Master’s Thesis, 60 ECTS

Social-ecological Resilience for Sustainable Development

Master’s programme 2015/17, 120 ECTS

Measuring

Sustainable Development Goals

- A Social-Ecological Perspective

Sophie Gripenberg

1
 ABSTRACT

The 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals provide benchmarks for global
sustainable development. However, there may be trade-offs between goals if they are not treated
as interlinked components of a larger system. The achievement of these goals then relies on
countries’ ability to monitor and measure them consistently and interdependently. This study
compares seven measures of development and welfare that goes beyond Gross Domestic
Product in relation to the Sustainable Development Goals. The aim of this study is to clarify
which measures are suitable for monitoring the Sustainable Development Goals. This is done
by assessing measure indicators similarities with the indicators suggested by the United Nations
for each goal. The study utilises a social-ecological framework emphasising the three
dimensions of sustainability: the economy, the society and the biosphere. The result of this
study indicates that measures, such as the Social Progress Index and Sustainable Society Index
are the most suitable for measuring the Sustainable Development Goals. However, none of the
chosen measures exhibit similarities with all the goals. The goals belonging to the society are
most covered, whereas goals belonging to the economy and biosphere being least covered. This
study suggests three possibilities for these results: First, measures that goes beyond Gross
Domestic Product view the progress of human prosperity from the dimension of society.
Secondly, measures are shaped and shape development issues where knowledge and trends lead
to bases of frameworks and indicators used, where certain topics, such as sanitation, is
overrepresented and infrastructure and technology underrepresented. Finally, measures
inclusion of the biosphere is based on human needs and direct interaction with ecosystems and
not the condition of ecosystem per se. This study propose that measures need to be
complemented from a social-ecological system perspective, to be useful for the achievement of
the Sustainable Development Goals.

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

One year ago, I was convinced that I would never write any of my master thesis at all.
Sometimes life does not go as planned and suddenly you are facing challenges you never
thought you would encounter. When you do not have the ability to work or write as you
normally would, because all your effort needs to be placed somewhere else, a master thesis
seems to be not very important. However, with the break I took, and with the love of my
classmates and those I hold dear, I keep on going. I started my project without true aspiration
to finish it. I did it day by day and in environments I enjoyed. I got a wonderful supervisor,
Anne-Sophie Crépin, who was flexible and supportive to my needs. My project gave me back
the motivation, in the very best way I can, to make this world a better place.
The world nations have spoken and we need to find a way to make our common Sustainable
Development Goals come true. In my case my goal, to have a master degree, became my
method to again find life enjoyable.

Special thanks to those of you who have helped me with the language and most thanks to my
wonderful siblings, Marcus Gripenberg, Caroline Gripenberg and Louise Gripenberg, I have
the most honourable and important work in the world as your older sister.

3
 ACRONYMS

EPI Environmental Performance Index

GNHI Gross National Happiness Index
GPI Genuine Progress Index
IWI Inclusive Wealth Index
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
SES Social-Ecological System
SPI Social Progress Index
SSI Sustainable Society Index
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNU-IHDP United Nations University - International Human Dimensions
Programme on Global Environmental Change

4
 TABLE OF CONTENT

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 7
AIM AND OBJECTIVE OF THE THESIS ............................................................................................................. 9

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .......................................................................................................... 10

SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS .................................................................................................................. 10
ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK - THE WEDDING CAKE ......................................................................................... 10

THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS ..................................................................................... 12

METHODS ...................................................................................................................................... 13
SELECTION OF MEASURES ........................................................................................................................ 13
SEARCHING FOR SIMILARITIES BETWEEN SDGS AND MEASURES ...................................................................... 15
Criteria for similarities .................................................................................................................. 15
MEASURES DISTRIBUTION AMONG THE THREE DIMENSIONS OF SUSTAINABILITY ................................................ 16
EXTENT OF COVERAGE ............................................................................................................................ 16
MOTIVATION OF THE APPROACH AND METHOD ........................................................................................... 17
LIMITATIONS AND CONCERNS OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................... 18

RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................ 19
MEASURES SIMILARITIES WITH THE SDGS .................................................................................................. 19
SDGS EXHIBIT MOST SIMILARITIES ............................................................................................................ 20
MEASURES DISTRIBUTION AMONG THE THREE DIMENSIONS OF SUSTAINABILITY ................................................ 22
MEASURES COVERAGE OF THE SDGS ........................................................................................................ 24

DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................................. 27
SUITABLE MEASURES FOR THE SDGS ......................................................................................................... 27
A SYSTEM PERSPECTIVE ........................................................................................................................... 28

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. 30

LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................................................... 31

APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................. 34
A1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE SDGS .............................................................................................. 34
A2 CLASSIFICATION AND CONCEPTUALISATION OF MEASURES ........................................................................ 35
A3 DESCRIPTION OF MEASURES AND LIST OF ITS INDICATORS ......................................................................... 37
Genuine Progress Indicator ........................................................................................................... 37

5
 Inclusive Wealth Index .................................................................................................................. 39
Environmental Performance Index ............................................................................................... 40
Gross National Happiness Index ................................................................................................... 42
Sustainable Society Index ............................................................................................................. 44
Social Progress Index .................................................................................................................... 46
Better Life Index ............................................................................................................................ 48
A4 UNITED NATIONS WEBSITES ABOUT THE SDGS ...................................................................................... 51
A5 EXAMPLES OF MATCHING INDICATORS .................................................................................................. 52
A6 EXAMPLE OF RELATED INDICATORS ...................................................................................................... 52
A7 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SDGS INDICATORS FROM 2016 AND THE REVISITED 2017 ...................................... 53

LITERATURE CITED APPENDICES .................................................................................................... 59

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ 63

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................. 63

A8 FINAL LIST OF PROPOSED SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL INDICATORS ............................. 64

6
 INTRODUCTION

In 2015, the United Nations (UN) adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (see
A1), which places sustainability and resilience at the heart of global development frameworks.
In particular, the Agenda focuses on achieving 17 ambitious Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs) (UNDP 2015).

The main criticism of the adopted goals concerns the possibility of trade-offs if the SDGs are
treated separately and not as inter-linked components of a larger system. Research suggests that
some SDGs may be contradictory, inconsistent or can be poorly synchronized (Pogge and
Sengupta 2015, Allen et al. 2016, Spaiser et al. 2016, International Council for Science 2017).
Action to achieve one goal can hinder the achievement of other goals. For example, lifting
people out of extreme poverty (SDG1) tends to be correlated with immediate health benefits
(SDG3). Investing in fossil fuel power plants could be a low cost and relative rapid way of
improving both of the aforementioned goals but the use of fossil fuels may impinge on SDG13,
incorporating climate change action and adaption (Spaiser et al. 2016).

Another concern is potential contradictions between some of the goals with SDG8, which
involves a target of 7% annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth for least developed
countries (Hedlund-de Witt 2014, Death and Gabay 2015, Hickel 2015, Tkacik 2015, Salleh
2016, Ward et al. 2016). While GDP growth has typically been used as a proxy for welfare
(Tkacik 2015), it tends to correlates with environmental degradation. Environmental changes,
on the other hand, can adversely affect long-term development by being associated with more
frequent and stronger flooding, droughts or rapid sea level changes (Turner 2008, Victor 2010,
Costanza et al. 2015). Another potential issue with GDP growth as a SDG target is that it implies
an increase in production and consumption (Hickel 2015), while current level of these activities
is beyond the planet’s sustainable capacity (Meadows et al. 2005). Leaders of poor countries
face the challenge of achieving the SDG growth target without impairing their ability to achieve
the SDGs related to conservation and restoration of the planet’s ecosystems. Hence, a
framework is required to go beyond the independent objectives of each SDG.
One way to ensure consistent and synchronized monitoring of the SDGs could be to measure
them in a social-ecological system (SES) framework, where humans and nature are seen as an
integrated whole with multiple and complex connections (Folke et al. 2016). This approach
could reconnect people with the biosphere and recognize the interactions and the

7
interdependencies of the goals (Norström et al. 2014). Indeed, the 2030 Agenda itself reflects a
willingness to find alternative ways for measuring development, stating that ‘we are committed
to developing broader measures of progress to complement gross domestic product’ (UN
General Assembly 2015).

There have been few attempts to develop measures for the SDGs. Sachs, Schmidt-Traub and
Durand-Delacre (2016) propose a SDG Index and SDG Dashboard. Their method aggregates
different variables, based on SDG indicators, into a single index (Sachs et al. 2016). Their index
and the dashboard rank countries across the SDGs with the purpose to help countries identify
most urgent priorities. Likewise, Costanza et al (2016) propose an aggregated measure
Sustainable Wellbeing Index as a motivator and guide for change. Their index is based on the
following sustainable wellbeing sub-indices: Net Economic Contribution, Ecosystem Services
Contribution and Community Contribution, and an improvement in Sustainable Wellbeing
Index is best achieved if these three variables improve simultaneously (Costanza et al. 2016).

Aggregators of SDGs have several limitations. One example is their ability to compare between
different forms of capital. While converting different forms of capital to a present monetary
value facilities comparison, it assumes that human capital is exchangeable with natural capital
(UNECE/Eurostat/OECD 2013), hence, ignoring that there are natural limits to natural capital
reduction (Rockström et al. 2009).

Another way would be investigating already suggested measures, such as Genuine Progress
Indicator and Human Development Index, for the achievement of the SDGs. The advantage of
this approach is that it builds on vast stock of existing research and data on development
(Goossens et al. 2007, Stiglitz et al. 2009, Ragnarsdóttir et al. 2014, Schoenaker et al. 2015,
Neri et al. 2017). However, no study encountered explore existent measures possibilities as a
framework to monitor the SDGs from a SES perspective.

8
Aim and objective of the thesis
The aim of this thesis is to assess the usefulness of existing measures for sustainable
development for monitoring the SDGs from a SES perspective. The objective is to identify
suitable measures of the achievement of SDGs that incorporate all three dimensions of
sustainability, the economy, the society and the biosphere, and compare these to the SDGs.
Suitability is further characterized by the following research questions:

• Which of the chosen measures exhibit similarities with the SDGs and how many of the
SDGs do they cover?
• Are those similarities distributed on the economy, the society and the biosphere
dimension according to a SES framework?

9
 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Social-ecological systems
Using the concept of SES helps us understand the interplay between different SDGs and
whether specific measures view ecosystems as fundamental parts of human wellbeing and
societal development (Norström et al. 2014). The ‘social’ component relates to the human
dimension, including the economy, politics, technology and culture. The ‘ecological’
component relates to the thin layer of planet Earth where there is life - the biosphere. This
includes all living beings and their relationships, including humans, and their dynamic
interaction with the atmosphere, water cycles, biogeochemical cycles, and the dynamics of
Earth’s system as a whole (Folke et al. 2016).

Socio-ecological systems emerge of subsystem dynamics that are multileveled (Berkes and
Folke 1998). An important component is the adaptive dynamics and feedback processes
between their components (Cote and Nightingale 2012). Key drivers or changes, such as climate
change, could lead a SES on a new trajectory or rapid transition into qualitatively different
situations and configurations. Such systems also have self-reinforcing mechanisms that prevent
shifts into other trajectories (Walker et al. 2002).

Analytical framework - the wedding cake

There are several analytical frameworks conceptualising SES (Binder et al. 2011). A recent
novel approach reframes the SDGs in the, so-called, wedding cake (Folke et al. 2016). The
framework emphasises the importance of the biosphere for sustainable development by placing
SDGs belonging to the dimension of the economy as a subsystem of the SDGs belonging to the
dimension of society, which is a subsystem of the SDGs belonging to the biosphere (Folke et
al. 2016). The foundation of the biosphere is based on the concept of ‘planetary boundaries’.
There are nine planetary boundaries, which define a safe operating space for humanity, as
precondition for global sustainable development (Rockström et al. 2009). For this study, a
suitable measure has an SES outlook when including goals belonging to each of the three
dimensions. Measure coverage of SDGs belonging to the biosphere are considered important
for the achievement of other SDGs, since the biosphere underpins the future of humanity by its
providing resources (Folke et al. 2016). This analytical framework provides support to answer
research question two.

10
 Figure 1. The wedding cake. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals categorised in relation to the, from the bottom, the biosphere, the
society and the economy. Redrawn from Folke et al. (2016) based on the presentation of Rockström and Dukadev (2014) at the 2016
EAT Forum (http://eatforum.org/event/eat-stockholm-food-forum-2016/#program) (Folke et al. 2016). The logos under the wedding
cake are from Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform of United Nations, communication materials
(http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/news/communications-material/)

11
 THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS

The 17 SDGs include 169 targets, some of these relate to means of implementation. Each SDG
has about 5 to 12 targets (UN General Assembly 2015). To monitor these targets, the Inter-
Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) have
developed an indicator framework, where the 2016 version consists of 241 indicators. The total
amount of indicators are 230 though some are repeated for different goals (see A8) (IAEG-
SDGs 2016) .

Countries are committed to provide a systematic review every year and follow the
implementation of the 2030 Agenda at national and regional levels (United Nations Economic
Council 2016). To foster statistical capacity building and partnership, High-level Group for
Partnership, Coordination and Capacity Building of the 2030 Agenda has been established,
representing 23 national statistical officers. Relevant international stakeholders and
organisations will help to plan for improvement in availability and quality of sectoral data (UN
Statistics Division Statistical Services Branch). Further, a progress report based the proposed
UN indicators will be annually reported built on high-level political forums prepared by
Secretary-General in cooperation with UN systems (United Nations Economic Council 2016).

However, Resolution 70/1 is not a legal binding document. The implementation of politics
aimed at achieving the SDGs is guided by the purpose and principles of the Charter of the UN
with full respect for national law and other international declarations such as the one on Human
Rights (UN General Assembly 2015). The goals are considered as highly negotiated and
compromised with large effort on solidarity and financial support to be able to achieve them.
They form rather universal agreed upon values (Gaffney 2015).

A suitable measure could help countries with accountability by providing a way to demonstrate
progress through relevant quantifiable indicators and with a framed analysis highlighting
challenges and constraints, comparable among countries (Elgin-Cossart and Chandran 2016)

12
 METHODS

Selection of measures
To answer the research questions useful measures were searched for through the web and search
engine of Stockholm University Online Library and Google Scholar. The search words were;
welfare, economic welfare, well-being, social development, measuring welfare, measuring
development, sustainable development, measures for sustainable development, alternative
measures, conceptualise sustainable development, sustainable development indicators,
sustainability indices, index for sustainability, beyond GDP, replacing GDP and measures
beyond GDP. The literature review encountered 26 measures for development. A
conceptualisation of measures (see A2) was done to identify measures suitable for this study.
Three general categories of measures were identified:

• Economic measures – are monetary and comparable to GDP

• Well-being measures – seek to capture social factors
• Environmental measures – seek to capture environmental factors

The purpose was to create a baseline to find suitable measures, where categorisation facilitated
a diversity of measures aim. Nevertheless, measures only related to one dimension of
sustainability, such as the biosphere, were excluded. The measures were selected on the
following criteria’s:

• National applicable – indicators are fit for national scales

• Available information – measures have complete lists of indicators
• Inclusion of the three sustainability dimensions; the economy, the society and the
biosphere.

The methodology of the measures; if it is an aggregated single indices or not, if it measures

stock or flow, or, if it is subjective or objective were not included in the criteria. The SDGs
respective targets and indicators vary in this regard. Seven measures fulfilled the criteria and
were set up for the comparison: Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), Inclusive Wealth Index
(IWI), Environmental Performance Index (EPI), Gross National Happiness Index (GNHI),
Sustainable Society Index (SSI), Social Progress Index (SPI) and Better Life Index (BLI) (see
A3).

13
Table 1. The chosen measures. The column to the left presents the measures (Measures), the middle column how they have
been categorised in this study (Categorisation) and the column to the right explains why the measures were chosen for the
study (Criteria met).

Measures Categorisation Criteria met

Genuine Progress Economic measure GPI complements GDP by including environmental and social
Indicator costs, such as cost of crime and cost of water and air pollution
( Anielski, M. and J. Rowe. 1998).
Inclusive Wealth Economic measure IWI measures a country’s productive base by its human and
Index natural capital. It includes indicators related to society, for
example educational attainment, and the biosphere, in terms
of natural capital like forest resources (UNU-IHDP and UNEP
2014)

Environmental Environmental measure EPI measures the well-being of the environment and its
Performance relationship with human health. The EPI does not cover
Index economic performance to a large extent. It is chosen since it
covers such a wide range of the SDGs (Hsu, et al. 2016)
Gross National Well-being measure GNHI is subjective and includes several aspects covering
Happiness Index social issues and ecology, such as standard of living and
ecological diversity (Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH
Reserach 2015).
Sustainable Well-being measure SSI covers a wide range of social indicators and some related
Society Index to the environment, like biodiversity. It measures
sustainability based on human-, environmental- and economic
well-being (van de Kerk et al. 2014).
Social Progress Well-being measure SPI has several social indicators and some related to the
Index environment with focus on measuring health and wellness
achieved in a society (Stern et al. 2016).
Better Life Index Well-being measure BLI indicators is based on what contributes to quality of life
and material living. Compared to the other selected measures
it includes economic indicators such as income and
employment (OECD Better Life Index 2017).

Information about the chosen measures and their indicators were collected from official
websites of organisations, institutions and universities related to each measure (see A3).
Information about the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs, was collected from official UN websites
(see A4).

14
Searching for similarities between SDGs and measures
To answer research question one, two measures, called matching and relating, has been
produced, along with associated criteria, to assess similarities between SDGs and a given
measure. The measures were then ranked, where measures having more matches and relating’s
with the SDGs, got a higher rank.

A matching occurred when a measure and the SDG used at least one common indicator. Some
variations in units, characteristics and timespan were allowed within the matching. The
technical concepts used within the SDG indicator did not need to have a clear definition. For
example, the SDG indicator 3.1.1 Maternal mortality ratio belonging to target 3.1, By 2030,
reduce the global material mortality ratio to less than 70 per 100,000 live births, matched with
SPI indicator of Maternal mortality rate, since the SPI indicator were useful for the 3.1 target
despite the 3.1.1 indicator measuring ratio and not rate (see A5) (IAEG-SDGs 2016).

When a measure indicator was relating, it related to the target of the SDG. To only compare
indicators, would have been too strict in search for similarities. If measures indicators related
to the target, it is still useful for monitoring the SDG even though variables measured could
differ. For example, the GPI indicator Cost of water pollution and the SDG indicator 6.1.1
Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services, measure different
things, thus both addresses healthy waters. If the measures indicator could be useful for
achieving the target, in this case 6.1. By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe
and affordable drinking water for all, it classified as related. (see A6) (IAEG-SDGs 2016).

Criteria for similarities

Only one indicator from a measure needed to be matched with one SDG indicator, to make that
measure a total match towards the SDG. Similarly, only one indicator from a measure needed
to be related with one target to make that measure related to the overall SDG. Some measures
indicators might relate to more than one target within the same SDG, however the amount of
related within one SDG did not change their ranking. One indicator from a measure could also
relate to more than one SDG. In this case, a relating occurred even though the indicator was
used for several SDGs. A measure could also have indicators matching and relating within the
same SDG, in that case matching was ranked first though similar indicators in this study were
considered more suitable for monitoring and measuring the SDGs. Comparing indicators

15
sometimes meant that measures indicators had similarities that did not deliver to the goal. In
that case those indicators were not seen as matchings since they did not fulfil the SDG.

Some SDGs targets are means of implementation making them less comparable with measures
indicators. For this study, these targets and their respective indicators were included. The
reasons for their inclusion was: 1.) They were presented in line with other targets without minor
distinction when communicated by the UN 2.) They contained new areas, maybe not
traditionally seen as development issues. An example would be the indicator 9.c.1 Proportion
of population covered by a mobile network, by technology. Other goals did no cover
accessibility to technology (IAEG-SDGs 2016).

Measures distribution among the three dimensions of sustainability

To answer research question two, the wedding cake framework served to categorise the SDGs,
based on whether they focused on the economy, the society or the biosphere:
• The economy includes SDG 8, 9, 10 and 12.
• The society includes SDG 1, 2, 5, 7, 11 and 16.
• The biosphere includes SDG 6, 13, 14 and 15.

Each measures performance regarding matching and relating was divided between the three
dimensions. The objective was to identify measures that covering all three. These were ranked
higher and seen as more suitable for the achievement of the SDGs. Among these measures, the
measure covering more SDGs within one dimension were ranked higher and in cases where
measures covered all three dimensions and had similar amount of covering goals, the ones
matching compared to related were ranked higher.

Extent of coverage
A summary of measures combined coverage of all SDGs, categorised according to the
economy, the society and the biosphere, was made to identify to what extent measures capture
the SDGs. This summery provides credibility to measures suitability. The purpose is that the
wedding cake framework places eight goals as social and only four goals respectively belonging
to the economy and the biosphere. To assess coverage of all the SDGs, this study first calculates
the percentage of matching indicators within each SDG and secondly it calculates the
percentage of relating within each SDG, by all measures combined. To combine the percentage

16
of coverage from both matching and relating, matching indicators were represented by their
specific target, for example target 8.1 represents indicator 8.1.1. Each target was only calculated
once even if several measures related to it. Even though measures might exhibit high degree of
similarities, the extent of coverage revealed how many of the 169 SDG targets the chosen
measures were covering.

Motivation of the approach and method

Another approach, such as a literature review of expert’s opinion of measuring sustainable
development, could have provided understanding of the complexities when measuring the
SDGs. However, the time-frame of this study and the research gap found when analysing
previous studies, provide this study’s approach some advantages 1.) It can provide incentives
for countries to move beyond GDP, since data and information already exist, making it a cost-
effective and instant way to measure development. 2). Experts opinion and literature reviews
on this issue rely on subjective interpretations, complicating universal national assessments. 3.)
Existing measures needs to be tested and lunched within the global sustainable development
framework, if ever being adapted on a larger scale. Additional, the method to compare
indicators created a tangible comparison with the purpose to easily demonstrate the SDGs
inclusion in measures.

17
Limitations and concerns of the study
The lack of comprehensive lists of indicators was a limitation when choosing and comparing
measures with the SDGs. Some measures were not chosen though information was lacking. In
some cases, the chosen measure was lacking an updated official list of indicators, hence, latest
list where used and sometimes complemented by reports or studies from governmental bodies
or institutions. This motivates for a future update of the study (see A3.)

Another limitation was that some measures had several indicators similar to indicators within
one specific SDG. This study did not to address each specific measure coverage of each SDG.
In other words, some measures might be more suitable for a specific SDG compared to other
SDGs. This study took a holistic approach in search for similarities and therefore lager in-depth
analyses were not possible.

The SDGs indicators, used in this study, have been revisited since the official published list of
indicators were launched in March 2016 (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1) (see A8). The total number of
indicators has only changed from 230 to 232. Most changes refer to language, specification in
characteristics, such as numbers, or referring’s to UN programmes, which the SDG target deals
with. These changes, based on a comparison analysis, did not seem to impact the results of this
study, however revised indicators published by UN could motivate for a future update of this
study (see A7).

18
 RESULTS

Measures similarities with the SDGs

The measure exhibiting most similarities with the SDGs is SPI. It matches 11 out of 17 goals.
EPI, GNHI and SSI, match five goals each. GPI and GNHI relate with most SDGs, 10 goals
each, while SSI and SPI, relate to 9 goals each. When aggregating measures matching and
relating to the SDGs, the most suitable are SPI covering 14 goals, SSI covering 13 goals and
GNHI covering 12 goals. In cases where a measure both matches and relates to one SDG, only
the matching is calculated for (Table 2).
Table 2. Measures matching and relating with the SDGs. The column to the left rank measures matching with SDGs
(Matching), the column in the middle ranks measures relating to the SDGs (Relating) and the column to the right ranks
measures aggregated matching and relating to the SDGs. Note that when a measure being matched and related to the same
SDG, only the match has been calculated for, therefore, the right table is not the sum of measures numbers in the left and
middle column (Matching and Relating).

Matching Relating Matching and relating

Measure Number Measure Number Measur Number

of SDGs of SDGs of SDGs
Social Progress 11 Genuine Progress 10 Social Progress Index 14
Index Indicator
Environmental 5 Gross National 10 Sustainable Society 13
Performance Index Happiness Index Index
Gross National 5 Sustainable Society 9 Gross National 12
Happiness Index Index Happiness Index
Sustainable Society 5 Social Progress Index 9 Genuine Progress 10
Index Indicator
Better Life Index 4 Better Life Index 6 Better Life Index 8

Inclusive Wealth 1 Inclusive Wealth Index 4 Environmental 7

Index Performance Index
Genuine Progress 0 Environmental 3 Inclusive Welfare 5
Index Performance Index Index

19
SDGs exhibit most similarities
The SDG that exhibit the most matches with measures are SDG6 Clean Water and Sanitation
and SDG15 Life on land, with four matches each. Three SDGs, 1 No Poverty, 7 Affordable and
Clean Energy, and 16 Peace Justice and Strong Institutions, exhibit three matching with
measures. SDG4 Quality Education, has five relating measures and one match. SDG10
Reduced Inequalities, relates to five measures, SDG13 Climate Action relates with four and
they exhibit no matches with measures. SDG3, No Hunger and SDG11 Sustainable Cites and
Communities, exhibit three relating’s, with none match each. The SDGs that have the fewest
similarities with the measures are SDG17 Partnership for the goals, only matching with SPI and
relating to SSI, and SDG9 Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, matching SPI and relating
to IWI (Table 3, 4 and 5).

Table 3. A comparison between the SDGs and the measures. The yellow colour represents a relating between the SDG
and the measure, the green colour represents a match and the red colour stands for no match or relating between
the SDG and the measure. Note that some measures being matched, green colour, could also have indicators being
related to the same goal.

SDG GPI IWI EPI GNHI SSI SPI BLI

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

20
Table 4. Ranking table of most matched, related and both matched and related SDGs.

Most matched SDG Most related SDG Most matched and related SDG
6 4 6
15 10 4
1 13 15
7 3 2
16 11 3

Table 5. Ranking table of least matched, related and both matched and related SDGs.

Least matched SDG Least related SDG Least matched and related SDG
10 17 17
12 9 9
13 5 5
17 7 12

21
Measures distribution among the three dimensions of sustainability
SPIs exhibit most similarities with goals belonging to the society, six out of eight possible SDGs
has been matched. Three goals, 6 Clean Water and Sanitation, 14 Life below Water, and 15
Life on Land address the biosphere and only one goal, SDG9, in this case indicator 9.c.1
Proportion of population covered by a mobile network, by technology, concerns the economy.
The goals SPI further relates to share the same representation among the three different
dimensions of sustainability. The related goals are: 10 Reduced Inequalities (economy), 11
Sustainable Cities and Communities (society) and 13 Climate Action (biosphere). The goals
that SPI do not cover are associated with poverty (SDG1), work and economic growth (SDG8)
and responsible consumption and production (SDG12) (Figure 2a).

SSI also share a similar distribution among the three dimensions of sustainability. It matches
society with SDG2 No Hunger and SDG7 Affordable and Clean Energy, economy with SDG8
Decent Work and Economic Growth and biosphere with SDG6 and SDG15. SSI relates to four
more goals in the society, two in the economy and SDG13, Climate Action, in the biosphere
(Figure 2b).

Most measures, GNHI, EPI, BLI and IWI, do not match with goals belonging to all three
dimensions of sustainability, only with one or two of them. EPI and GNHI lack matches with
economic goals (Figure 2c, d) while BLI lacks matches with biosphere goals (Figure 2g). When
similarities are searched for, where measures can match and relate, the exhibit similarities
toward goals are distributed among the three dimensions. GNHI and BLI then addresses all
three dimensions but only one goal in the biosphere being similar (Figure 2c, g), SDG6 Clean
Water and Sanitation, with indicators including quality of water use and safe drinking water.
EPI, has similarities with all the biosphere goals but lacks economic goals (Figure 2d). IWI
relating’s are distributed among the three dimensions even if it is similar to six SDGs (Figure
2f), while GPI ten relating’s are also distributed among the three dimensions (Figure 2e).

22
 a b c

d e f

g
Figure 2. Each measure illustrated in the wedding cake framework. The top of the wedding cake indicates the measure. The
first level is the measure similarity with the economic dimension. The second level is the measure similarity with the society
dimension and the base of the wedding cake is the measure similarity with SDGs belonging to the biosphere. Each piece of the
cake represents a SDG illustrated in the wedding cake framework (see page 11, figure 1). The red colour are SDGs where the
measure has no similarities, the yellow colour are SDGs where the measure is related and the green colour are SDGs where
the measure has a match.

23
Measures coverage of the SDGs
The goals mostly covered belongs to the social dimension of sustainability (Table 6, red rows).
The SDG mostly covered, by 60%, is goal 7 Affordable and Clean Energy (Table 6 and Table
7). Examples of similarities are target 7.1 By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable
reliable and modern energy services and 7.2 By 2030, increase substantially the share of
renewable energy in the global energy mix. Measures similarities with SDG1 No Poverty, cover
57% of its targets. Indicators being matched with EPI, GNHI and BLI are 1.4.1 Proportion of
population living in households with access to basic services and 1.4.2 Proportion of adult
population with secure tenure rights to land (..). Targets 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 are related to GPI and
IWI, dealing with reduced extreme poverty and social protection systems. SDG2, No Hunger,
has half of its targets covered. The goal concern people’s access to sufficient food, sustainable
food production systems and doubling agriculture productivity and farmers. SDG4, Quality
Education, also covered with 50%, consist of indicators such as 4.1, ensure girls and boys
complete free primary and secondary education, and 4.2, ensure girls and boys access to quality
early childhood development (Table 6 and Table 7).

The SDGs that have the highest percentage of their targets matching, are all associated with the
biosphere, except goal 7. These are SDG6 Clean Water and Sanitation, SDG15 Life on Land
and SDG14 Life below Water (Table 5). Most of the measures cover the same indicators for
goal 14 and 15, which deal with marine pollution, marine protected areas, fishery stock and
forest cover. The SDGs belonging to the economy are the ones that have the fewest of their
targets covered. An example is SDG8, covered by 23.52%. The indicators that matched concern
annual growth rate, average hourly earnings and unemployment rate. The least covered SDGs
are goal 17 Partnership for the goals, goal 12 Responsible Consumption and Production and
goal 13 Climate Action (Table 8). The measures that relate to goal 13, EPI, SSI and SPI,
measure greenhouse gas emissions while no indicator in that SDG do so.

When summarising to what extent the measures cover the SDGs, according to the wedding cake
framework, they cover economy by 32.50%, the society by 48.63% and the biosphere by
29.41%.

24
Table 6. Measures combined coverage of SDGs indicators and targets in percentage. Matched indicators, second column
from the left, list indicators for each SDG being matched by measures. Matched indicators in percentage, the third
column form the left, shows the percentage of indicators being match within each SDG. Related targets, second
column from the right, list targets that the measures relate to. Related indicators in percentage, right column, is
the percentage of targets for each SDG that the measures relate to. The background colours represent the different
dimensions of sustainability: yellow for economic goals, red for social goals and green colour for environmental
goals. Goal 17 is neutral and has a white background colour.

Sustainable Matched Matched Related Related Total coverage

Development indicators indicators in targets targets in in percentage
Goals percentage percentage
8 8.1.1, 8.5.2 11.76 8.4, 8.5, 8.10 16.66 23.52

9 9.c.1 8.33 9.2 12.50 25.00

10 10.1, 10.3, 10.7 33.33 30.00

12 12.2, 12.5, 36.36 18.18

12.8, 12.c
1 1.4.1, 1.4.2 16.66 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 42.85 57.00

2 2.1.1, 2.4.1 14.28 2.1, 2.3, 2,4 2.c 50.00 50.00

3 3.1.1, 3.2.1, 19.23 3.3, 3.4, 3.9 23.07 46.15

3.4.2, 3.6.1,
3.9.1
4 4.6.1 09.09 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 40.00 50.00
4.7, 4.b
5 5.2.2, 5.3.1 14.28 5.2, 5.4, 5.c 33.33 44.44

7 7.1.1, 7.2.1 33.33 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 80.00 60.00

7.b
11 11.6.2 6.66 11.1, 11.3, 11.6 30.00 40.00

16 16.1.1, 16.1.3, 17.39 16.1, 16.3, 33.33 41.00

16.1.4, 16.b.1 16.5, 16.7
6 6.1.1, 6.2.1, 27.27 6.1, 6.3 25.00 37.50
6.3.1
13 13.2 20.00 20.00

14 14.4.1, 14.5.1 20.00 14.1, 14.3 22.00 40.00

15 15.1.1, 15.1.2, 21.42 15.1 8.33 16.66

15.4.1
17 17.8.1 4.00 17.4 5.26 10.52

25
Table 7. Ranking table of measures combined coverage of specific SDGs.

SDG most covered when SDG most covered when related SDG most covered by matchings
matched and relating’s
7 7 7
6 2 1
15 1 2
14 4 4

Table 8. Ranking table of measures combined least coverage of specific SDGs.

Least matched SDG Least related SDG Least matched and related SDG
13 17 17
10 15 15
12 9 12
17 13 13

26
 DISCUSSION

Suitable measures for the SDGs

There is no perfect measure for the SDGs: choosing existing alternative ways to measure
sustainable development implies missing some SDGs and their targets. However, the two
measures that exhibit the most similarities with the SDGs and cover the three dimensions of
sustainability are SPI and SSI. They are promising, but both have issues.
In particular, SPI currently does not cover SDGs related to poverty reduction, economic growth,
decent work, and responsible consumption and production. Including these areas requires
assessing whether they relate to Basic Human Needs, Foundations of Well-being or
Opportunity, which form the SPI’s basic framework. This also means that each SDG’s
performance must be embedded within these three dimensions of social progress. Hence, the
measure does not distinguish between indicators’ distribution among the three dimensions of
sustainability, decreasing the transparency reporting of the performance of each dimension. At
the same time, the holistic properties of SPI have the advantage that indicators related to the
economy, the society and the biosphere are all embedded within SPI. This is an advantage
because, for example, neglecting biosphere indicators, for example, would generate a lower
score in one of its bases. Taking a holistic approach to further develop SPI is probably necessary
but increases the risk to use it from a social progress perspective with no focus on the underlying
feedback mechanisms between goals based on a SES framework.
By contrast SSI, omits out goals 14, 11 and 9 (Marine Life, Sustainable Cities and Communities
and Industry, Innovation and Technology, respectively). It might, however, be easier to
complement SSI than SPI, using the wedding cake framework. This thesis suggests it could be
meaningful to complement SSI by applying indicators from goal 14 (a biosphere goal), for
Environmental wellbeing, goal 11 (a society goal) for Human wellbeing, and goal 9 (an
economic goal) for Economic wellbeing. Meanwhile, the three areas of wellbeing are
disaggregated and can be used to measure each of the three dimensions of sustainability
separately but not the inter-connections of the SDGs.

27
A system perspective
The combined coverage of similarities to measures among the three dimension varies. The
SDGs belonging to society have more similarities with measures than other SDGs; biosphere
SDGs have the fewest similarities, while economic SDGs claim the middle ground. There are
some possible explanations for this:

• To select alternative measures implies leaving out economic topics. Measures were
selected as alternatives to GDP with the criteria to cover several SDGs, therefore more
focused on ‘well-being’ and/or ‘human needs’. Measures being alternatives to GDP
seeks to complement economic welfare. As such, the measures might not have an
economic framework, leaving out areas as technology and infrastructure belonging to
SDG9. There are measures not covering general economic areas per se, however several
indicators relate to economic costs. GNHI has five indicators related to target 12.5 and
12.8 and GPI eight indicators related to target 8.4.

• Measures are being shaped and shape development issues where knowledge and trends
lead to bases of frameworks and issues to include. The major focus is societal, in
particular poverty, hunger, education and energy, which are areas being discussed for
decades when it comes to development of societies. This is also obvious from examining
which type of societal targets that the measures are covering. SDG1 No Poverty, for
example, has seven targets, of which four are related to measures. SDG5 is also one of
the goals exhibit least similarities with the measures, however having a half of its targets
covered. This indicates that measures differ regarding the inclusion of specific SDGs,
where these measures having similarities with several topics related to gender equality.
Two of these measures, SPI and SSI, are relatively new. Contrarily, the goals belonging
to the economy are also development issues, however not reflected in measures, for
example goal 12 Consumption and Production. One explanation could be that
consumerism and production respectively recently started to be viewed as cause and
means for long-term sustainable development.

• The SDGs linked to the biosphere, the base for human prosperity, are the least covered
by measures but also the ones having a higher percentage of matches. This could be
explained by measures such as GNHI and IWI almost exhibit no similarities with
biosphere goals. The biosphere goal exhibit most matches, SDG6 Clean Water and

28
 Sanitation and SDG15 Life on Land, in percentage, could be explained by well-known
developed indicators. SDG6 interacts universally and directly with humans and is
therefore considered a necessity for humans, and in some conceptualisations, even
considered being a social goal. Additional, the SDG15 most matched indicator consist
of forest area covered, which is viewed as an important component of economic welfare
by some countries. Further, SDG13 Climate Action, mostly contain policy documents
and adaptation and lack quantitative indicators, as carbon dioxide emissions, a common
indicator among measures, resulting in measures being related instead of matched.
Indeed, measures are mostly focusing on human interaction with ecosystems, while the
condition of the ecosystem per se is neglected.

The three stated findings suggest that human systems are still the major focus when measuring
development, while the earth systems which human depends on are neglected. Researchers,
policy makers and stakeholders likely have more knowledge today regarding the interaction of
several development issues, otherwise alternative measures and including frameworks as the
SDGs would not have been developed. Still, the complexities SES face requires an approach
where humans, the society and economic goals are embedded within the biosphere to remain in
a safe operating space for humanity. Other areas mentioned by the SDG targets that do not have
similarities with the measures, such as restoring degraded soil, action towards the degradation
of natural habitat, and addressing the ocean acidification and inclusion of ecosystem values into
national planning, need somehow to be components of development measures.

Going beyond GPI requires countries to be fearless in implementing other more promising
measures. Countries face several issues and opportunities in this task since no single unit
measure can cover all the complexities related to sustainable development. There are concerns,
such as availability of data, how to interpret the results for policy-making, availability of
financial resources to implement the measure, and so on. A future update of this study could
include an updated list of indicators and assessment of their respective methodologies to find
ways to inter-link their components in relation to the SDGs. A more in-depth SES analysis
would then be possible. This study highlights some strengths and weaknesses of a few selected
measures in comparison to the SDGs. A good starting point when measuring sustainable
development, could be as Costanza et al. 2015 frame it; 'it is better to be approximately right
than precisely wrong’.

29
 CONCLUSION

This study compared seven measures regarding their potential use as measures of achievements
of the SDGs. This study suggests that SPI and SSI to be the most suitable for measuring the
achievement of the SDGs, though they reflect all three dimensions of sustainability according
to SES framework. That said, existing measures are not yet well integrated in a SES perspective
where achieving the goals belonging to the biosphere should be a precondition for long term
human prosperity. Furthermore, economic SDGs are not fully consistent with measures having
goals belonging to the society and the biosphere. For this reason, it remains important to assess
the SDGs with measure frameworks that treat them as integrated-linked areas for sustainable
development. This thesis has argued that a system’s perspective is crucial to understanding the
interactions of different aspects of development and provides a guide to measures from a
system’s perspective.

30
 LITERATURE CITED
Allen, C., G. Metternicht, and T. Wiedmann. 2016. National pathways to the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs): A comparative review of scenario modelling tools. Environmental Science & Policy 66:199–207.
Anielski, M. and J. Rowe. 1998. The 1998 U-S Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) - Summary Report. Redefining
Progess. Washinton D.C.
Berkes, F., and C. Folke. 1998. Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social
mechanisms for buildning resilience. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Binder, C., J. Hinkel, P. Bots, and C. Pahl-Wostl. 2011. Comparison of Frameworks for Analyzing Social-
ecological Systems. Ecology & Society 18(4):26.
Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH Reserach. 2015. 2015 GNH Survey Report - A Compass Towards a Just and
Harmonious Society. Centre for Bhutan Studies and Gross National Happiness Research. Thimphu.
Costanza, R., L. Daly, L. Fioramonti, E. Giovannini, I. Kubiszewski, L. F. Mortensen, K. E. Pickett, K. V.
Ragnarsdottir, R. De Vogli, and R. Wilkinson. 2016. Modelling and measuring sustainable wellbeing in
connection with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Ecological Economics 130:350–355.
Costanza, R., I. Kubiszewski, E. Giovannini, H. Lovins, J. McGlade, K. E. Pickett, K. V. Ragnarsdóttir, D.
Roberts, R. De Vogli, and R. Wilkinson. 2015. Time to leave GDP behind. Nature 505:283–285.
Cote, M., and A. J. Nightingale. 2012. Resilience thinking meets social theory - Situating social change in socio-
ecological systems (SES) research. Progress in Human Geography 36(4):475–489.
Death, C., and C. Gabay. 2015. Doing biopolitics differently? Radical potential in the Post-2015 MDG and SDG
debates. Globalizations 12(4):597–612.
Elgin-Cossart, M., and R. Chandran. 2016. Designing better accountability mechanisms for the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development. United Nations University Centre for Policy Research. Available at:
https://cpr.unu.edu/designing-better-accountability-mechanisms-for-the-2030-agenda-for-sustainable-
development.html.
Folke, C., R. Biggs, A. V. Norström, B. Reyers, and J. Rockström. 2016. Social-ecological resilience and
biosphere-based sustainability science. Ecology and Society 21(3):41.
Gaffney, O. 2015. 10 things to know about the Sustainable Development Goals - Road to Paris. International
Council for Science (ICSU). Available at: http://roadtoparis.info/2015/09/16/10-things-to-know-about-the-
sustainable-development-goals/.
Goossens, Y., A. Mäkipäa, P. Schepelmann, and I. van de Sand. 2007. Alternative progress indicators to gross
domestic product (GDP) as a means towards sustainable development. Policy Department Economic and
Scientific Policy.
Hedlund-de Witt, A. 2014. Rethinking sustainable development: considering how different worldviews envision
“development” and “quality of life.” Sustainability (Switzerland) 6(11):8310–8328.
Hickel, J. 2015. The Problem with Saving the World. Jacobin:1–9.
Hsu, A., and e. al. 2016. Global Metrics for the Environment. New Haven.
IAEG-SDGs. 2016. Final list of global Sustainable Development Goal indicators. Inter-Agency and Expert
Group on SDG Indicators. Available at:
https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Official%20List%20of%20Proposed%20SDG%20Indicators.pdf
International Council for Science (ICSU). 2017. A Guide to SDG Interactions: From Science to Implementation.

31
 Page International Council for Science. Paris.
van de Kerk, G., A. Manuel, and R. Kleinjans. 2014. Sustainable Society Index - SSI - 2014. The Hague, The
Netherlands. Available at: http://www.ssfindex.com/publications/
Meadows, D. H., J. Randers, and D. L. Meadows. 2005. Limits to Growth: The 30-year Update. Taykor &
Francis, London.
Neri, L., A. D’Agostino, A. Regoli, F. M. Pulselli, and L. Coscieme. 2017. Evaluating dynamics of national
economies through cluster analysis within the input-state-output sustainability framework. Ecological
Indicators 72:77–90.
Norström, A., H. Wetterstrand, M. Schultz, T. Elmqvist, S. Cornell, M. C. Öhman, T. Daw, F. Moberg, A.
Persson, G. Peterson, J. Rockström, and E. H. Török. 2014. Issue Brief: Integrating social-ecological
resilience, biodiversity and ecosystem services into the Sustainable Development Goals. A contribution of
Stockholm Resilience Centre and ICSU (International Council for Science) for the 8th Session of the UN
General Assembly Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals, 4-8 February 2014. New
York: Stockholm Resilience Centre and ICSU.
OECD Better Life Index. 2017. What’s the Better Life Index? Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development. Available at: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/about/better-life-initiative/.
Pogge, T., and M. Sengupta. 2015. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as drafted: nice idea, poor
execution. Washington International Law Journal Association.
Ragnarsdóttir, K. V., R. Costanza, I. Kubiszewski, and H. Lovins. 2014. Beyond GDP. London: GeoScientist
24(9):12-17.
Rockström, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, Å. Persson, F. S. Chapin, E. F. Lambin, T. M. Lenton, M. Scheffer, C.
Folke, and H. Joachim. 2009. Planetary Boundaries : Exploring the safe operating space for humanity.
Ecology & Society 14(2):32.
Sachs, J., G. Schmidt-Traub, D. Durand-Delacre, and K. Teksoz. 2016. SDG Index and SDG dashboards - A
Global Report. Bertesmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
Salleh, A. 2016. Climate, water, and livelihood skills: A post-development reading of the SDGs. Globalizations
13(6):952-959.
Schoenaker, N., R. Hoekstra, and J. P. Smits. 2015. Comparison of measurement systems for sustainable
development at the national level. Sustainable Development 23(5):285–300.
Spaiser, V., S. Ranganathan, R. B. Swain, and J. T. David. 2016. The sustainable development oxymoron:
quantifying and modelling the incompatibility of sustainable development goals. International Journal of
Sustainable Development & World Ecology:1–14
Stern, S. A. Wares, and T. Hellman. 2016. Social Progress Index 2016 Methodological Report. Washington DC:
Social Progress Imperative. Availiable at: http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/07/SPI-2016-Methodological-Report.pdf
Stiglitz, J. E., A. Sen, and J.-P. Fitoussi. 2009. Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic
Performance and Social Progress. Comission of the measurement of economic performance and social
progress.
Sustainable Knowledge Platform of the United Nations (n.d.) Communication materials. United Nations.
Availabe at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/news/communications-material/

32
Tkacik, J. 2015. Beyond GDP for Beyond 2015. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 16(4):619–
624.
Turner, G. M. 2008. A comparison of The Limits to Growth with 30 years of reality. Global Environmental
Change 18(3):397–411.
UN General Assembly. 2015. Resolution adopted by the General Assemly on 25 September 2015. Page 70/1.
Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations General
Assembly. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld
UNDP. 2015. World leaders adopt Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations Development Programme.
Available at: http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2015/09/24/undp-
welcomes-adoption-of-sustainable-development-goals-by-world-leaders.html.
UNECE/Eurostat/OECD Task Force on Measuring Sustainable Development. 2013. Framework and suggested
indicators to measure sustainable development. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe,
Eurostat and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (May):179.
United Nations Economic Council (UNESC). 2016. Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals -
Report of the Secretary-General. United Nations Economic and Social Council. Available at:
http://ggim.un.org/docs/WG6/SG-SDG-Report-2016-EN.pdf
United Nations Statistics Division Statistical Services Branch (n.d.) Cape Town global action plan for Sustainable
Development Data. United Nations Statistics Division Statistical Services Branch. Department of Economic
and Social Affairs. New York. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/hlg/Cape-Town-Global-Action-Plan/
UN Statistics Division Statistical Services Branch (n.d.) Cape Town global action plan for Sustainable
Development Data. High-level Group for Partnership, Coordination and Capacity-Building for the 2030
Agenda. United Nations Statistics Division Statistical Services Branch. Department of Economic and
Social Affairs. New York. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/hlg/Cape-Town-Global-Action-Plan/
UNU-IHDP and UNEP. 2014. Inclusive Wealth Report 2014 Measuring progress toward sustainability. United
Nations University – International Human Dimensions Programme and the United Nations Environment
Programme. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: http://mgiep.unesco.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/12/IWR2014-WEB.pdf
Victor, P. 2010. Questioning economic growth. Nature 468(7322):370–371.
Walker, B., S. Carpenter, J. Anderies, N. Abel, G. Cumming, M. Janssen, L. Lebel, J. Norberg, G. Peterson, and
R. Pritchard. 2002. Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a
participatory approach resilience management in social-ecological systems. Conservation Ecology 6(1):14.
Ward, James D., Paul C. Sutton, Adrian D. Werner, Robert Costanza, Steve H. Mohr, and Craig T. Simmons.
2016. Is Decoupling GDP Growth from Environmental Impact Possible? PLoS ONE 11(10).

33
 APPENDICES

A1 Historical background of the SDGs

Box 1. Definition of Sustainable Development

The first of January 2016 the 2030 Agenda its

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) came into Brundtland Commission in1987 defined

force. The Agenda are world countries benchmark for
sustainable development for the upcoming fifteen
years. The SDGs are built on the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), which targets were
supposed to be met by 2015 (Sustainable knowledge
sustainable development as: ‘development that
needs the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs’ (Brundtland 1987).
A new definition has been suggested:

platform of the United Nations). The MDGs were ‘development that meets the needs of the present
while safeguarding Earth’s life support system,
adopted in 2000 by 189 countries. The MDGs consisted
on which the welfare of current and future
of eight goals; eradicating extreme poverty and hunger,
generations depends’ (Griggs et al. 2013)
achieve universal primary education, promote gender
equality and empower women, reduced child mortality,
improve maternal health, combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, ensure environmental
sustainability and global partnership for development (UN MDGs). The MDGs have to some
extent been met, world population living in extreme poverty has declined more than half,
primary school enrolment rate in developing regions has reached 91%, the proportion of women
in parliament has doubled and ozone-depleting substances have been eliminated (UNDP and
World Bank 2016). The SDGs are broader and more inclusive then the MDGs (World Health
Organisation 2015). The process of creating the SDGs differed form the process of creating the
MDGs. The UN Conference on Sustainable Development Rio+20 (2012) launched a process to
develop a set of SDGs written in the outcome document The Future We Want (UN Department
of Economic and Social Affairs). The mandate to create a new development agenda was set by
the Intergovernmental 30 member Open Working Group (OWG) of the UN General Assembly
in 2013 (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations). OWG promised to include
relevant stakeholders from civil society, the scientific community and the UN organisations
(Open Working Group 2013). Hence, the umbrella of UN System Task Team on the Post-2015
UN Development Agenda, an inter-agency technical support team were established, with the
task of preparing issues to discuss with the OWG (UN Women). The group met during eight
sessions between 2013-2014. The outcome of those meetings were published on OWGs website
as a part of their transparency (Open Working Group on SDGs).

34
A2 Classification and conceptualisation of measures

There are several scholars that have classified and conceptualised measures going beyond Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) (Diener and Suh 1997, Boarini et al. 2006, Costanza et al. 2009, Bleys
2012). The following table summarises a few selected scholars’ classification of measures:

Table 9. Scholars classification of measures (Offer 2003, Goossens et al. 2007, Bleys 2012, Costanza et al. 2015). Criteria for
classification, the second horizontal column, defines this study interpretation of scholar’s baseline for their classification.
Classification lists the scholar’s categorisation of measures. Examples of measures lists measures that scholars give as an
example for their categorisation in their literature. In the table according to the above column classification.

Scholars Costanza et al. Offer 2003 Goossens et al. Bleys 2012

2015 2007

Criteria for The method of The objective of The measures The measures relation
classification the measures the measures relation towards towards definitions of
GDP welfare (with sub-
categorisation)
Classification Adjusted Extended Adjusting GDP Well-being
economics economic
accounts
Subjective Social Indicators Replacing GDP Economic Welfare

Weighted Psychological Supplements GDP Sustainability

indicators

Examples of Genuine Adjusted Net Index of Happy Planet Index

measures Progress Domestic Product Sustainable
Indicator Economic Welfare
World Values Human Ecological Index Adjusted Net Savings
Survey Development Footprint
Index

Gross National Happy Life Years Happy Planet Ecological Footprint

Happiness Index Index
Index

35
Costanza et al. (2015) group measures based on their method of calculation. The adjusted
economic measures are expressed in monetary units and are therefore easier to compare with
GDP but are complemented with social and environmental factors. The indicators normally
consider annual income, net savings, wealth and environmental costs and benefits. Subjective
measures focus on well-being as drawn from surveys. The result from subjective measures are
hard to compare between countries, since culture and societies differs and therefore might
require different indicators. Weighted measures rely on composite indicators that can be both
subjective and objective, such as housing, life expectancy, leisure time and democratic
engagement (Costanza et al. 2015).

Offer (2003) classifies extended economic accounts as measures adjusting traditional national
accounts by including social and environmental indicators. The other two classifications of
measures are based on social indicators pursues to capture human well-being while
psychological indicators seek to assess individuals’ personal experience (Offer 2003).

Goossens et al. (2007) classify measures as adjusting GDP, being measures containing
monetised value of environmental and social issues, replacing GDP, measures with focus on
human well-being rather than economic performance and supplementing GDP, measures
including only environmental and social data (Goossens et al. 2007).

Bleys (2012)’s classification of measures focuses on their usefulness for policy-making. Well-
being measures evaluates the life situation of individuals or groups of people. Economic welfare
measures relate to how the nation’s economy captures the overall level of well-being of its
citizens. Sustainability measures focuses on whether current levels of well-being and economic
welfare are sustainable (Bleys 2012).

36
A3 Description of measures and list of its indicators

Genuine Progress Indicator

The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) is designed to measure economic welfare derived from
economic activity, essentially counting the depression of community capital as an economic
cost. GPI is an updated version of the index of Sustainable Economic Welfare first proposed in
1989 by Daly and Cobb (Kubiszewski et al. 2013). The measure calculates personal
consumption expenditures, a measure of all spending by individuals and a major component of
GDP, and making more than 20 additions and subtractions to account for factors such as
monetary value of volunteer work and monetary costs of divorce, crime and pollution. GPI also
consider income distribution, where increased income from a relative poor citizen boost
economy more than the same amount increased by a rich (Costanza et al. 2015).

Alberta and Nova Scotia province in Canada have used GPI. Vermont and Maryland are
examples of two states where GPI has been applied in United States of America. Further, there
are papers on GPI for Hong Kong and Singapore (Maryland Department of Natural Resources,
Anielski, M. and J. Rowe. 1998, Hamilton et al. 2000, Anielski 2001, Costanza et al. 2004,
GPIAtlantic 2011, Delang and Yu 2015)

The indicators GPI consists of, has changed and varied since its release (Anielski, M. and J.
Rowe. 1998, Hamilton et al. 2000, Costanza et al. 2004). The indicators used for this study are
based on The Genuine Progress Indicator 2006 report. The report is the latest list of indicators
available at the time of research and published by Redefining Progress with one of the GPI
founders, Clifford Cobb, as a contributor (Talberth et al. 2007). Larger variances are not
expected compared to if another list had been used. In comparison with Alberta GPI 2001; it
adds Value of Free time as an unaccounted benefit and Services of highways is replaced by
Value of public infrastructure investment. Further, Cost of non-renewable resource use and cost
of family breakdown has been added as depreciation costs (Anielski 2001).

37
Table 10. The Genuine Progress Index indicators redrawn from the Genuine Progress Indicator Report 2006 of the United
States (Talberth et al. 2007).

CONTRIBUTORS
Personal consumption expenditures
Income distribution index
Weighted personal consumption expenditures (adjusted for inequality)
Value of housework and parenting
Value of higher education
Value of volunteering work
Service of consumer durables
Services of highways
Net capital investment

DEDUCTIONS
Cost of crime
Loss of leisure time
Costs of unemployment and underemployment
Cost of consumer durable purchases
Cost of commuting
Cost of household pollution abatement
Cost of auto accidents
Cost of water pollution
Cost of air pollution
Cost of noise pollution
Loss of wetlands
Loss of farmlands
Loss of primary forest cover
Resources depletion
Carbon emissions damage
Cost of ozone depletion
Net foreign borrowing

38
Inclusive Wealth Index
The Inclusive Wealth Index (IWI) was launched at Rio+20 in 2012. The indices is based on a
joint initiative by UN University International Human Dimensions Programme on Global
Environmental Change (UNU-IHDP) and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) (UNU-
IHDP and UNEP 2014). The IWI measures a country’s wealth by looking at its production
base, measured by the social value of each form of capital to capture where human well-being
is derived from. It aims to link the discounted present value of all future consumption
possibilities to the total worth of capital assets (or wealth) in an economy (Inclusive Wealth
Project 2014).
Equation 1. Inclusie Wealth Index equation. It is the sum of manufactires capital, natural capital and human capital
(Inclusive Wealth Project 2014)

IWI = MANUFACTURED CAPITAL + NATURAL CAPITAL + HUMAN CAPITAL

Redrawn from the website of IWI, the calculation as the addition of present values of:
Manufactured capital (investment, depreciation rate, assets lifetime, output growth, population
and productivity), Natural capital (fossil fuels, minerals, forest resources, agriculture land and
fisheries) and Human capital (population by age and gender, mortality probability by age and
gender, discount rate, employment, educational attainment, employment compensation and
labour force by age and gender) (Inclusive Wealth Project 2014). The latest report from 2014
differs from the 2012 report. The former focuses on Human Capital while the later on Natural
Capital. Further, it includes data from 120 countries more, with an updated time horizon to
include data form 1990, 2008, 2009 and 2010 (Inclusive Wealth Project 2014). Further, the
three factors of oil capital gains, carbon damage and productivity has led to the Adjusted
Inclusive Wealth Index. The indicator of population and productivity is not included in 2014
report though it does not contribute to an asset rather it captures the contribution of several
‘missing’ assets. The 2014 report also keeps the damage of fossil fuel separated since the
damage cannot be related to an asset of a country. In the 2012 report, fossil fuels are included
as a stock. Adjusted Inclusive Wealth has been excluded from this study. This study uses both
the 2012 and 2014 report and the indicators listed for manufactures capital, redrawn from the
official website, as the baseline for the indicator comparison (UNU-IHDP and UNEP 2012,
2014).

39
Table 11. The Inclusive Wealth indicators (UNU-IHDP and UNEP 2012, 2014).

HUMAN CAPITAL
Population by age, gender, time
Mortality rates by age, gender, time
Discount rate
Employment
Educational attainment
Employment compensation
Labour force rates by age, gender, time
MANUFACTURES CAPITAL
Investment
Depreciation rate
Assets lifetime
Output growth
Population and productivity
NATURAL CAPITAL
Fossil fuel (oil, natural gas and coal)
Minerals (bauxite, nickel, copper, phosphate, gold, silver, iron, tin, lead and zinc)
Forest Resources (timber and non-timber forest resources)
Agricultural Land (cropland and pastureland)
Fisheries (fishery stock, value of captures fish, quantity of captured fish and rental rate)

Environmental Performance Index

The Environmental Performance Index (EPI) was developed by Yale University and Columbia
University, firstly launched in 2002. The latest EPI version from 2014 is a project lead by Yale
Center for Environmental Law and Policy and Centre for International Earth Science
Information Network at Columbia University in collaboration with World Economic Forum
(Yale University 2017a). EPI have 20 indicators spanning over nine categories (Emerson et al.
2012). The categories are health impacts, air quality, water and sanitation, water resources,
agriculture, forests, fisheries, biodiversity and habitat and climate and energy. The EPI
calculation starts with transforming data to standardised comparable performance indicators.
The first step is to use raw values according to, for example, population or by using statistical
transformation, such as logarithmic transformation. The performance is calculated by using
‘proximity-to-target’ methodology, which assesses how a country is performing according to
an identified national or international policy target. Scores are converted to a scale of 0 to 100

40
by arithmetic calculation, where 0 begin with farthest from the target and 100 closest to the
target. Each indicator is weighted within each policy issue to create a single policy issue score.
The weighting is based on the quality of the dataset and how well the indicator fits the policy
issue (Yale University 2017b)

Figure 3. Environmental Performance Index. It ranks performance where 0 is the lowest performance of countries,
shortest to their environmental targets, closer to the leftt side of the figure, and 100 is the highest performance of
countries being closer to their environmental targets, at the right side of the figure (Hsu, et al. 2016)

Table 12. The Environmental Performance Index indicators redrawn from the 2016 year’s report (Hsu and Al. 2016).

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Environmental risk exposure
Household air quality
Air pollutions avg. exposure to fine particulate matter
Air pollution fine particulate matter exceedance
Air pollution avg. exposure to NO2
Unsafe drinking water
Unsafe sanitation
Water and Sanitation
ECOSYSTEM VITALITY
Trend in carbon intensity per kwh
Trend in carbon intensity
Species protection (national/global)
Terrestrial biome protection (national/global)
Marine protected areas
Fish stock
Tree cover loss
Nitrogen balance
Nitrogen use efficiency
Wastewater treatment

41
Gross National Happiness Index
The term Gross National Happiness (GNH) was firstly used by His Majesty the Fourth King of
Bhutan, Gigme Singyew Wangchuck in the 1970s. GNH has been developed and now relies on
four pillars of development: good governance, sustainable socio-economic development,
cultural preservation and environmental conservation. The four pillars consist of nine domains;
psychological well-being, health, time use, education, cultural diversity and resilience, good
governance, community vitality, ecological diversity and resilience and living standards. The
domains represent the well-being of the Bhutanese people (Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH
Reserach 2015). The Centre of Bhutan Studies has developed GNHI. It consists of 33 indicators
distributed on the nine domains. It is designed for government, non-governmental organisations
and business to increase GNH in Bhutan. Three rounds of surveys have been carried out with
the start of a pilot study in 2006-07. The latest study carried out in 2015 had a sample size of
7153 people demographically spread over Bhutan (Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH
Reserach 2015).

It is a single number index where each domain is equally weighted. Within the domain objective
indicators are higher weighted while the subjective indicators are assigned lower weights (Ura
et al. 2012). An example would be psychological well-being, where the indicators are life
satisfaction, positive emotion, negative emotion and spirituality. Life satisfaction and
spirituality is weighted one-third while positive and negative emotion is weighted one of six.
Surveys conducted in Bhutan give respondents a GNH profile where sufficiency for each
indicator is measured. Adding up the weights of the sufficient indicators give each respondent
a GNH score showing the share of the domains in which sufficiency is achieved. At least two-
thirds has to be sufficient for a person to be considered ‘happy’ (Centre for Bhutan Studies and
GNH Reserach 2015). The indicators have sub-indicators with a related survey question each.
Most questions are based on rankings from five to a higher value (where the highest and the
threshold is different for different questions), some are Yes or No questions and some measures
stock, for example hours of sleep (Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH Reserach 2015).

After the ‘happy’ identification of respondents, the information is aggregated into a measure
reflecting the GNH across Bhutan. It is a single number index ranging from zero to one.

42
 H
Equation 2. Gross National Happiness equation. Happy people (H ) are added with the extent of sufficiency that not-
yet-happy-people enjoy. The second term is calculated by multiplying the percentage of people who are not yet
happy (HU, which is 100% minus HH) by the average percentage of domains in which not-yet-happy people have
sufficient achievements AUsuff (Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH Reserach 2015)

GNH = HH + (HU *AUsuff)

The indicators used for this study is based on a list provided at the official website of Gross
National Happiness. The indicators were not always clear and therefore complemented with the
2015 GNH Survey Report (Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH Reserach 2015). During time
of finishing the study and preparation for publication, the website has been re-arranged and the
original list is not to be found. However, since all the indicators has been doubled checked
against the report. The comparisons are still considered to be valid.

Table 13. The Gross National Happiness Index indicators redrawn from the 2015 Gross National Happiness Survey Report
(Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH Reserach 2015).

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLBEING
Life satisfaction
Spirituality
Positive emotion
Negative emotion
HEALTH
Self-reported health status
Healthy days
Disability
Mental health
EDUCATION
Literacy
Schooling
Knowledge
Value
CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND RESILIENCE
Speak native language
Cultural participation
Artisan skills (Zorig chusum skills)
Driglam Namzha (code of etiquette and conduct)
GOOD GOVERNANCE
Government performance
Fundamental rights

43
 Services (electricity, health care, source of water, waste disposal)
Political participation
COMMUNITY VITALITY
Donation (time and money),
Community relationship (sense of belonging)
Family (quality of relationship)
Safety (victim of crime)
ECOLOGY DIVERSITY and RESILIENCE
Ecological issues (different kinds of pollution and natural catastrophes)
Responsibility towards environment
Wildlife damage (rural)
Urban issues
LIVING STANDARDS
Assets
Housing
Household per capita income
TIME USE
Work (including domestic work)
Sleep

Sustainable Society Index

In 2006, by the initiative of Guert can de Kerk and Arthur Mark, the Sustainable Society
Foundation was established with the main objective to develop Sustainable Society Index (SSI).
The SSI framework is based on three domains of well-being; human, environmental and
economic, with two-three categories each. The human well-being consists of Basic Needs,
Personal Development and Health, and Well-balanced Society. The environmental well-being
consists of Natural Resources and Climate and Energy. Finally, economic well-being consists
of Transition and Economy. Each category have two to four indicators, totally there are 21
indicators within the SSI framework (Sustainable Society Foundation 2017a).
SSI aggregates the geometric average for each indicator, within each domain of well-being.
They are weighted equally since Sustainable Society Foundation finds no scientific basis for
weighting them differently. Further, geometric allows no compensation in accordance with
strong sustainability, where low scores could compensate for high scores. The totals are also
weighted according to population size (Sustainable Society Foundation 2017b). SSI has been
developed for 158 countries at national level and data has been presented every second year

44
since 2006 and there is also a summary of the last 10 years of global development progress
according to SSI (Sustainable Society Foundation 2017c).
This study used the SSI indicators from the report Sustainable Society Index 2014 (Sustainable
Society Foundation 2017d). During time of writing 2016 years data, covering 154 countries,
was available, however no publication was done related to its method and the indicators used
(Sustainable Society Foundation 2017e).

Table 14.The Sustainable Society Index indicators redrawn from the Sustainable Society Index 2014 report (van de Kerk et
al. 2014).

BASIC NEEDS
Sufficient Food
Sufficient to Drink
Safe Sanitation
HEALTH
Education
Healthy Life
Gender Equality
PERSONAL and SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Income Distribution
Population Growth
Good Governance
NATURAL RESOURCES
Biodiversity
Renewable Water Resources
Consumption
CLIMATE and ENERGY
Energy Use
Energy Saving
Greenhouses Gases
Renewable Energy
TRANSITION
Organic Farming
Genuine Saving
ECONOMY
Gross Domestic Product
Employment
Public Debt

45
Social Progress Index
The organisation the Social Progressive Imperative was founded in 2012 with the aim to create
an index measuring social progress. The definition is ‘the capacity of a society to meet the basic
human needs of its citizens, establish the building blocks that allow citizens and communities
to enhance and sustain the quality of their lives, and create the conditions for all individuals to
reach their full potential’. In 2014 the first official Social Progress Index (SPI) report was
published (Worldwatch Institute Europe 2014). SPI consists of three dimensions; Basic Human
Needs, Foundations of Wellbeing and Opportunity. These dimensions consist of four
components each, where Basic Human Needs refers to Nutrition and Basic Medical Care, Water
and Sanitation and Shelter and Personal Safety. Foundations of Well-being refer to Access to
Basic Knowledge, Access to Information and Communications, Health and Wellness and
Environmental Quality. Opportunity refers to Personal Rights, Personal Freedom and Choice,
Tolerance and Inclusion and Access to Advanced Education (Stern et al. 2016). Each
component is a composed set of indicators aggregated using a weighted average, where the
weights are set by principal component analysis. The components overall final score is
weighted equally with other components in its own dimension. The three dimensions final score
is then comparable among countries (Stern et al. 2016). The latest report from 2016 includes
160 countries since these countries can provide reliable data according to the organisations
criteria (The Social Progress Imperative 2017).

46
Table 15. The Social Progress indicators redrawn from the Methodological Report 2016 (Stern et al. 2016).

NUTRITION AND BASIC MEDICAL CARE

Undernourishment
Depth of food deficit
Maternal mortality rate
Child mortality rate
Deaths from infectious diseases
WATER AND SANITATION
Access to piped water
Rural access to improved water source
Access to improved sanitation facilities
SHELTER
Availability of affordable housing
Access to electricity
Quality of electricity supply
Household air pollution attributable death
PERSONAL SAFETY
Homicide rate
Level of Violent crime
Perceived criminality
Political terror
Traffic deaths
ACCESS TO BASIC KNOWLEDGE
Adult literacy rate
Primary school enrolment
Lower secondary school enrolment
Upper secondary school enrolment
Gender parity in secondary enrolment
ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION
Mobile telephone subscriptions
Internet users
Press Freedom Index
HEALTH AND WELLNESS
Life expectancy at 60
Premature deaths from non-communicable diseases
Obesity rate
Suicide rate
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

47
 Outdoor air pollution attributable deaths
Wastewater treatment
Greenhouse gas emissions
Biodiversity and habitat
PERSONAL RIGHTS
Political rights
Freedom of speech
Freedom of assembly/association
Freedom of movement
Private property rights
PERSONAL FREEDOM AND CHOICE
Freedom over life choices
Freedom of religion
Early marriage
Satisfied demand for contraception
Corruption
TOLERANCE AND INCLUSION
Tolerance for immigrants
Tolerance for homosexuals
Discrimination and violence against minorities
Religious tolerance
Community safety net
ACCESS TO ADVANCED EDUCATION
Years of tertiary schooling
Women’s average years in school
Inequality in the attainment of education
Globally ranked universities
Percentage of tertiary students enrolled in globally ranked universities

Better Life Index

Better Life Initiative is an Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD)
project with the aim to develop better statistics to measure well-being and quality of life of
people and households. The initiative started at the World Forum on ‘Statistics, Knowledge and
Policies’ in Palermo 2004 and were further developed by two more forums in Istanbul in 2007
and then after the Global Project on Measuring the Progress of Societies in Busan 2009. In 2011
OECD released its first report ‘How’s Life?’ (OECD Better Life Initative 2011).

48
The Better Life Index is one of the initiatives core projects. The index is a web-based tool where
people can weight indicators differently according to their own priorities and then compare
them with other people or with the non-weighted data of OECD. The indices is updated annually
and covers data from the 35 OECD countries including the Russian Federation, South Africa
and Brazil (OECD Better Life Initiative 2017).

Better Life Index is built on eleven topics each with one to four indicators being average
weighted. The eleven topics are Housing, Income, Jobs, Community, Education,
Environmental, Civic Engagement, Health, Life Satisfaction, Safety and Work-Life Balance.
(OECD Better Life Initiative 2017).

Table 16. The Better Life Index indicators redrawn from the official website of the Better Life Index (OECD 2013).

HOUSING
Dwelling without basic facilities
Housing experience
Rooms per person
INCOME
Household net adjusted disposable income
Household net financial wealth
JOBS
Labour market insecurity
Employment rate
Long-term unemployment rate
Personal earnings
COMMUNITY
Quality of support network
EDUCATION
Educational attainment
Student skills
Years in education
ENVIRONMENT
Air pollution
Water quality
CIVIL ENGAGEMENT
Stakeholder engagement for developing regulations
Voter turnout
HEALTH
Life expectancy

49
Self-reported health
LIFE SATISFACTION
Life satisfaction
SAFETY
Feeling safe walking alone at night
Homicide rate
WORK-LIFE BALANCE
Employees working very long hours
Time devoted to leisure and personal care

50
A4 United Nations websites about the SDGs
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (n.d.). Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Available at: http://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-
goals/overview/open-working-group-on-sustainable-development-goals/en/.
IAEG-SDGs. 2016. Final list of global Sustainable Development Goal indicators. Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG
Indicators. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/iaeg-sdgs/.
IAEG-SDGs. 2017. Revisited list of global Sustainable Development Goal indicators. Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG
Indicators. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/.
Open Working Group on SDGs (n.d.). Open Working Group On Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations Department
of Social and Economic Affairs. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/owg.html
Open Working Group. 2013. Sustaianble development: implementation of the Agenda 21, the Programme for the Futher
Implementation of the Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development and the United
Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. Sixty-seventh session. Agenda item 20. By the Co-Chairs of the
Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals addressed to the President of the
General Assembly. Available at: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/941&Lang=E.
Sustainable Knowledge Platform of the United Nations (n.d.) Communication materials. United Nations. Available at:
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/news/communications-material/
Sustainable Knowledge Platform of the United Nations (n.d.). The Sustainable Development Agenda. Sustainable knowledge
platform of the United Nations. Available at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/development-agenda/.
UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (n.d.). Future We Want - Outcome document. United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs. Available at: Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/futurewewant.html.
UN General Assembly. 2015. Resolution adopted by the General Assemly on 25 September 2015. Page 70/1. Transforming our
world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations General Assembly. Available at:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld
UN MDGs (n.d.). News on Millennium Development Goals. Millennium Development Goals knowledge platform of United
Nations. Available at: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.
UN Women (n.d.). The process to identify the Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations Women. Available at:
http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/post-2015/sustainable-development-goals.
UNDP and World Bank. 2016. Transition from the MDGs to the SDGs. United Nation Development Programme and the
World Bank Group. Available at: http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/sustainable-development-
goals/transitioning-from-the-mdgs-to-the-sdgs.html.
UNDP. 2015. World leaders adopt Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations Development Programme. Available at:
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2015/09/24/undp-welcomes-adoption-of-
sustainable-development-goals-by-world-leaders/
United Nations Economic Council (UNESC). 2016. Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals - Report of the
Secretary-General. United Nations Economic and Social Council. Available at: http://ggim.un.org/docs/WG6/SG-
SDG-Report-2016-EN.pdf
United Nations Statistics Division Statistical Services Branch (n.d.) Cape Town global action plan for Sustainable Development
Data. United Nations Statistics Division Statistical Services Branch. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. New
York. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/hlg/Cape-Town-Global-Action-Plan/
World Health Organisation. 2015. From MDGs to SDGs, WHO launches new report. World Health Organisation. Available
at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/mdg-sdg-report/en/.

51
A5 Examples of matching indicators
The SDG indicator 3.9.1 Mortality rate attributed to household and ambient air pollution, has
been matched with the EPI indicator Household air quality. The indicators are outlined
differently but both deals with health risk exposure, in this study regarded as being similar
measures.

SDG2 End Hunger, has one indicator 2.4.1, Proportion of agricultural area under productive
and sustainable agriculture, where its definition is not clear regarding what is meant by
productive and sustainable agriculture. However, a match has been made with the SSI indicator
of Area for Organic Farming in % of total agricultural area of a country. This study assume
that organic farming partly belongs to the definition of sustainable agriculture and therefore
seen as a match.

Another uncertainty regarding an SDG indicator definition would be the SDG indicator 14.4.1,
Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels, which has been matched with
EPIs indicator of Fish stocks marine, which calculates countries total catch, reproduction and
replacement of fish. What is meant with biologically sustainable levels is not defined but this
study assume that reproduction and replacement could be part of the criteria.

A6 Example of related indicators

SDG13 Climate Action relates to SSI and SPI since they are measuring CO2 emissions.
However, there is no target or indicator under SDG13 dealing with reduction of CO2 emissions
(IAEG-SDGs 2016). This study assumes that such indicators still goes under the theme of the
overall goal, Climate Action and therefore could be useful for its achievement.

SDG1 No Poverty, target 1.2, By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women
and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions,
is another complex comparison. The GPI measures inequality by the Gini-coefficient, which is
a different tool than the suggested SDG indicator that measures the population below the
international poverty line. However, the use of Gini-coefficient could still help to reach the
target of reducing people living in poverty since a higher inequality rate suggests that there are
people living in relative poverty. In this study, GPI is related with target 1.2.

52
A7 Differences between SDGs indicators from 2016 and the revisited 2017

The major change is that the 2016 list of SDG indicators are 230, while 2017 has 232 indicators.
When including repeated indicators, same indicators used for different targets, the listed has
been changed from 241 to 244. In the 2016 list indicator 7.a.1 and 13.a.1 is the same. Therefore
repeated, in the 2017 list indicators 1.5.4, 11.6.2 and 13.1.3 are instead repeated (IAEG-SDGs
2016, 2017)

Table 17. Changed SDG indicator from 2016 to 2017. The column to the left list indicators used in 2016 version. The second
column to the left briefly mentions the change in indicators. The first listed indicator is from 2016 and the second is form the
2017. The second column from the right answering yes or no to whatever the indicator has been match or related in this study.
The column to the right explains if there is a possibility that the 2017 indicator could be related or matched in this study to the
measures.

Indicator What’s new Matched or relate in this Possibility for a new

study match or relating
1.5.1 Formulated differently. No Change in sentence do not
change the comparison in
1.5.1 Number of deaths, missing similarities.
persons and persons affected by
disaster per 100,000 people

1.5.1 Number of deaths, missing

persons and directly affected
persons attributed to disasters per
100,000 population
1.5.2 Formulated differently. No No

1.5.2 Direct disaster economic loss

in relation to global gross domestic
product (GDP)

1.5.2 Direct economic loss

attributed to disasters in relation to
global gross domestic product
(GDP)
1.5.3 Now refers to a specific framework No To refer to a specific
of measures. framework does not
change this study
comparison since major

53
 1.5.3 Number of countries with characteristics are not
national and local disaster risk included in this study.
reduction strategies

1.5.3 Number of countries that

adopt and implement national
disaster risk reduction strategies in
line with the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030
1.5.4 One indicator has been replaced No The first indicator is
with two more specific ones. similar enough to the new
ones for a match or
1.a.1 Proportion of resources relating to be made if there
allocated by the government were any similar indicators
directly to poverty reduction among the measures.
programmes

1.5.4 Proportion of local

governments that adopt and
implement local disaster risk
reduction strategies in line with
national disaster risk reduction
strategies

1.a.1 Proportion of domestically

generated resources allocated by the
government directly to poverty
reduction programmes
1.a.3 A complete new indicator.
1.a.3 Sum of total grants and non-
debt-creating inflows directly
allocated to poverty reduction
programmes as a proportion of GDP
2.b.1 One indicator has been removed,
therefore the next coming has
changed number.
No The indicator is basically
an aid indicator for poverty
reduction programmes,
where none of the
measures in this study
measures poverty reduction
per se.
No Producer Support Estimate
has been omitted, which
has not been match or
related in this study and
therefore makes no

54
 2.a.2 Total official flows (official difference in search for
development assistance plus other similarities.
official flows) to the agriculture
sector

2.b.1 Producer Support Estimate

2.b.2 Agricultural export subsidies

2.a.2 Total official flows (official

development assistance plus other
official flows) to the agriculture
sector

2.b.1 Agricultural export subsidies

3.3.2 The indicator’s number has changed
to 100.000 people instead of 1000
people.
3.3.2 Tuberculosis incidence per
1,000 population
3.3.2 Tuberculosis incidence per
100,000 population
3.8.2 Formulated differently.
3.8.2 Number of people covered by
health insurance or a public health
system per 1,000 population
A measures is related with
target 3.3 By 2030, end the
epidemics of AIDS,
tuberculosis, malaria and
neglected tropical diseases
and combat hepatitis,
water-borne diseases and
other communicable
diseases.
No
The similarity comparison
make any difference if the
indicators unit has changed
from 1000 to 100,000
people.
The chosen measures do
not cover health insurance
or debts.

3.8.2 Proportion of population with

large household expenditures on
health as a share of total household
expenditure or income
7.a.1 Formulated differently. No No

7.a.1 Mobilized amount of United

States dollars per year starting in
2020 accountable towards the $100
billion commitment

55
 7.a.1 International financial flows to
developing countries in support of
clean energy research and
development and renewable energy
production, including in hybrid
systems
8.9.2 Formulated differently. No It is more specific by
adding sustainable
8.9.2 Number of jobs in tourism tourism, however none of
industries as a proportion of total the measures include
jobs and growth rate of jobs, by sex tourism.
8.10.1

8.9.2 Proportion of jobs in

sustainable tourism industries out of
total tourism jobs
11.5.1 Formulated differently. No Nothing about disasters in
the measures.
11.5.1 Number of deaths, missing
persons and persons affected by
disaster per 100,000 people
11.5.2

11.5.1 Number of deaths, missing

persons and directly affected
persons attributed to disasters per
100,000 population
11.5.2 Formulated differently. No No

11.5.2 Direct economic loss in

relation to global GDP, damage to
critical infrastructure and number of
disruptions to basic services,
attributed to disasters

11.5.2 Direct disaster economic loss

in relation to global GDP, including
disaster damage to critical
infrastructure and disruption of
basic services

56
11.b.2 More specific. No No

11.b.2 Number of countries with

national and local disaster risk
reduction strategies

11.b.2 Proportion of local

governments that adopt and
implement local disaster risk
reduction strategies in line with
national disaster risk reduction
strategies
13.1.1 The last two has switched places. No No

13.1.1 Number of countries with

national and local disaster risk
reduction strategies

13.1.1 Number of deaths, missing

persons and directly affected
persons attributed to disasters per
100,000 population
13.1.2 The last two has switched places No No
and a new one is added.

13.1.2 Number of deaths, missing

persons and persons affected by
disaster per 100,000 people

13.1.2 Number of countries that

adopt and implement national
disaster risk reduction strategies in
line with the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

13.1.3 Proportion of local

governments that adopt and
implement local disaster risk
reduction strategies in line with
national disaster risk reduction
strategies

57
16.4.2 Formulated differently. No The measures do not
contain indicators related
16.4.2 Proportion of seized small to arms trade.
arms and light weapons that are
recorded and traced, in accordance
with international standards and
legal instruments

16.4.2 Proportion of seized, found

or surrendered arms whose illicit
origin or context has been traced or
established by a competent
authority in line with international
instruments

58
 LITERATURE CITED APPENDICES

Anielski, M. 2001. Measuring the Sustainability of Nations: the Genuine Progress Indicator system of
sustainable well-being accounts. Pages 1–52 in The Fourth Biennial Conference of the Canadian Society
for Ecological Economics: Ecological Sustainability of the Global Market Place. Montreal.
Anielski, M. and J. Rowe. 1998. The 1998 U-S Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) - Summary Report. Redefining
Progess. Washinton D.C.
Bleys, B. 2012. Beyond GDP: Classifying Alternative Measures for Progress. Social Indicators Research
109(3):355–376.
Boarini, R., A. Johansson, and M. Mira d’Ercole. 2006. Alternative measures of well-being. Organisation for
Economic and Co-operation and Development, Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers. No.
33.
Brundtland, G. H. 1987.: Our Common Future/World Commission on Environment and Development.
Sustainable Development. Vol. 154. doi:10.2307/2621529.
Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH Reserach. 2015. 2015 GNH Survey Report - A Compass Towards a Just and
Harmonious Society. Centre for Bhutan Studies and Gross National Happiness Research. Thimphu.
Costanza, R., J. Erickson, K. Fligger, A. Adams, C. Adams, B. Altschuler, S. Balter, B. Fisher, J. Hike, J. Kelly,
T. Kerr, M. McCauley, K. Montone, M. Rauch, K. Schmiedeskamp, D. Saxton, L. Sparacino, W. Tusinski,
and L. Williams. 2004. Estimates of the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) for Vermont, Chittenden
County and Burlington, from 1950 to 2000. Ecological Economics 51(1–2):139–155.
Costanza, R., I. Kubiszewski, E. Giovannini, H. Lovins, J. McGlade, K. E. Pickett, K. V. Ragnarsdóttir, D.
Roberts, R. De Vogli, and R. Wilkinson. 2015. Time to leave GDP behind. Nature 505:283–285.
Costanza, R., M. Hart, S. Posner, and J. Talberth. 2009. Beyond GDP: The need for new measures of progress
beyond GDP. Boston University(4):47.
Delang, C. O., and Y. H. Yu. 2015. Measuring welfare beyond economics: The Genuine Progress of Hongkong
and Singapore. Routledge, Adingdon.
Diener, E., and E. Suh. 1997. Measuring quality of life: economic, social and subjective indicators. Social
Indicators Research 40(1–2):189–216.
Emerson, J. W., D. C. Esty, A. Hsu, M. A. Levy, A. de Scherbinin, V. Mara, and M. Jaiteh. 2012. Environmental
Performance Index and pilot trend Environmental Performance Index. New Haven: Yale Center for
Environmental Law and Policy.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (n.d.). Open Working Group on Sustainable
Development Goals. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Available at:
http://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/overview/open-working-group-on-sustainable-
development-goals/en/.
Goossens, Y., A. Mäkipäa, P. Schepelmann, and I. van de Sand. 2007. Alternative progress indicators to gross
domestic product (GDP) as a means towards sustainable development. Policy Department Economic and
Scientific Policy.
Griggs, D., M. Stafford-Smith, O. Gaffney, J. Rockström, M. C. Öhman, P. Shyamsundar, W. Steffen, G. Glaser,
K. Norichika, and I. Noble. 2013. Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature 495:305–

59
 307.
GPIAtlantic. 2011. GPIAtlantic - A New Measure on Progress. GPIAtlantic. Glen Haven. Available at:
http://gpiatlantic.org/.
Hamilton, C., R. Denniss, and Australia Institute. 2000. Tracking well-being in Australia : the Genuine Progress
Indicator 2000. Discussion paper / Australia Institute, Deakin, A.C.T.: Australia Institute. (35):70.
Hsu, A., and e. al. 2016. Global Metrics for the Environment. New Haven.
Inclusive Wealth Project. 2014. 2014 Human Capital — Inclusive Wealth Index. Available at:
http://inclusivewealthindex.org/2014-human-capital#release-2014.
IAEG-SDGs. 2016. Final list of global Sustainable Development Goal indicators. Inter-Agency and Expert
Group on SDG Indicators. Available at:
https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Official%20List%20of%20Proposed%20SDG%20Indicators.pdf
IAEG-SDGs. 2017. Revisited list of global Sustainable Development Goal indicators. Inter-Agency and Expert
Group on SDG Indicators. Available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/.
van de Kerk, G., A. Manuel, and R. Kleinjans. 2014. Sustainable Society Index - SSI - 2014. The Hague, The
Netherlands. Available at: http://www.ssfindex.com/publications/
Kubiszewski, I., R. Costanza, C. Franco, P. Lawn, J. Talberth, T. Jackson, and C. Aylmer. 2013. Beyond GDP:
Measuring and achieving global genuine progress. Ecological Economics 93:57–68.
Maryland Department of Natural Resources. (n.d.). Maryland Genuine Progress Indicator. Available at:
http://dnr.maryland.gov/mdgpi/Pages/default.aspx.
OECD 2013. Better Life Index - Edition 2013. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Available at: http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=BLI.
OECD Better Life Initative. 2011. Compendium of OECD well-being indicators. Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/std/47917288.pdf
OECD Better Life Index. 2017. What’s the Better Life Index? Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development. Available at: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/about/better-life-initiative/.
Offer, A. 2003. Economic welfare measures and human well-being. Pages 371–399 in The Economic future in
historical perspective. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Open Working Group. 2013. Sustaianble development: implementation of the Agenda 21, the Programme for the
Futher Implementation of the Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development and the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. Sixty-seventh session.
Agenda item 20. By the Co-Chairs of the Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable
Development Goals addressed to the President of the General Assembly. Available at:
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/941&Lang=E
Open Working Group on SDGs. (n.d.). Open Working Group On Sustainable Development Goals. United
Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs. Available at:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/owg.html
Stern, S. A. Wares, and T. Hellman. 2016. Social Progress Index 2016 Methodological Report. Washington DC:
Social Progress Imperative. Availiable at: http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/wp-Sustainable
knowledge platform of the United Nations (n.d.). The Sustainable Development Agenda. Sustainable
knowledge platform of the United Nations. Available at:

60
 http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/development-agenda/.
Sustainable Society Foundation. 2017a. Framework – Sustainable Society Index.
http://www.ssfindex.com/ssi/framework/.
Sustainable Society Foundation. 2017b. Calculation Methodology – Sustainable Society Index. Available at:
http://www.ssfindex.com/ssi/calculation-methodology/.
Sustainable Society Foundation. 2017c. Data – All countries – Sustainable Society Index. Available at:
http://www.ssfindex.com/data-all-countries/.
Sustainable Society Foundation. 2017d. Publications – Sustainable Society Index. Available at:
http://www.ssfindex.com/publications/.
Sustainable Society Foundation. 2017e. Main results 2016 – Sustainable Society Index. Available at:
http://www.ssfindex.com/results/main-results-2016/.
Talberth, J., C. Cobb, and N. Slattery. 2007. The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) 2006 - A tool for Sustainable
Development. Oakland: Redefining Progress 510:1–31.
The Social Progress Imperative. 2017. Frequently Asked Questions | Social Progress Imperative. Available at:
http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/faqs/.
UNDP and World Bank. 2016. Transition from the MDGs to the SDGs. United Nation Development Programme
and the World Bank Group. Available at:
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/sustainable-development-goals/transitioning-
from-the-mdgs-to-the-sdgs.html.
UN Deparment of Economic and Social Affairs (n.d.). Future We Want - Outcome document. United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Availble at: Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/futurewewant.html.
UN MDGs (n.d.). News on Millennium Development Goals. Millennium Development Goals knowledge
platform of United Nations. Available at: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.
UN Women (n.d.). The process to identify the Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations Women.
Available at: http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/post-2015/sustainable-development-goals.
UNU-IHDP and UNEP. 2012. Inclusive Wealth Report 2012. Measuring Progress Towards Sustainability.
United Nations University – International Human Dimensions Programme and United Nations
Environment Programme. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at:
http://mgiep.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/IWR2014.pdf
UNU-IHDP and UNEP. 2014. Inclusive Wealth Report 2014 Measuring progress toward sustainability. United
Nations University – International Human Dimensions Programme and the United Nations Environment
Programme. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at: http://mgiep.unesco.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/12/IWR2014-WEB.pdf
Ura, K., S. Alkire, T. Zangmo, and K. Wangdi. 2012. A Short Guide to Gross National Happiness Index. The
Centre for Bhutan Studies. Thimphu.
World Health Organisation. 2015. From MDGs to SDGs, WHO launches new report. World Health
Organisation. Availaible at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/mdg-sdg-report/en/.
Ward, J. D., P. C. Sutton, A. D. Werner, R. Costanza, S. H. Mohr, and C. T. Simmons. 2016. Is decoupling GDP
growth from environmental impact possible? PLoS ONE 11(10):1–15.

61
Worldwatch Institute Europe. 2014. Going Beyond GDP - Measuring Social Progress | Worldwatch Institute
Europe. Available at: http://www.worldwatch-europe.org/node/240.
Yale University. 2017a. About - Environmental Performance Index. Available at:
http://archive.epi.yale.edu/about.
Yale University. 2017b. Our Methods Environmental Performance Index.http://archive.epi.yale.edu/our-methods

62
List of Figures

Figure 1. The wedding cake.. ............................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 2. Each measure illustrated in the wedding cake framework............................................................... 23
Figure 3. Environmental Performance Index. ................................................................................................... 41

List of Tables

Table 1. The chosen measures.............................................................................................................................. 14

Table 2. Measures matching and relating with the SDGs.. ............................................................................... 19
Table 3. A comparison between the SDGs and the measures.. ......................................................................... 20
Table 4. Ranking table of most matched, related and both matched and related SDGs. .............................. 21
Table 5. Ranking table of least matched, related and both matched and related SDGs. ............................... 21
Table 6. Measures combined coverage of SDGs indicators and targets in percentages................................. 25
Table 7. Ranking table of measures combined coverage of specific SDGs. ..................................................... 26
Table 8. Ranking table of measures least combined coverage of specific SDGs…………………………….26
Table 9. Scholars classification of measures ……………………………………………………………………35
Table 10. The Genuine Progress Index indicators………………………………….………………………….38
Table 11. The Inclusice Wealth Index indicators………………………………………………………………40
Table 12. The Environmental Performance Index indicators………………………………….……………..41
Table 13. The Gross National Happiness Index indicators……………………………………………………43
Table 14. The Sustainable Society Index indicators…………………………………………………...………45
Table 15. The Social Progress Index indicators………………………………………………….…………….47
Table 16. The Better Life Index indicators..........................................................................................................49
Table 17. Changed SDG indicator from 2016 to 2017…………………………………………………………53

Equation 2. Incluvise Wealth Index equation. ................................................................................................... 39

Equation 1. Gross National Happiness equation. .............................................................................................. 43

Box 1. Definition of Sustainable Development. .................................................................................................. 34

63
A8 Final list of proposed Sustainable Development
Goal indicators
The following global indicator framework was developed by the Inter-Agency and
Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) and agreed to, as a practical starting
point at the 47th session of the UN Statistical Commission held in March 2016. The
report of the Commission, which included the global indicator framework, was then
taken note of by ECOSOC at its 70th session in June 2016.
The global indicator list is contained in the Report of the Inter-Agency and
Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators
(E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1), Annex IV and provided below.
The list includes 230 indicators on which general agreement has been reached.
Please note that the total number of indicators listed in the final indicator proposal
is 241. However, since nine indicators repeat under two or three different targets
(see below), the actual total number of individual indicators in the list is 230.
Indicators in the final list that repeat are the following:
1) 7.a.1/13.a.1
2) 8.4.1/12.2.1
3) 8.4.2/12.2.2
4) 10.3.1/16.b.1
5) 10.6.1/16.8.1
6) 15.7.1/15.c.1
7) 15.a.1/15.b.1
8) 1.5.1/11.5.1/13.1.2
9) 1.5.3/11.b.2/13.1.1
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Annex IV
Final list of proposed Sustainable Development
Goal indicators *
Sustainable Development Goal indicators should be disaggregated, where
relevant, by income, sex, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability and
geographic location, or other characteristics, in accordance with the Fundamental
Principles of Official Statistics (General Assembly resolution 68/261).

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere

1.1 By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people
everywhere, currently measured as people living on less
than $1.25 a day
1.2 By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of
men, women and children of all ages living in poverty
in all its dimensions according to national definitions
1.3 Implement nationally appropriate social protection
systems and measures for all, including floors, and by
2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the
vulnerable
1.4 By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in
particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights
to economic resources, as well as access to basic services,
ownership and control over land and other forms of
property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new
technology and financial services, including microfinance
1.5 By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those
in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and
vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and
other economic, social and environmental shocks and
disasters
1.1.1 Proportion of population below the
international poverty line, by sex, age, employment
status and geographical location (urban/rural)
1.2.1 Proportion of population living below the
national poverty line, by sex and age
1.2.2 Proportion of men, women and children of all
ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according
to national definitions
1.3.1 Proportion of population covered by social
protection floors/systems, by sex, distinguishing
children, unemployed persons, older persons, persons
with disabilities, pregnant women, newborns, work-
injury victims and the poor and the vulnerable
1.4.1 Proportion of population living in households
with access to basic services
1.4.2 Proportion of total adult population with secure
tenure rights to land, with legally recognized
documentation and who perceive their rights to land as
secure, by sex and by type of tenure
1.5.1 Number of deaths, missing persons and persons
affected by disaster per 100,000 peoplea
1.5.2 Direct disaster economic loss in relation to
global gross domestic product (GDP)a
1.5.3 Number of countries with national and local
disaster risk reduction strategiesa

__________________

a
An open-ended intergovernmental expert working group on indicators and terminology relating to disaster risk reduction
established by the General Assembly (resolution 69/284) is developing a set of indicators to measure global progress in the
implementation of the Sendai Framework. These indicators will eventually reflect the agreements on the Sendai Framework
indicators.

2/25
 Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

1.a Ensure significant mobilization of resources from 1.a.1 Proportion of resources allocated by the
a variety of sources, including through enhanced government directly to poverty reduction programmes
development cooperation, in order to provide adequate
1.a.2 Proportion of total government spending on
and predictable means for developing countries, in
essential services (education, health and social
particular least developed countries, to implement
protection)
programmes and policies to end poverty in all its
dimensions
1.b Create sound policy frameworks at the national, 1.b.1 Proportion of government recurrent and capital
regional and international levels, based on pro-poor and spending to sectors that disproportionately benefit
gender-sensitive development strategies, to support women, the poor and vulnerable groups
accelerated investment in poverty eradication actions
Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
2.1 By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all 2.1.1 Prevalence of undernourishment
people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable
2.1.2 Prevalence of moderate or severe food
situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and
insecurity in the population, based on the Food
sufficient food all year round
Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)
2.2 By 2030, end all forms of malnutrition, including 2.2.1 Prevalence of stunting (height for age <-2
achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on standard deviation from the median of the World
stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, Health Organization (WHO) Child Growth Standards)
and address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, among children under 5 years of age
pregnant and lactating women and older persons
2.2.2 Prevalence of malnutrition (weight for height
>+2 or <-2 standard deviation from the median of the
WHO Child Growth Standards) among children under
5 years of age, by type (wasting and overweight)
2.3 By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and 2.3.1 Volume of production per labour unit by
incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular classes of farming/pastoral/forestry enterprise size
women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists
2.3.2 Average income of small-scale food producers,
and fishers, including through secure and equal access to
by sex and indigenous status
land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge,
financial services, markets and opportunities for value
addition and non-farm employment
2.4 By 2030, ensure sustainable food production 2.4.1 Proportion of agricultural area under
systems and implement resilient agricultural practices productive and sustainable agriculture
that increase productivity and production, that help
maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for
adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought,
flooding and other disasters and that progressively
improve land and soil quality

3/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

2.5 By 2020, maintain the genetic diversity of seeds, 2.5.1 Number of plant and animal genetic resources
cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals for food and agriculture secured in either medium or
and their related wild species, including through soundly long-term conservation facilities
managed and diversified seed and plant banks at the
2.5.2 Proportion of local breeds classified as being at
national, regional and international levels, and promote
risk, not-at-risk or at unknown level of risk of
access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising
extinction
from the utilization of genetic resources and associated
traditional knowledge, as internationally agreed
2.a Increase investment, including through enhanced 2.a.1 The agriculture orientation index for
international cooperation, in rural infrastructure, government expenditures
agricultural research and extension services, technology
2.a.2 Total official flows (official development
development and plant and livestock gene banks in order
assistance plus other official flows) to the agriculture
to enhance agricultural productive capacity in developing
sector
countries, in particular least developed countries
2.b Correct and prevent trade restrictions and 2.b.1 Producer Support Estimate
distortions in world agricultural markets, including
2.b.2 Agricultural export subsidies
through the parallel elimination of all forms of
agricultural export subsidies and all export measures
with equivalent effect, in accordance with the mandate
of the Doha Development Round
2.c Adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning 2.c.1 Indicator of food price anomalies
of food commodity markets and their derivatives and
facilitate timely access to market information, including
on food reserves, in order to help limit extreme food
price volatility
Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
3.1 By 2030, reduce the global maternal mortality 3.1.1 Maternal mortality ratio
ratio to less than 70 per 100,000 live births
3.1.2 Proportion of births attended by skilled health
personnel
3.2 By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and 3.2.1 Under-five mortality rate
children under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming
3.2.2 Neonatal mortality rate
to reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12 per
1,000 live births and under-5 mortality to at least as low
as 25 per 1,000 live births

4/25

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
3.3 By 2030, end the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis,
malaria and neglected tropical diseases and combat
hepatitis, water-borne diseases and other communicable
diseases
3.4 By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality 3.4.1 Mortality rate attributed to cardiovascular
from non-communicable diseases through prevention disease, cancer, diabetes or chronic respiratory disease
and treatment and promote mental health and well-being
3.4.2 Suicide mortality rate
3.5 Strengthen the prevention and treatment of
substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and
harmful use of alcohol
3.6 By 2020, halve the number of global deaths and
injuries from road traffic accidents
3.7 By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and
reproductive health-care services, including for family
planning, information and education, and the integration
of reproductive health into national strategies and
programmes
3.8 Achieve universal health coverage, including
financial risk protection, access to quality essential
health-care services and access to safe, effective, quality
and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all
3.9 By 2030, substantially reduce the number of
deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air,
water and soil pollution and contamination
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
3.3.1 Number of new HIV infections per 1,000
uninfected population, by sex, age and key populations
3.3.2 Tuberculosis incidence per 1,000 population
3.3.3 Malaria incidence per 1,000 population
3.3.4 Hepatitis B incidence per 100,000 population
3.3.5 Number of people requiring interventions
against neglected tropical diseases
3.5.1 Coverage of treatment interventions
(pharmacological, psychosocial and rehabilitation and
aftercare services) for substance use disorders
3.5.2 Harmful use of alcohol, defined according to
the national context as alcohol per capita consumption
(aged 15 years and older) within a calendar year in
litres of pure alcohol
3.6.1 Death rate due to road traffic injuries
3.7.1 Proportion of women of reproductive age (aged
15-49 years) who have their need for family planning
satisfied with modern methods
3.7.2 Adolescent birth rate (aged 10-14 years; aged
15-19 years) per 1,000 women in that age group
3.8.1 Coverage of essential health services (defined
as the average coverage of essential services based on
tracer interventions that include reproductive,
maternal, newborn and child health, infectious
diseases, non-communicable diseases and service
capacity and access, among the general and the most
disadvantaged population)
3.8.2 Number of people covered by health insurance
or a public health system per 1,000 population
3.9.1 Mortality rate attributed to household and
ambient air pollution
3.9.2 Mortality rate attributed to unsafe water, unsafe
sanitation and lack of hygiene (exposure to unsafe
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for All (WASH)
services)
5/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

3.9.3 Mortality rate attributed to unintentional

3.a Strengthen the implementation of the World
Health Organization Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control in all countries, as appropriate
3.b Support the research and development of vaccines
and medicines for the communicable and
non-communicable diseases that primarily affect
developing countries, provide access to affordable
essential medicines and vaccines, in accordance with the
Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public
Health, which affirms the right of developing countries
to use to the full the provisions in the Agreement on
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
regarding flexibilities to protect public health, and, in
particular, provide access to medicines for all
3.c Substantially increase health financing and the
recruitment, development, training and retention of the
health workforce in developing countries, especially in
least developed countries and small island developing
States
3.d Strengthen the capacity of all countries, in
particular developing countries, for early warning, risk
reduction and management of national and global health
risks
Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
4.1 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete
free, equitable and quality primary and secondary
education leading to relevant and effective learning
outcomes
4.2 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access
to quality early childhood development, care and
pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary
education
4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and
men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and
tertiary education, including university
4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of
youth and adults who have relevant skills, including
technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent
jobs and entrepreneurship
poisoning
3.a.1 Age-standardized prevalence of current
tobacco use among persons aged 15 years and older
3.b.1 Proportion of the population with access to
affordable medicines and vaccines on a sustainable
basis
3.b.2 Total net official development assistance to
medical research and basic health sectors
3.c.1 Health worker density and distribution
3.d.1 International Health Regulations (IHR)
capacity and health emergency preparedness
4.1.1 Proportion of children and young people:
(a) in grades 2/3; (b) at the end of primary; and
(c) at the end of lower secondary achieving at least a
minimum proficiency level in (i) reading and
(ii) mathematics, by sex
4.2.1 Proportion of children under 5 years of age
who are developmentally on track in health, learning
and psychosocial well-being, by sex
4.2.2 Participation rate in organized learning (one
year before the official primary entry age), by sex
4.3.1 Participation rate of youth and adults in formal
and non-formal education and training in the previous
12 months, by sex
4.4.1 Proportion of youth and adults with
information and communications technology (ICT)
skills, by type of skill

6/25

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
4.5 By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education
and ensure equal access to all levels of education and
vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons
with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in
vulnerable situations
4.6 By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial
proportion of adults, both men and women, achieve
literacy and numeracy
4.7 By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the
knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable
development, including, among others, through
education for sustainable development and sustainable
lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a
culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship
and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s
contribution to sustainable development
4.a Build and upgrade education facilities that are
child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe,
non-violent, inclusive and effective learning
environments for all
4.b By 2020, substantially expand globally the number 4.b.1 Volume of official development assistance
of scholarships available to developing countries, in flows for scholarships by sector and type of study
particular least developed countries, small island
developing States and African countries, for enrolment
in higher education, including vocational training and
information and communications technology, technical,
engineering and scientific programmes, in developed
countries and other developing countries
4.c By 2030, substantially increase the supply of
qualified teachers, including through international
cooperation for teacher training in developing countries,
especially least developed countries and small island
developing States
Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women
and girls everywhere
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
4.5.1 Parity indices (female/male, rural/urban,
bottom/top wealth quintile and others such as
disability status, indigenous peoples and conflict-
affected, as data become available) for all education
indicators on this list that can be disaggregated
4.6.1 Percentage of population in a given age group
achieving at least a fixed level of proficiency in
functional (a) literacy and (b) numeracy skills, by sex
4.7.1 Extent to which (i) global citizenship education
and (ii) education for sustainable development,
including gender equality and human rights, are
mainstreamed at all levels in: (a) national education
policies, (b) curricula, (c) teacher education and
(d) student assessment
4.a.1 Proportion of schools with access to:
(a) electricity; (b) the Internet for pedagogical
purposes; (c) computers for pedagogical purposes;
(d) adapted infrastructure and materials for students
with disabilities; (e) basic drinking water; (f) single-
sex basic sanitation facilities; and (g) basic
handwashing facilities (as per the WASH indicator
definitions)
4.c.1 Proportion of teachers in: (a) pre-primary;
(b) primary; (c) lower secondary; and (d) upper
secondary education who have received at least the
minimum organized teacher training (e.g. pedagogical
training) pre-service or in-service required for
teaching at the relevant level in a given country
5.1.1 Whether or not legal frameworks are in place
to promote, enforce and monitor equality and
non-discrimination on the basis of sex
7/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women
and girls in the public and private spheres, including
trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation
5.3 Eliminate all harmful practices, such as child,
early and forced marriage and female genital mutilation
5.4 Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic
work through the provision of public services,
infrastructure and social protection policies and the
promotion of shared responsibility within the household
and the family as nationally appropriate
5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective participation
and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of
decision-making in political, economic and public life
5.6 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive
health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance
with the Programme of Action of the International
Conference on Population and Development and the
Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents
of their review conferences
5.a Undertake reforms to give women equal rights to
economic resources, as well as access to ownership and
control over land and other forms of property, financial
services, inheritance and natural resources, in
accordance with national laws
5.b Enhance the use of enabling technology, in
particular information and communications technology,
to promote the empowerment of women
8/25
Indicators
5.2.1 Proportion of ever-partnered women and girls
aged 15 years and older subjected to physical, sexual
or psychological violence by a current or former
intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by form of
violence and by age
5.2.2 Proportion of women and girls aged 15 years
and older subjected to sexual violence by persons
other than an intimate partner in the previous
12 months, by age and place of occurrence
5.3.1 Proportion of women aged 20-24 years who
were married or in a union before age 15 and before
age 18
5.3.2 Proportion of girls and women aged 15-49 years
who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting,
by age
5.4.1 Proportion of time spent on unpaid domestic
and care work, by sex, age and location
5.5.1 Proportion of seats held by women in national
parliaments and local governments
5.5.2 Proportion of women in managerial positions
5.6.1 Proportion of women aged 15-49 years who
make their own informed decisions regarding sexual
relations, contraceptive use and reproductive health
care
5.6.2 Number of countries with laws and regulations
that guarantee women aged 15-49 years access to
sexual and reproductive health care, information and
education
5.a.1 (a) Proportion of total agricultural population
with ownership or secure rights over agricultural land,
by sex; and (b) share of women among owners or
rights-bearers of agricultural land, by type of tenure
5.a.2 Proportion of countries where the legal
framework (including customary law) guarantees
women’s equal rights to land ownership and/or control
5.b.1 Proportion of individuals who own a mobile
telephone, by sex

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
5.c Adopt and strengthen sound policies and
enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender
equality and the empowerment of all women and girls at
all levels
Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
6.1 By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to
safe and affordable drinking water for all
6.2 By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable
sanitation and hygiene for all and end open defecation,
paying special attention to the needs of women and girls
and those in vulnerable situations
6.3 By 2030, improve water quality by reducing
pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release
of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the
proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially
increasing recycling and safe reuse globally
6.4 By 2030, substantially increase water-use
efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable
withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water
scarcity and substantially reduce the number of people
suffering from water scarcity
6.5 By 2030, implement integrated water resources
management at all levels, including through
transboundary cooperation as appropriate
6.6 By 2020, protect and restore water-related
ecosystems, including mountains, forests, wetlands,
rivers, aquifers and lakes
6.a By 2030, expand international cooperation and
capacity-building support to developing countries in
water- and sanitation-related activities and programmes,
including water harvesting, desalination, water
efficiency, wastewater treatment, recycling and reuse
technologies
6.b Support and strengthen the participation of local
communities in improving water and sanitation
management
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
5.c.1 Proportion of countries with systems to track
and make public allocations for gender equality and
women’s empowerment
6.1.1 Proportion of population using safely managed
drinking water services
6.2.1 Proportion of population using safely managed
sanitation services, including a hand-washing facility
with soap and water
6.3.1 Proportion of wastewater safely treated
6.3.2 Proportion of bodies of water with good
ambient water quality
6.4.1 Change in water-use efficiency over time
6.4.2 Level of water stress: freshwater withdrawal as
a proportion of available freshwater resources
6.5.1 Degree of integrated water resources
management implementation (0-100)
6.5.2 Proportion of transboundary basin area with an
operational arrangement for water cooperation
6.6.1 Change in the extent of water-related
ecosystems over time
6.a.1 Amount of water- and sanitation-related
official development assistance that is part of a
government-coordinated spending plan
6.b.1 Proportion of local administrative units with
established and operational policies and procedures
for participation of local communities in water and
sanitation management
9/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
7.1 By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, 7.1.1 Proportion of population with access to
reliable and modern energy services electricity
7.1.2 Proportion of population with primary reliance
on clean fuels and technology
7.2 By 2030, increase substantially the share of 7.2.1 Renewable energy share in the total final
renewable energy in the global energy mix energy consumption
7.3 By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in 7.3.1 Energy intensity measured in terms of primary
energy efficiency energy and GDP
7.a By 2030, enhance international cooperation to 7.a.1 Mobilized amount of United States dollars per
facilitate access to clean energy research and year starting in 2020 accountable towards the
technology, including renewable energy, energy $100 billion commitment
efficiency and advanced and cleaner fossil-fuel
technology, and promote investment in energy
infrastructure and clean energy technology
7.b By 2030, expand infrastructure and upgrade 7.b.1 Investments in energy efficiency as a
technology for supplying modern and sustainable energy percentage of GDP and the amount of foreign direct
services for all in developing countries, in particular investment in financial transfer for infrastructure and
least developed countries, small island developing States technology to sustainable development services
and landlocked developing countries, in accordance with
their respective programmes of support
Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment
and decent work for all
8.1 Sustain per capita economic growth in accordance 8.1.1 Annual growth rate of real GDP per capita
with national circumstances and, in particular, at least
7 per cent gross domestic product growth per annum in
the least developed countries
8.2 Achieve higher levels of economic productivity 8.2.1 Annual growth rate of real GDP per employed
through diversification, technological upgrading and person
innovation, including through a focus on high-value
added and labour-intensive sectors
8.3 Promote development-oriented policies that 8.3.1 Proportion of informal employment in
support productive activities, decent job creation, non-agriculture employment, by sex
entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and
encourage the formalization and growth of micro-,
small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through
access to financial services

10/25

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
8.4 Improve progressively, through 2030, global
resource efficiency in consumption and production and
endeavour to decouple economic growth from
environmental degradation, in accordance with the
10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable
Consumption and Production, with developed countries
taking the lead
8.5 By 2030, achieve full and productive employment
and decent work for all women and men, including for
young people and persons with disabilities, and equal
pay for work of equal value
8.6 By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of
youth not in employment, education or training
8.7 Take immediate and effective measures to
eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human
trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of
the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment
and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour
in all its forms
8.8 Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure
working environments for all workers, including
migrant workers, in particular women migrants, and
those in precarious employment
8.9 By 2030, devise and implement policies to
promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and
promotes local culture and products
8.10 Strengthen the capacity of domestic financial
institutions to encourage and expand access to banking,
insurance and financial services for all
8.a Increase Aid for Trade support for developing
countries, in particular least developed countries,
including through the Enhanced Integrated Framework
for Trade-related Technical Assistance to Least
Developed Countries
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
8.4.1 Material footprint, material footprint per
capita, and material footprint per GDP
8.4.2 Domestic material consumption, domestic
material consumption per capita, and domestic
material consumption per GDP
8.5.1 Average hourly earnings of female and male
employees, by occupation, age and persons with
disabilities
8.5.2 Unemployment rate, by sex, age and persons
with disabilities
8.6.1 Proportion of youth (aged 15-24 years) not in
education, employment or training
8.7.1 Proportion and number of children aged
5-17 years engaged in child labour, by sex and age
8.8.1 Frequency rates of fatal and non-fatal
occupational injuries, by sex and migrant status
8.8.2 Increase in national compliance of labour
rights (freedom of association and collective
bargaining) based on International Labour
Organization (ILO) textual sources and national
legislation, by sex and migrant status
8.9.1 Tourism direct GDP as a proportion of total
GDP and in growth rate
8.9.2 Number of jobs in tourism industries as a
proportion of total jobs and growth rate of jobs, by sex
8.10.1 Number of commercial bank branches and
automated teller machines (ATMs) per 100,000 adults
8.10.2 Proportion of adults (15 years and older) with
an account at a bank or other financial institution or
with a mobile-money-service provider
8.a.1 Aid for Trade commitments and disbursements
11/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

8.b By 2020, develop and operationalize a global 8.b.1 Total government spending in social protection
strategy for youth employment and implement the and employment programmes as a proportion of the
Global Jobs Pact of the International Labour national budgets and GDP
Organization
Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and
foster innovation
9.1 Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient 9.1.1 Proportion of the rural population who live
infrastructure, including regional and trans-border within 2 km of an all-season road
infrastructure, to support economic development and
9.1.2 Passenger and freight volumes, by mode of
human well-being, with a focus on affordable and
transport
equitable access for all
9.2 Promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization 9.2.1 Manufacturing value added as a proportion of
and, by 2030, significantly raise industry’s share of GDP and per capita
employment and gross domestic product, in line with
9.2.2 Manufacturing employment as a proportion of
national circumstances, and double its share in least
total employment
developed countries
9.3 Increase the access of small-scale industrial and 9.3.1 Proportion of small-scale industries in total
other enterprises, in particular in developing countries, industry value added
to financial services, including affordable credit, and
9.3.2 Proportion of small-scale industries with a loan
their integration into value chains and markets
or line of credit
9.4 By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit 9.4.1 CO2 emission per unit of value added
industries to make them sustainable, with increased
resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean
and environmentally sound technologies and industrial
processes, with all countries taking action in accordance
with their respective capabilities
9.5 Enhance scientific research, upgrade the 9.5.1 Research and development expenditure as a
technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all proportion of GDP
countries, in particular developing countries, including,
9.5.2 Researchers (in full-time equivalent) per
by 2030, encouraging innovation and substantially
million inhabitants
increasing the number of research and development
workers per 1 million people and public and private
research and development spending
9.a Facilitate sustainable and resilient infrastructure 9.a.1 Total official international support (official
development in developing countries through enhanced development assistance plus other official flows) to
financial, technological and technical support to African infrastructure
countries, least developed countries, landlocked
developing countries and small island developing States
9.b Support domestic technology development, 9.b.1 Proportion of medium and high-tech industry
research and innovation in developing countries, value added in total value added
including by ensuring a conducive policy environment
for, inter alia, industrial diversification and value
addition to commodities

12/25

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
9.c Significantly increase access to information and
communications technology and strive to provide
universal and affordable access to the Internet in least
developed countries by 2020
Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries
10.1 By 2030, progressively achieve and sustain
income growth of the bottom 40 per cent of the
population at a rate higher than the national average
10.2 By 2030, empower and promote the social,
economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of
age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or
economic or other status
10.3 Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities
of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory
laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate
legislation, policies and action in this regard
10.4 Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social
protection policies, and progressively achieve greater
equality
10.5 Improve the regulation and monitoring of global
financial markets and institutions and strengthen the
implementation of such regulations
10.6 Ensure enhanced representation and voice for
developing countries in decision-making in global
international economic and financial institutions in
order to deliver more effective, credible, accountable
and legitimate institutions
10.7 Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible
migration and mobility of people, including through the
implementation of planned and well-managed migration
policies
10.a Implement the principle of special and differential
treatment for developing countries, in particular least
developed countries, in accordance with World Trade
Organization agreements
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
9.c.1 Proportion of population covered by a mobile
network, by technology
10.1.1 Growth rates of household expenditure or
income per capita among the bottom 40 per cent of the
population and the total population
10.2.1 Proportion of people living below 50 per cent
of median income, by age, sex and persons with
disabilities
10.3.1 Proportion of the population reporting having
personally felt discriminated against or harassed
within the previous 12 months on the basis of a
ground of discrimination prohibited under
international human rights law
10.4.1 Labour share of GDP, comprising wages and
social protection transfers
10.5.1 Financial Soundness Indicators
10.6.1 Proportion of members and voting rights of
developing countries in international organizations
10.7.1 Recruitment cost borne by employee as a
proportion of yearly income earned in country of
destination
10.7.2 Number of countries that have implemented
well-managed migration policies
10.a.1 Proportion of tariff lines applied to imports
from least developed countries and developing
countries with zero-tariff
13/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
10.b Encourage official development assistance and
financial flows, including foreign direct investment, to
States where the need is greatest, in particular least
developed countries, African countries, small island
developing States and landlocked developing countries,
in accordance with their national plans and programmes
10.c By 2030, reduce to less than 3 per cent the
transaction costs of migrant remittances and eliminate
remittance corridors with costs higher than 5 per cent
Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
11.1 By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe
and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade
slums
11.2 By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable,
accessible and sustainable transport systems for all,
improving road safety, notably by expanding public
transport, with special attention to the needs of those in
vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with
disabilities and older persons
11.3 By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable
urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated
and sustainable human settlement planning and
management in all countries
11.4 Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the
world’s cultural and natural heritage
11.5 By 2030, significantly reduce the number of
deaths and the number of people affected and
substantially decrease the direct economic losses
relative to global gross domestic product caused by
disasters, including water-related disasters, with a focus
on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable
situations
14/25
Indicators
10.b.1 Total resource flows for development, by
recipient and donor countries and type of flow
(e.g. official development assistance, foreign direct
investment and other flows)
10.c.1 Remittance costs as a proportion of the amount
remitted
11.1.1 Proportion of urban population living in slums,
informal settlements or inadequate housing
11.2.1 Proportion of population that has convenient
access to public transport, by sex, age and persons
with disabilities
11.3.1 Ratio of land consumption rate to population
growth rate
11.3.2 Proportion of cities with a direct participation
structure of civil society in urban planning and
management that operate regularly and democratically
11.4.1 Total expenditure (public and private) per
capita spent on the preservation, protection and
conservation of all cultural and natural heritage, by
type of heritage (cultural, natural, mixed and World
Heritage Centre designation), level of government
(national, regional and local/municipal), type of
expenditure (operating expenditure/investment) and
type of private funding (donations in kind, private
non-profit sector and sponsorship)
11.5.1 Number of deaths, missing persons and persons
affected by disaster per 100,000 peoplea
11.5.2 Direct disaster economic loss in relation to
global GDP, including disaster damage to critical
infrastructure and disruption of basic servicesa

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
11.6 By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita
environmental impact of cities, including by paying
special attention to air quality and municipal and other
waste management
11.7 By 2030, provide universal access to safe,
inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in
particular for women and children, older persons and
persons with disabilities
11.a Support positive economic, social and
environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural
areas by strengthening national and regional
development planning
11.b By 2020, substantially increase the number of
cities and human settlements adopting and
implementing integrated policies and plans towards
inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation
to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop
and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, holistic disaster
risk management at all levels
11.c Support least developed countries, including
through financial and technical assistance, in building
sustainable and resilient buildings utilizing local
materials
Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
12.1 Implement the 10-Year Framework of Programmes
on Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns,
all countries taking action, with developed countries
taking the lead, taking into account the development
and capabilities of developing countries
12.2 By 2030, achieve the sustainable management and
efficient use of natural resources
12.3 By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the
retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along
production and supply chains, including post-harvest
losses
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
11.6.1 Proportion of urban solid waste regularly
collected and with adequate final discharge out of
total urban solid waste generated, by cities
11.6.2 Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter
(e.g. PM2.5 and PM10) in cities (population weighted)
11.7.1 Average share of the built-up area of cities that
is open space for public use for all, by sex, age and
persons with disabilities
11.7.2 Proportion of persons victim of physical or
sexual harassment, by sex, age, disability status and
place of occurrence, in the previous 12 months
11.a.1 Proportion of population living in cities that
implement urban and regional development plans
integrating population projections and resource needs,
by size of city
11.b.1 Proportion of local governments that adopt and
implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in
line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction 2015-2030a
11.b.2 Number of countries with national and local
disaster risk reduction strategiesa
11.c.1 Proportion of financial support to the least
developed countries that is allocated to the
construction and retrofitting of sustainable, resilient
and resource-efficient buildings utilizing local
materials
12.1.1 Number of countries with sustainable
consumption and production (SCP) national action
plans or SCP mainstreamed as a priority or a target
into national policies
12.2.1 Material footprint, material footprint per
capita, and material footprint per GDP
12.2.2 Domestic material consumption, domestic
material consumption per capita, and domestic
material consumption per GDP
12.3.1 Global food loss index
15/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
12.4 By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound
management of chemicals and all wastes throughout
their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international
frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air,
water and soil in order to minimize their adverse
impacts on human health and the environment
12.5 By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation
through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse
12.6 Encourage companies, especially large and
transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices
and to integrate sustainability information into their
reporting cycle
12.7 Promote public procurement practices that are
sustainable, in accordance with national policies and
priorities
12.8 By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the
relevant information and awareness for sustainable
development and lifestyles in harmony with nature
12.a Support developing countries to strengthen their
scientific and technological capacity to move towards
more sustainable patterns of consumption and
production
12.b Develop and implement tools to monitor
sustainable development impacts for sustainable
tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and
products
12.c Rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies that
encourage wasteful consumption by removing market
distortions, in accordance with national circumstances,
including by restructuring taxation and phasing out
those harmful subsidies, where they exist, to reflect
their environmental impacts, taking fully into account
the specific needs and conditions of developing
countries and minimizing the possible adverse impacts
on their development in a manner that protects the poor
and the affected communities
16/25
Indicators
12.4.1 Number of parties to international multilateral
environmental agreements on hazardous waste, and
other chemicals that meet their commitments and
obligations in transmitting information as required by
each relevant agreement
12.4.2 Hazardous waste generated per capita and
proportion of hazardous waste treated, by type of
treatment
12.5.1 National recycling rate, tons of material
recycled
12.6.1 Number of companies publishing sustainability
reports
12.7.1 Number of countries implementing sustainable
public procurement policies and action plans
12.8.1 Extent to which (i) global citizenship education
and (ii) education for sustainable development
(including climate change education) are
mainstreamed in (a) national education policies;
(b) curricula; (c) teacher education; and (d) student
assessment
12.a.1 Amount of support to developing countries on
research and development for sustainable consumption
and production and environmentally sound
technologies
12.b.1 Number of sustainable tourism strategies or
policies and implemented action plans with agreed
monitoring and evaluation tools
12.c.1 Amount of fossil-fuel subsidies per unit of
GDP (production and consumption) and as a
proportion of total national expenditure on fossil fuels

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impactsb
13.1 Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to
climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all
countries
13.2 Integrate climate change measures into national
policies, strategies and planning
13.3 Improve education, awareness-raising and human
and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation,
adaptation, impact reduction and early warning
13.a Implement the commitment undertaken by
developed-country parties to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change to a goal of
mobilizing jointly $100 billion annually by 2020 from
all sources to address the needs of developing countries
in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and
transparency on implementation and fully
operationalize the Green Climate Fund through its
capitalization as soon as possible
13.b Promote mechanisms for raising capacity for
effective climate change-related planning and
management in least developed countries and small
island developing States, including focusing on women,
youth and local and marginalized communities
__________________
b
Acknowledging that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is the
primary international, intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate
change.
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
13.1.1 Number of countries with national and local
disaster risk reduction strategiesa
13.1.2 Number of deaths, missing persons and persons
affected by disaster per 100,000 peoplea
13.2.1 Number of countries that have communicated
the establishment or operationalization of an
integrated policy/strategy/plan which increases their
ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate
change, and foster climate resilience and low
greenhouse gas emissions development in a manner
that does not threaten food production (including a
national adaptation plan, nationally determined
contribution, national communication, biennial update
report or other)
13.3.1 Number of countries that have integrated
mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early
warning into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula
13.3.2 Number of countries that have communicated
the strengthening of institutional, systemic and
individual capacity-building to implement adaptation,
mitigation and technology transfer, and development
actions
13.a.1 Mobilized amount of United States dollars per
year starting in 2020 accountable towards the
$100 billion commitment
13.b.1 Number of least developed countries and small
island developing States that are receiving specialized
support, and amount of support, including finance,
technology and capacity-building, for mechanisms for
raising capacities for effective climate change-related
planning and management, including focusing on
women, youth and local and marginalized
communities
17/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
14.1 By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine 14.1.1 Index of coastal eutrophication and floating
pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based plastic debris density
activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution
14.2 By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine 14.2.1 Proportion of national exclusive economic
and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse zones managed using ecosystem-based approaches
impacts, including by strengthening their resilience, and
take action for their restoration in order to achieve
healthy and productive oceans
14.3 Minimize and address the impacts of ocean 14.3.1 Average marine acidity (pH) measured at
acidification, including through enhanced scientific agreed suite of representative sampling stations
cooperation at all levels
14.4 By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end 14.4.1 Proportion of fish stocks within biologically
overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing sustainable levels
and destructive fishing practices and implement
science-based management plans, in order to restore
fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels
that can produce maximum sustainable yield as
determined by their biological characteristics
14.5 By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal 14.5.1 Coverage of protected areas in relation to
and marine areas, consistent with national and marine areas
international law and based on the best available
scientific information
14.6 By 2020, prohibit certain forms of fisheries 14.6.1 Progress by countries in the degree of
subsidies which contribute to overcapacity and implementation of international instruments aiming to
overfishing, eliminate subsidies that contribute to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing
illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and refrain
from introducing new such subsidies, recognizing that
appropriate and effective special and differential
treatment for developing and least developed countries
should be an integral part of the World Trade
Organization fisheries subsidies negotiationc
14.7 By 2030, increase the economic benefits to small 14.7.1 Sustainable fisheries as a percentage of GDP in
island developing States and least developed countries small island developing States, least developed
from the sustainable use of marine resources, including countries and all countries
through sustainable management of fisheries,
aquaculture and tourism

__________________
c
Taking into account ongoing World Trade Organization negotiations, the Doha Development
Agenda and the Hong Kong ministerial mandate.

18/25
 Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

14.a Increase scientific knowledge, develop research 14.a.1 Proportion of total research budget allocated to
capacity and transfer marine technology, taking into research in the field of marine technology
account the Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Commission Criteria and Guidelines on the Transfer of
Marine Technology, in order to improve ocean health
and to enhance the contribution of marine biodiversity
to the development of developing countries, in
particular small island developing States and least
developed countries
14.b Provide access for small-scale artisanal fishers to 14.b.1 Progress by countries in the degree of
marine resources and markets application of a legal/regulatory/policy/institutional
framework which recognizes and protects access
rights for small-scale fisheries
14.c Enhance the conservation and sustainable use of 14.c.1 Number of countries making progress in
oceans and their resources by implementing ratifying, accepting and implementing through legal,
international law as reflected in the United Nations policy and institutional frameworks, ocean-related
Convention on the Law of the Sea, which provides the instruments that implement international law, as
legal framework for the conservation and sustainable reflected in the United Nation Convention on the Law
use of oceans and their resources, as recalled in of the Sea, for the conservation and sustainable use of
paragraph 158 of “The future we want” the oceans and their resources
Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage
forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
15.1 By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and 15.1.1 Forest area as a proportion of total land area
sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater
15.1.2 Proportion of important sites for terrestrial and
ecosystems and their services, in particular forests,
freshwater biodiversity that are covered by protected
wetlands, mountains and drylands, in line with
areas, by ecosystem type
obligations under international agreements
15.2 By 2020, promote the implementation of 15.2.1 Progress towards sustainable forest
sustainable management of all types of forests, halt management
deforestation, restore degraded forests and substantially
increase afforestation and reforestation globally
15.3 By 2030, combat desertification, restore degraded 15.3.1 Proportion of land that is degraded over total
land and soil, including land affected by desertification, land area
drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land
degradation-neutral world
15.4 By 2030, ensure the conservation of mountain 15.4.1 Coverage by protected areas of important sites
ecosystems, including their biodiversity, in order to for mountain biodiversity
enhance their capacity to provide benefits that are
15.4.2 Mountain Green Cover Index
essential for sustainable development
15.5 Take urgent and significant action to reduce the 15.5.1 Red List Index
degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of
biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the
extinction of threatened species

19/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
15.6 Promote fair and equitable sharing of the benefits
arising from the utilization of genetic resources and
promote appropriate access to such resources, as
internationally agreed
15.7 Take urgent action to end poaching and trafficking
of protected species of flora and fauna and address both
demand and supply of illegal wildlife products
15.8 By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the
introduction and significantly reduce the impact of
invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and
control or eradicate the priority species
15.9 By 2020, integrate ecosystem and biodiversity
values into national and local planning, development
processes, poverty reduction strategies and accounts
15.a Mobilize and significantly increase financial
resources from all sources to conserve and sustainably
use biodiversity and ecosystems
15.b Mobilize significant resources from all sources
and at all levels to finance sustainable forest
management and provide adequate incentives to
developing countries to advance such management,
including for conservation and reforestation
15.c Enhance global support for efforts to combat
poaching and trafficking of protected species, including
by increasing the capacity of local communities to
pursue sustainable livelihood opportunities
Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for
all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
16.1 Significantly reduce all forms of violence and
related death rates everywhere
16.2 End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms
of violence against and torture of children
20/25
Indicators
15.6.1 Number of countries that have adopted
legislative, administrative and policy frameworks to
ensure fair and equitable sharing of benefits
15.7.1 Proportion of traded wildlife that was poached
or illicitly trafficked
15.8.1 Proportion of countries adopting relevant
national legislation and adequately resourcing the
prevention or control of invasive alien species
15.9.1 Progress towards national targets established in
accordance with Aichi Biodiversity Target 2 of the
Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020
15.a.1 Official development assistance and public
expenditure on conservation and sustainable use of
biodiversity and ecosystems
15.b.1 Official development assistance and public
expenditure on conservation and sustainable use of
biodiversity and ecosystems
15.c.1 Proportion of traded wildlife that was poached
or illicitly trafficked
16.1.1 Number of victims of intentional homicide per
100,000 population, by sex and age
16.1.2 Conflict-related deaths per 100,000 population,
by sex, age and cause
16.1.3 Proportion of population subjected to physical,
psychological or sexual violence in the previous
12 months
16.1.4 Proportion of population that feel safe walking
alone around the area they live
16.2.1 Proportion of children aged 1-17 years who
experienced any physical punishment and/or
psychological aggression by caregivers in the past
month

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
16.3 Promote the rule of law at the national and
international levels and ensure equal access to justice
for all
16.4 By 2030, significantly reduce illicit financial and
arms flows, strengthen the recovery and return of stolen
assets and combat all forms of organized crime
16.5 Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all
their forms
16.6 Develop effective, accountable and transparent
institutions at all levels
16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and
representative decision-making at all levels
16.8 Broaden and strengthen the participation of
developing countries in the institutions of global
governance
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
16.2.2 Number of victims of human trafficking per
100,000 population, by sex, age and form of
exploitation
16.2.3 Proportion of young women and men aged
18-29 years who experienced sexual violence by
age 18
16.3.1 Proportion of victims of violence in the
previous 12 months who reported their victimization
to competent authorities or other officially recognized
conflict resolution mechanisms
16.3.2 Unsentenced detainees as a proportion of
overall prison population
16.4.1 Total value of inward and outward illicit
financial flows (in current United States dollars)
16.4.2 Proportion of seized small arms and light
weapons that are recorded and traced, in accordance
with international standards and legal instruments
16.5.1 Proportion of persons who had at least one
contact with a public official and who paid a bribe to a
public official, or were asked for a bribe by those
public officials, during the previous 12 months
16.5.2 Proportion of businesses that had at least one
contact with a public official and that paid a bribe to a
public official, or were asked for a bribe by those
public officials during the previous 12 months
16.6.1 Primary government expenditures as a
proportion of original approved budget, by sector (or
by budget codes or similar)
16.6.2 Proportion of the population satisfied with their
last experience of public services
16.7.1 Proportions of positions (by sex, age, persons
with disabilities and population groups) in public
institutions (national and local legislatures, public
service, and judiciary) compared to national
distributions
16.7.2 Proportion of population who believe decision-
making is inclusive and responsive, by sex, age,
disability and population group
16.8.1 Proportion of members and voting rights of
developing countries in international organizations
21/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
16.9 By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including
birth registration
16.10 Ensure public access to information and protect
fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national
legislation and international agreements
16.a Strengthen relevant national institutions, including
through international cooperation, for building capacity
at all levels, in particular in developing countries, to
prevent violence and combat terrorism and crime
16.b Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and
policies for sustainable development
Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for
Sustainable Development
Finance
17.1 Strengthen domestic resource mobilization,
including through international support to developing
countries, to improve domestic capacity for tax and
other revenue collection
17.2 Developed countries to implement fully their
official development assistance commitments, including
the commitment by many developed countries to
achieve the target of 0.7 per cent of gross national
income for official development assistance (ODA/GNI)
to developing countries and 0.15 to 0.20 per cent of
ODA/GNI to least developed countries; ODA providers
are encouraged to consider setting a target to provide at
least 0.20 per cent of ODA/GNI to least developed
countries
17.3 Mobilize additional financial resources for
developing countries from multiple sources
22/25
Indicators
16.9.1 Proportion of children under 5 years of age
whose births have been registered with a civil
authority, by age
16.10.1 Number of verified cases of killing,
kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary
detention and torture of journalists, associated media
personnel, trade unionists and human rights advocates
in the previous 12 months
16.10.2 Number of countries that adopt and implement
constitutional, statutory and/or policy guarantees for
public access to information
16.a.1 Existence of independent national human rights
institutions in compliance with the Paris Principles
16.b.1 Proportion of population reporting having
personally felt discriminated against or harassed in the
previous 12 months on the basis of a ground of
discrimination prohibited under international human
rights law
17.1.1 Total government revenue as a proportion of
GDP, by source
17.1.2 Proportion of domestic budget funded by
domestic taxes
17.2.1 Net official development assistance, total and
to least developed countries, as a proportion of the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) Development Assistance
Committee donors’ gross national income (GNI)
17.3.1 Foreign direct investments (FDI), official
development assistance and South-South Cooperation
as a proportion of total domestic budget
17.3.2 Volume of remittances (in United States
dollars) as a proportion of total GDP
 Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda) Indicators

17.4 Assist developing countries in attaining long-term 17.4.1 Debt service as a proportion of exports of
debt sustainability through coordinated policies aimed goods and services
at fostering debt financing, debt relief and debt
restructuring, as appropriate, and address the external
debt of highly indebted poor countries to reduce debt
distress
17.5 Adopt and implement investment promotion 17.5.1 Number of countries that adopt and implement
regimes for least developed countries investment promotion regimes for least developed
countries
Technology
17.6 Enhance North-South, South-South and triangular 17.6.1 Number of science and/or technology
regional and international cooperation on and access to cooperation agreements and programmes between
science, technology and innovation and enhance countries, by type of cooperation
knowledge-sharing on mutually agreed terms, including
17.6.2 Fixed Internet broadband subscriptions per
through improved coordination among existing
100 inhabitants, by speed
mechanisms, in particular at the United Nations level,
and through a global technology facilitation mechanism
17.7 Promote the development, transfer, dissemination 17.7.1 Total amount of approved funding for
and diffusion of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries to promote the development,
developing countries on favourable terms, including on transfer, dissemination and diffusion of
concessional and preferential terms, as mutually agreed environmentally sound technologies
17.8 Fully operationalize the technology bank and 17.8.1 Proportion of individuals using the Internet
science, technology and innovation capacity-building
mechanism for least developed countries by 2017 and
enhance the use of enabling technology, in particular
information and communications technology
Capacity-building
17.9 Enhance international support for implementing 17.9.1 Dollar value of financial and technical
effective and targeted capacity-building in developing assistance (including through North-South, South-
countries to support national plans to implement all the South and triangular cooperation) committed to
Sustainable Development Goals, including through developing countries
North-South, South-South and triangular cooperation
Trade
17.10 Promote a universal, rules-based, open, 17.10.1 Worldwide weighted tariff-average
non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading
system under the World Trade Organization, including
through the conclusion of negotiations under its Doha
Development Agenda

23/25
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
17.11 Significantly increase the exports of developing
countries, in particular with a view to doubling the least
developed countries’ share of global exports by 2020
17.12 Realize timely implementation of duty-free and
quota-free market access on a lasting basis for all least
developed countries, consistent with World Trade
Organization decisions, including by ensuring that
preferential rules of origin applicable to imports from
least developed countries are transparent and simple,
and contribute to facilitating market access
Systemic issues
Policy and institutional coherence
17.13 Enhance global macroeconomic stability,
including through policy coordination and policy
coherence
17.14 Enhance policy coherence for sustainable
development
17.15 Respect each country’s policy space and
leadership to establish and implement policies for
poverty eradication and sustainable development
Multi-stakeholder partnerships
17.16 Enhance the Global Partnership for Sustainable
Development, complemented by multi-stakeholder
partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge,
expertise, technology and financial resources, to support
the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals
in all countries, in particular developing countries
17.17 Encourage and promote effective public, public-
private and civil society partnerships, building on the
experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships
Data, monitoring and accountability
17.18 By 2020, enhance capacity-building support to
developing countries, including for least developed
countries and small island developing States, to increase
significantly the availability of high-quality, timely and
reliable data disaggregated by income, gender, age,
race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability, geographic
location and other characteristics relevant in national
contexts
24/25
Indicators
17.11.1 Developing countries’ and least developed
countries’ share of global exports
17.12.1 Average tariffs faced by developing countries,
least developed countries and small island developing
States
17.13.1 Macroeconomic Dashboard
17.14.1 Number of countries with mechanisms in
place to enhance policy coherence of sustainable
development
17.15.1 Extent of use of country-owned results
frameworks and planning tools by providers of
development cooperation
17.16.1 Number of countries reporting progress in
multi-stakeholder development effectiveness
monitoring frameworks that support the achievement
of the sustainable development goals
17.17.1 Amount of United States dollars committed to
public-private and civil society partnerships
17.18.1 Proportion of sustainable development
indicators produced at the national level with full
disaggregation when relevant to the target, in
accordance with the Fundamental Principles of
Official Statistics
17.18.2 Number of countries that have national
statistical legislation that complies with the
Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics

Goals and targets (from the 2030 Agenda)
17.19 By 2030, build on existing initiatives to develop
measurements of progress on sustainable development
that complement gross domestic product, and support
statistical capacity-building in developing countries
Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable
Development Goal Indicators (E/CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1)
Indicators
17.18.3 Number of countries with a national statistical
plan that is fully funded and under implementation, by
source of funding
17.19.1 Dollar value of all resources made available to
strengthen statistical capacity in developing countries
17.19.2 Proportion of countries that (a) have
conducted at least one population and housing census
in the last 10 years; and (b) have achieved 100 per
cent birth registration and 80 per cent death
registration
25/25


65