girls, as identified
by the CEDAW Committee (specific dimensions to
be monitored include age of marriage, inheritance,
property rights, nationality, citizenship, restrictions
on work, access to health care, possibly existence of
special temporary measures)
CEDAW Committee, UN-Women and OHCHR have
a working group to develop a methodology for
collecting data for and monitoring this indicator.
Achieving gender equality and empowering women
and girls requires ending all these forms of
discrimination. However, the overarching and all-
encompassing nature of the target makes it difficult
to measure. Some examples of areas of law that
can be considered are whether equal pay for work of
equal value is guaranteed in law; whether national
law is in line with ILO Convention 183 on Maternity
Protection; if national law prohibits discrimination
based on a definition of discrimination against
women in accordance with article 1 of CEDAW;
whether the national legal framework provides equal
rights for women and men with respect to
inheritance and property, etc.

Global March Against Child Labour
HDS systems design science Separate goals must all be subject to the one
essential goal, of design and planning for cultural
growth for whole societies.
Health Poverty Action Indigenous women often face multiple forms of
discrimination . This target should be disaggregated
by ethnicity
Health Priorities in Post-2015 Modify indicator:
Taskforce Number of countries with legal frameworks that
against all women and girls, by adding: Proportion of
countries that have undertaken systematic reviews
and reforms of their national legislation to revoke all
gender-discriminatory legislation by 2020
High-Level Task Force for the ICPD - The Suggested Indicator on legal frameworks
that promote equality/non-discrimination is fully
supported. Given the critical importance and broad
scope of this target, a second global indicator may
be reasonably considered. One possibility, as a
complement to the lead indicator is: Proportion of
countries that have undertaken systematic reviews
and reforms of their national legislation to revoke all
gender-discriminatory legislation by 2020. This
indicator responds to the Beijing+5 (2000) unfulfilled
commitment to ‘revoke all gender discriminatory
legislation by 2005’, and links to targets 10.3 and
16.b. ‘By 2020’ or earlier/more immediate target date
than 2030 is warranted under international human
rights principles and law. Sources: National
legislative records; complementary information
would also be available from specialized UN bodies
and other stakeholder sources.
Human Dignity Foundation
Human Rights Watch
IDDC
Institute for Reproductive and Exactly we have to do it and I thnk that civil society
Family Health are the best organizations to solve problems
International Association for Media

and Communication Research
(IAMCR)

International Justice Mission
Germany
International Movement ATD Fourth

World
International Network on Migration

and Development

Federation
Ipas

Planning (JOICFP)
Johns Hopkins University Yes!

Delhi
Kepa Finland a) Percentage of women and girls with final say on
decisions about own healthcare.
b) Percentage of population with basic national
identity documentation, by sex.
c) Birth registration coverage, by sex.
d) Ratios of girls to boys in primary, secondary and
tertiary education.
e) Transition rate to secondary education, by sex.
f) Missing women.
g) Fertility Preferences.
=>
d) MDG indicator for target 3A.
f) Measures gender bias in mortality due to sex
selective abortions, female infanticide or insufficient
care given to baby girls (Source: SIGI).
g) Measures gender bias in fertility preferences
using the share of males
as the last child (Source: SIGI).
Kimse Yok Mu
Land Alliance, Inc.
Landesa
MADE
Major Group of Workers and Trade

Unions
Making It Work Global gender and Assessment of Inclusivity of indicator 5.1.1: To
disability initiative capture the broad nature of different forms of
discrimination and its multiple and intersecting
forms, we would recommend to broaden this
indicator to include the CRPD and CRC.
Suggested indicator 5.1.1:Whether or not legal

frameworks discriminate against women and girls,
as identified by the CEDAW committee, as well as
the CRPD and CRC Committee wherever
appropriate.
Assessment of Inclusivity of Indicator 5.1.2: As

women and girls with disabilities are at a higher risk
of being discriminated on both grounds, gender and
disability, we would recommend to disaggregate this
indicator by disability and other minority status
leading to multiple discrimination.
Suggested indicator 5.1.2:

Whether or not inheritance rights discriminate
against women regardless of age,sex, disability,
geographical location or any other minority status.

http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2015_draft_indicator.
pdf
Médecins Sans Frontières - to end all forms of gender based discrimination.

Medical Mission Sisters 5.1.1 Elimination of discriminatory legal frameworks /
restrictions on work, possibly existence of special
temporary measures)
Data Source: The CEDAW Committee, UN-Women

and OHCHR have formed a working group to
develop a methodology for collecting data for and
monitoring this indicator.
Achieving gender equality and empowering women
and girls requires ending all these forms of
discrimination, making achieving this target critical
for the SDGs. However, the overarching and all-
encompassing nature of the target makes it difficult
to measure. Some examples of areas of law that
can be considered are whether equal pay for work of
equal value is guaranteed in law; whether national
law is in line with ILO Convention 183 on Maternity
Protection; if national law prohibits discrimination
based on a definition of discrimination against
women in accordance with article 1 of CEDAW;
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 1. Disaggregated data on multiple dimension

Organization (NNDSWO) index (MDI) inclusive of – age, sex, disability, race,
caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other
status and rural-urban divide— on violence against
women.
OneFamilyPeople Persons with disabilities are not mentioned in
targets dealing with vulnerability. We therefore
recommend the following in targets below:
End all forms of discrimination against all women

and girls everywhere especially those with
disabilities
Orchid Project
Oxfam
PAI PAI supports the proposed indicator 5.1.1. This

indicator would measure the number of countries
with legal frameworks that promote gender equality
and non-discrimination against all women and girls.
Persons Against Non-State Torture Ensure the promotion of non-discriminatory human

rights principles as stated in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights to ensure that all
articles are applied equally as belonging to women
and girls as well as men and boys as stated in
article 2. Of particular note is article 5 which states
no one shall be subjected to torture; it matters not
whether torture is perpetrated by State or non-State
actors, whether perpetrated in the public or private
spheres, States parties must ensure their laws
address both State and non-State torture human
rights crimes.
Plan International Proposal 5.1.1 Whether or not legal frameworks are
in place to promote equality and non-discrimination
on the basis of sex in line with international human
rights and normative standards
Rationale: Girls and women face discrimination in
both law and practice. This target is particularly
critical. International human rights and normative
standards includes but is not limited to: nationality
and citizenship, marital status, age, inheritance and
property rights, equal ages of marriage of 18 for
both boys and girls with or without parental consent,
criminalization of FGM, and whether the constitution
provides for equality on the basis of sex with no
exceptions for religious, ethnic, or other status.
Proposal: 5.1.2 Prevalence of customary or legal

practices restricting girls’ and women’s mobility
and/or participation in public spaces
Rationale: Gaps and challenges remain across
some key areas affecting women’s socio-economic
and political rights and freedom from violence.
Discriminatory social institutions are correlated with
countries performing poorly in many socioeconomic
dimensions and development outcomes.

America
Practical Action
Realizing Sexual and Reproductive Indicator: Elimination of discriminatory legal

Justice Alliance (RESURJ) frameworks / policies that discriminate against
women and girls, as identified by the CEDAW
Committee (specific dimensions to be monitored
include age of marriage, inheritance, property rights,
nationality, citizenship, restrictions on work, possibly
existence of special temporary measures)
Source: The CEDAW Committee, UN-Women and
OHCHR have formed a working group to develop a
methodology for collecting data for and monitoring
this indicator.
Regional network for yourth and

Adult Education Advocacy
Saferworld REMOVE: "Whether or not legal frameworks are in

place to promote equality and nondiscrimination on
the basis of sex" - This indicator is too easy to
achieve; many countries have frameworks which
have no impact. A survey question would be better:
use discrimination indicator suggested for target
16.b instead.
Save the Children
Sierra Club
Sightsavers
Signatory organizations: United 5.1.1 Whether or not legal frameworks are in place
Nations Foundation, Plan to promote equality and non-discrimination on the
International, Girl Effect, CARE, basis of sex in line with international human rights
International Women's Health and normative standards
Coalition, Girls Not Brides, World This includes but is not limited to: nationality and
Association of Girl Guides and Girl citizenship, marital status, age, inheritance and
Scouts, European Parliamentary property rights, equal ages of marriage of 18 for
Forum, International Center for both boys and girls with or without parental consent,
Research on Women, Advocates equality in marriage and divorce, equal pay for equal
for Youth, FHI360, Equality Now, work, restrictions on work, criminalization of
Mercy Corps, Let Girls Lead, domestic violence, criminalization of FGM, gender
International Rescue Committee quotas for local and national governments, and
whether the constitution provides for equality on the
basis of sex with no exceptions for religious, ethnic,
or other status
5.1.2 Number of countries that ratified and

domesticated all core international and regional
human rights treaties, including CEDAW and CRC,
that have fully nationalized their commitments and
report to the treaty monitoring committees
5.1.3 Prevalence of customary or legal practices

restricting girls’ and women’s mobility and/or
participation in public spaces
Small Arms Survey

Society for the Psychological Data on all ford of discrimination against girls and
Study of Social Issues; Psychology women (access to physical and mental health care,
Coalition at the United Nations social protection, education, reproductive health
care, decision-making in public and private
institutions, etc.) disaggregated by gender, age,
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration
status
Somos el Presente Measured by specific public policy that adress this

issue by country.
Stakeholder Group on Ageing 5.1.1 In principle we support the revised indicator
(posted by HelpAge International) proposed by UN Women.
UN Women’s proposal suggests questions on

gender equality in a number of areas of the law -
property, domestic violence, marriage age etc.
Additional questions are necessary to ensure that
the indicator monitors progress towards elimination
of the multiple discrimination that women are
subjected to, including in older age, for example, but
not limited to:
- Does the law prohibit multiple discrimination based

on sex in combination with others grounds, including
age?
Does the law guarantee equal rights for women to

pensions?
- Does the law prohibit harmful or discriminatory

practices related to widowhood?
It is also important to explore further whether UN

Women’s tentative proposal that the CEDAW
Committee be the monitoring body for this indicator
is appropriate. The CEDAW Committee already has
a full programme of work. Not every country has
ratified CEDAW and reporting is periodic. Additional
resources may be necessary for the CEDAW
Committee to fulfil this additional monitoring
responsibility. Alternative monitoring bodies should
be considered.
Statistics Without Borders of the 1. Develop definitions since "discrimination", "gender
American Statistical Association violence", sexual violence" , "women's rights" ,
"human trafficking" are vague concepts and differ
greatly between cultures.
2. Although developing a baseline is important, I
would want efforts not to be delayed just to gather
baseline data.
3. Develop educational programs for women.
Education above all else will increase the level of
equality for both women and children.
4. Develop measurable goals.
5. These goal, although I realize are focused
primarily on developing countries, there is still work
to be done in developed countries .
Some General thoughts:

Topic 5:Goal5: Achieve gender equality and
empower all women and girls
Comments:
1. Develop a definition of physical/sexual violence.
The culture of a society has a strong impact on what
women think their rights are. In many countries
women are happy to be given just a little; in other
countries this little amount would be defined as
deprivation.
2. Develop a definition of discrimination.
3. Do not wait to work on this goal. Age
discrimination and violence of older women is on the
increase.
Tebtebba
Transparency International In tracking this target, it would be critical to look at
how corruption impacts its achievement. The
relevant target and indicator should be drawn from
target 16.5 given the strong and proven inter-
linkages between corruption, governance and
gender equality. For example, bribery is inversely
correlated with girls enrolling in secondary school.
Bribery completely negates the effect of economic
growth in ensuring higher numbers of girls in
secondary education. We also know from empirical
work that corruption hits women and girls the
hardest.
-
https://www.transparency.org/files/content/feature/20
14_MDGs_Statistical_Annex.pdf
-
http://www.transparency.org/images/uploads/feature/
MDG_infographic_hi-res.jpg
UCLG
University of Southampton
USIL Excellent, but it must complemented wtih

supervision and fullfilment policies to examine the
work of states.
VSO
Water Supply and Sanitation Women and girls menstruate every month between
Collaborative Council (WSSCC) the ages of 9 and 45 on average thereby ensuring
the continuity of the human race. This biological
phenomenon is shrouded in silence and as a result
women and girls are denied information and basic
water, sanitation and hygiene to manage their
monthly flows with dignity and safety. Infrastructure
in public spaces such as schools, colleges,
workplaces, markets and transport hubs ignores this
basic biological phenomenon that affects more than
3 billion women across their life course. Failure to
clearly articulate this life fact and respond to
women’s biological needs is to continue this age old
discrimination, violating women’s human rights.
A specific indicator on menstrual hygiene
management would address this discrimination that
prevents girls and women from embracing their
natural life course with dignity and from reaching
their full human potential.
Proposed indicator: All women and girls have access

to adequate information and facilities to manage
their menstruation with safety and dignity.
WaterAid
Womankind Worldwide
Women for Expo this goal is too general in its formulation and not
easy measurable. A more realistic target is
encouraged. What about cultural variations in the
way a violation on women is perceived?
Women for Women's Human Rights 5.1.1 Elimination of discriminatory legal frameworks /
- New Ways policies that discriminate against women and girls,
as identified by the CEDAW Committee and the
HRC (specific dimensions to be monitored include
age of marriage, inheritance, property rights,
nationality, citizenship, restrictions on work)
Women Thrive Worldwide Definition needs to be more clearly defined to

ensure applicability to girls and women at all stages
of life and in all contexts.
Women's Global Network for
Reproductive Rights (WGNRR)
Women's Major Group 5.1.1 Elimination of discriminatory legal frameworks /

Essential to include a positive measure indicator.
This is the UN Women proposal for 5.c.
5.1.3 Number of countries that have ratified CEDAW

and CRC, fully nationalized their commitments, and
report to the CEDAW and CRC committees.
World Chlorine Council

World Vision We support the following suggested indicators:
• Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls
(aged 15-49) subjected to physical and/or sexual
violence by a current or former intimate partner, in
the last 12 months.
• Proportion of women and girls (aged 15-49)
subjected to sexual violence by persons other than
an intimate partner, since age 15.

Environment
WWF
YouAct We agree on the suggested indicator. We also
suggest an additional indicator measuring the
number of countries with legal frameworks that
against all women and girls, in both public and
private spheres. This would measure the legal
foundations of governments that repsect and protect
human rights of women. We could also include the
percentage of girls currently in and out of school per
country (at different age ranges). This measure
would indicate governmental efforts in ensuring a
legal framework in specific countries regarding
gender equality in the education system.
Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence
against all women and girls in the public and Target 5.3: Eliminate all harmful practices, such
private spheres, including trafficking and sexual as child, early and forced marriage and female
and other types of exploitation genital mutilation
disability.
Women with disability face an increased risk of

gender-based violence (source: I. Van der Heijden,
What Works to Prevent Violence against Women
with Disabilities:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uplo
ads/attachment_data/file/337954/Interventions-
abuse-against-WWD-W.pdf)
Our proposed indicator addresses target 10.2 also.

We welcome the two proposed indicators under
target 5.3, however we would like to suggest to add
“and before age 15” to 5.3.1 which would then read
“Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were
married or in a union before age 18 and before age
15”. This is relevant given that younger girls are
especially at risk of forced marriage, while older
adolescents may enter marriage and/or unions
voluntarily in accordance with their evolving
capacities and maturity level. Disaggregation for
those ‘under 15’ requires no extra effort, as data is
available from existing survey questions (eg. DHS
and MICS) that ask at ‘what age’ the marriage
occurred. We suggest deleting “for relevant
countries only” in 5.3.2, as girls and women living in
countries of low prevalence may be subject to FGM
due to immigration from practicing countries. This is
also true for Europe. Indeed, the European
Commission estimates that hundreds of thousands
of women in Europe have been subjected to FGM;
thousands of girls are at risk; it is a global
phenomenon and data collection should not be
limited to the most affected African countries.
AJWS supports the proposed indicator on child,
early and forced marriage with the addition of "and
before age 15", to emphasize the specific
programmatic attention that must be paid to
addressing CEFM among older adolescents and
younger adolescents. Data on age at marriage is
currently disaggregated by these two age categories
by UNICEF, which suggests that indicator would still
retain it's Tier 1 category with the inclusion of "and
before age 15".
Expert Group’s recommendations needs a broader Expert Group’s recommendations needs a broader
focus with respect to areas measured by the focus with respect to areas measured by the
proposed indicator. Eg. percentage of referred cases proposed indicator. Aspects to consider are legal
of sexual and gender-based violence against minimum marriageable age, domestic laws
women and children that are investigated and prohibiting female genital mutilation, proportion of
sentenced, Time frame and coverage of a national public social expenditure on campaigns to sensitize
policy to combat trafficking within and over national people on violence against women, reported cases
borders, date of entry into force of domestic laws of genital mutilation, rape and other violence
prohibiting all forms of violence against women, restricting women’s sexual and reproductive
including domestic violence. freedom/violence against women responded to
effectively by the government.
1. The comprehensive law to link local governance 1. Uniformity across diverse legislations, policies
mechanisms, and educational departments in and provisions on the age of the child being till 18
curbing child marriage. years.
2. Percentage of reported cases of sexual abuse 2. Presence of a comprehensive laws and policies
to increase by 50%. at national level to counter practices of child
3. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases marriage and due machinery for effective
in instances of sexual abuse to increase by 80%. implementation of the same with necessary
4. Percentage of reported cases of domestic measures to curb impunity.
violence to increase by 50%. 3. Percentage of reported cases of child marriage
5. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases to increase by 50%.
in instances of domestic violence to increase by 4. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases
80%. in instances of child marriage to increase by 80%.
6. Percentage of reported cases of sexual
harassment at workplace to increase by 50%.
7. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases
in instances of sexual harassment at work place to
increase by 80%.
8. Percentage of reported cases of forced
trafficking increase by 50% and percentage of
released trafficked girls increase by 50%
increase by 80%.
We agree with both suggested indicators, and we agree to the suggested indicators, and suggest
suggest to add, at the end of both the indicators: “by to add text to both indicators. To the indicator
age groups, income, location, ethnicity and other “Percentage of women ages 20-24 who were
characteristics”. We strongly recommend this married or in a union before age 18” there´s a need
additional. The expanded data collection efforts to to add“and before age 15, by location,
capture violence against women and girls of all ages income,race,ethnicity and educational level” at the
and from key population groups is necessary to end of the indicator.The proposal to disaggregate
comprehensively track this target, including data also ‘before age 15’ is relevant to inform policy-
women living with HIV, with disabilities, making:younger girls are especially at risk of forced
indigenous and migrant women, among others who marriage,with particularly serious consequences
face heightened risks, building on leading country for their health, education, development and
experiences available. (example of disaggregated even survival. And to the indicator “Percentage of
data here http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra- girls ages 15-19 (changed from 49) who have
2014-vaw-survey-main-results-apr14_en.pdf , pages undergone female genital mutilation/cutting, by age
184-190 ) It is of highest importance to fill data gaps of undergoing the practice (0-5, 6-9, 10-14, 15-19)”
for 10-14 year olds who are currently largely we see the need to add “location, income and
excluded from data collection despite their high risks ethnicity” at the end of the indicator. A focus on the
of gender-based violence, contributing to inadequate youngest age range would serve as a more
policy attention to these groups. (Guidelines for meaningful measure of trends for policy-makers.
Producing Statistics on Violence against Women-
Statistical Surveys:
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/gender/docs/Guidelines_
Statistics_VAW.pdf)
Indicators that measure prevalence rates do not

track changes in the underpinning social norms that
lead to violence against women and girls, and to
ensure transformative social the following indicator
is proposed by Christian Aid: Percentage of people
who think it is never justifiable for a man to
physically and/or sexually abuse his intimate female
partner, by sex, by age
We support the suggested indicator Percentage of
women aged 20-24 who were married or in a union
before age 18 (i.e. child marriage), which is a Tier I
indicator reflecting there is already an established
methodology for measurement and data. This
indicator is included in the Minimum set of gender
indicators agreed by the UNSC. Progress in
reducing child marriage is an important indicator of
women and girls’ empowerment that should be
tracked at the global level. This indicator also has
many important interlinkages with other targets.
Nations with high rates of child marriage have been
found to contend with higher rates of maternal and
infant mortality, and less utilization of maternal
health services. Child marriage also reduces girls’
chances of completing education with subsequent
impacts on their labor force participation and
economic independence.
To achieve the transformative intent of the SDGs, We recognize the existence of an already well-
countries must tackle inequitable attitudes and established indicator on child marriage measuring
social norms that drive violence and discrimination percentage of girls and women aged 20-24 who
against women. The inclusion of measures of were married at age 18. However we believe that
change in such attitudes and norms is key to focusing on age at marriage as the sole indicator for
tracking progress on this target. We would propose child marriage risks missing the underlying drivers of
the inclusion of indicators used by DHS and other the practice, including restrictive gender norms,
surveys measuring the proportion of people who economic vulnerability, and structural inequality.
believe that a man is justified in hitting or beating his Progress on child marriage requires a focus on a
wife under specific circumstances. However, we comprehensive set of issues that determine girls’ life
would also note that such questions in DHS surveys options, including sexual and reproductive choice,
are more tailored towards capturing individual educational access and livelihood options, as well
attitudes and behaviors, as distinct from social as contextual issues that are not commonly tracked
norms or expectations i.e. people’s perceptions of in national surveys, such as consent to marriage,
what is acceptable/normal behavior in their social/cultural norms and aspirations for girls. We
communities. Measuring social norm change is a call for more data collection on these issues, e.g. by
critical but emerging area of work, with various tracking proportion of girls or women who say that
initiatives currently being piloted by UNICEF, CARE they wanted to get married at the time that they
and others to develop relevant methods and were married, parental preferences for educating
indicators. We therefore strongly recommend that girls versus boys and money or goods exchanged
the SDG indicator framework maintain some scope during marriage transactions.
for updating indicators as global and national
capacity for capturing data on social norms grows.
Indicators need to include women with disabilities in

order to ensure target is met for all. Suggest:
Percentage of women and girls with disabilities
subjected to physical and/or sexual violence
Proposed indicator 5.3.1: Existence of formal
accountability mechanisms accessible to women
and girls who experience or are threatened with
child, early, or forced marriage
Proposed indicator 5.3.2: Number of individuals who

access these accountability mechanisms
Proportion of elderly women (above 49) facing

violence.
We support the following suggested indicators: We support the following suggested indicators:
• Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls • Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were
(aged 15-49) subjected to physical and/or sexual first married or in union by age 18 (i.e. child
violence by a current or former intimate partner, in marriage).
the last 12 months. • Percentage of girls and women aged 15 to 49
• Proportion of women and girls (aged 15-49) who have undergone female genital mutilation/
subjected to sexual violence by persons other than cutting, by age group.
5.2.1 Percentage of all women and girls subjected to 5.3.1 Percentage of women and girls who were
physical, psychological, sexual and economic married or in a union before age 18 and before age
violence by a (i) current or former intimate partner, 15 (i.e. child marriage), disaggregated by age, sex,
(ii) other family member, or (iii) persons other than geography, education level, income, disability, race
an intimate partner or family member a) ever and b) and ethnicity, and other factors
within the last 12 months, by age (including 6-14), 5.3.2 Percentage of girls and women who have
income, and education level. undergone FGM/C by age group (10-14, 15-18, 18-
24).
Preferred indicator: Proportion of ever-partnered Preferred indicator: Percentage of women aged 20-
women and girls (aged 15+) subjected to physical 24 who were married or in a union before age 18
and/or sexual violence by a current or former (i.e. child marriage); AND Percentage of girls and
intimate partner, in the last 12 months; women aged 15-49 years who have undergone
FGM/C, by age group.
and Proportion of women and girls subjected to
sexual violence by persons other than an intimate Comment: We support this indicator but do not see
partner, since age 15. the need to add ‘for relevant countries only’.
Comment: We would like to see data collected

beyond the age of 49.
This target aims at eliminating all forms of violence

against all women and girls. This can only be
achieved by including girls and women with
disabilities, who are especially vulnerable because
of multiple discrimination. Disaggregation by
disability is vital to ensure girls and women with
disabilities are not ignored. Suggested indicator:
‘Percentage of women and girls with disabilities
subjected to physical and/or sexual violence’.
We welcome the two indicators proposed under We welcome the two proposed indicators under
target 5.2 and stress the importance of maintaining target 5.3, however we would like to suggest to add
both indicators. However, to track changes in the “and before age 15” to 5.3.1 which would then read
underpinning social norms that lead to violence “Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were
against women and girls, and to ensure that the married or in a union before age 18 and before age
post-2015 framework is achieving the transformative 15”. This is relevant given that younger girls are
social change that it has set out to, we recommend especially at risk of forced marriage, while older
adding a behaviour indicator: ‘Percentage of people adolescents may enter marriage and/or unions
who think it is never justifiable for a man to voluntarily in accordance with their evolving
physically and/or sexually abuse his intimate female capacities and maturity level. Disaggregation for
partner, by sex, by age’ (collected by DHS, WHO those ‘under 15’ requires no extra effort, as data is
multi-country studies). available from existing survey questions (eg. DHS
due to immigration from practicing countries. The
European Commission estimates that hundreds of
thousands of women in Europe have been subjected
to FGM; thousands of girls are at risk; it is a global
phenomenon.
It is a weakness that the proposed indicators do not The proposed indicator is somewhat weakened by
capture violence against women beyond the age the focus on the particular age group (FGM may
group 15-49 years also happen at a much younger age, thereby
making the reporting and response time
The indicators do not capture the aspects of unnecessarily long) and should be reported and
trafficking and other types of exploitation addressed addressed wherever it happens and not only in
in the target particular countries.
phenomenon.

of multiple discriminations. Disaggregation by
within the last 12 months, by age (including 6-14),
income, and education level. 5.3.2 Percentage of girls and women who have
undergone FGM/C by age group (10-14, 15-18, 18-
24).
We applaud the two proposed indicators under

target 5.3, however we would like to suggest adding
“and before age 15” to 5.3.1 which would then read
“Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were
married or in a union before age 18 and before age
15”. This is relevant given that younger girls are
especially at risk of forced marriage, while older
adolescents may enter marriage and/or unions
capacities and maturity level. Disaggregation for
phenomenon.
1 Percentage of all women and girls subjected to 5.3.1 Percentage of girls and women aged 10-49+
physical, psychological, sexual and economic years who have undergone FGM/C, by age group
violence by a (i) current or former intimate partner, (NOT LIMITED TO "RELEVANT COUNTRIES
(ii) other family member, or (iii) persons other than ONLY")
an intimate partner or family member (a) ever
and/or (b) within the last 12 months 5.3.2 Percentage of girls and women aged 20-24
who were married or in a union (i) before age 18 and
(ii) before age 15 (i.e. child marriage)
[NM: Tearfund UK] IPV is one of the most common [NM: Tearfund UK] Indicators on criminalizing such
and most frequent forms of violence experienced by practices? Also in-terms of engaging with religious
women and girls, then there must be stricter laws to leaders in terms of addressing these harmful
address violence within relationships. Also this practices. Commitment from member states to
excludes women above 49 who are still vulnerable strengthening local administration to prevent early
and also victims of IPV/and non-partner violence. child marriage.
What will be the mechanism to capture that for both
these indicators? There are many countries that
don’t recognize marital rape or have any domestic
violence laws, this must be on the agenda. Sexual
Harassment policies, esp. in public spaces are sth.
that member states can make commitments to.
Stronger and more consistent laws, legal
procedures to support survivors in the process and
follow through for prosecution of perpetrators. Most
countries lack trafficking laws, prevention
mechanisms & have a narrow definition of
trafficking. Also importantly this indicator misses the
critical aspect of violence experienced by
women/girls in conflict settings, use of rape/SV as a
weapon of warfare.
WE APPLAUD the proposed inclusion of
‘Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were
married or in a union before age 18’ as a global
indicator for monitoring Target 5.3. CEFM and
FGM/C share many of the same social drivers. In
many communities, FGM/C is the precursor to child
marriage, and as such needs to be equally targeted
for sustained reduction of CEFM.
A GLOBAL INDICATOR ON FGM/C is a vital
component of measuring change in terms of gender
equality, as outlined in Goal 5. We call for the
indicator: “Percentage of girls and women aged 15-
49 years who have undergone FGM/C” to be
included as a global indicator under Target 5.3,
alongside the CEFM indicator, to provide a
comprehensive framework for addressing both
issues.
target 5.2. We stress the importance of maintaining target 5.3, however we would like to suggest the
both indicators. However, to track changes in the following addition under the first one:
underpinning social norms that lead to violence ● Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were
against women and girls, and to ensure that the married or in a union before age 18 ADD: and before
post-2015 framework is achieving the transformative age 15.
social change that it has set out to, we recommend This proposal is relevant given that younger girls are
adding a behavior indicator: especially at risk of forced marriage, when older
● Percentage of people who think it is never adolescent may enter marriage voluntarily in
justifiable for a man to physically and/or sexually accordance with their evolving capacities and
abuse his intimate female partner, by sex, by age maturity level. Source of data: Disaggregation for
Source of data: collected by DHS, WHO multi- those ‘under 15’ requires no extra effort, as data is
country studies available from existing survey questions (eg. DHS
occurred.
e.g. Percentage of women and girls with disabilities
subjected to physical and/or sexual violence
Recommend: Recommend:
Percentage of all women and girls subjected to 5.3.1 % of women and girls married or in a union
physical, psychological, sexual and economic before age 18 and before age 15, disaggregated by
violence by a (i) current or former intimate partner, age, sex, geography, education level, income,
(ii) other family member, or (iii) persons other than disability, race and ethnicity and other factors
an intimate partner or family member a) ever and b) It is important to involve the girls married before the
within the last 12 months, by age (including 6-14), age of 15, as that bring many other health issues
income, and education level. and rights violations.
Data Source: DHS Data availability for violence
against women has improved significantly in recent 5.3.2 % of girls and women who have undergone
years and over 100 countries currently have data for FGM/C by age group (10-14, 15-18, 19-24)
this indicator. While targets must be set for reducing prevalence
rates of Female Genital Mutilation and Cutting
Violence against women and girls is one of the most (FGM/C) in the long term, in the short term many
pervasive human rights abuses in the world today, contexts may see an increase in prevalence and
happening in all countries. In order to eradicate reporting rates. For instance, prevalence rates may
violence against women and girls it is necessary to increase because better-administered surveys will
measure its prevalence in all its forms. From a be able to capture prevalence rates more accurately
human rights point of view it is important to ensure and reporting rates may increase if women’s
that this indicator measures violence for all age confidence in security, justice and health services
groups. increases. Such an increase would be a sign of
progress. In contrast, both prevalence and reporting
rates may also increase in contexts of conflict or
crisis, and signal the opposite.
The proposed indicators under target 16.2 would

also monitor this target. Violent punishment is the
most common form of violence against girls. The
experience of violent punishment is gendered – girls
may suffer different types of punishment than boys
and may be punished for different reasons, typically
reinforcing stereotypic ideas of what it means to be
a woman.
Violent punishment of children is closely linked to
violence against women, including intimate partner
violence: the two kinds of violence often coexist and
experience of violent punishment as a child is
associated with an increased risk of involvement in
intimate partner violence as an adult, as perpetrator
and/or victim. Prohibiting violent punishment
contributes to eliminating violence against girls and
women both directly, in reducing violence against
girls, and indirectly, in reducing gender-based
violence across the whole of society.
New indicator suggested:
Existence and implementation of legal frameworks
(including revision/enactment of laws) and/or
allocation of resources aimed at prevention of
gender-based violence.
Eliminating all forms of violence against all women

and girls can only be achieved by including girls and
women with disabilities, who are especially
vulnerable because of multiple discriminations.
Suggested indicator: ‘Percentage of women and
girls with disabilities subjected to physical and/or
sexual violence’.
Separate goals must all be subject to the one Separate goals must all be subject to the one
essential goal, of design and planning for cultural essential goal, of design and planning for cultural
growth for whole societies. growth for whole societies.
For both suggested indicators disaggregation by For both suggested indicators disaggregation by
ethnicity is possible within household survey DHS ethnicity is possible within household survey DHS
or MICS data sources. or MICS data sources.
- Include women 50+ in both indicators (WHO, - Both Suggested Indicators on child marriage
EU). and FGM are very relevant. Child marriage should
- Formulating 1 indicator if necessary: “% women be modified to capture girls married before 18 AND
who experienced physical and/or sexual violence” before 15, since 1 in 9 girls are married before 15 in
(WHO 2013,p.2); OR, 1st indicator/IPV (most developing countries; and disaggregated by
prevalent form, covering sexual violence). location, income, race, ethnicity, educational level.
- Critically important (or under 16.2, w/boys For FGM, the suggestion is to focus on data
included): % women (15-19,20-24) subjected to collected from girls 15-19 (instead of 15-49), to
sexual violence before age 15 by any persons. 50% capture most relevant trends during the SDGs
of sexual assaults are to girls under 16. Fills critical period (most FGM happens by age 15);
data gap: current proposals are for 15+. The focus disaggregated by age of undergoing the practice (0-
on 15-24 yr. old respondents would track most 5, 6-9, 10-14), location, income, ethnicity.
recent trends (e.g. younger cohorts), meaningful for - Alternative proposal for one indicator: %women
a time-bound agenda, w/policy focus on a high-risk 10-49 who have been subjected to harmful
but neglected group. DHS data. practices, by type of practice, age, location, income
- % people who think it is never justifiable for a and educational level. A more universal indicator,
man to beat his wife: A transformative indicator, may allowing countries to track prevalent forms of
serve as higher-level proxy for gender equality as it harmful practices in their contexts, especially child
addresses the social norms that perpetuate marriage and FGM where applicable. Countries
discrimination/violence; indicative of the could announce in 2016 which forms they will
effectiveness of prevention policies. Recommended commit to under the SDGs.
by WHO/ experts as a lead option for 5.2.
‘Percentage of girls and women aged 15-49 years
who have undergone Female Genital
Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C)’ to be included as a
global indicator alongside ‘Percentage of women
aged 20-24 who were married or in a union before
age 18’. CEFM and FGM/C share many of the same
social drivers and need to be equally targeted.
A GLOBAL indicator on FGM/C is a vital component
of measuring change in terms of gender equality, as
outlined in Goal 5.
The current proposal for Indicator 5.3.1 on ending

child, early, and forced marriage (CEFM) would track
marriage before the age of 18 (percentage of
women aged 20-24 who were married or in a union
before age 18). We support this proposal but
strongly urge, in order to set the most strategic
indicator for CEFM that the indicator also include
"before age 15." This will elicit additional and critical
information on the extent and severity of child
marriages in each country, and make clear to policy
and program-makers that children married before
age 15 are a critical subgroup to target, as they
often experience the greatest harm.

I agree with this Exactly we have to do it and our organization

interest in this issue
ICN understands that this target is about ICN supports the two suggested indicators.
empowering women and girls however we recognise
that boys and children under 15 years old are also
subject to physical and/or sexual violence.
Recommended indicator: Percentage of women and

girls with disabilities subjected to physical and/or
sexual violence.
Addition to Indicator "Proportion of women and girls
(aged 15-49) subjected to sexual violence by
persons other than an intimate partner, since age
15”
Disaggregate also by victim-perpetrator relation
(family member, acquaintance, unacquainted)
We support the following suggested indicators:

(aged 15-49), including migrant women, regardless
of status, subjected to physical and/or sexual
the last 12 months.
• Proportion of women and girls (aged 15-49),
including migrant women, regardless of status,
We are concerned the human trafficking indicator

does not have universal coverage (5.2/16.2/10.7):
• Number of victims of human trafficking per 100,000
people, by sex, age and form of exploitation - data
limited to 130 TIP countries
phenomenon.
phenomenon.
Drop "in the public and private spheres". Why do

these need to be identified. There should be no
violence anywhere.
No comments No comments
above mentioned Finnish NGO Task Force's
Position Paper on Post-2015 Agenda, including
indicators, page 24:
http://www.kepa.fi/tiedostot/post-2015_ngo-task-
forces-position-paper_web.pdf
(aged 15-49), including migrant women, regardless
of status, subjected to physical and/or sexual
the last 12 months.
• Proportion of women and girls (aged 15-49),
including migrant women, regardless of status,
We are concerned the human trafficking indicator
does not have universal coverage (5.2/16.2/10.7):
• Number of victims of human trafficking per 100,000
people, by sex, age and form of exploitation - data
limited to 130 TIP countries
The inter-generational cycle of violence, including "All" harmful practices are not just towards girls.
violence against women and girls, can only be Consider "Eliminate harmful practices towards girls
addressed if violence against boys is reduced. The such as child, early and forced marriage and FGM."
prevalence of violence against boys in many recent
CDC and UNICEF Violence Against Children
surveys is very high, if less than girls. Strongly
suggest moving 5.2 out of Topic 5 and into Topic 16
and covering both girls and boys. You can still keep
the target on violence against women, including
trafficking and exploitation "Eliminate trafficking,
sexual abuse and other forms of exploitation of
women by 2030." ... with violence covered under
the more universal umbrella proposed.
Assessment of Inclusivity of indicator 5.2.1 and
5.2.2: Given the higher exposure to violence of
women and girls with disabilities, and the unique
forms of violence and exploitation experienced by
this particular group of women, we would
recommend to disaggregate the indicator by
disability.
Suggested indicator 5.2.1: Proportion of ever-

partnered women and girls, regardless of age, sex,
disability, geographical location or any other minority
status, subjected to physical and/or sexual violence
by a current or former intimate partner, in the last 12
months
Suggested indicator 5.2.2:Proportion of women and

girls, regardless of age, sex, disability, geographical
location or any other minority status, subjected to
sexual violence by persons other than an intimate
partner, since age 15.
See PMNCH's recommendation - See PMNCH's recommendation -

http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2015_draft_indicator. http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2015_draft_indicator.
pdf pdf
Indicators are fine but we question the age group. Indicator 5.3.2 we have to comment on the age
What about those less than 15y and over 49. group. What about the girls born during this period
upto 2030. We suggest an indicator to target by
2030 prevalence rate of zero in the youngest age
group.
income, and education level. Data Source: The prevalence of child marriage is a
well-defined and measurable indicator of multiple
Data Source: DHS Data availability for violence development priorities that can be reliably tracked
against women has improved significantly in recent over time across a large number of countries. It is
years and over 100 countries currently have data for already being tracked through national surveys
this indicator. undertaken at regular intervals in most developing
Violence against women and girls is one of the most countries (data routinely collected through DHS and
pervasive human rights abuses in the world today, Multiple Indicators Cluster Surveys (MICS) and
happening in all countries. In order to eradicate routinely compiled and published by UNICEF).
violence against women and girls it is necessary to
measure its prevalence in all its forms. From a The indicator captures one of the most important life
human rights point of view it is important to ensure transitions for a girl. It signifies immediate and long
that this indicator measures violence for all age term disempowerment, violation of rights, and is
groups. symptomatic of an entrenched harmful social norm.
It is important to involve the girls married before the
age of 15, as that bring many other health issues
and rights violations.
1. Presence of a comprehensive laws and policies 1. Uniformity across diverse legislations, policies
at national level to counter practices of child sexual and provisions on the age of the child being till 18
abuse and due machinery for effective years.
implementation of the same with necessary 2. Presence of a comprehensive laws and policies
measures to curb impunity. at national level to counter practices of child
2. Percentage of reported cases of child sexual marriage and due machinery for effective
abuse to increase by 50%. implementation of the same with necessary
3. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases measures to curb impunity.
in instances of child sexual abuse to increase by 3. Percentage of reported cases of child marriage
80%. to increase by 50%.
4. The comprehensive law to link local governance 4. Percentage of conviction rate of reported cases
agencies/ mechanisms, and educational in instances of child marriage to increase by 80%.
departments in countering the practice of child
marriage.
5. Percentage of reported cases of sexual abuse
to increase by 50%.
in instances of sexual abuse to increase by 80%.
7. Percentage of reported cases of domestic
violence to increase by 50%.
in instances of domestic violence to increase by
80%.
9. Percentage of reported cases of sexual
harassment at workplace to increase by 50%.
increase by 80%.
Eliminate all forms of violence against all women
and girls especially those with disabilities, in the
public and private spheres, including trafficking and
sexual and other types of exploitation
In our previous response, we noted the importance

of the FGM/C indicator, and we are pleased that it
has been retained. We remain concerned, however,
that it will apply only to 'relevant countries'. The
following is additional information on this important
point.
FGM/C takes place in at least 17 countries in the

Middle East and Asia. It is known to take place in:
Brunei, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait,
Malaysia, The Maldives, Pakistan, Singapore,
Thailand, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syria, UAE and
Yemen.
It is impossible to estimate the number of women

affected in the Middle East and Asia, as good
statistics only exist for Yemen and Iraq. A small-
scale study by the Population Council showed,
however, that 86-100% of women had been cut in
Indonesia - a country of 250 million people.
FGM/C also takes place in Colombia, and in

diaspora communities in many countries in Europe,
North America and Australasia. It is estimated by the
Population Reference Bureau that 500,000 women
in the US are affected, and the European Parliament
estimates that 500,000 women in Europe are
affected.
5.2.1. and 5.2.2. We fully support the inclusion of
indicators on violence against women. However, we
suggest revising the existing ones by tracking
physical and/or sexual violence to all women – and
not just in the 15-49 age group - and to disaggregate
data also for severity of violence. In addition, without
replacing the headline indicators – we suggest to
track also the i) number of countries with legislation
that criminalizes violence against women, and ii) the
percentage of women and men who think violence
against women and girls is acceptable. These two
indicators are needed to receive a more
comprehensive picture on what is being done to
solve the problem. As the World Bank showed in its
report “Agency and Voice” from 2013, there is a
positive correlation between (punitive) legislation on
VAW and prevalence on VAW. The same holds for
attitudes and beliefs, which play a key role on why
VAW is used to subordinate women. Relevant data
on attitudes will also shed a light on to what women
themselves think is acceptable behavior of an
intimate partner.
PAI supports the two proposed indicators PAI supports the proposed indicator 5.3.1, however,
5.2.1:Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls would like to suggest adding “and before age 15”. It
(aged 15-49) subjected to physical and/or sexual is important to track girls who are married or in a
violence by a current or former intimate partner, in union both before 18 and before 15. Girls under the
the last 12 months; and 5.2.2: proportion of women age of 15 are especially at risk for forced marriage
and girls (aged 15-49) subjected to sexual violence and are at a higher risk of complications in childbirth.
by persons other than an intimate partner, since age
15.
However, we believe another indicator should be

added that tracks changes in social norms that lead
to violence against women and girls. We suggest
adding the following indicator: "Percentage of
people who think it is never justifiable for a man to
partner, by sex, by age."
Add a behavior indicator: For indicator: "Percentage of women aged 20-24
● Percentage of people who think it is never who were married or in a union before age 1" ADD:
justifiable for a man to physically and/or sexually "and before age 15."
abuse his intimate female partner, by sex, by age This proposal is relevant given that younger girls are
Source of data: collected by DHS, WHO multi- especially at risk of forced marriage, when older
country studies adolescent may enter marriage voluntarily in
accordance with their evolving capacities and
maturity level. Source of data: Disaggregation for
occurred.
In the report, NGO Declaration and

Recommendations, of the 2014 Geneva NGO
Forum Beijing+20, presented to the ECE Regional
Review, is the following recommendation, "Ensure
national laws criminalize non-State torture
perpetrated by non-State actors and hold
perpetrators accountable for gender-based non-
State torture crimes." The UN Committee against
Torture, paragraph 18 has identified that there are
manifestations of gender-based violence that
amounts to torture by non-State actors. If all forms
of violence are to be eliminated torture by non-State
actors in the private sphere is a specific and distinct
form of violence that must be named,
acknowledged, and criminalized as a human rights
crime suffered by women and girls globally.
Proposal: 5.2.1 Percentage of all women and girls Amendment: 5.3.1 Percentage of girls and women
subjected to physical, psychological, sexual and aged 20-24 who were married or in a union (i)
economic violence by a (i) current or former intimate before age 18 and (ii) before age 15 (i.e. child
partner, (ii) other family member, or (iii) persons marriage)
other than an intimate partner or family member (a)
ever and/or (b) within the last 12 months Rationale: 5.3.1 Approximately 15 million girls are
Rationale: 5.2.1 An estimated 150 million girls under married every year before they reach 18 but it is
age 18 have experienced rape or other forms of important to distinguish between those who were
sexual violence. Up to 50 percent of sexual assaults married under 18 and those who were under 15.
worldwide are committed against girls under 16 and This is relevant given that younger girls are
up to one in five girls under the age of 15 experience especially at risk of forced marriage, while older
sexual abuse adolescents may enter marriage and/or unions
Proposal 5.2.2 Percentage of people who believe capacities and maturity level.
that, in any circumstances: i) a husband/partner is
justified in hitting or beating their wife/partner, ii) We suggest amending 5.3.2 to include the age
people believe that their community members feel range 10-49 and to delete 'for relevant countries
that a husband/partner is justified in hitting or only'. We suggest deleting “for relevant countries
beating their wife/partner only,” as girls and women living in countries of low
prevalence may be subject to FGM due to
Rationale: 5.2.2 It is important to track changing immigration from practicing countries.
perceptions around violence, particularly gender
based violence both individually and within The girls at highest risk for FGM are often below the
communities. age of 15. For this reason we believe that
expanding the age range to include 10-14 year olds
will more accurately address girls most vulnerable to
the practice.
We welcome the two indicators proposed under

target 5.2. We stress the importance of maintaining
both indicators. However, to track changes in the
underpinning social norms that lead to violence
against women and girls, and to ensure that the
post-2015 framework is achieving the transformative
social change that it has set out to, we recommend
adding a behavior indicator: Percentage of people
who think it is never justifiable for a man to
partner, by sex, by age. Source of data: collected by
DHS, WHO multi-country studies
Indicator: Percentage of all women and girls Indicator: Percentage of women and girls who were
subjected to physical, psychological, sexual and married or in a union before age 18 and before age
economic violence by a (i) current or former intimate 15 (i.e. child marriage), disaggregated by age, sex,
partner, (ii) other family member, or (iii) persons geography, education level, income, disability, race
other than an intimate partner or family member a) and ethnicity, and other factors
ever and b) within the last 12 months, by age
(including 6-14), income, and education level. Source: The prevalence of child marriage is a well-
defined and measurable indicator of multiple
Source: DHS Data availability for violence against development priorities that can be reliably tracked
women has improved significantly in recent years over time across a large number of countries. It is
and over 100 countries currently have data for this already being tracked through national surveys
indicator. undertaken at regular intervals in most developing
countries (data routinely collected through DHS and
Multiple Indicators Cluster Surveys (MICS) and
routinely compiled and published by UNICEF).
Indicator: Percentage of girls and women who have

24).
Data Source: Data for both of this indicator are

routinely collected through DHS and Multiple
Indicators Cluster Surveys (MICS) and are routinely
compiled and published by UNICEF.
Is fair to say "to reduce". It should be good if we

eliminate violence against girls and woman. For
example Sexual arrasment of girls in schools by
teachers. But in 15 years it will not be eliminated,
but reduced.
ADJUST: " Proportion of ever-partnered women and
girls (aged 15-49) subjected to physical and/or
sexual violence by a current or former intimate
partner, in the last 12 months" - Should not be
gender specific as should seek to measure all forms
of sexual violence, and then disg. by gender. This
would make it gender neutral, which is clear aim of
goal.
RETAIN EXISTING INDICATORS
UNICEF maintains a global database on child

marriage since 2003. Fully comparable data are
available for some 117 low- and middle-income
countries. UNICEF is also the agency responsible
for reporting on this indicator as part of the UN
expert group on gender indicators.
target 5.2. We stress the importance of target 5.3, however we would like to suggest the
following addition under the first one:
maintaining both indicators. However, to track
changes in the underpinning social norms that lead ● Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were
to violence against women and girls, and to ensure married or in a union before age 18 ADD:
that the post-2015 framework is achieving the
transformative social change that it has set out to, and before age 15.
we recommend adding a behavior indicator:
This proposal is relevant given that younger girls are
● Percentage of people who think it is never especially at risk of forced marriage, when older
justifiable for a man to physically and/or sexually adolescent may enter marriage voluntarily in
abuse his intimate female partner, by sex, by age accordance with their evolving capacities and
Source of data: collected by DHS, WHO multi- maturity level. Source of data: Disaggregation for
country studies those ‘under 15’ requires no extra effort, as data is
occurred.

5.2.1 Percentage of all women and girls subjected to 5.3.1 Percentage of girls and women aged 20-24
physical, psychological, sexual and economic who were married or in a union (i) before age 18 and
violence by a (i) current or former intimate partner, (ii) before age 15 (i.e. child marriage)
(ii) other family member, or (iii) persons other than
an intimate partner or family member (a) ever NOTES: It is important to distinguish between those
and/or (b) within the last 12 months who were married under 18 and those who were
under 15, given that younger girls are especially at
5.2.2 Percentage of people who believe that, in any risk of forced marriage.It is important to involve the
circumstances: girls married before the age of 15, as that bring
i) a husband/partner is justified in hitting or beating many other health issues and rights violations.
their wife/partner
ii) people believe that their community members feel 5.3.2 Percentage of girls and women aged 10-49+
that a husband/partner is justified in hitting or years who have undergone FGM/C, by age group
beating their wife/partner
DATA SOURCE: Suggestion is DHS for 15-49+, but NOTES: We suggest deleting “for relevant countries
updated to reflect changing realities. Possibly MICS only,” as girls and women living in countries of low
for 14 and below. Potentially school surveys prevalence may be subject to FGM due to
immigration from practicing countries. The European
TIER: Tier III Commission estimates that hundreds of thousands
of women in Europe have been subjected to FGM; it
NOTES: An estimated 150 million girls under age 18 is a global phenomenon. The girls at highest risk for
have experienced rape or other forms of sexual FGM are often below the age of 15. For this reason
violence. It is important to track changing we believe that expanding the age range to include
perceptions around violence, particularly gender 10-14 year olds will more accurately address girls
based violence both individually and within most vulnerable to the practice.
communities.
KEEP IAEG indicator: Proportion of ever-partnered

women and girls (aged 15-49) subjected to physical
and/or sexual violence by a current or former
intimate partner, in the last 12 months.
This is a strong indicator. Data can come from 16.1 if
information is disaggregated also by perpetrator. It is
also likely that for SDG 5 survey will be carried out
on all-female samples.
A 2nd indicator would be (ALTERNATE from IAEG):
Proportion of women and girls (aged 15-49)
subjected to physical and/or sexual violence by
persons other than an intimate partner, in the last 12
months.
The proposed indicator should also focus on the
‘last 12 months’. Using ‘since the age of 15’ results
in a baseline that can’t be updated. This is a
complement to the previous question focused on
intimate partner (current or former).
Data on all forms of violence against girls and Data on harmful practices...disaggregated by
women in public and private spheres, disaggregated gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity,
by gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban residence, national
income, disability, rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration status
origin, and migration status
Target 5.2 focuses on the elimination of all forms of

violence against all women and girls. The currently
proposed indicators fall short of measuring progress
against this target as they focus on the collection of
data only for a particular age group.
This is the case for the DHS surveys referred to as a

key source for these indicators. Datasets, including
DHS, need to change to allow for monitoring of VAW
for women of all ages.
Violence against women does not stop at 49.
We welcome and support the UNFPA’s offer to lead

efforts to explore the expansion of measures to
women over 49 years of age.
Replace with: 5.2.1 Proportion of ever- partnered

women of all ages and girls subjected to physical
and/or sexual violence by a current or former
intimate partners.
Replace with: 5.2.2 Proportion of women of all ages

and girls subjected to sexual violence by persons
other than an intimate partner.
Target 5.2:Eliminate all forms of violence against all
woman and girls in the public and private spheres,
including trafficking and sexual and other types of
exploitation
1. Additional focus on measuring and reporting
human trafficking in developed and developing
countries.
2.. Develop a universal definition of human
trafficking
3.. Need a baseline of human trafficking within
developed and developing countries.
In tracking this target, it would be critical to look at
linkages between corruption, governance, gender
violence and gender equality. We also know from
empirical work that corruption hits women and girls
the hardest, particularly in the form of sexual
exploitation.
- 67 percent of female pupils had been sexually
harassed at school in Botswana, with 10 percent
consenting to sex for fear of reprisals, according to
UNESCO.
- Good grades are offered by teachers in return for
sexual favours. Schools often expel pregnant
students rather than firing staff. This sexual extortion
is a good example of gender-based corruption.
Both Suggested Indicators on child marriage and
FGM are very relevant. Child marriage should be
modified to capture girls married before 18 AND
before 15, since 1 in 9 girls are married before 15 in
developing countries; and disaggregated by
location, income, race, ethnicity, educational level.
Excellent, but it must complemented wtih Excellent, but it must complemented wtih
supervision and fullfilment policies to examine the supervision and fullfilment policies to examine the
work of states. work of states.
phenomenon
An interlinkage should be drawn with target 6.2
given the correlation between inadequate sanitation
and violence against women.
We welcome the two indicators proposed under
target 5.2 and stress the importance of maintaining
both indicators. However, to track changes in the
underpinning social norms that lead to violence
against women and girls, and to ensure that the
post-2015 framework is achieving the transformative
social change that it has set out to, we recommend
adding a behaviour indicator:
- ‘Percentage of people who think it is never
justifiable for a man to physically and/or sexually
abuse his intimate female partner, by sex, by age’
(collected by DHS, WHO multi-country studies).
you should be more precise in defyning the kind of why you do not mention child labour related to girls
exploitation you wish to target and any other way the girls are exploited and given
less chances to empower themselves (less access
to good quality food, education, mobility)
"5.2.3 Percentage of all women and girls, including 5.3.1 Percentage of women aged 10-14, 15-18 and
girls of age 6 - 14, subjected to physical, 18-24 who were married or in a union before age 18
psychological, sexual and economic violence by a (i) and before age 15 (i.e. child and early marriage)
current or former intimate partner, (ii) other family disaggregated by age, sex, geography, education
member, or (iii) persons other than an intimate level, income, disability, race and ethnicity, and other
partner or family member within the last 12 months. factors
"
Rationale: Girls aged 6 - 14 are also in grave danger
of systematic VAW and should be included in this
indicator
Limitation of upper limit of age range; discounts Limitation of age disaggregation.

violence perpetrated against women 50 and over.
Proposal: % of all women and girls subjected to Proposal: % of women and girls who were married
physical, psychological, sexual and economic or in a union before age 18 and before age 15 (i.e.
violence by a (i) current or former intimate partner, child marriage), disaggregated by age, sex,
income, and education level. It is important to involve the girls married before the
age of 15, as that brings many other health issues
Violence against women and girls is one of the most and rights violations.
pervasive human rights abuses in the world today,
happening in all countries. In order to eradicate Proposal: 5.3.2 % of girls and women who have
violence against women and girls it is necessary to undergone FGM/C by age group (10-14, 15-18, 18-
measure its prevalence in all its forms. From a 24).
human rights point of view it is important to ensure
that this indicator measures violence for all age Harmful practices such as FGM are a violation of
groups. human rights and have a host of negative
consequences for girls. While targets must be set for
reducing prevalence rates in the long term, in the
short term many contexts may see an increase in
prevalence and reporting rates. For e.g., prevalence
rates may increase because better-administered
surveys will be able to capture prevalence rates
more accurately and reporting rates may increase if
women’s confidence in security, justice, and health
services increases. Such an increase would be a
sign of progress. In contrast, both prevalence and
reporting rates may also increase in contexts of
conflict or crisis, and signal the opposite.
income, and education level. Country data supported by UNICEF
The prevalence of child marriage is a well-defined

and measurable indicator of multiple development
priorities that can be reliably tracked over time
across a large number of countries. It is already
being tracked through national surveys undertaken
at regular intervals in most developing countries.
The indicator captures one of the most important life
transitions for a girl. It signifies immediate and long
term disempowerment, violation of rights, and is
symptomatic of an entrenched harmful social norm.
It is important to involve the girls married before the
age of 15, as that bring many other health issues
and rights violations.
5.3.2 Percentage of girls and women who have

24).
Proposed Indicator 1: Percentage of women aged
20-24 who were married or in a union before age 18
(i.e. child marriage)
Percentage of women aged 20-24 who were first

married or in union by age 18 (i.e. child marriage).
Percentage of girls and women aged 15-49 years

who have undergone FGM/C, by age group (for
relevant countries only)
Both child marriage and FGM/C are direct

manifestations of gender inequality and will be
indicative of progress towards goal 5. Countries
have already implemented existing tools and
mechanisms for data collection to monitor the
situation using both indicators.
There should a target that enforces the government

to set up safe spaces for women to seek help and
protection from their abusers.
We agree with both suggested indicators, and we agree to the suggested indicators, and suggest
suggest to add, at the end of both the indicators: “by to add text to both indicators. To the indicator
age groups, income, location, ethnicity and other “Percentage of women ages 20-24 who were
characteristics”. We strongly recommend this married or in a union before age 18” there´s a need
additional. The expanded data collection efforts to to add “and before age 15, by location, income,
capture violence against women and girls of all ages race, ethnicity and educational level” at the end of
and from key population groups is necessary to the indicator. The proposal to disaggregate data also
comprehensively track this target, including ‘before age 15’ is relevant to inform policy-making:
women living with HIV, with disabilities, younger girls are especially at risk of forced
indigenous and migrant women, among others who marriage, with particularly serious consequences
face heightened risks, building on leading country for their health, education, development and
experiences available. (example of disaggregated even survival. And to the indicator “Percentage of
data here http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra- girls ages 15-19 (changed from 49) who have
2014-vaw-survey-main-results-apr14_en.pdf , pages undergone female genital mutilation/cutting, by age
184-190 ) It is of highest importance to fill data gaps of undergoing the practice (0-5, 6-9, 10-14, 15-19)”
for 10-14 year olds who are currently largely we see the need to add “location, income and
excluded from data collection despite their high risks ethnicity” at the end of the indicator. A focus on the
of gender-based violence, contributing to inadequate youngest age range would serve as a more
policy attention to these groups. (Guidelines for meaningful measure of trends for policy-makers.
Producing Statistics on Violence against Women- Disaggregation by location, income level, ethnicity
Statistical Surveys: and other factors are also especially relevant in
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/gender/docs/Guidelines_ addressing this issue.
Statistics_VAW.pdf)
Target 5.4: Recognize and value unpaid care and
domestic work through the provision of public
services, infrastructure and social protection Target 5.5: Ensure women’s full and effective
policies and the promotion of shared participation and equal opportunities for
responsibility within the household and the leadership at all levels of decision-making in
family as nationally appropriate political, economic and public life
Indicators to consider - Proportion of educational Indicators to consider: Stipulated duration of
institutions at the primary and secondary level with compulsory education and minimum age for
educational programmes that challenge traditional admission into school for both boys and girls, Ratio
gender stereotypes and teach that care of girls to boys in primary/secondary/tertiary
work/housework is a common responsibility of men education, International human rights treaties,
and women / Perception among children aged 5 – relevant to the right to education, ratified by the
18 and adults 18 – 49 who consider domestic work State , Date of entry into force and coverage of
to be a woman’s responsibility versus a social and domestic laws for implementing the right to work
collective responsibility, indicate awareness of and including regulations to ensure equal opportunities
openness to non-traditional male/female roles / for all and the elimination of employment-related
Number of girls who have missed school in the past discrimination as well as special measures for
three months in order to undertake unpaid care women and other vulnerable groups.
work/housework.
1. Calculation of unpaid care work performed by 1. Disaggregated data of women elected
women as part of GDP. representative on multiple dimension index
2. Provision of maternity and paternity benefits in 2. 33% reservation for women in elected
government private and non-governmental sector. institutions and special reservations for women from
3. Government policies and schemes geared marginalised communities.
towards agriculture to recognise women’s 3. All assets to be registered jointly in the name of
contribution to livelihood creation. husband and wife 4. Women have right to the
4. Public education against patriarchy in private assets in case of dissolution of the marriage.
and public sphere
Nothing in the proposed indicators measures the The indicators for this target shouldn't be limited to
provision of public services/infrastructure referred to measuring women's participation in national and
in the target. The indicators should measure local government, but should extend to all levels of
effectiveness of mechanisms to recognise and public governance, including informal and
redistribute unpaid care work, including public community-based governance.
services for reconciling professional and family roles
for women and men, such as provision of daycare
centres for children; paid parental leave; sick leave;
and other social services. We propose measuring:
Percentage of children and other dependents with
access to publicly funded or employer funded care;
and
Percentage of government budget dedicated to care
services.
There are no indicators of rural women's

empowerment. Suggest indicators for rural women
in leadership positions in agricultural co-operatives,
farmers' unions, savings clubs, extension service
and small businesses.
An indicator for the number of women's groups
involved in exporting commodity crops is also
needed.
Relevance: Provided aspects of the target such as Relevance: This is a poor proxy for the full ambition
public services, infrastructure and social protection of the target. The quantitative indicator should
provision are dealt with elsewhere and cross- measure progress towards ‘full and effective
referenced, the indicator captures the elements of participation’ and ‘equal opportunities for leadership’,
the target. More could be made to assess whether by looking at the share of seats women have at the
unpaid care work is being “valued” through highest level of decision-making, such as ministerial
qualitative or subjective indicators. and cabinet positions. A qualitative indicator would
allow measurement of changes in influence,
Aptness: The indicator does not explicitly barriers to perceptions and attitudes. A subjective indicator of
value or sharing unpaid care or domestic work but female politicians' perception of impact and an
does focus on outcomes in terms of time spent (but indicator for decision-making at household level are
not for value) also useful for testing change in social norms and
attitudes.
Disaggregation: is by age, sex and location. This
would address disparities for rural women, older Aptness: Qualitative indicator would allow
women and girls. measurement of changes in influence, perceptions
and attitudes.
Preference: The indicator could implicitly create a
preference, but stepping-stone targets would need Disaggregation: The indicator could be usefully
to reflect this. The indicator only partially addresses disaggregated including by socio-economic status
the issues in the target. Hours spent on unpaid work and other marginalised groups. It should be
needs to be contextualized in total time use spent on sophisticated enough to track whether disabled or
paid work, sleeping, eating and self-care in order to ethnic minority women for example are locked out of
be meaningful. This will enable better tracking of decision making more than other women.
barriers to sharing of burdens of unpaid work and
effectiveness of policies designed to reduce these Preference: The target creates a preference for
such as infrastructure, social protection, etc. women, but not for women with multiple inequalities.
CARE strongly support the proposed indicator • CARE strongly supports the inclusion of an
measuring average weekly hours spent on unpaid indicator on women’s decision-making at a
domestic and care work, by sex, age and location household level as evidence shows that household
(for individuals five years and above). The gendered power structures have a primary effect on women’s
division of labor in the household has profound public and political engagement, due to the reality of
implications for women and girls in terms of their women’s domestic subordination, and women and
daily lives and options, and their status in society. In girls’ unequal access to resources in the household.
particular we note the importance of ensuring that • In addition, efforts to monitor women’s full
data collection and analysis mechanisms capture participation in leadership and decision-making must
the labor of children and adolescents, particularly take into account the important role of women’s
young girls, who often take on the burden of mobilization and collective action as a key enabler of
housework and care-giving responsibilities, women’s voice in political and public decision-
particularly in poor families, with negative impacts on making, as well as a contributor to shifting gender
their education attainment, participation in social norms and expectations in ways that benefit women.
activities and other developmental outcomes.
SDG 5.4 is to recognize and value unpaid work Concept of Unpaid Work: There are some important
public services, infrastructure and social protectiondifferences between the concepts of the unpaid
and shared responsibility within the household as work in the Global North and in the Global South.
nationally appropriate While “unpaid work in the North includes time spent
on unpaid domestic work (household upkeep) and
It is necessary to add care work, in the Global South, unpaid work is also
observed within the production boundary, i.e. unpaid
1. Conducting periodical time use surveys work is performed in unpaid family work,
regularly to recognize the existence of this work. subsistence production (of goods) and in collection
of free goods, such as water, fuel wood, fodder,
2. Valuation of this work in monetary terms: the wood for housing, raw material for craft, fruits,
indictor could be the value of unpaid domestic and vegetables etc. This unpaid work is also performed
unpaid care as % of national GDP. for the household without any direct remuneration to
unpaid workers for the well-being of the household.
3. countries providing social protection provided to This unpaid work also constrains gender equality
unpaid workers, and badly.
4. Progress made in sharing of unpaid work This wider concept of unpaid work will have to be
between men and women in the household. reflected in the indicators of SDG 5.4. This could be
termed as SDG 5.3
1 Weekly time spent on unpaid family work by

women and men
2 Weekly time spent on subsistence production

and collection of free goods by men and women.
Indicator 1: Number/percentage of women led

enterprises in a country
Indicator 2: Increase in annual percentage in
renewal of women led enterprises
Indicator 3: Increase in percentage of employment
generated by women led enterprises
Comments: Here we need to decide base year and
define BAU condition based on which the progress
is to be measured. (MDG completion year could be
used as base year)
5.4.1 Existence of mechanisms to value, reduce and 5.5.1 Proportion of seats held by women in political
redistribute unpaid care work. decision-making positions, disaggregated and
5.4.2 Average weekly hours spent on unpaid reported for three levels: women in ministerial
domestic and care work, by task (water, energy, positions, national parliament and local government
food, childcare, cleaning) and by sex, age and and municipalities.
location 5.5.2 Women's share of public and private high-level
5.4.3 Proportion of households within 15 minutes of civil and managerial positions.
clean fuel and clean water. (alternative: Proportion
of women-headed households with access to basic
services (housing, water, energy, health and
education)
Preferred indicator: Average weekly hours spent on Preferred indicator: Proportion of seats held by
unpaid domestic and care work, paid work, sleeping women in local governments and national
and eating, and other forms of self-care, by sex, parliaments disaggregated by socio-economic
age, number of children in household, and location status, and the proportion of those seats held at a
(for individuals five years and above). leadership, ministerial or cabinet level.
Comment: We support this indicator with some Comment: We would like to see this supplemented
addition so that you can see the full composition of by a qualitative indicator such as: Female politicians’
time-use. perceptions of the impact that they have on decision
making, by level of government OR an indicator to
measure perceptions towards women as leaders in
political and public life. An indicator measuring
decision-making at the household level may also be
a better way of measuring changes in social norms
over time.
The proposed indicators do not capture the aspects The proposed indicators do not capture the aspect
of property, financial services, inheritance and of participation and opportunities in economic life, as
natural resources, as reflected in the target reflected in the target
reported for three levels: women in ministerial
5.4.2 Average weekly hours spent on unpaid positions, national parliament and local government
domestic and care work, by task (water, energy, and municipalities.
food, childcare, cleaning) and by sex, age and
location 5.5.2 Women's share of public and private high-level
civil and managerial positions.
5.4.3 Proportion of households within 15 minutes of
education)
Proportion of representation in state, local, and
customary institutions (legislature, government,
military, and judiciary) compared to national
distribution
Additional disaggregation: level of representation
[NM: Tearfund UK] An indicator on engaging men [NM: Tearfund UK] This needs to be cascaded to
and boys in unpaid care and domestic work needs local communities, government administrative
to be explicitly stated, tracked and evaluated. bodies. Entry point for women in political
Integration of this into national plans in respective participation usually begins at community level.
ministries such as gender/women’s empowerment Maybe also it will be good to push for commitment
etc is critical. Indicator on the economic, social, on increasing women’s leadership in religious
physical cost of unpaid domestic and care work by institutions? Will be good to also track proportion of
women when not shared will be great. women’s seats in parliament vs resource allocated
to their respective bodies. An indicator on proportion
Therefore we propose the following indicator: of women’s participation in economic life, chambers,
Average daily (24 hours) spent on unpaid domestic financial institutions etc? Likewise for public spaces?
and care work, by sex, age, vocation and
location (for individuals five years and above). Therefore we propose the following indicators:
Proportion of seats held by women in national
parliaments; Proportion of seats held by women in
local governments and divisional administrative
bodies.
Suggested Indicators 5.4.1 (unpaid doemstic and
care hours) and 5.4.2 (water collecting time) will not
collect unpaid work data in the context of total work
hours, paid work and travel time, self-care time, or
household unpaid work needs.
Revised Suggested Indicator 5.4.1:
"Average weekly hours spent on unpaid domestic

and care work, paid work, sleeping, eating, and
other forms of self-care, by sex, age, numbers of
children in household and location (for individuals
five years and above)."
Rationale: Unpaid work responsibilities limit

women’s time for paid work, education, and self-
care. At the same time, cash subsidies that help
women spend more time on unpaid work, including
child care, form significant barriers to women's paid
work. Women cannot achieve economic equality
unless the complex interactions among care needs,
unpaid work hours, paid work time, and social
benefit needs such as public care resources can be
analyzed with precision. These complex interactions
form the crux of women’s economic inequalities, and
complete data is needed to develop sound policies
capable of producing more equitable allocation of
work times.
Current proposed indicators focus on the political /

public life. We believe it is important that women
empowerment and leaderships is also monitored in
the economic life. The number of women in Boards
on the Board of Directors or large (publically-listed
companies in the stock exchange) and in Small
Medium Enterprises and in producer cooperatives
could be useful indicators.
We support the inclusion of indicator 5.4.1 on unpaid
work, “Average weekly hours spent on unpaid
domestic & care work, by sex, age & location.”
In addition, we support proposed indicator 5.4.2
“Proportion of household within 15 minutes of
nearest water source” if it is expanded to include
fuel for cooking as well as water. The revised
indicator should be “Proportion of households within
15 minutes of fuel & clean water.” Collecting fuel can
take as much time or more than collecting water.
Measuring this time spent is an important step
towards reducing the hours of drudgery that people,
largely women & girls, spend collecting the natural
resources that they depend on. These indicators
would be measured via Demographic & Health
Surveys.
Suggested indicator 1 "Proportion of seats held by
women in national parliaments" Indigenous women
and women from cultural and ethnic minorities face
particular issues of underrepresentation. The IAEG
must explore ways to disaggregate this indicator by
ethnicity.
Suggested indicator 2 "Proportion of seats held by

women in local governments" Indigenous women
and women from cultural and ethnic minorities face
particular issues of underrepresentation. The IAEG
must explore ways to disaggregate this indicator by
ethnicity
- The Suggested Indicator is very relevant, as it is - HLTF for ICPD supports both Suggested
a major barrier to gender equality and women’s Indicators. Note the existence of temporary special
economic participation. It should also be measures, such as quotas, can secure women’s
disaggregated by income to capture how this affects increased participation in decision-making bodies,
women and girls in different socio-economic also among the UN Minimum Set of Gender
brackets, as lower-income women are especially Indicators.
overburdened. The indicator is among the UN
Minimum Set of Gender Indicators.
It is good idea, we are trying to do it seen recently Empowerment and leadership for women need to be
concerned and realise effectively in reality
Additional indicator under target 5.6: Existence of a
legal and normative framework that protects the
human rights of individuals to have control over and
decide freely and responsibly on matters related to
sexuality and reproduction, free of discrimination,
coercion and violence.
We propose a new indicator 5.5.3:

Proportion of women in decision-making positions in
national media and ICT organisations, and in media
and ICT governance bodies. In 2013 the European
Institute for Gender Equality devised three indicators
to measure progress in relation to Section J of the
Beijing Platform for Action. Indicator 1: Proportion of
women and men in decision-making posts in media
organisations in the EU; Indicator 2: Proportion of
women and men on the boards of media
organisations in the EU; Indicator 3: Policies to
promote gender equality in media organisations. The
European Union has called on its 28 Member states
to use these indicators to measure to progress in
relation to Section J of the Beijing Platform for
Action.
To understand what is the impact of unpaid care To understand and avoid women elite capture of this
work on poverty rates this indicator should be target, the indicator should be disaggregated by
disaggregated by income income and disability
Too long and complicated Shorten, "Ensure women's full and effective
participation and equal opportunities for leadership
in political, economic and public life."
Need to be simplified and specified. This target to be carefully written taking into
consideration the need of participation of women
from the backward classes of the countries like India
where untouchability and other social stigmas exist.
a) Average weekly numbers of hours spent on a) Laws and policies on equal participation of
unpaid domestic work, disaggregated by sex. women in public life, including national government
b) Proportion of children under primary school age and local public decision making bodies.
enrolled in organized childcare. b) Presence of gender quotas for parliament.
c) Percentage of women who have a say in c) Women’s representation in public office and
household decision regarding large purchases. services, including
d) Percentage of women who have a say in i. Women’s share of government ministerial
household decisions regarding visiting relatives. positions.
e) Percentage of people who think important ii. Proportion of seats held by women in national
decisions in the household should be made by both parliament.
men and women, by sex. iii. Proportion of seats held by women in local
f) Whether women and men have the same right to governments.
be the legal guardian of a child during marriage. iv. Share of female police officers including at senior
(Source: SIGI) level.
g) Average weekly time spent in water collection v. Share of female judges.
(including waiting time at public supply points), by vi. Share of female civil servants at national and
sex. local government level.
vii. Proportion of women in decision-making roles in
relevant regional organizations involved in
preventing conflict.
d) Women’s share of managerial positions in both
state and non-state actors.
e) Proportion of media professionals who are
women.
f) Share of female science, engineering,
manufacturing and construction graduates at tertiary
level.
Given that the purpose of the target is to achieve
gender equality in the labour market by recognising,
valuing and reducing unpaid care work, through
provision of public services, social protection policies
and household responsibility. It is therefore
worthwhile to assess the following:
Ratification and implementation of the ILO
Convention No. 183 on maternity protection, No.
156 on workers with family responsibilities and No.
189 on domestic workers and compliance in law and
practice
Assessment of Inclusivity of indicator 5.4.3: We Suggested for indicators of target 5.5: All indicators
would recommend to add accessible and safe water should be disaggregated by disability to assess the
source within 15 minutes walk. For instance, 15 level of participation of women and girls with
minutes walk for certain women with disabilities, or disabilities in the public and political life.
older women, can represent a much longer walk
distance than for their non-disabled peers. Suggested indicator 5.5.1.: Proportion of seats held
by women in local governments regardless of age,
Suggested indicator 5.4.3: Proportion of households sex, disability, geographical location or any other
within 15 minutes of nearest, safe and accessible minority status.
water source

http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2015_draft_indicator.
pdf
1. Calculation of unpaid care work performed by 1. Disaggregated data of women elected
women as part of GDP. representative inclusive of – age, disability, race,
2. Recognise, redistribute and reduce unpaid work caste, ethnicity, origin, occupation religion or
performed by women through comprehensive economic or other status.
policies at national level. 2. 33% reservation for women in elected
3. Provision of maternity and paternity benefits in institutions and special reservations for women from
government private and non-governmental sector. marginalised communities.
4. Recognition of women’s role in livelihood 3. All assets to be registered jointly in the name of
production through calculation of GDP. husband and wife and women have right to the
5. Government policies and schemes geared assets in case of dissolution of the marriage.
towards agriculture to recognise women’s
contribution to livelihood creation.
6. Public education against patriarchy in private
and public sphere
Ensure women especially those with disabilities' full
and effective participation and equal opportunities
for leadership at all levels of decision-making in
political, economic and public life
Recognise and value unpaid care and domestic

work through the provision of public services,
infrastructure and social protection policies and the
promotion of shared responsibility within the
household and the family.
5.4.1. We think the indicator should disaggregate
data per type of work (childcare and housework).
This will enable better understanding of the nature of
women’s unpaid care responsibilities; how they are
supported through public services and the gender
divide in carrying out different unpaid care tasks.
The indicator is already robust and feasible, as time-
use surveys are currently in use in 68 countries.
UNSD has compiled info on unpaid work for 51. The
surveys would need to be rolled out to all countries
and ensure they disaggregate by sex, age and
location and type of work (housework and
childcare). The ambition of the target is to reduce
and redistribute unpaid care, so collecting data in
this way will meet the intention of the target. It is
also important that the data is collected from 5 years
and above as unpaid care is a recognized barrier for
girls attending school or achieving the same levels
of education. The indicator is Included in the
Minimum Set of Gender Indicators, and supported
by UN Women and the World Bank.
Proposal: 5.5.1 Proportion of representation in state,
local, and customary institutions (legislature,
government, military, and judiciary) compared to
national distribution
Additional disaggregation: level of representation
Rationale: 5.5.1 Having a voice and participating in

the processes and decisions that determine their
lives is an essential aspect of women’s and girls’
freedoms.
We would like to propose a second indicator:
‘Proportion of households with a total collection time
of 30 minutes or less for fuel and clean water’. We
would like to propose measuring the total collection
time to account for the considerable amounts of time
that are often spent queuing for unreliable water
sources particularly in urban areas (where distance
is less of a problem). Women and girls often spend
enormous amounts of time collecting fuel, so this
would be a valuable addition to the indicator.
5.4.1 Average daily (24 hours) spent on unpaid 5.5.1 Proportion of representation in state, local, and
domestic and care work by task (water, fuel, food, customary institutions (legislature, government,
child and elder care, cleaning) with explicit attention military, and judiciary) compared to national
to age and sex disaggregation distribution
NOTES: This indicator addresses the unequal Additional disaggregation: level of representation
division of labor in the household, which has
profound implications for women and girls in terms DATA SOURCE: IPU, censuses, government
of their daily lives and options, and their status in records
society. Unpaid care work takes up large amounts of
women's and girls' time, restricting participation in GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: IPU, UN Women
educational, economic and social activities, and also
in public life. In many developing countries, school- TIER: Tier I
age girls spend more time on domestic labor or
household work than school-age boys. Analysis NOTES: Having a voice and participating in the
shows that school attendance declines as the processes and decisions that determine their lives is
number of hours spent on household chores an essential aspect of women’s and girls’ freedoms.
increases – and declines more steeply for girls than
for boys.

fuel and clean water
NOTES: Lack of access to cooking fuel forces

women and children to spend many hours gathering
fuel - up to 5 hours per day- or spend significant
household income purchasing fuel.
Data on policies for social protection, public Data on women's access for leadership at all levels
services, infrastructure and shared responsibilities of decision-making in political, economic and public
within the household and family. life, disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,
indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence,
Data on shared responsibilities within the household national origin, and migration status
and family, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, disability,
status
We support the inclusion of an indicator on unpaid

care and would like noted that this should recognize
care in older age as well as child care.
5.5: 1) Number of special measures or programs to
promote capacity building and strengthen leadership
of indigenous women; 2) Percentage of seats held
by indigenous women in national parliament and/or
subnational elected office according to their share in
the population
Goal 5: Target 5.5. Suggested indicator: proportion
of seats held by women in local governments. UCLG
is mentioned as body to ensure monitoring
Suggested Indicators 5.4.1 (unpaid domestic and

care hours) and 5.4.2 (water collecting time) will not
collect unpaid work data in the context of total work
hours, paid work and travel time, self-care time, or
household unpaid work needs.
Revised Suggested Indicator 5.4.1: "Average weekly

hours spent on unpaid domestic and care work, paid
work, sleeping, eating, and other forms of self-care,
by sex, age, numbers of children in household and
location (for individuals five years and above)."
Rationale: Unpaid work limits women’s time for paid

work, education, and self-care. At the same time,
cash subsidies that help women spend more time on
unpaid work, including caring for more children, form
significant barriers to paid work. Women cannot
achieve economic equality unless the complex
interactions among care needs, unpaid work hours,
paid work time, and social benefit needs such as
public care resources can be analyzed with
precision. These complex interactions form the crux
of women’s economic inequalities, and complete
data is needed to develop sound policies capable of
producing more equitable allocation of work times.
Support inclusion of a local government indicator for
5.5. But are concerned that indicators are still limited
to numerical representation of women, and do not
reflect key elements of the target itself ie ‘full and
effective participation’ and ‘equal opportunities for
leadership’. They do not provide insight into
women’s ability to influence decision-making or the
level of power entrusted to women in these
positions. We recommend the quantitative indicators
are merged & extended and a second qualitative
indicator to be added as follows:
• Proportion of seats held by women in local
governments and national parliaments,
disaggregated by socio-economic status, and the
proportion of those seats held at a leadership,
ministerial or cabinet level. Source of data: IPU, UN
Women and UCLG.
• Female politicians’ perceptions of the impact
that they have on decision-making, by level of
government. Data sources do not currently exist, but
a similar model to the World Economic Forum’s
Executive Opinion Survey could be developed which
surveys female politicians worldwide on an annual
basis.
We welcome inclusion of a local level indicator
under this target. However, we are concerned that
indicators are limited to women's numerical
representation, and do not reflect key elements of
the target they are intended to measure ie ‘full and
effective participation’ and ‘equal leadership
opportunities’. We recommend merging and
extending the two quantitative indicators to measure
women’s share of seats. We also recommend a
second qualitative indicator which measures
women’s perceptions of their impact:
- Proportion of seats held by women in local
governments and national parliaments,
disaggregated by socio-economic status, and the
proportion of those seats held at a leadership,
ministerial or cabinet level. Source of data: IPU, UN
Women and UCLG.
- Female politicians’ perceptions of the impact that
they have on decision-making, by level of
government. Data sources do not currently exist, but
a similar model to the World Economic Forum’s
Executive Opinion Survey could be developed which
surveys female politicians worldwide on an annual
basis.
positions, national parliament and local government
and municipalities, as well as civic duty positions
5.5.2 Women's share of public and private high-level
civil and managerial positions.
This includes public services for reconciling positions, national parliament and local government
professional and family roles for women and men, and municipalities.
such as provision of daycare centers for children
(percentage of children with access to publicly 5.5.2 Women's share of public and private high-level
funded or employer-funded childcare); paid parental civil and managerial positions.
leave; sick leave; and other social services.
5.4.2 Average weekly hours spent on unpaid

domestic and care work, by task (water, energy,
food, childcare, cleaning) and by sex, age and
location
Measuring unpaid work in the agenda is essential,

since millions of women and girls spend many hours
collecting fuel and cooking. Women have an
average working day of 11-14 hours, compared to
10 hours on average for men (ENERGIA 2006).

education)
In much of the developing world women and girls

procure the family's water, often walking long
distances over many hours per week. Water
infrastructure--such as light, durable PVC pipe--that
delivers safe, chlorinated drinking water to
households helps enable women and girls to focus
on education and employment. This target is
Target 5.6: Ensure universal access to sexual
and reproductive health and reproductive rights Target 5.a: Undertake reforms to give women
as agreed in accordance with the Programme of equal rights to economic resources, as well as
Action of the International Conference on access to ownership and control over land and
Population and Development and the Beijing other forms of property, financial services,
Platform for Action and the outcome documents inheritance and natural resources, in accordance
of their review conferences with national laws
We support disaggregation of this indicator by
disability.
Women with disability face particular barriers to

accessing sexual and reproductive healthcare
(source: Groce, N.E., Rohleder, P., Eide, A.H.,
MacLachlan, M., Mall, S., Swartz, L., HIV issues and
People with Disabilities: A Review and Agenda for
Research, Social Science & Medicine (2012), doi:
10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.10.024).
To comply with the ICPD, the indicators for Target

5.6 must not promote or track the legalization of
abortion or the liberalization of abortion laws. The
language in Target 5.6—“as agreed in accordance
with the Programme of Action of the International
Conference on Population and Development”—
makes this clear. Paragraph 8.25 of the ICPD states
that “[i]n no case should abortion be promoted as a
method of family planning…every attempt should be
made to eliminate the need for abortion,” and “[a]ny
measures or changes related to abortion…can only
be determined at the national or local level
according to the national legislative process.”
Because national governments retain exclusive
jurisdiction over matters related to abortion, abortion
must not be promoted by global indicators.
Promotion of abortion would also violate binding
international instruments, such as the CRC and
ICCPR, which recognize that children, before and
after birth, are rights-bearers. The ICPD instructs
States to eliminate, not promote, abortion.
Therefore, we recommend that the IAEG design
indicators that limit recourse to abortion.
Indicator should also cover adolescents (aged 10- Indicators to cover ; Ratification and compliance with
14) & women above 49 years of age as SRH needs international treaties outlining state obligations in
& decision-making doesn’t stop at 49; data this area: International Covenant on Economic,
disaggregation should cover all protected grounds of Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the
discrimination, including minority, ethnic or Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Indigenous status, marital status, age, disability, etc. Women, the International Covenant on Civil and
and not only wealth, education and location as in Political Rights, Existence of non-discriminatory
DHS and MICS surveys; decision making power inheritance laws ,
regarding SR choices should be measured in the
private sphere and within the health care system –
SRH services should be provided with respect to
human rights & without coercion or imposition of
certain choices. Second indicator should measure
whether the legal framework is enabling women's
and adolescent's access to SRH services, education
and information (including CSE covering children
both in and out of school & provided according to
the UNESCO Guidance on Sexuality Education), as
well as any legal or policy barriers to access to SRH
services, information and education such as third
party authorization or restrictions in terms of age
and marital status; restrictions on provision of
abortion services.
1. Presence of a comprehensive laws and policies
at national level to ensure access to public health
and due machinery for effective implementation of
the same with necessary measures to curb impunity.
2. Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births
3. Under-five mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live
births) especially among disadvantaged groups.
4. Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live
5. Neo-natal mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live
Proposed indicators should not limit measurement to

agricultural land or to formal land ownership. We
propose indicators that measure the percentage of
women with secure rights to land, property, and
natural resources measuring percentage with legally
documented or recognized evidence of tenure; and
who perceive their rights are recognized and
protected.
It is also critical to include a measure of
concentration of land ownership to address the
phenomenon of land-grabbing which has resulted in
diminishing land available to local communities.
Women are particularly vulnerable to dispossession
because of multiple barriers they face to secure
tenure.
We welcome the proposed indicators under target
5.6. There could be more discussions about some
aspects of the indicators.
5.6.1 The indicator focuses on the key rights-based
measure of autonomy in decision-making about
women’s sexual and reproductive lives. It possible
that other DHS questions,besides the one’s that
already excist, also could be relevant.
5.6.2 A potential challenge is that polices are much
harder to track than laws, and practice may not
follow laws/policies; this indicator also wouldn’t
address stigma and discrimination or other barriers
to access/exercise of rights.
We support the suggested indicator Percentage (%)
of countries with laws and regulations that
guarantee all women and adolescents access to
sexual and reproductive health services, information
and education (official records) and propose
Percentage of women who make family planning
decisions alone or jointly with their husbands or
partners also be used to monitor target 5.6.
Universal access is a critical issue to track in the
global indicator framework, and these two indicators
reflect accessibility to sexual and reproductive
health products and services among those in need.
The latter indicator is also a FP2020 core indicator,
and thus has been vetted by all major donors and
measurement stakeholders, and is mostly available
through conventional data sources.
- We support the inclusion of an indicator tracking

women’s and girls’ decision-making on sexual and
reproductive health and rights, noting that such data
is already available for many countries though DHS
surveys.
- We also support the proposed indicator tracking
the existence of policies guaranteeing all people
including adolescents, access to sexual and
reproductive health services, information and
education. This should include the right to access
SRH services without third party authorization and
the right to access to SRH information and
education without restrictions related to age and
marital status. It should also include tracking the
inclusion of comprehensive sexuality education in
national curricula (or percentage of schools that
teach comprehensive sexuality education) as one
measure of adolescents’ access to sexual and
reproductive information and education.
In order to ensure universal access, indicator must

include women and girls with disabilities. Percentage
of women and girls who make decisions about their
own sexual and reproductive health and rights,
disaggregated for persons with/without disabilities
These indicators remain unworkable and intrusive.
Delegations voiced reservations in the GA about

proposals purporting to measure access to
"abortion," availability of "comprehensive sexuality
education," and "sexual and reproductive health
services" to minors without regard for parental
responsibility.
Abortion is a subject that is exclusively the province

of domestic legislation (UN Charter Article II, ICPD
8.25). Therefore, this target cannot be translated
into requiring universal access to abortion, or
measuring access to abortion.
Similarly, the notion of "comprehensive sexuality

education" does not enjoy consensus in the General
Assembly and therefore should not be an element of
the indicators to track progress on this target.
Finally, the "prior right" of parents to educate their

children is completely ignored in the proposed
indicators and the metadata to support them.
Proposed indicator 5.6.1: Number of government

officials, health care providers, and educators
trained on women’s rights, including sexual and
reproductive rights, and substantive gender equality.
Proposed indicator 5.6.2: Do regulations exist in law

or in practice that prevent women and girls from
accessing school or employment due to pregnancy,
sexual activity, or marriage
For 5.4 indicators
2. The time spent on unpaid work by men and

women is not enough, as most women are also
constrained by the burden of total work. Add “the
time spent on paid and unpaid work together (on
total work) by men and women
3. Also add the time spent by men and women on

leisure, i.e. on rest, relaxation and sleep.
Proposed indicator: Number of young women who

are receiving appropriate financial services and are
in control of their financial assets.

receiving compulsory economic citizenship
education (which includes financial, social and
entrepreneurship education).
5.6.1 Proportion of women who make their own 5.a.1 Percentage of women, men, indigenous
sexual and reproductive health decisions peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure
5.6.2 Countries with laws and regulations that rights to land, property, and natural resources,
guarantee access to sexual and reproductive health measured by: a) percentage with legally
services documented or recognized evidence of tenure, and
- Access to SHR services without third party b) percentage who perceive their rights are
authorization/consent recognized and protected
- Access by adolescents to SRH information, 5.a.2 Proportion of population with an account at a
education and services without restrictions in terms formal financial institution, disaggregated by gender.
of age and marital status
- Comprehensive sexuality education included in
national curricula
- Abortion legal under broad grounds
Note: the indicator also measures the absence of
laws that prohibit or restrict access to SRH services
5.6.3 Women who have access to safe abortion
services in circumstances allowed by law
Preferred indicator: Percentage of women and girls Preferred indicator: Share of women among
who make decisions about their own sexual and agricultural land owners by age and location (U/R);
reproductive health and reproductive rights by age, and The legal framework includes special measures
location, income, disability and other characteristics to guarantee women's equal rights to land
relevant to each country. ownership and control.
Comment: We would like to see this supplemented Comment: We support the suggested indicators but
by an indicator focused on legislation and policy would also note that in order to satisfy the full
such as: Existence of laws and regulations that definition of economic resources, there should also
guarantee all women and adolescents informed be an additional focus on income either here or
choices regarding their sexual and reproductive under goal 1: Total income by household and
health and reproductive rights regardless of marital individual by quintile, with individual disaggregation
status. of it by sex and age group, household members and
children, and composition of income.
In order to ensure universal access to sexual and

reproductive health and reproductive rights, girls and
women with disabilities have to be included in all
actions fostering informed choice by women when it
comes to their own sexual health and reproductive
rights. This topic is especially important given it is at
the confluence of issues of rights, health, and
education, exposing girls and women with
disabilities to more risks of discrimination. We would
strongly urge the proposed disaggregation of this
target by disability in Indicator 5.6.1..
Although this suggested indicator will measure an
important aspect of women's access to economic
resources, it's current formulation focusing on
ownership of agricultural land, risks narrowing other
ways in which women should have access to land
and other forms of property. An indicator that was
broader than "ownership" and focused on productive
resources more generally would be more useful in
places where ownership is not the primary means of
securing tenure, and where other types of land and
resources, including commons lands or forest
resources, are equally as important as agricultural
land for women's livelihoods.

5.6 which should be retained.
Indicator 5.6.1 responds to a core element for
achieving gender equality — the exercise of RR. It
fills a critical gap in data collection. Women face
multiple barriers rooted in gender discrimination and
violence, in making basic decisions about their
health and lives, which is at the core of the concept
of reproductive rights. It is fundamental to
disaggregate data by income quintile, education,
marital status, HIV-status and disability since these
represent barriers to making decisions about SRH.
Indicator 5.6.2 reflects that legal and regulatory
protections are needed to ensure access to
reproductive information, education and services.
The indicator complements the above on women’s
real-lived experiences and perceptions. One major
factor why universal access to SRH remains elusive
for so many is because basic rights intrinsic to the
health and well-being of women and adolescent girls
are neglected and denied.
5.6.1 responds to a core element for achieving
gender equality — the exercise of reproductive
rights (RR). It fills a critical gap in data collection.
Women face multiple barriers rooted in gender
discrimination and violence, in making basic
decisions about their health and lives, which is at the
core of the concept of RR. It is fundamental to
disaggregate data by income quintile, location,
education, marital status, HIV-status and disability
since these represent barriers to making decisions
about SRH.
5.6.2 reflects that legal and regulatory protections
are needed to ensure access to reproductive
information, education and services. The indicator
complements the above on women’s real-lived
experiences and perceptions. One major factor why
universal access to SRH remains elusive for so
many is because basic rights intrinsic to the health
and well-being of women and adolescent girls are
neglected and denied.

welcome the proposed disaggregation of this target
by disability in Indicator 5.6.1., while maintaining that
this disaggregation should be present everywhere
possible.
"5.6.1 Proportion of women who make their own 5.a.1 Percentage of women, men, indigenous
sexual and reproductive health decisions: peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure
1.Whether the woman can say no to her rights to land, property, and natural resources,
husband/partner if she does not want to have sexual measured by: a) percentage with legally
intercourse (DHS q. 1054) documented or recognized evidence of tenure, and
2. Whether using contraception or not using b) percentage who perceive their rights are
contraception has been the woman’s decision (DHS recognized and protected
phase 7 q. 819 and 820)
3. Whether the woman can make a decision about 5.a.2 Proportion of population with an account at a
sexual and reproductive healthcare for herself (DHS formal financial institution, disaggregated by gender.
q.922)"
"5.6.2 Countries with laws and regulations that

guarantee access to sexual and reproductive health
services
- Access to SHR services without third party
authorization/consent (from spouse, partner,
parent, guardian or others)
- Access by adolescents to SRH information,
education and services without restrictions in terms
teach CSE) (as a measure of access to
education/information)
- Abortion legal under broad grounds (at least
health, life endangerment, rape, incest)

laws that prohibit or restrict access to SRH services"
Proportion of girls and women (aged 10-49+15-49) The legal framework includes special measures to
who make their own sexual and reproductive guarantee girls’ and women’s equal rights to
decisions: inheritance, property, land ownership and control, as
well as access to financial products and services
i) Whether the girl/woman can say no to her
husband/partner if she does not want to have sexual Percentage of girls, women, men, indigenous
intercourse peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure
rights to land, property, and natural resources,
ii) Whether using contraception or not using measured by: a) percentage with legally
contraception has been the girl/woman’s decision documented or recognized evidence of tenure, and
b) percentage who perceive their rights are
iii) Whether a girl/woman can make a decision about recognized and protected
sexual and reproductive healthcare for herself
[NM: Tearfund UK] It will be also vital to track the

proportion of women and girls who access the
reproductive services linked to the decision-making,
laws and regulations. It will be also critical to track
the available SRH services in countries that sign up
to this indicator, the resource allocation along with
laws and regulations. This is where the challenge is
in most instances, where there are many
progressive policies, but no resource allocation to
move it forward. Also push for paid maternity leave
for women in some countries, such as the US!
Please add to the indicator: "[...] and are accessing
the same services"
[NM: Light for the World NL] We propose the

following indicator: Percentage of women and girls
who make decisions about their own sexual and
reproductive health and reproductive rights,
disaggregated for persons with/without disabilities.
New Suggested Indicator 5.a.3:
“Total income by household and individual by

quintile, with individual disaggregation of it by sex
and age group, household members and children,
and composition of income.”
Rationale: Equal rights to economic resources

cannot be monitored without identifying both capital
and income rights. Proposed Indicators 5.a.1 (land
rights) and 5.a.2 (financial institution accounts)
provide no information on total incomes. Economic
rights include access to all forms of earnings,
transfers, and other monetary receipts that are not
loans. Other indicators measure women’s earnings,
but data on total income and composition of income
is essential for accurate measurement of gender
economic equality. A total income indicator is also
essential to monitoring the poverty and gender
effects of basic services, social benefits, and other
forms of support needed to offset the economic,
social, and political effects of longstanding gender
discrimination.
target 5.6, which should be retained. Indicator 5.6.1
responds to a core element and prerequisite for
achieving gender equality and the human rights and
empowerment of women—the exercise of their
reproductive rights. It is a new indicator that fills a
critical gap in data collection. Women face multiple
barriers and restrictions rooted in gender
discrimination, including violence, in making even
the most basic decisions about their own health and
lives, which is at the core of the concept of
reproductive rights.

protections are required to ensure access to
e.g. Percentage of women and girls who make

decisions about their own sexual and reproductive
health and reproductive rights, disaggregated for
persons with/without disabilities
Recommend: 5.6.1 Proportion of women who make their own
5.6.1 Proportion of women who make their own sexual and reproductive health decisions:
sexual and reproductive health decisions: Whether 1.Whether the woman can say no to her
the woman can say no to her husband/partner if she husband/partner if she does not want to have sexual
does not want to have sexual intercourse (DHS q. intercourse (DHS q. 1054);
1054); Whether using contraception or not using 2. Whether using contraception or not using
contraception has been the woman’s decision (DHS contraception has been the woman’s decision (DHS
phase 7 q. 819 and 820); Whether the woman can phase 7 q. 819 and 820);
make a decision about sexual and reproductive 3. Whether the woman can make a decision about
healthcare for herself (DHS q. 922). sexual and reproductive healthcare for herself (DHS
q. 922).
5.6.2 Countries with laws and regulations that
guarantee access to sexual and reproductive health 5.6.2 Countries with laws and regulations that
services: guarantee access to sexual and reproductive health
1. Access to SHR services without third party services:
authorization/consent (from spouse, partner, parent, 1. Access to SHR services without third party
guardian or others); authorization/consent (from spouse, partner, parent,
2. Access by adolescents to SRH information, guardian or others);
education and services without restrictions in terms 2. Access by adolescents to SRH information,
of age and marital status; education and services without restrictions in terms
3. Comprehensive sexuality education included in of age and marital status;
national curricula (or percentage of schools that 3. Comprehensive sexuality education included in
teach CSE) - as a measure of access to national curricula (or percentage of schools that
education/information; teach CSE) - as a measure of access to
4. Abortion legal under broad grounds (at least education/information;
health, life endangerment, rape, incest); 4. Abortion legal under broad grounds (at least
health, life endangerment, rape, incest);
Note: the indicator also measures the absence of Note: the indicator also measures the absence of
laws that prohibit or restrict access to SRH services laws that prohibit or restrict access to SRH services
Respect for women’s sexual health and rights within
marriage
2. Whether universal access to contraceptive and
SRH information and services is included in national
policy
To ensure universal access to sexual and
possible.
Suggested indicator 1 "Proportion of women (aged Suggested indicator 1 "Share of women among
15-49) who make their own sexual and reproductive agricultural land owners by age and location (U/R)"
decisions." Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible It is well known that indigenous peoples face
within household survey DHS or MICS data sources. particular issues in terms of access to land.
The IAEG must explore ways to disaggregate this
Suggested indicator 2 "Proportion (%) of countries indicator by ethnicity.
with laws and regulations that guarantee all women
and adolescents access to sexual and reproductive Suggested indicator 2 "The legal framework includes
health services, information and education (official special measures to guarantee women's equal rights
records)" to land ownership and control"
Indigenous women and women from cultural and It is well known that indigenous peoples face
ethnic minorities face particular barriers to SRHR particular issues in terms of access to land.The
services. The IAEG must explore ways to IAEG must explore ways to disaggregate this
disaggregate this indicator by ethnicity indicator by ethnicity
• Modify proposed indicator: Proportion of women
(ages 15-49) who make their own sexual and
reproductive decisions by adding: “, by age groups,
location, income, education, marital status and
disability”. This indicator is essential for achieving
gender equality and specifically addresses
reproductive rights.
• Support proposed indicator: Proportion of countries
with laws and regulations that guarantee all women
and adolescents access to sexual and reproductive
health services
• New proposed additional indicator: Existence of a
legal and normative framework that protects the
human rights of individuals to have control over and
decide freely and responsibly on matters related to
sexuality and reproduction, free of discrimination,
coercion and violence. Gets to whether or not SRH
is addressed in legislation.
Recommend: Whether universal access to
contraceptive and SRH information and services is
included in national policy. See also Quality of Care
Including Respect for Rights indicator 3 in this
document. This indicator is similar to a proposed
gender indicator by UNFPA (indicator 5.6.2).
- HLTF for ICPD strongly supports the 2 - HLTF for ICPD supports the 2 Suggested
Suggested Indicators. Women’s ability to exercise Indicators, as women are estimated to hold only
their reproductive rights is central to achieving 15% of land titles though they comprise nearly half
gender equality, and has cross-cutting, multiplier and of the agricultural labour force in developing
inter-generational effects for the new Agenda–for countries. Share of women land owners should be
poverty eradication, education, health, productivity, disaggregated by income, race and ethnicity
female labour force participation, women’s full whenever possible. For the indicator on legal
participation in societies and economies. The frameworks, complementary information should be
indicator on SRH decisions should be disaggregated considered to assess enforcement, as well as data
by age, location, income, marital status and collection efforts to capture to what extent specific
disability. The indicator tracking laws to guarantee groups of women, including indigenous women and
women and adolescents access to SRH services is widows, perceive their rights are being protected.
critical to measure whether normative frameworks
address leading barriers to the exercise of
reproductive rights: provisions explicitly protecting
the right to access SRH information, education and
services w/o third party authorization from spouses,
guardians, parents or others; without restrictions as
to age and marital status; and that enable access by
adolescents.
possible.
I agree with it and now our orgnization are Exactly we have to do it but it denpends on the law
implementing and goverment policies. It is problem of governor of
goverment at all level
"5.6.1 Proportion of women who make their own
sexual and reproductive health decisions:
1.Whether the woman can say no to her
husband/partner if she does not want to have sexual
intercourse (DHS q. 1054)
2. Whether using contraception or not using
contraception has been the woman’s decision (DHS
phase 7 q. 819 and 820)
3. Whether the woman can make a decision about
sexual and reproductive healthcare for herself (DHS
q.922)"
This indicator is relevant to HIV because of the role
of sex in transmission and for the role of condoms in
HIV prevention. This indicator focuses on the key
rights-based measure of autonomy in decision-
making about women's sexual and reproductive
lives. There could be more discussion about whether
these are the right questions and there are
other DHS questions that may also be relevant. For
example, Whether a woman can ask her partner to
use a condom during sexual intercourse.
Recommended indicator: Percentage of women and

girls who make decisions about their own sexual
and reproductive health and reproductive rights,
To understand if and how access to land can have
an impact on poverty reduction this indicator should
be disaggregated by income

disaggregate data by income quintile, education,
Ipas requests that the indicator for this target call for
laws and regulations that guarantee access to
sexual and reproductive health services, with the
added four elements proposed by the Women's
Major Group. The indicator will not have meaning
without further definition about which laws are most
important. This indicator should include the legal
status of abortion, which is already monitored
regularly by the UN Population Division, and based
on global evidence and guidance both from WHO
and UN Human Rights bodies, should provide for
ABORTION LEGAL UNDER BROAD GROUNDS
(AT LEAST HEALTH, LIFE ENDANGERMENT,
RAPE, INCEST), which is also in accord with the
African Union Women's Rights Protocol ratified by
most African governments.


disaggregate data on by income quintile, HIV status,
education, marital status and disability since these

When two global consensus events (ICPD in 1994 "Undertake" is not a very proactive term. Why not,
and the Beijing Platform in 1995) that took place 20 "Achieve legal reforms to enhance women's rights to
years ago do not yet ensure universal access to economic resources..."
SRH and RR, one has to question whether they
deserve their own target. This goal is subsumed in
3.7.
This already reflected in the health related targets. This has already mentioned in earlier targets. May
be removed.
Not enough space here for our comments. See the a) Existence of national laws ensure equal right of
above mentioned Finnish NGO Task Force's women to own and inherit property, sign a contract,
Position Paper on Post-2015 Agenda, including register a business and open a bank
indicators, page 26: account.
http://www.kepa.fi/tiedostot/post-2015_ngo-task- b) Percentage of population undernourished,
forces-position-paper_web.pdf disaggregated by sex.
c) Percentage of people earning their own income,
disaggregated by sex.
d) Ownership of dwelling, disaggregated by sex.
e) Proportion of adult population owning land,
f) Proportion of population with access to
institutional credit (other than microfinance),
g) Old age pension recipient ratio 65+,
h) Proportion employed in vulnerable employment,
i) Gender gap in wages.
j) Percentage of low pay workers, disaggregated by
sex.
=>
a) Inheritance of widows / daughters could be
separated and also access to bank account / credit
could be its own indicator (SIGI).
It should be emphasized that cultural norms and the

specific contextual conditions determine to a large
extent the way women perceive the world, this
should be taken into account while framing the
reforms and making it accessible for everyone
The current proposed indicator "The legal framework
includes special measures to guarantee women’s
equal rights to land ownership and control" might
seem strong at first. Legal recognition of women's
rights to land is vital. However, it is not sufficient that
the law provide for equal access. There is a gap
between law and practice in many countries. Also,
this indicator should be applied to non-ownership
forms of tenure e.g., in China, no one can own land.
The indicator below (also suggested under 1.4 and
2.3 and relevant to 11.1 and 15.a) covers the law
and practice and broadens from ownership to tenure
security (a term that includes but is not limited to
ownership rights).
Percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples

and local communities with secure tenure rights to
individually or communally held land [measured by
(i) percentage with legally documented or
recognized evidence of tenure; and (ii) percentage
who perceived their rights as recognized and
protected]
Targets 1.4, 2.3, and 5.a see secure land rights as

foundational and cross-cutting to the agenda, which
to live up to its full intent must include a meaningful
and universal land rights indicator. The current
indicator leaves behind millions by limiting its scope
to:
• agricultural land, ignoring those who live in the
forest, practice nomadic pastoralism, live in rural
areas without engaging in agric. production, and the
urban poor
• ownership, ignoring those who cannot own land
because they live in countries where the State owns
the land (e.g. China and Vietnam); reside on
communal land (e.g. under customary tenure in
Africa, indigenous peoples in Latin America, Tribal
communities in India); or cannot afford to own land
but need secure use rights
• a gender ratio among right holders, ignoring
those who do not have secure rights.
See http://landpost2015.landesa.org/resources/land-
rights-an-essential-global-indicator-for-the-post-
2015-sdgs/ for an indicator that is universal and
feasible.
Suggestion for indicators of target 5.6: We Assessment of Inclusivity of indicator 5.6.a: We
recommend to disaggregate the indicators according recommend to disaggregate this indicator by
to disability to be able to track the violations of their disability as it will help to give evidence to the types
sexual and reproductive rights and how this impacts of discrimination and inequality experienced by
on the lives of this specific group. women and girls with disabilities.
Comment on indicator 5.6.1: We welcome the Suggested indicator 5.6.a:Undertake reforms to give
inclusion of disability given girls and women with women equal rights to economic resources, as well
disabilities are often prevented from making as access to ownership and control over land and
informed decisions or from sex education. other forms of property, financial services,
inheritance and natural resources, in accordance
Assessment of Inclusivity of indicator 5.6.2: We with national laws regardless regardless of age, sex,
recommend to disaggregate this indicator by disability, geographical location or any other minority
disability as it will help to track the steps made by status
governments to upheal legislation which prevent
women and girls with disabilities to make informed
choices.
Suggested indicator 5.6.2: Existence of laws and

regulations that guarantee all women, and
adolescents, regardless of age, sex, disability,
geographical location or any other minority status,
informed choices regarding their sexual and
reproductive health and reproductive rights
regardless of marital status.
Strongly support the existing indicators - thank you

for leadership and consultation on this which is
highly appreciated by health providers across the
world
As a general comment we find these indicators too
vague. How can one make your own decisions when
in your country you have laws that are restrictive for
example for Termination of Pregnancy (ToP). We
suggest to mention explicitely among the indicators
TOP. This is one of the main causes of maternal
death. For political reasons WHO refers to speak
only about 'post abortion care'.
1. Presence of a comprehensive laws and policies
at national level to ensure access to public health
and due machinery for effective implementation of
the same with necessary measures to curb impunity.
2. Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births
3. Under-five mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live
4. Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live
5. Neo-natal mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live
Undertake reforms to give women including those
with disabilities equal rights to economic resources,
as well as access to ownership and control over
land and other forms of property, financial services,
inheritance and natural resources, in accordance
with national laws
Undertake reforms to give women equal rights to

economic resources, as well as access to ownership
and control over land and other forms of property,
financial services, inheritance and natural resources.
PAI welcomes the two proposed indicators under
target 5.6, which should be retained.
Indicator 5.6.1 responds to a core element and

prerequisite for achieving gender equality and the
human rights and empowerment of women—the
exercise of their reproductive rights. It is a new
indicator that fills a critical gap in data collection.
Women face multiple barriers and restrictions rooted
in gender discrimination, including violence, in
making even the most basic decisions about their
own health and lives, which is at the core of the
concept of reproductive rights.

Very good. We welcome the two proposed indicators Excellent
under target 5.6, which should be retained.
Proposal: 5.6.1 Proportion of girls and women (aged
10-49+15-49) who make their own sexual and
reproductive decisions:
i) Whether the girl/woman can say no to her

ii) Whether using contraception or not using
contraception has been the girl/woman’s decision
(DHS phase 7 q. 819 and 820)
iii) Whether a girl/woman can make a decision about
q. 922)
Rationale: 5.6.1 This indicator responds to a core

element for achieving gender equality — the
exercise of RR. It fills a critical gap in data collection.
core of the concept of reproductive rights. It is
fundamental to disaggregate data by income
quintile, education, marital status, HIV-status and
disability since these represent barriers to making
decisions about SRH.
This indicator focuses on the key rights-based

measure of autonomy in decision-making about
women's sexual and reproductive lives.



services:
1. Access to SRH services without third party
authorization/consent (from spouse, partner, parent,
guardian or others);
2. Access by adolescents to SRH information,
of age and marital status;
3. Comprehensive sexuality education included in
teach CSE) - as a measure of access to
education/information;
4. Abortion legal under broad grounds (at least
Data source: Country reports, UNESCO, WHO's

Policy Indicator Survey on adolescent health



possible.
5.6.1 Proportion of girls and women (aged 10-49+) 5.a.1 The legal framework includes special
who make their own sexual and reproductive measures to guarantee girls’ and women’s equal
decisions: i) Whether the girl/woman can say no to rights to inheritance, property, land ownership and
her husband/partner if she does not want to have control, as well as access to financial products and
sexual intercourse, ii) Whether using contraception services
or not using contraception has been the
girl/woman’s decision, iii) Whether a girl/woman can NOTES: Women and girls often lack access to or
make a decision about sexual and reproductive control over resources, both within and outside of
healthcare for herself the household.
5.6.2 Proportion of countries with laws and 5.a.2 Percentage of girls, women, men, indigenous
regulations that guarantee all people, including peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure
adolescents access to sexual and reproductive rights to land, property, and natural resources,
health services, information and education (official measured by: a) percentage with legally
records): i) Access to SHR services without third documented or recognized evidence of tenure, and
party authorization/consent (from spouse, partner, b) percentage who perceive their rights are
parent, guardian or others), ii) Access by recognized and protected
adolescents to SRH information, education and
services without restrictions in terms of age and DATA SOURCE: In the short-term, global polls. In
marital status, iii) CSE included in national curricula the medium-term household surveys like the LSMS-
(or percentage of schools that teach CSE) (as a ISA and the Urban Inequities surveys led by the
measure of access to education/information), iv) World Bank and by UN Habitat, respectively.
Abortion legal under broad grounds (at least health,
life endangerment, rape, incest) and protocols are in GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: FAO and UN
place for how one can access an abortion Women
NOTES: It is vital to ensure girls and women have

equal control of economic assets relative to boys
and men, especially since, in many parts of the
world, land tenure arrangements recognize the male
household head as the owner, subsuming girls and
women as their ‘dependents.’
Data on access to reproductive rights and sexual Data on access to inheritance, ownership and
and reproductive health...disaggregated by gender, control of land and other property, natural resources,
age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, financial services, disaggregated by gender, age,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
status rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration
status
Target 5.a. proposed amendment to 1st suggested
indicator: Share of women among (delete
"agricultural")land and housing owners by age and
location
New Suggested Indicator 5.a.3: “Total income by
household and individual by quintile, with individual
disaggregation of it by sex and age group,
household members and children, and composition
of income.”
Rationale: Equal rights to economic resources

cannot be monitored without identifying both capital
and income rights. Proposed Indicators 5.a.1 (land
rights) and 5.a.2 (financial institution accounts)
provide no information on total incomes. Economic
rights include access to all forms of earnings,
transfers, and other monetary receipts that are not
loans. Other indicators measure women’s earnings,
but data on total income and composition of income
is essential to measure gender equality. A total
income indicator is also essential to monitoring the
poverty and gender effects of basic services, social
benefits, and other forms of support needed to offset
the economic, social, and political effects of
longstanding gender discrimination.
We strongly support the 2 Suggested Indicators (%
women 15-49 who make their own sexual and
reproductive decisions, and % of countries with
laws/regulations guaranteeing all women and
adolescents access to SRH services +IE).
5.6.1 responds to a core element for achieving
gender equality — the exercise of reproductive
rights (RR). It fills a critical gap in data collection.
core of the concept of RR. It is fundamental to
disaggregate data on by income quintile, education,
5.6.2 reflects that legal and regulatory protections
are needed to ensure access to reproductive
The call for reforms can be misleading as in may
countrie law and regulations in favour of women,
already exist. The problem is related to the lack of
implementation of these regulations.
Many women we interviewed insist on the lack of
guidance in driving their economic empowerment.
Having access to credit is not enough and can result
also in a harm for women, if they are not provided
with the right infrastructure to help their idea grow
and get economically viable.
"5.6.1 Proportion of women who make their own 5.a.1 Percentage of women, men, indigenous
sexual and reproductive health decisions: peoples, and local communities (IPLCs) with secure
1.Whether the woman can say no to her rights to land, property, and natural resources,
husband/partner if she does not want to have sexual measured by: a) percentage with legally
intercourse (DHS q. 1054) documented or recognized evidence of tenure, and
2. Whether using contraception or not using b) percentage who perceive their rights are
contraception has been the woman’s decision (DHS recognized and protected
phase 7 q. 819 and 820) Note: (This cross-cutting indicator can also track
3. Whether the woman can make a decision about progress towards targets: 1.4., 2.3., 10.2., 11.1., and
sexual and reproductive healthcare for herself (DHS 15.a.)
q.922)"
"5.6.2 Countries with laws and regulations that

services
laws that prohibit or restrict access to SRH services"
5.a.1 definition should include specific reference to

inheritance; "control" is vague.
Proposal: countries with laws and regulations that
guarantee:
1. Access to sexual & reproductive health services
without third party authorization/consent (from
spouse, partner, parent, guardian or others);
2. Access by adolescents to SRH information,
of age and marital status;
3. Comprehensive sexuality education included in
teach CSE) - as a measure of access to
education/information;
4. Abortion legal under broad grounds (at least
This is a modification of an indicator proposed by

UNFPA to provide more specificity and add an
element about the status of abortion laws, which are
directly linked to women's ability to access SRH
services. Laws that restrict or enable access to
services directly impact women's and young
people's ability to exercise their reproductive rights,
and hence this is a key rights-based indicator.
5.6.1 Proportion of women who make their own 5.a.2 Proportion of population with an account at a
sexual and reproductive health decisions: formal financial institution, disaggregated by gender.
1.Whether the woman can say no to her
2. Whether using contraception or not using
contraception has been the woman’s decision (DHS
phase 7 q. 819 and 820)
3. Whether the woman can make a decision about
q.922)

services
5.6.3 Women who have access to safe abortion

services in circumstances allowed by law
We would prefer both indicators be deleted or, if not
deleted, adjusted, as explained below.
The inclusion of children in the proposed indicators

may violation the right of parents to direct their
children’s upbringing in accordance with their values
(ICCPR art. 18, ICESCR art. 13, and CRC art. 5, 14,
and 29). The indicator should measure from age 18
or add “as permitted by law.”
In 5.6.1, the inclusion of a three-question test cannot

account for variations in cultures, values, and
practices. Additionally, many cultures would consider
asking such questions of children completely
inappropriate.
Indicator 5.6.2 seeks to ensure countries meet their

international obligations related to reproductive
health. However “reproductive rights” is widely
understood to include abortion, which is not a
human right in international law by treaty or custom,
and which violates national laws of many Member
States. If this indicator remains, it should include “as
agreed in ICPD ¶ 8.25.”
What happens to communities that defy government

legislation and laws on access, ownership and
control over land and property inheritance? How do
we get them to comply?
WWF supports the 2nd, rights-based indicator
(proposed by FAO/IFAD/UN Women): "The legal
framework includes special measures to guarantee
women's equal rights to land ownership and
control". We encourage as broad an interpretation of
“land” as feasible to include natural resources.
We agree on the indicator " 17 Proportion of women
(ages 15-49) who make their own sexual and
reproductive decisions" but suggest to add, at the
end of the indicator: "by age groups, location,
income, education, marital status and disability".
This indicator responds to a core element and
prerequisite for achieving gender equality and
realizing the human rights and empowerment of
women—the exercise of their reproductive rights. It
is a new indicator that fills a critical gap in data
collection twenty years since reproductive rights
we reaffirmed in the landmark 1994 Programme
of Action of the International Conference on
Population and Development (ICPD), the 1995
Beijing Platform for Action and multiple inter-
governmental agreements adopted since.The
methodology for this indicator has been developed
by UNFPA utilizing data available from DHS and
MICS surveys.
Target 5.b: Enhance the use of enabling Target 5.c: Adopt and strengthen sound policies
technology, in particular information and and enforceable legislation for the promotion of
communications technology, to promote the gender equality and the empowerment of all
empowerment of women women and girls at all levels
In addition to the suggested indicator 5.b.1
“Proportion of individuals who own a mobile
telephone, by sex,” we propose an additional
indicator:
Proportion of individuals using the Internet, by sex
This is a Tier I indicator as the ITU already collates

this data for 70+ countries using a standard and
agreed upon methodology:
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-
D/Statistics/Documents/statistics/2015/Gender_201
0-2013.xls
This is related to proposed indicator 17.8.1

“Proportion of individuals using the Internet”
Given the importance of Internet use for social and

economic development, we believe that including
this indicator will be critical in measuring the extent
to which ICTs can promote women’s empowerment.
Timeframe and coverage of national policy to Indicators to cover - Existence of government
promote access to information technology (OHCHR) provision/funding/support for child care/provision of
supporting social services [affordable health care,
child care, primary education] to enable parents to
combine family obligations with work responsibilities
and participation in public life , Proportion of
national laws and policies relevant to gender
equality and empowerment for women and girls that
have been reviewed nationally for consistency with
international human rights standards and UN
treaties, through a transparent and participatory
process, including a transformative gender
assessment, and revised where necessary,
availability of independent judicial or administrative
mechanisms that have the power to provide remedy
in an instance of non-compliance with human rights
standards
Indicators for this target should go beyond
measuring gender-responsive budgeting to measure
governments implementation of international human
rights commitments relating to gender equality and
accountability mechanisms for those commitments.
E.g.
- Ratification and implementation of international
human rights instruments and ILO fundamental
conventions, including the Convention on the
Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against
Women
➢ Existence of independent national human rights
institutions (NHRIs) in compliance with the Paris
Principles
➢ Proportion of government ministries that have
gender focal points
➢ Existence of human rights and gender equality
auditing processes for all new legislation and
policies
Indicator 59 should be disaggregated between men

and women: Mobile broadband subscriptions per
100 inhabitants, by women/men; urban/rural.
We support inclusion of the proposal to track
progress on policy implementation by measuring
percentage of countries with systems to track and
make public allocations for gender equality and
women’s empowerment.
5.b.1 Individuals in ICT profession, by type of skill 5.c.1 Number of institutional mechanisms present
and sex. that allow for resources and meaningful participation
5.b.2 Proportion of girls and women with access to of women's and feminist organizations in policy and
science, technology, engineering and mathematics legislation-making
(STEM) education 5.c.2 Existence of gender-responsive budgetary
5.b.3 Ratio of population (or households) with resources across the public sector
access to the internet, by sex, by rural-urban
5.b.4 Ratio of women and girls attending or
completing informal computer education/literacy
Preferred indicator: Percentage of countries with

systems to track and make public allocations for
gender equality and women’s empowerment, and
with temporary special measures to accelerate
progress towards gender equality as defined by
CEDAW.
Comment: We support this suggested indicator with

the additional reference to CEDAW.
5.c.1 Number of institutional mechanisms present
that allow for resources and meaningful participation
of women's and feminist organizations in policy and
legislation-making
5.c.2 Existence of gender-responsive budgetary

resources across the public sector
Percentage of countries with systems to track and
make public allocations for gender equality and
women’s empowerment
Suggested Indicator 5.b: It would be useful to collect
data on type of phone i.e smartphone or not
“Proportion of individuals who own a mobile
telephone, and type of phone by sex”
Indigenous women and women from cultural and
ethnic minorities face intersecting forms of
marginalisation and discrimination. The IAEG must
explore ways to disaggregate this indicator by
ethnicity
- Both proposals should be supported – noting - The Suggested Indicator is strongly supported:
women are 14% less likely to own a mobile phone it addresses one of the major global challenges and
than men in low and middle-income countries, barriers to achieving gender equality: the lack of
resulting in 200 million fewer female mobile phone institutionalized budgetary policies for gender
owners than men. equality, which will be essential to implementation of
- The Suggested Indicator on Proportion of the new Agenda. The indicator is a meaningful
individuals with ICT skills should also be measure of governmental commitment and
disaggregated by age, income and location in accountability to gender equality; and responds to
addition to by sex. the Addis Ababa Financing for Development
agreement, “urg[ing] countries to track and report
resource allocations for gender equality and
women’s empowerment” (para. 53). It is also among
the set of indicators utilized in monitoring the Busan
Partnership on Development Cooperation.
- An additional option if a second or
complementary indicator might be considered is: %
of countries with policies in place for undertaking
gender-responsive budgeting across sectors/line
ministries, in line with the Addis Ababa agreement.
I agree with it I agree with it
We propose an additional indicator 5.b.3: We note the proposal to finalise an indicator that
Proportion of individuals with access to Internet, by would monitor the existence and quality of policies
sex. to achieve gender equality. We consider it
imperative that such monitoring should cover
This is related to current indicator 9.1.1, which calls policies to promote gender equality in media
for a measure of ‘households’ with broadband organisations.
internet access. However, such a measure could not
be disaggregated by sex. We believe that a sex- This is one of three indicators that the European
disaggregated measure of Internet access is Union has called on its 28 Member states to use in
essential. The ITU should be in a position to collect measuring progress in relation to Section J of the
the data. Beijing Platform for Action.
See:
http://eurogender.eige.europa.eu/documents/council
-conclusions-advancing-women%E2%80%99s-
roles-decision-makers-media
In addition to policies to promote gender equality in

the media workplace, eventual monitoring – for
example by CEDAW, if the current proposal is
retained – should cover policies to ensure gender
equality in media content and access to freedom of
expression.
To measure i access to enabling technology, in
particular information and communications
technology promotes the empowerment of all
women including the poorest, this indicator should
be disaggregated by income.
Drop "at all levels"
a) Proportion of households with access to mass a) Existence of national laws against discrimination,
media (radio, TV, Internet), by sex. stigma and harassment on the basis of sexuality,
sexual orientation or gender identity and expression
b) Proportion of individuals using mobile/ cellular in employment, education, health care or housing.
telephones, by sex. b) Government’s expenditure on gender equality
(share of the entire budget).
c) Existence of laws prohibiting all forms of violence
against women, including domestic violence.
=> c) Source: UN Global Gender Statistics

Programme.
Assessment of Inclusivity of indicator 5.6.b:As Assessment of Inclusivity of indicator 5.6.c:This
access to information is critical to inclusion and target should be amended to include data
mobile phones are an increasing source of personal disaggregation by age, sex, disability, geographical
information access, we recommend that this location, economic status or other minority status.
indicator is also disaggregated by disability – or
accessible ICT - and that this should be relatively Suggested indicator 5.6.c.1:Adopt and strengthen
straightforward to do. sound policies and enforceable legislation for the
promotion of gender equality and the empowerment
of all women and girls at all levels regardless of age,
Suggested indicator 5.6.b:Enhance the use of sex, disability, geographical location or any other
accessible and enabling technology, in particular minority status.
information and communications technology, to
promote the empowerment of women.
Enhance the use of enabling technology, in Adopt and strengthen sound policies and
particular information and communications enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender
technology, to promote the empowerment of women equality and the empowerment of all women and
including those with disabilities girls including those with disabilities at all levels
5.b.1 Proportion of girls and women with access to 5.c.1 Percentage of countries with systems to track
science, technology, engineering and mathematics and make public allocations for gender equality and
(STEM) education women’s empowerment
DATA SOURCE: Already collected by Gallup as part DATA SOURCE: Methodology being developed.
of their Annual World Poll and should be expanded
for the sample size to be nationally representative. GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UN Women takes
lead in monitoring progress on the indicator. Data is
TIER: Tier II available for 35 countries which reported on the
indicator in the first round of monitoring.
TIER: Tier III
NOTES: The indicator recognizes that governments

play a significant role in the achievement of
outcomes by allocating resources to support policies
to achieve gender equality, therefore improving
accountability systems and the efficient
management of public resources.
Data on use of information and communications Data on the existence and regular evaluation of the
technology, disaggregated by gender, age, race, implementation of policies to promote gender
ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, rural/urban equality and the empowerment of girls and women
residence, national origin, and migration status in all areas of human development and social life,
including public awareness and formal education at
all levels and in all public and social services about
human rights, gender equality, and the mental health
and psychosocial wellbeing of women and girls.
Both proposals should be supported – noting
women are 14% less likely to own a mobile phone
than men in low and middle-income countries,
resulting in 200 million fewer female mobile phone
owners than men. The Suggested Indicator on
Proportion of individuals with ICT skills should also
be disaggregated by age, income and location in
addition to by sex.
Rather than focusing only on technology we suggest Efferts as law are already in place but lack effective
to mention an "enabling environment" that does not implementation.
rely on access to technologies only, but is a more
complicated issue.
5.b.2 Proportion of girls and women with access to of women's and feminist organizations in policy and
science, technology, engineering and mathematics legislation-making
(STEM) education 5.c.2 Existence of gender-responsive budgetary
Rationale: Profession and skills should go together resources across the public sector
5.c.1 definition should take into account integration

of gender considerations outside of specific efforts
to advance gender equality and women's
empowerment.
of women's and feminist organizations in policy and
5.b.2 Proportion of girls and women with access to legislation-making
science, technology, engineering and mathematics
(STEM) education Women's and feminist organizations are key means
for carrying the voices of women and girls in the
5.b.3 Ratio of population (or households) with society forward. The participation of women's and
access to the internet, by sex, by rural-urban feminist organizations into policy and legislation-
making processes in a well-resourced and
5.b.4 Ratio of women and girls attending or meaningful way, through which they can affect these
completing informal computer education/literacy processes, will make the policies and legislations
more sound, effective, as well as more transparent.
5.c.2 Existence of gender-responsive budgetary

resources across the public sector
The national budgetary processes and policies

encompass both resource revenue and expenditure
and are responsive to (a) the different needs,
interests and priorities of women and men, girls and
boys, and (b) the differential impacts of financial
expenditure on the lives of women, men, girls and
boys.
Gender-responsive budgeting may manifest as

collection and use of sex-disaggregated data; sex-
disaggregated beneficiary assessments and
analysis of the impact of a budget on time use.
We agree with this indicator. And see the importance
of this indicator and how it addresses one of the
most common global challenges and barriers to
achieving gender equality: the lack of
institutionalized budgetary policies for gender
equality that ensure an adequate level of
predictable resources, which will be essential to
implementation of the new Agenda. The indicator is
a meaningful measure of governmental
commitment and accountability to gender
equality. It directly responds to the commitment
adopted at the Addis Ababa International
Conference on Financing for Development of July
2015,“urg[ing] countries to track and report
resource allocations for gender equality and
women’s empowerment” (para. 53). It is also
among the set of indicators utilized in
monitoringthe Busan Partnership on Development
Cooperation.This indicator and methodology is
under further development by UN Women, building
on lessons learned from a testing round in 2013 in
which 15 countries participated.
Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable
Organization: access to safe and affordable drinking water for all
ADD International We recommend that this indicator be disaggregated by
disability.
For example, data collected in the WHO Study on Ageing and

Adult Health (SAGE) would lend itself to disaggregation by
disability.
Based on studies in a range of countries, the World Report on

Disability concluded that households having a member with a
disability are more likely to lack access to safe water and
sanitation (World Report on Disability, World Bank/WHO,
2011).
AquaFed We strongly support the first suggested indicator on ‘safely-

managed water services’ which is far better than the MDG
Indicator on ‘improved water sources’ since the water
delivered by ‘safely-managed water services’ is free from
faecal contamination. This assessment of drinking water
quality is indispensable because it was lacking in the MDG
indicator and the majority of people who are currently using
contaminated water are using ‘improved water sources’. The
MDG indicator led many to significantly underestimate the
number of people who are using water that is unsafe. They
are numbered in billions as we have advocated for many
years. See http://www.aquafed.org/page-5-106.html
ASTEE The first indicator "Safely Managed Drinking Water services"
is a compound one and could be subsequently disaggregated
according to its different components.
The second indicator ““Average weekly time spent in water
collection indicator” could be replaced by the following :
“Percentage of schools and health centers offering safely
managed water, sanitation and hygiene services separated
and for both sexes”
Beyond 2015 UK Relevance: The indicator captures the access aims of the
target but not directly the equity target.
Aptness: By monitoring use and time the indicator can

highlight the realities of access for marginalised groups.
Disaggregation: Sex, age, location and income are

considered. Additional criteria such as location (U/R) might
also be useful to consider.
Preference: The indicator is disaggregated so could implicitly

create a preference, although targets would need to reflect
this. Time spent reflects barriers of poorer, rural groups and
women particularly. The focus on “safely managed” could
create perverse incentives to tackle those for whom such
services could be provided, rather than basic services for
more marginalised, rural communities, according to Water Aid.
Transformative: The indicator is not transformative, but could

be made so through inclusion of a participatory element.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Agri-Retailers)
CBM UK In order to ensure target is met for all, people with disabilities
must be included in the indicator. We suggest: Percentage of
population using safely managed drinking water services,
CDP

Center of Guarulhos
Centre for Built Environment Sustainable development of water requires waste water
recycling and
the importance of disposal of water for multipurpose benefits
should be
included in the management
Alternate method to provide safe drinking water should be
explored.
Christoffel-Blindenmission Based on studies in a range of countries, the World Report on

Deutschland e.V. Disability concluded that households having a member with a
2011).
The target aiming at universal and equitable access to safe
and affordable drinking water should be disaggregated by
disability in order to make sure that one fifth of the population
is not only able to have enough water to drink and live, but is
also able to use water that won’t incur any health hazards.
Suggested indicator: Percentage of population using safely
managed drinking water services, disaggregated for persons
Community Based Water We suggest to include the next indicators: Percentage of
Monitoring Network of Monarch population with access to drinking water safe, sources located
Butterfly Biosphere Reserve in the vicinity (no more than 1 Km), low-cost and free of fecal
and chemical pollution. Percentage of sanitary buildings and
water supply community built during the past 10 years,
managed by the water committees local.
Dutch Coalition on Disability and Based on studies in a range of countries, the World Report on
Development www.dcdd.nl Disability concluded that households having a member with a
2011).
EAT Initiative
End Water Poverty We suggest editing of the proposed indicator to "Percentage
of population using safely managed drinking water". We call
for the elimination of the word 'services' as included in the
original indicator proposal; this is important so as to maintain
a priority focus on water being accessible to people, not
simply on the infrastructure available. We also call for the
definition of safely managed water to be extended to:
Percentage of population using an improved drinking water
source [MDG 'improved' indicator'] which is located on
premises or within close proximity (within 15 minutes) and
available at a cost affordable for all, free of faecal and toxic
chemicals contamination (due to the damage of this kind of
pollution on people's health) and regulated by a competent
authority.
Fertilizer Canada

French Water Parnership • We strongly support the 1st suggested indicator in August
11th list. Safely Managed Drinking Water services defined as:
"Population using a basic drinking water source which is
located on premises and available when needed; free of
faecal contamination and/or regulated by a competent
authority". We suggest that this indicator be tracked by
disaggregating progress according to its different
components.
• The 2nd suggested indicator ““Average weekly time spent in
water collection indicator” is interesting, but the indicator
measuring access to safely managed drinking water services
implies using a drinking water source which is located on
premises and available when needed, thus making it
unnecessary the presence of an indicator on the time of
collection of water. Since the number of core is limited, we
suggest considering this indicator as secondary and propose
to replace it by an indicator on schools and health centers that
reads : “% of public venues (schools, health centers, markets,
transport stations, administrations, refugee camps) offering
safely managed water, sanitation and hygiene services
separated and for both sexes”
Freshwater Action Network Mexico related to 6.1.1: The focus of the indicator cannot be on the
facilities but on the actual access of water by people. We
want to see an additional indicator which measures access,
continuity and affordability to quality drinking water
disaggregated by households, schools, health centres and
public places. We call for the inclusion of the following
indicator: percentage of house holds, schools, health centres,
public spaces offering safely managed and improved water,
sanitation and hygiene services.
Gender and Water Alliance, GWA
German NGOs and DPOs e.g. Percentage of population using safely managed drinking
water services, disaggregated for persons with/without
disabilities
Global Health Council Modify indicator:
6.1 Percentage of population using safely managed drinking

water services disaggregated by service level (basic, safely
managed) and location (home, school, health centre). This is
a good indicator, but should explicitly mention the specific
disaggregation to ensure the need for equity and universal
coverage, particularly access for those away from home in
schools or health centres is covered. To achieve this, we
recommend adding at the end ‘disaggregated by service level
(basic, safely managed) and location (home, school, health
centre).
6.1.2 This should be reworded to reflect WASH sector

consensus that ‘basic service’ should be defined as an
‘improved’ facility within 30 min round trip. Percentage of
population using basic water service by sex, age, location
(home, school, health centre) and by income
Global Public-Private Partnership
for Handwashing: ADRA Germany,
Center for Global Safe Water,
Sanitation, and Hygiene at Emory
University, Centre for Health
Enhancement and Social
Development, Coca-Cola,
Community Water and Sanitation
Agency, Ghana, Concern Universal,
End Water Poverty, Environmental
Awareness, FHI 360, GBCHealth,
German Toilet Organization, Global
Public-Private Partnership for
Handwashing, Global Soap Project,
HELVETAS, International Scientific
Forum on Home Hygiene, IRC,
IRSP, Kenya Water and Sanitation
Civil Society Network, Plan
International UK, Practical Action,
Raleigh International, Reckitt-
Nigeria, Water Supply and
Handicap International Based on studies in a range of countries, the World Report on
sanitation.
disability. Suggested indicator: Percentage of population using
safely managed drinking water services, disaggregated for
Health Poverty Action For both proposed indicators disaggregation by ethnicity is

ICMM and IPIECA
IDDC Based on studies in a range of countries, the World Report on

2011).
Indigenous and Frontier This is very much possible if the corporates / Industries /
Technology Research Centre - IFTR community organizations / village administration are taken
into confidence by respective Governments.
Reduction in corruption is another requirement to achieve this
Institute for Reproductive and I agree with it but it is difficult to do it for all
Family Health

International Disability Alliance Recommended indicator:

Percentage of population using safely managed drinking
water services, disaggregated for persons with/without
disabilities.
Comment:
Data on access to water and sanitation was collected in past
World Health Surveys (2003-4) and disaggregated for
disability. This information with the possibility of
disaggregation for disability is currently being collected and
will continue to be collected through the WHO Study on
Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE).
Association (IFA)
International Movement ATD Fourth The Special Rapporteur on the Right to Safe Drinking Water
World has written various articles on the disproportionate
improvement during the MDG-era under Goal 6 for people of
the higher income quintiles . To measure progress on those
furthest behind suggested indicator for target 6.1: Percentage
of population using safely managed drinking water services
should be disaggregated by income. (de Albuquerque,
Catarina, THE FUTURE IS NOW Eliminating inequalities in
sanitation, water and hygiene. 2012)
International Office for Water
International Water Resources

Association
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS Groundwater around the world is threatened by pollution from
Inc. ("ISACI") agriculture & urban areas, solid waste, on-site wastewater
treatment,mining wastes, hydraulic fracturing, manufacturing
& other industrial sources.

Delhi
Kepa Finland

National Campaign for Dalit Human 1. Percentage of HH having equitable and affordable
Rights access to safe drinking water disaggregated on multiple
dimension index
2. Non-discrimination legislation which includes right to safe
water irrespective of social locations, with punitive action
against who discriminate.
3. Adequate budgetary allocation at national, sub-national
and local governments.
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 6.1 By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe
Organization (NNDSWO) and affordable drinking water for all
1. Percentage of HH having equitable and affordable
access to safe drinking water disaggregated on age, sex,
other status and rural-urban divide HH having access to tap
drinking water.
2. Non-discrimination legislation which includes right to safe
water irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity,
origin, religion economic or other status and rural-urban
divide, with punitive action against that discriminate.
3. Adequate allocation budgetary resources at national,
sub-national and local governments.
Newcastle University, Institute for Quality must also be a measured factor - something lacking
Sustainability under the Millennium Development Goals. The MDGs
indicator for having clean and safe drinking water is the
percentage of population using an ‘improved’ drinking water
source. Countries may have met this target based on the
definition of ‘improved’ yet the quality of the water supplied by
the national provider in some areas is so poor the population
cannot consume it.
The following indicators to replace the proposal are
recommended:
(1) % of population using a drinking water source that
provides a satisfactory supply (based on WHO definition of
satisfactory: adequate quantity, safe quality & convenient
access).
(2) % of population access to a safely managed water source
providing wholesome drinking water as defined at the national
level.
OneFamilyPeople Persons with disabilities are not mentioned in targets dealing

with vulnerability. We therefore recommend the following in
targets below:
Partnership for Economic Policy To ensure the achievement of this goal there is a need for
age/gender disaggregation
Planning 4 Sustainable The infrastructure cost of achieving this by many LDCs makes
Development this target very optimistic
Practical Action
Sightsavers Based on studies in a range of countries, the World Report on

2011).
Signatory organizations: United 6.1.1 Average weekly time spent in water collection (including
Nations Foundation, Plan waiting time at public supply points)
International Women's Health DATA SOURCE: DHS/MICs
Association of Girl Guides and Girl GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: JMP on WASH could
Scouts, European Parliamentary monitor this indicator. This data is collected in MICS and DHS,
Forum, International Center for for over 100 countries.
for Youth, FHI360, Equality Now, TIER: Tier I
International Rescue Committee NOTES: Improved access to water means that women and
girls will spend less time fetching water and result in
improvements in other areas, such as reduced incidence of
water-borne illnesses (particularly for children).
Society for the Psychological Data on population access to safe and affordable drinking
Study of Social Issues; Psychology water for all, disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,
Coalition at the United Nations indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence, national
Stakeholder Group on Ageing Indicator 6.1.1 Change to: Percentage of population, by

(posted by HelpAge International) gender, age, income and persons with disabilities, using
safely managed drinking water services.
Disaggregation for groups most likely to lack safe and

affordable drinking water is essential.
Stockholm Environment Institute General: ‘Access’ needs to be very clearly defined. Does this
relate to access in house?
It is also important that the reliability of access is accounted
for. ‘Available’ can mean many things and the costs of
unreliable water supply are often downplayed. There are
social, economic, health costs and it undermines people’s
confidence in the water provision system, which can drive
them to seek water from elsewhere. In response to this
comment, it would be pertinent to extend the suggested
indicator to include ‘reliable’ water services, with a clear
definition of what constitutes a minimum threshold of
reliability. From the ECE feedback, it appears that continuity
of supply data – for this purpose – would be available from
household surveys and administrative sources.
Sudanese Environment
Conservation Society
Tebtebba
The Cyprus Institute We suggest the adoption of both indicators as follows:

6.1.1: Percentage of population using safely managed
drinking water services
6.1.2: Average weekly time spent in water collection (including
waiting time at public supply points), by sex, age, location and
income.
The Hague University of Applied While the concept of “planetary boundaries” is valuable idea
Science in drawing public attention to breaching limits, it is
dangerously anthropocentric in strongly suggesting that all we
need to do is stay just outside the borders of those
boundaries, in our use of (and impact on) the biosphere, in
order to be ‘sustainable’. While the planetary boundaries of
“Land Use” and “Freshwater” appear to be infinitely malleable
as they can be ‘effectively managed’ for the benefit of
humanity, as far as biodiversity in concerned these
boundaries have long been surpassed. Land Use or
Freshwater, while still widely ‘available’ although degraded or
polluted (to humans) actually testify to wild habitat destruction
which in itself is the leading cause of biodiversity loss.
When talking about water availability, other species and

natural systems also need to be considered

and access to water. Globally, 20 to 70 per cent of lost
resources in the water sector could be saved if transparency
was widespread and corruption was eliminated. Findings
show that a population’s access to safe drinking water is
negatively correlated with the level of bribery in the country.
The statistical effect of bribery is equivalent to that of per
capita income: a lower prevalence of bribery has the same
correlation to increased access to clean water as does a
higher per capita income. In addition, a higher level of bribery
reported in a country is associated with decreased access to
safe drinking water, most notably in rural areas.
UCLG Target 6.1.: the affordability dimension, critical for poor and
vulnerable groups of the population, is not addressed in the
suggested indicator. We propose adding: “Percentage of
population in the poorest quintile whose financial expenditure
on water, sanitation and hygiene is below 3% of the national
poverty line” (source: JMP WHO/UNICEF and household
surveys)
UNSD Education Caucus
USIL Excellent, but it must complemented wtih supervision and

WASH United
Water Supply and Sanitation

Collaborative Council (WSSCC)
WaterAid 6.1.1 Percentage of population using safely managed drinking
water services
This is a good indicator, but should explicitly mention the

specific disaggregation to ensure the need for equity and
universal coverage, particularly access for those away from
home in schools or health centres is covered. To achieve this,
we recommend adding at the end ‘disaggregated by service
level (basic, safely managed) and location (home, school,
health centre).
WaterAid proposal:
Percentage of population using safely managed drinking
water services disaggregated by service level (basic, safely
managed) and location (home, school, health centre)
6.1.2 Average weekly time spent in water collection (including

waiting time at public supply points), by sex, age, location and
income
This should be reworded to reflect WASH sector consensus

that ‘basic service’ should be defined as an ‘improved’ facility
within 30 min round trip.
WaterAid proposal:
Percentage of population using basic water service by sex,
age, location (home, school, health centre) and by income


- New Ways
Women in Europe for a Common

Future, African Ministries Council
Sanitation Alliance, Women's Major
Group, Women's Environmental
Programme, GWA
Women's Major Group 6.1.1 Percentage of population, by gender, age, persons with
disabilities, socioeconomic status, and spatial location, using
safely managed drinking water services
National household surveys and administrative surveys.

WHO/UNICEF JMP
6.1.2 Percentage of income spent on drinking water by

socioeconomic status.
National household surveys and administrative surveys.

WHO/UNICEF JMP
World Chlorine Council Affordable, reliable chlorine-based disinfectants are a key

factor in making safe drinking water and sanitation services
available globally, which is fundamental to sustainable
societies.

Environment
WWF
Target 6.2: By 2030, achieve access to adequate and
equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and end open
defecation, paying special attention to the needs of
women and girls and those in vulnerable situations
We recommend that this indicator be disaggregated by
disability.
For example, data collected in the WHO Study on Ageing and

Adult Health (SAGE) would lend itself to disaggregation by
disability.
Target 6.2 aims at securing access to sanitation and hygiene

for all. These are 2 different sub-targets. The proposed
indicator on ‘safely-managed sanitation services’ is certainly
necessary for sanitation but it will not measure progress
towards access to hygiene. This is why a second indicator
needs to be added to track progress on hygiene.
The indicator on hygiene (Population with a hand washing
facility with soap and water in the household) initially
proposed by UN Water has disappeared. Hygiene is part of
the target and is not addressed by the indicator on safely
managed sanitation services. It must be integrated as a
priority indicator.
Relevance: The indicator captures the access aims of the

target for sanitation but ignores the hygiene element entirely.
It also does not directly capture the equity target.
Aptness: Hygiene must be measured for this to be apt. By

monitoring use and time the indicator can highlight the
realities of access for marginalised groups.
Disaggregation: Sex, age, location and income are

considered. Additional criteria such as location (U/R) might
also be useful to consider.
Preference: The indicator is disaggregated so could implicitly

create a preference, although targets would need to reflect
this. The focus on “safely managed” could create perverse
incentives to tackle those for whom such services could be
provided, rather than basic services for more marginalised,
rural communities.
Transformative: The indicator is not transformative and

without inclusion of hygiene, will be ineffective. The inclusion
of a participatory element and measurement of hygiene would
be a significant improvement.
We encourage the IAEG to consider proposals which call for

the suggested indicator on hygiene to be upgraded to a
proposed indicator.
We support Percentage of population using safely managed
sanitation services which, in calling out the safe management
of sanitation services, reflects the breadth of the sanitation
challenge, including use of sanitation services and safe
management of fecal sludge. The wording of the indicator is
important as “safely managed” conveys that excreta is safely
disposed at the site, or is transported to a designated place
for safe disposal or treatment. Such treatment is critical to
minimizing environmental pollution that cause illness and
disease.
This indicator builds on existing indicators tracked by the
WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program, which has
monitored progress to date for water and sanitation within the
MDGs. While excreta management data will need to be
improved over the SDG period, sufficient data exists through
household surveys on the availability and type of sanitation
facilities, and in situ disposal. Administrative and
environmental data can be used in the interim to estimate
safe transport and disposal of excreta. Disaggregation by
wealth quintiles and urban versus rural is already being done
and should continue.
- The nature and extent of gender-disaggregated data related

to water and sanitation collected by responsible public entities
at national and local levels (in relation to the totality of social
indicators on water and sanitation collected).
- Percent households with access to “improved” sanitation
facility, by household structure and by nature of the
“improved” facility
- Intra-household M/F use of /access to improved sanitation
facilities
- M/F perceptions of the safety of sanitation facilities that are
located outside the house; identified particular safety
concerns
Similarly to 6.1., universal and equitable access to sanitation
and hygiene can only be achieved if inclusion of all is applied.
This target also mentions ‘special attention to the needs of
women and girls and those in vulnerable situations’, of which
persons with disabilities according to the declaration to the
2030-agenda clearly are. Therefore, disaggregation by
disability is needed for this target. Suggest indicator:
Percentage of population using safely managed sanitation
services, disaggregated for persons with/without disabilities.
We suggest to include the next indicators: Percentage of
public sites (schools, hospitals, markets, transport stations,
refugee camps) that offer safe water and hygiene services
separated for both sexes.

and hygiene can only be achieved if inclusiveness of all is
applied. This target also mentions ‘special attention to the
needs of women and girls and those in vulnerable situations’,
of which girls and women with disabilities clearly are.
Therefore, disaggregation by disability is needed for this
target. Suggest indicator: Percentage of population using
safely managed sanitation services, disaggregated for
persons with/without disabilities.
6.1.2 Percentage of population using a basic drinking
water source which is located on premises or within close
proximity [within 15 minutes] and available at a cost affordable
for all, free of faecal (and priority chemical) contamination
and/or regulated by a competent authority "Percentage of
public venues (schools, hospitals, markets, transport stations,
administrations, refugee camps) offering safely managed
water, sanitation AND hygiene services separated and for
both sexes. Proposed indicator for 6.2.1 based on the human
right to sanitation standards: Percentage of population whose
faecal waste is safely collected, safely transported, safely
treated and/or safely reused. We also call for the need for
extra disaggregation of information per different location
(households, schools, public markets, healthcare centres/
facilities), as well as on who is responsible for its maintenance
(community water users, public service or public-private
partnerships).
• We strongly support the notion of safely managed sanitation
services, which is defined as: "the use of a basic sanitation
facility which is not shared with other households, and where
excreta is safely disposed in situ or transported to a
designated place for safe disposal or treatment"
• In the list of indicators presented on August 7th, the indicator

on hygiene initially proposed by UN Water has disappeared.
However, hygiene is not optional. It is part of the target and is
not addressed by the indicator on safely managed sanitation
services. The inadequate hygiene practices still affect 80% of
the world’s population. Governments must be held
accountable to ensure that facilities for good hygiene are
available. To support the ambition of Target 6.2, the hygiene
indicator proposed by UN-Water must be integrated as a
priority indicator: “Population with a hand washing facility with
soap and water in the household”. It can be measured
through household surveys and has been shown to be a
robust proxy indicator. It is already followed at international
level by the JMP WHO / UNICEF in many countries.
We proposed indicator for 6.2.1: Percentage of population

whose feacal waste is safely collected, safely transported,
safely treated and/or safely reused. Each of these steps
indicate the level of safetyness of the service (sanitation
ladder). We also call for the need for extra disaggregation of
information per different location (households, schools, public
markets, healthcare centers/ facilities), as well as on who is
responsible for its maintenance (community water users,
public service or public-private partnerships).
Hygiene needs to go beyond than home, it needs to be

extended to schools, health centers and public areas and
facilities. The proposal is :
Percentage of population having access to safe handwashing
facilities including water and soap; desegregated by
household, schools, health centers and public areas facilities.
% of people* using safely managed sanitation services**

including MHM in working and learning
environments/institutions
e.g. Percentage of population using safely managed
sanitation services, disaggregated for persons with/without
disabilities
Recommend:
services disaggregated by service level (ODF, basic, safely
managed) and location (home, school, health centre). - As
with the water target, this needs explicit reference to specific
disaggregation to address the need for equity, progress up
the service ladder from open defecation to safely managed
services, and access in vulnerable situations, particularly
schools and health centres. So the additional requirement
should be included of ‘disaggregated by service level (ODF,
basic, safely managed) and location (home, school, health
centre)’.
Proposed indicator:
6.2.2 Percentage of population using a handwashing facility
with water and soap, disaggregated by location (home,
school, health centre)
Having been left out of the MDGs, hygiene is explicitly

mentioned on the first page of the declaration of the
framework. This represents its status as globally relevant
development intervention. It is specifically mentioned in the
target, and a viable indicator has been proposed by the WHO
and Unicef.
In addition to the proposed sanitation indicator, an indicator
measuring the percentage of the population with
handwashing facilities with soap and water is essential to
achieving this target. This indicator has been agreed to by
both the water, sanitation, and hygiene sector and the
UNICEF/WHO Joint Monitoring Programme. It additionally is
already used in global level surveys.
Hygiene is critical to making progress on goals relating to

water and sanitation, particularly due to the fact that water,
sanitation, and hygiene can have a greater health impact
when implemented together than when implemented
individually. Furthermore, the linkages between hygiene
improvement and the achievement of targets relating to
health, nutrition, education, gender equality, and sustainable
economic growth are well established. One significant failure
of the MDGs was not including hygiene alongside water and
sanitation, despite its huge global impact. This must not occur
in the SDGs, and for hygiene to receive its proper place in the
agenda it must be measured as a global indicator.

Suggest indicator: Percentage of population using safely
managed sanitation services, disaggregated for persons
with/without disabilities.


This is more to do with the way of life of individuals and

communities in different parts of the World.
Needs lot of education, advocacy and more sustained efforts
to introduce the concept of sanitation and hygiene in the
minds of people. Help them understand this better by
providing proper education and training them on the use of
infrastructure developed for such purpose.
Good idea. I hope by 2030, we will achieve it effectively
Recommended indicator: Percentage of population using

No comments
Percentage of schools (serving any girls aged > 10 years)

with sufficient gender appropriate latrines (Governmental /
UNICEF WASH in Schools program monitoring system)
access to sanitation facilitated disaggregated on multiple
dimension index.
2. Non-discrimination legislation which includes right to
sanitation facilitates irrespective of social locations with
punitive action against who discriminate.
3. Adequate budgetary allocation at national, sub-national
and local governments.
4. Schemes focusing on culturally relevant sanitation
facilities for socially disadvantaged groups especially focusing
on gender, disability and social origins.

access to sanitation facilitated disaggregated on age, sex,
other status and rural-urban divide HH having access to tap
drinking water.
2. Non-discrimination legislation which includes right to
sanitation facilitated irrespective of age, sex, disability, race,
caste, ethnicity, origin, religion economic or other status and
rural-urban divide, with punitive action against that
discriminate.
3. Adequate allocation budgetary resources at national,
sub-national and local governments.
4. Schemes focusing on culturally relevant sanitation
facilities for socially disadvantaged groups especially focusing
on gender, disability and social origins.
The suggested indicator for Target 6.2 for monitoring
sanitation improvement will be unable to measure 'adequacy'
of facilities as well as equitable access. Additionally, there
needs to be a unification of terms (basic, improved,
environment, adequate). It should also be required that
handwashing should be within a sanitation facility to support
good hygiene practices.
The following are recommended as replacement Indicators for

Target 6.2:
(1) % of population using a sanitation facility that allows safe
separation of excreta from human contact without the
potential for future interaction or the causing of any adverse
environmental effects .
(2) % of population having sole access to a sanitation facility
that allows safe and convenient use and which effectively
separates excreta from human contact and environmentally
sensitive areas.
By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation

and hygiene for all and end open defecation, paying special
attention to the needs of women and girls including those with
disabilities and those in vulnerable situations
To ensure the achievement of this goal there is a need for

age/gender disaggregation.
Along with a large coalition of other civil society organisation

we join the call for the addition of a separate indicator on
hygiene, specifically ‘Percentage of people who have a
handwashing facility with soap and water in the household’.
We urge the international community to ensure that the spirit

of the target is met through measuring of hygiene as well as
sanitation. Otherwise we risk failing to achieve the health
outcomes we envisage from this goal.

6.2.1 Percentage of the population who say they have access
to safe, separate sanitation facilities, with water and soap,
management, in public, private, rural, and urban spaces
NOTES: Without safe facilities for sanitation and hygiene, girls

are at greater risk of violence.
Access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for

all, disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous
identity, income, rural/urban residence, national origin, and
migration status
Consideration should be given to public spaces and services

sanitation rather than narrowing the scope to household data
only.
no change to indicator

and access to sanitation.
For example, the relationship between a higher reported rate
of bribery in a country and reduced access to sanitation
facilities is two thirds the magnitude of the correlation between
greater access to sanitation facilities and increases in the
country’s wealth.
-
https://www.transparency.org/files/content/feature/2014_MDG
s_Statistical_Annex.pdf
Target 6.2.: Open defecation was a critical MDG indicator. It

should be included in the SDGs. Proposed indicator:
percentage of population practicing open defecation.
PROPOSED INDICATOR: "% of people (disaggregated by
sex, age, income quintile) using safely managed saniation
services (=safe, separate sanitation facilities, with water &
soap, incl. accommodations for menstrual hygiene
management (MHM) in public, private, rural and urban
spaces, incl. schools) including MHM in working and learning
environments/institutions".
RATIONALE: The target calls for addressing the needs of
women & girls, which is impossible if sanitation facilities do
not accommodate MHM. This is crucial for women's dignity
and equality, but also for economic development. A study has
found that absenteeism of female workers is associated with
inadequate sanitation facilities and the resulting inability of
women to manage their menstruation
(https://sanitationupdates.wordpress.com/2014/11/17/sca-
and-wsscc-partner-to-break-silence-around-menstruation/).
The target can only be met if measured by both sanitation and

hygiene indicators. Together, water, sanitation and hygiene
(WASH) have a greater health impact than alone. Therefore, it
is critical to include a hygiene indicator alongside the
sanitation indicator. As ‘special attention has to be paid to the
needs of women and girls’ the indicator must include
measurement of WASH needs specific to them. Half of the 2.4
billion people without access to sanitation and hygiene are
women. Girls and women menstruate between the ages of 9
and 45 every month for 10 years over a lifetime. Even where
they have access to water and sanitation, the silence and
taboo surrounding menstruation denies almost 3 billion girls
and women adequate information and facilities for managing
their monthly menstrual flows with safety and dignity inside
and outside the home. The SDGs require a specific hygiene
indicator to achieve access and adequate sanitation and
hygiene for all including women, girls and the vulnerable. This
hygiene indicator must be precise and clearly articulate both
hand washing and menstrual hygiene as indicators.
6.1.2 Explicit reference needed to specific disaggregation to
address the need for equity, progress up the service ladder
from open defecation to safely managed services, and access
in vulnerable situations, particularly schools and health
centres.
WaterAid proposal:
services disaggregated by service level (ODF, basic, safely
managed) and location (home, school, health centre)
Proposed indicator for Hygiene

Specifically mentioned in the target, and a viable indicator
which has been proposed by the World Health Organization
and Unicef, with data already existing for 50+ countries .
Despite this. it has not been included as a suggested indicator
by the IAEG.
We propose:
6.2.2 Percentage of population using a handwashing facility

with water and soap, disaggregated by location (home,
school, health centre)
6.2 Percentage of population using safely managed sanitation

services defined as safe, separate sanitation facilities, with
water and soap, including accommodations for menstrual
hygiene management, in public, private, rural, and urban
spaces, including schools.
all data disaggregated by sex, age and wealth quintiles
% of schools with pupils using safely managed sanitation

services with separate toilets for females and males including
MHM (according to WHO/UNICEF guidelines*)**
OR
• % of girls and boys attending secondary school (14-15 yrs
old) without
missing school days (as a proxy to measure drop out due to
lack of MHM
for girls)
AND

including MHM in working and learning
environments/institutions
Support the multi-purpose indicators to address menstrual
hygiene management developed at a working group meeting
on 27. Aug at the World Water Week4, with experts from
AMCOW, WECF, UNESCO, UNSGAB, UNEP, UNHABITAT,
BORDA, WEP, GWA, GIZ, SUSANA:

including MHM in
working and learning environments/institutions
*disaggregated by sex (age and income quintile)
** based on WHO guidelines, definition of ‘safely managed

sanitation services’ needs to be extended as follows: “safe,
separate sanitation facilities, with water and soap, including
accommodations for menstrual hygiene management in
public, private, rural and urban spaces, including schools”.
6.2.1 Percentage of girls attending secondary school (13-15

years old) without missing school days during menstruation
Country data, school surveys, UNICEF WASH in Schools

Program monitoring system
6.2.2 Percentage of population using safely managed

sanitation services defined as safe, separate sanitation
facilities, with water and soap, including accommodations for
menstrual hygiene management, in public, private, rural, and
urban spaces, including schools.
Household surveys (adapting the JMP questionnaire) or

community based survey (through community monitoring
team via mobile phone)
Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing
pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of
hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the
proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially
increasing recycling and safe reuse globally
The first indicator is indispensable since it aims at measuring

progress towards the component of the target that is
quantified, i.e. halving the proportion of untreated wastewater.
As it will be the first time that this information is tracked
globally, we suggest to keep the indicator simple by:
- Numbering the population whose wastewater is treated to
national standards in on-site or off-site facilities
- Measuring the flows of industrial wastewater that are not
discharged through municipal sewerage networks.
We not to recommend trying to measure all the flows of
wastewater to avoid unnecessary methodological difficulties
and, in particular not trying to measure all domestic flows.
We draw attention to the fact that the Target lists several
actions to improve the quality of water resources. The
proposed indicator on ambient water quality is not able to
track progress on those actions. We suggest that and
indicator measures progress on water reuse and recycling
since it would be useful to inform progress on both targets 6.3
and 6.4.
The first indicator, and believe it should be improved into
reading “Percentage of wastewater flows and sludge , safely
treated”.
The second indicator (water quality of receiving water bodies
through a set of chemical and physical measures) is difficult to
reach for many countries. The indicator of progress should be
concentrated on building indicators and developing data
bases to be able to assess the quality of water. As a first step,
we suggest replacing that indicator with a new priority
indicator that reads: “Percentage of receiving water bodies
with a relevant data collection network to assess ambient
water quality with respect to risk to the environment or human
health”
The target refers to recycling and safe reuse of water, and I
suggest the following indicator “% of urban wastewater that is
reused after appropriate treatment"
The presence and nature of gender-specific objectives and
commitments (or gender strategy) in national, local and
sector-level water policies.
Percentage of households connected to sewerage or

alternative means of water treatment *
Percentages reported health-incidents/ impacts

disaggregated by sex *
Percentages of M/F in charge of waste and waste-water

management
% of wastewater and –reuse * organisations with gender

equality at all levels of decision making > applies for 6.a as
well
% of wastewater and –reuse * authorities who have the

capacity and budget allocation for gender responsive
planning, implementation and monitoring > applies for 6.a as
well
% of processes with meaningful participation of civil society

and local communities in planning, budgeting, implementation
and monitoring processes of WASH, wastewater, reuse >
applies for 6.b as well
Data gathered by CDP's global water disclosure programs (for
companies and cities) could support tracking of progress
against this target.
We suggest to consider the next indicators: Percentage of
entrerprises having treatment plant as a previous step to
water release to water bodies. Percentage of monitoring sites
classified as good or excellent water quality. Percentage of
water assigned or concesioned by sector: agriculture, energy,
domestic, industry, etc. Porcentage of municipalities supplying
water from overexploted aquifers. Procentage of local
population at rural or urban areas, without water diary supply
or with source at more than 15 min of walking.
New Proposed Indicator: "Area eutrophicated vs. total

national water area separate"
freshwater bodies and coastal.
Alterations to nutrient cycles, primarily nitrogen and
phosphorus used in agriculture industries have caused
widespread eutrophication of inland and coastal waters. This
eutrophication has driven changes in trophic structure and
formation of anoxic and hypoxic environments in bottom
waters at global scales (Diaz R, Rosenberg R, 2008). An
indicator that measures eutrophication is a critical indicator to
measure SDG target 6.3 to improve water quality by reducing
pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of
hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of
untreated wastewater, and increasing recycling and safe
reuse by x% globally. Primary Data Source: UNEP, OECD and
some NSO’s Tier I: Methodology exists, data widely available.
However, some data gaps do exist and need to be mapped.
There is a critical need to have a very explicit definition for
'safely treated' for each economic activity measured;
specifically for agriculture and for all kind of extractive
industries that use water. We agree with the proposal from
UNEP to monitoring this through the Water Quality Index. This
is good as it collects data on POPs in blood, human milk, air
and water: http://www.bipindicators.net/wqib as well as the
Stockholm Convention: (i) (Global Monitoring Plan, which also
collects data on POPs in air, human milk, blood, and water).
• The 1st indicator should be improved into “% of wastewater
flows AND FAECAL SLUDGE FROM ON-SITE SANITATIONS
SYSTEMS, safely treated TO RELEVANT NATIONAL
STANDARDS”, with wastewater from domestic and industrial
sources, and treatment by collective, individual or specific
facilities. "National Standards" is important: policies should
define national frameworks.
• Experience of the EU Water Framework shows it seems
difficult to universally implement the 2nd suggested indicator
on water quality, within the intended 15 years scope. We need
first to build indicators and develop databases to be able to
assess the quality of water. As first step, we suggest replacing
with : “%of receiving water bodies with a relevant data
collection network to assess ambient water quality with
respect to risk to the environment or human health”.
• Also, the target refers to recycling and safe reuse of water,
and is not supported by an indicator.We suggest: “In territories
where the amount of water resources consumed exceed 20 %
of renewable resources, % of urban wastewater that is reused
after appropriate treatment in conformity with national
standards"
Re-use and recycling of water has not been measured or

included. It would be important to include a disaggregated
data on indicator 6.3.2 to measure the percentage of
industries and water and sanitation services facilities that are
reusing and recycling water.
We call also for an indicator that measures the percentage of
flowing water bodies free of dumping, as elimination of
dumping is stated in the target but not measured by any
indicator.
Particular to indicator 6.3.1 There is a critical need to have a

very explicit definition for 'safely treated' for each economic
activity measured; specifically for agriculture and for all kind of
extractive industries that use water.
• % of population whose wastewater and faecal waste are

safely managed* and reused** through gender responsive
capacity building, planning and governance
Suggestions by UNICEF and ECE that suggest an indicator
measuring water 'safely treated' compared to total wastage
begs clarification on what is intended by 'safely treated' water.
The World Bank comment that all channels of waste water

should be considered (including septic tanks, open
defecation, industries) but not those related to mining
(including drilling due to the diffuse sources of pollution
associated with those activities might be worth exploring.
see Target 3.9
I agree with it but it is difficult to do it
The indicator suggested by UNEP for the target 3.9 could be

used here - Death and disability from contaminated water.
As wastewater is a major source of marine nutrient pollution,
the proposed indicator for this target could also be used as
indicator for target 14.1 (unless it duplicates with a retained
indicator for target 14.1)
The list of indicator proposals (as of 11 August 2015)

mentions:
1. Percentage of wastewater safely treated, disaggregated by
economic activity,
2. Percentage of receiving water bodies with ambient water
quality not presenting risk to the environment or human health
We support indicator number one. However, it could be useful

to add a reference to national standards for wastewater
treatment, as the goal is to foster implementation and
enforcement of national standards and/or their upgrade to
international standards.
We support indicator number two and we note that this would

require huge financial support for capacity building of
monitoring networks in the basins of rivers, lakes or aquifers
of countries where these infrastructure are underdeveloped,
or non-existent (in developing countries of Africa and South-
East Asia for instance).
Groundwater around the world is threatened by pollution from
agriculture & urban areas, solid waste, on-site wastewater
treatment,mining wastes, hydraulic fracturing, manufacturing
& other industrial sources. Suitable indicators for monitoring
include:
6.1.1 Proportion of the population for whom all domestic
wastewater is treated to national standards in either collective
or individual facilities.
6.3.1 Proportion of industrial and point source agricultural
wastewater flows not collected in public systems that is
treated to national standards
6.3.2 Proportion of the flows of treated municipal wastewater
that are directly and safely reused, including testing for
environmentally persistent pharmaceutical pollutants.
6.3.3 Proportion of the flows discharged by industrial waste
water treatment plants that may be safely re-used.
6.3.4 Proportion of receiving water bodies meeting water
quality standards (including nitrogen & phosphorous as a
minimum
It may be essential to specify the improved water quality level

with suitable measurement.
1. Protecting the marginalized communities from

occupations that deal with dumping hazardous chemicals and
minerals and untreated wastewater.
2. Legislating policies that protect and ensure that people
working with hazardous chemicals and minerals and
untreated wastewater are compensated adequately, protected
from all diseases and have access to healthcare and not
forced on the basis of age, sex, and social origins.
1. Protecting the marginalized communities from

occupations that deal with dumping hazardous chemicals and
minerals and untreated wastewater.
2. Legislating policies that protect and ensure that people
working with hazardous chemicals and minerals and
untreated wastewater are compensated at adequately,
protected from all disease and have access to healthcare and
not forced on the basis of age, sex, race, caste, ethnicity,
origin, religion economic or other status and rural-urban
divide.
A recommended indicator for Target 6.3 is:
% of total volume of wastewater (commercial, industrial,

domestic) treated to appropriate standard prior to disposal
The two proposed indicators under this target talk about the
percentage of waste water safely treated, and safety of
receiving bodies, but it is not apparent which pollutants are
included? This is an important aspect to clarify as it will likely
otherwise affect the quality of the indicator data. There is, for
example, a significant danger that only ‘old’ and ‘most
common’ pollutants are included for which there are already
monitoring programmes, which would then miss the newer
pollutants – many of which may have higher policy relevance
due to their potentially higher impacts.
The WB comments that the indicator 6.3.2 should only include
point sources and not diffuse pollution from agriculture and
mining. However, diffuse pollution also impacts water quality.
Therefore, it would seem important that these sources ARE
included.
6.3: presence of contaminants from extractive industries and
other sources in water on indigenous peoples’ lands and
territories
No change to indicators. Due to its high immportance for

human and environmnetal health we suggest that the
suggested indicator " Percentage of receiving water bodies
with ambient water quality not presenting risk
to the environment or human health" is given Priority status 1.
% of population whose wastewater and faecal waste are
safely managed and reused** through gender responsive
capacity building, planning and governance
** according to WHO guidelines 2006 of waste water and

faecal material
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/wastewater/gsuw
w/en/
6.3.1 Percentage of population (or women headed-
households) safely reusing domestic wastewater for
foodgardens.
6.3.2 Percentage of women and men in decision making

positions of wastewater and drinking water bodies.
6.3.3 Percentage of water and wastewater infrastructure

projects having women equally participating in the
assessments and decision-making, including specific spaces
for women to include their needs and priorities
Chlorine-based disinfection technologies are affordable and

reliable, making them a key factor in providing sanitation and
water recycling and reuse services globally. Improved
sanitation leads to improved water quality overall,
necessitating less treatment for drinking water.
The current proposals do not include an indicator for industrial
sources of pollution – such as measurement of pollutants in
wastewater – only fecal pollution. Access to water/wastewater
treatment is mentioned in multiple goals (1, 3, 4, 5, 6), and in
all cases, in order to successfully measure the indicators,
there must be a definition of clean water in addition to the
definitions for access to water for drinking and sources of
water. We also recommend measuring industrial sources of
pollution in sources of water – as it can also be a possible
measurement of compliance and enforcement of permits – in
indicators measuring effectiveness of wastewater treatment.
Therefore, WRI recommends the indicator read as "Percent
change of wastewater treated by level of treatment (no
treatment, primary, treatment, secondary treatment, tertiary
treatment) compared to total wastewater generated both
through domestic and industrial sources including
measurement of percent change of heavy metals, BOD, COD,
TSS, and AOX."
WWF supports the suggested indicators: “Percentage of

wastewater safely treated” and “Percentage of receiving water
bodies with ambient water quality not presenting risk to the
environment or human health”. Both are equally important to
report on Target 6.3. Both should also be used to inform
Target 14.1.
Target 6.4: By 2030, substantially increase water-use
efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable
withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water
scarcity and substantially reduce the number of people
suffering from water scarcity
The Target aims at addressing water scarcity through 2

complementary actions requiring 2 separate indicators:
Increase water-use efficiency. The proposed indicator on
water-use efficiency is appropriate and we fully support it.
However, we believe that the sectoral indexes should use
physical outputs as much as possible and not economic
outputs. This is possible for at least agriculture (Kcal),
electrical production (KWh) and cities (volume per inhabitant).
Ensure sustainable withdrawals
The Level of Water Stress indicator provides interesting
information. However, it is not an operational indicator that
tracks results of a policy and it does not capture the benefits
of water recycling. This indicator is unable to measure
progress towards ‘ensuring sustainable withdrawals’. An
indicator that measures the flows withdrawn unsustainably
from water resources should replace it.
In the absence of an indicator that measures the flows
withdrawn unsustainably, half of the political ambition of target
6.4 would be lost.
The water stress indicator used for years is not relevant.
Based on withdrawal without any consideration for net
consumption and upstream-downstream reuse of treated
water, it does not give information about the sustainability of
the water management.
A new indicator formulation measuring net consumptions is
needed.
New Proposed Indicator: m3 of blue freshwater consumed
through diet per week
Globally, 70% of freshwater withdrawals are used for irrigation
and one-third of the world’s land surface is used for food
production (Vermeulen S et al., 2012).
This indicator will monitor SDG target 6.4 to substantially
increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure
sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address
water scarcity and substantially reduce the number of people
suffering from water scarcity. Disaggregation Household
incomes, urban/rural Primary Data Source
AQUASTAT (FAO), NSOs Tier III: Methodology and data
collection baseline needs to be developed.
The Target aims at addressing water scarcity through 2
complementary actions requiring 2 separate indicators:
• ENSURE SUSTAINABLE WITHDRAWAL

The level of water stress indicator gives a simple observation
of water availability, but does not give information about the
sustainability of the water management, and it does not take
into account water reuse and net consumptions.
As this indicator is unable to measure progress towards
sustainability of water resource, we suggest a new indicator
measuring withdrawals from unsustainable water resources.
• INCREASE WATER-USE EFFICIENCY

The current list suggests a Water productivity indicator
measured as the “% of change in water use efficiency over
time”. We approve this notion. However using economic
outputs such as GDP is not apropriate because difficult to
interpret to measure efficiency. We recommend measuring
sectors efficiencies with physical outputs such as:
- KWh for energy production
- Kcal for agriculture.
- For drinking water : ratio between the amount of water
resources withdrawn and the number of people served.
% of WASH & Wastewater-reuse programs with participation

of civil society, local communities and vulnerable groups***
Suggestions by IFAD, FAO, ECE for an indicator "percentage
of change in water use efficiency" may not be helpful in
measuring use efficiency in the extractives sector, where the
very physics of its operations (mining and drilling) call for
increasing use of water (and other resources, including
energy) over a projects' lifetime (which can typically stretch
into decades). Setting case by case 'base scenarios' and
working to improve on those scenarios over the lifetime of a
project might better reflect extractives' capacity to increase its
water efficiency use.
This could be achieved by educating, empowering people to

take care of the water bodies.
Regarding safe freshwater to address water scarcity and

reduce the number of people suffering from water scarcity is
difficult to do in many settings of developing countries
Regarding the first indicator, "water use efficiency" shouldn't
be assessed on the same basis (volume of water used per
unit of GDP) for each sector (energy, agriculture, industry,
etc.) as the production of these sectors cannot be practically
compared. It would be like comparing apple and oranges.
Instead, we suggest to compare water use efficiency within
each sector. For instance, for energy production, we should
assess the amount of water used for a given amount of
energy production (cubic meter per kilowatt hour produced).
For agriculture, we should assess the amount of water used
for a given amount of kilocalories.
In the second indicator (the level of water stress),

sustainability of water withdrawals is out of the picture.
Therefore, we suggest a revision of this indicator which would
take into account withdrawals from unsustainable water
resource (for instance, fossil groundwater).
1. We support the indicator for water use efficiency. In order

for it to be a useful indicator however, it should take into
consideration the ongoing difficulties in defining how total
water use efficiency is arrived at. It should take into sectoral
efficiencies (eg agriculture) as well as inter-sectoral (eg water
loss through seepage in irrigation canals may end up
charging aquifers which can be used in wells or for the
environment). Overall basin efficiency should be considered.
2. The percentage of total available water resources used

must take into consideration that there renewable resources
but there are also sources that are not recharged (or slowly
recharged). Further complexity is introduced when drought
situations are considered. Futhermore, it is not possible to
consider total water quantity without considering water quality.
In particular, appropriate water quality for appropriate uses
(agriculture, domestic, energy, industry, ecosystems).
6.3.4 Proportion of receiving water bodies meeting water
quality standards (including nitrogen & phosphorous as a
minimum
No comments
By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all
sectors and ensure sustainable withdrawals and supply of
freshwater to address water scarcity and substantially reduce
the number of people especially those with disabilities
suffering from water scarcity
Access to efficient freshwater use, disaggregated by gender,
age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, rural/urban
residence, national origin, and migration status
6.4.1.: Given the temporal and spatial aspects of water

availability versus water use, it is highly unlikely that national-
level information on water stress will be sufficient as a sole
indicator. This should be supplemented with an indicator
linked to basin-level and temporal statistics so that a better
understanding of water-stress is encouraged within countries.
We recommend: ‘Investment ($) in sub-national water
monitoring activities’. Additionally, transboundary
considerations should - ideally - be integrated into the
indicator, or included as a sub-indicator. We recommend:
‘Potential reduction in water availability to downstream
countries (due to in-country abstraction) as a percentage of
down-stream country requirements’.
6.4.2.: Important to recognise that water use efficiency will
naturally vary in different sectors (e.g.
industrial/agricultural/household consumption) due to the
nature of activities. Water use efficiency is also likely to vary
across regions. Any use of weighting coefficients proportional
to each sector’s share of total water withdrawal/consumption
should consider the spatial distribution of activities.
To add additional indicator "Natural Water Capital Index", and
include the national expenditure on research and
development for the adoption of new sustainable practices for
water exploitation.
reliable, making them a key factor in providing water reuse
services globally, helping to address water scarcity.
WRI is pleased to see the new, second suggested indicator
honing in on level of water stress, which is reflective of the de
facto standard.
WWF supports the suggested indicators: “Percentage of

change in water use efficiency over time” and “Percentage of
total available water resources used, taking environmental
requirements into account (Level of Water Stress)”. Both
indicators can also inform targets 2.4, 14.1, 14.2, and 14.5.
Target 6.5: By 2030, implement integrated water
resources management at all levels, including through
transboundary cooperation as appropriate
no input
We suggest to consider the next indicators: Porcentage of
local communities (rural, peri-urban and urban) with territorial
planning agreements.Porcentage of municipalities with
permanent consultatn process on water and health issues.
6.4 This indicator need to measure community engagement
in the form of outcome and impact of participatory integrated
water-shed management. Assess participation ladder
engagement according to specific indicators. Rural:
percentage of communities conducting a public/ social audit
during the construction and operation/ maintenance of WASH
services. Peri-urban: percentage of WASH service providers
who regularly conduct customer satisfaction surveys and
optimise their operations accordingly. The issue of trans-
boundary management water is critical towards achieving the
human right to water in a country. An indicator pursuing equity
in the sharing of water resources between both upstream and
downstream communities should be included.
• We strongly favor a general indicator of degree measuring
Integraged Water resources at all management at all level.
• Considering that 40% of the world population lives in basins

shared by several countries, and that the 263 transboundary
basins in 145 countries cover nearly half the land area and
60% of global freshwater supplies, we suggest keeping the
indicator provided by UN Water on transboundary cooperation
as a priority indicator: "% of transboundary basin area with an
operation arrangement for water cooperation "
The indicator needs to measure community engagement in,

and outcome/ impact of participatory integrated water-shed
management. Assess participation ladder engagement
according to following specific indicators.
- Rural: percentage of communities participating in the
watershed plannification, and in conducting a public/ social
audit during the construction and operation/ maintenance of
WASH services.
- Peri-urban: percentage of WASH service providers who
regularly conduct customer satisfaction surveys and optimize
their operations accordingly.
An indicator pursuing equity in the sharing of water resources

between both upstream and downstream communities should
be included.
Number of Women are included in the decision making body

of local government
Promotion of more less water loving crops in agriculture and
implementation of efficient water recycling measures by
industries will help to achieve this.
I agree with this and hoping that we can do it

The current indicator leaves transboundary cooperation out of
the picture, despite a clear mention in the target 6.5.
Therefore, we suggest to revise this indicator (or add another
one) following the phrasing of the UN-Water indicator:
"percentage of transboundary basin area with an operational
arrangement for water cooperation".
6.b.2. Use chemical-free alternatives for disinfection of
potable water. Chlorinating & fluoridating municipal water
creates further environmental problems for Small Island
Developing States by threatening coral reefs which protect
them from storm surges.
6.b.3 Avoid sewage-outfalls into water bodies by promoting
engineered water treatment wetlands.
No comments
On 6.5.2.: Collaborating with upstream and downstream
basins is a part of IWRM. An indicator which covers ‘Number
of agreements related to data/information sharing between
upstream and downstream basins for water resources
management (e.g. water allocation, infrastructure
development etc.)’ could therefore be included within the
consideration of operational arrangements, and would
potentially supply a richer source of information that the
currently proposed indicator which considers only the
existence of arrangements.
6.5 and/or 6b: Extent of indigenous peoples participation
based on FPIC in all phases of development of water-related
resources at all levels
We agree with the adoption of the suggested indicator by

ECE: "Degree of integrated water resources management
(IWRM) implementation (0-100)" The suggested indicator falls
short on assessing transboundary cooperation in water
management and distribution.
Engaging stakeholders and communities, transparency,
cultural knowledge and social-cultural constructs.
WWF supports the suggested indicator: “Degree of integrated
water resources management (IWRM) implementation”. We
also support the additional indicator proposed and by UNECE
and UNEP, on behalf of UN-Water: “Percentage of
transboundary basin areas with an operational arrangement
for water cooperation.”
Target 6.6: By 2020, protect and restore water-related
ecosystems, including mountains, forests, wetlands,
rivers, aquifers and lakes
no input
Canada’s fertilizer industry has undertaken work to reduce
phosphorus losses to protect and restore water-related
ecosystems and is committed to working with governments,
watershed groups, scientists, agri-retailers, farmers and
stakeholders.
CAAR supports the adoption and implementation of 4R
Nutrient Stewardship. We believe that the voluntary adoption
of these principles is the best approach to reduce the
negative environmental impacts of unwanted nutrient loading.
When the right fertilizers are applied at the right rate, time and
place, the impact on water quality is minimal. The primary
nutrient found to cause the growth of algae and aquatic
weeds in streams and lakes is phosphorus, which has many
sources other than fertilizer. Phosphorus from properly
applied fertilizers rapidly binds with the soil following
application. When applied at the right rate, right time and in
the right place, its losses in drainage water are minimal.
goals support and promote the 4R Nutrient Stewardship
program as a means to protect water quality.

As well as in Brazil, that all the world's governments pay
monthly, mainly smallholders and farmers, for "environmental
services" when they fail to use part of their land to preserve
springs that are found there.
There should be comprehensive plan to preserve
river,lake,creek and
other water bodies.
sucessfull reforestation activities on the whole types of
ecosystems. Percentage of national wetlands under RAMSAR
convention status of protection. Percentage of recharge zone
for national aquifers with protection status. Percentage of
recovered aquifers on 50% of its capacity, in the early five
years of protection actions.
New Proposed Indicator Area eutrophicated vs. total national

water area-separate
freshwater bodies and coastal
measure SDG target 6.6 by 2020 to protect and restore
water-related ecosystems, including mountains, forests,
wetlands, rivers, aquifers and lakes. Primary Data Source
World Resources Institute, UNEP, OECD and some NSO’s
Tier I: Methodology exists, data widely available. However,
some data gaps do exist and need to be mapped.
Fertilizer Canada promotes the adoption and implementation
of 4R Nutrient Stewardship - using the right fertilizer source,
at the right rate, at the right time and in the right place.
Canada’s fertilizer industry believes that the voluntary
adoption of these principles is the best approach towards
reducing the negative environmental impacts of unwanted
nutrient loading.
When the right fertilizers are applied at the right rate, time and
place, the impact on water quality is minimal. The primary
nutrient found to cause the growth of algae and aquatic
weeds in streams and lakes is phosphorus, which has many
sources other than fertilizer. Phosphorus from properly
applied fertilizers rapidly binds with the soil following
application. When applied at the right rate, as determined by
a soil test, and at the right time and in the right place, its
losses in drainage water are minimal.
Sustainability goals support and promote the 4R Nutrient
Stewardship program as a means to protect water quality.
Percentage of all the water related ecosystems mentioned
are recovered to a level of their function for the water cycle is
achieved. desegregated by the ecosystems mentioned.
1) Reconnaissance survey from 1930s and dedicate identified
lands to go back to nature will help achieve this. More than
this, community participation is key in achieving this.
I agree with it
ISARM, among other instruments, should provide a good
basis for this indicator.
6.6.1 Use indicators to measure the poportion of receiving
water bodies that meet water quality standards (including
nitrogen & phosphorous as a minimum.
2020 IS TO SHORT TIME FOR THIS ACTIVITY.

Costs and size of the commitment needed make this target
very very speculative
There is agreement with the IUCN suggestion to complement
wetland extent with information related to the level of
protection offered to these wetlands.
Specify the indicator to quantify change to human induced or
natural wetland extend change (% change over time /cause of
change)where data are available, or adopt the alternative
indicator suggested by IUCN "Coverage by protected areas of
freshwater sites of particular importance for biodiversity" to
account for vulnerable habitats.
In addition, we feel that the achievement of this goal is too
ambitious for the 5-year time-frame provided by the target
Target 6.6. Support IUCN proposal to complement the

suggested indicator with “coverage by protected areas of
freshwater sites of particular importance for biodiversity”.
WWF supports the suggested indicator. However measuring
wetland extent alone will not provide a true assessment of the
health of those areas (e.g. species abundance and
conservation status, levels of protection). Therefore,
alongside the main indicator we propose to add the River
Connectivity Index (being adopted by the BIP) as well as a
combination of other appropriate BIP indicators with
interlinkages to other targets: The Living Planet Index (14.1,
14.2, 14.4, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8), The Red
List Index (14.1, 14.2, 14.4, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8),
coverage of protected areas (14.2, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4,
15.5), PA management effectiveness (14.2, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2,
15.4, 15.5) and coverage of habitat (14.2, 15.1, 15.4). Note
that the LPI is already disaggregated into freshwater species.
Target 6.a: By 2030, expand international cooperation and
capacity-building support to developing countries in
water- and sanitation-related activities and programmes,
including water harvesting, desalination, water efficiency,
wastewater treatment, recycling and reuse technologies
Additional indicators and disaggregated data collection for
national or specific program use
Percentage of countries using gender-budgeting methodology

for ODA evaluation
Percentage of ODA allocated for capacity development in this

regard disaggregated by sex
Percentage of water and sanitation-related ODA that reaches

women’s organizations directly
% of wastewater and –reuse * organisations with gender

equality at all levels of decision making > applies for 6.3 as
well
% of wastewater and –reuse * authorities who have the

capacity and budget allocation for gender responsive
planning, implementation and monitoring > applies for 6.3 as
well
*as defined in WHO guidelines on safe management and

reuse of wastewater and faecal material
We suggest to consider the next indicators: International
cooperation agreements to share technology and training
people to strengthen local capacities.
It is important to be explicit about what the related water and
sanitation activities and programmes are and how they are
measured. They should include priorities such as: Capacity
building support to civil society and communities, focus on
fostering South-South cooperation, and support the active
involvement and inclusion of non-state actor in international
cooperation and partnerships. We support the current
proposed UN-Water indicator: Water and sanitation related
Official Development Assistance should be part of
government coordinated spending plan. We believe that due
to some missing information that ODA does not capture,
including a need for more qualitative. We recommend that the
Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water
(GLAAS) report is used as a complementary source of quality
data
Suggested Indicator 6.a: Possibility to add in other types of

financial flows here including philanthropic
“ODA and philanthropic finance for water and sanitation
related activities and programmes”
We support the currently proposed UN-Water indicator: «
Amount of water and sanitation related Official Development
Assistance that is part of a government coordinated spending
plan ». We believe that this indicator can capture more
qualitative information about ODA (including alignement of
ODA with country priorities, coordination).
UN Water is currently working with GLAAS and OCDE for the

full definition and implementation of this indicator. The
qualitative data ‘”coordinated spending plan” could be
available through GLAAS.
It is important to set a minimum of criteria to be included , in

the definition of what are the related water and sanitation
activities and programmes and how they are measured. They
should include priorities such as: Capacity building support to
civil society and communities, focus on fostering South-South
cooperation, and support the active involvement and inclusion
of non-state actor in international cooperation and
partnerships.
I appreciate it very much
Needc to emphasise the role of South-South collaboration.

The indicator is very North-South focused, while WASH-
related activities and bridging the gap between science and
innovation (which can also be southern-grown)
Current wastewater treatment focuses on bacteria
contamination but does not deal with environmentally
persistent pharmaceutical pollutants, which increase
proportionally to the number of ageing persons.
-Chlorinating & fluoridating municipal water creates further
environmental problems for Small Island Developing States
by threatening coral reefs which protect them from storm
surges.
No comments
Suggested indicator is solid and fit for purpose
reliable, making them a key factor in providing water reuse
services globally, helping to address water scarcity.
Target 6.b: Support and strengthen the participation of
local communities in improving water and sanitation
management
Number of M/F in paid and unpaid positions in local water
governance formally-structured entities (water users
associations, etc) at town/ village level
(sample) ; disaggregated by nature of relationship to the entity
(e.g., “member”, “board”, “executive”, “leadership,” decision-
making group, etc) and types of tasks
Intensity of M/F participation in (sample/representative)

meetings of public entity bodies sampled at national, sub-
national, and local levels, including outcomes such as: ratio of
contributions in decision-making meetings by women and
men; percentage of decisions adopted from women’s
contributions in meetings.
M/F perceptions of gender discrimination (or equality)

regarding women’s participation in decision-making entities
% of processes with meaningful participation of civil society

and local communities in planning, budgeting, implementation
and monitoring processes of WASH, wastewater, reuse >
applies for 6.3 as well
local communities having water committees, participating in
water decisions at the local level. Community monitors
working on local and regional water bodies, assessing water
and environmental quality and reporting data to local and
regional authorities. Multi-actor councils or agencies making
decisions supported by communty-based water monitoring
data and scientific data.
There is no indicator proposed for this target. An indicator

should be developed with reference to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) art. 25, and
article 23 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples (UNDRIP), regarding the right and the opportunity to
take part in the conduct of public affairs and the need for
consultation, participation and consent in the context of
economic and social programmes.
Marginalised persons and people living in poverty should be
involved in all decisions relating to their lives. A participatory
approach is not only in line with human rights principles, but
also leads to effective and sustainable initiatives as buy-in
from communities is secured and services reflect the real
needs of individuals. Therefore we call for the inclusion of two
indicators which measure participation:
- Governments and water and sanitation management boards
actively seek, and support, through guidance and funding, the
participation of all local communities, including the most
marginalised, in the planning and delivery of water and
sanitation.
- Number of communities with a higher level of involvement in
the operations and maintenance plan of WASH facilities with
a need for disaggregated data for schools and households.
We suggest the use of the following indicator “Percentage of
local administrative units with established and operational
policies and procedures for participation of local communities
in water and sanitation management. “
We call for the inclusion of two indicators which measure

participation:
- Governments and water and sanitation management
boards actively seek, and support, through guidance and
funding, the participation of all local communities, including
the most marginalized, in the planning and delivery of water
and sanitation.
- Number of communities with a higher level of involvement in
the operations and maintenance plan of WASH facilities with
a need for disaggregated data for schools and households.
Marginalized persons and people including the most

marginalized should be involved in all decisions relating their
lives. A participatory approach is not only in line with human
rights principles, but also leads to effective and sustainable
initiatives as buy-in from communities is secured and services
reflect the real needs of individuals.
Exactly mobilizing the community people in improving water
are effective appraoch
We have not seen any suggestion of indicator on this.
On the basis of the IWRM projects we are implementing
throughout the world and together with our partners, we would
like to suggest the indicator below: “Percentage of local
administrative units with established and operational policies
and procedures for participation of local communities in water
and sanitation management.“
6.b.1 Make water quality statistics freely available to the
public e.g. through websites, daily media publication.
6.b.2. Use chemical-free alternatives for disinfection of
potable water. Chlorinating & fluoridating municipal water
creates further environmental problems for Small Island
Developing States by threatening coral reefs which protect
them from storm surges.
6.b.3 Avoid sewage-outfalls into the ocean by promoting
engineered water treatment wetlands.
No comments
A recommended indicator for Target 6b is:
Number of local community representatives/members having

access to water and sanitation training
Support and strengthen the participation of local and disable

communities in improving water and sanitation management
Suggest to add "...improving water and sanitation

management in an environmentally sustainable manner."
No indicator has yet been proposed for this target. We would

like to suggest: ‘Percentage of local agencies responsible for
WASH who regularly seek and act on participation from local
communities’
6.b.1 Number of countries that include communities in water
and sanitation policy development and management,
particularly women and girls
NOTES: Women, including girls, provide 91% of households’

total efforts in collecting fuel and water.
Data on support and strengthening of the participation of local

communities in improving water and sanitation management,
disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous
identity, income, rural/urban residence, national origin, and
migration status
6.5 and/or 6b: Extent of indigenous peoples participation
based on FPIC in all phases of development of water-related
resources at all levels
6.b: policies in places to support and strengthen the
participation of indigenous peoples for improving water and
sanitation management
Suggested indicator: Proportion of locally regulated water and

sanitation managment programs
Data may be derived from national surveys
We strongly support the proposals made by the End Water
Poverty coalition in a separate submisison.
WCC commends the work of Haiti-Philanthropy (http://haiti-
philanthropy.org/) in developing a chlorine bank to promote
local community autonomy in providing safe drinking water.
Such examples can inspire other communities in the
developing world.
Improve designs and technology of hand pumps to be gender
friendly.
Target 7.1: By 2030, ensure universal access to
Organization: affordable, reliable and modern energy services
Beyond 2015 UK The proposed indicators do not directly account for affordable,
reliable and sustainable energy access, but only for modern
energy access. Sustainable and renewable sources of energy
must be sought in order to achieve lower levels of global
warming. Moreover, renewable energies will be more reliable
and affordable, moving forward, than modern alternatives. As
such, this indicator should steer action towards climate-proof
sustainable development and the adoption of clean and
renewable energies. Action towards energy access must
acknowledge that communities require energy for many of
their sustainable development needs, including to power
households, health clinics, schools and livelihood activities13.
We support the two suggested indicators to replace the UNSD
proposed indicator.
i. Percentage of population (%) with access to electricity of at

least Tier 3 of the Global Tracking Framework
ii. Percentage of population (%) with access to clean and
efficient cooking fuels and technology of at least Tier 4 of the
Global Tracking Framework
CDP

Centre For Development Please add 7.1.3 Percentage of household using bio-fuels
Alternatives as cooking energy
use of bio-fuels (fuel wood, dung cakes etc) is used widely in

cooking the developing world. Use of this energy is a huge
constraint to women’s empowerment, because (1) it takes a
long time for women (and frequently children) to collect fuel
wood from common lands, forests etc; and under the climate
change, the time for collecting this has increased for many
women. This strenuous operation causes under-nutrition
among women on the one hand and creates problems of their
safety and security on the other hand, (2) use of bio-fuels on
traditional stoves emits toxic gases that are very harmful to
eyes and health of not only women but also other inmates of
the houses. It is essential to add the following indicator for
women:
Centre For Rural Technology, Nepal Indicator 1: Increase access to public transportation
(terrestrial) that operates on clean source of energy.
Comment: Transportation sector one of the major source
contributing to global emission of GHGs. Replacing fossil fuel
based vehicle with vehicles operating on renewable or cleaner
source of energy for public transportation can complement
both climate change mitigation and improvement in access to
transportation services.
Indicator 2: Universal access to clean cooking, clean lighting
and clean heating energy should be ensured to all.
Indicator 3: Reliable modern energy technologies used in the
household level for evaluating performances such as
System/Material sustainability and Efficiencies – The values
be mapped with the international (ISO/Gold) Standards.
Christian Aid Preferred indicator: Percentage of population (%),

disaggregated by age and sex, with access to electricity of at
least Tier 3 of the Global Tracking Framework; and
Percentage of population (%) with access to clean and
efficient cooking fuels and technology of at least Tier 4 of the
Global Tracking Framework.
Comment: More detail on the rationale for this proposal is

found in the joint paper on energy indicators: Measuring What
Matters in the Energy SDG
(http://www.climatenetwork.org/sites/default/files/measuring_w
hat_matters_in_the_energy_sdg_briefing_paper.pdf)
End Water Poverty There is a need to be explicit about what the definition for
renewable, modern and clean energy entails. We strongly call
for the exclusion of extractives industries from those
definitions
ericsson
FIA Foundation
Freshwater Action Network Mexico There is a need to be explicit about what the definition for
renewable, modern and clean energy entails. We strongly call
for the exclusion of extractives industries from those
definitions.
Any international cooperation should respect human rights

and will need to ensure extractives industries are not
considered as clean energy sources.
We strongly call to explicitly mention that any infrastructure

and upgraded technology will not undermine water quality, nor
impact on human access and environmental quota in
developing countries.
Global Alliance for Clean The indicator on cooking energy (7.1.2) is limited to
Cookstoves measuring the transition from solid fuels to non-solid fuels.
This indicator wouldn’t provide satisfactory data to understand
progress in improving cooking energy. We need to measure
not only the fuel households are using to cook, but also the
technologies. Many households will continue to use solid-fuels
for cooking but with more efficient technologies that will allow
for the realization of environmental & socio-economic
benefits. The current indicator also does not account for the
fact that kerosene, while a liquid fuel, has proven negative
health impacts & contributes to black carbon emissions.
We urge the IAEG-SDGs to include “Percentage of
households primarily using clean & efficient cooking fuels &
technologies” as Indicator 7.1.2.
This indicator better captures the spectrum of household
energy solutions & measures “use,” which is more practical to
measure than “reliance” or “access.” Also note that we
recommend measuring cooking energy by household, not by
population, since people access cooking energy at the
household level.
ICMM and IPIECA
Indigenous and Frontier

Technology Research Centre - IFTR
Institute for Governance and The indicator should be modified to "Percentage of population
Sustainable Development with primary reliance on clean fuels and technologies at the
household level* (*where the recommendations of the WHO
guidelines for indoor air quality: household fuel combustion
define “clean” fuels and technologies)"
Referring to ‘clean fuels and technologies’ in place of
‘nonsolid fuels’ will help direct countries away from an
unhealthy and detrimental solutions (i.e. kerosene) and not
bias the indicator against solid fuels and technologies that
may meet the WHO guidelines.
Defining the energy access indicator to refer to as energy
access at the household level makes this indicator more
specific, measurable, comparable (over time and
geographically) and requires less resources and capacity for
its monitoring.
Data sources: WHO’s Global household energy database;
WHO’s Global Health Observatory; WHO guidelines for indoor
air quality: household fuel combustion; Sustainable Energy for
All Multi-Tier Tracking Framework; GACCs’s Clean Cooking
Catalogue.
Institute for Reproductive and I hope so

Family Health
Transport (UITP)
International Council of Nurses The indicator suggested by UNEP for the target 3.9 could be
used here - Death and disability from indoor and outdoor air
quality.
International Strategy and
Reconciliation Foundation
Inc. ("ISACI")
Kamla Nehru College, University of Energy services in both transport and cooking fuel sector
Delhi
Kepa Finland a) Share of the population with access to reliable electricity,
by urban and rural (%).
b) Share of the population with access to modern cooking

solutions, by urban and rural (%).
c) Percentage of solar, wind and geothermal in final energy
use; % change from last year. (WWF International.)
NCD Alliance Propose the following:

7.1.1. Percentage of households with access to affordable,
reliable, and cleanly generated electricity;
7.1.2. 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;
7.1.3. Rates of adult and child disease burden (deaths and
DALYs) attributable to outdoor air pollution in both urban and
rural settings; and,
7.1.4. Percentage of households primarily using clean and
efficient cooking fuels and technologies .
Newcastle University, Institute for Target 7.1 needs to define what is meant by the term ‘modern
Sustainability energy’. Access to energy is important for a variety of reasons
including health, economic development, education, and
communications, but target indicators for goal 7 need to
identify what kind of ‘modern energy’ is required and for what
purpose. If Target 7.1 is to be realized it requires an approach
to energy that is customer-led — a society pull rather than a
technology push.
Additionally the data collected for monitoring Target 7.1

require disaggregation by location as highlighted by
UNWOMEN. While Target 7.1 focuses on global access to
sustainable energy supply, the largest energy demands come
from cities and in making the low-carbon transition cities will
not only be able to increase energy efficiency, but reduce air
pollution, improve public health and well-being, and create
new forms of economy based on innovation.
Oxfam 7.1.1. We propose a slight revision to proposed indicator,
beyond the binary definition of energy access (having access
or not) to include the varied needs of the poor, and ensure the
quality of supply. This would read as “Percentage of
population with electricity access of at least Tier 3 of the
Global Tracking Framework”, and would align the indicator
with the UN Global Tracking Framework (GTF) methodology
of SE4ALL. The classification of ‘access’ or ‘no access’ does
not capture the varied energy needs of the poor. In South
Africa for example, 85% of households have electricity
access, yet many sections of the population, both rich and
poor, having at times only 30 mins of electricity a day. Data is
already collected by the UN (SE4ALL) and the World Bank’s
ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Program),
primarily through energy surveys that the ESMPA program
has already begun. The multi-tier system will disaggregate
data across 8 energy criteria: capacity, duration and
availability; reliability, quality, affordability, legality,
convenience; health and safety.

Carbon Transport
Practical Action We would like to suggest some small adjustments to these

indicators. This will make it clearer (as with the WASH
indicators) what the definition of energy access actually
means, by linking it to the global tracking framework as now
defined by the World Bank. We propose the following:
Percentage of population with electricity access of at least
Tier 3 of the Global Tracking Framework
Percentage of population with access to clean and efficient

cooking fuels and technologies of at least Tier 4 of the Global
Tracking Framework.
Signatory organizations: United 7.1.1 Percentage of households primarily using clean and
Nations Foundation, Plan efficient fuels and technologies
International Women's Health NOTES: We need to measure not only the fuel households
Coalition, Girls Not Brides, World are using to cook, but also the technologies they are using.
Association of Girl Guides and Girl This is particularly important because many households,
Scouts, European Parliamentary particularly in Sub-Saharan African and South Asia, will
Forum, International Center for continue to use solid-fuels for cooking but with more efficient
Research on Women, Advocates technologies that will allow for the realization of environmental
for Youth, FHI360, Equality Now, and socio-economic benefits.
Society for the Psychological Data on access to affordable, reliable and modern energy
Study of Social Issues; Psychology services, disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,
Coalition at the United Nations indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence, national
Stockholm Environment Institute The proposed indicators cover only a sub-set of the target.
E.g. 7.1.1 will not monitor affordability, reliability or modernity.
"Access" is a multi-dimensional issue, but the indicator is
vague. WB ESMAP's ‘Beyond Connections’ report on
reconceptualizing access includes comprehensive indicators
and identifies limitations of the methodology.
Non-solid fuels is important, but 7.1.2 is a poor indicator;
modern biofuels using pellets for CHP is one of the best
renewable energies in some contexts and kerosene is non-
solid but unhealthy. Hence, it is not clear that a focus on non-
solid fuels is warranted. Also, what is mean by 'primary'?
Lighting/cooking services are often met by different sources,
so which determines the primary use? There can also be
stacking of sources for the same service.
For ‘affordability’: ‘average cost p. kwh (or fuel poverty % of
income spent on fuel)’. For ‘reliability’: ‘hours of disruption to
the electricity grid’. ‘Modern’ should be removed as it is
normative and difficult to measure.
Any indicators should be disaggregated to cover rural-urban
availability.
Tebtebba 7.1: Appropriate environmental and social safeguards, in

accordance with international standards on indigenous
peoples’ rights and in all phases and levels of energy
development projects
The Cyprus Institute To alter the word electricity in the indicator to "renewable and
non renewable energy" to account for instances that energy is
not in the form of electricity.
The Hague University of Applied Yes, particularly wind and solar (no compromises such as
Science biofuels that compete for both productive land and destroy
wild areas)
United Nations Association of Can there be consideration of an "energy development
Tanzania index", where the extent to which development and
deployment of energy exploitation technologies - solar, wind,
hydro, geothermal etc - is being achieved?
Women for Expo energy is not a stand alone issue and it should not be left
solely to the energy provision and conservation sector.
Women's Major Group 7.1.1 Percentage of population (disaggregated by geography,
gender, age, disability) with electricity access (%)
IRENA, World Bank, UN, Regional Development Banks
Access to electricity is both a major development objective

and an enabling factor across other areas of development,
such as economic productivity, health, environmental
sustainability, and gender equality. An indicator on access to
electricity is critical to understanding global
7.1.2 Percentage of households (disaggregated by geography

and household members) primarily using clean and efficient
fuels and technologies for cooking and heating (%)
SE4All, World Bank, WHO (Global Tracking Framework)

development progress and to measuring against SDG 7.
World Resources Institute WRI suggests going beyond the indicator as currently stated,
to provide solutions that allow sufficient access to electricity to
power economic development. This could be measured by
per capita income growth in previously un-electrified regions.
Further, the level of reliability of electrification will need to be
tracked to ensure consistent access. An indicator on
percentage of households with at least one lightbulb could be
useful, rather than villages, buildings or other levels, to ensure
that we leave no one behind.
WWF WWF supports the suggested indicator 7.1.1 “Percentage of

population with electricity access”. We recommend modifying
proposed indicator 7.1.2 “Percentage of population with
primary reliance on non-solid fuels” to read “Percentage of
population depending on traditional and inefficient use of solid
fuels.”
Target 7.2: By 2030, increase substantially the share of
renewable energy in the global energy mix
This indicator is straightforward and responds directly to the
target. It is therefore appropriate and easily measurable at a
global level. However there is no specific incentive for
reducing fossil-fuel reliance while also increasing the
renewable energy share. We support the additional indicator
below.
i. Percentage change from last year collected at national level

then aggregated
The suggested indicator provides further persuasion towards

making tangible progress in order to curb global warming
before 2030. A 4.5 percent global improvement in energy
intensity (energy/unit GDP) and a shift to 45 percent
renewable energy use is necessary to limit global warming to
1.5-2 degrees. Together, the two indicators can measure
progress towards the target directly and regularly and can
therefore ensure that the appropriate level of ambition is
sought.
Data gathered by CDP's climate programs (for companies and

cities) could support tracking of progress against this target.
Comment: Substantial means at least 20 percent in the global
mix.
Preferred indicator: Renewable energy share (%) in the total

energy final energy consumption; and % change from last
year, collected at national and global level.
Comment: We support the suggested indicator with the

addition of looking at the percentage change year on year.
We support the suggested indicator « Renewable energy
share in the total final energy consumption (%) », and
recommend a disaggregation by type of renewable energy
(hydropower, solar, wind …)
It is critical to have a very explicit definition for renewable
energy. this cannot allow gas shale by fracking technology
that threatens water availability and quality , and impact
health of living beings and ecosystems
Definition/scope of 'renewable energy' should be clarified.
Suggest additional indicator for measuring share of

'sustainable energy' that tracks technologies which work to
lessen the environmental impact of fossil fuels (carbon
storage would be an example).
Villages can be encouraged to device their own energy

programmes at least to fulfill some percentage of their
requirements.
I hope we can do it
"Change to # number of legalislation and frameworks passed

for renewable energy production. We want to measure the
speed in which the planet is shifting to renewable energy"
Renewable energy should be truly renewable, rather than
from incineration which has adverse health effects on
populations living close to the incinerator facility.
7.2.1 Promote best available technology and best
environmental practice such as solar energy in order to
protect human health and fragile ecosystsems.
Taraget value may be needed
a) Share of modern, sustainable renewable energy in the

energy mix.
b) Implicit incentives for modern renewable energy in the
electricity sector.
c) Fossil fuel subsidies ($ or %GNI).
We propose that in addition to measuring the share of
renewables, we also measure the % change from last year,
collected at national level and aggregated globally.
General: There could be a more specific target here, e.g.
double/triple or threshold percentage for RE contribution.
On 7.2.1: Should be disaggregated to specify the type of
renewable energy (e.g. solar, hydro, wind, biomass etc.).
Where possible, this indicator should also be supplemented
with a consideration of the wider environmental impacts of
renewable production (e.g. for hydro), and/or conflicts with
agricultural systems (in the context of biomass). A
supplementary indicator could also detail the government
subsidies/incentives available to promote RE increases.
On 7.2.2: The proposed indicator needs clarity on what
‘enabling legislation’ actually is. There is agreement with the
WB that this indicator, whilst potentially important, is not
necessarily a good fit to the target.
Also increase the ability of dealing with current energy
sources in sustainable way.
To supplement the suggested indicator, measuring the rate of

growth of renewable energy in net domestic consumption
would also be useful in tracking progress. Further, as some
high-income countries may not be able to substantially
increase their share of renewable energy beyond current
levels by 2030, but do contribute globally to a renewable
energy transition through their industry and exports, an
indicator around this or more broadly, renewable industry-
related revenue may show further contributions towards
meeting the target.
WWF recommends amending the suggested indicator to read:

“Percentage of renewable energies of all primary energy
consumed” in order to capture energy conversion losses in
fossil fuel powered plants. In addition, as the suggested
indicator 7.3 on Energy Efficiency is also based on primary
energy, this would improve consistency in the metrics for this
goal area. This target could also be informed by the proposed
amended indicator in Target 6.4 “Percentage of change in
water use efficiency over time”: this would address
interlinkages and build understanding of the water aspect of
resource-use efficiency in energy.
Target 7.3: By 2030, double the global rate of
improvement in energy efficiency
This target is well defined and the indicator suggested can
provide an appropriate measurement of the global rate of
improvement in energy efficiency to assess whether progress
has fallen short of the target. While this indicator is supported,
it also requires an indicator to ensure a more stringent
measurement of progress11, as specified below.
i. Percentage change from last year, collected at national level

then aggregated
As with the indicators for target 7.2, the additional indicator

suggested here will measure progress towards the target
directly and regularly and can therefore ensure that the
appropriate level of ambition is sought to curb global warming.

Preferred indicator: Rate of improvement in energy intensity
(%) measured in terms of primary energy and GDP; and
percentage change from last year, collected at national level
then aggregated.
Comment: Similar to the suggested indicator with the addition

of looking at the percentage change year on year.
On energy efficiency it is important that the indicator for target
7.3 includes transport energy efficiency, as transport is
responsible for around 20% of global energy use. We support
indicator 7.3.2 that is included in the consultation document -
the ‘Composite Energy Efficiency Improvement Index’, as this
covers the major sub-sectors responsible for energy
consumption and associated carbon emissions, including
transport. The ‘Composite Energy Efficiency Improvement
Index’ should therefore be listed as the ‘Suggested Indicator’
for 7.3.
The Global Fuel Economy Initiative (GFEI) is a partnership of

6 organisations (FIA Foundation, IEA, ICCT, ITF, UC Davis
and UNEP). GFEI has set a target to double fuel economy in
passenger cars by 2050, which we have shown can be
achieved by using existing cost-effective technology. This
could save $2 trillion by 2025. GFEI is able to provide regular
data, collected by the IEA, on average fuel economy in
countries around the world, which can be used as the proxy
for transport energy efficiency.
It is critical that energy efficiency calculations include all the

ecological cost needed in the process to obtain the energy.
Much as in our comments on Target 6.4, it is important that

indicators being developed take into account the particular
circumstances of extractives' operations. Setting case by
case 'base scenarios' and working to improve on those
scenarios over the lifetime of a project might better reflect
extractives' contributions in improving energy efficiency use.
Support proposal for Composite Energy Index which is

comprised of transportation energy efficiency, industrial
energy efficiency, power generation energy efficiency,
buildings energy efficiency and agricultural energy efficiency.
It will be excellent if we can realise it
The link to 11.2 should be made as public transport is

fundamental to an energy efficient transport system. As such.
the indicator could benefit from the inclusion of key sectors
and by making the link to 11.2 and measuring mode share of
sustainable transport modes (i.e. modal split % of public
transport, walking and cycling) as it has the potential to
advance an avoid, shift, improve approach which is most
effective means to improve the energy efficiency of the
transport sector at the local level. This will make a key
contribution to Goal 13 while acknowledging that the
UNFCCC is the primary international, intergovernmental
forum for negotiating the global response to climate change.
Should build index on amount of public funding is diverted to

energy efficency research. There should be an index directly
accountable to national effort
Compact fluorescent lamps (CDLs) are coated with mercury,
which creates a problem for environmentally sound disposal
for Small Island Developing States and developing countries.
7.3.1 Promote the use of LED lighting, which is more efficient
than CDLs and furthermore is less intractable for sound
disposal.
No comments
Proposed Indicator 7.3.1: Rate of improvement in energy
intensity (%) measured in terms of primary energy and GDP
Comments:
• Sectoral targets should be mentioned in particular for
transport that is a significant source and the fastest growing
sector in terms of energy use.
• As stated in comments by IFAD, UPU and WB in the
document, the Global Fuel Economy Initiative measures
average fuel economy regularly to enable measurement of
the overall CO2 emissions of the global fleet. Data are
available for major countries, regions and the globe.
We propose that in addition to measuring rate of improvement

in energy intensity, we also measure the % change from last
year, collected at national level and aggregated globally.
General: These indicators are less relevant for LDCs as their
energy demand is so low that efficiency improvements would
easily be overwhelmed if access is increased significantly.
Overall, however, the indicators are important in the context of
targets and goals.
On 7.3.1: The proposed indicator measures energy intensity.
This is not the same as energy efficiency. For example, an
industrial economy that manages to acquire a large financial
sector containing very few people but with enormous
overheads might see a reduction in intensity. However, energy
consumption, and inequality, may have increased. As an
alternative, consider energy per unit of capital stock, with
capital stock computed in a transparent fashion, e.g., as in the
Penn World Tables 8.0. A further alternative is energy per
capita. These are both also problematic indicators but less so
than per unit of GDP.
On 7.3.2. Energy efficiency in the ICT sector, as a standalone
‘subset’ on industry within disaggregations may be warranted
due to its growing importance in both developed and
developing societies.
Indicator is in accordance to the target

WWF supports the suggested indicator “Rate of improvement

in energy intensity (%) measured in terms of primary energy
and GDP”.
Target 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
In order to climate-proof this SDG framework, the notion of
facilitating access to cleaner fossil-fuel technology needs to
be removed altogether. As the targets have been finalized, the
indicators now need to strengthen this target to focus the
progress on access to renewable and clean energy. As such,
we support the following suggested indicators in place of the
UNSD indicator.
i. Total global investment in renewables and percentage

change from previous year
ii. Total global investments in energy efficiency and

conservation and percentage change from previous year
iii. Percentage of national research & development spending

on renewables and energy efficiency and percentage change
from previous year
These indicators incentivize progress on renewables and

energy efficiency. They promote regular measurements, to
clearly elucidate progress in transitioning to cleaner energy
pathways, which will help to limit global temperature rise and
reach ambitious global mitigation targets. The indicators
should be applied simultaneously in order to reach the target
while ensuring climate-proof sustainable development.

Preferred indicator: Total global investment in renewables and
% change from previous year; and total global investments in
energy efficiency and conservation and % change from
previous year.
Comment: There should be a focus on investment in this

indicator as per the target.
Any international cooperation should respect human rights

and will need to ensure extractive industries are not
considered as clean energy sources.
Explicit definition of clean energy is a must. Cleaner fossil
fuel technology needs to include the water ressources impact
in the assessment
I appreciate it very much
It needs to consider the indicator on sharing energy and

energy techonology.
To be shortened in one line.
a) Increased investment in clean energy research.

b) Increased investment in clean energy infrastructure and
technologies.
We feel that these indicators are not adequate to measure the
target, and would like to suggest the following alternatives:
Total global investment in renewables and % change from
previous year
Total global investment in energy efficiency and conservation

and % change from previous year
% of national research and development spending on

renewables and energy efficiency and % change from
previous year
The suggested indicators are OK, but there are some issues.
Firstly, there are several overlaps with other indicators under
Goal 7 which should be considered further.
Net carbon intensity is fine, but says nothing of international
cooperation. Even FDI tells us little about true cooperation,
and – in agreement with the WB comment – we question
whether it would even be possible to set a target for FDI
related to energy?
There is also little coverage/consideration of capacity
development or build-up of local innovative capabilities. These
should be considered as important components under this
target. See – for example -
http://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456
789/2459/Low%20Carbon%20Development.pdf?sequence=1
However, to achieve the targets in 7 there will need to be
significant support given and it is very useful for these aspects
to be considered here, and not just within UNFCCC
agreements.
7.a: Number of new alternative energy initiatives carried out in

collaboration with indigenous peoples.
The indicator suggested does not cover the goal of the target
towards "...enhancing international cooperation...". Indicator
7.a.2, although focused on financing, is better fit in showing
trends of cooperation.
WWF would propose alternative or additional indicators on

“Percentage of Renewable Energy investments of all energy
investments” and “Percentage of energy efficiency
investments of all energy investments”.
Target 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
The indicator needs to direct progress towards providing
climate-proof energy infrastructure and technology i.e.
renewables and clean energy. They should encourage
support from developed to developing countries to ensure
such action. We therefore support the two suggested
indicators given below be used instead.
i. Total international development and climate finance spent

on renewables & energy efficiency and percentage change
from previous year
ii. Total international development and climate finance spent

on decentralised energy solutions and percentage change
from previous year
The suggested indicators will provide a measure of

international investment in decentralized, renewable and
efficient energy infrastructure and technology. They are clearly
defined and easily measurable indicators that will provide a
straightforward assessment of investments being made in this
area, and therefore will steer the framework more directly
towards ensuring global mitigation ambitions are met

Develop solar energy devises to provide warm

water,electricity at home
at residences.offices etc.
We strongly call to explicitly mention that any infrastructure
and upgraded technology will not undermine water quality, nor
impact on human access and environmental quota in
ICT is one industry that should be measured and
7,b,2 should include smart grid projects
I hope so however it is difficult to cover some least developed
countries and small island developing states
Avoid waste-to-energy incineration projects because
indiscriminate burning of unseparated municipal waste leads
to releases of persistent toxic substances and other toxic
substances. Compact fluorescent lamps (CDLs) are coated
with mercury, which creates a problem for environmentally
sound disposal for Small Island Developing States and
7.b.1 Promote best available technology and best

environmental practice such as solar energy in order to
protect human health and fragile ecosystsems.
7.b.2 Promote the use of LED lighting, for increased energy
efficiency and less problematic waste diisposal.
No comments
We feel that these indicators are not adequate to measure the
target, and would like to suggest the following alternatives:
Total international development and climate finance spent on
renewables and energy efficiency and % change from
previous year
Total international development and climate finance spent on

decentralised energy solutions and % change from previous
year
Data on population access to expanded infrastructure and
upgraded technology for supplying modern and sustainable
energy services, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence,
national origin, and migration status
On 7.b.1. This appears to be equivalent to 7.3.1 and therefore
it is unclear to what extent it actually relates to the target,
which is focused on infrastructure. Perhaps better measures
would include the urban and rural electrification rate,
combined with rates of use of traditional biomass. Note that
any proposed indicator should encompass the availability of
energy infrastructure in rural vs urban areas as an important
aspect to capture. HOWEVER, it is also important that the
indicator does not just capture new infrastructure, if this isn’t
actually used in the improvement of energy services and
productivity, so any indicator focused on infrastructure should
be used in the context of these other ‘end-goals’.
A further suggested indicator could include measures of co-
operation and aid from government (e.g. via
subsidies/certification for sustainable energy generation).
To adopt the suggestion by WB on altering the indicator to

capture the trade data on uptake of clean energy technologies
by lower income countries.
A more basic indicator on the level of infrastructure

investment may have increased value, using a three to five
year weighted average.
Target 8.1: Sustain per capita economic growth in
accordance with national circumstances and, in particular,
at least 7 per cent gross domestic product growth per
Organization: annum in the least developed countries
ADD International

and Development
Asia South Pacific Association for

Basic and Adult Education
(ASPBAE)

Beyond 2015 UK
Bioregional
CAFOD
CBM UK
CDP
Centre For Development

Alternatives

International
ChildFund Alliancd
Deutschland e.V.

Planners
Equality Now
ericsson
Executive Development Centre -

University of Lahore


HDS systems design science Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential goal, of
Human Rights Watch

ICMM and IPIECA
IDAY-International
IDDC


Family Health

Applied Psychology

World
and Development


Inc. ("ISACI")

Delhi
Kepa Finland A general comment: there is a very strong emphasis on
traditional, GDP-measured economic growth under this goal.
The approach should be more diversified in order to take all
the dimensions of sustainable development fully into account.
MADE

Unions
NCD Alliance
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 1. Measurement of Intergroup and intragroup disparity of
Organization (NNDSWO) average income growth across sex, disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status and rural-
urban divide.
OneFamilyPeople Disability is omitted in specific targets dealing vulnerable

groups. We have therefore recommended in the specific target
dealing with persons with disabilities
Planning 4 Sustainable No target date! Many SIDS have 'remoteness' and

Development 'vulnerability' circumstances that makes this target very very
speculative
DERECHOS HUMANOS DE LA
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL
AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO
Save the Children INCLUDE:
Growth rates of household expenditure or income per capita

among the bottom 40 per cent of the population and the total
population.
Sightsavers

Society for the Psychological Include Psychosocial Wellbeing and resilience measures of
Study of Social Issues; Psychology sustainable development in addition to GDP.
Coalition at the United Nations

Tebtebba

The Hague University of Applied This is absurd.
Science
Since sustaining (keeping constant) something dynamic (such
as growth) is a contradiction in terms and indeed a cause of
most unsustainability challenges. sustaining unsustainability at
the cost of nature becomes a norm. As Paul Ekins (1991) has
noted, a sustainable ‘consumer society’ is an oxymoron and
certainly not something that can be sustained in the long term.
While the countries of the global North or West are still driving
global environmental degradation, particularly if measured in
per capita terms or from a consumption perspective, yet the
developing countries’ economies are swiftly catching up
The aspiring ‘emerging economies’ do not seem to be fostering

alternative environmentally benign development paths.
Following outwardly admirable SDG’s objectives, growth
strategies pursued in developing countries do in fact allow –
and stimulate - economic growth taking the driver’s seat, with
the ‘catch-up’ with the rich countries being the overriding goal.
TRK asbl
UCLG We support the proposal of UNCDF to disaggregate the

indicator at subnational levels (GDP per capita by region or
province, cities)
Women Access Trust Organisation One of the indicators should be the number of sustainable
Of Nigeria platforms set up for effective collection and distribution of GDP
for domestic and International transactions
- New Ways
Women's Major Group

World Vision
WWF
Target 8.2: Achieve higher levels of economic productivity
through diversification, technological upgrading and
innovation, including through a focus on high-value added
and labour-intensive sectors
Supported Appropriate city and regional planning can assist
in this area
Exactly
"This indicator doesn't quite capture the goal of the target.
Maybe supply chain metric or innovation metric?
"
May be specified
1. Having principles of non-discrimination based on as well
as affirmative action for people based on sex, disability, race,
caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status and
rural-urban divide in economic productivity through
diversification, technological up-gradation and renovation.
2. Disaggregated data of higher levels of economic activity
based on sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or
economic or other status and rural-urban divide.
Target 8.3: Promote development-oriented policies that
support productive activities, decent job creation,
entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and
encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small-
and medium-sized enterprises, including through access
to financial services
Indicator 1: Percentage of rural Population with Financial
access - with at least one person employed in a family through
small medium enterprises besides other jobs.
Comment: A population cluster – village/county should have
some kind of industry in their periphery with them being the
primary beneficiaries.
Proposed indicator: Number of jobs created for young people

through skills training programs.
Proposed indicator: Number of enterprises supported through

education, training and resources for young entrepreneurs.
Proposed indicator: Number of young people receiving

appropriate financial services.
Supported Appropriate city and regional planning can assist in

this area
add indicator on enterprises and access to financial services
(incl ICT access)
For Pakistan, it would prudent to add in the requirement for

stringent and regularly scheduled checks on the *application*
and *follow-through* of development-oriented policies. That is
where the progress stalls.
Not all methods of production and trade (e.g. fairly traded or
sustainably produced or not), type of organisations (e.g. Fair
Trade organisations or inclusive business models or not)
deliver the same sustainable development outcomes. The
proportion/volumes of key commodities PRODUCED under
sustainable or Fair Trade schemes, and then the
proportion/volumes of those commodities that are then SOLD
or traded as certified from/within those countries into the
consumer market (i.e that are then part of a sustainable
consumption offer) would be useful indicators.
It is basic approach of economic development for every
developing country
This target is a very wide target with many different elements.
The proposed indicator: Share of informal employment in non-
agriculture employment by sex covers only a small part of the
target. To measure progress on the formalization of
employment and its impact in the eradication of poverty this
indicator should be disaggregated by income.
"This should be focused on developing nations, especially third
world nations"
"This should be fouced on developing social enterprise and
social economy."
8.4.1 Annual global production and sales of chemicals.
The chemical industry is a major driver of economic growth

and employs more than 20 million people globally. Nearly all
workers are potentially exposed to chemical hazards because
chemicals are used in occupations ranging from mining,
welding, mechanical & manufacturing work, to office work.
8.8.1 Monitor the number of safe and decent jobs involving
chemicals and waste in manufacturing, and design, processes
and productions, including resources recovery and recycling.
No comments
1. Presence of a national policy on ensures non-
discrimination and substantive equality in the processes of
recruitment, employment in work place and in supply chain.
2. Percentage of trained teachers employed from socially
3. Adequate budgetary allocation for job creation,
entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation for people based
on their disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, occupation
religion or economic or other status and rural-urban divide.
Promote development-oriented policies that support productive

activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and
innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of
micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through
access to regulated financial services.
Informal labor is an obstacle to decent work and a persistent

problem in Mexico and Latin America, with millions of people
who have informal jobs without social protection and labor
rights. In this context, to measure decent job creation it is
important to include structural indicators in order to identify
deficiencies in public policy.
The proposed indicators cover only a sub-set of the breadth of
the target. Additional, potentially useful and important
indicators, may include:
‘Investments in R&D – government and private sector’
‘Start-up funding available, including via government, private
sector, and crowd-funding’
‘Growth rates of (social) enterprises’
‘Establishment of legal entities that promote/enable innovative
partnerships and new organisation structures’
On 8.3.1. Information should be disaggregated by sector,
gender and location (U/R).
Target 8.4: Improve progressively, through 2030, global
resource efficiency in consumption and production and
endeavour to decouple economic growth from
environmental degradation, in accordance with the 10-
year framework of programmes on sustainable
consumption and production, with developed countries
taking the lead
Target 8.4 seeks to achieve similar objectives to SDG 12 and
therefore the indicators employed for each are interlinked and
can be used to complement primary measurements of
progress for each target. The indicator proposed by the UNSD
for target 8.4 needs some direction to ensure it is climate-
proof. This indicator decouples economic growth from
environmental degradation but lacks a measure of carbon
intensity necessary for climate-proofing this indicator. As such,
we suggest the following additional indicator.
i. Carbon intensity of an economy (CO2 equivalent/$GDP)
A measure of carbon intensity should be used as an additional
indicator here. In order to address the target in its entirety, this
new measure should not detract from other elements in the
target. As such, we suggest a measure of carbon intensity is
used in addition to the UNSD definition of ‘Resource
productivity’. The UNSD suggested indicator for target 12.1
should also be used to inform the measurement of progress for
this target.
The suggested priority indicator has changed since the first set
of proposals, and is now 'resource productivity'. This is vague
and undefined. We continue to favour an alternative which
gives a better reflection of the total public and private effort to
improve overall resource productivity and decouple economic
growth from environmental degradation, one is compatible with
the UN environmental and economic accounting framework.
This is "The Level of gross national expenditure on
environmental defence and protection and natural resource
base conservation, compared to GDP, compatible with the
SEEA accounting framework."
Target 8.4 seeks to achieve similar objectives to SDG 12 and

therefore the indicators employed for each are interlinked and
can be used to complement primary measurements of
progress for each target. The indicator proposed by the UNSD
for target 8.4 needs some direction to ensure it is climate-
proof. This indicator decouples economic growth from
environmental degradation but lacks a measure of carbon
intensity necessary for climate-proofing this indicator. As such,
we suggest the following additional indicator.
i. Carbon intensity of an economy (CO2 equivalent/$GDP)
A measure of carbon intensity should be used as an additional
indicator here. In order to address the target in its entirety, this
new measure should not detract from other elements in the
target. As such, we suggest a measure of carbon intensity is
used in addition to the UNSD definition of ‘Resource
productivity’. The UNSD suggested indicator for target 12.1
should also be used to inform the measurement of progress for
this target.
Data gathered by CDP's various programs (for companies and
Supported
Care must be taken that the proposed indicator on resource
productivity not penalize those countries and economies that
play a critical role in providing the material needs of the global
economy.
The principle of decoupling economic growth from

environmental degradation is important. As an indicator, it
needs to be developed in a way that supports the sustainable
growth of resource based activities, particularly in developing
countries where the the development of such resources plays
such a fundamental in their economic growth and poverty
eradication prospects.
I hope so
The chemical industry is a major driver of economic growth
and employs more than 20 million people globally. Nearly all
workers are potentially exposed to chemical hazards because
chemicals are used in occupations ranging from mining,
welding, mechanical & manufacturing work, to office work
May be shortened in one line

1. Disaggregated data on multiple dimension index (MDI)
inclusive of – age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin,
occupation religion or economic or other status and rural-urban
divide— of employment within government sector.
divide— of employment within private sector.
divide— employment in non-formal sector.
divide— of bonded labour.
5. Presence of Comprehensive law and policies to counter
the practice of bonded labour and effective implementation the
said policy.
Environmental degradation and the use of natural resources

have a direct impact on the economic dynamics of any country,
so it is essential to include an indicator to calculate the
economic costs for the conservation, protection and restoration
of the environment and natural resources, damaged by human
activities.
The information collected from these indicators is important
and useful. However, the data is limited in that it only covers
resource use and links to environmental degradation will – in
some cases – be highly indirect. It is very important to consider
also that DMC does not incorporate the indirect resource
extraction which is required to produce imports (and therefore
it is not a complete estimate of all the materials required for
consumption). Thus, it is extremely important that full-
consumption indicators (e.g. Material Footprint/Total Material
Consumption) are retained in the indicator set and used as a
complement to DMC, in order to truly ascertain whether
production activities (and impacts) have been decoupled from
economic growth. There is a risk that – if such complements
are not maintained – that damaging production is ‘offshored’
with potentially severe environmental and political implications.
Suitable for purpose

How is this decoupling to hbe done? This is a key question.
SDGs also promote ‘sustainable industrialisation’ and

‘sustainable use of land’. Sustainable USE is again a highly
anthropocentric term. As critical observers have reflected,
unless fundamental issues conserving production and
consumption, as well as population growth are addressed, the
practice is likely to be ABUSE of ecosystems. Besides, USING
anything without giving back is ethically problematic – at least
as it has been presently framed in the ‘enlightened’ academic
and politically correct public discourse (e.g. using slaves, using
women, etc.).

WWF supports the suggested indicator “Resource productivity”
but it would be important to ensure that the definition of
resource productivity includes ‘resources within exclusive
national jurisdiction and control’. “Territories” do not cover the
fishing waters of states (EEZ), and so this definition would not
include most fisheries in the resource productivity of a state.
Catch data would be available in national catch data
documentation
Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive
employment and decent work for all women and men,
including for young people and persons with disabilities,
and equal pay for work of equal value
We welcome the inclusion of disability in the second suggested
indicator (Unemployment rate by sex, age-group and
disability), but recommend that disability also be included in
the first suggested indicator (average hourly earnings of
female and male employees by occupations -Wages/Gender
wage gap).
A pilot study by the ILO in 10 Low and Middle Income

Countries found that countries could lose up to 5% of their
GDP if disabled people did not have equal access to
employment (source: S Buckup, The Price of Exclusion: the
Economic Consequences of Excluding People with Disabilities
from the World of Work, International Labour Organisation,
Geneva, 2009)
Much data is already available to help measure progress

against the proposed indicators: 73 countries collected
information on disability in recent labour force surveys and
other surveys including a labour force module; 98 countries
collected information on disability in their last census – this
information can be cross-tabulated with employment data
typically collected in census.
Comment on suggested indicators:

- Include ILO’s decent work country profiles framework
which measures national progress towards achievement of
decent work indicators. Capacity of countries will need to be
developed to enable them assess, monitor and report on
progress towards decent work.
- There is also the need to ensure that data disaggregation
ensures that these targets are also being met by diaspora and
migrants (or refugees, IDPs etc), either as entrepreneurs or
recipients of jobs.
- We recommend an indicator around growth of (fast-growth)
SMEs as they are typically the ones that create employment.
This target cannot be met without that sector growing.
The indicators for this target must clearly address all
components of decent work, not merely the existence of work
or average earnings. Rights at work and social dialogue must
also be measured. Suitable indicators include:
➢ Percentage of workers receiving a living wage
(disaggregated by gender, migration status, disability, age)
➢ Percentage of sectors and/or enterprises with collective
bargaining agreements
➢ Enactment in national legislation of the eight ILO
fundamental Conventions and other key instruments, including
ILO Convention on decent work for domestic workers (ILO
Convention 189) including provisions for equality of treatment
in respect of employment (in particular wages, social security
benefits and skills recognition).
➢ Percentage of workers covered by the national labour
code (disaggregated by migration status, gender)
The right to a living wage is based on ILO Conventions 95 and
131, ILO Recommendations 131 and 135, and article 23 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Relevance: The indicator reflects unemployment and pay rates
aspirations of the target, but lacks a focus on “decent work” or
pay equity (beyond gender)
Aptness: The indicator reflects outcomes of marginalised
groups, it could usefully add a qualitative indicator to capture
discrimination or working conditions.
Disaggregation: By sex, age and disability. Other groups
marginalised in the work place such as ethnic minorities, could
also be considered.
Preference: The indicator is disaggregated and compare
male:female wage gap, so could therefore create a preference
if equity targets reflect this.
Transformative: The indicator is not transformative, but could
do so through inclusion of an indicator reflecting workers'
rights, for example.
In order to achieve the target for all, the indicator must include
people with disabilities. We suggest: Unemployment rate,
Full and productive employment for men and women is not
adequate. There is a need to add gender inequalities in the
labour market outcomes as follows: (considering the available
data in countries):
1. Gender gap in the workforce participation rates
2. % of women participating in total professional jobs
3. % of women in the total formal sector
Proposed indicator: Number of quality, well-paying jobs

created for young people through skills training programs.
This target mentions explicitly persons with disabilities and all

relevant indicators to this target must accordingly be fully
disaggregated by disability. It should clearly appear in the first
suggested indicator (Average hourly earnings of female and
male employees by occupations -Wages/Gender wage gap)
just like it is already included in the second suggested indicator
(Unemployment rate by sex, age-group and disability).
Supported
This target mentions explicitly persons with disabilities and
there should be fully disaggregated by disability. It should
clearly appear in the first suggested indicator (Average hourly
earnings of female and male employees by occupations
-Wages/Gender wage gap) just like it is already included in the
second suggested indicator (Unemployment rate by sex, age-
group and disability).
For this target, comprehensive disaggregation by age

(preferably in five-year intervals) will be important in order to
fully capture whether full and productive employment and
decent work is achieved for all women and men, including
young people. In the European context, figures for youth
unemployment often extend beyond age 24 to age 29 or
further. Youth is seen as a period of transition from childhood
to adulthood, and this transition phase has become delayed in
many European countries, with young people achieving
autonomy later. As such, the age-group disaggregation for the
unemployment rate should be comprehensive.
This is imperative! We need to move swiftly from the planning

to the implementation stage to ensure success of policies
promoting full and productive employment and decent work for
all women and men.
Unemployment rate, disaggregated for persons with/without
disabilities
Explicit mention of persons with disabilities so should be fully
disaggregated by disability. It should appear in the first
indicator (Average hourly earnings of female and male
employees by occupations -Wages/Gender wage gap) as it is
already included in the second one (Unemployment rate by
sex, age-group and disability).

For both proposed indicators disaggregation by ethnicity is
This target seeks to ensure that productive employment is

universally accessible. In order to measure the inclusion of
persons with disabilities in these targets, the indicators, such
as employment rates, need to be disaggregated by disability,
age and gender. While the proposed indicators mention
disaggregation by gender and age group, they do not include a
call for data disaggregated by disability.
Good idea

thus the indicators need to be fully disaggregated by disability.
It should be incorporated into the first suggested indicator
regarding average hourly earnings, as it is included in the
second suggested indicator on unemployment rate.
Additional Indicators:
1. Presence of Social protection for workers
2.Reduction in informal economy
3.Potential for sense of achievement and accomplishment
from work
4. Elimination of Hazardous working conditions
5. Elimination of bonded labor
6.Freedom of association of workers
7. increase in full-time career employment and reduction of
part-time, seasonal employment
8. equal opportunities for all genera, ages, ethnicity
ICN suggests including average hourly earnings in female
dominant profession compared to male dominant or gender
balanced profession in a similar category (e.g. pre-school
teachers and primary school teachers, or nurses and
physicians).
Indicator:
Unemployment rate, disaggregated for persons with/without
disabilities.
(73 countries collected information on disability in recent

labour force surveys and other surveys including a labour force
module; 98 countries collected information on disability in their
last census – this information can be cross-tabulated with
employment data typically collected in census.)
Comment:
In particular, the indicators for targets 4.5 and 8.5 should be
disaggregated for persons with/without disabilities. In addition,
for target 4.5, an indicator on inclusion is needed to ensure
equal access. It is not enough for children with disabilities to
enrol/attend school - access to education for all requires that
teachers have the capacity to teach students with special
educational needs. Therefore the following indicator is
proposed: ‘percentage of teachers receiving in-service training
each year on inclusive education’ (this indicator is also linked
to targets 4.c and 10.2).
Suggested indicator for target 8.5: Unemployment rate by sex,

age-group and disability focuses on workers in the formal
economy but it doesn’t measure underemployment and
poverty of people working in the informal economy. To
understand the relationship in between poverty and
employment and the impact of decent work on the reduction of
poverty those aspects will need to be measured.
This should account for racial/ethnic disparity and bias
Consider using the indicators for advocay policy for young

persons and people with disability
No comments
We welcome the suggestion to monitor the Gender Wage/Pay
Gap.
We, however, still feel that is important to complement this

target with an indicator on the informal economy to give a
more holistic picture of the employment situation. Therefore it
is important to measure: Share of informal employment in total
employment disaggregated by gender
Propose the following: 8.5.1. Number of people in a country

achieving at least a minimum level of GDP per capita in PPP-
adjusted international dollars; and, 8.5.2. Data collected on
harm from alcohol at workplace
By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent
work for all women and men, including persons with
disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value.
To measure decent work is required to have a set of indicators

that goes beyond simple unemployment, the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights stipulates
that States must guarantee the right of everyone to the
enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work which
ensure, in particular: remuneration which ensures all workers a
decent living for themselves and their families, without
distinction of any kind; safe and healthy working conditions;
equal opportunity for everyone to be promoted in their
employment to an appropriate higher level; as well as rest,
leisure and reasonable limitation of working hours, periodic
holidays with pay and remuneration for public holidays.
As a minimum, it is proposed to incorporate the ILO indicators
for decent work, which include four areas: (1) the creation of
quality jobs for men and women; (2) the extension of social
protection; (3) the promotion and strengthening of social
dialogue, and (4) respect for the principles and rights at work.
INCLUDE:
Average hourly earnings disaggregated by age of female and

male (employees by occupations (Wages/Gender wage gap)

Data on full and productive employment and decent work for
all and equal pay for work of equal value, disaggregated by
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration status
Data on the mental health and psychosocial wellbeing of

employees in relation to their productivity, disaggregated by
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration status.
8.5: Existence of legal or regulatory frameworks to protect

local economies and traditional livelihoods/occupations
including subsistence livelihoods]
Budgeting for youth entrepreneurship indicator by gender
groups

8.5.1 Percentage of women in trade unions or covered by

collective bargaining agreements
8.5.1 Percentage of women in trade unions or covered by

collective bargaining agreements
An important dimension of decent work is the extent to which

workers can express themselves on work-related matters and
participate in defining their working conditions. This can involve
direct interaction between the worker and employer or may be
channeled through collectively chosen representatives. The
ability of workers to organize freely to defend their interests
collectively in negotiations with the employer is a pivotal
element of democracy at the workplace and the effectiveness
of social dialogue.
Target 8.6: By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of
youth not in employment, education or training
Support the proposed indicator but with an amendment:
% of youth not in education, employment or training (NEET)

with age of youth to follow national standards
Rationale:
Countries have their own definition of age period for youth.
Following country definitions will provide a better gauge of how
countries are progressing in reducing youth NEET.
Proposed indicator: Number of young people involved in
Economic Citizenship Education and/or employabiility training.
Proposed indicator: % of youth populations that are in

meaningful work or a skills training program.
Supported
As stated above for target 8.5, the proportion of youth not in
employment, education or training should be measured
beyond age 24. Youth is seen as a period of transition from
childhood to adulthood, and this transition phase has become
delayed in many European countries, with young people
achieving autonomy later. The percentage should be captured
for the age bracket 25-34, for example, in addition to 15-24
(and ideally broken down into five-year intervals).
If the following statistics are considered, it is imperative that

work to categorise and bridge the gap for Pakistan's youth not
in employment, education or training begins now.
"Out of 180 million, 60 percent of Pakistan's population
comprises of youth. According to 2008 statistics, 36 million are
in the age group of 20-24 years and 58 million are below the
age of 15."
Suggested Indicator 8.6.1: Suggest it includes specific
reference to gender
Percentage of youth, by gender (15-24) not in education,
employment or training (NEET)
Promote rural based productive income generation activities
and educate youth in rural areas to take up profession in such
areas identified that will serve rural communities. One example
is Agriculture. The second areas is the decentralized spare
parts manufacturing by rural youth.
Percentage
Disaggregating this indicator by income will allow to track
progress on the access to education, employment or training
for the poorest and most excluded youth.
This doesn't capture the opportunities presented to the youths.
Should at least be broken down by race, sex, and disability.
Needs index on incentive
No comments
a) Number of youth engaged in productive employment and
decent work.
1. Unemployment rate by— age, sex, disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, origin, occupation religion or economic or other status
and rural-urban divide.
2. Affirmative action to promote youth from diversity based
on sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, occupation
religion or economic or other status and rural-urban divide for
employment, education and training.
By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth

especially those with disabilities not in employment, education
or training
AMEND SUGGESTED INDICATOR 8.6.1:
a) Percentage of youth (15-24) disaggregated by gender,

race, geography not in education, employment or training
(NEET) (AAA)
8.6.1 Percentage of youth (15-24) not in education,

employment or training (NEET)
DATA SOURCE: Household surveys (LFS, HIES, LSMS,

Integrated HH surveys, etc.), Administrative records.
TIER: Tier I
Data on the number and proportion of youth in employment,
education and training, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
Data on training in income generating

activities/entrepreneurship skills, especially for youth, girls and
women, orphans, vulnerable children and those at risk,
combined with life skills training, to address poverty and
women’s empowerment, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
Addressing population growth might help

Target 8.7: Take immediate and effective measures to
eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human
trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of
the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and
use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all
its forms
Revise indicator to read: Percentage and number of children
under the age of 18 engaged in worst forms of child labour, per
sex and age group disaggregated by gender and age groups
of 0-5, 5-11, 12-14, 15-17 years, in:
a) all forms of slavery and practices
similar to slavery;
b) commercial sexual exploitation;
c) illicit activities; and
d) hazardous work
e) children affected by armed conflict
f) children in conflict with law
Additional indicator: Existence of legislative and institutional

framework to tackle trafficking, slavery and forced labour in all
its forms.
We strongly support the following suggested indicator:
• Percentage and number of children aged 5-17 years
engaged in child labour, per sex and age group (disaggregated
by the worst forms of child labour).
In our view the following indicator, which is currently proposed
for 16.2, would be more suitable as an indicator for target 8.7,
which explicitly aims to eradicate forced labour:
• Number of victims of trafficking (within and across
countries), slavery, exploitation and forced labour, per 100,000
Supported
The proposed indicator rightly addresses child labour,

including the worst forms of child labour). However, the
ambition of the target to eliminate forced labour is not
addressed. Hence, a supplementary indicator to monitor
progress in the eradication of forced labour needs to be
developed.
Existence of and implementation of laws against sexual
exploitation of girls and women, including by buyers of
commercial sex, pimps, and brothel keepers.
Laws that decriminalize and provide services to women and

girls who are exploited in the commercial sex trade.
Revision in indicators:
Percentage & number of children under the age of 18 engaged
in child labour, per sex & age group
Percentage &a number of children under the age of 18

engaged in the worst forms of child labour, disaggregated by
sex and age groups (5-11, 12-14, 15-17), in:
a) all forms of slavery & practices similar to slavery;
b) commercial sexual exploitation;
c) illicit activities; &
d) hazardous work
Number of people in forced labour, disaggregated by gender

and age
New indicators:
Number of people in modern slavery & human trafficking per
100,000 (within & across countries), disaggregated by sex,
age, region, & type
Existence & implementation of legal frameworks (incl

revision/enactments) &/or allocation of resources for
eradication of forced labour, modern slavery & human
trafficking
Existence & implementation of legal frameworks (incl

revision/enactments) &/or allocation of resources for
prohibition of child labour & eliminating the worst forms of child
labour, including recruitment & use of child soldiers

Is it not particularly important to understand the ethnicity of the
child to ascertain whether particular groups or countries are
being targeted? Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible within
The only proposed indicator focuses on children. It's
insufficient.
- Number and percentage of people engaged in forced labour
and modern slavery, disaggregated per sex, age group,
ethnicity, disability
- Number of people victim of human trafficking
Not labour happened independent have to do it, much

investment more involvement of civil society
Should be broken by race and national origin
Index on proportion of workforce that is solely forced labor by
nation/industry sector to target the worse offenders.
To be shortened.
1. The comprehensive law to link local governance agencies
and mechanisms to ensure elimination of practice of bonded
labour.
2. Percentage of reported cases of bonded labour to
increase by 50%.
3. Percentage of conviction rate in instances of bonded
labour to increase by 80%.
4. Comprehensive law and policies to counter the practice of
manual scavenging.
5. Percentage of reported cases of manual scavenging to
increase by 50%.
Percentage of children aged 5-17 years engaged in child

labour
RATIONALE: Children are considered to be involved in child

labour when they are either too young to work or are involved
in activities harmful to their health and development. Children’s
involvement in hazardous work can compromise their physical,
mental, social and educational development. It is recognized
that the target is broader and inclusive of more concepts than
just child labour but it is recommended that the indicator
should be focused on hazardous work, since there is currently
no solid or internationally agreed methodologies for collecting
information on the worst forms of child labour or the
involvement of children in armed conflicts.
8.7.1 Percentage and number of children aged 5-17 years

engaged in child labour, (disaggregated by the worst forms of
child labour)
DATA SOURCE: Household surveys (Child Labour Surveys,

Mixed Surveys, LFS, HIES, LSMS, Integrated HH surveys,
etc.).
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: Responsible entity: ILO.

Availability: Data available for about 60 countries (at least one
data set collected in each of past 5 years for generating
estimates of the proposed indicators).
TIER: Tier II
8.7.2 Number of people in forced labor
DATA SOURCE: Household surveys (Child Labour Surveys,

Mixed Surveys, LFS, HIES, LSMS, Integrated HH surveys,
etc.).
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: Responsible entity: ILO.

Availability: 10 countries for selected forms of forced labour,
pending national circumstances.
Data on the number and proportion of people experiencing
forced labour, modern slavery, human trafficking, and all forms
of child labour, disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,
indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence, national
origin, and migration status.
We strongly support the following suggested indicator:
• Percentage and number of children aged 5-17 years
engaged in child labour, per sex and age group (disaggregated
by the worst forms of child labour).
The indicator provides good indication of changes that are

intended through this target. Countries have already
implemented existing tools and mechanisms for data collection
to monitor the situation using this indicator. World Vision also
recognizes that disaggregation by the worst forms of labour is
currently methodologically difficult, but welcomes the
investments in statistical monitoring systems that will make it
possible
In our view the following indicator, which is currently proposed

for 16.2, would be more suitable as an additional indicator for
target 8.7, which explicitly aims to eradicate forced labour:
• Number of victims of trafficking (within and across
countries), slavery, exploitation and forced labour, per 100,000
WWF supports the suggested indicator “Percentage and

number of children aged 5-17 years engaged in child labour,
per sex and age group” and recommends that it also be
disaggregated by sector of activity in order to capture child
labour in agriculture, aquaculture and fisheries.
Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and
secure working environments for all workers, including
migrant workers, in particular women migrants, and those
in precarious employment
We support the following suggested indicator:

• Frequency rates of fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries
and time lost due to occupational injuries by gender and
migration status
We suggest to amend the following suggested indicator:
• Number of ILO Conventions ratified by type of Convention,
ADD: "and implemented into national legal framework".
We support the following indicators:
• Number of countries in which all migrant workers, regardless
of migration status, enjoy equal wages for equal work relative
to nationals by 2020.
of migration status, can exercise the right to form and
participate in trade unions and other worker associations by
2020.
• Proportion of migrant workers reporting discrimination and
abuse at work who initiated legal or administrative action by
2020.
• Number of migrant workers that regularized their status
based on a work relationship by 2020.
We agree with the proposed indicator measuring ratification of
ILO Conventions. However it is unacceptable to measure a
safe & secure working environment by reference to industrial
accidents. Regarding conditions of work for migrant workers,
we propose
➢ Percentage of workers covered by the national labour
code (by migration status, gender)
- Existence of policies ensuring labour recruitment costs
including visa costs are borne by the employer
- Percentage of migrant workers in debt.
➢ Wage gap between employed migrants and employed
nationals
➢ Share of migrant workers in regular employment, by
gender
➢ Number of social security agreements ensuring the
portability of social security benefits.
Governments have the primary responsibility to prevent
exploitation of migrants in line with their international human
rights commitments. Policies should be designed to both
reduce exploitative practices and identify individuals or groups
at risk of falling victim to exploitation.
Supported
for suggested indicator 1 disaggregation by ethnicity is
- Percentage of workers without proper employment contract
and socioprofessional, disaggregated per trade/economic
sector
Good propose. However the problem of ecnomic development

due to jobless in their cou tries, they have to go developed
countries to get jobs
Gender inequality therefore to the salary for migrant women is
low
Migrant women are tarhet of sexual explotation
Indicator 8.8.2 - ICN suggests including work related illness
and disabilities (both physical and mental) in addition to
injuries.
Suggested indicator to measure target 8.8: Frequency rates of

fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries and time lost due to
occupational injuries by gender and migrant status is a good
indicator, however, when it comes to implementation and
important development outcomes that reach workers who live
in poverty, this indicator falls short, it could overlook workers in
precarious work or informal work. There are other options such
as self-reported excessive work hours or self-reported
precarious work, which when disaggregated could better
describe the experience of the most vulnerable workers with
regards to employment. The other proposed indicator:
Ratifying Fundamental ILO Labor Conventions could be an
important structural indicator for the protection of labor rights
but it doesn’t provide information about the actual
implementation of the Conventions.
migration status
2020.
2020.
Consider developing the lndex of labor rights for migrant

workers, in particluar women migrants and children.
No comments
a) Minimum living wages established (set at the national level).
b) Reduction of proportion of employed people living in poverty
with a salary that cannot cover a minimum living standard.
c) Ratification and implementation of the eight ILO Core Labor
Standards and Ratification and implementation of the ILO
Convention No. 155 on Occupational Safety and Health and
compliance in law and practice.
d) Percentage of workplaces with Collective Bargaining
Agreements and Supporting Policies.
e) Number of youth with capacity to develop business ideas
which contribute to the wellbeing of themselves, the societies
and the planet.
=> This target should be amended to protect decent work and

fundamental workers’ rights for all and reduce unfair income
disparities.

migration status
2020.
2020.
We suggest to include to suggested indicator Frequency rates

of fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries and time lost due to
occupational injuries by gender and migrant status also a
measure of "number of trained labour inspectors as a ratio of
workforce"
In addition, we believe that there could still be a dedicated

indicator on migrant work: Labour migration indicators,
including wage gap between migrants and nationals
Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working
environments for all workers, including migrant workers, in
particular women migrants with disabilities , and those in
precarious employment
to include other social and economic groups, including age,

ethnicity and migratory status.
RATIONALE: We know that young people are migrating for

work. According to OECD:
“Six out of every ten international migrants under the age of 20

resided in developing regions.”
(http://www.oecd.org/els/mig/World-Migration-in-Figures.pdf)
8.8.1 Existence of and implementation of laws on non-

discriminatory labor and workplace policies, including
protections against discrimination, violence, harassment
8.8.1 Ratification and implementation of ILO Convention

concerning decent work for domestic workers (Convention
189) and related Recommendation No. 201.
8.8.1 Ratification and implementation of ILO Convention
concerning decent work for domestic workers (Convention
189) and related Recommendation No. 201.
ILO Information System on International Labor Standards

(NORMLEX),46 ILO General Surveys, Official Gazettes.
Domestic workers comprise a significant part of the global

workforce in informal employment and are among the most
vulnerable groups of workers. There are at least 53 million
domestic workers worldwide, and domestic work is the largest
source of waged employment for women in Asia. Domestic
workers remain highly susceptible to violations of their rights to
decent work and a living wage, contrary to the rights provided
for in ILO Domestic Workers Convention (no. 189 (2011)).
WWF supports the suggested indicator “Number of ILO
conventions ratified by type of convention” but recommends
that it also be broadened to other relevant labour codes, to
read: “Number of ILO conventions and other relevant labour
safety instruments that are ratified and implemented”. Other
conventions and instruments would include the Cape Town
Agreement of 2012 on the Implementation of the Provisions of
the 1993 Torremolinos Protocol and IMO International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel. If proposed
indicator 8.8.2 is retained, it should also be disaggregated by
sector of activity.
Target 8.9: By 2030, devise and implement policies to
promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and
promotes local culture and products
Supported
Existence and implementation of laws that criminalize sex
tourism with those exploited in sex tourism and the commercial
sex trade, including buyers of commercial sex, pimps, and
brothel keepers.
Laws the decriminalize and provide services to those exploited

in sex tourism and the commercial sex trade.
Community participation will help in this and already there are
number of examples.
I is good idea. However how to do it have the involvement of

many sustainable bank, commercial, technology
Need a measure to determine if tourism is beneficial compared
to the destructive forces of tourism
Tourism is a signficiant revenue generator for developing

countries and Smalll Island Developing States. But this sector
is also responsible for generating waste streams, in particular
plastic packaging which is difficult to dispose of in an
environmentally sound manner.
8.9.1 Use procurement mechanisms that offer biodegradable
packaging or bulk supply in order to reduce packaging waste.
8.9.2 Food wastes should be separated at source and
disposed of using organic methods.
8.9.3 Airplane wastes such as plastic drinkware should be
minimized in favour of biodegradable materials (including
bagasse) or flown back to the flight origin
No comments
The proposed indicators are not fit for purpose. Firstly, they do
not touch on sustainability at all. Secondly, given that the
target is about policies, it seems strange that there isn’t an
indicator such as ‘Presence/submission of national policy on
sustainable tourism, covering job-creation and local cultural
aspects'. A standardised framework for such a policy would -
presumably - be possible via requests made to countries to
provide (regularly updated) policies on a regular basis to e.g.
via the UNWTO?
8.9: # of jobs and livelihoods created for indigenous peoples

through development of sustainable tourism
WWF strongly supports the UNWTO proposal under 8.9.2 to
replace the indicator ‘Tourism consumption” with
“Environmental pressure indicator; residual flows and natural
inputs...derived from a SEEA for Tourism” which would better
reflect the intent of this target.
Target 8.10: Strengthen the capacity of domestic financial
institutions to encourage and expand access to banking,
insurance and financial services for all
appropriate financial products and services.
Proposed indicator: % of institutions in the financial services

sector that offer Child and Youth Friendly Banking products.
Supported
should NOT be "Number of commercial bank branches and
ATMs per 100,000 adults" since it doesnt include mobile
banking, and mobile money at all. Instead measure: access to
mobile banking/money services
This is of particular interest to my non-profit effort, catalyst

woman.com, where I am researching the role of financial
exclusion on Women's Empowerment in Pakistan.
Every village should have one bank / financial institutions that
works closely with the local communities.
It is good to do it
No comments
1. Presence of a policy for financial inclusion and extension
of adequate credit facilities to entrepreneurs based on sex,
disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, occupation religion or
economic or other status and rural-urban divide.
2. Non-discriminatory access to financial credit for all
communities, especially those based on disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, origin, occupation religion or economic or other status
and rural-urban divide and sex.
Strengthen the capacity of domestic financial institutions to

encourage and expand access to regulated banking, insurance
and financial services for all.
8.10.1 % adults and youth with a formal account or personally
using a mobile money service in the past 12 months". Possible
to have a break down by income e.g. bottom 40% of income
share or <$1.25/day, Adults: ages 15+
Data on access to domestic banking, insurance, and financial
services, disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,
indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence, national
Add: 8.10.3 Increased percentage of adults (at every stage of

life) with a formal account or personally using a mobile money
service in the past 12 months, by income, gender, age,and
rural, with access to basic financial services
This is a revision of 8.10.3 proposed by WB and UPU, but

grouping adults 15+. Full adult age disaggregation is
essential.
8.10: Ratio/or percentage of indigenous peoples and other

disadvantaged groups, disaggregated by sex, accessing
appropriate financial services
8.10.1 Percentage of people, by age and gender, with access

to basic financial services.
Target 8.a: Increase Aid for Trade support for developing
countries, in particular least developed countries,
including through the Enhanced Integrated Framework for
Trade-Related Technical Assistance to Least Developed
Countries
Supported
To help reduce poverty, growth must be pro-poor. This means
growth must benefit the poorest sections of society
proportionally more than it benefits the better off. One possible
indicator would be the number of small producer cooperatives
that are partner or beneficiaries of pro-poor government
programmes to develop commercialisation opportunities in the
local, regional and international markets.
In terms of Aid for Trade policy making (priority-setting at

national level, oversight of implementation), the role of
beneficiaries is key. A propose inclusiveness indicators would
be linked to the number of small producers and workers that
have been consulted by governments in the design of policies,
projects and programmes. The objective is to make them
effective and pro-poor, meaning that they benefit the poorest
proportionally more than they benefit the better off.
For further reading, see the publication by the Fair Trade

Advocacy Office “Aid for Trade: Is the EU helping small
producers to trade their way out of poverty?” (September
2009).
Good idea. The competition of economic development depend
on the background of natural resources, modern technology
level and political problem
May be simplified
This indicator should receive high priority. There are many
LDCs with good potential when it comes especially to
agriculture and bio-based products.
Target 8.b: By 2020, develop and operationalize a global
strategy for youth employment and implement the Global
Jobs Pact of the International Labour Organization
Supported
The suggested indicator refers to the Global Jobs Pact and
does not include measurement of the development or
operationalisation of a global strategy for youth employment.
An indicator for the global strategy should be added, such as:
"Global strategy for youth employment exists and is
implemented".
we can do it. However coul or could not achieve are not sure
This should be divided ethnic or racial categories to see if
social protection is disportionate
No comments
On target 8.b.1, we fully support the inclusion of Collective
Bargaining Rates in the suggested indicator and would urge
that it be retained.
By 2020, develop and operationalize a global strategy for
youth employment including those with disabilities and
implement the Global Jobs Pact of the International Labour
Organization
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
Organization: affordable and equitable access for all
ADD International
Asian Disaster Reduction and Proposed indicator: % of critical infrastructure and road
Response Network (ADRRN) network that is inclusive, accessible, quality, hazard-
proofed and all-season, dis-aggregated by urban/rural.
The current suggested indicators focus on transportation
and road network. We suggest that the focus should not
just be on roads and should be the whole of critical
infrastructure including transport, water, energy, sanitation,
and communication as well as private sector
establishments and facilities, health and education
facilities and infrastructure, and community centers which
is not stated in the SDGs but are reflective of the goals of
the Sendai Framework. This is to ensure that critical
infrastructure, not just roads and road networks, is
designed to be resilient to extreme shocks and
disturbances.
Bioregional
Bond Disaster Risk Reduction The current proposed indicators focus only on transport
Working Group rather than a broader perspective of infrastructure – earlier
drafts of this target explicitly included water, energy, waste,
ICT, etc.
Further, the suggested indicators do not capture the sense
of infrastructure being ‘resilient’ (ie able to withstand
natural hazards such as floods, earthquakes etc) which is
critical for sustained economic development.
We propose a new indicator: % of critical infrastructure
and road network that is quality, hazard-proofed and all-
season, disaggregated by urban/rural
Critical infrastructure must be carefully defined: it should
include transport, water, energy, sanitation as well as
buildings for health and education which are not covered
elsewhere in the SDGs framework.
This proposed indicator has very close alignment with
Target (d) of the new global Sendai Framework for DRR,
with additional information to be taken from the Sendai
Framework monitor. Hence this is measurable and
verifiable.
CDP
Christian Aid The current proposed indicators focus only on transport

rather than a broader perspective of infrastructure – earlier
ICT, etc.
verifiable.
Deutschland e.V.
Commonwealth Association of Supported Appropriate city and regional planning can
Planners help maximise the cost benefit ratios of the limited input
funds
Danish Institute for Human RIghts The suggested indicator does not capture the aspects of
affordable and equitable access, but solely the
geographical distance to an all season road (availability).
This should be reformulated to address affordability and
accessibility.
Weltbevoelkerung

ericsson Good indicator suggested by ITU: "[Proportion of

households with broadband Internet access, by
urban/rural]"
9.1.1 should be ICT instead of only IT
Federal Environment Agency of

Germany
Foundation Center (on behalf of Additional indicators should be created and included here.
SDG Philanthropy Platform) One suggestion is
“Number of households and employment places with
access to broadband internet”
Global Health Technologies
Coalition
Global Network of Civil Society The current proposed indicators focus only on transport
Organisations for Disaster rather than a broader perspective of infrastructure – earlier
Reduction drafts of this target explicitly included water, energy, waste,
ICT, etc.
verifiable.
societies.
Health Priorities in Post-2015
Taskforce
ICMM and IPIECA
IDDC

Institute for Reproductive and Good idea

Family Health
International AIDS Vaccine
Initiative
International Association of Public Concerning the proposed indicator on passenger and

Transport (UITP) freight volumes at all levels (not excluding urban areas),
this should be aggregated by mode and volume, which will
help make the link to goal 11.2 as proposed by UITP.
Consideration should also be given to the capacity offer of
the transport modes.
International Council of Nurses ICN proposes a new indicator: proportion of infrastructure

integrating health impact assessment.
Inc. ("ISACI")
Kamla Nehru College, University of To be shortened

Delhi
Unions
MARS Practitioners Network The proposed indicator focus only on transport rather than
perspective of infrastructure in earlier drafts which
included water, energy, waste, ICT, etc. It does not
capture the target’s explicit reference to ‘resilience’ (i.e.
with standing damage in natural & technological disasters)
essential for sustained economic development &
avoiding wasted investment (from rebuilding roads every
few years washed away by floods ) & minimising
environmental & disaster risk consequences from building
new infrastructure & altering ecosystem balance. Much
good work has been done on this in Asia (ADB, MRC,
WWF, ADPC)
We support OXFAM’s new indicator: % of critical
infrastructure and road network that is quality, hazard-
proofed & all-season, with low ecosystem impact;
disaggregated by urban/rural. Critical infrastructure
definition should include transport, water, energy,
sanitation as well as buildings for health and education,
not explicitly covered elsewhere in the SDGs.
This proposal is aligned with Target (d) of the Sendai
Framework for DRR, with additional information to be
taken from the SFDRR monitor, and is measurable &
verifiable.
Oxfam The current proposed indicators focus only on transport

ICT, etc. Further, the suggested indicators do not capture
the sense of infrastructure being ‘resilient’ (i.e. able to
withstand natural hazards such as floods, earthquakes
etc) which is critical for sustained economic development.
season, disaggregated by urban/rural. Critical
infrastructure must be carefully defined: it should include
transport, water, energy, sanitation as well as buildings for
health and education which are not covered elsewhere in
the SDGs framework. This proposed indicator has very
close alignment with Target (d) of the new global Sendai
Framework for DRR, with additional information to be
taken from the Sendai Framework monitor. Hence this is
measurable and verifiable.
Partnership on Sustainable Low Proposed Indicator 7.3.1: Rate of improvement in energy
Carbon Transport intensity (%) measured in terms of primary energy and
GDP
Comments:
• Sectoral targets should be mentioned in particular for
transport that is a significant source and the fastest
growing sector in terms of energy use.
• As stated in comments by IFAD, UPU and WB in the
document, the Global Fuel Economy Initiative measures
average fuel economy regularly to enable measurement of
the overall CO2 emissions of the global fleet. Data are
available for major countries, regions and the globe.
PATH
Planning 4 Sustainable
Development
Policy Cures
Practical Action The current proposed indicator focusses only on transport

rather than a broader perspective of infrastructure and it
fails to capture the sense of this infrastructure being
‘resilient’ which is critical for sustained economic
development.
This indicator overlaps with Target (d) of the Sendai DRR
Framework, so additional information could be collected
from the Sendai monitoring process.
We propose the following indicator: % of critical

infrastructure and road network that is quality, hazard-
proofed and all-season, disaggregated by urban/rural.
reflect the essential services and respond to the shocks
and stresses to be expected
Sightsavers
Society for the Psychological Data on proportion of national, trans-border, and regional
Study of Social Issues; Psychology population employed in secure, quality, reliable and
Coalition at the United Nations sustainable physical infrastructure supportive of economic
development, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, rural/urban
Data on the psychosocial infrastructure (i.e. mental health

and psychosocial wellbeing) of national, transborder and
regional employed population, disaggregated by gender,
age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration status
Stockholm Environment Institute This is a highly amalgamated target, which is reflected in

the variety of indicator suggestions that have been
proposed. It is critical, however, that the scope goes
beyond the transport-related indicators that appear to
have been first suggested, to include ICT and energy etc.
An additional indicator that might be considered is the rate
of road traffic accidents occurring, which could be a good
indicator of the need to target investments.
TAG
TB Alliance
Tearfund The current proposed indicators focus only on transport

ICT, etc.



verifiable.
Tebtebba 9.1 and/or 9.a: Consultations with indigenous peoples and

participation in decision-making in regards to infrastructure
development based on FPIC
9.1: Appropriate environmental and social safeguards, in
accordance with international standards on indigenous
peoples’ rights, in all phases and levels of infrastructure
development projects
The Hague University of Applied In terms of production and consumption, what is needed is
Science a radical re-orientation of human industry away from those
systems that support ‘sustaining unsustainability’ - not
'resilience'.
This includes attempts to employ eco-efficiency,

adaptation, and resilience thinking or other conventional
measures that simply put delay the inevitable crisis without
addressing – and completely eliminating – the root causes
of unsustainability. This orientation calls for adherence to
the truly transformative frameworks, such as Cradle to
Cradle (McDonough and Braungart 2002) and circular
economy (Ellen MacArthur Foundation). These
frameworks promise to reach beyond conventional
sustainability which basically makes a bad system last
longer – but to design human industries in a way that
“replenishes, restores and nourishes the rest of the world”.
The distinction between “restoration” in a sense of striving
for “good growth” (as in the case of natural growth of
trees) is very different from economic growth (McDonough
and Braungart 2002) and the essentially taken but not give
back system that is implicit in the currently formulated
SDGs.

strong and proven inter-linkages between corruption and
public procurement.
-
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/activity/curbing_cor
ruption_in_public_procurement (for links between
corruption, construction and public procurement).
USIL A good goal. It is neceessary to create and implement

solidarity policies between developed countries and
Of Nigeria

Environment
WWF The proposed indicator does not capture sustainability
dimensions of this target. WWF proposes an additional
indicator to measure application of protective safeguards,
without which infrastructure projects risk damaging the
environment, climate, and communities—and actually
hindering growth: "Number of infrastructure projects that
meet best practice international standards for social and
environmental safeguards." Source information (World
Bank, regional development banks)
Y Care International The current proposed indicators focus only on transport

ICT, etc.
verifiable.
Target 9.2: Promote inclusive and sustainable
industrialization and, by 2030, significantly raise
industry’s share of employment and gross domestic
product, in line with national circumstances, and
double its share in least developed countries
Data gathered by CDP's various programs (for companies
and cities) could support tracking of progress against this
target.
Supported Appropriate city and regional planning can
help maximise the cost benefit ratios of the limited input
funds
societies.
Good idea however I think it is not reality

No comments
On 9.2.2, it is critical that this indicator seek to incorporate
better the environmental dimension of the SDGs. We do
not have a specific or readily available indicator to
propose, but reiterate the principle that we should be
trying to assess the environmental sustainability of
industrial growth. Something that tries to assess:
"Employment in environmental activities and percentage of
establishments using green technologies" would be
appropriate.
As for 9.1. this is an inherently compound and normative
target. The suggested indicators 9.2.1. and 9.2.2 cover
very restricted aspects of the wider target.
sustainable industrialisation means sustaining
industrialisation which is in itself not sustainable unless
one want to ruin the Earth
A good goal. It is neceessary to create and implement

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
target.
Supported
measure access to financial services including mobile

banking and mobile services
societies.
Good idea
9.3.1 Monitor the number of countries that have developed
sound chemicals management corporate policies and
practices throughout the value chain, including extended
producer responsibility, communication about chemical
hazards and risks both for chemicals and chemicals in
products together with the promotion of green design and
BAT/BEP/
In comparison with 9.2 and 9.1. the indicators under this
target appear broadly fit for purpose, which probably
reflects the more specific nature of the target.
Make one of the specifications ' value addition '. Value
addition should be One of the qualifying conditions for
easy access of credit and other financial services
To make these services available and affordable to all
women.
Target 9.4: By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit
industries to make them sustainable, with increased
resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean
and environmentally sound technologies and
industrial processes, with all countries taking action
in accordance with their respective capabilities
The suggested priority indicator changed since the first set

of proposals and is now: "Carbon emissions per unit of
value added." We support this change because we believe
this proposed indicator can provide a good overall picture
of progress on this target at various levels.
target.
Supported
1) include ICT as one infrastructure
2) ANd measure upgrade of infrastructure in indicator

below
The suggested indicator „carbon emission per unit value

added“ falls short of measuring state or progress with
regard to the target as it omits the dimensions of pollution
of different environmental media and the issue of resource
efficiency. At the very least the indicator should be
augmented by an indicator measuring “resource use per
unit of value added”.
societies.
ICMM and IPIECA strongly supports the principle of

resource use efficiency but have concerns with the
proposed indicator of resource productivity as currently
drafted (see comments on Target 8.4).
Proposal for indicator of energy intensity per unit of value

added has the potential not properly account for the
particular physical realities relating to mining and drilling
(see comments on Target 7.3).
It is good suggestion and not sure to achievement

9.2.1 Number of deaths/occurrence of diseases
attributable to chemicals exposure in the workplace.
9.2.2 Number of workers employed in sectors with
exposure to chemicals and waste where little or no
individual and collective protective measures are in place.
9.2.3 Number of job created in the field of environmentally
sound waste management and decontamination .
9.2.4 Numbers of working days with limited or no ability to
work due to occupational chemical poisoning .
To be shortened
The proposed indicators address intensity per unit of GDP.
For reasons explained above (Target 7.3), this is not a
measure of efficiency, and - further - indicators that only
consider efficiency relative GDP may be useless for other
framings. Moreover, the indicators covers only a limited
range of environmental impacts. In this case, recycling
rates, emissions from the industrial sector, or similar would
be better measures.
Even though the suggestion of UNSD (indicator 9.1.4) will
face a challenge in measuring resource use efficiency we
believe it is more appropriate for monitoring this target
than the currently suggested indicator

The proposed indicator does not capture sustainability
dimensions of this target. WWF proposes an additional
indicator to measure application of protective safeguards,
without which infrastructure projects risk damaging the
environment, climate, and communities—and actually
hindering growth: "Number of infrastructure projects that
meet best practice international standards for
environmental and social safeguards." Source information
(World Bank, regional development banks)
Target 9.5: Enhance scientific research, upgrade the
technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all
countries, in particular developing countries,
including, by 2030, encouraging innovation and
substantially increasing the number of research and
development workers per 1 million people and public
and private research and development spending
target.
Supported
Without robust investments into new and improved, safe

and effective, affordable and accessible health
technologies and products, especially diagnostics,
vaccines, microbicides and drugs for poverty-related and
neglected diseases including HIV & AIDS, TB, malaria and
neglected tropical diseases, we will not be able to achieve
goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all
at all ages. Therefore we support UNSC, UNESCO and
SDSN proposal to disaggregate the indicator through focal
sectors including health; in addition, this broad, potentially
crosscutting indicator has an already established
methodology that will not overburden national statistical
agencies. We therefore support the following indicator
suggested by UNSC, SDSN, and UNESCO:
- Expenditure on research and development as a
percentage of GDP (Disaggregated by sector of
performance, source of funds, field of science, and
socioeconomic objective. It also serves targets 3.b, 9.a,
17.6 and 17.9.
collected] R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP
(Disaggregated by sector of performance, source of funds,
field of science, and socioeconomic objective)
Recommended indicator: [National level indicator,

nationally collected] Number of formal coordination and
collaboration initiatives aimed at increasing and facilitating
transfer of health-related technology, including between
public and private entities. Technology transfer is a key
focus of the means of implementation goal (goal 17) of the
SDGs and is also a fundamental component of
international support for innovation capacity in LMICs (goal
9).

nationally collected] Number of clinical trial sites that meet
international quality and safety standards. Clinical trials
are an essential aspect of R&D for new health products.
Tracking the number and quality of both trials and trial
sites would provide proxy measures of the existence of an
enabling policy environment for health research and of
infrastructure and would be relevant to countries looking to
track progress.
societies.
Current indicator: [Global indicator, nationally collected]
R&D expenditure as percentage of GDP. Recommend
adding: (Disaggregated by sector of performance, source
of funds, field of science, and socioeconomic objective)
Comment: This is cross-cutting and addresses targets 9.5,
9.b, and 17.9.
Recommended indicator: [National indicator, nationally

collected] Number of formal coordination and collaboration
initiatives aimed at increasing and facilitating transfer of
health-related technology, including between public and
private entities.
Comment: Technology transfer is a key focus of Goal 17
and a fundamental component of international support for
innovation capacity in low- and middle income countries
(LMICs).This is cross-cutting and addresses targets 9.5,
9.a, 17.6, and 17.9.

collected] Number of clinical trial sites that meet
international quality and safety standards.
Comment: Tracking the number and quality of trials and
trial sites would provide targeted proxy measures of the
existence of an enabling policy environment for health
research and infrastructure.
Encourage public and private sector educational

institutions, industries and Governments to work closely to
come up with solutions for a particular sector / region
Very important idea and I hope it become realistic
public and private entities
Technology transfer is a key focus of the means of
implementation goal (goal 17) of the SDGs and is also a
fundamental component of international support for
innovation capacity in LMICs (goal 9).
international quality and safety standards
Clinical trials are an essential aspect of R&D for new
health products. Tracking the number and quality of both
trials and trial sites would provide proxy measures of the
research and would be relevant to any countries looking to
track progress in these areas.
9.5.1 Record the number of regulations and financial

incentives developed to reduce the use of chemicals of
highest concerns and to promote and substitute with safer
alternatives.
9.5.2 Monitor the levels of financial investments into
research and development to promote green product
design and safer alternatives, including non-chemical
alternatives.
No comments
R&D expenditure as percentage of GDP [Global indicator]
Recommend disaggregating this indicator by sector of
performance, source of funds, field of science, and
socioeconomic objective.
private entities as a national indicator.
Technology transfer is a key focus of Goal 17 and a
innovation capacity in low- and middle income countries
(LMICs).
collected] Number of clinical trial sites that meet
Tracking the number and quality of trials and trial sites
would provide targeted proxy measures of the existence of
an enabling policy environment for health research and
infrastructure.
[Global level indicator, nationally collected]

R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP (Disaggregated
by sector of performance, source of funds, field of science,
and socioeconomic objective)
[National level indicator, nationally collected]

Number of formal coordination and collaboration initiatives
aimed at increasing and facilitating transfer of health-
related technology, including between public and private
entities



health products. Tracking the number and quality of both
trials and trial sites would provide proxy measures of the
research and of infrastructure and would be relevant to
any countries looking to track progress in these areas.
On 9.5.1. There is agreement with UNIDO to use ‘the
number of researchers per million inhabitants’ as this is in
the target (i.e. it covers the number of workers rather than
overall expenditure)



Technology transfer is a key focus of goal 17 of the SDGs
and is also a fundamental component of international
support for innovation capacity in LMICs (goal 9).
health products. Tracking the number and quality of trials
and trial sites would provide proxy measures of an
enabling policy environment for health research and
would be relevant to countries looking to track progress in
these areas.
Separate into two different indicators:
Research and development expenditure, and
The number of researchers per million inhabitants,
disagregated by sex and age

Target 9.a: Facilitate sustainable and resilient
infrastructure development in developing countries
through enhanced financial, technological and
technical support to African countries, least
developed countries, landlocked developing countries
and small island developing States
target.
Supported
infrastructure should include ICT

innovation capacity in LMICs (goal 9). This indicator was
proposed in the WHO Global Strategy and Plan of Action
on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property, and
while no standardized international methodology or data
exists, tracking this indicator would be an important step in
monitoring progress toward the aims set out in this
document.
societies.

document.
Ok
document.
Most Small Island Developing States and developing

countires have no facilities for environmentally sound
disposal of importer products that have become hazard
wastes at end-of-life e.g. e-waste and other, products
containing heavy metals. One measure of progress could
be:
9.a.1 Monitor mechanisms and their implementation for
regional/subregional collection and transport of hazardous
wastes under the Basel Convention for the purpose of
environmentally sound disposal.
No comments
Proposed IEAG Indicator: Amount of investments in
infrastructure as a % of GDP
Comments:
Would be useful to incorporate transport as subset of total
infrastructure investment to determine whether transport
infrastructure is sufficient.

private entities as a national indicator.
*See rationale under Target 9.5.
[Complementary national level indicator]

Number of formal coordination and collaboration initiatives
aimed at increasing and facilitating transfer of health-
related technology, including between public and private
entities
Technology transfer is a fundamental component of both

international support for innovation capacity in LMICs (goal
9) and the means of implementation (goal 17) of the
SDGs. This indicator was proposed in the WHO Global
Strategy and Plan of Action on Public Health, Innovation
and Intellectual Property, and while no standardized
international methodology or data exists, tracking this
indicator would be an important step in monitoring
progress toward international cooperation on science,
technology and innovation and the transfer of technology.
The proposed indicators do not address sustainability or
resilience. Therefore, they are not fit for purpose in the
context of the target.
document.
9.1 and/or 9.a: Consultations with indigenous peoples and

participation in decision-making in regards to infrastructure
development based on FPIC
Indicator does not reflect the sustainability concept
expressed in target 9.a. We suggest the following
alternative: Amount of investment in sustainable and
resilient infrastructure as a %GDP

Target 9.b: Support domestic technology
development, research and innovation in developing
countries, including by ensuring a conducive policy
environment for, inter alia, industrial diversification
and value addition to commodities
target.
Supported
A critical element of domestic technology development,

research and innovation is the capacity of National
Regulatory Authorities to register new products and issue
recommendations and standards on product use. In
addition, clinical trials are an essential aspect of R&D for
new health products. Tracking the number and quality of
both trials and trial sites at national level would be useful
proxy measures of the existence of an enabling policy
environment.
Therefore we suggest adding the following two indicators:
- National Regulatory Authorities participating in
harmonized registration initiatives based on internationally
recognized policies and standards; and sharing regulatory
policies, legislation, guidelines, and information on
registered products;
- Number of registered clinical trials that meet
Nationally collected] National Regulatory Authorities
internationally recognized policies and standards; and
sharing regulatory policies, legislation, guidelines, and
information on registered products
Differing capacities and standards between countries are a
major impediment to access to new health technologies,
particularly in many LMICs where regulatory capacity is
often strained.

nationally collected] Number of registered clinical trials that
meet international quality and safety standards
societies.


often strained.

Very good
often strained.

9.b.1 Monitor rates for waste generation (kg per

capita/year, overall and by economic sector.
9.b.2 Percentage of waste materials including obsolete

stockpiles of pesticides, recovered, reused and/or
recycled, including for energy generation, by economic
sector.
No comments
Recommended indicator: [Global indicator, nationally
collected] R&D expenditure as percentage of GDP
(disaggregated by sector of performance, source of funds,
field of science, and socioeconomic objective).
collected] Number of registered clinical trials that meet
Tracking the number and quality of trials and trial sites
would provide targeted proxy measures of the existence of
an enabling policy environment for health research and
infrastructure.

R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP (Disaggregated
by sector of performance, source of funds, field of science,
and socioeconomic objective)

Number of registered clinical trials that meet international
quality and safety standards

registration initiatives based on internationally recognized
policies and standards; and sharing regulatory policies,
legislation, guidelines, and information on registered
products

often strained.
this indicator needs to support and measure low tech

development and pro-poor innovation, not just industrial
innovation
On 9.c.1: There is agreement with ITU and UNIDO that the
indicator should focus on affordability.
On 9.c.2. There is agreement with the ITU proposal.

often strained.

Create a questionnaire to assess the increase in the area
of integration by SMEs into value chains and organized
markets.
Target 9.c: Significantly increase access to
information and communications technology and
strive to provide universal and affordable access to
the Internet in least developed countries by 2020
Please refer to comments under target 10.2
We support the inclusion of ITU’s alternative for indicator
9.c.1 “Broadband Internet prices.” However, it is also
important to measure the proportion of the population that
can afford these prices. Thus we suggest the following
(which is defined by the UN Broadband Commission):
Broadband prices as a proportion of GNI/capita (data
source ITU).
In addition, while target 9c does not specify what the

threshold for “affordable” is, we argue that for any
meaningful policy action, we should use the 5% target
adopted by the UN Broadband Commission, at a minimum
for least developed countries. For other developing
countries a target of 2% of average monthly incomes
should be used..
We also note that it is unlikely that least developed

countries will realize universal and affordable access by
2020. Thus we suggest 2030 instead.
Finally, we suggest the Affordability Index be used as a

measure of progress in universal and affordable access
using data collected for 51 countries. See
http://a4ai.org/affordability-report/
target.
Increased access to information and communication

technology should be fully disaggregated by disability,
given the barriers persons with disabilities often face
impeding their full inclusion in society and given,
conversely, the capacity for such technology to empower
persons with disabilities and promote inclusion.
(Interlinkage with Target 10.2).
Supported

given the barriers persons with disabilities often face which
impede their full inclusion in society and given, conversely,
the capacity for such technology to empower persons with
disabilities and promote inclusion. (Interlinkage with Target
10.2).
should be 2G, 3G and 4G + others as technology

development continues.
Focus on internet broadband services
UPU measerement on e-commerce is also good, but could

be included in Goal area 8
disabilities and promote inclusion.
societies.

10.2).
Good
2020 may be too short time
Target is less than 5 years away. Many programmes have
gestations beyond 3 years before there is action on the
ground. Makes the target date very optimistic
10.2).
Data on number and proportion of national population with
access to information and communications technology and
access to the internet, disaggregated by gender, age,
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, rural/urban
Target 10.1: By 2030, progressively achieve and
sustain income growth of the bottom 40 per cent
of the population at a rate higher than the
Organization: national average
ADD International
Amnesty International Expert Group’s recommendations needs a broader

focus with respect to areas measured by the
proposed indicator. Eg. Formulation of strategies
and policies to address poverty and inequality
focusing on the most marginalised and
disadvantaged, % of people covered by minimum
social protection floor, that include basic education
and health packages, by age, sex, economic status,
origin, place of residence, disability, and civil status
(widows, partners in union outside of marriage,
divorced spouses, orphan children) and other
characteristics of relevance for each country
Asia Dalit Rights Forum 1. Disaggregated data on multiple dimension index
(MDI) inclusive of – age, sex, disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, origin, occupation religion or economic or
disadvantaged communities in infrastructure and
industrial development.
3. Growth rates of household expenditure or
income per capita among the bottom 40 percent of
the population and the total population especially
inclusive of households of marginalized
communities.
Asia Pacific Forum on Women Law We agree with the OHCHR's suggested indicator
and Development relying on the Palma ration to measure income
inequality pre and post social transfer and tax at a
national, regional and global level.
Beyond 2015 UK The current indicator for the income inequality target
should be replaced by the Palma ratio, which tracks
the post-tax income of the top 10 percent, top 1%
and top 0.1% as well as the post-transfer income of
the bottom 40%.
CBM UK
Center for Economic and Social The suggested indicator does directly measure the
Rights target, but by focusing only on the bottom 40%, it
neglects to capture the top income and wealth
brackets.
Focusing on the top end of the income spectrum is
key when assessing overall economic inequality.
Given that much of the economic power of the top
10% is held in wealth, we propose a complementary
indicator on wealth (financial assets and property)
concentration, which should include offshore wealth.
An indicator on wealth inequality/concentration will
also have the positive effect of driving data-
production and collection to permit a better
understanding of the true extent of economic
inequality worldwide.
CESR ADDITIONAL indicator: Indicator on wealth
inequality/concentration - to be developed
Note: as suggested by OHCHR, an indicator
measuring income inequality using the Gini
coefficient or (preferably) the Palma ratio would also
be useful here. Note that we are proposing this as
the priority indicator for target 10.4 (see below), but it
can certainly be multipurpose.
Rights (C-Fam)

CHOICE for youth and sexuality
Christian Aid Preferred indicator: Income inequality, using the Gini

coefficient or Palma ratio, pre- and post-social
transfers/tax at national, regional and global levels.
Comment: As proposed by OHCHR. This could also

be used as an indicator under 10.2 if there is a
preference for a ‘shared prosperity’ indicator here.
As per the target, any indicator needs to track the
bottom 40% against national average.
Deutschland e.V.
Climate Change Centre Reading Youth conclusions and inclusion and resilience in the
New Urban Agenda based on three years project
with placemaking and climate change coverage.
Why? The youth is our future and their need for
protective shelter in a changing climate, first and
foremost. This requires multidisciplinary climate
action across multilevel jurisdictional boundaries…


Global Health Council

Health Poverty Action Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible within

ICMM and IPIECA
IDDC
Institute for Reproductive and I am not sure to achieve because many

Family Health development contries still have many problem on
political and economic problem, poor people are still
increasing in many countries



International Movement ATD Fourth While ATD Fourth World welcomes the proposed
World indicator for target 10.1: Growth rates of household
expenditure or income per capita among the bottom
40 percent of the population and the total population,
a more comprehensive method which would look at
the full distributive impacts of fiscal policy pre and
post-social transfers/tax at national, regional and
global levels is needed as proposed by the OHCHR.
In this sense Indicator 10.1.1: Measure income
inequality using the Gini coefficient or Palma ratio,
pre- and post-social transfers/tax, at global, regional
and national level disaggregated by groups as
defined above should be also retained in view of his
rating AAA using the Palma ratio.

and Development

Kepa Finland a) Reduce income inequality in all countries such
that the post-tax income of the top 10 per cent is no
more than the post-transfer income of the bottom 40
per cent.
b) Whether a country is measuring the redistributive
capacity of their fiscal systems by comparing market
income inequality (Gini before tax and transfers) and
net income inequality (Gini after tax and transfers).
c) Income gap between poorest and richest reduced
(Gini or Palma) nationally and globally, x% reduction
in population living on less than median income in
countries with a Gini coefficient exceeding 0,35.
d) Whether a country is publishing data on the gap
between the rich and the rest (including income,
wealth, consumption distribution data for deciles and
each of the top 10 percentiles, pre- and post-tax
gini)
=> This target should ensure that economic

inequality and the gap in income and wealth
between the poorest and richest in society is
reduced.
MADE
Unions
National Campaign for Dalit Human 1. Disaggregated data on multiple dimension index
Rights (MDI) inclusive of – age, sex, disability, race, caste,
communities.
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 1. Disaggregated data on multiple dimension index
Organization (NNDSWO) (MDI) inclusive of – age, sex, disability, race, caste,
communities.
Newcastle University, Institute for There are many commendable aims captured by
Sustainability Goal 10 of the SDGs and a number of the indicators
are entirely suitable for purpose. However, no
indicator here seriously engages with measurement
of substantive inequality between countries. Thus,
the indicators are not sufficient to measure overall
progress towards the headline goal.
An indicator for the success of progress, could, at

very least, measure inequality in GDP/capita, and
preferably in far more complex and rounded ways.
OneFamilyPeople Persons with disabilities are not mentioned in targets

dealing with vulnerability. We therefore recommend
as stated in target 10.4
Oxfam 10.1.1. We propose to adjust the current indicator to
better align with the agreed Target, as follows:
“Measure income inequality using the Palma ratio,
measuring the post-tax income of the top 10
percent, and top 1% and top 0.1%, and the post-
transfer income of the bottom 40 percent”. We
propose to compare the bottom 40% with the top
10%, rather than the national average. Studies have
found that the share of income of deciles 5 – 9 is
stable across time and space. This is the basis on
which the Palma measure for inequality was
developed. By analyzing the tails (top 10% and
bottom 40%) you focus on the mobile part of the
distribution that is also most important for
understanding inequality and poverty reduction,
particularly as the rising share of income and power
at the very top can be a key driver of inequality. We
also propose to compare the income shares of the
two groups at a point in time, rather than the growth
of these incomes. The indicator is feasible, and
consistent with methodology developed by UNU
WIDER, UNICEF, UNCDF, Global Migration working
group, NEF, IASG, ESCAP, OECD already use
Palma ratio.
Saferworld
Sightsavers

Society for the Psychological Data on the economic growth of the bottom 40 per
Study of Social Issues; Psychology cent of the population in comparison with the
Coalition at the United Nations national average, disaggregated by gender, age,
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
status
Stockholm Environment Institute The proposed indicator is a mechanism, and not an

outcome, and does not properly address regulation
and monitoring aspects.
Tebtebba
The Hague University of Applied . If SDG’s propose that the poor need to earn (and
Science logically, consume more), do the rich need to
consume less? Indeed, if they have to, this raises a
host of other ethical questions.
As it is, conventional sustainability discourse offers

no alternative to the present state of poverty and
inequality. Historical examples of socialist
revolutionaries taking resources away from the
overconsuming elites and redistributing them to the
less fortunate– as in the case of the Russian
revolution (with its disastrous consequences)– are
wilfully avoided.
TRK asbl % access to credit and finance data %per sexe and
age
USIL A good goal. It is neceessary to create and

implement solidarity policies between developed
countries and developing countries.
Western Union

- New Ways
Women's Major Group 10.1.1 Measure income inequality using the Gini
coefficient or Palma ratio, pre and post-social
transfers/tax, at global, regional and national level
disaggregated by groups as defined above
The methodology of
this index assesses the incidence of fiscal policy on
inequality and is therefore a more comprehensive
tool to measure income inequality pre and post-
tax/social transfers.
We support including the Palma ratio, which

indicates distributional changes at both the top and
bottom of the income spectrum better than
alternative measures of inequality such as the Gini
coefficient. We strongly urge an explicit commitment
to measure income inequality before and after fiscal
policies (pre-tax, post- tax, pre- and post-social
transfers), disaggregated by disadvantaged groups.

Environment
Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and
Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the reduce inequalities of outcome, including by
social, economic and political inclusion of all, eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and
irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, practices and promoting appropriate legislation,
origin, religion or economic or other status policies and action in this regard
The indicators that we have proposed elsewhere in This target addresses discrimination and should be
this consultation can monitor economic and social disaggregated by disability, as persons with
exclusion. disabilities are a group especially susceptible to
discrimination (Interlinkage with 16.b)
However, we recommend that additional data be
gathered on the political inclusion of persons with
disabilities, including:
- Percentage of persons with disabilities able to

participate in basic political activity (like voting
secretly in elections and participating in political
activities);
- percentage of persons with disabilities actively

engaged in national political processes;
- percentage of seats held by persons with

disabilities in national parliament; percentage of
positions in public institutions (national and local
legislatures, public service, and judiciary) held by
persons with disabilities;
- percentage of government websites which meet

the ISO/IEC 40500:2012 of accessibility for Web
content
These indicators also cover, collectively, target 9.c,

target 16.7, and target 17.8
The Expert Group’s recommendations takes a very The Expert Group’s recommendations takes a very
limited focus with respect to the target - Measure the limited focus with respect to the target - Proportion of
progressive reduction of inequality gaps over time, national laws and policies relevant to global goals
disaggregated by group, for selected social, that have been reviewed nationally for consistency
economic, political and environmental SDG targets, with the right to equality and the principle of non-
Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic discrimination, through a transparent and
laws for implementing the right to participate in participatory process, including a transformative
public affairs, including freedom of opinion, gender assessment, and revised where necessary,
expression, information, media, association and Existence of an independent body responsible for
assembly [OHCHR], Percentage of major socio- promoting and protecting the right to non-
economic laws and policies that have been subject discrimination, Percentage of women, men,
to public consultation, including amongst the most indigenous peoples, and local communities with
marginalised and disadvantaged, prior to coming secure rights to land, property, and natural
into force, International human rights treaties, resources, measured by (i) percentage with
relevant to non-discrimination and the right to documented or recognized evidence of tenure, and
participate in public affairs, ratified by the State (ii) percentage who perceive their rights are
recognized and protected.
1. Necessary legislation to ensure necessary 1. Presence of a comprehensive laws and policies
budgetary allocation for the inclusion of Targeted at national level to ensure elimination of practises of
budgeting for the social, economic and political discrimination based on descent and work
inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, (untouchability, devadasi, manual scavenging,
race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or bonded labour, witch hunting) and due machinery for
other status. effective implementation of the same with necessary
2. Across-sectional policy that looks at substantive measures to curb impunity.
equality and inclusion policy of all existing laws. 2. Percentage of reported cases of discrimination
3. Proportion of people living below 50% of and violence based on descent and work to increase
median income disaggregated by age, sex disability, by 50%.
race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or 3. Percentage of conviction rate of discrimination
other status and rural-urban divide. and violence based on descent and work to increase
by 80%.
4. Expansion of provisions of existing laws to
address instances of intentional death and harm to
people based on age, sex, disability,
race/caste/ethnicity, social origin, religion and
economic and other status
We agree with proposed indicators measuring

perceived discrimination and the existence of on
independent body such as an NHRI to promote and
protect the right to discrimination.
We support Stiglitz's proposal of an indicator on the

establishment of national inequality commissions,
which would greatly enhance the transparency and
effectiveness of government's efforts to fight
inequalities beyond the limited scope afforded by
non-discrimination legislation, with a focus on wealth
and income inequality. These national bodies could
also conduct statistical surveys–in collaboration with
national statistical offices–to ascertain which groups
are facing inequality and non-discrimination.
An indicator on change in real median income is An indicator to measure wealth concentration such
useful and should be retained. as share of wealth of the top 40% would be usefully
However, a further indicator is needed to capture added as a barrier to progress on these ambitions.
social and political factors of exclusion and
marginalisation in order to address the full ambition
of the target. One currently suggested is: Measure
the progressive reduction of inequality gaps over
time, disaggregated by groups as defined above, for
selected social, economic, political and
environmental SDG targets
Target included disability and therefore disability
must be reflected in the indicators.
We suggest:
Percentage of seats held by persons with disabilities
in national parliament
Percentage of population owning a mobile phone,
Percentage of the population with internet access,
Percentage of positions in public institutions
(national and local legislatures, public service, and
judiciary) held by persons with disabilities
Percentage of government websites which meet the
ISO/IEC 405000: 2012 of accessibility for Web
Content (also knowledge as the Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines)
We welcome the suggested indicator's emphasis on We support the suggested indicator as a key way of
relative poverty as a core measure to ensure a measuring people’s lived experience of
universal post-2015 agenda. If measured against discrimination.
median household/personal income, we believe that We also strongly support an additional indicator
relative poverty should be defined by the percentage (proposed by OHCHR) for target 10.3.
of households with less than 60% of the median ADDITIONAL: Existence of independent National
household income. In general, this will capture a Human Rights Institution in compliance with the
more accurate number of people living in (or at risk Paris Principles
of falling into) relative poverty, and is the standard National Human Rights Institutions have a unique
definition already developed for the at-risk-of-poverty and valuable role to play in the implementation and
or social exclusion (AROPE) rate across Europe monitoring of a wide range of SDGs at a national
(Eurostat). level, and can be crucial actors in tackling
CESR ALTERNATIVE indicator: Percentage of discrimination and inequalities.
people with incomes below 60% of median income
("relative poverty")
We also propose an ADDITIONAL indicator:
Measure the progressive reduction of inequality
gaps over time, disaggregated by groups as defined
above, for selected social, economic, political and
environmental SDG targets (at least one target per
goal where relevant should be monitored using this
approach)
This indicator was included in the UN Statistical
Division proposed indicators of March 2015. This
could also be used as an indicator for target 10.3.
"Other status" should not apply to the subjective See comment on 10.2 above.
sexual preferences and private behaviors of
individuals through notions such as “sexual
orientation and gender identity.” Member states have
no obligation to recognize such a category. This is
not a legally cognizable category in human rights
law, it is not in any UN treaty, and cannot be fairly
implied from any UN treaty, and there is no
consensus in the United Nations on these issues.
The consensus of the United Nations should be both

the floor and ceiling by which the SDGs are
measured. Any action by UN secretariat and
agencies in furtherance of these controversial
notions is entirely beyond their mandate.
This comment applies also to target 10.3 below with

regard to discrimination.
Growth rates of women's share in household income
Increase in women's participation in household

economic decision making
10.3.1 Percentage of population reporting perceived

existence of discrimination based on all grounds of
discrimination prohibited by international human
rights law
Preferred indicator: Proportion of people living below Preferred indicator: Measure the progressive
50% of median income disaggregated by age and reduction of inequality gaps over time,
sex disaggregated by groups as defined above, for
selected social, economic, political and
Comment: We support the suggested indicator. environmental SDG targets (at least one target per
approach).
Comment: Currently suggested under target 10.2

but we feel it fits better here. This cross-cutting
measure is essential to ensure that no one is left
behind and could supplement the indicator proposed
by UNOHCHR.
This target mentions explicitly persons with This target addresses discrimination and must hence
disabilities and should be fully disaggregated by be disaggregated by disability, as persons with
disability. While economic and social inclusion can disabilities are a group especially susceptible to
be monitored by the proposed indicators, political discrimination (Interlinkage with 16.b) – only by
inclusion is more complex. Amongst the possible disaggregating the relevant indicators under this
and recommended indicators in this regard are, target will direct and indirect, multiple and de facto
among others, Percentage of persons with discrimination become visible and be addressed
disabilities able to participate in basic political activity accordingly.
(like voting secretly in elections and participating in
political activities); percentage of persons with
disabilities actively engaged in national political
processes; percentage of seats held by persons with
persons with disabilities; percentage of government
websites which meet the ISO/IEC 40500:2012 of
accessibility for Web content (Interlinkage with 9.c)
The proposed indicator falls short of addressing the The proposed indicator is strong and human rights
crucial human rights aspects of the target. Firstly, the relevant, but should be supplemented with an
indicator only addresses economic exclusion. additional process indicator to capture the
Secondly, the indicator fails to address the equality elimination of discriminatory laws, policies and
aspect, as related to the range of prohibited grounds practices. See also comment under target 16.b.
of discrimination mentioned in the target. From a
human rights perspective, 10.2. is one of the most
important targets and there is therefore a need to
rethink this indicator, e.g. by measuring the
progressive reduction of inequalities for the groups
reflected in the target, as related to a selection of
indicators across the SDG targets.
This target mentions explicitly persons with This target addresses discrimination and should be
disabilities and should be fully disaggregated by disaggregated by disability, as persons with
be monitored by the proposed indicators, political discrimination (Interlinkage with 16.b)
inclusion is more complex. Possible indicators are,
among others, Percentage of persons with
disabilities able to participate in basic political activity

rights law
The suggested indicator does not measure social We appreciate the previously suggested indicator
and political inclusion and is not adequately referring to the existence of an independent body
disaggregated to measure economic inclusion for all (indicator 10.3.2), in addition to the currently
groups. suggested indicator.
- Percentage of seats held by persons with
disabilities in national
parliament
- Percentage of positions in public institutions
(national and local
persons with
disabilities
- Percentage of government websites which meet
the ISO/IEC
40500:2012 of accessibility for Web content
- Percentage of population owning a mobile phone,
disaggregated for
- Percentage of population with disabilities with
internet access,
Add language to indicator 10.3.1 “and those groups

currently recognized by UN human rights bodies as
particularly vulnerable to discrimination”. While this
is not actual international human rights law, factors
recognized as vulnerable to discrimination by UN
human rights bodies includes : gender, sex,
disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity,
income, geographical location, language, ethnicity,
race, caste, indigenous status, religion, citizenship or
lack thereof, nationality or lack thereof, HIV status,
marital status, migrant status, work, including sex
work.
The proposed indicators under target 16.2 would

also monitor this target. A legal system which allows
children to be lawfully assaulted in the name of
“discipline” while protecting adults from violent
assault is inherently discriminatory. Prohibiting
violent punishment is not only essential to ending
violence against children; it is also about children’s
status. Nothing is more symbolic of the low regard
given to children than the fact that they are afforded
less legal protection from violent assault than adults.
Ending the legality of violent punishment is key in
creating a non-discriminatory legal system and in
raising children’s status in society, promoting a view
of them as holders of human rights and in turn
contributing to ending all violations of their rights.
Explicit mention of persons with disabilities so it This target addresses discrimination and should be
should be fully disaggregated by disability. While disaggregated by disability, as persons with
economic and social inclusion can be monitored by disabilities are a group especially susceptible to
the proposed indicators, political inclusion is more discrimination
complex. Possible indicators are, among others,
Percentage of persons with disabilities able to
participate in basic political activity (like voting
secretly in elections and participating in political
activities); percentage of persons with disabilities
actively engaged in national political processes;
percentage of seats held by persons with disabilities
in national parliament; percentage of positions in
public institutions (national and local legislatures,
public service, and judiciary) held by persons with
disabilities; percentage of government websites
which meet the ISO/IEC 40500:2012 of accessibility
for Web content
This must be disaggregated by all categories Indigenous peoples and other cultural and ethnic
outlined in the target. Ethnicity should be specified in minorities face intersecting forms of marginalisation
the indictor. and discrimination. The IAEG should explore ways
to disaggregate this indicator by ethnicity
be monitored by the proposed indicators, political discrimination (Interlinkage with 16.b)
I happy with it Good idea. Hoping that it become realistic

rights law and those groups recognized by UN
human rights bodies as particularly vulnerable to
discrimination.
This indicator is a key way to capture people's lived
experience of discrimination, which is particularly
important for people living with HIV.
10.3.2 Existence of an independent body
responsible for promoting and protecting the right to
nondiscrimination
Existence of a national public commission that will
assess, report on and recommend actions to combat
national inequalities and the discriminatory policies
and practices underlying them, which is important for
PLWHA. Such bodies should conform to the
requirements set out in the Paris Principles Relating
to the Status of National Institutions. For these
reasons, disaggregation could include HIV status or
voluntary disclosure of HIV status.
The suggested indicator only covers economic

inclusion so it will be necessary to have indicators
here that cover all aspects of the target and are
disaggregated for disability. IAPB urges the use of
the initially suggested indicator 10.2.1 with this
disaggregated by disability. Further, IAPB would
welcome the suggested indicator for 16.7, on
proportions of positions in public institutions, which is
disaggregated by disability.
Indicators
- Percentage of seats held by persons with
disabilities in national parliament
- Percentage of positions in public institutions
(national and local legislatures, public service, and
judiciary) held by persons with disabilities
- Percentage of government websites which meet
the ISO/IEC 40500:2012 of accessibility for Web
content
- Percentage of population owning a mobile phone,
- Percentage of population with disabilities with
internet access, disaggregated for persons
Comment: For target 10.2, social and economic

inclusion can be monitored with the indicators
proposed in this note – there is no need for extra
indicators. But for monitoring political inclusion, the
indicators below are suggested. In addition, it is
suggested to include indicators on mobile phone
ownership and internet access by persons with
disabilities, as these tools empower persons with
disabilities and promote inclusion (these indicators
are also related to target 9.c).
World Bank already inventories discriminatory

legislation on gender, and could extend this to other
forms of discrimination
Indicator 10.3.1 Percentage of population reporting

perceived existence of discrimination based on all
grounds of discrimination prohibited by international
human rights law.
Special attention needed in data collection with
surveys to include fully representative samples
including marginalized and discriminated groups that
are often "invisible" and escape standard
methodologies
The proposed indicator to measure target 10.3:
Percentage of population reporting having
personally felt discriminated against or harassed
within the last 12 months on the basis of a ground of
discrimination prohibited under international human
rights law can highlight trends in the experience of
discrimination across social and income groups in
both high and low income countries.
As expressed by many of the participants in the
participatory research discrimination is a
crosscutting experience that prevent people from
accessing their rights (Challenge 2015: Towards
Sustainable Development that Leaves No One
Behind)
Besides measuring gaps in performance, it is not
possible to objectively measure discrimination.
However, there is plenty of experiential knowledge
held by people from all backgrounds on the
prevalence of discrimination in their communities.
Consider disagreegating the indicator by education

as well.
It should include indicators of democracy and anti-
inequality policy in country.
by 80%.

by 80%.
REMOVE: "Proportion of people living below 50% of
median income disaggregated by age and sex" -
This is a very specific measure of inequalities which
does not capture whole target. The previous
suggestion was better:
"Measure the progressive reduction of inequality

gaps over time, disaggregated by groups as defined
above, for selected social, economic, political and
environmental SDG targets (at least one target per
approach)"
be monitored by the proposed indicators, political discrimination (Interlinkage with 16.b).
accessibility for Web content (Interlinkage with 9.c).
10.2.1 Measure the progressive reduction of 10.3.1 Percentage of population reporting having
inequality gaps over time, disaggregated by groups personally felt discriminated against or harassed
as defined above, for selected social, economic, within the last 12 months on the basis of a ground of
political and environmental SDG targets (at least one discrimination prohibited under international human
target per goal where relevant should be monitored rights law
using this approach)
DATA SOURCE: Survey
DATA SOURCE: SIGI, HDR, GINI, gender gap
reports, GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: Data for this
indicator are collected in an increasing number of
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UNDP countries. At the regional level, the EU Fundamental
Rights Agency has collected the data for 27 EU
NOTES: The case for the adoption of an equal rights Member States. Relevant data is also collected in
approach rests not only on the importance of greater Eurobarometer and Afrobarometer surveys, and this
equality as an end in itself, but on the role which an question could easily be added.
effective and comprehensive system of law can have
as a means to achieving development ends. The NOTES: Girls and boys are particularly vulnerable to
adoption of an equal rights approach could the damaging effects of inequality; the
represent a transformative shift, giving the most consequences often last for the rest of their lives.
marginalised a means to challenge the
discriminatory barriers to their development. In so
doing, it would provide a decisive means to “enlarge
people’s choices” and thus ensure that the final SDG
framework is able to deliver on the central promise
of human development.
Data on social, economic and political inclusion and Data on access to equal opportunity and equal
empowerment of all,disaggregated by gender, age, outcomes in social, economic, and environmental
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, areas of development, disaggregated by gender,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
status rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration
status.
Indicator 10.2.1: We support the current proposal.
Indicator 10.2.2: Proportion of people living below

50% of median income, by age and sex.
We support the proposal by UNICEF and

UNWOMEN which emphasises the need for
disaggregation
10.2 1) Measure the progressive reduction of 10.3: Percentage of indigenous peoples and other
inequality gaps over time, disaggregated by age, disadvantaged groups reporting perceived existence
sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or of discrimination based on all grounds of
economic or other status for selected social, discrimination prohibited by international human
economic, political and environmental SDG targets; rights law
2) Proportion of seats in national and local
government held by relevant social groups and
indigenous peoples, disaggregated by sex and
according to their share in the population
The redistribution of wealth between the 99% of less

prosperous population, hinted upon by the members
of the Occupy movement, could then guarantee that
the total global natural resource pie stays the same
(considering that population growth is halted). Yet,
no such revolution is likely to occur (and judging
from the lessons of the Russian revolution, it might
be a good thing that it does not). Thus, consumption
in the rich countries is far from abating (in fact, most
developed countries’ governments attempt to
promote economic growth); and poor countries are
all too happy to emanate this ‘progress’
National programs to support civil society indiccator by sex , measure promoting women
organisation specially youth and women political and decision maaking access in all policy
organisation and decicion making level
As a category, biological research confirms race

does not exist, it is a social-cultural construct that
supports inequality. This needs reworking. You are
talking about racism. Perhaps tied to the monitoring
and indicator research methods/approaches, this
statement needs to be verified that the tools are not
supporting the opposite intended target.
A good goal. It is neceessary to create and A good goal. It is neceessary to create and
implement solidarity policies between developed implement solidarity policies between developed
countries and developing countries. countries and developing countries.
rights law
nondiscrimination
10.2.1 Reduction in inequality gaps over time, 10.3.1 Percentage of population reporting perceived
disaggregated by groups as defined above, for existence of discrimination based on all grounds of
selected social, economic, political and discrimination prohibited by international human
environmental SDG targets (at least one target per rights law
approach) This indicator is a key way to capture people's lived
experience of discrimination.

nondiscrimination
Existence of a national public commission that will

assess, report on and recommend actions to combat
national inequalities and the discriminatory policies
and practices underlying them. Such bodies should
conform to the requirements set out in the Paris
Principles Relating to the Status of National
Institutions.
Target 10.5: Improve the regulation and
Target 10.4: Adopt policies, especially fiscal, monitoring of global financial markets and
wage and social protection policies, and institutions and strengthen the implementation
progressively achieve greater equality of such regulations
Please see comments under target 1.3
Areas to consider: Time frame and coverage of Compliance of IFIs safeguards policies with human
policy for the elimination of forced labour, including rights standards
the worst forms of child labour, Formulation of
strategies and policies to address labour exploitation
particularly amongst the most marginalised and
vulnerable, Measure the progressive reduction of
inequality gaps over time, disaggregated by group,
for selected social, economic, political and
environmental SDG targets , percentage of people
covered by minimum social protection floor, that
include basic education and health packages, by
age, sex, economic status, origin, place of
residence, disability, and civil status (widows,
partners in union outside of marriage, divorced
spouses, orphan children) and other characteristics
of relevance for each country, Existence and level
of a minimum/living wage for all economic sectors
We agree with suggested indicators on labour share We agree with the proposal for an indicator on the
of GDP; progressivity of tax and social expenditures; adoption of a financial transaction tax. We also think
and coverage of social protection floors. We also it is critical to measure the degree of tax evasion
propose an indicator measuring union density and facilitated by global markets and institutions and an
coverage by sector and industry of collective indicator should be included to measure the amount
bargaining agreements. IMF and OECD research of wealth held in offshore bank accounts (by country
confirm that there is an inverse correlation between of origin and destination).
union membership and income inequality. Further,
sectors that are traditionally unionised tend to have
lower pay gaps, such as the public sector. Those
with low unionisation rates and low wage levels tend
to have relatively higher gender pay gaps.
The indicator could be improved by ensuring social

protection indicator includes coverage as well as
transfers; Including indicators on progressivity of tax
policy and indicators on progressive taxation of
income and wealth, for example, by improving the
ratio of taxes on wage income vs. capital gains
income; Including indicators that demonstrate
equitable public spending, for example, existence of
budget processes that allow allocation on basis of
need.
Same as 1.3: Percentage of persons with disabilities
covered by social protection; or percentage of
The suggested indicator is welcome, but including No single indicator will accurately measure financial
social protection transfers may dilute the potency of market regulation, which is an essential but
this indicator and muddle the analysis. neglected global policy priority to prevent the type of
ALTERNATIVE: Wage or labour income share ratio economic crises we have seen recently, which drive
This must not be the only indicator for target 10.4, poverty and inequality. Thus, additional indicators for
which is a multifaceted target that will have a critical this target should be developed and proposed.
role to play in progress across the SDG agenda.
ADDITIONAL: Palma national income inequality We do however support the adoption of financial
measured pre-tax and post-social transfers transactions taxes across major financial centers as
The other proposed indicators for this target in the one step toward empowering governments to
current IAEG list are overly blunt (for further analysis safeguard against financial crises and promote
see cesr.org), so we propose a more comprehensive financial sector accountability. It would also have the
method which would look at the full distributive effect of mobilizing a significant source of resources
impacts of fiscal policy. This would look at the to contribute to sustainable development and the
incidence of fiscal policy using the income ratio of realization of human rights. (It is important to note
income inequality measured across the chain from that financial transaction taxes can also be adopted
market (pre-tax) income to post-tax income to post- at country, regional and supra-national levels, not
transfer income. We support using the Palma ratio, just at global level.)
which indicates distributional changes at both the
top and bottom of the income spectrum better than We do not agree with the World Bank’s suggestion
alternative measures of inequality such as the Gini to use their Country Policy and Institutional
coefficient. Assessment (CPIA) indicators for the financial
sector, but agree with them that further consultation
is needed on indicators for this target.
Labour share of GDP, comprising wages and social
protection transfers; disaggregated by sex.
Preferred indicator: Progressivity of tax policy

(Source: Kakwani Index or the Commitment to
Equity Index)
Comment: This target clearly mentions three

different public policies and therefore the indicator(s)
should reflect this. We have included this indicator
as a supplement to those covering wage and social
protection policies.
We would welcome the proposed disaggregation of
data by disability in Indicator 10.4.1, while calling for
disaggregation by disability in all possible indicators.
We suggest the following indicators: e.g. Percentage
of persons with disabilities covered by social
protection; or percentage of persons with disabilities
receiving benefits (Interlinkage with Target 1.3.). We
suggest using lowest wage in countries as the
baseline for measured data and comparisons.
The proposed indicator does not capture the

process-oriented ambition of the target for adoption
of policies to progressively achieve greater equality.
The indicator should be replaced with a more
relevant indicator.
The suggested indicator does not measure whether

policies have been adopted and does not measure
across the three types of policies specified in the
target. Sub-indicators are required for fiscal, wage
and social protection policies. Measurement of
adoption of fiscal policies is lacking.
receiving benefit. We suggest using lowest wage in
countries as the baseline for measured data and
comparisons.
Fully support the WB comment that the suggestions

of using implementation of a global Tobin tax as the
sole indicator for measuring progress on this is not
appropriate. Agree with the proposal that the use of
WB's Country Policy and Institutional Assessment
would be appropriate, including sub-indicators on
financial sector stability and efficiency and depth.

I agree with it I agree with it and the role of supervisor of civil

society and community people are very important
ICN supports the WB proposal to use health and
education services coverage as these are important
determinants of inequity as explained in the
comment under Target 1.4.
Indicator 10.4.1: % of people covered by minimum
and health packages, by age, sex, economic status,
origin, place of residence, disability, and civil status
(widows, partners in union outside of marriage,
divorced spouses, orphan children) and other
characteristics of relevance for each country
This indicator addresses target 1.4 as well and
should be retained. The policies in place to
implement this wide vision of social protection can
help ensure that adequate funds are being budgeted
for equality and to reduce poverty.
We fully support the usage of the Tobin tax as an
indicator! It is definitely a way forward towards
sustainable economic development.
We fully support the suggested indicator on “Labour
share of GDP, comprising wages and social
protection transfers". An additional indicator on
"Minimum wage as % of the median wages" could
be considered.
There is a strong correlation between Trade Union

Density and Collective Bargaining Coverage and
more equal societies; we thus see value in
measuring Trade Union Density and Collective
Bargaining Coverage here.
The highlighted indicator for target 10.5 measures
adoption of a Tobin Tax on international financial
transactions. But this is (arguably) not necessary for
the achievement of "well-regulated financial
institutions" which is the core objective of target
10.5: Nor is it sufficient, by itself, to measure
achievement of the target. Overall, the target could
be achieved without the implementation of a Tobin
tax, and a Tobin Tax put in place without achieving
effective regulation of financial institutions. Lastly,
and consequently, it is not clear that this addresses
the core of the target - if states had wanted to
implement a Tobin tax, and committed to do so, this
would be the relevant target.
Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and disable

friendly social protection policies, and progressively
achieve greater equality
10.4.1 Percentage of people covered by minimum

and health packages.
Further disaggregations: other characteristics of

relevance for each country
Data on equality of access to fiscal, wage and social

protection provided by policies, disaggregated by
gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity,
income, rural/urban residence, national origin, and
migration status.
specific program for youth and women employement
10.5.1 Adoption of a financial transaction tax (Tobin
tax) at a world level
No single indicator will accurately measure financial
market regulation, which is an essential but
neglected global policy priority to prevent the type of
economic crises we have seen recently, which drive
poverty and inequality. We do however support the
adoption of financial transactions taxes across major
financial centers as one step toward empowering
governments to safeguard against financial crises
and promote financial sector accountability. It would
also have the effect of mobilizing a significant source
of resources to contribute to sustainable
development and the realization of human rights.
And use of qoata system and affirmative action if

necessary to ensure that women are equally
included and represented.
Target 10.6: Ensure enhanced representation and
voice for developing countries in decision-
making in global international economic and Target 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and
financial institutions in order to deliver more responsible migration and mobility of people,
effective, credible, accountable and legitimate including through the implementation of planned
institutions and well-managed migration policies
Comment on indicators: We support the following suggested indicators, as
We recommend the inclusion of 'voices of diaspora amended:
and migrants in development' to be reflected in the • Recruitment costs borne by employee as
indicators. percentage of yearly income earned in country of
destination, ADD: "disaggregated by sex and age"
• Number of migrants killed, injured or victims of
crime while in closed detention centers, attempting
to cross maritime, land, air borders, or be forcibly
returned to their countries of origin, disaggregated
by sex and age
• Percentage of refugees and IDPs who have
found a durable solution, disaggregated by sex and
age
• Number of countries that have banned the
charging of migrant workers for recruitment fees by
2020.
• Number of international migrants reported to
have died or disappeared on crossing of land or and
sea borders 2015-2020 compared to 2010-2015.
• Number of countries providing regular migration
channels for labour market access across skill
levels, family reunification, and refuge to migrants
and asylum seekers by 2020.
• Number of countries implementing protection-
sensitive training for law enforcement personnel on
migration movements especially at the borders by
2020.
Ratification and implementation of the International

Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All
Migrant Workers and Members of their Families,
Compliance with international law regarding
migration and migrants, Plan and timeframe for the
implementation of domestic policies that promote the
protection of all migrant workers and their families,
labour market inclusion, family reunion, long term
residence, naturalization and anti-discrimination for
migrants, Number of migrants killed, injured or
victims of crime while attempting to cross maritime,
land, air borders, The existence of a legal framework
to grant asylum or refugee status in accordance with
international and regional conventions and system
for refugee protection, Presence of basic essential
services [clean drinking water, sanitation, adequate
food, air, minimum shelter, heating] in
camps/locations where migrants are detained ,
Formulation of strategies and policies for the
protection of migrants including the most vulnerable
such as domestic workers
1. Disaggregated data of access to public services
and entitlements by women inclusive of – age,
disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, occupation
religion or economic or other status.
Governments have the primary responsibility to

prevent exploitation of migrants in line with their
international human rights commitments. Policies
should be designed to both reduce exploitative
practices and identify individuals or groups at risk of
falling victim to exploitation. We agree with the
proposed indicator on ratification of relevant ILO
conventions, but think that the indicator on
recruitment cost born by the employee should have
a target of zero recruitment costs being born by the
employee, and all costs born by the employer. We
also propose an indicator on migrant workers in debt
to employers or financial institutions.
We certainly support increased representation of
developing countries in these bodies. However,
membership AND (not or) voting rights should be
monitored.
Also, effective voice in these institutions requires
meaningful participation and decision-making over
the actual outcomes of the debates, which is not
measured with this proposed indicator. We need to
see institutions that are specifically designed, from
the outset, to represent the needs of the poorest
countries and their populations. We would also urge
enhanced voice of civil society actors in these
bodies.
ADDITIONAL: Share of proposals from civil society
and developing country governments implemented
in national and inter-governmental processes and
bodies determining tax reforms, e.g. OECD BEPS
process
Preferred indicator: Percentage of membership AND
voting rights of developing countries in international
organisations.
Comment: It's necessary to have both membership

and voting rights not either/or. It would also be
useful for indicator to monitor origins of proposals,
level of spillover analysis of impacts on developing
countries, and percentage of regulations that have
been explicitly assessed for applicability in
developing country context.
Set up set of search and rescue indicators and a
Monitoring Framework for sectorial public space
commitments (rat runs, energy, street lighting,
transport, waste management, building and
construction, urban and land planning, green
procurement, water resource management, forest
management, resilient an low carbon agriculture,
public outreach policy) that empower behaviour
change.
There is currently no public information available as

to the substance of this indicator. It is therefore
impossible to assess to what extent this indicator will
allow for monitor of progress regarding the human
rights of migrants
I agree with it It is good strategy
Indicator 10.7.1 Index on Human Mobility
Governance measuring key features of good-
governance of migration.
Indicators mostly reflect refugee flows and economic
migration, need to be expanded to anticipate
environmental migration from climate change, sea
level rise and land/water resource degradation
We support the following suggested indicators, as
amended:
* Recruitment costs borne by employee as
percentage of yearly income earned in country of
* Number of migrants killed, injured or victims of
by sex and age
* Percentage of refugees and IDPs who have found
a durable solution, disaggregated by sex and age
* Number of countries that have banned the
2020.
* Number of international migrants reported to have
died or disappeared on crossing of land or and sea
borders 2015-2020 compared to 2010-2015.
* Number of countries providing regular migration
* Number of countries implementing protection-
2020.
We support the following suggested indicators, as
amended:
• Recruitment costs borne by employee as
percentage of yearly income earned in country of
• Number of migrants killed, injured or victims of
by sex and age
• Percentage of refugees and IDPs who have found
a durable solution, disaggregated by sex and age
• Number of countries that have banned the
2020.
• Number of international migrants reported to have
died or disappeared on crossing of land or and sea
borders 2015-2020 compared to 2010-2015.
• Number of countries providing regular migration
• Number of countries implementing protection-
2020.

Data on plannedful, well-managed, orderly and safe
migration of people, disaggregated by gender, age,
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
status.
% of representation or decision making Have a clear international rule that ensure refugees
from all zone at climate , war or other major risk are
always first welcome and put at security and not left
to die or sometimes as we've seen the last 2 year
Europe helped to die!
10.6.1 Percentage of voting rights in international 10.7.1 Share of migrants in regular employment
organizations of developing countries, compared to (Regular employment refers to a job with a written or
population or GDP as appropriate verbal contract, regularized employment relationship
We certainly support increased representation of under agreed terms).
developing countries in these bodies. Yet, this
indicator is flawed for two reasons. First, voting National surveys, conducted by the National
rights-based on population or GDP worsens rather Statistical Offices on employment, wages and
than enhances representation of small, poor working conditions; ILO International Labour
countries in international institutions. Second, Migration Module
effective voice in these institutions requires
meaningful participation and decision-making over 10.7.2 Share of migrant workers in regular
the actual outcomes of the debates, which is not employment, by gender
measured with this proposed indicator. We need to
see institutions that are specifically designed, from
the outset, to represent the needs of the poorest
countries and their populations. We would also urge
enhanced voice of civil society actors in these
bodies.
Target 10.b: Encourage official development
assistance and financial flows, including foreign
direct investment, to States where the need is
Target 10.a: Implement the principle of special greatest, in particular least developed countries,
and differential treatment for developing African countries, small island developing States
countries, in particular least developed and landlocked developing countries, in
countries, in accordance with World Trade accordance with their national plans and
Organization agreements programmes
We support the following suggested indicator, as
amended:
FDI inflows as a share of GDP to developing
countries, broken down by group (LDCs, African
countries, SIDS, LLDCS, [ADD: remittances from
diaspora and migrant communities]) and by source
country.
Trade-related indicators should not only focus on
trade restrictions and distortions. Indicators should
also measure changes in trade which have improved
market access for poorer countries and delivered in
terms of sustainable, less volatile/vulnerable
livelihoods, strengthening the stability of commodity
markets, reducing their volatility. As paragraph 30 of
the revised outcome document reads "States are
strongly urged to refrain from promulgating and
applying any unilateral economic, financial or trade
measures not in accordance with international law
and the Charter of the United Nations that impede
the full achievement of economic and social
development, particularly in developing countries"
Suggested Indicator 10.b: Target refers to ‘financial

flows’ in general beyond ODA but the indicator
doesn’t measure this. Suggest add in additional text
“OECD ODA and other financial flow data,
disaggregated by recipient and donor countries or
grantee type”
SDGfunders.org will track philanthropic financial
flows
Very good I agree with it
Target 10.c: By 2030, reduce to less than 3 per
cent the transaction costs of migrant
remittances and eliminate remittance corridors
with costs higher than 5 per cent
• Remittance costs as a percentage of the amount
remitted
We agree with the WB suggested amendment for

the target, and if possible, would add the following to
that amendment:
By 2030, reduce to less than 3% the transaction
cost of migrant remittances, with at least one reliable
and accessible service available in each corridor at a
cost significanty lower than the average for that
corridor, through enhanced information,
transparency, competition [ADD: and technology, eg
mobile money transfers], and cooperation with
partners.
I agree with it
remitted
remitted
A good goal. It is neceessary to create and
implement solidarity policies between developed
countries and developing countries.
Neither the establishment of arbitrary remittance
price targets (Avg. 3%/no corridor 5%), nor a sole
indicator of price @ $200 principal for a single
consumer service, address the real barriers to the
SDG goal to reduce inequality. Deficiencies in the
following are barriers to access, inclusion &
opportunity which support equality: Target 4.6 Adult
literacy & numeracy, Target 7.1 Access to modern
energy/electricity, Target 8.10 Capacity of domestic
financial institutions to expand access, Target 9.1
infrastructure (incl. broadband access), Target 9.C
Access to ICT, incl. Internet & mobile, Target 10.2
Economic inclusion (via financial institution or mobile
money),Target 16.4 Illicit financial flows, Target 16.9
Legal identity. Such barriers preserve market
inefficiencies & reduce use of innovative technology;
their indicators should be 1st priority indicators for
Target 10.C. to facilitate cost reduction and access
for all financial services-- including remittances.
Indicators must allow for market anomalies/issues.
Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate,
safe and affordable housing and basic services and
Organization: upgrade slums
ADD International

Beyond 2015 UK
Bond Disaster Risk Reduction

Working Group
CAFOD
CBM UK
CDP
Centre for Built Environment New comprehensive development plans are required including
smart
cities for cities. Urbanisation in the context of globalization of
market
economy and market economy and at the same time
preserving the
social and Cuktural values.

International
ChildFund Alliancd
Christian Aid
Deutschland e.V.
Clean Air Asia
Climate Change Centre Reading Establish policy and frameworks at the national level for cities
to allocate an appropriate percentage of the land to public
space. An inventory of public space assets in a city will reveal
the availability of public space typologies, allowing city-builders
to address shortfalls and encourage a balance of public
spaces throughout a city.
Commonwealth Association of Strongly supported Appropriate city and regional planning can
Planners assist in achieving safer more resilient communities
Communitas Coalition for We support the proposed indicator: “Proportion of urban
Sustainable Cities in the New UN population living in slums.”
Development Agenda has This could be improved by adding “or informal settlements” at
facilitated the development of the end, as suggested earlier by UN-Habitat.
these comments based on the
outcomes of the 3 June 2015 Geospatial data at the city/regional level is essential for
technical seminar: Urban tracking the adequacy, accessibility and affordability of
Sustainability for Human housing and basic services (which are generally delivered by
Development: Indicators, local authorities) and for assessing progress in upgrading
Geospatial Technology & slums. Disaggregated spatial data at the local level can
Disaggregation for SDG11 and its provide governments and other stakeholders with a detailed
Linkages with other SDGs, which understanding of the proportion of the population living in
we organized at the United Nations slums or informal settlements. Moreover, when integrated with
in close collaboration with Group census data or household surveys, the location-specific
of Member States Friends for conditions and affordability faced by various populations (e.g.,
Sustainable Cities, the UN low-income households) can be tracked. This city/regional
Statistics Division in the data is necessary not only for aggregation into national data,
Department for Economic and but also for informing needs and priorities for local and
Social Affairs (DESA), the national policies and implementation activities to achieve this
European Commission Joint target.
Research Centre, the Penn Institute
for Urban Research and the UN
Solutions Network (SDSN); and
with the support of the Global Task
Force of Local and Regional
Governments, the World Urban
Campaign and the Urban SDG
Campaign. Details on the co-
organizers and signatories of this
submission, as well as the
technical presentations at the
event and a detailed outcomes
report can be found at:
http://www.communitascoalition.or
g/pdf/indicators-workshop/Tech
%20Seminar%20on%20Indicators

ericsson including ICT as a basic infrastructure

Federal Environment Agency of Possible Indicator to measure „access for all to basic
Germany services“:
1.) Availability of local services measured by percentage of
population per type of area (urban/rural) that lives within 1 km
distance to the next food store
This indicator is described in a German study on mobility

indicators in specific fields of action including “Guaranteeing
Mobility”:
http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/entwicklung-
von-indikatoren-im-bereich-mobilitaet (In German).

French Water Parnership We support the suggested indicator stating « Proportion of

urban population living in slums ».
As we highly recommend having cross-cutting indicators to

measure basic services, we suggest a disaggregation of the
indicator that includes the “proportion of the population having
access to safely managed- water services and safely
managed sanitation services”, which are the indicators used in
target 6.1 and 6.2
Future of Places
Global Network of Civil Society

Organisations for Disaster
Reduction
Habitat for Humanity International 1. Expand the suggested indicator to measure all elements of
a slum, including security of tenure. The suggested indicator is
a continuation of the MDGs and the MDGs did not measure
tenure security which is vital to the achievement of goals 1, 2,
5 and 11 of the SDGs
2. Include the proposed affordability indicator in the final

framework to: ensure universality given the suggested slum
indicator is more broadly applicable to the developing world
and ensure the indicators capture the full intent of target 11.1
Health Poverty Action Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible within household

HealthBridge Foundation of
Canada
HealthBridge Vietnam
Human Rights Watch

IDDC
Institute for Governance and

Institute for Reproductive and Very good. I am not sure access to all, it depends on economic
Family Health development, political system

Transport (UITP)

World

Island Sustainability Allliance CIS 11.1.1 Monitor the percentage of people living in proximity to
Inc. ("ISACI") uncontrolled dumpsites and other environmental “hot spots”
that emit and release hazardous chemicals .
11.1.2 Monitor the percentage of major toxic

hotspots/sites/stockpiles with chemical risk management
measures applied.
11.6.1 Number of deaths as well and environmental and

economic losses from industrial/technological
disasters/emergencies.
11.6.2 Monitor concentration of hazardous pollutants in the air.
11.6.3 Monitor the proportion of the urban population exposed

to small/fine urban particulates (PM10 or PM2.5) in
concentrations exceeding WHO Air Quality Guideline.
11.6.4 Monitor rates for waste generation (kg per capita/year,

overall and by economic sector.
11.6.5 Percentage of waste materials including obsolete

stockpiles of pesticides, recovered, reused and/or recycled,
including for energy generation, by economic sector.

Delhi
1,000 Days
Kepa Finland
MARS Practitioners Network The suggested indicator “Proportion of urban population living
in slums” needs to beefed up to reflect both the quality of
housing, slum services and the services and quality of life that
all urban residents should have. Thus the indicator should be
modified to include percentage of all urban residents having
safe housing through access to safe land, siting and location
of house and its quality and resilience. So too percentage of
slum dwellers & other residents having access to urban
services at least covering roads, lighting, electricity, water,
sanitation, waste management and emergency response
services must be recognized. The indicator should be suitably
modified.
National Union of Tenants of Indicator 11.1.1 and 11.1.2

Nigeria Given that safe/affordable housing and basic services are key
parameters for adequate housing, as defined in General
Comment No.4 on art. 11 of ICESCR; inclusion of the word
“adequate” in Target 11.1 is needless hence, we suggest a
modification to: By 2030, ensure access for all to decent,
safe/affordable housing and basic services and upgrade
slums. Further given that Target 11.1 focused on slum-
upgrading, but did not give any implementation framework, we
further suggest that the indicator be modified to: proportion of
slum-dwellers having access to basic infrastructure and
services. Also given that Indicator 11.1.2 is narrowed to
accommodation and ignored to recognize other costs
associated to adequate housing such as cost of energy, water,
security and safety; we propose that these costs be integrate
into the Target to read – fraction of population that spends
more than 30% of its income on housing-related costs –
disaggregated by rental and service costs.
NCD Alliance Propose: 11.1.1. Proportion of urban population living in slums
NSF Research Coordination

Network on Sustainable Cities
'Ph.D., Postdoc, Early-Career'
Working Group
OneFamilyPeople Disability is not factored in this target. we therefore

recommend that:
By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe, accessible,

affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums
Oxfam
Partnership for Economic Policy

Carbon Transport
Planning 4 Sustainable upgrade slums' - not measurable. Land use/urban planning,

Development even is strategic for developing customary societies should be
pushed
Practical Action The indicator is OK, but the definition of slums needs to be
improved to ensure it is in line with other definitions and
indicators in the SDGs in particular in relation to access to
safely managed water, sanitation and hygiene.
RMS
SECOVI-SP Comment: It is necessary to clearly define what is a slum,

because it may have different definitions in different countries.
Comment on the WB suggestion: [Proportion of income spent

by urban families on transport to reach employment,
education, health and community services.] Too complex to be
measured in the most of the cities.
Comment on the WB suggestion: [Proportion of income spent

by urban families on transport to reach employment,
education, health and community services.] Good indicator,
but could just be […] to reach employment and education.
Because those two destinations are universal in any city.
Sightsavers
Signatory organizations: United 11.1.1 Proportion of urban development, including slum

Nations Foundation, Plan upgrading initiatives, that take into account one or more of the
International, Girl Effect, CARE, needs of women and girls including but not limited to
International Women's Health participation of women and girls in the planning process,
Coalition, Girls Not Brides, World enhancing safety and security, improving accessibility of
Association of Girl Guides and Girl women and girls to public services, and improving land tenure
Scouts, European Parliamentary rights of women and girls.
Research on Women, Advocates GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UN Habitat
Small Arms Survey Indicator 16.1 (homicides and conflict deaths) and 16.1.2 (if
focused on non-lethal violence) once disaggregated by
location (urban vs rural) will provide data on urban safety.
A useful indicator to be added would be: 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 and freedom from fear, underpinning the target and
the aspiration of the wider goal.
It’s strength also comes from the fact that, when
disaggregated by urban/rural, age, gender, the indicator can
be used for targets 5.2, 10.2, 10.3, 11.1, 11.2, 11.7, 16.2, 16.a
Global data for this indicator could be drawn from Gallup’s
annual World Poll, which covers 95% of the world’s population.
Nonetheless, the indicator is already being used by several
NSOs, including those in Africa that are part of the SHaSA
process. The indicator could be packaged into household,
victimisation or national polling surveys.
Origin of Data: Population-based and specialized surveys,
crime victimization surveys.
Society for the Psychological Data on access to adequate, safe and affordable housing and
Study of Social Issues; Psychology basic human services, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
Coalition at the United Nations ethnicity, indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence,
national origin, and migration status.
Stakeholder Group on Ageing Indicator 11.1.1 Change to: Percentage of urban population,
(posted by HelpAge International) by age, gender and persons of disabilities, living in slums or
informal settlements
Indicator 11.1.2 Change to: Proportion of the population, by

age, gender and persons of disabilities, that spends more than
30% of its income on accommodation..
Stockholm Environment Institute We believe indicator 11.1.1: Percentage of urban population
living in slums or informal settlements ( BBA ) is limited in its
ability to adequately measure universal access to ‘adequate,
safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade
slums’. Indeed, in sub-Saharan countries, many low-income
and lower-middle income urban households do not live in
informal settlements or slums but do not have access to
adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services
(e.g. water). Hence, indicator 11.1.1 should be broadened to
capture urban residents living in low and lower-middle income
neighbourhoods more generally (especially in developing
countries) to meaningfully assess the level of access to
‘adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services’.
Sudanese Environment
Conservation Society
Tearfund
Tebtebba 11.1: 1)Number of incidences of displacement and relocation

of indigenous peoples without FPIC; 20 number of appropriate
human settlement provided to indigenous peoples; 3)
proportion or level of participation of indigenous peoples in
planning and management
and proven inter-linkages between corruption and access to
land and housing.
- http://unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Habitat-III-
Issue-Paper-9_Urban-Land-2.0.pdf
TRK asbl Indicator ;

National rules that prevent the housing prices to rise above a
certain level!
- National program for public affordable housing in all cities
AND rural areas
UCLG
Urban Institute “Suggested” indicator on proportion of population living in

slums is inadequate to measure target, which covers safe and
affordable housing and access to basic services. It also does
not support “universal” application of SDGs as slums (as
traditionally defined) are not pervasive in many higher-income
countries, while housing affordability and access remains a
key issue.
Indicator 11.1.2 (on housing affordability) is important to
measure Target 11.1 and apply this target under a universal
agenda. The 30 percent threshold is likely inspired by the US
national threshold, and it’s not clear whether this is an
appropriate threshold across country contexts. Although data
in support of this is not currently available across country
contexts, this indicator could be computed from
income/expenditure household surveys.
Target 11.1 should be supported by indicator related to
security of tenure. Our proposed revisions to “suggested”
indicator on property ownership under Target 1.4 (and
proposed Indicator 1.4.2) would accomplish this, without
adding additional indicators.
USIL This target must be completed by a group of

recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states the best
way reach it.
Vietnam Association of Architects
Women Access Trust Organisation One of the indicators should be : proportion of rural dwellers
Of Nigeria with jobs in metropolitan areas
Women for Women's Human Rights 11.1 Proportion of slum-upgrading initiatives that take into
- New Ways account one or more of the needs of women and girls,
including but not limited to participation of women and girls in
the planning process, enhancing safety and security,
improving accessibility of women and girls to public services,
and improving land tenure rights of women and girls.
Women's Environment and 1) We must operationalize the language 'upgrade slums' with
Development Orgranization the realization that the negative impacts of slum dwelling
disparately impact women and girls. Recommend:
a) Proportion of slum-upgrading initiatives that take into
account one or more of the needs of women and girls,
2) It is not clear how a slum is "upgraded" - there should be a

reduction of people living in slums. If the definition of a slum as
defined by UN-Habitat is utilized, then monitoring of the global
slum population would meet the intent of ensuring universal
access to housing and basic services. Recommend:
a)Percentage of population by age, sex, civil status and
persons with disabilities, living in slums according to the UN-
Habitat definition
Women's Major Group 11.1.1 Percentage of population by age, sex, civil status and
persons with disabilities, living in slums according to the UN-
Habitat definition
UN-Habitat
11.1.2 Proportion of slum-upgrading initiatives that take into

account one or more of the needs of women and girls,
UN-Habitat
11.1.3 Proportion of the female headed households that
spends more than 30% of its income on accommodation that
meets basic needs for quality and service provision in line with
UN-Habitat standards and ensures a safe and secure
environment.
National census, household surveys

World Chlorine Council Affordable, reliable chlorine-based disinfectants are a key

factor in making safe drinking water and sanitation services
available globally. This target is therefore linked to targets
under Goal #6.
World Vision
WWF It will be important to ensure a clear and appropriate definition

of the world ‘slum’ using UN HABITAT’s five characteristics as
a starting point. A large problem has been countries and cities
limiting the definition as a means to neglect these areas and
their inhabitants. Indicator data provided by UN HABITAT
could possibly be complemented by CSOs data collection
such as Slum Dwellers International.
Y Care International
Target 11.2: By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable,
accessible and sustainable transport systems for all,
improving road safety, notably by expanding public
transport, with special attention to the needs of those in
vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with
disabilities and older persons
We recommend the following indicator against this target:
‘Percentage of public transport vehicles meeting the minimum
national standards for accessibility by persons with disabilities’
[current suggested indicator: Proportion of the population that

has a public transit stop within 0.5 km]
The indicator is not reflective of the needs of those in
vulnerable situations. Countries such as the India,
Bangladesh, Philippines, and Sri Lanka have access to public
transportation within 0.5 km but these are not sensitive to
those living in vulnerable situations.
Proposed indicator: Proportion of the population that has
access to public transit transportation based on universal
design within 0.5 km
Additional indicator suggested: Specific measures taken to
ensure a)safety of public transport to ensure safety for various
social groups such as i) children, ii) women, iii) disability and
disaggregated by geographical area.
b)affordability disaggregated by rural/urban, bottom/ top wealth
quintile
Rationale: While the current indicators assess access in terms

of availability and distance, other social aspects of access
such as safety is not being taken into consideration
In order to ensure people with disabilities are reached indicator
must include disability. We suggest: Percentage of public
transport vehicles meeting the minimum national standards for
accessibility by persons with disabilities
Data gathered by CDP's programs for cities, states and
regions could support tracking of progress against this target.
Studies are required with respect to urban mobility and all
modes of
transport ,land use and future city growth.
must therefore be fully disaggregated by disability. An
additional indicator to ensure inclusive data gathering could be
(Interlinkages with 4.a, 11.7.)
Please see comments on the list of indicator proposals (as of

11 August 2015) currently under discussion by the IAEG-
SDGs, sent to email address statistics@un.org
Special area of Interest

70. Area of public and green space as a proportion of total city
space
Cross-cutting SDG-GROUP 10, 11 (11.2, 11.6, 11.7, 11.b) + 13
and 17
11.2 – 11.b Rat run indicator

Disaggregation: district rat runs
Strongly supported Appropriate city and regional planning can

assist in achieving safer more resilient communities and can
help maximise the cost benefit ratios of the limited input funds
We support the proposed indicator: “Proportion of the
population that has a public transit stop within 0.5 km.”
Geospatial data at the local level is essential for tracking the

accessibility, safety, and affordability of public transport
systems. Disaggregated spatial data at the local level can
provide governments and other stakeholders with a detailed
understanding of the proportion of the population living within .
5 km of a public transport stop. Combined with census data
and/or household surveys, the location-specific data can also
identify the proportion of income spent on transport by
households in various parts of a city/region, as well as areas in
which vulnerable populations are underserved. This
disaggregated geospatial data can inform transportation
infrastructure planning and budgeting priorities at the local,
regional and national scales, thereby enhancing effective
implementation efforts to meet this target and ensure access
by underserved populations.
This indicator has similar shortcomings as the one proposed

under target 9.1. It addresses availability, but not accessibility
and affordability for vulnerable groups, as specifically
mentioned in the target.

should therefore be fully disaggregated by disability. An
Possible indicators to measure „provide access to safe,
affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for
all“:
1.) Environmentally friendly transport systems: Final energy
consumption of passenger and freight transport.
2.) Use of energetic resources: Primary energy consumption

and proportion of renewable energy to energy consumption
3.) Climate protection: Greenhouse gases in CO2-equvalents

by different sectors
4.) Air quality: Air pollution (NH3, NOx, NMVOC, SO2)
5.) Road safety: Premature mortality of men and women
6.) Financial sustainability: Gross fixed capital investments in

proportion to GDP
These indicators are described in a German study on mobility

indicators in specific fields of action including „Environmentally
Friendly Transport“, “Use of Energetic Resources”, “Climate
Change”, “Air Quality”, “Traffic Safety” and “Financial
Sustainability” :
von-indikatoren-im-bereich-mobilitaet (in German).
Percentage of public transport vehicles meeting the minimum
national standards for accessibility by persons with disabilities
Explicit mention of persons with disabilitie so should be fully

disaggregated by disability. An additional indicator to ensure
inclusive data gathering could be ‘Percentage of public
transport vehicles meeting the minimum national standards for
accessibility by persons with disabilities’
Although we agree that measuring proximity to public transit is
important, we believe that in order to truly achieve target 11.2
governments need to improve walking and bicycling
environments, along with public transit. Walking and cycling
are sustainable, healthy, and affordable means of individual
transport. Good walking and cycling environments lead to
more equitable cities. By choosing an indicator that measures
only one aspect of sustainable transportation runs the risk of
minimizing the importance of the other components of
sustainable transportation. We believe modal split is a more
comprehensive indicator to measure the impact of the full
scope of programs, policies, and activities that will be needed
to achieve the 11.2 target. We propose to change the
indicator to focus on modal split:
The proportion of the population using walking, bicycling, and
public transit, and for all purposes travel.
Sustainable transportation is a complicated system that

includes many different forms of transportation. In order to
achieve target 11.2 nations and local governments must
ensure that there are safe, comfortable and convenient
walking and bicycling environments, along with public transit.
In fact, it is impossible to achieve sustainable transportation
without focusing on walking and cycling. Choosing an indicator
that measures only one aspect of sustainable transportation
runs the risk of minimize the importance of the other
components of sustainable transportation. We suggest, given
the complex nature of this target, that modal split is a better
indicator to measure the impact of the full scope of programs,
policies and activities that will be needed to achieve the target.
We would change the indicator to focus on modal split:
The proportion of the population using walking, bicycling,
public transit, and private motorized vehicles for all purposes
travel.
This target seeks to provide safe and accessible services for

all in cities and public spaces, including facilities, schools,
public transportation, public spaces, and government
websites. The indicators, however, do not include the
measurement of accessibility for persons with disabilities.
Without including indicators that ensure that the building and
development of such services are accessible to persons with
disabilities, these targets may not be fully met.
Very good

additional indicator to ensure data is inclusive of persons with
disabilities could be ‘Percentage of public transport vehicles
meeting the minimum national standards for accessibility by
persons with disabilities’.
1) A better measure than the current proposals would be to

develop an indicator that measures a population’s access to
and supply of public transport within a defined city boundary.
This would help measure the offer and capacity of public
transport that is easily accessible by urban citizens.
2) This should be complemented by an indicator that
measures the mode share of public transport, walking and
cycling. This should be measured in the first instance.
Taken together, this will help define expanding public transport

in terms of infrastructure; capacity and use which the current
set of indicators do not take into full consideration. Further
detail is in section 4.
ICN proposes a new indicator: Designs to encourage use of
public transport and physical activities.
Indicator
- Percentage of public transport vehicles meeting the minimum
national standards for accessibility by persons with disabilities
Comments:
For targets 4.a, 11.2 and 11.7, which refer to accessibility by
persons with disabilities, the indicators can be based on
existing ISO standards for accessibility to buildings or
"minimum national standards of accessibility by persons with
disabilities". The Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities refers to universal design, but there is not an
operational currently used international definition of
accessibility/universal design. Countries tend to either use
existing ISO standards or make their own assessments of
accessible schools, accessible public buildings, and
accessible transport according to national standards.
To measure progress over the years in access to public

transportation in the lowest quintiles of the population this
indicator should be disaggregated by income
Suggest paying attention to migrant workers as well.

11.2.1 Monitor the provision of bicycle lanes or similar
infrastructure that enables people to use no or low-carbon
commuting paths.
No comments
Propose the following: 11.2.1. Safe, equitable, energy-efficient
transport; 11.2.2. Opportunities for physical activity; and,
11.2.3. The proportion of the population using walking,
bicycling, public transit, and motorized vehicles for all
purposes travel.
Sustainable transportation is a complicated system that

includes many different forms of transportation. In order to
achieve target 11.2 nations and local governments must
ensure that there are safe, comfortable and convenient
walking and bicycling environments, along with public transit.
In fact, it is impossible to achieve sustainable transportation
without focusing on walking and cycling.
Choosing an indicator that measures only one aspect of
sustainable transportation runs the risk of minimizing the
importance of the other components of sustainable
transportation. We suggest, given the complex nature of this
target, that modal split is a better indicator to measure the
impact of the full scope of programs, policies and activities that
will be needed to achieve the target.
Normalize annual traffic deaths based on vehicle

miles/kilometers traveled (VMT/VKT) or residents-plus-jobs to
more easily compare different types of cities and urban areas.
The proposed indicator for accessibility fails to account for

destinations accessible by transit. Additionally, considering the
0.5 km distance along the transportation network to transit
stops will provide a truer understanding of access, and
accounting for occupancy in addition to frequency will more
fully addresses life cycle energy; safety, sustainability, and
resilience goals. Shifts in mode choice is offered as an
indicator of transit accessibility.
Two indicators are offered to address sustainability and equity

goals expressed in the target verbiage: average daily
VMT/VKT per capita and percent of income expenditures to
transportation.
To ensure the achievement of this goal there is a need for
age/gender disaggregation.
• Walking and cycling (as well as public transport) should
be explicitly measured under 11.2, in addition to 9.1. An
alternate measure is urban road safety since most city
fatalities are pedestrians and cyclists. The proposed road
crash fatality indicator for target 3.6 should be disaggregated
by city (and ideally by cyclists/pedestrians).
• WB proposed indicator 11.2.2: This is superior to 11.2.1
in measuring access to jobs, and could be improved by
measuring access to other basic needs (e.g. education, health
services). If possible, should be disaggregated by income
level, as the poorest often have greater commute times. If
replaced by two indicators (e.g. number of (1) residents and
(2) jobs within 0.5km of rapid transit) it would approximate
access for the bulk of large city populations.
• UN-Habitat proposed indicator 11.2.2: ‘Km of facilities’
does not provide much information about access, but can
serve as an easily measured proxy indicator to compare
progress across countries.
requires land use planning to underpin it

We agree with WB comment on indicator 11.3.2
11.2.1 Percentage of public transport systems that include

provisions to ensure the safety and security of women and
girls
DATA SOURCE: Country data
11.2.2 Percentage of women and girls who say they ever feel
safe using public transit, noting under what circumstances they
do and do not feel safe
DATA SOURCE: Surveys
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UN Women

Indicator 11.2.1 Proportion of population disaggregated by
age, sex, and disability status, who live within 0.5km of public
transit
Comment: Because of the emphasis on vulnerable subgroups

in the target, disaggregation is essential
We recommend the following indicators and areas of
measurement for effective monitoring of target 11.2.:
1) Density of public transport routes (as a proxy for bus
frequency)
2) Price of public transport weighted according to per capita
income
3) Number of demand responsive feeder systems lines
which connect peri urban areas and rural areas with urban
centers.
4) Total kilometres of dedicated cycle lanes within an urban
center.
5) Percentage of facilities in public transport system designed
to support vulnerable groups (i.e. pregnant, disabled and older
persons).
6) Subsidies earmarked for reducing the cost of public
transport use as a proportion of GDP (%)
Free public transport should be the ideal program, indicator :
National program to maintain the price of transport no higher
that 0,75 cents! Target
The proposed indicators do not measure transportation/transit

affordability, a key element of Target 11.2. An alternative or
supplementary indicator would be “share of income spent by
urban households on transport (by income quintile),” as
recommended by USDN. This would also link this target to
Target 1.4 on basic services.
Indicator 11.2.2: the World Bank (WB) has used a one hour
commute radii for identifying labor market scales and
efficiencies, but a recent study (link) shows that replication
requires significant fieldwork. While the WB has done this data
collection for a few cities, simply stating that “GIS and open
data” could be used for this purpose is not enough. It should
be accompanied by references of studies that have
successfully implemented this in several types of cities, and
analysis of costs associated with such efforts. We recommend
seeking further evidence on the practical operationalization of
this indicator before being adapted in practice.
This target must be completed by a group of

way reach it.
Nowadays, many international discussions on urban
transportation are talk about sustainable system. However,
almost of them forget or disregard about pedestrians and
cyclist as well as the built environment for these vulnerable
road users group. In most transit oriented transportation
system, we need to consider the quality and safety
environment for pedestrians and cyclists. In general, walkway
and bike lanes could help the people access to public transits
and make the whole system work. So when we talk about
sustainable transport system, we could not skip pedestrians
and cyclists. In order to achieve target 11.2 cities must ensure
that there are safe, comfortable and convenient walking and
bicycling environments, along with public transit. It is not
enough if we chose an indicator that measures only transit to
show the success of sustainable transportation. In addition,
some small cities in our country with radius of less than 3km
may archive target of sustainable transportation while they
promote for walking and cycling only. So we suggest, using
modal split as an indicator for sustainable transportation
target.
11.2 Percentage of women and girls who say they always feel
safe using public transit, disaggregated by age, civil status,
disability, education level, ethnicity, geographic location,
income, migrant status, IDPs, refugees
1) Safety is a primary concern for women and girls when
accessing public transport systems. Safety measure support
truly inclusive systems. Transport is also critical for the health,
economic livelihood, and cultural access of women.
Recommend:
a) Percentage of public transport systems that include

girls, including but not limited to separate seating or cars,
active patrolling, and punitive framework for violence against
women and girls.
2)Perceptions of safety are important if marginalized

communities, particularly women and girls, are going to use
public transportation. around issues of safety; it shows
whether or not these initiatives are reaching their intended
targets. Support:
a) Percentage of women and girls who say they always feel
safe using public transit, disaggregated by age, civil status,
disability, education level, ethnicity, geographic location,
income, migrant status, IDPs, refugees
3) Indicator must include settlements of all sizes, as well as

frequency of transport.
11.2.1 Percentage of public transport systems that include

girls, including but not limited to separate seating or cars,
active patrolling, and punitive framework for violence against
women and girls.
UNDESA social indicators for public transport
11.2.2 Percentage of women and girls who say they always

feel safe using public transit, disaggregated by age, civil
status, disability, education level, ethnicity, geographic
location, income, migrant status, IDPs, refugees Based on
Plan International research on safety in cities for girls.
11.2.3 Percentage of population disaggregated by age, sex,

and disability status, who live within 0.5 km of public transit
that runs at least every 20 minutes in communities with at least
100,000 inhabitants, and within 1.0 km of public transit running
to meet demand as operationally defined with communities for
less than 100,000 inhabitants.
National census, household surveys

Walking and cycle rickshaws are the main modes of transport
in Dhaka. It is not possible to improve the public transport
system without good conditions for walkers, cyclists and cycle
rickshaw. In order to achieve target 11.2 nations and local
governments need to improve environments for them. These
highly effective, healthy, affordable and equitable means of
transport can be measured to evaluate the success of building
sustainable transport systems for all people. Choosing an
indicator that measures only one aspect of sustainable
transportation runs the risk of minimizing the importance of the
other components of sustainable transportation and leaves out
people who rely on other sustainable modes for their mobility.
We suggest modal split is a more comprehensive indicator to
measure the impact of the full scope of programs, policies, and
activities that will be needed to achieve the 11.2 target. We
propose to change the indicator to focus on modal split: "The
proportion of the population using walking, bicycling, and
public transit, and for all purposes travel."
The suggested indicator erroneously assumes that close
proximity to transit implies high usage. WRI supports an
indicator that measures peoples’ access to destinations. Such
an indicator would similar to the World Bank’s proposal:
"Share of jobs in the metropolitan area an 'average' household
can access within 60/75 minutes….” Measurement tools and
access to data are now available, allowing us to track
accessibility to ‘destinations’ (jobs, open spaces, schools,
etc.), by different modes such as transit, walking, bicycle and
auto, in 942 cities around the world.
There is ample research sustaining why measuring

accessibility is more effective than measuring distance to
stops, since the former links the transit system (spatial
coverage and frequency) to where people want to go,
measuring how efficient the transport system is in fulfilling this
goal. The latter does not offer insight as to the frequency of the
service it serves, how many transfers are needed, amount of
time, etc.
WWF strongly supports the WB proposed indicator “Proportion

of income spent by families on transport to reach services
such as employment, health, education and community
services” in addition to the suggested indicator.
Target 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable
urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and
sustainable human settlement planning and management
in all countries
[current suggested indicator in 11.3.2: Cities with more than

100,000 inhabitants that implement urban and regional
development plans integrating population projections and
resource needs]
The current suggested indicator is not reflective of the target
especially on the issue of participation. There is a need to
measure how plans are developed through meaningful
participation of different sectors.
Proposed additional indicator: Number of groups representing
vulnerable groups engaged in urban and regional
development plans integrating population projections and
resource needs based on climate and disaster risk
assessment.
Human settlement planning will undergo changes to include
smart city
Objectives,,social and Cultural development ,equity of
services and
equity of people.
We support modifying the proposed indicator to: "Just and
efficient land use." This recognizes that all need access to land
sufficient to supply space for affordable and decent shelter,
safe transportation, access to work places and room for
recreation.
For inclusive and participatory planning and management, we

also fully support the indicators for target 16.7: Ensure
responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative
decision-making at all levels.
Rapid urbanization with unplanned settlements result in

inefficient land use and sprawl where the rate of urban land
use expansion exceeds the rate of urban population growth.
This impinges on nearby agricultural land and forested areas,
and often occurs without the infrastructure to provide basic
services. Informed by geospatial data at the local level,
planning and management efforts can direct urbanization
processes to locations with adequate infrastructure.
Examples of successfully using spatial indicators to monitor

land use efficiency include UN-Habitat’s City Prosperity
Initiative, NYU's Stern Urbanization Project, and EC Joint Res
Centre's Global Human Settlement Layer.
The proposed indicator has only weak correspondence with

the target and does not capture the aspects of inclusions and
participation
Additional/revised indicators should be created and included
here such as:
Number of cities with population larger than 100,000

inhabitants with current (developed in the last 5 years or
specifically referencing current year in which data is collected)
strategic urban plan
Percentage of population of cities with population larger than

100,000 inhabitants participating in participatory planning of
strategic urban plan
Very good
Land use and public transport accessibility indexing as

proposed by UITP for 11.2 measures access to basic
community services which aims to deliver integrated land use
and transport outcomes, which is essential for sustainable
urbanism and delivering integrated land use planning and
transport. Complementing this with an indicator that captures
the intensity of use of public transport will help measure
enhanced, inclusive and sustainable urbanization and guide
sustainable investment choices needed for expanding public
transport.
11.3.1 Monitor the number of cities with infrastructure in place
for sustainable waste collection, separation, re-use, transport,
recycling, resource recovery, and disposal
This may be shortened in one line

Indicator 11.3.2 on “Cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants
that implement urban and regional development plans
integrating population projections and resource needs” is
better than merely the proposed indictor “ efficient land use”
without even defining what efficiency is.
A new indicator combining the two could be “By 2030, at least
60 % of Cities ( and wards) with more than 80,000 inhabitants
and 80% of all cities with more than 400,000 must develop
and implement efficient urban and regional development and
land use plans integrating population projections and future
resource needs”
Indicators to evaluate inclusive and participatory planning are
critical to Target 11.3; none are yet listed. A useful resource for
identifying justice indicators for the Urban SDG’s
implementation is the Rio Declaration, Principle 10; Aarhus
Convention: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/.
From IPCC-AR5, key physical characteristics of low carbon

development are: (1) high population and employment
densities that are co-located; (2) compact urban form; (3)
mixed land uses; (4) high connectivity street patterns; and (5)
destination accessibility to jobs and services.
Urban land expansion is not directly related to low carbon

development patterns. Indicators could be improved by
incorporating additional remote sensing datasets (building
heights, nightlights, street density). Optimal density levels are
unknown, and high densities can exasperate
environmental/social ills. The desirable trajectory for urban
expansion depends on initial conditions, which vary.
Proposed Indicator 11.3.1: Ratio of land consumption rate to
population growth rate at comparable scale (Efficient land use)
Comments
• Transport is an important influencer on the efficiency of
land use. With hierarchical transport systems integrated with
land use plans, and other infrastructure, more efficient land
use outcomes can be facilitated
• Data is readily available and should be easy to calculate
on an annual basis through satellite imagery and UN
population data (e.g. through the following data sources):
http://ghslsys.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/CD-ROM/
The currently proposed indicators do nothing to touch on a
crucial part of the target which is about the capacity for
participatory planning and management. The proposed
indicator will not even be a close proxy for this. Without a
clearer indicator, levels of exclusion and inequality for the
urban poor will persist.
We suggest:
Cities and human settlements that develop, revise and
implement development plans based on effective stakeholder
engagement that includes participation from poor and
vulnerable communities
11.3.1 Existence of legal frameworks in place for participatory
planning processes especially including provisions for the
inclusion of women and marginalized groups
DATA SOURCE: Country Data

W.H.O.’s Age-Friendly Cities Criteria is a useful existing
measure for target 11.3.
We recommend 11.3.1 or 11.3.2 are revised to incorporate

those who have adopted W.H.O.’s Age-Friendly Cities Criteria.
http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Age_friendly_cities_che
cklist.pdf
We believe the proposed indicators (11.3.1 and 11.3.2) to
monitor target 11.3 are ambiguous in their relevance to target
11.3 and poorly reflect the participatory aspects of this goal
and the need for inclusive development. Instead, we suggest
additional data collection around the governance and tenure of
land and indicators linked to participation in land planning, i.e.
number of residential dialogues and participation rate in public
referendums and general elections and extent of mandatory
legislation surrounding prior informed consent and public
consultation in planning.
11.3: number of plans and level of indigenous peoples

participation
The target is too diverse and tries to capture so to many

variables hat is difficult to be monitored by a small set of
indicators. We suggest to reformulate the target.
Target 11.3. The suggested indicator (efficient land use) does
not include the participatory dimension. We proposed:
Proposed: “Number of countries with legislation to promote
participatory mechanisms related to urban planning and local
decision making that ensure a fair representation of the urban
population.”
The “suggested” indicator (on efficient land use) does not

measure progress towards meeting several elements of Target
11.3, which includes important references to “inclusive” and
“participatory” planning and land management. Indicators for
this target can and should be harmonized with indicators for
Target 16.7 on “inclusive, participatory, and representative
decision-making at all levels.” This can be accomplished
through suggested changes to indicators in support of this
target, which we include below.
Indicator 11.3.2: In addition to the WB’s comments regarding
the present indicator’s ambiguity, it is also worth noting that the
existence of plans alone is not an appropriate measure for
reforms on the ground since the de facto and de jure situations
tend to vary dramatically. If possible, collecting data around
some measure of public participation in urban planning or
management (e.g., the number of annual public consultations)
would capture the essence of this goal.

way reach it.
There should be a specification in the area of advocacy to
induce legal frameworks for putting together, measures to
guarantee collective, inclusive and sustainable urbanization
policies.
11.3.1 Existence and type of legal framework in place for
participatory planning processes especially including
provisions for the inclusion of women and marginalized
groups.
1) Inclusive and participatory planning and management is
critical to meeting the intent of this target, not solely the
presence of urban planning. Furthermore, rather than a binary
metric, gauges of the typology of participation allowed by legal
frameworks would be more useful.
Recommend:
a) Existence and type of legal framework in place for
groups.
2) Consultations must include women and girls, and address

specific participation needs.
3) Qualitative indicators to measure satisfaction of all
participants is important to understand if the planning and
management is inclusive and participatory.
4) Existing suggested indicator "Efficient land use" must be
enhanced by including "just and rights-based" or similar
language.
11.3.1 Existence and type of legal framework in place for

groups.
UN-Habitat/Rockefeller Foundation 100 Resilient Cities
11.3.2 1) The number of public consultations on new projects

or initiatives that are widely announced by the government
with provisions of separate participation from women and girls
2) The proportion of consultation participants who report
satisfaction with their involvement, disaggregated by gender
and/or other underrepresented groups
Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance Standard on

community consultation
Suggested indicators should be enhanced with qualitative
indicators to measure participation and level of integration of
planning and management to fully reflect the intent of this
target. This could include for example, the number of cities
employing participatory budgeting practices with data from UN
Habitat, and number of cities incorporating climate strategy
into their development plans (source reporting to ICLEI’s
carbonn Climate Registry, see www.carbonn.org).
Target 11.4: Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard
the world’s cultural and natural heritage
[current indicator: Percentage of budget provided for

maintaining cultural and natural heritage ( BBA )]
While the current indicator looks into how funds are provided
for to the maintenance of cultural and natural heritage, this is
not indicative whether the measure is disaster and climate
resilient. The experiences of earthquakes destroying cultural
heritage sites such as seen during the 2013 Bohol Earthquake
and the 2015 Nepal Earthquake reflects that the maintenance
of these sites are not sensitive to risks. Thus, there is a need
to have an indicator looking into how cultural heritage
maintenance is reflected in urban and regional development
plans.
Propose a new indicator: Cities and human settlements with
more than 100,000 inhabitants or with jurisdiction over a
UNESCO World Heritage Site and/or considered national
heritage sites that integrate the protection and safeguarding of
cultural and natural heritage into urban and regional
development plans.
Cultural heritage and preservation of historic buildings and
area as well
as new cultural development will be included in new plan for
cities.
Preservation of greeneries and waterbodies and biodiversity
will be
included in the sustainable development of cities.
Strongly supported
We support the proposed indicator: “Share of national (or
municipal) budget which is dedicated to preservation,
protection and conservation of national cultural natural
heritage including World Heritage sites.”
Protection of cultural and natural heritage sites is critical for

maintaining a sense of place and identity in cities and human
settlements.
Suggested Indicator 11.4.1: Could also make reference to
tangible and intangible (this is no always measurable though -
UNESCO?) cultural heritage
“Share of national (or municipal) budget which is dedicated to
preservation, protection and conservation of national cultural
natural heritage, both tangible and intangible including World
Heritage sites
Very good
No comments
In lieu of indicator 14.1.1 ‘Percentage of budget provided for
maintaining cultural and natural heritage ( BBA )’ we
recommend monitoring the ‘Number of heritage sites relative
to national GDP’. Indicator 14.1.1 does also not account for
propensity of cultural and natural heritage sites to be managed
under the aegis of civil society organisations (i.e. charities and
local community members) so may underestimate the level of
protection these receive; a more holistic indicator would
capture all domestic expenditures intended for the
maintenance of cultural and natural heritage sites.
11.4.: Provision of access for indigenous peoples to their

religious and cultural sites and access to and repatriation of
their ceremonial objects and human remains
Indicator is fit for purpose

Both Indicator 11.4.1 and 11.4.2 could be critiqued on the
same point as above, i.e. simply identifying a site as being
‘protected’ or allocating more resources to its preservation
does not imply that the results would also be proportionally
positive.

way reach it.
WWF supports the UNSD and IUCN proposed indicators.
Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of
deaths and the number of people affected and
substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative
to global gross domestic product caused by disasters,
including water-related disasters, with a focus on
protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations
[current suggested indicator: Number of deaths, missing

people, injured, relocated or evacuated due to disasters per
100,000 people.]
The current indicator is only looking at the number of deaths
and not reflective of the people affected by disasters, the
reduction of economic losses, and the protection of the poor
and people in vulnerable situations. There is a need to align
the indicator with the global targets of Sendai Framework. The
Sendai Framework for DRR already includes the following
targets, and hence providing this data to the SDGs provides
no extra obligation on states.
a) Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030,
aiming to lower the average per 100,000 global mortality rate
in the decade 2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;
b) Substantially reduce the number of affected people
globally by 2030, aiming to lower the average global figure per
100,000 in the decade 2020–2030 compared to the period
2005–2015;
c) Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global
gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030.
Revise the indicator to read: Number of people killed, injured,
displaced, evacuated, relocated, stateless, or otherwise
affected by disasters.
Rationale: One of the worst consequences of a natural or

man- made disaster is not only displacement, relocation,
evacuation etc. many are left without refuge and hence
stateless. Between Jan- August’ 2015 350,000 refugees were
detected at the borders of EU, according to International
Organisation on Migration. A true measure of vulnerability due
to disasters can be measured only if one factors in persons
who are stateless and hence left out of all other indicators.
This target explicitly requires 3 separate indicators - these 3

are clearly indicated in the target itself, and cannot be
meaningfully combined. It is imperative that both the human
losses (mortality and affected) and economic losses are
captured in the indicators for this target; anything else simply
is illogic al and incongruous and does not reflect the target.
The Sendai Framework for DRR already includes the following
2005–2015;
Same as 1.5: Percentage of death from persons with
disabilities among all deaths due to disasters
Percentage of injured persons with disabilities amongst all
injured due to disaster
Preferred indicator: Number of deaths, missing people, injured,

relocated or evacuated due to disasters per 100,000 people;
AND % of economic and non-economic loss and damages
reduced resulting from extreme weather and slow onset
events compare to previous years.
Comment: Indicator needs to reflect economic loss as well as

death and injury.
only 20% could evacuate immediately without difficulty in the
event of a sudden disaster event (source: UNISDR:
http://www.unisdr.org/archive/35032). In order to observe the
evolution of the number of death and of people affected by
disaster and to gather meaningful data, specifically with a
focus on protecting people in vulnerable situations, this target
needs to be disaggregated by disability. This is especially
relevant with regard to data on death and injury. Suggested
additional indicators: Percentage of deaths from persons with
disabilities among all deaths due to disasters; Percentage of
injured persons with disabilities among all injured due to
disasters (interlinked with 11.5).

We support the proposed indicator: “Number of deaths,
missing people, injured, relocated or evacuated due to
disasters per 100,000 people.”
Disasters and their human and ecological impacts are by

definition place-based. With the poor and other vulnerable
populations often concentrated in particular neighborhoods,
disaggregated geospatial data can go beyond simple tracking
of deaths, injuries, displacements, destroyed housing units,
economic losses, etc., and provide location-specific
information on where such impacts and losses occur and
which populations are affected. Promoting efficient land use
(the indicator for Target 11.3) and national urban development
planning can help avoid urban development in particularly
vulnerable areas. Geospatial data can thereby inform
proactive public policies and budgets to incentivize settlement
patterns that reduce losses and build resilience, particularly
among the poor and most vulnerable. Making such information
broadly accessible can also inform location decisions by
private residents and businesses.
This indicator also serves target 13.1 on resilience to climate-

related hazards.

http://www.unisdr.org/archive/35032) .
In order to observe the evolution of the number of death and of
people affected by disaster and to gather meaningful data,
specifically with a focus on protecting people in vulnerable
situations, this target needs to be disaggregated by disability.
This is especially relevant with regard to data on death and
injury. Suggested indicators: Percentage of deaths from
persons with disabilities among all deaths due to disasters;
injured due to disasters (interlinked with 11.5).
We support the suggested indicator: "Number of deaths,
missing people, injured, relocated or evacuated due to
disasters", and we call for a disaggregation that measures the
number of deaths due to water-related disasters, as mentioned
in the target.
- e.g. Percentage of deaths from persons with disabilities
among all deaths
due to disasters
- Percentage of injured persons with disabilities among all
injured due to
disasters

2005–2015;

event of a sudden disaster event.In order to observe the
evolution of the number of death and of people affected by
disaster and to gather meaningful data, specifically with a
focus on protecting people in vulnerable situations, this target
needs to be disaggregated by disability. This is especially
relevant with regard to data on death and injury. Suggested
indicators: Percentage of deaths from persons with disabilities
among all deaths due to disasters; Percentage of injured
persons with disabilities among all injured due to disasters.
Percentage of deaths from persons with disabilities among all
deaths due to disasters
To measure progress and keep the focus of the target on

protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations, this
target should be disaggregated by income and disability
11.5.1 Monitor the number of countries that developed sound
chemicals management corporate policies and practices
throughout the value chain, including extended producer
responsibility, communication about chemical hazards and
risks both for chemicals and chemicals in products together
with the promotion of green design and best available
techniques and best environmental practices (BAT/BEP).
11.5.2 Record the number of deaths in urban areas resulting
from chemicals accidents related to poor storage or disposal.
This has already reflected in the earlier targets.

To honour the goal’s spirit, we need a new target &
composite indicator which measures urban resilience. 2700
city governments supported by UCLG,UNISDR & UN Habitat
are implementing the Resilient Cities (RC) campaign 10
essentials with benchmarks under each. These are1)
Effective city level institutional DRR framework, 2) Adequate
Financing & resources, 3) Multi hazard risk assessment, 4)
Infrastructure Protection, Upgrading & Resilience, 5)
Protecting health & education facilities, 6)Building regulations
& land use planning, 7) Training Education & Public
Awareness, 8) Environmental Protection & Ecosystem
Strengthening , 9) Effective Preparedness, Early warning &
Response, 10) Recovery & Rebuilding communities.
To meaningfully achieve the target & its 3 elements we need a
composite index for urban resilience which can measure both
human (mortality & affected) & economic losses & building
urban resilience systems, especially of its most poor &
vulnerable. Data on attainment level of the RC’s 10 essentials
is available for enrolled cities thus not imposing a fresh burden
on NSOs and will serve as a stimulus for action.
2005–2015;
strategic land use planning needed to provide the basis for

disaster risk reduction
This target explicitly requires 3 separate indicators - reduction
in mortality/affected people, reduce economic losses and
reaching the poorest and vulnerable so difficult to combine.
Vital to capture the human losses (mortality and affected) and
economic losses in the indicators for this target.
The Sendai framework captures the following thus provides
this data with no additional obligation on states.
b) Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally
by 2030, aiming to lower the average global figure per 100,000
Change indicator to ‘number of expected deaths, expected

number of people affected and expected economic losses
(relative to GDP)' and measure using a likely disaster scenario
or a combination of events along with their likelihoods’. Tokyo
has announced a similar approach, with its plan to halve
earthquake casualties over the next ten years and assessing
this based on a scenario with a 70% likelihood within the next
30 years:
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs/AJ2015
04010060
If an indicator is measured by national loss databases, it will
give a misleading impression of success or failure because a
few years or decades of catastrophe experience do not give a
clear indication of the level of risk. The 2010 Haiti earthquake
claimed 200,000+ lives yet for 100+ years prior to this
devastating event, earthquakes in Haiti had claimed fewer
than 10 lives. We could get around this issue by using the
expected number of deaths / losses based on likely scenarios,
without the need for disasters to take place.
Suggestion on Indicator 11.5.1: Consider to compliment this

indicator with a time frame (for example, per year)
Suggestion on Indicator 11.5.2: Consider only destroyed units,

because damaged units are difficult to define. Or clearly define
what is a destroyed unit, because it may have different
definitions in different countries.
Data on the number of deaths and GDP economic losses
caused by disasters, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
Change to: Number of deaths, missing people, injured,
relocated or evacuated due to disasters per 100,000 people,
by age and sex.
We support the UNISDR proposal in principle. It is a better

measure of progress against target 11.15 than against 1.5
where it has also been proposed.
However, in order for the numbers to be meaningful year on

year, they must be reported alongside the disaster type.
Furthermore, deaths, missing people, injured, relocated or

evacuated would need to be recorded separately.
Without these considerations being included, we would rather

support the proposal by ECE.
We regard proposed indicators 11.5.1 and 11.5.2 adequate for
monitoring progress against target 11.5
Measures to reduce, protect or maintain the damaged and

destroyed housing units should be added to this indicator.
Capturing units number only is not enough to reach the goal.
Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming

to lower the average per 100,000 global mortality rate in the
decade 2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;
Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by

2030, aiming to lower the average global figure per 100,000 in
the decade 2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;
Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global

The indicator(s) for this target could be improved by focusing
less on outputs (deaths, injuries, etc.) and more on
preventative inputs. An indicator that would accomplish this
would be “Proportion of housing units built on hazardous
locations (per 100,000 housing units,” as proposed by UN-
Habitat and the Global Taskforce of Local and Regional
Governments. This indicator would re-direct attention to
prevention of deaths, injury and economic losses through
resilience planning and improved land development patterns.
It could be measured using remote sensing and satellite
imagery, combined with climate data and risk projections.
Indicator 11.5.1: The UNISDR’s suggestion of including “per
100,000 people” helps in standardizing the indicator across a
variety of population density contexts. However, as noted
elsewhere in existing comments, we reiterate the
recommendation that the indicator should be broken down into
sub-indicators by breaking down deaths, injuries, relocations,
and evacuations etc. This would allow more nuanced tracking
and analysis.

way reach it.
Must include disaggregation by socioeconomic status since
effects of disasters disproportionately impact lower income
groups.
Indicators should also support measure of initiatives for

disaster prevention and preparedness, resilience and
adaptation that engage the poor and people in vulnerable
situations, including women, girls and others.
is illogical and incongruous and does not reflect the target.
Target 11.5 also includes a focus on protecting the poor in

particular. Therefore, as close to 75 % of the world’s poorest
people largely depend on animals for their income and food
security and as the poorest are also the most vulnerable to
disasters, a focus on animals in measuring disaster resilience
is essential in determining whether disaster risk reduction
measures are effective and reaching those most in need.
Proposed indicators: Direct disaster economic loss in relation

to global gross domestic product or Agricultural loss due to
disasters (as proposed by UNISDR for target 2.4)
While we see the value in streamlining the indicator
framework, using the same indicator as the current proposal
for target 1.5 is insufficient. A metric on economic losses is
also needed. Further, “affected persons” should be
disaggregated by age, sex and ethnicity to address the
emphasis on vulnerable people.

2005–2015;
Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita
environmental impact of cities, including by paying
special attention to air quality and municipal and other
waste management
There should be studies on pollution of all kinds in cities and
abatement
Measures. Carbon free cities should be the objective to
achieve in stages
It is suggested to measure the levels of particulate matter as
annual average concentrations (current proposed indicator). A
more specific formulation of the indicator could refer to
exceedances throughout a year compared either with national
standards/guidelines or WHO air quality guidelines.
In addition we also suggest to consider indicators for air quality

management. Clean Air Asia has developed indicators to
assess Clean Air Management Capacity which covers a city’s
capacity to (1) determine sources and their contribution, (2)
assess air quality status, (3) estimate impacts, and (4) reduce
air pollution and GHG emissions.


space
and 17


We support the two proposed indicators: “Percentage of urban
solid waste regularly collected and well managed
(disaggregated by type of waste)” and “Level of ambient
particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5).”
Both indicators will benefit from disaggregated geospatial data

at the local level. For air quality, particulate matter
concentrations can vary considerably within cities due to
proximity to emitting industrial facilities or transportation
corridors. Integrating spatial air quality conditions with
demographic and public health information can identify the
most impacted areas and population groups and inform policy
decisions about reducing air emissions and help identify where
to site new development and infrastructure facilities.
The air quality indicator also serves the health targets under
Goal 3.
Geospatial data can reveal areas and populations that are

underserved in terms of regular solid waste collection and
management, informing public and/or private entities where
such needs exist. Geospatial technology can also assist in
identifying preferable locations for new solid waste transfer
and processing facilities.
Possible indicator to measure „reducing the adverse …
environmental impact of cities … paying special attention to air
quality“:
1.) Air quality: Air pollution (NH3, NOx, NMVOC, SO2)
This indicator is described in a German study on mobility

indicators in specific fields of action including „Environmentally
Friendly Transport“ and “Air Quality:
von-indikatoren-im-bereich-mobilitaet (in German).
The indicator 11.6.2 should be modified to read “Annual mean
levels of fine particulate matter (i.e. PM2.5 & PM10) air
pollution in cities (population weighted)”
Articulating the indicator as annual mean is a more specific
indicator for monitoring the health and environmental impacts
of sustainable growth and development in cities over time.
Incidents of high air pollution levels also have health impacts,
but are less important than longer term exposures, and related
statistics are less reliable in view of greater variability due to
external factors.
Data sources: WHO Ambient Air Pollution in Cities Database;
WHO Global Health Observatory; WHO air quality guidelines:
global update 2005
I hope it become realistic
There would be an element of cross over with Target 3.9.

Again, splitting out by main pollutants and source would be
important so as to identify where the policy leavers lie e.g.
cities have no control over external sources of emissions
which undermine or enhance local efforts.
The indicator suggested by UNEP under Target 3.9 “Death
and disability from indoor and outdoor air quality,
water/sanitation, and contaminated sites” could be used here.
ICN suggests including total volume or weight in addition to
the percentage of urban solid waste.
This indicator should not only target the total number of green
and public spaces, but also the distribution of those spaces
along the city. This proposed indicator fails to highlight the
spatial distribution of green and public spaces and won't allow
to measure progress in the poorest and most deprived
neighbourhoods.
11.6.1 LMonitor the number of deaths/occurrence of diseases
attributable to chemicals exposure in the workplace.
11.6.2.2 Monitor the number of workers employed in sectors
with exposure to chemicals and waste where little or no
individual and collective protective measures are in place.
11.6.3 Monitor the number of job created in the field of
environmentally sound waste management and
decontamination .
11.6.4 Monitor the numbers of working days with limited or no
ability to work due to occupational chemical poisoning .
11.6.5 Monitor the number of countries that have developed
sound chemicals management corporate policies and
practices throughout the value chain, including extended
producer responsibility, communication about chemical
hazards and risks both for chemicals and chemicals in
products together with the promotion of green design and best
available techniques and best environmental practices
(BAT/BEP).
No comments
Indicators that measure sectors with a strong informal aspect,
such as solid waste management and recycling, will prove
especially difficult to attain, particularly for cities in developing
countries.
Endeavoring to meet indicator objectives, cities may outsource

their environmental burdens beyond municipal boundaries,
shifting the environmental burden to a different location. Trans-
boundary accounting, for example, ensures that all GHG
emissions and environmental impact are attributed to the
location of the responsible user, regardless of where the
emissions or impacts occur.
Some additional comments on specific proposed indicators

follow.
“Concentration of fine particulate matter” - Applicable in
developing and developed cities
“Percentage of wastewater treated” - Expand applicability to
developed cities, perhaps addressing overall watershed
impact
“GHG emissions, tons/capita” - Coordination of methods
needed; methods data intensive across sectors
Proposed Indicator: Level of ambient particulate matter (PM 10
and PM 2.5)
Comments:
Duplicates Indicator 3.9.1 but is less useful, since it does not
indicate % of population exposed
land use planning required to underpin decision-making

Suggested new indicator: Percentage of the urban territory
with regularly collected waste
Suggested new indicator: Percentage of households in the city

with regularly collected waste
Suggestion on Indicator 11.6.2 - Level of ambient particulate

matter. Consider a time frame (for example, average per year)
We regard indicator 11.6.1 Percentage of urban solid waste
regularly collected and recycled (disaggregated by E-waste
and non-E-waste) as a meaningful indicator for monitoring
progress against 11.6 so long this is monitored using detailed
time-series data to indicate increasing/decreasing trends in
waste collection and recycling. We recommend indicator
11.6.1 is also combine with information on the ‘number of
waste factions in place, collected and their volumes in
municipalities’, ‘percentage of the population having close
access (i.e. household or public within a 1km radius) to
recycling facilities and ‘revenues from public waste deposit
systems’. Premature deaths from annual mean levels of fine
particulate matter (i.e. PM2.5) air pollution in cities would be
more meaningful and is collected as part of the Global Burden
of Disease.
Again the target is ill stated. It lacks to define where the

impacts should be measured (human health, environment,
environmental aesthetics)
Penalty program?
Target 11.6: the proposed indicators do not include the

following dimensions:
• Total amount of GHG emissions per city and per capita
• Traffic noise level
We propose to complement the suggested indicators with
these two dimensions.
We agree with the WB proposed alternative indicator on

“Urban greenhouse gas emissions per capita and per US$ of
urban GDP.”
Indicator 11.6.1: The Urban Institute’s research on urban
service delivery has attempted to collect such information both
directly from municipalities and through intermediaries. It is
extremely difficult to collect such information across local
contexts for two primary reasons: (a) municipalities are often
unaware of how much solid waste is being collected; and (b)
there are various informal services that are not documented by
even the most statistically capacitated cities.
The per capita solid waste production depends on levels of per
capita disposable incomes, which makes it less relevant of an
indicator. In terms of solid waste collection being “well-
managed” the cross-country variations in standards makes it
impossible to undertake useful comparative analyses without
detailed frameworks. The Urban Institute’s service delivery
framework, which is currently being applied to solid waste in
42 developing cities, is illustrative.

way reach it.
1) In waste management, as in many areas, women are often
outside the consultation and decision making process in the
community, have less access to information and training (often
provided by the municipality), have little to no access to the
capital required for new technology. However, it is critical that
reducing adverse environmental impacts of cities involve the
inputs and innovations of everyone, thus indicators measuring
women’s participation and access to capital can support
attaining the target.
a) Percentage of women participating in community
consultation processes and training regarding waste
management and air quality.
b) Proportion of women-owned enterprises & women’s

organizations with access to capital for safe, sustainable and
socially and environmentally sound technology in waste
management, waste collection, disposal, recycling and
sanitation.
Although the current two suggested indicators are appropriate,
additional fundamental measurements are needed to measure
adverse environmental impacts, including number of high-
pollution days, reducing overall GHG emissions, and
percentage of tree cover.
WWF supports the suggested indicators and would propose

an additional indicator “GHG emissions per city as measured
per capita and per USD of GDP”. Source information could
include reporting to the Compact of Mayors launched by UN
Secretary-General. The target should also be informed by the
Global Food Loss Indicator under 12.3.
Target 11.7: By 2030, provide universal access to safe,
inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in
particular for women and children, older persons and
persons with disabilities
We suggest the following indicators to measure accessibility
for persons with disabilities:
‘Percentage of public buildings meeting the ISO 21542:2011

environment’, ‘Percentage of public green spaces (parks and
recreational facilities) meeting the minimum national standards
for accessibility by persons with disabilities’.
In the Asia-Pacific region, some relevant data is already

gathered under the Incheon Strategy indicators, and the same
approach could potentially be adopted elsewhere.

In order to ensure target is met for people with disabilities we
suggest: Percentage of public buildings meeting the ISO
21542:2011 standards on accessibility and usability of the built
environment
As stated before,planning and design of public space
,greenery and
water bodies and safe access should the planning agenda,
Bicycle
pathways,pedestrian walkways etc. Should be linked with this.
We recommend inclusion of an indicator that measures

perception of safety by users of public spaces, disaggregated
by age and sex.
Since accessibility for persons with disabilities is specifically
mentioned in this target, it is necessary that the indicator takes
this into account. This would require an indicator focusing on
accessibility for persons with disabilities. Possible indicators,
among others, could be ‘Percentage of public buildings
meeting the ISO 21542:2011 standards on accessibility and
usability of the built environment’, ‘Percentage of public green
spaces (parks and recreational facilities) meeting the minimum
national standards for accessibility by persons with
disabilities’. (Interlinkages with 4.a, 11.2.)


space
and 17


We support the proposed indicator: “The average share of the
built-up areas of cities in open space in public ownership and
use.”
We propose an additional indicator to track the accessibility
dimension: “Proportion of residents within 0.5 km of accessible
green and public space.”
While the proportion of a city’s area devoted to green and
public space is a critical metric concerning the existence of
such spaces, it does not provide any information about the
accessibility to various populations such as women, children,
older persons, and persons with disabilities. Tracking
meaningful access to green and public spaces requires
disaggregated geospatial data to provide an understanding of
both the distribution of such amenities throughout a city as well
as the proximity of green and public space to these groups
and to low-income residents. Ideally, accessibility to green and
open space is defined by a walkable distance, but the
proximity of such space to public transport is also an important
consideration and one that is geospatial in nature.
The proposed indicator does not capture inclusiveness and

accessibility for specific groups, as specified in the target.
Also, the indicator does not take into account distribution of
public areas across the city, which may be important in terms
of accessibility.
it into account. This would require an indicator focusing on
possibly "multi-purpose" could be added
- Percentage of public buildings meeting the ISO 21542:2011
standards on
accessibility and usability of the built environment
- Percentage of public green spaces (parks and recreational
facilities)
meeting the minimum national standards for accessibility by
persons with
disabilities
Accessibility for persons with disabilities is specifically

disabilities’.
We agree with the proposed target, especially the emphasis
on public ownership, but suggest either an enhancement or a
second indicator. We suggest that measuring universal access
is perhaps the best proxy measure to determine access to
green and public spaces across vulnerable populations. The
indicator, as it currently reads, is focused only on quantity.
Quantity does not, unfortunately, provide information about
distribution. One very large park that requires long distances to
travel is not the same as many smaller parks located
throughout the city. Given the emphasis on ensuring access
to vulnerable populations, we believe that creating an
understanding of the distribution in addition to the quantity
might more accurately measure the intent of the target.
Therefore, we would suggest an alternative indicator to
measure open space:
The proportion of the population that has an open space in
public ownership within 0.5km of their residence.
There is no one indicator that can measure all elements of the

target including different types of public spaces. Because the
IAEG-SDGs has chosen an open space indicator, we are also
focusing on an open space indicator. However, we suggest
that measuring universal access is perhaps the best proxy
measure to determine access to green and public spaces
across vulnerable populations. The indicator, as it currently
reads, it focused only on quantity. It is important to understand
both quantity and distribution. One very large park that
requires long distances to travel is not the same as many
smaller parks located throughout the city. Understanding the
proportion of the population that lives within 0.5km to a park
helps to address the issue of distribution. Therefore, we would
suggest an alternative indicator to measure open space:
The proportion of the population that has an open space in
public ownership within 0.5km of their residence.
This target seeks to provide safe and accessible services for

all in cities and public spaces, including facilities, schools,
public transportation, public spaces, and government
websites. The indicators, however, do not include the
measurement of accessibility for persons with disabilities.
Without including indicators that ensure that the building and
development of such services are accessible to persons with
disabilities, these targets may not be fully met.
It is very good strategy
As accessibility for persons with disabilities is specifically

mentioned in this target, the indicator needs to account for
this. Possible indicators, could be ‘Percentage of public
buildings meeting the ISO 21542:2011 standards on
accessibility and usability of the built environment’,
‘Percentage of public green spaces (parks and recreational
facilities) meeting the minimum national standards for
accessibility by persons with disabilities’.
Indicator
- Percentage of public buildings meeting the ISO 21542:2011
environment
- Percentage of public green spaces (parks and recreational
facilities) meeting the minimum national standards for
accessibility by persons with disabilities
Comments:
For targets 4.a, 11.2 and 11.7, which refer to accessibility by
persons with disabilities, the indicators can be based on
existing ISO standards for accessibility to buildings or
"minimum national standards of accessibility by persons with
disabilities". The Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities refers to universal design, but there is not an
operational currently used international definition of
accessibility/universal design. Countries tend to either use
existing ISO standards or make their own assessments of
accessible schools, accessible public buildings, and
accessible transport according to national standards.
11.7.1 Monitor the provision of safe bicycle lanes or footpaths
that enable people to use no or low-carbon commuting paths.
No comments
Proportion of women subjected to physical or sexual

harassment, in
the last 12 months by perpetrator and location
Propose the following: The proportion of the population that
has an open space in public ownership within 0.5km of their
residence.
For parks/open spaces, a focus on measuring universal

access is perhaps the best proxy measure. We need to
understand both quantity and distribution. One very large park
that requires long distances to travel is not the same as many
smaller parks located throughout the city. Understanding the
proportion of the population that lives within 0.5km to a park
helps to address the issue of distribution.
Proposed IAEG-SDG Indicator: The average share of the built-
up areas of cities in open space in public ownership and use.
Comments:
• Endorse World Bank’s comments as follows: “This target
should not only target the total number of green and public
spaces, but also the distribution of those spaces along the city.
This proposed indicator fails to highlight the spatial distribution
of green and public spaces. We note the critical importance of
public spaces, which include the street network, for providing
the main channel through which infrastructure such as water
pipes can be laid. Intersections per km is one way to measure
the adequacy of the street network”.
• World Bank propose this indicator as Priority 2
Suggestion on Indicator 11.7.1: Clearly define what is a public
space, because it may have different definitions in different
countries.
11.7.1 Percentage of women and girls who say they ever feel
safe when in public spaces, noting under what circumstances
they do and do not feel safe
11.7.2 Percentage of women and girls who say they have

access to safe public spaces
DATA SOURCE: This has been piloted by Plan International in

their research on safer cities in 3 countries. The baseline
report is being developed.
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: Suggestion would be to

further develop this in conjunction with UN Women and UN
Habitat.
TIER: Tier III
NOTES: In public spaces and settlements across many parts

of the world, girls and women report feeling unsafe. In some
cities, one in five girls chooses not to venture outside the
home alone for fear of violence.
Indicator 11.7.1 Replace with:
The average share of the green and/or open public areas of

communities, both built and natural, that are designed through
consultation with vulnerable groups to be freely accessible and
safe for all, including women, children, older persons and
persons with disabilities.
The proposal does not relate in any way to safe, accessible

public spaces for the groups mentioned in the target.
Indicator 11.7.2 Proportion of residents, by gender, age, sex,

and persons with disabilities, within 0.5 km of accessible green
and public space.
Emphasis on vulnerable groups must be captured in the

indicator.
We regard the suggested indicators (11.7.1 and 11.7.2) as
useful proxies for monitoring universal access to ‘safe,
inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in
particular for women and children, older persons and persons
with disabilities’. However, more detailed Information on the
spatial distribution of green spaces, i.e. from remote sensing
data, is necessary to meaningful account for disparities in
access to green space between different groups. Spatial data
collection and use could complement indicator 11.7.2.
Indicators don't reflect measures to assess safety of open

spaces which should be dis-aggregated by sex and disability.
The suggested indicator opens the question whether publicly

owned spaces are accessible and inclusive. We suggest to
include the specification in the wording of the indicator.
linked to affordable housing and public houses that are
inclusively built with a consultation of the populations
Target 11.7: the suggested indicator only refers to “built-up

areas of cities in open space in public ownership and use”. It
does not include the green areas. We propose to keep
indicator 17.7.2.: “Proportion of residents within 0.5 km of
accessible green and public space” or propose as an
alternative “Urban green space per capita (forests, parks,
gardens, etc.) (sqm per capita)”.
The “suggested” indicator and proposed Indicator 11.7.1 do

not measure access to public space for vulnerable
populations, which is key to Target 11.7 (as noted by the WB’s
in its critique of this indicator). We suggest a proximity or
access measure be included with this indicator, such as those
included in proposed Indicator 11.7.2.

way reach it.
Open public spaces includes many urban functional spaces.
They are parks, sidewalks, local markets and sometimes even
roads. And the most important aspect of open public spaces
could effect to the use of people is its accessibility. A city can
have big parks but far away from residence, it is useless
sometime. We thing that the distribution of open public spaces
in the cities also very important. If we plan the neighborhood
parks with good distribution the people can use that parks
more frequently. Then more closed proximity parks could be
better than less big parks but far from residences. In that case,
we would suggest measuring the universal access to open
public spaces as well as the area of open per capita.
11.7 Percentage of women and girls who say they have

access to safe spaces, age, civil status, disability, education
level, ethnicity, geographic location, income, migrant status,
IDPs, refugees
1) Support proposal of other organization, to better measure
green space in all communities (built up or not), as well as
their safety:
Recommend:
The average share of the green and/or open public areas of
communities, both built and natural, that are designed through
consultation with marginalized and vulnerable groups to be
freely accessible and safe for all, including women, older
persons, children and persons with disabilities.
2) Also, whether public space is safe is dependent on how

safety is perceived by the users, which requires qualitative
assessment directed toward civil society. In public spaces and
settlements across many parts of the world, girls and women
report feeling unsafe. In some cities, one in five girls chooses
not to venture outside the home alone for fear of violence.
Support: Percentage of women and girls who say they always

feel safe when in public spaces, disaggregated by age, civil
status, disability, education level, ethnicity, geographic
location, income, migrant status, IDPs, refugees
11.7.1 Proportion of residents, by age, sex and persons with

disabilities, within 0.5 km of accessible green and public space
UN-Habitat
11.7.2 Percentage of women and girls who say they always

feel safe when in public spaces, age, civil status, disability,
education level, ethnicity, geographic location, income, migrant
status, IDPs, refugees
This is Tier III and has been piloted by Plan International in

their research on safer cities in 3 countries. the baseline report
is being developed. Suggestion would be to further develop
this in conjunction with UN Women and UN Habitat
11.7.3 Percentage of women and girls who say they have

access to safe spaces, age, civil status, disability, education
level, ethnicity, geographic location, income, migrant status,
IDPs, refugees
This is Tier III and has been piloted by Plan International in

their research on safer cities in 3 countries. the baseline report
is being developed. Suggestion would be to further develop
this in conjunction with UN Women and UN Habitat
We have very few parks in Dhaka and it is common for them to
be redeveloped and used inappropriately. Also our research
shows people don't want to visit parks that are far from their
homes. Another problem we have is the design and
infrastructure are not user- friendly. It is difficult to capture all
of these important issues with just one indicator. Therefore,
we suggest that measuring universal access is a good first
step in understanding the issues related to public space. The
indicator suggested by the IAEG-SDG is focused only on
quantity. It is important to understand both quantity and the
proximity to where people live. One very large park that
requires long distances to travel is not the same as many
smaller parks located throughout the city. Therefore, we would
suggest an alternative indicator to measure open space: "The
proportion of the population that has an open space in public
ownership within 0.5km of their residence."
We recommend inclusion of an indicator that measures
perception of safety by users of public spaces, disaggregated
by age and sex.
WWF supports the WB comment in that the suggested
indicator 11.7.1 also needs to incorporate distribution of
spaces in the city as a means to measuring inclusiveness and
accessibility.
Target 11.a: Support positive economic, social and
environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural
areas by strengthening national and regional development
planning
Urban regions and linkage of cities should be the framework of
cities.
Proposed indicator: Number of national and regional

development strategies that include an economic citizenship
dimension for children and youth, involving access to finance,
skills training and sustainable livelihoods.
We support the intent of the proposed indicator but we suggest
an alternative formulation: “The number of countries that are
developing or implementing a National Urban Policy that (a)
responds to population dynamics, (b) ensures balanced
territorial development (urban, peri-urban, rural), (c) prepares
for infrastructure development, (d) promotes urban land-use
efficiency, (e) enhances resilience to climate change, (f)
protects public space, and (g) develops effective urban
governance systems.
To effectively support the positive links between urban, peri-

urban and rural areas (including agriculture/food supply)
requires strengthened regional and national development
planning informed by geospatial data. Consideration of
population dynamics (a), balanced territorial development (b),
and support for infrastructure development (c) are essential for
the addressing this target. Promotion of land use efficiency (d),
enhancing resilience to climate change (e), and protecting
public space support other SDG-11 targets by adding a
regional perspective. Effective urban governance (g) is key to
implementing the target and overall SDG 11 goal.
Plans measured should including ICT as basic infrastructure

Good
It will be important that the link with 11.2 and 9.1 is made so
that indicators developed support integrated urban, regional,
national and transboundary planning. The proposed public
transport accessibility and use index proposed by UITP for
11.2 would help target investments that will forward an
integrated approach to sustainable transport more widely.
No comments
Proposed Indicator: 11.a.1 Cities with more than 100,000
inhabitants that implement urban and regional development
plans integrating population projections and resource needs
(UNFPA, UN-Habitat, DESA)
Comments:
• Transport confers accessibility and is an important driver
of efficient land use outcomes, particularly where management
of land development is weak. Water and power infrastructure
are also important.
• Suggest indicator be reworded to read “Cities with more
than 100,000 inhabitants that implement urban and regional
development plans integrating population projections, resource
needs, *transport, water, energy and other infrastructure*.”
• Linked to Targets 11.2 and 11.3
We suggest an alternative indicator that would remove the
threshold of city size, which is important because such a high
proportion of the world’s urban population lives in smaller and
secondary towns, and this is set to grow even more in future.
Also, we suggest some changes in wording to give greater
emphasis to inclusion of poor and vulnerable populations:
Cities and human settlements that implement urban and
regional development plans based on effective stakeholder
engagement, that includes participation from poor and
vulnerable communities, integrating population projects and
resource needs
Suggestion to adapt Indicator 11.a.1 to: Percentage of cities

with more than 100,000 inhabitants that implement urban and
regional development plans integrating population projections
and resource needs in relation, in relation to the total number
of cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants in the country.
We regard proposed indicators 11.a.1 and 11.a.2 adequate for
monitoring progress against target 11.a
Indicator is suitable
Program for developing good and sustainable infrastructure .
indicator % National budget dedicated to this
As noted by WB, proposed Indicator 11.a.2 is not useful

across country contexts. In addition to the WB’s concern that
in many countries land consumption as a function of
population growth has hit a ceiling, this indicator does not
address efficient land use patterns in “shrinking” or “legacy”
cities in many developed countries. Country and metropolitan
baselines will be critical here.

way reach it.
11.a.1 Cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants that
implement urban and regional development plans integrating
population projections and resource needs.
UN-Habitat; National statistics agencies; Rockefeller

Foundation 100 Resilient Cities
Target 11.b: By 2020, substantially increase the number of
cities and human settlements adopting and implementing
integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource
efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change,
resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line
with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction
2015-2030, holistic disaster risk management at all levels
[current suggested indicator: Percentage of cities

implementing risk reduction and resilience policies that include
vulnerable and marginalized groups.]
The current indicator only focuses on cities and we have to
consider rural areas and other human settlements that are
also vulnerable to different hazards, especially those who high
climate and disaster risk.
Proposed Indicator: Percentage of cities and human
settlements of over 100,000 people implementing risk
reduction and resilience policies that involve vulnerable and
marginalized groups in their design, implementation and
monitoring.
The UNSD proposed indicator is straightforward and captures
the increase in relevant policies used within cities. It integrates
a focus on vulnerable and marginalised groups, which is
particularly important in addressing inclusion. However,
broadening its scope to include the multiple facets of the target
will help to ensure that the indicator is climate-proofed and
therefore that the framework is focused more directly on
combatting climate change.
i. Percentage of cities and other human settlements

successfully implementing plans and policies that address
inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to
climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and
implement, in line with the Sendai Framework, holistic disaster
risk management at all levels
This target complements target 13.2: Integrate climate change

measures into national policies, strategies and planning, and
therefore the indicator employed for this should feed into
measurements of progress for target 13.2.
The suggested indicator

- only applies to cities (undefined), whereas the target
refers to cities and human settlements
- says that the implementation should ‘include’ vulnerable
and marginalised groups, which is rather vague. We would
want to see these groups ‘involved in their design,
implementation and monitoring’
Hence new proposed indicator: Percentage of cities and
human settlements of over 100,000 people implementing risk
monitoring
The source for this would be the Sendai Framework monitor.
The UNSD proposed indicator is straightforward and captures
the increase in relevant policies used within cities. It integrates
a focus on vulnerable and marginalised groups, which is
particularly important in addressing inclusion. However,
broadening its scope to include the multiple facets of the target
will help to ensure that the indicator is climate-proofed and
therefore that the framework is focused more directly on
combatting climate change. Suggested Indicator:
i. Percentage of cities and other human settlements
successfully implementing plans and policies that address
inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to
climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and
implement, in line with the Sendai Framework, holistic disaster
risk management at all levels
This target complements target 13.2: Integrate climate change
measures into national policies, strategies and planning, and
therefore the indicator employed for this should feed into
measurements of progress for target 13.2.

New cities or extension of existing cities.should be planned
considering
availability of water, soil condition,avoidance of disaster area
etc.
Preferred indicator: Percentage of cities and other human

settlements successfully implementing plans and policies that
address inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and
adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and
develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework,
holistic disaster risk management at all levels.

space
and 17


We support the proposed indicator: “Percentage of cities
vulnerable and marginalized groups.”
Disaster risks vary based on both physical characteristics

(e.g., proximity to coastlines or rivers) as well as demographic
and social phenomenon, such as population density, levels of
poverty. Policies and plans for mitigation, adaptation, and
building resilience, particularly for vulnerable populations,
should be informed by geospatial data integrated with
demographic and/or survey data.
Enhancing the availability of disaggregated geospatial data will

help increase the number of cities with the capacity to develop
and implement disaster risk management policies in
conjunction with regional and national efforts. As mentioned for
Target 1.a, numerous geospatial data development efforts and
tools are increasingly available. planners and policymakers.
This indicator complements our proposed indicator for 11.a,

and serves Target 13.1 on resilience to climate-related
hazards, adding the local/regional dimension where much of
the implementation will occur.
monitoring
To be shortened
Target 11.b is aligned with the goal’s spirit, but we need a new
composite index/indicator which measures urban resilience.
2700 city governments supported by UCLG,UNISDR & UN
Habitat are implementing the Resilient Cities (RC) campaign
10 essentials with benchmarks for attainment under each,
namely 1) Effective city level institutional DRR framework, 2)
Adequate Financing & resources, 3) multi hazard risk
assessment, 4) Infrastructure Protection, Upgrading &
Resilience, 5) Protecting Vital health & education facilities, 6)
Building regulations & land use planning, 7) Training Education
& Public Awareness, 8) Environmental Protection & Ecosystem
Strengthening , 9) Effective Preparedness, Early warning &
Response, 10) Recovery & Rebuilding communities.
A new proposed indicator: Percentage of cities and human
settlements of over 100,000 people implementing risk
reduction policies measured by a composite urban resilience
indicator building on the 10 essentials that involve vulnerable
and marginalized groups in their design, implementation and
monitoring. The source would be the Sendai Framework
monitor.
The suggested indicator i) only applies to cities (undefined),
whereas the target refers to cities and human settlements; ii)
says that the implementation should ‘include’ vulnerable and
marginalised groups, which is rather vague. We would want to
see these groups ‘involved in their design, implementation and
monitoring’
Hence new proposed indicator: “Percentage of cities and
monitoring”. The source for this would be the Sendai
Framework monitor.
requires land use planning to underpin these measures

We suggest the following indicator: Percentage of cities and
human settlements (greater than 100,000 people)
vulnerable and marginalised groups in their design,
implementation and monitoring
Change to: Percentage of human settlements with more than
100,000 inhabitants implementing risk reduction and resilience
policies that include vulnerable and marginalized groups.
We support the indicator proposed by UN-Habitat, World Bank,

ICLEI, UNISDR and Rockefeller Foundation as it reflect a
broader range of policies and plans related to disasters,
climate change and specifically mentions vulnerable and
marginalised groups which should include older people as a
specific target
We advocate that “cities” is replaced with “human settlements

with more than 100,000 inhabitants, in line with the
UNISDR definition cities and number of local governments
with more than 100,000 inhabitants, to include more broadly
urban environments and human settlements and not limit the
data to cities.
It would be important to clarify the different plans that could be

included within ‘integrated policies and plans towards
inclusion’ and to ensure that these include policies and plans
specifically aiming to improve wellbeing of and inclusiveness
of older people.
We regard proposed indicators 11.b.1 and 11.b.2 adequate for
monitoring progress against target 11.b but feel more explicit
attention should be paid to methods and data sources to
assess the inclusion of vulnerable groups.
The suggested indicator:

only applies to cities (undefined), whereas the target refers to
cities and human settlements
says that the implementation should ‘include’ vulnerable and

marginalised groups, which is rather vague. We would want to
see these groups ‘involved in their design, implementation and
monitoring’

monitoring
The indicator does not provide any information on resource

efficiency. We suggest consider to remove this variable from
the target
way reach it.
Adopting and implementing successful policies relies upon
consultation with civil society, as well as ensuring that gender
analysis is undertake. Recommend the following:
a) Percentage of cities that implement gender-sensitive

strategies in regard to resilient, DRR, mitigation and
adaptation
b) The proportion/number of public consultations, projects, and
initiatives engaging the most marginalized and vulnerable
groups, including women, girls, youth, local and marginalized
communities, in the design of integrated policies and plans
c) The proportion of consultation participants who report
satisfaction with their involvement, disaggregated by gender
and other underrepresented groups
monitoring
Target 11.c: Support least developed countries, including
through financial and technical assistance, in building
sustainable and resilient buildings utilizing local materials
No comments.
Good
No comments
We regard proposed indicators 11.c.1 and 11.c.2 adequate for
monitoring progress against target 11.c. A complementary
indicator could measure the ‘percentage of financial support
that is allocated to promote energy efficiency education
programs in households’.
way reach it.
Target 12.1: Implement the 10-year
framework of programmes on sustainable
consumption and production, all countries
taking action, with developed countries
taking the lead, taking into account the
development and capabilities of developing
Organization: countries
(ASPBAE)
Beyond 2015 UK
Bioregional
CAFOD
CDP Data gathered by CDP's various programs (for

companies and cities) could support tracking of
progress against this target.

Center of Guarulhos
Centre for Built Environment Cities should have less footprint
Christian Aid
Consumers International
EAT Initiative
ericsson

Fair Trade Advocacy Office We believe this goal and target are key but we
have two important remarks:
1) Creating a safe and just space for humanity
to thrive with planetary and social boundaries is
a key global change for the XXIst century. We
believe the social, human rights, economic
aspects of sustainable development should be
more explicit in the indicators. eg. cost of
production, fair terms of trading, fair treatment of
workers etc.
2) In terms of production, not all methods of
production and trade (e.g. fairly traded or
sustainably produced or not), type of
organisations (e.g. Fair Trade organisations or
inclusive business models or not) deliver the
same sustainable development outcomes. The
proportion/volumes of key commodities
PRODUCED under sustainable or Fair Trade
schemes, and then the proportions of those
commodities that are then SOLD or traded as
certified from/within those countries into the
consumer market (ie that are then part of a
sustainable consumption offer) would be useful
indicators.
Global Footprint Network

GRI
ICMM and IPIECA
ILSI Research Foundation

Institute for Reproductive and Good

Family Health

Association (IFA)
International Plant Nutrition
Institute
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS 12.1.1 Monitor the number of job created in the
Inc. ("ISACI") field of environmentally sound waste
management and decontamination .
12.1.2 Monitor the numbers of working days
with limited or no ability to work due to
occupational chemical poisoning .
12.1.3 Monitor the number of countries that
have developed sound chemicals management
corporate policies and practices throughout the
value chain, including extended producer
responsibility, communication about chemical
hazards and risks both for chemicals and
chemicals in products together with the
promotion of green design and best available
techniques and best environmental practices
(BAT/BEP).
Kamla Nehru College, University of To be shortened

Delhi
Kepa Finland
Carbon Transport
Society for the Psychological

Study of Social Issues; Psychology
Stockholm Environment Institute We regard proposed indicators 12.1.1 and

12.1.2 adequate for monitoring progress against
target 12.1.
Tebtebba
The Cyprus Institute Indicator suitable for purpose. Target should
include a time frame for the monitoring of the
target
The Hague University of Applied see

Science
Ekins, P. 1991. ‘The sustainable consumer
society: a contradiction in terms?’, International
Environmental Affairs, vol. 3, pp. 243-257.
Look into Cradle to Cradle and circular economy

models as solutions
TRK asbl
UNSD Education Caucus To ensure disaggregation of indicators and to

include a human rights and intergenerational
justice dimension to the indicator framework
(following “no one left behind” principle), a new
standard metric, the Geocoded Spatial
Transparent Metric at locally unique spatial
scale of 10km3x2 x y z t as such a framework
for the 10-year framework. Disaggregated data
may be collected by many stakeholders at all
levels, respecting CBDR.

recommendations, papers, and data to guide to
states the best way reach it. A solidarity
cooperation policy between nations is highly
relevant.
Of Nigeria
WWF WWF supports the suggestion by UNEP for

indicator 12.1.2 to include other organisations
actively engaged in regional cooperation
supporting the implementation of SCP activities.
Target 12.3: By 2030, halve per capita global food
Target 12.2: By 2030, achieve the sustainable waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce
management and efficient use of natural food losses along production and supply chains,
resources including post-harvest losses
Data gathered by CDP's various programs (for Data gathered by CDP's various programs (for
companies and cities) could support tracking of companies and cities) could support tracking of
progress against this target. progress against this target.
Such objectives should be connected with cities
also.
New Proposed Indicator: Carbon emissions from NPS: Percentage of food lost and wasted from
agricultural land use (tons per production to consumption and percentage of food
hectare per year) waste recycled
As many countries are party to the UNFCCC and One third of all food produced in the world is wasted
follow the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National and goes uneaten, roughly amounting to 1.3 billion
Greenhouse gas inventories, this indicator tracks tonnes of food every year. Furthermore, food waste
closely to what the UNFCCC require under the also contributes around 7% of global greenhouse gas
LULUCF GHG monitoring mechanisms. An emissions; hence reducing food waste will significantly
indicator that measures carbon emissions from contribute to mitigating climate change. A Global Food
agricultural land use is a critical indicator to Loss Index (GFLI) is to be developed by the FAO by the
measure SDG target 12.2 to by 2030 achieve end of 2015. The indicator will measure the totality of
sustainable management and efficient use of losses occurring from the time at which production of an
natural resources. Disaggregation Crop and agricultural product is recorded until it reaches the final
livestock sectors Primary Data Source The consumer as food, but it will not take into account
United Nations Framework Convention on losses occurring at the consumer level. Hence this
Climate Change (UNFCCC) collects data on indicator will also attempt to track food lost and wasted
countries’ national GHG inventories. Tier I: on the consumption side. Dis: Food system level:
Established methodology exists and data are Sectors along the food value chain, Consumer level:
already widely available. household income, urban/rural Primary Data Source
Name of entity responsible for global monitoring: FAO
Tier II: Already existing well-developed methodology
with variable data collection mechanism and availability
measured per industry, including ICT as one

industry
As we are in favor of CROSS CUTTING
indicators: we would like to highlight that
indicator 6.4 on sustainable water management
also support target 12.2
Ecological footprint and biocapacity accounts
measure human demand on the regenerative
capacity of productive ecosystems. The
ecological footprint (demand) captures the
resource metabolism of economies, and the
biocapacity (supply) documents the amount of
metabolism that ecosystems can renew on an
annual basis. Using UN data sets, ecological
footprint and biocapacity is tracked
systematically for the world and all nations back
to 1961. The ecological footprint of demand
captures all embedded resource use, including
those originating in other countries and
contained in imported goods. The ecological
footprint can be scaled down to sub-national
level, and even to household or individual level.
The ecological footprint can also be calculated
for different categories of consumption. Multi-
Regional IO assessments are used to break
down overall demand by final consumption
categories, and track trade flows back to country
of origin. For more details see
www.footprintnetwork.org
(WCMC may be making similar suggestions.)

Consistent with previous comments, it is
important that the proposed indicators of
domestic material consumption and material
footprint be designed in a manner that takes into
account the unique characteristics of extractives
industries (see previous comments on water,
energy efficiency and sustainable consumption
and production).
It is important to consider the impact food waste and

loss can have on nutrition, and therefore connect this
factor to both sustainability throughout the food system
and human health outcomes. As the World Resources
Institute notes in their report Reducing Food Loss and
Waste (WRI 2013), overall global food availability is
lower than it would be otherwise, negatively affecting
food security and requiring the planet’s agriculture
system to produce additional food to compensate for
the food that is not ultimately consumed by people. A
broad group of stakeholders have identified this as a
crucial topic for metrics of sustainable food systems.
Appropriately targeting and measuring this problem will
be critical for achieving sustainable nutrition security.
This is why the ILSI Research Foundation has explicitly
included a Waste & Loss Reduction indicator as one of
our seven food system metrics.
Only respective Governments can participate in Development of appropriate machinery and modern
this by taking local people into confidence. storage facilities for post harvest losses
Sustained consumption of food will help. This could be
achieved only by educating people on the wastes
through various modes of communication.
Not realistic Hoping that we can do it
12.2.2 Monitor the number of countries that have
developed and implemented internalization of
costs throughout the life cycle of products and
processes.
We strongly support UNEP's and IUCN's views

to these indicators!
Proposed Indicator 12.3.1 Global Food Loss Index
(GFLI)
Comments:
Transport is a key component of supply chains; hence,
Target 9.1 and related indicators are relevant.
Suggest to add: "...keeping in mind demographic

parameters and human rights."
Domestic Material Consumption (DMC) is We regard indicators 12.3.1 and 12.3.2 as too narrowly
inadequate as it is not a full consumption-based focused on food losses downstream food supply chains
indicator. at manufacturing/processing, retail and consumer
We agree with the use of the Material Footprint stages. An indicator which captures trends in pre-
(MF) as an interim measure. However, MF is harvest food losses is an important element to consider
currently ill-defined and needs further within the context of target 12.3 and interacts with
development for long-term use, i.e via carbon sustainable agriculture and food security aspects of the
footprint modelling to adopt a consumption- SDGs. Pre-harvest losses are also a major issue in
based approach. OECD IO tables cover only developing countries.
OECD countries, rendering the use of a linked Critically, this target requires a suite of indicators which
MF indicator inadequate for global application. provide details on when and where waste is occurring
There are implications in the selection of IO within the supply chain, e.g. distinguish between
databases which must be identified and effort households throwing out food, supermarkets throwing
channelled towards improved data collection to out expired unsold goods and farmers unable to sell
inform these via national accounting. goods to traders or farm-level environmental shocks
Further clarification around the commodity disasters: Floods, hurricanes, tsunamis, drought, plant
coverage of indicators is required. Data on some pests, diseases other hazards and other hazards. An
commodity types (e.g. wood, fish) is patchy important at the consumer-level could measure the
compared to agri-commodities. Proposed amount of organic waste per capita diverted from landfill
indicators do not indicate whether natural - e.g. to Anaerobic Digestion (AD) units or other uses.
resources are being managed efficiently or
sustainably and must reflect the ambition to cut
consumption regardless of commodity
provenance. The MF is an important indicator to
develop further. SEI has broad expertise in this
area which could be lent to development of such
an indicator in future.
The target is too general. It neither specifies Indicator suitable for purpose
temporal or spatial scales for the measurement
of progress towards the achievement of the goal.
The suggested indicator falls short of measuring
sustainablly managed resource use.
In tracking this target, it would be critical to look

at how corruption impacts its achievement. The
relevant target and indicator should be drawn
from target 16.5 given the strong and proven
inter-linkages between corruption and natural
resource management.
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/answer/ill
egal_unreported_and_unregulated_fishing_and_
corruption (links between corruption and fishing)
Strengthen the protection policies of some vital

areas -\ zero tolerance to dammage
Strengthen coordinating mechanisms between

institutions that deal with land-use and resources
management - environmental protection and
restoration - to facilitate integration of sectoral
concerns and strategies.
This target must be completed by a group of This target must be completed by a group of
recommendations, papers, and data to guide to recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states
states the best way reach it. A solidarity the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy
cooperation policy between nations is highly between nations is highly relevant.
relevant.
There should be an indicator to compare GFLI with the
availability of electrical energy supply per nation. This is
because there is bound to be food loss if cold storage or
other forms of electricity driven preservation methods
are not in place.
World Animal Protection proposed indicator: % of
human-edible food calories produced that are
consumed as food by humans
The FAO/IFAD proposed measurement of food loss and

waste only includes human-edible food that is
produced for the purpose of being used as food by
humans. This means that all food (one third of all
cereals, one quarter of all fish, over half of all oil crops,
etc.) produced for purposes other than food (animal
feed) are currently not included in the global debate on
food loss and waste and/or the debate on food security.
Moreover, noting that using human-edible food as
animal feed constitutes a loss of at least 70% in caloric
value, it is proposed that food loss is measured using
calories as the measurement unit rather than food
mass.
WRI proposes that indicator 12.3.2 be elevated to a

‘suggested indicator’ as the Global Food Loss Index
(GFLI) scope is only up until food reaches the
consumer. Indicator 12.3.2 should also be edited for
accuracy to read "per capita food waste (kg/year),
accounted for and reported in conformance with the
Food Loss and Waste Protocol Accounting and
Reporting Standard.”
Additionally, indicator 12.3.1 should be revised to read

as follows in order to ensure consistent and transparent
reporting of the data: “Global Food Loss Index, with
data accounted for and reported in conformance with
the Food Loss and Waste Protocol Accounting and
Reporting Standard.” To enable global consistency, WRI
also recommends that both “food” and "waste" are
defined based on the framework laid out in the Food
Loss and Waste Protocol Accounting and Reporting
Standard.
WWF strongly supports the suggested indicator WWF supports the suggested indicator “Global Food
12.2.2 Material footprint (MF) and MF/capita. Loss Index”. It should include post-harvest losses and
This should cover for non-food production such food waste via discards and waste in the fishing sector,
as wood, cotton, mining etc. This indicator can and be disaggregated for rural and urban. Trends on the
also inform targets 8.4 and 12.5. latter would inform Target 11.6 and 12.5.
Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the
environmentally sound management of
chemicals and all wastes throughout their
life cycle, in accordance with agreed
international frameworks, and significantly
reduce their release to air, water and soil in Target 12.5: By 2030, substantially reduce waste
order to minimize their adverse impacts on generation through prevention, reduction,
human health and the environment recycling and reuse
Originally two suggested priority indicators
were proposed but now there is only one:
"The Number of Parties to, and number of
national reports on the implementation of
international multilateral environmental
agreements on hazardous chemicals and
waste."
We continue to prefer alternative outcome-
based indicators over this process based
proposal as follows:
i) Average annual concentrations in water,
soil and agricultural products of selected toxic
chemicals resulting from human activities.
These could include some persistent and
bioaccumulative chemicals, with a focus on
those posing the greatest threats to humans
and wildlife
ii) Ambient air pollution deaths per 100,000
capita attributable to outdoor air pollution.
The first of our two proposals is similar to the
original suggested priority indicator that is not
now prioritised: "Annual average levels of
selected contaminants in air, water and soil
from industrial sources, energy generation,
agriculture, transport and wastewater and
waste treatment plants"
Data gathered by CDP's various programs (for

companies and cities) could support tracking
of progress against this target.
Find legal ways that meet the rules of health and

hygiene so that no food is discarded as waste of
hundreds of thousands of restaurants worldwide,
becoming destined to foundations or assists
institutions.
NPS: Percentage of food lost and wasted from
production to consumption and percentage of food
waste recycled
One third of all food produced in the world is wasted
and goes uneaten, roughly amounting to 1.3 billion
tonnes of food every year. Furthermore, food waste
also contributes around 7% of global greenhouse gas
emissions; hence reducing food waste will significantly
contribute to mitigating climate change (WRAP, 2014).
A Global Food Loss Index (GFLI) is to be developed
by the FAO by the end of 2015. The indicator will
measure the totality of losses occurring from the time
at which production of an agricultural product is
recorded until it reaches the final consumer as food,
but it will not take into account losses occurring at the
consumer level. Hence this indicator will also attempt
to track food lost and wasted on the consumption side.
Disaggregation Food system level: Sectors along the
food value chain, Consumer level: household income,
urban/rural Source: FAO Tier II: Already existing well-
developed methodology with variable data collection
mechanism and availability
measure per industry, also including ICT

Very good Good
A modified indicator suggested by UNEP ICN supports the Indicator 12.5.1. The indicator should
under the Target 3.9 could be used here - measure the total volume or weight in order to
Death and disability from chemicals and all measure the reduction of waste generation. Efforts
wastes released to air, water and soil. should be made to reduce waste generation before
recycling.
IFA does not agree with the UNEP suggestion

under 12.4.2 that data on nitrogen surplus and
nitrogen deposition is a suitable indicator. It
does not cover most pollutants and in any
event nitrogen in soils is essential for crops
and is not a contaminant. Furthermore the
BIP indicator developed by INI is developed
using a modelling approach and underlying
data quality and coverage is questionable
outside West Europe and North America. A
broader measure of air pollution would be
more appropriate. Water quality can be
covered by the proposed indicator for 6.3
Indicator 12.4.2 - UNEP is suggesting that N
surplus, N deposition and loss of reactive N,
etc. would be an appropriate indicator, but this
only covers one "contaminant" and nitrogen
should not be considered a contaminant or a
pollutant in soil. N surplus and deposition
does mean the N would become a pollutant or
contaminant. This approach would need to be
very carefully thought out given N is
responsible for over half the world's food
production is a critical to global food security.
More appropriate indicators that measure air

quality, that includes NOx, SOx, ozone, etc.
The Air Quality Index would seem more
appropriate as an indicator.
12.4.1 Monitor the number of job created in Unsustainable consumption & production patterns are
the field of environmentally sound waste increasing air & water pollution, forest & land
management and decontamination . degradation, waste generation and the use of harmful
12.4.2 Monitor the numbers of working days chemical substances. Measure improvements by:
with limited or no ability to work due to 12.5.1 Monitoring national reports by parties to the
occupational chemical poisoning . multilateral environmental agreements on hazardous
13.4.3 Monitor the number of countries that chemicals and waste, including the Basel, Rotterdam
have developed sound chemicals & Stockholm Conventions, the ILO Chemicals
management corporate policies and practices Conventions, the International Health Regulations and
throughout the value chain, including the Minamata Convention on Mercury.
extended producer responsibility, 12.5.1 Monitor the percentage of national budget
communication about chemical hazards and allocated to the implementation of institutional, legal,
risks both for chemicals and chemicals in and regulatory frameworks for the sound management
products together with the promotion of green of chemicals and waste, including enforcement of
design and best available techniques and best national legislation and prevention of illegal traffic.
environmental practices (BAT/BEP). 12.5.2 Monitor the number of countries with
12.4.4 Monitor the number of countries that institutional, legal, and regulatory frameworks for the
have developed and implemented sound life cycle management of chemicals and
internalization of costs throughout the life wastes.
cycle of products and processes.
2020 IS TOO SHORT TIME No comments
We strongly support UNEP's and IUCN's

views to the indicator 12.4.1!
12.4.1: UNEPs suggested amendment to We agree with the indicators proposed for target 12.5.
measure No. of parties meeting their overall In addition we recommend:
commitments is good. However, how will 1) Indicator related to public information
‘meeting commitments and obligations’ be broadcasting and education around the economic and
embedded in reporting? Without clarity on this environmental benefits of waste reduction and
issue for each MEA this indicator will not be management strategies per country
informative of on-the ground progress. 2) Information on domestic land fill taxes and other
Alternatives: ‘No. of reported chemical economic instruments used to moderate waste and
accidents in the world/nation states’. This encourage material reduction and reuse
requires clarification on MEAs to be included; 3) An indicator for the promotion of composting as
Alternative: ‘Number of chemical companies an alternative to waste-to-landfill
complying to ISO14000’. 4) The volumes of trans-boundary (imports and
12.4.2: We agree with the WB notes on issues exports balance sheets) of waste and recycled
of data quality. Indicator requires a common products traded to capture efficiency and equity
set of contaminants for measurement. In dimensions implicit in waste reduction and
terms of governance, how the selection will be management approaches.
conducted? Where/how should contaminants 5) Amount of waste generated per kg of chemical
be monitored? Moreover, 12.4.2 only captures product produced. A similar indicator, uses the amount
ambient pollution levels and does not inform of material input per kg of product. Typically these
health and ecosystem impacts in linked to values vary depending on the industry (bulk producers
these levels. Data: UN ECE GHS or nations will have less waste per kg than fine industry), but
committed to the voluntary SAICM process. benchmark standards per sector will help evaluate
We also recommend: consumption-based how a country's companies do in comparison an ideal
indicators/metrics to measure chemical use scenario.
from producer-to-consumer to reflect the life-
cycle aspect of the target and links with the
MF indicator proposed under 12.2. to be
exploited.
12.4 – number of policies prohibiting waste

disposal in indigenous peoples’ territories
Indicator suitable for purpose Indicator suitable for the target
Data
National surveillance management system
Program of mass surveillance through
education of the population for reporting and
monitoring
recommendations, papers, and data to guide recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states
to states the best way reach it. A solidarity the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy
cooperation policy between nations is highly between nations is highly relevant.
relevant.
Add innovation as one of the factors for reduction of
waste generation. This is because there are many
waste products that can be converted into raw
materials for other products
The indicator must also be able to measure
governance around industrial chemical use
and pollution. Therefore, WRI recommends a
new proposed indicator: “Percent change in
the number of countries meeting obligations of
international multilateral environmental
agreements on hazardous chemicals (Basel,
Rotterdam, Stockholm, Montreal Protocol) that
also have signed the Kiev Protocol on
Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers or
other convention that ensures the proactive
release of information on industrial pollution to
air, water, and land including transfers.”
Target 12.6: Encourage companies, especially
large and transnational companies, to adopt
sustainable practices and to integrate Target 12.7: Promote public procurement practices that
sustainability information into their reporting are sustainable, in accordance with national policies
cycle and priorities
The suggested priority indicator is now a somewhat Two indicators were originally proposed, and one of these is
vague: "Number of companies publishing now the suggested priority indicator: "Number of countries
sustainability reporting." We would prefer a more implementing Sustainable Public Procurement policies and
specific indicator as follows: "Proportion of action plans." We would prefer a more outcome-based
companies with either >10,000 employees, or market indicator as follows: "Proportion of sustainable public
capitalization of > $1 billion, or sales > $1 billion that procurement in total public procurement for key product
integrate significant sustainability information into areas (e g timber, energy, food). This is very close to the
their reporting cycles." second of the originally proposed indicators, which has now
been dropped.
Data gathered by CDP's various programs for

companies could support tracking of progress
against this target. In particular CDP can play a key
role in enabling global reporting through its global
online platform of corporate environmental
disclosures, and has a key tool to offer to companies
in the form of the Climate Disclosure Standards
Board (CDSB)'s Reporting Framework for aligning
financial and non-financial reporting.
Preferred indicator: Sustainability reporting rate and
quality: 1) Percentage of large companies publicly
disclosing sustainability information, including
financial and non-financial information on a country
by country basis; 2) the % of such reporting which is
addressing the entire supply chain; 3) % of the
reporting companies with information in their
sustainability reporting aligned with relevant
indicators in the SDGs.
Comment on existing proposals:

The proposed indicator, ‘Number of companies
publishing sustainability reporting’ tells you very little
and we would therefore like to see indicator 12.6.1
prioritised with some tweaks to ensure that
information is publicly available, covering all large
companies, and including both financial and non-
financial information in a definition of sustainability
information/reporting. We also believe that
measuring the percentage of large companies rather
than just counting the number, will result in much
more meaningful data which can be tracked over
time.
UNEPs suggestion for 12.6.2 is NOT ok due to lack
of trustworthy certificates and assessors
We support the proposed modified indicator by We believe it is important that indicators under this target do
UNEP "Market share of goods and services certified not only monitor political commitments but also cover
by independently verified sustainability labelling implementation, such as government spending. Public
scheme" (covering 12.8 as well). A choice could be procurement should serve not only to obtain the cheapest
made of key representative commodities as a way to products and services. It should serve to achieve societal
reduce data collection. On the basis of the choice of goals, as put forward by UNEP Sustainable Public
commodities chosen, the identification of the relevant Procurement Initiative and the EU Directive on public
sustainability schemes and the comparison of procurement 2014/24/EU, inter alia.
certified vs non-certified would become simpler. For
identification of credible sustainability schemes, the We therefore support the proposed modified indicator by
codes developed by the ISEAL Alliance are an UNEP for 12.7.1 "Number of countries implementing
Internationally-recognised benchmark. Sustainable Public Procurement policies and action plans"
as well as for 12.7.2 "% of Sustainable Public Procurement
in total public procurement for a set of prioritized product
groups".
As it stands, the proposed indicators to track 12.6 -
Number of companies publishing sustainability
reporting will be mapped against the companies
listed in the Fortune Global 500. GRI believes that
restricting benchmarking of reported sustainability
data against a Global Fortune list will not reflect a fair
representation of the application of the target on a
global basis and it will offer a limited understanding
of the global reporting trends. The world's 500
largest companies are present in only 36 countries
worldwide, therefore, leaving behind a number of
other large companies in the rest of the world.
In order to enable a fair and universal application of

this target, GRI would like to propose that this target
is mapped against the top 100 largest companies by
country. Each country can define what qualifies a
large company, and where relevant include other
type of companies, such as SMEs and State-owned
Enterprises.
Proposed indicator 12.6.1 presents a number of

challenges: first, % of world’s largest companies
disclosing sustainability information requires further
definition: what is the criteria for defining “world’s
largest companies”? What is intended by
“sustainability information”. The second element
seeking full life cycle information is extremely
challenging for multinational extractives as it is next
to impossible to track the end use of these
commodities at the consumption level. The third
element seeking alignment with proposed SDGs is
premature as the SDGs have just been adopted and
national policies on private sector alignment with
SDGs has yet to be defined.
Good Very good
12.6.1 Monitor the number of countries that have 12.7.1 Monitor the number of countries that have developed
delopved ulti-sectoral and multi-stakeholder sound chemicals management corporate policies and
coordination mechanisms for coordinated practices throughout the value chain, including extended
implementation of chemicals and wastes producer responsibility, communication about chemical
conventions and SAICM hazards and risks both for chemicals and chemicals in
12.6.2 Monitor the level of financial investments in products.
research and development to promote green product 12.7.28 Monitor the number of regulations and financial
design and safer (including non-chemical) incentives developed to reduce the use of chemicals of
alternatives, together with the promotion of best highest concerns and to promote and substitute with safer
available technique and best environmental practice alternatives
(BAT-BEP).
12.6.2. Monitor and collate the national reports of
waste generation rates statistics (kg per capita/year,
overall and by economic sector.
12.6.3 Monitor the percentage of hazardous wastes
and other wastes, including obsolete stockpiles of
pesticides, recovered, reused and recycled, including
for energy generation.
We suggest removing “especially large and In order to monitor progress against target 12.7 there needs
transnational companies” from indicator 12. SMEs to be a very clear definition of what ‘sustainable’ means
often have better insight into full impacts of their within the context of sustainable public procurement
business activities than transnationals. This would policies. We recommend more detailed information is
also encourage wider information disclosure. collected for indicator 12.7.1 on the ‘% of procurement
Suggested indicator: 'Percentage of small and contracts certified under common sustainable
medium sized enterprises reporting non-financial labelling/procurement schemes per country. Furthermore,
information annually to government/statistical clear definitions of product groups, i.e. food, healthcare,
agencies’ councils, heavy industry’ and the level of sub-sector
Indicators linked to target 12.6 should take account disaggregation is required.
of both mandatory (number and type – climate
change, energy, employee welfare, water use, of
guidelines for corporate disclosure on environmental
and social governance) and voluntary corporate
reporting practices and procurement guidelines (from
GRI, CDP, UN Global Compact data etc.) per
country. There is also a clear need for performance-
related indicators, which not only capture levels of
corporate reporting but also actively measure trends
in the adoption of sound sustainability practice, since
the quality, depth and implementation plans may vary
between each corporate report.
Indicator suitable for the target Indicator suitable for the target
In tracking this target, it would be critical to look at

linkages between corruption and corporate
sustainability.
-
https://www.transparency.de/fileadmin/pdfs/Themen/
Wirtschaft/TI%20Working%20Paper%20Corporate
%20Responsibility_6_April_2010.pdf
Ex. Brazil has tied Environmental Education and

principles... with evidence, to government contracts. It has
been in place for a number of years, very successful, and
they carefully monitor and evaluate. Ideas for indicators are
here. See Ministry of Environment Brazil.
recommendations, papers, and data to guide to recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states the
states the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy between
policy between nations is highly relevant. nations is highly relevant.
WWF supports the suggested indicator “Number of WWF supports the suggested indicator, however there
companies publishing sustainability reporting”. needs to be a clear definition of ‘sustainable procurement’,
However there needs to be a clear definition of what this could include specification of credible certification
is meant by "sustainability reporting"; this definition schemes; or commitment to zero-deforestation procurement
should refer to high quality standards such as the etc.
Global Reporting Initiative and the UN Global
Compact Global Corporate Sustainability Report.
Target 12.8: By 2030, ensure that people everywhere Target 12.a: Support developing countries to
have the relevant information and awareness for strengthen their scientific and technological
sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony capacity to move towards more sustainable
with nature patterns of consumption and production
Support the UNFPA proposal but with an amendment:
% of education institutions, including CLCs non-formal and

community education programs, providing ESD UNESCO
global module (all eleven components, ranging from
biodiversity and climate, to disaster risk reduction and
sustainable lifestyles, to health promotion and cultural
diversity, together offering a holistic approach) and other
ESD programs suited to country contexts
Rationale: The amendment accounts for nonformal

education modes for delivering on ESD - where a
substantial amount of ESD work occurs. It also accounts for
adaptation of existing modules to country contexts.
Two indicators were originally proposed:
(1) Amount of spending on R&D in developing
countries, for SCP
(2) Number of patents granted annually in
developing countries, for SCP products /
innovations.
The suggested priority indicator is now "Number of
qualified green patent applications".
We continue to support the first of these two
indicators, now dropped as a suggested priority,
and to propose two others for which there is
widespread data availability:
i) Proportion of children of secondary school age
gaining secondary education and proportion of
youth gaining further and higher education in
developing countries. This is a cross cutting
indicator linked to other SDG targets.
ii) Number of science/social science journal
papers linked to SCP, resource efficiency and
decoupling authored by someone from a
developing country”
People are to be brought in the main stream planning from
grass roots.
Consumers International (CI) notes with regret that UNEP's

proposed indicator, 'Number of countries implementing the
UN Guidelines for Consumer Protection (UNGCP)' is not
included in the list of indicator proposals (11 Aug 2015). CI
strongly urges its inclusion (here or under 17.14, see
below).
The UNGCP contain a dedicated section and further

provisions for governments, business, NGOs & other
stakeholders to promote and address sustainable
consumption. Moreover, consumer protection ensures that
people everywhere are treated fairly in the marketplace,
with access to safe, healthy & fair products & services. This
is particularly important for poor and vulnerable people who
are often exploited, and helps to address multiple SDG
targets (for examples:
http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/1488820/the-
role-of-consumer-protection-in-meeting-the-sdgs_updated-
jan15.pdf)
The UNGCP contain internationally-agreed definitions &

approaches to ensure consumer protection, and
implementation is measurable (see UNCTAD & CI reports).
CI considers this indicator essential to the success of the
entire Agenda and welcomes further discussion.
patents in environementally sound technologies
needs to be defined. . ICT is one
The formal education system does not reach people of all
ages and inclusion of sustainable development in formal
education curricula will therefore not allow people
everywhere to have the relevant information and
awareness. Non-formal education providers, including
youth organisations, will also play a significant role in
ensuring that people have information and awareness for
sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with
nature. Measuring inclusion of the topic in formal education
curricula only excludes the recognition and measurement of
the role of these non-formal education providers.
Consumers can play an active role in driving sustainable
consumption if they have information about. Credible
sustainability schemes such as those developed by the
members of the ISEAL Alliance are Internationally-
recognised benchmarks. In terms of data collection,
Eurostat (European Union statistical office) and other public
bodies already survey the willingness of consumers to buy
Fair Trade products. There are numerous private surveys
(e.g. Globescan) on the level of awareness, understanding
and recognition of the Fairtrade mark by consumers.
Very good It is very good strategy for economic and sccientific
development for each developing countries
Indicator 12.8.1 Number of countries reporting inclusion of Indicator 12.a.1 Amount of spending on R&D in
sustainable development and lifestyles topics in formal developing countries, for SCP; and Indicator 12.a.2
education curricula. Number of patents granted annually in developing
The Partnership for Education and research about countries, for SCP products / innovations.
Responsible Living (PERL) http://www.livingresponsibly.org Both indicators assume that modern science and
and related UNITWIN network under UNESCO could help technology with funding and patents are the only
in the design of appropriate indicators for this target. contributors to sustainability, when local and
indigenous science may in fact be more important.
Indicator 12.8.2 Frequency of researches online for key A broader definition of sustainability science is
words with direct links with sustainable development and needed.
lifestyles.
A complementary methodology will be needed for rural
populations and indigenous peoples with inherently
sustainable lifestyles and no internet connectivity.
12.8.1 Monitor the provision of safe bicycle lanes or 12.a.1 Monitor the number of regional and
footpaths that enable people to use no or low-carbon subregional facilities established to deal with
commuting paths. hazardous waste in an environmentally sound
12.8.2. Make available to the public national reports of manner.
waste generation rates statistics (kg per capita/year) overall 12.1.2 Monitor the implementation of multilateral
and by economic sector. environmental agreements in developing countries
12.8.3 Monitor and make public the number of national and Small Island Developing States by aggregating
facilities for environmentally sound management of reports at subregional and regional levels.
hazardous wastes.
By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the relevant

information and awareness for sustainable development
and lifestyles in harmony with nature, ensuring that
sustainable development is included in early childhood
education and care programmes and universal primary and
secondary education.
Add indicator here: Number of countries that include the
"Population, Health, Environment (PHE)" integrated
approach as a means of implementation
Data on the number and proportion of people that have
information and awareness for sustainable development
and lifestyles in harmony with nature, disaggregated by
rural/urban residence, national origin, and migration status.
On 12.8.1. Scales in the Education for SD Literature could

be used to measure this across countries, but would need
adapting to be globally applicable. Measure of level of
compulsory education teaching around SD in each country
(i.e. by age-group/level of schooling) and topics (diet,
waste, climate change, energy use) are covered in each
country’s curriculum is required.
On 12.8.2. Keywords used to measure engagement with

SD issues need to be updated over-time in line with
emerging technological developments and current
sustainability discourse (i.e. names of conventions and
policy frameworks).
Proposed indicator also assumes people are thinking

positively when they search for topics around SD. Queries
associated with “How can I...-reduce my carbon footprint,
-live more sustainably etc.” are more appropriate.
We recommend: ‘No. of public service broadcasts (as a %

of total per annum) around sustainable consumption and
education’ and ‘No. of different languages (and local
languages) used on government websites/public
information exchange on SD’ to measure accessibility to
civil society and minority ethnicity groups.
Suggested indicator is suitable for purpose Suggested alternative indicator: "R&D spending in
environmentally sound technologies"
National Budget dedicated to research , and

educate new generation of specialists and
technicians
Assess and monitor, evaluate, progress but with an

eye to eliminating the 19th and 20th century "deficit
development" models and approaches using
money as the incentive with promises that only
benefit the initiator.
recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states the recommendations, papers, and data to guide to
best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy between states the best way reach it. A solidarity
nations is highly relevant. cooperation policy between nations is highly
relevant.
WWF would propose an additional/alternative
indicator: “Percentage of credibly certified
sustainable production (as defined by ISEAL
http://www.isealalliance.org/our-members) of
overall production” as proxy for ‘sustainable
production”.
Target 12.b: Develop and implement tools to monitor sustainable development
impacts for sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and
products
The suggested priority indicator is now: "Residual flows generated as a result of
tourism direct GDP (derived from an extended version of the System of Environmental-
Economic Accounting (SEEA) for tourism)". This says nothing about the social and
environmental impacts of tourism, only the economic impact. So we favour alternative
indicators and have proposed "A small number of impact per visitor night key indicators
that can be widely and easily used by tourism facilities and destinations in developed
and developing nations." These could include GHG emissions and water consumption,
for example.
very good
12.b.1 Monitor the number of national, regional and subregional facilities established
to deal with hazardous waste in an environmentally sound manner.
12.2.2 Monitor the number of countries that have developed and implemented
internalization of costs throughout the life cycle of products and processes so that
costs (including externalities) are matched with benefits.
No comments
On Indicator 12.b.1: Percentage of the destinations with a sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan, with agreed monitoring, development control and evaluation
arrangement ( CBB ). We regard this as an appropriate indicator but ‘sustainable
tourism’ needs to be defined with respect to national and universal hotel certification
and star grading systems/criteria.
12.b – % jobs created to promote local culture and products

Consider to reformulate the target wording as it is unclear to "Develop and Implement
sustainable tourism that creates jobs... " . Nevertheless indicator 12.b.2 would identify
tourism operation that have adopted sustainable managed directives
This target must be completed by a group of recommendations, papers, and data to

guide to states the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy between nations is
highly relevant.
Target 12.c: Rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies that encourage
wasteful consumption by removing market distortions, in accordance
with national circumstances, including by restructuring taxation and
phasing out those harmful subsidies, where they exist, to reflect their
environmental impacts, taking fully into account the specific needs and
conditions of developing countries and minimizing the possible adverse
impacts on their development in a manner that protects the poor and the
affected communities
The UNSD proposed indicator is straightforward and captures the increase in

relevant policies used within cities. It integrates a focus on vulnerable and
marginalised groups, which is particularly important in addressing inclusion.
However, broadening its scope to include the multiple facets of the target will
help to ensure that the indicator is climate-proofed and therefore that the
framework is focused more directly on combatting climate change. Suggested
Indicator:
i. Percentage of cities and other human settlements successfully implementing
plans and policies that address inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and
adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and
implement, in line with the Sendai Framework, holistic disaster risk
management at all levels
This target complements target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into
national policies, strategies and planning, and therefore the indicator employed
for this should feed into measurements of progress for target 13.2.
We support the indicator proposed by UNSD. The UNSD proposed indicator
provides a measurement of fossil fuel subsides in consideration of the
economical status of a country. This ensures that the common but differentiated
responsibilities of different countries are taken into account. In doing so it
accounts for how economically developed a country is and therefore how far
this country may be reliant on fossil-fuel production and consumption for it’s
development. This indicator could be supported by a national level indicator
measuring expenditure on fossil fuels per unit of GDP. Such a measurement
would highlight how much countries are spending on fossil fuels as opposed to
other energy sources, thereby providing information about shifts to more
sustainable energy supplies that can contribute towards reduced global
warming.
Comment: We support the suggested indicator.
Proposed indicator lacks clarity on a number of fronts. “Amount of fossil fuel
subsidies per unit of GDP” does not define the scope of what subsidies actually
represents. Proposed use of WEO data on consumption based subsidies may
be workable, but as noted in your document, there is no comparable data base
for production based subsidies. Also estimation of subsidies as % of national
expenditures requires further clarity: what is intended to be covered under
“national expenditures”?
Good
Mercury vapour from coal-fired power stations deposits methylmercury in
waterways and oceans
12.c.1 Reduce the negative impact of fossil fuels by substituting truly renewable
energy.
May be reduced to one initial line

Proposed Indicator 12.c.1: Amount of fossil fuel subsidies, per unit of GDP
(production and consumption), and as proportion of total national expenditure
on fossil fuels
Comments:
• IEA measure in line with World Energy Outlook, on annual basis
• GIZ undertake transport fuel prices survey every 2-3 years that is land
transport-specific
• Without subsidies being significantly reduced or removed altogether,
indicator 7.3.1 on energy efficiency will be harder to achieve
Indicator 12.c.1 for target 12.c needs to assess the national and regional (EU,
US) regulatory landscape around full-pricing of environmental externalities and
quantify levels of taxation on fossil fuel extraction and use as well as the
adoption of different market-based instruments and their implications for the
cost of pollution.
We recommend this indicator is also split by production and consumption
related subsidies to account for each separately. We note that there is no
universal agreed definition of fossil fuel subsidies which may lead to data
quality issues in comparing progress of countries against target 12.c.
Target is ill defined and confusing. It tries to encompass to many aspects
related to subsidised fossil fuel. The suggested indicator addresses the extend
of fossil fuel subsidies but does not address the efficiency in fossil fuel use.
No fossil fuel subsidies, in fact, fossil fuel and other industrial lobbies need to
be treated in teh same way (or worse as they cause more demage) as tobacco
industry
This target must be completed by a group of recommendations, papers, and

data to guide to states the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy
between nations is highly relevant.
Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive
capacity to climate-related hazards and natural
Organization: disasters in all countries
AGRIUM
Asian Disaster Reduction and [current suggested indicator: Number of deaths,
Response Network (ADRRN) missing people, injured, relocated or evacuated due
to disasters per 100,000 people.]
We have to consider that disasters are due to human
action or inaction. Natural phenomena are hazards
and when it hits a vulnerable and exposed population
and it could not absorb the shock, it becomes a
disaster. Thus, we would want to rename the target to
reflect this perspective.
Proposed renaming of the target: Strengthen
resilience and adaptive capacity to climate related
hazards and natural hazards in all countries
Echoing the indicator in Target 1.5, the indicator
focuses solely on human losses and does not
consider losses nor social, cultural, and environmental
losses. It is crucial to align the indicator with the other
indicators set forth in the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction.
Beyond 2015 UK As with where it features under target 1.5, this

indicator fails to consider resilience and adaptive
capacity and we instead propose the same suggested
indicator as under 1.5. The indicator under 1.5,
provided it is adequately disaggregated to distinguish
climate-related extreme events, can provide useful
data for tracking progress under 13.1.
Proposed indicator:
i. Percentage of population with increased

resources, improved governance, stronger social
safety nets and access to/availability of systems and
services for responding to climate-related related
environmental shocks and disasters, by age, sex,
income and location.
As with 1.5 this focus on the positive attributes of

resilience is suggested in order to encourage further
action towards increasing resilience and reducing
vulnerability. Such action will help to steer the
framework towards ensuring that adaptation targets
are being met.
Bond Disaster Risk Reduction As for target 1.5, this indicator has a narrow human
Working Group loss approach, which is not able to measure resilience
and adaptive capacity.
The same indicator methodology should be used for
this as proposed by us for target 1.5 (composite
index), but selecting only for natural hazards, not
broader shocks.

Agri-Retailers)
CAFOD As with where it features under target 1.5, this
indicator fails to consider resilience and adaptive
capacity and we instead propose the same suggested
indicator as under 1.5. The indicator under 1.5,
provided it is adequately disaggregated to distinguish
climate-related extreme events, can provide useful
data for tracking progress under 13.1.
Proposed indicator:
i. Percentage of population with increased
resources, improved governance, stronger social
safety nets and access to/availability of systems and
services for responding to climate-related related
environmental shocks and disasters, by age, sex,
income and location.
As with 1.5 this focus on the positive attributes of

resilience is suggested in order to encourage further
action towards increasing resilience and reducing
vulnerability. Such action will help to steer the
framework towards ensuring that adaptation targets
are being met.
CDP Data gathered by CDP's climate programs (for

companies and cities) could support tracking of
progress against this target.
Center of Guarulhos
Centre for Built Environment It is necessary to adopt preventive rather than

curative measures.
Every city should have climate resilience plam
Alternatives
Christian Aid Preferred indicator: % of all countries that report

having progressed from a perceived low to an
intermediate or from an intermediate to a high level of
adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and
natural disasters in relation to a 1.5/2 degree world.
(UNFCCC, UNISDR, Loss & Damage portal)
Comment: In measuring adaptive capacity, we would

like to see proposal 13.1.1 (proposed by UNEP)
retained. The suggested indicator here, which is also
used to measure progress against other targets in the
framework, has a different focus
Deutschland e.V.
CiaoLapo Onlus
Clean Air Asia
Climate Change Centre Reading Public space and the buildings that surround and
define it need to be socially, economically and
environmentally sustainable. Social sustainability
requires security, equity and justice; economic
sustainability benefits from affordable capital and
operating budgets; environmental sustainability
addresses ecological and health issues. These
include clean air, water and soil, green micro-climates
and the mitigation and adaptation to the Urban Heat
Island Effect and Climate Change.
Commonwealth Association of Strongly supported Appropriate city and regional

Planners planning can assist in achieving safer more resilient
communities and can help maximise the cost benefit
ratios of the limited input funds
ericsson
Federal Environment Agency of It could be helpful to make use of the comprehensive

Germany disaster databases of CRED (Brussels) and of the
big re-insurance companies as e.g. Munich-Re in
addition.
Fertilizer Canada

French Water Parnership We support the suggested indicator « Number of

deaths, missing people, injured, relocated or
evacuated due to disasters », and call for a
disaggregation measuring water-related disasters
(drought, flood, storms …)
Global Network of Civil Society As for target 1.5, this indicator has a narrow human
Organisations for Disaster loss approach, which is not able to measure resilience
Reduction and adaptive capacity.
this as proposed by us for target 1.5 (composite
index), but selecting only for natural hazards, not
broader shocks.
ICMM and IPIECA
Institute for Reproductive and Very good

Family Health
International Movement ATD Fourth Disaggregation by income will allow to measure

World impact of climate-related hazards and natural
disasters on different quintiles of the population
International Strategy and Need measure of countries' ability to predict natural
Reconciliation Foundation disasters and the steps that countries take to alleviate
consequences of natural disasters.
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS Global warming as part of climate change revolatizes
Inc. ("ISACI") Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and causes
them to recirculate, particularly associated with poor
waste management.
13.1.1 Monitor methane gas and mercury emissions
to the air in order to measure improvement of waste
management practices at landfills.
13.1.2 Monitor mercury vapour from existing coal-fired
power stations and phase out over time, to avoid
global deposition of methylmercury in waterways and
oceans.

Delhi
Kepa Finland a) The existence, proper funding and implementation
of National Adaptation Plans based on the latest
scientific knowledge in a
participatory way.
b) Disaster mortality rates significantly reduced by
2030 (compared to an average of the period 2000-
2010).
c) Direct of economic losses as % of GDP significantly
reduced by 2030 (compared to an average of the
period 2000-2010).
d) Share of population suffering from flooding and/or
droughts.

Unions
OneFamilyPeople Disability in is not mentioned in the only target for

vulnerable group we therefore recommend as stated
in target 13.3
Overseas Development Institute As for target 1.5, this indicator has a narrow human
(ODI) loss approach, which is not able to measure resilience
this as proposed for target 1.5, but selecting only for
natural hazards, not broader shocks. See the
proposal from ODI:
www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-
assets/publications-opinion-files/9780.pdf
Oxfam As for target 1.5, this indicator has a narrow human
loss approach, which is not able to measure resilience
and adaptive capacity. The same indicator
methodology should be used for this as proposed for
target 1.5, but selecting only for natural hazards, not
broader shocks.ODI has developed a good example
of how it may look like: see
assets/publications-opinion-files/9780.pdf.

Carbon Transport
Pathfinder International Need to link this to health goals and targets
Planning 4 Sustainable The 'how' needs to be identifiable in indicators and

Development targets
Practical Action As Target 1.5 focusses on building resilience and
adaptive capacity, suggestion for this indicator to
focus on adaptive capacity and natural hazards only
Rainforest Foundation Norway Indicator: 13.1.1: It is necessary to specify what the
criteria to measure adaptive capacity is. It is
necessary to define the criteria to classify a country
as one with low, intermediate or high level of adaptive
capacity. It is also necessary to outline the criteria to
define when a country improves from one level of
adaptive capacity to another.
In relation with Indicator 13.1.2: A definition of

“causalities” should be provided. Specification of what
kind of natural disasters are included in this term
should be provided. A definition will help countries to
know what sort of hazards and natural disasters
should be reported.
- This indicator fails to reflect that climate change
not only causes economic losses but damages on
biodiversity and ecosystems. Developing further
guidance to measure biodiversity and ecosystems
losses must be considered. The relation between
indicator 13.1.2 and target 13.1 is not clear. A
clarification should be provided regarding how
reporting about the amount of economic losses is
going to help to determine how countries have
strengthened resilience and adaptive capacity to
climate-related hazards.
RMS For any disaster related indicators we advise not to

use the number of deaths/losses from loss databases,
but change to ‘number of expected deaths, expected
number of people affected and expected economic
losses (relative to GDP)' and measure using a likely
disaster scenario or a combination of events along
with their likelihoods’. Tokyo has announced a similar
approach, with its plan to halve earthquake casualties
over the next ten years and assessing this based on a
scenario with a 70% likelihood within the next 30
years:
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs
/AJ201504010060
If an indicator is measured by national loss
databases, it will give a misleading impression of
success or failure because a few years or decades of
catastrophe experience do not give a clear indication
of the level of risk. The 2010 Haiti earthquake claimed
200,000+ lives yet for 100+ years prior to this
devastating event, earthquakes in Haiti had claimed
fewer than 10 lives. We could get around this issue by
using the expected number of deaths / losses based
on likely scenarios, without the need for disasters to
take place.
Signatory organizations: United 13.2.1 Number of countries which have formally
Nations Foundation, Plan reviewed their national policies, strategies and
International, Girl Effect, CARE, planning in order to mainstream and indicate gender
International Women's Health responsive climate change measures
Society for the Psychological Define “resilience” not only in relation to physical
Study of Social Issues; Psychology infrastructure but also mental or psychosocial
Coalition at the United Nations infrastructure, specifically highlighting training people
on positive coping behaviors and personal strengths
that can be effective in combatting climate change
and its impacts.
Data on psychosocial resilience, disaggregated by

gender, age, race, ethnicity, indigenous identity,
income, rural/urban residence, national origin, and
migration status.
Somos el Presente
Stakeholder Group on Ageing Change to: Decrease in the ratio of vulnerable vs
(posted by HelpAge International) resilient (in terms of death and impact)
subpopulations to exposure of climate-related
extreme events and disasters.
We support and adapted version of the UNEP

proposal. This indicator captures progress against
resilience and it specifies climate-related hazards.
However it goes on to list a broader array of disasters
which may not be relevant. Impact is also not well
defined and should include livelihood assets and
income.
We are not able to access the methodology to identify

whether this indicator is feasible or could be age
disaggregated.
The indicator also needs to be reported against the

event type in order to be meaningful.
An alternative existing methodology is DARA Impact

Monitoring Approach which is a feasible and
appropriate measure of adaptive capacity.
We do not support the proposed indicator by UNISDR

which, as was the case in 1.5, is not fit for purpose.
Stockholm Environment Institute ‘Resilience’ and ‘Adaptive capacity’ must be defined if

they are to be amenable to measurement. ‘Recovery
time’ to a baseline level of service provision before a
climate-related hazard presents a potential indicator
for adaptive capacity/resilience. Investment in
adaptive measures as proposed under this target
provides an adequate interim indicator in lieu of
metrics to measure adaptive capacity and resilience.
Tearfund As for target 1.5, this indicator has a narrow human
natural hazards, not broader shocks.
Tebtebba 13.1: 1) use of strategies based on traditional

knowledge of indigenous peoples to strengthen
resilience and adaptive capacity to impacts of climate
change and natural disasters
The Cyprus Institute Indicator is suitable, measurable. we suggest to
include also indicator 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",
as to capture the progress made as well as adverse
impacts not reflected in the immediate loss of human
life.
The Hague University of Applied See point about resilience above

Science
Supposedly, part of this ‘sustainable growth’ would
address sustainability itself – also concrete
sustainability challenges, including climate change.
Yet, at present we fail the global aims of cutting down

the level of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that
contribute to climate change, stopping the massive
extinction of species, and generally bringing our
consumption level to the sustainable standards (e.g.
Corner 2014; Klein 2015; Washington 2015). Due to
vested interests (or sometimes, disinterests, or
ignorance) of a multitude of stakeholders and
‘consumers’, sustainability becomes nothing more
than a talk shop. As Washington (2015:36) has noted,
sustainability should not be allowed to be high-jacked
to justify further ‘business-as-usual’: “If we are to
demystify sustainability, we have to be on the same
page and speak of the same meaning. In a finite
world, we need to accept once and for all that
sustainability cannot be about further growth. This
challenge remains critical, though still denied”.
Track 0

how corruption impacts its achievement. The relevant
target and indicator should be drawn from target 16.5
given the strong and proven inter-linkages between
corruption and climate-change.
http://www.transparency.org/research/gcr/gcr_climate
_change/0/
TRK asbl

recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states
the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy
- New Ways
Women's Environment and Quantitative measure of deaths, relocation, etc. does
Development Orgranization not measure differentiation in adaptive capacity or
resilience within a country & does not take into
account the type of disaster or event, e.g. a slow-
onset climate-related hazard.
Numerous factors influence resilience and adaptive
capacity, including underlying inequalities and, for
example, differences in coastal and inland areas. A
baseline for “adaptive capacity” should be developed
in order to measure the change in it. It is important to
understand in the indicators how people are more
resilient and able to adapt, e.g. via employment data,
#s who move back after x amount of time; food
security; land rights; health services, etc. (link to
target 1.4, and recommended indicator re rights to
land)
Indicators need to measure non-economic loss and
damage, from slow onset events as well as extreme
events, over time. Including qualitative and
quantitative measures of non-economic losses
presents a clearer picture of resilience by assessing
impacts and losses of ecosystems, health,
biodiversity, gender equality, food systems, etc.
Women's Major Group

World Animal Protection As for target 1.5, 2.4 and 11.5 a narrow human loss
approach will not allow for an adequate measure of
resilience and adaptive capacity.
As indicated under target 1.5, a new resilience index

must include a measurement of the ability to avoid
losses, including both the stock (physical assets,
including livestock) and flow (lost income due to lack
of physical asset) aspects of loss.
Moreover, as close to 75 % of the world’s poorest

people largely depend on animals for their income
and food security and as the poorest are also the
most vulnerable to disasters, a focus on animals in
measuring disaster resilience is essential in
determining whether disaster risk reduction measures
are effective and reaching those most in need.
World Resources Institute Similar to our recommendation for measuring targets

1.5 and 11.5, we feel there is a more appropriate
indicator that the current recommendation that covers
all three targets. This may be based on percentage of
population with mobile phone access or percentage of
population covered by multi-hazard early warning
action systems (by district or lower).
WWF WWF supports the proposed Indicator 13.1.1. “X % of

all countries that report having progressed from a
perceived low …” and the suggested indicator
“Number of deaths…” in that order of priority. We also
believe it is critical to track both economic and non-
economic loss and damage from climate impacts for
critical ecosystem and species and thus would
support the proposed indicator 13.1.2 amended to
include non-economic losses, or through
amendments to the suggested Indicator to read:
“Percentage of casualties and amount of economic
and non-economic loss and damage resulting from
extreme weather and slow onset events compare to
previous years.”
Y Care International As for target 1.5, this indicator has a narrow human
natural hazards, not broader shocks.
Target 13.3: Improve education, awareness-raising
and human and institutional capacity on climate
Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction
into national policies, strategies and planning and early warning
Nitrogen fertilizer is an important driver of nitrous
oxide emissions, but it is also the main driver of yield
in modern high production systems. Through careful
selection of nitrogen fertilizer source, rate, timing and
placement practices, the nitrous oxide emissions per
unit of crop produced can be substantially reduced, in
some cases by up to half. The practices that reduce
nitrous oxide emissions also tend to increase nitrogen
use efficiency and the economic return on fertilizer
dollars.
The Nitrous Oxide Emission Reduction Protocol

(NERP) is a science-based protocol designed to meet
international standards for improving nitrogen
management in cropping systems and estimating the
nitrous oxide reduction associated with better nitrogen
management. NERP is driven by data that producers
are either already collecting or are interested in
collecting to improve their overall farm management
system.
Improved nitrogen management is delivered through

a 4R Nutrient Stewardship Plan on the farm. NERP
could be adopted into National strategies to provide
climate change measures, actions and trading
platforms for agricultural nutrients.
[current suggested indicator: Number of countries that
have formally communicated the establishment of
integrated low-carbon, climate-resilient, disaster risk
reduction development strategies (e.g. a national
adaptation plan process, national policies and
measures to promote transition to environmentally-
friendly substances and technologies).]
The current suggested indicator is a poor
measurement of implementation of climate and
disaster resilient strategies. It only looks at the
number of countries with such plans and is not
reflective of a) if the plans are followed and
implemented, 2) quality of the plans in relation to
addressing climate and disaster risk, 3) and if it
addresses the needs of vulnerable groups especially
those that would be affected by extreme shocks and
disturbances.
The proposed indicator is the same as 11.b:
Percentage of cities and human settlements of over
100,000 people implementing risk reduction and
resilience policies that involve vulnerable and
marginalized groups in their design, implementation
and monitoring
This is a clear indicator that assesses the This indicator gives a good indication of the global
formalization of policies, strategies and planning. spread of countries that have integrated an
However, measuring the implementation of policies awareness of climate change into their school
rather than simply the communication of intent would curricula. However, it could provide misleading
provide a better indication of the direction of travel results, as it does not give any indication of the
towards achieving the target and reducing further proportion of schools that have integrated climate
temperature increase by 2030. Acknowledgement of change into their curricula. Moreover, it does not
this in the indicator will assist in promoting action account for other forms of education and awareness
before 2030, rather than planning alone. The indicator building, which are often particularly significant in less
should also include zero-carbon as well as low carbon developed countries. It also provides a limited
strategies to take into account the different levels of indication of human and institutional capacity. We
ambition expected from developed and developing therefore suggest the adjusted indicators, given
countries respectively. below.
Suggested indicator:
i. The number of countries that have successfully Suggested Indicators:
implemented nationwide policies and plans that
establish integrated low-carbon, zero-carbon, climate- i. Percentage of educational and awareness building
resilient, disaster risk reduction sustainable institutions (including schools, training establishments,
development strategies (e.g. a national adaptation community groups and others) that have integrated
plan process, national policies and measures to educational and awareness raising programs related
promote transition to environmentally-friendly to climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact
substances and technologies). The indicator reduction and early warning.
suggested for target 11.b can be used to complement
measurements of progress for target 13.2. ii. Percentage of population partaking in such
institutional activities that have taken action as a
result of these educational activities, appropriately
responding to or preparing for climatic effects.
The current proposed indicator is a very poor
measure of the target. It only considers the ‘number
of countries’, which is not nearly fine-grained/localised
enough to be useful; it only looks at the countries that
have communicated the establishment of strategies –
which says nothing about the implementation or
quality of those strategies.
We propose that the same indicator is used here as
for 11.b: Percentage of cities and human settlements
of over 100,000 people implementing risk reduction
and resilience policies that involve vulnerable and
and monitoring.
Nitrogen fertilizer is an important driver of nitrous

oxide emissions, but it is also the main driver of yield
in modern high production systems. Through careful
selection of nitrogen fertilizer source, rate, timing and
placement practices, the nitrous oxide emissions per
unit of crop produced can be substantially reduced, in
some cases by up to half. The practices that reduce
nitrous oxide emissions also tend to increase nitrogen
use efficiency and the economic return on fertilizer
dollars.

management.
NERP was developed in Canada but was designed to
be flexible enough to be used anywhere in the world
to reduce emissions.
CAAR recommends that the UN Post 2015

Sustainability goals support and promote the Nitrous
Oxide Emission Reduction Protocol as a solution to
help integrate climate change measures into national
policies, strategies and planning.
This is a clear indicator that assesses the This indicator gives a good indication of the global
formalization of policies, strategies and planning. spread of countries that have integrated an
However, measuring the implementation of policies awareness of climate change into their school
rather than simply the communication of intent would curricula. However, it could provide misleading
provide a better indication of the direction of travel results, as it does not give any indication of the
towards achieving the target and reducing further proportion of schools that have integrated climate
temperature increase by 2030. Acknowledgement of change into their curricula. Moreover, it does not
this in the indicator will assist in promoting action account for other forms of education and awareness
before 2030, rather than planning alone. The indicator building, which are often particularly significant in less
should also include zero-carbon as well as low carbon developed countries. It also provides a limited
strategies to take into account the different levels of indication of human and institutional capacity. We
ambition expected from developed and developing therefore suggest the adjusted indicators, given
countries respectively. below.
Suggested indicator: i. Percentage of educational and awareness building
i. The number of countries that have successfully institutions (including schools, training establishments,
implemented nationwide policies and plans that community groups and others) that have integrated
establish integrated low-carbon, zero-carbon, climate- educational and awareness raising programs related
resilient, disaster risk reduction sustainable to climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact
development strategies (e.g. a national adaptation reduction and early warning.
plan process, national policies and measures to ii. Percentage of population partaking in such
promote transition to environmentally-friendly institutional activities that have taken action as a
substances and technologies). result of these educational activities, appropriately
The indicator suggested for target 11.b can be used to responding to or preparing for climatic effects
complement measurements of progress for target
13.2.
Data gathered by CDP's climate programs (for Data gathered by CDP's climate programs (for
companies and cities) could support tracking of companies and cities) could support tracking of
progress against this target. progress against this target.
That rather than continue deforesting, governments
invest in stimulating technological development that
can qualify a better productive use of areas that have
suffered deforestation, even using tax incentives for
entrepreneurs to develop their business in a
sustainable way while preserving what is left of forests
and using more rationally areas already deforested.
Climate change measures to be included cities and Awareness campaign in schools,community etc
surrounding regions. needed.
Number of national schemes and strategies

identifying women as key agents.
The gender dimension is extremely important here, as
climate changes have increased unpaid work of
women obstructing gender equality and women’s
empowerment. Add the following:
13.1.1 Add sex segregated data in this indicator:

Number of deaths, missing people, injured, relocated
or evacuated due to disasters per 100.000 people
13.1.2 Add sex segregated data in this indicator:

number of casualties and amount of economic losses
13.3.2 (add) countries that have addressed increased

unpaid work of women (and men) in climate change
policies
Preferred indicator: The number of countries with

nationwide policies and plans successfully
implemented that incorporate effective climate change
measures.
Comment: There should be a focus on the

implementation rather than communication.
Effective use should be made of green technologies

and systems. Architecture and urban design that is
adaptable and appreciated is cared for and sustained
for a longer time.
Strongly supported Appropriate city and regional Strongly supported Appropriate city and regional
planning can assist in achieving safer more resilient planning can assist in achieving safer more resilient
communities and can help maximise the cost benefit communities and can help maximise the cost benefit
ratios of the limited input funds ratios of the limited input funds
"environmentally-friendly substances and
technologies " needs to be defined. ICT is one of the
environmentally friendly technologies
Through careful selection of nitrogen fertilizer source,
rate, timing and placement practices, the nitrous oxide
emissions per unit of crop produced can be
substantially reduced.
management.
Improved nitrogen management within NERP is
delivered through a 4R Nutrient Stewardship Plan.
The 4Rs (Right Source @ Right Rate, Right Time,
Right Place®) is a science-based program, based in
sustainable agriculture that seeks to balance nutrient
management decisions within a framework of
economic, social, and environmental goals. NERP
was developed in Canada but was designed to be
flexible enough to be used anywhere in the world to
reduce emissions.
Sustainability goals support and promote NERP as a
solution to help integrate climate change measures
into national policies, strategies and planning.

and monitoring.
Indicators developed for this target are in danger of
duplicating actions that would be addressed under the
UNFCCC, which all countries have agreed is the
primary forum for addressing climate change.
Very good Exactly people need it
ICN supports the suggested indicator and suggests

referring to the indicator under Target 3.d. as the
currently suggested indicator does not measure
human and institutional capacity on climate change
mitigation, adoption, impact reduction and early
warning.
Indicator 13.3.1 # of countries that have integrated

mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early
warning into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula;
and Indicator 13.3.2 % of population with increased
knowledge on climate change, disaggregated by sex
and age.
The lack of data for these indicators shows that they
should be built into the COP21 Paris outcomes
No coments This target should be included in all the 17 goals with

relevant modifications.
a) Number of countries that have developed and a) Number of children or youth who have learned
implemented Zero Carbon Action Plans (ZCAPS) and climate change mitigation and adaptation measures at
Low Carbon Development Plans school.
(LCDPs). b) Percentage of population with increased
b) Number of cities that have developed and knowledge on climate change.
implemented Zero Carbon Action Plans (ZCAPS) and
Low Carbon Development Plans (LCDPs). => a & b) Disaggregated by gender and age.
c) Countries en route to phasing out carbon emissions
in 2050 by 2030.
d) Carbon intensity per unit of GDP reduced
significantly in all countries.
e) Net GHG emissions in areas under forest
management (GtCO2 e/ha).
f) Availability and implementation of a transparent and
detailed deep national decarbonization strategy,
consistent with the 2°C -or below -global carbon
budget, and with GHG emission targets for 2020,
2030 and 2050.
g) CO2 intensity of new power generation capacity
installed (gCO2per kWh), and of new cars
(gCO2/pkm) and trucks (gCO2/tkm).
While supporting the suggested indicator, there is

reason to consider spelling out vocational education
to the list.
and monitoring. [618 characters]
Improve inclusive education, awareness-raising and

human and institutional capacity on climate change
warning
Proposed Indicator 13.2.1: Number of countries that
have formally communicated the establishment of
integrated low-carbon, climate-resilient, disaster risk
reduction development strategies (e.g. a national
adaptation plan process, national policies and
measures to promote transition to environmentally-
friendly substances and technologies).
Comments:
• Highly relevant to cities and several targets under
Goal 11
• Target mainly focuses on adaptation. Transport is
relevant to both mitigation and adaptation, but there is
no specific target related to transport nor
acknowledgement of the role of transport in national
low-carbon development policies
The indicator currently proposed only considers the

‘number of countries’; it only looks at the countries
that have communicated the establishment of
strategies (with nothing about the implementation or
quality of the strategies).
We suggest the following indicator: Adoption of

national legislation that requires integrated low-
carbon, climate-resilient, disaster risk reduction
development strategies (e.g. a national adaptation
plan, national policies and measures to promote
transition to environmentally-friendly technologies).
We suggest the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and - Indicator 13.3.1 focuses in a “number”. Thus, it is
local communities as criteria to be identified in each limited to the number of countries that have integrated
“development strategy” designed and established at mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early
the national level. We suggest the addition of: “The warming into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula.
number of national integrated low-carbon, climate- We suggest including criteria that allow the
resilient, disaster risk reduction development examination of the curricula. The objective would be
strategies that consider Indigenous Peoples and local to ensure the quality of the courses and the possibility
communities as particular affected and vulnerable of further improvement.
groups by climate change”. The indicators fail to - We suggest the inclusion of the following
measure the impacts that the policies and strategies indicator: “Percentage of Indigenous Peoples with
will have among Indigenous Peoples and local increased knowledge on climate change,
communities. Therefore, we suggest developing an disaggregated by sex and region”.
indicator (possible 13.2.2) that focuses on the impacts - We suggest the inclusion of the following
of those development strategies. If the objective is indicator: “Number of countries that have developed
the effective integration of climate change measures educational materials about mitigation, adaptation,
into national policies and strategies, the criteria of impact reduction and early warning into minority
“number of countries that count with a development languages”. Many Indigenous Peoples and local
strategy” is insufficient. Countries should specify what communities do not speak the official language of the
the content of the development plan is. Therefore, the country. Therefore, it is important to ensure that they
inclusion of sub-indicators that can help the can access to information in their local language.
evaluators to identify whether the plan achieves the
objectives are necessary.
13.3.1 Number of countries that have integrated
warning into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula,
that equally targets girls and boys
DATA SOURCE: IUCN (Environment and Gender

Index (EGI))
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UNICEF
TIER: Tier III
Cross policy integration between ministries. Include this education on population that is
traditionally left behind, such as people with
disabilities.
We would endorse the suggested indicator as
proposed by UNEP.
These policies and strategies and plans need to be

inclusive of older people and other specific
stakeholder groups (women, children, disabled,
indigenous people). However we recognize that this is
not currently assessed under the current methodology
which is the most appropriate source of overall data.
Indicators linked to target 13.2 must assess both On indicator 13.3.1: An outcome indicator would be
climate change (CC) mitigation and adaptation efforts. better here than the proposed one focusing on
With respect to mitigation, national strategies for national self-reporting on education curricula. For
reduction of Short-Lived Climate Pollutants also have example, surveys of the general population on
a role to play, especially in mitigating near-term CC. awareness about climate change. Possibly questions
Quantification of benefits of taking action on human of this kind could be integrated in regular, international
health, crop yields, and ecosystem structure and public opinion polls like the World Values Survey.
function is required to capture national efforts to Alternatively, the research community could be
reduce carbon emission. Potential opportunity for incentivised to measure. This would show the
consolidating indicators and improving linkages penetration and effect of various educational
between goal measurement, with food security (goal measures.
2), health/well-being (goal 3) and terrestrial Currently, It is unclear what would be the source of
ecosystem health (goal 15). information for this indicator. Also, the indicator (and
Recommendation for 13.2.1 to be separated into No. the target as such) do not specify if all of the elements
of countries that have formally communicated an need to be addressed (mitigation, adaptation, impact
adaptation (indicator 13.2.1a) and a low-carbon/low- reduction and early warning). Finally, it is not clear
emissions (indicator 13.2.1b) strategy to convey what impact reduction and early warning are referring
adaptation and mitigation efforts. Indicator on to. In sum, this would not be clearly measurable.
Intended Nationally Determined Contributions may be On indicator: 13.3.2 Scale will need to be developed
clearest for this target. to assess knowledge and awareness of climate
Another indicator would be the number of countries change. One often neglected indicator for assessing
that have formally reported that they have established the effectiveness of early warning is the percentage of
governmental coordination mechanisms for CC. people responding to warning information.
and monitoring.
13.3: number of education programs and awareness

raising campaigns specifically targeting indigenous
peoples; 2) number of capacity building programs on
climate change targeting indigenous peoples;
Indicator is solid and fit. We suggest that is is given Indicator is fit for purpose
priority 1 status.
In relation to climate change, Naomi Klein (2015) has Not mitigation adaptation and reduction but complete
commented: “Our current economic system is both elimination of root causes - and strict prohibition of
fueling the climate crisis and actively preventing us industrial/fossil fuels lobbies
from taking the necessary actions to avert it.” If the
rhetoric of economic sustainability persists, this will
result in nothing more than helping to ‘sustain the
unsustainable’ - thus resilience and adaptation rather
than addressing root causes which is oil dependency
Number of developing countries that have formally
communicated the establishment of integrated
(including land use) low-carbon, climate-resilient,
disaster risk reduction development strategies with
2030 and 2050 timelines, commensurate with national
mitigation commitments communicated under the
UNFCCC, or higher.
Number of developed countries that have formally

communicated the establishment of integrated
(including land use) zero emissions, climate-resilient,
disaster risk reduction strategies with 2030 and 2050
timelines, commensurate with national mitigation
commitments communicated under the UNFCCC,
national climate legislation or higher.
As the INDCs are submitted to the ADP framework, What is missing, public participation, public
Post 2015 a global success needs to be monitored, engagement, transparency and easy access to
take advantage of the data already in place including information and resources, 13.3 is very dependent
National Strategies, Plans of Action, etc.since 1993 upon environmental education, learning and
and adjusted for the MDGs and SD in the 2000s, plus understanding through international cooperation and
UNEP's Division on Policy and Environmental coordination, CBDR.
Education and Training has conducted a global
survey among nation states that provides further
baseline data and more. Implementation of every
climate change policy framework, work programme,
plan of action, and means of implementation depends
upon a common denominator. Post- 2015
development requires that environmental education,
as a policy instrument is the key concept and shared
focus of preparing society as a whole for climate
change.
Environmental education comes from Agenda 21, with

calls for environmental education, across and
throughout the Chapters, and is comprehensively
stated in Chapter 36.1.
recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states
the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy
between nations is highly relevant. between nations is highly relevant.
1) Indicators should measure both the existence and
the impact of climate change measures. This includes
quality and inclusiveness of strategies and related
initiatives. Recommend:
a)Number of initiatives that engage the most

marginalized and vulnerable groups, including
women, girls, youth, local and marginalized
communities in, effective climate change -related
2) Linking with the full agenda requires gender lens.

Two indicators:
a) Percentage of low-carbon DRR, mitigation and
adaptation initiatives/measures integrated into
national policies and planning that are gender-
responsive
b) Number of measures that are gender-responsive
and address human rights
3) Comment: binary indicators cannot gauge progress

over the next 20 years. A scoring rubric would allow
understanding of both the quantity and quality of
integrated DRR and climate change development
plans globally through computation of a weighted
score. This would help to not only gauge an increase
in the number of plans, but also the advancement of
the contents.
13.2.1 Number of countries which have formally 13.3.1 Number of countries that have integrated
reviewed their nationally policies, strategies and mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early
planning in order to mainstream and indicate climate warning into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula
change measures.
UNISDR and Rockefeller foundation 100 resilient UNISDR

cities
Binary indicators cannot gauge progress in the area

of DRR over the course of the next 20 years. A
scoring rubric would allow for an understanding of
both the quantity and quality of DRR and climate
change mitigation plans globally through allowance of
the computation of a weighted score. This would help
to not only gauge an increase in the number of global
DRR plans, but also the advancement of the contents
of them.
In order to ensure differentiated ambition between WWF supports the suggested indicator “Number of
developed and developing countries for this target countries that have integrated mitigation, adaptation,
WWF suggests amending the suggested indicator to impact reduction and early warning into primary,
read “Number of countries, which have formally secondary and tertiary curricula” and the proposed
communicated and implemented the establishment of indicator 13.3.2 in that order of priority.
integrated zero-carbon and low-carbon, climate-
resilient, disaster risk reduction development
strategies (e.g. a national adaptation plan process)”.

and monitoring.
Target 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
This is a clear and direct indicator that would provide accurate information to
assess the success in achieving this target. The Green Climate Fund (GCF) will
be responsible for both mobilizing and delivering the $100 billion a year that has
been promised and therefore should be the central institution addressed in this
indicator. The indicator could benefit from addressing this two-fold responsibility.
We propose replacing it with the indicator suggested below.
i. USD per year dedicated and implemented specifically to appropriate climate

change response activities (including both mitigation and adaptation) in
developing countries via an operationalised GCF.
The indicator suggested aims to ensure that the finances accounted for are those
that are actually transferred and used rather than merely pledged to and held by
a funding body. There are two parts to the target, which include to: i. secure
funds, and ii. fully operationalize the GCF. The indicator accounts for both of
these to be measured.
This is a clear and direct indicator that would provide accurate information to
assess the success in achieving this target. The Green Climate Fund (GCF) will
be responsible for both mobilizing and delivering the $100 billion a year that has
been promised and therefore should be the central institution addressed in this
indicator. The indicator could benefit from addressing this two-fold responsibility.
We propose replacing it with the indicator suggested below.
i. USD per year dedicated and implemented specifically to appropriate climate
change response activities (including both mitigation and adaptation) in
developing countries via an operationalised GCF.
The indicator suggested aims to ensure that the finances accounted for are those
that are actually transferred and used rather than merely pledged to and held by
a funding body. Transparency in the financial operations of the GCF will help to
assess progress in this target. There are two parts to the target, which include to:
i. secure funds, and ii. fully operationalize the GCF. The indicator accounts for
both of these to be measured.
Data gathered by CDP's climate programs (for companies and cities) could
support tracking of progress against this target.
Climate Fund is to be distributed ,not blocked or misused.

Preferred indicator: USD per year dedicated and implemented specifically to
appropriate climate change response activities in developing countries via an
operationalised GCF.
(Green Climate Fund (GCF))
Comment: Current proposal does not reflect the agreement to mobilise finance
‘BY 2020’.
Strongly supported
Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential goal, of design and
planning for cultural growth for whole societies.
I totally agree with it. It is very good strategy that the commitment of United
Nations to implement Green Climate Fund
Need a measure to ensure transparency on implementation of funding in

No comments
a) USD of new and additional climate finance mobilised from developed to
b) USD available in new and additional public climate finance.
c) Systems for the necessary funding of NAPs for LDC-countries and others
according to the Cancun agreements on adaptation in place.
d) Share of climate funding allocated to adaptation.
We suggest modifying indicator 13.a.1 in line with target 13.a) which states that
100 billion dollars annually should be mobilized before 2020.The amount of
finance provided by each country per year should be reported in relation with
areas of funding allocation. For example, the amount of finance allocated in
mitigation and adaptation activities, projects in cooperation with Indigenous
Peoples and local communities, etc.The amount of finance provided by
developed countries should also be disaggregated in relation with the
groups/organizations that the public finance aims to support. For example, the
amount of finance allocated in adaptation and mitigation activities within areas
habited by Indigenous Peoples and local communities. - We suggest adding
international funding: “percentage of GCF funded projects finalized and sustained
afterwards through national and international funding to produce climate neutral
solutions”.
On indicator 13.a.1: This indicator is not clear in its current state. An improved
indicator would simply be the amount of money put in the Green Climate Fund.
Measurement can start before 2020.
On indicator 13.a.2: projects are rarely 'finalized' and it will be hard to determine
'sustained afterwards through national funding'.
Within this target we would also like to see assessments of indirect sources of
investment which could improve climate change mitigation, i.e. investment in low-
carbon infrastructure (energy, transport, housing) and FDI links to green
infrastructure development. There is also a clear need for a consensus definition
of 'climate finance' and what counts towards the 100 billion target. SEI’s Climate
Finance initiative could provide further information with respect to indicator
development for this target.
Monitoring of the pledge to raise the 100 billion now?
This target must be completed by a group of recommendations, papers, and data

to guide to states the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy between
nations is highly relevant.
Indicator should clearly reflect that the $100 is to be mobilized by 2020. Public
funds, and funds additional to existing development commitments must be
measured. Recommend:
a) Amount of funds mobilized by developed countries by 2020 that are public
grants, loans, other; amount that are private funds – all of which must be
additional to existing development commitments.
b) Amount of funds disbursed by the GCF per year, per type of disbursement.
13.a.1 Mobilized amount of USD per year starting in 2020 accountable towards
the USD 100 billion commitment
UNFCC, World Bank
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.
The suggested indicator does not reflect the intent of the target. WWF proposes
to amend the indicator to read “Mobilized amount of USD per year by 2020
accountable towards the developed country parties commitment to address the
needs of developing countries for mitigation and adaptation action.”
Target 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
This is a clear indicator, however it seeks only to
provide a measurement of the LDCs receiving
support, rather than those successfully implementing
such support.
i. Number of LDCs and SIDs that are receiving

specialized support for mechanisms that effectively
raise capacity for effective climate change related
planning and management, including those focusing
on women, youth, local and marginalized communities
The success of promoting mechanisms for raising
capacity must be measured by those promotional
activities that have been successful. Therefore it is
suggested that the indicator looks at data one step
further to show that the promotion of such
mechanisms was successful. It is only by looking
forward to this next step that it can be said that the
target was both valuable and successfully achieved
and that it therefore contributes to the overarching
goals of responding effectively to climate change
through mitigation, adaptation and climate-proof
sustainable development. This indicator can feed into
those discussed for target 1.5 and 13.1 to measure
capacity for responding to climate change.
This is a clear indicator, however it seeks only to
provide a measurement of the LDCs receiving
support, rather than those successfully implementing
such support.
i. Number of LDCs and SIDs that are receiving
specialized support for mechanisms that effectively
raise capacity for effective climate change related
planning and management, including those focusing
on women, youth, local and marginalized communities
The success of promoting mechanisms for raising
capacity must be measured by those promotional
activities that have been successful. Therefore it is
suggested that the indicator looks at data one step
further to show that the promotion of such
mechanisms was successful. It is only by looking
forward to this next step that it can be said that the
target was both valuable and successfully achieved
and that it therefore contributes to the overarching
goals of responding effectively to climate change
through mitigation, adaptation and climate-proof
sustainable development. This indicator can feed into
those discussed for target 1.5 and 13.1 to measure
capacity for responding to climate change.
To be included in the sustainable development of

cities with climate
resilience
Strongly supported
The target could be revised to also refer to Small
Island Developing States which are particularly
vulnerable to climate change
Separate goals must all be subject to the one

Very good
Also need to focus on the elderly and the disabled.
No comments
Suggest to add "...including focusing on women,
youth and local and marginalized communities,
providing sexual and reproductive health information
and incorporating the Population, Health,
Environment (PHE) integrated approach"
We suggest adding: “number of LDCs that are
receiving specialized support for mechanisms for
raising capacities for effective climate change related
planning, including focusing on women, youth,
indigenous peoples, local and marginalized
communities”. Indicator 13.b should be disaggregated
by target groups. In this way, it would be possible to
determine how much support is giving to Indigenous
Peoples, local communities, women and young
independently, and direct support to groups that are
left behind. The indicator should be disaggregated by
source of financing. In this way, it would be possible to
determine the percentage of programs and
mechanisms financing through public or international
funding. The indicator should be disaggregated by the
criteria of gender within Indigenous Peoples.
Therefore, we suggest adding the following indicator:
“consider the percentage of women within Indigenous
Peoples that participate in the different mechanisms
for raising capacity for effective climate change-
related planning in LDC”.
13.b.1 Number of LDCs that are receiving specialized
support for mechanisms for raising capacities for
effective climate change related planning and
management, including focusing on women and girls,
youth, local and marginalized communities and the
national and local DRR coordination mechanism has
a gender equity policy that supports women’s and
girls’ full and equal participation in DRR planning and
leadership opportunities
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: OECD
TIER: Tier III
NOTES: Women are most often responsible for

growing, harvesting and preparing food for their
families — therefore preparedness for climate change
related planning and management is crucial for
women and girls
13.b.2 Number of initiatives that engage the most

vulnerable, including women boys, and girls, in
disaster-preparedness and resilience-training
DATA SOURCE: IUCN (Environment and Gender

Index (EGI))
NOTES: Inequalities in social relations, economic

assets and political power exacerbate human
vulnerabilities, as a result, the impact of disasters
worsens the unequal conditions faced by women,
children, indigenous peoples and the elders, among
others
Develop advocacy skills in these target populations.

We recommend indicators linked to this goal evaluate
trends in SLCPs in addition to GHGs and assess the
co-benefits for health and development from
interventions to reduce both.
13.b: representation of indigenous peoples in climate
change related offices and high level meetings.

Number of least developed countries supported
through a capacity-building process with government
policy makers and civil society, to run a sectoral
model that measures greenhouse gas emissions,
affordable and sustainable technology and energy
mixes, decentralised energy access, jobs creation
and breadth of provision across skills sets, and need
and opportunities for further education and skillsets to
support the development and low carbon transition.
Strengthen local decision-making capacity and

improve coordination and stakeholder engagement
with higher levels.

13.b.1 Amount USD per year that is going towards
specialized support to LDCs for mechanisms for
planning and management, including focusing on
women, youth, local and marginalized communities.
1) It is important to measure the amount of resources
flowing to the efforts than to measure the number of
LDCs that are receiving specialized support. Using
this indicator will inform a better picture of the
situation and will facilitate more appropriate policy
responses. Recommend:
a) Amount USD per year that is going towards
2) Additional indicators to understand how capacity is

being raised:
a) % of funds that directly incrase participation of
women, youth and local and marginalized
communities in climate change-related planning and
management
b) Leadership of women, youth and local and
marginalized communities in climate change-related
c) % of funds to organizations in climate change-
related planning and management that are led by
women, youth and local and marginalized
communities
13.b.1 Amount USD per year that is going towards

World Bank
Measuring this target in amount of resources flowing

to the efforts is more telling than measuring the
number of LDCs that are receiving specialized
support. Using this indicator will inform a better picture
of the situation and will facilitate more appropriate
policy responses.
Target 14.1: By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce
marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-
based activities, including marine debris and nutrient
Organization: pollution
AGRIUM Fertilizer use (as Kg/ha arable land) is an ineffective indicator
for preventing and reducing all marine nutrient pollution. The
amount of fertilizer used does not indicate the potential of
nutrient loss to marine environments. The indicator also
ignores the contributions of other sources of nutrient pollution
from untreated wastewater, animal waste, aquaculture and
biological processes and the importance of addressing all
sources of nutrients. Fertilizer use is necessary for
sustainable agricultural intensification (SAI). Using the right
fertilizer nutrient management practices contributes positively
to SAI. 4R Nutrient Stewardship is a globally applicable
system for nutrient management decisions. The education,
extension efforts and adoption of 4R would be more useful in
prevention and reduction of nutrient loss to marine
environments. If an indicator based on fertilizer use is
desired, more useful measures would consider fertilizer use
in relation to crop yield, a balance of nutrient inputs and
outputs, a surplus/deficit ratio that would also indicate soil
fertility trends and nutrient cycling within agro ecosystems.
CAAR (Canadian Association of Proposed indicator: Fertilizer consumption (kg/ha arable

Agri-Retailers) land).
This indicator should address all nutrient sources, not only
mineral fertilizer applied to arable land. In some situations,
comparatively high nutrient application rates are needed and
sustainable in areas with high yields and nutrient use
efficiency, or a history of soil fertility mining.
By 2050, nutrient input to marine ecosystems from mineral
fertilizers is very likely to grow at a much slower pace than
input from livestock manure, aquaculture and wastewater.
Looking at only mineral fertilizers would overlook the fastest
growing sources of nutrient input to the oceans.
In agriculture, nutrient balance (surplus/deficit) is the most
relevant metric. OECD already monitors nutrient balances in
its member states, taking all nutrient inputs and outputs into
account. The Global Partnership on Nutrient Management
(GPNM), the European Nitrogen Expert Panel and the
International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA) have also
proposed an indicator of N use efficiency, reflecting N input,
output, output/input ratio, and surplus/deficit, which could be
used here and for Goal 2.
Costa del Mar As the leading manufacturer of polarized performance
sunglasses, Costa Del Mar is a private sector company that
provides products to consumers who rely on healthy oceans
for recreation and economic aspects.
Committed to sustainable sport fishing practices and ocean

conservation, Costa launched a campaign this year, Kick
Plastic, to educate its customers about the severity of the
marine debris problem and encourage them to kick the
plastic habit.
In addition to the consumer campaign, Costa is currently

evaluating its own operational procedures, and implementing
plans to reduce the amount of plastic it uses in its products,
shipping, and supply chain.
Costa is commenting on Goal 14.1, encouraging the U.N. to

support and adopt plastic free seas and healthy ocean
indicators that include:
a. Levels of plastic pollution found in the oceans.

b. Quantity of plastic found in marine life and its impacts.
c. The reduction of plastic used by corporations in products
and packaging.
EAT Initiative New Proposed Indicator: Area eutrophicated vs. total national
water area separate
measure SDG target 14.1 by 2025, prevent and significantly
reduce marine pollution of all kinds, particularly from land-
based activities, including marine debris and nutrient
pollution. Primary Data Source World Resources Institute,
UNEP, OECD and some NSO’s Tier I: Methodology exists,
data widely available. However, some data gaps do exist and
need to be mapped.
Fair Oceans | IntKom e.V.

Fertilizer Canada The indicator should address all nutrient sources, not only
from mineral fertilizers applied to arable land. Also, it should
be noted that, by 2050, the nutrient input to marine
ecosystems from mineral fertilizers is very likely to grow at
much slower pace than the input from livestock manure,
aquaculture and wastewater. It is feasible that with improved
techniques the nutrient input to marine systems could be
reduced in many regions. Therefore, looking at mineral
fertilizers only would result in overlooking the fastest growing
sources of nutrient input to the oceans. For agricultural
systems, the nutrient balance (surplus or deficit) would be the
most relevant metric. OECD already monitors nutrient
balances in agricultural systems in its member states, taking
all nutrient inputs and outputs into account4. The Global
Partnership on Nutrient Management (GPNM), the European
Nitrogen Expert Panel and the International Fertilizer Industry
Association (IFA) have also proposed an indicator of N use
efficiency, reflecting the N input, the N output, the N
output/input ratio and the N surplus/deficit, which could be
used for that purpose.
Global Ocean Commission The indicator should not be restricted to nutrient pollution as
Target 14.1. has a broader scope.
Indicator 14.1.2.: GOC suggests monitoring the presence of

plastic in the ocean, rather than the amount “entering” the
ocean, which is often based on estimates.
An indicator on the concentration of micro-plastics would

encourage the further development of research and
monitoring of trends, while monitoring progress in the marine
environment of policies and measures designed to prevent
plastics from entering the ocean. GOC thus suggests [Micro-
plastics concentration in seawater] or [Accumulation of
plastics, including micro-plastics, in marine life (fish, seabirds,
marine mammals)] and [Number of countries with taxes or
restrictions on certain plastics uses, including single-use
plastics bans, and programmes to improve waste
management and increase circular use.]
GPIC Do not agree as this indicator clearly inappropriate and could

be damaging to food security.
Indigenous and Frontier Efficient liquid and solid waste management practices will
Technology Research Centre - IFTR reduce this. But that requires a will from respective
Governments to achieve this.
Family Health
International Council of Nurses A modified indicator suggested by UNEP under the Target 3.9
could be used here - Death and disability from marine
pollution of all kind.
International Environemnt Forum Indicator 14.1.2 Metric tonnes per year of plastic materials
entering the ocean from all sources.
Plastic waste is an under-estimated problem both on land
and sea, and should be addressed with a life cycle approach
starting with total plastic production figures and then
separating by waste streams across several targets, and
recycling into a circular economy
International Fertilizer Industry The proposed indicator doesn’t meet relevancy criteria.
Association (IFA) Fertilizer use need not result in nutrient pollution. Nutrient
stewardship, applying the right fertilizer at the right rate, right
time and right place minimizes environmental impact.
Focusing on fertilizer use detracts from dealing with overall
marine pollution. Focusing on fertilizer use as an indicator of
nutrient pollution could have a negative impact on food
security – e.g. in Sub Saharan Africa where fertilizer
application is often deficient, resulting in low yields and soil
degradation. Discouraging fertilizer use could damage
implementation of Goals 1, 2, 15. Indicator 6.3.2 (Water
Quality Index) includes nitrogen and phosphorus content of
water and is a more accurate measure of water quality. The
proposed indicator for 6.3.2 could also be used for 14.1. The
Indicator of Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP), based
on measured inputs of nitrogen, phosphorus and silicon in
estuaries, is a possible alternative.
International Plant Nutrition Proposed indicator: Fertilizer consumption (kg/ha of arable

Institute land)
Fertilizer application rate (kg/ha) is a poor indicator of nutrient

pollution in marine environments from land-based activities
because it does not reflect nutrient loss to water or air.
Application rates vary with soil type, crop, cropping system,
yield potential, and economics. Fertilizer use could pose an
environmental risk if the fertilizer was not applied properly or
at the right time, the rate was higher than recommended and
the soil and climatic conditions allowed the nutrients not
taken up by the crop to leach of by lost from the farm
field.Nutrient use efficiency (i.e. nutrient removed by the
crop/nutrient input from fertilizer) would be a better indicator,
but even this indicator does not reflect actual losses of
nutrients to marine environments. It simply reflects the
proportion of applied nutrient that may be lost under the right
conditions. A more suitable indicator is the Indicator of
Coastal Eutrophication Potential (ICEP), which is already in
use in all large marine ecosystems and it encompasses a
nutrient use efficiency component.
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS 14.1.4 Measure ocean pollution by monitoring ocean waters
Inc. ("ISACI") and biomonitoring ocean-going migratory fish for mercury
vapour deposition, using appropriate technology such as
radionucleoides, in order to trace the source of mercury
vapour from coal-fired power stations with the aim or
reducing or eliminating global deposition of methlymercury
oceans and waterways.
14.1.2 Monitor quantities of plastics and other wastes
captured in ocean gyres of marine debrisusing appropriate
technology such as remote sensing..
14.1.3 Monitor the percentage of national budget invested in
compliance and implementation of the MARPOL.
14.1.4 Monitor the number of facilities that treat ship-
generated waste on land in an environmentally sound
manner.
14.1.5 Monitor Investment in facilities for sound waste
management in ports.

Delhi
Kepa Finland a) Ocean Health Index.
b) Area of coral reef ecosystems and percentage live cover.
c) Percentage of land-based pollution levels reduced,
including litter and oils, municipal wastewater, nutrients and
sediments, radioactive waste, heavy metals and persistent
organic pollutants.
We strongly support IUCN's views to the indicator 14.1.2!
=> a) Requires improved data collection. For example, 80%

of the world’s fisheries are data poor or data deficient.
Somos el Presente
Stockholm Environment Institute On indicator 14.1.1: Fertiliser consumption as an indicator in
isolation seems a poor indicator related to marine pollution.
We assume it would be cost effective to install remote
monitoring systems to monitor dissolved nitrogen content
and/or dissolve oxygen content which would provide better
proxies for marine pollution due to fertiliser run-off.
Furthermore nitrogenous loving plants presents a potential
indicator of nitrogen enrichment in coastal areas. We also
recommend the use of a nutrient use efficiency indicator, (i.e.
as efficiency increases eutrophication should decrease).
There are also potentially useful global datasets for eutrophic
rivers and coastal dead zones to support this indicator.
Tebtebba
The 5 Gyres Institute The 5 Gyres Institute is a leading global researcher on plastic
pollution in the oceans, and an advocate for solutions that
include creating policies to ban single use plastics,
encourage EPR, reduce plastic use in products/packaging,
consumer education and waste management strategies.
5 Gyres supports the proposed indicator 14.1.2 regarding the

“metric tonnes per year of plastic materials entering the
ocean from all sources.” However, other indicators and
measurements must be considered. 5 Gyres suggests these
additional indicators:
a. Plastic pollution levels found in the oceans.

b. Quantity of plastic found in marine life, the number
of species interacting with plastic pollution and the impact
thereof.
c. The number and effectiveness of government
policies that reduce municipal solid waste through waste
diversion strategies and elimination of problematic plastic
products.
d. Corporate “plastic footprints”, that is, the reduction
of plastic use in products and packaging.
The Cyprus Institute Indicator may not directly represent the nitrogen ending up in
the sea but is a close proxy
Suggested additional indicators: "Red list Index (impacts of
pollution on marine species)
The Fertilizer Institute The proposed indictor is inappropriate for assessing pollution
from “all kinds” of land based activities. Fertilizer
consumption focuses on nutrient loss from agriculture, which
by recent estimates only accounts for 25 to 30% of global
annual nitrogen input to marine systems. A sole focus on
fertilizer detracts from assessing other forms of nutrient loss.
Also, fertilizer use varies by crop, yield, soil type, climate and
other factors; and recommended application rates vary even
within local regions, making fertilizer consumption an
inaccurate indicator. Due to nutrient cycling via microbial,
physical and chemical processes within the soil, only a
fraction of surplus nutrients end up in surface water. Again,
making fertilizer consumption an inaccurate indicator.
Regarding agricultural fertilizers, a nutrient balance would be
more relevant. An indicator of use efficiency reflecting the
input, output, the output/input ratio, and the surplus/deficit
ratio is more accurate and it could also be used for Goal 2.
The Hague University of Applied Sustainable USE is again very anthropocentric.
Science
The critical observers have observed however, that
implementation of many of these goals are likely in fact to
exacerbate environmental crisis and result in victimising
nonhuman species. Just as sustainable development,
especially in a sense of ‘sustaining growth’, has been
branded to be an oxymoron and exacerbate ecological
injustice between species, privileging human welfare over
concerns with other species.
The achievement of SDG goals is unlikely to lead to greater

social equality and economic prosperity, but to a greater
spread of unsustainable production and consumption to all
corners of the globe, continuous economic as well as
population growth that has caused environmental problems
in the first place, and non-abating commodification and
objectification of environment and its elements
TRK asbl Rule and regulation AND penalties more strict aiming for zero
tolerance for industrial misconduct.
recommendations, papers, and data to guide to states the
best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy between
World Animal Protection World Animal Protection supports the use of proposed
indicator 14.1.2 - Metric tonnes per year of plastic materials
entering the ocean from all sources
WWF The suggested indicator “Nitrogen use efficiency” does not
adequately reflect the intent of the target. WWF suggests to
replace it with the suite of HELCOM (Baltic Marine
Environment Protection Commission) indicators in order to
capture a more comprehensive set of pollution indicators.
Data are collected by regional seas organisations and
national coastal management organisations. WWF supports
proposed indicator 14.1.2 on the understanding that “all
sources” includes non-land based sources. Vessel based
garbage into sea could be measured via proxy: MARPOL
Annex V ratified and implemented by all flag states.
Indicators for 14.1 can also be used to inform targets 6.3 and
6.6. The Red List Index and Living Planet Index of species
threatened by pollution would also be of use and have
interlinkages with other targets.
Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect
marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant
adverse impacts, including by strengthening their
resilience, and take action for their restoration in order to
achieve healthy and productive oceans
Given the significant overlap with Target 14.5, GOC suggests
considering an action oriented-approach on regional
management measures for Target 14.2, such as: [Number of
RFMOs carrying out independent performance reviews to
assess, in particular, whether the ecosystem-approach and
the precautionary principle are upheld] and/or [Number of fish
species and fish stocks commercially exploited with no catch
limit assigned by any Regional Fisheries Management
Organizations or Arrangements].
The Ocean Health Index alone (Indicator 14.2.2) is not

sufficiently robust because it is an index and not primary
data.
Agreed
Good
14.2.1. Use chemical-free alternatives for disinfection of
potable water for Small Island Developing States, to avoid
further environmental problems created by chlorinating &
fluoridating municipal water which adversely impat the coral
reefs which protect them from storm surges.
14.2.2 Avoid sewage-outfalls into the ocean by promoting
engineered wetlands for wastewater treatment.
May be removed because already mentioned in target 14.1

above
a) Share of coastal and marine areas that are protected.
We strongly support IUCN's views to the indicator 14.2.1!
1) Number of marine and coastal ecosystems sustainably

managed by indigenous peoples; 2) Number of government
policies recognizing indigenous peoples’ rights to marine and
coastal ecosystems developed in consultation with
indigenous peoples ; 3) Number of government policies
recognizing indigenous peoples’ livelihoods in marine and
coastal ecosystems developed in consultation with
indigenous peoples.
Indicator suggested is fit for purpose
Additional indicator suggested: "% of coastal area reserved
as Marine Protected area (no fishing)"
Indeed, in the words of Eileen Crist (2012: 140), we live in a
world that is ‘propped by the strengths advanced industrial
civilization has at its disposal: the rational-instrumental
means of technical management, heightened efficiency, and
technological breakthrough’. The view that the advance of
industrialism can be equated with human development or
‘progress’, and that human destiny is intrinsically linked to a
future defined by science and capital, is dubious as
evidenced by many military and industrial disasters, as well
as climate change (Kidner 2014). Indeed, ‘more serious than
modern society’s potential ability to technologically fix or
muddle through problems of its own making is people’s
apparent willingness to live in an ecologically devastated
world and to tolerate dead zones, endocrine disruptors,
domestic animal torture (aka CAFOS), and unnatural weather
as unavoidable concomitants of modern living’ (Crist
2012:149).
Oceans should not be productive, but healthy
BAN on exploration of new marine ecosystems for

exploitation of natural ressource
World Animal Protection proposed 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.
WWF suggests replacing the suggested indicator (% of
coastal and marine development with ICM/MSP plans) with a
combination of appropriate BIP indicators with interlinkages
to other targets: The Living Planet Index (6.6, 14.1, 14.4,
14.5, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8), The Red List Index
(14.1, 14.4, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8), coverage of
protected areas (6.6, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5), PA
management effectiveness (6.6, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5)
coverage of habitat (6.6, 15.1, 15.4, 15.5). Note that the LPI
is already disaggregated by marine species. Protected areas
should include a wide range of management regimes.
Target 14.3: Minimize and address the impacts of ocean
acidification, including through enhanced scientific
cooperation at all levels
The suggested indicator could be refined and take into
account relevant time scales and baselines.
GOC also suggests considering [Research programmes on

carbon sequestration trends]
GOC welcomes indicator 14.3.2, measuring impacts of

carbon surplus in the ocean on vulnerable marine species
and ecosystems.
Agreed
Very good
Indicator 14.3.2 Coral coverage.
For an operational indicator, representative sites should be
selected where there is already good long-term data on coral
coverage for several decades, and follow these to determine
long-term trends and smooth out natural short-term
variations. The International Society for Reef Studies could
help identify sites.
No coments
a) CO2 emissions reduced.

b) Zero carbon emission goals adopted.
Acidification is a complex subject affecting many marine
ecosystems. we suggest it is given priority 1 status.
Indicator suggested is suitable and fit for purpose but we
should pays special attention in distributing the stations to
cover coastal and open water areas around the globe.
We join our voice to he IUCN suggestion for the inclusion of
an additional/alternative indicator "Red list Index (corals)"
The suggested indicator does not address the call for
"enhanced scientific cooperation" of the target. We suggest
an additional indicator: "%of scientists involved in monitoring
marine systems"
It is also likely that rather than the apocalyptic planetary
collapse in which humans suffer the greatest brunt of their
own short-sightedness, a new ‘civilization’ might be
‘developed’. This ‘sustainable’ society might indeed be
‘established upon a thoroughly denatured planet’:
‘What is deeply repugnant about such a civilization is not its

potential for self-annihilation, but its totalitarian conversion of
the natural world into a domain of resources to serve a
human supremacist way of life, and the consequent
destruction of all the intrinsic wealth of its natural places,
beings, and elements’ (Crist 2012:149).

Target 14.4: By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end
overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and
destructive fishing practices and implement science-based
management plans, in order to restore fish stocks in the
shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce
maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological
characteristics
Indicator 14.4.2. could be developed further as follows:
[Percentage of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels
(i.e. fish stocks at or above the level that can produce their
Maximum Sustainable Yield), which were previously overfished. ]
Target 14.4. addresses a number of other policy-related issues

that should be supported by policy-oriented indicators, such as:
- Overfishing: [Flag States’ total industrial fishing fleet size and

capacity] and [ratio between artisanal fisheries/industrial fisheries]
- Illegal fishing: [Number of Flag States and RFMOs requesting

mandatory IMO numbers and transponders for all their vessels
fishing in the high seas and in distant waters], and [Number of
countries and RFMOs having established satellite monitoring
programmes and sharing information among each other], and
[Number of fishing vessels suspected of IUU operations identified
by law enforcement agencies and RFMOs]
Agreed
Good
May be made simple to understand and short
a) Percentage of fish stocks within safe biological limits.

b) Use of destructive fishing techniques reduced or eliminated.
c) Science-based management plans implemented.
control over oil pits.

Currently proposed indicators do not cover 'destructive fishing
practices'. Statistics on fishing mechanisms/techniques/equipment
should be available from e.g. ICES and national statistical
agencies. Suggested indicator therefore 'Tonnes of fisheries
landings, by fishing method'. It will be important, e.g. to distinguish
between trawling (and sub-types), seine, line, etc. fishing
techniques. Alternative suggested indicator wording. "Percentage
of marine EEZ area protected by marine protected areas and/or
fisheries exclusion zones"
The indicator is fit for purpose
linkages between corruption and fishing.
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/answer/illegal_unreported_
and_unregulated_fishing_and_corruption (links between
corruption and fishing)
This target must be completed by a group of recommendations,

papers, and data to guide to states the best way reach it. A
solidarity cooperation policy between nations is highly relevant.
WWF supports the suggested indicator but it should be
complemented with a suite of BIP indicators with interlinkages to
other targets: The Living Planet Index (6.6, 14.1, 14.2, 14.5, 15.1,
15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8) AND The Red List Index (14.1, 14.2,
15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8), which will show population trends
and conservation status of key species. Because bycatch is one of
the most pervasive and devastating destructive practices we also
suggest the indicator “Numbers of bycaught individuals/weight of
bycaught catch”. Data are not currently compiled at global level
but could be by the FAO with data from countries and Regional
Fisheries Management Organisations where available.
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
scientific information
New Proposed Indicator: Area eutrophicated vs. total national
water area separate
New Proposed Indicator Area: eutrophicated vs. total national
water area separate
measure SDG 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 best available scientific
information. Primary Data Source World Resources Institute,
UNEP, OECD and some NSO’s Tier I: Methodology exists,
data widely available. However, some data gaps do exist and
need to be mapped.
The suggested indicator could be refined by structuring it in a
strategic manner: [MPA surface within EEZs by 2020], to be
consistent with Aichi Target 11, and [MPA surface in areas
beyond national jurisdiction, especially after 2020], as it is
expected that the negotiation for an UNCLOS Implementing
Agreement on marine biodiversity in areas beyond national
jurisdiction (BBNJ) will have been concluded or will be well
underway by 2020.
Agreed
Good
No comments
We suggest to alter the indicator to read "%cover of
protected areas of
marine sites of particular importance for biodiversity" in order
to be in line and monitor the progress of the goal of the target
for conservation of "... 10% of coastal and marine areas...",
while focusing on sites of particular interest.
WWF supports the indicator of Coverage of protected areas
(linked to 6.6, 14.2, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5) but this must
be supplemented with additional BIP indicators to give the full
picture: the Living Planet Index (also 6.6, 14.1, 14.2, 14.4,
15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8) and PA management
effectiveness (6.6, 14.2, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5). It is also
important to ensure representativeness
(coherence/connectivity) of Protected Areas and we support
IUCN’s comments on 14.5.2 and the need to link to Key
Biodiversity Areas. Other possible indicators include those
under Aichi Target 11 indicators.
Target 14.6: By 2020, prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies
which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, 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 fisheries subsidies negotiation
Suggested indicator: “negative” fisheries subsidies is not language agreed
by the international community.
Indicators for Target 14.6 should address better transparency in fisheries

subsidies, support the need for fisheries research and monitoring, and
recall the need to reduce and control all fisheries subsidies contributing to
overcapacity and overfishing
GOC thus suggests: [Number of countries publically disclosing detailed

data on fisheries subsidies related to vessel measures such as vessels
building, modernization or scrapping], [Ratio between expenditure on
fisheries data collection, science and monitoring and control, versus public
expenditure supporting extraction], and [Reduction of direct-transfer
subsidies and tax breaks for fuel to high seas and distant water fishing]
Agreed
Good
To be shortened
a) Elimination of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and

overfishing.
The indicator is fit for purpose
This target must be completed by a group of recommendations, papers,
and data to guide to states the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation
policy between nations is highly relevant.
WWF supports the suggested indicator “Dollar value of negative fishery
subsidies against 2015 baseline” although the definition of negative
subsidies will need to be clear and should be determined through
interagency collaboration between FAO, UNEP, RFMOs, and WTO.
Target 14.7: By 2030, increase the economic benefits 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
Indicator 14.7.2
The definition of the "Level of revenue generated from
sustainable use of marine resources" has also to include the
revenue generated from offshore mineral resources, offshore
oil and gas, shipping and harbour activities. A wider
understanding of blue economy corresponds to the trends in
the international debates on the use of marine resources and
the future challenges of marine environment protection.
Agreed
Good
No comments
a) Number of countries that have developed or implemented

sustainable management plans for fisheries, aquaculture and
tourism.
The suggested indicator, "Fisheries as a % of GDP", does
not differentiate between sustainable and unsustainable
fishing activities. For example the use of a new, and
potentially more destructive tool, will at the short term
increase revenue from fishing activities but it will also
decrease fish stock at the long term. we suggest the adoption
of the second indicator as well ("Level of revenue generated
from sustainable use of marine resources"), even if it is more
challenging to measure, n order to move towards measuring
sustainable development.
To capture the sustainability and productivity dimensions of
this target, 14.7 should be informed jointly by the suggested
indicator for 14.4 “Proportion of fish stocks within biologically
sustainable level” and the suggested indicator “Fisheries as a
percentage of GDP”. In addition, in order to better represent
the economic benefits for SIDS and LDCs WWF suggests an
additional indicator on “Volume of aquaculture production
certified against credible independent certification schemes”
with data collected from the certification bodies.
Target 14.a: Increase scientific 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
Propose alternative to indicator 14.a.1: Percentage of the
development aid budget allocation in marine projects
Agreed
Very important to do it
Already mentioned above in 14.a
This target must be completed by a group of recommendations,
papers, and data to guide to states the best way reach it. A solidarity
cooperation policy between nations is highly relevant.
Target 14.b: Provide access for small-scale artisanal
fishers to marine resources and markets
Agreed
Good
No comments
Indicator 14.b.2: By 2030, increase by X% the proportion of
global fish catch from sustainable managed small scale
fisheries", better captures the essence of the target than the
suggested indicator "Percentage of catches that are subject
to a catch documentation scheme or similar
traceability system as a percentage of the total catches that
are less than x tons and traded in major markets", which
addresses mainly the traceability of fisheries and not the
source.
WWF suggests moving the suggested indicator to 14.4 and
replacing it with “Improved capacity (number/proportion of
trained staff) within key stakeholders to manage small scale
fisheries and enhance coordination and collaboration
between fisheries and policy management institutions.”
Source FAO voluntary guidelines for small scale fisheries.
Target 14.c: Enhance the conservation and sustainable
use of oceans and their resources by implementing
international law as reflected in UNCLOS, which provides
the legal framework for the conservation and sustainable
use of oceans and their resources, as recalled in
paragraph 158 of The Future We Want
Propose alternative to indicator 14.c.2: Number of countries
implementing legal rights to examine the use and protection
of marine resources by the civil society
This indicator will strengthen the involvement of the civil
society in the implementation of the Sustainable
Development Goal 14 and is reflecting the status of the
oceans as a common heritage in the spirit of UNCLOS.
[Number of relevant flag States having ratified relevant
RFMOs - indicator also applicable to Target 14.2]
[Number of States having ratified the UNFSA agreement -
indicator also applicable to Target 14.2]
[Number of RFMOs effectively assigning all catch quotas in
accordance with scientific advice - indicator also applicable to
Target 14.2]
[Number of ratifications to the UN Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) Port States Measures Agreement
(PSMA) and number of port States developing supporting
domestic legislation - indicator also applicable to Target 14.4]
[Number of countries conducting Environment Impact
Assessments as a pre-condition to allow their vessels to
pursue bottom fishing in the high seas - indicator also
applicable to Target 14.4]
In addition, the Global Ocean Commission believes that it

would be important to include a reference to the [number of
Parties to the Minamata Convention on Mercury of 2014], the
most recent Multilateral Environmental Agreement - also
relevant to Target 14.1.
Agreed
I agree with it
No comments
We suggest to alter the indicator to: "% of countries
implementing either legally or programmatically the
provisions set out in regional seas protocols and ratification
and implementation of the ILO Maritime and Fisheries
Conventions, disaggregated by location and GDP"
WWF suggests amending the suggested indicator to add
other relevant agreements: ‘Number of countries
implementing the provisions set out in all relevant
agreements and instruments (including UN Fish Stocks
Agreement, IMO MARPOL and annexes, Cape Town
Agreement, STWC-F, FAO Port State Measures Agreement,
ILO Labour in Fishing Agreement, the UNGA annual oceans
and fisheries resolutions).
Target 15.1: By 2020, ensure the conservation,
restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and
inland freshwater ecosystems and their services,
in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and
drylands, in line with obligations under
Organization: international agreements
Bioregional
CDP Data gathered by CDP's forest programs for

companies could support tracking of progress against
this target.
Center of Guarulhos

Community Based Water We suggest to consider the next indicators: Number
Monitoring Network of Monarch of water and environmental monitoring programs
Butterfly Biosphere Reserve established by citizens at local communities. Number
of water, biodiversity and environmental monitoring
programs conducted by govern agencies.
EAT Initiative
French Water Parnership As the target mentions « inland freshwater

ecosystems », in particular wetlands, we recommend
using the CROSS CUTTING indicator « % of
evolution of the extent of wetlands compared to the
year of reference 2000 » that monitors both target
6.6 and 15.1.
Global Forest Coalition (GFC) 15.1.1 - Coverage of protected areas is a flawed
indicator. It does not indicate conservation outcomes,
as both the management effectiveness and addition
of protected areas are questionable. More
importantly other area-based measures like
Indigenous Peoples' and Community Conserved
Territories and Areas (ICCAs) have proven to be far
more effective and socially sustainable than State-
governed protected areas.
There should be recognition and inclusion of

“Effectively and equitably conserved territories and
areas,” which would be a more appropriate indicator.
15.1.2 – The definition of forests should be given

serious consideration. It is very important to clarify
that the term "forests" is defined as natural forest
ecosystems and excludes monoculture tree
plantations. If this is not explicitly defined, the
expansion of 'forest cover' could actually lead to the
deterioration of terrestrial ecosystems.
Include the recognition of the different governance

structures and efforts to provide legal recognition and
protection to the collective land tenure rights of
indigenous peoples and local communities, including
women.

Family Health
Association (IFA)
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS 15.5.1 Monitor the number of unmanaged obsolete
Inc. ("ISACI") pesticide stockpiles and improperly managed waste
disposal sites.
15. 5.2 Monitor the percentage of hazardous wastes
and other wastes, including obsolete stockpiles of
pesticides, recovered, reused and recycled, including
for energy generation.
15.5.3 Monitor the number of facilities for
environmentally sound management of hazardous
waste
15.5.4 Monitor the levels of hazardous chemical &
heavy metal pollutants in freshwater ecosystems
Kepa Finland a) Annual change in forest area and land under
cultivation.
b) Percentage of ecosystems and services protected.
Oxfam
Rainforest Foundation Norway Ind. 15.1.1: RFN supports this indicator, but
suggests that it is supplemented by an indication of
percentage of forest lands and total area (thousands
of hectares) recognized as indigenous lands and
forest lands under collective owner- or user rights by
forest communities.
Ind. 15.1.2: “Forest area as a percentage of land
area”, based on the FAO definition of forest, does not
capture “conservation, restoration and sustainable
use” as set out in the target.
This indicator must be broken down according to
1) forest types (extent of tree plantations, extent of
natural forest and of intact/primary forest, and by
categories of canopy cover), and
2) by user categories (industrial logging areas
(including areas under reduced impact logging),
protected areas, indigenous lands and community
forest).
Stockholm Environment Institute On 15.1.1: Coverage of protected areas broken down

by ecosystem type, including total area of forests in
protected areas (thousands of hectares) ( BAA ).
Agree with FAO Forest Assessment.
Augmentation of production data with geospatial
environmental data is likely to produce the most
powerful indicators for monitoring land cover and
land use change. Relevant satellite data: MODIS,
Landsat, AVHRR and Envisat
Following papers demonstrate opportunities for
linking land use data from country-level census
statistics and global spatial data on land use cover to
obtain accurate indicators for target 15.1:
Ramankutty, N. et al. (2008). Farming the planet: 1.
Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in
the year 2000; Monfreda, C. et al. (2008). Farming
the planet: 2. Geographic distribution of crop areas,
yields, physiological types, and net primary
production in the year 2000.
On 15.1.2: Clarification on level of disaggregation by
forest type and ‘% of forest which is managed for
commercial purposes’ (including that managed
according to FSC or other recognised standards -
which overlaps with Target 15.2).
Tebtebba 1: Percentage of lands, territories and resources
sustainably used and managed by indigenous
peoples.
The Cyprus Institute Although the FAO forest index "Forest area as a
percentage of total land area"is an important
indicator, it is not inclusive of short bush, wetland or
other ecosystems that are part of the target but do
not fall under the FAO description of "forest". We
suggest the adoption of indicator 15.1.1 or the
alternative suggested by IUCN "Coverage by
protected
areas of important sites for terrestrial and freshwater
biodiversity"
The Hague University of Applied The most important goal.

Science
Yet the root causes of biodiversity loss, not
symptoms should be treated. For example, stopping
climate change by halting the use of fossil fuels is far
more effective in the long term than increasing
referring to resilience and adaptation, the terms often
used by UNEP and increasingly human-interest
NGOs. The 15th goal of SDG to ‘halt biodiversity
loss’, among other objectives formulated within the
same aim in terms of ‘management’ and ‘sustainable
use’becomes all but impossible.
Track 0

how corruption impacts its achievement. The relevant
target and indicator should be drawn from target 16.5
given the strong and proven inter-linkages between
corruption and forestry.
-
http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/uprooting_
corruption_not_trees and
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/an
alysing_corruption_in_the_forestry_sector_a_manual
(links between corruption and deforestation)
TRK asbl
UNSD Education Caucus Environmental education represents the planetary

boundary within which the inter-relationships of
human agency and climate change remain viable. To
achieve a balance between mitigation and adaption
from human impacts, requires an enabling framework
where policy action and direction will promote the
engagement of all of society for a highly informed
decision making process, inclusive especially of
those most vulnerable, and therefore encompass:
nondiscriminatory public access and participation in
decision-making, transparency, broad-based coalition
building, intergenerational justice, traditional and
cultural knowledge, and CBDRRC, applied to the UN
vision of protecting the planet.

states the best way reach it. A solidarity cooperation
policy between nations is highly relevant.
Women's Major Group 15.1.1 Forest area as a percentage of total land area
(disaggregate by types -- national, community,
protected and private)
FAO
Disaggregation of this indicator is key to

understanding the situation and creating appropriate
policy.
World Animal Net

WWF WWF suggests amending the suggested indicator

“Forest area as a percentage of total land area” to
harmonize with the BIP definition: “Percentage of
change in forest extent over time”. This would work in
tandem with the similar wetlands indicator under
target 6.6. The data could be obtained through
digitization of aerial or satellite images where
available and otherwise rely on FAO resource
assessments. The data could be disaggregated by
forest type, and should distinguish natural forests
from plantations. Regional and global datasets are
already available from 1990 to the present. It could
also be supplemented with additional BIP indicators
to provide a larger picture of the extent of
conservation or restoration (e.g. The Living Planet
Index, Red List Index, PA cover and PA management
effectiveness)
Zoological Society of London (ZSL) We support the inclusion of the indicator ‘Forest area
as a percentage of total land area’, but note that
under the current definition of forest area, primary or
natural forest is not distinguished from
secondary/degraded/replanted forest. Therefore an
increase in overall forest area could disguise losses
of primary forest, which would be a perverse and
unsatisfactory outcome for sustainable development,
biodiversity and climate change.
While we recognise it is currently not possible to

track global annual change in primary forest area, we
propose that: (1) accompanying guidance for this
indicator state that governments set and implement
policies to conserve existing primary forests over
other forest types, and monitor and report this as
possible, and (2) research focus on developing an
indicator to track annual change in primary forest
area. This could more immediately be achieved in
some areas by combining remote sensing data with
ground information (e.g. via the FAO GFRA) and
modelling and form the basis of a national indicator.
Target 15.2: By 2020, promote the Target 15.3: By 2030, combat
implementation of sustainable desertification, restore degraded land
management of all types of forests, halt and soil, including land affected by
deforestation, restore degraded forests desertification, drought and floods, and
and substantially increase afforestation strive to achieve a land degradation-
and reforestation globally neutral world
Data gathered by CDP's forest programs for

companies could support tracking of progress
against this target
That rather than continue deforesting,
governments invest in stimulating
technological development that can qualify a
better productive use of areas that have
suffered deforestation, even using tax
incentives for entrepreneurs to develop their
business in a sustainable way while
preserving what is left of forests and using
more rationally areas already deforested.
We suggest to consider the next indicators:

Percentage of sites with at least 70% of
sucessfull reforestation
For achieving successful conservation and Current developments in the livestock
sustainable development outcomes it is industry have led to unsustainable agro-
essential to establish a clear differentiation industrial production patterns. Furthermore,
between a natural forest and a monoculture corporate-led trade liberalization in the
tree plantation. Monoculture tree plantations livestock industry is undermining the
should be excluded from ‘forest area livelihoods of pastoralist communities that
percentages’ and the FAO definition of forests have until now succeeded to combine food
should be updated accordingly. sovereignty strategies with biodiversity
conservation. For a culture and livelihood
Indicator 15.2.1- Check the definition of ‘net’ so intrinsically connected with the land, it is
forest emissions and bring it to a realistic essential to value patterns of interactions
dimension. The whole concept of ‘offsets’ is between ecological and social variables
based on a false assumption that CO2 across time and space.
emissions from deforestation can be
compensated with plantations and other Indicator 15.3.1- Consider further elements
harmful technologies. that include analysis of the root causes of
trends in land degradation such as land
Indicator 15.2.2- Sustainable Forest grabs for industrial bioenergy production,
Management is not a well-defined concept industrial agriculture, and the livestock
from a conservation perspective. Some industry. These elements should be
deforestation and forest degradation analyzed in their relation to land tenure
practices that deteriorate biodiversity may fall including gender and ecosystems
under this concept. SFM practices that have disaggregated data and collective rights.
contributed (or not) to conservation need to
be distinguished, tracked and accounted for. Indicator 15.3.2 - Explicitly include
community practices in light of their
Any indicator should also differentiate sustainable development benefits.
industrial practices from community practices
that have lead to conservation of
areas/territories, while providing significant
livelihood benefits.
Good Good
IFA agrees with IFAD that proposed

indicator 15.3.2 is covered by the proposed
indicator for 2.4.on sustainable land
management
a) Percentage of primary forest protected.
b) Area of forest under sustainable forest
management as a percentage of forest area.
c) Improved land ownership and governance
of forests.
15.2.1.: The indicator should include emission
from soil and below ground biomass, to
capture emission is from below the surface
where vegetation in peat swamps and
mangroves is lost. To avoid covering up
conversion of natural forest into plantations,
forest emissions should be measured
separately for primary forest, natural forest
and planted forest. Ind. 15.2.2.: Criteria for
SFM should be specified, in line with country
obligations under human rights treaties and
CBD:
- SFM must enhance the country’s efforts to
fulfill its obligations under CBD.- SFM must
be rights-based, meaning the rights of
indigenous peoples and forest communities
to land, culture and participation, are
respected. The “SFMI” criteria of “stakeholder
platform […] and involvement […]” should be
supplemented by reference to the rights of
indigenous peoples and forest communities.
- SFM reporting must include reporting on
communities access to forest resources,
specifies by sex, age and indigenous peoples
or minority group.
On: Indicator 15.2.2 Forest cover under Agree with the use of satellite data and
sustainable forest management ( BBA ) could harnessing remote sensing data to monitor
be measured via the assessment of % of progress against 15.3
forest under sustainable certification
according to common certification systems –
Fair Trade, Rainforest Alliance etc.using
multi-regional input-output tales, physical
production data and global financial
information.
We do not recommend the use of a no net

loss indicator for forest loss to assess trends
in afforestation due to the nascency and lack
of scientific evidence supporting biodiversity
offsetting. Overall, these indicators are too
conflated and should be assessed with
regard to separate balance sheets of forest
loss and forest afforestation rate then forest
restored through offsetting mechanisms.
Indicator is fit for purpose although we Indicator is fit for purpose
suggest to reconsider the time-frame. Five
years is to short to achieve change
suggested
As Eric Katz (1992) has reflected,

anthropocentrically motivated protection of
nature can SOMETIMES make a positive
contribution to the environment. However, this
happens only in situations dealing with
human-made or the human-connected
environment, such as in cases of urban air
pollution, or indeed climate change that
threatens to effect human livelihood. Yet in
cases of protection of wilderness and the
preservation of endangered species
anthropocentrically inclined policies fall short
of effectiveness.
Ensure that indigenous people living in these
areas are always the first consulted and are
part in final decision making
Inclusion, engagement, and transparency.
The Global Forests interactive mega data
[See WRI initiative]. As environmental
education is integral to all the elements of
protecting the planet, relative to all actors and
related actions, as well as, guides the
responsibility to act within planetary
boundaries in collaboration with the UN
system, think tanks, centers of expertise
[UNU-IAS], academics across the disciplines,
and civil society organizations monitor and
evaluate learning models and impacts.
This target must be completed by a group of This target must be completed by a group
recommendations, papers, and data to guide of recommendations, papers, and data to
to states the best way reach it. A solidarity guide to states the best way reach it. A
cooperation policy between nations is highly solidarity cooperation policy between
relevant. nations is highly relevant.
WWF suggests the indicator “Area of forest
under Sustainable Management Certification”.
Certification is geographically precise and is a
strong verifier of better levels of management.
PEFC and FSC schemes currently cover 400
million ha -- a decent proportion of the world's
production forests, and this portion should
grow if forest management improves in line
with the SDG target. While this is only
around 10% of total forests, it could be as
much as 40% of forests under active
management. This indicator could be
complemented by FAO’s proposed index
which would ensure that no areas are
excluded, i.e. production systems where
certification is not feasible due to high
transaction costs. It could also be
supplemented with additional BIP indicators
to provide a larger picture of the extent of
sustainable management and the reduction in
forest loss (e.g. The Living Planet Index, Red
List Index, PA cover and PA management
effectiveness).
Target 15.4: By 2030, ensure the Target 15.5: Take urgent and
conservation of mountain ecosystems, significant action to reduce the
including their biodiversity, in order to degradation of natural habitats, halt
enhance their capacity to provide benefits the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020,
that are essential for sustainable protect and prevent the extinction of
development threatened species
Two indicators were originally proposed:
1) Red List Index and 2) Living Planet
Index. The first of these is now the
suggested priority indicator.
We agree with using this proposed
indicator, but we also favour two
supporting indicators required to give a
fuller picture of the key issue of habitat
and biodiversity loss: 1) the Living Planet
Index and 2) The area of forest under
sustainable forest management as a
percentage of forest area
We suggest to consider the next indicators:

Percentage of protected areas by ecosystem
type at national level, with local management
plans which includes communities.
Proposed Indicator: Mean Species
Abundance (MSA) in food production
systems
Mean Species Abundance provides an
aggregate measure of both the number
of species, and for each species group,
the number of species required for key
ecological functions. Mean Species
Abundance tracks ecosystem resilience
and is a suitable indicator for SDG target
15.5 to take urgent and significant action
to reduce degradation of natural habitat,
halt the loss of biodiversity, and by 2020
protect and prevent the extinction of
threatened species. Primary Data
Source Based on the GLOBIO model,
MSA uses relations between pressures
and impacts on species abundance.
MSA has been used in various
assessment reports amongst which
UNEP's Global Environment Outlooks,
Convention on Biological Diversity’s
Global Biodiversity Outlook 2 and the
OECD Environmental Outlook. Tier I:
Methodology exists, data widely
available. However, some data gaps do
exist and need to be mapped.
Indicator 15.4.1 - Replace indicator 1 with an Both 15.5.1 and 15.5.2 should include
indicator of effectively conserved areas, identification of root causes of
including Indigenous and Community degradation in order to reduce and halt
Conserved Territories and Areas (ICCAs), biodiversity loss.
(See suggestions for Target 15.1)
Indicator 15.4.2 - The same as above; to

recognize mountain governance types,
including mountain biodiversity ICCAs.
Good Good
We agree with IUCN that this indicator needs Both indicators are species-rather than
to incorporate the term montane biodiversity, habitat focused. An additional indicator
just knowing an area is protected is not that would cover part of the 'degradation
sufficient. Additional data on the measurement of habitats', part of the target, and which
of HCV habitats in mountain ecosystems could be generated from country-
presents an additional indicator for assessing provided or remote-sensing information,
conservation efforts in mountain ecosystems – might be the percentage land-coverage
although this may be data deficient for global of different habitat classifications (i.e.
application. biomes) - perhaps in line with WWF's
'eco-region' classifications or similar.
Further databases to be exploited
include: WWF Ecoregions; World
Database of Protected Areas (WDPA);
Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) sourced
from the World Biodiversity Database
(WBDB); Alliance for Zero Extinction
(AZE); IUCN Protected Area
Management Categories; IUCN Red List
of Threatened Species; Ramsar
Convention; Species listed under the
CITES convention and data acquired
from High Conversation Value (HCV)
sites (although HCV data is locally-
specific so globally patchy).
Indicator is fit for purpose Indicator is fit for purpose
By anthropocentrism Katz (1992: 377-378)

means both the ‘idea that human interests,
human goods, and/or human values are the
focal point of any moral evaluation of
environmental policy, and the idea that these
human interests, goods, and values are the
basis of any justification of an environmental
ethic’.
Empirically, it appears from examining the

evidence of rising numbers of endangered
species and recent extinctions humans do just
fine, for instance, without Sumatran tigers and
white rhinoceros. While there are arguments
that we need all biodiversity to create a ‘safe
operating space for humanity’ (Rockström et al
2009), it appears that humans are reasonably
well sustained by planted monocultures,
synthetic medicines, and electronic
entertainment.
This target must be completed by a group of This target must be completed by a
recommendations, papers, and data to guide group of recommendations, papers, and
to states the best way reach it. A solidarity data to guide to states the best way
cooperation policy between nations is highly reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy
relevant. between nations is highly relevant.
World Animal Protection proposed
indicator: World Database on Protected
Areas (WDPA)
Protected areas worldwide store 15

percent of the global terrestrial carbon
stock, help reduce deforestation, habitat
and species loss, and support the
livelihoods of over one billion people.
The WDPA is used to track progress
towards international biodiversity and
development targets, identify new priority
areas for protection, and flag sensitive
conservation areas that should be
avoided in industrial development
projects.
WWF supports the suggested indicator A combination of indicators is needed to

“Coverage of Protected Areas” but capture adequately the different
recommends that this target be more fully elements of this target. We propose to
informed with a combination of appropriate use a combination of appropriate BIP
BIP indicators with interlinkages to other indicators with interlinkages to multiple
targets: The Living Planet Index of montane targets: The Living Planet Index (also
species (also 6.6, 14.1, 14.2, 14.4, 14.5, 15.1, 6.6, 14.1, 14.2, 14.4, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2,
15.2, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8), The Red List Index 15.4, 15.7, 15.8), The Red List Index
(14.1, 14.2, 14.4, 15.2, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8) and (14.1, 14.2, 14.4, 15.2, 15.4, 15.7, 15.8)
PA management effectiveness (6.6, 14.2, 14.5, and habitat cover measures such as
15.1, 15.2, 15.5) as well as a measure of “Percentage of change in forest extent
habitat cover (6.6, 14.2, 15.1, 15.5). over time” (6.6, 14.2, 15.1, 15.4).
We support proposals from UNEP/IUCN
to include the Living Planet Index (LPI)
as a co-lead indicator alongside the Red
List Index (RLI) for target 15.5. The LPI’s
measure of changes in species
population sizes provides an indicator
that relates directly to ecosystem state
and function and complements the RLI’s
broader taxonomic coverage of species’
conservation status. The LPI is
continually updated, uses freely available
data, is easy to communicate and
provides sensitivity to annual changes in
biodiversity (supplementing the RLI
which uses assessments at coarser
intervals so even significant population
changes may not change Red List status
for a few years). The LPI will therefore
be of greater use to nations wanting to
track progress regularly. The LPI is a
global indicator for the CBD Aichi targets,
can be disaggregated to regions,
countries, habitats and species and can
be used as an indicator for SDG targets
6.6, 14.1, 14.2, 14.4, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4,
15.5, 15.7, 15.8. It should however be
rated BAA as for the RLI; it is highly
suitable and relevant, though some effort
may be required to collect data for some
countries.
Target 15.6: Ensure fair and
equitable sharing of the benefits Target 15.7: Take urgent action to end
arising from the utilization of poaching and trafficking of protected
genetic resources and promote species of flora and fauna and address
appropriate access to such both demand and supply of illegal
resources wildlife products
We suggest to consider the next

indicators: Number of local or mixed
entreprises getting commodities or
money benefits from their genetic
resources.
Both the indicators 15.6.1 and 15.6.2 Efforts should recognize Indigenous
should have an accountability peoples’ and communities’ customary
mechanism that would ensure that hunting rights and customary sustainable
the rights of the knowledge holders use of wildlife.
are safeguarded, including Free, Prior
and Informed Consent (FPIC), Efforts to end poaching and trafficking
customary laws and procedures, and should target syndicates and crime rings
mutually agreed terms; and should – including transnational – and
abide by international human rights sentencing should be commensurate with
instruments including the UN the crime. Incarceration of ‘runners’ (who
Declaration on the Rights of may often be community members) is
Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). ineffective and causes long-term negative
impacts on their families.
These indicators should also include
and refer to community protocols as
another safeguard, which is
enshrined in Article 12 and 21 of
Nagoya Protocol.
Good It is important to take action right now

We strongly support these indicators!
Suggested indicator: ‘number of HCV We agree with use of CITES data. Also
assessments conducted within each scope to assess the volume of
nation as this covers ecosystem transactions and transboundary trade
services and benefits. flows on wildlife products via data on
online internet trading platforms.
Indicator is fit for purpose Indicators are fit for purpose
This target must be completed by a This target must be completed by a group
group of recommendations, papers, of recommendations, papers, and data to
and data to guide to states the best guide to states the best way reach it. A
way reach it. A solidarity cooperation solidarity cooperation policy between
policy between nations is highly nations is highly relevant.
relevant.
15.6.1 Number of countries that have

adopted legislative, administrative
and policy frameworks for the
implementation of the Nagoya
Protocol
Secretariat of the Convention on

Biological Diversity
Number of enforcement officials trained to

protect endangered species.
Percentage of forests cleared annually.
Number of domestic grazing animals per
hectare.
These suggestions are also relevant to
Target 15.5.
WWF supports the inclusion of 15.7.1
Red List Index for species in trade,
especially if used with the Living Planet
Index for species in trade. Both are
established BIP indicators. We also
support 15.7.2 as an established indicator
managed by CITES that more directly
measures the Target. It could be the
primary indicator if supported by the RLI
and Living PIanet Index; it’s linked to
targets 16.4 and 16.5. Clarity is needed
on use of the term “protected”. For
15.7.2, data concern species protected
within a defined framework (CITES) but
overlook non-CITES-listed species
regulated under forestry/fisheries
management regimes and trafficked
illegally. Combined with data collection
challenges, it would underestimate illegal
wildlife trade. The RLI and LPI include a
broad range of species and provide a
basis to assess species status but do not
always distinguish between legal and
illegal trade: their utility for trafficked
species is limited unless linked to trade
systems through 15.7.2.
Target 15.8: By 2020, introduce Target 15.9: By 2020, integrate
measures to prevent the introduction ecosystem and biodiversity
and significantly reduce the impact of values into national and local
invasive alien species on land and planning, development
water ecosystems and control or processes, poverty reduction
eradicate the priority species strategies and accounts
All property developments, to obtain

government operating licenses shall
compulsorily present environmental
education programs in their work
strategies, for the benefit of the
surrounding communities.
no comments Both Indicators 15.9.1 and 15.9.2
should not only address monetary
values of biodiversity but also
include social, cultural, spiritual, and
environmental values, which often
play a far more important role in
biodiversity-related policy-making
than monetary values. It also should
not lead to payment for ecosystem
services schemes, which may
marginalize and/or violate the rights
of indigenous peoples, local
communities, and women.
Indicator 15.9.1 – Emphasis should

include "all kinds" of values and the
social indicators should take the
center stage.
Indicator 15.9.2- Recognize

Indigenous peoples’ and Community
Conserved Territories and Areas
including full and effective
participation of indigenous peoples,
local communities and women in
development plans.
Very good to do it Very good

a) Abundance of invasive alien species.
Suggest to add "...poverty reduction

strategies and accounts, and health
promotion strategies"
We agree with the indicators proposed. Proposed indicators for this target
However, we feel there is no clear assume national level
justification to restrict indicators to bird implementation implies local level
species. implementation. We recommend
further disaggregation of this
indicator by sub-national regional
and localities (cities, towns and local
authorities). Also, poverty reduction
strategies are not mentioned in the
indicators specifically - but should
be since these are contained within
the ambition of the target.
An additional indicator could

measure the ‘Number of Km2
dedicated to parks and urban
allotments in urban centres’ would
improve the devolved covered of
monitoring at sub-national levels.
Furthermore, information related to
the embeddedness of the ‘mitigation
hierarchy’ across national and sub-
national planning could help indicate
level of protection of priority species
within planning processes.
The suggested indicator will serve target Suggested indicator is in-line with
15.8 in those cases where legislation the target
does exist. It also does not give a
baseline for comparison between states.
The challenge is great since legislation
may be followed in some
countries,invasive species do not
recognize state boundaries. We suggest
the adoption of indicator 15.8.2 with the
wording alterations as suggested by
IUCN: "“Red List Index (impacts of
invasive alien species)”
Require the inclusion of a national

ecosystems assessment, national
parks reporting and principles of
biodiversity promotion and
maintenance in the low carbon and
zero emissions strategies under
target 13.2.
This target must be completed by a This target must be completed by a
group of recommendations, papers, and group of recommendations, papers,
data to guide to states the best way and data to guide to states the best
reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy way reach it. A solidarity cooperation
between nations is highly relevant. policy between nations is highly
relevant.
The suggested indicator is weak in that
it considers only one “measure to
prevent” invasives (legislation). It would
be much stronger if the impact of those
measures was monitored, which could
be done with a combination of
appropriate BIP indicators with
interlinkages to multiple targets: The
Living Planet Index for species
threatened by invasives (also 6.6, 14.1,
14.2, 14.4, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5,
15.7) and the Red List Index for species
threatened by invasives (14.1, 14.2,
14.4, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7). These
would allow both “measures” taken and
“impact” to be tracked.
We support IUCN’s note that the Red
List Index (and Living Planet Index, as
mentioned in our comments under
target 15.5 above), can be used to
report trends in impacts of invasive alien
species on a variety of taxa, not just
birds.
Target 15.b: Mobilize significant
resources from all sources and at all
levels to finance sustainable forest
management and provide adequate
Target 15.a: Mobilize and significantly increase financial incentives to developing countries to
resources from all sources to conserve and sustainably use advance such management, including for
biodiversity and ecosystems conservation and reforestation
Data gathered by CDP's forest programs for companies could Data gathered by CDP's forest programs for
support tracking of progress against this target companies could support tracking of
progress against this target
Of course
We suggest to consider the next indicators: Number of mixed multi-
actor funds established to support environmental conservation
activities.
To monitor that this process does not drive into the payment for There is no evidence of a relation between
ecosystem services, which may have challenges related to SFM funding and reduced forest loss.
biodiversity loss and the violation of rights of indigenous peoples Collective action of Indigenous Peoples and
and local communities, especially marginalized groups such as local communities contribute significantly to
women. conservation and restoration in non-financial
ways and is a very low-cost and cost
effective way of sustainable forest
management. It should be ensured
Indigenous peoples and local communities
are also benefitting from such financial
incentive for restoration and enhanced
biodiversity conservation. However, this
should not be taken as means of payment for
ecosystem services but rather as recognition
for the contributions that IPLCs already make
to conservation.
Indicator15.b.1 and 15.b.2– These indicators

should be merged and be included as a
indicator as it relates to the implementation
of Aichi target 3 of the CBD Strategic Plan.
Very good Very important

a) Increase in funding for conservation and sustainable use of a) Improved land ownership and governance
biodiversity and ecosystems. of forests.
Notice! It should be kept in mind that the SDGs are universal. Thus,
the indicator should indicate the amount of funding for biodiversity
conservation worldwide, not only in poor countries. This is truly a
universal goal!
Suggest to add: "including integrated channels of funding to

address multiple SDGs"
Suggested indicator is in-line with the target We suggest to reformulate the wording of he
target since it is misleading and unclear.
This target must be completed by a group of recommendations, This target must be completed by a group of
papers, and data to guide to states the best way reach it. A solidarity recommendations, papers, and data to guide
cooperation policy between nations is highly relevant. to states the best way reach it. A solidarity
relevant.
Target 15.c: Enhance global support for
efforts to combat poaching and trafficking of
protected species, including by increasing
the capacity of local communities to pursue
sustainable livelihood opportunities
Indicator 15.c.2 is one of the most important
indicators currently proposed and should
definitely be maintained. It is the only indicator
proposed under the SDG 15 that recognizes
the links between biodiversity and sustainable
livelihoods.
Preferably, indicator 15.c.2 should reflect both

the quantitative and the qualitative nature of
sustainable practice. This includes the
recognition of indigenous peoples and local
communities and also ensuing their full and
effective participation in their pursuit of
sustainable livelihoods. The data needs to be
disaggregated data for indigenous peoples and
for gender, age, and other social factors.. They
are crucial actors in achieving the desired
collective vision of transforming our world by
2030.
very important
15.2.c. We consider fundamental to include a
specific indicator on the sustainable practices
and management of local communities to match
the ambition of the Targets, which explicitly
mentions them as primary actors. We therefore
fully support current indicator 15.2.c, and only
suggest a slight revision in the formulation:
“Existence and quality of policies and
regulations that legally protect and enhance
sustainable practices and management by
women and men pastoralists, farmers, and
fishers, forest dwellers on common lands,
including national and trans-national mobility”.
This is essentially an output indicator, and
therefore feasible, cost-effective and easy to
use. Countries will be encouraged to enhance
their legislation, track progress on their
implementation, and share best practices in a
constructive way. This indicator has strong
inter-linkages across the Agenda, being one of
the few that really links poverty with planet
stewardship.
We agree with UNDCC on use of CITES data
as an acceptable indicator data source.
The suggested indicator is already suggested
for target 15.7. We suggest the adoption of
Indicator 15.c.2: "Extent to which sustainable
practices and management by women and men
pastoralists, farmers, fishers, forest dwellers on
common lands, including national and trans-
national mobility, are legally protected and
enhanced by policies and regulations"which
capture the ecological and socio-economic
aspect of the poaching and trafficking
challenge.
relevant.
Organization: Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of
ADD International
Amnesty International The Expert Group’s recommendations need to

take a broader focus with respect to the targets
- Eg.
• Percentage of the adult population aged 18
and older, subjected to violence within the last
12 months, by type (physical, psychological
and/or sexual)
• Ratification and implementation of the UN
Convention against Torture
• Incorporation and implementation of the
Declaration on the elimination of all forms of
violence against women
• Prevalence of girls and women 15 – 49 who
have experienced physical or sexual violence
[by an intimate partner] in the last 12 months
• Formation of national and local strategies
and policies to combat domestic violence and
other forms of gender based violence
• Formation of national and local strategies for
armed violence prevention and reduction
[Geneva convention]
• Percentage change in willingness of person to
report incidents of armed violence [Geneva
declaration] + domestic violence
• Percentage change in public confidence in the
ability of justice and security providers to
contribute to security and safety effectively and
fairly [Geneva convention]
Asia Pacific Forum on Women Law The reduction of all forms of violence should
and Development also be measured by reference to the level of
military expenditure by governments and the
availability of arms within the community. This
would be consistent with governments'
obligations under Critical Area E of the Beijing
Platform for Action. These indicators are also
relevant for Target 5.3. Proposed indicators
include:
➢ Proportion of military personnel relative to
civilian population (geographically localised)
➢ Availability of small arms and armaments in
the community
➢ Percentage of military budget as a
percentage of national budgets
➢ Proportion of budget spent on military
purposes compared to social development
sectors such as health and education.
➢ Existence of a tax on the arms trade

(ASPBAE)
Beyond 2015 UK
Bingham Centre for the Rule of
Law, British Institute of
International and Comparative Law
CBM UK
Center for Economic and Social
Rights

Centre for Human Rights and Indicator should ensure provision of data on
Climate Change research number of country where laws have been
enacted or reformed to ensure punishment for
violence particularly gender based violence.
Indicator and Data source should reflect per

cent reduction in murder cases.

cent reduction in Violence Against Women,
Sexual Violence and Gender Based Violence

cent reduction in murder cases infanticide

International
ChildFund Alliancd We support the following suggested indicators:

• Number of victims of intentional homicide
by age, sex, mechanism and where possible
type of perpetrator, per 100,000 population.
• Conflict-related deaths per 100,000 people
(disaggregated by age, sex and cause)
Christian Aid
Deutschland e.V.
Columbia Law School Human
Rights Institute

Equality Now
ericsson
Erskinomics Consulting Pty Ltd na - see 16.4 only

EU-CORD Network - European [Network Member: Cord] Cord proposes that
Christian Organisations in Relief the first draft indicator is re-worded in the
and Development following way: Number of victims of intentional
homicide; disaggregated by age, sex, location,
population group, mechanism, type of
perpetrator and cause, per 100,000 people,
measured at five yearly intervals.
We propose that the second draft indicator is

re-worded in the following way: Number of
deaths caused directly and indirectly by violent
conflict; disaggregated by age, sex, location,
population group, type of perpetrator and
cause, per 100,000 people, measured at five
yearly intervals.
We recommend including a third indicator, to

monitor the success of peacebuilding and other
confidence-building measures aimed at
reducing violence and conflict related deaths.
Please see below:
Percentage reduction in armed conflict and

homicide related deaths in areas where formal
(state-led) or informal (civil society-led)
peacebuilding and/or other confidence-building
measures are in place, measured at five yearly
intervals; disaggregated by age, sex, location,
population group, and intervention type.

Global Forum for Media
Development
Global Initiative to End All Corporal The proposed indicators under target 16.2
Punishment of Children would also monitor this target. Ending violent
punishment is key not only for ending violence
against children, but for reducing violence
across the whole of society in the longer term.
Violence against children is the foundation and
source of much violence in society. There is
overwhelming evidence that violent punishment
of children is associated with increased
aggression and involvement in criminal
behaviour in children and adults. Efforts to end
corporal punishment are crucial in building
peaceful, non-violent societies in which human
rights are respected.
HDS systems design science

ICMM and IPIECA

IDAY-International
IDDC
Indedependent consultant,
formerly with Statistics Norway,
International Labour Office and
Norwegian Directorate of
Immigration

Family Health
International Association for Media

and Communication Research
(IAMCR)
International Bar Association
Human Rights' Institute
International Budget Partnership
International Center for Not-for-
Profit Law
International Council of Nurses ICN suggests disaggregated date on healthcare

workers and patients at clinics and medical
transports within the suggested indicator on
Conflict related deaths.


International Justice Mission

Germany
World

and Development
International Strategy and Need a measure for individuals aged 14-18 as

Reconciliation Foundation well.
Journalists and Writers Foundation Currently, it is suggested that conflict-related
deaths per 100,000 people is measured using
the UCDP Battle-Related Deaths Dataset and
PRIO Battle-Deaths Data, among others.
Please note that these datasets do not include
all conflict-related deaths. They only count
those deaths in civil wars where one side must
be government and the other is organized
armed group. The datasets do not include
deaths resulted from conflicts among only
organized armed groups. Neither they count
deaths resulted from violence against civilians,
either by government or armed groups.
Suggestions:
A. Use two additional datasets for better

measurement:
1) UCDP One-sided Violence Dataset
2) UCDP Non-state Actor Dataset
B. Please note that fatality count is generated

using different sources. The datasets have
"best estimate" number, but the range for some
incidents could be very wide. Member States
may not agree to use this conflict-related deaths
measurement because the used sources come
from different NGOs.

Delhi
Kepa Finland a) A country reduces by X % the number of
violent deaths and injuries caused by societal
violence per 100,000 by year Y.
b) A country reduces by X % the number of
violent deaths and injuries caused by war or
violent conflict per 100,000 by year Y.
c) A country reduces by X % the number of
cases of rape and other forms of sexual
violence annually per 100,000 by year Y.
d) A country increases the share of criminal
charges in cases of rape and other forms of
sexual violence, and child abuse by X % by
year Y.
e) A country has developed official reporting
mechanisms / systems for reporting and
processing cases of violence.
f) Existence of national laws and policies to
actively prevent violence against any person.
g) Percentage of people who report feeling safe
walking alone at night.
=>
c) This indicator should not discourage
reporting.
g) Measuring public perception of security is of
value. Gallups on
perception of safety already collected in 135
countries (see SDSN).
Lumos
MADE
Maestral International "all forms of violence, including violence against

children,..."
Unions
http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2015_draft_indic
ator.pdf
National Campaign for Dalit Human 1. Disaggregated data of violent crime rate
Rights (intentional homicide, assault and sexual
violence, including attempts) per 100,000
population [proposed due to gender bias of
homicide rate] – age, sex, disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, social origin, religion and economic
and other status and, conflict and intentional
homicide.
2. Percentage of reported cases increased by
50%
3. Percentage of conviction increased by 80%
in Trial court.
4. Ensuring 100% appeal process at the
higher courts.
5. Percentage of FIR filed increase by 50%
6. Charge-sheeting increased by 50%
7. Disaggregated data on criminal justice
administration based on every point of
complaint filing, FIR registration, investigation,
CG filing, trial, acquittal/ conviction and appeal.
8. Budgetary allocation for Criminal justice
administration especially when deals with crime
against socially excluded groups based on age,
sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, social
origin, religion and economic and other status
and, conflict and intentional homicide.
National Center for Access to
Justice at Cardozo Law School
Nepal National Dalit Social Welfare 1. Disaggregated data of violent crime rate
Organization (NNDSWO) (intentional homicide, assault and sexual
violence, including attempts) per 100,000
population [proposed due to gender bias of
homicide rate] – age, sex, disability, race, caste,
ethnicity, social origin, religion and economic
and other status and, conflict and intentional
homicide.
2. Percentage of reported cases increased by
50%
3. Percentage of conviction increased by 80%
in Trial court.
4. Ensuring 100% appeal process at the
higher courts.
5. Percentage of FIR filed increase by 50%
6. Charge-sheeting increased by 50%
7. Disaggregated data on criminal justice
administration based on every point of
complaint filing, FIR registration, investigation,
CG filing, trial, acquittal/ conviction and appeal.
8. Budgetary allocation for Criminal justice
administration especially when deals with crime
against socially excluded groups based on age,
sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, social
origin, religion and economic and other status
and, conflict and intentional homicide.
Sustainability
OneFamilyPeople
Open Society Justice Initiative
Oxfam
Plan International
Post-2015 volunteering Working
Group
Public Services International COMMENT: Endorse OHCHR suggested

indicator
COMMENT: Specification of homicide as
“intentional” is not useful and is irrelevant in
WHO-sourced data
16.1.2: COMMENT: Should refer to the whole

population. Endorse OHCHR suggested
indicator that includes all persons < 18 years.
Disaggregation can provide data for 18+
population.
Restless Development
Saferworld KEEP: "Number of victims of intentional
homicide by age, sex, mechanism and where
possible type of perpetrator, per 100,000
population" - This is a strong indicator. Efforts
will be required to widen coverage and
overcome reliance on estimates.
KEEP: "Conflict-related deaths per 100,000

people (disaggregated by age, sex and cause)"
- This is a strong indicator. Few NSOs currently
collect data on direct conflict deaths, meaning
that third parties such as the Uppsala Conflict
Data Program (UCPD) will be required for initial
global baselines or could be the primary source
for this data, using a consistent methodology
across countries. Data on other deaths caused
by conflict - e.g. deaths caused by famine
associated with violent displacement– will need
to be gathered. Survey data on other types of
deaths measured in other targets (e.g. 1.5, 3.1,
3.2) should be drawn on in conflict-zones to
gather wider estimates. Estimated differences in
average death rates before and after conflict
could also be drawn on.
Save the Children
Sightsavers
Signatory organizations: United 16.1.1 Conflict-related deaths, injuries, assaults,
Nations Foundation, Plan exploitation, forced inscription, trafficking,
International, Girl Effect, CARE, torture and degrading/inhumane treatment per
International Women's Health 100,000 people by cause and type of
Coalition, Girls Not Brides, World perpetrator
Scouts, European Parliamentary DATA SOURCE: Estimates of conflict related
Forum, International Center for death is collected by the IISS Armed Conflict
Research on Women, Advocates Database, the UCDP Battle-Related Deaths
for Youth, FHI360, Equality Now, Dataset, PRIO Battle-Deaths Data and WHO.
International Rescue Committee GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: Data on
conflict-related deaths is collected by the IISS
Armed Conflict Database, the UCDP Battle-
Related Deaths Dataset, PRIO Battle-Deaths
Data and WHO estimates of deaths by cause.
16.1.2 Violent crime rate (intentional homicide,

assault and sexual violence, including attempts)
per 100,000 population, as compared against
reporting and conviction rates
Additional disaggregations: relationship to

perpetrator
DATA SOURCE: National crime statistics
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: Data currently

collected by UNODC, but other agencies could
participate.
Small Arms Survey 1. IAEG should consider the alternate, indicator
'Violent deaths per 100,000 population'. ‘Violent
deaths’ is a composite indicator that uses
intentional homicide and conflict deaths per
100,000 population. Experience and
methodology exist through the Global Burden of
Armed Violence (GBAV) reports and database
(http://www.genevadeclaration.org/measurability
/global-burden-of-armed-violence/global-
burden-of-armed-violence-2015.html). While
data collection would be separate, data should
be combined into one; to be disaggregated, by
sex, age, location and instrument of violence.
2. On conflict, IAEG should consider using:
‘conflict deaths per 100,000 population’. 'conflict
-related' is usually understood as ‘indirect
deaths’ for persons dying by the indirect effects
of an armed conflict for ex disease due to
displacement.
3. ADD: Percentage of population who have
experienced physical and/or sexual violence in
the last 12 months, disaggregated by sex, age
and location. Strong indicator, feasible and
relevant to complement indicators on lethal
violence This indicator would have linkages with
targets 5.1 and 5.2.
Society for the Psychological Data on all forms of violence and related
Study of Social Issues; Psychology deaths, disaggregated by gender, age, race,
Coalition at the United Nations ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
rural/urban residence, national origin, and
migration status.
Somos el Presente Should focus on latent and active social

conflicts worldwide.
SOS Children's Villages
International

Tebtebba
The International Legal Foundation

Transparency International The first suggested indicator should be
retained, and is a strong indicator. Efforts will be
required to widen coverage and overcome
reliance on estimates.
The second suggested indicator should be

retained, and is a strong indicator. Few NSOs,
however, currently collect data on it, meaning
that third parties such as the Uppsala Conflict
Database Program will be required for initial
global baselines and/or could be authorised by
the UNSC to be the primary source for this
data, using a consistent methodology across
countries. In the long-term, NSOs could collect
this data.
It should be noted that there is a difference

between direct conflict deaths and conflict-
related deaths. The IAEG may want to consider
changing the wording.
Data should be disaggregated by income,

disability and social groups to assess how
violence affects different groups, and to
measure progress on the poorest and most
marginalized and discriminated against.
Transparency, Accountability & The first suggested indicator should be
Participation (TAP) Network retained, and is a strong indicator. Efforts will be
required to widen coverage and overcome
reliance on estimates.
The second suggested indicator should be

retained, and is a strong indicator. Few NSOs,
however, currently collect data on direct conflict
deaths, meaning that third parties such as the
Uppsala Conflict Data Program will be required
for initial global baselines and/or could be
authorised by the UNSC to be the primary
source for this data, using a consistent
methodology across countries. In the long-term,
NSOs could collect this data. Methodologies
exist for calculating indirect conflict deaths – for
example deaths from diseases associated with
displacement); data from other goals (for
example on health) would need to be drawn on.
Data should be disaggregated by income,

disability and social groups to assess how
violence affects different groups, and to
measure progress on the poorest and most
marginalized and discriminated against.
UCLG Target 16.1: The suggested indicator is only

related to homicide and excludes injuries.
Proposed: Violent injuries, deaths and homicide
rates (per 100,000 habitants)
The second target is also related to conflict
related deaths. We propose to add: Refugees
and internally displaced persons (IDPs) caused
by conflict and violence
United Nations Association of the
USA (UNA-USA)
Urban Institute

relevant.
Women Access Trust Organisation There should be an indicator to point out the
Of Nigeria percentage of increase or reduction in conflict
related cases in courts
Women for Women's Human Rights 16.1 Number of countries which have 1) set up
- New Ways monitoring mechanism against all forms of
violence; and 2) enacted and strengthened the
enforcement of
laws addressing and punishing all forms of
violence, including gender-based violence
Women's Major Group 16.1.1 1) Reduction in homicide deaths, civilian
deaths during armed conflict, incidents of
torture and inhumane and degrading treatment,
incidents of domestic and child abuse; and 2)
Increase in people's perception of safety.
Central govt. data 2. UNOCHA data 3. National

human rights body and CSOs 4. National
bodies responsible for the welfare of women,
National police records and CSOs 5. Annual
surveys Strengths: Accuracy of data. Relies on
data sources that already exist, reporting would
be a matter of coordinating inputs from various
sources Weaknesses: Sources do not account
for all incidents, only reported ones. This is why
including CSO sources is important, to fill the
gap on official sources, however, ensuring a
lack of duplication will be a very tedious task.
Permanent coordination pooling data from all
sources on a weekly basis is needed to
minimize duplication of incidents.
16.1.2 Number of countries which have 1) set

up monitoring mechanism against all forms of
violence; and 2) enacted and strengthened the
enforcement of laws addressing and punishing
all forms of violence, including gender-based
violence
World Vision We support the following suggested indicators:

• Number of victims of intentional homicide
by age, sex, mechanism and where possible
type of perpetrator, per 100,000 population.
• Conflict-related deaths per 100,000 people
(disaggregated by age, sex and cause)
Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitatiTarget 16.3: Promote the rule of lawTarget 16.4: By 2030, significantly re
The Expert Group’s Aspects to consider: •Incorporation Aspects to consider: - Adoption of and
recommendations need to take a and implementation of the compliance with the UN Convention
broader focus with respect to the Declaration on the Rule of Law , against Trans-National Organized
targets: •Date of entry into force and Crime, Signature, ratification and
coverage of legislation guaranteeing reporting on the implementation of the
• Percentage of young adults non-discriminatory access to courts UN Arms Trade Treaty, Actions taken to
aged 18-24 years who have (eg for unaccompanied women, improve management of arms
experienced violence by age 18, children and migrants) [OHCHR], stockpiles, nationally/internationally
by type (physical, psychological •The availability of independent
and/or sexual) judicial or administrative mechanisms
• Ratification and implementation that have the power to provide
of the UN Convention on the remedy in an instance of non-
Rights of the Child compliance with human rights
• Ratification of and compliance standards that are relevant to the
with the UN Convention against development goals
Trans-National Organized Crime •Proportion of people whose human
Protocol to Prevent, Suppress rights related to the post 2015 goals
and Punish Trafficking in Persons are protected under the national law
Especially Women and Children. and have access to an available
• Ratification and implementation effective remedy (National Census
of relevant fundamental ILO data)
labour conventions and standards •Proportion of national laws and
including No.182 and compliance policies relevant to post 2015 goals
in law and practice that have been reviewed nationally
• Date of entry into force and for consistency with international
coverage of legal frameworks that human rights standards, through a
guarantee the right to education transparent and participatory
for all children for early childhood process, including a transformative
and basic education, and that gender assessment, and revised
guarantee a minimum age of where necessary, •Percentage of
entry to employment not below people who have experienced a
the years of basic education dispute and been able to (i) access
• Formation of national and an adequate dispute resolution
local strategies and policies to mechanism and (ii) obtain an
combat child labour including effective remedy,
elimination of the worst forms and
other forms of exploitation.
It is important that the indicators
measure the perceived fairness of
justice processes and legal service
providers. We propose:
➢ Percentage of people who live
within reasonable reach of affordable
and effective basic legal service
providers and of a justice institution
whose resolutions are fair, timely and
enforced
➢ Percentage of people who
express confidence in justice
systems and dispute resolution
(formal and informal), disaggregated
by gender, location, etc.
➢ Existence of a right to
information law that establishes 1)
citizens’ access to information,
including laws, budgets and
expenditures; 2) defines a time limit
for responding to RTI requests; and
3) establishes a mechanism for
appeal in the event of denial
➢ Proportion of requests for
information lodged and answered
fully in a reasonable amount of time
(X days)
➢ Existence of legal aid services
that are affordable, fair and timely,
including for family law and
complaints of gender-based violence
A number of these indicators are also

applicable to targets 16.6 and 16.10.
Revise existing indicator to read: Revise indicator to read: Percentage
Percentage of children aged 0-17 of people who have experienced a
years who experienced physical dispute, reporting access to an
or sexual or psychological adequate dispute resolution
violence including sexual abuse at mechanism ( CBB ), and effective
safe havens, pornography, child disposal of cases
sex tourism, incest, human
sacrifice and organ removal by Additional indicator suggested: No:
caregivers/supervisors in the past of cases in which death penalty was
month. awarded vis a vis total disposal of
cases where such punishment could
Rationale: Interlinkages with be awarded , disaggregated by
target 4a, 8.7 and 5.2. This social group and bottom/top wealth
indicator is very narrow, and quintile
should be revised to include
violence against children that
takes places in the different 5
spaces/spheres as defined by UN
Secretary General’s study on this
issue, ie., violence
at schools, in institutions, at
homes, at work and in society in
general. Violence encompasses
physical, sexual and physological
violence inflicted on children.
Global March’s recommends
revising the
existing indicator to reflect and
include these aspects. Please
note that caregiver should include
at the very minimum – parents,
guardians, teachers, social
workers
and others.
Recommendation A: If an indicator
on unsentenced detainees will be
included, we prefer the UNSC
Bureau Technical Report March '15
version “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”. In any case
we recommend that the indicator
clearly reflects minimum standards
established in international human
rights law & customary international
law. In our view the language of
“unsentenced detainees” in the
August ‘15 version does not capture
the heart of the problem of “unlawful
and arbitrary detention”. It does not
allow distinctions between categories
of detainees, e.g. on the basis of
length of detention, stage of the
judicial process, or detention not
related to criminal law (e.g. migrants
and asylum seekers). In our view the
broader indicator on access to fair
dispute mechanisms in the May ‘15
version more fully captures the
essence of access to justice and is
preferred. See also Topics 20, 21 &
22 on Target 16.3.
Suggested Indicator 1 measures We welcome the measurement of illicit
public confidence in authorities financial flows (IFFs), relevant also to
rather than access to justice. goal 17. We propose a slight
ALTERNATIVE (proposed by modification: Total value of inward and
Saferworld): Proportion of those who outward illicit financial flows – to include
have experienced a dispute in the those related to trade misinvoicing,
past 12 months who have accessed transfer mispricing and other tax
a formal, informal, alternative or abuses
traditional dispute resolution N.B. Transfer mispricing and other tax
mechanism and who feel it was just abuses are not currently included under
Proposed indicator 2: lengthy pre- Global Financial Integrity measures.
trial detention is a huge human rights We also propose several additional
problem, but this indicator could complementary indicators for this target
incentivize speedy but unjust trials. (for more detail see cesr.org).
ALTERNATIVE: Percentage of Additional: Indicator of risk/vulnerability
people who express confidence in to illicit financial flows
justice systems and dispute Additional: Share of companies (and
resolution legal arrangements including trusts and
Accountable fiscal governance is a foundations) for which beneficial
prerequisite for the achievement of ownership is known and publicly
sustainable development, hence we registered
propose some policy-responsive Additional: Overall financial secrecy
indicators. For more, see cesr.org. (see Financial Secrecy Index)
Additional: Share of government tax Additional: Share of international trade
laws, budget policies, public and recorded financial flows that takes
procurement and social service place between jurisdictions with
delivery subject to public and judicial automatic exchange of tax information,
oversight and review as well as the number of countries
Additional: Existence of independent covered by automatic information
audit agency or other oversight body exchange
which carries out regular audits that Additional: Share of stolen assets
are published in full returned to source country
Additional: Compliance with
recommendations from the Universal
Periodic Review and UN human
rights Treaty Bodies
Indicator and Data source should No of states that integrated human
reflect per cent reduction in child rights education in their civic
abuse, child labour and child education programme
trafficking
No of countries that provide access
Number of victims of intentional to free legal service
infanticide by age, sex,
mechanism and where possible No of countries with laws that
type of perpetrator, per 100,000 support public interest litigation
population
No of countries that offer no filing
Reduction in Number of child fees for human rights cases and
molestation cases reported at the public interest cases
police station and to community
police
We strongly call for the inclusion

of the following proposed
indicator:
• Percentage of young women
and men aged 18- 24 who
experienced sexual violence by
age 18.
We support the following
suggested indicator:
• Percentage of children aged
1-14 years who experienced any
physical punishment by
caregivers in the past month.
Preferred indicator: Share of companies
for which beneficial ownership is known
and publicly registered, AND Share of
international trade and recorded
financial flows which takes place
between jurisdictions with automatic
exchange of tax information/Number of
countries covered by AIE.
Comment: New data on offshore
holdings from AIE data will be available
on an annual basis as AIE is
implemented. It will therefore be
possible to compile statistics on country
of residence of all offshore account
holders from most major financial
centres from 2017.
2 possible approaches to IFFs indicator
(can be combined): 1)seek to measure
the IFFs directly, either using GFI data,
or via joint effort by IFIs to decide better
methodology; 2) seek to measure the
risk factors, which our alternative
indicators do by looking at coverage of
automatic information exchange and
transparency of beneficial ownership.
The indicator must underline shared
responsibility between countries
experiencing outflows/receiving inflows.
Endorse the formulation for indicator
16.3 suggested by the Virtual
Network of Stakeholders on
indicators for SDG 16:
"Proportion of those who have

experienced a dispute in the past 12
months who have accessed a formal,
informal, alternative or traditional
dispute resolution mechanism and
who feel it was just."
This formulation importantly captures

experiences in both civil and criminal
aspects of access to justice. Access
to justice in the civil context is a key
element of domestic and
international anti-poverty initiatives.
This formulation also reflects the
important links between criminal and
civil justice, underscoring the fact
that criminal justice problems are
commonly prompted by civil justice
problems, and commonly require civil
justice solutions.
The proposed indicators address

crucial aspects related to the rule of
law and access to justice, but as
these are such broad and multi-
dimensional areas, and the target
further emphasises an equality
aspect of ensuring equal access to
justice for all, there is a need for
supplementary indicators to capture
additional aspects. These could, for
example, address a) Recognition of
the jurisdiction of customary law
institutions in national legislation;
b)de facto access to remedy
Existence and implementation of Percentage of victims of violence in
laws that criminalize buyers, the previous 12 months who reported
pimps and brothel keepers of sex their victimization to competent
with minors. authorities or other officially
recognized conflict resolution
Decriminalization of and provision mechanisms (also called crime
of services to minors in the sex reporting rate) against conviction
trade. rates
Further disaggregation: relationship

to perpetrator, type of crime
na - see 16.4 only na - see 16.4 only Indicator 16.4.1 Total volume of inward
and outward illicit financial flows. I am
engaged in an in-depth country study of
illicit financial flows and now understand
the concept and the methods used in
multi-country studies. These are entirely
inadequate: the methods used do not
measure illicit financial flows (mostly
they are based on imputing that errors
and mismatches in balance of
payments data represent illicit flows).
Very intensive individual-country data
collection and analysis is required for
the generation of estimates of illicit
flows that might be meaningful.
[NM: Cord] Cord recommends [NM: Cord] Cord recommends that [NM: Cord] Cord wishes to edit the first
that the first suggested indicator the first suggested indicator should suggested indicator as follows: Total
should be withdrawn as it appears be edited as follows: value of inward and outward illicit
to fail to add value in support of financial flows (in current US$); by
Target 16.2. Percentage of victims of violence in country, and to add an additional
We also recommend that the the previous 12 months who have indicator:
second suggested indicator reported their success in accessing a
should be re-worded as follows: dispute resolution mechanism that Total value of inward and outward illicit
Number of detected and non- has upheld the rule of law, and that arms flows (in current US$); by country
detected children as victims of provided an inclusive route to justice
human trafficking per 100,000; by and accountability; by sex, age, Cord argues that this indicator is
sex, age, location, population location, and population group. required in order to address the
group, and form of exploitation, challenge of illicit arms flows in the
and instances where article 35 of Cord would also recommend that the same way as illicit financial flows.
the Convention on the Rights of current suggested indicator, Cord also wishes to edit the second
the Child (CRC) have been concerned with unsentenced suggested indicator as follows:
breached. detainees, be withdrawn in favour of Percentage of seized and collected
the following two indicators: firearms that are recorded and traced,
We also recommend that the in accordance with international
following three additional Percentage of those who have standards and legal instruments; by
indicators be included: experienced a dispute in the country
previous 12 months, not related to
Number of detected and non- violence, who have reported their
detected children as victims of success in accessing a dispute
torture per 100,000; by sex, age, resolution mechanism that has
location, population group, form of upheld the rule of law, and that
torture, and instances where provided an inclusive route to justice
articles 37 and 39 of the CRC, and accountability; by sex, age,
and the Convention Against location, and population group.
Torture more generally, have been Percentage of people who voice
breached; confidence in their national judicial
systems; by sex, age, location, and
Number of children below the age population group
of 18 recruited as child soldiers
per 100,000; by sex, age, This text has been partly informed by
location, and population group, Saferworld.
and instances where article 38 of
Proposed indicators:
"Percentage of children aged 1-14
years who experienced any
caregivers in the past month."
"Violent punishment of children is
prohibited in all settings of
children’s lives including the
family home."
Rationale:
Ending violent punishment, the
most common form of violence
against children, is fundamental to
creating peaceful, non-violent
societies. The well-established
human rights imperative to
prohibit all corporal punishment
has led to accelerating progress
around the world: 46 countries
have now prohibited all corporal
punishment including the family
home and 51 are committed to do
so.
Violent punishment is widespread
in states in all regions. UNICEF's
major 2014 report "Hidden in
Plain Sight" which used data from
62 countries found that 80% of
children aged 2-14 had
experienced violent “discipline” at
home in the past month.
Prohibiting corporal punishment is
essential in ending all abuse and
violence against children.
Revision in existing indicator:
Percentage of children aged 1-18
years who experienced physical
or sexual or psychological
violence by
caregivers/supervisors in the past
month
Percentage of young people aged

18-24 years subject to violence by
age 18, gender and by type
(physical or sexual or
psychological)
Number of detected and non-

detected victims of human
trafficking per 100,000 within and
across states/countries, by sex,
age, region and form of
exploitation as defined in
trafficking/Palermo Protocol (UN
Convention against Transnational
Organized Crime), under Protocol
to Prevent, Suppress and Punish
Trafficking in Persons, especially
Women and Children))
16.3 needs to include the phrase "as

a general fiduciary duty"
Separate goals must all be subject to

the one essential goal, of design and
planning for cultural growth for whole
societies.
For suggested indicator 1 In relation to both suggested
"Percentage of children aged 1-14 indicators: Indigenous peoples and
years who experienced any other cultural and ethnic minorities
physical punishment face particular issues in accessing
by caregivers in the past month" justice. The IAEG must explore ways
disaggregation by ethnicity is to disaggregate this indicator by
possible within household survey ethnicity
For suggested indicator 2

"Number of detected and non-
trafficking per 100,000; by
sex, age and form of exploitation"
The IAEG must explore ways to
disaggregate this indicator by
ethnicity
Millions of children are in

institutional care. Evidence shows
that these children are at
increased risk of violence and
abuse. Institutions are also often
used by trafficking networks and
can be a vehicle for child labor
and/or child sexual exploitation. It
is crucial that children living
outside of family care and in
institutions are included in the
global monitoring framework.
Suggested indicators: Number of

children in institutional care
(sources: national governments,
field studies/assessments).
Number of children removed from
institutions and placed within
appropriate and protective family
care.
Percentage of children who
experienced abuse who are
accessing the necessary services.
We have to protect human rights, Exactly, it is human rights I agree with it
child rights. It is emerge and
urgent problem in many
developing countries and in
Vietnam. Do it right now, more
investment for children are quality
of future generation population
Promoting rule of law is feasible and
can be measured with clear
indicators including proposed 16.3
and measures of judiciary processes
including legislation and court
proceedings. This is critical for
people affected by HIV because they
have experienced high levels of
discrimination and can use the rule
of law to enforce their rights.
The International Bar Association's
Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) and
the International Commission of
Jurists (ICJ) recommend the two
following indicators:
1. Indicator on the independence of
the judiciary:
'Existence of a specific legal
framework to protect judges from
external interference and arbitrary
removal and punishment'.
- This indicator aligns with the
existing OHCHR Rule of Law
Indicator n.57 and is related to
current targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7,
16.10 and 16a.
the legal profession
'Existence of a self-governing
professional association of lawyers
established through law with the
mandate and authority to protect the
independence and role of of the legal
profession, in compliance with the
United Nations Basic Principles on
the Role of Lawyers.”
- This indicator completes the current
indicator proposed under Target 16.a
concerning the existence of a
national human rights institution. It is
related to targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7,
16.10 and 16a
- The International Bar Association is
a professional organization gathering
more than 200 national bar
associations worldwide
Justice systems often fail due to the
simple fact that the poor can’t afford
a lawyer and because states don’t
provide legal aid in many of these
cases.
Therefore we propose an additional
indicator: Percentage of people who
filed a report for any crime against
them who received access to legal
aid from the state if they could not
afford it. Disaggregate by sex, age,
residence and population group.
As proposed by UN WOMEN this
indicator should be disaggregated by
income to measure progress on
access to justice by the lowest
quintile

indicator:
and men, including migrants,
regardless of migration status,
aged 18- 24 who experienced
sexual violence by age 18.
• Percentage of children aged 0-
14 years who experienced any
We are concerned the human

trafficking indicators does not
have universal coverage:
• Number of victims of human
trafficking per 100,000 people, by
sex, age and form of exploitation -
data limited to 130 TIP countries
How about adding percentage of

children who are abused (verbally,
emotionally, sexually) by their
peers?
No comments No comments No comments
a) A country reduces by X % the a) Assets and liabilities of Bank for
number of infant homicide per International Settlements (BIS)
100,000 by year Y. reporting banks in international tax
b) A country reduces by X % the havens (as per OECD definition), by
number of cases of physical country.
violence against children by b) Publication of all payments made to
100,000 by year Y. governments under resource contracts.
c) A country reduces by X % the c) A country reduces by X % the
number of cases of sexual number of illicit and legal small arms
violence against children by and light weapons by year Y.
100,000 by year Y. d) A country has and effectively uses
d) A country has developed official national mechanisms to control illicit
reporting mechanisms / systems small arms and light weapons and to
for reporting and processing hinder illegal trade with weapons,
cases of child abuse. humans and drugs.
e) A country reduces by X % the e) Number of countries that have
number of children out of school ratified and implemented the Arms
because of conflict, insecurity, or Trade Treaty (ATT).
disaster. f) Level of perceived criminality in
f) A country reduces by X % the society.
number of children recruited and
women and girls captured by
armed forces per 100,000 by year
Y.
g) A country reduces by X % the
number of women aged 20–24
who were married before 15 or 18
per 100,000 by year Y.
h) A country reduces by X% the
prevalence of FMG.
i) A country has developed official
reporting mechanisms / systems
for reporting and processing
cases of trafficking.
=> must not discourage reporting

Millions of children are in
institutional care. Evidence shows
that these children are at
increased risk of violence and
abuse. Institutions are also often
used by trafficking networks and
can be a vehicle for child labor
and/or child sexual exploitation. It
is crucial that children living
outside of family care and in
institutions are included in the
global monitoring framework.
Suggested indicators: Number of

children in institutional care
(sources: national governments,
field studies/assessments).
Number of children removed from
institutions and placed within
appropriate and protective family
care. Percentage of children who
experienced abuse who are
accessing the necessary services.

indicator:
and men, including migrants,
regardless of migration status,
aged 18- 24 who experienced
sexual violence by age 18.
• Percentage of children aged 0-
14 years who experienced any
We are concerned the human
trafficking indicators does not
have universal coverage
(5.2/16.2/10.7):
• Number of victims of human
trafficking per 100,000 people, by
sex, age and form of exploitation -
data limited to 130 TIP countries
http://www.who.int/pmnch/post201
5_draft_indicator.pdf
1. Age of children synchronized 1. CEDAW, CRC, CERD, ICCPR
to be upto 18 years across all and ICESCR all countries sign and
legislative and policy instruments. ratify these conventions along with
2. Disaggregated data on all the optional protocols.
forms of abuse, exploitation, 2. UN convention on the
trafficking and all forms of elimination of discrimination based
violence and torture of children by on work and descent based on the
age, sex, disability, race, caste, principles and guidance ensuring
ethnicity, religion, social origin, equal access to justice to
region, language, economic and communities which are affected by
other status. inter-generational discrimination
3. Human rights education and based on work and descent, caste
mechanisms instituted and made and analogous forms of hierarchy.
functional to address Encompassing access to public and
discrimination and violence private recourses, institutions, and
against children from socially markets.
excluded communities. 3. Presence of effective national
4. All bodies and personnel campaign that visiblaises forms of
responsible for the protection and violence based age, sex, disability,
welfare of children are trained on race, caste, ethnicity, social origin,
diversity and non-discrimination religion and economic and other
dimensions and follow code of status.
conduct in discharging their 4.Effective mechanisms instituted to
duties. ensure community voice and
5. Well established relief and consensus regarding use of natural
rehabilitation centres, prgrammes and community resources.
and financing including trauma
care and counseling for children
who are victims of violence or
threat of violence.
6. Special mechanisms ensured
during disasters to ensure that
children from socially excluded
and vulnerable sections,
particularly girl children are
protected and their rights are not
We urge adoption of the following
formulation for indicator 16.3, as
recommended by the Virtual Network
of Stakeholders on indicators for
SDG 16: "Proportion of those who
have experienced a dispute in the
past 12 months who have accessed
a formal, informal, alternative or
traditional dispute resolution
mechanism and who feel it was just."
This formulation importantly captures

both civil and criminal aspects of
access to justice, taking into account
that access to justice in the civil
context is a key element of domestic
and international anti-poverty
initiatives and of the Post-2015
Sustainable Development Goals.
This formulation also reflects the
important links between civil and
criminal justice, underscoring that
criminal justice problems are
commonly prompted by civil justice
problems, and commonly require civil
justice solutions.
1. CEDAW, CRC, CERD,

ICCPR and ICESCR all countries
sign and ratify these conventions
along with the optional protocols.
2. UN convention on the
elimination of discrimination
based on work and descent
based on the principles and
guidance ensuring equal access
to justice to communities which
are affected by inter-generational
discrimination based on work and
descent, caste and analogous
forms of hierarchy. Encompassing
access to public and private
recourses, institutions, and
markets.
3. Presence of effective
national campaign that visiblaises
forms of violence based age, sex,
disability, race, caste, ethnicity,
social origin, religion and
economic and other status.
End abuse, exploitation,
trafficking and all forms of
violence against and torture of
children especially those with
disqbilities
Existing suggested indicators focus The provision of financial secrecy by
on narrow elements of criminal states is a key driver of illicit financial
justice. To advance sustainable flows.
development—and to “preserve the
political balance, integration and - Priority Indicator 1: Financial Secrecy
ambition” of the agenda—the Ranking on the Financial Secrecy Index
framework should include indicators
that more fully respond to the target. The Financial Secrecy Index is
produced every two years by the Tax
- Priority indicator 1: Proportion of Justice Network and ranks jurisdictions
those who have experienced a according to the level of financial
dispute in the past 12 months who secrecy they provide and global
have accessed a formal, informal, relevance of their financial services
alternative or traditional dispute sector – the higher a country is ranked
resolution mechanism and who on the index, the more financial secrecy
believe it was just it provides.
The 1st priority indicator advances - Priority Indicator 2: The number of Tax
rule of law and access to justice, is Information Exchange Agreements
simple to understand, is currently ratified by jurisdiction
gathered through surveys and is
available for 107 countries. It Tax Information Exchange Agreements
captures criminal justice as well. (TIEAs) allow tax administrators to
better detect tax avoidance and
- Priority indicator 2: Percentage of evasion. Thus, the larger a
total remandees who have been held jurisdiction’s TIEA treaty network, the
in detention for more than 6 months less likely it should be for that
while awaiting trial, sentencing or a jurisdiction to be used to facilitate illicit
final disposition financial flows.
The 2nd indicator is relevant for the

target’s focus, is simple to
understand, and is gathered
administratively at the national level.
Amendment: 16.2.1 Percentage
of children aged under 18 years
who experienced any physical
punishment by caregivers in the
past month
Rationale: 16.2.1 Plan

International strongly supports the
inclusion of suggested indicator 1.
We call for the age range to be
increased to 18 to be in line with
the Convention on the Rights of
the Child. Data for 15-18 year
olds can be covered in DHS. Use
of the term ‘caregivers’ is crucial
as it recognises that children can
be exposed to violence from a
variety of actors charged with
their care.
Proposal 16.2.2 Percentage of

young women and men aged 18-
24 who experienced sexual
violence by sex, age,
location/region, wealth, and
disability.
Rationale: 16.2.2 Plan

International recommends this
indicator replace the IAEG
suggested indicator.
This indicator would capture one

of the most widespread, and
socially accepted, types of
violence against children and is
universally relevant. Fully
COMMENT: UNICEF suggested
indicator for 1-14 year olds should
be 0 to 18 years and include all
sources of abuse and violence.
KEEP: "Percentage of children MOVE: "Percentage of victims of KEEP: "Total value of inward and
aged 1-14 years who experienced violence in the previous 12 months outward illicit financial flows (in current
any physical punishment by who reported their victimization to US$)"
caregivers in the past month" - competent authorities or other
This is a strong indicator that has officially recognized conflict REMOVE: Percentage of seized and
widespread support. resolution mechanisms" - This collected firearms that are recorded and
indicator is already used below in traced, in accordance with international
KEEP: "Number of detected and 16a. standards and legal instruments
non-detected victims of human
trafficking per 100,000; by sex, REPLACE WITH: "Proportion of REPLACE WITH: "Percentage of
age and form of exploitation" - those who have experienced a people who believe that illicit arms are
This is a strong indicator that dispute in the past 12 months who widespread in their community" - This
could be used in 5.2, 10.7. Due to have accessed a formal, informal, indicator is based on survey questions
the illicit nature of human alternative or traditional dispute developed as part of the UN
trafficking, accurate data may be resolution mechanism and who feel it International Small Arms Control
challenging to gather. was just" - better indicator, wider Standards. It would be a proxy for the
support. extent to which people are affected by
the illicit arms trade – more outcome
REMOVE: "Unsentenced detainees focused that the suggested indicator.
as percentage of overall prison The survey question could be easily
population" - has risks. added to household surveys or national
polls.
REPLACE WITH : "Percentage of
people who voice confidence in the ADD: "Drug-related crime per 100,000
judicial system" - This perception population" - proxy for organised crime
indicator gathers people’s views on negative impact, data exists.
the judicial system – and is a proxy
of their confidence in the rule of law ADD: "Recovered stolen assets as a
more widely (making it also useful for percentage of illicit financial flows" -
16.6. 16.7 and 16b). deals with asset aspect of the target,
some data exists.
RETAIN SUGGESTED
INDICATOR (% of children aged
1-14 etc)
RATIONALE: Although it refers to

only one specific form, 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. Fully
comparable data are available for
some 60 low- and middle-income
countries
AMEND INDICATOR FROM:

Number of detected and non-
trafficking per 100,000; by
sex, age and form of exploitation
TO: Percentage of young women
and men aged 18-24 who
experiences sexual violence by
the age of 18
RATIONALE: 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
16.2.1 Percentage of children 16.3.1 Percentage of victims of
aged under 18 years who violence in the previous 12 months
experienced any physical who reported their victimization to
punishment by caregivers in the competent authorities or other
past month against reporting and officially recognized conflict
conviction rates resolution mechanisms (also called
crime reporting rate) against
DATA SOURCE: Household conviction rates
surveys such as MICS (1-14) that
have been collecting data on this Further disaggregation: relationship
indicator in low- and middle- to perpetrator, type of crime
income countries since 2005.DHS
would cover 15-18. DATA SOURCE: Victimisation
surveys
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY:
UNICEF. Fully comparable data GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY:
are available for some 60 low and UNODC collects data on crime
middle-income countries reporting rate through the annual
data collection UN-CTS. Data on
16.2.2 Number of detected and crime reporting rates are currently
non-detected victims of human available for approx. 35 countries.
trafficking per 100,000; by form of
exploitation TIER: Tier II
against reporting and conviction
rates 16.3.2 Proportion of those who have
experienced a dispute in the past 12
Further disaggregation: months and who have accessed a
relationship to trafficker fair, formal, or alternative dispute
mechanism.
DATA SOURCE: National
governments/Field studies Further disaggregation: relationship
to perpetrator, type of mechanism
UNODC, Data on number of DATA SOURCE: Household surveys;
detected victims of TIP is data is available for 107 countries
available for over 130 countries
The 2 IAEG suggested indicators 1. The IAEG proposed indicator on 1. On 'illicit arms flows', the following
do not include forms of violence 'Crime reporting rates' focuses only alternate indicator should be
outside punishment or trafficking. on 'crimes' and officially recognized considered: “Percentage of seized
The measurement of 'any mechanism. While useful this would firearms that are recorded and traced in
physical punishment' would be be only part of the whole picture. accordance with international standards
problematic or totally dependent This indicator is already used below and instruments”.
on context and reporting agency. in 16a.
IAEG should consider using: The alternate suggestion simplifies the
Percentage of children aged 1-14, ALTERNATE: ‘Proportion of those concept by focusing on the proportion
subjected to violence within the who have experienced a dispute in of seized weapons that are recorded
last 12 months, by type (physical, the past 12 months who have and traced according to international
psychological and/or sexual) accessed a formal, informal, standards and instruments. With a
instead of the current proposed alternative or traditional dispute purpose of clarity, measurability and
indicator on physical punishment. resolution mechanism and who feel it priority, the alternate indicator focuses
The currently proposed indicator was just’ on illicit weapons that are seized. These
on trafficking could be moved and weapons are among the key drivers for
used in 5.2, 10.7. Due to the illicit This is potentially a very informative armed violence in conflict and non-
nature of human trafficking, objective indicator that directly conflict settings.
accurate data may be challenging captures the target’s intended The word 'legal' was deleted. The
to access. outcome, which is people’s access to International Tracing Instrument (ITI)
a dispute resolution mechanism contains most of the relevant standards
beyond the formal justice sector. and applies to all UN member states,
This indicator has been tested in but it is a politically binding instrument.
several contexts and can be easily So, the mention of the word 'legal' could
added to household surveys or be taken to exclude the application of
national polling. the ITI, which would be unfortunate if
the indicator would deal with 'tracing'
2. On unsentenced detainees IAEG (the ITI defines 'tracing' under para 5).
could consider rewording:
'Percentage of inmates awaiting trial'. 2. ADD: Percentage of small arms that
are marked and recorded by the time of
import in accordance with international
standards and instruments.
Monitor and assess Monitor and assess educational

implementation of policies on human rights campaigns for the
ending all forms of abuse, national, regional, and international
exploitation, and violence against public and for all persons providing
children, by means of data public and social services as well
disaggregated by gender, age, and human rights formal education at
race, ethnicity, indigenous identity, all levels of educational systems.
income, rural/urban residence,
national origin, and migration Data on access to justice for all,
status. disaggregated by gender, age, race,
ethnicity, indigenous identity, income,
rural/urban residence, national origin,
and migration status.
To better track progress towards
Target 16.2, which calls for an end
to abuse, exploitation, trafficking
and ALL forms of violence against
children, a preferred indicator
would be: "Percentage of young
adults aged 18-24 years who
have experienced violence by age
18, by type (physical,
psychological and/or sexual). This
indicator has already gathered
consensus among many
organizations (see e.g. PMNCH
Post 2015 Indicator Statement,
with over a hundred signatories).
For this indicator, we also strongly
recommend further
disaggregation by violence
setting, to be able to better
prioritize interventions. According
to the office of the UN SRSG on
Violence against Children,
violence settings include: home
and family; schools; care and
justice systems; work; community.
16.3: Existence of procedures to 16.4: Availability of training programs
delineate competencies and resolve for customary law authorities on
conflicts between customary and international human rights standards
statutory law
The proposed indicators are
outcome oriented & vague; they
should be process based metrics for
assessing access to justice &
ensuring fairness of State’s justice
systems. It is within justice
processes that rights violations take
place: abuse, torture, & forced
confessions in investigations;
arbitrary & extended pretrial
detention imposed in hearings;
denial of fundamental health & safety
protections in detention; & more.
Consensus has emerged on the
meaning of access to justice in
international treaties, regional courts,
regional human rights instruments, &
national constitutions, laws, & court
decisions making clear that access
to counsel is a fundamental
component of access to justice.
Right to counsel is paramount as it
effects all other rights, but
inadequate access for the poor
continues to be the norm rather than
the exception in too many
jurisdictions throughout the world. It
is critical that 16.3 indicators
measure whether States are
providing the poor with access to
counsel, & other key elements of
access to justice including the rights
to be heard by a competent and
impartial tribunal & within a
reasonable time.
Indicator 16.2.1: The Miracle

Foundation calls for
disaggregation and adequate
representation of orphans and
vulnerable children, including
those living on the street or in
program/institutional/orphanage
care, in the surveys utilized to
Indicator 16.2.2: The Miracle

Foundation calls for
disaggregation and adequate
representation of orphans and
vulnerable children, including
those living on the street or in
program/institutional/orphanage
care, in the surveys utilized to
Both indicators are strong and Suggested Indicator: “Proportion of Indicator 1: “Total annual value of
enjoy widespread support, those who have experienced a inward and outward illicit financial flows
including from relevant UN dispute in the past 12 months who at the country level (in current US$)
agencies and the Goal 16 Virtual have accessed a formal, informal, disaggregated by trade misinvoicing
Network. The second suggested alternative or traditional dispute and other sources.” Indicator closely
indicator could also potentially be resolution mechanism and who feel it mirrors that suggested by IAEG.
used to help measure 5.2 and was just” Additions include a requirement for an
10.7. Due to the illicit nature of annual country level report and data
human trafficking, accurate data The suggested indicators focus on disaggregated by sources.
may be challenging to access. narrow elements of criminal justice.
To advance progress towards Indicator 2: "Percentage of seized and
sustainable development—and to collected firearms that are recorded and
“preserve the political balance, traced, in accordance with international
integration and ambition” of the standards and legal instruments." Same
agenda—the framework should as suggested by IAEG.
include indicators that more fully
respond to the target. Priority Indicator 3: “Recovered stolen assets
indicator 1 advances the focus on as a percentage of illicit financial flows.”
rule of law and access to justice, is Stolen assets issue is not captured in
simple to understand, is currently other indicators. As a % of IFFs in a
gathered through household surveys given year, excluding trade mispricing,
and is available for 107 countries. It indicator would demonstrate successes
captures criminal justice as well. in proportion to the challenge.
The first suggested IAEG Suggested Indicator: “Proportion of Indicator 1: “Total annual value of
indicator is strong and enjoy those who have experienced a inward and outward illicit financial flows
widespread support, including dispute in the past 12 months who at the country level (in current US$)
from relevant UN agencies and have accessed a formal, informal, disaggregated by trade misinvoicing
the Goal 16 Virtual Network. alternative or traditional dispute and other sources.” Indicator closely
resolution mechanism and who feel it mirrors that suggested by IAEG.
We would recommend the was just” Additions include a requirement for an
following indicator to replace the annual country level report and data
second indicator: “Percentage of The suggested indicators focus on disaggregated by sources.
young women and men aged 18- narrow elements of criminal justice.
24 who experiences sexual To advance progress towards Indicator 2: "Percentage of seized and
violence by the age of 18.” sustainable development—and to collected firearms that are recorded and
“preserve the political balance, traced, in accordance with international
While this only refers to only one integration and ambition” of the standards and legal instruments." Same
specific form of violence, it is the agenda—the framework should as suggested by IAEG.
most widespread, and socially include indicators that more fully
accepted, type of violence against respond to the target. Priority Indicator 3: “Recovered stolen assets
children and will provide a good indicator 1 advances the focus on as a percentage of illicit financial flows.”
indication of children’s overall rule of law and access to justice, is Stolen assets issue is not captured in
exposure to violence. It is simple to understand, is currently other indicators. As a % of IFFs in a
universally relevant. Fully gathered through household surveys given year, excluding trade mispricing,
comparable data are available for and is available for 107 countries. It indicator would demonstrate successes
some 60 low- and middle-income captures criminal justice as well. in proportion to the challenge.
countries (household surveys
such as MICS that have been Indicator 4: "Percentage of businesses
collecting data on this indicator in who believe organized crime imposes
low- and middle-income countries costs on business in their country.” This
since 2005). indicator could be feasibly integrated
into polling of the general public or into
Additionally, the issue of human crime victimization surveys.
trafficking needs to be addressed
somewhere in this framework, for
example in 5.2 or 10.7.
(Indicator 16.3.1) Exclusive focus on
”victims of violence” is too
constrictive to properly satisfy this
target, particularly the commitment to
“promote the rule of law . . . and
ensure equal access to justice for
all.” The current language prioritizes
criminal over civil disputes. The
current language would not account
for reporting of business and
investment disputes to “competent
authorities or other officially
recognized conflict resolution
mechanism.” Recommend adoption
of the broader phrasing of the UNDP
Virtual Network Report on Goal 16
language for this indicator: “those
who have experienced a dispute.”
From the same report, also
recommend adoption of 16.3o, p & q
as a package that provides a
business and investment
perspective. The reputable World
Bank Group’s “Doing Business” and
“Investing Across Borders” initiatives
offer existing datasets to support
effective measurement and tracking
of the proposed broader language
focused on “disputes.”
This target must be completed by This target must be completed by a This target must be completed by a
a group of recommendations, group of recommendations, papers, group of recommendations, papers,
papers, and data to guide to and data to guide to states the best and data to guide to states the best way
states the best way reach it. A way reach it. A solidarity cooperation reach it. A solidarity cooperation policy
solidarity cooperation policy policy between nations is highly between nations is highly relevant.
relevant.
16.3.1 Percentage of people who live 16.4.1 Number of countries which have
within reasonable reach of affordable put in place and strengthened
and effective basic legal service independent institutions and agencies
providers and of a justice institution responsible for preventing illicit financial
whose resolutions are fair, timely and flows: 1. Countries sign, ratify and
enforced report on ATT 2. reduction in number of
illicit financial flows 3. reduction in
Drawn from number of incidents related to
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.o organized crime (deaths, torture,
rg/sites/default/files/measuring- extortion, bribery) 4. reduction in the
justice-20140303.pdf gap between number of stolen assets
and number of returned assets 5.
16.3.2 Percentage of people who decrease in the perception of drug-
express confidence in justice related crime in neighborhood
systems and dispute resolution
1. ATT monitoring body 2. National
16.3.3 Number of public defenders, financial bodies and CSOs 3. National
and defenders provided through police crime data and CSOs 4. National
legal aid, and law clinics per 100,000 police records/ archives of stolen assets
people; 5. Annual surveys in communities most
% change in the cases handled by affected by presence of organized
public defender, legal aid, or law crime (not just perception of
clinics; % change in citizens communities targeted by organized
receiving information on legal rights; crime/ middle class)
Number of people who have
received the socialization of laws in
favor of women in both urban and
rural areas and in native languages;
% of population who know how to
access the legal system; Number of
Reformed laws which directly, or
indirectly limit access.
Court records, Public records, legal

reviews, surveys, national &
international statistics, media records
indicator:
and men aged 18- 24 who
experienced sexual violence by
age 18.
• Percentage of children aged
1-14 years who experienced any
Target 16.5: Substantially reduce corru
Target 16.6: Develop effective, accoun
•Adoption of the UN Convention •Existence of laws requiring

Against Corruption companies to disclose information,
•Date of entry into force of domestic policies and processes relating to the
anti-corruption and bribery laws and human rights impacts of their
commitments operations, including those caused by
their subsidiaries, as they relate to the
post 2015 framework [OHCHR], •
Availability of independent judicial,
parliamentary or administrative
mechanisms that have the power to
scrutinise relevant laws and policies
and/orprovide effective remedies for
violations of human rights standards
that are relevant to the development
goals, •Proportion of population
satisfied with the quality of public
services, disaggregated by service,
•Perception of public sector
corruption/corruption in service
delivery, •Ranking on Transparency
International’s Corruption Perception
Index, •Perception that the
government will be responsive to a
concern/grievance communicated by
significant percentage of the
population, •Percentage of population
who believe decision-making at all
levels is inclusive and responsive,
•Percentage of people who have
access to a complaints/ dispute
resolution mechanism and obtained a
satisfactory outcome/effective remedy.
We welcome the inclusion of an Proposed indicator 1 is unclear and
indicator on bribe-paying (which should provides only a partial picture of
be disaggregated along lines of sex, government effectiveness. It is also
age and income, at least). We also difficult to assess when fiscal reports
advocate for additional, more are not produced and made available.
comprehensive indicator(s) to a) As an alternative, we support the IBP
measure everyday people's perception proposal.
of how their governments manage Alternative: Regular reporting on
public resources for sustainable budgeted vs. actual revenues and
development and b) track the expenditures, disaggregated by type
permissive environment which of revenue and by sector/sub-sector
facilitates corruption. We would urge Previously, an indicator (16.6.2) was
that special attention is paid to ensure proposed that sought to capture public
that the whole community (especially satisfaction with service delivery. We
those most marginalized) are counted urge the reinstatement of this or a
in these perception surveys, rather than similar perception indicator.
just a select group of business people Additional: Proportion of population
or academic experts. satisfied with the quality of public
Additional: Percentage of people who services, disaggregated by service
believe that corruption is widespread We also suggest context-independent
throughout the government in their indicators measuring the quality and
country transparency of fiscal institutions at
Additional: Perception of fairness and the national and local levels. These
equity of fiscal policy and tax morale key fiscal governance process
Additional: Ease by which a jurisdiction indicators are essential to ensuring
can facilitate corruption participatory, equitable and legitimate
outcomes that serve the most
marginalized.
Additional: Performance and
accountability of public financial
management
% of citizens who believe that official No of countries that identify the Public
corruption is reduced concerned, inform and make them
understand Issues and receive Input,
Comment Or Reservation, Opinions
before Joint Decisions
.
No of countries that have in place
procedures for effective remedy in
cases of human rights violation
# of countries that have a framework

for ensuring reporting on activities
taken to review national laws in order
to ensure effective remedy for
noncompliance with implementation of
SDGs.
Preferred indicator: Percentage of
recommendations to strengthen
national anti-corruption frameworks
(institutional and legislative)
implemented, as identified through the
UNCAC Implementation Review
Mechanism.
Comment: This has currently been

suggested under target 16.6 but
probably fits better here as a
measurement of 16.5. The current
proposal is relevant but limited – it does
not deal with systemic issues or the
facilitation of corruption.
The proposed indicator addressing
government expenditure is assessing
economic efficiency, thus irrelevant for
the target, which aims at developing
effective, accountable and transparent
institutions. The second indicator is
relevant for the transparency aspect of
the target. Hence, the effectiveness
and accountability aspects of the
targets are not addressed. As 16.6. is
a key target that address the
institutional capacity required for the
realisation of the entire agenda, the
first indicator need to be replaced by
an adequate indicator that addresses
effectiveness and accountability. One
such indicator could be the existence
of an independent National Human
Rights Institution in compliance with
the Paris principles, as per UN
General Assembly Resolution 48/134
of 1993.
16.6.2 - add Transparancy after
"quality of services"
na - see 16.4 only na - see 16.4 only
[NM: Cord] Cord broadly supports the [NM: Cord] Cord recommends
existing language within this suggested withdrawing the first suggested
indicator, with the exception of a small indicator for Target 16.6, and replacing
number of recommended changes of it with the following suggested
language as follows: indicator:
Percentage of persons considered
Percentage of persons who had at satisfied with the accessibility and
least one experience of paying a bribe quality of their local and national
to a public official, or were asked for a public services; by service, sex, age,
bribe by a public official, during the last location, and population group
12 months. Disaggregate by age, sex,
location and population group. Cord believes that the question of
access to information and government
transparency must also be monitored
in support of this target, in order to
develop a more complete picture and
understanding of the levels of
effectiveness, accountability and
transparency of specific public
institutions.
We therefore recommend editing the

second suggested indicator as follows:
Percentage of recommendations to
strengthen national anti-corruption
frameworks (institutional and
legislative), access to information, and
government transparency
implemented, as identified through the
UNCAC Implementation Review
Mechanism; by service and location
An indicator similar to the previously

suggested indicator 16.6.2, regarding
satisfcation with public services, would
be a useful measure for this target,
focusing on effectiveness and
accountability of institutions.
Separate goals must all be subject to
the one essential goal, of design and
planning for cultural growth for whole
societies.
The indicator appears to be quite
naïve: percentage of population
seeking to bribe a public official or
having a public official attempting to
bribe someone is virtually impossible to
credibly measure.
- Existence of institutionalized, open
and accessible accountability
mechanisms at all levels
- Public budget for basic services as a
percentage of total approved budget
- Government expenditures for basic
services as a percentage of original
approved budget
It has to end totally corutipn in Very good

governance and put in safe.
Proportions of positions (by sex,
disability, HIV status and population
groups) in public institutions (national
and local legislatures, public service,
and judiciary) compared to national
distributions
Include people living with HIV in
assessment of proportional
representation, or voluntary reporting
of HIV status in proposed indicators,
as well as gender, age and other
factors.
Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) and
the International Commission of
Jurists (ICJ) recommend the two
the judiciary
- This indicator aligns with the existing
OHCHR Rule of Law Indicator n.57
and is related to current targets 16.3,
16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and 16a.
mandate and authority to protect the
independence and role of of the legal
profession, in compliance with the
United Nations Basic Principles on the
Role of Lawyers.”
- This indicator completes the current
indicator proposed under Target 16.a
concerning the existence of a national
human rights institution. It is related to
targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and
16a
- The International Bar Association is a
professional organization gathering
more than 200 national bar
Regarding the current proposed
indicator ‘Primary government
expenditures as a percentage of
original approved budget’, it is not
clear what is meant by ‘primary’, nor
does it refer to transparency of fiscal
reports, which is critical for
accountable institutions. We propose
‘Regular public reporting on budgeted
vs. actual revenues and expenditures,
disaggregated by type of revenue and
by sector/sub-sector.’
The Open Budget Survey, the only

independent, comparative, and
regular measure of budget
transparency and accountability
around the world, complements Public
Expenditure and Financial
Accountability (PEFA) assessments as
a source of data for this indicator. The
International Budget Partnership and
independent researchers in 102
countries produce the survey.
Alternative to Indicator 16.5.2,
indicators for Target 3.a: Strengthen the
implementation of the World Health
Organization Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control in all countries
could be used under Target 16.5 e.g.
Proportion of countries in which the
Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in
Tobacco Products is in force. Similar
suggestions include proportion of
countries implementing restrictions on
advertisement of unhealthy food and
drinks or proportion of countries that
have regulations for transparent
labellings on ingredients in processed
foods throughout the food chain.
Additional Indicators:
- Percentage of people considered

satisfied with the accessibility and
quality of their local and national
justice system.
- Average time for reported crimes to

appear before court.
Diasggregate indicator by income Indicator 16.6.2: Proportion of
population satisfied with the quality of
public services, disaggregated by
service should be retained.
“They treat us like animals. We
endured insulting remarks such as,
‘Why did you give birth to so many
children, like a rabbit?’ (Words by a
person living in poverty"
ATD Fourth World has found that the
quality of a service can sharply
influence peoples’ propensity to use
them. 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.
A target value may be possible No comments
(transparency international)
a) Public perception surveys show that a) Public perception shows that
people believe the rule of law exists in people have trust in their national
practice, and the prevalence of Parliament, political parties and local
corruption is low and/or declining. governance.
b) Reduction in corruption at local, b) Increase in Open Budget Index
regional and national levels of state. score (transparency and participation
in public budgeting).
c) Increase in overall Rule of Law
index score (e.g using World Justice
Project index).
d) Improvement in equity and
effectiveness of public services (with
access to services disaggregated by
gender, region, ethnicity, etc.).
e) Open, competitive, and transparent
contract allocation processes are
enshrined in laws which are
consistently implemented.
1. Accountable budget preparation,
execution and audit.
2. Budget allocation, utilization and
benefits accrued are tracked as per
social groups, particularly vulnerable
and marginalised social groups and
available in public domain.
1. Accountable budget preparation,
execution and audit.
The transparency part of the target is
under-represented here. Transparency
in certain contexts is one of the topics
of UNCAC review, but addressed only
in a limited way. Accountability, as is
noted under 16.6.2, is addressed very
indirectly, if at all. The proposed
indicators perhaps measure aspects
of abuse of power or effectiveness,
but do not get to the core of
accountability – e.g. public standards,
redress, answerability. The proposed
indicators, therefore, fail to do justice
to the ambition of the target, and are
insufficient to enable assessment of
progress. Instead, a new indicator or
indicator component should be
developed to measure the
accountability of institutions. Here and
under 16.7, the wider health of civil
society is critical, and might be
indicated by measuring the
representativeness of civil society
institutions (such as the media).
- Priority Indicator 1: Percentage of - Priority Indicator 1: Proportion of
persons who had at least one contact population satisfied with their last
with a public official, who paid a bribe experience of public services,
to a public official, or were asked for a disaggregated by service
bribe by these public officials, during
the last 12 months The anti-corruption focus of the 2nd
suggested indicator captures too little
- Priority Indicator 2: Percentage of of the target’s ambition and lacks
recommendations to strengthen aspirational and outcome orientation.
national anti-corruption frameworks Priority indicator 1 was evaluated and
(institutional and legislative) recommended by the TST and Virtual
implemented, as identified through the Network, is framed from people’s
UNCAC Implementation Review perspective, is well established among
Mechanism NSOs in developed and developing
countries and is currently collected
We recommend that the IAEG keep the through numerous surveys including
suggested indicator. If the IAEG is to various NSOs, the World Value
include the indicator on UNCAC Survey, Gallup, and Regional
recommendations, we suggest it be Barometers.
included under target 16.5.
- Priority Indicator 2: Open Budget
Index Score
The 1st suggested indicator can be

improved. IBP annually produces the
open budget survey measuring the
extent of public participation and
access to national public budget
information and processes. The
survey is easy to understand and the
last round included 102 countries and
can be expanded.
PROPOSAL: (Suggested indicator):
“Basic services and executed by
accountable public services as a
proportion of all basic services funded
with public revenues”
COMMENT: Endorse PEFA
suggestion and OECD placeholder
16.6.2: COMMENT: Do not endorse

the current suggested replacement.
The public service must be qualified
as either carried out by public service
employees, or as outsourced and
carried out by a delegated private
sector entity, either for-profit or not-for
profit
KEEP: "Percentage of persons who REMOVE: "Primary government
had at least one contact with a public expenditures as a percentage of
official, who paid a bribe to a public original approved budget"
official, or were asked for a bribe by
these public officials, during the last 12 REPLACE WITH: "Proportion of
months." population satisfied with the quality of
ADD: "Percentage of people who service" - This indicator directly
believe that corruption is widespread measures people’s experiences of
throughout the government in their institutions. It has been used by NSOs
country" - Vital to make attempt to in several contexts over a long period
monitor corruption at high levels, as of time.
this is the kind of corruption that robs
public funds vital for development. This REMOVE: "Percentage of
perception indicator could serve as a recommendations to strengthen
useful complement to the other more national anti-corruption frameworks
objective indicator – and perceptions of (institutional and legislative)
corruption have been shown to implemented, as identified through the
correlate with experiences of UNCAC Implementation Review
corruption. Data for this indicator are Mechanism"
currently gathered through Gallup’s
World Poll and Transparency REPLACE WITH: "Open Budget Index
International’s Corruption Perceptions Score" - Focusing on an important
Index, demonstrating the high feasibility aspect of governance, this capacity
of this indicator. It could be added to indicator would help measure
household, victimisation or national transparency and access to
polling surveys. This indicator could be information in a country. As well as
collected by a third party independent requiring improvements in coverage
of the state. and timeliness, this indicator could be
challenged on the basis of subjectivity.
Nonetheless, it should be noted that
expert assessments from third parties
similar to this have been proposed as
indicators in other goals. The indicator
could also be used for 16.10 and 16.b
RETAIN INDICATOR RECOMMEND PRIORITISING THIS
UNSC INITIALLY PROPOSED
RATIONALE: Children, who constitute INDICATOR AS A PRIMARY
more than 30% of the world's SUGGESTED INDICATOR: Proportion
population and who are more of population satisfied with: their last
dependent on public services for their experience of public services,
survival and development than any disaggregated by service.
other group, come into contact with
public service providers on a daily RATIONALE: The UNSC initially
basis and very often encounter suggested indicator captures real
corruption and bribery. In view of this, change due to work of effective
the indicator must also be institutions as perceived by the
disaggregated by age. beneficiaries of these services and
should therefore be considered as the
Where children are not able to express primary suggested indicator for this
their own views, the household surveys target. It is important that the indicator
and victimisation surveys should be is disaggregated by age and that
designed so that their caregivers could perception surveys used to measure
provide the information. this indicator are designed to capture
the perceptions of children.
There are methodologies and tools
developed at national, regional and
international levels to capture children’s
perceptions on public policy-making,
governance and service delivery that
could be adapted to capture the views
of children in relation to this indicator.
For example, see
http://www.childrightsconnect.org/govts
pendingsurvey
KEEP the current IAEG proposal: 1. Remove the current proposed
Percentage of persons who had at indicator on primary government
least one contact with a public official, expenditures that is very specific and
who paid a bribe to a public official, or only provides a partial picture of
were asked for a bribe by these public government effectiveness. Consider
officials, during the last 12 months. the ALTERNATE: 'Proportion of
service'. This indicator directly
measures people’s experiences of
institutions. It has been used by NSOs
in several contexts over a long period
of time.
2. The current proposed indicator

focusing on 'strengthening national
anti-corruption frameworks' is a
corruption-focused indicator dealing
with processes rather than actual
outcomes. It should be removed.
Consider the ALTERNATE:
'Percentage of population who
considers that state security providers
do a good job.'This is a more specific
alternative from the previous indicator.
It focuses on the security sector, an
important aspect of governance, this
capacity indicator would help measure
people’s experience and perception in
security sector / state security
providers.
16.5: Existence of the right to access to 16.6: 1)Existence of special measures
translation in legal proceedings to strengthen capacity of indigenous
recognized in national constitutions or peoples’ representative institutions; 2)
other forms of superior or domestic law existence and capacity of NHRI to
reach out to vulnerable groups such
as indigenous peoples; 3) institutional
mechanisms and procedures for
consultation with indigenous peoples,
in accordance with international
standards.
The proposed indicator has already The first suggested indicator is very
been used comprehensively around the specific and only provides a partial
world. People’s experience with bribery picture of government effectiveness.
has a strong and positive correlation
with perceptions of public sector Alternate suggested indicator:
corruption and other SDG targets. The “Proportion of population satisfied with
indicator is feasible and sustainable. the quality of public services,
disaggregated by service”
Data exists from regional surveys (e.g
Afrobarometer, Latinobarometer and This alternate indicator directly
Eurobarometer) as well as global measures people’s experiences of
surveys (e.g. Transparency institutions. It has been used by NSOs
International). Findings must be in several contexts over a long period
disaggregated (by gender, age, of time. Additionally, other surveys and
income, ethnicity, disability, sector and data from non-official sources have
urban/rural). Also, the definition for been used to measure these
public official must be aligned with the perceptions – including in
UN Convention against Corruption marginalized communities.
(Article 2). In addition, an indicator
about people’s perceptions of whether The second suggested indicator
their government is effectively should be moved from 16.6 to either
addressing corruption should be 16.5, 16.b or 16.10.
included. Existing data is available (e.g.
from UNODC, Gallup, and TI). As an alternative, we would suggest
an alternate indicator of “Open Budget
Index Score.” IBP biennially produces
the open budget survey measuring the
transparency and comprehensiveness
of national public budget information,
extent of public participation and
strength of oversight institutions and
includes 102 countries.
The proposed indicator has already The first suggested indicator is very
been used comprehensively around the specific and only provides a partial
world. Governments and other actors picture of government effectiveness.
have successfully used this indicator to
track changes in corruption. People’s Alternate suggested indicator:
experience with bribery has a strong “Proportion of population satisfied with
and positive correlation with the quality of public services,
perceptions of public sector corruption disaggregated by service”
and other SDG targets. The indicator is
feasible and sustainable. This alternate indicator directly
measures people’s experiences of
Data exists from regional surveys (e.g institutions. It has been used by NSOs
Afrobarometer, Latinobarometer and in several contexts over a long period
Eurobarometer) as well as global of time. Additionally, other surveys and
surveys (e.g. Transparency data from non-official sources have
International). Findings must be been used to measure these
disaggregated (by gender, age, perceptions – including in
income, ethnicity, disability, sector and marginalized communities.
urban/rural). Also, the definition for
public official must be aligned with the The second suggested indicator
UN Convention against Corruption should be moved from 16.6 to either
(Article 2). In addition, an indicator 16.5, 16.b or 16.10.
about people’s perceptions of whether
their government is effectively As an alternative, we would suggest
addressing corruption should be an alternate indicator of “Open Budget
included. Existing data is available (e.g. Index Score.” IBP biennially produces
from UNODC, Gallup, and TI). Another the open budget survey measuring the
complementary indicator could be the transparency and comprehensiveness
“Annual volume of state prosecuted of national public budget information,
complaint cases” (quantitative, data extent of public participation and
source compiled by UNODC). strength of oversight institutions and
includes 102 countries.
Target 16.6. Current suggested

indicators are related to national
budgets and corruption. Other
proposed indicators:
• ALTERNATIVE: Percentage of
people saying that they trust/have
confidence in national and sub-
national governments (disaggregated
by different levels of government)
• We support the proposed
indicator 16.6.2: “Proportion of
service” but amended: Proportion of
population satisfied with their access
to, and the quality of, public services,
by sex, age, wealth, location/region,
and disability (for this indicator see
also below target 16.b.2)
The proposed indicators do not fully
measure Target 16.6, which specifies
the need “to develop effective,
accountable and transparent
institutions at all levels” (emphasis
added). In order to support more
effective and well-resourced sub-
national and local governance
capacities, indicator(s) in support of
this target should measure primary
expenditures as percentage of
approved budget at the national,
state/provincial, and local/municipal
levels.
Similarly, proposed Indicator 16.6.2
measuring proportion of population
satisfied with quality of public services
should be disaggregated not only by
the type of service but also the level of
government providing it.
There is also a growing global
movement for “open” government data
at all levels, which this target could
support with an indicator that
measures “government data publicly
available at all levels (national and
subnational), as recommended by the
Global Taskforce of Local and
Regional Governments.

group of recommendations, papers, group of recommendations, papers,
and data to guide to states the best and data to guide to states the best
way reach it. A solidarity cooperation way reach it. A solidarity cooperation
policy between nations is highly policy between nations is highly
relevant. relevant.
16.5.1 Number of countries which have
open budget sufficient for the public to
access national budget information: 1.
countries have transparent and
detailed national budget (Open Budget
index); 2. Transparency in political
party donations; 3. reduction in the
number of bribes accepted by national
officials; 4. reduction in the number of
people who offered bribes to national
officials; 5. reduction in the perception
of people that their government is
corrupt
1. Ministries of Finance (and CSOs on

Open Budget Index) 2. National bodies
responsible for election monitoring and
private sector 3. National ombudsman
for monitoring government agencies
and private sector auditing services 4.
Annual surveys 5. Annual surveys
Strengths: Data is more or less

currently available, reporting would
require coordination and pooling from
sources.
The second suggested indicator on
anti-corruption frameworks does not
belong under target 16.6, but rather
under 16.5. Proposed indicator 16.6.1
alone is not sufficient, and should be
supplemented by others. On proposed
indicator 16.6.2, we agree that
effectiveness of public service delivery
should be part of target 16.6’s
measurement. We would propose a
new indicator: "The proportion of
[alternatively, the proportion of the
population living in areas where]
national and subnational institutions
developed systems for monitoring and
proactively disseminating information
on environmental quality, trends and
pressures that impact public health
and safety, livelihoods and
development pathways." This would
include air and water quality (including
drinking water), toxic storage and
release, facility level pollution
information, and pressures on forests
and marine ecosystems. WRI has
begun this measurement with the
Environmental Democracy Index.
Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inc
Target 16.8: Broaden and strengthen
•The percentage of laws that have

been subject to public consultation
and parliamentary scrutiny prior to
coming into force, •Formulation of
strategies and policies to actively
promote participation by
marginalised and disadvantaged
groups in public policy decision-
making, •Ratification of international
human rights treaties, relevant to
the right to participation in public
affairs [OHCHR], •Date of entry into
force and coverage of domestic
laws for implementing the right to
participate in public affairs,
including freedom of opinion,
expression, information, media,
association and assembly
[OHCHR], •Date of entry into force
of universal suffrage, right to vote,
right to stand for election, legal
provisions defining citizenship on
permanent residents with respect to
the right to participate in public
affairs at the national and local level
[OHCHR], •Date of entry into force
and coverage of legal provisions
guaranteeing access to public
service positions without
discrimination [OHCHR]
Propose:
Proportion of countries with CSOs

and citizen’s groups participating in
government planning and
budgeting processes in
institutionalised mechanisms.
Rationale: The presence of
institutionalised mechanisms for
civil society participation in policy is
a strong indicator of inclusive and
participatory decision-making.
Relevance: Current quantitative
indicator does not highlight whether
groups have real influence around
important issues such as budget
planning. Christian Aid recommend
to add an indicator on budget
openness and number of countries
applying gender budgeting tools.
Aptness: Qualitative indicator

needed to ensure having influence
and that groups are being included
in an appropriate manner for
example that is sensitive to
language, cultural and gender
barriers to participation.
Disaggregation/ Preference: The

current quantitative indicator is
disaggregated and weighted (for
some groups). It creates a
preference for young people but not
for other groups without equity
targets.
Transformative: Structural target

that will involve changes in
institutional frameworks and
practices in many countries.
Process change captured in “youth”
indicator, but not for broader
objectives.
The indicators suggested will only
provide a very partial picture of how
far countries are meeting this
target. Public participation in
budgeting and other aspects of
fiscal policy is an essential
component of any public finance
management system and decision-
making process.
These key fiscal governance
process indicators are essential to
ensuring participatory, equitable
and legitimate outcomes that serve
the most marginalized.
Additional: 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
policy-making (including the fiscal
policy cycle), at all levels from local
to global
Additional: Share of tax and budget
laws and policies subject to
periodic, participatory gender
equality and human rights
analyses, and public expenditure
tracking
or
(as suggested by IBP) Extent to
which the executive and/or the
legislature receive inputs through
written submissions or public
meetings from citizens during the
budget cycle, and provide feedback
on the use of such inputs.
already suggested
Increase in # of people attending No of countries that have framework
town meetings organized by local for ensuring Compliance and
govt. Monitoring
Increase in % of local governments No of indicators for measuring the

that hold town meetings in the last commitment of wealthy countries to
year before making decision development
No of states that involve local No of indicators for measuring the

people in budgeting and financial Lack of sufficient sensitivity to country
auditing and publicly publish the context.
results of such audits
No of indicators for measuring
participation of people from poorer
# of well publicized government’s countries in the process and
meetings open to citizens & CSOs negotiation of goals by wealthy
country representatives
No of countries that have

frameworks for participation of civil
society, and women’s groups in
particular, in the project of target
setting;
Proposed indicator: Number of

policies and programs for economic
citizenship designed through the
active participation of children and
youth.
Proposed indicator: Number of jobs

created for youth by governments
through skills training programs.
Preferred indicator: Budget
Openness AND Number of
countries applying gender-
budgeting tools
[NM: Cord] While Cord is satisfied [NM: Cord] Cord has no significant
with the language in the first recommended changes to the
suggested indicator, we would suggested indicator apart from some
recommend that the second small edits around language, as
suggested indicator is edited in the follows:
following way:
Percentage of developing countries
Proportion of national governments as members with voting rights in key
that are able to evidence international organizations (e.g. the
institutional strategies for inclusion United Nations Security Council)
within their national development
plans and poverty reduction
strategies; by public service,
location, and population group
Cord would also recommend

including an additional indicator, as
follows:
Proportion of national governments

that are able to evidence active
consultation with the most
marginalised population groups
concerning how to maximise their
participation in decision making
processes at all levels; by public
service, location, and population
group
Cord argues that this additional

indicator would help to monitor the
extent to which national
governments actively encourage
the participation of the most
marginalised population groups in
any one country.
We consider both suggested
indicators for this target to be
appropriate and useful. We strongly
support the second suggested
indicator regarding the proportion of
countries that address young
people's needs with their national
development plans and poverty
reduction strategies. The indicator
could be further improved with the
inclusion of reference to rights and
the recognition that young people's
needs must be defined by young
people themselves in each national
context.
Separate goals must all be subject
to the one essential goal, of design
and planning for cultural growth for
whole societies.
Indigenous peoples and other
cultural and ethnic minorities face
particular issues of
underrepresentation. The IAEG
must explore ways to disaggregate
these indicators by ethnicity and
disaggregation by ethnicity should
be specified in the indictor.
- Distribution and quantity of civil
society representation in policy-
making at all levels
Very good Very important in democracy

development
Proportions of positions (by sex,
disability, HIV status, and
population groups) in public
institutions (national and local
legislatures, public service, and
judiciary) compared to national
distributions
Include people living with HIV in
assessment of proportional
representation, or voluntary
reporting of HIV status in proposed
indicators, as well as gender, age
and other factors.
16.7.1 Diversity in representation in

key decision-making bodies
(legislature, executive, and
judiciary)
We support this indicator, as
proposed by EOSG/RoLU, PBSO,
UNDP, UNODC and others, with the
inclusion of ‘the media’ among the
bodies to be monitored: i.e.
‘Proportion of positions by sex in
public institutions (national and
local legislatures, public service
including the media, judiciary)
compared to national distributions.’
Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
and the International Commission
of Jurists (ICJ) recommend the two
the judiciary
- This indicator aligns with the
existing OHCHR Rule of Law
Indicator n.57 and is related to
current targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7,
16.10 and 16a.
mandate and authority to protect
the independence and role of of the
legal profession, in compliance with
the United Nations Basic Principles
on the Role of Lawyers.”
- This indicator completes the
current indicator proposed under
Target 16.a concerning the
existence of a national human
rights institution. It is related to
targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and
16a
- The International Bar Association
is a professional organization
gathering more than 200 national
bar associations worldwide
We support the proposed indicator Regarding ‘Indicator 16.10.1
‘Extent to which legislature Percentage of actual government
conducts public hearings during budget, procurement, revenues and
budget cycle.’ It offers a precise natural resource concessions that are
measure of participatory decision- publicly available and easily
making. Support for public accessible (BBA)’, bundling these
participation in budgeting is elements together makes it difficult to
enshrined in the Global Initiative for measure their public availability and
Fiscal Transparency High-Level accessibility as a percentage. On
Principles endorsed by UN General budgets, at least five budget
Assembly Resolution 67/218. The documents should be made publically
IMF included public participation as available in a timely manner
an indicator in its revised Fiscal (Executive’s Budget Proposal,
Transparency Code, as did the Enacted Budget, Year-End Report,
OECD in its Principles of Budgetary Audit Report, and Citizens Budget).
Governance. The International Each should provide breakdowns
Budget Partnership surveyed public according to expenditure allocated
participation in the budget process and spent towards each of the SDGs.
in 100 countries for the Open
Budget Survey (OBS) 2012 and We suggest the following indicator:
102 countries for the OBS 2015.
The indicator could be broadened Extent to which budget information,
to include the executive and how including expected and actual on-
public inputs are taken into budget and off-budget revenue and
account. We propose the following: expenditure, procurement, and
Extent to which the executive natural resource concessions, is
and/or the legislature receive inputs publicly available and easily
through written submissions or accessible in open data format.
public meetings from citizens during
the budget cycle, and provide
feedback on the use of such inputs.
The OBS, a biennial assessment
that will soon expand to cover more
countries, serves as a source of
data for this indicator.
• Gender identity and sexual
orientation could also be added to
the proportions of the population
measured.
• Currently the indicator does not

explicitly address “participatory” and
“responsive.” The indicators below
could address these aspects:
- Number of times in which the
public and civil society
organizations are invited to
comment on policy and legal
initiatives, compared to the number
of policy and legal initiatives in the
last twelve months.
- Proportions of the public and civil
society organizations that believe
that the government provides them
adequate time, opportunity, and
information to comment on policy
and legal initiatives. (survey/poll)
- Proportions of the public and civil
society organizations that believe
that the government genuinely
considers their comments on policy
or legal initiatives. (survey/poll)
Suggested indicator to measure
this target should be disaggregated
by income to measure inclusivity in
decision making for all economic
groups.
Indicator 16.7.2: Percentage of
population who believe decision-
making at all levels is inclusive and
responsive should be part of the
indicators to measure target 16.7
as it is the only indicator that
measures non-gendered
participation.
Participation is another issue that is
most effectively captured through
people’s perceptions. 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.
a) National politics and governance
take place in a pluralist multiparty
setting.
b) Voter turnout increased (with
data disaggregated by gender,
region, ethnicity, etc.).
c) Percentage of people
participating in political parties and
civil society organizations increased
(with data disaggregated by gender,
region, ethnicity, etc.).
d) Percentage of youth, women and
marginalized groups in decision-
making bodies at all levels.
e) National and local governance
structures enabling participation of
all are in place and enforced.
f) Existence of laws and strategies
to actively ban and prevent
discrimination against any person
or group.
g) Existence of national strategies
for civil society participation.
h) Public surveys show that people,
especially the most marginalized
ones, can engage effectively in
civic activities, including
policymaking, budgeting and other
public processes.
1. Population proportionate
representation across social groups
ensured in all decision making
bodies at all levels.
2. Orientation and training to
representatives of socially excluded
and marginalised communities to
fulfill their role and responsibilities.
3. Issues of socially excluded,
marginalised and vulnerable
population groups are mandatory
agenda and reporting points in the
meetings of all decision-making
bodies at all levels.
4. Instituted support mechanisms
to address grievances from
and marginalised communities on
priority basis.
5. Special fund allocation to
address grievances and support
grievances raised by
and marginalised communities
1. Special mechanisms available
to educate and ensure legal identity
among marginalised communities,
vulnerable populations, nomadic
communities and migrants,
The current highlighted indicators
are insufficient to capture the core
of the target. Responsive, inclusive
and participatory decision making
are not addressed. The UNFPA-
suggested indicator on young
people's multisectoral needs -
currently highlighted in blue - fails a
basic test of fidelity: it does not
address 'decision making' at all,
and it also leaves other
marginalised groups behind,
making it deeply problematic.
A new indicator for target 16.7

should be adopted measuring
voting rights for all citizens in
systems of representative
governance with regular multi-party
elections at local, sub-national and
national levels (in addition to
regional and global levels, bearing
in mind the target on this). The
presence of the proposed indicator
16.8 analysing voting rights for
states within international
organisations shows the feasibility
of such a measure.
- Priority Indicator 1: Percentage of
total population who believe
decision-making is inclusive and
responsive
The 2nd suggested indicator is not

well constructed, easy to
communicate nor comprehensive in
covering the ambition of the target.
Priority Indicator 1 was evaluated
and recommended by the Virtual
Network and TST, is relevant for the
target’s focus, easy to
communicate, feasible to gather
through existing, well established
methodologies and more accurately
reflects the balance and ambition
sought through the SDG outcome
document.
We suggest to add a third indicator

that would address the specific
needs of indigenous peoples and
the internationally recognized right
and principle of Free, Prior and
Informed Consent. We suggest to
add the following indicator:
“Number of policies that recognize
the duty to consult and cooperate in
good faith with indigenous peoples
and local communities to obtain
their free, prior, and informed
consent before adopting and
implementing legislative of
administrative measures that may
affect them”
Proposal: 16.7.1 Percentage of
making is inclusive and responsive
Rationale: Plan International,
aligned with the TAP Network,
recommends a reversion to this
previously recommended indicator.
This outcome indicator was
evaluated and recommended by
the Virtual Network on Goal 16
Indicators, is relevant for the
communicate, and feasible to
gather through existing, well-
established methodologies.
Amendment: 16.7.2 Proportion of

countries that address children and
young people's multisectoral needs
with their national development
plans and poverty reduction
strategies including mechanisms for
young people to actively participate
in the policy making process.
Rationale: Plan International
strongly supports the inclusion of
suggested indicator 2 which
recognises young people, and
children, as ‘agents of change’
whose needs must be met. We also
advocate for explicit recognition
that children and young people
have a right to participate in
decision-making that affects them,
including in the development of
relevant multisectoral policies.
Volunteer groups and civil society
organizations that engage
volunteers play a vital role in easing
conflicts around the world and are
crucial actors in building
accountable and inclusive
institutions.
● peaceful dialogues and
facilitate reconciliation efforts.
● monitor national and private
institutions.
● inclusion of marginalized
communities the world over.
● promotion of fair and impartial
justice systems.
In order to participate effectively

and build peaceful and inclusive
societies, policies and legislation
must facilitate the engagement of
citizens and volunteers. Current
indicator 16.7.2 could thus be
usefully strengthened by going
beyond the perception of inclusive
and responsive decision-making, to
empirical measures of an enabling
environment for inclusive and
responsive decision-making.
Proposed indicator: National

Development frameworks and
plans to support sustainable
development, access to justice and
good governance that include
meaningful civic engagement,
including volunteerism
16.7.1: COMMENT: Endorse
ROSG/RoLU et al. suggested
replacement
We strongly support the call from
the Virtual Network to include the
suggested indicator under 16.7:
“Proportions of positions (by AGE,
sex, disability and population
groups) in public institutions
(national and local legislatures,
public service, and judiciary)
compared to national distributions.”
Data on on participatory decision-

making is a long identified gap -
especially for youth - which is why
disaggregation by age is crucial.
Although this is currently our
preferred global level indicator, we
also feel that we should note that
third-party and citizen-generated
data should be collected at the
national level to compliment, verify
and give the most accurate picture
of inclusion and progress.
KEEP BUT IMPROVED KEEP BUT IMPROVED WORDING:
WORDING: Proportions of positions "Percentage of members or voting
held by different age, sex, disability rights of developing countries in
and population groups in public international decision-making bodies "
institutions (national and local - This would capture voting rights
legislatures, public service, and within multiple bodies in international
judiciary) compared to national organisations – such as the UN
distributions. Security Council within the wider UN
or the board of governors in the World
REMOVE: "Proportion of countries Bank.
that address young people's
multisectoral needs with their
national development plans and
poverty reduction strategies" - too
specific
REPLACE WITH: "Percentage of

population who believe they can
influence policy-making 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 feelings of
responsiveness and inclusiveness
as it relates to decision-making.
While there are currently no known
global data sources for this
indicator, it would be feasible to add
it into existing national polls or
household surveys.
RECOMMEND PRIORITISING
THIS UNSC INITIALLY
PROPOSED INDICATOR AS A
PRIMARY SUGGESTED
INDICATOR: Percentage of
making at all levels is inclusive and
responsive.
RATIONALE: 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
this UNSC originally suggested
indicator 2 is considered the
primary suggested indicator for this
target. Children, who constitute
more than 30% of the world's
population, have a right to be
involved in public decision-making.
Their participation as actors in civil
society and in public decision-
making can also assist
governments to design more
accurate and relevant interventions
for children and allocate resources
more effectively. In view of this, the
indicator should be disaggregated
by age and track to what extent
children believe decision-making is
inclusive and responsive. Please
see above under target 16.5 for
information about methodologies
and tools.
16.7.1 Proportion of countries that
address young people’s
multisectoral needs with their
national development plans and
poverty reduction strategies
including mechanisms for young
people to actively participate in the
policy making process.
DATA SOURCE: UNFPA COAR

database

UNFPA
TIER: Tier III
NOTES: Unequal power relations at

the family, community, and
institutional level mean that girls
and women often lack voice and
influence in decision-making.
16.7.2 Percentage of population

levels is inclusive and responsive
1. Keep the proposed indicator on
'Proportions of positions (by age,
groups) in public institutions (...)'.
2. REMOVE: 'Proportion of
countries that address young
people's multisectoral needs with
their national development plans
and poverty reduction strategies'.
This indicator only measures
representativeness and
responsiveness to one social group
(youth). It is too specific.
3. Consider the ALTERNATE:

'Percentage of population who
believe they can influence policy-
making in their country'. This
perception indicator would reflect
people’s views on the essence of
the target. It has a broader scope
than elections. Source of data
would be national polls or
household surveys.
Data on inclusive, participatory and

representative decision-making at
all levels, disaggregated by gender,
age, race, ethnicity, indigenous
identity, income, rural/urban
residence, national origin, and
migration status.
Should be measured by the

creation of formal mechanisms of
participation for groups of
population that are traditionally left
behind.
Indicator 16.7.1: Change to:
Diversity in representation in key
decision-making bodies (legislature,
executive, and judiciary), with
disaggregation by sex, age, region
and other prohibited grounds of
discrimination
Indicator 16.7.2: Percentage of

population, by age, sex, region, and
other prohibited grounds of
discrimination. who believe
decision-making at all levels is
inclusive and responsive
We support UNFPA call for

disaggregation by sex, age, region
and other prohibited grounds of
discrimination.
We agree with the intent of We recommend the an indicator
measuring inclusion at all levels, measuring the ‘percentage of people
but emphasise the importance of with voting rights who actively
linked-up thinking in measuring participate in voting’
cross-level participation, rather than
assessing participation of only
marginalised actors within local
silos. To this end, there is a clear
need for weighting of
‘satisfactory/meaningful’ levels of
participatory from the vantage point
of different stakeholders, i.e. an
artisanal fisher vs a staff member
from an international organisation.
16.7: 1) Number of policies that

recognize the duty to consult and
cooperate in good faith with
indigenous peoples in order to
obtain their FPIC before adopting
and implementing legislative or
administrative measures that may
affect them, 2)Provisions for direct
participation of indigenous peoples’
elected representatives in
legislative and elected bodies; 3)
Recognition in the national legal
framework of the duty to consult
with indigenous peoples before
adopting or implementing legislative
or administrative measures that
may affect them
Suggested alternate indicator: The suggested indicator for this target
"Percentage of population who should be retained. This is a fairly
believe decision-making is inclusive strong indicator. However, it would
and responsive” require the IAEG, UNDESA or
Member States to agree on which
We would recommend a reversion international organizations it applied
to the previous indicator of 16.7.2. to, as well as defining “developing
This outcome indicator was countries.”
the virtual network on goal 16
indicators, is relevant for the
document.
Alternatively, a similarly effective

option would be an indicator of
“Percentage of population who
making in their country.” This
the target and is potentially the
optimal way to measure feelings of
as it relates to decision-making. It is
also worded in a way that would be
more universal than indicators on
elections.
Suggested alternate indicator: The suggested indicator for this target
"Percentage of population who should be retained. This is a fairly
believe decision-making is inclusive strong indicator. However, it would
and responsive” require the IAEG, UNDESA or
Member States to agree on which
We would recommend a reversion international organizations it applied
to the previous indicator of 16.7.2. to, as well as defining “developing
This outcome indicator was countries.”
the virtual network on goal 16
indicators, is relevant for the
document.
Alternatively, a similarly effective

option would be an indicator of
“Percentage of population who
making in their country.” This
the target and is potentially the
optimal way to measure feelings of
as it relates to decision-making. It is
also worded in a way that would be
more universal than indicators on
elections.
Target 16.7: Suggested indicator:

Proportions of positions (by age,
groups) in public institutions
(national and local legislatures, civil
service, and judiciary) compared to
national distributions.
Target 16.7: We support indicator
16.7.2. “Percentage of population
levels is inclusive and responsive”,
but we also propose an
ALTERNATIVE INDICATOR:
“Turnout as a share of voting-age
population in national and local
elections”. (proposed by
EOSG/RoLU, PBSO, UNDP, and
UNODC in consultation with other
institutions, page 96-97)
Indicator 16.7.2 should be elevated
to a Tier 1 indicator, as it is the only
proposed indicator that measures
participatory decision-making at all
levels of government, which will be
key to supporting not just Target
16.7, but also Target 16.6 and 11.3.

group of recommendations, papers, group of recommendations, papers,
and data to guide to states the best and data to guide to states the best
way reach it. A solidarity way reach it. A solidarity cooperation
cooperation policy between nations policy between nations is highly
is highly relevant. relevant.
16.7.1 Diversity in representation in
key decision-making bodies
(legislature, executive, and
judiciary): 1. national and local
governments to publish detailed
version of national budgets, with
breakdowns on security sector
spending (data needs to be
available to encourage
participation); 2. local governments
to promote participatory budgeting
at local levels; 3. national
governments to publish white
papers and proposals for policy
changes ahead of time and
promote civil society responses; 4.
local governments to hold
interactive hearings on policy
proposals with a broad
representation of civil society and
the private sector; 5. number of
different people who have
participated in local hearings and
national policy debates;
6.Percentage of population who
believe decision-making at all levels
is inclusive and responsive; and 7.
extent to which the executive
and/or the legislature receive inputs
through written submissions or
public meetings from citizens during
the budget cycle, and provide
feedback on the use of such inputs.
The top suggested indicator would
be an excellent measure for
representative, likely inclusive, but
not necessarily for responsive or
participatory. The second
suggested indicator would be
appropriate as one of several
measurements, but we feel it is not
adequate on its own. We would
prefer the following alternatives: 1)
Percentage of population who
believe decision-making at all levels
is inclusive and responsive and 2)
"Legislatures conduct public
hearings at the enactment and
evaluation of the budget and
government reports on how inputs
were taken into account”
(International Budget Partnership –
Stakeholder Consultation Process)
and 3) Extent to which legislature
conducts public hearings during
budget cycle. WRI would also
propose a new indicator for this
target, "Whether the right for the
public to participate in planning,
policy-making, and the
development of legally-binding
rules and regulations has been
established by law.”
Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information
and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance
Target 16.9: By 2030, provide legal identity for all, with national legislation and international
including birth registration agreements
disability. The UN Human Rights Council and
Committee on the Rights of the Child have found that
children with disabilities are disproportionately
vulnerable to non-registration at birth (A/HRC/27/22
paragraph 67, CRC/C/GC/9, paragraph 35).
•Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic •International human rights treaties, relevant to the
laws, policies and standard for free and universal birth right to freedom of opinion and expression and
registration information ratified by the State [OHCHR]
•Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic
•Ratification and implementation of the Convention on laws for implementing the right to freedom of opinion
the Rights of the Child and expression and information, including availability
of judicial review of any decision taken by the State to
•Reported awareness of obligation to report births, restrict right to freedom of opinion and expression and
importance of reporting births [survey] information [OHCHR], •Existence of laws requiring
companies to disclose information, policies and
•Absence of late fees, fines or judicial procedures for processes relating to the human rights impacts of their
late registration [poses undue burden on those with operations, including those caused by their
more limited access to government authorities/civil subsidiaries [OHCHR], •Number of journalists and
registrar services - discriminatory] associated media personnel that are physically
attacked, unlawfully detained or killed as a result of
•Willingness to report births to government authorities pursuing their legitimate activities, •Proportion of
people with a legal entitlement to information held by
public bodies provided within 30 days without arbitrary
barriers (RTI), •Percentage of denial of information
requests successfully challenged, •Scope and number
of legal exceptions to right to information
In order to ensure target met for all we suggest:
Percentage of children under 5 whose births have
been registered with civil authority, disaggregated for
children with/without disabilities
We support the suggested indicator.
As proposed by the Global Forum for Media Dialogue,
Article 19, and UNESCO, we also strongly support an
indicator on the right to information, including legal
guarantees.
Additional (priority): The adoption and implementation
of legal guarantees and mechanisms ensuring public
access to information
Further additional possibilities (for more details see

cesr.org):
Additional: 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, machine-readable, detailed, timely
and accessible standard
Additional: 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
country-by-country and project-by-project basis, full
transparency in public procurement, corporate
political donations and lobbying activities
No of countries that have reformed laws on legal Number of countries that have freedom of information
identity and promote civic registeration laws
Number of countries that have signed on to promote
open data
We strongly support the suggested indicator under

target 16.9:
• Percentage of children under five whose births
are registered with civil authorities.
Children with disabilities are especially at risk of not
being registered with civil authority, and often suffer
the double impact of not being recognized officially as
citizens and being denied consequently of all rights
offered to citizens. Given this situation, disaggregation
by disability for this target is extremely important.
Suggested indicator: Percentage of children under 5
whose births have been registered with civil authority,
disaggregated for children with/without disabilities.
The proposed crucial human rights indicator
addresses the issue of protection of the fundamental
freedoms of opinion and expression. However, the
“public access to information” aspect of the target is
not necessarily addressed in the indicator. Hence, a
complementary indicator of this fundamental aspect of
human rights should be considered.

[NM: Light for the World NL] We would suggest: [NM: Cord] Cord would recommend adding a second
suggested indicator to support Target 16.10, as
% of children under 5 whose births have been follows:
registered with civil authority, disaggreg. for children
with/without disabilities Percentage of countries that allow full freedom of
expression of the press, associated media personnel,
Children with disabilities are esp. at risk of not being trade unionists, and human rights advocates.
registered with civil authorities, and often suffer the
double impact of not being recognized as citizens, Gauging the level of public access to information and
and thus are denied their basic human rights. Given the protection of fundamental freedoms purely on the
this situation, disaggreg. by disab. for this target is basis of the extent to which journalists, associated
extremely important. media personnel, trade unionists and human rights
advocates are persecuted is insufficient. This second
[NM: Cord] Cord would add: indicator will allow for the monitoring of freedom to
express and publish a diverse range of views and
Prop. of a population that are able to access inclusive perspectives, which in turn can be accessed and
and non-discriminatory legal identification services; by appreciated by public audiences.
age, sex, and pop. group
Minority ethnic groups struggle disproportionately with

deep, protracted marginalisation owing to the
perspective of their national governments that
particular ethnic minorities do not deserve to be
granted full citizenship. Subsequently, min. ethnic
groups are forced to live on the fringes of society,
unable to access neither legal identity nor basic public
services.
The indicator is very specific and does not adequately

measure access to information and protection of
fundamental freedoms. Previously suggested indicator
16.10.1, or something similar, would provide a
measure of public access to information.
e.g. Percentage of children under 5 whose births have

The Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD)
proposes the following indicator for ensuring public
access to information: "Adoption and implementation
of legal guarantees and mechanisms ensuring public
access to information, including but not limited to
information relevant to each and all of the Sustainable
Development Goals."
This is similar in intent to the UNESCO-proposed

16.10 indicator included in prior submissions to the
Statistical Commission: “Number of countries that
have adopted and implemented constitutional,
statutory and/or policy guarantees for public access to
information.”
A specific indicator on legal provisions for ‘ensuring

public access to information’ is essential for the
achievement of SDG16.10, in keeping with both the
spirit and literal text of this target. Most member
states – more than 100 - already have such laws.
Verification is a matter of public record. All countries
can improve in this area: Progress in implementation
could be documented in regular country reports to the
designated UN body [UNESCO, UNDP, HLPF], which
would provide templates for submissions and
assistance as requested.
offered to citizens. Disaggregation by disability for this
target is extremely important. Suggested indicator:
children with/without disabilities.
Disaggregation by ethnicity is possible within
- Existence of a legal framework that is protective of
the freedom of expression and free media

The proposed indicator on birth registrations cannot

reflect progress towards the 'legal identity' part of this
target, as 'birth registration' does not necessarily lead
to a 'legal identity', and as a 'legal identity' in a country
may be acquired long after birth, e.g. following
immigration.. To obtain an indicator on 'legal identity
for all' a working group consisting of legal and
statistical experts with experience in developing
international statistical standards should be given the
following mandate:
• To define the concept ‘legal identity’
• To define the forms/situations that ‘legal identity’
may take/cover, as well as non-legal forms/identity
situations
• To describe the indicator that can describe
progress towards 'legal identity for all'
• To suggest posible data collection mechanisms
(data sources) for the data needed for this indicator
Exactly very good Very important, it is the right of people to access to all
information
Numbers of violations of fundamental freedoms which
impact on public access to information, and
percentage of judicial cases resolved. (disaggregated
by targeted group (journalists, associated media
personnel, human rights defenders, trade unionists
and human rights advocates)).
This should include people living with HIV and
populations affected by HIV.
We propose an additional indicator 16.10.3:

Number of countries promoting fundamental freedoms
through regulatory frameworks, legislation or policies
that guarantee women and men equal access to
information and to freedom of expression.
The International Bar Association's Human Rights
Institute (IBAHRI) and the International Commission of
Jurists (ICJ) recommend the two following indicators:
1. Indicator on the independence of the judiciary
'Existence of a specific legal framework to protect
judges from external interference and arbitrary
- This indicator aligns with the existing OHCHR Rule
of Law Indicator n.57 and is related to current targets
16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and 16a.
2. Indicator on the independence of the legal
profession
'Existence of a self-governing professional
association of lawyers established through law with
the mandate and authority to protect the
independence and role of of the legal profession, in
compliance with the United Nations Basic Principles
- This indicator completes the current indicator
proposed under Target 16.a concerning the existence
of a national human rights institution. It is related to
targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and 16a
- The International Bar Association is a professional
organization gathering more than 200 national bar
16.10.1 revision: Number of reported cases of killing,
kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary
detention, arbitrary blocking or shutting down of
activities, and torture of journalists, associated media
personnel, trade unionists, staff of civil society
organizations, and human rights or governance
advocates in the previous 12 months
More targeted indicators for the “fundamental

freedoms” component of 16.10 could be included to
ensure such freedoms are fully protected, rather than
only focusing on the most extreme violations, e.g.
- Number of times UN Special Rapporteurs report
violations of fundamental freedoms, including
freedoms of association, expression, assembly.
- Percentage of recommendations to strengthen
fundamental freedoms—including freedoms of
association, assembly, and expression—that were
implemented, as identified through the Universal
Periodic Review
- Perception of the public and of CSOs on whether
they can pursue issues of interest, including human
rights and governance, in the public arena without
fear of government retribution.
ICN supports the suggested indicator - Percentage of

children under 5 whose births have been registered
with civil authority.
Indicator 16.10.2 Number of journalists, associated
media personnel and human rights advocates killed,
kidnapped, disappeared, detained or tortured in the
last 12 months.
Add environmental activists/defenders to this indicator
We support the position that the two indicators chosen

should 1. monitor the enabling and legal environment
around public access to information. 2. reach further
to measure human rights aspects of the target, such
as the environment for freedom of expression, or as
we have proposed in previous consultations the ability
of people to use information that has been provided
for their benefit.
IFLA proposes (in line with previous consultations):
1. [Existence of a comprehensive law and legal
regime that ensures the right of access to information
from public bodies, based on international standards].
Existing data is collected by UNESCO, with support
from UNDP, UNODC, OHCHR
2. [Literacy rate of Youth and Adults, urban and rural
literacy rate]. Existing literacy data is collected
annually by UNESCO Institute for Statistics (same
indicator also proposed for 4.6.2)
3. Media and Information (MIL) competencies, with
data from the Global MIL Assessment Framework
developed by UNESCO (also proposed for 4.4.2)
We also support UNESCO’s proposal on 16.10 for
[ Number of library service points per 1,000
inhabitants,]
Since processes to obtain a citizenship are often very

complicated and tedious, people tend not to make the
way through the complicated process; thus, focus
should be on shortening and simplifying that process.
Therefore we propose an additional Indicator: Average
time from initial application for legal identity until final
approval.
Proposed indicator to measure target 16.9 should be
disaggregated by income to ensure that progress is
made for all sectors of society. Having a legal identity
is one of the principal barriers to access education,
social protection and civic participation for people
living in poverty in developing countries. As one
person explains “Before I had an identity card, I was
scared to enter an office [...]. I worked as a street
vendor then, and my prices were low because I was
scared. With my identity card, I’m not scared
anymore; I’m more confident.” Yet UNICEF has found
that progress in birth registration has been focused in
the middle and upper quintiles, leaving the poorest
behind. (UNICEF, Progress for Children Achieving the
MDGs with Equity)
No comments Target value may be set.
a) Percentage of children under age 5 whose birth is a) Existence of Freedom of Information (FOI) Act and
registered with a civil authority. its efficient implementation.
b) Percentage of countries with CRVS (Civil b) Proportion of people with a legal entitlement to
Registration & Vital Statistics) strategy/plans of action information held by public bodies provided within 30
based on updated population censuses. days without arbitrary barriers.
c) Proportion of people who apply to access of
=> information, and whose requests are accepted,
This target should ensure equal rights for all to disaggregated by gender and other most relevant
citizenship, free and accessible birth registration of all grounds of discrimination, including ethnicity and
children (regardless of disability, ethnicity, gender, or disability.
social group), the right to identity cards for all citizens d) Increase in CIRI indicator of freedoms of speech
and effective Civil Registration and Vital Statistics and press.
systems. e) Increase in CIRI indicator of freedom of political
choice.
f) Increase in CIRI indicator of freedom of religion.
g) Public surveys show that people believe that they
can exercise their freedom of expression and are
heard.
=> This target should ensure that countries practice

freedom of information and respect the right to
accessible and high quality information, including
budget, financial and tax policies.
We fully support the inclusion of a reference to "trade
unionists" in the suggested indicator and urge that it
be retained.
http://www.who.int/pmnch/post2015_draft_indicator.pd
f
1. Special mechanisms available to educate and 1. Presence of Right to Information Act, with
ensure legal identity among marginalised necessary judicial powers inclusive of all branches of
communities, vulnerable populations, nomadic the state machinery.
communities and migrants,
The proposed indicator is problematic:
-It tracks only violations of rights of HR advocates etc.,
not the freedoms of all.
-the freedoms addressed are not the only
fundamental ones
-It "leaves behind" ordinary citizens, rendering abuses
of their freedoms invisible.
-Precisely where the government is most complicit in
human rights abuses, it will be difficult for killings and
detention to be "independently verified".
-A focus on the specified groups represents a problem
for universality – will this downplay abuses in “liberal,
democratic” developed countries?
The indicator should be supplemented or replaced by
a wider measure - for example, the number of
recommendations and response to recommendations
of the Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights
Council. An indicator of this kind - % of
recommendations acted upon - is already adopted
under 16.6, and is no less feasible here (though
number of recommendations are also important).
- Priority Indicator 1: Percentage of children under 1 The suggested indicator does not adequately capture
whose births have been registered with civil authority the diverse themes in the target nor advance the
ambition of the outcome document.
This indicator relies on established, widely used
methodologies. By focusing on children under 1 - Priority Indicator 1: Percentage of budget
whose births have been registered, member states documents, off budget revenue documents,
will ensure a more responsive measurement procurement and natural resource concessions
framework. Additional surveys will be needed to reach publicly available and easily accessible in open data
non-registered populations who are typically not format
covered in general household surveys. Like other
indicators, results for this indicator should be Priority indicator 1 is consistent with TST proposals,
disaggregated to surface inequalities. recommended by the Virtual Network, and begins to
track progress towards ensuring one important aspect
of public information.
- Priority Indicator 2: Percentage of population who

believe they can express political opinion without fear
Priority Indicator 2 is highly relevant to the target and

likely to have meaningful change over the time period
on the national level. As this indicator may be
differently understood in different country contexts,
care should be taken in comparing results across
countries.
Plan International supports the IAEG suggested Amendment: 16.10.2 Number of verified cases of
indicator as critical to ensuring that the SDGs are killing, kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary
rights-based, leave no one behind, and reach the detention and torture of journalists, associated media
most vulnerable and isolated. Marginalised people personnel, trade unionists, civil society activists, and
cannot and will not be reached if governments and human and women’s rights advocates in the previous
other stakeholders do not have information on who 12 months
they are and where they are located. Information from
civil registration and vital statistics is essential in Rationale 16.10.2 Plan International supports the
tracking births, school attendance rates, age of inclusion of the suggested indicator for Target 16.10.
marriage and in accurately understanding mortality However, we feel that the effort to measure freedom
and causes of death, among other critical public of association must also include action taken against
health and broader policy outcomes. civil society activists in light of closing civil society
space in many contexts.
16.9.1 COMMENT : Endorse WB replacement
indicator
KEEP: Percentage of children under 5 whose births KEEP: "Number of verified cases of killing,
have been registered with civil authority" - This kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary
indicator is broadly accepted. Nonetheless, the age detention and torture of journalists, associated media
could be lowered to 1 in order to bring it into line with personnel, trade unionists and human rights
established practice. advocates in the previous 12 months"
ADD: "Percentage of people who feel that they can

express political views without fear" - Freedom of
expression is a fundamental freedom. 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
behaviors, a variant of this indicator would measure
the percentage of people who feel free to join any
political organisation they want (Afro-barometer
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 – and are
perceived to be - independent of the state.
RETAIN SUGGESTED INDICATOR: EDIT ORIGINALLY PROPOSED UNSC INDICATOR
AND INCLUDE AS A SUGGESTED INDICATOR
RATIONALE: Fully comparable data are available in Percentage of actual budget documents, off budget
UNICEF databases for more than 110 low- and revenue documents, procurement and natural
middle-income countries resource concessions publicly available in a timely
manner and easily accessible in open data format
RATIONALE: By including a reference to 'documents'

in the indicator, as well as 'timely manner' and 'open
data format' the indicator will be made more precise.
REPLACE SUGGESTED UNSC INDICATOR 16.10.2

WITH:
Extent to which the rights to freedom of expression,
association, peaceful assembly and access to
information are guaranteed in law and practice
RATIONALE: 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
internationally agreed standards on the rights to
freedom of expression, association and peaceful
assembly and the freedom of the media in less
extreme situations.

16.9.1 Percentage of persons over 5 who have a 16.10.1 Number of verified cases of killing,
national identity document kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary
detention and torture of journalists, associated media
TIER: Tier III personnel, trade unionists, women’s rights defenders
and human rights advocates in the previous 12
NOTES: Information from civil registration and vital months
statistics is essential in tracking births, school
attendance rates, age of marriage and in accurately 16.10.2 Number of initiatives on awareness-raising of
understanding mortality and causes of death, among rights, with specific focus on youth, girls, women, and
other critical public health and broader policy other marginalized populations
outcomes.
GLOBAL MONITORING ENTITY: UN Women
TIER: Tier III

KEEP the proposed indicator: 'Number of verified
cases of killing, kidnapping, enforced disappearance,
arbitrary detention and torture of journalists,
associated media personnel, trade unionists and
human rights advocates in the previous 12 months'.
It is an important indicator with broad

support.Independent third parties should be
responsible for gathering data for this indicator.
Data on legal identity including birth registration for all,

disaggregated by gender, age, race, ethnicity,
indigenous identity, income, rural/urban residence,
Indicator 16.9.1 Change to: Percentage of persons of
all ages who have been registered with civil authority.
Proof of legal identity is prerequisite for accessing the

benefits and obligations of citizenship, including
opportunities to vote, to open and maintain accounts
in financial institutions, migration, benefits that are
publicly or privately available, accurate census and
similar information, etc. Lack of proof of legal identity
has a high impact on older persons, limiting
participation in civic affairs. The issuance of identity
papers should therefore not be focused only on
children under 5. It should be more inclusive of
persons at all stages of life.
disaggregation and adequate representation of
orphans and vulnerable children, including those living
on the street or in program/institutional/orphanage
care, in the surveys utilized to measure the indicator.
We would endorse this suggested indicator by the We support UNESCO’s proposal for two
IAEG-SDGs. This indicator relies on established, complementary but distinct indicators for the two
widely used methodologies. Targeted surveys and interrelated components of SDG16.10:
specific methodologies will be needed to reach non-
registered populations who are typically not covered in 1. “Number of countries that have adopted and
general household surveys. Like other indicators, implemented constitutional, statutory and/or policy
results for this indicator should be disaggregated to guarantees for public access to information.”
surface inequalities including, but not limited to, age,
gender, region, population group, etc. 2. “Number of verified cases of killing, kidnapping,
enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and
torture of journalists, associated media personnel,
trade unionists and human rights advocates in the
previous 12 months.”
The latter indicator was proposed by UNESCO,

OHCHR and ILO for 5 targets, in whole or in part,
including 16.10’s commitment to the protection of
‘fundamental freedoms.’ The former specific indicator
on legal provisions for ‘ensuring public access to
information’ is essential for the achievement of 16.10,
in keeping with both the spirit and literal text of this
target. More than 100 countries already have such
laws and verification is a matter of public record.
We would endorse this suggested indicator by the We support UNESCO’s proposal for two
IAEG-SDGs. This indicator relies on established, complementary but distinct indicators for the two
widely used methodologies. Targeted surveys and interrelated components of SDG16.10:
specific methodologies will be needed to reach non-
registered populations who are typically not covered in 1. “Number of countries that have adopted and
general household surveys. Like other indicators, implemented constitutional, statutory and/or policy
results for this indicator should be disaggregated to guarantees for public access to information.”
surface inequalities including, but not limited to, age,
gender, region, population group, income, disabilities, 2. “Number of verified cases of killing, kidnapping,
etc. enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and
torture of journalists, associated media personnel,
trade unionists and human rights advocates in the
previous 12 months.”
The latter indicator was proposed by UNESCO,

OHCHR and ILO for 5 targets, in whole or in part,
including 16.10’s commitment to the protection of
‘fundamental freedoms.’ The former specific indicator
on legal provisions for ‘ensuring public access to
information’ is essential for the achievement of 16.10,
in keeping with both the spirit and literal text of this
target. More than 100 countries already have such
laws and verification is a matter of public record.
Target 16.10. Instead of the suggested indicator, we

support this alternative indicator for 16.10.1:
“Percentage of actual government budget,
procurement and natural resource concessions that
are publicly available [from all levels of government
and easily accessible." (proposed by EOSG/RoLU,
PBSO, UNDP, UNODC in consultation with others
institutions) (see p. 98 & 99)
16.10.1 Number of verified cases of killing,

kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary
detention and torture of journalists, associated media
personnel, trade unionists, women's human rights
defenders, and human rights advocates in the
previous 12 months
16.9.1 Percentage of children under 5 whose births 16.10.1 Number of verified cases of killing,
have been registered with civil authority kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary
and percentage of persons over 5 who have a legal detention and torture of journalists, associated media
identity personnel, trade unionists, women's human rights
defenders, and human rights advocates in the
Information from civil registration and vital statistics is previous 12 months
essential in tracking births, school attendance rates,
age of marriage and in accurately understanding
mortality and causes of death, among other critical
public health and broader policy outcomes.
The current suggested indicator would better fit under
target 16.3 or 16.1. We recommend that proposed
indicator 16.10.1 be amended to read: Percentage of
government revenues, procurement, natural resource
concession and air and water quality data that are
publicly available and easily accessible in an open
data format.
We strongly support the suggested indicator under

target 16.9:
• Percentage of children under five whose births
are registered with civil authorities.
Target 16.a: Strengthen relevant national
institutions, including through international
cooperation, for building capacity at all levels, in Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-
particular in developing countries, to prevent discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable
violence and combat terrorism and crime development
This target addresses discrimination and should be
disaggregated by disability, as persons with
disabilities are a group especially susceptible to
discrimination (Interlinkage with 10.3)
• Incorporation and implementation of the Declaration •Ratification of relevant international treaties on

on the Rule of Law at the National and International human rights and non-discrimination, •The availability
levels , •Percentage of victims of crime who have of independent judicial or administrative mechanisms
been able to make a report and receive a satisfactory that have the power to provide remedy in an instance
outcome•Public confidence in justice officials [UN] of non-compliance with human rights standards that
•Percentage of population that reports feeling satisfied are relevant to the development goals, •Proportion of
with policing mechanisms people whose human rights related to the post 2015
•Proportion of population satisfied with the quality of goals are protected under the national law and have
public services, disaggregated by service access to an available effective remedy, •Proportion of
•Laws and policies for combatting violent crime and national laws and policies relevant to post 2015 goals
terrorism that are human rights compliant that have been reviewed nationally for consistency
with international human rights standards and UN
treaties, through a transparent and participatory
process, including a transformative gender
assessment, and revised where necessary,
•Formulation of strategies and policies to address
systemic discrimination of marginalised and
disadvantaged groups with respect to the SDGs
No of countries that have in place programmes and No of countries that have made economic social and
funding to build capacity of the legal and judicial environmental rights justiceable
sector on international framework for countering
terrorism No of states that have identified, reviewed and
reformed non discriminatory laws and policies for
No of countries where the judiciary is independent sustainable development
# of activities taken in counties to promote training of # of countries that have a framework for ensuring
the Judiciary on judicial standards and the role of the reporting on activities taken to review national laws
judiciary in ensuring accountability for post 2015 and policies in order to ensure implementation of
development SDGs.
This target addresses discrimination and must
accordingly and in line with the UN-CRPD be
The proposed indicator is highly relevant under target This is the same indicator proposed under target 10.3.
16.3., and should be retained. However, it does not The proposed indicator is strong and human rights
address the target to “strengthen relevant national relevant, but should be supplemented with an
institutions”. Also here, a relevant indicator would be additional process indicator to capture the elimination
the existence of an independent National Human of discriminatory laws, policies and practices, as
Rights Institution in compliance with the Paris intended in the target. See also comment under target
principles, as per UN General Assembly Resolution 10.3.
48/134 of 1993.
and transparency (add after "quality in Q of services"

[NM: Cord] Cord would recommend adding a second [NM: Light for the World NL] Light for the World
suggested indicator to support Target 16.a, as follows: recommends making the following edit to the first
suggested indicator, as follows:
Percentage of countries whose national institutions
evidence examples of sustained engagement with a Percentage of population reporting having personally
diverse array of population groups with a view to felt discriminated against or harassed within the last
addressing the root causes of violence associated 12 months on the basis of a ground of discrimination
with terrorism and radicalism; by country, institution, prohibited under international human rights law.
and population group. Disaggregate by age, sex, region, population group,
and disability.
To prevent crime and violence associated with
terrorism, national government institutions require the Light for the World argue that as this target addresses
capacity and intention to engage with a diverse array discrimination, it should also be disaggregated by
of population groups, both secular and of faith, in disability, as persons with disabilities as a group are
order to better understand and address the root especially susceptible to discrimination. Clear
causes of such violence. interlinkages exist between Target 16.b and Target
10.3 (Ensure equal opportunity and reduce
inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating
discriminatory laws, policies and practices and
promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action
in this regard).
disaggregated by disability
Separate goals must all be subject to the one

Indigenous peoples and other cultural and ethnic
minorities face particular issues of discrimination and
marginalisation. The IAEG should explore ways to
disaggregate this indicator by ethnicity

Percentage of population reporting having personally
felt discriminated against or harassed within the last
12 months on the basis of a ground of discrimination
prohibited under international human rights law.
Disaggregate by age, sex, region and population
group, including people affected by HIV.
- This indicator aligns with the existing OHCHR Rule
of Law Indicator n.57 and is related to current targets
16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and 16a.
profession
association of lawyers established through law with
the mandate and authority to protect the
independence and role of of the legal profession, in
compliance with the United Nations Basic Principles
proposed under Target 16.a concerning the existence
of a national human rights institution. It is related to
targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and 16a
ICN feels that empowering people by enhancing their
awareness, knowledge and skills could help achieve
the Goal 16. We encourage including an indicator
such as Percentage of primary and secondary schools
integrated education on peaceful and inclusive
societies into school curricula or Percentage of
primary school children demonstrating at least a fixed
level of knowledge across a selection of topics
including peaceful and inclusive societies.
Alternatively, peaceful and inclusive societies could be
integrated in the indicator for the Target 4.7 -
Percentage of 15-year old students enrolled in
secondary school demonstrating at least a fixed level
of knowledge across a selection of topics in
environmental science and geosciences (ICN has
suggested including health or environmental impact
on health and human rights).
Disaggregate by income People living in poverty report that as part of their
daily experience to be humilated, shamed,
discriminated… To measure correlations in between
poverty and discrimination this indicator should be
disaggregate by income
May be shortened No comments
KEEP: Percentage of victims of violence in the KEEP BUT IMPROVED WORDING: Percentage of
previous 12 months who reported their victimization to population reporting having felt discriminated against
competent authorities or other officially recognized or harassed within the last 12 months because of their
conflict resolution mechanisms (also called crime identity.
reporting rate)
ADD: "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 and freedom
from fear, underpinning the target and the aspiration
of the wider goal. Its strength also comes from the fact
that, when disaggregated by urban/rural, age, gender,
the indicator can be used for targets 5.2, 10.2, 10.3,
11.1, 11.2, 11.7, 16.2. The indicator could also be put
in target 16. Global data for this indicator could be
drawn from Gallup’s annual World Poll, which covers
95% of the world’s population. Nonetheless, the
indicator is already being used by several NSOs,
including those in Africa that are part of the SHaSA
process. The indicator could be packaged into
household, victimisation or national polling surveys.
16.10 CONTD: The new suggested indicator should
also track to what extent children have their rights to
expression, association, peaceful assembly and
access to information guaranteed.(Convention on the
Rights of the Child, Articles 12, 13, 15 and 17).

16.a.1 Number of public initiatives on trainings for 16.b.1 Percentage of population reporting having
inclusive reporting, including gender-based violence personally felt discriminated against or harassed
sensitivity-training for local and national law within the last 12 months on the basis of a ground of
enforcement, judicial institutions, and other discrimination prohibited under international human
governments agencies rights law.
Further disaggregations: relationship to perpetrator
16.b.2 Proportion of the population satisfied with the

quality of public services, disaggregated by service
Further disaggregations: relationship to perpetrator

KEEP the indicator on crime reporting rate: KEEP: 'Percentage of population reporting having
'Percentage of victims of violence in the previous 12 personally felt discriminated against or harassed
months who reported their victimization to competent within the last 12 months on the basis of a ground of
authorities or other officially recognized conflict discrimination prohibited under international human
resolution mechanisms'. rights law.'
This is a strong proxy for capacities of security This is a strong indicator which measures people’s
services and other authorities to deal with crime and direct experiences of discrimination. It should be
present conflict. clarified whether ‘reporting’ refers to an authority
collecting such complaints or whether this is a survey-
It's a rurvey- based indicator that further characterizes based data collection.
the data collected for 16.1 and 16.2.
We would recommend a combination of the proposals The suggested indicator for this target should be
to read: “Percentage of victims of violence in the retained. This is a strong indicator which measures
previous 12 months who reported their victimization to people’s direct experiences of discrimination. In an
competent authorities or other officially recognized effort to measure correlations in between poverty and
conflict resolution mechanisms (also called crime discrimination this indicator should be disaggregated
reporting rate)”. by income.
This is a strong proxy for capacities of security

services and other authorities to deal with crime and
present conflict.
Another indicator could also be added on “Percentage

of Official Development Assistance devoted to
institution-building,” which could draw on data from
the OECD CRS and the IATI registry by looking at
information on aid provided to support governance.
These indicators must also be disaggregated by

income.
We would recommend a combination of the proposals The suggested indicator for this target should be
to read: “Percentage of victims of violence in the retained. This is a strong indicator which measures
previous 12 months who reported their victimization to people’s direct experiences of discrimination. In an
competent authorities or other officially recognized effort to measure correlations in between poverty and
conflict resolution mechanisms (also called crime discrimination this indicator should be disaggregated
reporting rate)”. by income.
This is a strong proxy for capacities of security

services and other authorities to deal with crime and
present conflict.
Another indicator could also be added on “Percentage

of Official Development Assistance devoted to
institution-building,” which could draw on data from
the OECD CRS and the IATI registry by looking at
information on aid provided to support governance.
These indicators must also be disaggregated by

income.
Target 16.b.2. Related to satisfaction with quality

public services. The suggested indicator for this target
refers only to target 10.b.1. (discrimination). We
propose an indicator that addresses the issue
mentioned in target 16.b.2: “Proportion of population
satisfied with their access to, and the quality of, public
services, by sex, age, wealth, location/region, and
disability”
16.a.1 Percentage of victims who report physical
and/or sexual crime to law enforcement agencies
during past 12 months, disaggregated by age, sex,
region and population group
16.a.2 Actual primary expenditures and revenues per

sector dealing with human rights as a percentage of
the original approved budget of the government.
Fiscal reports, policy briefs, expert assessments of

fiscal reports, reports of national planning offices,
national statistics, CSO statistics
Regular reporting on budget estimates and actual

revenues and expenditures, disaggregated by type of
revenue and by sector/sub-sector. Regular reporting
on policies guiding budget priorities.
Target 17.1: Strengthen domestic resource
mobilization, including through international
support to developing countries, to improve
domestic capacity for tax and other revenue
Organization: collection
ADD International


Asia Pacific Forum on Women Law International support to developing countries in this
and Development context should be measured through the existence of a
global corporate tax floor and fair and inclusive
cooperation on international tax rules and their
enforcement through, for example, the existence of an
intergovernmental tax body.

(ASPBAE)
Bioregional
CBM UK
CDP
Center for Economic and Social Information about tax composition is important
Rights (especially to track environmental taxes), but is not an
indicator in and of itself, nor does it get at the amount
raised. Previously, we have welcomed using tax to
GDP ratio to measure target 17.1. 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.
Alternative: Tax to GDP ratio (Note that this indicator
must be explicitly linked to complementary indicators
on the progressivity of tax regime and tax effort.)
Additional: Potential vs. actual tax revenue (tax effort)
Additional: Capacity of public revenue authorities - to
be developed
Additional: Amount of domestic revenue and public
expenditure on sustainable development goals
Additional: Existence of global corporate tax floor
CHOICE for youth and sexuality
Christian Aid Preferred indicator: Composition of Tax Revenues (by

sources), including revenues derived from
environmental taxes as a %of GDP. (Country National
Accounts)
Comment: We do not agree with the World Bank

comment against the IAEG table that, “maximising
taxes is not a development objective or indicator.” Not
only is it relevant to this indicator but maximising tax
revenue is also highly relevant to target 17.3. We
believe that this measure (or tax/GDP ratio if that is
also used), should be linked closely to a
complementary indicator on the progressivity of fiscal
policy (see target 10.4). A ‘Tax Effort’ indicator could
also be used here or under 17.3 to show the potential
for development of any tax regime.
Deutschland e.V.
Consumers International

Debt Justice Norway

Weltbevoelkerung


Equality Now
ericsson
Eurodad
Faculty of Law, Queen's University, New Suggested Indicator 17.1.3:
Canada
"Total percentage of annual tax revenues, tax
expenditures, and program spending paid or received
by adult couples, households, or families instead of on
the basis of individual entitlement."
Rationale: Couple, household, and family-based tax

and benefit policies create fiscal incentives to women's
unpaid domestic and care work, and create fiscal
barriers to women's paid work, education, self-care,
and healthy living time. They mainly exist to place limits
on government costs of public services and income
supports, but they also create tax and benefit
incentives to allocate women's time on unpaid work,
thus creating barriers to women's ability to engage in
as much paid work, education, and healthy living time
as men. Repeal or individualization of all such
provisions will render domestic tax and expenditure
policies more gender equal.

Framericas
Global Campaign for Education

Global Health Technologies
Coalition
goal, of design and planning for cultural growth for
whole societies.
Taskforce
ICMM and IPIECA Agree with the WB that the proposed indicators should
be dropped (total tax per GDP and total per capita tax)
as they appear to incentivize maximizing taxes, which
is not the objective of this target. Rather it is intended
to measure countries’ effectiveness in collecting taxes,
irrespective of a country’s particular public budget
policies.
IDDC
Institute for Reproductive and It is very important however civil society organizations
Family Health are very limitted to get support from international
organizations
Internaitonal Council of AIDS Composition of Tax Revenues (by sources), including
Service Organizations revenues derived from environmental taxes, and as %
of GDP, and spending by sector, including health and
civil services
Clear indicators on domestic financing for health are
quite relevant to people living with HIV and people
affected by HIV.

International AIDS Vaccine

Initiative
Applied Psychology
International Center for Not-for-

Profit Law

and Development
Jubilee Debt Campaign, UK
Jubilee Scotland

Delhi
Kepa Finland a) Whether a country requires public country-by-
country reporting for large multinational companies. To
capture tax avoidance, country-by-
country reporting must be public, cover all jurisdictions,
and include;
• The name of each country in which the company
operates and the names of its subsidiaries in each
country
• Internal and external sales purchases and finance
costs, labor costs, employee numbers, pre-tax profits
and assets, and
• Tax payments to the government in each country.
b) Whether a country has signed up to a multilateral
agreement on automatic information exchange.
c) Full and effective participation by developing
countries in design and implementation of multilateral
automatic information exchanges between tax
authorities.
d) A country publishes public registers of beneficial
owners of companies and funds.
e) A country has a minimum 20 percent tax to GDP
ratio.
Latin American Campaign for the

Right to Education (CLADE)
Latindadd
MADE
Oxfam
Partnership for Economic Policy
PATH
Policy Cures
Group
Sightsavers
Small Arms Survey

Statistics Without Borders of the

American Statistical Association
Stockholm Environment Institute We regard this as an important target within the SDGs
and do not agree with the WB’s proposal to remove the
indicator. Strengthening the national capacity to collect
tax is extremely important. According to the OECD,
governments of developing countries collect much
lower proportions of their GDP in tax revenue than their
OECD counterparts: 10-20% in contrast to 30-40%.
We recommend alternative indicators linked to goal 17
which measures the 1) the ratio of domestic tax
revenue to received ODA, over time and/or 2) tax
collection effectiveness, i.e. collection deficit. Relevant
data sources are likely to be national statistical
offices/tax and revenues departments.
We also agree with the UNEP proposal to integrate
information on the export of sustainable and low-
carbon products into the proposed indicator. This is
because exports of non-sustainable materials may
reflect 'off-shoring' of impacts by developed economies,
which would be an undesirable outcome.
TAG
TB Alliance

Track 0
UCLG Target 17.1. (Strengthen domestic resources

mobilization). The suggested indicator focuses on the
“composition of tax revenues (by sources) as % of
GDP”. We propose a complementary indicator on tax
revenues as % of GDP, disaggregated by source in
territories and levels of government (national,
subnational, local).
University of Manitoba New Suggested Indicator 17.1.3: "Total percentage of

annual tax revenues, tax expenditures, and program
spending paid or received by adult couples,
households, or families instead of on the basis of
individual entitlement."
Rationale: Couple, household, and family-based tax

and benefit policies create fiscal incentives to women's
unpaid domestic and care work, and create fiscal
barriers to women's paid work, education, self-care,
and healthy living time. They mainly exist to place limits
on government costs of public services and income
supports, but they also create tax and benefit
incentives to allocate women's time on unpaid work,
thus creating barriers to women's ability to engage in
as much paid work, education, and healthy living time
as men. Repeal or individualization of all such
provisions will render domestic tax and expenditure
policies more gender equal.
University of Oxford

VSO
Women Access Trust Organisation One of the indicators should be the development of a
Of Nigeria comprehensive data base for businesses in nations
showing revenue collection and tax derived as % of
GDP
- New Ways
Women's Major Group 17.1.1 Existence of global corporate tax floor
Average corporate tax rates worldwide reduced on

average from 38% in 1993 to 24.9% in 2010. Tax
competition has the effect of deepening inequality by
preventing capital gains from being effectively taxed,
and thereby shifting more of the fiscal burden onto
increased labor taxes, or cutbacks to public
expenditure on essential services which affect lower-
income groups and women disproportionately. Illicit
financial flows, about 80% of which stem from cross-
border corporate tax evasion and capital flight through
tax avoidance, amount to around a trillion dollars in
developing countries.36 These outflows are facilitated
by off-shore secrecy and low-tax jurisdictions which
fundamentally encroach upon, if not erode, the
sovereignty of countries in North and South to levy and
protect their own revenue base in non-discriminatory
ways.37 Associated declines in tax revenues are of
much larger consequence to low- and middle-income
countries, whose tax revenue bases are already much
lower on average than OECD countries.
Target 17.2: Developed countries to implement fully
their official development assistance commitments,
including the commitment by many developed
countries to achieve the target of 0.7 per cent of
ODA/GNI to developing countries and 0.15 to 0.20
per cent of ODA/GNI to least developed countries;
ODA providers are encouraged to consider setting
a target to provide at least 0.20 per cent of ODA/GNI Target 17.3: Mobilize additional financial resources
to least developed countries for developing countries from multiple sources
Data gathered by CDP's various programs for
companies could support tracking of progress against
this target
Total Capital Inflow is an extremely blunt indicator that
does not identify between different types of inflow, and
would not illuminate whether resources are being
mobilized for sustainable development, profit, or other
ends – or whether the resources are being used in
rights-respecting, sustainable ways.
Alternative: TOSSD
Total Official Support for Sustainable Development
(TOSSD) – as proposed by the OECD - would be
preferable to TCI which could be undermine rather than
promote sustainable development. It would also be
necessary to be able to track the 'additional' resources
in this indicator.
In our publication A Post-2015 Fiscal Revolution (see
cesr.org), 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. The idea presented here for an
additional indicator is an initial proposal.
Additional: Amount of additional, predictable and untied
finance available in national budgets for sustainable
development financing
Preferred indicator: Total official support for sustainable

development (proposed by OECD)
Comment: Total Capital Inflow (TCI) tells you nothing

about the quality of finance and in some cases, these
flows could undermine sustainable development.
Suggest adding in two additional indicators that read:
“percentage of domestic wealth that has been used for

philanthropic purposes”
“increase in percentage of cross-border grantmaking to

developing countries by philanthropy”
Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential Separate goals must all be subject to the one essential
goal, of design and planning for cultural growth for goal, of design and planning for cultural growth for
whole societies. whole societies.
Good Very good
17.3.1 Amount of additional, predictable and untied
development financing, and how funds are spent by
sector, including health and infrastructure
Clear indicators on domestic financing for health are
quite relevant to people living with HIV and people
affected by HIV.
a) Countries commit to implement their official Measuring the mobilization of additional financial
development assistance and climate finance resources by the trends of remittance costs does not
commitments. sound like a very illustrative solution. Something else
b) Developing and implementing concrete and binding should be developed.
timetables for achieving the targets.
Suggest to add "...multiple sources and integrated
streams of funding to address multiple SDGs and their
targets"
We believe NET ODA indicator from OECD/DAC is the We recommend the use of several indicators to
best indicator for this target. measure the target on separate ‘balance sheets’ rather
than assessing total capital flows which might conceal
trends in individual channels of financial support.
Assessing FDI flows, Bank lending (Bonds, guarantees
etc.), Remittances, Insurance/Re-insurance and
Philanthropy separately would be preferable to a
combined metric. Furthermore, a measure to capture
illicit financial flows from developing countries to
developed countries is also important, although
information to develop associated indicators are likely
to be data-deficient.
Target 17.2.2. We support the indicator proposed:
“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)”, that goes to the poorest countries
(countries with special needs) OECD, WB, IMF etc.
and marginalized and vulnerable groups within
countries]
We support the inclusion of indicator 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), but would propose to reformulate the
present indicator which focusing exclusively on bilateral
ODA to the following: “Proportion of total ODA of
OECD/DAC donors to basic social services” in order to
also measure contributions to important multilateral
organisations.
17.3.1 Amount of additional, predictable and untied
development financing
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 Target 17.5: Adopt and implement investment
distress promotion regimes for least developed countries
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 to both a mechanism
that covers all odious debt, and the outcomes from
such a mechanism.
Additional: Establishment of a comprehensive debt
workout mechanism;
Volumes of debt relief provided under this mechanism
Measurable indicators on volumes of odious debt are

another important avenue for restoring fiscal space for
Additional: Volume of odious debt forgiven
Preferred indicator: Proportion of countries in debt

distress a) receiving debt relief and b) being in debt
distress for two years or more. (IMF)
Comment: Two indicators are proposed as there is a
need to look at both countries in debt distress, and the
policies/conditions of the loans being granted. Ideally
there would also be an indicator to show the number of
countries that undertake debt audits, and the amount of
global debt covered by vulture funds regulations. The
suggested indicator tells you nothing about the
assistance received by developing countries, which is
the clearly stated intention of the target.
The indicators related to HIPC make no sense, HIPC
expired. Delete.
The suggested indicator on reserves would create

perverse incentives. Delete.
Indicators need to reflect qualitative and governance-

dimensions of 17.4. too, and SDG-related
commitments in AAAA and other UN Resolutions. We
suggests:
- Debt service as a percentage of government

revenue
- Actual payments as percentages of debt service
due
- Number of countries entering debt distress which
receive comprehensive debt relief
- Amounts of debt relief committed (to all countries)
- Number of countries that have passed
comprehensive national vulture funds legislation,
weighted by proportion of international debt covered by
such legislation.
- Number of countries that audit their debt stock
based on responsible lending and borrowing principles.
- Percentage of debt stock covered by legal
frameworks for sovereign debt restructurings
We support the suggestions delivered by Eurodad.

The indicators related to HIPC make no sense, HIPC
expired. Delete.
The suggested indicator on reserves would create

perverse incentives. Delete.
Indicators need to reflect qualitative and governance-

dimensions of 17.4. too, and SDG-related
commitments in AAAA and other UN Resolutions.
Eurodad suggests:
- Debt service as a percentage of government

revenue
- Actual payments as percentages of debt service
due
- Number of countries entering debt distress which
- Amounts of debt relief committed (to all countries)
- Number of countries that have passed
comprehensive national vulture funds legislation,
weighted by proportion of international debt covered by
such legislation.
- Number of countries that audit their debt stock
based on responsible lending and borrowing principles.
- Percentage of debt stock covered by legal
frameworks for sovereign debt restructurings
Our pleasure to explain the rationale for these

indicators, if space allows.
Suggest adding in additional indicator that reads:
“number of countries with multi-sectoral and multi-

stakeholder coordination mechanisms in place for a
coordinated implementation of the SDGs”
Very good Very good
The currently proposed indicators will not measure
implementation of this target. There is not enough
space allowed in the consultation to explain why, and
how the targets can be changed. But this is explained
in 861 words at: http://jubileedebt.org.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2015/09/Comments-on-
SDGs_09.15.docx
Remove indicators 1&2 relating to HIPC as it is now

irrelevant
Revise indicator 4- debt service as a percentage of

government revenue is a more accurate indicator
showing the financial impact on debt on government
finances, and the actual ability of a government to
finance sustainable development
Add these indicators:
-Number of countries entering debt distress which

-No country in debt distress for two successive years,
and minimum number of countries at high and
moderate risk of debt distress."
-Percentage of debt stock covered by legal frameworks
for sovereign debt restructurings
-Percentage of debt stock that contains properly
collective-collective action clauses.
-Number of countries that audit their debt stock based
on responsible lending and borrowing principles.
-Number of countries that have passed comprehensive
national vulture funds legislation, weighted by
proportion of international debt covered by such
legislation.
Ratios that should be part of this are:
- Total public debt (external and domestic) to GDP:
MICs debt has a trend to increase, and it involves also
domestic debt; not to inlcude the whole public debt
might mean a possibility debt distress not managed
timely.
- Debt service (external and domestic) to fiscal
revenues: debt is payed with fiscal revenues, not with
exports, so this is the most accurate ratio that shouyld
be used instead.
- Number of countries with a DSA that includes an SDG
approach: DSAs, in line with AAAA outcome on FFD
proces, should be taken into account to analyse if a
debt is sustainable or not, if it would involve a debt
service that undermines social expenditure it is not
sustainable.
- Number of countries entering in debt distress with
comprehensive debt relief: countries that need an
urgent debt cancelation should be able to get it, after a
climate event or a disease.
- Number of countries in debt distress for two succesive
years and a minimun number of countries in high risk
- Number of countries that include CACs on its
sovereign debt issuance
We agree with the use of Debt per GNI and debt per Indicator 17.5.1 is essential qualitative and is not
GNI/cap as an effective indicator for monitoring amenable to cross-country comparisons so should be
progress against target 17.4. Disaggregation of private dropped. Indicator 17.5.2 is useful, but there needs to
and public debt would enhance the proposed be a clear consensus definition of the types of policy
indicators. changes being monitored and a uniform assessment
criteria developed for effective monitoring of country-
level and global progress against target 17.5
17.4.1 Establishment of a comprehensive sovereign
debt workout mechanism; volumes of debt relief
provided under this mechanism
17.4.2 Volume of odious debt forgiven

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 Target 17.7: Promote the development, transfer,
mutually agreed terms, including through improved dissemination and diffusion of environmentally
coordination among existing mechanisms, in sound technologies to developing countries on
particular at the United Nations level, and through a favourable terms, including on concessional and
global technology facilitation mechanism preferential terms, as mutually agreed
We welcome the proposed indicators under 17.6.
However, we recommend explicit reference to the need
for innovative research models, including partnerships
aimed at developing and delivering global public goods,
capacity building and technology transfer at the
national, regional, and the global levels. North-South
and South-South collaborations should drive
technology transfer, technology development and
adoption in LMIC.
Therefore we propose adding the following indicator:
• Number of formal coordination and collaboration
private entities [nationally collected, also serves targets
3, 9.5, 9.a and 17.9]
Agree with ITU and UNGDF to add a new indicator. What is the definition of environmental Goods? Does it
"Fixed Internet broadband subscriptions broken include ICT industry Goods?
down by speed."
17.6.1: Suggested addition to existing indicator: "and
R& D initiatives"
NEW 17.6.3:
Indicator: "Volume of North-South & South-South
cooperation programs to facilitate access to S,T&I and
K-sharing".
Specification: "# of initiatives (programs, projects,
activities) with that objective. Specifies: (i) amount
funded; (ii) direction of flow –N-S or S-S; (iii) # of
beneficiaries, including special interest groups: women,
Persons with Disabiities, others". To be collected by
Civil Society organizations; project of FRAmericas.
NEW 17.6.4
Indicator: "Wireless readiness".
Specification: (i) population density; (ii) number of
households
collaboration initiatives aimed at increasing and
facilitating transfer of health-related technology,
including between public and private entities
implementation goal (goal 17) of the SDGs and is also
a fundamental component of international support for
innovation capacity in LMICs (goal 9). This indicator
was proposed in the WHO Global Strategy and Plan of
Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual
Property, and while no standardized international
methodology or data exists, tracking this indicator
would be an important step in monitoring progress
toward the aims set out in this document.

Very good Very good


collected] Number of formal coordination and
including between public and private entities as a
national indicator.
*See rationale under Target 9.5.

Number of formal coordination and collaboration
private entities
Technology transfer is a fundamental component of

both international support for innovation capacity in
LMICs (goal 9) and the means of implementation (goal
17) of the SDGs. This indicator was proposed in the
WHO Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public
Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property, and while
no standardized international methodology or data
exists, tracking this indicator would be an important
step in monitoring progress toward international
cooperation on science, technology and innovation and
the transfer of technology.
We recommend the addition of an indicator related to We do not regard indicator 17.7.1 and 17.7.2 on STEM
the presence of national-level Multi-stakeholder investment as an adequate proxy of sound
Sustainable development commissions or councils in technologies and recommend these indicator are
operation to assess levels of engagement of reviewed/dropped.
stakeholders in sustainable development discourse and Indicator 17.7.1 refers to tariffs imposed on important
policy processes. goods; this may go some way to promote diffusion of
technologies across borders, but only so far. In Asia
(ASEAN) they agreed a couple of years ago to waive
duties on trade of environmental technologies between
member states. So trade flows might be more useful.
Consensus definition of 'diffusion of technologies’
required to develop useful metrics. It involves
substantial investments/support in building up
capabilities to manage, repair, adapt and modify such
technologies. UNEP suggestion on use of various
funds (including climate finance) being utilised for this
goal might be helpful. But it won't tell us whether those
funds are actually being used effectively - are they just
on hardware, or on software too?
Recommendation: use of ‘No. of north-south and
south-south technology transfer initiatives’ and ‘Total
north-south and south-south funding for technology
transfer initiatives’ as alternative indicators.


The alternative indicator suggested by ESCAP,

"Enhanced trade and investment flows by X% in
climate-friendly/environmental goods, services and
technologies for sustainable consumption and
production and enhanced supply chains" may be more
able to capture the progress towards sustainable
development.
Target 17.17: proposed amendment to the suggested
indicator: “Amount of US$ committed to public-private
partnership and to public-civil society partnerships”
Target 17.8: Fully operationalize the technology Target 17.9: Enhance international support for
bank and science, technology and innovation implementing effective and targeted capacity-
capacity-building mechanism for least developed building in developing countries to support
countries by 2017 and enhance the use of enabling national plans to implement all the sustainable
technology, in particular information and development goals, including through North-South,
communications technology South-South and triangular cooperation
With regard to indicator 17.8.2 we note the suggestion

by UNESCO that the Alliance for Affordable Internet
(A4AI) among others can support data collection for
their suggested alternative “Percentage of public
libraries with broadband Internet access.” However, the
underlying focus here is on public broadband Internet
access. In addition to libraries there are other important
sources of public access to ICTs which often support
the connectivity needs of those where broadband
Internet is currently unaffordable. Such access will
support the STI capacity building needs of LDC’s as
well (target 17.8).
Thus we propose a broader indicators that can

combine the following:
“Proportion of post offices providing public Internet
access.” (Source UPU)
“Percentage of public libraries providing public Internet
access.” (as defined by the IFLA, although it's not clear
if this is currently being collected)
we suggest: Percentage of countries with data for all
disability related indicators and disability
disaggregation of the SDG framework
This will require no additional data collection.

17.8.1 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
This target, which clearly states the importance of
disaggregation of data, including by disability, can be
easily monitored with an indicator which will cause no
extra data collection burden on countries, ‘Percentage
of countries with data for all disability related indicators
and disability disaggregation of the SDG framework, in
the last 5 years’.

Usage of Broadband internet measured per individual In 1.9.1 secure one indicator (it says % of indicators)
that focuses on ICT as a basic infrastructure
UNEP indicator is great, please add that " ICT
penetration in terms of equality of access, quality, and
affordability"
"International Internet bandwidth per inhabitant" good

to measure as suggested by ITU
WB suggestion on fixed broadband is too narrow since

it doesnt include mobile
NEW 17.8.1
Indicator: "ICT penetration".
Specification: "Evolution of ICT penetration:
- Increase in the number of land-lines contracts in
ten years’ time for all the countries in a given Region
- Increase in the number of internet accesses in ten

years’ time for all the countries in a
given Region
- Increase in the number of mobile contracts in ten

years’ time for all the countries in a given Region
- Increase in the number or Wi-fi installations in ten

years’ time in a given Region
EXISTING 17.8.2. Add to Specification at the end: "and

affordability – cost of 1Mbit/sec adjusted by PPP and
inflation"
NEW 17.8.3
Indicator: "Volume of financing to enable use of
technology innovation and ICT"
Specification: "Annual investment in R&D to apply
Technology Innovation & ICT to development purposes.
Specifies: (i) source of financing –public or private; (ii)
amount of financing; (iii) application of funds; (iv)
beneficiaries"
NEW 17.8.4
Indicator: "Internet relevance"
Specification: " Proportion of transactions and official
acts conducted over the Internet over the total"
Recommended indicator: [Global level indicator,
nationally collected] R&D expenditure as a percentage
of GDP (Disaggregated by sector of performance,
source of funds, field of science, and socioeconomic
objective). As an existing indicator with an established
methodology and broad coverage, this indicator
already has the support of UNSC, UNESCO, and
SDSN as an indicator for target 9.5 and the potential to
be a cross-cutting indicator for multiple other SDG
targets—for which it was strongly supported during the
stakeholder consultation. However, as noted above,
even when perfectly reported and fully disaggregated,
this indicator cannot be used to monitor the global
health R&D target (target 3.b).
including between public and private entities.
implementation goal of the SDGs and is also a
Recommend: See recommended indicator and comment under
[National indicator, nationally collected] Percentage of Target 9.5 on R&D expenditure.
individuals or communities with access to ICTs, national See recommended indicator and comment under
information and communication networks, and the Target 9.5 technology transfer
Internet.
Comment: Access to ICTs address infrastructure
capacity issues as populations must access ICTs in
order to participate in the information economy.
[National indicator, nationally collected] Percentage of

population routinely exhibiting digital literacy through
the use of ICT’s in their daily work and non-work
activities.
Comment: Measures basic skills to use ICTs effectively.
[National indicator, nationally collected] Proportion of

ICT development and support professionals to digitally
literate population.
Comment: Measures technology development capacity
and the ability to support the national ICT infrastructure
and the users who depend on it.
[National indicator, nationally collected] Presence of

governing and enabling ICT strategies and policies in
all public sector domains.
Comment: Enabling policy and strategy environment is
an overlooked capacity needed to effectively deploy
and support ICTs.
Very good. I hope it become realistic Very good

objective)
As an existing indicator with an established
implementation goal (17) of the SDGs and is also a
innovation capacity in LMICs (9).
We continue to support UNESCO’s proposal for 17.8.2:
[Percentage of public libraries with broadband Internet
access]
Ensure that local policy researchers in developing
countries - who know best the local context and are on
the ground to advocate and advise on an ongoing
basis - have access to the resources (funding, ICT,
documentation, professional networking, training) to
take a leading role in designing national and regional
policies
All National level indicators. Recommended indicator: [Global indicator, nationally

Recommended indicator: Percentage of individuals or collected] R&D expenditure as percentage of GDP
communities with access to ICTs, national information (disaggregated by sector of performance, source of
and communication networks, and the Internet. funds, field of science, and socioeconomic objective).
Access to ICTs address infrastructure capacity issues Recommended indicator: [National indicator, nationally
as populations must access ICTs in order to participate collected] Number of formal coordination and
in the information economy. collaboration initiatives aimed at increasing and
Recommended indicator: Percentage of population facilitating transfer of health-related technology,
routinely exhibiting digital literacy through the use of including between public and private entities as a
ICT’s in their daily work and non-work activities. national indicator. *
Measures basic skills to use ICTs effectively. *See rationale under Target 9.5.
Recommended indicator: Proportion of ICT
development and support professionals to digitally
literate population.
Measures technology development capacity and the
ability to support the national ICT infrastructure and the
users who depend on it.
Recommended indicator: Presence of governing and
enabling ICT strategies and policies in all public sector
domains.
Enabling policy and strategy environment is an
overlooked capacity needed to effectively deploy and
support ICTs.

R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP
(Disaggregated by sector of performance, source of
funds, field of science, and socioeconomic objective)

targets, including Target 17.9—for which it was strongly
supported during stakeholder consultation.

private entities
Technology transfer is a fundamental component of

both international support for innovation capacity in
LMICs (goal 9) and the means of implementation (goal
17) of the SDGs.
17.8.1 ICT penetration in terms of equality of access,
quality, and affordability, including access to a mobile
phone and access to the internet
Further disaggregation: by type of ICT
DATA SOURCE: UNCTAD & ITU - Already core

Indicator for Partnership on Measuring ICT for
Development
We believe proposed indicators are weighted heavily We recommend an additional indicator which captures
towards enhancing use of ICT and would like to see the amount of development and climate finance that
indicators related to the adoption and implementation supports national development plans (instead of donor-
of the science, technology and innovation capacity- driven tools such as PRSP, NAMA, NAPA, NAP, etc.)
building mechanism. Complementary indicators could
assess ‘Proportion of individuals having a bank
account’, ‘Proportion of individuals in higher education’,
‘Proportion of individuals having smart phones’ and
‘average internet speed at national and sub-national
levels (good data availability using speed tests on the
ground)’.

objective)
objective)
It is not sufficient to have capacity and institutional

arrangements. it is crucial to ensure that data collected
are disaggregated in order to understand specific
needs.
Target 17.10: Promote a universal, rules-based,
open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral Target 17.11: Significantly increase the exports of
trading system under the World Trade Organization, developing countries, in particular with a view to
including through the conclusion of negotiations doubling the least developed countries’ share of
under its Doha Development Agenda global exports by 2020
Trade-related indicators should not only focus on trade We support the proposed modified Indicator by UNEP
restrictions and distortions. Indicators should also 17.11.1 "Monitoring the evolution of developing
measure changes in trade which have improved market countries export by partner group and key sectors.
access for poorer countries and delivered in terms of Such as: a) Exports of high technological content as
sustainable, less volatile/vulnerable livelihoods, proportion of total exports, b) Labour-intensive exports
strengthening the stability of commodity markets, as proportion of total exports (pro-poor exports), and c)
reducing their volatility. As paragraph 30 of the revised Export diversification (by product; by market
outcome document reads "States are strongly urged to destination)"
refrain from promulgating and applying any unilateral
economic, financial or trade measures not in
accordance with international law and the Charter of
the United Nations that impede the full achievement of
economic and social development, particularly in
developing countries"
Very good Good
a) The Doha Development round is finalised.
b) Number of trade and investment treaties that include
binding human rights clauses.
c) Number of trade and investment treaties that include
environmental and social standards.
d) Trade and investment agreements include
mechanisms whereby developing countries can protect
their agriculture against import surges and dumping.
e) Aid for trade funds allocated according to developing
countries’ own priorities, to support capacity for local
production of food at the center, as well as the local
markets and local processing.
=> This target should include all trade and investment

treaties.
The target should include the requirement that trade

and investment
treaties have binding human rights clauses that are
greater in importance than investor protection clauses,
and that trade and investment treaties promote
It should also promote a trade system that supports

local food production in developing countries.
We suggest developing an indicator which measures
the volume of domestic exports disaggregated by
volume of raw materials and volume of processed
materials/products to indicate the maturity of a nation’s
export markets. A complementary indicator could
consider the level of investment ($) in domestic export
processing zones.
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 Target 17.13: Enhance global macroeconomic
countries are transparent and simple, and stability, including through policy coordination and
contribute to facilitating market access policy coherence
Good Good
May be shortened and simplified
We support the WB's and UNEP's observations that the
GDP is too narrow an indicator for this target. The
measuring method should have more dimensions.
Target 17.15: Respect each country’s policy space
and leadership to establish and implement policies
Target 17.14: Enhance policy coherence for for poverty eradication and sustainable
sustainable development development
This target is critical for evaluating the impact of
international trade investment and finance frameworks
on a country's ability to undertake regulations to
promote sustainable development and human rights. It
therefore needs to have indicators that are broader in
scope than those proposed so far. We suggest.
➢ Number of disputes brought against countries
through dispute settlement processes (by companies,
other countries, other) in areas such as trade,
investment, technology etc that challenge policies or
practices promoting poverty eradication, sustainable
development or human rights.
➢ Number of policy constraints embodied in ODA or
loan agreements
➢ Existence of a gender wage gap, quality of work
conditions and social benefits in the sectors affected by
trade (export-oriented and import-competing sectors)
It is not clear how this target can be quantified.

We support the suggested indicator, however we feel it
will not be sufficient on its own. A more adequate way
of measuring policy coherence would be the existence
of sustainable development impact assessments
across all relevant policies.
Additional: 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
Impact assessments are critical to knowing and proving
the extent to which one's own country's policies and
practices (e.g. environment, trade, investment, aid, tax,
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. This is potentially
relevant also to targets 17.1, 17.2 and 17.3.
As noted under 12.8, the indicator, 'Number of
countries implementing the UN Guidelines for
Consumer Protection (UNGCP)' would address multiple
SDG targets and deliver benefits across multiple policy
areas.
The indicators currently proposed are broad & open, to

include ‘relevant international instruments including
environmental, human rights, and labour instruments’;
elsewhere, specific MEAs & policies are cited. The
UNGCP provides a framework, trusted for c.30 years,
which brings together all such policy areas and helps to
deliver coherence within and across nations. CI
considers it essential to cite the UNGCP as a crucial
policy instrument for its ability to join up the 2030
Agenda. For examples of how the UNGCP addresses
multiple SDG targets, see
http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/1488820/
the-role-of-consumer-protection-in-meeting-the-
sdgs_updated-jan15.pdf
The indicator requires no elaboration, is measurable,

and may be tailored to relevant national priorities, e.g.
access to food, energy, water; consumer redress; data
protection; sustainable consumption etc., should
complementary national indicators be required.
This proposed indicator is a key structural human rights

indicator, and should include the range of human rights
instruments explicitly and implicitly referenced across
the SDG targets (see list compiled by the Danish
Institute for Human Rights at www.humanrights.dk/sdg-
guide
We strongly support a strong binding framework on
policy coherence for sustainable development, which
includes monitoring of government spendig including in
public procurement. To ready more, you may refer to
the Fairtrade Foundation briefing "Sustainable
Development Goals through trade – a five-point
agenda for policy coherence" (July 2015).
We support proposed indicator by UNEP “Number of

countries that have ratified and implemented relevant
international instruments including environmental,
human rights, and labour instruments”
a) Number of international agreements or treaties
contradicting with sustainable development goals.
b) Number of new international agreements or treaties
that have a chapter on sustainable development goals.
c) Number of countries with a multi-sectoral strategy to
achieve and promote sustainable development goals.
Although monitoring the adoption and implementation
of relevant international instruments including
environmental, human rights, and labour instruments is
important for indicating maturity of policy processes
around SD, the proposed indicators do not actually
seem to address policy coherence between the
different instruments, Furthermore, indicator 17.14.2 is
ill-equipped to measure policy coherence since it will
not provide a meaningful assessment of the
effectiveness of multi-sectoral and -stakeholder
coordination currently in place. Here, we recommend a
performance-orientated indicator which measures the
level of representation of stakeholders and sectors
within coordination mechanisms and related outcomes
for improving harmonisation and policy coherence for
An additional area of measurement not covered within
the proposed indicators is the level of alignment
between current corporate and national level
frameworks used to monitor SD growth and impact and
the proposed SDG measurement agenda. SEI is
conducting research on this as part of the Measure
What Matters project - http://measurewhatmatters.info/.
Suggested indicator is suitable for target Suggested indicator is suitable for target
Through numbers of countries (developed and
developing) stating the principles of sustainable
development used at the beginning of their integrated
low carbon and zero emissions strategies (under target
13.2) connected up with Targets 13.b and 15.9.
17.15.1 Number of disputes brought against countries
through dispute settlement processes (by companies,
other countries, other) in areas such as trade,
investment, technology etc.
UNCITRAL; UNCTAD; ICSID
Investor-state dispute settlement clauses are regularly

used to undermine the ability of countries to regulate
the interests of human rights, gender equality and
sustainable development, including challenging
government regulation to increase the minimum wage;
protect environmental resources; and ensure
accessibility of public services
Target 17.16: Enhance the global partnership for
sustainable development, complemented by multi-
stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share
knowledge, expertise, technology and financial Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective
resources, to support the achievement of the public, public-private and civil society
sustainable development goals in all countries, in partnerships, building on the experience and
particular developing countries resourcing strategies of partnerships
Nothing in the current proposed indicators measures
the effectiveness of partnerships. We therefore propose
and indicator to measure:
➢ Existence and implementation of binding human

rights and environmental protection frameworks for the
regulation of public-private partnerships, including
period impact assessments
Propose:
# of global partnerships that support SDGs at the

country, regional and global levels.
Rationale: There should be a broader gauge of

partnerships at different levels supporting SDGs
keep technology sub-category in the indicators
Indicators for this target should aim at capturing the
number of small farmers, civil society partnerships that
are at the outset of and effectively leading such public-
private partnerships. This could be measured with the
number of small farmers and civil society organisations
that have a say in the top decision-making body of
such public-private partnership. For further details, you
may refer to the 'A seat at the table?’ study by the
Fairtrade Foundation of four agricultural PPPs in
Ghana, Malawi and Kenya (September 2014).
Suggest including additional indicator (similar to Ensure the reference to PPP in this indicator includes
original draft indicator) that reads philanthropy and CSO and is not limited to the World
“Change in the number of multi-stakeholder Bank classification that does not include philanthropy
partnerships participants active in developing
countries”
The proposed IAEG Priority Indicator ignores civil
society as partners in development and reduces the
concept of partnership to
transfer of funds from the public to the private sector.
There is no evidence to show that PPPs in the
education sector reliably deliver better quality services,
and considerable evidence that reliance on the private
sector to deliver essential services has a negative
impact on equity. Commericalization of education has
been the subject of the last two reports of the UN
Special Rapportuer on the Right to Education and the
Human Rights Council Resolution in 2015 recognized
its dangers for education. Clear accountability
mechanisms and democratic overight is required for
private providers.
Good Good
17.17.1 Existence and implementation of binding
human rights and environmental protection frameworks
for the regulation of public-private partnerships,
including periodic impact assessments
For public-private partnerships to be effective, they
must not weaken human rights or environmental
protections or facilitate the violation of human rights
through, e.g. the provision of incentives for private
investment. This is particularly relevant for health
issues including HIV and access to medicines.
• 17.16.1: "Development co-operation actors" should • 17.17.1: It is unclear whether the "PPPs" indicator
explicitly include civil society organizations. refers to partnerships with both for-profit and not-for-
profit entities. Partnerships with civil society entities
• An additional 17.16 indicator to ensure that should ideally be disaggregated from partnerships with
multistakeholder partnerships involve civil society could for-profit entities once “civil society partnerships” is
be Indicator 2 from the Global Monitoring Exercise: well-defined.
“Civil society operates within an environment which • The target—to promote “effective” partnerships—calls
maximises its engagement in and contribution to for the quality of partnerships to be measured as well.
development.” The Global Partnership for Effective One way to indicate promotion of effective partnerships
Development Cooperation (GPEDC)—recognized in with civil society organizations is to count the existence
the Addis outcome document for its particular of policies that institutionalize open and inclusive
experience in monitoring efforts to strengthen inclusive consultation with the civil society sector on design and
cooperation for effective development outcomes—has implementation of development programs. (The
finalized a methodology for Indicator 2 that will be GPEDC is collecting data on this, under its
approved by the Global Partnership Steering methodology for Indicator 2 of the Global Partnership
Committee this week. The methodology addresses Monitoring Framework.)
quality of donor and government cooperation with civil
society organizations. The Global Partnership also
continues to monitor Indicator 2 based on reporting
from CSOs and UN bodies.
ICN suggests including indicator to measure effective

civil society partnership in addition to public-private
partnership.
a) Increase in the number of multi-stakeholder
partnerships.
b) Number of participants active in both developed and
=>
b) The participants should include members of all
subgroups of society.
We strongly call for an indicator that promotes civil

society participation in decision making and monitoring
& evaluation. The indicator that is currently being
propósed makes an incentive for the promotion of
PPPs in a wide-scale. Evidence shows that PPPs can
be detremental to the accomplishment of rights,
depending on their content and process of
implementation. Clear standards for PPPs must be put
in place.
The current proposed indicator completely fails to track
progress on the target, as it measures just USD
invested in PPP and not whether they are effective or
not. Moreover, PPPs can have major shortcomings and
damaging impacts themselves. Oxfam’s report on a
PPP hospital in Lesotho, found that the hospital was
costing at least three times the amount of the old public
hospital it was built to replace for example, amounting
to 51% of the total health budget for the entire country.
The value of these partnerships should be measured in
terms of their contribution to sustainable development.
For this reason, we suggest the following two
indicators: i) % of public-(for profit) private partnerships
that deliver greater value for achieving the SDGs than
public or private finance alone, as measured via ex
ante and ex post evaluations of impact against cost
effectiveness, poverty and equity. ii) % of public-(for
profit) private partnerships that include full
transparency of contracts, terms, and ex ante and ex
post assessment results, and subject to the highest
international environmental and social safeguards.
Volunteers are essential to the achievement of ALL of
the SDGs, and their inclusion should not be taken for
granted. Instead, governments should be accountable
for ensuring the inclusion of volunteers in the global
partnership, and all institutions mobilized for the
planning, implementation, and monitoring of the SDGs.
The currently proposed indicators could strengthened

by making explicit mention of the engagement of
volunteers, either through the mobilization of volunteer-
led groups, volunteer-involving organizations, or
volunteer support groups, ideally by reporting on not
just the headcounts, but in the amount of time
dedicated to multi-stakeholder partnerships.
Indicator proposed: Changes in the number of multi-

stakeholder partnerships participants active in
developing countries and their inclusion of a range of
partners including businesses, private philanthropic
foundations, international organizations, civil society,
volunteer groups, local authorities, parliaments, trade
unions, research institutes and academia.
We support the alternative proposals, to measure both

public and public-private investments. At the same time
we also propose indicators on public-public
partnerships.
The proposed indicators already benefit from those
being developed under existing Conventions and Multi-
lateral agreements. Ideally, to avoid reinvention of the
wheel and waste of resources relevant
Conventions/institutions could be tasked with running
the indicators or at least the development of them. This
will help streamline the M and E process. Within the
context of complex systems of multi-scale indicators we
recommend the use of a federated database system to
coherently link proposed indicators against the SDG
indicator framework.
Suggested indicator is suitable for target

The current IAEG indicator proposes to adopt Indicator Under this target we think it would be relevant to
7 of the Global Patnership for Effective Development measure the existence of enabling policies and
Cooperation GPEDC. We would say they should also practices with regard to civil society participation in
adopt Indicator 2 from this list "Civil society operates legislative and official decision making processes. The
within an environment which maximises its current emphasis on measuring the $US invested in
engagement in and contribution to development". This, public-private partnerships (PPPs) does not evaluate
like the first suggestion, is already an agreed indicator the quality of official engagement with civil society. An
within the GPEDC and therefore can be enhanced enabling environment for civil society and civil society’s
through its inclusion in this framework. GPEDC - ability to engage in multi-stakeholder partnerships are
http://effectivecooperation.org/wordpress/wp- measurable and have been monitored through several
content/uploads/2015/05/GPEDC-Monitoring- sources of data, including the Enabling Environment
Framework-10-Indicators.pdf 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 ie
CIVICUS are in the process of further refining their
methodologies to measure the extent of civic freedoms
and enabling environment for CSOs. Additionally there
is a risk that this indicator can create perverse
incentives for privatization of service delivery
17.17.1 Existence and implementation of binding
human rights and environmental protection frameworks
for the regulation of public-private partnerships,
including periodic impact assessments
National parliaments; legislative records
For public-private partnerships to be effective, they

must not weaken human rights or environmental
protections or facilitate the violation of human rights
through, e.g. the provision of incentives for private
investment.
Target 17.18: By 2020, enhance capacity-building
support to developing countries, including for least
developed countries and small island developing
States, to increase significantly the availability of Target 17.19: By 2030, build on existing initiatives
high-quality, timely and reliable data disaggregated to develop measurements of progress on
by income, gender, age, race, ethnicity, migratory sustainable development that complement gross
status, disability, geographic location and other domestic product, and support statistical capacity-
characteristics relevant in national contexts building in developing countries

• 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)
amended:
• Number of countries that have formal institutional
arrangements for the coordination [ADD: and
accessibility] of the compilation of official statistics
[ADD: disaggregated by income, gender, age, race,
ethnicity, migratory status, migration trends/flows,
disability, geographic location and other characteristics
relevant in national, regional and international
contexts].
The two suggested priority indicators differ from what
was previously proposed; they are now:
1) Financial and other resources made available to
strengthen the statistical capacity in developing
countries
2) Inclusive Wealth Index.
We propose instead the following two indicators which
link directly to support by nations towards measuring
their progress on implementing the SDG Goals.
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.”
CDP's global database of corporate and city

disclosures could play a useful role here, as could its
global online data platform.
disaggregation of data, including by disability, can and
hence should be easily monitored with an indicator
which will cause no extra data collection burden on
countries, ‘Percentage of countries with data for all
disability related indicators and disability
disaggregation of the SDG framework, in the last 5
years’.
Proportion of sustainable 17.19.1 Number of countries whose national budgets
development indicators with full disaggregation include resourcing for gender data collection and
produced at the national level. analysis
Number of countries that have mandated minimum

Gender Indicators be integrated into formal data
collection mechanisms through legislation or national
statistical plans
include access to affordable ICT as one Resource

Suggest including additional indicator that reads
“Number of foundations, CSOs and private sector
organisations in X country that track and collect data
against the SDGs”
Percentage of countries with data for all disability
related indicators and disability disaggregation of the
SDG framework, in the last 5 years
Very important Very important

This target emphasizing the importance of increasing
availability and quality of disaggregated data, including
by disability, can be monitored with a straightforward
indicator causing no extra data burden on countries,
‘Percentage of countries with data for all disability
SDG framework, in the last 5 years’.
Extensive information and support exists for
measurements “Beyond GDP,” to include well-being,
life satisfaction and related concepts, both worldwide
and even in models in the state of Maryland in USA.
See my comments in target 3.4 about scales for well-
being, documented in the World Happiness Report (by
3 economists), and exemplified in scale examples by
the OECD; Happy Planet Index; WHO QOL
questionnaire, UNDP 2011 satisfaction ratings &
Human Development Index. Also see
http://bit.ly/1VJhcpu & http://bit.ly/1OsmUrv Part 10,
pp.64-70. An easy google scholar search reveals much
research about possible measures.
Indicator
- Percentage of countries with data for all disability
SDG framework, in the last 5 years
Target 17.18 can be easily monitored with an indicator

which will cause no extra data collection burden on
countries.

amended:
contexts].
Capacity building sectors may be specified No comments

Number of countries that have developed and / or
implemented a new wider indicator for measuring well-
being alongside with the GDP.
This target should be amended to ensure that by 2030,

every country has implemented a standard for
measuring multidimensional progress towards
sustainable development, beyond GDP and an income-
based focus on economic growth.
Examples: Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare

(Nordhaus/Tobin),
Gross National Happiness.
amended:
contexts].
Civil society organizations and volunteers are
recognized as crucial partners in the achievement of
the SDGs, especially in developing countries. The 2008
System of National Accounts, developed new
guidelines for the “sub-sectoring” of institutional sectors
in order to separately identify nonprofit institutions.
The contributions of civil society organizations and

volunteers are under-recognized. Volunteers are
estimated to compose nearly half of the civil society
workforce, and that figure is even higher in some
countries.
Proposed indicator: Number of countries that have

implemented the 2008 System of National Accounts
and developed satellite accounts on non-profit
institutions and volunteering
The proposed indicator supports improving the

capacity of global statistical systems to measure
progress towards achieving the SDGs through the
implementation of the 2008 and supports capacity to
assess the capabilities of the key vehicles for
implementing the SDGs. Furthermore, it does so in a
manner that complements GDP using existing UN-
approved statistical machinery.

17.18.1 Proportion of sustainable development 17.19.1 Number of countries whose national budgets
indicators with full disaggregation produced at the include resourcing for gender data collection and
national level. analysis
17.18.2 Number of countries that have mandated

minimum Gender Indicators be integrated into formal
data collection mechanisms through legislation or
national statistical plans
NOTES: Gender inequality is reproduced through the

statistical record—girls and women, and their issues
are often not measured. Existing gender statistics vary
in quality and comparability. In 2013, only 37 percent
of 126 countries reviewed for gender statistics
programs had a mechanism for gender statistics at the
national level.
The current IAEG indicators focus only on the

presence of legal and institutional arrangements
regulating state institutions, not on outcomes.
Furthermore, the proposals do not consider at all the
role that so called 'third parties' (academia, NGOs,
private sector) have already and will have in the
provision of high-quality, timely and reliable data.
Add Indicator 17.18.3 Proportion of national

sustainable development indicators with full
disaggregation produced at national level.
Comment: This alternative indicator proposed by

UNFPA would address the need for including data by
age.
Capacity Development is an on-going activity of

Statistics without Borders
The Gross National Happiness Index (GNH Index) of
the Kingdom of Bhutan should be explored as a
national example with international salience.
The methodology (Ura et al 2012: An extensive

analysis of the GNH index) and powerpoints are
available on www.grossnationalhappiness.com.
The updated GNH index will be released November

2015.
Bhutan's Gross National Happiness is methodologically

rigorous and is used for policy by the Gross National
Happiness Commission. It covers nine SDG-related
domains: health, education, living standards (including
work and income), governance, time use, the
environment, culture, community, and psychological
well-being. The methodology underlying the GNH index
has been published as Alkire et al (2015),
Multidimensional Poverty Measurement and Analysis
(Oxford University Press).
The GNH Index has been decomposed by gender, age,

region, occupational category, rural-urban areas, and
could be decomposed by groups such as disability or
ethnicity. It illustrates the kind of multidimensional well-
being indices that should complement economic
measures of progress.
CSOs & volunteers are crucial partners in
development. Volunteers are estimated at nearly half of
the civil society workforce, higher in some countries.
Recognizing this, the 2008 System of National
Accounts, the global system that all countries use to
produce national economic estimates, developed new
guidelines for the “sub-sectoring” of institutional sectors
in order to separately identify nonprofit institutions
(NPIs). But it does not go so far as to recommend that
countries report on the separately identified NPIs as a
whole.
The UN Handbook on Nonprofit Institutions in the

System of National Accounts, approved by Statistical
Commission & currently undergoing an update,
provides the guidance for statistical offices to
separately identify NPIs in their core accounts and
compile them into what are known as “satellite
accounts on nonprofit institutions.” This indicator
supports improving the capacity of global statistical
systems to measure BOTH progress towards achieving
the SDGs through the implementation of the 2008 AND
supports capacity to assess the capabilities of
CSOs&volunteers to implement SDGs.

national statistical plans; umber of countries whose
national budgets include resourcing for gender data
collection and analysis
national statistical plans; umber of countries whose
national budgets include resourcing for gender data
collection and analysis
Gender inequality is reproduced through the statistical

record—girls and women, and their issues are often not
measured. Existing gender statistics vary in quality and
comparability. In 2013, only 37 percent of 126 countries
reviewed for gender statistics programs had a
mechanism for gender statistics at the national level
Organization: Topic 18: Verify and match the indicator
proposed against existing major indicator
frameworks, including those developed at the
regional level
1,000 Days
Action Against Hunger | ACF Global (and national and regional) data on
International childhood wasting (Target 2.2, and supportive of
other targets) is available through the UNICEF-
World Bank-WHO ‘Joint Estimates’ and the
WHO’s Global Database on Child Growth and
Malnutrition.
The World Health Assembly (WHA) targets,
including stunting and wasting, are based on
strong scientific evidence and reflect a universal
agenda to address multiple, interconnected forms
of malnutrition. In addition, the Rome Declaration
on Nutrition and Framework for Action, explicitly
welcomed in the Post 2015 Declaration,
reaffirmed member states commitment to the
WHA targets.
ADD International Please see comments in Section 2, especially on
the Incheon Strategy indicators in the Asia-Pacific
region.
Africa Network Campaign on There is need to expand on information collected

Education for All (ANCEFA) in household surveys such as the EU Adult
education survey to other regions such as Africa.
Alliance for Affordable Internet Our additional suggestion for indicator

5.b.1:”Proportion of individuals using the Internet,
by sex” is already collated by the ITU on a
frequent basis for 70+ countries.
Our suggestion for indicator 9.c.1 “Broadband

prices as a proportion of GNI/capita” (as a
complement to the ITU’s suggestion of
“Broadband Internet Prices”) is based on the
target developed by the UN Broadband
Commission. This was established in 2011 and
has measured annually by the ITU (see
Measuring Information Society Reports).
For indicator 17.8.2, the indicator “Proportion of

post offices providing public Internet access” is
collected by the UPU. However, the indicator
“Percentage of public libraries providing public
Internet access” was collected in the past by the
IFLA and its not clear if this is still the case.
American Jewish World Service
AquaFed

and Development
Asia South Pacific Association for Definitely, the existing major indicator frameworks
Basic and Adult Education are largely inadequate for a reliable, updated and
(ASPBAE) comprehensive monitoring of the SDGs. Most of
the proposed indicators on education are not
currently in the national and global monitoring and
statistical systems, thus, the need to develop
rather than simply match whatever is existing and
economical. Governments and donors must
invest if they are serious about the SDGs.


World

Agées (ACAMAGE)
Berhan Lehetsanat
Beyond 2015 UK
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation • 2.1 Prevalence of Wasting: used to track
World Health Assembly (WHA) nutrition target.
• 2.2 Prevalence of Stunting and Prevalence of
Exclusive Breastfeeding: both used to track WHA
nutrition target.
• 3.1 Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births
and Proportion of births attended by skilled health
personnel: MDG indicators, UNFPA State of the
World Population indicators to track progress
against ICPD, Global strategy for Women and
Children’s Health.
• 3.2 Under-five mortality, Neonatal mortality
and Immunization coverage: Core indicators for
the Global Strategy for Women and Children’s
Health include child mortality and the proportion
of newborn deaths as well as an immunization
indicator focused on DTP3 coverage. The MDGs
also tracked the two indicators currently
suggested for target 3.2 as well as an
immunization indicator, though it was focused on
immunization against measles. Our suggestion is
an updated version of this immunization indicator,
to be responsive to scientific and development
advances we expect to see in the coming years.
Gavi’s indicators (for 2016-2020 strategy) include
reach of routine coverage: 3rd dose of
pentavalent vaccine and first dose of routine
measles vaccine, and breadth of protection:
average coverage across all Gavi supported
vaccines.
• 3.3 TB and malaria incidence: The WHO
tracks malaria and TB incidence in their World
Malaria Reports and through the END TB
Strategy (though the latter uses incidence rate
per 100,000).
• 3.7 Need for family planning met by modern
methods and Adolescent birth rate: Satisfied
Bingham Centre for the Rule of
Law, British Institute of
International and Comparative Law
Bioregional
BLUE 21 e.V: The proposed indicator 3.a.2 (affordability of

cigarettes) is already used to measure progress
in tobacco taxation by the WHO within the FCTC
reporting system.
Bond Disaster Risk Reduction Alignment of indicators between SFDRR, Climate

Working Group change Agreement and SDGs.
Brazilian Campaign for the Right to
Education

Agri-Retailers)
CAFOD It is vital that, wherever possible, the SDG

indicator framework builds on existing,
established measures being used in other fora.
CARE
CBM UK
CDP CDP's detailed annual questionnaires for

companies and cities (which are responded to by
c.6,000 of the largest companies worldwide, and
>200 of the world's largest cities) can be classed
as an existing major indicator framework. They
cover the environmental themes of climate, water
and forests but also contain data relevant to
finance and investment, energy, technology
innovation, agriculture and other relevant topics.
More work remains to be done to map the
existing CDP questionnaires against the SDGs
(this was done to some extent by the 'SDG
Compass' project but this did not look across the
full range of CDP's work) - and it is also important
to note that CDP has the capacity to adapt these
questionnaires going forwards in order to better fit
the needs of SDG reporting.
CEAAL Data collection for youth and adult education and
lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
information collected in household surveys. At a
regional level there are some experiences that
could be used as an example, such as the
European Union’s Adult Education survey. We
recommend to evaluate the cost and
methodologies to expand this type of survey to
other regions, and to develop questions that
could be applied on other surveys, e.g. on the
labour force.
CEAG - Environmental Education Data collection for youth and adult education and
Center of Guarulhos lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
labour force.
Center for Economic and Social Existing human rights accountability initiatives are
Rights very relevant for monitoring the SDGs. At the
international level, OHCHR and some of the
international human rights mechanisms (e.g.
treaty bodies) have important existing
methodologies and datasets that can be used.
Existing indicator frameworks, datasets and

methodologies relevant to our proposed
indicators include: The Commitment to Equity
Index; the Open Budget Survey; Open Budget
Index; Financial Secrecy Index; Regional
Barometers e.g. Latinobarómetro, Afrobarometer,
Eurobarometer; Global Right to Information
rating; Civil Society Enabling Environment Index.
Rights (C-Fam)
Center for Reproductive Rights


Alternatives
Changemaker
International
Christian Aid
Deutschland e.V.
CiaoLapo Onlus Stillbirth rate is a core indicator of the Every

Newborn action plan, which includes the target of
reducing stillbirths to at least 12 per 1,000 births
by 2030. Since the launch of this global plan,
most countries who have taken for national
maternal and newborn action plans or sharpened
RMNCH plans have included stillbirth targets and
relevant indicators. Stillbirth rate is now included
in the WHO core health indicator list (2015).
Climate Change Centre Reading Valid principle for all 17 SDGs, and indicators is to
measure generated negative input reduce to
increase positive outcome impact, reuse, to
guarantee and recycle net outcome
Columbia Center on Sustainable The indicator proposed by UNEP for Target 1.4 is
Investment aligned with indicators developed by the Global
Land Indicators Initiative, the indicator suggested
by the UN Sustainable Development Solutions
Network, and the indicator suggested by a broad
coalition of land experts and land organizations.
Commonwealth Medical Trust Data for this indicator can be collected from data
(Commat) already collected by WHO.
Communitas Coalition for The SDG indicators should not be strictly limited
Sustainable Cities in the New UN to existing data sources at the national level. As
Development Agenda has the SDGs are aspirational, so should the
facilitated the development of indicators framework be. Where data does not yet
these comments based on the exist for important indicators/targets, it needs to
outcomes of the 3 June 2015 be developed over time, taking advantage of
technical seminar: Urban powerful new internet-based and other tools that
Sustainability for Human are contributing to the “Data Revolution.” Our
Development: Indicators, comments on the specific indicators reflect this
Geospatial Technology & perspective.
Disaggregation for SDG11 and its
Linkages with other SDGs, which Since much of the on-the-ground implementation
we organized at the United Nations of SDG 11 and the other goals will be the
in close collaboration with Group responsibility of subnational authorities,
of Member States Friends for local/regional geospatial data will be required to
Sustainable Cities, the UN track progress over time. This technical data
Statistics Division in the needs to be complimented by community-based
Department for Economic and data gathering efforts.
Social Affairs (DESA), the
European Commission Joint For effective tracking of progress towards the
Research Centre, the Penn Institute SDG targets, the indicators must be integrated
for Urban Research and the UN across the various levels of government from
Sustainable Development local to national.
Solutions Network (SDSN); and
with the support of the Global Task Finally, the individual indicators for SDG 11 (and
Force of Local and Regional the other goals) should not be viewed in isolation.
Governments, the World Urban Rather, they form a collective set of metrics that
Campaign and the Urban SDG together can measure the progress across the
Campaign. Details on the co- multiple dimensions of the goals and targets.
organizers and signatories of this
submission, as well as the
technical presentations at the
event and a detailed outcomes
report can be found at:
http://www.communitascoalition.or
g/pdf/indicators-workshop/Tech
%20Seminar%20on%20Indicators
Community Based Water Include cross-disciplinary efforts to get a
Monitoring Network of Monarch framework having sense, in the acomplishment of
Butterfly Biosphere Reserve the OD goals, from local to national levels.
Consumers International The 10-Year Framework of Programmes on
Sustainable Consumption and Production
(10YFP) clearly provides a crucial implementation
instrument for the SDGs, as affirmed by its
inclusion in Targets 8.4 & 12.1, and the
‘Transforming Our World’ Declaration. It will be
crucial, therefore, to ensure clear linkages
between the proposed SDG indicators, and the
indicators of the 10YFP itself, to ensure both are
progressing and reaffirming each other.
UNEP, as the coordinating UN agency of the

10YFP, has undertaken work on both sets of
indicators, and its proposals for SDG indicators
should therefore be well noted to ensure
consistency across the frameworks. Of particular
relevance to the 10YFP Consumer Information
Programme but also to the other programmes, is
UNEP’s proposed indicator, 'Number of countries
implementing the UN Guidelines for Consumer
Protection'. This indicator will be extremely helpful
in monitoring the actions of governments,
business, and other stakeholders to provide
better, more reliable information to consumers on
how to consume more sustainably, but also
empower consumers to take action and to hold
government and business to account, fostering a
clear partnership for sustainable development.
As CI has demonstrated
(http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/14
88820/the-role-of-consumer-protection-in-
meeting-the-sdgs_updated-jan15.pdf),
implementation of the UNGCP will also yield great
benefits across many other SDG targets. This is
an opportunity not to be missed.
Costa del Mar
European
Network
Danish Institute for Human RIghts The SDG targets have a very high degree of
convergence and relevance with the provisions of
core human rights and labour standards, and thus
provide an unprecedented opportunity to
contribute to the realisation of human rights at a
global scale.
A review of the proposed indicators under goals

1-6, 8, 10, 11 , 17 and 17 suggests that of the 130
indicators:
• 71 indicators refer explicitly or implicitly to
human rights
• 35 indicators are human rights relevant
• 24 indicators have no reference to human
rights
This relatively high number of indicators that are
either human rights referenced or relevant
suggests that SDG monitoring will contribute
data, which can be used to monitor key aspects
of the realization of human rights.
Moreover, it also suggests that data and

information generated through the human rights
system, e.g. through treaty monitoring bodies and
national human rights institutions, among others,
can contribute to monitoring the agenda.
However, a human rights review also highlights a
number of weaknesses:
• The human rights principles of participation

and accountability are only weakly reflected
across the indicators.
• There are relatively few “structural” and
“process” indicators under certain goals, which
will make it difficult to measure the efforts
undertaken by state - and make it difficult to
correlate these efforts to the outcomes. This is
Development Initiatives
DITTA
Weltbevoelkerung
EAT Initiative We matched our proposed indicators against
existing major indicator frameworks. Proposed
indicators were also matched against the up to
date list of IAEG indicator proposals.
NPS: Income of smallholder farmers and fishing

communities against national poverty lines
ILO: [Proportion of population living below
national poverty line]
IFAD: [Percentage of female/male agricultural
landowners out of total agricultural landowners".
NPS: DDS
FAO/IFAD/UNEP: [Minimum DD for Women
indicator
NPS: Micronutrient deficiencies of iron [zinc,

iodine, vitamin A, folate, vitamin B12 and vitamin
D if nationally measureable and applicable]
UNICEF: Prevalence of anaemia (Hb = 11 g/dl)
among women of reproductive age
SDSN: Percentage of population with shortfalls
of: iron, zinc, iodine, vitamin A, folate, vitamin B12
[and vitamin D]
NPS: per capita animal protein consumption and

per capita land requirement for animal protein
consumption.
SDSN: Percentage change in per capita [red]
meat consumption relative to a 2015 baseline
NPS (1): Carbon emissions from agricultural land

use (tons per hectare per year)
NPS (2): Consumptive GGH from diets in tCO2eq
per year
UNSC: Emissions of greenhouse gases in
agriculture (CO2 equivalent per hectare of land
End Water Poverty
ericsson ICT should be included as a basic infrastructure,

alongside with transportation, electricity, buildings
etc
Erskinomics Consulting Pty Ltd Regarding 16.4.1 (illicit financial flows), it seems
after the Addis Ababa outcome agreement that
two measures are envisaged:
1. Estimates of illicit financial flows for each
individual country (which can be used to create
global and regional aggregates)
2. Measures of efforts by each individual country
to curb illicit financial flows (again which can be
used to create global and regional aggregates)
Because of their illicit nature, illicit financial flows
cannot be measured but only estimated, drawing
on data and perceptions from local and
international sources. Existing multi-country
studies do not incorporate sufficient local data
and perceptions to be useful.
Attempts to measure efforts to curb illicit financial
flows will run into similar problems: some inputs
and outputs may be measurable but effectiveness
is virtually impossible to measure.
European Association for the Data collection for youth and adult education and
Education of Adults (EAEA) lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
labour force.

Canada

Federal Environment Agency of As Germany has committed itself to several

Germany national, European and international obligations
to combat climate change, reduce GHG-
Emissions, and to boost the use of renewable
energies and promote resource and energy
efficiency, it is of utmost importance, that new
goals and indicator sets fit to those existing
obligations and rather create synergies than
cancel each other out. Therefore, targets and
methodologies shall be verified and matched to
each other.
Federation of African Engineering

Organisations
Fertilizer Canada
FHI 360 / Alive & Thrive Considering the recognized right-based

arguments to nutrition and breastfeeding, as well
as the available scientific and socio-economic
evidence of the impact for mothers, children,
families, societies and nations, it is controversial
that the current SDG indicators only include one
of the 8 core globally recommended infant and
young child feeding indicators (exclusive
breastfeeding under 6 months) and that this
indicator is rated at the lowest level (4).
FIABCI
Finnish Youth Cooperation

Allianssi
Framericas
Framework Convention Alliance The most recent report of the World Health
Organization (WHO) contains 2014 data on
affordability (% of GDP per capita required to
purchase 100 packs of most sold brand of
cigarettes) for over 160 countries. Data on
cigarette prices were collected by WHO regional
data collectors, either from existing national data
sources (tax authorities or statistical agencies) or
by surveying retail outlets. Many countries include
cigarette prices in the basket of goods for their
consumer price index, ensuring routine (often
monthly) collection of data. Cigarette price data
are also provided every two years by all Parties to
the FCTC through the mandatory reporting
instrument. Data on GDP per capita may come
from Word Bank’s World Development Indicators
database.
Future of Places
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance The indicator is already agreed by all UN member
states through the Global Vaccine Action Plan
(GVAP), which was endorsed at the 2012 World
Health Assembly. No additional monitoring is
required at country level.
Generation Nutrition The reduction of wasting in under-fives is already

one of six global targets on nutrition agreed by
the World Health Assembly in 2012. The WHO
states that ‘It will be difficult to continue improving
rates of child survival without improvements in the
proportion of wasted children receiving timely and
appropriate life-saving treatment, alongside
reductions in the number of children becoming
wasted in the first place (prevention).’
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/globaltarg
ets2025_policybrief_wasting/en/

Cookstoves
Global Campaign for Education Thematic indicaotors for education are beign also
being developed by UNESCO. GCE's
recommended re-articulation of the thematic
indicators can be accessed on the link below.
This also lists the proposed indicators that
UNESCO is putting forward.
http://campaignforeducation.org/docs/post2015/P
roposed
%20THEMATIC_indicators_FINAL_EN.pdf
An overall briefing on the issue of education

indicators:
http://campaignforeducation.org/docs/post2015/M
EMBERS%20BRIEFING%20ON
%20INDICATORS%20PROCESS_EN.pdf
Materials are also available in other languages-

viz. French, Spanish, Portugese available here:
http://campaignforeducation.org/en/campaigns/ed
ucation-post-2015
Global Footprint Network
Global Forum for Media SDG16.10 - Regional standards for laws and
Development mechanisms for 'ensuring public access to
information' have been established by the African
Union, the Organization of American States, and
the Council of Europe, among other regional and
subregional institutions. The adoption and use of
access-to-information laws is already monitored
several intergovernmental bodies, including
UNESCO, the OHCHR, IPU, and the World Bank.
Global Health Advocates France

Global Health Technologies "Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in
Coalition R&D for the health needs that disproportionately
affect people living in low- and middle-income
countries."
AND
"Number of new health technologies developed
that target the health needs that
disproportionately affect people living in low- and
middle-income countries." Data exists for both of
these indicators, and there is an accepted
methodology for the collection of investment data
and a defined scope that could be directly
adopted or refined. Data from these sources is
available on an annual basis, unlike much current
R&D expenditure data collected from standard
national research surveys.
"R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP." This

is an existing indicator with an established
methodology. This indicator is currently collected
by NSOs or other government agencies through
R&D surveys. Consistently reported data for this
indicator is available for 135-140 countries from
UNESCO-UIS. However, the quality of R&D data
from existing sources deteriorates significantly
when disaggregated. This is particularly true for
many LMICs.
"Number of formal coordination and collaboration

initiatives aimed at increasing and facilitating
transfer of health-related technology, including
between public and private entities." This
indicator was proposed in the WHO GSPA-PHI
and while no standardized international
would be an important step in monitoring
progress toward the aims set out in this
Global Initiative to End All Corporal Proposed global indicator on the elimination of
Punishment of Children violent punishment:
"Percentage of children aged 1-14 years who
experienced any physical punishment by
caregivers in the past month."
UN entities including UNICEF, EOSG/RoLU,

PBSO, UNDP and UNODC and the group of
child-focused agencies advocating on the SDGs,
including all major children’s rights INGOs, have
proposed this as a priority indicator under target
16.2. As many of these entities have noted,
UNICEF’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys
provide a clear and internationally comparable set
of data on the prevalence of violent punishment
of children. The existing data, available for more
than 60 countries, provides clear baselines for
measuring progress towards the elimination of all
corporal punishment of children. The
internationally accepted methodology used to
carry out these surveys could quickly and easily
be used in many other states, making this a
highly feasible indicator.
Proposed global indicator on prohibition of violent

punishment:
"Violent punishment of children is prohibited in all
settings of children’s lives including the family
home."
Complete data for this indicator for all states and
territories worldwide is available and
acknowledged by the Committee on the Rights of
the Child, UNICEF and other UN bodies as fully
reliable. The Global Initiative to End All Corporal
Punishment of Children provides comprehensive
and constantly updated information on the legal
status of corporal punishment of children in all
Global Network for Neglected

Tropical Diseases
Global Network of Civil Society Coherence between SFDRR, Climate Change

Organisations for Disaster Agreement, and SDGs.
Reduction
Global Public-Private Partnership Hygiene was neglected in the MDGs, but that
for Handwashing: ADRA Germany, does not mean that progress on measuring
Center for Global Safe Water, access to hygiene facilities is not occurring. A
Sanitation, and Hygiene at Emory global indicator of percentage of the population
University, Centre for Health with handwashing facilities with soap and water is
Enhancement and Social a key indicator that was agreed to by the water,
Development, Coca-Cola, sanitation, and hygiene sector through extensive
Community Water and Sanitation consultation led by the JMP. This indicator is
Agency, Ghana, Concern Universal, already well established and used to measure
End Water Poverty, Environmental handwashing at the global level.
Awareness, FHI 360, GBCHealth, For instance, it is included in major household
German Toilet Organization, Global surveys, such as the DHS and MICS. Likewise,
Public-Private Partnership for presence of handwashing facilities with soap and
Handwashing, Global Soap Project, water is used by some governments to measure
HELVETAS, International Scientific the availability of handwashing stations in
Forum on Home Hygiene, IRC, schools. Inclusion of the aforementioned hygiene
IRSP, Kenya Water and Sanitation indicator for Target 6.2 will reinforce the current
Civil Society Network, Plan knowledge regarding the availability of
International UK, Practical Action, handwashing facilities and increase support for
Raleigh International, Reckitt- handwashing programs around the world.
Nigeria, Water Supply and
Goshen Free Medical Assistance
Association
GPIC Agreed but must be very careful in estabklising

meaningful vrification process
GRI 1. As a potential data producer for the target 12.6,
GRI would like to offer its Sustainability
Disclosure Database
(http://database.globalreporting.org/) as a starting
point on which to build for an effective monitoring
of indicator 12.6.2. The database includes more
than 27,000 sustainability reports collected since
1999 until today, from close to 100 countries and
territories. Inclusion of reports in the database is
free of charge and it is an open source freely
available to the general public. The database
provides users access to all types of sustainability
reports, whether GRI-based or otherwise, and
relevant information related to the reporting
organizations such as location, sector and type of
organization. It also offers a way to search per
sector, size and several other characteristics.
Registration of reports on the GRI Sustainability
Disclosure Database is voluntary and does
therefore not cover all reports published around
the world. The Sustainability Disclosure Database
is populated in collaboration with GRI Data
Partners and includes reports that GRI is
currently aware of.
GRI is available to explore further ways to
improve the robustness of the database, through
partnerships and other types of collaboration.
Additionally, GRI is currently working on an

interactive web platform that will present live
information on sustainability reporting in all world
regions so that countries can see the status of
sustainability reports in their own countries.
2. GRI, UN Global Compact and the World

Business Council on Sustainable Development
are developing a tool that will help companies to
Habitat for Humanity International


Taskforce
HealthBridge Foundation of The United Nations collects road safety statistics
Canada and publishes the Global Status Report on Road
Safety. However, injuries are not captured, only
fatalities. At the regional level, transportation
authorities or the census bureau typically collects
road safety statistics.
Modal split is a common measure used in urban

planning studies and travel surveys conducted by
regional governments to measure mobility and
accessibility in the urban environment. The
Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) currently captures modal
share information that specially focus on inland
passenger transport (bus and coach, rail
passengers, private car) for their member
countries. Such an indicator framework could be
adapted to include walking and cycling.
Information regarding the proximity to public

space is being collected at the regional level
through urban planning studies and through
academic studies. Various applications and digital
tools are currently being developed to measure
walkability (including to destinations such as
parks) at an urban scale.
HealthBridge Vietnam The United Nations collects road safety statistics

and publishes the Global Status Report on Road
Safety. However, injuries are not captured, only
fatalities. At the regional level, transportation
authorities or the census bureau typically collects
road safety statistics.
Modal split is a common measure used in urban
planning studies and travel surveys conducted by
regional governments to measure mobility and
accessibility in the urban environment. The
Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) currently captures modal
share information that specially focus on inland
passenger transport (bus and coach, rail
passengers, private car) for their member
countries. Such a indicator framework could be
adapted to include walking and cycling.
Information regarding the proximity to public
space is being collected at the regional level
through urban planning studies and through
academic studies. Various applications and digital
tools are currently developed to measure
walkability (including to destinations such as
parks) at an urban scale.
High-Level Task Force for the ICPD

Human Rights Watch
ICMM and IPIECA

IDAY-International Accountability mechanisms should draw on
experiences of existing mechanisms for review of
human rights obligations, like the Universal
Periodic Review. In the education sector, pre-
existing mechanisms like the Global Education
Monitoring Report, the Education 2030 Steering
Committee, and the Collective Consultation of
NGOs (CCNGO) must be strengthened.
IDDC
ILSI Research Foundation

Indedependent consultant, The concept/variable 'legal identity' (cf. target
formerly with Statistics Norway, 16.9) and a corresponding value set is not
International Labour Office and covered by any of the relevant international
Norwegian Directorate of statistical standards and recommendations, e.g.
Immigration those on population censuses, statistics on
international migration, vital statistics etc.

Institute for Reproductive and Women and girls health and gnder equality are
Family Health center of social economic development
Fetal life consider as human rights, quality of
maternak and family planning access to all of
developing countries are economic development.
Intenational Stillbirth Alliance Stillbirth rate is a core indicator of the Every
Internaitonal Council of AIDS The indicator framework must be ambitious and
Service Organizations measure the factors that will be most likely to
contribute to the transformative change
envisioned by the Sustainable Development
Goals. The indicators developed for the SDGs
must measure the information we need to ensure
progress, not the information that we can easily
get. It is also essential for the global indicator
framework to include indicators that measure
progress against all 169 targets, not just the
pieces that are easier to address. This means
prioritizing missing data and filling data gaps. We
should not restrict ourselves to existing data, but
rather use this opportunity to measure what is
critical, even if this entails additional data
collection. New indicators will be required to make
sure that we are measuring the factors that are
most likely to lead to transformative change and
the realization of gender equality and human
rights.
International AIDS Vaccine Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in
Initiative R&D for the health needs that disproportionately
countries
Number of new health technologies developed

middle-income countries. Data exists for both of
R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP. This is

an existing indicator with an established
many LMICs.

between public and private entities. This indicator
was proposed in the WHO GSPA-PHI and while
no standardized international methodology or
data exists, tracking this indicator would be an
important step in monitoring progress toward the
aims set out in this document.
International Alliance for The prevention and treatment of harmful drinking,
Responsible Drinking as laid out in Target 3.5, requires appropriate
indicators for monitoring progress. The proposed
indicator “coverage of treatment interventions”
does not adequately address the prevention of
harmful drinking.
Version 2 of the SDG targets includes alcohol per
capita (APC) as an indicator towards progress in
this area, which is an aggregate measure, and
insensitive to variations in drinking patterns and
the prevalence of alcohol-related harm. Although
the emphasis of Target 3.5.2 is on individuals
below the age of 25, APC also cannot provide
information about drinking by underage youth.
The following indicators are better suited:
prevalence of heavy episodic drinking (HED),
monitored at country and regional level and
among different groups; and prevalence of
alcohol-related morbidity and mortality from
alcoholic liver cirrhosis and AUDs, useful
indicators of long-term outcomes.
These indicators are consistent with the scientific
evidence on preventing harmful drinking. HED is
associated with acute alcohol-related harm,
including accidents and injuries, while longer-term
outcomes are better indicators of chronic heavy
drinking. Monitoring both also offers an
opportunity to develop specific and appropriate
approaches for prevention that differentiate
among drinking patterns. It also better informs
the crafting of interventions for treating the
outcomes of harmful drinking.
Both prevention and treatment need to account
for the role of factors, including social
determinants and equity, drinking culture, and the
most appropriate regulatory framework within
which targeted interventions can best be applied.
International Association of Most of the references for scales I suggested for
Applied Psychology well-being have been applied worldwide, beyond
regional levels. However, self-report
methodology would have to be adapted for
populations in remote areas, taking into account
language, comprehension, communication skills,
and cultural differences would have to be taken
into account, establishing cultural norms to insure
validity and cross-cultural comparisons. Similar
issues apply to the concept of resilience in the
document. Community leaders can be trained to
collect data, as they are trusted in rural areas.
Transport (UITP)
International Bar Association The International Bar Association's Human Rights
Human Rights' Institute Institute (IBAHRI) and the International
Commission of Jurists (ICJ) recommend the two
- This indicator aligns with the existing OHCHR
Rule of Law Indicator n.57 and is related to
current targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and 16a.
profession
association of lawyers established through law
with the mandate and authority to protect the
independence and role of of the legal profession,
in compliance with the United Nations Basic
Principles on the Role of Lawyers.”
proposed under Target 16.a concerning the
existence of a national human rights institution. It
is related to targets 16.3, 16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and
16a
- The International Bar Association is a
professional organization gathering more than
200 national bar associations worldwide
International Budget Partnership

International Council for Adult Data collection for youth and adult education and
Education lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
labour force.


Association (IFA)
International Land Coalition, Global This indicator, best placed under Target 1.4,
Secretariat would capture gender equality and progress of all
people’s on-the-ground rights to land, property,
and natural resources. It further aligns with
priority indicators issued by the Global Land
Indicators Initiative, and supported by the Global
Donor Working Group on Land.
The recommended indicator focuses on the twin
aims of tracking legal and administrative progress
by governments in recognizing secure rights to
land (documentation) and of people-defined
progress on the quality of land rights
(perceptions). In doing so, this indicator fully
tracks the agenda’s land rights content developed
through months of
inclusive negotiation and consultation and
satisfies the request in the recently finalized UN
declaration that global indicators maintain the
level of ambition of the agenda (Para. 75).
The land rights indicator must extend beyond

ownership: The indicator should use “tenure
security,” a widely accepted concept that
encompasses more than ownership and is in line
with FAO’s Voluntary Guidelines on the
Responsible Governance of Tenure. Using
“tenure security” (or “secure land rights”)
terminology would protect the rights of those who
access land through a number of group- or
individually-held tenure arrangements. Indicators
limited to those who “own” land ignore the
millions:
• who live in countries, such as China and
Vietnam, where the State owns all the land, and
individuals have use rights.
• who reside in regions across the world on
communally-held land not individually-owned,
World

Federation
Reconciliation Foundation What are the criteria for deciding "existing major
indicator frameworks"? Vailidity and reliability of
the proposed indicators may vary on how the
existing indicator frameworks are determined,
analyzed, and compared. Be clear about the
process of selecting indicator frameworks.
Investigaciòn e Intervencion Data collection for youth and adult education and
Educativa AC lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
labour force.
IOGT International Proposed indicator: ”Total per capita (aged 15+
years old) pure alcohol consumption within a
calendar year in liters,”
Indicator frameworks:
- Global Action plan for the Prevention and
Control of NCDs 2013 - 2020
- All countries within their regular monitoring
report
- WHO
- European action plan to reduce the harmful use
of alcohol 2012–2020
Ipas Indicators to include availability of safe abortion

and postabortion care (treatment of
complications) are increasingly in use in national
health information systems and national level
studies.
Island Sustainability Allliance CIS 18.1 WHO potable water standards need to be
Inc. ("ISACI") revised because currently they focus on bacterial
contamination such as E.Coli or clostridium. They
need to include chemical & heavy metal
contamination because studies show that long-
term exposure to such contaminants at relatively
low levels is harmful firstly to wildlife and then to
human health. An example is that the artisanal
small-scale goldmining (ASGM) which releases
mercury and arsenic into waterways, results in
permanent damage to the central nervous
system, which is passed on to the next generation
through biomagnification.
18.2 Similarly with wastewater monitoring, there
is no way to determine or remove
pharmaceuticals, used to treat chronic NCDs
such as diabetes or high blood pressure, from
wastewater. Swedish research by Dr Ake
Bergstrom indicates that these pharmaceuticals
are appearing in the fish upon which many
coastal and island communities depend, and
provide a pathway for exposure to such
endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs). New
technologies or processes are needed to combat
this.
Japan Council on Education for

Planning (JOICFP)
Johns Hopkins University
Journalists and Writers Foundation

Jubilee Scotland
Kamla Nehru College, University of

Delhi
Kepa Finland
Kimse Yok Mu
Land Alliance, Inc.
Landesa Together with a coalition of over 30 global and
national organizations, we propose a meaningful,
cross-cutting and feasible land rights indicator to
replace suggested indicator 1.4.2.
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
Currently, there is no globally available, nationally

representative, sex-disaggregated data on land
rights. Thus, any indicator on land rights will
require new data collection efforts. The indicator
we propose is feasible and aligns with the
indicators prioritized and soon to be piloted by the
Global Land Indicators Initiative.
The post-2015 agenda presents a historic

opportunity to push the data and evidence base
forward, rather than having the available data
control the framing of priorities.
For more information on this proposal see:

http://landpost2015.landesa.org/resources/land-
2015-sdgs/.
Latin American Campaign for the

Right to Education (CLADE)
Latindadd On debt issues, ratios need to be changed

regarding the current frameworks, according to
the new data and situation ongoing in most
countries. So intesad of matching, in this case
would be updating and making them more
comprehensive.
Lumos
Maestral International Major indicator frameworks have only limited, but

essential, information on social welfare and well
being issues such as violence, children outside of
safe, appropriate and protective family care
(including in institutions), abuse and neglect.
These frameworks need to be strengthened to
capture these and related dimensions of overall
social welfare.
Major Group of Workers and Trade All indicators developed must of course be in
Unions accordance with human rights, and the work that
the OHCHR has done in this regard.
Making It Work Global gender and
disability initiative
Médecins Sans Frontières -
Multidimensional Poverty Peer • A Latin American MPI has been developed
Network and published by ECLAC/CEPAL in 2015. An
Arab Poverty MPI is under development by
UNESCWA.
• Just like there is a global measure of income
poverty ($1.25/day) and national measures, so
too there is a Global MPI, as well as an
increasing number of national MPIs which
countries design to reflect their own contexts and
priorities.
• The global and national MPI complement
income poverty measures by illuminating non-
monetary dimensions affected by social policies
and structural change. These two poverty
indicators together give a fuller overview of poor
people’s lives, as many countries have shown.
• For the national multidimensional poverty
indicator, the definition should be:
“Multidimensional poverty indicators, according to
national definitions.”
• National MPIs can build from poor people’s
voices and agency, and be designed to reflect
their priorities, as studies such as Poverty as
viewed by its protagonists in El Salvador shows.
NCD Alliance The NCD Alliance strongly suggests indicators for

Target 3.4 are in line with the existing 25
indicators contained in the WHO NCD Global
Monitoring Framework. Data on these are already
being collected and alignment would therefore
reduce the reporting burden of countries.
Sustainability
NSF Research Coordination
Network on Sustainable Cities
'Ph.D., Postdoc, Early-Career'
Working Group
on behalf of individuals from Stillbirth rate is a core indicator of the Every
MamaYe Evidence for Action Newborn action plan, which includes the target of
programme, Options Consultancy reducing stillbirths to at least 12 per 1,000 births
on behalf of the International There is broad consensus around a set of priority
Coalition for Advocacy on Nutrition nutrition indicators for the new SDG framework.
The SDG framework should include—at a
minimum—indicators measuring all six global
nutrition targets that were endorsed as priorities
for action by 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. In addition,
in the ICN2 Rome Declaration, member states
reaffirmed and expanded on their commitment to
the WHA targets and the WHA Global Action Plan
for the Prevention and Control of NCDs.
OneFamilyPeople The indicators developed in the SDGs are

reflective of most emerging issues after the
MDGs. They covered wide range of issues
ranging from separating poverty from hunger and
nutrition,. and those of foreign investment,
science and technology etc.They also covered
issues of human rights especially violence
against women, child trafficking etc. Most
significantly it gives CSOs opportunities to
engage their governments in ensuring mutual
agreement on the type and form of aid to
However certain specific targets omitted persons
with disabilities which was a major gap in the
MDGs. Therefore emphasis on our
recommendations were on filling this gap
Open Society Foundations
Orchid Project
Oxfam
Partnership on Sustainable Low Sustainable transport has strong cross-cutting
Carbon Transport impacts; for example, it has an important role in
enabling access to jobs, education, health
facilities, and clean water, that are encompassed
by other targets. While repetition of indicators
across targets is not advocated, appropriate
wording of relevant targets to reflect transport’s
enabling role is considered important.
For example, the WB’s Rural Access Indicator

(RAI) is highly supported for its own sake. Yet,
while the RAI index is included among proposed
indicators, the wording of the indicator does not
explicitly refer to rural transport and access, and
despite its importance, rural access is not
mentioned in the overall indicator list. It should
also be noted that the RAI is also relevant to
Target 3.8 on access to health services; Target
4.a on (access to) education facilities, and Target
6.1 on access to clean water.
PATH Targets 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.7 (regulatory
authorities)
A reporting framework would need to be
developed to allow disaggregation according to
the SDG targets, but data should be readily
reportable to national statistical offices from
National Regulatory Authorities and health
agencies.
Harmonized registration initiatives is based on a
metric currently used by the African Medicines
Regulatory Harmonization Initiative and would be
well-suited to additional monitoring at the regional
level.
Targets 3.2 and 3.8 (immunization)
The Global Vaccine Action Plan, approved by all
194 WHO Member States, currently measures
this indicator at nationally and globally.
Target 3.b (global health R&D)
This is an existing indicator with an established
by national statistical offices or other government
agencies through R&D surveys and reported to
supra-national organizations. Consistently
reported data for this indicator is available for
135-140 countries from UNESCO-UIS. The
quality of R&D data deteriorates significantly
when disaggregated, particularly for LMICs.
Target 3.c (health workers)
Currently under development is the PEPFAR
human resource information system to track
workforce indicators.
Target 3.d (health information systems)
The Health Metrics Network health information
assessment tools developed by WHO and in use
by some member states.
Targets 9.5, 9.b, and 17.9 (R&D)
Existing indicator with an established
people's health movement

Persons Against Non-State Torture
Peruvian Campaign for the Right to
Education
Plan International Most of the rationales for indicators proposed by

Plan International include notes on how and
where they are already being measured or if they
are a Tier II or III proposal. Most amendments or
'new' indicators being proposed can be collected
though existing methodologies such as MICS and
DHS. Others will require new commitments and
indicators to match the ambition of the SDG
targets.
America
Planning 4 Sustainable needs to enable scale based cascading

Development
Policy Cures - Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in
R&D for the health needs that disproportionately
countries
- Number of new health technologies developed
middle-income countries.
Data exists for both of these indicators, and there
is an accepted methodology for the collection of
investment data and a defined scope that could
be directly adopted or refined. Data from these
sources is available on an annual basis, unlike
much current R&D expenditure data collected
from standard national research surveys.
- R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP.

This is an existing indicator with an established
many LMICs.
- Number of formal coordination and

including between public and private entities.
This indicator was proposed in the WHO GSPA-
PHI and while no standardized international
would be an important step in monitoring
progress toward the aims set out in this
document.
Group
Practical Action The proposals we are suggesting under Goal 6
are in line with data already collected under the
JMP of UNICEF/WHO. They would not impose an
additional burden.
Similarly, the proposals under Goal 7 are in line
with the newly defined ‘Global Tracking
Framework’ of the World Bank / IEA, which is
proposed to be rolled out in full in the coming
years.
Under 11.5: The Sendai framework captures the

following thus provides this data with no
additional obligation on states.
a) Substantially reduce global disaster mortality
by 2030, aiming to lower the average per 100,000
global mortality rate in the decade 2020–2030
compared to the period 2005–2015;
b) Substantially reduce the number of affected
people globally by 2030, aiming to lower the
average global figure per 100,000 in the decade
2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;
c) Reduce direct disaster economic loss in
relation to global gross domestic product (GDP)
by 2030.
PROGRAMA UNIVERSITARIO DE In general terms, we propose to use the
DERECHOS HUMANOS DE LA indicators established in the methodology of
UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL "Progress Indicators for Measuring Rights
AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO contemplated in the Additional Protocol to the
American Convention on Human Rights in the
Area of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights,
'Protocol of San Salvador'"*, developed within the
Human Rights’ Inter-American System,
considering legislation that supports it.
This methodology succeeds in translating from its
conceptual roots the meaning of human rights
and is also a tool that makes it possible not only
stimulate processes of assessing compliance with
rights on an objective basis, but assist in the
formulation of public policies on human rights,
based on evidence. The indicators' system
approved by the OAS General Assembly (June
2012 and 2014) establishes that countries that
have ratified the Protocol are required to submit
regular reports on economic, social and cultural
rights based on progress indicators.
The measurement model consists of indicators
classified into three conceptual categories that
include: incorporation of the right; financial
context and budgetary commitment; state
capabilities; also three cross-cutting principles:
equality and non-discrimination, access to justice,
and access to information and participation.
These are key elements to design and/or
evaluate public policies with human rights
approach. These categories and principles
intersect with three types of indicators: structural,
process and outcome, which allow evaluation at
three levels: first, the structural conditions of state
action and the context in which states operate;
second, on the actions and processes carried out
by States themselves and third, the results in
Pure Earth / Blacksmith Institute Using Global Burden of Disease methodology for
Target 3.9 makes sense because it is data that is
already being collected in 188 countries. GBD
data capture premature death and disability (all-
cause mortality, deaths by cause, years of life lost
(YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and
disability adjusted life years (DALYs)) from more
than 300 diseases and injuries, by age and sex,
from 1990 to the present, allowing comparisons
over time, across age groups, and among
populations.
Realizing Sexual and Reproductive
Justice Alliance (RESURJ)
REPEM
Restless Development
RESULTS UK
RMS
Saferworld For Goal 16 - should look at indicators developed
for New Deal for Conflict-Affected and Fragile
States. Many are universally applicable. There
are 33 common ones.
Sands New Zealand Stillbirth rate is a core indicator of the Every

Save the Children
SDSN
Sierra Club
Sightsavers
Small Arms Survey

Society for the Psychological
Study of Social Issues; Psychology
SOS Children's Villages

International
Statistics Without Borders of the

American Statistical Association

Stockholm Environment Institute The proposed indicators already benefit from
those being developed under existing
Conventions and Multi-lateral agreements.
Ideally, to avoid reinvention of the wheel and
waste of resources relevant
Conventions/institutions could be tasked with
running the indicators or at least the development
of them. This will help streamline the M and E
process. Within the context of complex systems
of multi-scale indicators we recommend the use
of a federated database system to coherently link
proposed indicators against the SDG indicator
framework.
Sudanese Environment Developed verification means should be flexible

Conservation Society enough to accommodate the data details level
variation among different regions.
TAG Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in
countries (Disaggregated)

middle-income countries (Disaggregated)
R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP

(Disaggregated)
Number of new health technologies registered by

the National Regulatory Authority and/or
recommended by national guidelines
(Disaggregated by target)
Number of registered clinical trials that meet

Number of clinical trial sites that meet

National Regulatory Authorities participating in

harmonized registration initiatives based on
internationally recognized policies and standards;
and sharing regulatory policies, legislation,
guidelines, and information on registered
products
This indicator is based on a metric currently used
by the African Medicines Regulatory
Harmonization Initiative and would be well-suited
to additional monitoring at the regional level.
TB Alliance Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in
countries

middle-income countries. Data exists for both of
R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP. This is

an existing indicator with an established
many LMICs.

between public and private entities. This indicator
was proposed in the WHO GSPA-PHI and while
no standardized international methodology or
data exists, tracking this indicator would be an
important step in monitoring progress toward the
aims set out in this document.
Tebtebba There has not be a single indicator proposed by
the UN Statistical Commission that included
indigenous Peoples
The 5 Gyres Institute
The Cyprus Institute The majority of indicators proposed are in line

with existing frameworks therefore use indicators
for which the effectiveness is proven. and are
thus resilient and utilise already set initiatives.
New ones are also proposed as to tackle the new
challenges facing the global community. The
greatest challenge is to harmonise and unify the
indicators with respect to local and regional
differences in governance.
The Fertilizer Institute
The Hague University of Applied

Science
The International Legal Foundation The fundamental right of access to counsel is
recognized in many major indicator frameworks.
The UN Rule of Law Indicators include: (49)
availability of free legal assistance for indigent
defendants & (71) legal assistance for children in
conflict with the law. The WJP Rule of Law Index
includes indicators on access to counsel for both
civil cases (7.1) and criminal cases (8.7). These
frameworks take cues from human rights
instruments, standards, laws, & court decisions
that recognize the paramount role access to
counsel plays in ensuring meaningful access to
justice. The UN Basic Principles on the Role of
Lawyers capture the pivotal nature of counsel in
criminal, civil, and administrative cases—all of
which can result in significant infringement of
fundamental rights if counsel is not available to
protect them: “adequate protection of human
rights and fundamental freedoms to which all
persons are entitled, be they economic, social &
cultural, or civil & political, requires that all
persons have effective access to legal services.”
Focusing on criminal justice, the ICCPR requires
that the accused have the right “to defend himself
in person or through legal assistance of his own
choosing; to be informed, if he does not have
legal assistance, of this right; & to have legal
assistance assigned to him, in any case where
the interests of justice so require, & without
payment by him…if he does not have sufficient
means to pay for it.” (Art. 14.3.d). The UN
Principles & Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in
Criminal Justice Systems powerfully state “legal
aid is an essential element of a functioning
criminal justice system that is based on the rule of
law, a foundation for the enjoyment of other
rights, including the right to a fair trial, & an
The UK Coalition against Neglected
Tropical Diseases
Theatre of Solutions The Self Awareness Index and Self Management

Index matches as a good indicator for targets 4.1
and 4.2 of Goal 4
Track 0 Mitigation and finance commitments, pledges and
agreements developed under the UNFCCC, in
Paris, should be cross referenced with SDGs
indicators.
TRANSNUT (WHO CC), Department Food security, nutrition and NCD risk surveillance
of Nutrition, University of Montreal, systems would need to be better intergrated.
Canada
Transparency, Accountability &

Participation (TAP) Network
TRK asbl as well as national levels

UCI-Red Data collection for youth and adult education and
lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
labour force.
UCLG
Umamanita Stillbirth rate is a core indicator of the Every

UNESCO Chair in Youth and Adult Data collection for youth and adult education and
Education lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
labour force.
United Nations Association of Proposed indicators must be associated with a

Tanzania data source - existing or within means to establish
or link to existing data frameworks. The indicator
framework thus should make deliberate utilization
of national, regional and global data frameworks
and utilize local expertise as much it relies on the
technical capacities globally.
University of Cambridge
University of Luxembourg/Simon
Fraser University
University of Oxford The existing Global MPI (published by UNDP’s
Human Development Reports) that reflects acute
poverty in over 100 developing countries would
be modified to reflect the SDG indicators if, as we
propose, it is adopted as a Tier 1 indicator for
Target 1.2
In July 2015, 217 survey datasets for 117 different

countries had been analysed for the Global MPI.
Of those, 11 survey datasets come from the
South Asia region, 19 from the East Asia and the
Pacific region, 23 from the Arab States, 36 from
Europe and Central Asia region, 39 from the Latin
America and the Caribbean region, and 89 from
the Sub-Saharan Africa region.
A research study under the Net-SILC2 explored

possible MPIs for 31 European countries using
various specifications with the AF methodology,
and analysed them over six time periods 2006-
2012, as well as disaggregated them by gender,
age, and other categories (Alkire, Apablaza and
Jung 2014).
If appropriate, a moderate MPI could be

developed by and for low-poverty countries,
building perhaps on the open method of
coordination in Europe, as well as regional
studies and regional MPI such as that published
by CEPAL/ ECLAC for Latin America (Social
Panorama 2015), and the Arab Poverty MPI being
developed by UNESCWA, as well as Eurostat,
UNECE and other regional bodies and
institutions.
University of Southampton Indicators suggested in Section 2 are matched
primarily to the list of MDG indicator where
globally the target has not been reached/more
progress needs to be made. Other specific
indicators suggested have the relevant framework
listed.

Urban Institute
USIL
Vietnam Association of Architects Modal split is a measure used in urban and

transportation planning studies conducted by
local governments to measure mobility and
accessibility in the cities. The Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) currently collected modal share data that
specially focus on road passenger transportation
for OECD’s member countries. Such an indicator
framework could be modified to include walking
and cycling.
Information regarding the distribution and
distances to public space from residences could
be collected at the local and regional level
through urban planning studies and urban
administration.
VSO
Water Supply and Sanitation

Collaborative Council (WSSCC)
WaterAid WaterAid highlights that the indicators proposed
for handwashing in target 6.2 have been
recommended by the WHO/UNICEF Joint
Monitoring Programme. This recommendation
was made after consulting with over 60
organisations in the WASH sector.
We also note that the inclusion of WASH as a

tracer intervention for target 3.8 fits with the World
Bank and WHO reporting for Universal Health
Coverage.
Welthungerhilfe
Western Union Please note that the comment for question 97
does identify linked targets, and recommends that
the indicators for those targets become the first
priority indicators for Target 10.C. As the World
Bank indicator comments noted, price targets
(and regulatory burden) can risk a market
distortion which reduces access to services/drives
toward informal systems. In a natural market
environment in which enablers (literacy,
technological innovation/use, Identification for
KYC, etc.) are advanced, both access and
market efficiency are advanced.
Womankind Worldwide

Of Nigeria
Women for Expo

Women for Women's Human Rights While it will be useful to use already existing
- New Ways indicator frameworks, the scope, ambition and the
holistic approach of the SDGs are so that these
frameworks may not be enough. Not having the
right indicators may result in costs in the long
term, then developing new ones at this point in
history. We should not restrict ourselves to
existing data, but rather use this opportunity to
measure what is critical, even if this entails
additional data collection. New indicators will be
required to make sure that we are measuring the
factors that are most likely to lead to
transformative change and the realization of
gender equality and human rights.
It is critical that indicators are quantitative and
qualitative. A rigorous indicator framework
including both quantitative and qualitative
indicators will underpin financing strategies and
implementation frameworks that reflect the
various types of resources needed to achieve
sustainable development, overcome inequalities
and fulfil gender equality commitments. Therefore
gender-differentiated statistics and indicators
should be collected nationally, regionally and
globally in order to measure gender gaps and
adjust development programmes to rectify
inequalities.
There must be scope to elaborate on the indicator
framework in coming years in order to adapt to
changing development environments and
evolving methodologies.
Women in Europe for a Common inline with the proposal of UN Women´s Major
Future, African Ministries Council Group
Sanitation Alliance, Women's Major the indicators proposed here have been
Group, Women's Environmental developed with a group of organisations and are
Programme, GWA supported by:
UNESCO WWAP
NGO BORDA, Germany
NGO Gender and Water Alliance (GWA)
UN Environmental Programme (UNEP)
African Ministers´ Council on Water (AMCOW)
Women Environmental Programme (WEP)
Nigeria
German Toilet Organization (GTO)
Adventist Development and Relief Agency
(ADRA)
Women Thrive Worldwide
Women's Environment and Indicators cannot rely on existing data only. Data
Development Orgranization must be developed over time. Qualitative data
serves important purposes in this regard. The
framework should not replace existing and in
some cases stronger frameworks for tracking
right and gender equality, for example.
Women's Major Group The Women’s Major Group believes that any
indicator framework must be ambitious and
measure the factors that will be most likely to
contribute to the transformative change
envisioned by the Sustainable Development
Goals. The indicators developed for the SDGs
must measure the information we need to ensure
progress, not the information that we can easily
get. It is also essential for the global indicator
framework to include indicators that measure
progress against all 169 targets, not just the
pieces that are easier to address. This means
prioritizing missing data and filling data gaps. We
should not restrict ourselves to existing data, but
rather use this opportunity to measure what is
collection. New indicators will be required to make
sure that we are measuring the factors that are
most likely to lead to transformative change and
the realization of gender equality and human
rights. The long-term costs of not having
indicators will be greater than investing in their
development now; failure to develop new
indicators where needed will hamper the
development of effective policies and programs at
the country level.

World Chlorine Council Under Target 6.1 By 2030, achieve universal and
equitable access to safe and affordable drinking
water for all, Indicator 6.1.1 is: Percentage of
population using safely managed drinking water
services ( AAA ). WCC proposes data collected
on drinking water safety include a measurable
chlorine residual. The ongoing presence of a few
milligrams per liter of free chlorine in drinking
water ensures protection from a wide variety of
waterborne pathogens. This is particularly
important in stored water, as it can become re-
contaminated over the period of storage. A
science-based, measurable chlorine residual
provides a high degree of confidence in water
quality than simply noting people have access to
"an improved water source". For example, in the
US, the Environmental Protection Agency
requires all water facilities that treat water to
ensure a chlorine residual in water delivered to
consumers. This residual level protects
consumers' water as it journeys from the
treatment plant to the tap. No existing water
treatment technology has been as successful as
chlorination in reducing the scourge of
waterborne illness wherever it has been
implemented.
World Vision
WWF It is vital that, wherever possible, the SDG
indicator framework builds on existing,
established measures being used in other fora.
For the environment-related indicators, we
advocate the use of indicators already developed
by the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (BIP)
and applied by many governments for use in
tracking CBD Aichi Biodiversity Targets. In
particular, we propose the multiple use of a small
number of strong, appropriate, well-established,
BIP-developed indicators with strong scientific
foundations and existing databases, which have
interlinkages to each other and to multiple SDG
targets and which can be disaggregated at
multiple levels, biomes and taxa. The primary
indicators are: (a) The Living Planet Index (LPI):
relevant to SDG targets 6.6, 14.2, 14.4, 14.5,
15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8 (Database
available and managed by WWF/ZSL); (b) The
Red List Index (RLI): relevant to 14.2, 14.4, 15.2,
15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8 (Database available and
managed by IUCN); (c) Coverage of Protected
Areas (PA cover): relevant to 6.6, 14.2, 14.5,
15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5 (World Database on
Protected Areas managed by UNEP-WCMC and
IUCN WCPA); (d) PA management effectiveness
(PAME): relevant to 6.6, 14.2, 14.5, 15.1, 15.2,
15.4, 15.5 (Global Database on PA Management
Effectiveness managed by UNEP-WCMC, IUCN
WCPA, Universities of Queensland and Oxford);
and (e) Habitat cover (several remote sensing
databases exist for this purpose - e.g. NASA,
ESA, Google Earth, University of Maryland, etc.).
We also actively encourage the use of other BIP
indicators where they enhance the overall picture
for any given target (e.g. area of forest under
certification, River Connectivity Index, an
Environment
Young and adult people education Data collection for youth and adult education and
Network lifelong learning relies to a great extent on
labour force.
Zoological Society of London (ZSL) The Living Planet Index (LPI) is one of the
indicators adopted by the Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD) to measure progress
towards the Aichi targets and is used by the
Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (BIP) in their
communication and reports to the CBD. The LPI
has also been used as an indicator in both
regional and national indicator frameworks to
monitor species abundance. For example a
subset of the LPI has been developed as the
Arctic Species Trend Index which is used by
CAFF (the working group of the Arctic Council).
Topic 19: Develop a framework for the Topic 20: Address the issue of data
presentation and communication of the list disaggregation, and other cross-cutting issues
of proposed indicators for global such inequality, special groups etc
monitoring
We realise that the comparability and specificity of
data will be key concerns for the IAEG-SDGs. With
this in mind, we particularly recommend the UN
Statistics Division Washington Group questions on
disability, which are now being widely adopted, for
example in DFID-supported surveys/censuses, and
in the UN-ESCAP Incheon Strategy indicators.
This is quite okey and as CSOs we will be Dis-aggregation should include all categories
involved in monitoring and advocating for possible including by income quintile, sex, age,
member states to comply to present and race/ethnicity, disability, rural and urban place of
communicate on all indicators using the residence; and other categories that may be
format set up identified at the national level, using data of both
formal and informal economy.
Data for all suggestions are already collated

by international organizations.
The ability to make progress on the SDGs will be
impacted by existing forms of structural inequality
between, and within, nations. In order to ensure
that the SDGs live up to the promise to "leave no
one behind", it is crucial that indicators be designed
to facilitate the disaggregation of data, where
relevant and to the extent possible. Disaggregation
of data will provide a more complete picture of how
progress made on goals and targets is impacting
different segments of society and hone government
and civil society attention on those groups where
progress is being least felt.
It is important to note that political, legal and social

contexts may hinder the ability of data to be
collected on some marginalized groups, such as
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT)
persons. Where data is disaggregated based on
certain characteristics, the absence of data relevant
to particular groups should not be taken as an
indication that governments should not address the
needs of such groups within their broader efforts on
the SDGs.
Indicators 6.1 and 6.2 on ‘safely-managed water

services’ and ‘safely-managed sanitation services’
must be disaggregated between urban and rural
because the dynamics of progress and regress
differ significantly between the urban and rural
halves of the world as shown in the WHO-UNICEF
JMP statistics. See http://www.aquafed.org/page-5-
121.html
Disaggregation between wealth quintiles should
also be continued for these indicators in order to
track progress on inequality gaps.
Disaggregation of data is fundamental for

addressing social exclusion and to ensure policies
are in line with the principle of non-discrimination
and equality enshrined in international instruments.
All data must be disaggregated with regard to
groups that are currently recognised by UN human
rights bodies as particularly vulnerable to
discrimination (gender; sex; geographical location;
ethnicity; caste; migrant status, etc). To ensure
individuals are not at further risk of social exclusion,
the confidentiality of data should be protected.
However, disaggregation by gender should not
replace specific indicators addressing gender
equality and women’s human rights.
A clear and effective communication strategy Equity is a critical cross-cutting concern of the
must be developed to have impact on policy, SDGs. Progress is best measured if the poorest,
practice, financing and cooperation. It should most excluded and disadvantaged sectors of
reach all sectors of society, particularly local society are able to catch up, move forward and
communities and disadvantaged groups. achieve the SDG targets. For the proposed
indicators on education, including non-formal,
Alternative reports should be encouraged and literacy and adult education, it is critical to ensure
supported to get the perspectives of civil data disaggregation by gender, age group,
society actors, and to provide spaces for economic status (income quintile), location (rural-
meaningful participation of and input from urban, ethnicity/race, disability, caste, residency
disadvantaged groups - women, youth, status (referring to migrants), and other categories
elderly, ethnic minorities, people with disability specific to the national context.
and other marginalized sectors of society.
Investment should be done by national
governments to include data disaggregation in the
national statistical system. UN and the donor
community should set up a fund and develop
monitoring systems that will adequately include
data disaggregation, and assist developing
countries in strengthening their monitoring systems,
particularly those that monitor the status of the
most excluded and disadvantaged groups in
society.
Monitoring the SDGs will fail without a credible and

updated monitoring system with data
disaggregation that reflects the situation of the
poorest, the most excluded and disadvantaged
groups and individuals.
All indicators should also be disaggregated along

the lines of social groups such as trans-genders
and sexual minorities, specifically where goals/
targets of gender equality, inclusion, equity etc is
being addressed, i.e, in Goal 4, 5, 16 etc.
Across our proposed targets, we encourage the
development community to focus on differential
progress according to gender, socioeconomic
status, wealth quintile, subnational and other
relevant divisions. Disaggregated data will be
essential to monitor inequality, and will help to
better target interventions and shape programs,
which will become ever more important as we
progress towards zero, ensuring we leave no one
behind.
Data 2X, an initiative mapping gender data gaps

based at the UN Foundation, has identified 26
indicators where gender disaggregation is in
particular essential. These indicators include
female and male headed households below the
national poverty line, documented tenure, stunting,
anemia, small-scale food production (participation
and labor productivity), maternal and under-five
mortality, adolescent birth rate, HIV, modern
contraception use, mental health, schooling
completion rates and proficiency standards
achieved in reading and math, physical and sexual
violence, child marriage, representation in
government, mobile telephone and formal financial
services usage, unemployment, non-agricultural
wage, own-account and informal employment, birth
registration, and human trafficking. These
recommendations for where to prioritize gender
disaggregated data should also be heeded.
Additional notes:
• 2.1 Prevalence of Wasting: should be
• 2.2 Prevalence of Stunting: should be
• 2.3 Value of production per labor unit: should
Recommendation B: We recommend broad
disaggregation, including by age, sex, region,
population group, residence (U/R) and type of
mechanism. Broad disaggregation is to be
preferred so as to “leave no one behind”. The
August ’15 version also adds a useful provision in
this regard: “and other characteristics, as relevant
and possible” (page 1).
Recommendation C: There should be mechanisms

to formalise the involvement of civil society and
academia in data collection, monitoring and
reporting across the SDGs. In addition, the cross-
cutting nature of access to justice should itself be
recognised. The indicator on access to a fair
dispute mechanism in the May ‘15 version (which,
as discussed in Topics 16, 21 and 22, we prefer
among the various indicator proposals for Target
16.3 before the IAEG-SDGs) also appears to omit
considerations of access to legal education as a
form of legal empowerment and a preliminary
component of access to justice. Legal advice and
education can be provided on a range of issues
e.g. employment, public services, health and
discrimination, which highlights the cross-cutting
nature of access to justice and its relevance for a
range of the SDGs. We acknowledge that there
may be difficulties in obtaining comparable data in
this regard. However, the role of civil society and
academia will be crucial in data collection,
monitoring and reporting for the SDGs, including in
this regard.
Recommendation D: It is important to acknowledge

that measuring progress in ensuring access to
justice needs to take place in the broader context of
the promotion of the rule of law, as recognised in
Concerning the use of addictive substances such
as tobacco, data disaggregation by sex, age and
income is urgently needed, because the tobacco
epidemic is an industry-driven epidemic. Target
groups of this industry are youth, women and
underprivileged people. This sort of disaggregation
is already practised in tobacco control surveys by
the WHO.
Data must be disaggregated not only by sex and

age, but also by income bracket and disability. Only
then can we ensure no one is left behind.
Items marked with an asterisk (*) sign in our
proposed indicators must be disaggregated. This is
to be done by income quintile, gender,
residence. Additional categories may be identified
at the national level. Furthermore, the extent to
which the gap between the highest and lowest
groups is being closed (eg. first and fifth income
quintile) should be assessed.
Items marked with a pound/number/hashtag (#)

sign in our proposed indicators must be
disaggregated by rural and urban location;
disaggregation by province/region is desirable at
the national level.
‘Disaggregated by level’ refers to disaggregation

according to pre-primary, primary, lower secondary,
higher secondary and tertiary, unless otherwise
specified.
sex-disaggregated data are going to be key to

ensure that women and girls are going the be
included in the national and proramm plannung for
the SGDs
For many of the indicators for Goal 2, data should
be disaggregated by rural and urban populations,
type of food producers (farmer, small livestock
husbandry, fisherfolk, pastoralst), economic
quintiles and farm size quintiles.
To ensure that the SDGs reach the most vulnerable
and marginalised, including people with disabilities
indicators must be disaggregated by disability and
other social and economic groups. Without
disaggregation we will not be able to check that
progress is being made for all, and those who are
hardest to reach may be left behind. The
importance of disaggregating by disability is
highlighted in the Outcome document for the
SDGs. While data disaggregated by disability is not
currently widely available for many of the indicators,
enormous progress has been made in recent years
to develop methodologies that allow
disaggregation, such as the Washington Group
Questions. These methodologies mean that we are
in a strong position to improve disaggregation of
data and generate the data needed to establish
whether the SDGs are succeeding in leaving no-
one behind.
The data held by CDP is very granular, relating to

individual organisations and (in the case of
multinational companies) also to activity within
individual geographies.
Within the scope of our network and the For many of the indicators proposed on youth and
broader global education community, we’re adult education we suggest for them to be
committed to communicate and disseminate disaggregated by income quintile, sex, age,
all relevant information of the sustainable race/ethnicity, disability, rural and urban place of
development agenda through electronic residence; and other categories that may be
means, meetings, articles, and capacity identified at the national level, using data of both
building processes. Beyond that, we plan to formal and informal economy.
follow-up the implementation of the agenda To properly monitor the progress the education for
and data collection of non-formal youth and all goal and targets, a bigger effort must be done to
adult education and lifelong learning at a collect disaggregated data by age groups. ICAE
national level, in cooperation with our believes stongly that the indicator 4.4.1 would be
members. wholly inadequate as a reflection of the inclusive
commitment of the goal 4, and would similarly
discriminate against the achievement of the lifelong
learning dimensions of the goal. We believe the
arbitrary cut off of population above 64 in surveys
of adults is no longer helpful or functional in a
rapidly ageing society, and in economies where
people have to continue working above this age to
secure their existence.
We recognized that to monitor the fulfilment of adult
education targets, requires information on values,
attitudes and non-academic skills that in the
majority of countries are not assessed by national
education systems. However, there are
opportunities to collect disaggregated information
through household and labour force surveys.
To uphold the full exercise of the human right to
education for all, children, youth and adults in this
agenda will require significant investment, by
national governments and development partners
alike, and to backed all targets with appropriate
monitoring and accountability. The failure to
achieve even the modest educational targets for
adults will result in ‘hundreds of millions left behind.’
Indicators should draw upon and reinforce For all indicators, it will be essential to use
existing human rights treaty obligations, disaggregated data to see the gaps in outcomes
especially given that the final agreement between different social or economic groups or
explicitly states that this Agenda “ is founded sectors of the population (i.e. horizontal inequalities
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights between men and women or between people with
[and] international human rights treaties” and disabilities and the rest of the population, or vertical
“is to be implemented in a manner that is inequalities in terms of income/wealth.) This will be
consistent with the rights and obligations of crucial to provide evidence of inequalities and
states under international law”. This will help discrimination, and highlight the need for targeted
to ensure that post-2015 accountability policies and resources. Target 17.18 states that
processes and international human rights data should be disaggregated by income, gender,
treaty commitments reinforce each other. age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability,
geographic location “and other characteristics
In order to have legitimacy and salience, is relevant in national contexts”. Indeed, further
important that the indicators selected are, at relevant and necessary categories for
least to a degree, connected to the realities of disaggregation will vary according to the national
the individuals and reflect the perspectives of context, but disaggregation should be as extensive
rights holders. People living in poverty and as possible and guided by the grounds of
other marginalized groups have the most discrimination prohibited under international human
immediate insights on their own experiences rights law, in consultation with OHCHR, National
with sustainable development policies. For Human Rights Institutions and other national
this reason, it would be beneficial for policy human rights actors. Certainly, there are challenges
makers and other stakeholders to work with for some countries in rapidly scaling up
people living in poverty to devise indicators disaggregation, but a universal, initial minimum
that reflect their own progress. Indicators should be disaggregation on the basis of age, sex,
should be understandable and easy to disability, rural/urban location, and income, with
interpret. concrete plans and strategies to progressively
improve capacities (supported by international
donors where necessary).
In order to ensure positive and sustainable
outcomes, it will be important to include not
only a framework for monitoring but also for
review and accountability. The follow up and
review framework for the SDGs should
encourage a culture of universal participation;
an interactive dialogue that reviews each
state’s progress in implementing the agenda;
reviews every state periodically; robust
reporting from individual states; independent
reports by civil society, UN bodies and other
stakeholders; sufficient resources; and, open,
participatory, and transparent procedures.
Data disaggregation will be required to assess the
change in inequality levels in various soci-economic
backgrounds and setting and will also help in
making effective changes in the country planning
processes.
Another important crosscutting issue is the
capacities of the existing system and mechanisms
at the national level, which are severely lacking and
will pose a severe hurdle unless worked upon.
There is also the issue of convergence amongst
the sub-national mechanisms.
Also the data availability is going to be a challenge
as several sources identified for the indicators are
not very regular, therefore updated information
availability to measure change will be a concern.
In order to monitor and assess the targets As the main focus of Child and Youth Finance
and indicators associated with the 17 goals, International is young people themselves, we
CYFI suggests that a framework is developed strongly encourage the disaggregation of data that
to monitor each of the indicators by stage. For addresses children and youth specifically when
example, on a scale of 1 – 5 stages, a given measuring each of the 17 goals. While CYFI finds
indicator can be assessed as having little to the explicit monitoring and evaluation of children
no progress or support, to having an excellent and youth in each of the 17 goals highly relevant in
environment and active implementation order to monitor the progress amongst various
initiatives for any given indicator. For generations, CYFI places a strong emphasis on the
example: disaggregation of data for children and youth in
relation to Goals 1, 4, 5, 8 & 16. When looking at
Stage 1: limited progress/ support in place children and youth as the leaders of tomorrow, it is
essential that young people are monitored as their
Stage 2: No strategy, sporadic programs own target group, especially in relation to issues
such as poverty, education, gender equality,
Stage 3: Strategy in place, not implemented economic growth and inclusive societies.
Stage 4: On track with implementation
Stage 5: Excellent environment and active

implementation initiatives
- The IAEG should not be constrained by

existing data-sets and should also consider how to
make use of third-party data including indices and
methodologies developed with input from civil
society e.g. the financial secrecy index (FSI).
- Data disaggregation will be critical. In addition
to gender, age and disability, characteristics
relevant in national context should also be
identified and data disaggregated to ensure that no
one is left behind.
- Indicators should be used to measure
progress against particular outcomes but where
appropriate, perceptions or behavioural indicators
should be used to track changes in social norms.
‘Process’ indicators which look at policy adoption
and implementation may also be relevant
measurements for some targets.
With 20% of the world population living with a
disability, 80% of those in developing countries,
and the declaration of the soon to be adopted
2030-Agenda for Sustainable Development
explicitly recognizing this in para. 23, disability must
be a cross-cutting issue in this process, and needs
to be if eradication of poverty is to be achieved.
As Member States stated that indicators must: 1)

directly respond to the goals and targets and their
level of ambition; 2) not undermine or re-interpret
the targets; and 3) cover all targets and give equal
weight to all targets, CBM stresses that as long as
not un-reasonable due to unsurmountable burdens,
all indicators relative to SDGs targets addressing
disability and/or persons with disabilities directly
(i.e. targets 4.5, 4.a, 8.5, 10.2, 11.2, 11.7, 17.18)
should be disaggregated by disability.
An additional six SDGs targets refer to persons in

vulnerable situations (targets 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.1, 6.2,
11.5) - which include persons with disabilities
according to the outcome document for adoption at
the UN Summit on the Post-2015 Development
Agenda, and should accordingly be disaggregated
by disability, too.
Ideally, all data relating to universal targets should

also be disaggregated by disability. However, since
disaggregating all possible indicators may
represent an excessive burden to countries at this
point of time, it is suggested to interims
disaggregate data by disability status for a smaller
set of targets, those targets for which there is
urgent need for action for persons with disabilities
(i.e. targets 1.1, 3.2, 3.8, 5.2, 5.6, 6.1, 16.9).
However in line with the promulgated “Data
Stillbirth rate should be included in all Data availability for stillbirths is on the rise and now
frameworks for maternal, newborn and child available for 165 countries. The UN Inter-agency
health as an impact indicator for mortality. Group for Child Mortality Estimation (IGME) has
Investment frameworks for women’s and agreed to include stillbirth monitoring in their
children’s health include stillbirth to portfolio after 2015. While comparable,
strengthen the cost-effectiveness and disaggregated national data is not currently
additional lives saved of an investment. Yet available by income, gender, age, etc… national
without explicit monitoring of the outcome stillbirth estimates are available by intrapartum and
indicator – stillbirth rate – tracking will be antepartum. Recent investment in CRVS provides a
insufficient towards measuring full potential of key opportunity to improve counting and
investment and actions for women’s and disaggregation of births and deaths, including
children’s health. stillbirths.
Indicator order and inter linkage (cross- Disaggregation: district rat runs
cutting)
Areas to detect imbalances
Cross-cutting SDG-GROUP 10, 11 (11.2, 11.6,
Indicator and a Monitoring Framework 11.7, 11.b) + 13 and 17
relationships
- In relation to media coverage, organic and Traffic, Transport, Congestion, Emissions, Health
promoted and Public Spaces
- In relation to short, mid and long term effect
- In relation to virtual reality We suggest an indicator to analyse big data and
- In relation to direct/indirect passive/active measure cities rat runs. Every urban structure has
action main roads where you travel from one place to
… another. Between the roads cities develops a range
… of district settlements for habitable usage/purpose,
- Etc. where we live and nurture our own and
neighbourhood life situation. Everyone live in and
Special area of Interest has relation to districts which also is a form a shape
70. Area of public and green space as a a city.
proportion of total city space
Cross-cutting SDG-GROUP 10, 11 (11.2, Within the districts we have organised residential
11.6, 11.7, 11.b) + 13 and 17 streets patterns in systems to balance planned and
organic development, these are also important in
SDG 10 the way we move and travel locally, most of the
Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among distances within a district are walkable or can be
countries used for multi-modal transportation and generate
How would indicated affect SDG if car-independence.
implemented for 1 day, 1 week, 1 month or
even 1 Year? Quality in Air, Water and Soil? In each district living neighbourhood area local
residential streets, transport and commercial
SDG 11 Connected streets and public spaces delivery use and overuse rat runs for own benefits.
for spatial development This behaviour has a negative impact on local
livelihood prosperity and cause traffic imbalances
which further on cause and affect the main roads
and in the whole regional transportation system.
This is the habitat butterfly effect.
Goal 11 has brought to the fore the A key challenge across all the SDGs is the fact that
operational challenge of building a multinational-level data may conceal important
scalar indicator framework to enable differences and inequities among populations or
monitoring of the SDGs at the appropriate cities/regions within a country. Supplementing
level of action. Disaggregated geospatial data national statistical data with (disaggregated)
is critical for effectively tracking the progress geospatial data at the city and sub-national level
of various targets at the city, regional, and facilitates regional and city-level analyses that
national levels where implementation reveal such differences and produce a more
activities occur. This multi-scalar approach detailed understanding of trends and progress
requires a minimal set of ‘universal’ national within a country. Subnational and local
Indicators that will be reported globally, plus governments can be an important source of such
supplementary indicators that could be local/regional statistics and survey information.
reported at the national, regional, and/or city Moreover, including the spatial dimension can help
level as considered appropriate by the standardize and make sense of divergent data
member state (in consultation with its National definitions and data collection methods.
Statistical Office and Regional and Local
Governments). An important benefit of indicators supported by
disaggregated geospatial data is the potential for
The Urban SDG Campaign has taken upon supporting the localization of the Post-2015
itself the responsibility of building and testing Development Agenda by enhancing the capacity for
this framework in 2015 in a set of cities monitoring of progress at the subnational level. This
across major geographies of the world. This localization can help assess inequalities within
work in progress is intended to support the countries, inform better decision-making and
further refinement of monitoring and statistical resource allocation at all levels, foster ownership of
processes and innovation that will be needed the Post-2015 Development Agenda by citizens
to enable successful SDG implementation. and civil society, and strengthen transparency and
accountability in its implementation. Ensuring
effective use of disaggregated geospatial and other
data requires active collaboration between
statistical offices from the different levels of
government.
Considering a multi-audience strategy

Costa supports the comments and
suggestions that have been submitted to the
IAEG-SDG by the 5 Gyres Institute.
We welcome the recognition that all indicators
should be disaggregated by sex, age, residence
(U/R) and other characteristics. Disaggregation by
income should be added in this context.
As girls are reaching puberty earlier than in
previous decades and may get pregnant before the
age of 15, we suggest that the age-span of
reproductive age be expanded to 10-49. This is
relevant for the indicators under target 3.7, 5.2, 5.3
and 5.6. It would ensure that there is an accurate
picture of the reproductive health of all girls and
women, not just those over the age of 15. It would
highlight specific needs for those girls who are
married or exposed to sexual intercourse at a very
young age. For indicators under target 5.2 and 5.3
women above the age of 49 need to be included,
as they are equally vulnerable to violence (5.2) and
to have undergone FGM/C (5.3).
The indicators for targets 3.7 and 5.6 are indicated
as ‘interlinked’. We want to emphasize that target
3.7 (on access to SRH care services) and target
5.6 (on ensuring universal access to SRH and RR)
are complementary and mutually reinforcing. Their
achievement will require distinct actions and
different sets of indicators. They should not be seen
as duplicative or overlapping.
Target 3.7 focuses on ensuring the availability,
accessibility, acceptability and quality of health
services, information and education in the area of
sexual and reproductive health, such as maternal
health services, modern contraceptives, family
planning, counseling and services, safe abortion
where legal and post-abortion care, prevention and
treatment of HIV and other sexually transmitted
diseases, reproductive cancers, infertility and
services related to gender-based and sexual
violence. It is linked to wider health-sector efforts
The Outcome Document on the 2030 Sustainable
Development Agenda specifies in para. 74 (g) that
the follow-up and review mechanisms will be
“rigorous and based on evidence, informed by
country-led evaluations and data which is high-
quality, accessible, timely, reliable and
disaggregated by sex, age, race, ethnicity,
migration status, disability and geographic location
and other characteristics relevant in national
contexts”.
This is reaffirmed in target 17.18., which explicitly

aims, by 2020, to significantly increase the
availability of data disaggregated by income,
gender, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status,
disability, geographic location and other
characteristics relevant in national contexts.
The above approach is largely consistent with the

so-called “prohibited grounds of discrimination” and
address the cross-cutting human rights principles of
non-discrimination and equality. Hence, the
adequate implementation of target 17.18. is key to
enabling a systematic monitoring of the equality
and non-discrimination dimensions of the entire
2030 development agenda, and to realising the
slogan of “leaving no one behind”.
However, the requirement for comprehensive

disaggregation of data is only addressed in a few
indicators, such as that proposed for target 17.18,
while others only address a few grounds of
discrimination (e.g. age or gender) or none at all.
It is of outmost importance for the human rights

relevance of the indicators framework that:
• A systematic approach to disaggregation of
Disaggregated data is vital for poverty eradication.
It is essential to know exactly who and where poor
people are, to target investments so they have the
greatest impact possible on the right people, and to
assess progress specifically of those we need to
focus on.
There are large gaps in data on people's needs,

including who and where people in poverty are, the
conditions that contribute to and keep them in
poverty, as well as the type of poverty they are
experiencing.
Poverty data is typically based on surveys, and

these are often infrequent and inconsistent across
countries and years. For example, for 17 countries
2011 estimates of global extreme poverty
measured as PPP $1.25/day incorporate data from
surveys conducted in 2004 or earlier. For the 28
countries for which survey data is entirely missing,
figures are derived from regional averages, which
may bear little resemblance to actual country
contexts (such as in the case of North Korea).
Data disaggregated both by geographical location

at sub-national level and by social group – which
can be used to measure where progress is being
achieved and by who – is also lacking, for example,
World Bank data on extreme poverty is not
disaggregated by gender, which means we cannot
accurately measure progress of women compared
with men.
An essential first step to improving this situation is

developing accurate civil registration and vital
statistical data which are vital for counting and
locating people and a prerequisite for identifying
We welcome the fact the list of proposed indicators
is longer than in the first version of the list. Most
targets in the draft outcome document of the post-
2015 development agenda will need at least two
indicators to meaningfully monitor the
implementation of the post-2015 agenda. Where
two indicators are not enough to sufficiently cover
the content of the targets, we have suggested
additional indicators.
We also welcome the recognition that all indicators
reproductive age be expanded to 10-49. This is be
disability should be a cross-cutting issue in this
process, and needs to be if eradication of poverty is
to be achieved.
Indicators relative to SDGs targets addressing

(i.e. targets 4.5, 4.a, 8.5, 10.2, 11.2, 11.7, 17.18)
should be disaggregated by disability where
possible, as Member States stated that indicators
must: 1) directly respond to the goals and targets
and their level of ambition; 2) not undermine or re-
interpret the targets; and 3) cover all targets and
give equal weight to all targets.

by disability.

represent an excessive burden to countries, it is
suggested to disaggregate data by disability status
for a smaller set of targets, those targets for which
there is urgent need for action for persons with
disabilities (i.e. targets 1.1, 3.2, 3.8, 5.2, 5.6, 6.1,
16.9)
Additionally, targets 10.3 and 16.b, addressing

discrimination, should also be disaggregated by
disability.
Data required to track the SDG indicators needs to
be disaggregated and more complex than what
was required for monitoring the Millennium
Development Goals.
Disaggregation for each proposed indicator has
been highlighted in Section 2 under each relevant
target.
In order to meet the increased demand for high-

quality information for the SDGs, we call for an
extensive investment in national and global data
collecting capabilities to maximise the opportunities
presented by the Data Revolution as defined by
The UN Secretary-General’s Independent Expert
Advisory Group
on a Data Revolution for Sustainable Development
(UN IEAG-Data Revolution for Sustainable
Development, 2014). A good example of the Data
Revolution is to develop low-cost on-farm
measurements, in order to build an “ecological
landscape monitoring system”. This could allow for
crowdsourcing of data from farmers, through
improving the access of farmers to technologies
that measure soil quality and water use efficiency
on their fields.
ICT should be included as a basic ICT should be included as a basic infrastructure,

infrastructure, alongside with transportation, then it can help to collect data in a transparant way
electricity, buildings etc which is still not personal (all info can be
Then global monitoring can be made anonymized at source)
Regarding 16.4.1 (illicit financial flows), I Regarding 16.4.1 (illicit financial flows), I note that
commend developing methodologies that hold the measures should be built up from individual-
out better prospects of producing more country data, not disaggregated from global or
plausible proxies for illicit financial flows at the regional measures. To be meaningful, the
individual-country level. This has to come well individual-country measures will need to be
before presenting and communicating compiled from the many types of illicit financial
indicators. flows.
adult education and lifelong learning at a collect disaggregated data by age groups. EAEA
We appreciate the recognition that all indicators
should be disaggregated by age, sex and
residence, although further characteristics should
be included. As regards disaggregation by age, it is
imperative that this disaggregation is
comprehensive and broken down into a significant
number of age groups, in order to adequately
measure progress for young people and other age
groups across the goals and targets. The Major
Group for Children and Youth has suggested
disaggregation in five-year intervals and we support
this call, as this would allow measurement of
progress for young people beyond the age of 24
and for young people of different age cohorts.
(urban/rural) and other characteristics. It is
fundamental to add disaggregation by income
quintile, education, marital status and disability
given that these represent some serious barriers
for women to make decisions about their sexual
and reproductive health. As girls are reaching
puberty earlier than in previous decades and may
get pregnant before the age of 15, we suggest that
the age-span of reproductive age be expanded to
10-49. This is relevant for the indicators under
target 3.7, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.6. It would ensure that
there is an accurate picture of the reproductive
health of all girls and women, not just those over
the age of 15. It would highlight specific needs for
those girls who are married or exposed to sexual
intercourse at a very young age. For indicators
under target 5.2 and 5.3 women above the age of
49 need to be included, as they are equally
vulnerable to violence (5.2) and to have undergone
FGM/C (5.3).
We want to emphasize the importance of target 3.7

and target 5.6 which are complementary and
mutually reinforcing. Their achievement will require
distinct actions and different sets of indicators.
Though they are ‘interlinked’, we caution against
them being seen as duplicative or overlapping.

This should not only be data disaggregation, but

information too.
Disaggregation of data for children under 2 years of
age and not only children under 5 should be
considered to recognize this special group and the
importance of the first 1,000 days.
FRAmericas proposes to work in the context
of the UN’s Inter-agency and Expert Group on
SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) to contribute to
the monitoring of progress in the
implementation of SDG17, particularly in the
area of “technology” and its applications to
further development objectives. In order to do
this,
FRAmericas will: (i) develop baseline data for

selected target indicator (see Scope, below);
(ii) construct a data base to collect, verify and
register activities undertaken by governmental
and non-governmental organizations world-
wide that respond to the selected target
indicators; (iii) create an open platform to
which registered organizations can access
and contribute their inputs to the monitoring
process; and (iv) report periodically on
tendencies, progress and perceived obstacles
to the attainment of the targets selected.
FRAmericas will attempt to coordinate its

efforts with those of other civil society
organizations and the UN System agencies,
among others: (i) civil society participating in
the consultations of IAEG-SDGs itself; (ii) ITU
Data and Statistics Division; (iii) Sustainable
Development Knowledge Platform.
FRAmericas will organize and conduct

promotional and dissemination events and
use social media to further the reach of this
monitoring activity and enlarge the cache of
registered organizations participating in its
open platform,
In the case of tobacco use prevalence, UN Prevalence data are generally disaggregated by
member states have already committed, as sex, and many countries also collect data for
part of the voluntary global targets for Non- specific age groups (usually youth). Some
Communicable Diseases, to a relative countries also collect more detailed prevalence
reduction of 30% by 2025. Accordingly, it may data for specific ethnic groups (e.g. aboriginal
make sense to present prevalence data not people) or income categories.
only as single numbers for a given year, but
also in terms of relative reduction (or Affordability data as collected at present are not
increase) in prevalence in comparison to the disaggregated, although it would certainly be
reference year. possible to do so (e.g. based on income trends in
different social groups). However, it is worth
With respect to tobacco affordability data, emphasizing the strong evidence that the health
these are primarily helpful for measuring benefits of tobacco tax increases are skewed
trends within each country, and accessorily towards lower-income households.
for comparisons between similar countries.
Again, it would make sense to present both
raw numbers and trends relative to the
reference year.
According to JMP’s 2015 Report, access to water
and sanitation is nearly always higher in urban than
in rural settings. In some countries, rural areas
account for a vast majority of the population, and is
thus left out of their right to water and sanitation. In
parallel, cities are growing fast and the number of
poorly served people decreases faster in rural than
in urban.To keep track of these two different
dynamics, it is primordial that the WASH indicators
of the future post-2015 Agenda should be
measured both in urban and rural settings. It is
crucial to ensure that the current imbalance
between cities and rural and remote areas be
reduced, and that financement is granted so that no
one is left behind.Even though the 11th of August
document is only focused on core indicators, the
UN Statistics Commission should keep in mind that
complementary indicators are also fundamental to
ensure that no one is left behind : economic
disaggregation is important. For example,
Inequalities in household access to safely-
managed drinking water services and safely
managed sanitation services, hand washing and
menstrual hygiene facility should be measured
between lowest and highest wealth quintiles.
urban / rural desegregation won't be enough at
national level, and there should be a special
mention that if we actually want to achieve not left
anyone behind, at the rural level there should be a
second level of desegregation and measure the
percentage of population living outside the capital
of the municipality. Because what is happening
usually the money arrives to the capital of the
municipality but it doesn't reach any population out
side in the rest of the municipality. At the global
level, there should be a recognition of this
systematic problem and include a way of
measuring if the improvements are really arriving to
the most in need
The proposed indicator addresses issues of
inequitable access to health services within
countries - with the 90% national coverage and
80% coverage in districts – it aims to ensure
countries work to reach the unreached – the
underserved children living in remote areas and in
deprived urban and other settings – to ensure
equity with routine immunisation vaccines.
The Alliance supports disaggregation across the
indicator framework where relevant. In particular,
the indicators should be disaggregated by sex, age,
geography (urban/rural/per-urban), income,
disability, race and ethnicity. In the case of
indicators that are measured by household, they
should be disaggregated by geography, household
members (number of women, men, girls, and boys),
and household income.
It should be possible to disaagregate data for all
relevant education indicators. Disaggregation
should be done based on all forms of exclusion as
recognised in human rights law – including gender,
class, race, caste, disability, age, indigenous/ethnic
background and geography. Target 4.5 explicitly
mentioning persons with disabilities, indigenous
peoples, and children in vulnerable situations.
Broad criteria and datasets, such as the EFA
Global Monitoring Report’s WIDE database, are a
useful source of information.
All GCE proposed indicaotors have provided

disaggregation of indictors.
Items marked with an asterisk (*) sign must be

disaggregated. This is to be done by income
quintile, gender, race/ethnicity, disability, rural and
urban place of residence. Additional categories
may be identified at the national level. Furthermore,
the extent to which the gap between the highest
and lowest groups is being closed (eg. first and fifth
income quintile) should be assessed.
• Items marked with a pound/number/hashtag (#)
sign must be disaggregated by rural and urban
location; disaggregation by province/region is
desirable at the national level.
• ‘Disaggregated by level’ refers to disaggregation
according to pre-primary, primary, lower secondary,
higher secondary and tertiary, unless otherwise
specified.
Indicators need to be separated into at least Visual representations are a very powerful means
two camps: of showing data. It also makes apparent potential
Sustainable: does the human economy fit on tradeoffs between goals and targets. For example,
the planet (for example measured by the many stakeholders, including governments,
Ecological Footprint)? business and civil society, have made use of a
Development: do all people have great lives graph depicting the HDI on the horizontal axis and
(for example measured by HDI)? the ecological footprint on the vertical axis. This
provides a simple summary means of assessing
whether progress in improving people’s lives is
accompanied by increases in demand on the
planet’s regenerative capacity, relative to how much
is available. The further development of such a
framework for the SDGs would considerably
support their integration into thinking and practice
of a wide range of stakeholders.
A lead indicator for SDG 16.10 on 'ensuring public

access to information' would be based on national
adoption and use of legal mechanisms in this area,
which by its nature would not lend itself to
consistent, internaitonally comparable
disaggregation by gender, income, ethnicity, or
other such groupings. However, individual country
reports on progress in this area - or 'implementaion'
- could and should include disaggregated national
data documenting possible group disparities in
accessing information.
All indicators must be measurable and

disaggregated to demonstrate equitable progress
across regions, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic
status, disability, age, and geographic location. No
goal should be considered complete unless it is
achieved for every group with specific attention to
the needs of the poorest, most vulnerable,
marginalized, and stigmatized populations. Without
clear measurements mandated in the wording of
these goals, adequate tracking and accountability
around commitments will not be possible.
Data quality is an important factor to consider when
establishing the global monitoring framework. For
some indicators, such as “R&D expenditure as a
percentage of GDP”, the quality of R&D data from
existing sources deteriorates significantly when
disaggregated. This is particularly true for many
LMICs, who often do not report data by field of
science or socioeconomic objective or adequately
capture nongovernment sectors. However, in order
to have an adequate picture of global health R&D
spending, disaggregation by performance sector,
funding source, scientific field, and socioeconomic
objective is critical. To resolve this conflict,
improved evaluation and monitoring systems in
LMICs should be supported throughout the
implementation process for the SDG framework.
Data must be disaggregated beyond just sex and
age. It must also include income bracket and
disability. Only then can we ensure we leave no
one behind.
Disaggregation of indicator data is crucial to
identifying inequities in access to and use of
essential services and interventions, and assessing
the scope and impact of discrimination and other
human rights violations experienced by different
segments of the population. Disaggregation can
also help show where targeted improvements can
and should be made to ensure universal access,
improve public health, and fulfill human rights.
Therefore, wherever possible, it is strongly
recommended that data be collected in a way that
they can be disaggregated by age, sex, place of
residence (urban or rural), marital status, and
wealth. This list is not exhaustive; many other
categories such as disability, education, sexual
orientation and gender identity should be assessed
for inclusion as measurement systems improve and
grow in sophistication. The disaggregation of data
will be critical in ensuring that appropriate laws,
policies and programs exist or are created that are
responsive to, support and promote health and
human rights.
to be achieved.

(i.e. targets 4.5, 4.a, 8.5, 10.2, 11.2, 11.7, 17.18)

by disability.

16.9)

disability.
essential goal, of design and planning for essential goal, of design and planning for cultural
cultural growth for whole societies. growth for whole societies.
For data aggregation to correspond to the working

organization of the natural systems we need to
work with... science can follow the naturally defined
perimeters of the systems to be monitored.
We are concerned by the failure of the indicators
document to specify the full range of categories for
data disaggregation, as stated in the SDGs. We
propose that the note on disaggregation in the
current IEAG indicators document: “All indicators
(U/R) and other characteristics, as relevant and
possible,” is amended to “All indicators should be
disaggregated by income, gender, age, race,
ethnicity, migratory status, disability, geographic
location and other characteristics relevant in
national contexts”. This is in line with the wording
and intention of the SDGs. We are concerned that
failure to do so risks undermining the entire
framework.
We have a specific interest in the disaggregation of

data by ethnicity. Indigenous peoples and other
cultural and ethnic minorities often have the worst
poverty and health outcomes. It is vital that this is
captured in the data. This already possible within
existing data sources. Any indicators which rely on
DHS, MICS or Household Survey Information can
be disaggregated by ethnicity. These surveys
already contain questions pertaining to ethnicity or
proxies such as language. It simply requires that
governments use them.
In addition some of the targets specifically

reference indigenous peoples, failure to
disaggregate by ethnicity would undermine the
target.
Whilst we accept the complexities regarding data
collection, the data does not have to disaggregated
by 2016. Rather the indicators should provide a
level of ambition which countries can progress
towards.
For indicators measuring target 3.6 and target 11.2
it is very important to ensure that pedestrian and
bicyclist data is captured separately from motorized
vehicles. Often pedestrians and bicyclists are
excluded from the data captured or are included
with motorbikes as vulnerable road users. However,
there are different facilities and infrastructures
needed to support walking and cycling (vs
motorcycles that would use similar infrastructure to
cars). And, there are particular vulnerabilities that
would separate pedestrians and cyclists from
motorized vehicles.
Whenever possible, the data should always be

disaggregated by income. The poor are particularly
vulnerable to road traffic deaths, and have unequal
access to safe sustainable transportation options
and public spaces

it is very important to ensure that pedestrian and
bicyclist data is captured separately from motorized
vehicles. Often pedestrians and bicyclists are
with motorbikes as vulnerable road users.
access to sustainable transportation options and
public spaces.
To ‘leave nobody behind’, a high level of ambition
on data disaggregation should guide indicator
development at all levels, based on leading
grounds of discrimination prohibited by international
human rights law and standards. Disaggregation
should be specified in each indicator adopted.
Particular attention must also be paid to:
disaggregation by sex across the board- noting
many countries already produce but do not yet
utilize the data; geographical location, with
emphasis on impoverished urban, peri-urban and
rural areas, to assess progress in eliminating
inequalities, exclusion, and poverty; key age sub-
groups traditionally excluded from statistics, many
living in especially vulnerable situations, in
particular younger adolescents 10-14 and persons
50 years of age and above. Rights to privacy and
confidentiality must be safeguarded across all data
collection and management efforts, especially to
protect groups living in vulnerable situations.
If the 15-year global development agenda is truly

designed to leave no one behind, it is important to
ensure the global monitoring framework includes
mechanisms to assess the conditions of children
living outside of family care.
All children count, but not all children are counted.
As a global monitoring indicator framework is
developed, it is important to note that children living
outside of family care – including children living in
institutions or on the street, children who have been
trafficked, separated from their families as a result
of conflict or disaster, recruited into armed groups –
have largely fallen off the UN’s statistical map.
There are only limited data about how many
children live in such precarious circumstances,
except for scattered estimates from some specific
countries. Such children are not covered in
household-based surveys, including the
Demographic and Health Surveys (USAID) and the
Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (UNICEF).
According to UNICEF’s 2015 Progress for Children
report,
“As the world prepares for a new development
agenda, data and evidence will only increase in
importance and national systems must be
strengthened to meet new demands. (...) The new
data agenda will need to provide insight into the
most vulnerable children, relying on household
surveys that provide data regardless of whether or
not a child attends school or is taken to a health
facility, as well as developing new approaches for
collecting information about children who are
homeless, institutionalized or internally displaced.”
When assessing States’ progress in improving the

living conditions of children, living arrangements
and caregiving environments are key markers for
The targets that are inclusive of persons with
disabilities should be monitored with disability-
specific indicators, particularly data disaggregated
by disability, age and gender. Human Rights Watch
and other organizations have documented that the
absence of data disability-disaggregated data is a
serious barrier to the inclusion of persons with
disabilities in basic services and programs. For
example, according to UNESCO, the majority of
school-aged children who are out of school
worldwide are children with disabilities, yet there is
no accurate figure of how many children with
disabilities are out of school. The lack of such data
often results in the lack of targeted initiatives to
ensure that children with disabilities have equal
access to education.One of the main reasons cited
for not including persons with disabilities in
development plans and frameworks is the lack of
data. Historically, many quantitative instruments —
especially in developing countries — have
employed differing methodologies that not only
greatly undercounted persons with disabilities, but
made international comparisons of data difficult or
impossible. However, recent advances in methods
of identifying persons with disabilities through
surveys, censuses, and administrative data
systems are improving the ability to develop,
monitor and evaluate policies aimed at promoting
inclusion in an internationally comparative way.
to be achieved.

(i.e. targets 4.5, 4.a, 8.5, 10.2, 11.2, 11.7, 17.18)

by disability.

16.9)

disability.
While the importance of mitigating GHG emissions
is highlighted throughout the SDGs, it is important
to note that Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) plays an
important role in measuring the impact of particular
agricultural practices. Several of our public- and
private-sector collaborators have strong capabilities
in this important area of science. In our role as a
convener of tri-partite (academia, government,
industry) scientific communities, we’d welcome the
opportunity to help ensure that such highly
developed LCA approaches are being employed to
support the development and implementation of
indicators to track progress toward the
achievement of SDG targets.
The indicator on progress towards 'legal In addition to disaggregation by standard
identity for all' (cf. target 16.9) needs to be demographic variable (age, sex, citizenship) it
accompanied by should be possible to calculate an indicator of 'legal
• a description of how a ‘legal identity’ may identity for all (cf. taget 16.9) for particularly
be obtained/decided vulnerable groups, e.g. those residing in contested
• a description of how a ‘legal identity’ may geographic areas.
be changed
• a description of how a ‘legal identity’ may
be documented
• a description of how a ‘legal identity’ may
be verified
• a description of what rights and
obligation a particular ‘legal identity’
status/situation may represent
• a description of how a person’s legal
identity may be protected
• a description of possible data collection
mechanisms (sources)
As above we mention human rights, women

children rights, gender equality
A robust indicator framework will be Data where relevant - regarding health and
necessary for monitoring and accountability discrimination - should include HIV status and
mechanisms at the national, regional and membership in groups affected by HIV. Health data
international levels. This is also critical for including HIV should be disaggregated in five year
private sector accountability. The private increments Disaggregation by age sub-groups
sector has a responsibility to collect accurate should be expanded to cover all age groups
data about their environmental and social implicated-- 0-14, 15-19, 20-24, 25-49, and above
impact in support of national data collection 50--including to capture vertical transmission in
systems.We support the calls of many that infants as well as younger adolescents (10-14) –
there must be increased efforts aimed at especially relevant in the context of child, early
capacity-building and supporting national and marriage and forced marriage--and among older
international statistics offices in the collection persons, ignored to date in data collection and
and analysis of data. This should include prevention efforts despite their risks. Particular
gender-expertise and improved resourcing emphasis is needed on adolescents and youth,
and adequate funds for independent civil including young key populations, who continue to
society participation in monitoring be among the groups most at risk, recalling that the
frameworks. Throughout this process, civil MDG indicator on HIV prevalence focused
society must be afforded the opportunity to exclusively on 15-24 year olds. Sources: Data is
provide inputs throughout the indicator available annually for 158 countries from UNAIDS,
development process. In addition to attending WHO based on household surveys, surveillance
meetings, civil society should have access to and modelling. On data on older persons, note that
online consultations to observe and provide UNAIDS published regional and global estimates of
recommendations, in line with the Terms of HIV incidence among people 50 and older in 2013
Reference for the IAEG. and 2014, though quality country-level survey data
for this age group remains rare as existing modules
often exclude people over 49.
Gender disaggregation shoudl include transgender
people, as they are in UNAIDS data.
Harmful drinking patterns are linked not only with
quantity and frequency of drinking, but also with
differences in age, gender, education and
socioeconomic level, health status, drinking culture,
attitudes, and other factors. Understanding these
relationships allows the crafting of interventions
that are appropriate, tailored, and likely to be
effective.
Disaggregation of data on alcohol consumption
allows the identification of harmful patterns of
individuals at particular risk for harm, offering a
more nuanced approach to interventions and
prevention.
o Given the particular emphasis on those below
the age of in Target 3.5.2, data for underage youth
must be separated from those on those of legal
drinking age.
o The rising ageing population across the world
calls for better insight into drinking patterns among
the elderly, who may be at increased risk for harm.
o The changing patterns of consumption among
women around the world, linked with changing
drinking cultures, globalization, and evolving
gender roles, also warrant disaggregation of
gender-specific data. Particular attention is also
needed to drinking during pregnancy and to
maternal health.
o Social determinants – poverty, social
exclusion, and differences in social equity – play a
significant role in the relationship between drinking
patterns and harm and may influence the very
definition of harmful drinking itself. Disaggregation
on the basis of social and economic factors is
needed for better interventions and the reduction of
harm.
o Much of the world’s alcohol is unrecorded,
unregulated, and of potentially low quality,
The ILO has been given the responsibility of Data disaggregation is extremely important to gain
collecting the data on work and decent work. an understanding of the sustainability of each goal.
We approve of the use of household surveys The data should be desegregated by gender, age,
as the data collection agency. The ILO should region of the world, education and level of
be given the responsibility for advertising and development of the country.With disaggregation it
promoting the indicators among the nations. It will be possible to develop specific procedures to
is important that the indicators be presented improve the lives of specific groups. Once again,
and measured not as an exercise in psychologists should be involved in designing
judgement of the countries but in ways that programs for specific groups.
will be motivating to improve conditions.
Psychologist should be consulted as to how
best to present the indicators, measure them
and present the results so as to be motivating
and not evaluative.
Special attention should be given to the definition of
the geographical scope of indicators related to goal
11. As functional areas (e.g. job catchment areas)
often differ from the administrative boundaries of
cities, it is important that indicators focus on those
functional areas as a whole and not only on the
administrative boundaries of the cities.
Relevant methodologies have been developed and
should be built upon (e.g. OECD approach to
measure metropolitan areas).
There are strong inter-linkages between Goal 11
(Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe,
resilient and sustainable) & associated target 11.5
(by 2030 significantly reduce the number of deaths
and the number of affected people and decrease
by y% the economic losses relative to GDP caused
by disasters, including water-related disasters, with
the focus on protecting the poor and people in
vulnerable situations) with targets like 9.1 (develop
quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient
infrastructure, including regional and trans-border
infrastructure, to support economic development
and human well-being, with a focus on affordable
and equitable access for all) and target 3.9 (by
2030 substantially reduce the number of deaths
and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air,
water, and soil pollution and contamination).
Goal 11 & associated target 11.5 are also closely
related to Goal 6 (Ensure availability and
sustainable management of water and sanitation
for all), especially targets 6.1 (6.1 by 2030, achieve
universal and equitable access to safe and
affordable drinking water for all), 6.2 (6.2 by 2030,
achieve access to adequate and equitable
sanitation and hygiene for all, and end open
defecation, paying special attention to the needs of
women and girls and those in vulnerable situations)
and 6.3 (improve water quality by reducing
pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing
release of hazardous chemicals and materials,
halving the proportion of untreated wastewater, and
increasing recycling and safe reuse by x%
globally).
Disability in the SDGs
The sustainable development goals (SDGs) and
targets in the outcome document agreed by UN
Member States on 1 August 2015 includes seven
targets which explicitly refer to persons with
disabilities (see Annex). At the March meeting of
the inter-governmental negotiations on the outcome
document for the UN Summit to adopt the Post-
2015 Development Agenda, Member States
indicated that indicators must directly respond to
the goals and targets and their level of ambition;
must not undermine or re-interpret the targets; and
must cover all targets and give equal weight to all
targets. Therefore, the targets which explicitly refer
to disability must include disability related
indicators.
An additional six SDG targets refer to persons in
vulnerable situations (Annex) - which include
persons with disabilities according to the outcome
document for adoption at the UN Summit on the
Post-2015 Development Agenda. In addition,
several other targets are universal targets, and thus
must also be achieved for persons with disabilities.
Two other targets address discrimination (Annex),
which is a key cause of unequal access to
opportunities and services for persons with
disabilities.
The experience of the Environmental A major challenge is data collection on the extreme
Vulnerability Index in combining 50 poor, rural populations, indigenous peoples,
environmental indicators into simple country marginalized groups, legally unrecognized groups,
profiles may be useful: the homeless, displaced people and migrants, who
http://www.vulnerabilityindex.net/ generally escape from standard census and data
collection processes, and are thus left behind. They
need to be targeted with specific data collection
methods, sometime against the wishes of the
governments concerned where marginalization is
intentional. The special rapporteurs on human
rights may provide a model.
This is important for indicators using surveys or
aiming at such groups like 10.3.1, 11.b.1 and
12.8.2
A transformational agenda should seek new Target 1.4 encompasses all people regardless of
data and not be constrained by already where they reside, their livelihood activities, or the
available data. While critical to inform policy assets they own. It covers both social and
and to track progress, there is no globally economic resources.
available, nationally representative, The land rights indicator must hence capture more
sexdisaggregated data on land rights. Thus, than agricultural land: Secure rights to land are key
any indicator on land rights will require new to accessing income, food, status, housing, credit,
data collection efforts. The post-2015 agenda government services, and greater household- and
presents a historic opportunity to push the community-level decision-making. Indicators limited
data and evidence base forward, rather than to agricultural land ignore the millions of women,
having the available data control the framing men, indigenous peoples and local
of priorities. communities (IPLCs) who live in the forest, practice
nomadic or semi nomadic pastoralism, rely on plots
too small to be considered agricultural holdings,
live in rural areas but are not engaged in
agricultural production, reside on communal land
not designated for agricultural purposes, or rely on
land for small businesses, as well as
the urban and peri-urban poor.
As well as disaggregation of data visibility and
Iinvisibility is a crucial reality. 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. As stated in several
sections of the Outcome Document it is important
to disaggregate by income as comprehensively as
possible so as to render their experience visible.
Income, together with sex, age and residence
(U/R), should be a part of the explicit factors that
are mentioned in the note on disaggregation on the
proposed list of indicators.

diseases, reproductive cancers, infertility and
services related to gender-based and sexual
violence. It is linked to wider health-sector efforts
The framework needed here may have the What are criteria for data disaggregation? The
following properties: 1) connect 17 goals to need for data disaggregation may vary from
the higher-level startegic mission of IAEG; 2) country to country and region to region. How much
tie them to UN's overarching strategic goals; flexibility and granular data needs could be justified
and 3) offer a framework that could be on what grounds?
tailored to regional differences.
I recommend that relevant UN agencies, As mentioned above, progress in addressing
together with NGO experts from each region, maternal mortality will be best served by increasing
should provide guidance for the measurement the ability of countries to disaggregate the numbers
of targets 3.7 and 5.6 and communicate the by cause.
indicators and means of verification to National-level measurement on health (and other)
national counterparts through capacity- indicators should be carried out in a way that
building workshops and mobilization of enables identification of under-served groups by
resources from bilateral and multilateral age, geography, income, and other factors.
sources.



Global monitoring of key indicators is
essential, as is ensuring accountability
procedures are in place. PMA2020 (see
www.pma2020.org) carries out nationally
representative rapid annual monitoring
surveys of family planning and WASH
indicators. It gathers data relevant to some of
the SDG targets and will be issuing briefs on
those that can be measured for countries
where PMA2020 surveys are conducted.
Together with a coalition of over 30 global and
national organizations, we propose a meaningful
and universal land rights indicator, to replace
suggested indicator 1.4.2, that explicitly calls out
women and men:
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
Indicators that refer to people, households,

farmers, or individuals, even with the direction to
collect sex disaggregated data, leave the door
open to prioritizing men over women, a
considerable risk given realities on the ground.
Land-related indicators that expressly distinguish
between the “percentage of women” and the
“percentage of men” have a built-in safety guard to
ensure that women are not left behind in land
rights.

http://landpost2015.landesa.org/resources/land-
2015-sdgs/.
A global monitoring is important, taking into On debt issues, data disaggregation might not be
account the different context of each country that difficult for most countries, perhaps a
on specific interpretation, but able to compare methodology that contributes to the aggregation
among regions and at a global level. criteria.
If the 15-year global development agenda is truly
designed to leave no one behind, it is important to
ensure the global monitoring framework includes
mechanisms to assess the conditions of children
living outside of family care.
All children count, but not all children are counted.

As a global monitoring indicator framework is
developed, it is important to note that children living
outside of family care – including children living in
institutions or on the street, children who have been
trafficked, separated from their families as a result
of conflict or disaster, recruited into armed groups –
have largely fallen off the UN’s statistical map.
There are only limited data about how many
children live in such precarious circumstances,
except for scattered estimates from some specific
countries. Such children are not covered in
household-based surveys, including the
Demographic and Health Surveys (USAID) and the
Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (UNICEF).
According to UNICEF’s 2015 Progress for Children
report,
Non-mainstream data and innovative approaches

must be developed to assess the conditions of the
world’s most vulnerable children. The Committee
on the Rights of the Child has urged all States to
develop indicators and data collection systems
consistent with the Convention on the Rights of the
Child. The global monitoring framework must
include mechanisms to track progress for all
children, including those who are currently invisible
as the result of inadequate indicators and data
collection systems.
to be achieved.

(i.e. targets 4.5, 4.a, 8.5, 10.2, 11.2, 11.7, 17.18)

by disability.

16.9)

disability.
• There is an issue of indicators (how to • It would be best to differentiate between
measure) and targets (reaching what level indicators of progress linked to health interventions
means success). For some indicators the specifically and the impact of both health and non-
threshold to reach is included (eg maternal health interventions on overall mortality indicators.
and child mortality) but for others/most not. Therefore we strongly support to have specific
The question is then what progress and what health sector-specific indicators, in order to boost
speed of progress will be considered specific improvements there.
‘successful’ or even ‘sufficient’. • Indicators chosen to express outputs and
outcomes of health interventions need a direct link
with the population’s health impact. One should
give preference to indicators such as coverage and
actual utilization of services and go beyond the
offer or the availability of services. Actual uptake of
services by the people is critical to impact on
population’s health status.
• • In order to capture issues of inequity
within countries, targets and indicators need to be
specified beyond average country level and
disaggregated.
• In particular it should be a priority to formulate
indicators for specific population groups or areas
that are known to be disadvantaged excluded or
discriminated. This will drive progress to be made
first in the most disadvantaged groups and not left
to last.
o In general, specific indicators (eg child
mortality, immunization coverage, ART coverage,
access to modern contraception) among the lowest
poverty quintile could fit well with the overall
‘reduce poverty’ goal. Specific concerns of equity
per ethnicity or gender can be added where
needed.
o To capture inequity for outcomes between the
most privileged and the most vulnerable groups, we
suggest to create an indicator composed of the
difference in outcomes or outputs for the most and
the least privileged groups. E.g. by the ratio of
• The MPI is the product of two intuitive Any MPI and its associated indicators can be and
numbers. These are: the percentage of in practice have been disaggregated by any group
people who are multidimensionally poor for which data are representative, such as
(headcount ratio H), and the average intensity rural/urban, subnational region, ethnicity, age
(percentage of weighted deprivations poor category, or disability status, so policy makers can
people, on average, experience get the information they need to leave no one
simultaneously, denoted A). behind. They know for example where the poorest
• An MPI unfolds into a dashboard that people live, how they are poor, and whether they
shows the percentage of people who are MPI are catching up over time or not.
poor and deprived in each included indicator.
This is used a great deal for monitoring,
program design, and policy coordination.
The indicators need to bear in mind two cross
cutting basic principles of the SDGs - the idea of
universality, and the need to "leave no-one behind":
The principle of “leave no one behind” impacts on

the selection of indicators, not just on data
disaggregation within each indicator area.
Indicators that focus only on the measurement of
the target for a subsection of a larger population
risk leaving behind those who are not measured.
The outcome document states that reviews,
informed by indicators, should "have a particular
focus on the poorest, most vulnerable and those
furthest behind" (para 74e). But "Leaving no-one
behind" is not simply a matter of data
disaggregation within the chosen indicator. Instead,
it is about choosing an inclusive indicator to begin
with. Any indicator that professes to measure
something general by tracking a particular sub-
group (or set of sub-group) potentially undermines
this guiding commitment of the goals.
The selection of indicators can also undermine the

universality of the SDGs by being biased towards
the situation of developed or developing countries.
The goals are universal, and progress must be
tracked "in a manner which respects their universal,
integrated and interrelated nature" (para 74b). This
is a framework focused on people everywhere and
the whole planet, but it is quite possible for
indicator selection to distribute apparent burdens
and problems differently across the world's
countries. The IAEG should strive to avoid
indicators that carry inherent bias, especially
between developed and developing countries,
against particular sub-sections of the population, or
one pillar of sustainable development over others.
Two questions present a challenge for developing
and measuring indicators: will the final Urban SDG
targets measure and monitor only what is
convenient? Or will indicators be aligned with local
city priorities in order to increase the value of and
motivation for data collection in each city?
The Urban SDG’s dual purpose to address local

and global sustainability challenges requires
different data sets depending on the problem. Most
international bodies that provide global data collect
national level data, which is not relevant at the
spatial or temporal scale necessary for the Urban
SDG. Few have the capacity to capture extensive
city-level data and monitor annually as the SDGs
intend. Even where data exists it is often scattered
across institutions, departments, and agencies,
complicating coordination, long-term tracking, and
comparison (e.g., city greenhouse gas accounting
methods and energy use benchmarks).
Universal data across cities gathered through

surveys and statistical collection systems are
sparse and vary in accuracy. Indicators will
therefore need to rely on remotely-sensed data and
other global city network sources. A recent flood of
new data applicable to sustainable urban
development has created opportunities to derive
indicators that are sensitive and relevant to SDG
targets.
Figuring out how to accurately measure

transboundary environmental impacts remains a
critical challenge, as highly porous urban
boundaries encumber data collection. Instituting
sound governance and building competencies to
properly collect, manage, and analyze data require
1) The two aspirations stated in No 1. of the To ‘leave nobody behind’, a high level of ambition
key points for the 11 August 2015 Indicator list on data disaggregation should guide indicator
are stated as a) the need for a coherent and development at all levels, based on leading
comprehensive measurement of all goals and grounds of discrimination prohibited by international
targets and b) the need to limit the number of human rights law and standards. Disaggregation
“global” indicators. Most of the indicators should be specified in each indicator adopted.
listed should be measured BOTH at national Particular attention must also be paid to:
and country levels – unless they refer to disaggregation by sex across the board- noting
particular geographical features e.g oceans many countries already produce but do not yet
and forests (which are not relevant for all utilize the data; geographical location, with
countries – in which case the indicator is emphasis on impoverished urban, peri-urban and
probably only relevant for some countries, rural areas, to assess progress in eliminating
and regions). Our view is that it is not possible inequalities, exclusion, and poverty; key age sub-
to limit the number of indicators measured at groups traditionally excluded from statistics, many
global/national level to less than THREE living in especially vulnerable situations, in
HUNDRED – given aspiration a) to particular younger adolescents 10-14 and persons
comprehensively measure the SDG agenda. 50 years of age and above. Rights to privacy and
2) Instead of merely trying to reduce the confidentiality must be safeguarded across all data
number of indicators to one indicator per collection and management efforts, especially to
target – which is clearly not possible given the protect groups living in vulnerable situations, and
current listed attempt from 11 August and the support given to statistical agencies to strengthen
response from agencies and others for more the enforcement of data confidentiality as well as
indicators– the indicator list needs to be data collection and new techniques of
structured carefully for maximum ease of disaggregation eg GIS.
communication – and input or process
indicators need to be differentiated from
IMPACT indicators. Currently there is no
attention to this fundamental structural issue.
It is possible to pick THIRTY IMPACT
INDICATORS for maximum political tracking
and visibility – especially if the 17 goals are
regrouped into broad areas – e.g
environment, social, infrastructure etc. As
inputs and processes to arrive at these key 30
impacts – it is possible to use no less than
300 indicators to describe the whole agenda.
The total framework would therefore include
To monitor the indicators at global level the Most of the data disaggregation was restricted to
following framework will be useful: age and sex in most targets exonerating persons
Goal with disabilities especially women and children.It
Target widely believed that disability is one of the most
Progress significant cross cutting issues that was omitted in
Responsible government agency the MDGs and the SDGs provides a great
Time frame opportunity to correct that anomaly as they are the
Means of verification larges minority groups that have enormous
Challenges potential to contribute to the success of SDGs
When determining how to present and It is critical that data on FGM/C is disaggregated by
communicate the indicator on FGM/C, it is age, as it is only possible to understand trends in
critical that the UN works closely with all prevalence if relatively narrow age bands, as per
countries where FGM/C takes place. There is MICS, are utilised. This is particularly important for
a widespread assumption that FGM/C takes girls and young women.
place only in Africa: in reality it takes place in
at least 17 countries in the Middle East and
Asia. It is known to take place in:
Brunei, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan,

Kuwait, Malaysia, The Maldives, Pakistan,
Singapore, Thailand, Oman, Saudi Arabia,
Syria, UAE and Yemen.
FGM/C also takes place in Colombia, and in

diaspora communities in many countries in
Europe, North America and Australasia. The
UN's communication work must therefore be
global in nature, and sensitive to the specific
cultural contexts that FGM/C exists in.
For more information on FGM/C in the Middle

East and Asia, see:
http://orchidproject.org/fgc-in-the-middle-east-
and-asia/
Data should always be disaggregated by sex, age,
income levels, ethnicity, geographical areas
(rural/urban), marginalized groups, and any other
target-relevant dimension. We are encouraged by
and fully support the emphasis on disaggregation in
the work of the IAEG. Firstly, data should be always
disaggregated by sex. Information at community or
household level in fact obscures differences
between women and men. In addition, data should
be disaggregated by age and income levels, so as
to capture vertical inequalities across the board.
Likewise, indicators should always capture the
situation of marginalized groups - with a special
attention to indigenous peoples - and differences
across areas of the same countries. We also ask
the monitoring framework to encourage the use of
maps, alongside quantitative indicators, as a
monitoring tool, and include indigenous peoples’
identifiers in administrative registers.
It is hoped that sustainable transport’s Wherever possible, data disaggregation should be
enabling nature is reflected in proposed use to reflect income, gender and other
indicators for global monitoring and as well characteristics relevant to vulnerable groups. For
that transport is mentioned in the pre-amble. example, WB’s proposed indicator 11.2.2 is useful
Whatever indicators are chosen for global for measuring access, but a more precise definition
monitoring, indicators that are adopted at a of the ‘average’ household would increase
country level remain vitally important and understanding of the impact on different income
relevant for implementation. It is hoped that groups, as often the most disadvantaged have
the global indicator framework emphasize the greater commute times than higher income groups.
importance of country level implementation Thus, if possible, it would be useful to
and indicators for monitoring with a mention disaggregate by income level in this context.
of transport and that indicators function in a
complementary fashion across these different For practical reasons such disaggregation will likely
scales. need to occur mainly at the country level (hence,
the importance of country level indicators). We
For example, in the proposed indicator 11.2.2 assume that Tier II (and later Tier III) indicators may
(‘Share of jobs in the metropolitan area an be suitable candidates for country level indicators,
'average' household can access within 60/75 due to their more likely measurability at national
minutes without a private car i.e. using levels.
walking, cycling and public transport), larger
metro areas could have much lower
percentages, simply due to their size. For
example, a resident of Manhattan (NYC) has
nearly 3 million jobs available within 75
minutes by walking/cycling/transit, but that
may only be 40% of the total jobs in the metro
area, whereas a resident of the central core of
Stockton, California may have 100,000 jobs
available within 75 minutes by
walking/cycling/transit, but that may represent
90% of the total jobs in the metro area. Thus
it is necessary to ensure that global indicators
yield intended results relative to national and
local indicators.
Greater disaggregation of data will account for the
poorest populations and identify areas of inequity
both within and among countries. For some
indicators, such as “R&D expenditure as a
capture nongovernment sectors. In order to have
an adequate picture of global health R&D
Data disaggregation has demonstrated that
subgroups from populations to disease area face
greater challenges than aggregated data suggests,
and it is the responsibility of UN member states to
account for these gaps in the SDG indicator
framework.

(U/R) and other characteristics. It is fundamental to
add disaggregation by income quintile, education,
marital status and disability given that these
represent some serious barriers for women to make
decisions about their sexual and reproductive
health.
1. Is there a law that criminalizes torture

perpetrated by non-State actors?
2. If not, why not?
3. If there is law covering non-State torture is
it being used?
4. Is it being used in a gender equal way?
5. If not, plans for adapting non-discriminatory
and equality justice reform (rule of law).
Principles for Ambitious Indicators
• Indicators should measure the more complex
aspects of each target, not just the easiest to
evaluate, or be based on what is currently being
measured.
• Indicators should include both quantitative and
qualitative measures, and measures of policy, legal,
structural, behavioral and normative change.
• There must be scope for further development of
the indicator framework in the coming years, in
particular, for updating indicators as global and
national capacity for collecting complex data
develops and as contexts change. As such,
research and development of the indicator
framework should remain open after the 47th
Session of the Statistical Commission.
• All data should be regulated by frameworks that
guarantee data privacy, confidentiality, and
protection, across data collection, analysis, and
management.
• All efforts should be made to include third party
data sources in tracking the SDGs, particularly
reputable civil society organizations and academic
institutions.
• To monitor the SDGs, national statistical offices
(NSOs) must be adequately resourced and
strengthened to be functionally autonomous and
transparent in order to produce consistent, reliable,
and high-quality data that are independent,
protected, and accountable.
• Support for strengthening NSOs should come
from a coordinated effort by governments, regional
and international institutions, donors, and civil
society
Developing Ambitious Indicators

• Across the entire SDG framework, there must be
health. As girls are reaching puberty earlier than in

distinct actions and different sets of indicators.

again needs a scale based cascading system Data needs to be characterized to suit various
decision making needs
objective is critical.
To resolve this conflict, improved evaluation and

monitoring systems in LMICs should be supported
throughout the implementation process for the SDG
framework.
Indicators to monitor the SDGs should provide not
only general results (such as literacy rates,
unemployment rates, extreme poverty rate, etc).
They should include detailed data of relevant actors
contributing to the SDGs, in particular volunteer
groups. Detailed data on actors is the only way to
guarantee an analysis of the contributions of each
type of actor in different contexts, and thus to be
able to take informed decisions on which
combinations of actors and types of action can be
most effective in specific contexts.
The UNSG’s synthesis report recognized

volunteering as a “powerful and cross-cutting
means of implementation” of the SDGs able to
“help to localize the new agenda by providing new
spaces of interaction between governments and
people for concrete and scalable actions.”
Volunteer contributions to sustainable development
are distinctive. Volunteers’ close engagement with
communities in need, their skills and motivation to
contribute to more inclusive, active and cohesive
societies, and modeling/facilitation of the reciprocal
exchange of knowledge and skills among
stakeholders make volunteers distinctive actors in
support of the achievement of the SDGs.
It is then urgent that SDG indicators provide
disaggregated data on different actors involved in
implementation, especially volunteer groups,
whose role is particularly important in assuring
capacity development, empowerment and
sustainability.
It is crucial that there is an opportunity to
disaggregate data to address one of the most
overlooked inequalities that is likely to persist in the
coming 15 years: the inequality between slum
dwellers / the urban poor and the rest of the city.
Currently disaggregation simply between urban and
rural areas is not sufficient to address inequality
WITHIN urban areas. We urge the international
community to do more to recognise and address
this problem. Secondly, we urge national statistical
departments to take seriously the challenge of
setting poverty lines that are relevant to urban
areas, where the costs of achieving a basic
standard of living are higher. Without this, the level
of urban poverty will remain under-recognised and
under-counted.
The disaggregation of indicators is essential to
visualize the situation of groups subject to
discrimination or vulnerability, which constitute the
main focus of the 2030 Agenda. Also, from the
perspective of the human rights approach is
essential to establish specific measures to ensure
that these groups live in conditions of equality.
Global Burden of Disease data for Target 3.9 can

be disaggregated by country, age, gender, region
and year.
any indicator framework must be ovearching All population based indicators should: at a
and measure the factors that will be most minimum, data should be disaggregated on the
likely to contribute to the transformative basis of age, sex, geography, income, disability,
change envisioned by the Sustainable race and ethnicity and other factors as relevant to
Development Goals. The indicators monitoring inequalities.
developed for the SDGs should measure the
information we need to ensure progress, not Even though some indicators are measured by
the information that we can easily get. It is household (not by individual) it is still important that
also essential for the global indicator the data collected for those indicators is
framework to include indicators that measure disaggregated – it is important to know how the
progress against all 169 targets, not just the household is comprised.
pieces that are easier to address. This
means prioritizing missing data and filling
data gaps. This means that we should not
restrict the process to existing data, but rather
use this opportunity to measure what is
collection.
New indicators will be required to make sure

that we are measuring the factors that are
most likely to lead to transformative change
and the realization of gender equality and
human rights.
We know that for the framework to be the Alongside others, we are calling for data
ambitious and transformative shift from the disaggregation in line with current human rights
MDGs - the way that it is delivered is as obligations, (outlined by the UNHCR), and as
important as the content itself. Our focus on outlined in the SDGs themselves - (target 17.18).
participation, and ensuring no one is left We support the UN Interagency Youth Working
behind, (including young people), means we Group, and the Major Group for Children and
often consult with young people to Youth, calling for data disaggregation by age in 5-
understand and figure out how to year intervals, (0-5yrs, 6-10yrs etc), for all people-
communicate the Goals and Targets. We focussed targets. 50% of the world’s population is
currently have two projects with young people under 30 years old, with 90% living in developing
on the indicator discussion. Firstly a group of countries - young people will be key to delivering
young advocates working with academics and the SDGs, but if programmes fail to identify and
technical experts to make recommendations target young people in all their diversity, targets will
on the indicators themselves. not be met. Official data-sets lack age
disaggregation – for example demographic and
Secondly, a group of accountability advocates health surveys (DHS) that collect 15-49 age range,
looking to develop youth-led indicator missing out the nuance and not accurately
frameworks for the SDGs on particular capturing a picture of opinion, practice and
thematic issues. It is important that indicators progress.
as well as Goals and Targets are
communicated for and with citizens, and we
do not siphon indicators off as too technical.
We propose workshops and consultations to

work out a way to present the indicators in
people-friendly language and position them in
the wider SDG framework.
Can we say something about the need to

translate them in youth (and citizen)-friendly
language, so that young people/citizens can
use them to hold their governments to
account? You could say that organisations
like ours could be consulted in doing that?
This could go alongside a list/overview of
opportunities for citizens and civil society to
feed into data & reports on the SDGs?
Data collected on people and what buildings they
live in can be disaggregrated by age/sex/vulnerable
group. These can be collected from governments
and scientific sources/data providers
Disaggregation of data could make it possible to
spot differences in access to resources, services
and benefits between, for example, racial, ethnic,
religious, class, gender, age, income, and
geographic groups. Disaggregation according to
refugee/internally displaced person (IDP)
status can also provide important insights.
Disaggregation is difficult, but it should be a priority.
Capturing inequalities is central to achieving
fairness and ensuring no-one is left behind.
However, there is also a conflict prevention
dimension: a considerable body of evidence
suggests that horizontal inequalities between social
groups are a significant driver of conflict. As
disaggregation may carry political sensitivities/risks
for vulnerable groups, confidential and impartial
data gathering mechanisms are required.
Disaggregation will require that statistically
significant sample sizes are produced. If data
availability restricts the level of disaggregation
possible then, from a peace perspective, sex, age,
and
geographic region should be prioritised. The most
important identity group in a given context should
also be added, whether religious, ethnic or racial. In
some cases, however, individual indicators may
merit tailored disaggregations.
children’s health stillbirths.
The cross-cutting pledge that no one is left behind
and for the goals and targets to be met for all
nations and peoples and for all segments of society
is one of the most important and potentially
transformative commitments of the 2030 agenda.
The successful implementation of the 2030 agenda

will depend on more and better data. Good quality
disaggregated data is crucial for realising the
commitment to leave no one behind and plays an
essential role in tracking and tackling group-based
inequalities.
At the global level, there should be a minimum level

of data disaggregation across the board to allow for
international reporting and comparison. This means
by income, sex, age, race, ethnicity, migration
status, disability and geographic location. At the
national level, countries should further
disaggregate data to meet their national planning
and monitoring needs.
Urgent action is needed to improve the coverage,

quality and transparency of data, and to ensure that
that it is collected regularly enough to be useful for
policymakers and citizens. The time and investment
needed to bolster global and national monitoring
will vary from indicator to indicator; however, it
should not be used as an excuse to lower levels of
ambition on the range and type of indicators
included in the new framework.
Traditional data collection approaches often fail to

capture the voices of the most excluded and
hardest to reach people. Governments should
invest more resources to complement conventional
data collection mechanisms (such as household
SDSN has developed a proposal for an To ensure countries fulfill the commitment to leave
integrated indicator framework. We have no one behind, they will need to identify (i) levels of
prepared a briefing that summarizes key disaggregation (stratification variables) for relevant
lessons learnt by the SDSN on the conceptual SDG indicators, and (ii) a set of indicators that
framework, which include the need for i) a specifically reflect inequalities that are not captured
concise, integrated framework, ii) by disaggregation of other indicators.
differentiated levels of monitoring, and iii) Please see Annex 3 (page 97) of the SDSN report
clear principles for selecting indicators. “Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the
Please see the detailed briefing entitled SDGs” for a more detailed discussion of the issue
"Developing a robust statistical framework for of data disaggregation. http://indicators.report/
SDG monitoring" here:
http://unsdsn.org/what-we-do/indicators-and-
monitoring/indicators/inputs-to-the-iaeg-sdgs/
health. As girls are reaching puberty earlier than in
relevant for the indicators under target 3.7,
5.2, 5.3 and 5.6. It would ensure that there is an

accurate picture of the reproductive health of all
girls and women, not just those over the age of 15.
It would highlight specific needs for those girls who
are married or exposed to sexual intercourse at a
very young age. For indicators under target 5.2 and
5.3 women above the age of 49 need to be
included, as they are equally vulnerable to violence
(5.2) and to have undergone FGM/C (5.3).

distinct actio and different sets of indicators.

to be achieved.

(i.e. targets 4.5, 4.a, 8.5, 10.2, 11.2, 11.7, 17.18)

by disability.

16.9)

disability.
All indicators should be disaggregated by the
following at minimum: sex, age, civil status,
disability, education level, wealth quintile, ethnicity,
geographic location, employment status, migrant
status, IDPs, refugees, type of household (including
head of household). We have not included
disaggregations in each indicator because we
would like each indicator to be disaggregated by
the minimum indicators listed here.
As insecurity and violence are positively correlated

with (rapidly growing) inequality, this is a specially
important area.
The development of disaggregated data in general
(by sex, age, location, socio-economic ) will be of
wey importance to ensure that all social groups are
included.
Data disaggregation is essential if the principle of
"leaving no one behind" is to be more than a
mantra. Therefore, most of the SDGs targets
require indicators calling for data to be
disaggregated by age, gender, race, ethnicity,
indigenous identity, income, disability, rural/urban
residence, national origin, migratory status,
language, and religion.
Mental health and Psychosocial wellbeing and

inequality are cross-cutting issues involved in many
if not most of the 17 SDGs topics. For example,
they are correlates of poverty, education, the
empowerment of girls and women, peaceful
societies and access to social justice.
In the monitoring of progress on SDGs for children

and youth, especially with reference to goals 1, 3,
4, 8, 10 and 16, disaggregation of data by care-
giving setting is necessary to a) ensure that policies
and investments prioritize the most vulnerable
children and youth; b) display how trends differ
between children without or at risk of losing
parental care and the general child population.
For the types of care-giving settings we
recommend to apply the definitions of the UN
Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children.
Types range from the biological family to living
arrangements out of the family of origin, such as
residential care and foster family care.
The care-giving setting is a key marker for
vulnerability and disadvantage. Millions of children
worldwide have lost or are at risk of losing parental
care. They experience multiple traumas linked to
abandonment or separation from their family
because of domestic violence, poverty, HIV/AIDS,
disability, etc. They often lack of quality care and
protection, thus their development challenges and
outcomes differ from those of their peers. Children
without or at risk of losing parental care are more
likely to experience multidimensional poverty, be
discriminated against and marginalised, drop out of
school, be employed in precarious or illegal jobs,
be victims of violence.
These children are often invisible in national
statistics. We must develop methodologies and
data that ensure every child and young person is
counted.
Data are most commonly extracted from household
surveys or household income data. However, many
children and young people do not live in
households. They live in refugee camps, in prisons,
in institutions, and other settings. Many are not
Disaggregation is more than just a technical
discussion. It goes to the heart of the human rights
approach to achieve universality and leave no one
behind. It determines how some specific targets
and goals will be made meaningful.
The Stakeholder Group on Ageing strongly

supports the overarching commitment stated in the
list of indicator proposals (11 August 2015)
disaggregate by sex, age, residence (U/R). All
countries should disaggregate data by prohibited
grounds of discrimination under international
human rights law as a minimum which include age,
marital status and disability.
However, a number of the proposed indicators will

fall short of this commitment in relation to age and
will not be able to adequately monitor achievement
of the agreed targets, in spite of the fact that there
are references to ‘older people’, ‘age’, ‘all ages’.
Adequate age disaggregation is essential across all
goal areas. Sex disaggregation is equally essential
and, taken together, age and sex disaggregation
will illuminate the unique and often invisible
intersectional and cumulative discrimination which
older women are subjected to.
However, approaches to disaggregating data by

age throughout the lifecourse must also be robust
and reliable and include sensitivity testing, in
particular in relation to poverty data.
There are major limitations in analysis of old age

poverty in a number of developing countries, has
revealed major limitations in analysis of old age
poverty using household survey data. Whether
older people appear to be more or less poor is
Many of the indicators proposed rely on In General, the proposed indicators address the
verifying the number of national plans for issue of data disaggregation well. However, as
relevant action but this does not necessarily noted in our responses, these are instances where
indicate the level of decoupling between attention to interlinkages between household,
economic growth and environmental community, regional, national and global
degradation. To aid communication measurement of targets is not captured. In
successful trends should show socio- particular, assumptions made about national level
economic benefits where ever possible. To do adoption of sustainable policy instruments and
this indicators could be separated into those processes and ratification of international
that report institutional infrastructure for action environmental agreements as a proxy for local-level
e.g. national planning etc and those that action and implementation of sustainable planning
reflect progress on the ground e.g. area of are tenuous.
forest, low carbon measures, efficiency gains In terms of recognising marginalised and special
etc groups we felt the notion all indicators would be
Accuracy of interlinkages not fully assessed ‘disaggregated by sex, age, residence (U/R) and
within our internal consultation. However, we other characteristics, as relevant and possible’ as
believe this exercise is extremely important important but felt the inclusion of ethnic groups
for ensuring coherence within and between should have been more embedded in the
goals and targets and should be retained measurement of the goals and targets.
within the implementation and measurement
of the SDGs. We also recommend the
development of an interactive platform to
better communicate the proposed SDG
indicators and their interlinkages with existing
major indicator frameworks. Use of Gephi
software to display interlinkages may be
useful in this regard.
One of the main concerns of indigenous peoples

with regards to implementation and monitoring of
MDGs was the lack of disaggregated data
specifically addressing indigenous peoples. As a
result, indigenous peoples were invisible and
absent in national reports and data collections. So
as not to repeat the mistakes of the MDGs it is of
vital importance to: 1) disaggregate data for every
SDG by including indigenous identifiers in national
data censuses, household surveys and other data
gathering efforts; 2) to cross-reference World
Conference on Indigenous Peopls commitments on
data disaggregation with the SDGs document; 3)
include existing indicators based on gender, age
and ethnicity, etc.; 4) disaggregation to focus on
education, health, basic social services, agriculture
and labor statistics.etc, including traditional
occupations and etc.
In support of the suggested indicators listed in
Section 2, Target 14.1:
Indicators a. & b. Track plastic pollution levels

in the ocean and the impact on marine life
5 Gyres, along with numerous other

organizations and independent scientists are
already tracking plastic pollution in our
oceans and marine life. These reports are
published in peer-reviewed periodicals and
information therein is utilized by entities such
as the U.N., World Bank, and governments
around the world. As of 2014, it is estimated
there are 5.2 trillion pieces of plastic in our
oceans.(1) In 2015, scientists documented
that at least 690 marine species have
encountered marine debris, 92% involving
plastic pollution.(2)
Indicator c. Track the number and

effectiveness of government policies that
reduce municipal solid waste through waste
diversion strategies and elimination of
problematic plastic products.
Suggested metrics include policies that

demonstrate governments are reducing
opportunities for pollution by enacting single
use plastic bans such as plastic bag, bottle
and microbead bans as well mandating
Extended Producer Responsibility.
5 Gyres and other organizations are tracking

these laws, enacted or in progress, around
the world. Examples include plastic bag bans
in Bangladesh, Rwanda, Uganda, Somalia;
The SDG framework (goals, targets and Data diffusion and open data policies are a very
indicators) are meant to be fulfilled in their important contemporary subject that should be
majority at a local level. If decision makers taken into consideration. Although a number of
are to be reached we need to formulate them targets call for the dissemination of information
in a way that they are able to be better there is yet a specific target/indicator that would
communicated. We suggest thorough monitor the proper dissemination of data.
reformulations using plain language to
enhance the communication ability to those
that will eventually be asked to embrace the
change required to achieve the set goals.
The more clear, measureable and Most Member States provide for a right to counsel
comprehensive the global indicators on for the poor, vulnerable and marginalized (at least
access to justice, the easier they will be to in criminal cases), but do not collect data on
communicate, and tailor to States’ and whether these individuals are receiving access to
regions local laws, cultures and conditions. By effective legal representation. As a result, they do
focusing on broadly agreed measures of not know the extent and nature of the problem and
access to justice, e.g., access to counsel, the cannot effectively tailor a solution. The SDG global
SDGs will help move forward the work indicators have the potential to focus Member
already being undertaken by the international States and the larger international community’s
community, individual States and regional attention on this critical issue and highlight the
networks. When communicating the global critical link between access to counsel and access
indicators, the UN should not only make clear to justice.
the basis for selecting a particular indicator,
but provide examples and best practices for When gathering and providing data for an indicator
how the indicator can be measured. Further, on access to counsel, it is imperative that the data
in addition to international reporting be disaggregated by demographics—sex, age,
mechanisms, it should consider regional residence (U/R), race, ethnicity, and income level—
mechanisms for enforcement. as well as by whether the matter at issue is one
that could result in a deprivation of life or liberty
The presentation and communication of (note that this is different than disaggregating in
global indicators could involve providing terms of civil v criminal matters v administrative
examples to States at different income levels matters, as there are some civil and administrative
and stages of development about how to matters that can result in detention for one party).
tailor indicators to their local context, e.g., in The disaggregation by demographics is important
developing legal systems where there are not because it will highlight which groups are facing the
sufficient lawyers, States may want to allow most significant barriers to accessing legal
nonlawyers, or paralegals to provide legal assistance, allowing States and civil society
assistance to the poor. organizations to tailor efforts to reach those groups.
The disaggregation by possibility-of-detention is
important because—as is well-recognized by
consensus in the international human rights
community—the interests of justice demand that a
person be represented by counsel when the State
may exercise the powerful measure of taking their
liberty. Highlighting through data whether that
standard is being respected will be a significant tool
in efforts to hold States to their human rights
The Miracle Foundation calls for disaggregation of
data by parental care status.
The Miracle Foundation is concerned orphans and
other vulnerable children, particularly those who
are homeless or living in
program/institutional/orphanage care, will not be
adequately represented in the proposed surveys
utilized to measure the suggested indicators.
The self awareness index and self
management index can be a good indicator to
monitor target 4.1 and 4.2 of Goal 4
The rising numbers of refugees is a problem

needing to be addressed.
The Outcome Document states in paragraph 74
that follow up and review processes should be
based on “data which is high-quality, accessible,
timely, reliable and disaggregated by income, sex,
age, race, ethnicity, migration status, disability and
geographic location and other characteristics
relevant in national contexts”. Following this
recommendation the note on disaggregation on the
proposed list of indicators should include income
and disability as part of the explicit factors together
with sex, age and residence (U/R) as well as sector
(where relevant). They are factors that are relevant
to all contexts and countries.
Ensure CSO are as now included in that National plans to enable themselves in providing
process data
follow-up the implementation of the agenda
and data collection of non-formal youth and To properly monitor the progress the education for
adult education and lifelong learning at a all goal and targets, a bigger effort must be done to
national level, in cooperation with our collect disaggregated data by age groups. ICAE
members. believes stongly that the indicator 4.4.1 would be
wholly inadequate as a reflection of the inclusive


General comments: the indicators proposed don’t
take into account disaggregation by location.
Household surveys need to be improved to
facilitate this level of disaggregation
broader global education community, we are adult education we suggest for them to be
follow-up the implementation of the agenda To properly monitor the progress of the education
and data collection of non-formal youth and for all goal and targets, a bigger effort must be
adult education and lifelong learning at a made to collect disaggregated data by age groups.
national level, in cooperation with our ICAE believes strongly that the indicator 4.4.1
members. would be wholly inadequate as a reflection of the
inclusive commitment of the goal 4, and would
similarly discriminate against the achievement of
the lifelong learning dimensions of the goal. We
believe the arbitrary cut off of population above 64
in surveys of adults is no longer helpful or
functional in a rapidly ageing society, and in
economies where people have to continue working
above this age to secure their existence.
alike, and to back all targets with appropriate
There must be a SDGs databank or progress

platform, where on demand comparisons on
progress across the indicators can be
performed on different variables - populations
groups, country and region.
Previous comments made in relation to goal 4 are
relevant here.
All targets should be tracked for the most

disadvantaged group, showing how the gap
between them and the most advantaged narrows
over time. See here for examples in relation to
learning: http://www.heart-
resources.org/assignment/how-can-education-
systems-become-equitable-by-2030/
World Young Leaders in Dementia suggest that

indicator data should be disaggregated by age,
gender, and other where appropriate, including
education as socioeconomic indicator, as it is in
many countries an indicator of cognitive reserve,
general literacy, health literacy, and others which
produce a link to economic outcomes, health
behaviors, health and disease. In other countries,
lack of education can be seen as indicator for
deprivation and disadvantage again with
explanatory potential for health and economic
outcomes.
The Global MPI has been shown to be The Global MPI, propsed as a Tier 1 indicator for
capable of extensive presentation and Target 1.2, fits the SDG needs for disaggregation .
communication, via both the UNDP Human
Development Report, and OPHI website and The MPI can be disaggregated by any group for
publications. It is versatile, intuitive and which data are representative. It can also be
media-friendly, having garnered substantial broken down by indicator, to reveal the average
global media coverage (e.g. profiles of poverty for any population subgroup –
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10609407). The how they are poor. This makes the MPI appropriate
presentation can be formal and technical and for powerful data visualization as this Tier 1
rigorous (with robustness tests), or policy headline measure can be unfolded in different and
oriented (giving case studies of MPI use to powerful ways. This section describes some of the
energise integrated and coordinated policy in disaggregated analysis available for the Global
different contexts), or humane and intuitive for MPI; national MPIs also have similar analyses
a public or civil society audience. available.
Communication is vital. To the public, you Note that because the Global MPI measures
explain the MPI indicators, perhaps drawing deprivations directly, no PPPs are required, so
on participatory work or studies like My World disaggregation is straightforward.
to justify them. You may also show which
indicators pertain to which SDG goals and Rural and urban decompositions are available for
targets. all except 2 countries in the Global MPI 2015
tables.
To explain the methodology to civil society
groups, you may provide a real example with The surveys used for the Global MPI 2015 permit
pictures, showing their deprivation profile disaggregation into 884 subnational regions (a total
according to the MPI indicators. Then you ask of 1362 regions since 2010). These tables are
if they are MPI poor, and add up their online with the full set of consistent partial indices,
deprivations and identify them as poor or non- and also downloadable in maps.
poor. For example, they are MPI poor if they
are deprived in one-third of the weighted Analysis by gender and by age groups is available
indicators. online (the latter with a special attention to child
poverty, as data for older persons are limited in
From that human foundation, you explain that DHS and MICS). Unfortunately we cannot
nationally, the MPI is the product of two presently build a gendered Global MPI due to data
numbers: H the percentage of people who are restrictions.
poor (because they are deprived in at least
one-third of the weighted indicators), Data on race, ethnicity, caste, etc is available for
1) The two aspirations stated in No 1. of the To ‘leave nobody behind’, a high level of ambition
key points for the 11 August 2015 Indicator list on data disaggregation should guide indicator
are stated as a) the need for a coherent and development at all levels, based on leading
comprehensive measurement of all goals and grounds of discrimination prohibited by international
targets and b) the need to limit the number of human rights law and standards. Disaggregation
“global” indicators. Most of the indicators should be specified in each indicator adopted.
listed should be measured at national AND at Particular attention must also be paid to:
country levels unless they refer to particular disaggregation by sex across the board- noting
geographical features e.g. oceans and many countries already produce but do not yet
forests, or geographical regions, such as utilize the data; geographical location, with
deltas in which case the indicator should be emphasis on impoverished urban, peri-urban and
tracked at regional level). It is not possible to rural areas, to assess progress in eliminating
limit the number of indicators measured at inequalities, exclusion, and poverty; key age sub-
global/national level to less than THREE groups traditionally excluded from statistics, many
HUNDRED given aspiration to living in especially vulnerable situations, in
comprehensively measure SDG agenda. particular younger adolescents 10-14 and persons
50 years of age and above. Rights to privacy and
2) Instead of trying to reduce the number of confidentiality must be safeguarded across all data
indicators to 1 indicator p target (which is collection and management efforts, especially to
clearly not possible given the current listed protect groups living in vulnerable situations, and
attempt from 11 August and the response support given to statistical agencies to strengthen
from agencies and others for more indicators) the enforcement of data confidentiality as well as
the indicator list should be structured data collection and new techniques of
carefully. Input or process indicators need to disaggregation eg GIS.
be differentiated from IMPACT indicators-
currently there is no attention to this
fundamental structural issue. It is possible to
pick THIRTY IMPACT INDICATORS for max
political tracking and visibility especially if the
17 goals are regrouped into broad areas e.g
environment, social, infrastructure etc. Adding
inputs and process indicators to measure how
to arrive at these key 30 impacts it is possible
to use a total of no less than 300 indicators to
describe the whole agenda. The total
framework would therefore include 30 topline
impacts to be achieved by 2030, with 300
A common ground must be identified that includes
as appropriate/need both qualitative and
quantitative indicators. Human and hard sciences.
We welcome the fact the list of proposed indicators
is longer than in the first version of the list. Most
targets in the draft outcome document of post-2015
development agenda will need at least two
indicators to meaningfully monitor the
implementation of the post-2015 agenda. Where
two indicators are not enough to sufficiently cover
the content of the targets, we have suggested
We also welcome the recognition that all indicators

it is very important to ensure that non-motorized
transportation user such as pedestrian and cyclist
data is collected separately from private motorized
vehicles such as motorcyclist.
The collected data should be dis-aggregated by
income, age, gender and disability. The poor,
children, woman and disability are particularly
open public spaces.
• All data should be disaggregated by age,
disability, socio economic status, gender, ethnicity,
and geography and minority status. It is important
that the SDGs propel actions focused on
marginalised groups and those most likely to suffer
poverty and inequalities. What is clear is that data
about groups facing multiple disadvantages, for
example girls from marginalised ethnic groups such
as Dalit or Janajati or disabled girls and their
experiences are often missing. We therefore agree
that there needs to be a common minimum
standard for data disaggregation agreed at the
global level. At the national level governments then
commit to disaggregate data for those groups
identified globally and any further groups that are at
risk of poverty, exclusion and inequality within that
particular national context.
Please see our comments against the specific
targets.
We strongly support the inclusion of an indicator to

measure basic water access as well as an indicator
that measures safely managed water. It is
imperative that member states have incentives to
measure the SDGs. A single indicator for safely
manager water may actually show little progress for
several years base on current trends. This may
inadvertently set incentives to focus on increasing
access for those who already have access to basic
water rather than on upgrading those who have no
access.
WaterAid supports data disaggregation as a

principle. The WHO/UNICEF JMP will be able to
provide data disagregated across a wide range of
dimensions including age, gender and socio-
economic status and we believe that these should
be explicitly stated in the indicator proposal
document.
The indicators for targets 5.5 and 16.7 are
indicated as ‘interlinked’. We want to emphasize
the importance of target 5.5 (on women’s
participation and leadership at all levels) and target
16.7 (notably 16.7.1 on diversity in representation
in key decision-making bodies [legislature,
executive, and judiciary]) which are complementary
and mutually reinforcing. Their achievement will
require distinct actions and different sets of
indicators. We caution against them being seen as
duplicative or overlapping.
The problem here is to align to the find another ways to match groups for example you
accountability framework for corporations set don't seem to match women and disability and
by GRI and other bodies. The Sdgs and children and disability.
measuring improvements on the goals and
related target should become the rule for
accounting within the government and
corporate sector.
A robust indicator framework will be At a minimum, data should be disaggregated on
necessary for monitoring and accountability the basis of age, sex, gender, geography, income,
mechanisms at the national, regional and disability, race and ethnicity and other factors as
international levels. This is also critical for relevant to monitoring inequalities
private sector accountability. The private
sector has a responsibility to collect accurate
data about their environmental and social
impact in support of national data collection
systems. A robust indicator framework will be
necessary for monitoring and accountability
mechanisms at the national, regional and
international levels. This is also critical for
private sector accountability. The private
sector has a responsibility to collect accurate
data about their environmental and social
impact in support of national data collection
systems.
We support the calls of many that there must

be increased efforts aimed at capacity-
building and supporting national and
international statistics offices in the collection
and analysis of data. This should include
gender-expertise and improved resourcing
and adequate funds for independent civil
society participation in monitoring
frameworks.
Throughout this process, civil society must be

afforded the opportunity to provide inputs
throughout the indicator development
process. In addition to attending meetings,
civil society should have access to online
consultations to observe and provide
recommendations, in line with the Terms of
Reference for the IAEG. This will also help
the presentation and communication of the list
see explanations under 4 and 6 data should be disaggregated by sex, youth and
wealth
MIP on WASH in Schools covering education,
gender equality and water&sanitation By sex: for target 6.2 this can be done in household
based interviews and interviewing women and men
MIP on WASH in public and working places separately
covering education, gender equality and
water&sanitation JMP and UNICEF have already
Thoughtful disaggregation of data is crucial, and

should include age, sex and other key factors that
truly help us understand contexts. Disability is often
under-addressed in data collection and analysis. A
gendered lens should be applied throughout the
agenda and not just where women and girls are
specifically mentioned in the targets.
The priority for the global indicator framework It is critical that indicators are quantitative and
should be to ensure indicators are technically qualitative. A rigorous indicator framework including
sound and comply with and promote current both quantitative and qualitative indicators will
human rights standards in order to measure underpin financing strategies and implementation
progress and track development objectives. frameworks that reflect the various types of
There must be scope to elaborate on the resources needed to achieve sustainable
indicator framework in coming years in order development, overcome inequalities and fulfil
to adapt to changing development gender equality commitments. Therefore gender-
environments and evolving methodologies. differentiated statistics and indicators should be
collected nationally, regionally and globally in order
to measure gender gaps and adjust development
programmes to rectify inequalities. At a minimum,
data should be disaggregated on the basis of age,
sex, geography, income, disability, race and
ethnicity and other factors as relevant to monitoring
inequalities. Even though some indicators are
measured by household (not by individual) it is still
important that the data collected for those
indicators is disaggregated – it is important to know
how the household is comprised.

it is very important to ensure that pedestrians,
bicyclists and cycle rickshaw data is captured
separately from motorized vehicles. Often they are
with motorbikes as vulnerable road users.
public spaces.
WHO/UNICEF JMP databases list information Data on the presence of a chlorine residual could
on access to improved water sources, but be disaggregated by economic status, geographic
precise indicators of actual water quality are location and other parameters to help understand
important in supporting the veracity of true why it is possible in some cases and less so in
progress. For that reason, where possible others. This could lead to more widespread use of
(e.g., wherever it has been measured), the this life-saving technology.
presence of a chlorine residual should be
listed as a verifiable indicator of safe drinking
water.
Effective indicators are those that can be used at
multiple levels to allow their use and application by
multiple stakeholders. This is one argument for
using the BIP CBD indicators such as the Living
Planet Index and the Red List Index which can be
disaggregated by geography (local, national,
regional, global), taxonomy (e.g. vertebrates,
mammals, birds, etc.), biome (e.g. marine,
terrestrial, freshwater) or their threats (e.g. those
impacted by invasives, trade or pollution). The LPI
is especially strong as it is more sensitive to
change than most other indicators and will be of
greater use at national level for States wanting to
track progress regularly. The LPI is continually
updated, uses freely available data and provides
sensitivity to annual changes in biodiversity. It
therefore complements the RLI which uses
assessments made at coarser intervals (e.g. 5-
yearly or longer). It will be important to
disaggregate some indicators by sector of activity
and by ethnic/indigenous identity to ensure that
trends for groups highly dependent on natural
resources for their livelihoods/income and well-
being are captured. WWF recommends
disaggregation by sector of activity for indicators
1.1, 8.7, and 8.8.2 to capture trends for
smallholders and small scale fisheries; and by
ethnic/indigenous group for indicators 1.4.2 and 2.3
in addition to other indicators already identified in
the document.
Civil Society Organizations should be Data should be disaggregated so we know the
involved in the developing of the monitoring performance of each section on the targets.
and evaluation mechanism, and should be Women should be specially included in all targets
involved in monitoring and evaluating projects dealing with gender and inequality.
and programmes at country level, aimed at
meeting the Sustainable development Goals
and targets.
These comments relate specifically to our above
input on the Living Planet Index (LPI). The data
that comprises the Living Planet Index Database
(which is freely available from
www.livingplanetindex.org) can be disaggregated in
a variety of ways. To date, disaggregations have
been made by region/country, various taxonomic
groups, protected/non-protected populations, and
comparisons have been made to country average
economic income, corruption index, etc. As such,
we feel that the Living Planet Index, or some
indicator derived or including these data, would
present significant value and opportunity across a
range of indicators relating to a number of different
SDG targets.
Topic 21: Identify interlinkages across goals and
targets with the purpose of reducing the total number
of indicators, using text and scientific analysis
Nutrition and breastfeeding are crosscutting issues often

overlooked. Breastfeeding is a crosscutting issue, and a
priority indicator that have interlinkages across goals and
could feed into targets 2.1, 2.2, 3.2 and 3.4, as well as
support for economic growth, poverty eradication, health,
obesity prevention, education and WASH goals.
Evidence shows that breastfeeding is positively

income as adults [1]
The use of stunting as a headline, crosscutting indicator

food security and agriculture, health, education, early
child development, WASH, gender equality and economic
growth
• helps measure a person’s physical and
developmental well-being
• preventing stunting reduces the risk of cardiovascular
diseases and obesity as adults (Goal 3, target 3.4)
[1] Victora C et al. (2015). Association between

breastfeeding and intelligence, educational attainment,
and income at 30 years of age: a prospective birth cohort
study from Brazil. Lancet Glob. Health 2015; 3: e199–205
The need for a manageable number of indicators overall

should not mean a reduction in the quality of the indicator
framework and jeopardise having the best indicators
possible. Nutrition is a very good example, where
excellent indicators exist. For example, including an
indicator childhood wasting not only covers target 2.2, but
also reflects progress in 2.1 as well as 1.1. and 1.2 on
poverty and targets 3.1 and 3.2 on neonatal, child and
maternal mortality.
Where there are overlaps indicators can be harmonized
to avoid duplication. But this exercise should not lead to a
reduction of the indicators which are critical in each
target/goal including those on education.
It is essential that indicators be included for all 169
targets. Where data gaps or weaknesses for targets exist,
priority should be given to determining what needs to be
measured, with a commitment to undertaking the
necessary data collection.
Education and literacy have shown strong linkages and
impact on other development concerns, including health,
poverty eradication, income and employment, mobility,
fertility, environmental protection practices, disaster
mitigation, gender equality, elimination of violence against
women, appreciation of cultural diversity, peace and non-
violence, human rights, child rights and development,
mobility, political and community participation, and global
citizenship. As such, continuing studies should be done to
offer education as added indicators that can proxy for
other human and social development concerns.
Many of the proposed goals and targets have areas of
concern which overlap each other. Given the complexity
of the sustainable development agenda and the breadth
of ambition in the goals this is a necessary feature, and
has the potential to promote a more holistic and
integrated approach to development.
However, none of the proposed targets directly repeat
others, meaning that it is unlikely that any one indicator
will act as a satisfactory proxy for more than one target.
Indeed, it is more likely that some targets will require
more than one indicator, or a composite index, to monitor
progress on their different facets, and this is reflected in
the current proposals.
The purpose of identifying linkages across targets should
therefore be to identify indicators which, while measuring
one target, also support or reinforce monitoring elsewhere
where another target overlaps the same field.
It is therefore important to prioritise indicators proposed
which are structured and disaggregated sufficiently to
simultaneously a) monitor the core targets and b)
contribute to the monitoring of overlapping targets.
To expect multipurpose indicators to monitor multiple
whole target areas is to expect too much, and would be
highly likely to reduce the ambition and scope of the goals
themselves, contrary to the mandate of the IAEG
established in para.75 of the agenda for sustainable
development.
2.1 MDD-W reflects progress on 2.2 and Goal 5.
2.1 Wasting reflects progress on malnutrition, poverty, and
maternal and child health (MCH) (2.2, 1.1, 1.2, 3.1 3.2).
2.2 Stunting reflects progress on malnutrition, poverty,
and MCH (2.2, 1.1, 1.2, 3.1 3.2), and impacts children’s
ability to access and complete quality education (4.1, 4.2).
2.2 Breastfeeding contributes to child health, delivering
nutrition (2.1, 2.2) and protecting infants from infectious
diseases (3.2). Breastfeeding protects mothers and
children against obesity and some NCDs (3.4). 2.3 Ag
productivity is linked to economic growth (8.1).
Smallholder productivity growth is important for poverty
alleviation, inclusive growth and food security (1.1, 1.2,
2.1, 10.1 and 8.5). Growth in the ag sector is about 2-4
times more effective in raising incomes of the poorest
compared to growth in other sectors.
3.1 Both indicators reflect progress on quality health care
services (3.8), injustice and equity gaps (Goals 5 and 10).
Maternal health has lifecycle and multigenerational
poverty impacts (1.1, 1.2).
3.2 U-5 and neonatal mortality reflect poverty reduction
(1.1, 1.2) and maternal health (3.1). Immunization
coverage is a proxy for the strength of a national health
system (3.8).
3.3 HIV and malaria incidence linked to MCH (3.1, 3.2).
Health coverage, health care workforce and R&D are
critical for HIV, TB and malaria incidence (3.8, 3.b, 3.c).
3.d is related to the spread of resistance for infectious
diseases, particularly TB and malaria. HIV linked to SRH
(3.7, 5.6) and gender based violence (5.2, 5.3). These
indicators are linked to school absenteeism and learning
(4.1, 4.2), productive employment, growth and poverty
(8.1, 8.5, 1.1, 1.2).
3.3 NTD programs open up a path out of extreme poverty
and have paved the way for the provision of primary
health care to the poorest (3.8, 1.1, 1.2).
3.7 Both suggested indicators linked with MCH, quality
Recommendation E: The indicator on access to a fair
dispute mechanism in the May ’15 version best reflects
the essence of Target 16.3 and is to be preferred among
the various indicator proposals for this Target before the
IAEG-SDGs. We also strongly recommend a specific
indicator in this regard.
While we welcome the reference in the August ‘15 version

to crime reporting and to unsentenced detainees, these
are very particular access to justice concerns. In our view
the broader indicator on access to fair dispute
mechanisms proposed in the May version more fully
captures the essence of access to justice and is to be
preferred: “Proportion of those who have experienced a
dispute in the past 12 months and who have accessed a
fair formal, informal, alternative or traditional dispute
mechanism”.
In fact, this very question was raised at the first IAEG-

SDGs meeting: “whether the group should identify the
indicator with the most readily available data or the one
that best captures the essence of the target” (para 28,
report of first meeting). In our view, given the practical
preference for a limited number of global indicators, the
broader indicator on fair dispute mechanisms in the May
version is to be preferred. Moreover, given that Target
16.3 is the only one in the outcome document to
specifically address access to justice, a specific rather
than a multi-purpose indicator is to be strongly
recommended.
See also Topics 16, 20 & 22.

Indicator 3.4.2 = indicator 3.a.1 (tobacco use among age
15 and older). Tobacco use is a major cause of NCDs
(3.4), tobacco use data documents how successful the
WHO FCTC is implemented (3.a).
Proposed Indicator 3.a.2 (affordability of cigarettes) is

interlinked with target 17.1 (mobilize domestic resources).
Tobacco taxes are central to minimize the affordability of
cigarettes in order to reduce tobacco use. The Addis
Abeba Action Agenda has recognized, that tobacco taxes
represent a revenue stream for financing for development
in many countries (AAAA para 32).
Furthermore, the implementation of the WHO FCTC is

interlinked with a wide range of targets, as shown in our
infographic at https://www.unfairtobacco.org/wp-
content/uploads/SDG_tobacco_graphic.pdf
The current indicator for 14.1 is inappropriate for that goal
and it is currently only used to reflect outcomes for one
goal. Using an indicator of nitrogen use efficiency would
also be useful for Goal 2. Additionally, the proposed
indicator for 6.3.2 (percentage of receiving water bodies
with ambient water quality not presenting risk to the
environment of human health) would be a useful
complement to an indicator of nitrogen use efficiency for
Target 14.1.
Indicators for some goals relate to other goals, though

what is captured below does not necessarily suggest
potential elimination of indicators, rather greater depth of
data and a more comprehensive snapshot of progress.
2.1 is linked to 3.2; 5.1, 5.5, 6
2.2 is linked to 3.2, 5.1, 6.1, 6.2
2.3 is linked to 1.4, 1.5, 5.1, 5.4, 5.5, 5a, 5c, 6.4, 6.5, 6b,
indicators in goal 10, 12, 13, 14.2, 14.3, 14.4, 14.6, 15.1,
15.3
2.4 is linked to 1.4, 1.5, 5.1, 5.5, 5a, 5c, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6b,
10.1, indicators in goals 12 & 13, 14.2
2.5 is linked to 1.4, 5.1, 5.5, 5a, 5c, 15.6
2a is linked to 1a, 5.5, indicators in goal 10, 13a
2b is linked to 1b and indicators in goal 10
When a full mapping has been done showing how CDP
data can contribute to SDG monitoring, it is quite likely
that the result will be some reduction in the overall
reporting burden for companies and cities. Many of them
are already reporting this data to investors or customers
via CDP, and a single CDP questionnaire can cover
multiple SDG topics as is hopefully clear from the
answers given to the previous section. CDP's online
reporting platform similarly provides opportunities to
simplify the process of reporting and data
aggregation/analysis.
Youth and adult education is needed for the achievement
of all sustainable goals, in some targets one can see
clearly this interlinkage, like target 4.7 on education for
sustainable development, human rights, gender equality,
promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global
citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of
culture’s contribution to sustainable development.
Indicators developped for this target could support
monitoring other targets and vice versa, for example
target 3.7 on universal access to sexual and reproductive
health-care services, including for family planning,
information and education […] or target 13.3 to improve
education, awareness-raising and human and institutional
capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact
reduction and early warning.
We see possible overlapping in indicators to measure
targets on education and vocational training in targets 4.3,
4.4 and 4.5.
4.4 and 4.5.
Many of the indicators we have proposed for Goals 10, 16
and 17 are also relevant to other targets (including under
Goal 1). Indicators that examine unequal outcomes and
the causes and determinants of inequality (e.g. economic
policy, discrimination) will be relevant across the whole
agenda, in the effort to 'leave no one behind'. The same
can be said with indicators on resources, as the
achievement of the SDGs will depend to a large degree
on whether governments ensure sufficient, equitable and
accountable financing, as is their human rights duty.
Properly measuring to what degree they are doing so—
through an innovative and holistic indicator framework—
will help in monitoring not only the achievement of the
goals and targets themselves, but also the means by
which they are being implemented and financed.
Note on the number of indicators: The calls to ensure that

the list of global indicators preserve the ambition and
balance of the goals and targets are somewhat undercut
by the simultaneous push to limit the number of indicators
to maximum one per target. Diplomats and official
statisticians from countries at various levels of
development have claimed that any more would be an
unfeasible burden for national statistical systems. There is
a difficult balance to strike here. Many countries, in
particular Least Developed Countries, face real limitations
in data collection, storage and analysis; some were not
able to properly measure the MDGs, which was a far less
demanding task. However, ambition and innovation are
imperative if we are to take this agenda seriously. We also
need to recognize that having ‘orphan’ targets without
indicators will reduce the scope, balance and ambition of
the agenda considerably. Even having one indicator per
target will be profoundly limiting, given that many targets
have multiple elements to them (e.g. 10.4 on fiscal, wage
and social protection policies or 16.4 which encompasses
Structural issues, like the functioning of a national health
system, are central to the realization of a number of the
proposed targets, including those relating to maternal
mortality, universal access to sexual and reproductive
health information and services, as well as inequalities
and discrimination in accessing these services.
Ensuring the participation and inclusion of a broad range

of groups in all aspects of development policy (planning
and design, monitoring, implementation) will be key to
ensuring their compliance with states’ human rights
obligations. As such, it will be critical to assess which
groups participate in decision-making and implementation
around development policies across the targets and
indicators.
The stillbirth rate is a measureable, sensitive indicator of
high-quality antenatal and intrapartum care. As a marker
of equity and quality care in pregnancy and childbirth,
stillbirth rate is a priority indicator that could feed into
targets 3.1 and 3.2 but also links to maternal depression,
child neurodevelopmental outcomes and long-term
economic growth, poverty eradication, and general health.
An interesting way to reduce traffic, and noise and
pollution generate air quality, life quality and decongest,
reduce traffic and embrace the city with multiple more
green and public spaces for its habitant’s usage, like
recreational activities, space for urban farming, local
markets, shelter and protection etc. An action plan to
search, find and stop city rat runs would give support for
biodiversity, lower global emissions reduce urban heat
islands would in general benefit slow down climate
change.
It’s time to take back streets space from cars and give it
back, to its residents.
The integrative nature of Goal 11, especially around
implementation, implies considerable synergy with at least
11 other SDGs and their Targets and Indicators [SDGs on
Poverty (#1), Food (#2), Health (#3), Education (#4),
Gender (#5), Water and Sanitation (#6), Energy (#7),
Growth and Employment (#8), Infrastructure (#9),
Inequality (#10) and Climate Change (#13)].
This presents an opportunity to condense the overall SDG

Indicator set and would facilitate effective national,
regional and local implementation. Moreover, the
urbanization of indicator sets of other SDGs strengthens
universal coverage, especially aiding those countries in
the midst of the urban transition.
In our comments on the SDG 11 proposed indicators we

have identified several specific linkages including:
11.5: “Number of deaths, missing people, injured,

relocated or evacuated due to disasters per 100,000
people” also serves climate target 13.1 on resilience to
climate-related hazards.
11.6: “Level of ambient particulate matter (PM 10 and PM

2.5)” also serves the health targets under Goal 3.
11.b: “Percentage of cities implementing risk reduction

and resilience policies that include vulnerable and
marginalized groups” also serves target 13.1 on resilience
to climate-related hazards.
Make hierarchical approach to create indicators linkages.

For example: health, water and forest are tied each other,
in several scales. Next dimension can include governance
and policy issues.
An indicator on 'Number of countries implementing the
UN Guidelines for Consumer Protection (UNGCP)' would
address multiple goals & targets (for examples, see
http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/1488820/th
e-role-of-consumer-protection-in-meeting-the-
sdgs_updated-jan15.pdf).
As cited, it fits particularly well under Targets 12.8 &

17.14, but will equally address and provide interlinkages
between many other targets, as demonstrated by the
examples at the link above. CI urges the IAEG-SDGs to
consider this cross-cutting policy framework as an
excellent tool for delivering benefits across the 2030
Agenda, through one simple indicator.
A key interlinking factor across the goals and targets
should be the principle of monitoring the poorest 20%.
Across each of the SDGs there is a need to be measuring
the progress of the poorest as these are the people that
will need to be targeted if we are to achieve the ambition
of leaving no one behind. Given that poverty and
deprivation can be experienced and measured in different
ways we need to know how the poorest are progressing
across each of these dimensions, which requires
disaggregated data (see topic 20).
Currently, data is lacking to monitor the poorest people’s

progress, whether poverty is defined by income or other
indicators of wellbeing, such as access to nutrition and
health. Since 1998 only 0.6% of the benefits of economic
growth worldwide have gone to the poorest 20% of the
world’s population. Data disaggregated into quintiles for
each indicator of wellbeing can help monitor the progress
of the poorest 20% of people worldwide.
To address hunger, the emerging public health crisis,
rising global environmental risks, whilst at the same time
creating a more secure, equitable and nutritionally
adequate food future, the issues of ag, diet, nutrition,
public health and sustainability need to be addressed
holistically.
SDG targets associated with each of these areas are

largely siloed. The SDGs framework needs to capture
these interdependencies. Integrated indicators can
therefore play a major role in bridging these
interconnected objectives and effectively track cross-
cutting issues to support integrated, systems-based
approaches to implementation.
To support this process, EAT, SDSN and CGIAR propose

3 priority indicators and a total set of 8 integrated
indicators on healthy diets from sustainable food systems
with the specific aim of making links between the issues
of food, health and sustainability. Many of the proposed
indicators therefore appear under more than one target.
Priority Proposed Indicator: per capita animal protein

consumption and per capita land requirement for animal
protein consumption.
Targets: 2.4, 3.4, 12.1, 15.1, 15.3, 15.5
Priority Proposed Indicator: Carbon emissions from

agricultural land use (tons per hectare per year)
Targets: 2.4, 12.2, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, 15.5
Proposed Indicator: Percentage of food lost and wasted

from production to consumption and percentage of food
waste recycled
Targets: 11.6, 12.3, 12.4, 12.5
Proposed Indicator: Income of smallholder farmers and
Skills should be only under Goal Education

Regarding 16.4.1 (illicit financial flows), it seems
premature to be including measurement of illicit financial
flows in the list of indicators until there is greater
agreement on how individual countries are to measure
illicit financial flows.

4.4 and 4.5.
The current indicator for 14.1 is inappropriate for that goal
Target 14.1.
It would make sense to separate the indicators in the

entire document into 1) impact indicators such as
mortality, morbidity, disability etc. and 2) output / process
indicators. This would also provide a better justification for
the prioritization of indicators as 1-4.There is also a
limited number of policy indicators such as ratification of
international conventions (CEDAW, CRC etc.) for health
and nutrition, legislating international recommendations
(International Codes, WHA resolutions) and other means
of measuring Government commitments/accountabilities
as duty bearers and policy makers.
Tobacco use is the one common risk factor for the four
main types of non-communicable diseases
(cardiovascular disease, cancer, respiratory disease and
diabetes). Accordingly, data that measure progress on
target 3a are also highly relevant to target 3.4 (both under
health goal - SDG3)
Water is a fundamental component for many sectors (food
security, health, energy, ecosystem preservation, risk
management, etc.) and thus has a major influence on the
fight against poverty and on the three pillars of
sustainable development. Water-depend Sectors must
take into account this dependency by integrating water
indicators in other goals, and in particular into the
following targets :
• FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION : 2.2 & 2.3 & 2.4

(linked to Water access, Water productivity)
• HEALTHY LIVES : 3.2 & 3.3 (linked to Water
Sanitation and Hygiene)
• GENDER EQUALITY : 5.1 & 5.4 : (linked to Water
Sanitation and Hygiene )
• ENERGY : 7.2 & 7.3 : hydro power and energy
efficiency in water services
• BASIC SERVICES IN CITIES AND WATER
RELATED DISASTERS : 11.1 & 11.5 & 11.6 ((linked to
Water Sanitation and Hygiene)
• SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND
PRODUCTION : 12.4 / (linked to Wastewater
management)
• OCEANS : 14.1 & 14.2
• ECOSYSTEMS : 15.1 / (linked to Wetlands)
There are many interlinkages between goals, but I will
only address the ones that are related with water (goal 6)
It is very important to assure that solutions for other target

don't put in risk water for drinking, eating and keep
healthy.
Goal 1: One of the most extreme signal of poverty is not
having water to drink and/or cook.
Goal 2: Assuring the allocation of water is crutial for
subsistence agriculture ,
Goal 3: WAter and sanitation are intimately linked to
provide good health, in a preventive perspective but also
to get cured.
Goal 4: there won't be any real change if the education
programes don't change the approach of managing
natural ressources, if they don't explain the importance of
respecting and protecting the different water cycles, within
the territory
Goal 5: Most of the time required to assure water in the
family is given by the women and girls.the right to water
standards need to be implemented so the women and
girls can use their time in other activities and stop risking
their lifes.
Goal 7: This is the most important interlinkage with water

from our point of view, because if very dirty and very
thirsty technologies such as open pit mining and fracking
are not explicitly forbidden in the possibility of solutions
for clean, modern or renewable solutions, this could be
threatening the availability ad quality of water for a whole
country drastically. Those technologies are very far form
any definition of sustainability. And also when comparing
energy production for cleaner energy, the inclusion of
environmental cost such as water amount and quality
needs to be reflected when comparing.
Goal 8: If people are healthy and well hydrated because

As immunisation depends on all core components of a
health system (e.g. planning, financing, cold chain,
trained health workers, infrastructure), the proposed
indicator can be used to measure the strength of a health
system so can be used under 3.2 and 3.8
As this indicator has a strong equity component as

outlined above it is very suited to equity targets such as
1.4.
Focusing on issues that bring about benefits across the
SDGs will also help focus the indicator framework. Clean
cooking is a key example. Enhanced adoption of clean
and efficient cookstoves and fuels will bring about health,
environment, livelihood, and social benefits. We do not
need to include this issue under all of the SDGs.
However, measuring household air pollution under Goal 3
on Health, unpaid work under Goal 5 on Gender Equality,
and the use of clean and efficient cookstoves and fuels
under Goal 7 on Energy will help us measure the broad,
cross-cutting agenda and drive effective sustainable
development. Addressing household air pollution and
enhancing sustainable energy will also help the
international community reach our shared goals on
environment and climate. Reducing unpaid work,
including time spent on collecting fuel and cooking, will
also help the international community reach our economic
growth, education, and health goals. Strong indicators on
energy access will be absolutely critical to enabling
success across the Agenda.
The Alliance supports an indicator framework that builds

on interlinkages. However, there are some areas where
we cannot cut indicators. It is imperative to measure both
electricity and cooking energy to measure Goal 7, Target
7.1 on energy for example. We must not arbitrarily cut the
number of indicators and we must ensure that all targets
are measured in some way.
None of the proposed targets directly repeat others,
meaning that it is unlikely that any one indicator will act as
a satisfactory proxy for more than one target. Indeed, it is
more likely that some targets will require more than one
indicator to monitor progress on their different facets.
Instead, the purpose of identifying linkages across
indicators should be to identify indicators which while
measuring one target, also support or reinforce
monitoring elsewhere where another target overlaps the
same field.
Goals 2, 12, 14 and 15 all address the sustainable
management of natural resources. The use of the various
resource systems addressed is however linked and it may
be useful to include summary, or umbrella, indicators that
aggregate the use of these resources. This makes it
apparent when the gains in the use of some resources
come at the expense of others, which may represent an
improvement or a deterioration in terms of sustainable
resource management. For example, demand for animal-
based protein can be supplied by agriculture (related to
Goal 2) or by marine resources (related to Goal 14).
Efforts to promote sustainable consumption patterns that
treat one resource system might lead to increased
consumption of the other. An indicator such as the
ecological footprint measures the total use of animal-
based protein, as one demand on the regenerative
capacity of productive ecosystems. Such an integrative
indicator and approach has additional value in tracking
the sustainability of human development, particularly by
capturing the overall scale of resource use. More
information at www.footprintnetwork.org
Reducing the total number of indicators should not be

pursued or even proposed as an end in itself, as this
would be antithetical to the spirit of the comprehensive,
universal, detailed '2030 Agenda' of the SDGs. There
should be no more indicators than necessary, but there
should be as many as are needed to monitor
achievement of all 169 targets, including critical
differentiated components of those targets. Preference
should be given to the many applicable indicators already
in accepted intergovernmental use.
As is evident above, several of our proposed indicators
can be used to measure more than one target and/or
more than one goal, which will assist in reducing the total
number of indicators. Experts have suggested 100-120
global indicators as the maximum number that could
feasibly be incorporated into the global SDG monitoring
framework, so as not to overburden national statistical
systems. This is an important principle, and minimizing
the reporting burden and limiting the number of indicators
has been a key premise of this work. But it is equally
important that the number of indicators included in the
global indicator list should not be arbitrarily limited if
additional, globally-important, and appropriate indicators
are identified that create no additional burden on national
statistical offices—or if this limit means that some targets
are left without an acceptable indicator. The outputs of
global health R&D—such as new health technologies—
are global public goods. Their development commonly
involves input from multiple international collaborators,
and their benefits accrue to multiple countries—not all of
which will necessarily fund or conduct R&D themselves.
As a result, data on global health R&D is ideally suited to
being collected and reported at the global level and for
inclusion in the global SDG monitoring framework.
See comments in Section 2 on other targets which would
be monitored by the proposed indicators on the legality
and prevalence of violent punishment under target 16.2.
The proposed indicators, to the extent possible, are
grounded in existing data collection systems, but truly
comprehensive global monitoring will require some
countries to expand their statistical systems and non-
governmental organizations to expand their monitoring.
Some indicators will require investment in entirely new
data collection efforts; other indicators need further work
to develop common definitions and data collection
methodologies but remain on this list given the critical
nature of the topic. These more “aspirational” indicators
are identified as such on this list, including information
about the work needed to develop them.
We CAN *accurately* measure "individual responsibilities"
for "shares of aggregate world GDP economic impacts",
using the natural organized complexity of the economy.
The math shows "average end products and services" are
responsible for shares of aggregate world GDP impacts,
*in proportion to* their "shares of world GDP"! [i'd be
happy to help you work out the math to confirm].
It's likely the most powerful systems science discovery of

the decade... a key to doing "HONEST ESG
ACCOUNTING": YOU SHOULD USE IT.
Whole system accounting like that then also lets you

measure whole system sustainability***, something others
are making assumptions about, but no one else is yet
doing.
The indicators for 11.2 and 11.7 are related to target 3.4
as both sustainable transportation and public spaces are
important avenues for the public to achieve their needed
physical activity (physical inactivity is a major risk factor
for NCDs).
Indicator for target 3.6 can be used as a measure to

determine if the policies and activities undertaken to
achieve 11.2 were successful in creating safe options for
people.
The percentage of population using walking and cycling

for daily trip purposes can be used as proxy for population
health as established scientific analysis tools (the WHO
tool HEAT for example) measure the health benefits of
cycling and walking.
as both sustainable transportation and public spaces are
important avenues for the public to achieve their needed
for Non-Communicable Diseases)
See the suggestions submitted for multi-purpose
indicators under:
- Target 3.7 - Percentage of primary health care
facilities that provide an essential integrated package of
sexual and reproductive health services (Links to 3.1, 3.2,
3.3, 3.8, and complements 5.2, 5.6); and % of young
people 10-24 with basic knowledge about SRH (Links to
Targets 3.1, 3.3, 4.1, 4.7, 5.1, 5.2, 12.8).
- Target 4.7 - Percentage of schools that provided
comprehensive sexuality education in the previous
academic year (Links to Targets 3.1, 3.3, 3.7, 4.1, 5.1,
5.2, 5.3, 5.6, 12.8).
- In addition, another proposal in the IAEG list for
Target 4.a may also be relevant to consider: Percentage
of students experiencing bullying, corporal punishment,
harassment, violence, sexual discrimination and abuse,
by sex, age, income, location, race, ethnicity, disability,
and other factors (Links to 5.1, 5.2, 16.1, and 16.2). A
measurement inclusive of out-of-school children would be
desirable.
The ILSI Research Foundation would like to highlight our
continuing work with several SDG collaborators (FAO,
Columbia University, a number of CGIAR centers) on the
development of food system metrics for assessing
sustainable nutrition security. We held a workshop on this
topic in February 2015 and are soon submitting the
resulting scientific paper (“Seven Food System Metrics of
Sustainable Nutrition Security”) to the peer-reviewed
literature. This set of seven metrics includes quantitative
measures that could be used as indicators of progress
toward the achievement of many SDG targets: human
nutrition, environmental sustainability (GHG emissions,
water use, etc.), affordability & availability, sociocultural
wellbeing (including gender equity), resilience, food
safety, and reduction of waste & loss. As the goal of these
food system metrics focuses on producing policies
towards a sustainable food system that would contribute
to improved human health and non-communicable
disease outcomes, we’d welcome the opportunity to
directly harmonize this effort with the SDGs as they are
finalized.
I think the goal of society are peaceful, democracy,
gender equality, good health for all.

Indictaors may be developed that contribute to multiple
targets and measure the impact of multiple inputs, but
some targets will require multiple indicators. The number
of indicators should not be arbitrarily limited. They must
live up to the ambition of the SDGs and targets.
The long-term costs of not having indicators will be
greater than investing in their development now; failure to
develop new indicators where needed will hamper the
development of effective policies and programs at the
country level.
The WHO Global Monitoring Framework on NCDs calls
for a 10% reduction in harmful drinking, as appropriate
within the national context. Three indicators are included:
total alcohol per capita, which includes both recorded and
unrecorded beverages; the prevalence of heavy episodic
drinking among adolescents and adults; and alcohol-
related morbidity and mortality. Focusing on these
indicators in the targets for SDGs would ensure
consistency and avoid duplication of efforts across these
two important and interrelated global frameworks.
Work and decent work is related to poverty reduction,

gender equality, education, physical and mental health. I
would recommend using those indicators that are intact
crosscutting to several goals.
Transportation is a key development issue and target 11.2
is important to achieve safe, resilient and sustainable
cities. It is important to note that public transport cannot
be seen in isolation. Well-placed walking and bicycle
riding networks can extend the catchment of public
transport systems. As such, public transport, walking and
cycling are interdependent and should be enhanced in
tandem. However, achieving target 11.2 will also be
necessary if we are to address many of the other targets
in SDG 11 as well as SDG 3 (ensure healthy lives)
including reducing non-communicable diseases (NCDs)
by encouraging physical activity and provides both
affordable and accessible ways for the vulnerable,
including women and the poor, to move about cities. In
addition, public transport can contribute to achieving the
target of halving the number of global deaths and injuries
from road traffic collisions. While the benefits to health
are obvious, sustainable means of transportation will also
determine how easy it is to access other key services in
the city, such as education and employment, and is
therefore connected indirectly to SDG 1 (Eradicate
poverty), SDG 4 (Ensure inclusive and equitable quality
education), SDG 8 (job creation), SDG10 (reduce
inequality within countries), and SDG 16 (inclusive
societies). Efficient transportation systems can support
SDG 5 (Gender equality) by ensuring that they meet the
unique needs of women as well as being relevant for
SDG 7 (energy efficiency), SDG 12 (sustainable
consumption and production) and SDG 13 (climate
change). Expanding public transport is again relevant for
SDG 9 (build resilient infrastructure) and UITP on behalf
of the sector is here to help parties and the UN realize the
post-2015 agenda in support of SDG 17 (capacity
building). Therefore, given the cross-cutting nature of
public transport, goal 11.2 should be regarded as a top
priority indicator that will help deliver on many of the
SDGs. Therefore, the indicators need to ensure policy
'Existence of a specific legal framework to protect judges
from external interference and arbitrary removal and
punishment'.
- This indicator aligns with the existing OHCHR Rule of
Law Indicator n.57 and is related to current targets 16.3,
16.6, 16.7, 16.10 and 16a.
2. Indicator on the independence of the legal profession
'Existence of a self-governing professional association of
lawyers established through law with the mandate and
authority to protect the independence and role of of the
legal profession, in compliance with the United Nations
Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.”
- This indicator completes the current indicator proposed
under Target 16.a concerning the existence of a national
human rights institution. It is related to targets 16.3, 16.6,
16.7, 16.10 and 16a
4.4 and 4.5.
The indicator for Target 3.9 could be under Goal 6, 7, 9,

11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 in order to remember the impact of
non-health sectors on health and to encourage health in
all policies approach and multisectoral actions to promote
and protect people’s health.
Currently, too many proposed indicators refer to nutrients.
There is a need to be more focused.
There should not be more than one indicator of nutrient
load (indices of water quality, air quality, ocean health,
coastal eutrophication potential) as these may be
redundant.
Universal and feasible, this recommended land rights

indicator is vital to four of the sustainable development
goals, including ending poverty (goal 1), ensuring food
security (goal 2), achieving gender equality and
empowering women (goal 5), and making cities and
human settlements inclusive (goal 11).
The cross-cutting nature of the recommended indicator,
which can also track progress towards targets 2.3, 5.a
and 11.1, makes it a powerful option if there is pressure to
settle for a manageable set of indicators without
sacrificing key components of the agenda.
We recognize that many countries, in particular Least
Developed Countries, face real limitations in data
collection, storage and analysis and that there are many
targets for which data is sparse or non-existent. However,
the 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 inter-
agency expert group on SDGs (IAEG-SDGs) 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.
What is meant by text and scientific analysis in this
context? Determining interlinkages across goals and
targets seems to be a conceptual, qualitative process
rather than qunatitative process.

4.4 and 4.5.
Eleven out of 17 goals are undermined by harmful use of
alcohol. Through the population approaches reducing
alcohol use per capita, we can enhance the following
goals: End poverty: People with lower socio-economic
status are more exposed and more vulnerable to tangible
problems and negative consequences of alcohol
consumption. High % of income in poor families is spent
on alcohol instead of education, nutritious food etc.
Gender equality: There is a strong relationship between
alcohol and domestic abuse, intimate partner violence
and sexual assault. Reducing the affordability and
accessibility of alcohol is associated with lower levels of
reported incidents across a range of violent crimes.
Increasing the price of an ounce of pure alcohol would
reduce the probability of intimate partner violence against
women by 5.3%. Evidence from the US shows that an
increase in the price of alcohol, reduced the probability of
severe violence against wives. A 1% increase in the price
of alcohol is associated with a 5% reduced risk of being a
victim of domestic violence as a wife.
Productive employment,: Globally, alcohol is the world’s
number one risk factor for ill-health and premature death
amongst the 25-59 year old age group, the core of the
working age population. Therefore costs due to lost
productivity feature dominantly in social costs studies
arising from the harm caused by alcohol. Alcohol is a
significant risk factor for absenteeism and presenteeism
at work, largely in a dose response manner, with a
relationship between societal and individual level of
alcohol consumption and sickness absence. A 10-year
analysis of workplace accidents in the USA found that an
increase of 10% in beer taxes would have resulted in
1.7% fewer workdays lost through injuries. Healthy lives
and well-being: Alcohol is widely established as a
structural driver of both the TB and HIV/AIDS
epidemics.Research shows causal relationships between
alcohol use and infectious diseases, such as tuberculosis
The architecture of the indicators should minimize
overlapping indicators and allow for core indicators for
global reporting and monitoring across the SDGs, with
additional recommended indicators (backed by UN and
CSO expert consensus) that facilitate national-level
planning and prioritization within each goal and target.
With these considerations in mind, it may be best for
some of the gender and health goals to have primary
global indicators of laws and access to information and
services that are readily observable and reportable, and
then offer other indicators as recommended, but
secondary, such as women's ability to make their own
SRH decisions.
The targets need simplification in phrasing and reduction
in number. There are too many qualifying phrases and
adopting simple straightforward phrasing will make the
targets more memorable, understandable and thus
personally relevant.
There are goals/targets that address youth and youth

development needs. These should be tagged.
It is my opinion to maintain 100 targets instead of more
than 160
With regards to interlinkages, it is good to keep in mind

that the fewer indicators there are the bigger likelihood
there is that something crucial will be missed. If one
indicator is used to measure several things then all the
relevant causal relationships between various factors
might not be noticed, which may lead into false
interpretations of success.
One indicator can cover the land rights content directly or
implicitly relevant to 1.4, 2.3, 5.a, 11.1 and 15.a. It is
better to economize on the total number of indicators by
using one cross cutting, feasible and universal indicators
on secure access to land for all women and men than to
cause yourselves to pick one indicator per target thereby
leaving behind substantial content from the targets.
This indicator has wide support from a global coalition of

organizations and is similar to what UNEP has
recommended.
Percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples and local

communities with secure tenure rights to individually or
communally held land [measured by (i) percentage with
legally documented or recognized evidence of tenure; and
(ii) percentage who perceived their rights as recognized
and protected]
To learn why this is feasible and universal, please read

our short document at:
http://landpost2015.landesa.org/resources/one-indicator-
many-targets-a-path-for-tracking-land-rights-post-2015/
Together with a coalition of over 30 global and national
organizations, we propose a meaningful, cross-cutting
and universal land rights indicator to replace suggested
indicator 1.4.2:
Percentage of women, men, indigenous peoples, and

property, and natural resources, measured by
b. percentage who perceive their rights are recognized
and protected
This indicator can help track progress toward 4 targets:

• Target 1.4, as is.
• Target 2.3, disaggregating by urban/rural and
focusing on the rural.
• Target 5.a, disaggregating by sex and seeing how
women fare in absolute terms as well as in comparison to
men.
• Target 11.1, disaggregating by urban/rural and
focusing on the urban.

http://landpost2015.landesa.org/resources/land-rights-an-
essential-global-indicator-for-the-post-2015-sdgs/
Regarding debt issues, as part of MOIs, the inclusion of

this ratios will be a great step in comparison with the
MDGs, that were not clear at all on the 8th objective. On
this issue, an interlinkage might not be possible, but also
the data collection is already made by the economic
ministerial areas and central banks.
The ratio proposed on the link between DSAs and SDGs
will need a methodology to include SDGs expenditure
proyections on the scenarios of debt to analyse if an
specific credit is sustainable to pay and keep SDGs track
or not.
On the measures of access in particular, but even overall,
there is a question about the methodology to collect info
on the indicators. It is essential to measure on basis of
population assessments which should be captured in the
indicator itself.
o Assessments relying on figures reported by health
services or implementing agencies are open to reporting
bias and there are countless examples of poor reliability
of these figures.
o Similarly, modelling might be presented as attractive
because less burdensome, but not reflecting reality on the
ground and too dependent on underlying assumptions.
• Population estimates present a specific challenge
and their validity can undermine indicators using
population figures as denominator. Where validity is
questioned, sample assessments should be preferred
where proportions are measured.
• As African Statisticians directed by Strategies for
Harmonization of Statistics in Africa (SHaSA) have
emphasized, the existing global MPI reflects SDGs 1-8
and 10, and puts indicators from these SDGs into a
headline poverty figure that reflects deprivations directly
without PPPs – things like malnutrition or a lack of clean
water.
• The existing Global MPI (published by UNDP’s
Human Development Reports) reflects acute poverty in
developing countries. It would be modified to reflect the
SDG indicators.
• At the same time, the MPI adds new and policy-
relevant information to the one-by-one indicator
dashboard. It (alone of the SDG indicators thus far)
profiles the package of deprivations poor people are
experiencing together nationally and by disaggregated
groups. This supports multisectoral and integrated policy
response.
• Multidimensional poverty indices provide a powerful
complement to traditional income measures. The nearly
40 countries in our expanding network strongly believe
the MPI will add tremendous value to the global
monitoring of the SDGs.
Our view is that trying to reduce the total number of
technical indicators is not a good objective. Instead we
would suggest reducing the total number of IMPACT
indicators for better political communication of a broad
agenda to only 30.
The purpose of identifying linkages across targets is to
identify indicators which while measuring one target, also
support or reinforce monitoring of another related target.
Nutrition indicators offer such cross cutting linkages, as is
demonstrated in the current List of Indicators Proposal
from 11th August (interlinkages column). However
nutrition and breastfeeding are crosscutting issues often
overlooked. Good nutrition is not just an outcome of
development, but also a driver of human development
and economic growth. Equally, nutrition is
multidimensional in nature and requires a range of actions
across sectors in order to end malnutrition in all its forms.
As such, ensuring adequate nutrition for all will make
large contributions to the SDGs overall and set countries
on a strong social and economic growth trajectory.
Adequate nutrition is necessary for realising targets under
education, health, and sustained, inclusive and
sustainable economic growth, full and productive
employment and decent work for all.
Breastfeeding is a crosscutting issue, and a priority

indicator that has interlinkages across goals and could
feed into targets 2.1, 2.2, 3.2 and 3.4, as well as support
for economic growth, poverty eradication, health, obesity
prevention, education and WASH goals.
Evidence shows that breastfeeding is positively

income as adults .
The use of stunting as a headline, crosscutting indicator

FGM/C is a profound human rights abuse which must be
measured in order to ensure the global action needed to
end it takes place. It is a very specific issue, and it would
not make sense to subsume it within another target, or to
attempt to measure it by proxy with another indicator.
Attempting to reduce the number of indicators seems

unnecessary since each indicator appears to have an
important role.
We believe that cross-cutting indicators are important, but
should not be used to artificially bring down the number of
indicators and reduce the ambitions of the agenda. That
said, we strongly encourage the IAEG to have a strong
and robust indicator on secure land rights, as suggested
by UNEP “Percentage of women, men, indigenous
peoples, and local communities with secure tenure rights,
measured by: a) percentage with legally documented or
recognized evidence of tenure, and b) percentage who
perceive their rights are recognized and protected”. This
indicator – in this exact formulation - will track progress on
a very important inter linkage across Goal 1,2,5,10,11,
and 15 and therefore link poverty, gender and
environmental goals. It is therefore fundamental that this
indicator includes "Indigenous peoples and local
communities" explicitely, as recognized by the Convention
on Biological Diversity.
Some suggested interlinkages across goals and targets
are given in the comments for the individual
targets/indicators in Section II.
For example, WB’s proposed indicator 11.2.2 measures

access to jobs by sustainable transport modes, and in so
doing, it also measures Indicator 11.2.1, which targets
access to public transit. It should also be noted that the
proposed Indicator 11.2.2 is also closely linked to
Indicator 3.9.1 (‘Population in urban areas exposed to
outdoor air pollution levels above WHO guideline values’)
and Indicator 7.3.2 (‘Composite Energy Efficiency
Improvement Index’).
In addition (as previously noted), it is proposed that

walking and cycling (as well as public transport) be
measured under Target 11.2 (in addition to Target 9.1),
potentially using the same indicator in both cases.
Another way to measure this is by measuring *urban*
road safety, since most fatalities are pedestrians and
cyclists. Since there is a call for a “fatalities due to road
crashes” indicator under Target 3.6, the data burden
would not be increased, though to be most effective the
indicator should be disaggregated by mode (including
cyclists and pedestrians).
Several of our proposed indicators can be used to
measure more than one target, which will assist in
reducing the total number of indicators. Experts have
suggested 100 to 120 global indicators as the maximum
number so that it could feasibly be incorporated into the
global SDG monitoring framework and not overburden
national statistical systems. This is an important principle,
and minimizing the reporting burden and limiting the
number of indicators has been a key premise of this work.
But it is equally important that the number of indicators
included in the global indicator list should not be arbitrarily
limited if additional, globally-important, and appropriate
indicators are identified that create no additional burden
on national statistical offices—or if this limit means that
some targets are left without an acceptable indicator. The
outputs of global health R&D—such as new health
technologies—are global public goods. Their development
commonly involves input from multiple international
collaborators, and their benefits accrue to multiple
countries—not all of which will necessarily fund or
conduct R&D themselves. As a result, data on global
health R&D is ideally suited to being collected and
reported at the global level and for inclusion in the global
SDG monitoring framework.
Plan International believes that proficiency levels and
respectful of multi-cultural and linguistic contexts and that
nationally-defined indicators will provide the best
measurement to capture a holistic and rights-based
learning process. We therefore advocate the 3
recommended global-level indicators listed to replace
IAEG suggested indicators for targets 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3.
These 3 recommendations can provide cross-cutting
indicators for targets 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 as long as they are
disaggregated by level of education. These align with the
recommendations of the Global Campaign for Education.
% of schools that are free, disaggregated by level
Transition rates between pre-primary and primary/ primary

and secondary/ secondary and tertiary

inclusion in the global SDG monitoring framework
Global Burden of Disease methodology for Target 3.9 can
also be used to measure progress against Target 12.4.
Goals 2 and 3 are very closely linked and so are some of
the targets and proposed indicators.
a. Proposed target on overweight (target 2.2) can also

help achieve target 3.4 on reducing premature mortality
from NCDs, as overweight is associated with increased
risk of NCDs and associated mortality and morbidity.
b.Proposed indicator on prevalence of anaemia in women

of reproductive age (proposed target 2.2) can also reduce
maternal mortality (target 3.1). As explained before,
anaemia has been found to be associated with nearly
20% maternal deaths, and addressing anaemia among
adolescent girls and pregnant women is one of the key
interventions to prevent maternal mortality.
c. Proposed indicator on exclusive breastfeeding (target

2.2) can also help achieve target 3.2 on ending
preventable newborn and child deaths. Sub optimal
breastfeeding practices, including non-exclusive
breastfeeding, contribute to 11.6% of mortality in children
under 5 years of age. This was equivalent to about
804,000 child deaths in 2011. (WHO). Exclusive
breastfeeding has great impact on saving lives of young
children.
d. Indicators on wasting and stunting can also contribute

to achieving Goal 3, and in particular target 3.2 as poor
nutrition underlies nearly 45% of child deaths.
Targets 11.5, 1.5, 13.1, 2.4 and any others which suggest
measuring the direct impact of disaster events (e.g. 14.2)
"Percentage of people who report that they feel safe
walking alone at night in the city or area where they live" -
useful for targets 5.2, 10.2, 10.3, 11.1, 11.2, 11.7, 16.2.
"Percentage of members or voting rights of developing

countries in international decision-making bodies" - 16.8
and 10.6

economic growth, poverty eradication, and general health
We have prepared a note that sketches out a means for
identifying inter-linkages between targets and proposes
multi-purpose indicators that adequately track two or more
targets across goals. We propose a pragmatic approach
to the question of inter-linkages by looking at the
dimensions of sustainable development with shared
measurement approaches, which will not only encourage
cross-sectoral monitoring and collaboration, but will help
to ease the total number of indicators. Please see the
note entitled “Indicators for the SDGs: Identifying inter-
linkages” here: http://unsdsn.org/what-we-do/indicators-
and-monitoring/indicators/inputs-to-the-iaeg-sdgs/
Indicator 4.7.2 (following) is cross-cutting with target 3.7.
Proportion of young people who demonstrate desired
levels of knowledge about sexual and reproductive health,
including at a minimum: 1. knowledge of three common
types of contraceptive measures: oral contraceptive (pill),
condom, and at least one longer-acting reversible
contraceptive (injection, IUD, implant); 2. Knowledge of
two ways to reduce sexual transmission of HIV; 3. A
measure related to gender, power relation, and
perceptions of gender equality (i.e. belief that a
husband/partner is justified in beating his wife/partner if
they refuse sex.
Indicator for goal 16.1 do have strong inter-linkages with

goal 5, target 5.2 and 11, target 11.1 on urban safety.
Ending Poverty -- Hunger -- Water and Sanitation --
Healthy Lives
Gender Equality -- Inequalities -- Peaceful, Just Societies

This requires involvement of statisticians for "Sound
reliable and robust data collection about progress and
achievement of goals, with statistician experts involved
before data collection begins"
We felt interlinkages could have been easier to identify
and comment given a more interactive format to the SDG
indicators. Nevertheless, we commend the ambition to
identify interlinkages to consolidate proposed indicators
and develop a coherent measurement agenda for the
SDGs.
One missing cross-cutting issue is to improve how

biomass is used. This is addressed somewhat through
resource efficiency, but because LDCs rely so much on
land and biomass, they critically need to improve, and by
using the interlinkages in markets it could be possible to
be more concise.
One missing cross-cutting issue we identified surrounded

the improvement in biomass use. This is addressed
somewhat through resource efficiency, but because LDCs
are heavily reliant on land and biomass, they critically
need to improve within this area. By identifying the
interlinkages in food, fuel and biomass markets it could be
possible to better integrate this issue. Furthermore, we
identified complementarity between goals 11.6 and 12.5
around waste which presents opportunities for further
consolidation of the SDG indicators.
There seems to be an overlap in target objectives which
is sometimes concealed under the mal-formulation and
wording of the targets. For example, target 15.7 calls for
urgent action to end poaching and trafficking of protected
flora and fauna, while target 15.c. talks about the
enhancement of global support and involvement of local
communities to combat poaching and trafficking. The
mobilization of local communities and the enhancement of
global support for efforts towards eliminating poaching
and trafficking globally are essential actions that would aid
in ending these unwanted practices (target 15.7).
Therefore these two targets (15.7, 15.c) could be merged
under a common initiative that would take into
consideration the multiple steps towards its completion.
We suggest a review of the suggested targets in order to
(1) include directed actions that would be feasible and
measurable in defined spatial and temporal scales, (2)
alternate wording to specify the desired result and (3)
differentiate targets of seeming overlap only when
necessary and specified.
The current indicator for 14.1 is inappropriate for the goal
Target 14.1.
Access to counsel is an invaluable indicator because it
cuts across a broad range of issues addressed by the
SDGs, interlinking with other proposed goals, targets, and
indicators.First, several targets address inequality (i.e.
Indicators 5.1.1, 10.2.1, &Target 16.b). There are
traditionally broad inequalities in terms of who is able to
access counsel, particularly along gender, race, ethnicity,
and economic lines. The justice gap between those who
can afford to pay for a lawyer and those that can’t is
widening and perpetuating inequality in justice systems.
An indicator that not only measures access to counsel,
but also disaggregates the data to reveal (in)equality of
access for particularly vulnerable groups, will be useful in
understanding the progress toward Goals 5, 10, and 16.
Second, access to counsel helps people hold institutions
accountable for their actions and responsibilities, which is
a concern of Targets 16.5 (reduce corruption and bribery)
and 16.6 (develop effective, accountable, and transparent
institutions). Access to counsel facilitates prosecution of
officials who might engage in corruption and bribery, and
also increases trust in the justice system so that average
citizens do not feel that they must engage in bribery in
order to have their grievances heard or get a fair result.
Access to counsel particularly holds justice sector
institutions accountable, as lawyers are able to provide
citizens with information about the rights they are owed,
and are positioned to help individuals take whatever legal
action is necessary to ensure that police, prosecutors,
and courts properly fulfill their obligations.Finally, access
to counsel is an imperative indicator for Target 16.10
(ensure public access to information and protect
fundamental freedoms). The laws that govern individuals
and the processes that enforce the laws are complex.
Without a lawyer to help individuals’ understand the law
and navigate the process, there can be no meaningful
access to justice. Lawyers are also responsible for
protecting the rights and liberties of individuals. Other
This is needed to ensure the connections between varies
targets and goals are clear, as sustainable development
itself is also a holistic pursuit.
Corruption impedes good governance and therefore
undermines poverty reduction. It manifests in the form of
poor health outcomes - mothers dying during childbirth
and children struggling to live past the age of 5 and many
people in poor countries lacking things taken for granted
by most in the west such as clean water or toilets. The
countries that are the poorest are also the ones that tend
to be more corrupt and most reliant on overseas aid. Our
analysis shows that higher levels of bribery are
significantly and positively correlated with foreign aid. This
suggests that corruption removes any positive
incremental effect that foreign aid has on poverty
reduction. Corrupt politicians in poor countries are
diverting government revenues for private gain while
foreign aid pours in to maintain basic government
services. Good governance through more voice and
accountability or political stability helps in reducing the
dependence on aid. However, better governance is only
achieved by reducing corruption and building strong and
sustainable institutions.
A target to substantially reduce corruption and bribery in
all their forms has been included in the SDG under goal
16. The proposed indicator to monitor this target
measures the prevalence of bribery in a country. Due to
this indicator’s interlinkages with many governance
targets, it can also be used for monitoring access to basic
services, overseas development assistance (ODA), rule of
law, or protection of fundamental freedoms. In an attempt
to test some of these links we found that in countries with
higher bribery rates people are more likely to be detained
in prisons without any charges, almost entirely negating
the positive effects of good governance on protecting
fundamental freedoms. While this shows corruption’s
undermining effects, we could not establish clear links
between corruption and the other related concepts owing
to a lack of data availability. And even when data are
available, there is no standardised approach to data
Maybve not such a good idea to reduce the indicators ,

but mostly make sure they are relevant!

4.4 and 4.5.

Indicators developed for this target could support
4.4 and 4.5.
It will ultimately be important to prioritise within each of he
goal areas, as well as across.
For education, if I were to select one target that would be

most relevant for global monitoring, it would be to ensure
all children aged 10 have achieved the basics in reading
and maths.
Without this, children cannot continue with their learning;

and, if schools are not imparting these basic skills, they
are not going to be promoting other types of important
skills associated with global citizenship etc.
The existing Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
reflects the Millennium Development Goals. Eight of its
ten indicators drew directly on MDGs, for example, and
the definitions such as of ‘adequate’ sanitation or ‘safe’
water were taken from the MDGs. Similarly, we would
anticipate that the Global MPI might be modified as
necessary to reflect SDG indicator definitions and
priorities, data permitting.
A document on Strategies for Harmonisation of Statistics

in Africa (SHaSA) observes, and we would reiterate, that
the existing Global MPI already relates to SDGs 1-8 and
10. Furthermore it summarises the level and trends in
these indicators in a headline, which can be unpacked by
indicator as needed.
What the MPI adds to a dashboard of the same indicators

is that it shows how many deprivations people are
experiencing at the same time. For example, what you
could see from a dashboard of the ten current Global MPI
indicators for 101 countries and 5.2 billion people is that
they experience 13.2 billion deprivations in those 10
indicators. But you simply cannot know from the
dashboard how many people experience exactly one
deprivation, or more than one. It turns out that 75% of the
population – 3.9 billion people – experience one or more
deprivations. Probing further, 1 billion people experience
exactly one deprivation, whereas 1.6 billion are deprived
in one-third or more of the weighted indicators. So if a
key purpose is to ‘leave no one behind’ it can be useful to
see, in each country, who is deprived in 33%, 50%, 70%,
or 90% etc of the weighted MPI indicators. No dashboard
can show that, but the MPI can do so for a core set of
SDG poverty indicators.
For the Health goal - see the suggestions in the previous
section to group many of the coverage/health indicators
under Target 3.8 on Universal Health Coverage. However
– our view is that trying to reduce the total number of
technical indicators is not a good objective. Instead we
would suggest reducing the total number of IMPACT
indicators for better political communication of a broad
agenda to only 30.
Many of the proposed goals and targets have areas of
concern which overlap each other. Given the complexity
of the SDGs and the breadth of ambition in the goals this
is a necessary feature, and has the potential to promote a
more holistic approach to development.
However, none of the proposed targets directly repeat
others, meaning that it is unlikely that any one indicator
will act as a satisfactory proxy for more than one target.
Indeed, it is more likely that some targets will require
more than one indicator, or a composite index, to monitor
progress on their different facets, and this is reflected in
the current proposals.
The purpose of identifying linkages across indicators
should therefore be to identify indicators which while
measuring one target, also support or reinforce
monitoring elsewhere where another target overlaps the
same field.
Gender equality and women’s rights issues, such as

women’s participation and leadership,
are multi-dimensional and changes to one area may
impact on another. For example, violence against women
in the household can increase as women move into public
and political life or into the economic sphere. Some
indicators therefore will ‘interlink’ in very complex ways.
Target 16.7 looks to ensure responsive, inclusive,
participatory and representative decision-making at all
levels. Indicators for this target are relevant to but do not
fully capture the specific focus intention behind target 5.5
which is specifically focused on ensuring women's full and
effective participation and equal opportunities for
leadership at all levels of decision-making in political,
economic and public life. Target 5.5 seeks to address the
specific persistent inequality which has seen women as
50% of the population having a disproportionately
unequal say in decisions that are made politically,
economically and publically which in turn result in the
WaterAid strongly opposes any reduction in the total
number of indicators. We refer to paragraph 75 of the
declaration which calls for the ambition of the framework
to be kept intact. The absence of measurement for targets
would be a clear reduction in ambition and should be
avoided.
A number interlinkages exist between target 6.1 and 6.2

and other targets. These intelinkages can be brought out
by using a system of primary "output" and secondary
"contributory" indicators.
Given that there would be comparing existing data

sources with each other, there would be no additional cost
of data collection.
The main targets that have outcomes which are

underpinned by WASH access i.e. 6.1 and 6.2 are 1.4,
2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 4a, 5.2, 5.4, 5.6.
In all cases, WASH access could be overlaid with the

primary indicators for these targets to enhance national,
regional and global understanding of the levers of
change. For example, where we see a significant
reduction in child mortality in a country which later slows,
overlaying WASH access would help to show whether
WASH access was the blocking factor on further
reduction.
An effort should be made to refine methodology and
relevance of indicators across the 169 targets, applying
select indicators to more than one target so as to reduce
indicators. Tier I data only should be used; capacity for
Tier I data needs to be created in countries where it is not
developed; and data sources should be re-evaluated as
part of this process to ensure each qualifies as Tier I data.
We suggest re-evaluating each indicator’s data source to
define Tier: a) Reliable Methodology, certifiable by at
least one third party governmental body subject to peer
review mechanism with certain voting quorum, to follow
the Indicator with a standardized, certifiable, procedure;
b) Publicly Available, certifiable (see 1.) data; c) Data that
should not need regulatory clearance (e.g. privacy); d)
Objective measurability of Target setting (at T0 and
following thereafter according to a certifiable procedure,
see 1 above ); e) Internationally comparable.
women related goals should be mainstreaming and not

relegated to a single goal.
Indictors may be developed that contribute to multiple
Proposed MPI indicator for 4.1. and 6.2 for WASH in
Schools has been proposed by UN Women and by
UNESCO WWP as well
Proposed MPI indicator for 4.3 and 6.2 for working,

vocational and education environment
Indictors may be developed that contribute to multiple
as walking and cycling is an important way for people to
achieve physical activity and public spaces are important
places where the public can achieve their needed
for NCDs).
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 the IAEG-SDGs to favour indicators that cut
across targets and where possible cut across goals. For
example:
• 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. A
resilience target should extend beyond the issue of
human loss and include both the stock and flow value of
economic loss.
• Targets 14.1 through to 14.7 all 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.
• Targets 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.7, and 3.8 all focus on a

health system that is functional, accessible and
affordable. Antibiotics are essential to securing and
maintaining the advances of modern medicine as well as
ensuring that national health systems around the world
are affordable. Achieving universal access to safe,
effective, quality and affordable essential medicines will
therefore require the adoption of antibiotic conservation
measures, including the phasing out of antibiotic use for
non-therapeutic purposes in livestock production.
Measuring the Antimicrobial Resistance incidence rate is
I have not had time to perform this analysis.
Many of the targets with relevance to the environment can
be measured by a small cluster of well-established
indicators developed scientifically by the Biodiversity
Indicator Partnership (BIP). For the full list, please see
WWF’s response to Topic 18. In these cases, countries
could be provided with time series data from existing
databases at no or minimal cost. Although several
indicators would be used to monitor one target, using the
same indicators for multiple targets would ultimately
reduce the overall number of indicators employed. The
interlinkages across goals and targets can be made with
the following cluster of indicators:
4.4 and 4.5.
These comments relate specifically to our above input on
the Living Planet Index (LPI). There are many
interlinkages across targets that can be made using the
LPI ideally in conjunction with other biodiversity indicators
which are part of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s
Aichi target framework and have been suggested here,
such as the Red List Index (RLI) and protected area cover
and management effectiveness. The main pairing for the
LPI and RLI as complementary indicators would be for the
following targets: 14.2, 14.4, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 15.7, 15.8.
Topic 22: Please use the space below to provide any additional
comments/proposals on the indicator framework that you believe would be
useful to the IAEG-SDGs in their work towards developing an indicator
framework. Note that there is a character limit of 2,500 (approximately 500
words).
We urge you to consider the inclusion of all WHA nutrition targets. In addition to
stunting and wasting, it is vital to add and elevate exclusive breastfeeding
[percentage of children less than six months old who are fed breast milk alone (no
other liquids or food)] as a tier 1 top priority. This indicator is already used to track
the WHA target on breastfeeding, and could also feed important data into targets
2.1, 3.2 and 3.4. We urge you to prioritize breastfeeding as it also supports
economic growth, poverty eradication, health, obesity prevention, education and
WASH goals. Evidence shows that breastfeeding is positively associated with IQ,
educational attainment, and improved income as adults [1]
[1] Victora C et al. (2015). Association between breastfeeding and intelligence,

educational attainment, and income at 30 years of age: a prospective birth cohort
study from Brazil. Lancet Glob. Health 2015; 3: e199–205
The process for developing the indicators must be transparent, accountable and
participatory. There must be adequate space globally for civil society groups to
contribute to the IAEG and nationally, with NSOs actively involving civil society
whether as data producers and/or users.
The scope and ambition of the goals and targets must be preserved and the
indicator set must include the means to measure all the main outcomes stated in a
goal or target.
The indicators are generally fine. There is however need to ensure a mix of both
qualitative and quantitative indicators. Finally dis-aggregation of data should
address all categories of group[s that are could be disadvantaged or made
vulnerable in various circumstances and geographical location
As a member, AJWS supports the submission of the Women's Major Group and
calls the IAEG-SDGs particular attention to the general comments made as part of
that submission.
We believe that the Statistical Commission should pay utmost attention to select a
number of SDG Indicators that is sufficient to inform progress at least on all the
elements of SDG targets that are quantified. Limiting the number of indicators to a
lower number would have a material political impact since it would reduce de facto
the ambition of the SDG resolution that will be adopted by the UN General
Assembly end Sept 2015. To avoid such a disappointment, we believe that the
proposed list should be augmented by:
- An indicator on access to hygiene for all to inform progress towards target 6.2
- An indicator on water flows withdrawn unsustainably to inform progress
towards ensuring sustainable withdrawals (target 6.4)
We strongly recommend the stronger participation of civil society in the
development of the indicator framework and the implementation of the SDG
monitoring system at national, regional and global levels, including sectoral
monitoring systems on education, health, poverty, gender and other social
development concerns. There should be civil society participation with full
representation and voting rights in all policy and decision bodies on the planning,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the SDGs.
There should be full access and disclosure policy on all information on the SDGs,
including revenue and financing measures that will be adopted and implemented by
governments, donors and international bodies. Often, information is denied and
kept from public scrutiny using all flimsy excuses to deprive public access to
information. States must legislate and implement freedom of information if indeed
there is value to any monitoring system.
Qualitative monitoring should, likewise, be developed using appropriate tools and

approaches to offer deeper insights and analysis on the progress of the SDGs from
the perspectives especially of local communities and disadvantaged population
groups. Household surveys, community mapping exercises, FGDs, and local
consultations must be part of the tools for the indicator and monitoring framework.
2015 is very critical year as lots of global frameworks will be decided and it is also
good opportunity to align various indicators particularly for local level action as for
the vulnerable communities including governments there is no difference in terms of
the risk due to poor development or due to natural hazards. As a network of grass
root civil societies we urge IAEG-SDGs to work based on holistic approach.
There is currently an urban bias in many of the targets. Please ensure that rural
women's empowerment and sustainable economic growth in rural areas, can be
measured
OLDER PEOPLE MAIINLY OLDER WOMEN
The existence of an institutional mechanism and systems to collect, analyse and

disseminate data should be one of the over all monitoring targets so as to ensure
that each country is capable of evaluating and building measures to bring about
necessary changes to achieve the Goals set in the SGDs.
Appreciating the world wide effort towards achieving the utmost development of all
people and countries in the world by the international community on the Post MDG
policy, Berhan Lehetsanat has comment on the general SDG framework
• It is very unrealistic to treat all world countries to ensure sustainability of their
development within the frame work, it neglect countries with the least economic
development level “we cannot talk about sustainability of development where there
is no development”. Hence, it is very important to consider the time needed for such
countries to reach at least reasonable development level let alone to sustain it. BL
believe that and promote a tailor made framework for the developed and
developing nation in terms of level of achievement and time given to reach towards.
• The issue of disability still is neglected to be explicitly recognized in the global

agenda, all in all the Goals indicate “vulnerable groups” and all goals must have to
focus on the inclusion of persons with disability as a target and indicator.
• In the promotion of maternal health and minimalizing child/infant mortality, we
believe a targeted focus must be issued for prevention of childhood disability by
promoting grass root community based initiatives such as CBR (Community Based
Rehabilitation) in community health programs. Since one way or another is the main
cause for house hold and even national social and economic crises.
We also wanted to note our support for the dynamic nature of the indicator
framework, which should evolve over time as measurement becomes more
sophisticated and to respond to changing development challenges. For example, in
the coming 15 years we expect that the most useful indicator to measure progress
against the malaria target will change from disease burden (incidence case
reduction) to population-level measurement of parasite prevalence reduction, which
will reflect a shift in focus to elimination of the disease as we get closer to zero.
We have two additional comments here which we hope will be useful.
First, we would make a further recommendation in relation to Target 16.3. See also
Topics 16, 20 & 21. Recommendation F: While preferred, the indicator on access to
a fair dispute mechanism in the May ‘15 version needs to be further specified at the
national level. We recommend that any measurement in practice involves a
combination of quantitative and qualitative data reflecting users’ experiences and
also includes access to legal advice and legal aid. There are aspects of this broader
indicator on access to a fair dispute mechanism which we would wish to highlight.
First, elements of this indicator would require clear definition and specification (for
example “dispute”, “fair”, types of mechanisms etc.), particularly in order to allow for
cross-country comparisons. Second, the concept of “fairness” would seem to
require a combination of both quantitative data and data from experience surveys.
This is important because it suggests an understanding of access to justice which
better serves the aim of the new development Agenda: “leave no one behind”.
Third, we welcome that the indicator covers a broad range of “formal, informal,
alternative or traditional” dispute mechanisms, rather than being limited to court-
based mechanisms. However, the language of access to dispute mechanisms does
not appear to include other aspects of access to justice, such as access to legal
advice and legal aid (whether these relate to dispute mechanisms or otherwise).
For example, many issues do not come before a “dispute mechanism” as such, but
are otherwise resolved by access to legal advice, including informal advice.
Second, the Bingham Centre (which is a constituent part of the British Institute of
International and Comparative Law) has undertaken a range of further work on the
SDGs, which is available on our website: http://www.biicl.org/bingham-
centre/projects/developmentagenda. In particular:
(1) The Bingham Centre made a submission to the UK Office for National
Statistics in August 2015 to input into its work on the SDGs indicators, which
focused on the measurement of Target 16.3 and included
comments/recommendations relating to the indicator proposals before the IAEG-
SDGs.
(2) The Centre’s ONS submission draws particularly on our recent report
'Measuring Policy on Access to Justice and Taxation in the UK', March 2015, which
was commissioned by the Open Society Justice Initiative.
In addition to being feasible, suitable and relevant, the following considerations
should apply to the framework. Indicators should be:
• Outcome-focussed. In general, they should measure whether desired outcomes
are achieved rather than on whether policies, regulations and processes are put in
place. Nations and organisations should be free to choose their own ways of
making progress towards the targets, so long as they do not compromise other
SDG targets on the way.
• Established. Ideally, indicators need to already be established 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. The data needs to
be independently verifiable and able to be generated at a reasonable cost.
However, there may be a need for a limited number of relatively novel and
undeveloped indicators to be adopted if progress cannot be adequately measured
by existing indicators. That reflects inherent metrics challenge set by a few targets;
for example 2.4 on sustainable agriculture.
• Tightly linked to the target and policy relevant.
• 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 need the support of
business, civil society and citizens. So there must also be maximum scope for
different levels to use the indicators to monitor and report their own progress, down
to individual enterprises, local and regional governments and even individual
families.
• Capable of being regularly and widely reported on. Nations should be able to
commit to reporting on the indicators, preferably annually without multi-year time
lags, although biennial and triennial reporting may be appropriate for some. That
requires support to build data gathering and analysis capabilities especially in
LDCs.
• Universal. Core indicators should be 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. In the case of a few indicators which measure under-consumption,
most developed nations reached one end of the scale decades ago. Yet they
should still be considered as universal indicators and included in the set.
The global fertilizer industry association (IFA), its members and national fertilizer
associations like Fertilizer Canada (formally known as the Canadian Fertilizer
Institute) and The Fertilizer Institute are developing strategic programs across the
globe to address international food security. The global fertilizer industry is
committed to balancing the economic, social and environmental goals of its
stakeholders, including farm groups, homeowners, researchers, conservationists,
governments, industry members and communities. CAAR, in representing
agricultural retailers across Canada – a critical support network for farmers,
providing knowledge and guidance to support their economic, social, and
environmental sustainability – supports the development and implementation of
these important programs.
The global fertilizer industry supports 4R Nutrient Stewardship Best Management
Practices which align with the principles of Climate Smart Agriculture and contribute
to the United Nation’s key deliverables for 2015. 4R Nutrient Stewardship is a
science-based approach which works to increase production/profitability for farmers
while enhancing environmental protection and improving sustainability. To achieve
these goals, the 4Rs encourage farmers to use fertilizer management practices that
ensure the right source is applied at the right rate, at the right time and in the right
place.
The United Nations has a unique opportunity to take advantage of advancements
made by the global fertilizer industry, and to develop goals and indicators that
balance environmental and economic performance. CAAR would encourage the
United Nations to contemplate the following:
• Adopt and support science-based decision-making on matters affecting
agricultural productivity and food security.
• Support and promote 4R Nutrient Stewardship program as a solution to help
increase agricultural productivity in developing countries.
• Recognize the actions undertaken by the global fertilizer industry to promote
the principles of 4R Nutrient Stewardship as a means to end hunger, achieve food
security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture.
• Support and promote the 4R Nutrient Stewardship program as a means to
protect water quality.
• Support and promote the Nitrous Oxide Emission Reduction Protocol as a
solution to help integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies
and planning.
- CARE believes that indicators should measure the more complex aspects of each
target, not just the easiest to evaluate, or be based on what is currently being
measured. For example when it comes to measuring progress on targets that
largely or partly depend on shifting social norms (e.g. ending gender discrimination)
methods and indicators are promising but still emerging - including through
research and programming initiatives currently being undertaken by UNICEF, CARE
and others. Given that the SDG agenda has been framed as transformational, it
presents a historic opportunity to push the data and evidence base forward, rather
than being constrained by the data that is currently available.
- As a related point, we believe that there must be scope for further development of
the indicator framework in the coming years, in particular, for updating indicators as
global and national capacity for collecting complex data develops and as contexts
change.
- We also strongly believe that all data should be regulated by frameworks that
guarantee data privacy, confidentiality, and protection, across data collection,
analysis, and management.
While the importance of respecting national policies and measures is clear, the
framework should still aim to maximise comparability across countries of what is
measured and reported. This will be vital if we are to properly assess global
progress towards the Goals.
We note that this indicator framework relies to a great extend on quantitative
indicators, however numeric measures won't cover everything, and where there
aren’t any, we need to push national and regional frameworks to develop qualitative
measures and to combine them (e.g.: happiness and well-being data relies on
asking people on a 5 point scale how happy they are - there are obvious
equivalents in relation to unmet learning needs).
We need to redouble our efforts to secure robust data on youth adult learning
beyond school. With almost 800 million illiterate men and women in the world, from
which more than 60% are women, we can afford to wait another 15 years to see
only limited progress. Indicators on functional literacy and numeracy need to be
seeing in context and as a continuum. This requires enriching and skilling people to
analyse household surveys, which could provide much better data on adult literacy
but might involve the development of different methodologies for consistent data
and comparison. Furthermore, there is plenty of analysis and research from civil
society and academia that could complement national data collection, so their
engagement in the monitoring process is essential. Various reviews, overviews,
project results and studies of national and international organizations could be also
used in a combination with the national statistics.
In the face of complexity that characterize the socio-environmental issues it is
important that sufficiently representative indicators are defined, but they must be
linked to viable targets as you run the risk that has indicators as mere statistical
data that do not represent the desired changes. Thus it is important to understand
that integrate goals, since a single action can often serve more than one target and
more than one goal. On the other hand, the planning of actions, their goals and
their indicators must necessarily be always thought with a systemic view and
complexity.
Ambition and innovation are imperative if we are to take this agenda seriously.
Having ‘orphan’ targets without indicators will reduce the scope, balance and
ambition of the agenda considerably. Meanwhile, many targets will absolutely
require more than one indicator, especially those that clearly have multiple
elements to them (e.g. 10.4 on fiscal, wage and social protection policies or 16.4
which encompasses arms flows, illicit financial flows, stolen assets and all forms of
organized crime). Therefore, we urge the IAEG to select a list of indicators which
can accurately measure the agenda in its entirety.
Please see our website http://cesr.org/article.php?list=type&type=157 for more

ideas and proposals for how to ensure the indicators are human rights-informed
and human rights-sensitive.
The human rights system and the United Nations agencies and funds must not
receive an institutional role in defining the legal obligations of member states in the
post-2015 development agenda.
Several proposals for indicators envision such a role by including observations of

treaty bodies, the recommendations in the UPR, as well as special mandate
holders, as measures of the legal obligations or political commitments of UN
member states.
Only state parties to a treaty have the final authority to define their obligations
under such treaty. No UN body or mandate holder has ever received a mandate
taking away this prerogative from sovereign states.
This would confuse the respective mandates of entities that form part of the human
rights system, which are independently established, and the mandate of the UN
system in carrying out development assistance, which is directly overseen by inter-
governmental processes in the GA and ECOSOC.
Moreover, the legal advice produced within the secretariat, treaty bodies, special
mandate holders, as well as United Nations agencies and funds, is unsound in
areas involving social policy, especially with regard to abortion and sexual
orientation and gender identity.
To base the follow-up and review on unsound legal advice would not bode well for
the agenda going forward.
Please give a draft on which further suggestion and improvement can

bw made
Investing in developing realistic baseline and raising capacities of the authorities to
monitor progress should also be monitored in someway.
I have made recommendations only in SDG 5, SDG -1, SDG - 7, SDG - 8, SDG -
13.
The SDGs are better than MDGs in several aspects. Apart from expanding content
and coverage the framework of sustainable development and national autonomy
are positive points.
There is a need to sharpen the underpinned growth model by adding specific

points regarding (1) the inability of the neoliberal policies to generate adequate
productive employment opportunities with decent work conditions, (2) expanding
fiscal space at the national level by expanding the purview of macroeconomic
policies, (3) the contradiction in depending on private corporate finance on the one
hand and poverty eradication and sustainability of development on the other hand.
We would also recommend to include this indicator under target 3.4:

Disability Adjusted Life Years Lost and Years Lived with Disability from mental
disorders.
It is not sufficient for a country to reduce the incidence and number of new cases of
mental illness. It is also necessary to ensure that the impact of mental disorders on
society is diminished. For this purpose, the Global Burden of Disease study has
developed the terms "Disability Adjusted Life Years" (DALY) and “Years Lived with
Disability” (YLD). The figures are precisely defined and calculated regularly for all
countries in the world from the best available data. From a social policy perspective,
it may be more important to reduce countries' disease burden from mental disorders
than it is to reduce the incidence. The objectives of disease burden and
prevalence / incidence are not overlapping, but complementary.
Climate change and the SDGs are locked in a symbiotic relationship: while climate
change will significantly impact the success of the SDGs, the SDGs are able to
promote action towards climate mitigation and adaptation . Appropriate climate-
proofing of the whole SDG framework can ensure the framework strongly supports
the implementation of ambitious climate agreement in Paris in December, over the
next 15 years. To reach these likely ambitious targets, the SDG indicators need to
be climate-proofed.
Climate-proofing the SDGs framework requires strategic indicators across the post-
2015 framework that ensure significant progress in mitigation and adaptation,
globally. Such indicators should elicit measurable data that promotes the
appropriate management of climate within each SDG target and enables progress
to be reliably assessed.
The complexity and disparate effects of climate change mean that simplistic
indicators relying on readily available statistical data alone are not appropriate for
acquiring a realistic indication of progress. Instead, indicators for climate related
targets need to be multi-dimensional: they should measure the progress of
sustainable development and the exacerbation of sustainable development needs
due to climate change impacts, while also ensuring that mitigation and adaptation
targets are being met.
For targets 4.a, 11.2 and 11.7, which refer to accessibility by persons with
disabilities, the indicators can be based on existing ISO standards for accessibility
to buildings or "minimum national standards of accessibility by persons with
disabilities". The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities refers to
universal design, but there is not an operational currently used international
definition of accessibility/universal design. Countries tend to either use existing ISO
standards or make their own assessments of accessible schools, accessible public
buildings, and accessible transport according to national standards.
Also: given that the previous comments and recommendations are largely inspired
by the very instructive UN-DESA/UN-CRPD Secretariat technical note "Disability
indicators for the SDG Framework", which had been developed in close
consultation with many civil society stakeholders, incl. CBM, and which had been
submitted to the IAEG-SDGs in due time, CBM urges the IAEG-SDGs to draw back
on the recommendations contained therein for the remainder course of their work.
Finally, for the remainder process of developing global SDG-indicators as well as for
an updating and expanding/adapting of the by March 2016 to be adopted initial
global indicator Framework, the IAEG-SDGs should allow for meaningful, timely
and comprehensive consultation with civil Society actors, including disabled
person's organizations.
Stillbirths remain the single largest uncounted accountability agenda for deaths
after the MDGs. Stillbirth prevention is closely linked to adverse outcomes for both
women and child and is a concern in both rich and poor countries. SBR is a core
indicator in ENAP & is critical to measure–even more so since a specific target is
not including in the SDGs. Efforts to prevent stillbirths will also reduce maternal and
newborn mortality. We sincerely hope the SDGs will not make the same mistake
and overlook this indicator which not only measures a mortality outcome but also
can be used to measure quality and equity of health care for a women in pregnancy
and around the time of birth.
CCCRdg Papers_Campaigning for Transport and climate change a Monthly Car-
Free Work-Day PLANET and ambient air quality (Urban Action) as a contribution,
comments on the list of indicator proposals (as of 11 August 2015) currently under
discussion by the IAEG-SDGs - Climate Change Centre Reading (CCCRdg)
Please see comments on the list of indicator proposals (as of 11 August 2015)
currently under discussion by the IAEG-SDGs, sent to email address
statistics@un.org

70. Area of public and green space as a proportion of total city space
Cross-cutting SDG-GROUP 10, 11 (11.2, 11.6, 11.7, 11.b) + 13 and 17

To United Nations Statistics Division/Statistical Services Branch, IAEG and #SDNs
Please find below Climate Change Centre Reading´s (CCCRdg) comments on the
list of indicator proposals (as of 11 August 2015) currently under discussion by the
IAEG-SDGs;
Goal 10. – Reduce inequality within and among countries

Goal 11. – Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and
sustainable
Goal 11.2 – By 2030, provide...
Goal 11.6 – By 2030, reduce...
Goal 11.7 – By 2030, provide...
Goal 11.b – By 2020, substantially...
Goal 13. – Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
Goal 17. – Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global
partnership for sustainable development
The final session of Open Consultation of Civil Society, Academia and the Private
Sector on the Global Indicator Framework for the Goals and Targets of the
Sustainable Development. This agenda will be launched at a New York Summit in
September 2015
Although the targets indicate the importance of land rights for sustainable
development, none of the indicators prioritized to date would sufficiently measure
land rights for all men and women. Given the importance of land rights to
sustainable development generally -- including for poverty reduction, food security,
women's empowerment, conflict minimization, etc -- this appears to be a significant
oversight. Would suggest an indicator such as that suggested by UNEP for Target
1.4, which could perhaps take the place of the more narrow indicator focused on
women's ownership of agricultural land.
In the final drafts of Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development, the co-facilitators added antimicrobial resistance to paragraph 26. It
was a very important issue not properly addressed in the SDGs. This indicator
remedies the omission.
The targets and indicators associated with SDG 11 provide important opportunities
for collaboration across local, regional and national governments for tracking,
reporting, and implementing the goal. Goal 11 also has strong linkages to spatial
analysis and the “Data Revolution,” allowing for enhanced linkages across the
SDGs.
To effectively track the progress of Goal11, Make cities and human settlements
inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, it is essential to have systematic,
comparable and consistent information on cities around the globe over time.
Unfortunately, such information does not currently exist.
Geospatial technology offers unique opportunities for crafting an architecture of

indicators for SDG 11 applicable at all geographical scales across the rural-urban
continuum (Target 11.a), with particular relevance to human settlement planning
and management (Target 11.3), and green and public spaces (Target 11.7).
Geospatial technologies represent an invaluable tool for enhancing the capacity to

benchmark and measure performance in sustainability at multiple scales. Including
the spatial dimension can help standardize and make sense of divergent data
definitions and data collection methods. Moreover, integration of geospatial data
with traditional statistical data (such as a national census) produces a more detailed
understanding of trends and progress within a country, facilitating regional and city-
level analyses, and tracking the progress of vulnerable population groups.
Geospatial indicators can support the localization of the Post-2015 Development

Agenda by enhancing the capacity for monitoring of progress at the subnational
level. This localization can help assess inequalities within countries, inform better
decision-making and resource allocation at all levels, foster ownership of the Post-
2015 Development Agenda by citizens and civil society, and strengthen
transparency and accountability in its implementation. Moreover, by facilitating data
collection in real time, geospatial technology, fosters the use of such data for
improved urban planning and management, both for existing cities and rapidly
urbanizing regions.
Subnational and local governments are both important providers of relevant data for
tracking indicators, as well as front-line users of such data for implementing the
Post-2015 Development Agenda, including SDG 11. Moreover, subnational and
CI commends the open and inclusive approach to developing the indicator
framework, and is grateful for the opportunity to comment. However, CI is still
concerned that the SDGs take a very narrow approach to consumer protection, a
tool which can support the delivery of many goals and targets. We urge the IAEG-
SDGs to consider the multiple ways in which consumer protection can provide such
cross-cutting benefits for the 2030 Agenda (see
http://www.consumersinternational.org/media/1488820/the-role-of-consumer-
protection-in-meeting-the-sdgs_updated-jan15.pdf), and how such a simple
indicator, ‘Number of countries implementing the UN Guidelines for Consumer
Protection', can help to monitor and secure its achievement.
We welcome the fact that the list of proposed indicators is more comprehensive
than the first version of the list that was presented during the first IAEG meeting.
Most targets in the outcome document of the post-2015 agenda will need at least
two indicators to meaningfully monitor the implementation of the agenda. Where
two indicators are not enough to sufficiently cover the content of the targets, we
suggest additional indicators.
It is explicitly affirmed in the Outcome Document for the 2030 sustainable
development agenda that the SDGs should contribute to the realisation of human
rights - while human rights instrument should guide the strategies for their
implementation. However, it is not well understood what the concrete linkages are
between human rights and the 17 goals and 169 targets.
Therefore, the Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR) has undertaken a
comprehensive mapping of the human rights references implicitly or explicitly
embedded in the SDG targets. Based on this mapping, DIHR has further
undertaken a review of the proposed priority indicators, in order to assess their
reference and relevance to human rights, as well as the correspondence between
indicators and targets (see Annex A for the methodology applied).
Thereby, the review can help:

• Identify gaps where proposed indicators do not capture relevant human rights
references of the targets;
• Provide guidance to align the proposed indicators with international human
rights standards;
• Identify priorities for additional global or national indicators to ensure a human
rights-based approach to monitoring of the SDGs.
The full mapping of targets and human rights references as well as the review of
indicators is available at: DIHR website: www.humanrights.dk/sdg-guide
Data coverage and quality are not sufficient to accurately monitor progress of the
sustainable development goal (SDG) of ‘ending poverty in all its forms everywhere’.
We need investments in data collection, including baseline data, to inform
progress. Without this, efforts to reach the poorest people and make the
investments needed to end poverty cannot be appropriately targeted and their
success cannot be measured.
• There are multiple sources of data – such as survey, administrative, big and
feedback data –that can be improved and used to inform policy and monitor
progress in complementary ways.
• To inform the end of poverty, data needs to be:

o Disaggregated by gender, age, disability, income quintile and by geographical
location.
o Joined up across datasets so investments can be compared with the needs
and their impact on the poorest people to track whether the right resources are
benefitting the right people.
• For data to be used as a tool in decision-making:

o Countries must own and develop their own national data systems and thereby
develop a culture of data use.
o The international community has a supporting role to play by investing in core
statistical systems and data collection that reflects national priorities.
It will be essential that different data types can be used in complementary ways to
inform our understanding of needs, access to services and resources and the
effectiveness of investments, including by triangulating official data. Both private
and public stakeholders have a role to play in collecting and sharing data to inform
efforts to reduce poverty. An ecosystem of data producers and users working on a
common agenda for better data can inform better allocation of resources to end
poverty.
DITTA , the Global Diagnostic Imaging Healthcare IT & Radiation Therapy Trade
Association, welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the discussion on indicators
for the SDGs.
Generally speaking, the public and policymakers alike are aware medical devices
play an important role in contributing to medical outcomes in countries at all levels
of development. For example, many of the advances in treating diseases such as
HIV, malaria or multiple-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR TB) have depended on
diagnosing such diseases, while cost-effective technologies such as infant warmers
have reduced infant mortality. Thus, it can hardly be questioned whether access to
such devices exists as an important consideration in healthcare policy – clearly this
is the case.
However, the lack of a globally accepted framework, a clear methodology or
indicators to measure access and uptake of such technologies have hampered
development of a robust policy framework aimed at improving access and ensuring
minimum standards are met. It is important that there is room for innovative thinking
and thought leadership to develop such a framework for medical devices.
As DITTA, a NGO representing more than 600 medical technology manufacturers,
we are committed to improving health care and patient outcomes. Medical
technologies tend to be linked to areas of healthcare– such as medical IT,
diagnostic imaging, or radiotherapy, and thus are integrated in all levels of the
health system. Proposals to set metrics on this basis – such as stipulating minimum
number of devices per million population – have some advantages, but also ignore
that the real measure of effectiveness is how they are utilized to generate specific
outcomes.
As DITTA we believe a different approach may be worth considering, in which
recommendations for medical technology and the measurement of their
effectiveness is linked to their use in disease-specific care pathways. The concept
is simple but powerful: to assess for each disease area at which stage medical
devices are utilized in the patient journey from prevention, to screening, to
diagnosis, to treatment and to palliative care, and to identify how the use of
technologies can be applied in each disease area to achieve optimal outcomes.
We propose to develop representative “Pathways of Care”, which could, among
other indicators and sub-indicators, define the required number of healthcare
professionals, the required content and level of their training, the appropriate
medical equipment etc.
An integrated indicator is an indicator on which progress entails multiple thematic
“wins”, in this context these wins are related to human health, environmental
sustainability and development. The fundamental strength of integrated indicators is
that they measure both environmental and human health outcomes of diet. The
proposed integrated indicators contribute to the global monitoring of SDGs in
addition to thematic reporting on targets related to food systems and diets.
Among the 169 proposed targets, 62 relate to food (Annex 3). Notably, significant
emphasis is placed on sustainable food production and natural resource use across
these targets, whereas proposed targets seem to neglect nutrition related
challenges.
The number of SDG targets implies that every globally harmonized indicator has to
be carefully selected in order to keep the total of global indicators manageable with
existing and future data collection abilities. Our proposal highlights 11 integrated
indicators, each to be assigned to a cluster of targets.
National indicators: in addition to the universal set of indicators, Member States

should set a transparent and inclusive process at national level to establish
indictors which capture the national realities. No one is left behind: the post-2015
agenda must contain an explicit commitment that no target shall be considered met
unless it is met for all social and economic groups. No one must be left behind by
virtue of their gender, age, disability, income, geography or ethnicity. Indicators will
need to be disaggregated to ensure that disparities and inequalities in progress are
visible, and that the impact of the SDGs on the poorest and most marginalised
people is monitored. Participation of CSOs, social movements and individuals must
be guaranteed throughout all aspects of the post-2015 development agenda:
planning, implementation and monitoring with means (capacity building, funds, etc).
Integrated agenda: No target can be met if the implementation of another target is
threaten or violated. Solutions for one target need to contemplate the respect of the
realization of the whole agenda targets
Please add whom within the different organizations we can contact to discuss
indicators and baselines. FOr ex ITU point of contact or mail box. WB point of
contact or mailbox. etc
WHen will the baselines be added to the indicators work?
Regarding 16.4.1 (illicit financial flows), please do not set the indicators in 'concrete'
yet. See if the few individual-country studies that are being prepared are at all
compatible with existing regional or global estimates. If they are incompatible, this
calls into question the exercise until many more individual-country studies have
been undertaken.

In order to get a clear picture of women's and men's economic status by gender, the
framework of indicators needed to address women's economic inequalities
effectively must produce data on three interlinked aspects of women's economic
existences:
(1) women's and men's total incomes (defined broadly as including all cash
transfers as well as earned incomes, investment incomes, occasional receipts, and
other cash flows) -- as well as the relative composition of those incomes; and
(2) women's and men's total paid work time, including time to travel to and from
paid work; and
(3) women's and men's total unpaid work time, broken down by domestic and care
work in own home and in homes of others, self-care, education, and leisure times,
with information on the numbers of others in the household needing care.
No human being has more than 24 hours a day. So long as women remain
responsible for disproportionate amounts of unpaid work and low-wage and/or low-
hours work, economic inequality will remain a physical impossibility for most women
in the world. These factors are exacerbated for racialized, indigenous, disabled,
poor, and aging women and men, all of which are important breakouts that must be
able to be generated with appropriate data.
Creating a safe and just space for humanity to thrive with planetary and social
boundaries is a key global change for the XXIst century. We believe the social,
human rights, economic aspects of sustainable development should be more
explicit in the indicators.
In terms of production, not all methods of production and trade (e.g. fairly traded or
sustainably produced or not), type of organisations (e.g. Fair Trade organisations or
inclusive business models or not) deliver the same sustainable development
outcomes. The proportion/volumes of key commodities PRODUCED under
sustainable or Fair Trade schemes, and then the proportions of those commodities
that are then SOLD or traded as certified from/within those countries into the
consumer market (ie that are then part of a sustainable consumption offer) would
be useful indicators.
We welcome the fact the list of proposed indicators is more comprehensive than the
first version of the list that was presented during the first IAEG meeting. Most
targets in the draft outcome document of post-2015 development agenda will need
at least two indicators to meaningfully monitor the implementation of the post-2015
agenda. Indicators may be developed that contribute to multiple targets and
measure the impact of multiple inputs, but some targets will require multiple
indicators. The number of indicators should not be arbitrarily limited, but should live
up to the ambition of the sustainable development goals and targets. It is essential
for the global indicator framework to include indicators that measure progress
against all 169 targets, not just the pieces that are easier to address. Where two
indicators are not enough to sufficiently cover the content of the targets, we suggest
Specifically, women’s ability to exercise their reproductive rights is central to their

empowerment and achieving gender equality and achieving universal access to
sexual and reproductive health services is a key pillar and prerequisite for achieving
the SDGs. These issues have cross-cutting effects for the new Agenda, including
for poverty eradication, public health, gender equality, education, women’s full
participation in societies and economies, young people’s development,
environmental stewardship, economic growth and seizing demographic windows of
opportunity. Proposals offered in relation to these issues aim to fill critical gaps in
indicators needed for tracking commitments made by Member States to respect,
protect, and promote the rights of women and girls. It is imperative indicators
comply with and promote current human rights standards in order to measure
progress and track development objectives.
We want to underline that combating climate change as well as combating

environmental degradation and promoting a sustainable, affordable and reliable
energy future are main challenges of the 21st century, nationally – and globally. It,
therefore, is utmost important that indicators to all targets are chosen and all
dimensions of sustainability including the environmental dimension are sufficiently
addressed in the global Sustainable Development Agenda.
If further indicator development and statistical capacity building is needed to reach

this goal, we urgently recommend to include a process to allow periodical review of
the indicator framework to be presented by the IAEG. This is necessary to respond
to the results of further indicator research done by institutions such as the Federal
Environment Agency of Germany.
The indicator framework is too complex and contains too many variables to
measure. Poor countries, where the need is the greatest, will most likely not be able
to mobilise enough resources to measure progress.
The global fertilizer industry association (IFA), its members and national fertilizer
associations like Fertilizer Canada (formally known as the Canadian Fertilizer
Institute) and The Fertilizer Institute are developing strategic programs across the
globe to address international food security. The global fertilizer industry is
committed to balancing the economic, social and environmental goals of our
stakeholders, including farm groups, homeowners, researchers, conservationists,
governments, industry members and communities.
The global fertilizer industry supports 4R Nutrient Stewardship Best Management
Practices which align with the principles of Climate Smart Agriculture and contribute
to the United Nation’s key deliverables for 2015. 4R Nutrient Stewardship is a
science-based approach which works to increase production/profitability for farmers
while enhancing environmental protection and improving sustainability. To achieve
these goals, the 4Rs encourage farmers to use fertilizer management practices that
ensure the right source is applied at the right rate, at the right time and in the right
place.
The United Nations has a unique opportunity to take advantage of advancements
made by the global fertilizer industry, and to develop a goals and indicators that
balance environmental and economic performance. The United Nations should
contemplate the following:
•Adopt and support science-based decision-making on matters affecting agricultural
productivity and food security.
•Support and promote 4R Nutrient Stewardship program as a solution to help
increase agricultural productivity in developing countries.
•Recognize the actions undertaken by the global fertilizer industry to promote the
principles of 4R Nutrient Stewardship as a means to end hunger, achieve food
security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture.
•Support and promote the 4R Nutrient Stewardship program as a means to protect
water quality.
•Support and promote the Nitrous Oxide Emission Reduction Protocol as a solution
to help integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and
planning.
FIABCI, the International Real Estate Federation, is an umbrella organization
representative the RE private sector with a long history of cooperation with UN and
International Organizations; it is focused on SD of Real Estate markets, of Cities
and Regions, of Housing, covering directly or indirectly all the thematic area of
point 6 of this questionnaire and all the 17 SDGs.
The Real Estate private sector is a major structural component of national
economies (representing roughly 70% of global wealth) and the driving force for
economic growth, that, through its involvement in housing, has a major impact on
cities and societies SD; further an appropriate RE property registration and
representation is a relevant instrument for eradicating poverty in developing
countries as it has been shown in countries that applied the Hernando de Soto
theory; an accurate evaluation of value and risk of RE assets backing financial
products constitutes a relevant contribution at global financial stability. As noted at
Rio+20, the market and the private sector play a key role in implementing global
sustainability and financing it.
Since Rio+20 FIABCI is focused, other than SD of Real Estate Markets and
Housing, on Cities SD, based on the cooperation of private RE sector with local
and national authorities; FIABCI signed on 2014 a partnership in WUC of
UNHABITAT and an Innovating Partnership with Cities Programme, the urban
component of Global Compact, and on the basis of this Partnership produced an
alfa version of a software to assess Cities SD, according to Circles of Sustainability
theory, with the methodology and process given at that time by GC Cities
programme. The alfa version has still a restricted access online ( id: admin, pwd:
city) at
cities.mesys.it
This software could be modified in an experimental beta version, considering the
indicators related to cities, that will be decided by UN and implemented by inputs
coming from the preparation and then finalized with the outcomes of HABITAT III.
From the dropbox it is possible to download more info about FIABCI activities to
support SD, about the software and the indicators will be used and to download
the documents to which these comments refer:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ofolldyb46fwg0/Documents%20related%20to
%20FIABCI%20comments%20to%20SDGs%20Indicators%20Public
%20Survey.doc?dl=0
When referring to young people, indicators should take into consideration national
definitions rather than one universal age limit.
Important to take into account philanthropic data which will be tracked by
Foundation Center, UNDP and the SDG Philanthropy Platform as a whole. The
Platform will work to encourage foundations to understand the need for data and
encourage them to use SDG indicators through country level capacity building
mechanisms from the starting point of awareness and understanding, knowledge
building and eventually to data sharing and exchange.
FRAmericas is proposing to undertake an independent indicator follow-up project,
fed by civil society organizations, to contribute to the efforts of IAEG-SDGs
specifically regarding 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, particularly at UN
level, and through a global technology facilitation mechanism when agreed) and
17.8 (fully operationalize the Technology Bank and STI (Science, Technology and
Innovation) capacity building mechanism for LDCs by 2017, and enhance the use
of enabling technologies in particular ICT).
The affordability indicator meets all criteria outlined by the IAEG-SDGs process.
Methodologically sound: The methodology has been applied by WHO, most

recently in its 2015 Global Tobacco Control Report (GTCR). It is based on peer-
reviewed literature, examining options for measuring affordability; the indicator
being proposed is closely correlated with alternative but methodologically more
complicated measures.
Accessible: There are readily available, transparent and credible data sources
available, in the WHO’s GTCR, statistical agencies’ consumer price data, and
biennial reports by all Parties to the FCTC via mandatory reporting instrument. Data
on GDP per capita may come from Word Bank’s World Development Indicators
database for per capita GDP.
Relevant: In countries where incomes and purchasing power are growing rapidly
and/or tobacco taxes are not keeping up with inflation and/or income growth,
tobacco is becoming increasingly more affordable, with the potential to more than
counteract the positive health impact of non-tax measures to control tobacco use.
This is particularly relevant for developing countries which are experiencing rapid
rates of economic growth, many of which are seeing sharp increases in tobacco
use prevalence and/or tobacco-caused mortality. Guidelines on implementation of
Article 6 of the WHO FCTC highlight the need to consider the affordability of
tobacco products as a key measure of effective tobacco tax policies. Measuring
affordability will provide an interim measure of policy change necessary to assess
efforts to strengthen implementation of the WHO FCTC, especially in developing
countries.
Price and tax measures on tobacco are explicitly highlighted by the Addis Ababa
Action Agenda as an effective and important tool to reduce tobacco consumption
and health-care costs, as well as a potential revenue stream for development at
country level (para 32).
Timely: An affordability indicator provides information on government’s efforts to

increase prices of, and demand for, tobacco. An increase of a price of cigarettes
has an immediate effect on cigarette consumption and on uptake of smoking by
new users, youth in particular.
The French water stakeholders, united within the French Water Partnership, are
collectively in favour of a specific water Goal within the post 2015 Development
Agenda, and have been working on providing “SMART” indicators. They have
collaborated on this issue with the National Statistical Office which is also
represented in the United Nations Statistical Commissions. The current reponse to
the IAEG-SDG open consultation is based on their work, which is available at:
http://www.partenariat-francais-eau.fr/en/calendar/evenement/the-un-general-
assembly-for-a-2015-2030-agenda/
The big failure of MDG was the non appropriation of the agenda. If we want this
agenda to be implemented and have an actual impact the agenda need to
guarantee Participation of CSOs, social movements and individuals must
throughout all aspects of the post-2015 development agenda implementation and
monitoring with means to do it (capacity building, funds, etc). In addition to the
universal set of indicators, Member States should set a transparent and inclusive
process at national level where CSO and NGO are included to establish collectively
indicators which capture the national realities.
Integrated agenda: No target can be met if the implementation of it, implies that
another target is threaten or violated. Solutions for one target needs to contemplate
the respect of the realization of the whole agenda targets.
In order to actually reach the most marginalized, disaggregation of urban and rural,
need to goes beyond. And measure the percentage of the improvement for the
most abandoned communities in urban and in rural groups.
the post-2015 agenda must contain an explicit commitment that no target shall be
considered met unless it is met for all social and economic groups. No one must be
left behind by virtue of their gender, age, disability, income, geography or ethnicity.
SDG 11.7: We support indicator 11.7.1 but stresse the importance of adoption of
additional indicators to measure the quality and distribution of public space. As
these indicators have to rest on robust evidence there is a need for a continued
research to develop contextual indicators.
-Increase by one-third the amount of urban public space over total urban land area,
meet WHO’s suggested minimum of 9 square meters open space per resident, and
ensure that there is an accessible public park or recreational open space within
half-a-kilometer (walking distance) of every city resident by 2030 (Urban
Environmental Accords, Action 10)
-Increase measures to protect vulnerable groups particularly women and girls from
violence and harassment, including sexual harassment and bullying, in both public
and private spaces, to address security and safety, through awareness-raising,
involvement of local communities, crime prevention laws, policies, programmes,
improved urban planning, infrastructures, public transport and street lighting, and
also through social and interactive media (CSW, 2013)
-Extend the rule of law and policing to all urban areas, reduce violent deaths in
urban areas per 100,000 by x, including traffic-related accidents and violence
against women and children
-Increase access (multiple access) to multipurpose public space and services, for
all but particularly for vulnerable groups that depend on the use of public space for
their livelihoods (Percentage of citizens living within 300m of public open areas)
-Increase the proportion of permeable, walkable and green (unsealed/unpaved)
public land in cities and increase the environmental services and biodiversity in
public space, and by 2030 ensure all city-regions achieve a tree canopy of at least
25% of land area
-Include in national frameworks and action plans a “Cultural Impact Assessment”
mechanism for urbanization processes in order to improve and/or preserve the
cultural quality of public spaces (through public art, distinctive architecture, design,
and landscapes)
-Promote the active participation of citizens in urban planning, including of women,
children and vulnerable groups, and measure the societal engagement. Also
measure the urban population’s satisfaction with the city’s management of its public
space
In addition to global, national and regional indicators cities and local government
should be supported to propose city-wide strategies and action plans for public
space implementation.
Human rights and equity underpin the 17 SDG’s. Every year immunisation averts 2
to 3 million infant deaths globally from deadly diseases such as diphtheria, hepatitis
B, measles, mumps, pertussis, polio and tetanus. Vaccines save lives, but 1 in 5
children, an estimated 21.8 million infants worldwide, still miss out on basic
vaccines. This indicator is recognition that every child has the right to lead a
healthy life, and vaccination is a vital step.
It is recognised that the SDG’s and targets are integrated, global in nature and
universally applicable. Also central to the SDG discourse is that national ownership
is key to achieving sustainable development. The proposed indicator is universal in
its application given its relevance to all countries irrespective of their GNI. As it
focuses on the scale up of access to vaccines in the national schedule, the
indicator reinforces country-led development.
Immunisation coverage has long been a recognised and widely used measure of
health. In the past it has often focussed on a single antigen or vaccine, such as the
last dose of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine. The added value of the proposed
indicator is that it is responsive to scientific and development advances by
measuring coverage of all vaccines in national programmes. It aligns with the intent
of the SDGs to have relevance at the national level, across all countries, and be
able to be meaningfully aggregated.
Thanks to the determination of developing country and donor governments, Gavi
has recently mobilised the resources to significantly scale up new vaccine use and
expand coverage of vaccines in routine national systems. The coming years will
see significant shifts in vaccine use and coverage, with a potential transformational
impact on people’s health and well-being. Therefore while the proposed indicator is
ambitious, with the partnership of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and strong leadership
at country level, this is attainable.
We support the indicators developed by UN DESA/DSPS/Secretariat for the

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities with contributions and support
from the World Health Organization prepared in the note"Disability indicators for the
SDG framework".
1. The reduction of the number of indicators must not be at the expense of critical
aspects of the education goal and targets. It is our concern that the parts of the
education target that are measured will be the only ones that will be implemented.
The broad and holistic education goal should not lose its richness by parts of the
framework for measurement selected arbitrarily. If an aspect of the education target
is treasured or valued, it must also have a mechanism for follow up and review. One
indicator per target is not enough to capture the complexities involved.
2. Indicators must be in line with existing human rights obligations and should not
be limited to outcome indicators. They must be in line with existing human rights
obligations and thus include structure, process and outcome indicators. They must
evaluate not only the extent of enjoyment of rights by rights holders, but also the
extent to which states fulfil their obligations as duty-bearers. Including structure and
process indicators, and not only outcomes, will ensure that states put in place
enabling systems (structures) and undertake specific actions (processes) that are
critical to ensure that outcomes are achieved.
3. Provide space for qualitative indicators. Restricting the indicators picked to only
quantitative data carries risks. The statistical principle ‘Campbell’s law’1 highlights
that the more a quantitative social indicator (e.g. a learning achievement test) is
used for decision-making, the more apt it will be to distort
and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.
4. Incentivise action for the poorest and most marginalised and provide for
disaagregation.
5. Support national and public educational systems. Indicators picked should
recognise and support national education systems and should not undermine
member states’ ability to lay down their own curricula.
6. Be based on an understanding of the opportunity costs (both direct and indirect)
and risks associated with the regular measurement of the indicators. It is currently
proposed to measure progress against the SDGs annually. It is questionable
whether it is realistic to expect annual progress against many of
the indicators being proposed, especially outcome indicators.
7. Indicators must lend themselves to direct citizen participation in the process of
measurement of progress, from design, collection of data, and analysis and
communication of the results
The IAEG should look not only at all details of the many proposed SDGs indicators,
but also at whether, where and how those proposed indicators are already in use in
the intergovernmental system, including by specialized agencies and expert
monitoring bodies which draw on "third party" data from academic and civil society
sources. Adoption of such accepted internationally comparable indicators imposes
no additional burden on national statistical offices. There are many such examples
relevant to the SDGs, in areas ranging from women's rights and the environment to
education, economics, and governance. It would be a historic mistake to impose an
arbitrary cap on the absolute number of indicators. What is required is a rigorous
assessment of what is being measured now; what is not being measured but could
and should be; and what is not and cannot be empirically measured in any
consistent, accepted, internationally comparable manner for the next 15 years.
• All the targets that fall below previous international commitments should be
removed. The SDGs must clearly align with already agreed upon commitments,
including the unfinished agenda of the MDGs, to ensure stronger consistency and
continuity while adapting to new challenges in a technically achievable manner.
• Transparency, accountability, and the use of accurate data (and making sure
this data is available) must be guaranteed. A fixed baseline for data must be
defined by 2016. Each indicator and target in the new framework should be either
an absolute goal (0% or 100%) or call for a specified reduction in the number of
cases and/or deaths from a baseline collected in a specified baseline year.
• Targets of the OWG that use a percentage (e.g., X% reduction based on X

year) should be specified through international agreed upon commitments.
• Each target should be measured against at least 2 indicators and convert

global targets to national contexts.
Health is fundamental to achieving the SDGs. In particular, the health burden that
falls disproportionately on LMICs must be addressed if we are to ensure
sustainable economic prosperity.
As recognized by the ambitious targets that make up the health goal, this will
require ending the epidemics of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected
tropical diseases, as well as reducing maternal mortality and ending preventable
deaths in newborns and children.
These goals will not be achieved without R&D to develop new health technologies
—such as new and improved drugs, vaccines, diagnostics, and other critical
innovations—and to improve our understanding of how to best target the tools we
already have.
And this R&D will not happen without public and philanthropic investment and
leadership. If the SDGs are to be successful, it is therefore vital that they
acknowledge the importance of—and measure progress toward—R&D for global
health.
But current SDG discussions have largely overlooked the importance of R&D in
reaching the health targets, and no current SDG indicator proposals include any
indicators that can adequately measure global health R&D.
Based on extensive landscaping, consultation, and analysis, we have proposed a

set of indicators for measuring progress in global health R&D. Including these
indicators in the SDG monitoring framework is essential if we are to track the
innovation that is fundamental to achieving the health goals of the post-2015
development agenda. As health R&D and issues of access and affordability are
interlinked, the indicators suggested here are not meant to replace indicators that
facilitate access and affordability of new technologies, which have already been
proposed and included in the draft monitoring framework.
On behalf of a group of global health R&D organizations, Policy Cures has

conducted an in-depth analysis and stakeholder consultation to evaluate the SDG
indicator landscape and recommend indicators that could be used to monitor
progress toward global health R&D in the post-2015 development agenda. Pieces
of this analysis have been included in this set of consultation feedback. The
Child labour currently affects around 168 million children, and recent trends slow a
sluggish pace of reduction. Given its inter-connectedness with a range other
development issues, its a topic which deserves prominence only not only in
goals/targets, but also in terms of establishing clear and comprehensive indicators.
Given this, while Global March agrees with the recommended indicator, it is
suggested to break them into indicators for all children in child labour, and those in
worst forms, disaggregated as per type of worst forms. The different catgories of
worst forms are included here to highlight the importance of tracking progress for
the different categories, particularly for a) which refers to child slavery – children in
the most hidden, and abusive forms of work. Till date, progress was mostly
monitored for category d), and the statistics collected for children in hazardous work
was considered to a proxy measure of progress for children in other worst forms of
child labour.
The suggested indicator for human trafficking is linked and also already existing for
the indicator for target 16.2 on trafficking of children, with the “type” of human
trafficking to mean “exploitation” as defined in Trafficking/Palermo Protocol. Given
the different and devasting forms of modern slavery that cover prostitution, and
other forms of commercial sexual exploitation, forced marriages, forced labour, and
differnt types of worst forms of child labour, a seperate indicator is recommended.
The role of a robust and comprehensive legal and policy framework at national
levels, that is well resourced in addressing forced labour, modern slavery, human
trafficking and child labour cannot be denied or argued against. Given this, Global
March recommends indicators on national frameworks and resource allocation to
monitor progress on endind forced labour, modern slavery, human trafficking and
child labour.
The most promising and prominient aspect of the MDGs was the goal to ensure that
by 2015 all children would have completed primary schooling.
At present, the vast majority of children trapped in the worst forms of child labour
have not completed their primary education. Achieving UPE will not by itself be
sufficient to eliminate the worst forms of child labour, but it is a virtual certainty that
such exploitation will not be eliminated if large numbers of young children continue
to be excluded from primary schooling.
NTDs were overlooked in the original Millennium Development Goals. It is critical

that these diseases not be neglected again, particularly with the progress made so
far. Successful public-private partnerships with leading pharmaceutical companies
have made treating NTDs extremely inexpensive and the commitments made by
the private sector continue to grow-- yet, these will not continue indefinitely.
In addition, the treatment of NTDs can serve as an early indicator of access to basic
health care among the poorest and most marginalized people, supporting the
overall goals of the SDGs to eliminate extreme poverty in all its forms.
Having been left out of the MDGs, hygiene is explicitly mentioned on the first page
of the declaration of the Sustainable Development framework. This reflects its
status as a globally relevant development intervention. Furthermore, it is specifically
mentioned in the target 6.2.
There is significant consensus that handwashing is a viable indicator and it has

been proposed by the World Health Organization and Unicef, with data already
existing for 50+ countries. Despite this, it has not been included as a suggested
indicator by the IAEG.
To reflect the intent of the target and to ensure the IAEG does not inadvertently
diminish the ambition of the framework, we strongly recommend the inclusion of an
indicator to measure hygiene with additionally specified disaggregation of location
(home, school, health centre), reflecting the need for focus on those in vulnerable
situations.
The indicator should be included as follows:
6.2.2 Percentage of population using a handwashing facility with soap,

disaggregated by location (home, school, health centre).
The SDG is an encouragement especially at this time when they're are so many
global emergencies.
Effective delivery of all the targets will take us all FOWARD.
Our proposed indicators, to the extent possible, are grounded in existing data
collection systems, but truly comprehensive global monitoring will require some
countries to expand their statistical systems and non-governmental organizations to
expand their monitoring as well. However, some indicators will require investment
in entirely new data collection efforts; other indicators are included given the critical
nature of the topic but need further work to develop common definitions and data
collection methodologies. We have considered this latter type of indicators to be
“aspirational” and provided some indication of the work needed to develop them.
Some topics have multiple proposed indicators, which are ranked in order of
preference.
Disaggregation is crucial to assessing equity and protection of human rights across

all indicators. Therefore we recommend that, where possible, data systems include
socio-demographic characteristics such as age, sex, wealth quintile and place of
residence (urban or rural) and that data be reported according to these
characteristics.
A more extensive list of Guttmacher recommended SRHR indicators will be

available from Sept 25th at www.guttmacher.org
This input on target 11.1 is supported by a wider group of NGOs. The full statement
can be found here
http://intlhc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Input-to-IAEG-SDGs-on-Target-11.pdf
Nature organizes systems to work as complex wholes,… but our indicators
measure separate parts. So we create *lots of problems* if we believe individual
goals can be met individually.
Individual cultural and economic development goals can only be met by the
development of the whole culture and its economy, working with how the parts
connect.
In historical terms, humanity is very late in noticing this. Our global circumstance is
already severely compromised by our having failed to notice the limits of the earth
until we collided with them... So now we have naturally restricted choices, and
making a whole system viewpoint *especially* important to develop.
I have a great deal to offer in that regard, as a natural systems scientist. I could
help others fill in a lot of missing terminology and methodology for recognizing and
responding to the natural whole systems we need to respond to. You could say,
since each natural whole system defines its own language, that “I speak multiple
scientific languages”. You might need that... I'd be happy to hear from you.
We just wish to reinforce the need to amend the note regarding the disaggregation
of data in the indicators framework to specify all categories for disaggregation as
outlined in the SDGs.
CONTINUATION OF COMMENTS FOR 3.7
And: adolescent birth rate by age (10-14, 15-17, 18-19), income, location, marital
status, educational level & other characteristics; proportion of family planning
service sites with at least 5 modern methods available; inclusion of universal
access to contraceptive & other SRH information & services in national policy;
indicator reflective of respectful care & human rights in provision of SRH information
& services; grounds under which induced abortion is legal; rate of unsafe abortions
per 1,000 women of reproductive age
We fully recognize the challenge the IAEG-SDG has in developing an indicator
framework that is both comprehensive and yet manageable. However, for the
targets for which we have focused (namely 11.2 and 11.7), we are concerned that
one indicator cannot possibly address the entire target. Although we suggested
modal split as a potential indicator for 11.2, we do believe that a proximity to public
transit target is important. However, even that target cannot address the full myriad
of issues that impact access for women, the disabled, and poor. In addition modal
split does not tell us anything about whether or not people are choosing to walk and
cycle because it is an appealing choice or because they have no other options.
Walking and cycling need to be attractive choices, not just the only choice, if we are
to achieve sustainable transportation. There is a similar issue for a public spaces
indicator since proximity to a park or public space does not say anything about the
quality of the experience. We would therefore like to suggest that in addition to the
indicators developed for the Global Monitoring Framework an additional set of
measures be developed and used by countries that address these important
issues.
Finally, we would like to suggest an additional cross-cutting indicator that could

perhaps be included with the Nutrition goal. The SDGs have targets related to
maintaining a connection between rural and urban areas, ensuring access to public
spaces, ensuring access to healthy food, and supporting local economies. Local
public markets' play an important role in achieving all of these objectives, and yet
there is no specific target in the SDGs that encourages cities to ensure access to
local public markets. Therefore, it is important to have a local public market
indicator: The proportion of the population that has a public market within 0.5km.
We realize that it may be difficult to include such an indicator at this late stage.
However, we wanted to raise the awareness of this important issue.
We fully recognize the challenge the IAEG-SDG has in developing an indicator

framework that is both comprehensive and yet manageable. However, for the
targets for which we have focused (namely 11.2 and 11.7), we are concerned that
one indicator cannot possibly address the entire target. Although we suggested
modal split as a potential indicator for 11.2, we do believe that a proximity to public
transit target is important. However, even that target cannot address the full myriad
of issues that impact access for women, the disabled, and poor. In addition modal
split does not tell us anything about whether or not people are choosing to walk and
cycle because it is an appealing choice or because they have no other options.
Walking and cycling need to be attractive choices, not just the only choice, if we are
to achieve sustainable transportation. There is a similar issue for a public spaces
indicator since proximity to a park or public space does not say anything about the
quality of the experience. We would therefore like to suggest that in addition to the
indicators developed for the Global Monitoring Framework an additional set of
measures be developed and used by countries that address these important
issues.
Finally, we would like to suggest an additional cross-cutting indicator that could
perhaps be included with the Nutrition goal. The SDGs have targets related to
maintaining a connection between rural and urban areas, ensuring access to public
spaces, ensuring access to healthy food, and supporting local economies.
However, despite the local public markets' role in achieving all of these objectives,
there is no specific target in the SDGs that encourages access to local public
markets. Therefore, it is important to have a local public market indicator:
The proportion of the population that has a public market within 0.5km.
With regard to Indicator 5.3.1, the additional level of specificity (by adding "before
age 15") does not add any burden to data collection, as information on age of
marriage (whether under 15 or 18) is already systematically collected, for example,
through question 711 of the DHS Women's Survey and UNICEF's own Multiple
Indicator Cluster Survey, among others, and reported on by multiple organizations,
including UNICEF. While CEFM carries risks for all girls, these are particularly
pronounced for those younger than 15 and girls younger than 15 require specific
and tailored attention in prevention and response efforts. They are often much less
able to resist marriage or negotiate any terms of their marriage or likely to know
where to seek help, and may face the greatest obstacles to accessing
comprehensive sexuality education, and a wide range of reproductive health
services and information, including contraception and safe and legal abortion.
Furthermore, as shown by research in multiple countries, preventing marriage
among girls under 15 will require different interventions than preventing the
marriage of older girls, and should be a matter of particular urgency – as would be
emphasized by an indicator disaggregating such marriages.
Keen to further discuss with IAEG-SDGs on how best to take into account unique
challenges of extractives in measuring efficiency and material footprint.
- With regards to the education goal and targets, the reduction of the number of
indicators must not be at the expense of critical aspects for measuring their
achievement. Otherwise the parts of the education targets that are measured will
be the only ones that will be implemented. The broad and holistic education goal
should not lose its richness by parts of the framework for measurement selected
arbitrarily. The TAG and the IAEG-SDG must not cherry-pick components of Goal 4
and its targets which they deem worthy of measurement. If an aspect of the
education target is treasured or valued, it must also have a mechanism for follow up
and review. Member states must agree that one indicator per target is not enough
to capture the complexities involved.
- Incentivise action for the poorest and most marginalised and include
disaggregation based on all forms of exclusion as recognised in human rights law –
including gender, class, race, caste, disability, age, indigenous/ethnic background
and geography. Both proposals only talk about disaggregation based on sex,
location and wealth, despite target 4.5 explicitly mentioning persons with
disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations. Broad criteria
and datasets, such as the EFA Global Monitoring Report’s WIDE database, are a
useful source of information.
- It is currently proposed to measure progress against the SDGs annually. Yet is
questionable whether it is realistic to expect annual progress against many of the
indicators being proposed, especially outcome indicators.
- The indicators must evaluate not only the extent of enjoyment of
rights by rights holders, but also the extent to which States fulfil their obligations as
duty-bearers. Including structure and process indicators, and not only outcomes,
will ensure that States put in place enabling systems (structures) and undertake
specific actions (processes) that are critical to ensure that outcomes are achieved.
There are frequently gaps between policies and the reality of their implementation,
hence the importance of having both structure and process indicators.
To obtain the statistics needed for calculating the indicator for progress towards
'legal identity for all' necessary questions need to be added to national population
censuses and/or large scale nation wide household surveys. Countries should be
encouraged to do so for the forthcoming population census, even though the
recommendations for the 2020 round of population censuses have been developed
already. These questions should be required in the 2030 round of population
censuses.
SDGs should carry area specific objectives for effective implementation

The framework should identify identical areas (coastal areas, wetlands, forests,
deserts; cities, sub urban areas, towns, villages; educated, uneducated; developed,
under developed, developing, zero developments in terms of maturation of the
services, developments in a particular area), where models for such groups could
be established and then rehearsed in other parts. For example, the situation in
Africa and Asia and Europe cannot be equated. In sanitation while Europe (water
rich ) is more towards dry toilets, India (water starved) still finds difficult to endorse
them but votes for wet toilets.
The global situation are critical recently increased poverty, migrants, trafficking
inperson violent women and child right and also human. Many conflicts occurin
many countries in the world. They have affected on social economic development
and people are living in poor condition.
It is critical that indicators are quantitative and qualitative. A rigorous indicator
framework including both quantitative and qualitative indicators will underpin
financing strategies and implementation frameworks that reflect the various types of
resources needed to achieve sustainable development, overcome inequalities and
fulfil gender equality commitments. Therefore gender-differentiated statistics and
indicators should be collected nationally, regionally and globally in order to measure
gender gaps and adjust development programmes to rectify inequalities.
At a minimum, data should be disaggregated on the basis of age, sex, geography,
income, disability, race and ethnicity and other factors as relevant to monitoring
inequalities.
Even though some indicators are measured by household (not by individual) it is
still important that the data collected for those indicators is disaggregated – it is
important to know how the household is comprised.
There must be scope to elaborate on the indicator framework in coming years in
order to adapt to changing development environments and evolving methodologies.
already have.
health.


of this analysis have been included in this set of consultation feedback.
IARD congratulates Member States on their efforts to address health within the
framework of the SDGs, and for the inclusion of a reduction in harmful drinking as a
global target that requires concerted action at the local level. Because of its
relationship with chronic disease and acute harm, as well as its relationship with
social, demographic, and economic factors, harmful drinking is a key health
concern, but also a preventable one.
The selection of appropriate indicators for measuring progress towards the
reduction of harmful drinking will be key in determining success. Therefore, targets
based simply on coverage of interventions, or on per capita consumption of alcohol
(APC) are inadequate to capture variations in drinking patterns that constitute
harmful drinking. They are also inadequate for identifying and addressing those
groups within the general population most at risk for harm, including young people,
women, socially excluded groups, and those at the lower end of the socioeconomic
scale.
Instead, indicators that are specific to harmful drinking – heavy episodic drinking
and measures of harm, such as alcoholic liver cirrhosis and alcohol use disorders
(AUD) – offer more nuanced and also more appropriate measures of progress. The
ability to monitor changes in these indicators can assist governments to identify
appropriate solutions and implement prevention measures to safeguard the health
of future generations.
The selection of appropriate indicators also has relevance for the implementation of
prevention measures. An emphasis on risk and harm allows for tailored
approaches that include all-of-society engagement, rather than sole reliance on
government intervention. Targeted approaches can also help to focus resources
and share the burden of engagement and cost among all relevant stakeholders.
They include educational efforts and prevention strategies aimed at those at
greatest risk for harm. A targeted emphasis on prevention also reduces the need for
and cost associated with treatment and long-term care.
A tailored array of possible interventions, focusing on harmful drinking is also in
keeping with the goals and indicators that have already been included in other
global efforts to reduce harmful drinking. These include the WHO Global Action
Plan on NCDs and also the WHO Global Strategy to Reduce the Harmful Use of
Alcohol. Aligning targets and indicators in the SDG plan with already existing
initiatives will help to streamline approaches, allow for consistency and cross-
measurement, and ensure synergy among these various global efforts to improve
health and well-being worldwide.
(1) Involve social psychologists in identifying methodology since they are expert in
survey research and instrument design, selection and analysis. (2) Consult with
clinical psychologists in the process of developing indicators for target 3.4 and
17.19 as they are expert in human behavior.
(3) emotional factors should always be considered, for example, a considerable
body of research on Prosocial environmental Behavior (PEB) indicates that
emotions will gravely affect goal sin the SGDs related to, for example, consumerism
and sustainable consumption, and taking action about climate change.
UITP is internationally recognized for its work in advancing the sustainable
development policy agenda and is the only worldwide network that brings together
everyone involved in public transport (PT) but also a whole range of sustainable
transport modes from all over the world. Our network extends to more than 1,400
companies from 96 countries. While some of the targets name transport directly,
many will need to incorporate transport elements by recognizing the importance of
access in achieving advances in education, GDP growth, food security healthcare
and other critical needs. This needs greater recognition in the indicators but
encouragingly both cities and PT (11.2) take prominent roles but a harmonized
definition of a city is needed as the city area may be small, the official metropolitan
area might be bigger and the area of urbanisation might be larger still. In addition,
UITP proposes to replace what is currently put forward with the following indicators
as we feel that it would better measure 11.2 and decision making.
• A GIS-based land use and PT accessibility indexing indicator used for
measuring and mapping levels of accessibility to basic community services by
walking, cycling and/or PT, within local government areas. The model aims to assist
the planning and decision making process to deliver integrated land use and
transport outcomes and future investment needs by measuring accessibility based
distribution of population in the city as well as both actual walking/cycling distances
to/and PT frequency. This indicator would help measure time from point-of interest
to PT access points; the reliability of the PT service modes available; the number of
services available within the catchment (PT capacity e.g. vehicle km); and the level
of service at PT access points i.e. average waiting time.
• Indicator on mode share in order to capture the intensity of use of PT, walking
and cycling and the flipside, intensity of car use. A city could have hideous
congestion and empty PT and rate highly in the proposed measures. This
information must be captured in the first instance but combining it with an
accessibility index will help better define 11.2 i.e. expanding PT infrastructure,
capacity and use.
Much of the data needed will be captured by PT authorities and operators so it will
be important to engage the sector and build capacity to collect and analyse it. UITP
is willing to work with parties and the UN to help achieve this in support of SDG 17.
We support the statements and publications of the Transparency, Accountability
and Participation in Post-2015 (TAP) Network (http://tapnetwork2015.org/our-
work/sdg-goal-16-indicators/) and the Virtual Network, which includes National
Statistics Offices and IAEG members. Please see the Report of the Virtual Network
of Stakeholders for the Development of Indicators on Peaceful Societies, Justice
and Effective Institutions for SDG 16. We also support the references to fiscal
transparency, participation and accountability made by the Sustainable
Development Solutions Network.
With the advent of the new development agenda, we now have the opportunity to
encourage and foster innovations for health. The role of science and technology in
the development of low-cost, home-grown and scalable life-saving solutions needs
to be recognized in the future development agenda.
Harnessing Southern leadership & knowledge transfer
With the majority of the world’s population living in resource-challenging settings,
now is the time to invest and recognise the role which Southern-led health
innovations have helped in accelerating progress towards development outcomes.
More specifically, health innovations designed by Southern innovators have proven
to be scalable and applicable in various low-resource settings. This has allowed for
the transfer of knowledge through South-South collaboration. The future of
development cooperation lies in interventions that are transferable and scalable
through South-South collaboration. The creation of Southern-led innovation hubs,
as centers for health solutions, will help advance Southern leadership in developing
health innovations and transferring expertise both regionally and globally.
Supporting the innovation continuum
Innovations for health do not happen in a vacuum. On the contrary, the entire
continuum of innovation: from its conceptualization to implementation in the field is
dependent on support and recognition by authorities. Proving the efficacy of
interventions for health on the ground is essential for effective delivery and scale-
up.
The research undertaken at innovation hubs in the Global South have proven the
effectiveness of interventions to the extent that innovative approaches have, in the
past, been adopted as minimum standards of care both nationally and globally. It is
these same hubs that have been centres of excellence in driving capacity building
for local and international health professionals to ensure the effective delivery of
new technologies and innovations. By bridging the gap between scientific
innovations for health and discovering effective means for implementation and
scale-up, Southern science and innovations for health truly have the potential to
make a global impact on health outcomes.
ICN recommends use of health indicators for non-health goals to promote health in
all policy approach to address determinants of health and inequity.
The initial indicator framework will obviously only be the beginning of a process.
Scientists and civil society can continue to research and develop indicators for gaps
in the framework. There needs to be an open process for indicators that have been
brought to an appropriate stage to be submitted to UNStats for testing and eventual
addition to the intergovernmental framework.
A funding mechanism that would issue a call for the development of specific
indicators and support the best research and development proposals could also be
considered to accelerate the process.
The key focus should be that all indicators should meet the SMART criteria. IFA is
particularly concerned that for target 14.1 the proposal is to use fertilizer application
as a measure of marine pollution when nutrient pollution is only one aspect of
marine pollution and fertilizer application need not result in nutrient pollution. A
holistic approach needs to be taken so that an indicator does not have a negative
impact on other targets. For example, using fertilizer use as a proxy for marine
pollution potentially has a negative impact on poverty reduction and improving food
security thus damaging implementation of Goals 1 and 2.
In some cases the approach to indicators appears to be to find something that is
easily measured, even if it not relevant and only addresses one small aspect of the
target. In many cases there are indicators that are relevant to multiple targets that
are only being considered for one target. For example as already pointed out by
some agencies the target of sustainable agricultural practices can be used as an
indicator for several targets. The fertilizer industry welcomes appropriate measures
of sustainable development and stands ready to partner with governments and
international organizations and share data to monitor accurately and cost-effectively
the implementation of the SDGs.
Secure land rights for all are a critical component of a transformational agenda of
the Post-2015 SDGs and targets. Leveraging decades of extensive expertise, a
broad coalition of global and national organizations, civil society, and experts
recommends the following Land Rights Indicator.
Universal and feasible, this recommended land rights indicator is vital to four of the
sustainable development goals, including ending poverty (goal 1), ensuring food
security (goal 2), achieving gender equality and empowering women (goal 5), and
making cities and human settlements inclusive (goal 11).1 This indicator, best
placed under Target 1.4, would capture gender equality and progress of all people’s
on-the-ground rights to land, property, and natural resources. This land rights
indicator further aligns with priority indicators issued by the Global Land Indicators
Initiative, and supported by the Global Donor Working Group on Land.
Recommended Land Rights Indicator:

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.
The recommended indicator focuses on the twin aims of tracking legal and
administrative progress by governments in recognizing secure rights to land
(documentation) and of people-defined progress on the quality of land rights
(perceptions). In doing so, this indicator fully tracks the agenda’s land rights content
developed through months of
inclusive negotiation and consultation and satisfies the request in the recently
finalized UN declaration that global indicators maintain the level of ambition of the
agenda (Para. 75).
This recommended indicator is supported by a broad coalition of international and

civil organizations, including UNEP, the Women’s Major Group (WMG), the IP major
group, IUCN, SDSN, the International Land Coalition, ActionAid, IASS Potsdam,
Landesa, Habitat for Humanity, the Columbia Center for Sustainable Investment,
Forest Peoples' Programme, IWGIA, the Global Land Indicators Initiative, Namati,
Oxfam, Huairou Commission, the Rights and Resources Initiative, Asia Indigenous
Peoples Pact, the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Espaco
Feminista, Ekta Parishad, Wilfad, Pakisama, Care International, Uganda Land
Alliance, and others.
Participation in the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the agenda will be
crucial for credibility. 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. This will need the will to go beyond
quantitative data and 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.
Most targets in the draft outcome document of the post-2015 agenda will need at
least two indicators to meaningfully monitor the implementation of the agenda.
Where two indicators are not enough to sufficiently cover the content of the targets,
we suggest additional indicators.
We want to point attention to the target 3.5 that is very unclear and not SMART
compared to other targets that are measurable and specific. "Strengthen"
prevention and treatment is a very broad concept that might include anything and
nothing. Due to that reason, the indicator needs to be very specific. Coverage of
prevention intervention will not show anything about reaching the goal: Ensure
healthy lives and promote well-being for all and at all ages. Many prevention
initiatives (such as school prevention methods, information and awareness raising)
are ineffective so their coverage (even if increasing) won't ensure the effect of
reduced alcohol use. The effective measures to reduce harmful use of alcohol thus
ensure healthy lives and promote wellbeing are those that are effective on
population level and that is why the progress needs to be measured on population
level as well: Total alcohol per capita consumption per year in liters of pure alcohol
is therefore much stronger indicator than "Coverage of interventions for the
prevention of substance abuse interventions among people under 25" which is too
general.
Please continue to ensure participation in the indicator framework of CSOs and

academic experts, especially those who have actually been involved in data
collection and analysis for the indicators they support. Ipas is an international NGO
in consultative status with ECOSOC, working to reduce maternal deaths and
injuries from unsafe abortion for more than 40 years. We collaborate with WHO,
UNFPA, and other international and local partners, and work with national health
ministries in countries around the world, with support from bilateral donors and
foundations. We both support national health systems to implement access to safe
abortion and PAC and provide technical assistance in monitoring and data
collection for access and quality of care.
There are few specific indicators which measure the impact of chemicals, wastes
and heavy metals upon ecosystems and food production. While it is important to
ensure water is available to all, that water must be made potable using non-
chemical methods to avoid further damage to ecosystems. Ozonation and ultra-
violet methods of disinfection might be preferable to chlorination but many
governments are swayed by immediate cost, rather than consideration of the full
cost over time time in terms of their health budget and ecosystem productivity to
deal with the outcomes of chlorination.
We are convinced that we should develop policies and programmes to promote and
bring ESD and GCED into the mainstream of formal, non-formal and informal
education through system-wide interventions and pedagogical support. This
includes implementing the Global Action Programme on ESD to play a key role on
capacity building to achieve 17 goals for sustainable development.
Please simplify the target language.
Please note that some of the measurements and indicators of the targets are
developed by academic institutions. For data collection, they use various sources
including NGOs and media. Member States may not be willing to be judged based
on these sources because they are in a direct conflict with some of these
organizations.
Under target 17.4
Indicator 3 should only be used if significant changes are made to the current IMF
debt sustainability framework. In its current form the IMF sustainability framework is
not an accurate indicator, and there are several better indicators of debt
sustainability included in our submission. However if the IMF framework continues
to be used it must be adjusted as follows:
-complete the assessment for all countries
-base the assessment on the impact of debt burdens on sustainable development
(such as poverty & inequality) not solely whether payments can be made or not
-fully includes domestic government and private sector debts, external private
sector debts, contingent liabilities and payment obligations accruing to governments
from public-private partnerships within the analysis
-move assessments to an independent body, not creditor or debtor, to address the
current conflict of interest by being carried out by 2 major creditors (World Bank and
IMF)
For most of the indicators there is no information.

Target no should be reduced to 100.
For each indicator there should be 1 indicator
There is a bug in your web form that prevents me repeatedly from sending all my
comments on one form, so you will get them in 3-4 installments. This is part 1.
Coordinated by Kepa in Finland, a group of Finnish NGOs have contributed to this

document. These organizations are:
Allianssi - Finnish Youth Cooperation
Amnesty International Finnish section
Crisis Management Initiative
Dalit Solidarity Network in Finland
Demo Finland - Political Parties of Finland for Democracy
Dodo
Finland National Committee for UN Women
Finn Church Aid
Finnish Agri-Agency for Food and Forest Development
The Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Mission
Greenpeace Finland
KATU - The Civil Society Conflict Prevention Network
Kehys - The Finnish NGDO Platform to the EU
Kepa - the Finnish umbrella for NGDOs
Kylväjä - The Finnish Lutheran Overseas Mission
Kynnys - The Threshold Association
Pelastakaa Lapset Save the Children Finland
SaferGlobe Finland
Seta - LGBTI Rights in Finland
Finnish Committee for UNICEF
UFF Finland
Suomen luonnonsuojeluliitto - The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation
Vammaiskumppanuus Disability Partnership Finland
Väestöliitto - The Family Federation of Finland
World Vision Finland
WWF Finland
The impact of corruption and lack of strong governance on poverty should be

addressed in the targets
To summarize our view: It is vital that the global set of indicators cover land rights.
Land is one of the most important assets of the poor in both rural and urban areas.
Secure access to land, with varying wording, is referred to or relevant to targets 1.4,
2.3, 5.a, 11.1 and 15.a. One indicator can be used to cover the land rights content
of all of these if it is sufficiently articulated-- it can not only measure agricultural
land; it can not only measure ownership rights; it must measure progress toward all
people having secure rights and that the gap between the land rights of women and
men is closed. A transformational agenda requires being willing to invest in data
collection and not being limited to only existing data sources. This is important for
the topic of land rights. It is feasible to measure progress but it will take effort and
investment. The following indicator is feasible and universal. It is cross cutting. It is
essential.
To learn more, please see the documents available at

http://landpost2015.landesa.org/resources/.
The approach taken by Landesa is supported by my organization as well as many

others.
We value the current consultation process and strongly reccomend that CSOs
participate actively in the monitoring and follow up processes of the implementation
of the Sustainable Development Agenda.
If the 15-year global development agenda is truly designed to leave no one behind,
it is important to ensure the global monitoring framework includes mechanisms to
assess the conditions of children living outside of family care.
All children count, but not all children are counted. As a global monitoring indicator
framework is developed, it is important to note that children living outside of family
care – including children living in institutions or on the street, children who have
been trafficked, separated from their families as a result of conflict or disaster,
recruited into armed groups – have largely fallen off the UN’s statistical map. There
are only limited data about how many children live in such precarious
circumstances, except for scattered estimates from some specific countries. Such
children are not covered in household-based surveys, including the Demographic
and Health Surveys (USAID) and the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (UNICEF).
Non-mainstream data and innovative approaches must be developed to assess the

conditions of the world’s most vulnerable children. The Committee on the Rights of
the Child has urged all States to develop indicators and data collection systems
consistent with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The global monitoring
framework must include mechanisms to track progress for all children, including
those who are currently invisible as the result of inadequate indicators and data
collection systems.
The framework is very long and fragmented. Might it not be reduced to: "Poverty
Reduction, Equity and Economic Opportunity," "Sustainable Development," "Human
Development," "Gender," and "The Welfare and Protection of all of Society" or
some similar framework? There are so many overlapping indicators, and many are
extremely wordy in their attempt to factor in every comment that has been sent to
date... quite a few can be streamlined substantially without loss of content. This will
help greatly with advocacy and overall presentation.
In the last 15 years, nations have often watched helplessly as natural/technological
disasters periodically reversed their MDG gains; partly because we had not
adequately disaster proofed the MDGs, and linked it to progress on the Hyogo
Framework for Action. Building resilience to hazards and disaster risk reduction are
an important guarantee for at least 11 of the SDGs; with benefits exemplified by
Jeffery Sachs hypothesis “Once the world is on a robust path to achieve the SDGs,
the need for, say, emergency-relief operations should decline as natural disasters
are better prevented or anticipated.” Only some SDG targets recognise this link
explicitly (1.5, 2.4, 9.1, 11.5,11.b). It is crucial to get them ‘right and fit for purpose’,
especially for the mother target 1.5, as this will help ‘protect’ the gains in many more
SDGs; avoiding the reversal of MDG gains from periodic natural/technological
disasters. A robust set of resilience indicators for these targets, will help countries
track this important cross cutting guarantor for success of the overall SDG
enterprise. Explicit linkage with the new Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction and the coming climate agreement, by and with national mechanisms
pursuing these 3 agendas, will help implementation and monitoring. MARS
Practitioners Network (MPN) stands committed to work with the IAEG and with
members states SDG implementation structures in operationalising this at the
national level.
So too, Goal 11 explicitly requires resilience as one of the key attributes for cities.
To honour the goal’s spirit, we need a new target & a composite index/indicator
which measures urban resilience. 2700 city governments supported by
UCLG,UNISDR & UN Habitat are implementing the Resilient Cities (RC) campaign
10 essentials with benchmarks for attainment under each. These are1) Effective
city level institutional DRR framework, 2) Adequate Financing & resources, 3) multi
hazard risk assessment, 4) Infrastructure Protection, Upgrading & Resilience, 5)
Protecting Vital health & education facilities, 6) Building regulations & land use
planning, 7) Training Education & Public Awareness, 8) Environmental Protection &
Ecosystem Strengthening , 9) Effective Preparedness, Early warning & Response,
10) Recovery & Rebuilding communities.
Data on attainment level of the RC’s 10 essentials is available for enrolled cities
thus not imposing a fresh burden on NSOs and in fact will serve as a stimulus for
action
•Indicators chosen to express outputs & outcomes of health interventions need a
direct link with population’s health impact. Prefer indicators as coverage & actual
use of services; go beyond offer or availability of services. Actual uptake of services
is critical to impact on population’s health status.
•Measures of access in particular, but even overall: a question about methodology
to collect info on indicators. It is essential to measure on basis of population
assessments.
o reports by health services/implementing agencies are open to bias, with countless
examples of poor reliability of these figures.
oSimilarly, modelling might seem attractive because less burdensome, but not
reflecting reality on the ground & too dependent on underlying assumptions.
•Pop. estimates are a specific challenge & their validity can undermine indicators
using pop figures as denominator. Sample assessments should be preferred in
which proportions are measured.
•To capture inequity within countries, targets & indicators need disaggregation
beyond average country levels.
•Priority to indicators for specific pop groups or areas known to be
disadvantaged/excluded/discriminated. This will drive progress to be made first in
most disadvantaged groups and not leave hem to last.
oIn general, specific indicators (eg child mortality, immunization coverage, ART
coverage, access to modern contraception) among the lowest poverty quintile could
fit well with overall ‘reduce poverty’ goal. Idem for ethnicity or gender.
oTo capture inequity for outcomes between most privileged & most vulnerable
groups, we suggest to create an indicator composed of difference in outcomes or
outputs for most and least privileged groups. E.g. ratio of measles immun.coverage
in lowest income quintile over the one in highest income quintile.
•Keep separate indicators & targets for health related issues in line with existing
MDGs. As the existing MDGs will not be reached in many countries, it will be
important to continue to measure progress after 2015 for these specific goals and
not to dilute these goals within a single health goal under label of UHC.
•There is an issue of indicators (how to measure) and targets (reaching what level
means success). For some indicators the threshold to reach is included (eg mat &
child mortality) but for otherst not. Question is what progress & what speed of
progress can be considered ‘successful’ or even ‘sufficient’.
Submitted by the Director of the Multidimensional Poverty Peer Network on behalf
of the Steering Committee of this south south network with participants from 38
countries (Afghanistan, Angola, Bhutan, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica,
Cuba, Dominican Republic, Djibouti, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Honduras,
India, Iraq, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Seychelles, South
Africa, Sudan, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Vietnam)
Steering Committee Members:

Tatyana Orozco de la Cruz, Director, Department of Social Prosperity, Government
of Colombia;
Gonzalo Hernández Licona, National Council for the Evaluation of Social
Development Policy (CONEVAL), of Mexico
Pali Lehohla, Statistician General, Government of South Africa;
Xiaolin Wang, Deputy Director-General, Information Centre, State Council Leading
Group of Poverty Alleviation and Development of China;
Sabina Alkire, Director, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI),
University of Oxford (which also hosts the Secretariat of the Network)
The NCD Alliance appreciates that global indicators must be limited in number to
reduce reporting burdens, but suggest that indicators be drawn from existing
reporting frameworks, such as the Global Nutrition Report and Global Monitoring
Framework on NCDs. Many of these indicators are cross-cutting and address
several goals and targets; indicators on air pollution and nutrition, for example,
have an affect on NCDs.
The comments and proposed indicators contained in this submission are the result
of consultation with the NCD Alliance network, which consists of over 2,000
organizations in 160 countries. The proposals represent a wide range, from clean
cookstoves and tuberculosis, to healthy diet and CVD. We strongly urge the IAEG
to take these into consideration.
In general, it is not clear that the currently proposed indicators fulfil the desiderata
set out in the outcome document:
"This framework will be simple yet robust, address all SDGs and targets including
for means of implementation, and preserve the political balance, integration and
ambition contained therein" ('Transforming our World', para. 75). In fulfilling these
requirements, indicators should, ideally, meet demands of fidelity, necessity and
sufficiency:
(1) fidelity. Accurate reflection of the targets being measured is the first virtue of a
list of indicators. Indicators that miss aspects of the targets compromise
implementation through leading responsible actors to adopt non-optimal policies
and to focus their attention wrongly. This, in turn, undermines accountability for the
goals.
Congruence with the key aspects in each target, then, is of crucial importance. This
has two implications: First, trading off "coherent and comprehensive measurement
of all goals and targets" against brevity is deeply problematic. Second, where there
is no scope to adopt multiple existing indicators, the IAEG should not hesitate to
suggest new indicators, where existing indicators do not adequately reflect the
targets.
(2) necessity - A commonsense requirement of an indicator is that it should

measure nothing extraneous or unnecessary to the achievement of the target.
Where this requirement is not met, the target could be achieved - or missed -
regardless of what the indicator tells us, and conversely, the indicator could show
progress which is not genuine. Such a case might also misdirect the focus of actors
responsible for implementation.
(3) sufficiency - Whether one or multiple indicators are chosen for a given target,
together, they must be enough to indicate fulfilment of the target, so that the target
could not be met, or missed, without this being indicated.
Without appropriate indicators the UN runs the risk of adopting metrics with limited
salience, legitimacy, or credibility, which would inhibit implementation and adoption
of the Urban SDG. Indicators that help benchmark and compare accomplishments
across cities may allow improved understanding of urban-to-global potential and
provide valuable information.
Urban SDG targets are broadly written, and single indicators will tend to prioritize
parts of the targets over others. The proposed, one indicator per target, does not
take into consideration the complexity of urbanization and multidimensional nature
of the Urban SDG. Indicators for sustainable urbanization must monitor changes in
the built environment and land cover, within the city core and at the periphery.
Distinct methods and timetables for measurement exist – some of which extend
beyond the 2030 deadline (i.e., inclusivity and equity dimensions). It would be a
mistake to merely refashion existing tools, indicators, and accounting methods
developed and applied in European and North American cities. Participation and
input from officials and urban actors across Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and
ensuring training and support to smaller rapidly industrializing cities that will
dominate future urbanization will be key.
It is imperative that the SDG architecture be addressed. We are not looking only for
a list of indicators here. We are looking for SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
IMPACTS that we want to achieve in the world (easily describable in 3 or 4
categories) and measureable PROCESSES and INPUTS that we need to check
and track to make sure we are arriving at those impacts.
Most of the indicators we need should be measureable by individual countries, and

ALSO on a global scale. Not only low income countries but ALL countries should
now be required to measure 300 INPUT, PROCESS, and IMPACT indicators. These
should be often DISAGGREGATED – as we now find poor people in very rich
countries. Rich countries must therefore be required to be transparent and
accountable for all their subgroups and marginalized populations. Many of them are
already being measuring based on the suggestions in the first two rounds of
indicator list-making.
Although 300 indicators may seem numerous –in fact – countries are generally
required to anyway collect such statistics, there are a few new areas – but this
reflects the new ambitions of the world to check up on accelerated progress. 300 is
not too many. In terms of the impacts – the agenda can be described in 30 key
stats.
Tracking the world’s progress using statistics is key to transparency – and

accountability. Here is a warning in relation to an upcoming accountability ‘gap’
which is of concern to many. When the MDGs officially finish in September 2015 -
for some of the indicators we do have a ‘report card’ – so that we know how well the
world has done in coming up to the expectations expressed at the Millennium
Summit. For other indicators we will not know the full story until a year or so later
as retrospective data collection techniques take their time in becoming available.
But we will not include these new important aspects into the development
accountability framework until at least March 2016 when the Statistical Commission
agrees the final list. Only about a year later in 2017 will the first results come in for
the new development agenda. We should use the first Forum for development
results in 2016 to ensure that steps are being taken to cover development efforts in
this dangerous accountability gap – otherwise 2016 could be the year that nobody
tracked!
The process for discussing and selecting indicators must be characterised by
transparency, accountability and participation. This should happen globally (by
providing space for different groups to contribute to the IAEG) and nationally (by
encouraging NSOs to set up reference groups involving different types of data
producers and users).
Maintaining the scope and ambition of the goals is critical, and indicators should not
be arbitrarily dropped or not included if doing so means that part of a goal or target
will not be measured. To offset this challenge, continuous learning, capacity
development and information sharing should be taken into account.
There is no provision for CSOs' active participation in monitoring progress at

national level. No formal platform for CSOs to engage their governments to monitor
progress of SDGs targets and at UN level where CSOs can submit status reports
separate from the state. Indicators developed are mostly useful to IAEG-SDGs.
We therefore strongly recommend that the UN creates a separate secretariat like

the UPR in Geneva where the state can submit a separate report while CSOs and
donor partner submit shadow reports every five years.
.
As the process of developing indicators for the Post-2015 education targets
unfolds, some of the targets are at risk of being sidelined on account of being ‘un-
measurable.’ However, excluding more holistic but harder to assess educational
targets will inevitably remove vital focus from some of the most important aspects of
high quality education provision. The Open Society Foundations identified three of
the education targets that are particularly contentious and commissioned four
papers proposing formulations of indicators for targets 4.1, 4.7, 4.a, and 4.c. Read
the full text of the commissioned papers at:
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/indicators-broad-bold-
education-agenda
To best translate the OWG targets into a framework for action that will
fundamentally shift priorities, resources, dynamics, and outcomes throughout the
sphere of education, these papers suggests pairing quantitative input and output
indicators with qualitative conduct indicators. Flexibility within many of the indicators
themselves is desirable because this allows localized contexts to influence how
indicators are pursued and eventually achieved.
Some of the proposed indicators reflect current capacities while others point to
paths we should consider. Overall, the various proposals presented below should
be understood as a range of suggestions that support understanding and
implementing quality education across various levels of governance, in diverse
contexts and capture data about what really matters.
Ensure indicators not only address inequalities between countries but also rising
inequalities within countries, not least 'first world' countries.
1. Indicators should not reduce the scope of the SDGs or be driven by data
currently available. The 2030 Agenda recognizes that challenges humanity is facing
are deeply inter-connected, and should be tackled together to achieve progress.
Our belief is that we should strive to measure every bit of what is in the Agenda -
even if it requires additional efforts in data collection - and “preserve the political
balance, integration and ambition contained therein” (par. 75). There is a big
opportunity to push the data base forward, rather than having the available data
control the framing of priorities and action. There is a good precedent for this. Only
few years ago, data on poverty was limited, inconsistent, and not representative.
Yet this did not stop visionary leaders from establishing high level objectives that
served as a visible call to action for data gathering. Today we have good data on
poverty and know the world has made considerable progress.
2. Indicators should include qualitative and perception-based indicators. In the past
fifteen years, the capacity of national statistical offices has remarkably improved.
Many countries have invested in methodologies that allow capturing qualitative
information and perceptions through multi-purpose household surveys or polls.
These tools have been tested and the expertise to lead efforts exists. These data
are fundamental to capture what women and men think, and identify any gap
between entitlements and the effective enjoyment of the benefits derived from
these entitlements. These data also allow to measure issues like participation and
well-being, and go beyond a GDP-like picture.
3. Indicators should generate data that it is easy to understand and access, and
can be complemented by quantitative and qualitative information by civil society. In
line with the people-centred nature of the 2030 Agenda, we believe that monitoring
and accountability are better achieved through easy-to-understand and accessible
information that can be complemented by data produced by third parties, including
civil society. These data should be officially and explicitly recognized in the
monitoring framework, as they help providing a more accurate assessment of
realities on the ground. Governments should be encouraged to recognize and
accept these data. We are therefore encouraged by the emphasis given to data
revolution and citizens-led data collection. Indicators should create adequate space
to enhance participatory and community-based monitoring systems.
• Sustainable transport is reasonably well covered in the current targets and
indicators (with the noted exception of walking and cycling) and it is essential that
this coverage be maintained, as the indicator list is expected to be reduced in future
• The cross-cutting nature of transport continues to be underemphasised.
Linkages between transport-related targets and indicators are relevant to more
targets than are currently identified (e.g. Target 9.1 and Target 11.2 are also
relevant to Target 3.8 on access to health services, Target 4.a on education
facilities, and Target 6.1 on access to clean water).
• There is still no specific target that highlights the importance of rural access
despite that fact that roughly 30% of the global population is expected to continue
to live in non-urban areas at 2030. Given the the absence of a direct reference to
rural access in the proposed SDGs and indicators, it is suggested that the indicator
for Target 9.1 read “Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure,
including *rural*, regional, transborder infrastructure and services, to support
improved logisitics, economic development and human well-being, …”
• There are several proposals for indicators to measure or supplement the
current suggested indicator for Target 11.2, each with their own advantages and
disadvantages:
- Currently, the suggested indicator 11.2.1 measures access to transport
services, rather than access to jobs, education, etc; however, it is a valuable Tier II
indicator. Sources of data indicate that definitions are not likely to be directly
comparable, and thus quality control would be needed to ensure comparability.
- World Bank propose for indicator (11.2.2) “Share of jobs in the metropolitan
area an 'average' household can access within 60/75 minutes using walking,
cycling and public transport.” This proposed indicator is a valuable Tier II indicator
and is superior to 11.2.1 as it measures access to activities (jobs) rather than
transport.
- UN-Habitat propose for indicator 11.2.2 “Km of high capacity (BRT, light rail,
metro) public transport per person for cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants”.
This indicator can be measured relatively easily at the national level and can serve
as an comparative measure of progress; thus, it is likely a Tier I indicator. This is a
valuable indicator but only in conjunction with IAEG-SDG’s proposed indicator
11.2.1 or World Bank’s proposed indicator 11.2.2.
Health is fundamental to achieving the SDGs, but more often than not the health
burden falls disproportionately on LMICs and must be addressed if we are to
ensure sustainable economic prosperity. As recognized by the ambitious targets
that make up the health goal, this will require ending the epidemics of HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected tropical diseases, as well as reducing maternal
mortality and ending preventable deaths in newborns and children. As we have
outlined, R&D for new health technologies, equitable measures for routine
immunizations, digital literacy, universal health care, and better data and
information systems will transform global health within a generation if countries
prioritize and track these important indicators.
On behalf of PATH and a group of global health R&D organizations, Policy Cures
has conducted an in-depth analysis and stakeholder consultation to evaluate the
SDG indicator landscape and recommend indicators that could be used to monitor
of this analysis have been included in this set of consultation feedback. The
analysis will be formally launched September 8th, 2015 and after that date can be
found on the website of the Global Health Technologies Coalition:
www.ghtcoalition.org
The indicators should really be enforcing a new paradigm of development

interventions that are not siloed, but rather, working in collaboration, reaching
across traditional sectors, and thus measuring numbers of innovative partnerships,
and efficiencies and value addition resulting from these new partnerships. While
sectoral indicators are of course easier to track and critical, it is important to push
for new models of development activities to achieve even more than the MDGs did,
and in more difficult and hard to reach places and more challenging circumstances.
Sorry, perhaps i should have used this space. apologize

There are countries that already have laws that address the human right violation of
torture whether perpetrated by State or non-State actors, whether perpetrated in
the public or private sphere, Belgium for example. And the two times Belgium has
used its law it was for non-State torture of women, for acid burning and for a
ritualized exorcism victimization that resulted in the woman's death. So, an
indicator would be whether a country has a law that covers the fundamental human
right violation of torture--State and non-State, in public or private spheres. This
evaluation will be necessary if utilizing the international classification of crime for
statistical purposes which is supposed to be applied to endorse human rights
equality.
One general comment we would like to add concerns the means to ensure civil
society participation in the following monitoring of the indicators to be approved.
This has been a principle and behavior all through the process of defining the SDG
that should be mantained.
indicators. The number of indicators should not be arbitrarily limited, but should live

Many indicators are not very tangible....and consist of 'motherhood' statements e.g
slums to be upgraded!
Many targets are very optimistic given the gestation of time to get action on the
ground
already have.
health.


of this analysis have been included in this set of consultation feedback.
The engagement of civil society and academia in the 2030 Agenda could build a
true multi-stakeholder platform that can modernize the way the United Nations
engages with people. We recognize and celebrate this position of the UN and ask
that this openness is maintained even during the implementation process.
Particularly, we encourage the UN to incorporate knowledge and information from
civil society organizations which produce data and statistics, to democratize the
indicator framework. Achieve true social participation in the Agenda process makes
it more solid and legitimate goals, in addition to complying with the principle of
participation, consistent with a true vision of human rights.
In addition, we stress the importance of harmonizing conceptual frameworks of
indicators with those existing for human rights monitoring, taking into account that
these systems will eventually be mandatory for the countries covered by
international human rights law.
It is critical that indicators are quantitative and qualitative. A rigorous indicator
framework including both quantitative and qualitative indicators will underpin
financing strategies and implementation frameworks that reflect the various types of
resources needed to achieve sustainable development, overcome inequalities and
fulfil gender equality commitments. Therefore gender-differentiated statistics and
indicators should be collected nationally, regionally and globally in order to measure
gender gaps and adjust development programmes to rectify inequalities.
There must be increased efforts aimed at capacity-building and supporting national

and international statistics offices in the collection and analysis of data. This should
include gender-expertise and improved resourcing and adequate funds for
independent civil society participation in monitoring frameworks.
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.
If an indicator reads ‘number of deaths/losses due to disasters’ or similar, as
measured by national loss databases, it will give a misleading impression of
success or failure if countries (or globally) are either lucky in avoiding (or unlucky in
experiencing) disaster events during the period measured. A few years or decades
of catastrophe experience do not give a clear indication of the level of risk. The
2010 Haiti earthquake claimed 200,000+ lives yet for 100+ years prior to this
devastating event, earthquakes in Haiti had claimed fewer than 10 lives. We could
get around this issue by using the expected number of deaths, expected number of
affected people and expected direct economic losses (relative to GDP) based on
likely scenarios, as demonstrated by Tokyo, without the need for disasters to take
place.
Where possible the IAEG should draw on different types of indicators in order to
present a rounded and balanced picture of progress. For example, administrative
data can be helpful for monitoring capacities. These are often not, however, the
same as outcomes for people – which is the focus of the 2030 Agenda. Outcomes
for people are best captured using experiential or perception surveys. In specific
cases, the IAEG should consider drawing on expert opinion from globally-
recognised third parties.
It is important that, to the greatest extent possible, all of the issues captured in each
of Goal 16’s targets are measured with individual indicators. For example, target
16.4 addresses 4 issues. The IAEG has the responsibility to identify indicators for
each one of these issues; it would otherwise be making a political decision on which
issues to prioritise. Furthermore, the nature of Goal 16 means that combinations of
indicators may be required to provide an accurate picture of progress on individual
issues.
The recommendations may result in a large number of indicators being proposed by

the IAEG, but it should be remembered that it will be the responsibility of member
states to support the development of necessary capacity to properly monitor what
they have agreed to. Furthermore, the reality is that producing data for every global
indicator in every context will be a development outcome in itself; the IAEG should
be establishing an aspirational vision to guide data providers collectively towards
this eventual outcome.
Official national statistical systems will not have sufficient capacity to deliver
comprehensive data coverage on their own. As has been recognised in the 2030
Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, national statistical organisations
(NSOs) will need to work with a number of non-official data providers, including
multilateral organisations, civil society and research organisations, the private
sector, and citizens themselves. Impartial organisations independent of the state
should be tasked will collecting data on especially sensitive issues within Goal 16
(e.g. targets 16.5, 16.7, 16.10). All data providers, however, will need to
demonstrate independence, impartiality and transparency if the data they produce
is to be meaningfully used by policy-makers and trusted by the wider public.
SDSN has prepared a series of inputs in support of the work of the IAEG-SDGs.
We invite members to review these briefings (here: http://unsdsn.org/what-we-
do/indicators-and-monitoring/indicators/inputs-to-the-iaeg-sdgs/), as well as review
our report “Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the SDGs”, which is the
result of 18 months of intensive consultations with expert communities, UN
organizations including the UN Statistics Division, civil society, and business. The
report is available on our website, as well as on our new interactive web platform:
http://indicators.report/
SDSN would welcome the opportunity to discuss the above in more detail with any
interested members, and to continue to provide any support we can to the process.
indicators. The number of indicatorsshould not be arbitrarily limited, but should live

Our input contains key indicators that are critical to comprehensively understand
the lives of adolescent girls and the progress of the SDGs.
Indicators should measure the more complex aspects of each target, not just the
easiest to evaluate, or be based on what is currently being measured. Indicators
should include both quantitative and qualitative measures, and measures of policy,
legal, structural, behavioral and normative change. There must be scope for further
development of the indicator framework in the coming years, in particular, for
updating indicators as global and national capacity for collecting complex data
develops and as contexts change. As such, research and development of the
indicator framework should remain open after the 47th Session of the Statistical
Commission. All data should be regulated by frameworks that guarantee data
privacy, confidentiality, and protection, across data collection, analysis, and
management. All efforts should be made to include third party data sources in
tracking the SDGs, particularly reputable civil society organizations and academic
institutions. To monitor the SDGs, national statistical offices (NSOs) must be
adequately resourced and strengthened to be functionally autonomous and
transparent in order to produce consistent, reliable, and high-quality data that are
independent, protected, and accountable. Support for strengthening NSOs should
come from a coordinated effort by governments, regional and international
institutions, donors, and civil society. Across the entire SDG framework, there must
be an inclusive and transparent process to create, pilot, and accept new (Tier II and
III) indicators, with regular review of new indicators and mechanisms for inclusion in
overall reporting. For instance, the first set of Tier II and III indicators could be
piloted in the first four years of the SDG framework implementation, then reviewed
by an appropriate committee in 2019. While the more aspirational Tier II and III
indicators are being piloted, the Inter-Agency Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) should agree interim indicators, for
measuring targets in the meantime. In developing new indicators, the IAEG-SDGs
should consider indicators as put forth by reputable civil society organizations and
academic institutions, which have already demonstrated rigorous and successful
pilot testing in the field. The production of timely and quality gender statistics must
be a policy and budgetary priority for governments, as well as regional and
international institutions.
The effectiveness of the indicator framework will depend on its provision of
indicators that call for data disaggregated for the various groups protected by the
various human rights conventions and standards. These include gender, age, race,
ethnicity, disabilities, income, indigenous identity, rural-urban residence, national
origin, migration status, etc.
Demand for data and statistics on older persons has been strengthened by the
negotiations on the Sustainable Development Goal framework. However, while the
Sustainable Development goals and targets have given timely attention to the rights
and needs of older persons, some of these critical areas for our older populations
are not easily captured or quantifiable using mainstream statistics.
Wherever a goal or target refers to older people, age or all, the associated indicator
must reflect this. However, even this basic principle is not being honoured in the
current indicators proposal. Furthermore, it is not enough to have an indicator which
covers all ages, this must be supported by the data sets that underpin and inform
them.
The challenge for older persons is that many data systems are simply inadequate.
Data on older women and men are missing – Data on older women and men may
be collected but is often not analysed, reported and utilized. This must not continue
in the post 2015 era. The commitment to leave no one behind gives clear guidance
for the development and adoption of indicators. A universal framework is not
business as usual.
However, the current proposed global indicator framework relies heavily on

Demographic Household Surveys (DHS) and other population based surveys, some
of which only collect data across certain age groups and some stop at age 49,
excluding older people.
For example, The WHO recommends an indicator on coverage of tracer

interventions that includes treatment for hypertension and diabetes. While the
Stakeholder Group on Ageing would welcome the inclusion of this indicator and
these two measures, the current data source is population based surveys including
DHS (restricted to ages 15-49, 59 for men) and STEPS (22-64). Hypertension and
diabetes treatment should be included, but alternate data sources and methods of
collection should be identified that ensure data is collected for the age group most
affected by NCDs.
Indicators for the framework should be both based on existing data sets and on
future ones yet to be developed, and be suitable, feasible and relevant for our
ageing world.
Paradigm: This word we know well. Our main experience, though, is in surveys and
censuses. My main intended use here is more global and covers the whole effort,
not just the part that a statistician can play. Most of these goals do not have an
explicit action approach linked with them, They can be just a bit above a wish and
so are vague, as to how they can be accomplished. Measurable: This word
measurable we also know well. But how do we construct a signal from the process
to guide our work and in as fine-grained enough way so, expression goes,
This is SEI's comments on goals 1-5, submitted in separate due to an incorrect

error message within the google from: 'We couldn't save your response because it
was too long. Brevity is the soul of wit'. We will submit comments on the other goals
in a separate form.
The comments below reflect individual responses from SEI staff and do not
necessarily reflect the view of SEI as an institution.1) In chemicals management
and pollution, indicators are mostly very general - and difficult to see how they will
be operationalised and what will be measured. Here, specific indicators may be
more informative than broader indicators that risk causing confusion in reporting
and analysing the results.2) Utilise data that can be collected and analysed
remotely - such as remote sensing data to look at change in urban/rural land use –
this is a reliable cost effective approach to data collection.3) Include and encourage
novel data collection such as citizen science or participatory data collection to fill
key indicator gaps4) Under Goal 12 a number of the targets explicitly link
production to consumption (e.g. 12.2.2) whilst others don't (e.g. 12.4.2). Linking of
production and consumption is somewhat intermittent, and probably related to the
existence/standing of methods. Whilst aspects of production can be considered in
isolation from consumption, it is important to take a more holistic view and establish
methods/indicators that consider the whole picture.5) Normative terms used in the
indicators (e.g. people affected by hazards, resilience/adaptive capacity) need a
consensus definition to enable their measurement 6) Promotion of SMEs among
women in secondary and tertiary sectors was not considered in adequate depth.7)
The role of informal economy in developing and developed countries was not
considered however is amenable to assessment using national income statistics.
Several industries within the informal sector are water-, energy- and resource-
intensive so it is important to measure impacts within these sectors.8) I support 10-
20 headline indicators for the SDGs as a whole which are already collected and
presented, for example in the World Development Report, Human Development
Report, etc. This limited, manageable set would provide an overview of global
performance. The proposed indicators are rarely indicative of overall performance
on the target. I believe in more composite data and 'stories' to be compiled on the
performance on the targets. Indicator-based reporting is very resource-intensive,
but of limited use.9) Q: Where will the funds come for data collection, which is so
inadequate in so many countries?10) With many indicators, there is a lack of
attention paid to sustainability, resilience, and other terms in the subgoal text. As we
tend to optimize on what we measure, this worries me. Some of the indicators
would, if optimized, encourage higher throughput.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Goal 14.1. Should further information
be needed, please contact Lia Colabello, Director of Global Partnerships &
Community Engagement, 5 Gyres Institute, at lia@5gyres.org.
www.5gyres.org
The successful establishment of an indicator framework will be dependent on the

ability of a set of indicators to monitor, both spatially and temporally, as appropriate,
the progress towards the fulfillment of the targets. The formulation of certain targets
is at places over ambitious, ill-defined, construed and defies the specification of a
single or a small set of indicators that would capture the essence of all aspects of
the given target.
Regarding Goal 2, increasing agricultural production per unit area is a key objective
for further preventing conversion of forests and grassland to cropping in order to
mitigate corresponding greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity losses.
However, yield – a key component of sustainable intensification – is not in the list of
proposed indicators. Interpreting some agricultural indicators in absence of yield
data may lead to misleading conclusions. Additionally, for Goals 2 and 15,
indicators should reflect access to knowledge, extension and sustainable
management. Such indicators are essential to reflect access to information on
knowledge intensive decision making. Activities for sustainable management may
vary by region, but regarding fertilizer inputs the global framework of 4R Nutrient
Stewardship address four areas of nutrient management (applying the right nutrient
source at the right rate, the right time and in the right place) to identify site specific
practices that meet economic, environmental and social expectations of
stakeholders.
The author believes that the revision of current ethical underpinning of SDG's is
necessary as it currently favors purely anthropocentric perspective insufficient for
addressing grave environmental challenges. (This has been explained in my
publications).
Engaging with the generalised ‘environment’ not as a ‘service’ or a ‘resource’ but as

a collection of living beings is necessary. Simply put, without consideration of
environment as anything more than a feedlot of one single species, no legal and
strong protection can be expected. Without realising the gravity of environmental
predicament, The UN appears to be nothing more than a ‘useful talking shop, but it
does not get much done’ (The Economist 2009).
The SDGs need to be critically examined for logic (to eliminate internal
contradictions of purpose), motives (who or what profits from proposed policies and
who is victimized by them) relevance (particularly in the world where environmental
sustainability is gravely threatened). If ‘People are at the centre of sustainable
development’ (Open Working Group 2015), and simultaneously it is the economic
growth that is seen as a panacea for social inequalities, and planet is seen as a
secondary value, this anthropocentric vision threatens to destroy the very
foundations upon which humanity depends. The true victim of unsustainability is the
Planet, including – but not limited to – all its people.
Target 16.3’s proposed indicators are outcome-oriented & vague, & should be
replaced by indicators that measure State compliance with key components of
access to justice, most importantly access to counsel for the poor. Countries are
currently discussing developing detailed indicators of access to justice that fit
national priorities, & these don’t generally address either of the narrowly defined
proposed global indicators for Target 16.3. The indicators should more broadly
encompass measurements on which all States must collect data to demonstrate
progress towards access to justice, & about which they can develop more detailed
indicators at the national & regional level, depending on priorities & need. An
access to counsel indicator is sufficiently broad to serve as a global indicator
because access to counsel is a fundamental component of access to justice; but it
is also narrow enough to show a meaningful statistic about whether the poor have
equal access to justice. Such an indicator would capture the purpose of the current
proposed indicators—access to counsel increases access to dispute mechanisms &
decreases likelihood of extended pretrial detention—but will also more broadly
assess whether the poor, vulnerable & marginalized have the same access to
justice as those who can afford a lawyer.Further, it is important to consider that
indicators will not be used only for collecting data; they will also be used as focal
points for governments, civil society actors, & funders. There is a crisis in access to
justice & access to counsel worldwide, & it needs targeted focus from stakeholders.
In many countries, laws providing for equal access to counsel are in place, but
implementation is deficient or nonexistent. It is lawyers that ensure implementation
of laws, & through that work can have an enormous impact on protection of
fundamental rights; mitigation of discrimination & exploitation of society’s most
vulnerable; promotion of transparent & accountable institutions that are free of
corruption, & trust in government; curtailment of crime & of the use of illegal tactics
like torture & excessive pretrial detention; &, ultimately, on the injustices that keep
people in the cycle of poverty that the SDGs seek to halt. Also, collecting data on
access to counsel in a range of cases—civil, administrative, & criminal—will open
the door for meaningful discussions amongst policymakers, funders, &
governments & civil society about the proper & most-effective use of non-lawyers
for legal services, making long-term provision of legal aid & access to justice more
efficient & viable.
The impact of NTDs stretches across multiple development sectors, including
water, sanitation and hygiene, nutrition, maternal and child health, and education.
Long-term sustainable development, poverty reduction and improved health
outcomes cannot be successfully achieved without simultaneously addressing
NTDs.
For example, intestinal worm infections can be spread by drinking contaminated

water and eating food that was not properly washed. Areas with stagnant water are
breeding grounds for mosquitoes that transmit both lymphatic filariasis and malaria.
In many communities, key water sources harbour the parasite that causes
schistosomiasis. Many of these parasites consume key nutrients in their victims,
diminishing the impact of food aid and nutrition programs. Whenever possible,
water and sanitation and nutrition programs should integrate NTD control and
elimination measures to maximize their impact, and their overlapping nature should
be clearly recognized at the indicator level of the sustainable development goals.
The indicator framework is obviously and important component of the SDG, hence
close and strong partnerships between the UN system and NGOs is crucial in the
implementation and monitoring of the SDG.
National budget for nutrition: I am certainly not the only one to foresee difficulty in
assessing this, particularly for nutrition-sensitive interventions...even in the health
sector, as regards the prevention of NCDs.
Optional indicators: The number of professionals trained in nutrition is potentially
interesting. However, why only health professionals? Agriculture, education and
food professionals should also be involved. And what type of nutrition training? In
several instances, ‘food science’ is called nutrition (see the papers by R Sodjinou
on capacity strengthening in nutrition).
Research, methodological gaps: More research would be needed in order to
identify relevant indicators of NCD risk along the food chain: commercial food
distribution; consumption of refined commercial foods; fast food outlets; food
marketing to children...
Third party data producers must be included among the data sources being used to
track official indicators.
For Goal 16, this approach would mean that data sources would include:
Administrative data points collected by governments. This is already happening –

we just need to make the data better and more widely used. For example, we
believe that corruption in government procurement happens when there is no
information about procurement tenders – so we need to monitor data about the
percentage of publicly available procurement tenders. The same can be said about
monitoring advances on peace and safety, by using government figures on violent
deaths for example.
Surveys (experiential, factual, opinion): these would capture and collate the
experiences and perceptions of citizens of key issues related to governance, justice
and peace. For example, there would be a survey asking if people had paid a bribe
to access a government service or whether people feel safe.
Expert assessments of relevant regulations and performance by organisations
like Global Integrity, International Budget Partnership, or Transparency
International.
Many different organisations collect and analyse data on these issues. So the key
will be to embrace partnerships that can provide regular evidence of progress. Civil
society, the private sector and governments can and must work together in these
efforts. There should be agreed common standards for verifying data sources as
credible.
Citizen or third-party generated data complements what governments collect and

fills potential gaps. The UN understands that measuring the new goals will be
difficult and it must be open to all the help it can get, with the obvious proviso that
the data is vetted and validated, just like officially collected government data.
Please note that the recommendations provided by the TAP Network in this
consultation is a synthesis of inputs from dozens of civil society organizations
around the targets of Goal 16. You can find a full compilation of TAP Network
organization's inputs on our website at: http://bit.ly/1UxzXyX
Thank for including us in the feedback process.
We have the reverse the way Money is spent in the World. Might be a wishful
idealistic thinking but objective should become 65 % of the world money for
education, health, food 20% to preserve the planet and 10% for any other thing and
it's just not the case as long as this doesn't become reality I which us all good luck !
indicators, however numeric measures will not cover everything, and where there
are not any, we need to push national and regional frameworks to develop
qualitative measures and to combine them (e.g.: happiness and well-being data
relies on asking people on a 5 point scale how happy they are - there are obvious
which more than 60% are women, we cannot afford to wait another 15 years to see
seen in context and as a continuum. This requires enriching and skilling people to
used in a combination with national statistics.
We believe it would be useful to have a means with which the indicators can be
clustered depending on country development status. While it is a collective global
responsibility to deliver on all fronts on the SDGs, it is also true that relevance and
the level of urgency across the goals is different between countries.
We recommend the development of a platform where, according to country

classification - least developed, developing, developed - the indicators based on
level of priority, type of implementation (whether direct or assistance) can be
visualized. This will assist all development actors to make sense of the expanse in
the indicator framework going forward.
As it currently stands, each of the targets require multiple indicators - and there are
already a lot of targets.
Prioritisation will be key - and such prioritisation needs to focus on targets that are
going to ensure that noone is left behind by 2030. Only if this is achieved can we be
confident that the SDGs have served their purpose.
In order to get a clear picture of women's and men's economic status by gender, the
framework of indicators needed to address women's economic inequalities
effectively must produce data on three interlinked aspects of women's economic
existence:
(1) women's and men's total incomes (defined broadly as including all cash
transfers as well as earned incomes, investment incomes, occasional receipts, and
other cash flows) -- as well as the relative composition of those incomes; and
(2) women's and men's total paid work time, including time to travel too and from
paid work; and
(3) women's and men's total unpaid work time, broken down by domestic and care
work in own home and in homes of others, self-care, education, and leisure times,
with information on the numbers of others in the household needing care.
No human being has more than 24 hours a day. So long as women remain
responsible for disproportionate amounts of unpaid work and low-wage and/or low-
hours work, economic inequality will remain a physical impossibility for most women
in the world. These factors are exacerbated for racialized, indigenous, disabled,
poor, and aging women and men, all of which are important breakouts that must be
able to be generated with appropriate data.
OPHI are willing to share information, interact informally, or respond to queries
regarding the existing Global MPI, and the Gross National Happiness Index
methodology, as appropriate.
The Multidimensional Poverty Index (Target 1.2), unlike one-by-one dashboards, is

the only proposed indicator to show the various simultaneous deprivations poor
people are suffering. Using data on different indicators for the same person or
household, it identifies as MPI poor those who experience multiple acute
deprivations at the same time. Its analysis uncovers the multidimensionality of
poverty and how deprivations actually cluster in poor people's lives in different
ways.
Because it illuminates overlapping deprivations, an MPI gives incentives for

integrated policies that address interconnected deprivations together.
Just like there is a global measure of income poverty ($1.25/day and $2/day) and
national income poverty measures, so too we propose a Global MPI – as a Tier 1
indicator for Target 1.2 – to be published in the SDGs alongside the increasing
number of national MPIs which are tailored to country’s particular contexts,
datasets, and priorities. The global and national MPI complement income poverty
measures by including non-monetary dimensions affected by social policies and
structural change. These two indicators together give a fuller overview of poor
people’s lives and of policy impacts.
The Global MPI is reported with standard errors, robustness tests, and consistent
partial indices: incidence (headcount ratio), intensity, uncensored and censored
headcount ratios for each indicator, and percentage contribution of each indicator to
overall poverty. A rigorous methodology underlies the MPI, articulated in Oxford
University Press’s Multidimensional Poverty Measurement and Analysis (2015).
The Global MPI 2015 has been decomposed by rural-urban group for all but 2
countries, by subnational region for a total of 884 regions, by age category,
ethnicity, disability, gender of the household head, and other variables. Because it
measures deprivations directly, without PPPs, it is straightforward to disaggregate
by these and other relevant groups, if the sample design permits.
The Global MPI uses a poverty cutoff of 33%; tables also report incidence for
It is imperative that the SDG architecture be addressed. We are not looking only for
a list of indicators here. We are looking for SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
IMPACTS that we want to achieve in the world and measureable PROCESSES and
INPUTS that we need to check and track to make sure we are arriving at those
impacts. In terms of the impacts – the high-level agenda can be described in 30
key stats.
THATS 30 KEY IMPACTS - EASY TO COMMUNICATE IN 3 OR 4 DIFFERENT

CATEGORIES. WE ALSO NEED 300 TECHNICAL MEASURES. BY 2030. IT CAN
BE DONE
Although 300 indicators may seem numerous – countries are generally required to
anyway collect such statistics, there are SOME new areas – but this reflects new
and good ambitions. 300 is not too many.
Most of the indicators we need should be measureable by individual countries, and

ALSO on a global scale. Not only low income countries but ALL countries should
now be required to measure 300 INPUT, PROCESS, and IMPACT indicators. These
should be often DISAGGREGATED – we now find poor people in high income
countries. ALL must be required to be transparent and accountable for all their
most marginalized populations.
Tracking the world’s progress using statistics is key to transparency – and

accountability. When the MDGs officially finish for some indicators we will not know
the full story until a year or so later as retrospective data collection techniques take
their time in becoming available. We probably already know that in terms of material
poverty and education, the world has done well though poverty is certainly not yet
history. But for basic health and gender equality there have been notable failures
that need to continue to be tracked. Some aspects of development were added as
late as 2007 (Repro Health) and we only now realize that these were key for
sustainability. In the year 2000 we did not fully understand how many aspects of
environmental degradation we should track to protect our planet. Additional
aspects such as infrastructure, justice and peace we now know as crucial
developments that we should have been following.
But we will not include these new important aspects into the development
accountability framework until at least March 2016 when the Statistical Commission
Definition of urban areas & the scope of Goal 11: There does not appear to be a
clearly established definition of what constitutes a “city” for the purpose of this goal.
Are we referring to administrative or functional boundaries or both interchangeably?
While this question might already have been resolved in previous UN discussions,
how small a human settlement constitutes an urban area? And what’s the scope of
the goal’s coverage around the world? There are literally thousands of cities (of
various sizes) and other types of human settlements, and surely not all of them can
be monitored on these indicators. We therefore recommend adapting a functional
definition of a city, i.e. specify a commuting time along the lines of the WB’s
methodology discussed under Goal 11, to create more meaningful comparative
indicators. We also suggest considering a city size classification, e.g. small,
medium, and large, for the same purpose and then specifying goals related to each
category.
Crowdsourced geo-spatial data: There is growing evidence that “crowdsourced”

data collection and analysis can support local goal setting and decision-making
across a range of urban policy issues. In addition to the functional benefits of
relying on crowdsourced data to overcome gaps in administrative data collection,
increasing the capacity to collect, analyze and apply such data can promote more
“participatory” processes, in support of target 11.3. While these methods are still
nascent and have not yet been applied across a broad spectrum of cities, the
success of Open Street Maps and other Wiki mapping applications coincides with
Goal 11’s emphasis on participatory processes and open data. More efforts should
therefore be made to engage applied geography scholars in discussions related to
indicators to understand the availability of data sources based on new technologies,
e.g. using GPS trackers in taxi fleets to collect traffic speed and CO2 emissions
data.
I think the UN Millenium Goals ar a good way of reach social, economic, and
enviromental objetives but we to create a policy of supervise each target.
The Sustainable Development Goals have many targets related to maintaining a
connection between rural and urban areas, ensuring access to public spaces,
ensuring access to healthy food, and supporting local economic development. In
case of Vietnamese cities, we had many lesson with the negative impacts to
people’s quality of life of turning local market to supermarkets. Traditional fresh food
market is means to connect rural and urban. In term of public health, markets
provide fresh foods to cities dwellers. In term of economic, markets are place to
sale local products thus develop local economic. In term of culture and social,
markets are places for people connecting and developing local culture of business
and so on. So local markets or traditional market could be a mean helps to archive
cross cutting targets. However, there is no SDGs target encourage the development
of market and no proposed indicator for local market. We think that it is a missing
and need to consider. We would suggest including market objective and same as
open public spaces we need an indicator to measure the universal access to local
markets as well.
We very much welcome the fact that the list of indicators released on 11 August is
more comprehensive than the first version of the list that was presented during the
first IAEG meeting.
• Most targets in the draft outcome document of the post-2015 agenda will need
at least two indicators to meaningfully monitor the implementation of the agenda.
• Where two indicators are not enough to sufficiently cover the content of the
targets, we suggest additional indicators.
• We recognise that setting indicators should be a technical rather than political
process. However it is critical to set indicators that allow us to track the political will
and vision expressed in goals and targets.
• The SDGs indicators should abide by the principle of non-regression and
cannot be less ambitious than the agreed targets or previously agreed indicators.
• One of the challenges of the Millennium Development Goals was that learning
on what progress was (or was not) being made wasn’t captured quickly enough.
VSO believes that more participatory monitoring of the SDGs indicators would be
beneficial and allow for a better sense of where progress is being made and in what
areas, and for what groups, it is lagging. . Citizen led monitoring initiatives for key
populations such as women and girls, disabled people or migrants would also allow
for assessments of progress from the perspective of those people most at risk of
being left behind.
• The important role that civil society, including volunteers and women’s
organisation, can play in collecting data and analyzing data should also be
recognized. Making data freely accessible, transparent and user-friendly will be
essential for implementers and national and local levels accountability.
• Indicators chosen must measure what we need to know, not what we can
easily measure. Where new measurements or methodology is needed, this must be
invested in and prioritised otherwise they will not lead to any transformative action.
• They must not only measure outcomes but also perceptions and qualitative
evidence of change. Acknowledging that while quantitative data is excellent for
telling us what is happening, qualitative research is vital for telling us how and why
it happens.
Hygiene has been mentioned throughout the SDG zero draft as an important
development issue that has to be addressed alongside water, sanitation and other
targets. A specific hygiene indicator will impact the achievement of targets on
equality, education, health, gender and many more. This goes a long way to
demonstrate how important it is to have a standalone indicator to measure hygiene
which impacts on achieving targets on sanitation, hygiene and water targets as well
as all other relevant targets in the SDGs.
Proposed Indicator: Percentage of population washing their hands with soap and
water and percentage of women and girls with access to adequate and affordable
information and facilities to manage their menstruation hygienically.
Indicators will need to be broadly disaggregated across all relevant goals and
targets to ensure that disparities and inequities in progress are visible, and that the
impact (or lack of it) of the SDGs on of the poorest and most marginalized people
are not obscured by medians or national averages as was the case with the MDGs.
- The SDGs indicators should abide by the principle of non-regression and
cannot be less ambitious than the agreed targets or previously agreed indicators.
Further, it should be faithful to the nature of the target which means measuring what
the target is clearly calling for.
- It is no longer acceptable to use GDP as a proxy for development outcomes.
Human development requires a more nuanced understanding of different elements
of human wellbeing and equity; our commitment to sustainable development must
include adequate measurement of environmental factors. Progress must be
measured in ways that go beyond GDP and account for human well-being,
sustainability and equity.
The sustainable development goals are far reaching and quite comprehensive.
The monitoring machine for its effective implementation must be carefully
developed.
There has to be an improvement on the one used for the MDGs.
All the Gaps have to be closed.
when a goal is general and can address both men and women, the fact that many
womens live in a disadvantaged position should be taken into consideration both in
the formulation and in the measurement of progress on a given target. Women
issue shoud appear in all goals with clear reference and not be isolated in a gender
perspective goal.
JUSTIFICATION for WASH in Schools:
School children, esp. girls, miss school due to inadequate school sanitation in
Unicef and WHO (2010) Raising
Clean Hands http://www.unicef.org/wash/schools/files/raisingcleanhands_2010.pdf
School study in Ethiopia reported over 50% of girls missing between one and four
days of school per month
due to menstruation in WaterAid (2012) Menstrual hygiene matters
http://www.wateraid.org/what-we-do/ourapproach/
research-and-publications/view-publication?id=02309d73-8e41-4d04-b2ef-
6641f6616a4f
JUSTIFICATION for WASH in public and working places

When Women without access to sanitation suppress the urge to drink and to go to
the toilet, this results in
dehydration and related diseases in Fisher (2006) For her it´s a big issue, WSSCC
Geneva
http://esa.un.org/iys/docs/san_lib_docs/FOR_HER_ITs_THE_BIG_ISSUE_Evidenc
e_Report-en%5B1%5D.pdf
Factory case study in Bangladesh could decrease the absenteeism of workers due
to improved MHM in Schappert
(2013) HER project and BSR at the Celebrating Women meeting in Geneva, March
8th, 2013
https://sanitationupdates.wordpress.com/2014/11/17/sca-and-wsscc-partner-to-
break-silence-around-menstruation
A robust indicator framework will be necessary for monitoring and accountability
mechanisms at the national, regional and international levels. This is also critical for
private sector accountability. The private sector has a responsibility to collect
accurate data about their environmental and social impact in support of national
data collection systems.
We support the calls of many that there must be increased efforts aimed at
capacity-building and supporting national and international statistics offices in the
collection and analysis of data. This should include gender-expertise and improved
resourcing and adequate funds for independent civil society participation in
monitoring frameworks.
Throughout this process, civil society must be afforded the opportunity to provide
inputs throughout the indicator development process. In addition to attending
meetings, civil society should have access to online consultations to observe and
provide recommendations, in line with the Terms of Reference for the IAEG.
We are concerned that one indicator cannot possibly address the entire target.
Although we suggested modal split as a potential indicator for 11.2, we do believe
that a proximity to public transit target is important. However, even that target
cannot address the full range of issues that impact access for women, the disabled,
and the poor. Walking, cycling and cycle rickshaw need to be attractive choices, not
just the only choice, if we are to achieve sustainable transportation. There is a
similar issue for a public spaces indicator since proximity to a park or public space
does not say anything about the quality of the experience. We would therefore like
to suggest that in addition to the indicators developed for the Global Monitoring
Framework an additional set of measures be developed and used by countries that
address these important issues.
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.
While we recognize the need for an efficient, tight framework for measuring
progress, we also concur with the statement in the civil society consultation
comments, “Setting limits on the overall number of indicators per target may
undermine the Member States’ desire that all targets are measured.”
Disaggregation: World Vision welcomes the widespread disaggregation by age in
the proposed indicators. As the most vulnerable group it is essential that impact on
children is measured whenever it is appropriate. Together with gender, World Vision
suggests that age is consistently applied as the minimum standard for
disaggregation across the framework.
Disaggregation in fragile and conflict affected contexts (FCAS): in addition to age
and gender, in FCAS further disaggregation is essential in order to track progress in
the most vulnerable and disenfranchised communities, and thus to reduce conflict
drivers. Such disaggregation may include by ethnicity, religion, social group and
geography.
Refugees and displaced people: This most vulnerable group is absent from the
framework. An indicator that measures the numbers of refugees and displaced
should be included. They may also be an appropriate group for disaggregation in
other indicators.
The indicators proposed under goal 16 go some way to articulating a constructive
and achievable agenda for this new area. But they require further refinement and
elaboration. For every indicator full disaggregation by age, gender, religion,
ethnicity, social group and geography needs to be considered.
(1) Recalling the guidance from Member States that the SDG indicator framework
will preserve the balance, integration and ambition of the goals and targets, (para
75, Transforming our World) WWF conducted an informal “back of the envelope”
assessment of the degree to which the set of suggested indicators (bright blue
lines) balance the three dimensions of sustainable development. Out of a total of
313 indicators (some indicators tick one or more boxes: social, economic,
environmental) nearly 50% are “social” with the remaining closely split between
“env” and “econ”. As the IAEG refines the full set we encourage them to improve
the balance to ensure an adequate coverage of environmental issues.
(2) We would also like to highlight the need to ensure that the indicators chosen for
SDGs are of relevance to national monitoring as well as global monitoring. Whereas
many indicators already have at least some datasets available, implementation of
the framework and monitoring of SDG delivery will only be effective if an
international effort is made to build capacity in countries that have most of the
biodiversity and most of the poverty. Many countries need help with accessing
existing data (especially in formats of use to them), collecting new data and
managing, analyzing, interpreting and sharing data. The CBD Secretariat’s efforts to
mobilize resources for environmental monitoring should also be supported.
WYA is a global youth organization with approximately 85,000 individual members

and 1 million members through affiliated organizations. As young people committed
to human dignity, we have a strong interest in building the world we want. We
encourage the IAEG-SDGs to promote the authentic needs of the world's youth:
safety, clean water, education, jobs, and good governance. We also want human
dignity, the intrinsic, inalienable value of every human being, to be at the foundation
of all sustainable development efforts, including how we assess our progress
towards eradicating poverty. We, youth from developed and developing countries,
stand in solidarity in support of authentic development.
We were disappointed to see our comments were not represented in the

compilation of comments from the previous consultation. We do not ask that any
other comments be left out, only that ours are included with them. To be
sustainable, development must be grounded on human dignity. Our comments
reflect a key concern about the indicators in that respect. We believe it is important
that all voices are heard for a truly open and transparent process. We ask that our
comments on the indicators for targets 3.7 and 5.6 be included in the compilation
made from this consultation period.
Some of the indicators need to be further broken down to be more specific. for
instance, in the issue of gainful employment and remuneration, what about unpaid
women's labour? Women who have left work to care and nurse babies, who are not
in full time employment?

Thank you for the opportunity to comment; it is good to see a broader range of
indicators and the removal of the distinction between global and complementary
national indicators. Cross-linkages between targets, particularly those which
depend on ecological sustainability, could however still be improved. ZSL stands
ready to support the continued development of the SDG indicators and would
welcome further participation in future consultations, workshops or other relevant
fora.

Ngo's Worldwide

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Ngo's Worldwide

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

How do you envision/see your

Thematic Areas of Interest of organization participating in the indicator

Environment and Climate

Economic Growth, Education,

Gender, Governance, peace and

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Energy,

Economic Growth, Environment

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Energy,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Environment and Climate

Economic Growth, Energy,

Education, Food, nutrition and

Education, Environment and

Education, Environment and

Education, Energy, Environment

Energy, Environment and Climate

Economic Growth, Education,

Data producer/collector, Indicator

Economic Growth, Education,

Education, Environment and

Economic Growth, Education,

Environment and Climate

Economic Growth, Environment

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Energy, Environment and Climate

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Energy,

Economic Growth, Energy,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Consortium of 28 disability and

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Director, Public Affairs, International Federation of International Business

Economic Growth, Energy,

Education, Environment and

Education, Governance, peace

Director, Communications lhoemeke@intrahealth.or Non-Governmental

Economic Growth, Education,

Sr. Director of Research, Non-Governmental Indicator development, Data analysis and

Economic Growth, Gender,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Education, Environment and

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Education,

Economic Growth, Energy,

Economic Growth, Education,

The Post 2015 Working Group

Education, Energy, Environment

Economic Growth, Education,