1. 1 Issues and Challenges in Monitoring the MDGs Post 2015 Yongyi Min United Nations Statistics Division United Nations Statistics Division

2. 2 Outline ● Issues in the current MDGs monitoring ● Challenges in monitoring the MDGs post 2015 ● Developing SMART post 2015 goals for monitoring

3. 3 Issues in the current MDGs monitoring ● 1. One-size-fit-all targets ● 2. Measuring relative change vs. absolute change ● 3. Baseline year: 1990 or 2000? ● 4. Other issues

4. 4 Issue 1: One-size-fit-all targets ● The MDGs are evaluated by numerical targets, some specific (e.g. reduce extreme poverty by half, reduce under-five mortality by two thirds), some more vague (e.g. productive and decent employment, reduce biodiversity loss). ● The targets were formulated based on historical trends at the global level. They are the projections to 2015 based on the global trends in the 60s, 70s and 80s. Therefore it might not be fair to impose them on each country or region.

5. 5 Issue 2: Measuring relative change vs. absolute change ● Performance on most of the MDGs are measured in relative terms, which puts countries with a poor starting point at a disadvantage. ● Monitoring MDG progress should use both relative and absolute changes and should investigate the association between them to gain the maximum possible insight into the MDG progress.

6. 6 Example 1: Reduce extreme poverty by half ● Top 20 performers based on Relative Annual Progress Rate (RAPR), RAPR = [(X latest -X first )/X first ] / (T latest -T first ) Low income Lower middle income Upper middle incomeTotal Caucasus and Central Asia2226 Eastern Asia 1 1 Latin America & the Caribbean 134 Northern Africa 1 1 South-eastern Asia 112 Southern Asia 2 2 Sub-Saharan Africa21 3 Western Asia 1 1 Total410620

7. 7 Example 1: Reduce extreme poverty by half ● Top 20 performers based on Absolute Annual Progress Rate (AAPR), AAPR = (X latest -X first )/(T latest -T first ) Low income Lower middle incomeTotal Caucasus and Central Asia112 Eastern Asia 11 South-eastern Asia 22 Southern Asia123 Sub-Saharan Africa9312 Total11920

8. 8 Example 2: Reduce Under-Five Child Mortality by two thirds ● Top 20 performers based Relative Change (RC) over 1990-2010, RC= (X 2010 -X 1990 )/X 1990 Low income Lower middle income Upper middle income High incomeTotal Caucasus and Central Asia 1 1 Eastern Asia 2 2 Latin America & the Caribbean 15 6 Northern Africa 2 2 Oceania 1 1 South-eastern Asia1 1 2 Southern Asia21 3 Western Asia 1 23 Total387 220

9. 9 Example 2: Reduce Under-Five Child Mortality by two thirds ● Top 20 performers based Absolute Change (AC) over 1990-2010, AC= X 2010 -X 1990 Low income Lower middle incomeTotal Eastern Asia 11 South-eastern Asia1 1 Southern Asia224 Sub-Saharan Africa13114 Total16420

10. 10 Issue 3: Baseline year: 1990 or 2000? ● The Millennium Declaration was adopted in September 2000 by the General Assembly and the MDG monitoring framework was established in 2001. ● 1990 is normally used as the reference/benchmark year for MDG monitoring. This leads to a discrimination against countries with poor 1990s performance.

11. 11 Example 1: Reduce extreme poverty by half - Bolivia

12. 12 Example 2: Reduce Child Mortality and Maternal Mortality Region Under-5 Child MortalityMaternal Mortality AARR (1990-2000)(2000-2010)(1990-2000)(2000-2010) Developing Regions1.932.391.733.05 Northern Africa 5.575.546.513.27 Sub-Saharan Africa 1.222.410.962.63 Eastern Asia 3.756.065.585.3 South-eastern Asia 3.914.055.024.54 Southern Asia 2.962.763.45.07 Western Asia 3.983.413.614.14 Oceania 1.741.921.091.53 Latin America and the Caribbean 4.344.22.413.16 Caucasus and Central Asia 2.173.20.223.02

13. 13 Issue 4. Some other issues in the current MDG monitoring ● Data issues in the current MDG monitoring: data availability, discrepancies between national data sets and series compiled by international agencies, data inconsistencies within country, data comparability. ● Lack of clear numerical targets for Goal 8 and its linkage with other MDGs. ● MDGs monitoring focuses more on average progress at global, regional or national level, neglecting the poorest and most vulnerable.

14. 14 Challenges in monitoring the MDGs post 2015 1. Global vs. local targets 2. Simplicity vs. complexity, and stability vs. flexibility 3. Disaggregated monitoring 4. Linking with monitoring other development goals and initiatives: Rio+20, measuring well- being.

15. 15 Developing SMART post 2015 goals for monitoring For better monitoring of development progress, SMART criteria can be used to develop the post 2015 MDGs ● S: Simple ● M: Measurable ● A: Achievable ● R: Relevant ● T: Time-bound