******************************************************************************
This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department for
Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development (DPCSD). Reproduction and
dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is
encouraged, provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United
Nations in making it available.
******************************************************************************
INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGIES
SOCIAL INDICATORS
Foreword
In the four years since the Rio Summit, there have been many
initiatives to promote sustainable development. Indicators are useful
tools to gain insight regarding the progress made in achieving sustainable
development. Agenda 21 calls for countries, international organizations
and non-governmental organizations to develop and use indicators of
sustainable development.
Building on many national and international initiatives aimed at
developing and using indicators, the Commission on Sustainable Development
in 1995 adopted a work programme on indicators for sustainable development.
The work programme includes an initial set of 130 indicators.
To facilitate the use of these indicators and to test their
practicability at the same time, methodology sheets have been developed
for each of them. This publication presents these methodology sheets.
It is essential to get feedback on the indicators and the
methodology sheets. We, in the CSD secretariat, look forward to your
reactions and comments. The goal is to have a good set of indicators
for sustainable development by the year 2000. We count on the users
of this publication to contribute to this goal.
On behalf of the United Nations, I would like to thank all of
those who have participated in the process of making this publication
possible.
Joke Waller-Hunter
Director
Division for Sustainable Development
Department for Policy Coordination
and Sustainable Development
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents
Page
Foreword
Table of contents v
Introduction vii
Working list of indicators of sustainable development ix
Methodology sheets:
Indicators for social aspects of sustainable development 1
Chapter 3: Combating poverty 3
Chapter 5: Demographic dynamics and sustainability 31
Chapter 36: Promoting education, public awareness and
training 44
Chapter 6: Protecting and promoting human health 83
Chapter 7: Promoting sustainable human settlement
development 123
Indicators for economic aspects of sustainable development 150
Chapter 2: International cooperation to accelerate
sustainable development in countries
and related domestic policies 152
Chapter 4: Changing consumption patterns 166
Chapter 33: Financial resources and mechanisms 184
Chapter 34: Transfer of environmentally sound
technology, cooperation and
capacity-building 201
Indicators for environmental aspects of sustainable development 210
Water
Chapter 18: Protection of the quality and supply
of freshwater resources 213
Chapter 17: Protection of the oceans, all kinds of
seas and coastal areas 233
Land
Chapter 10: Integrated approach to the planning
and management of land resources 245
Chapter 12: Managing fragile ecosystems: combating
desertification and drought 255
Chapter 13: Managing fragile ecosystems: sustainable
mountain development 269
Chapter 14: Promoting sustainable agriculture and
rural development 280
Other natural resources
Chapter 11: Combating deforestation 298
Chapter 15: Conservation of biological diversity 311
Chapter 16: Environmentally sound management of
biotechnology 318
Atmosphere
Chapter 9: Protection of the atmosphere 323
Waste
Chapter 21: Environmentally sound management of
solid wastes and sewage-related issues 349
Chapter 19: Environmentally sound management of
toxic chemicals 364
Chapter 20: Environmentally sound management of
hazardous wastes 366
Chapter 22: Safe and environmentally sound
management of radioactive wastes 382
Indicators for institutional aspects of sustainable development 385
Chapter 8: Integrating environment and development
in decision-making 386
Chapter 35: Science for sustainable development 395
Chapter 39: International legal instruments and
mechanisms 404
Chapter 40: Information for decision-making 411
Chapter 23-32: Strengthening the role of major groups 419
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
On occasion of its third session, in April 1995, the Commission on
Sustainable Development (CSD) approved a work programme on indicators of
sustainable development. The work programme included a list of
approximately 130 indicators organized in the Driving Force - State -
Response Framework. In this framework, Driving Force indicators represent
human activities, processes and patterns that impact on sustainable
development, State indicators indicate the "state" of sustainable
development, and response indicators indicate policy options and other
responses to changes in the state of sustainable development.
The indicators are intended for use at the national level by
countries in their decision-making processes. Not all of the indicators
will be applicable in every situation. It is understood that countries
will choose to use from among the indicators those relevant to national
priorities, goals and targets.
Following the decision of the CSD and the adoption of an
implementation plan by experts from various organizations involved in the
follow-up, the process of developing methodology sheets for each of the
indicators was started. The purpose of the methodology sheets is to
provide users at the national level with sufficient information about the
concept, significance, measurement and data sources for each indicator so
as to facilitate data collection and analysis. The process was coordinated
by the United Nations Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable
Development (DPCSD) but builds upon indicator work being carried out in
several organizations. The process was marked by a high degree of
collaboration among a large number of organizations of the United Nations
system, other intergovernmental organizations, and non-governmental
organizations.
Organizations which have contributed both to the development of the
indicators and to the preparation of the methodology sheets include the
following: the United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA); the United Nations Department for
Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development (DPCSD); the United Nations
Department for Development Support and Management Services (DDSMS); the
United Nations Department for Humanitarian Affairs (DHA); the secretariat
of the Framework Convention on Climate Change; the United Nations
Children~s Fund (UNICEF); the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD); the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and
its Office to Combat Desertification and Drought (UNSO); the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) and the secretariat of the Basel Convention;
the United Nations University; the Regional Commissions of the United
Nations; the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat); the
International Labour Organization (ILO); the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO); the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the World Health
Organization (WHO); the International Telecommunication Union (ITU); the
World Meteorological Organization (WMO); the United Nations Industrial
Development Organization (UNIDO); the World Bank; the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA); the European Communities Statistical Office; the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); the
International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT); the International
Conservation Union (IUCN); the International Institute for Sustainable
Development (IISD); the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis
(IIASA); the National Institute for Public Health and Environmental
Protection of the Netherlands (RIVM); the New Economics Foundation; the
Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE); the Worldwatch
Institute; the World Resources Institute (WRI); the World Wide Fund for
Nature (WWF); and the Wuppertal Institute.
In February 1996, a meeting of government experts was organized by
the Environment Agency of Japan, in cooperation with DPCSD, in Glen Cove,
New York, to discuss and evaluate the methodology sheets from the point of
view of potential users. The methodology sheets were also circulated among
a roster of international experts for their comments.
The responsible organizations revised the methodology sheets
accordingly and a first draft of the publication was presented as a
Background Paper no. 15, at the fourth session of the Commission on
Sustainable Development, in April/May 1996. Since then additional and
revised methodology sheets have been submitted by the lead agencies and
were incorporated into the revised edition of the document. In a few
instances, methodology sheets are still being developed and in these cases,
a "bookmark" has been included, stating the name of the indicator, a brief
definition, the unit of measurement, and its placement in the framework.
The work on completing and revising the methodology sheets will continue,
as the CSD work programme on indicators now enters its second phase.
The second phase concentrates on enhancement of information exchange
among all interested partners, training and capacity building at the
regional and national levels and monitoring the use of the indicators in
countries that have shown interest in this process. The publication will
now be forwarded to all Governments to assist them in working with
indicators in their decision-making processes. As feedback and results
from testing, analytical work are discussed, further improvements in the
indicators and methodology sheets will be implemented. This includes in
the longer run, additional work on interlinkages, highly aggregated
indicators and the conceptual framework and compilation of environmental
indicators.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methodology Sheets
Indicators for Social Aspects of Sustainable Development
Table of Contents
Page
Chapter 3: Combating poverty 3
- Unemployment rate 3
- Head count index of poverty 9
- Poverty gap index 14
- Squared poverty gap index 19
- Gini index of income inequality 24
- Ratio of average female wage to male wage 28
Chapter 5: Demographic dynamics and sustainability 31
- Population growth rate 31
- Net migration rate 34
- Total fertility rate 38
- Population density 41
Chapter 36: Promoting education, public awareness and training 44
- Rate of change of school-age population 44
- Primary school enrolment ratio--gross 47
- Primary school enrolment ratio--net 51
- Secondary school enrolment ratio--gross 55
- Secondary school enrolment ratio--net 59
- Adult literacy rate 63
- Children reaching grade 5 of primary education 66
- School life expectancy 70
- Difference between male and female school
enrolment ratios 73
- Women per hundred men in the labour force 76
- GDP spent on education 80
Chapter 6: Protecting and promoting human health 83
- Basic sanitation: percent of population with
adequate excreta disposal facilities 83
- Access to safe drinking water 86
- Life expectancy at birth 89
- Adequate birth weight 92
- Infant mortality rate 94
- Maternal mortality rate 98
- Nutritional status of children 102
- Immunization against infectious childhood diseases 105
- Contraceptive prevalence 108
- Proportion of potentially hazardous chemicals
monitored in food 112
- National health expenditure devoted to
local health care 118
- Total national health expenditure related to GNP 120
Chapter 7: Promoting sustainable human settlement development 123
- Rate of growth of urban population 123
- Per capita consumption of fossil fuel by motor
vehicle transport 126
- Human and economic loss due to natural disasters 129
- Percent of population in urban areas 134
- Area and population of urban formal and
informal settlements 137
- Floor area per person 140
- House price to income ratio 143
- Infrastructure expenditure per capita 147
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a)Name: Unemployment rate.
(b)Brief Definition: Unemployment rate is the ratio of unemployed people to
the labour force.
(c)Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a)Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The unemployment rate measures the part of the labour force
which, during the survey reference period, was neither (i) at work nor
temporarily absent from work (i.e. not in paid or self- employment); (ii)
available for work; or (iii) seeking work.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Unemployment is
useful and relevant to measuring sustainable development, especially if
uniformly measured over time, and considered with other socioeconomic
indicators. It is one of the main reasons for poverty in rich and medium
income countries and among persons with high education in low income countries
(no work, no income but compensation from insurance schemes or other welfare
state systems whenever they exist). It should be noted, however, that it is
common to find people working full-time but remaining poor due to the
particular social conditions and type of industrial relations prevalent in
their country, industry, or occupation.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is linked to other
socioeconomic indicators such as poverty measures and adult literacy.
(d) Targets: National targets for unemployment are common.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See 7 iii below.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The definitions for labour
force, employed population, and unemployed population are well established by
international agreements (see section 7 below).
i) Labour Force: The current economically active population or labour
force has two components: the employed and the unemployed population. The
international standard definition of labour force established by the Thirteen
International Conference of Labour Statisticians (ILO, 1982) is based on the
following elements:
--The survey population: All usual residents (de jure population) or
all persons present in the country at the time of the survey (de facto
population). Some particular groups, such as the armed forces or other
populations living in institutions, nomadic people, etc. may be excluded.
--An age limit: In countries where compulsory schooling and
legislation on the minimum age for admission to employment have broad coverage
and are widely respected, the age specified in these regulations may be used
as a basis for determining an appropriate minimum age limit for measuring the
economically active population.
In other countries the minimum age limit should be determined empirically on
the basis of (i) the extent and intensity of participation in economic
activities by young people, and (ii) the feasibility and cost of measuring
such participation with acceptable accuracy. Some countries also determine a
maximum age for inclusion in the labour force.
--The involvement in economic activities during the survey reference
period: The concept of economic activity adopted by the Thirteenth
International Conference of Labour Statisticians (1982) is defined in terms
of production of goods and services as set forth by the United Nations System
of National Accounts, (revised in 1993).
-- A short reference period: For example, one week or a day.
ii) Employed population: According to the 1982 international definition
of employment (ILO, 1983) the employed comprise all persons above the age
specified for measuring the labour force, who were in the following
categories:
--Paid employment: (i) at work: persons who, during the reference
period, performed some work (at least one hour) for wage or salary, in cash
or in kind; (ii) with a job but not at work: persons who, having already
worked in their present job, were temporarily not at work during the reference
period but had a formal attachment to their job;
--self-employment: (i) at work: persons who, during the reference
period, performed some work (at least one hour) for profit or family gain, in
cash or in kind; (ii) with an enterprise but not at work : persons with an
enterprise, which may be a business enterprise, a farm or a service
undertaking, who were temporarily not at work during the reference period for
some specific reason.
iii) Unemployed population: According to the 1982 international
definition of employment (ILO, 1983) the unemployed comprise all persons
above the age specified for measuring the labour force, who during the survey
reference period were at the same time: (i) not in paid employment or
self-employment, not even for an hour; (ii) available for work; and (iii)
seeking work.
(b) Measurement Methods:
--Sources may be grouped into two broad categories: (i) population
censuses and household sample surveys; and (ii) various types of
administrative records, such as employment exchange registers, unemployment
insurance records or social security files, which cover different segments of
the target population (numerator of the indicator) through different
conceptual frameworks.
Estimates according to the international standards can in practice be made
most reliably on the basis of data collected through household surveys and
population censuses. Some of the criteria specified in the international
standards can only be implemented precisely through personal interviews. This
is the only data source which, on a regular basis and with an appropriate
survey design, can cover virtually the entire population of a country, all
branches of economic activity, sectors of the economy, types of activity
status and categories of workers and which allow joint, mutually exclusive
measurement of the employed, unemployed and economically inactive.
--The one hour criterion is necessary to cover all regular and
irregular types of employment that may exist in a given country; to have the
total employment corresponding to aggregate production; and to justify the
international definition of unemployment as a total lack of work, so that the
two components of the labour force are mutually exclusive categories.
--Temporary absence from work is a notion which refers to situations
in which a period of work is interrupted by a period of absence, i.e. persons
have already worked at their current activity and are expected to return to
their work after the period of absence.
For paid employment, temporary absence from work is ascertained on the basis
of the concept of formal job attachment according to one or more of the
following criteria: continued receipt of wage or salary; an assurance of a
return to work following the end of the contingency, or an agreement as to the
date of return; the elapsed duration of absence from the job which, wherever
relevant, may be that duration for which workers can receive compensation
benefits without obligation to accept other jobs.
For self-employment, the concept of temporary absence from work is based on
two criteria: the continued existence of the enterprise and the duration of
absence.
--Availability for work means that, given a work opportunity, a
person should be able and ready to work during the survey reference period. In
practice, many countries prefer to use a slightly longer reference period for
availability (not everyone who is seeking work can be expected to take up a
job immediately one is offered).
--Seeking work means having taken specific active steps in a
specified recent period to seek paid employment or self-employment. This
specified period may be longer than the survey reference period (e.g. one
month or the four weeks before it) to take account of the time-lags which
often follow initial steps to obtain work, and during which jobseekers may not
take any other initiatives to find work.
The 1982 international standards introduced a provision which allows for the
relaxation of the seeking work criterion in situations where the conventional
means of seeking work are of limited relevance, where the labour market is
largely unorganised or of limited scope, where labour absorption is at the
time inadequate, or where the labour force is largely self-employed .
--Particular groups: (i) Future starts i.e. persons who have made
arrangements to take up paid employment or to undertake self-employment
activity at a date subsequent to the reference period, if currently available
for work, are to be considered as unemployed whether or not they continue to
seek work. (ii) Lay-offs without formal job attachment but seeking and
currently available for work are to be classified as unemployed. (iii)
Students seeking and available for work are unemployed (the availability of
full-time students seeking full-time work, however, may be questionable). (iv)
Persons seeking and available for apprenticeship are to be classified as
unemployed if the apprenticeship is an economic activity in the sense of SNA.
(v) Beneficiaries of employment creation schemes are unemployed if the
training does not take place within the context of an enterprise nor is
associated with the productive activities of the enterprise, and no formal job
attachment exists; but there is a definite commitment to employment after the
end of the training.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR framework the
unemployment rate (%) has been put into the Driving Force indicators category.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The concept of poverty refers to a long
lasting situation while the number of unemployed can change very fast
depending of various short term circumstances. Therefore, it may be
interesting to use the concept of usual unemployment and usual economically
active population instead of current unemployment and labour force. The
difference is that the survey reference period is a long one (e.g. one year)
and that a person is to be classified in one category (employed, unemployed
or inactive) according to the category in which he or she is classifiable for
the greatest amount of time.
National capacity to collect data related to unemployment varies considerably.
There are often severe problems with data quality. In addition, the informal
sector, and unpaid labour in, for example, households and the agricultural
sector are not captured by this indicator.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The unemployment rate is more meaningful
when shown by age, sex and other relevant variables such as the educational
level, previous work experience etc.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Labour force (total number of
persons) and total number of unemployed persons, derived from the same survey.
(b) Data Availability: The availability of the rate of unemployment in
recent years (1992, 1993 or 1994) is ascertained for 80 countries. The sources
are labour force surveys or general household surveys for 57 countries (3 do
not give the distribution by gender; 15 also use employment office statistics
of which 13 provide the distribution by gender); employment office statistics
exclusively for 18 countries (5 do not give the distribution by gender); and
official estimates for 4 countries (3 give the distribution by gender).
(c) Data Sources: See section 7i below.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is the International Labour Office (ILO) of the
United Nations, located in Geneva. The contact point is the Focal Point
for Environment and Sustainable Development, ILO; fax no. (41-22) 798
8685.
7. Further Information
(a) Data:
Yearbook of Labour Statistics, ILO, Geneva;
Bulletin of Labour Statistics (quarterly) and its Supplement
(January/February, April/May, July/August and October/November), ILO,
Geneva;
Statistical yearbooks and other publications issued by the national
statistical offices.
(b) Methodology:
Surveys of Economically Active Population, Employment, Unemployment and
Underemployment -An ILO Manual on Concepts and Methods, ILO, Geneva, 1992.
Sources and Methods: Labour Statistics, Volumes 3 and 5, ILO, Geneva, 1991 and
1990, currently updated.
System of National Accounts 1993, Commission of the European Communities,
International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development, United Nations, World Bank, Brussels/Luxembourg, New York, Paris,
Washington, D.C., 1993;
Current international recommendations on labour statistics, ILO, Geneva, 1988.
See particularly the Resolution Concerning Statistics of the Economically
Active Population, Employment, Unemployment and Underemployment, adopted by
the Thirteenth International Conference of Labour Statisticians (October
1982).
(c) International Conventions and Recommendations:
Labour Statistics Convention (No. 160) and Recommendation (No. 170), 1985.
LEAD AGENCY: ILO
HEAD COUNT INDEX OF POVERTY
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Head Count Index of Poverty.
(b) Brief Definition: The proportion of the population with a standard
of living below the poverty line.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The most important purpose of a poverty measure is to
enable poverty comparisons. These are required for an overall assessment of a
country's progress in poverty alleviation and/or the evaluation of specific
policies or projects. An important case of a poverty comparison is the poverty
profile which shows how the aggregate poverty measure can be decomposed into
poverty measures for various sub-groups of the population, such as by region
of residence, employment sector, education level, or ethnic group. A good
poverty profile can help reveal a number of aspects of poverty-reduction
policies, such as the regional or sectoral priorities for public spending.
Poverty comparisons are also made over time, in assessing overall performance
from the point of view of the poor.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Measures of
poverty are a very significant consideration of sustainable development. The
eradication of poverty remains a major challenge for policy decision makers.
Furthermore, an integrative viewpoint which simultaneously takes account of
development issues, resource use and environmental quality, and human welfare
must be taken if sustainable progress is to be achieved.
The Head Count Index of poverty captures the prevalence of poverty by
measuring the proportion of population for whom consumption (or any other
suitable measure of living standard) is below the poverty line. An increase
in this indicator implies a worsening of the poverty situation with a greater
proportion of the population falling below the poverty line.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: In general, this indicator is linked
to many other sustainable development measures, for example, net migration
rate, adult literacy rate, Gross Domestic Product per capita, and population
living below the poverty line in dryland areas. In particular, the Head Count
Index is closely associated to the Poverty Gap Index and the Squared Poverty
Gap Index which capture successively more detailed aspects of the poverty
situation. The Head Count Index measures how widespread poverty is, the
Poverty Gap Index measures how poor the poor are, and the Squared Poverty Gap
Index measures the severity of poverty by giving more weight to the poorest
of the poor.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A poverty measure is a summary
statistic on the economic welfare of the poor in a society. There is no one
universally accepted single measure of poverty. A number of different
approaches exist (see, for example, the methodology sheets for the Poverty Gap
Index and the Squared Poverty Gap Index). This methodology sheet guides the
reader along certain key issues, such as the different approaches to measuring
individual welfare, without prescribing decisions. Consequently, it is
directed at comparability over time within a given country, as it helps
national practitioners specify poverty indicators that match their specific
situation and preferred approach. However, this is at the expense of
international comparability.
To compute poverty measures, the following questions related to identifying
and defining the poor must be addressed first:
i) How do we measure an individual's economic welfare?
ii) At what level of measured welfare is a person considered poor?
(b) Measurement Methods: The Head Count Index (H) is the proportion of
the population whose economic welfare (y) is less than the poverty line (z).
If q people are deemed to be poor in a population of size n then H=q/n. For
computing the Head Count Index, estimates of individual economic welfare and
the poverty line are required.
i) Measuring Individual Welfare: There are a number of different
approaches to measuring welfare. The approaches differ in terms of the
importance attached to the individual's own judgment of well-being versus a
concept of welfare decided upon by somebody else. The former would focus on
measuring an individual's consumption of a bundle of goods and services. An
example of the latter would be defining welfare by the level of nutritional
intake, even though people do not live on food alone, or make food choices
solely on the basis of nutrition. Approaches in practice also differ according
to how difficult it is to obtain certain types of data in specific settings.
Typically one finds that poverty comparisons in developing countries put a
high weight on nutritional attainments, consistent with the behaviour of poor
people in a specific society. A comprehensive measure of consumption (for
example, total expenditure on all goods and services consumed, including
non-market goods, such as consumption from a farmer's own product) has been
more popular than using current income in the development literature. This is
due in part to the fact that incomes are harder to measure accurately. Current
consumption is also likely to give a better indication than current income of
a household's typical, long-term, economic welfare; income may fluctuate
greatly over time, particularly in rural economies (see Ravallion reference
in section 7a below).
The following methods can be used for measuring individual standards of
living:
--Consumption per equivalent male adult: Since households differ in
size and composition, a simple comparison of aggregate household consumption
can be misleading about the welfare of individual members of the household.
Therefore, for any given household, an equivalence scale is used to
approximate the number of single adults, based on observed consumption
behaviour. There are a number of value judgments embedded in this practice;
for example, differences in needs are reflected in differences in consumption.
Adult females and children are assigned a male equivalence of less than one
since they typically consume less; however, that may not mean that they have
lower "needs" but rather have less power within the household. The existence
of size economies in consumption may also mean that two people can live more
cheaply together than apart (for a further discussion of these issues, see
Ravallion reference in section 7a below).
--Undernutrition: This is a distinct concept, although closely
associated with poverty. Undernutrition can be viewed as a specific type of
poverty, namely food energy poverty. There are a number of arguments for and
against using this as a measure of well-being. A practical advantage is that
this measure does not have to be adjusted for inflation and would not be
constrained by any inadequacy of price data. Measures of child nutritional
status can help capture aspects of welfare, such as distribution within the
household which are not adequately reflected in other indicators. However,
nutrition is not the only aspect that matters to the well-being of people,
including the poor. Thus, poverty comparisons based solely on nutrition alone
may be limited and deceptive.
ii) Defining the Poverty Line: In practice, there are a number of
alternative approaches to defining poverty lines:
--Absolute poverty lines: An absolute poverty line is one which is
fixed in terms of the living standard indicator being used (consumption,
nutrition). It is fixed over the entire domain of comparison, that is, a
poverty line which assures the same level of economic welfare would be used to
measure and compare poverty across provinces or different situations. The
poverty line may still vary, but only so as to measure the differences in the
cost of a given level of welfare. Absolute poverty lines are more common in
developing country literature.
The most common approach to defining absolute poverty lines is to estimate the
cost in each region or at each date of a certain bundle of goods necessary to
attain basic consumption needs (this is called the basic needs approach). The
most important component of basic needs is a recommended food energy intake,
supplemented by essential non-food goods. To measure food energy requirements,
one needs to make an assumption about activity levels which in turn determine
energy requirements to maintain the body's metabolic rate at rest. Once the
food energy intake has been determined, and its cost has been calculated, an
allowance for non-food spending can be added by finding the total expenditure
level at which a person typically attains the food component of the poverty
line. An alternative (lower) allowance for non-food goods is to use the
average non-food spending of people who can just afford the food component of
the poverty line: it can be argued that this is a reasonable lower bound for
the non-food component of the poverty line (see Ravallion reference in section
7a below).
--Relative poverty lines: These have dominated developed country
literature where many studies have used a poverty line which is set at, for
example, 50% of the national mean income. When the poverty line is fixed as
a proportion of the national mean, if all incomes increase by the same
proportion, there would be no change in relative inequalities and the poverty
line would simply increase by the same proportion; that is, the poverty
measure will not change. This can make such poverty lines deceptive for some
purposes, such as assessing whether poor people are better or worse off.
A cross-country comparison of 36 countries, both developed and developing,
revealed that real poverty lines will tend to increase with economic growth,
but they will do so slowly for the poorest countries. Therefore, the concept
of absolute poverty appears to be more relevant to low income countries, while
relative poverty is of more relevance to high income countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of poverty.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: In practice, most applications in
developing countries have used consumption per person. This probably
overstates the extent to which poverty is associated with larger family sizes.
But other aspects of the poverty profile (such as assessments of the regional
or sectoral poverty profiles) tend to be more robust as a measurement choice.
It is important to note that a certain amount of arbitrariness and value
judgement are unavoidable in defining individual welfare and any poverty line.
Therefore, the overall assessment of the poverty situation should pay
particularly attention to how the choices made affect poverty comparisons,
since these are generally what matter most to policy implications. An
increasingly common practice is to recalculate the poverty measures using
various poverty lines, and to test whether the qualitative poverty comparisons
are robust to the choice.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below). In
addition, definitions of poverty are lacking in some countries or vary from
country to country. These problems are diminishing over time as survey
methodologies are improving and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The Poverty Gap Index and the Squared
Poverty Gap Index represent alternative definitions for a poverty indicator
(see section 3c above and the relevant methodology sheets for these
indicators).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Ravallion, M. Poverty Comparisons. Fundamentals in Pure and Applied Economics,
Volume 56, Harwood Academic Press, Switzerland. 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
POVERTY GAP INDEX
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Poverty Gap Index.
(b) Brief Definition: The mean over the population of the proportionate
poverty gap, where the poverty gap is given by the distance of the poor below
the poverty line, as a proportion of the line. The non-poor are counted as
having zero poverty gap.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Fraction bounded by 0 and the Head Count
Index.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The most important purpose of a poverty measure is to enable
poverty comparisons. These are required for an overall assessment of a
country's progress in poverty alleviation and/or the evaluation of specific
policies or projects. An important case of a poverty comparison is the poverty
profile which shows how the aggregate poverty measure can be decomposed into
poverty measures for various sub-groups of the population, such as by region
of residence, employment sector, education level, or ethnic group. A good
poverty profile can help reveal a number of aspects of poverty-reduction
policies, such as the regional or sectoral priorities for public spending.
Poverty comparisons are also made over time, in assessing overall performance
from the point of view of the poor.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Measures of
poverty are a very significant consideration of sustainable development. The
eradication of poverty remains a major challenge for policy decision makers.
Furthermore, an integrative viewpoint which simultaneously takes account of
development issues, resource use and environmental quality, and human welfare
must be taken if sustainable progress is to be achieved.
The Poverty Gap Index measures the depth of poverty in a country or region,
based on the aggregate poverty deficit of the poor relative to the poverty
line. Since the Head Count Index (see section 3c below) is not sensitive to
changes in the status of those already below the poverty line, it is
inadequate in assessing the impact of specific policies on the poor. On the
other hand, the Poverty Gap Index increases with the distance of the poor
below the poverty line, and thus gives a good indication of the depth of
poverty. A decline in the Poverty Gap Index reflects an improvement in the
current situation.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: In general, this indicator is linked
to many other sustainable development measures, for example, net migration
rate, adult literacy rate, Gross Domestic Product per capita, and population
living below the poverty line in dryland areas. More specifically, the poverty
measures discussed in this and two other methodology sheets; namely the Head
Count Index, the Poverty Gap Index, and the Squared Poverty Gap Index; capture
successively more detailed aspects of the poverty situation. The Head Count
Index measures how widespread poverty is, the Poverty Gap Index measures how
poor the poor are, and the Squared Poverty Gap Index measures the severity of
poverty by giving more weight to the poorest of the poor.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A poverty measure is a summary
statistic on the economic welfare of the poor in a society. There is no one
universally accepted single measure of poverty. A number of different
approaches exist (see, for example, the methodology sheets for the Poverty Gap
Index and the Squared Poverty Gap Index). This methodology sheet guides the
reader along certain key issues, such as the different approaches to measuring
individual welfare, without prescribing decisions. Consequently, it is
directed at comparability over time within a given country, as it helps
national practitioners specify poverty indicators that match their specific
situation and preferred approach. However, this is at the expense of
international comparability.
To compute poverty measures, the following questions related to identifying
and defining the poor must be addressed first:
i) How do we measure an individual's economic welfare?
ii) At what level of measured welfare is a person considered poor?
(b) Measurement Methods: The Poverty Gap Index is the mean across the
population of a household poverty measure (weighted by household-size). The
Index takes the value zero if the average economic welfare (for example,
consumption) is above the poverty line, and is measured by the function 1-y/z
if it is at or below the line, where z is the poverty line and y denotes the
mean consumption of the poor. For computing the Poverty Gap Index, estimates
of individual economic welfare (y), and the poverty line (z) are required.
i) Measuring Individual Welfare: There are a number of different
approaches to measuring welfare. The approaches differ in terms of the
importance attached to the individual's own judgment of well-being versus a
concept of welfare decided upon by somebody else. The former would focus on
measuring an individual's consumption of a bundle of goods and services. An
example of the latter would be defining welfare by the level of nutritional
intake, even though people do not live on food alone, or make food choices
solely on the basis of nutrition. Approaches in practice also differ according
to how difficult it is to obtain certain sorts of data in specific settings.
Typically one finds that poverty comparisons in developing countries put a
high weight on nutritional attainments, consistent with the behaviour of poor
people in a specific society. A comprehensive measure of consumption (for
example, total expenditure on all goods and services consumed, including
non-market goods, such as consumption from a farmer's own product) has been
more popular than using current income in the development literature. This is
due in part to the fact that incomes are harder to measure accurately. Current
consumption is also likely to give a better indication than current income of
a household's typical, long-term, economic welfare; income may fluctuate
greatly over time, particularly in rural economies (see Ravallion reference
in section 7a below).
The following methods can be used for measuring individual standards of
living:
--Consumption per equivalent male adult: Since households differ in
size and composition, a simple comparison of aggregate household consumption
can be misleading about the welfare of individual members of the household.
Therefore, for any given household, an equivalence scale is used to
approximate the number of single adults, based on observed consumption
behaviour. There are a number of value judgments embedded in this practice;
for example, differences in needs are reflected in differences in consumption.
Adult females and children are assigned a male equivalence of less than one
since they typically consume less; however, that may not mean that they have
lower "needs" but rather have less power within the household. The existence
of size economies in consumption may also mean that two people can live more
cheaply together than apart (for a further discussion of these issues, see
Ravallion reference in section 7a below).
--Undernutrition: This is a distinct concept, although closely
associated with poverty. Undernutrition can be viewed as a specific type of
poverty, namely food energy poverty. There are a number of arguments for and
against using this as a measure of well-being. A practical advantage is that
this measure does not have to be adjusted for inflation and would not be
constrained by any inadequacy of price data. Measures of child nutritional
status can help capture aspects of welfare, such as distribution within the
household which are not adequately reflected in other indicators. However,
nutrition is not the only aspect that matters to the well-being of people,
including the poor. Thus, poverty comparisons based solely on nutrition alone
may be limited and deceptive.
ii) Defining the Poverty Line: In practice, there are a number of
alternative approaches to defining poverty lines:
--Absolute poverty lines: An absolute poverty line is one which is
fixed in terms of the living standard indicator being used (consumption,
nutrition).
It is fixed over the entire domain of comparison, that is, a poverty line
which assures the same level of economic welfare would be used to measure and
compare poverty across provinces or different situations. The poverty line may
still vary, but only so as to measure the differences in the cost of a given
level of welfare. Absolute poverty lines are more common in developing country
literature.
The most common approach to defining absolute poverty lines is to estimate the
cost in each region or at each date of a certain bundle of goods necessary to
attain basic consumption needs (this is called the basic needs approach). The
most important component of basic needs is a recommended food energy intake,
supplemented by essential non-food goods. To measure food energy requirements,
one needs to make an assumption about activity levels which in turn determine
energy requirements to maintain the body's metabolic rate at rest. Once the
food energy intake has been determined, and its cost has been calculated, an
allowance for non-food spending can be added by finding the total expenditure
level at which a person typically attains the food component of the poverty
line. An alternative (lower) allowance for non-food goods is to use the
average non-food spending of people who can just afford the food component of
the poverty line: it can be argued that this is a reasonable lower bound for
the non-food component of the poverty line (see Ravallion reference in section
7a below).
--Relative poverty lines: These have dominated developed country
literature where many studies have used a poverty line which is set at, for
example, 50% of the national mean income. When the poverty line is fixed as
a proportion of the national mean, if all incomes increase by the same
proportion, there would be no change in relative inequalities and the poverty
line would simply increase by the same proportion; that is, the poverty
measure will not change. This can make such poverty lines deceptive for some
purposes, such as assessing whether poor people are better or worse off.
A cross-country comparison of 36 countries, both developed and developing,
revealed that real poverty lines will tend to increase with economic growth,
but they will do so slowly for the poorest countries. Therefore, the concept
of absolute poverty appears to be more relevant to low income countries, while
relative poverty is of more relevance to high income countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of poverty.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: In practice, most applications in
developing countries have used consumption per person. This probably
overstates the extent to which poverty is associated with larger family sizes.
But other aspects of the poverty profile (such as assessments of the regional
or sectoral poverty profiles) tend to be more robust as a measurement choice.
It is important to note that a certain amount of arbitrariness and value
judgement are unavoidable in defining individual welfare and any poverty line.
Therefore, the overall assessment of the poverty situation should pay
particularly attention to how the choices made affect poverty comparisons,
since these are generally what matter most to policy implications. An
increasingly common practice is to recalculate the poverty measures using
various poverty lines, and to test whether the qualitative poverty comparisons
are robust to the choice.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below). In
addition, definitions of poverty are lacking in some countries or vary from
country to country. These problems are diminishing over time as survey
methodologies are improving and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The Head Count Index and the Squared
Poverty Gap Index represent alternative definitions for a poverty indicator
(see section 3c above and the relevant methodology sheets for these
indicators).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Ravallion, M. Poverty Comparisons. Fundamentals in Pure and Applied Economics,
Volume 56, Harwood Academic Press, Switzerland. 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
SQUARED POVERTY GAP INDEX
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Squared Poverty Gap Index.
(b) Brief Definition: The mean of the squared proportionate poverty gap.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Fraction bounded by 0 and the Poverty Gap
Index.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The most important purpose of a poverty measure is to
enable poverty comparisons. These are required for an overall assessment of a
country's progress in poverty alleviation and/or the evaluation of specific
policies or projects. An important case of a poverty comparison is the poverty
profile which shows how the aggregate poverty measure can be decomposed into
poverty measures for various sub-groups of the population, such as by region
of residence, employment sector, education level, or ethnic group. A good
poverty profile can help reveal a number of aspects of poverty-reduction
policies, such as the regional or sectoral priorities for public spending.
Poverty comparisons are also made over time, in assessing overall performance
from the point of view of the poor.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Measures of
poverty are a very significant consideration of sustainable development. The
eradication of poverty remains a major challenge for policy decision makers.
Furthermore, an integrative viewpoint which simultaneously takes account of
development issues, resource use and environmental quality, and human welfare
must be taken if sustainable progress is to be achieved.
In addition to the Head Count and Poverty Gap Indices, a third measure which
better reflects changes in the severity of poverty is the Squared Poverty Gap
Index. This is defined similar to the Poverty Gap Index except that the
poverty gaps are squared, thus giving the highest weighting to the largest
poverty gap. The need for this Index arises because the Poverty Gap Index may
not adequately capture concerns over distribution changes within the poor. For
example, if a policy resulted in money transfer from someone just below the
poverty line to the poorest person, the Squared Poverty Gap Index will
reflect this change, while the Poverty Gap Index will not.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: In general, this indicator is linked
to many other sustainable development measures, for example, net migration
rate, adult literacy rate, Gross Domestic Product per capita, and population
living below the poverty line in dryland areas. More specifically, the
poverty measures discussed in this and two other methodology sheets; namely
the Head Count Index, the Poverty Gap Index, and the Squared Poverty Gap
Index; capture successively more detailed aspects of the poverty situation.
The Head Count Index measures how widespread poverty is, the Poverty Gap Index
measures how poor the poor are, and the Squared Poverty Gap Index measures the
severity of poverty by giving more weight to the poorest of the poor.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A poverty measure is a summary
statistic on the economic welfare of the poor in a society. There is no one
universally accepted single measure of poverty. A number of different
approaches exist (see, for example, the methodology sheets for the Poverty Gap
Index and the Squared Poverty Gap Index). This methodology sheet guides the
reader along certain key issues, such as the different approaches to measuring
individual welfare, without prescribing decisions. Consequently, it is
directed at comparability over time within a given country, as it helps
national practitioners specify poverty indicators that match their specific
situation and preferred approach. However, this is at the expense of
international comparability.
To compute poverty measures, the following questions related to identifying
and defining the poor must be addressed first:
i) How do we measure an individual's economic welfare?
ii) At what level of measured welfare is a person considered poor?
(b) Measurement Methods: The Squared Poverty Gap Index is the mean of a
measure (weighted by household-size) that is zero if the household's welfare
(y) is above the poverty line (z), and represented by the squared poverty gap,
that is [1-y/z] x [1-y/z], if y is at or below z.
For computing the above indicator, estimates of individual economic welfare
(y), and the poverty line (z) are required.
i) Measuring Individual Welfare: There are a number of different
approaches to measuring welfare. The approaches differ in terms of the
importance attached to the individual's own judgment of well-being versus a
concept of welfare decided upon by somebody else. The former would focus on
measuring an individual's consumption of a bundle of goods and services. An
example of the latter would be defining welfare by the level of nutritional
intake, even though people do not live on food alone, or make food choices
solely on the basis of nutrition. Approaches in practice also differ according
to how difficult it is to obtain certain sorts of data in specific settings.
Typically one finds that poverty comparisons in developing countries put a
high weight on nutritional attainments, consistent with the behaviour of poor
people in a specific society. A comprehensive measure of consumption (for
example, total expenditure on all goods and services consumed, including
non-market goods, such as consumption from a farmer's own product) has been
more popular than using current income in the development literature. This is
due in part to the fact that incomes are harder to measure accurately. Current
consumption is also likely to give a better indication than current income of
a household's typical, long-term, economic welfare; income may fluctuate
greatly over time, particularly in rural economies (see Ravallion reference
in section 7a below).
The following methods can be used for measuring individual standards of
living:
--Consumption per equivalent male adult: Since households differ in
size and composition, a simple comparison of aggregate household consumption
can be misleading about the welfare of individual members of the household.
Therefore, for any given household, an equivalence scale is used to
approximate the number of single adults, based on observed consumption
behaviour. There are a number of value judgments embedded in this practice;
for example, differences in needs are reflected in differences in consumption.
Adult females and children are assigned a male equivalence of less than one
since they typically consume less; however, that may not mean that they have
lower "needs" but rather have less power within the household. The existence
of size economies in consumption may also mean that two people can live more
cheaply together than apart (for a further discussion of these issues, see
Ravallion reference in section 7a below).
--Undernutrition: This is a distinct concept, although closely
associated with poverty. Undernutrition can be viewed as a specific type of
poverty, namely food energy poverty. There are a number of arguments for and
against using this as a measure of well-being. A practical advantage is that
this measure does not have to be adjusted for inflation and would not be
constrained by any inadequacy of price data. Measures of child nutritional
status can help capture aspects of welfare, such as distribution within the
household which are not adequately reflected in other indicators. However,
nutrition is not the only aspect that matters to the well-being of people,
including the poor. Thus, poverty comparisons based solely on nutrition alone
may be limited and deceptive.
ii) Defining the Poverty Line: In practice, there are a number of
alternative approaches to defining poverty lines:
--Absolute poverty lines: An absolute poverty line is one which is
fixed in terms of the living standard indicator being used (consumption,
nutrition).
It is fixed over the entire domain of comparison, that is, a poverty line
which assures the same level of economic welfare would be used to measure and
compare poverty across provinces or different situations. The poverty line may
still vary, but only so as to measure the differences in the cost of a given
level of welfare. Absolute poverty lines are more common in developing country
literature.
The most common approach to defining absolute poverty lines is to estimate the
cost in each region or at each date of a certain bundle of goods necessary to
attain basic consumption needs (this is called the basic needs approach). The
most important component of basic needs is a recommended food energy intake,
supplemented by essential non-food goods. To measure food energy requirements,
one needs to make an assumption about activity levels which in turn determine
energy requirements to maintain the body's metabolic rate at rest. Once the
food energy intake has been determined, and its cost has been calculated, an
allowance for non-food spending can be added by finding the total expenditure
level at which a person typically attains the food component of the poverty
line. An alternative (lower) allowance for non-food goods is to use the
average non-food spending of people who can just afford the food component of
the poverty line: it can be argued that this is a reasonable lower bound for
the non-food component of the poverty line (see Ravallion reference in section
7a below).
--Relative poverty lines: These have dominated developed country
literature where many studies have used a poverty line which is set at, for
example, 50% of the national mean income. When the poverty line is fixed as
a proportion of the national mean, if all incomes increase by the same
proportion, there would be no change in relative inequalities and the poverty
line would simply increase by the same proportion; that is, the poverty
measure will not change. This can make such poverty lines deceptive for some
purposes, such as assessing whether poor people are better or worse off.
A cross-country comparison of 36 countries, both developed and developing,
revealed that real poverty lines will tend to increase with economic growth,
but they will do so slowly for the poorest countries. Therefore, the concept
of absolute poverty appears to be more relevant to low income countries, while
relative poverty is of more relevance to high income countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of poverty.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: In practice, most applications in
developing countries have used consumption per person. This probably
overstates the extent to which poverty is associated with larger family sizes.
But other aspects of the poverty profile (such as assessments of the regional
or sectoral poverty profiles) tend to be more robust as a measurement choice.
It is important to note that a certain amount of arbitrariness and value
judgement are unavoidable in defining individual welfare and any poverty line.
Therefore, the overall assessment of the poverty situation should pay
particularly attention to how the choices made affect poverty comparisons,
since these are generally what matter most to policy implications. An
increasingly common practice is to recalculate the poverty measures using
various poverty lines, and to test whether the qualitative poverty comparisons
are robust to the choice.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below). In
addition, definitions of poverty are lacking in some countries or vary from
country to country. These problems are diminishing over time as survey
methodologies are improving and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The Head Count Index and the Poverty Gap
Index represent alternative definitions for a poverty indicator (see section
3c above and the relevant methodology sheets for these indicators).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Ravallion, M. Poverty Comparisons. Fundamentals in Pure and Applied Economics,
Volume 56, Harwood Academic Press, Switzerland. 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
GINI INDEX OF INCOME INEQUALITY
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Gini Index of Income Inequality.
(b) Brief Definition: A summary measure of the extent to which the
actual distribution of income, consumption expenditure, or a related variable,
differs from a hypothetical distribution in which each person receives an
identical share.
(c) Unit of Measurement: A dimensionless index scaled to vary from a
minimum of zero to a maximum of one; zero representing no inequality and one
representing the maximum possible degree of inequality.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The Gini Index provides a measure of income or resource
inequality within a population. It is the most popular measure of income
inequality.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: This indicator is
particularly relevant to the equity component of sustainable development.
Income or resource distribution have direct consequences on the poverty rate
of a country or region. Broadly speaking, average material welfare can be
defined by the per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, statistical
averages can mask the diversity that exists within any country. Therefore,
from a sustainable development perspective, it is informative to examine
income and wealth distribution throughout a population. A country can, for
example, have a high per capita GDP figure, but its income distribution so
skewed that the majority of people are poor. This indicator is useful both to
measure changes in income inequality over time and for international
comparisons.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is linked to several
other sustainable development measures, including the poverty indicators,
women per 100 men in the labour force, GDP per capita, population dynamics in
mountain areas, and sustainable development strategies.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The concept and definition of
this indicator are well understood and readily available. The Gini Index
measures the area between the Lorenz Curve and a hypothetical line of absolute
equality, expressed as a percentage of the maximum area under the line of
perfect equality (see Figure 1 in section 4b below). The Gini Index is
defined as one half of the average value of the absolute differences between
all possible pairs of "incomes".
(b) Measurement Methods: The Lorenz Curve plots the cumulative
percentages of total income received (on the vertical axis) against the
cumulative percentage of recipients, starting with the poorest individual or
household (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: The Lorenz Curve and Gini Index of Income
(Not available on the Internet)
There are a number of choices about data which can influence the precise value
of the Gini Index obtained. For example, a Gini Index for consumption
expenditure will typically be lower in value than one for income, even within
the same population. This is because households smooth their consumption over
time in response to income changes. At any one date, there will be some
households with unusually low incomes and others with unusually high ones;
with some opportunities for saving and/or borrowing. Thus, household
consumption will be less unequal.
It is important how "income" is measured, for example whether it is total
household income or per capita household income, or income per equivalent
adult. In addition, it matters whether or not the incomes are weighted by
household size, since households with lower income per person tend to be
larger. Thus, the income share of the poorest 20% of households will be higher
than the income share of the poorest 20% of persons.
The World Bank, for example, prefers to weight by household size and calculate
the shares held by persons rather than households for most purposes. As a
general rule, the Bank also considers consumption expenditure to be the more
reliable indicator of welfare than income, which can be excessively variable
over time, and is also more difficult to measure accurately, particularly in
developing countries. Looking at the sample of 67 low and middle income
countries for which Gini indices of income are reported in the World Bank's
draft report World Development Indicators, this coefficient ranges from a low
of 22% to a high value of 64%.
There are a number of ways of estimating the Gini Index of income, and the
choice depends in part on the type of data available. Distributional data are
often available in grouped form, such as the income share of the lowest decile
of households, where households are ranked by income per person. To estimate
the Lorenz Curve, and thus the Gini Index, from such data, the World Bank
often uses a software package called POVCAL. Having specified the type of
data, the program calculates both the General Quadratic specification for the
Lorenz Curve and the Beta specification. It then calculates the Gini Index and
various other statistics, including poverty measures for each Lorenz Curve.
The program also advises which is the better specification for the Lorenz
Curve for the specific data used.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of income inequality.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The Gini Index is not a very
discriminating indicator. Two very different distributions--one having more
inequality amongst the poor, the other having more amongst the rich--can have
exactly the same Gini Index.
Measurement errors in data sets are thought to be greater for incomes compared
to consumption expenditure, which will add to measured inequality (see section
4b above). Differences between countries in the measured Gini index may thus
reflect in part differences in the welfare measures used.
While the Gini Index of income (in common with most other measures of
inequality) captures information on the pattern of relative levels of
wellbeing in the population, it is independent of any considerations of
absolute living standards. So there is nothing to guarantee that a lower Gini
Index of income entails higher social welfare in any agreed sense, since the
mean income may have also fallen. The Gini Index is at best a partial
indicator, and other measures will be needed to complete the picture of how
levels of economic welfare are evolving in a society.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below).
These problems are diminishing over time as survey methodologies are improving
and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: There are many other measures of inequality,
with various strengths and weaknesses. These are discussed in Sen (1973) (see
section 7a below).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Chen, S., G. Datt, M. Ravallion. POVCAL: A Program for Calculating Poverty
Measures from Grouped Data. Poverty and Human Resources Division, Policy
Research Department, Washington DC: World Bank. 1992.
Ravallion, M., and S. Chen. What Can New Survey Data Tell Us About Recent
Changes in Living Standards in Developing and Transitional Economies?. Working
Paper 1. Research Project on Social and Environmental Consequences of
Growth-Oriented Policies, Washington DC: World Bank.
Sen, A. On Economic Inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1973.
The World Bank. World Development Indicators. Draft Report. 1996.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
RATIO OF AVERAGE FEMALE WAGE TO MALE WAGE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Ratio of average female wage to male wage.
(b) Brief Definition: Obtained as the quotient of average wage rates paid
to female and male employees at regular intervals for time worked or work done
for particular occupations.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: It is important to have an assessment of remuneration
offered women vis-a-vis their male counterpart to ultimately determine the
level of women's participation in the economy.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: The lower the
ratio of wages offered to women, the less the attraction for women to join the
labor force, which in turn deprives the economy of a vital component of
development.
This disadvantage could also be attributed to inequalities in educational
opportunities for women and the need for policy makers to correct this
inequity. It is generally acknowledged that if women are more educated, it is
likely to result in a corresponding reduction in infant mortality rates.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The indicator has close linkages with
the unemployment rate indicator because both deal with employment as a
principal generator of production. It is also closely linked to indicators
pertaining to education.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The resolution covering
the institution of an integrated system of wages statistics, including defined
earnings and wage rates, was adopted by the Twelfth International Conference
of Labor Statisticians in Geneva in 1973 (see section 7 below).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The UN International Labour
Office (ILO) and the UN System of National Accounts (SNA) provide two sources
for this section.
i) The concept of earnings, as applied in wages statistics, relate to
remuneration in cash and in kind paid to employees, usually at regular
intervals, for time worked; or work done together with remuneration for time
not worked, such as for annual vacation, other paid leave or holidays. Wage
rates, as part of earnings, include basic wages, cost-of-living allowances and
other guaranteed and regularly paid allowances, but exclude overtime payments,
bonuses and gratuities, family allowances and other social security payments
made by employers. Ex gratia payments in kind, supplementary to normal wage
rates are also excluded (ILO).
ii) Wages and salaries, as part of compensation to employees, are payable in
cash or in kind and include the values of any social contributions, such as
income taxes, payable by the employee even if they are actually withheld by
the employer for administrative convenience or other reasons and paid directly
to social insurance schemes, tax authorities, etc. on behalf of the employee.
Wages and salaries in cash include payments at regular intervals,
supplementary allowances payable regularly, payments to employees away from
work for short periods such as holidays, and ad hoc bonuses linked to
performance, commissions, gratuities and tips (SNA).
(b) Measurement Methods: The indicator is measured by taking the average
wage rates per day, week or month received by female employees as a ratio of
the corresponding average wage rates for males. It could be classified
further according to major divisions of economic activity, for example,
agriculture, mining and quarrying, etc., to facilitate measurement of sectoral
impact on the development process. Similarly, breakdowns according to age
classes would provide additional information related to sustainable
development trends.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator deals with the
participation of labor in the economic process, and stresses the importance
of human activities to sustainable development. It fits ideally within the
DSR Framework as a State indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: A serious limitation is the
reliability and comprehensiveness of wage rate data paid to female labor.
Although data is available for many countries, the quality varies
significantly among countries. Wage rates determine total remuneration and
measure women's contribution to total production. However, since most of the
basic remuneration for women's economic and social activities remain
unreported or unrecorded--and even if reported, are grossly undervalued--only
imputations are possible in many countries. The indicator will be greatly
influenced by the selection of wage sectors, and type and level of job. The
cost of collecting the data from questionnaires and surveys can be
significant.
Another limitation is that female wage rates do not tell the whole story.
Wages, particularly for females, may reflect under-employment. Women,
especially in developing countries, may participate in informal activities
where they are not classified as wage earners. They do not receive income in
the SNA sense and therefore these activities are not covered by this
indicator.
(e) Alternative Indicator Definitions: An alternative indicator to the
male-female wage would be the percentage contribution of women to GDP which
measures activities in the production boundary that incorporate the
contribution of women in the economic process as proposed in the 1993 SNA.
This would include the production and processing of agricultural, dairy and
fishery products and flour by milling; weaving, dress making, production of
footwear, baskets, mats, etc..
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
The average wage rates paid to female and male employees provide the basic
information to compile this indicator and are mainly reported by departments
or ministries of labor in most countries. It is obtained either through
questionnaires or surveys from the different economic sectors of the economy.
Average earnings are usually derived from payroll data supplied by a sample
of establishments together with data on hours of work and on employment.
Occasionally, wage indices are reported in the absence of absolute wage data.
In some other cases, information is compiled on the basis of social insurance
statistics. The extent of data availability is published by the ILO in the
Yearbook of Labor Statistics.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The International Labor Office (ILO) is the principal agency and contact point
in the development of this indicator. The contact is the Focal Point for
Environment and Sustainable Development; fax no. (41 22) 798 8685.
7. Further Information
The full text of the resolution listed in section 3e above can be found in
Current International Recommendations on Labor Statistics (Geneva 1988).
Further information can be obtained from other ILO publications, as follows:
An Integrated System of Wages Statistics: A Manual on Methods (Geneva 1979).
Statistical Sources and Methods; Vol. 2 Employment, Wages and Hours of Work
(Establishment Surveys) (Geneva 1987); Vol. 4 Employment, Unemployment, Wages
and Hours of Work (Administrative Records and Related Sources) (Geneva 1989).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
POPULATION GROWTH RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Population growth rate.
(b) Brief Definition: The average annual rate of change of population
size during a specified period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Usually expressed as a percentage.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The population growth rate measures how fast the size of
the population is changing.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Agenda 21
identifies population growth as one of the crucial elements affecting long-
term sustainability (see especially paragraphs 5.3 and 5.16). Population
growth, at both national and subnational levels, represents a fundamental
indicator for national decision makers. Its significance must be analyzed in
relation to other factors affecting sustainability. However, rapid population
growth can place strain on a country's capacity for handling a wide range of
issues of economic, social, and environmental significance, particularly when
rapid population growth occurs in conjunction with poverty and lack of access
to resources, or unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, or in
ecologically vulnerable zones (see paragraphs 3.14, 3.25 and 3.26 of the ICPD
Programme of Action).
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: There are close linkages between this
indicator and other demographic and social indicators, as well as all
indicators expressed in per capita terms (for example, GDP per capita).
Population growth usually has implications for indicators related to
education, infrastructure, and employment. It is also related to human
settlements and the use of natural resources, including sink capacities.
Population growth can increase environmental degradation, although this is not
always the case.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish national or
global targets. A number of national governments have adopted numerical
targets for the rate of population growth. In 1993, 11 percent of governments
considered their rates of population growth to be too low, 45 percent were
satisfied with the rate, and 44 percent considered it to be too high.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available (See 3d
above).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
The underlying concept of population growth rate as an indicator is well-
known. For a country, it is generally based on either (i) an intercensal
population growth rate calculated from two censuses, each adjusted for
incompleteness; or (ii) from the components of population growth (adjusted for
incompleteness, when necessary) during a period, namely, numbers of births,
deaths and migrants.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
As indicated above, the population growth rate can be calculated either from
census data or from registration data (births, deaths and migrants). The
United Nations recommends that countries take censuses every 10 years, and
these data can be used to calculate an intercensal population growth rate.
In recent decades most countries have carried out censuses and is widely
available. For example, 204 countries or areas carried out a census during
the 1990 census decade (1985 to 1994). Data on births, deaths and migrants
may come from national registration systems or from special questions in
demographic surveys and censuses.
National and sub-national census data, as well as data on births, deaths and
migrants, are available for the large majority of countries from national
sources and publications; as well as from special country questionnaires sent
to national statistical offices from the Statistical Division, UN Department
of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). For all
countries, census and registration data are evaluated and, if necessary,
adjusted for incompleteness by the Population Division, DESIPA as part of its
preparations of the official United Nations population estimates and
projections. Past, current and projected population growth rates are prepared
for all countries by the Population Division, DESIPA and appear in the United
Nations publication, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see item
7, below).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations DESIPA. The contact point is the
Director, Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147.
7. Further Information
Further references include:
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations publication Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Population Division, DESIPA, Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic
Estimation (United Nations Sales No. E.83.XIII.2, New York, 1983).
Population Division, DESIPA, World Urbanization Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations publication Sales No. E.95.XIII.12, New York, 1995).
Population Division, DESIPA, MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software
Package for Mortality Measurement (United Nations, New York, 1988).
Statistical Division/DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook, (United Nations Sales
No. E/F.95.XIII.1, 1995).
For information about government policies regarding this indicator see:
United Nations, World Population Monitoring, 1993 (United Nations Sales No.
E.95.XIII.8., New York, 1995).
United Nations, Results of the Seventh United Nations Population Inquiry Among
Governments (New York, 1995, ST/ESA/SER.R/140).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
NET MIGRATION RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Net migration rate.
(b) Brief Definition: Ratio of the difference between the number of in-
migrants and out-migrants from a particular area during a specified period to
the average population of that area during the period considered.
International and internal migration are discussed separately in sections 4
and 5 below.
(c) Unit of Measurement: The indicator is usually expressed as per
thousand population.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The net migration rate measures geographical mobility of
population. Migration is one of the basic demographic events ~ birth and
death are the others ~ that directly influence the size of population in an
area.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Net migration is
a major force of demographic redistribution. At the international level,
migration (people) is one of three important flows along with commodities
(goods and services), and capital (money), that go beyond the traditional
boundaries of a sovereign state. Within countries, migration both influences
and is influenced by economic, social, environmental and political events.
Increases of net migration linked to a loss of livelihood can be a symptom of
unsustainability.
Migration is often seen as an economic phenomenon~in discussions of labour
migration from rural to urban areas or from the developing countries to the
developed countries, for example. It can also be a political phenomenon, as
with asylum seekers and refugees. Recently, linkages with environmental
factors are receiving increasing attention, as in the cases of "environmental
refugees" and migration to ecologically fragile areas. The significance of
migration to national policy makers does not rest only in its size, but also
in its composition. Such migrant characteristics as age, sex, fertility
level, educational background, occupation, and skill levels have profound
implications for development in both the sending and the receiving areas or
countries.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The net migration rate is considered
to have strong associations with economic, social, and environmental
indicators.
There are close linkages between this indicator and other demographic
indicators, including urbanization-related indicators. In addition, migration
rates can be associated with natural resource depletion, desertification, and
land use change.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish national or
global targets. Nearly all national governments regulate international
migration, and many governments have policies intended to influence internal
migration flows.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: See section 4b below.
(b) Measurement Methods:
i) Net internal migration rate: The net migration rate for particular
areas within a country is usually estimated on the basis of the number of
persons reporting that they changed residence from outside to within the area
of interest during a given period and those reporting that they changed
residence from within to without the area of interest during the same period.
Those reports are usually made only at the time of a census. A few countries
maintaining continuous population registers have access to the required
information on a yearly basis. Both censuses and population registers also
produce information on the total population in the area of interest that
allows the estimation of the denominator for the calculation of a net
migration rate. When reliable direct information about in- and out-migration
is unavailable, net migration can be estimated indirectly, as a residual
factor when other sources of population change~births, deaths, and, in some
cases, changes of boundaries of cities or other units~have been estimated
separately (see section 5b below).
ii) Net international migration rate: Ideally, the net migration rate
for a country should be derived directly from the number of immigrants to and
emigrants from that country over a given period, and a count of the average
population size of the country during that period. However, few countries
gather sufficiently comprehensive international migration statistics on a
continuous basis to allow direct calculation of the net migration rate.
Therefore, the rate must often be estimated indirectly from other information.
The most common estimation approach is to calculate the net migration rate as
the difference between the growth rate of a country's population over a
certain period and the rate of natural increase of that population (itself
being the difference of the birth rate and the death rate). Such calculations
are usually made for intercensal periods. Before estimating the net migration
rate in this way, data must be evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for
differential levels of census under-enumeration between censuses and for
errors in the estimation of the birth or death rates of a country. Other
indicators of migration such as the percentage of the population born outside
the country (a "stock" measure) are often used instead of the net migration
rate.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: The indicator is a subcomponent
of population change. As such it is regarded as a Driving Force indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The definitions of immigrant and
emigrant used by different countries and even for different data sources
within a single country vary considerably, thus compromising the comparability
and interpretation of the indicator. The data are often poorly measured
restricting the usefulness for modelling purposes. Illegal immigrants are
not captured by the census or survey statistics.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Alternative indicators of international
migration, such as the stock of foreign-born persons in a country, are often
used.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
i) Net internal migration rate: Censuses are the major source of
information on internal migration. They vary, however, in the type of data
they collect and the way in which the information obtained is coded and
tabulated. The questions most commonly included in censuses that indicate the
occurrence of some change of residence are: current place residence and place
of residence at a specific time before the census; current and previous place
of residence, and length of stay in current residence; place of birth. Most
countries code place of residence in terms of major geographical subdivision
(state, department, province etc.) although use of a finer subdivision of the
territory is often useful. Some countries record the urban or rural nature
of the place of residence involved. However, net rural-urban migration is
more likely to be derived from indirect estimation procedures than directly
from census data. In general, data on internal migration gathered by censuses
remain underexploited and there is no comprehensive source of information of
net migration rates between different units within countries, except for
countries with a population register.
(ii) Net international migration rate: Direct and comprehensive data on
international migration movements are not available for most countries or
areas of the world. However, the Population Division, UN Department of
Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) takes into
account the available direct and indirect evidence to derive net migration
estimates, which are published as part of the biennial estimates and
projections of population. Population registers are the data sources most
likely to yield the information needed to calculate the net migration rate,
but only a few developed countries maintain such registers. Immigration
statistics derived from the administrative procedures involved in admitting
foreigners for residence do not provide good measures of flows nor are they
sufficiently comprehensive to permit the estimation of migration rates as they
do not reflect the migration of citizens. In a few countries, arrival and
departure statistics derived as part of migration control at ports of entry
provide information on the number of immigrants and emigrants. However, most
countries gathering arrival and departure statistics fail to differentiate
international migrants from other travellers and consequently those data
cannot be used to derive net migration rates.
For both internal and international migration, both absolute data and rate of
change are required by policy makers. The composition of migrants would also
be useful.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations DESIPA. The contact point is the
Director, Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. 1 212 963 2147.
7. Further information
i) Net internal migration rate
Patterns of Urban and Rural Population Growth (United Nations publication,
Sales No. E.79.XIII.9).
Internal Migration of Women in Developing Countries (United Nations
publication, Sales No. E.94.XIII.3).
Courgeau, Daniel, Me'thodes de Mesure de la Mobilite' Spatiale (Institut
National d'Etudes De'mographiques, Paris, 1988).
ii) Net international migration rate
World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (United Nations publication,
Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
1989 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations publication, Sales No.
E/F.90.XIII.1).
Trends in Total Migrant Stock, Revision 1, database maintained by the
Population Division, DESIPA, 1995 (POP/1B/DB/95/1).
Recommendations on International Migration Statistics (United Nations
publication, Sales No. F.79.XVII.18).
Consolidated Statistics of all International Arrivals and Departures: A
Technical Report (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.85.XVII.8).
National Data Sources and Programmes for Implementing the United Nations
Recommendations on Statistics of International Migration (United Nations
publication, Sales No. E.86.XVII.22).
Measuring International Migration: Theory and Practice, International
Migration Review (Staten Island, New York), vol. 21, No. 4 (Winter).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
TOTAL FERTILITY RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Total fertility rate.
(b) Brief Definition: The average number of children that would be born
to a woman in her lifetime, if she were to pass through her childbearing years
experiencing the age specific fertility rates for a given period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: The total fertility rate is usually expressed
as per woman or per thousand women.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance
(a) Purpose: This is one of the most commonly used summary indicators of
the level of fertility. An important property of the total fertility rate is
that it is not affected by the age distribution of the population, although
it can be affected by rapid changes in birth timing.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: The
International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Programme of
Action encourages countries to take the necessary steps to complete a
demographic transition, understanding that an imbalance between demographic
rates and social, economic and environmental goals, together with
unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, has serious implications
for sustainable development. In countries where fertility is still high,
large young populations create major challenges for health services, education
and employment (paragraphs 6.3, 6.4, and 6.6). As such it represents a
leading indicator of future change.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other demographic indicators, particularly with the population growth rate.
The ICPD Programme of Action also emphasizes the interrelationships between
fertility and mortality levels, the empowerment of women, and education
particularly of women and girls.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish specific national
or global targets, although the ICPD Programme of Action encourages
Governments to bring about the demographic transition. Some national
governments have established quantitative goals for total fertility rate. As
of 1993, 12 per cent of governments perceived their levels of fertility as
being too low, 44 per cent as satisfactory, and 45 per cent as too high (sec
DESIPA, World Population Monitoring, 1995 listed in section 7 below).
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
Where data on births by age of mother are of good quality, or adjustments for
age miss-statement and incompleteness can be made, the total fertility rate
is directly calculated as the sum of age-specific fertility rates, or five
times the sum if data are given in five-year age groups. (An age-specific
fertility rate is calculated as the ratio of annual births to women at a given
age to the population of women of the same age.) When data on births by age
of mother are unavailable from registration systems or maternity history data
in sample surveys, the total fertility rate can be calculated through indirect
methods based on special questions asked in censuses or demographic surveys.
For information on these indirect estimates, see Manual X and U.C. - LITE
(see section 7 below).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
Collected by the United Nations on a regular basis and available for most
countries from vital registration systems or surveys. For all countries,
census and registration data are evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for
incompleteness by the Population Division, Department of Economics and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) as part of its preparations of the
official United Nations population estimates and projections. Past, current
and projected population growth rates are prepared for all countries by the
Population Division, DESIPA and appear in the United Nations publication,
World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
Most countries tabulate data from birth registration systems at the sub-
national level. Surveys are generally designed to provide estimates for major
regions within countries as well as at the national level. Less frequently
the sample design permits the examining action of this indicator at state,
provincial or lower administrative levels.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations Department of Economics and Social
Information a Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963-2147.
7. Further Information
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Population Division, DESIPA, Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic
Estimation (United Nations Sales No. E.83.XIII.2, New York, 1983).
Population Division, DESIPA, MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software
Package for Mortality Measurement (United Nations, New York, 1988).
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Monitoring, 1993 (United
Nations publication, Sales No. E. 95.XIII.8, New York, 1995).
Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and
Development, Report of the International Conference on Population and
Development, Cairo, Egypt, September 5-13, 1994. (United Nations Document -
A/CONF. 171/13).
Statistical Division, DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations Sales
No.E/F.95.XIII.1,1995).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
POPULATION DENSITY
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Population density.
(b) Brief Definition: The total population size of a country or area
divided by its surface area.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Usually expressed as population per square
kilometer.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures concentration of the human
population in reference to space. Population density can be used as a partial
indicator of human requirements and activities in an area. More refined
indicators -- such as number of persons per unit of habitable or cultivable
land -- may be more useful for analytic purposes. Similarly, disaggregation
of the indicator to urban size categories would be useful in conjunction with
other human settlement indicators.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: This indicator
is most useful at the sub-national level. Agenda 21 makes specific references
to population density in relation to desertification (Chapter 12) and to
freshwater and solid wastes in urban areas (Chapters 18 and 21). In rural
areas, demographic factors, working interactively with other factors such as
ecological endowments and commercialization of agriculture, may place pressure
on land resources. Higher or growing population density can threaten
sustainability of protected forest area and ecologically fragile or marginal
land. At the same time, population density is considered by some to be a
driving-force of technological change in production, and high concentration
of population in a limited area is the main defining feature of urban areas.
High concentration of population also means more local demand for employment,
housing, amenities, social security and services, and environmental
infrastructure for sanitation and waste management, which may tax governments'
management ability.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other demographic indicators, particularly the population growth rate, net
migration rate, life expectancy at birth and total fertility rate as well as
human settlement indicators. In order to understand impacts of this
indicator, it should be examined in conjunction with location of resources and
systems of production and distribution. Higher population densities generally
mean increased reliance on resource imports and the export of goods, as well
as environmental impacts such as solid waste disposal, and emissions to air
and water. Areas with high population densities tend to rely on the resources
of less populated hinterlands, and thereby increase the risk of exceeding
regional carrying capacities for stock and sink resources. With sub-national
data, relationships to ecosystems, urban issues, and arable land, for example,
can be addressed at a more local level.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish national or
global targets.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available (see section
3d above).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: This indicator is well
established.
(b) Measurement Methods: By definition, population density is calculated
as population size divided by surface area. Surface area data, as collected by
the Statistical Division, UN Department of Economics and Social Information
and Policy Analysis (DESIPA), represent the total surface area, comprising
land area and inland waters (assumed to consist of major rivers and lakes) and
excluding only polar regions and uninhabited islands. In practice, the
definition differs among countries, but is sufficiently comparable for
interpretation and analysis.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Population density represents a
demographic State indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The significance of the indicator is
limited in countries which serve as international hinterlands importing all
their food and natural resources. Large uninhabited areas, such as deserts,
tend to distort the indicator. Disaggregation to the ecumene, or other sub-
national areas, may be difficult in many countries.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Total land area instead of total area could
represent a useful alternative definition.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
Collected by the United Nations on a regular basis and available for all
countries at the national level. For all countries, the population data,
which provide the numerator for calculating density, are evaluated and, if
necessary, adjusted for incompleteness by the Population Division/DESIPA as
part of its preparations of the official United Nations population estimates
and projections. Past, current and projected population figures for
population density are prepared for all countries by the Population
Division/DESIPA and appear in the United Nations publication, World Population
Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
Population density can be calculated for sub-national areas from census data
available in most countries. The United Nations does not produce sub-
national estimates of population density. However, such estimates are
available from certain regional institutions, such as Eurostat.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147).
7. Further Information
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Statistical Division, DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations Sales
No.E/F.95.XIII.1, 1995).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
RATE OF CHANGE OF SCHOOL-AGE POPULATION
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Rate of change of school-age population.
(b) Brief Definition: The average annual rate of change of school-age
population size during a specified period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Usually expressed as a percentage.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures how fast the school age population
is changing.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential. It
is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the capacity
of people to participate in decision making to address their sustainable
development concerns.
Knowledge of the rate of change in the school-age population assists in
planning for educational facilities and services at the national and local
levels. In most developing countries, growth in the school-age population
represents a major component of the increase in educational services. For
instance, in the least developed countries, between 1990 and 1995, the annual
increase in numbers at the primary and secondary-school ages averaged around
2.5 per cent; the number of enrolled students must grow this rapidly merely
to maintain enrolment ratios at their current levels. However, the school-age
population is not increasing in all countries. Fluctuations in the school-age
population may produce a need to adjust educational resources and
infrastructure.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other socioeconomic indicators such as the population growth rate, the
fertility rate, and net migration. The size of the school age population
provides the base (denominator) for calculation of school enrolment ratios.
It could influence education response indicators, such as the share of Gross
Domestic product devoted to education.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish specific
national or global targets for this indicator.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not applicable, see
section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
The school-age population is generally defined in three age groups, ages 6-11,
ages 12-17 and ages l8-23, which are used by the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for comparative purposes, since
they correspond to the main educational levels of many countries. Other age
groupings are used in some countries. The population figures should also be
tabulated by sex, as a basis for calculating gender-specific enrolment ratios.
The rate of change of the school-age population for a country is generally
based on an intercensal population growth rate calculated from two censuses,
each adjusted for incompleteness and age mis-statement. For periods
following the most recent census, the changing numbers at each school age can
be estimated, first, by applying estimated survival rates to the adjusted
numbers of persons enumerated at the census. For dates more than 5 or 6 years
since the census, account must be taken of children of school age born since
the census. Finally, it is necessary to estimate the amount of net migration,
which tends to be an important factor for smaller areas, even if it is
unimportant at the national level. The difficulty of estimating the
components of population change make estimates of growth of the school-age
population increasingly subject to doubt as the time since the last population
enumeration increases.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
As indicated in section 4 above, the rate of change of population of school
age can be calculated for national and sub-national areas from census data.
The United Nations recommends that countries take censuses every 10 years, and
these data can be used to calculate an intercensal population growth rate.
In recent decades most countries have carried out censuses; 204 countries or
areas carried out a census during the 1990 census decade (1985 to 1994).
National and sub-national census data are available by sex and age for the
large majority of countries from national sources (country publications) as
well as from special country questionnaires sent to national statistical
offices from the Statistical Division of the United Nations Department of
Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). For all
countries, national census data are evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for
incompleteness by the Population Division, DESIPA as part of its preparations
of the official United Nations population estimates and projections. Past,
current and projected school age populations are prepared for all countries
by the Population Division, and appear in the United Nations publication,
World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147.
7. Further Information
Population Division, DESIPA, MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software
Package for Mortality Measurement (United Nations, New York, 1988).
Population Division, DESIPA, The Sex and Age Distribution of the World
Populations - the 1994 Revision (United Nations publication, Sales No.
E.95.XIII.2, 1994).
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations publication Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Statistical Division, DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations Sales
No. E/F.95.XIII.1, 1995).
UNESCO, Trends and Projections of Enrolment by Level of Education, by Age and
by Sex, 1960-2025 (as assessed in 1993), CSR-E-63.
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
PRIMARY SCHOOL ENROLMENT RATIO - GROSS
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Primary school enrolment ratio - gross.
(b) Brief Definition: Total enrolment in primary education as a
proportion of the population of primary school-age according to national
regulations.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The gross enrolment ratio is a general indicator of the
level of participation in primary education. It provides at the same time a
measure of the availability and utilization of school places to satisfy the
educational needs of the eligible school-age population.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective
participation in decision making. It is during the primary educational stage
when children become aware of the basic knowledge and values regarding
sustainable development.
This indicator is used in monitoring the general status and trends of
participation in primary education, and in assessing the relation between
demand and supply of educational opportunities. Gross enrolment ratios of
less than 100% identify situations in which there is a need for more school
places to respond to unsatisfied educational needs, and/or for measures to
encourage increase in enrolment. When the indicator has a value in excess of
100, it highlights the incidence of under-aged and/or over-aged enrolment. As
regards over-aged students, their presence may be explained by late entrance
or the incidence of repetition.
The relevance of this indicator in many developed countries is limited as
primary school is compulsory with an enrolment ratio of usually 100%. If the
enrolment is lower it usually indicates a data problem.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, capacity building, information and science,
and the role of the major groups. By including under-aged and over-aged
students, gross enrolment ratio can only provide broad indications of the
level of participation and school capacity utilization. For more precise
assessments the net enrolment ratio should be used which is however
conditioned by the availability of data on enrolment by age.
(d) Targets: The value of gross enrolment ratios can vary from less than
10% to more than 100%, reaching 130% in some countries when there are sizable
under-aged and/or over-aged enrolment. For countries with low gross enrolment
ratios, the target is to reach and cross the 100% threshold. For those
posting 130 or 140% gross enrolment ratio, the target would be to lower it to
100%, by reducing in particular over-aged enrolment and grade repetition.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The International Covenants
on Human Rights and Optional Protocol.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Gross enrolment ratio for
primary education is the most frequently used education indicator. By
relating actual total enrolment in primary education, irrespective of age, to
the population who according to the prevailing national regulations should be
enrolled, this indicator of participation in primary education is conceptually
simple as well as easy to derive. The lower limit of the population
age-group is the entrance age to primary education and the upper limit is
obtained by adding as many single ages as there are grades.
(b) Measurement Methods: The ratio is calculated as follows:
Total enrolment in primary education
------------------------------------
Population in age-group e x 100
where e is the age-group of the population eligible to participate in primary
education according to national regulations. For sound measurement, the ratio
must be supported by consistent data for gender and area (such as rural/urban
zones).
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator stresses the
importance of education to the sustainable development process. It is
recognized as a Driving Force indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The gross enrolment ratio gives only
broad indications of the availability of school places and the level of
participation in primary education. It is important to point out that school
age varies from country to country. The official entry age may not be adhered
to by large sectors of the population in many developing countries because of
lack of funding.
(e) Alternative Definitions: If data on enrolment in primary education by
age are available, net enrolment ratio can be derived as a more precise
alternative indicator of participation in education.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Total enrolment in primary
education; and the corresponding school-age population according to national
regulations, classified by sex. The number of school places available would
provide additional meaning to this indicator.
(b) Data Availability: Data on total enrolment are normally available for
most countries on an annual basis, collected through national school censuses.
The corresponding data on primary school-age population are available only
during national population censuses. Many national statistical offices
produce inter-censal estimates as well as projections. United Nations
population estimates and projections can also be obtained for most countries
except for those with less than 150 000 inhabitants.
(c) Data Sources: Data on enrolment can be collected from the schools
during school censuses organized by national ministries of education. Data on
primary school-age population can be either derived from national population
census results, or estimated and projected for the intervening years by
national statistical offices or by the United Nations Population Division,
Department of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO, fax (33-1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
UNESCO, Statistical Yearbook (annual editions); World Education Report,
editions 1991, 1993, 1995. UNESCO, Paris.
(b) Other References:
UNESCO, Statistics of Education in Developing Countries - An Introduction to
their Collection and Analysis. Book 3. Division of Statistics, UNESCO, Paris
1983.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
PRIMARY SCHOOL ENROLMENT RATIO - NET
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Primary school enrolment ratio - net.
(b) Brief Definition: This is the proportion of the population of the
official age for primary education according to national regulations who are
enrolled in primary schools.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The net enrolment ratio provides a measure of the extent to
which the population eligible to participate in primary education is actually
enrolled. By deduction, it can be used in gauging the size of the non-
enrolled primary school-age population.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective
participation in decision making. It is during the primary educational stage
when children become aware of the basic knowledge and values regarding
sustainable development.
This indicator is used in monitoring the level of participation in primary
education and in identifying the non-enrolled school-age population. Net
enrolment ratios approaching 100% indicate availability of adequate primary
school capacities and active enrolment of school-age children. Low net
enrolment ratios signal inadequacies in universalizing participation in
primary education, due to either the lack of school places or other factors
that prevent children from enrolling in school. This indicator when
disaggregated by sex highlights the extent of gender disparities.
The relevance of this indicator in many developed countries is limited as
primary school is compulsory with an enrolment ratio of usually 100%. If the
enrolment is lower it usually indicates a data problem.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, capacity building, information and science,
and the role of the major groups. By including under-aged and over-aged
students, gross enrolment ratio can only provide broad indications of the
level of participation and school capacity utilization. For more precise
assessments the net enrolment ratio should be used which is however
conditioned by the availability of data on enrolment by age. Net enrolment
ratio is more precise than gross enrolment ratio for assessing the level of
participation in primary education. When combined in use with the latter, it
provides an order of magnitude of the over-aged and under-aged enrolment. If
data on enrolment and population by single years of age are available, the
concept can be extended to derive age-specific enrolment ratios and school
life expectancy.
(d) Targets: At both the international and national levels, the target of
primary education programmes is to reach a 100% net enrolment ratio, or full
participation in primary education of the school-age population.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The International Covenants
on Human Rights and Optional Protocol; and the World Declaration on Education
for All.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The basic for this indicator is
well-known. The numerator for the net enrolment ratio only includes those
students enrolled in primary education whose ages are within the nationally
prescribed age-range for primary education. The denominator is the population
of the same official primary school-age.
(b) Measurement Methods: The ratio is calculated as follows:
Enrolment within the age-group e for primary education
------------------------------------------------------
Population in age-group e x 100
where e is the age-group of the population eligible to participate in primary
education according to national regulations. As children enrolled within the
age-range e may be a subset of the population of the same age-range, the value
of this ratio can only lie in the range from 0 to 100%.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator stresses the
importance of education to the sustainable development process. It is
recognized as a Driving Force indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The net enrolment ratio, compared to
gross enrolment, is more precise in measuring participation in education, but
it also requires more basic data to derive the indicator, namely: enrolment
by age. However, these data are not collected by all countries, or may be
unreliable.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The net enrolment ratio can be further used
to determine the size of the non-enrolled school-age population, and over-aged
and under-aged enrolment. If data on enrolment in primary education by single
years of age are available, age-specific enrolment ratios can also be derived,
as well as school life expectancy.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Data on enrolment in primary
education and population either by single years of age or corresponding to the
official primary age-range, and classified by sex.
(b) Data Availability: Enrolment data are normally available for most
countries on an annual basis, collected through national school censuses. Some
countries do not collect data on enrolment in primary education by age, at
least not on a regular basis. The corresponding data on primary school-age
population are available only during national population censuses or from
inter-censal estimates. United Nations estimates and projections can also be
obtained for most countries except for those with less than 150,000
inhabitants.
(c) Data Sources: Data on enrolment by age can either be collected from
the schools during school censuses organized by national ministries of
education, or derived from data on school attendance by age collected during
population censuses. Data on primary school-age population can be derived
from national population census results, or estimated and projected for the
intervening years either by the national statistics office or by the United
Nations Population Division, Department of Economics and Social Information
and Policy Analysis.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO, fax (33-1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
UNESCO Statistical Yearbook (annual editions); World Education Report,
editions 1991, 1993, 1995. UNESCO, Paris.
(b) Other References:
Statistics of Education in Developing Countries - An Introduction to their
Collection and Analysis. Book 3. Division of Statistics, UNESCO, Paris
1983.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
SECONDARY SCHOOL ENROLMENT RATIO - GROSS
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a)Name: Secondary school enrolment ratio - gross.
(b)Brief Definition: Total enrolment in secondary education as a proportion
of the population of secondary school-age according to national regulations.
(c)Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The gross enrolment ratio is a general indicator of the level
of participation in secondary education. It provides at the same time a
measure of the availability and utilization of school places to satisfy the
educational needs of the eligible school-age population.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development, and for effective
participation in decision making. It is during the secondary educational
stage when more detailed knowledge regarding sustainable development is
gained, and its multiple interactions with environment, society and the
individual clarified.
This indicator is used in monitoring the general status and trends of
participation in secondary education, and assesses the relation between demand
and supply of educational opportunities. Gross enrolment ratios of less than
100% identify situations in which there is a need for more school places to
respond to unsatisfied educational needs, and/or for measures to encourage
increase in enrolment. When the indicator has a value in excess of 100, it
highlights the incidence of under-aged and/or over-aged enrolment. As regards
over-aged students, their presence may be explained by late entrance into
secondary schools or the incidence of repetition.
The relevance of this indicator in many developed countries is limited as
primary school is compulsory with an enrolment ratio of usually 100%. If the
enrolment is lower it usually indicates a data problem.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, capacity building, information and science,
and the role of major groups. By including under-aged and over-aged students,
gross enrolment ratio can only provide broad indications of the level of
participation in secondary education and school capacity utilization. For
more precise assessments, the net enrolment ratio should be used which is
however conditioned by the availability of data on enrolment by age.
(d) Targets: The value of gross enrolment ratios can vary from less than
10% to more than 100%, reaching 110% in some countries when there are
under-aged and/or over-aged enrolment. For countries with low gross enrolment
ratios, the target is to reach and cross the 100% threshold. For those
posting 110% gross enrolment ratio, the target would be to lower it to 100%,
by reducing in particular over-aged enrolment and grade repetition.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: By relating actual total enrolment
in secondary education, irrespective of age, to the population who according
to the prevailing national regulations should be enrolled, this indicator of
participation in secondary education is conceptually simple as well as easy
to derive.
(b) Measurement Methods: The ratio is calculated as follows:
Total enrolment in secondary education
--------------------------------------
Population in age-group e x 100
where e is the age-group of the population eligible to participate in
secondary education according to national regulations. For sound measurement;
the ratio must be supported by consistent data for gender and area (such as
rural/urban zones).
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator stresses the
importance of education to the sustainable development process. It is
recognized as a Driving Force indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The gross enrolment ratio gives only
broad indications of the level of participation in secondary education. There
may be different stages and streams in secondary education giving different
degrees of emphasis on environment and sustainable development. These
important details that are not reflected in a general gross enrolment in
secondary education. This indicator may not capture the secondary education
changes taking place in many countries, particularly with respect to
vocational education and second-chance programmes.
(e) Alternative Definitions: To meet the limitations expressed in 4d above,
the use of participation rates in secondary and tertiary education could be
used as an alternative indicator. In the majority of countries, secondary
education is disaggregated into two stages. In many countries the end of the
first stage coincides with the end of compulsory education. This gross
enrolment ratio may thus be adapted and calculations derived to produce gross
enrolment ratios by cycle for secondary education, when appropriate.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Total enrolment in secondary
education; and the corresponding school-age population according to national
regulations, classified by sex. The number of school places available would
provide additional meaning to this indicator.
(b) Data Availability: Data on total enrolment are normally available for
most countries on an annual basis, collected through national school censuses.
The corresponding data on secondary school-age population are available only
during national population censuses or from inter-censal estimates. United
Nations population estimates and projections can be obtained for most
countries except for those with less than 150 000 inhabitants. For sound
measurement, the ratio must be supported by consistent data for gender and
area (such as rural/urban zones).
(c) Data Sources: Data on enrolment can be collected from the schools
during school censuses organized by national ministries of education. Data on
secondary school-age population can be either derived from national population
census results, or estimated and projected for the intervening years by
national statistical offices or by the United Nations Population Division,
Department of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO; fax (33-1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
UNESCO, Statistical Yearbook (annual editions); World Education Report,
editions 1991, 1993, 1995. UNESCO, Paris.
(b) Other References:
Statistics of Education in Developing Countries: An Introduction to their
Collection and Analysis. Book 3. Division of Statistics, UNESCO, Paris 1983.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
SECONDARY SCHOOL ENROLMENT RATIO - NET
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Secondary school enrolment ratio - net.
(b) Brief Definition: This is the proportion of the population of the
official age for secondary education according to national regulations who are
actually enrolled in secondary schools.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The net enrolment ratio provides a measure of the extent to
which the population eligible to participate in secondary education is
actually enrolled. By deduction, it can be used in gauging the size of the
non-enrolled secondary school-age population.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development, and for effective
participation in decision making. It is during the secondary educational
stage when more detailed knowledge regarding sustainable development is
gained, and its multiple interactions with environment, society and the
individual clarified.
This indicator is used in monitoring the level of participation in secondary
education and in identifying the non-enrolled school-age population. Net
enrolment ratios approaching 100% indicate availability of adequate secondary
school capacities and active enrolment of school-age youth. Low net enrolment
ratios signal inadequacies in ensuring full participation of the school-age
population in secondary education, either for the lack of school places or due
to other factors that prevent young people from enrolling in secondary
schools. This indicator when disaggregated by sex highlights the extent of
gender disparities.
The relevance of this indicator in many developed countries is limited as
primary school is compulsory with an enrolment ratio of usually 100%. If the
enrolment is lower it usually indicates a data problem.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, capacity building, information and science,
and the role of major groups. Net enrolment ratio is more precise than gross
enrolment ratio for assessing the level of participation in secondary
education. When combined in use with the latter, it could provide indications
on the magnitude of over-aged and under-aged enrolment. If data on enrolment
and population by single years of age are available, the concept can be
extended to derive age-specific enrolment ratios and school life expectancy.
(d) Targets: At both the international and national levels, the target is
to reach a 100% net enrolment ratio, or full participation of the school-age
population in secondary education.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The basis for this indicator is
well known. The numerator for the net enrolment ratio only includes those
students enrolled in secondary education whose ages are within the nationally
prescribed age-range for secondary education. The denominator is the
population of the same official secondary school-age.
(b) Measurement Methods: The ratio is calculated as follows:
Enrolment within the age-range e for secondary education
--------------------------------------------------------
Population in the age-group e x 100
where e is the age-group of the population eligible to participate in
secondary education according to national regulations. As young persons
enrolled within the age-range e may be a subset of the population of the same
age-range, the value of this ratio can only lie in the range of 0 to 100%.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator stresses the
importance of education to the sustainable development process. It is
recognized as a Driving Force indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The net enrolment ratio, compared to
gross enrolment, may be more precise for measuring participation in education,
but it also requires more basic data to derive the indicator namely: enrolment
by age. In some countries these data are either not collected, or collected
but are not reliable.
(e) Alternative Definitions: In the majority of countries, secondary
education is disaggregated into two stages. In many countries the end of the
first stage coincides with the end of compulsory education. The net enrolment
ratio may thus be adapted and calculations derived to produce net enrolment
ratios by cycle for secondary education, when appropriate.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Neededto Compile the Indicator: Data on enrolment in secondary
education and population either by single years of age or corresponding to the
official secondary age-range, and by classified sex.
(b) Data Availability: Enrolment data are normally available for most
countries on an annual basis, collected through national school censuses. Some
countries in the world do not collect data on enrolment in secondary education
by age, at least not on a regular basis. The corresponding data on secondary
school-age population are available only during national population censuses
or from inter-censal estimates. United Nations estimates and projections can
be obtained for most countries except for those with less than 150 000
inhabitants. For sound measurement, the ratio must be supported by consistent
data for gender and area (such as rural/urban zones).
(c) Data Sources: Data on enrolment by age can either be collected during
school censuses organized by national ministries of education, or derived from
data on school attendance by age collected during population censuses. Data
on secondary school-age population can be derived from national population
census results, or estimated and projected for the intervening years either
by the national statistics office or by the United Nations Population
Division, Department of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO; fax (33-1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
UNESCO, Statistical Yearbook (annual editions); World Education Report,
editions 1991, 1993, 1995. UNESCO, Paris.
(b) Other References:
Statistics of Education in Developing Countries: An Introduction to their
Collection and Analysis. Book 3. Division of Statistics, UNESCO, Paris 1983.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris,
1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
ADULT LITERACY RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Adult literacy rate.
(b) Brief Definition: The proportion of the adult population aged 15 years
and over which is literate.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: In determining this indicator it provides a measure of the
stock of literate persons within the adult population. It reflects the
accumulated accomplishment of education in spreading literacy. Any shortfall
in literacy would provide indications of efforts required in the future to
extend literacy to the remaining adult illiterate population.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Literacy is
critical for promoting and communicating sustainable development and improving
the capacity of people to address environment and development issues. It
facilitates the achievement of environmental and ethical awareness, values,
and skills consistent with sustainable development and effective public
participation in decision making.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Literacy is closely linked to indicators
reflecting basic needs such as education, capacity building, information and
communication, and the role of major groups. The literacy rate indicates the
status, or stock of iterates at a given point in time. It is often linked to
school enrolment ratios and population reaching grade 5 of primary education,
both of which influence the accumulation of the stock of iterates.
(d) Targets: The general target is full literacy, i.e. 100% adult literacy
rate. This is the goal of most national efforts and international campaigns
to eradicate illiteracy.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The World Declaration on
Education for All to be achieved by the year 2000.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The Revised Recommendation
concerning the International Standardization of Educational Statistics
suggests the following definitions for statistical purposes:
i) A person is literate who can with understanding both read and write a short
simple statement related to his/her everyday life.
ii) A person is functionally literate who can engage in all those activities
in which literacy is required for effective functioning of his/her group and
community and also for enabling him/her to continue to use reading, writing
and calculation for his/her own and the community~s development.
Persons who do not fulfill (i) or (ii) are termed illiterates or functional
illiterates respectively. Adult literacy, in international practice, applies
only to the population aged 15 years and over, classified by sex, by five-year
age-groups, and by urban/rural zones.
(b) Measurement Methods: To calculate the adult literacy rate, the number
of iterates aged 15 years and over is divided by the corresponding total
population aged 15 years and over and multiplied by 100.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Literacy is a reflection of the
total education experience. It is an essential element for effective
participation in sustainable development processes, and represents a Driving
Force indicator within the DSR Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: As literacy is a relative concept, no
single measure can separate the literate from the illiterate. A cut-off point
is not totally appropriate because there are many different forms of literacy.
A person might be literate in numeric terms, but have difficulty with
comprehension. Literacy can be defined in terms of work, school, home, and
social spheres. Each area of life requires different skills.
Therefore, literacy ideally should be determined by the measurement of
reading, writing and numeracy abilities of each person within a social
context. It may however be too time-consuming, costly and operationally
complex to organize such measurements during national population censuses.
Literacy status is therefore usually based on self-declaration or declaration
of the head of household, which sometimes gives rise to concerns about data
reliability and consequently comparability, especially for females in many
developing countries.
(e) Alternative Definitions: To meet the limitations discussed in 4d above,
the definition of functional literacy represents an alternative indicator.
This is usually measured for four or five components of literacy such as
"prose", "document", and "quantitative" domains. The aim is to measure the
degree of functionality, rather than the dichotomy literate vs. illiterate.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Data on the number of iterates or
illiterates and the population aged 15 years and over as collected during
population censuses and household surveys.
(b) Data Availability: Data are usually collected during national
population censuses, or from household surveys. Official statistics exist for
most countries in the world but are often out-of-date due to late census data
release. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) carries out periodical estimations and projections to fill data gaps.
In principle literacy data are available at both the national and sub-national
levels. For sound measurement, the ratio must be supported by consistent data
for gender and area (such as rural/urban zones).
(c) Data Sources: The primary data sources are national population censuses
and household surveys. International data sources include the Statistical
Division of the United nations Department of Economics and Social Information
and Policy Analysis (DESIPA); and UNESCO~s Division of Statistics.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point
is the Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO; fax (33-1) 45 66 48 44.
(b) Other Organizations: The Statistical Division of DESIPA also collects
statistics on literacy from national population censuses and provide the data
to UNESCO for processing and dissemination.
7. Further Information
UNESCO Statistical Yearbook (annual editions); Compendium of Statistics on
Illiteracy: 1995 Edition. . UNESCO, Paris. 1995.
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
CHILDREN REACHING GRADE 5 OF PRIMARY EDUCATION
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Children reaching grade 5 of primary education.
(b) Brief Definition: The estimated proportion of the population entering
primary school who reach grade 5.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator provides an estimate of the proportion of
children entering primary school who reach grade 5 of primary education and
thereby acquire basic literacy.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address environment and development issues. It is also
critical for achieving environmental and ethical awareness, values, and skills
consistent with sustainable development and effective public participation in
decision making.
Policy makers concerned with children's retention in schools and their
eventual acquisition of basic literacy and numeracy skills would find this
indicator particularly useful as it indicates the functioning, or internal
efficiency, of the education system and its ability to turn out literates.
Appropriate policies and measures could then be adopted to address problems
of grade repetition and drop-out as well as bottlenecks with regard to
retention in school. Indirectly, this indicator reflects the quality and
performance of schools.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Literacy is closely linked to indicators
reflecting basic needs such as education, capacity building, information and
communications, and the role of major groups. Besides assessing the
functioning of the education system, this indicator is often used together
with enrolment ratios to depict respectively the complementary aspects of
participation and retention in education. It can be cross-referenced with
adult literacy rate which reflects the cumulative output of the education
system over the years.
(d) Targets: With values that can vary from 0 to 100%, the general target
would be 100%. This implies complete retention of children in school to grade
5 (or zero drop-out).
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Efforts to extend literacy depend
on the ability of the education system to ensure full participation of school-
age children and their successful progression to reach at least grade 5, which
is the stage when they are believed to have firmly acquired literacy and
numeracy. By estimating the percentage survival to grade 5, this indicator
measures the proportion of the population entering primary school who
eventually reach grade 5.
(b) Measurement Methods: This indicator can be derived using the
reconstructed cohort student flow method, which is analogous to that used in
demography to determine survival rates from one age to the next. This method
first derives the grade promotion, repetition and drop-out rates based on
available data on enrolment and repeaters by grade for two consecutive years
using Markov chain calculations. It then applies these rates to a cohort of
1,000 students in grade 1 to reconstruct their passage through the education
system assuming that these student flow rates by grade remain unchanged
throughout the life-time of the cohort. From the reconstructed cohort student
flow, the percentage survival to grade 5 can be derived.
If p(i), r(i) and d(i) represent respectively promotion rate, repetition rate
and drop-out rate at grade i of primary education, they can be derived but the
following conditions on the flow rates have to be satisfied:
p(i) + r(i) + d(i) = 1
0 < p(i), r(i), d(i) < 1
When these conditions are not satisfied, the method used to derive survival
is no longer valid since it is not possible to isolate the original cohort and
any inferences made will be of a dubious nature.
A fundamental assumption is that the probability of the cohort entering
primary school, irrespective of the age of the pupils not reaching grade 5 is
the same as that of the entrance age population for this level of education.
That is, the drop-out rate is the same for all pupils regardless of the age
at which they enter school.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: As explained in section 3c above,
this indicator highlights the functioning of the education system. As such
it represents a State indicator within the DSR Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The measurement method described in 4b
above is rather a cumbersome one to administer. In addition, in some
countries such as Germany and Austria the concept of grade 5 does not exist
in primary education. Data on enrolment and repetition by grade may not be
available for consecutive years for some countries and certain regions or
schools within a country. The reconstructed cohort student flow method
assumes that promotion rates, repetition rates and drop-out rates do not
change from year to year. When applying this method to sub-national and
school levels, the derived drop-out rates by grade may sometimes present a
negative value due to transfers between schools. A suggested solution to this
problem is to collect data on transferred students by grade, and to deduct
them from the corresponding enrolment figures before applying the
reconstructed cohort method.
(e) Alternative Definitions: In the absence of data on repeaters, the
methodology outlined in section 4b above may be adjusted by assuming that the
repetition rate is 0. However, this assumption, in addition to those
described in 4 (b), presupposes that the repetition rates are quite low and
that their magnitude does not vary much between grades.
An alternative indicator for education effectiveness would be school drop-out
rates, grade by grade.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Neededto Compile the Indicator: Basic data required to derive this
indicator include: enrolment and repeaters by grade for at least two
consecutive years.
(b) Data Availability: Data on enrolment and repeaters by grade in primary
school are general available in most countries and also at sub-national and
school levels. For sound measurement, this indicator must be supported by
consistent data for gender and area (such as rural/urban zones).
(c) Data Sources: Data on enrolment and repeaters by grade and new entrants
by age are generally those collected during school censuses conducted by
national ministries of education.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO, fax (33 1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Not available.
(b) Other References:
Not available.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation Concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
SCHOOL LIFE EXPECTANCY
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: School life expectancy.
(b) Brief Definition: Estimated average number of years a student will
remain enrolled in an educational institution.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Number of years.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The indicator provides an estimate of the expected number of
years of education that a child can expect to receive if enrolled at school.
This indicator can be used to gauge the overall level of development and
performance of an education system, in terms of the average duration of
participation in education of every child enrolled in school.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective
participation in decision making. It is during the primary educational stage
when children become aware of the basic knowledge and values regarding
sustainable development. It is believed that the longer a young person can
remain in the education system, the more he/she is likely to learn about
sustainable development and to form the right attitude conducive to its future
implementation.
The relevance of this indicator in many developed countries is limited as
primary school is compulsory with an enrolment ratio of usually 100%. If the
enrolment is lower it usually indicates a data problem.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, and capacity buildings, information and
science, and the role of major groups. This indicator is closely related to
the enrolment ratios by level of education.
(d) Targets: Higher school life expectancy generally implies more exposure
to education. It is increasingly suggested that school life expectancy should
be at least 10 to 12 years corresponding to the total duration of primary and
secondary education. However, it should be underlined that this indicator
does not measure the number of grades completed but the number of years a
student is enrolled.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The school life expectancy is
defined as the total number of years of schooling which a child who is
enrolled can expect to receive, assuming the probability of his or her being
enrolled in school at any particular future age is equal to the current
enrolment ratio for that age.
(b) Measurement Methods:
n Eat
SLE = sum ----
a=i Pat
where E = enrolment
P = population
a = age; a = i, ...n; i = school starting
age
t = the year for which the indicator is
derived
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: The indicator focuses on the
importance of education to the sustainable development process. It represents
a measure of the State of education within the DSR framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: This indicator requires data on enrolment
and population by single years of age, which certain countries have yet to
collect on a systematic basis. The estimated number of years enrolled does
not necessarily reflect the number of grades of the regular educational system
completed. Besides, as it is based on cross-sectional data by level of
education at a point in time rather than on longitudinal time-series, it does
not take into consideration differences among successive school cohorts over
time.
(e) Alternative Definitions: An alternative indicator for education
effectiveness would be school drop-out rates, grade by grade.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Enrolment and population by
single years of age corresponding to all levels of education.
(b) Data Availability: Data on enrolment and population by age are not
available on a regular basis for certain countries. Based on data from the
population censuses, the Population Division of the United Nations Department
of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) and certain
national statistical offices carry out estimations and projections of
population by age. For sound measurement, this indicator must be supported
by consistent data for gender and area (such as rural/urban zones).
(c) Data Sources: Data on enrolment by age can be obtained from the
national ministries of education. The source of the data on population by age
can be either the national statistical offices or DESIPA. The latter updates
their estimates and projections every two years for countries with a
population of more than 150 000 in 1990.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO; fax (33 1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Not available.
(b) Other References:
Not available.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation Concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MALE AND FEMALE SCHOOL ENROLMENT RATIOS
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Difference between male and female school enrolment.
(b) Brief Definition: The arithmetical difference between male and female
enrolment ratios.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator indicates the extent of gender disparities
with regard to the degree of participation in education between male and
female.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development, and for effective
participation in decision making. Differences in educational participation
between male and female draw attention to the likely existence of gender
disparities.
The relevance of this indicator in many developed countries is limited as
primary school is compulsory with an enrolment ratio of usually 100%. If the
enrolment is lower it usually indicates a data problem.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, a capacity building, information and
science, and the role of major groups. Differences between male and female
enrolment ratios can be calculated for primary and secondary education, and
for gross and net ratios. Such differences may also be applied to adult
literacy rates and other indicators which are derived by gender and expressed
in terms of ratios or percentages. In practice, this indicator of gender
differences is to be presented and interpreted together with the corresponding
indicators of enrolment ratio by sex, so as to examine concurrently the
overall level of participation in education for both sexes as well as the
degree of disparity between them.
(d) Targets: The value of this indicator can vary from +35% to -20% in
countries for primary school gross enrolment, with positive differences
indicating higher educational participation for male than for female, and
negative differences showing the reverse. The target is for a balance where
both male and female have the same level of participation in education.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Various concepts exist for
indicators or indices of gender disparity (see section 4e below). The concept
chosen here is based on the criteria of simplicity of computation and
interpretation as well as the discriminatory power of the indicator derived.
(b) Measurement Methods: This indicator is calculated by subtracting the
enrolment ratio for female from the corresponding enrolment ratio for male,
i.e. ENR(M) - ENR(F)
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: he indicator focuses on the
importance of education to the sustainable development process. It represents
a measure of the State of education within the DSR framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: This indicator provides an idea of the
magnitude of gender disparities in the level of participation in education,
based on enrolment ratios. As mentioned in section 3c above, this indicator
should be presented and interpreted together with the corresponding enrolment
ratios so as to give a more comprehensive picture of the extent of gender
disparities in the light of the overall level of educational participation.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Other indicators and indices of gender
disparity include: (ENR(M) -ENR(F))/ENR(M); (ENR(M) - ENR(F))/ENR(F);
(ENR(M)-ENR(F))/ENR(MF); Gini coefficient; and the index of gender disparity
in the Human Development Report 1995 published by the United Nations
Development Programme.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Comple the Indicator: Enrolment by sex (and also by age
in the case of net enrolment ratio) and by level of education; and the
corresponding school-age population according to national regulations,
classified by sex.
(b) Data Availability: Data on enrolment by sex, age and by level of
education are normally available for most countries on an annual basis,
collected through national school censuses. The corresponding data on primary
school-age population are available only during national population censuses.
Many national statistical offices produce inter-censal estimates as well as
projections. United Nations population estimates and projections can also be
obtained for most countries except for those with less than 150 000
inhabitants.
(c) Data Sources: Data on enrolment can be collected from schools during
school censuses organized by national ministries of education. Data on
primary school-age population can be either derived from national population
census results, or estimated and projected for the intervening years by the
national statistics office or by the Population Division of the United Nations
Department of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO; fax (33 1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
UNESCO, Statistical Yearbook (annual editions); World Education Report,
editions 1991, 1993, 1995. UNESCO, Paris.
(b) Other References:
UNESCO, Statistics of Education in Developing Countries - An Introduction to
their Collection and Analysis. Book 3. Division of Statistics, UNESCO, Paris
1983.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation Concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
WOMEN PER 100 MEN IN THE LABOUR FORCE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Women per 100 men in the labour force.
(b) Brief Definition: Women per hundred men in the labour force.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Number.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The ratio measures men and women's respective shares in the
labour force structure and should not be confused with the participation rate.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: A small women's
share, assuming properly designed surveys, indicates non access to education
and inequality of opportunity and treatment, from, for examples, national laws
or general social practices. Such situations are usually accepted as
unsustainable.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is linked to others
reflecting the role and participation of women as a major societal group. It
would be better interpreted by age group and according to the number of
children to be cared for; and paired with indicators on education and ratio
of average female wage to average male wage.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Equality of opportunity and
treatment is a basic international standard. International Labour Office
(ILO) conventions No. 100, Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951; No. 111
Discrimination Employment and Occupation Convention 1958; No. 156 Workers with
Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 are relevant to this indicator.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The current economically active
population or labour force has two components: the employed and the
unemployed population. The international standard definition established by
the Thirteenth International Conference of Labour Statisticians (ILO, 1982)
is based on the following elements:
i) The survey population: This is defined as all usual residents (de jura
population) or all persons present in the country at the time of the survey
(de facto population). Some particular groups, such as the armed forces or
other populations living in institutions, nomadic people, etc. may be
excluded.
ii) An age limit: In countries where compulsory schooling and
legislation on the minimum age for admission to employment have broad coverage
and are widely respected, the age specified in these regulations may be used
as a basis for determining an appropriate minimum age limit for measuring the
economically active population. In other countries, the minimum age limit
should be determined empirically on the basis of: (i) the extent and intensity
of participation in economic activities by young people; and (ii) the
feasibility and cost of measuring such participation with acceptable accuracy.
Some countries use a maximum age limit as well, often linked to the most
common age for pensions.
iii) The involvement in economic activities during the survey
reference period: The concept of economic activity adopted by the Thirteenth
International Conference of Labour Statisticians (1982) is defined in terms
of contribution to the production of goods and services as set forth by the
United Nations System of National Accounts, revised in 1993.
iv) A short reference period: For example, one week or one day.
(b) Measurement Methods: The labour force is distributed by gender. Gender
is a basic descriptive variable in censuses or household/labour force sample
surveys, questionnaires and administrative records. The total number of women
in the labour force is then divided by the total number of men in the labour
force and the result compared to 100.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Equal participation of men and
women in society is one of the principles tenets of sustainable development.
The ratio women per hundred men in the labour force measures participation and
is included as a State indicator within the DSR Framework; along with
population reaching grade 5 of primary education, and mean years of schooling.
The corresponding Driving Force indicators are the rate of growth of school
age population; the primary school enrolment ratio; secondary school enrolment
ratio; and adult literacy rate. The remaining indicator, GDP spent on
education, is a Response indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: All the indicators in section 4c above
relate to improving educational attainment, and strongly suggest a direct link
between an increased women's share in the labour force and an higher
educational level. This would make more sense for participation rates than
for this ratio, though various factors can affect both indicators, which shows
only the relative share of both genders in the labour force at a given moment.
In addition, the indicator does not capture women's participation in the
informal or domestic sectors.
Estimates according to the international standards can in practice be made
most reliably on the basis of data collected through household surveys and
population censuses. Some of the criteria specified in the international
standards can only be implemented precisely from personal interviews - data
which is expensive and time consuming to acquire. This is the only data
source which, on a regular basis and with an appropriate survey design, can
cover virtually the entire population of a country, all branches of economic
activity, all sectors of the economy, all types of activity status and all
categories of workers, and allows joint and mutually exclusive measurement of
the employed, unemployed and inactive persons.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Activity status, gender. The
relevance of the indicator would be improved with the use of disaggregated
area data, such as urban/rural zones.
(b) Data Availability: The availability of recent data is ascertained for
57 countries, 5 in Africa, 15 in America, 13 in Asia, 22 in Europe, and 2 in
Oceania. The sources are labour force sample surveys for 40 countries,
household sample surveys for 6 countries, censuses for six countries and
official estimates for 5 countries.
(c) Data Sources: (i) population censuses and household sample surveys;
(ii) establishment censuses and establishment sample surveys; and (iii)
various types of administrative records.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is The International Labour Office (ILO) of the United
Nations, located in Geneva. The contact point is the Focal Point for
Environment and Sustainable Development, ILO; fax no. (41 22) 798 8685.
7. Further Information
(a) Data:
Yearbook of Labour Statistics, ILO, Geneva.
Bulletin of Labour Statistics (quarterly) and its Supplement
(January/February, April/May, July/August and October/November), ILO, Geneva.
Statistical yearbooks and other publications issued by the national
statistical offices.
(b) Methodology:
Surveys of Economically Active Population, Employment, Unemployment and
Underemployment - An ILO Manual on Concepts and Methods, ILO, Geneva, 1992.
Sources and Methods: Labour Statistics, Volumes 3 and 5, ILO, Geneva, 1991
and 1990, currently updated.
System of National Accounts 1993, Commission of the European Communities,
International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development, United Nations, World Bank, Brussels/Luxembourg, New York, Paris,
Washington, D.C., 1993.
Current international recommendations on labour statistics, ILO, Geneva, 1988.
See particularly the resolution concerning Statistics of the Economically
Active Population, Employment, Unemployment and Underemployment adopted by the
Thirteenth International Conference of Labour Statisticians, October 1982.
(c) International Conventions and Recommendations:
Labour Statistics Convention (No. 160) and Recommendation (No. 170), 1985.
Equal Remuneration Convention (No. 100) and Recommendation (No. 90), 1951.
Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention (No. 111) and
Recommendation (No. 111), 1958.
Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention (No. 156) and Recommendation
(No. 165), 1981.
(d) Other Studies on Gender Issues:
Women Workers: An Annotated Bibliography, 1983-1994, ILO, Geneva, 1995, XIII,
290 pages (International Labour Bibliography. No. 14). Produced from the
LABORDOC database, lists 953 English-language publications, technical reports,
working papers and other documents produced at ILO headquarters or in ILO
field offices, or prepared in connection with ILO programmes.
LEAD AGENCY: ILO
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT SPENT ON EDUCATION
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Gross Domestic Product (GDP) spent on education.
(b) Brief Definition: Education expenditure expressed as a proportion of
GDP.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Response.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator provides a measure of financial resource input
into education and its share of national revenue support. It enables better
assessment of the adequacy and allocation of financial resource allocated to
education within the national economy. It facilitates appropriate policy and
decision-making, while taking into account investments in other public
sectors.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development, and for effective
participation in decision making. Financial resources for education directly
determines school capacity and quality, which in turn influences enrolment,
retention and learning of children and youth in school. Relevance is
increased if disaggregation to primary, secondary, and tertiary education is
feasible.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, capacity building, information and science,
and the role of major groups. This measure is also closely linked to other
GDP and expenditure indicators. The effect of expenditure on education can be
verified by changes in enrolment ratios and literacy rates. These ratios and
rates in turn indicate shortfalls and disparities which require modifications
in the allocation of financial resource for education.
(d) Targets: There is no standard international target for GDP spent on
education. A general target referenced, but not sanctioned by international
conventions or agreements, suggests that countries should devote at least 5%
of GDP to education.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: GDP spent on education has been in
common use to compare the level of financial resources for education among
countries. The basic concept is to measure the share of financial resource
devoted to education from total national revenue.
(b) Measurement Methods: This indicator can be calculated as follows:
Total expenditure on education x 100
------------------------------
GDP
Total expenditure comprises both public and private expenditure.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Adequate fiscal support for
education is essential for sustainable development. GDP spent on education
represents a Response indicator within the DSR framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The indicator does not capture
effectiveness and efficiency in the education system. It does not
differentiate, for example, between education expenditure which is relevant
for a country's development compared to that which is not. International
comparability of the indicator is problematic: GDP spent on education can be
affected by the availability and reliability of data covering both public and
private expenditure on education, particularly from households, productive and
service enterprises, local communities, NGOs, and individuals. Spending by
non-government institutions on education, for example, will be elusive to
capture.
The indicator also has the following advantages: (i) inflationary and
deflationary trends do not affect the comparability of this ratio either over
time or between countries since the data refer to the same year; (ii) currency
fluctuation does not impinge on the comparability of this ratio.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Capital and current expenditure
on education in the national currency covering both the public and private
sectors; and GDP in the national currency.
(b) Data Availability: Data or estimates on GDP are generally available for
all countries on an annual basis, either from the national ministries of
finance or the World Bank. Data on public expenditure on education are usually
collected either by the ministries of education, or finance; and/or national
statistical offices. Private education expenditures, particularly those made
by households, enterprises, local communities, NGOs and individuals are more
difficult to obtain and may be very often incomplete.
(c) Data Sources: See section 5b above.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for this indicator is the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The contact point is the
Director, Division of Statistics, UNESCO; fax (33 1) 45 66 48 44.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Not available.
(b) Other References:
Not available.
(c) Status of the Methodology:
This indicator has the status of a recommendation since the basic data
elements to derive it are included in the Revised Recommendation Concerning
the International Standardization of Education Statistics adopted by the
UNESCO General Conference at its twentieth session, Paris, 1978.
LEAD AGENCY: UNESCO
BASIC SANITATION: PERCENT OF POPULATION
WITH ADEQUATE EXCRETA DISPOSAL FACILITIES
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Basic sanitation: percent of population with adequate excreta
disposal facilities.
(b) Brief Definition: Proportion of population with access to a sanitary
facility for human excreta disposal in the dwelling or immediate vicinity.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: To monitor progress in the accessibility of the population to
sanitation facilities.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: This represents a
basic indicator useful for assessing sustainable development, especially human
health. Accessibility to adequate excreta disposal facilities is fundamental
to decrease the faecal risk and the frequency of associated diseases. Its
association with other socioeconomic characteristics (education, income) and
its contribution to general hygiene and quality of life also make it a good
universal indicator of human development. When broken down by geographic
(such as rural/urban zones) or social or economic criteria, it also provides
tangible evidence of inequities.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The indicator is closely associated with
other socioeconomic indicators (see section 3b above), particularly the
proportion of population with access to adequate and safe drinking water.
These indicators represent two of the eight elements of primary health care.
(d) Targets: International targets for this indicator have been
established under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO). The
Global Strategy for Health and the more regent Ninth General Programme provide
targets of 100% by the year 2000 and 75% by the year 2001 respectively. In
addition, many countries have established national targets.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The International Drinking
Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (IDWSSD) 1980-1990 is an international
agreement relevant to this indicator. It represents a component of the WHO
Global Strategy for Health for All by the year 2000.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Definitions for sanitary facility
and population covered are required.
i) Sanitary facility: "A sanitary facility is a unit for disposal of
human excreta which isolates faeces from contact with people, animals, crops
and water sources. Suitable facilities range from simple but protected pit
latrines to flush toilets with sewerage. All facilities, to be effective,
must be correctly constructed and properly maintained".
ii) Population covered: This includes the urban population served by
connections to public sewers; the urban population served by household systems
(pit privies, pour-flush latrines, septic tank, etc); the urban population
served by communal toilets; and the rural population with adequate excreta
disposal such as pit privies, pour-flush latrines, etc.
(b) Measurement Methods: This indicator may be calculated as follows: The
numerator is the number of people with adequate excreta-disposal facilities
available multiplied by 100. The denominator is the total population.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Basic sanitation is a fundamental
factor in the human health component of sustainable development. This
indicator reflects the State of access to sanitary facilities with in the DSR
Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The availability of facilities does not
always translate into their utilization.
(e) Alternative Definitions: This indicator could also be expressed as the
percent of people without access to adequate sanitation. The population that
must be used in the numerator is the number of people without access to
adequate sanitation. If the data available are in terms of proportion of
households for which sanitation is available, it should be possible to convert
this into a percentage of population, using average figures for household
size. Also see section 4d above.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: The number of people with access
to adequate sanitation, and the total population.
(b) Data Availability: Routinely collected at the national and sub-national
levels in most countries using censuses and surveys.
(c) Data Sources: In order to arrive at more robust estimates of
sanitation coverage, two main data source types are required. First,
administrative or infrastructure data which report on new and existing
facilities. Second, population-based data derived from some form of national
household survey.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the World Health Organization (WHO). The contact point is
the Director, Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health, WHO; fax
no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
WHO, Development of Indicators for Monitoring Progress Towards Health for All
by the Year 2000. Geneva, WHO, 1981, p. 29.
WHO, Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000. Geneva, WHO, 1981.
WHO, Ninth General Programme of Work Covering the Period 1996-2001. Geneva,
WHO, 1994.
World Health Organization, Division of Operational Support in Environmental
Health, October 1995.
(b) Other References:
World Health Organization. National and Global Monitoring of Water Supply and
Sanitation. CWS Series of Cooperative Action for the Decade, No. 2, 1982.
World Health Organization. Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Monitoring
Report (WSSSMR), 1990.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
ACCESS TO SAFE DRINKING WATER
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Percent of people with safe drinking water available in the home
or with reasonable access.
(b) Brief Definition: Proportion of population with access to an adequate
amount of safe drinking water in a dwelling or located within a convenient
distance from the user's dwelling.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: To monitor progress in the accessibility of the population to
safe drinking water.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Accessibility to
safe drinking water is of fundamental significance to lowering the faecal risk
and frequency of associated diseases. Its association with other
socioeconomic characteristics, including education and income, also makes it
a good universal indicator of human development. When broken down by
geographic (such as rural/urban zones), or social or economic criteria, it
provides useful information on inequity.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is closely associated
with other socioeconomic indicators on the proportion of people covered by
adequate sanitation. These indicators are among the eight elements of primary
health care. It also has close links to other water indicators such as
withdrawals, reserves, consumption, or quality. (See section 3b above.)
(d) Targets: International targets for this indicator have been
established under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO). The
Global Strategy for Health and the more regent Ninth General Programme provide
targets of 100% by the year 2000, and more than 85% by the year 2001
respectively. In addition, many countries have established national targets.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The International Drinking
Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (IDWSSD) 1980-1990 is an international
agreement relevant to this indicator. It is a component of the WHO Global
Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: This indicator requires
definitions for several elements.
i) Population covered: This includes urban population served by house
connections, urban population without house connections but with reasonable
access to public stand posts, and rural population with reasonable access to
safe water.
ii) Reasonable access to water: This is defined as water supply in the
home or within 15 minutes walking distance. Actually a proper definition
should be adopted taking the local conditions into account; in urban areas, a
distance of not more than 200 metres from a house to a public stand post may
be considered reasonable access. In rural areas, reasonable access implies
that anyone does not have to spend a disproportionate part of the day fetching
water for the family's needs.
iii) Convenient distance: Convenient distance and access are
distinct in a sense that there may be access to water but it is not
necessarily convenient to fetch the water due to distance. The water should
be within a reasonable distance from the home that is 200 metres.
iv) Adequate amount of water: The amount of water needed to satisfy
metabolic, hygienic, and domestic requirements. This is usually defined as
twenty litres of safe water per person per day.
v) Safe water: The water does not contain biological or chemical agents
at concentration levels directly detrimental to health. "Safe water" includes
treated surface waters and untreated but uncontaminated water such as that
from protected boreholes, springs, and sanitary wells. Untreated surface
waters, such as streams and lakes, should be considered safe only if the water
quality is regularly monitored and considered acceptable by public health
officials.
(b) Measurement Methods: This indicator may be calculated as follows: The
numerator is the number of persons with access to an adequate amount of safe
drinking water in a dwelling or located within a convenient distance from the
user's dwelling multiplied by 100. The denominator is the total population.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Access to water is a crucial
influence on human health and sustainable development. The conditions related
to water accessibility are contained within this State indicator of the DSR
Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The existence of a water outlet within
reasonable distance is often used as a proxy for availability of safe water.
The existence of a water outlet, however, is no guarantee in itself that water
will always be available or safe, or that people always use such sources.
(e) Alternative Definitions: This indicator may be also expressed as the
percent of population without access to sufficient and safe drinking water.
Thus the population indicated in the numerator would be those who do not have
access to adequate and safe drinking water. If these data are available in
terms of the proportion of households, it should be possible to convert this
into a percentage of the population, using average figures for household size.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: The number of people with access
to adequate and safe water, and the total population. Data on the source of
water, for example, house tap or yard pipe, would provide additional meaning
to this indicator.
(b) Data Availability: Routinely collected at the national and
sub-national levels in most countries using censuses and surveys.
(c) Data Sources: Two sources are common: administrative data that report
on new and existing facilities, and population data derived from some form of
household survey or census.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the World Health Organization (WHO). The contact point is
the Director, Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health, WHO; fax
no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
WHO, Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000. Geneva, WHO, 1981.
WHO, Ninth General Programme of Work Covering the Period 1996-2001. Geneva,
WHO, 1994.
WHO, Development of Indicators for Monitoring Progress Towards Health for All
by the Year 2000. Geneva, WHO, 1981, p. 40.
(b) Other References:
World Health Organization. National and Global Monitoring of Water Supply and
Sanitation. CWS Series of Cooperative Action for the Decade, No. 2, 1982.
World Health Organization. Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Monitoring
Report (WSSSMR), 1990.
Program of Action of the Ministerial Drinking Water Conference, 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Life expectancy at birth.
(b) Brief Definition: The average number of years that a newborn
could expect to live, if he or she were to pass through life subject to the
age-specific death rates of a given period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Life expectancy at birth as expressed in
years.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: Measures how many years on average a new-born baby is
expected to live, given current age-specific mortality risks. Life expectancy
at birth is an indicator of mortality conditions and, by proxy, of health
conditions. It is also one of the most favoured indicators of social
development, and is used as one of the components of United Nations
Development Programme's (UNDP) Human Development Index.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Mortality,
with fertility and migration, determines the size of human populations, their
composition by age, sex, and ethnicity, and their potential for future growth.
Life expectancy, a basic indicator, is closely connected with health
conditions, which are in turn an integral part of development. The ICPD
Programme of Action notes that the unprecedented increase in human longevity
reflects gains in public health and in access to primary health-care services
(paragraphs 8.1 and 8.2), which Agenda 21 recognizes as an integral part of
sustainable development and primary environmental care (paragraph 6.1). The
ICPD Programme of Action highlights the need to reduce disparities in
mortality and morbidity among countries and between socioeconomic and ethnic
groups. It identifies the health effects of environmental degradation and
exposure to hazardous substances in the work-place as an issue of increasing
concern.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator reflects many
social, economic, and environmental influences. It is closely related to
other demographic variables, particularly the population growth rate. It also
has linkages with indicators of human health and the environment as well as
economic indicators. Examples of closely linked indicators would include
infant mortality, and water and air quality.
(d) Targets: The Declaration of Alma Ata (1978) set a target of
life expectancy greater than 60 years by the year 2000, and the ICPD Programme
of Action revised the target: life expectancy should be greater than 65 years
by 2005 and 70 years by 2015 for countries that currently have the highest
levels of mortality; and 70 years and 75 years, respectively, for the other
countries (ICPD Programme of Action, paragraph 8.5).
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See section 3d
above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
Calculation of life expectancy at birth is based on age-specific death rates,
which may be calculated separately for males and females, or for both sexes
combined. The death rates are commonly tabulated for ages 0 to 1 years, 1 to
5 years, and for 5-year age groups for ages 5 and above. Where data on deaths
by age are of good quality, or adjustments for age mis-statement and
incompleteness can be made, the life expectancy at birth can be calculated
directly from registered deaths and population counts, which are usually based
on census enumerations, evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted. Several steps
are needed to derive life expectancy from age-specific death rates; the
details can be found in demographic or actuarial references that describe
construction of life tables, for example, Pressat (1972) or Shryock and Siegel
(1980). For a description of the methodology that is linked to computer
routines to aid in the calculation, see MORTPAK-LITE (item 7, below).
When data on deaths by age are unavailable from registration systems or sample
surveys, the life expectancy at birth can be calculated through "indirect"
methods based on special questions asked in censuses or demographic surveys.
For information on these indirect estimates, see Manual X and MORTPAK-LITE
(section 7, below).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
Data is collected by the United Nations on a regular basis and available for
most countries from vital registration systems or surveys. For all countries,
census and registration data are evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for
incompleteness by the Population Division, United Nations Department of
Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) as part of its
preparations of the official United Nations population estimates and
projections. Past, current and projected estimates of life expectancy at
birth are prepared for all countries by the Population Division, DESIPA and
appear in the United Nations publication, World Population Prospects: The 1994
Revision (see section 7, below).
Most countries tabulate data from death registration systems at the sub-
national level. The infant mortality rate and the crude death rate (annual
number of deaths per thousand population) is more readily available for sub-
national units than is life expectancy at birth.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations DESIPA. The contact point is the
Director, Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147. At the World
Health Organization, the contact person is the Director, Office of Global and
Integrated Environmental Health; fax no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
DESIPA. World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision. Population Division.
United Nations Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995.
DESIPA. Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic Estimation. Population
Division United Nations Sales No. E.83.XIII.2, New York, 1983.
DESIPA. MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software Package for Mortality
Measurement. Population Division. United Nations, New York, 1988.
DESIPA. Demographic Yearbook. Statistical Division. United Nations Sales
No.E/F.95.XIII.1,1995. 1993.
Pressat, R. Demographic Analysis: Methods, Results, Applications. London,
Edward Arnold; Chicago, Aldine Atherton. 1972.
United Nations. Report of the International Conference on Population and
Development. Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population
and Development. United Nations Document A/CONF. 171/13. Cairo, Egypt,
September 5-13, 1994.
Shryock, H.S, and J.S.Siegel. The Methods and Materials of Demography. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1980.
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
ADEQUATE BIRTH WEIGHT
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Adequate birth weight.
(b) Brief Definition: Adequate birth weight is defined as equal or greater
than 2500 grams, the measurement being taken preferably within the first hours
of life, before significant postnatal weight loss has occurred.
(c) Unit of Measurement: The indicator is expressed as the number of
children per 1000 live births whose birth weight is equal or greater than 2500
grams.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Adequate birth weight.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: To monitor the percentage of underweight newborns in a
community.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Birth weight can
be an important indicator of community nutrition. Low birth weights signal
insufficient access to adequate food supply. It may also be related to
certain diseases such as malaria, and to specific nutritional deficiencies
such as endemic goitre.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is closely associated
with nutrition related indicators such as measure of weight-for-age and
height-for-age for infants and children. Linkages to other health and
socioeconomic indicators are also pertinent.
(d) Targets: An international target for this indicator has been
established by the World Health Organization (WHO). Its Global Strategy for
Health establishes a target of at least 90% of newborn infants with a birth
weight of at least 2500 grams. National standards are also significant and
relevant to countries and sub-national areas.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: WHO's Global Strategy for
Health for All by the Year 2000 is an international agreement relevant to this
indicator.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Not available.
(b) Measurement Methods: In practice the percentage of low birth weight is
first calculated as follows: the numerator is represented by live born babies
with birth weight less than 2500 grams multiplied by 100. The denominator is
the total number of live born babies weighed. This percentage is then
subtracted from 100 to give the percentage of newborns weighing at least 2500
grams.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This proxy measure may be
considered as a State indicator of human health and nutrition.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: It may be difficult to obtain data on
birth weight. This would apply, for example, where coverage of supervised
births by trained personnel is low.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Number of newborns with a birth
weight less than 2500g. Number of newborns weighed.
(b) Data Availability: In principle, routinely collected by ministries of
health at the national and sub-national levels in most countries.
(c) Data Sources: Sources of data would include ministries of health,
health centres, hospital records, sample surveys and/or special studies.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the World Health Organization (WHO). The contact point is
the Director, Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health, WHO; fax
no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
Not available.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
INFANT MORTALITY RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Infant mortality rate (IMR).
(b) Brief Definition: The number of deaths under 1 year of age during a
period of time per 1000 live-births during the same period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Rate per thousand live born.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The purpose of this indicator is to estimate the proportion
of newborn who die during the first year of life.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Beyond its obvious
relevance to policy making for healthy children, the IMR is sensitive
indicator of availability, utilization and quality of health care,
particularly perinatal care. Moreover, given its association with GNP per
capita, family income, family size, mothers' education, and nutrition, it is
also considered one of the best indicators of overall socioeconomic
development of a community.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator, associated with access
to perinatal health services, is closely linked with life expectancy at birth.
It is more generally linked to many other social and economic indicators,
including those listed in section 3b above.
(d) Targets: The Declaration of Alma Ata (1978) set a target for the IMR
to be less than 50 per 1000 live-births by the year 2000. The Global Strategy
for Health for All by the Year 2000 (WHO, 1981) aimed to achieve IMR in all
identifiable subgroups below 50 per 1000 live-births by the year 2000. The
1990 World Summit for Children Programme of Action adopted a target of
reducing the 1990 infant mortality rates by one third, or to 50 per 1000 live
births, whichever is less, by the year 2000. The Programme of Action of the
International Conference on Population and Development further encouraged
countries with intermediate mortality levels to achieve an infant mortality
rate below 50 deaths per 1000 births by the year 2005, and all countries to
achieve an infant mortality rate below 35 per 1000 live births by 2015.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Not available.
(b) Measurement Methods: Infant mortality rate is calculated by dividing
the number of deaths under one year of age in a given period of time x 1000 by
the number of live-births in the same period of time.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: IMR provides a basic reflection of
the overall socioeconomic development in a country. It is a State indicator
within the DSR Framework..
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: There are often problems in collecting
the information required for calculating the IMR in many less developed
countries where routine data collection in the health services omits many
infant deaths.
In countries where civil registration of deaths is incomplete, especially in
rural areas, many infants dying during the first weeks of life have not even
been registered as having been born. For this reason, rates based on civil
registration in these countries, or hospital data covering mainly urban areas,
are biased to reflect the more privileged in the population. To compound
these problems, definitions of live birth differ among countries.
Where data on infant deaths and births are complete, or adjustments for age
mis-statement and incompleteness can be made, the infant mortality rate can
be calculated directly. When such data are unavailable from registration
systems or maternity history data in sample surveys, the infant mortality rate
can be calculated through indirect or modelling methods based on special
questions asked in censuses or demographic surveys. For information on these
estimates, see the Manual X and MORTPAK-LITE (5) references listed in section
7 below.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Number of live births during a
given period and number of infant deaths during the same period.
Disaggregated data by ethnicity or urban/rural zones support the
interpretation of this indicator.
(b) Data Availability: Data are now available for most countries thanks to
special surveys of representative samples of the population whenever vital
registration systems are not available. Surveys that rely on maternity
histories, in which women are asked to give the date of birth and age of death
(if applicable) of each live-born child, are used in many household surveys,
but care must be taken to avoid age mis-reporting and to ensure that there is
a complete report of infant deaths. The preceding birth technique, used in
antenatal clinics, maternity clinics, and at the time of immunization, can
provide a useful recent estimate of the probability of dying by age 2, for
children of health service users at the local level. Retrospective questions
about the survival of all children born included in censuses and surveys, and
analyses using indirect estimation procedures, are also considered to be
reliable sources.
(c) Data Sources: Original data sources include: vital registrations,
sample registration systems, surveillance systems, censuses, and demographic
surveys.
Information needed for this indicator is collected by the United Nations on
a regular basis. For all countries, survey and registration data are
evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for incompleteness by the Population
Division, Department of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis
(DESIPA) as part of its preparations of the official United Nations population
estimates and projections. Past, current and projected estimates of infant
mortality are prepared for all countries by the Population Division; DESIPA
and appear in the United Nations publication, World Population Prospects: The
1994 Revision. Demographic monitoring done by government statistical offices
often allows desegregation of information to show differences within
countries. Surveys are generally designed to provide estimates for major
regions within countries as well as at the national level.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agencies for this indicator are: the United
Nations Department of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis
with the contact point being the Director, Population Division, fax no. (1
212) 963 2147; and the World Health Organization (WHO) with the contact point
being the Director, Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health, fax
no. (41 22) 791 4123.
(b) Other Organizations: Other contributing organizations include: the
United Nations Statistics Division; and the United Nations Childrens Fund
(UNICEF).
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
WHO. Development of Indicators for Monitoring Progress Towards Health for All
by the Year 2000. Geneva, 1981, p. 67.
WHO. Global Health for All Data Base. Geneva, 1994.
WHO. Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000. Geneva, 1981.
DESIPA. Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic Estimation. Population
Division. United Nations Sales No. E. 83.XIII.2, New York, 1983.
DESIPA. MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software Package for Mortality
Measurement. Population Division. United Nations, New York, 1988.
DESIPA. World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision. Population Division.
United Nations Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995.
United Nations. Report of the International Conference on Population and
Development, Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population
and Development, Cairo, Egypt, September 5-13, 1994. United Nations Document
A/CONF. 171/13.
UNICEF. State of the World Children. 1994.
(b) Other References:
Hill K. Approaches to the measurement of childhood mortality: A comparative
review. Population Index 57(3):368-382, Fall, 1991.
WHO and UNICEF. Measurement of overall and cause-specific mortality in infants
and children. Report of a Joint WHO/UNICEF Consultation, 15-17 December 1992.
Unpublished document WHO/ESM/UNICEF/CONS/92.5.
DESIPA. 1993 Demographic Yearbook. Statistical Division. United Nations Sales
No. E/F.95.XIII.1, 1995.
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
MATERNAL MORTALITY RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Maternal mortality rate (MMR).
(b) Brief Definition: Number of maternal deaths per 1 000 (or per
10 000 or per 100 000) live births.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Ratio. Due to the considerable decrease of MMR in
many countries, this ratio is now increasingly expressed per 10 000 or more
often per 100 000 live-births, which is acceptable if preferred and indicated
by the country.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator estimates the proportion of pregnant women who
die from causes related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: The MMR reflects
the risk to mothers during pregnancy and childbirth and is influenced by the
following factors: general socioeconomic conditions; unsatisfactory health
conditions preceding the pregnancy; incidence of the various complications of
pregnancy and childbirth; availability and utilization of health care
facilities, including prenatal and obstetric care.
Monitoring MMRs is particularly useful for policy making and decisions
regarding the accessibility to and the quality of prenatal and obstetric care.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is closely linked with
infant mortality rate, contraceptive prevalence, and health care expenditures.
(d) Targets: The Ninth General Programme of Work Covering the Period 1996-
2001 calls for a reduction of MMR by half in all countries between 1990 and
the year 2000.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Maternal death: The death of a
woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy,
irrespective of the duration and the site of pregnancy, from any cause related
to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management, but not from accidental
or incidental cause. Maternal deaths should be divided into two groups: (i)
direct obstetric deaths are those resulting from obstetric complications of
the pregnant state (pregnancy, labour, and puerperium), from interventions,
omissions, incorrect treatment, or from a chain of events resulting from the
above; and (ii) indirect obstetric deaths are those resulting from previous
existing disease or disease that developed during pregnancy and which was not
due to direct obstetric causes, but was aggravated by physiologic effects of
pregnancy.
The ICD-10 includes two further definitions of maternal mortality: (i) late
maternal death: the death of a woman from direct or indirect obstetric causes
more than 42 days but less than one year after termination of pregnancy; and
(ii) pregnancy-related death: the death of a woman while pregnant or within
42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the cause of death
(includes deaths from accidents).
(b) Measurement Methods: The maternal mortality ratio is expressed as
follows:
Maternal deaths (direct and indirect) x K
-------------------------------------
live-births
k = 1 000, 10 000, or 100 000
For the purpose of international reporting of maternal mortality, only those
maternal deaths occurring before the end of the 42-day reference period should
be included in the calculation of the rate, although the recording of later
maternal deaths is useful for national analytical purposes (see section 4e
below).
Published maternal mortality rates should always specify the numerator (number
of recorded maternal deaths), which can be given as: (i) the number of
recorded direct obstetric deaths; or the number of recorded obstetric deaths
(direct plus indirect). It should be noted that maternal deaths from HIV
disease and obstetrical tetanus are to be included in the MMR.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: The MMR provides an indication of
the State of health care and general socioeconomic conditions in a country.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The computation of the MMR implies a
well-developed registration system of births and deaths, as well as of causes
of death. In order to improve the quality of maternal mortality data and
provide alternative methods of collecting data on deaths during pregnancy or
related to it, as well as to encourage the recording of deaths from obstetric
causes occurring more than 42 days following termination of pregnancy, the
Forty-third World Health Assembly in 1990 adopted the recommendation that
countries consider the inclusion on death certificates of questions regarding
current pregnancy and pregnancy within one year preceding death. In the
absence of a reliable registration system, a proxy measurement may be used
based on a count of deaths among women soon after childbirth. To be used as a
health indicator, the rate should preferably be based on observations of at
least 50 maternal deaths.
In countries with a small population (for example, less than half a million),
and also in some larger countries with very low maternal mortality, the rate
should be considered with great caution, as annual rates are subject to
considerable random variation.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Recording "late maternal death" and monitoring
its rate become more important the more developed the country is. In either
cases, it is essential to state which definition is used. The definition of
"pregnancy-related death" (see section 4a above) is irrespective of cause of
death and therefore includes incidental and accidental causes. This avoids
the determination of pathogenic causes of death, and strong clinical inputs
during data collection. In countries where maternal mortality is high, the
bias introduced by the inclusion of external causes is usually low and
simplifies data collection.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Number of live births; number
of maternal deaths.
(b) Data Availability: Data are routinely collected at national and sub-
national levels in most countries.
(c) Data Sources: The primary sources of data are: vital statistics
registration; and community-based information (reproductive age mortality
survey, case finding, sisterhood method). Hospital maternal mortality ratios
should not be interpreted as it is impossible to know the direction of the
bias.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the World Health Organization (WHO). The contact point is
the Director, Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health, WHO; fax
no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Abouzahr, C. and Royston, E. Maternal Mortality: A Global Factbook. Geneva,
WHO, 1991.
WHO. Maternal mortality, Rates and Ratios. A Tabulation of Available
Information. 3rd ed. Geneva, WHO/MCH/MSM/91.6, 1991.
WHO. Indicators to Monitor Maternal Health Goals. Report of a Technical
Working Group. Geneva, WHO, 1994.
(b) Other References:
WHO. Development of Indicators for Monitoring Progress Towards Health for All
by the Year 2000. Geneva, WHO, 1981.
WHO. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health
Problems, 10th rev. Geneva, WHO, 1992.
WHO. Ninth General Programme of Work Covering the Period 1996-2001. Geneva,
WHO, 1994.
WHO. Global Health for All Database. Geneva, WHO, 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
NUTRITIONAL STATUS OF CHILDREN
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: The nutritional status of children in relation to national
standards.
(b) Brief Definition: Children under age five whose weight-for-age and
height-for-age is between either 80% and 120% of the reference value of the
country, or within two standard deviations of this value.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The purpose of this indicator is to measure long term
nutritional imbalance and malnutrition, as well as current under-nutrition.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Health and
development are intimately interconnected. Meeting primary health care needs
and the nutritional requirement of children are fundamental to the achievement
of sustainable development. Anthropometric measurements to assess growth and
development, particularly in young children, are the most widely used
indicators of nutritional status in a community. The percentage of low
height-for-age reflects the cumulative effects of under-nutrition and
infections since birth, and even before birth. This measure, therefore,
should be interpreted as an indication of poor environmental conditions and/or
early malnutrition. The percentage of low weight-for-age reflects both the
cumulative effects of episodes of malnutrition or chronic under-nutrition
since birth and current under-nutrition. Thus, it is a composite indicator
which is more difficult to interpret.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is closely linked with
adequate birth weight. It is also associated with such socioeconomic and
environmental indicators as squared poverty gap index, access to safe drinking
water, infant mortality rate, life expectancy at birth, national health
expenditure devoted to local health care, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per
capita, environmental protection expenditures as a percent of GDP, and waste
water treatment coverage.
(d) Targets: At least 90% of children within a population should have a
weight-for-age that corresponds to the reference values given in section 1b
above by the year 2000. This target has been established by the World Health
Organization's (WHO) Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The WHO Global Strategy for
Health for All by the Year 2000 and its Ninth General Programme of Work,
together with the United Nations World Summit for Children represent
international agreements relevant to this indicator.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A national or international
reference population is used to calculate the indicators for weight-for-age
and height-for-age. A WHO Working Group has recommended that the best
available data for this has been established by the United States National
Center for Health Statistics (see references in section 7 below). This data
may be used for children up to five years of age, since the influence of
ethnic or genetic factors on young children is considered insignificant.
Low weight and low height are defined as less than the value corresponding to
two standard deviations below the median of the respective frequency
distributions for healthy children (see WHO, 1981 in section 7 below).
(b) Measurement Methods: The proportion of children under five with
acceptable weight-for-age (or height-for-age) can be calculated by using the
following formula:
Numerator: number of children under five with weight-for-age (or
height-for-age) acceptable x 100.
Denominator: total number of children under five weighed.
For height, supine length is measured in children under two, and stature
height in older children.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator, as a proxy measure
for access to adequate food supply, is a State indicator within the DSR
Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: Available data may be outdated, site-
specific, and lack a time series perspective. In some countries, the age of
children is difficult to determine. It is also difficult to measure the
height of children under two with accuracy and consistency.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: The data needed to compile this
indicator are the number of children under five weighed; and the number of
children under five with weight-for-age or height-for-age within the national
reference values.
(b) Data Availability: The data are routinely collected by ministries of
health at the national and subnational levels for most countries.
(c) Data Sources: The primary national sources of data are the ministries
of health.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency for the development of this indicator is the World Health
Organization (WHO). At WHO, the contact point is the Director, Office of
Global and Integrated Environmental Health; fax no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Growth Charts.
National Center for Health Statistics, Public Health Service, Health Resources
Administration. Rockville, Maryland. 1976.
Waterlow, J.C. et al. The Presentation and Use of Height and Weight Data for
Comparing the Nutritional Status of Groups of Children under the Age of Ten
Years. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, Volume 55: 489-498. 1977.
WHO. Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000. Geneva. 1981.
WHO. Development of Indicators for Monitoring Progress Towards Health for All
by the Year 2000. Geneva. 1981.
WHO. Ninth General Programme of Work Covering the Period 1996-2001. Geneva.
1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
IMMUNIZATION AGAINST INFECTIOUS CHILDHOOD DISEASES
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: The percent of the eligible population that have been immunized
according to national immunization policies.
(b) Brief Definition: The definition includes three components: (i) the
proportion of children immunized against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus,
measles, poliomyelitis, tuberculosis and hepatitis B before their first
birthday; (ii) the proportion of children immunized against yellow fever in
affected countries of Africa; and (iii) the proportion of women of child-
bearing age immunized against tetanus.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Immunization against infections childhood
diseases.
(b) Type of Indicator: Response.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator monitors the implementation of immunization
programs.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Health and
sustainable development are intimately interconnected. Both insufficient and
inappropriate development can lead to severe health problems in both
developing and developed countries. Addressing primary health needs is
integral to the achievement of sustainable development. Particularly relevant
is the provision of preventative programmes aimed at controlling communicable
diseases and protecting vulnerable groups. Good management of immunization
programmes, essential to the reduction of morbidity and mortality from major
childhood infectious diseases, is a basic measure of government commitment to
preventative health services.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is linked to other health
indicators, particularly those associated with the young, such as infant
mortality and life expectancy. It is influenced by such indicators as health
expenditure and the proportion of population in urban areas.
(d) Targets: Several international targets have been established for this
indicator. In the Global Strategy for Health and the Ninth General Programme
at Work, all children and 90% of children respectively, should be immunized
against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, measles, poliomyelitis, and
tuberculosis (see section 7 below). The 1992 World Health Assembly agreed
that all children should be immunized against hepatitis B as part of expanded
national programmes of immunization. In addition, all children in affected
countries of Africa should be immunized against yellow fever. At the World
Summit for Children it was resolved that all pregnant women should be
immunized against tetanus.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See sections 3d and 7.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A child is considered adequately
immunized against a disease when he or she has received the following number
of doses: tuberculosis (1 dose); diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT) (2
or 3 doses according to the immunization scheme adopted in the country);
poliomyelitis (3 doses of live or killed vaccine); measles (1 dose); hepatitis
B (3 doses); and yellow fever (1 dose). A pregnant woman is considered
adequately immunized against tetanus if she has received at least 2 doses of
tetanus toxoid during pregnancy or was already previously immunized.
(b) Measurement Methods:
i) Infant population: The numerator is the number of infants fully
immunized with the specified vaccines x 100, while the denominator is the
number of infants surviving to age one. If the national schedule provides for
immunization in a different age group, such as measles in the second year of
age, the value should be the percentage of children immunized in the target
age group. For the proper management of immunization programmes, it is
however essential to be able to break down the data in such a way as to show
the percentage covered in the first year of life (or second year for measles
immunization).
ii) Women of child-bearing age: The numerator is the number of women
immunized with two or more doses of tetanus toxoid during pregnancy x 100,
while the denominator is the number of live births.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator focuses on a
fundamental aspect of preventative health care. As such, it represents a
Response indicator influencing the State indicators of health in the DSR
Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: It is useful to have a composite
indicator of adequate coverage by immunization. However, it is easier to
collect data on the global coverage of a population against one disease than
on the immunization of each child against all target diseases at the same
time. This is why in most countries only the former data are easily available
and collected.
The percent of pregnant women immunized with two or more doses of tetanus
toxoid during pregnancy is rather easy to monitor through routine data
collection in the health services. However, it underestimates the percent of
pregnant women actually immunized against tetanus. It does not tale into
account women who are already adequately immunized when becoming pregnant and
therefore do not require new doses of tetanus toxoid during pregnancy. Women
in this category are not numerous in countries where neonatal tetanus is still
an issue and where, accordingly, this indicator is mainly used. But in some
countries in transition, with long-standing child immunization programmes, the
percent of pregnant women receiving tetanus toxoid is misleading as a
significant number of them may be already immunized at the moment of
pregnancy.
The indicator does not reflect other health preventative measures, such as
education, diet, and pollution prevention. The international targets are not
very meaningful for many countries.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: The number of infants fully
immunized against: DPT; poliomyelitis; measles; tuberculosis; the number of
infants surviving to age one year; the number of infants living in African
countries exposed to yellow fever; the number of pregnant women immunized
against tetanus; and the number of live births.
(b) Data Availability: Data is readily available from national immunization
programmes of most countries, at least at the national level.
(c) Data Sources: Reporting of vaccinations performed annually or
nationwide surveys are the most common data sources.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency is the World Health Organization (WHO).
The contact point is the Director, Office of Global and Integrated
Environmental Health, WHO; fax no. (41 22) 791 4123.
(b) Other Organizations: The United Nations Chilren's Fund is a
cooperating agency.
7. Further Information
WHO. Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000. Geneva, WHO, 1981.
WHO. Ninth General Programme of Work Covering the Period 1996-2001. Geneva,
WHO, 1994.
WHO. World Health Assembly Resolution. WHO45.19, 1992.
WHO. Expanded Programme on Immunization Data Base. Geneva, WHO.
WHO. World Summit for Children. Paris, UNICEF, 1990.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
CONTRACEPTIVE PREVALENCE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Contraceptive prevalence.
(b) Brief Definition: This indicator is generally defined as the percent
of women or reproductive age using any method of contraception. It is usually
calculated for married women of reproductive age, but sometimes for other base
population, such as all women of reproductive age, or for men of a specified
age group.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: Response.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The measure indicates the extent of people's conscious
efforts to control their fertility. It does not capture all actions taken to
control fertility, since induced abortion is common in many countries.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Increased
contraceptive prevalence, is, in general, the single most important proximate
determinant of inter-country differences in fertility, and of ongoing
fertility declines in developing countries. Contraceptive prevalence can also
be regarded as an indirect indicator of progress in providing access to
reproductive health services including family planning, one of the eight
elements of primary health care.
Agenda 21 discusses reproductive health programmes, which include family
planning, as among the programmes that promote changes in demographic trends
and factors towards sustainability. Family planning is discussed in the
broader context of reproductive, sexual health, and reproductive rights by
Chapter VII of the Programme of Action, International Conference on Population
and Development (ICPD); and Strategic Objective C of the Platform for Action
adopted at the Fourth World Conference on Women. Health benefits include the
ability to prevent pregnancies that are too early, too closely spaced, too
late, or too many.
Current contraceptive practice depends not only on people's fertility desires,
but also on availability and quality of family planning services; social
traditions that affect the acceptability of contraceptive use; and other
factors, such as marriage patterns and traditional birth-spacing practices,
that independently influence the supply of children.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The level of contraceptive use has a
strong, direct effect on the total fertility rate (TFR) and, through the TFR,
on the rate of population growth. Use of contraception to prevent pregnancies
that are too early, too closely spaced, too late, or too many has benefits for
maternal and child health. This indicator is also closely linked to access
to primary health care services particularly those pertaining to reproductive
health care. Furthermore, it has broader and predictive implications for many
other sustainable development indicators and issues, such as rate of change
of school-age population, woman's participation in the labour force, and
natural resource use.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish specific national
or global targets for contraceptive prevalence. Recent international
conferences have strongly affirmed the right of couples and individuals to
chose the number, spacing and timing of their children, and to have access to
the information and means to do so. The ICPD Programme of Action states that
"Governmental goals for family planning should be defined in terms of unmet
needs for information and services. Demographic goals, while legitimately the
subject of government development strategies, should not be imposed on family-
planning providers in the form of targets or quotas for the recruitment of
clients" (paragraph 7.12).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The standard indicator is the
percentage currently using any method of contraception among married women
aged 15-49 or 15-44. In this context, the married group usually includes
those in consensual or common-law unions in societies where such unions are
common. Contraceptive prevalence is also frequently reported for all women
of reproductive age, and statistics are sometimes presented for men instead
of, or in addition to, women.
Users of contraception are defined as women who are practising, or whose male
partners are practising, any form of contraception. These include female and
male sterilization, injectable and oral contraceptives, intrauterine devices,
diaphragms, spermicide, condoms, rhythm, withdrawal and abstinence, among
others.
For this indicator, too early is defined as under age 15. Such adolescents
are 5 to 7 times more likely to die in pregnancy and childbirth than women in
the lowest risk group of 20-24 years. Too closely spaced means women who
become pregnant less than two years after a previous birth. Greater adverse
consequences to women and their children are experienced under such
circumstances. Women who have had five or more pregnancies (too many) or who
are over 35 (too late), also face a substantially higher risk than the 20-24
year old group.
When presenting information about contraceptive use, it is useful to show the
data according to specific type of contraception; by social characteristics
such as rural/urban or region of residence, education, marital status; by 5-
year age group, including specific attention to adolescents aged under 18
years; and by family size.
(b) Measurement Methods: Measurements of contraceptive prevalence come
almost entirely from representative sample surveys of women or men of
reproductive age. Current use of contraception is usually assessed through
a series of questions about knowledge and use of particular methods.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator focuses on
individual preventative action to control fertility through family planning.
It is a Response indicator with wide implications for many elements of the DSR
Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: For surveys, under-reporting can occur
when specific methods are not mentioned by the interviewer. This can be the
case with the use of traditional methods such as rhythm and withdrawal, and
use of contraceptive surgical sterilization. The list of specific methods is
not completely uniform in practice, but in most cases is sufficiently
consistent to permit meaningful comparison. "Current" use is often specified
in surveys to mean "within the last month", but sometimes the time reference
is left vague, and occasionally longer reference periods are specified. With
statistics from family planning programmes, the accuracy of the assumptions
is often difficult to assess. The derived estimates obviously omit
contraceptive users who do not use the programme's services, and thus tend to
underestimate the overall level of use.
Service statistics maintained by family planning programmes are also sometimes
used to derive estimates of contraceptive prevalence. In such cases it is
necessary to apply assumptions in order to derive estimates of numbers of
current users from the records of numbers of family planning clients. Base
population statistics (numbers of women or of married women) are in this case
usually derived from census counts, adjusted to the reference date by the
Population Division of the Department of Economics and Social Information and
Policy Analysis (DESIPA), as part of its preparations of the official United
Nations population estimates and projections.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Number of women of childbearing
age using family planning methods. Number of women of childbearing age. Both
data sets are frequently limited to married women.
(b) Data Availability: The most recent United Nations review of
contraceptive prevalence includes statistics for 119 countries and areas with
information dating from 1975 or later. These countries include 90 per cent of
world population. This review includes contraceptive prevalence measures for
all women of reproductive age in 64 countries and areas and for samples of men
in 27 countries and areas.
Contraceptive prevalence is one of the few topics for which data coverage is
more complete and more current for developing than for developed countries.
Most surveys provide estimates for major regions within countries as well as
at the national level. Less frequently the sample design permits examining
prevalence at the state, provincial, or lower administrative levels. In
addition to those with national or near-national coverage, surveys covering
this topic are sometimes available for particular geographic areas. Data are
much less widely available for population groups other than married women,
although such information has increased in recent years.
(c) Data Sources: Executing agencies for surveys covering this topic vary.
National statistical offices and ministries of health are the most common
source, but other governmental offices, non-governmental voluntary or
commercial organizations are frequently involved. Many surveys are conducted
in collaboration with international survey programmes. The Population
Division, DESIPA regularly compiles information about contraceptive prevalence
and publishes it in the annual World Population Monitoring report.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agencies are: the United Nations Department of Economics and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA), with the contact point as the
Director, Population Division, fax no. (1 212) 963 2147; and the World Health
Organization (WHO), with the contact point as the Director, Office of Global
and Integrated Environmental Health, fax no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
Levels and Trends of Contraceptive Use as Assessed in 1988 (United Nations,
Sales No. E.89.XIII.4).
Levels and Trends of Contraceptive Use as Assessed in 1994 (United Nations,
ST/ESA/SER.A/146, forthcoming).
Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and
Development, Report of the International Conference on Population and
Development, Cairo, Egypt, September 5-13, 1994. (United Nations Document -
A/CONF. 171/13).
World Population Monitoring, 1993 (Sales No. E.95.XIII.8, New York).
World Population Monitoring, 1996 (ESA/P/WP.131).
LEAD AGENCIES: WHO/DESIPA
PROPORTION OF POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS MONITORED IN FOOD
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Proportion of potentially hazardous chemicals monitored in food.
(b) Brief Definition: Proportion of potentially hazardous chemicals
monitored in food which are appropriate for the country's stage of
development.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: Response.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The purpose of this indicator is to assess national
capacities to monitor, through population-based sampling and analysis, the
presence of potentially hazardous chemicals in various food commodities, based
on lists of priority chemicals and foods in which they occur, appropriate for
the country's stage of development.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Human health care
is integral to the achievement of the goals of sustainable development. Food
contamination is a major route of human exposure to a range of chemicals
potentially hazardous to health. Food contamination monitoring is essential
to protect public health and maintain confidence in the food supply. Taken
together with information on food consumption, monitoring provides an
assessment of whether human exposure to chemicals in food exceeds established
acceptable or tolerable levels. In this way, monitoring provides information
to identify problems, establish priorities, and select appropriate
interventions. Monitoring can also detect sporadic contamination which is
often associated with chemical misuse or accidents. Food contamination
monitoring serves to confirm the adequacy of source directed (environmental)
measures and other interventions to reduce or prevent the contamination of
food.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is closely linked with
other measures associated with human exposure to chemicals, such as use of
agricultural pesticides, ambient air pollution, unintentional chemically
induced acute poisonings, and generation of hazardous waste. It is also
linked to other health response indicators, such as total national health care
expenditure related to Gross National Product (GNP).
(d) Targets: It is generally accepted that at least 90% of the
contaminant/food commodity combinations should be monitored.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The Food Contamination
Monitoring and Assessment Programme (GEMS/Food) of the Global Environment
Monitoring System is of relevance to this indicator.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The definitions and concepts for
this indicator are well know and readily available. Monitoring is the
representative (random) sampling and analysis of selected food commodities,
including drinking water, to assess the dietary exposure of the population to
a potentially hazardous contaminant for comparison with the acceptable or
tolerable levels of human exposure established by national and international
bodies. Such monitoring should not be confused with compliance monitoring
which is performed for regulatory purposes.
(b) Measurement Methods: This indicator may be calculated by using: the
number of combinations of contaminants and foods which are monitored as the
numerator; and the number of combinations of contaminants and foods which
should be monitored by the country at its stage of development as the
denominator.
Based on over twenty years of GEMS/Food experience, three separate standard
lists of contaminant/food combinations have been prepared based on knowledge
of potentially hazardous chemicals and the foods in which they are known to
occur. The core list for lesser developed countries contains 153 combinations
of contaminants and foods which offer basic protection of the consumer from
known chemical hazards. The intermediate list for developing countries
contains 358 combinations of contaminants and foods which offer improved
protection of the consumer, especially as development increases the number and
amount of potentially hazardous chemicals used in the country. The
comprehensive list for industrialized countries includes 394 combinations
which provide assurance that the full range of potentially toxic chemicals are
being monitored in the food supply. For guidance on which list to select,
countries with per capita GNP under US$3 500 should use the core list. For
counties with per capita GNP between US$3 500 and US$7 500, the intermediate
list should be used. For countries with per capita GNP over US$7 500, the
comprehensive list should be used. The lists are attached in Annex 1 below.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator represents a
societal Response to human exposure to potentially hazardous chemicals.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: Frequency of monitoring, which is based
on the importance of the food in the diet and to total exposure, is not
addressed by this indicator.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: The number of
contaminant/commodity combinations monitored are required (see section 4b
above).
(b) Data Availability: The information is available for most countries
through the ministries of health, agriculture, and/or environment.
(c) Data Sources: The information may be obtained directly from the
laboratories with the mandate to collect it. Most countries undertaking
monitoring usually publish annual reports, often in professional journals.
In over seventy countries, the GEMS/Food Programme maintains a network of
Participating Institutions which are involved in this type of monitoring.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency is the World Health organization (WHO).
The contact point is the Director, Office of Global and Integrated
Environmental Health, WHO; fax no. (41 22) 791 4123.
(b) Other Organizations: The Food and Agriculure Organization (FAO) and
the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) are partners with WHO in the
GEMS/Food Programme.
7. Further Information
World Health Organization. Guidelines for Establishing or Strengthening
National Food Contamination Monitoring Programmes. Unpublished Document
WHO/HCS/FCM/78.1. GEMS/Food, Geneva.
World Health Organization. Guidelines for Predicting Dietary Intake of
Pesticide Residues. GEMS/Food, Geneva. 1990.
World Health Organization. Guidelines for the Study of Dietary Intake of
Chemical Contaminants. WHO Offset Publication No 87. GEMS/Food, Geneva.
1985.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
ANNEX 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORE LIST
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contaminant Food
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
aldrin, dieldrin, DDT (p,p'- and o,p'-), whole milk, butter, animal fats
TDE (p,p'-), TDE (p,p'-), DDE (p,p'-) and oils, fish, cereals*, human
endosulfan (alpha and beta), endosulfan milk
sulfate, endrin, hexachlorocyclohexane
(alpha, and beta and gamma),
hexachlorobenzene, heptachlor,
heptachlor epoxide and polychlorinated
biphenyls
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
lead milk, canned/fresh meat, kidney,
cereals*, canned/fresh fruit,
fruit juice, spices, infant
food, canned beverages, wine,
drinking water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
cadmium kidney, molluscs, crustaceans,
cereals*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury fish
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
aflatoxins milk, maize, groundnuts, other
nuts, dried figs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
diazinon, fenitrothion, malathion, cereals*, vegetables, drinking
parathion, methyl parathion, methyl water
pirimiphos
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Or other staple foods
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERMEDIATE LIST
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contaminant Food
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
aldrin, dieldrin, DDT (p,p'- and o,p'-), whole milk, dried milk, butter,
TDE (p,p'-), TDE (p,p'-), DDE (p,p'-) eggs, animal fats and oils,
endosulfan (alpha and beta), endosulfan fish, cereals*, vegetable fats
sulfate, endrin, hexachlorocyclohexane and oils,human milk, total diet,
(alpha and beta and gamma), drinking water
hexachlorobenzene, heptachlor, heptachlor
epoxide and polychlorinated biphenyls
(congeners No. 28, 52, 101, 118, 138,
153 and 180)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
lead milk, canned/fresh meat, kidney,
fish, molluscs, crustaceans,
cereals*, pulses, legumes,
canned/fresh fruit, fruit juice,
spices, infant food, canned
beverages, wine, total diet,
drinking water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
cadmium kidney, molluscs, crustaceans,
cereals* flour, vegetables,
total diet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury fish, fish products, total diet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
aflatoxins milk, milk products, maize,
cereals*, groundnuts, other
nuts, spices, dried figs, total
diet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
diazinon, fenitrothion, malathion, cereals*, vegetables, fruit,
parathion, methyl parathion, methyl total diet, drinking water
pirimiphos, chlorpyrifos
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
radionuclides (Cs-137, Sr-90, I-131, cereals*, vegetables, milk,
Pu-239) drinking water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
nitrate/nitrite vegetables, drink water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Or other staple foods
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPREHENSIVE LIST
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contaminant Food
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
aldrin, dieldrin, DDT (p,p'- and o,p'-), whole milk, dried milk, butter,
TDE (p,p'-), TDE (p,p'-), DDE (p,p'-) eggs, animal fats and oils, fish,
endosulfan (alpha and beta), endosulfan cereals*, vegetable fats and
sulfate, endrin, hexachlorocyclohexane oils, human milk, total diet,
(alpha and beta and gamma), drinking water
hexachlorobenzene, heptachlor, heptachlor
epoxide and polychlorinated biphenyls
(congeners No. 28, 52, 101, 118, 138,
153 and 180), dioxins (PCDDs and PCDFs)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
lead milk, canned/fresh meat, kidney,
fish, molluscs, crustaceans,
cereals*, pulses, legumes,
canned/fresh fruit, fruit juice,
spices, infant food, total diet,
drinking water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
cadmium kidney, molluscs, crustaceans,
cereals*, vegetables, total diet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury fish, fish products, mushrooms,
total diet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
aflatoxins milk, milk products, eggs,
maize, cereals*, groundnuts,
other nuts, spices, dried figs,
total diet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ochratoxin A wheat, cereals, meat (pork)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
patulin apples, apple juice, other pome
fruit and juice
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
fumonisins maize
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
diazinon, fenitrothion, malathion, cereals*, vegetables, fruit,total
parathion, methyl parathion, methyl diet, drinking water
pirimiphos, chlorpyrifos
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
dithiocarbamates cereals*, vegetables, fruit,
total diet, drinking water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
radionuclides (Cs-137, Sr-90, I-131, cereals*, vegetables, milk,
Pu-239) drinking water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
nitrate/nitrite vegetables, drinking water
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Or other staple foods
NATIONAL HEALTH EXPENDITURE DEVOTED TO LOCAL HEALTH CARE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: National health expenditure devoted to local health care.
(b) Brief Definition: Proportion of national health expenditure devoted to
local primary health care. This is the first-level contact and includes
community health care, health centre care, dispensary care, etc., but excludes
hospital care.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: Response.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures the proportion of resources devoted to
primary health care.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Everybody now
agrees that significant health progress worldwide can only be achieved through
universal access to primary health care, that is essential health care made
accessible to all at an affordable cost. The proportion of the national
health expenditure devoted to local health care is an indicator of the effort
made by a society to finance essential and easily accessible health care.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is closely linked to
other health care indicators, such as total national healthcare as a percent
of Gross National Product, immunization against infectious childhood diseases,
and infant and maternal mortality rates.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Local Health Care: first-level
contact, including community health care, health centre care, dispensary care
and the like, excluding hospital care. National health expenditure includes:
Public: current and capital expenditure of ministries of health and other
ministries with responsibilities in the health sector, and social security
expenditure, including external aid for the health sector; Private: out-of-
pocket health expenditure, patient co-payments, private health insurance
premiums, and health expenditures by non-government organizations (NGOs).
(b) Measurement Methods: Numerator: national health expenditure on local
health care; Denominator: total national health expenditure.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In reflecting the proportion of
total health care expenditures devoted to local health care, this is a
Response indicator in the DSR Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The definition does not take into
account primary health care activities which are delivered in hospitals, nor
the cost of central and regional activities needed to support and guide local
health care. Furthermore, each country will have to define what is "local
health care" with respect to its own health system.
The indicator says nothing about the quality or efficiency of health actions
and services. Household surveys are required to generate the information
needed for this indicator which may pose a significant burden for some
countries.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: A large amount of financial
data are needed from a wide variety of sources, as can be seen from the
definition.
(b) Data Availability: Data on out-of-pocket health expenditures requires
a household survey. All other data should usually be available from
responsible institutions at the national level (public or private).
(c) Data Sources: The primary sources of data are national ministries of
health, finance, and regional development; and NGOs.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the World Health Organization (WHO). The contact point is
the Director, Office of Global and Integrated Environmental Health, WHO; fax
no. (41 22) 791 4123.
7. Further Information
WHO. Development of Indicators for Monitoring Progress Towards Health for All
by the Year 2000. Geneva, 1981.
WHO. Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000. Geneva, 1981.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
TOTAL NATIONAL HEALTH EXPENDITURE RELATED TO
GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Total national health expenditure related to gross national
product (GNP).
(b) Brief Definition: This indicator is defined as the share of GNP
devoted to health expenditure. It includes public and private expenditure.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 6: Protecting and Promoting Human Health.
(b) Type of Indicator: Response.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The purpose of the indicator is to measure the proportion of
national resources devoted to health.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Health and
sustainable development are intimately interconnected. This measure provides
a first indication of the priorities granted to health as compared to other
sectors within the same country. It allows comparisons of the priority given
to health between countries.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Health expenditures is closely linked to
other indicators measuring the fiscal support for the provision of basic
needs, such as GDP spent on education.
(d) Targets: The Global Strategy for Health for All by the Year 2000
states that at least 5% of the Gross National Product should be spent on
health (see section 7 below).
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The definitions for national
health expenditure are well established and include:
i) Public: The current and capital expenditure of the Ministry of Health
and other ministries with responsibilities in the health sector; and social
security expenditure. It also includes external aid for the health sector.
ii) Private: This definition covers out-of-pocket health expenditure,
patient co-payments, private health insurance premiums, and health
expenditures by non-government organisations.
iii) Gross National Product: GNP consists of the Gross Domestic
Product (the total output of goods and services for final use produced by
residents) plus net factor income from abroad. This second aspect is the
income citizens receive from abroad for factor services, less similar payments
made to foreigners who contribute to the domestic economy.
(b) Measurement Methods: The numerator is the sum of public and private
expenditures on health, while the denominator is the GNP, both measured on a
national basis.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator deals with the
share of GNP devoted to national health. It provides a summary Response
indicator within the DSR Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The cost of health care, the efficiency
of the health care systems, and the quality of the services provided affect
the level of health expenditure. It is sometimes difficult to identify all
elements of public and private health expenditure, for example military and
traditional expenditures. The assessment of out-of-pocket expenditure
requires a household survey which may prove to be a burden for some countries.
Difficulties could arise with respect to estimating private health
expenditure. If estimated via extrapolation of data from small-scale
household surveys, mention should be made of the survey scope.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Public current and capital health
expenditure (including external aid), together with private health expenditure
and GNP.
(b) Data Availability: Most are normally available from the ministries of
health, finance and/or planning, and any other ministry engaged in health
expenditures. Data may not be readily available for private health
expenditure.
(c) Data Sources: Primary sources of data are the budget of the ministry of
health and the national budget.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency is the World Health Organisation (WHO),
with the contact point as the Director, Office of Global and Integrated
Environmental Health, WHO; fax no. (41 22 791 4123).
(b) Other Organizations: The World Bank and the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development contributed to the development of this indicator.
7. Further Information
WHO. Global Strategy for Health for all by the Year 2000. Geneva, WHO, 1981.
LEAD AGENCY: WHO
RATE OF GROWTH OF URBAN POPULATION
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Rate of growth of urban population.
(b) Brief Definition: The average annual rate of change of population
living in defined urban areas during a specified period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Usually expressed as a percentage.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement
Development.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures how fast the size of urban population
is changing. It aggregates impacts of natural increase in urban population,
net rural-to-urban migration, and increased land area with urban
characteristics.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Urban areas
promise economic efficiency and potential for development deriving from
concentration of population, business and industries. However, when needs of
a rapidly growing population in urban areas go beyond governments' ability to
meet them, sustainability of urban development can be threatened. Needs of a
growing population range from food, housing, land, employment, and education
to environmental infrastructure including water supply, sanitation, and waste
collection services. Demands for more and better urban services present one
of the major challenges for local and national governments. The usefulness
of this indicator is increased if growth rates are available for selected
urban size categories.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other socioeconomic variables, including percentage of population in urban
areas, growth in school age population, and overall population growth. It is
also linked to many environmental indicators, such as land use change, water
withdrawals, and generation of municipal waste.
(d) Targets: International agreements have not established specific
national or global targets for this indicator.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not applicable, see section
3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
The urban growth rate for a country is generally based on an intercensal urban
growth rate calculated from two censuses, each adjusted for incompleteness.
The demarcation of urban areas is usually defined by countries as part of
census procedures, and is usually based on the size of localities,
classification of areas as administrative centres, or classification of areas
according to special criteria such as population density or type of economic
activity of residents. Data on urban population are characterized by the same
limitations as total population, for example, under-enumeration of population
in censuses (which may differ between urban and rural areas).
There is no internationally agreed definition of urban areas, and national
definitions vary from country to country. Consistency in the breakdown of
what constitutes urban and rural areas is problematic. With growth, the
boundaries of urban areas change over time.
The Population Division of the United Nations Department of Economics and
Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) evaluates, and adjusts
whenever necessary, urban and rural data for under-enumeration and
inconsistencies, as part of its biennial revision of the United Nations urban
and rural population estimates and projections.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
As indicated above, the rate of growth of urban population for a country is
generally calculated from data on urban population from two censuses. The
Statistical Division, DESIPA recommends that countries take censuses every 10
years, and these data can be used to calculate an intercensal population
growth rate. In recent decades most countries have carried out censuses: 204
countries or areas carried out a census during the 1990 census decade (1985
to 1994). Data is also available from special country questionnaires sent to
national statistical offices from the Statistical Division, DESIPA. Such
census data also provide the basis for examining urban growth rates for sub-
national areas. For all countries, urban data are evaluated and, if
necessary, adjusted for incompleteness by the Population Division, DESIPA as
part of its preparation of the official United Nations urban and rural
population estimates and projections. Past, current and projected urban
growth rates are prepared for all countries by the Population Division, DESIPA
and appear in the United Nations publication, World Urbanization Prospects:
The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147.
7. Further Information
DESIPA. World Urbanization Prospects: The 1994 Revision. Population
Division. United Nations publication, Sales No. E.95.XIII.12. New York, 1995.
DESIPA. 1993 Demographic Yearbook. Statistical Division. United Nations
publication, Sales No. E/F.95.XIII.1. 1995.
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL FUEL BY MOTOR VEHICLE TRANSPORT
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Per capita consumption of fossil fuel by motor vehicle
transport.
(b) Brief Definition: Defined as the annual number of litres per person of
fossil fuel consumed by motor vehicle transport in urban areas.
(c) Measurement Unit: Litres.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter: 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement
Development.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures surface transport consumption of
fossil fuels within urban areas.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Reduced consumption
of non-renewable fossil fuels, and, indirectly, reduced use of motor vehicles,
is a prerequisite for sustainable human settlements development, since it
affects the whole ecosystem on a substantial scale. This indicator is
particularly relevant to decision making for urban areas.
As motor vehicles are the main users of transport fuel, the indicator is
highly correlated with motor vehicle usage, which in turn measures indirectly
the pressure on the environment through use of resources, energy consumption,
air pollutant emission (particularly ozone, particulate matter, carbon
monoxide and nitrogen oxide), noise pollution. The indicator also provides
indirect information about urban congestion and contamination of land and
water. Fuel consumption is highly dependent on urban land use pattern,
particularly density, and the fuel efficiency of the vehicle fleet. Increasing
fuel consumption may be the consequence of suburbanization of the work force,
increasing income and car ownership, and reduction of passenger numbers per
vehicle. Fuel consumption is a good indicator of automobile dependence and,
for certain countries, of import oil dependence.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has many linkages to other
socioeconomic and environmental indicators, especially those related to
consumption, human settlements, and protection of the atmosphere. There are
direct links, for example, to the emission of sulphur oxides (SOx) and
nitrogen oxides (NOx), reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases, energy
use, and land use change. In consequence, there are implications for ambient
concentration of pollutants in urban areas, human health, ozone depletion, and
expenditure on air pollution abatement.
(d) Targets: No international targets have been established. Some countries
have fuel consumption targets for the automobile vehicle fleet.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not applicable, see section
3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Transport fuel should include
fossil fuel such as petrol (gasoline), diesel, liquefied petroleum gas,
gasohol, but should exclude aviation fuel.
(b) Measurement Methods: Fuel consumption is always available at the
national level, but it is more difficult to calculate for the city, as much
fuel purchased in the city may be used for intercity hauling. Fuel purchased
within the city forms part of the city product, so one approach is to count
all fuel purchased within the city. On the other hand, if the emphasis is on
resource usage within the city, then only intra urban trips should be counted,
and it may be preferable to multiply the size of the vehicle fleet of personal
and commercial vehicles by estimated average fuel consumption.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Transport fuel consumption, as an
indicator of automobile dependence (and oil dependence in some countries),
measures the consumption of non-renewable resources and the negative pressure
and impact of motor vehicle transport on the environment in human settlements.
As such, it is a Driving Force indicator within the DSR Framework. It is
interlinked with many State and Response indicators (see section 3c above).
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: It is conceptually difficult to separate
motor vehicle fuel use for urban areas from non-urban areas (see section 4b
above). Data for the indicator are not as readily available as for countries
as a whole. While the indicator captures most fossil fuel use by motor
vehicles, it does not reflect fuel used to generate electricity for transport,
neither does it include fuel used for other surface forms, such as rail. Fuel
consumption may have various impacts on the environment depending on fuel
type, vehicle emissions, urban density, traffic and the road pattern. These
factors should be considered in the interpretation of the indicator.
(e) Alternative Definitions: In recognition of the difficulties of
measuring and defining the scope of the impact of this indicator, it is
suggested that per capita consumption of fossil fuel on a national basis
represents an alternative indicator. Such an indicator has a broader
relevance for consumption pattern, but does not focus on human settlement
sustainability.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Consumption of petrol
(gasoline), diesel, liquefied petroleum gas, and gasohol, used for transport
purposes. Urban population.
(b) Data Availability: Fuel consumption is always available at the national
level, usually from the ministry responsible for transportation, but it is
more difficult to calculate for urban areas (see section 4b above). Data for
this indicator are collected by the United Nations Centre for Human
Settlements (UNCHS or Habitat) at the city level, as an extensive indicator.
They are collected by the following international organizations at the
national level: The Statistical Division, the United Nations Department of
Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) publishes this
indicator in its Energy Statistics Yearbook. The International Roads
Federation collects and publishes appropriate data, except for alternative
fuels such as gasohol, in its World Road Statistics biennial compendium. The
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) publishes a
biennial Environmental Data Compendium which includes total final energy
consumption by transport sector by mode.
(c) Data Sources: See section 5b above.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency is the United Nations Centre for Human
Settlements (Habitat). The contact point is the Director, Programme
Coordination, Habitat; fax no. (254 2) 624 266.
(b) Other Organizations: The International Road Federation and the
Statistical Division of DESIPA have assisted with the development of this
indicator.
7. Further Information
OECD. Transport and the Environment. OECD, Paris, 1988.
OECD. OECD Environmental Data: Compendium 1995. OECD, Paris, 1995.
Newman, Peter W.G. and Jeffrey R.K. Kenworthy. Cities and Automobile
Dependence: a Sourcebook. Gower, England, 1991.
UNCHS (Habitat). Monitoring the City. Urban Indicators Review. UNCHS, Nairobi,
1995.
DESIPA. Energy Statistics Yearbooks.
International Roads Federation. World Road Statistics.
LEAD AGENCY: UNCHS
HUMAN AND ECONOMIC LOSS DUE TO NATURAL DISASTERS
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a)Name: Human and economic loss due to natural disasters.
(b)Brief Definition: The number of persons dead and missing as a direct result
of a natural disaster; and the amount of economic and infrastructure losses
incurred as a direct result of the natural disaster.
(c) Measurement Unit: Number of bodies or persons; $US.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement
Development.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: To provide estimates of the human impact and the economic
impact of disasters and emergencies over time and across administrative units
in order to measure the trends in population vulnerability. The indicators can
be used by decision makers at all levels to determine whether their country
or province is getting progressively more or less prone to the effects of
disasters.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Natural disasters
cause loss of life, disruption of economic activities and urban productivity,
particularly for highly susceptible low-income groups; and environmental
damage, such as loss of fertile agricultural land, and water contamination.
It can result in major re-settlement of populations.
While the number of disaster events may not be increasing, the growing
vulnerability of populations (population pressures on land, increasing
urbanisation and risky land-use, marginalisation of populations, civil unrest,
etc.) imply that the impacts are becoming greater. At the same time,
decreasing national and donor budgets reflect the need for better planning,
preparedness, and coordination.
The value of this indicator is a function of the different factors that define
the risk of death and damage, that is the frequency of events, the size of the
population and capital in the affected area, and the capacity of the local
population and government to prevent disasters or to respond. This indicator
lends itself for use in an assessment that takes into account the changes in
each of these components.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The immediate and longer term
implications of this indicator are linked to a number of other socioeconomic,
environmental, and institutional measures, such as population density, access
to safe drinking water, population in informal and formal urban areas,
development assistance, land use, and access to information.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions or Agreements: The General Assembly of the
United Nations has proclaimed the 1990s as the International Decade for
Natural Disaster Reduction.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The definitions and concepts for
this indicator are not well established with common acceptance. However, for
the purpose of this indicator, the following definition of natural disaster
used by the Global Disaster Database is suggested: a disaster is a situation
or event which overwhelms local capacity, necessitating a request to the
national or international level for external assistance, or is recognised as
such by a multilateral agency or by at least two sources, such as national,
regional, or international assistance groups and the media.
All disasters can be identified by several common elements, such as affected
country, human and economic impact, etc. Catastrophic phenomena that affect
more than one country are regarded as a combination of specific disasters
occurring in each affected country and are therefore to be recorded separately
for each affected country. For a long-term disaster spanning over a duration
of time, some of the relevant data (for example, contributions, affected
population) will have to be recorded per year while other characteristics (for
example., disaster type, damage) are unique to the disaster and can be stored
in one record. In the case of concurrent disasters in the same country or
area, events or situations can be linked together, if there is a causal
relationship, or identified separately if they require appeals for assistance.
For example, cyclonic storms that generate floods can be considered as being
part of the same emergency situation, while epidemics occurring several months
after a volcanic eruption have to be considered as separate events.
(b) Measurement Methods: The measurement methods proposed are based on the
criteria used by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disaster
(CRED). The data elements included here have been selected and modified
according to the requirements of the sustainable development indicator
methodology sheets. Overall, these data should be collected and validated at
the country level by a public authority using these standard criteria and
methods. Each element is presented first in a concise description, followed
by comments and the proposed recording procedure.
i) Onset Date: This establishes the date when the disaster situation
occurred. This date is well defined for all sudden-impact disasters. For
disaster situations which develop gradually overtime (for example, drought)
scientific (meteorology and seismology institutes) and governmental (civil
defence authorities) sources.
ii) Declaration Date: The date when the first call for external assistance
concerning the disaster is issued. This call for external assistance mentioned
here is defined according to the definition of a disaster situation stated
above. This date is available for all disaster situations to be included for
the indicator. Only the date of the first appeal for external assistance is
recorded.
iii) Disaster Type: This describes the disaster according to a pre-
defined classification scheme. Disaster types should include all types of
natural disasters, for example, earthquakes, cyclones, floods, volcanic
eruptions, drought, and storms. Disasters may be further described as sudden
onset, such as earthquakes and floods, and long-term, such as drought. Two or
more disasters may be related, or other disaster types may occur as a
consequence of a primary event. For example, a cyclone may generate a flood
or landslide; or an earthquake may cause a gas line to rupture.
iv) Country: This defines the country in which the disaster occurred.
Every disaster record will be by country. Autonomous regions, not yet
recognised as countries, will not be used. The same disaster may affect more
than one country, and here separate records are maintained.
v) Dead: This includes persons confirmed dead and persons missing and
presumed dead. Official figures are used whenever available. The figure is
updated as missing persons are confirmed to be dead.
vi) Estimated Amount of Damage: This represents the value of all damages
and economic losses directly related to the occurrence of the given disaster.
The economic impact of a disaster usually consists of direct (for example,
damage to infrastructure, crops, housing) and indirect (for example, loss of
revenues, unemployment, market destabilisation) consequences on the local
economy. Although several institutions have developed methodologies to
quantify these losses in their specific domain, no standard procedure to
determine a global figure for the economic impact exists. Three different
figures are recorded from sources which have a well-defined methodology for
the assessment of economic impacts, including the World Bank and other
international lending agencies; the host government; and, especially in the
case of complex emergency situations, the total budget requirements listed in
the consolidated appeals launched by UN agencies and other major non-
government organizations.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Natural disasters can have
devastating short and long term impacts on local and national life adversely
affecting progress towards sustainable development. They represent a Driving
Force indicator in the DSR Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The validity of these indicators are
limited to the quality and the standardised reporting of the data used for its
calculation. Use of data from insurance firms for example will introduce
serious bias in the data and therefore in its interpretation. Comparability
over time represents a particular problem for this indicator.
(e) Alternative Definitions: If the indicator has to reflect changing
risk, the measurement should be loses per unit of time per capita. This is
not possible without further development of the indicator methodology.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
Internationally, the data are maintained by the Centre for Research on the
Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) in Brussels. The Centre serves as a
reference source for most applications. CRED compiles and validates data from
diverse sources, including the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID),
United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs (UNDHA), Munich Re, Suisse
Re, Lloyds of England, and Royale Belge, the World Bank, World Health
Organization, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the International
Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the International
Committee of the Red Cross. National agencies and vary from country to
country, but generally includes civil defence organizations, ministries of
interior and agriculture, etc.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency is the United Nations Department of
Humanitarian Affairs (UNDHA). The contact point is the Director, Secretariat
for the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR); fax no.
(41 22) 733 8695.
(b) Other Organisations: Other contributing organizations include the
Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, Faculty of Medicine,
University of Louvain, Brussels. The following organizations were consulted
over the development of this indicator methodology sheet: World Food
Programme, United Nations Environment Programme, Pan American Health
Organization, International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies, and US Agency for International Development.
7. Further information
CRED. Profiles in the World: Summary of Disaster Statistics by Continent. CRED
Statistical Bulletin, May 1994.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Centre for
Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. World Disasters Reports for 1993,
1994, and 1995. Martinus Neijhoof Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands. 1993,
1994, and 1995.
Sapir, D.G. Natural and Man-made Disasters: the Vulnerability of Women-headed
Households and Children without Families. World Health Statistical Quarterly;
46: 227-233, 1993.
CRED. Proposed Principles and Guidelines for the Collection and Dissemination
of Disaster Related Data. Report on the IERRIS Workshop, 7-9 September 1992.
Sapir, D.G. & Sato, T. The Human Impact of Floods: Common Issues for
Preparedness and Prevention in Selected Asia-Pacific Countries. Paper
presented at the Second Asian Pacific Conference on Disaster Medicine, Chiba,
Japan. 1992.
Sapir, D.G. and Misson, C. The Development of a Database on Disasters.
Disasters; 16(1): 80-86. 1992.
CRED. Statistical Update from CRED Disaster Events Database in: CRED Disasters
in the World. November 1991.
LEAD AGENCY: IDNRD
PERCENT OF POPULATION IN URBAN AREAS
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Percent of population in urban areas.
(b) Brief Definition: The percentage of total population of a country or
area living in places defined as urban.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement
Development.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator is the most commonly used index of the degree
of urbanization. Although national definitions of "urban" vary (see section
4 below), there is sufficient uniformity to permit meaningful comparisons
between countries and over time. It is often useful to further classify urban
areas by size, since the benefits and problems of cities vary, in part, with
their size.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Agenda 21 calls
for a balance between urban and rural development patterns. In addition,
urbanization is recognized as an intrinsic dimension of economic and social
development by the Programme of Action of the International Conference on
Population and Development (ICPD). Urban areas have distinctive
characteristics reflecting the social fabric and density of their population,
and the nature and scale of economic activities. Urbanization has profound
social and economic implications that extend beyond the urban boundaries.
Although many urban areas have environmental and developmental problems such
as housing shortages, traffic congestion, air and water pollution, and waste,
Agenda 21 also notes urban societies' potential for sustainable development
if properly managed.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other demographic indicators, particularly the rate of growth of urban
population. Since it does not reflect differences in city size, the indicator
of the number of mega-cities adds useful information. Urbanization is also
linked to economic indicators such as manufacturing value added in GDP. Some
of the environmental indicators of solid waste, sewage and pollution are of
particular relevance to urban settings.
(d) Targets: International agreements have not established specific
national or global targets for this indicator.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not applicable (see section
3d above).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
By definition, this indicator is calculated as the population of urban areas
divided by total population of a country or area, expressed as a percentage.
The demarcation of urban areas is usually defined by countries as part of
census procedures, and is usually based on the size of localities,
classification of areas as administrative centres, or classification of areas
according to special criteria such as population density or type of economic
activity of residents. Data on urban population are characterized by the same
limitations as total population, for example, under-enumeration of population
in censuses (which may differ between urban and rural areas). The Population
Division of the United Nations Department of Economics and Social Information
and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) evaluates, and adjusts whenever necessary, urban
and rural data for under-enumeration and inconsistencies, as part of its
biennial revision of the United Nations urban and rural population estimates
and projections.
There is no international agreed definition of urban areas, and national
definitions vary from country to country. Consistency in the breakdown of
what constitutes an urban area is problematic. With growth, the boundaries
of urban areas change over time.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
As indicated above, the percentage urban population can be calculated from
censuses, and such data are available for nearly all countries. Such data are
available from national sources (country publications) as well as from special
country questionnaires sent to national statistical offices from the
Statistical Division, DESIPA. The United Nations recommends that countries
take censuses every 10 years and these data can be used to calculate the
percentage urban. The Population Division, DESIPA prepares the official United
Nations population estimates and projections of percentage urban. Past,
current and projected percentage urban are prepared for all countries by the
Population Division, DESIPA and appear in the United Nations publication,
World Urbanization Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 211) 963 2147.
7. Further Information
DESIPA. World Urbanization Prospects: The 1994 Revision. Population Division.
United Nations Sales No. E.95.XIII.12. New York, 1995.
DESIPA. 1993 Demographic Yearbook. Statistical Division. United Nations Sales
No.E/F.95.XIII.1. 1995.
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
AREA AND POPULATION OF URBAN FORMAL AND INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS
Category: Social
1. Indicator:
(a)Name: Area and population of urban formal and informal settlements.
(b)Brief Definition: Urban residential area in square kilometres occupied by
formal and informal settlements, and the number of their occupants.
(c)Measurement Unit: Area: km2; number of occupants.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement
Development.
(b) Type: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The indicator measures both the sizes of informal urban
settlements and the residential density of both formal and informal
settlements. By focusing on the legality of human settlements, this indicator
measures the marginality of human living conditions.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Settlements
characterized by illegality of tenure and unauthorized shelter are generally
marginal and precarious, and do not cater for basic human needs such as
affordable housing. They affect sustainable human settlements development,
human health, and socioeconomic development.
Illegal dwellers generally live in an unsafe and precarious environment, lack
basic services, suffer from the absence of tenure security, and have no legal
claim in case of eviction. Also, numerous illegal settlements are established
on lands which are predisposed to natural disasters. Informal settlements have
usually a much higher population density than formal settlements and these
living conditions constitute a threat to human health.
(c) Linkages with Other Indicators: This indicator is closely linked with
several other socioeconomic and environmental indicators, such as rate of
growth of urban population, human and economic losses due to natural
disasters, access to adequate sanitation, primary health care, infant
mortality, infrastructure expenditure, and land use.
(d) Targets: No international targets have been established for this
indicator.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not applicable, see
section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Informal settlements refer to:
i) residential areas where a group of housing units has been constructed on
land to which the occupant have no legal claim, or which they occupy
illegally; ii) unplanned settlements and areas where housing is not in
compliance with current planning and building regulations (unauthorized
housing). Formal settlements refer to land zoned residential in city master
plans or occupied by formal housing.
(b) Measurement Methods: Households and population living in informal
settlements are generally measured in censuses. Area of informal settlements
can be evaluated through aerial photography or land use maps. This indicator
should not cover dwelling units which have been regularized, that is those
units for which land titles, leases or occupancy permits have been granted.
It should only include those units which presently occupy land illegally
and/or housing units which are not in compliance with current regulation.
Where feasible, the interpretation and meaning of this indicator would be
supported by the comparison of informal settlement area and population to
total urban area and population.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This is a state indicator,
reflecting the major consequence of unplanned and unsustainable population
growth in human settlements.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The ephemeral nature and lack of an
acceptable operational definition for this indicator, limit its usefulness,
especially for trend analysis. The legal framework for settlements on which
this indicator is based varies from country to country. Informal housing is
not registered in official statistics, any measure of informal settlements
remains limited. Information may be obtained from specific research studies,
but it difficult to obtain and may be of variable quality. Homelessness, which
is one of the extreme symptoms of human settlements inadequacy, is not
accounted for by this indicator and in fact the existence of illegal
settlements may reduce the incidence of homelessness. This indicator does not
cover informal settlements in rural areas.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Many concepts intended to measure
marginality of human settlements have been formulated: unplanned, squatter,
marginal settlements, unconventional, non permanent structures, housing in
compliance, inadequate housing, slums, etc. "Unconventional dwellings" is one
of the most common measures, defined by the number of housing units occupied
by households, but considered inappropriate to human habitation. The type of
building (permanent, semi-permanent, non permanent) which describe the
building structures in which households live is another common measure, but
the criteria widely vary from country to country. Alternatively, attempts
could be made to include informal rural settlements within the indicator
concept. This would be more comprehensive, but detract from its urban focus.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Area and population of informal
settlements.
(b) Data Availability: These data are more likely to be available at the
city level and are generally collected in large cities affected by informal
settlements. Data sets at the national level will only occur sporadically.
(c) Data Sources: Data from research studies, census data, and aerial
photographs.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the United Nation Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat).
The contact point is the Director, Programme Coordination, Habitat; fax no.
(254 2) 624 266.
7. Further Information
World Bank. Housing: Enabling Markets to Work. A World Bank Policy Paper. The
World Bank, Washington D.C., 1993.
UNCHS (Habitat) and The World Bank. The Housing Indicators Programme. Report
of the Executive Director (Volume I). UNCHS, Nairobi, 1993.
UNCHS (Habitat). Monitoring the Shelter Sector. Housing Indicators Review.
UNCHS, Nairobi, 1995.
LEAD AGENCY: HABITAT
FLOOR AREA PER PERSON
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Floor area per person
(b) Brief Definition: Defined as the median usable living space per
person.
(c) Measurement Unit: mę
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement
Development.
(b) Type: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This is a key indicator of housing quality, which measures
the adequacy of living space in dwellings. A low value for the indicator is a
sign of overcrowding.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: This is a key
indicator measuring the adequacy of the basic human need for shelter. Human
settlement conditions in many parts of the world are deteriorating mainly as
a result of a low level of investment, although such investment has been shown
to generate considerable public and private sector investment. Housing
policies, particularly in urban areas, greatly affect the living conditions
of people. In low income settlements, reduced space per person can be
associated with certain categories of health risks.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is closely linked to
several other socioeconomic indicators with which it should be considered,
including population density, rate of growth of urban population, area and
population of informal settlements, and infrastructure expenditure per capita.
(d) Targets: No targets have been developed for this indicator.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: This indicator is one of
ten "key" housing indicators approved by the Commission on Human Settlements
(Resolution 14/13), to be collected in all countries and in a number of cities
in each country, to measure progress towards meeting the objectives of the
Global Shelter Strategy. Countries are to use the indicators to provide the
basis for their country reports to the Second United Nations Conference on
Human Settlements.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The floor area should include
all living space, along with bathrooms, internal corridors and closets.
Covered semi-private spaces such as corridors, inner courtyards or verandas
should be included in the calculation if used by the household for cooking,
eating, sleeping, or other domestic activities. Floor area refers to a housing
unit, defined as a separate and independent place of abode intended for
habitation by one household at the time of the census or other inquiry.
(b) Measurement Methods: The median floor area of a unit should be
divided by the average household size. If data from household surveys or from
a recent census are available, these can be used. In the absence of better
data, the floor area of the median priced dwelling may be used as an
approximation, although this may not be an accurate estimate. If the median
cannot be estimated, then the average should be provided.
(c) The indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator is a measure of
housing quality, an outcome of housing demand and housing supply, determined
by the overall housing policy framework. As such, this indicator is a State
measure in the DSR Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: Results for this indicator may vary
considerably if collected at the city, national, urban/rural levels, given the
variations in land availability and types of human settlements and activities.
Informal settlements in particular are likely to have much less space per
person, as are disadvantaged groups. Various levels of data collection are
necessary to provide a full picture of this specific housing outcome. Housing
size and housing quality are usually but not necessarily linked, and floor
area per person may not give a complete picture of living conditions.
Cultural values affect sensitivity to crowding. For these reasons,
interpretation of this indicator is difficult, and should be completed in
conjunction with related indicators (see section 3c above).
(e) Alternative Definitions: Alternative measures of crowding have been
the subject of data collection and reporting in international statistical
compendia. The two most common are persons per room and households per
dwelling unit, each of which was included among data collected during the
first phase of the Housing Indicators Programme (UNCHS, World Bank, 1992).
Surveys have shown that floor area per person is more precise and
policy-sensitive than the other two indicators. Habitat, the United Nations
Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS) has developed and tested a series of
crowding indicators in low-income settlements. They include, among others,
percentage of housing units with more than one household, in-house living area
per person, percentage of housing units with more than three persons per room,
number of households per building and per housing unit, number of persons per
building.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Median floor area of housing
units; average number of persons per household.
(b) Data Availability: The data are generally available at the country
level. This indicator was collected in 52 countries (one city per country)
by the Shelter Sector Performance Indicators Programme in 1992 (UNCHS, World
Bank). It is being collected worldwide by the UNCHS Indicators Programme in
preparation for the Habitat II Conference. A detailed set of crowding
indicators has been developed and the data collected for Jakarta (Indonesia),
Bissau (Guinea Bissau), and Accra (Ghana).
(c) Data Sources: Primary data sources include censuses or household
surveys. The indicator is reported in the Housing Indicators Programme report
listed in section 7 below.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency is the United Nations Centre for Human
Settlements (Habitat). The contact point is the Director, Programme
Coordination, UNCHS; fax no. (254 2) 624 266.
(b) Other Organizations: The World Bank.
7. Further Information
World Bank. Housing: Enabling Markets to Work. The World Bank, Washington
D.C., 1993 (A World Bank Policy Paper).
UNCHS (Habitat), World Bank. The Housing Indicators Programme. Report of the
Executive Director (Volume I). UNCHS, Nairobi, 1993.
UNCHS (Habitat). Monitoring the Shelter Sector. Housing Indicators Review.
UNCHS, Nairobi, 1995.
UNCHS (Habitat). Human Settlement, Interventions Addressing Crowding and
Health Issues, UNCHS, Nairobi, 1995.
LEAD AGENCY: HABITAT
HOUSE PRICE TO INCOME RATIO
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a)Name: House price to income ratio.
(b)Brief Definition: This indicator is defined as the ratio of the median
free-market price of a dwelling unit and the median annual household income.
(c)Unit of Measurement: Ratio
2. Placement in the Framework
(a)Agenda 21: Chapter 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement Development.
(b)Type of Indicator: State
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a)Purpose: This indicator is a key measure of housing affordability,
providing information on the overall performance of housing markets and
important insights into several housing market dysfunctions, indicative of a
variety of policy failures.
(b)Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: This is a key
indicator measuring human settlements sustainability by determining housing
affordability, and therefore the impact of market forces and housing policies
on the living conditions of people. It is strongly influenced by government
land use policy and is particularly relevant to urban areas.
(c)Linkages to Other Indicators: There are close links between this
indicator and a number of other socioeconomic Driving Force and Response
measures. These would include: infrastructure expenditure per capita, percent
of population in urban areas, increase in urban population, population
density, area and population of informal settlements.
(d)Targets: International agreements have not established specific national
and global goals for this indicator.
(e)International Conventions and Agreements: This indicator is one of ten
"key" housing indicators approved by the Commission on Human Settlements
(Resolution 14/13), to be collected in all countries and in a number of cities
in each country, to measure progress towards meeting the objectives of the
Global Shelter Strategy. Countries are to use the indicators to provide the
basis for their country reports for the Second United Nations Conference on
Human Settlements (Habitat II).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a)Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Two intermediate measures are
required: median house price and median annual household income.
i)Median household income: Household income is defined as gross income from
all sources, including wages, salaries, incomes from businesses or informal
sector activities, investment income, and, where information is available,
income in kind such as consumption of agricultural product which might have
been sold.
ii)Median house price: The median-priced house is that house which has 50%
of the houses priced below it, and 50% of the houses priced above it. Housing
value is defined as the price at which a house would be sold if placed on the
market for a reasonable length of time by a seller who is not under pressure
to sell.
(b)Measurement Methods: The following methods for calculating household
incomes and the median price house are suggested.
Many countries may have recent household surveys containing information on
median household incomes or expenditures which can be used directly.
Expenditures data rather than incomes data may be used to estimate incomes if
these data are more readily available. In fact, for lower income earners or
where incomes are routinely concealed, expenditures may be a better measure
of income than reported incomes. Mean household incomes, although less
preferable, are often easier to obtain as a recent estimate (for example, by
dividing household income or household expenditure in the National Accounts
by the number of households).
If a survey is available, which has mean and median incomes, but which is too
old to yield good estimates of household income, the ratio of median to mean
incomes may still be used to obtain a new median, because the distribution of
incomes does not change as rapidly as incomes themselves.
The calculation of the price of the median-priced house should, include all
housing, both new and old, and both formal and informal. If, for example, the
majority of the housing stock is informal, and the informal housing stock is
generally cheaper than the formal housing stock, then the median priced house
will probably be an informal unit. For blocks of apartments or
multiple-family dwellings which are usually sold as a single building, the
value of one dwelling unit should be estimated as a pro rata share of the
total sale price. This is particularly relevant for countries in Africa where
the majority of housing is of this type.
The following methods are available for estimating the median price.
i)Method 1: Where the informal sector is small and data is reliable, median
house price can be determined directly from published (formal) sales figures
or from recent surveys.
ii)Method 2: If recent average prices are available, they can be converted
to median price by using a median/mean ratio from an older household survey.
In much of the research done on housing markets in developing countries, it
has been found that median prices are generally about 70% of the average. This
figure is higher when housing is more equally distributed and lower when
housing is more unequally distributed.
iii)Method 3: If no direct data are available, then prices need to be
estimated for each sub-market. Estimate the percentage of all housing units
and price range per unit. The median should then be estimated, using a graph,
representing the different sub-markets. In some cases, the price ranges of
several different kinds of dwellings may overlap around the median, so that
the median dwelling could be of either type.
(c)The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator is a measure of housing
affordability, result of housing demand and housing supply, determined by the
overall housing policy framework. As such, this indicator represents a State
measure in the DSR Framework.
(d)Limitations of the Indicator: Results for this indicator may vary
considerably if collected at the city, national, urban/rural levels, given the
variations in land availability and type of human settlements and activities.
Although median house price is more indicative of general housing
affordability than mean price, some population subgroups may find housing much
less affordable than the median. Also, although rents generally reflect house
prices, rents may be much more or less affordable than this indicator would
show, depending on rental market regulation and the availability of rental
housing. Various levels of data collection are necessary to provide a full
picture of housing affordability. In some countries such as China, no formal
housing market exists and a meaningful value for the indicator is difficult
to estimate.
The influence of the financial markets are not reflected by this indicator.
It is a measure of what the market will pay, rather than a measure of the cost
to build housing.
(e)Alternative Indicator Definitions: Another key and complementary measure
of housing affordability is the rent-to-income ratio, defined as the ratio of
the median annual rent of a dwelling unit and the median household income of
renters. It may be very relevant in some countries and cities where rental
housing is a common tenure type.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a)Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Median household income;
median-priced house.
(b)Data Availability: Reliable data are generally available for many
countries. Median household income can be extracted from household surveys and
the median-priced house estimated based on market research. Such estimates
from respondents correspond closely to actual market values. This indicator
has been collected in 53 countries (one city per country) by the Shelter
Sector Performance Indicators Programme in 1992 (UNCHS, World Bank). It is
being collected worldwide by the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements
(UNCHS) Indicators Programme in preparation for the Habitat II Conference.
(c)Data Sources: Primary data sources exist at the individual urban area.
This indicator is reported in the Housing Indicators Programme report listed
in section 7 below.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a)Lead Agency: The lead agency is the United Nations Centre for Human
Settlements (Habitat). The contact point is the Director, Programme
Coordination, UNCHS; fax no. (254 2) 624 266.
(b)Other Organizations: The World Bank
7. Further Information
World Bank. Housing: Enabling Markets to Work. A World Bank Policy Paper.
Washington D.C., 1993.
UNCHS (Habitat), World Bank. The Housing Indicators Programme. Report of the
Executive Director (Volume I). UNCHS, Nairobi, 1993.
UNCHS (Habitat). Monitoring the Shelter Sector. Housing Indicators Review.
UNCHS, Nairobi, 1995.
LEAD AGENCY: HABITAT
INFRASTRUCTURE EXPENDITURE PER CAPITA
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a)Name: Infrastructure expenditure per capita.
(b)Brief Definition: This indicator is defined as the per capita expenditure
in US dollars by all levels of government, including government-owned
companies and utilities, on urban infrastructure services during the current
year.
(c)Measurement Unit: $US
2. Placement in the Framework
(a)Agenda 21: Chapter 7: Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement Development
(b)Type of Indicator: Response
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a)Purpose: This indicator measures the involvement of the different levels
of the government and the private sector in the provision, improvement and
maintenance of infrastructure. As such, it is a key measure of provision of
basic services, including housing to the population.
(b)Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Infrastructure is a
major indicator for the monitoring of the Global Shelter Strategy to the Year
2000, which calls for a fundamental shift in government's role in housing from
attempting to provide housing directly towards an enabling role, one which
facilitates, energises and supports the activities of the private sector, both
formal and informal. The enabling strategy provides the basis for a
sustainable long term approach to human settlement management.
Total infrastructure expenditure interacts strongly with new land development
and construction, and also with improved access to services by households.
Low levels of infrastructure expenditures result in land supply bottlenecks
and thus in higher prices for land and housing. They also result in
inadequate provision of residential amenities, such as water, sewerage,
drainage, electricity, and transportation facilities all of which can affect
the quality and access to housing.
(c)Linkages to Other Indicators: Infrastructure development energizes the
shelter sector, and improves housing affordability. It is closely linked with
other socioeconomic and environment indicators, especially those associated
with human settlements, including house price-to-income ratio, land use
change, transport fuel consumption, land and area of informal settlements,
access to adequate sanitation, and infant mortality rate.
(d)Targets: International agreements have not established specific national
and global goals for this indicator.
(e)International Conventions and Agreements: This indicator is one of ten
"key" housing indicators approved by the Commission on Human Settlements
(Resolution 14/13), to be collected in all countries and in a number of cities
in each country, to measure progress towards meeting the objectives of the
Global Shelter Strategy. Countries are to use the indicators to provide the
basis for their country reports for the Second United Nations Conference on
Human Settlements (Habitat II).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a)Underlying Definitions and Concepts: Infrastructure includes operations,
maintenance, and capital expenditures on physical infrastructure such as urban
roads, railways, sewerage, drainage, water supply, electricity, and garbage
collection, but not social infrastructure such as health and education
expenditure.
(b)Measurement Methods: Infrastructure expenditures are comprised of three
major components, capital expenditures (construction costs), recurrent
expenditures (operations, maintenance, salaries, etc.), and capital servicing
(debt service and depreciation). If there were unusually high capital
expenditures during the last year for which figures are available, then they
should not be included in the indicator. Only their first year depreciation
should be considered as current year expenditure. Only real outlays or real
transfers should be counted as expenditure. If debts (for example, to the
central government) are not actually paid, or depreciation payments are not
actually transferred to a sinking fund, they should not be counted as
expenditures.
(c)The indicator in the DSR Framework: Infrastructure expenditure is a key
measure of human settlement management, as infrastructure constitutes the main
input for land and shelter development and improvement. It is a major Response
to inadequate land development, and therefore housing production, in order to
meet the increasing demand of populations.
(d)Limitations of the Indicator: The methodology for this indicator requires
more work in, for example, defining the scope of infrastructure to be
included, and in the treatment of interest payments and depreciation. The
interpretation and meaning of this indicator will vary greatly by country and
geographic region.
In many countries, infrastructure expenditure is targeted towards certain
areas of the city and specific groups of the population. Aggregated data for
the city will not show who are the real beneficiaries of infrastructure
expenditure. Also, sectoral expenditures on different categories of
infrastructure may have very different outcomes for sustainability.
(e) Alternative Indicator Definitions: Under the limitations discussed
above, it may be advisable to consider a more basic definition of
infrastructure to include, for example, water supply, sewerage collection and
treatment, roads, communication, and schools. This, however, would increase
the overlap with other existing, more disaggregated indicators, such as water
and sanitation services.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a)Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Three data components are required:
capital expenditures (construction costs), recurrent expenditures (operations,
maintenance, salaries, etc.), capital servicing (debt service and
depreciation).
(b)Data Availability: This indicator has been collected in 44 countries (one
city per country) by the Shelter Sector Performance Indicators Programme in
1992 (UNCHS, World Bank). It is being collected worldwide by the United
Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS) Indicators Programme in
preparation for the Habitat II Conference.
(c)Data Sources: This indicator is obtained from expenditure accounts of local
and central governments, and from major public agencies. International data
is available from the Housing Indicators Programme report listed in section
7 below.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
(a)Lead Agency: The lead agency is the United Nations Centre for Human
Settlements (Habitat). The contact point is the Director, Programme
Coordination, UNCHS; fax no. (254 2) 624 266.
(b)Other Organizations: The World Bank.
7. Further Information
World Bank. Housing: Enabling Markets to Work. A World Bank Policy Paper.
Washington D.C., 1993.
UNCHS (Habitat), World Bank. The Housing Indicators Programme. Report of the
Executive Director (Volume I). UNCHS, Nairobi, 1993.
UNCHS (Habitat). Monitoring the Shelter Sector. Housing Indicators Review.
UNCHS, Nairobi, 1995.
LEAD AGENCY: HABITAT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RRojas Research Unit/1997
