Theme 1: The relevance of ‘new metrics’ for the evaluation of SDG2 – data revolution and innovative approaches for assessing human wellbeing Overview Of Thematic Group Breakout Discussion John Hoddinott, Cornell University November 18, 2015 ENHANCING THE EVALUABILITY OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL 2 IFAD HEADQUARTERS, ROME

OVERVIEW – HOW WE BEGAN The assessment of global, regional and national efforts to reach the ambitious and important objectives of SDG2 will require innovations in approaches to define and measure hunger, food security and agricultural sustainability. Our discussions will focus on the following inter-related questions: For which dimensions do we already have indicators/indices/data; Do we need ‘new metrics’ to measure all the dimensions of SDG2; What systems exist to measure these indicators, accurately and reliably; How complete and reliable is the global ‘data architecture’; Where are the gaps?

HOW DID WE END? It is the best of times, it is the worst of times, it is the epoch of belief, it is the epoch of incredulity, it is the season of Light, it is the season of Darkness, it is the spring of hope, it is the winter of despair, We have everything before us, we have nothing before us Paraphrased from Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities

WHAT DO WE “HAVE BEFORE US”? We have some basic, powerful building blocks: The Prevalence of Undernourishment metric Metrics for the measurement of chronic and acute undernutrition We have in many countries, a strong desire by national statistical services to take ownership of collecting the metrics associated with SDG2 We have, through advances in ICTs and related technologies, the prospects for more accurate, more encompassing, more timely metrics: Advances in remote sensing technologies (“rent time on a satellite”) Use of mobiles Blood spot assays using micro-readers Computer Aided Personal Interviews and participatory monitoring

OUR ‘SEASONS OF DARKNESS’ There are gaps in the global data architecture. We have countries with rich data across a range of food security and nutrition indicators and there are others with nothing. Consider the following: Two countries on the same continent Same levels of per capita income (~$1,600 per person) One country has 185x more people than the other (37 million v. 200,000) Or consider this. The latest SOFI estimates that there are 220 million undernourished people in sub-Saharan Africa This figure excludes the Democratic Republic of Congo which has approximately 68 million people. Maybe. The last census was 1981 (Note that the last estimate of POU for DRC that I could find was 70%) => There are gaps. But not all gaps are created equal. There is merit in a global stock taking that identifies the countries and basic indicators where the gaps really matter.

WHERE ARE THE BIGGEST GAPS IN TERMS OF METRICS Diet quality The distribution of food insecurity across and within countries (eg disaggregating by region; by gender) This speaks to debates over the usefulness of household surveys in the measurement of SDG2 The measurement of sustainable agriculture The need, in many countries, to re-invigorate farm surveys to capture “who produces what”, how do they produce what they produce and what are the environmental implications Scale-able and affordable measures of micro-nutrient deficiencies Measuring “in between” individuals/households and the nation: Market data (“affordability” in addition to access) Watersheds and other agro-ecological groupings

LOOKING AHEAD Addressing the tension between: “Standardized indicators NOW” and The risks of indicators “calcifying” There is a significant opportunity for the RBA’s to re-invigorate the measurement of food security that goes beyond (the important, useful) POU Lastly, there is a need to recognize that the implicit Theory of Change underpinning SDG2 does not reside solely within it; that progress on meeting SDG2 is intimately bound up with progress on other SDGs (poverty, gender, WASH, climate change, accountable institutions …)