Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Disaggregation of HD indicators: Why needed? Why difficult? What could be done?

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Why disaggregation needed? To avoid “formal reporting” attitudes To design adequate policies To build public support To achieve adequate measurements of progress (national aggregates are not the “sum for distinct groups”) Achieving the impact – addressing the most or least needed

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Types of disaggregation By differently defined population groups (by age, by sex, by education, by levels of incomes, by ethnicity, by employment status, by religious affiliation etc.). By territory (sub-national territorial and administrative entities, by rural/urban division, territories identified by socioeconomic criteria)

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Methodological problems Lack of disaggregated statistics (especially by ethnicity and incomes) Different indicators differently “disaggregatable” Different meaning of some indicators at national level and disaggregated “Small population”-related problems

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Possible approaches: Economic component of HDI Use proxies of disposable income trough simulation of the redistributive role of the state at sub-national level Recalculate the values of GDP per capita at sub-national levels using data from municipal tax revenues or municipal budgets Use data from household budget surveys

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Possible approaches: Life expectancy Encourage the elaboration of disaggregated mortality tables Use infant mortality and child mortality data (more often available) to select a country with similar profile

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Possible approaches: Educational attainment Use school and education administration registries for school attendance “Smooth” data using higher level of aggregation averages Use only the first two educational levels for sub-national estimations of educational attainment

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Possible approaches: HDI comparisons Avoid “national level rankings” Use “within district” rankings instead Be aware of the trade-offs (lower level of aggregation – higher magnitude of error)

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Few examples: HDI for Roma population in Romania Life expectancy: Educational attainment: 0.60 Economic component: 0.50 Romanian Roma HDI: Romania HDI in 2000: was HDI for Roma in Romania between countries like Zimbabwe (0.551) and Swaziland (0.577)

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Few examples: Ethnically disaggregated MDG1:

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Few examples: National PL assessment of poverty

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Few examples: Water and sanitation

Europe and CIS NHDR Workshop: Training on Statistical Indicators. Bratislava, May 2003 Conclusions Disaggregated indicators are necessary for increasing the relevance of policy recommendations “Aggregated” and “disaggregated” targets are different in scope and necessary policies A delicate compromise between global comparability and national adequacy is a necessary Different angles of analysis are complementary and not substitutive