SAKIKO FUKUDA-PARR COLLABORATIVE WORK WITH JOSHUA GREENSTEIN, SUSAN RANDOLPH, TERRA LAWSON-REMER Beyond Indicators: why metrics matter

Beyond Indicators for assessing state performance – some insights from the SERF Index Indicators in evaluative frameworks (normative use) Exploring characteristics and conditions (predictive and behavioural use) 2

Progressive realization ‘Each State party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps, individually and through international assistance and cooperation, especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present covenant by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislative measures (article 2, paragraph 1). 3

Why metrics matter – measuring HR performance vs development performance Obligations of conduct vs. obligations of result Assessment of conduct: by policy? by ‘effort’? By empirical evidence of improved outcomes? Value of quantification: rigorous assessment of magnitude and trend Progressive realization: making progress over time? Maximum available resources: maximum government spending?Resources beyond government revenue? Constraint of resources imposed by level of development and size of economy? 4

Assumptions and evaluative frameworks Criteria for defining success and failure, compliance and non-compliance with obligations Focus of measurement: (i) achieved level; (ii) pace of progress and progressive realization; (iii) initial starting point; (iv) resource constraints and maximum resources. 5

Comparison of evaluative frameworks Achieved level Pace of progress Initial conditions Resource constraints ‘HR outcome Indicators’ x(x) MDGs – on/off track x MDG – pace of progress method xx SERF Indexx(x)xx HDIx(x) 6

Example: achieving MDGs vs. ESR fulfillment CountryMDG 1SERF Index (work component) MDGs overallSERF Index composite ChinaLikely63.98On track/likely 5/ IndiaPossible to achieve 27.6Possible 4/ The GambiaOff track 5/893.88Off track 5/7 Likely/poss 2/7 81,65 Viet NamOn track58.66On track/likely 7/

Illustration: level vs pace of progress for child mortality CountryUN monitorAnnual Change post 2001 Post 2001 change in pace of progress LibyaOn track-0.57Slower MexicoAchieved-1.14Slower MalawiPossible-8.43Faster The GambiaOff track-3.14Faster LesothoOff track-3.29Faster TogoOff track-3.14Faster TanzaniaPossible-3.86Faster 8

Illustration: HDI vs SERF vs. Income HDI improvement top performer SERF scoreIncome top performer SERF score Oman China80 China80Botswana60 Nepal68S. Korea92 Indonesia66Hong Kong(85) Saudi Arabia71-81Malaysia85 9

Using measurement to explore conditions for human rights performance Explore relationships between SERF scores and: - Government spending - Gender equality - Governance, civil and political rights, legal guarantees - Economic structure - Regions 10

Public expenditure Health and education: weak relationship - High spending does not guarantee good score, low spending does not guarantee low score. However on average good performers spent more than 2% gdp on health, almost 5% on education 11

*OUTLIERS REMOVED

Gender equality Shows strongest correlation with SERF performance Social Watch Gender Equality Index - 70% of countries with good scores scored more than 70 UNDP Gender Inequality Index – good performers had good GII index, poor performers had poor GII index 15

Governance/Civil and political rights, legal guarantees Polity combined index (democracy) – positive but inconsistent correlation. V. few countries scoring well on Polity score poorly on SERF CIRI – V. few high CIRI score countries do poorly on SERF World Bank governance indicators – positive correlation but many good performers on SERF do poorly TIESR (legal guarantees) – positive but inconsistent correlation for health, weak for food 20

Relationship with Polity Autocracy/Democracy Score

Relationship with Performance on CIRI Rights Index

Legally Enshrined Social and Economic Rights

Average Governance Measurement Scores, LAC and SSA

Economic structure Higher proportion of GDP in manufacturing and services – better performance by SERF Higher proportion in agriculture – weaker performance by SERF 28

Structural Relationship constant?

Regional comparison Sub-saharan Africa and South Asia have lowest average scores More than 75% of countries with poor SERF scores are in SSA FSU and LAC do disproportionately well. 35

Regional comparison 36