| Globalization | Poverty | Development | Sustainability |
******************************************************************************
This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department for
Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development (DPCSD). Reproduction and
dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is
encouraged, provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United
Nations in making it available.
******************************************************************************
INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGIES
SOCIAL INDICATORS
Foreword
In the four years since the Rio Summit, there have been many
initiatives to promote sustainable development. Indicators are useful
tools to gain insight regarding the progress made in achieving sustainable
development. Agenda 21 calls for countries, international organizations
and non-governmental organizations to develop and use indicators of
sustainable development.
Building on many national and international initiatives aimed at
developing and using indicators, the Commission on Sustainable Development
in 1995 adopted a work programme on indicators for sustainable development.
The work programme includes an initial set of 130 indicators.
To facilitate the use of these indicators and to test their
practicability at the same time, methodology sheets have been developed
for each of them. This publication presents these methodology sheets.
It is essential to get feedback on the indicators and the
methodology sheets. We, in the CSD secretariat, look forward to your
reactions and comments. The goal is to have a good set of indicators
for sustainable development by the year 2000. We count on the users
of this publication to contribute to this goal.
On behalf of the United Nations, I would like to thank all of
those who have participated in the process of making this publication
possible.
Joke Waller-Hunter
Director
Division for Sustainable Development
Department for Policy Coordination
and Sustainable Development
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents
Page
Foreword
Table of contents v
Introduction vii
Working list of indicators of sustainable development ix
Methodology sheets:
Indicators for social aspects of sustainable development 1
Chapter 3: Combating poverty 3
Chapter 5: Demographic dynamics and sustainability 31
Chapter 36: Promoting education, public awareness and
training 44
Chapter 6: Protecting and promoting human health 83
Chapter 7: Promoting sustainable human settlement
development 123
Indicators for economic aspects of sustainable development 150
Chapter 2: International cooperation to accelerate
sustainable development in countries
and related domestic policies 152
Chapter 4: Changing consumption patterns 166
Chapter 33: Financial resources and mechanisms 184
Chapter 34: Transfer of environmentally sound
technology, cooperation and
capacity-building 201
Indicators for environmental aspects of sustainable development 210
Water
Chapter 18: Protection of the quality and supply
of freshwater resources 213
Chapter 17: Protection of the oceans, all kinds of
seas and coastal areas 233
Land
Chapter 10: Integrated approach to the planning
and management of land resources 245
Chapter 12: Managing fragile ecosystems: combating
desertification and drought 255
Chapter 13: Managing fragile ecosystems: sustainable
mountain development 269
Chapter 14: Promoting sustainable agriculture and
rural development 280
Other natural resources
Chapter 11: Combating deforestation 298
Chapter 15: Conservation of biological diversity 311
Chapter 16: Environmentally sound management of
biotechnology 318
Atmosphere
Chapter 9: Protection of the atmosphere 323
Waste
Chapter 21: Environmentally sound management of
solid wastes and sewage-related issues 349
Chapter 19: Environmentally sound management of
toxic chemicals 364
Chapter 20: Environmentally sound management of
hazardous wastes 366
Chapter 22: Safe and environmentally sound
management of radioactive wastes 382
Indicators for institutional aspects of sustainable development 385
Chapter 8: Integrating environment and development
in decision-making 386
Chapter 35: Science for sustainable development 395
Chapter 39: International legal instruments and
mechanisms 404
Chapter 40: Information for decision-making 411
Chapter 23-32: Strengthening the role of major groups 419
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
On occasion of its third session, in April 1995, the Commission on
Sustainable Development (CSD) approved a work programme on indicators of
sustainable development. The work programme included a list of
approximately 130 indicators organized in the Driving Force - State -
Response Framework. In this framework, Driving Force indicators represent
human activities, processes and patterns that impact on sustainable
development, State indicators indicate the "state" of sustainable
development, and response indicators indicate policy options and other
responses to changes in the state of sustainable development.
The indicators are intended for use at the national level by
countries in their decision-making processes. Not all of the indicators
will be applicable in every situation. It is understood that countries
will choose to use from among the indicators those relevant to national
priorities, goals and targets.
Following the decision of the CSD and the adoption of an
implementation plan by experts from various organizations involved in the
follow-up, the process of developing methodology sheets for each of the
indicators was started. The purpose of the methodology sheets is to
provide users at the national level with sufficient information about the
concept, significance, measurement and data sources for each indicator so
as to facilitate data collection and analysis. The process was coordinated
by the United Nations Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable
Development (DPCSD) but builds upon indicator work being carried out in
several organizations. The process was marked by a high degree of
collaboration among a large number of organizations of the United Nations
system, other intergovernmental organizations, and non-governmental
organizations.
Organizations which have contributed both to the development of the
indicators and to the preparation of the methodology sheets include the
following: the United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA); the United Nations Department for
Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development (DPCSD); the United Nations
Department for Development Support and Management Services (DDSMS); the
United Nations Department for Humanitarian Affairs (DHA); the secretariat
of the Framework Convention on Climate Change; the United Nations
Children~s Fund (UNICEF); the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD); the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and
its Office to Combat Desertification and Drought (UNSO); the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) and the secretariat of the Basel Convention;
the United Nations University; the Regional Commissions of the United
Nations; the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat); the
International Labour Organization (ILO); the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO); the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the World Health
Organization (WHO); the International Telecommunication Union (ITU); the
World Meteorological Organization (WMO); the United Nations Industrial
Development Organization (UNIDO); the World Bank; the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA); the European Communities Statistical Office; the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); the
International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT); the International
Conservation Union (IUCN); the International Institute for Sustainable
Development (IISD); the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis
(IIASA); the National Institute for Public Health and Environmental
Protection of the Netherlands (RIVM); the New Economics Foundation; the
Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE); the Worldwatch
Institute; the World Resources Institute (WRI); the World Wide Fund for
Nature (WWF); and the Wuppertal Institute.
In February 1996, a meeting of government experts was organized by
the Environment Agency of Japan, in cooperation with DPCSD, in Glen Cove,
New York, to discuss and evaluate the methodology sheets from the point of
view of potential users. The methodology sheets were also circulated among
a roster of international experts for their comments.
The responsible organizations revised the methodology sheets
accordingly and a first draft of the publication was presented as a
Background Paper no. 15, at the fourth session of the Commission on
Sustainable Development, in April/May 1996. Since then additional and
revised methodology sheets have been submitted by the lead agencies and
were incorporated into the revised edition of the document. In a few
instances, methodology sheets are still being developed and in these cases,
a "bookmark" has been included, stating the name of the indicator, a brief
definition, the unit of measurement, and its placement in the framework.
The work on completing and revising the methodology sheets will continue,
as the CSD work programme on indicators now enters its second phase.
The second phase concentrates on enhancement of information exchange
among all interested partners, training and capacity building at the
regional and national levels and monitoring the use of the indicators in
countries that have shown interest in this process. The publication will
now be forwarded to all Governments to assist them in working with
indicators in their decision-making processes. As feedback and results
from testing, analytical work are discussed, further improvements in the
indicators and methodology sheets will be implemented. This includes in
the longer run, additional work on interlinkages, highly aggregated
indicators and the conceptual framework and compilation of environmental
indicators.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methodology Sheets
Indicators for Social Aspects of Sustainable Development
Table of Contents
Page
Chapter 3: Combating poverty 3
- Unemployment rate 3
- Head count index of poverty 9
- Poverty gap index 14
- Squared poverty gap index 19
- Gini index of income inequality 24
- Ratio of average female wage to male wage 28
Chapter 5: Demographic dynamics and sustainability 31
- Population growth rate 31
- Net migration rate 34
- Total fertility rate 38
- Population density 41
Chapter 36: Promoting education, public awareness and training 44
- Rate of change of school-age population 44
- Primary school enrolment ratio--gross 47
- Primary school enrolment ratio--net 51
- Secondary school enrolment ratio--gross 55
- Secondary school enrolment ratio--net 59
- Adult literacy rate 63
- Children reaching grade 5 of primary education 66
- School life expectancy 70
- Difference between male and female school
enrolment ratios 73
- Women per hundred men in the labour force 76
- GDP spent on education 80
Chapter 6: Protecting and promoting human health 83
- Basic sanitation: percent of population with
adequate excreta disposal facilities 83
- Access to safe drinking water 86
- Life expectancy at birth 89
- Adequate birth weight 92
- Infant mortality rate 94
- Maternal mortality rate 98
- Nutritional status of children 102
- Immunization against infectious childhood diseases 105
- Contraceptive prevalence 108
- Proportion of potentially hazardous chemicals
monitored in food 112
- National health expenditure devoted to
local health care 118
- Total national health expenditure related to GNP 120
Chapter 7: Promoting sustainable human settlement development 123
- Rate of growth of urban population 123
- Per capita consumption of fossil fuel by motor
vehicle transport 126
- Human and economic loss due to natural disasters 129
- Percent of population in urban areas 134
- Area and population of urban formal and
informal settlements 137
- Floor area per person 140
- House price to income ratio 143
- Infrastructure expenditure per capita 147
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a)Name: Unemployment rate.
(b)Brief Definition: Unemployment rate is the ratio of unemployed people to
the labour force.
(c)Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a)Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The unemployment rate measures the part of the labour force
which, during the survey reference period, was neither (i) at work nor
temporarily absent from work (i.e. not in paid or self- employment); (ii)
available for work; or (iii) seeking work.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Unemployment is
useful and relevant to measuring sustainable development, especially if
uniformly measured over time, and considered with other socioeconomic
indicators. It is one of the main reasons for poverty in rich and medium
income countries and among persons with high education in low income countries
(no work, no income but compensation from insurance schemes or other welfare
state systems whenever they exist). It should be noted, however, that it is
common to find people working full-time but remaining poor due to the
particular social conditions and type of industrial relations prevalent in
their country, industry, or occupation.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is linked to other
socioeconomic indicators such as poverty measures and adult literacy.
(d) Targets: National targets for unemployment are common.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See 7 iii below.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The definitions for labour
force, employed population, and unemployed population are well established by
international agreements (see section 7 below).
i) Labour Force: The current economically active population or labour
force has two components: the employed and the unemployed population. The
international standard definition of labour force established by the Thirteen
International Conference of Labour Statisticians (ILO, 1982) is based on the
following elements:
--The survey population: All usual residents (de jure population) or
all persons present in the country at the time of the survey (de facto
population). Some particular groups, such as the armed forces or other
populations living in institutions, nomadic people, etc. may be excluded.
--An age limit: In countries where compulsory schooling and
legislation on the minimum age for admission to employment have broad coverage
and are widely respected, the age specified in these regulations may be used
as a basis for determining an appropriate minimum age limit for measuring the
economically active population.
In other countries the minimum age limit should be determined empirically on
the basis of (i) the extent and intensity of participation in economic
activities by young people, and (ii) the feasibility and cost of measuring
such participation with acceptable accuracy. Some countries also determine a
maximum age for inclusion in the labour force.
--The involvement in economic activities during the survey reference
period: The concept of economic activity adopted by the Thirteenth
International Conference of Labour Statisticians (1982) is defined in terms
of production of goods and services as set forth by the United Nations System
of National Accounts, (revised in 1993).
-- A short reference period: For example, one week or a day.
ii) Employed population: According to the 1982 international definition
of employment (ILO, 1983) the employed comprise all persons above the age
specified for measuring the labour force, who were in the following
categories:
--Paid employment: (i) at work: persons who, during the reference
period, performed some work (at least one hour) for wage or salary, in cash
or in kind; (ii) with a job but not at work: persons who, having already
worked in their present job, were temporarily not at work during the reference
period but had a formal attachment to their job;
--self-employment: (i) at work: persons who, during the reference
period, performed some work (at least one hour) for profit or family gain, in
cash or in kind; (ii) with an enterprise but not at work : persons with an
enterprise, which may be a business enterprise, a farm or a service
undertaking, who were temporarily not at work during the reference period for
some specific reason.
iii) Unemployed population: According to the 1982 international
definition of employment (ILO, 1983) the unemployed comprise all persons
above the age specified for measuring the labour force, who during the survey
reference period were at the same time: (i) not in paid employment or
self-employment, not even for an hour; (ii) available for work; and (iii)
seeking work.
(b) Measurement Methods:
--Sources may be grouped into two broad categories: (i) population
censuses and household sample surveys; and (ii) various types of
administrative records, such as employment exchange registers, unemployment
insurance records or social security files, which cover different segments of
the target population (numerator of the indicator) through different
conceptual frameworks.
Estimates according to the international standards can in practice be made
most reliably on the basis of data collected through household surveys and
population censuses. Some of the criteria specified in the international
standards can only be implemented precisely through personal interviews. This
is the only data source which, on a regular basis and with an appropriate
survey design, can cover virtually the entire population of a country, all
branches of economic activity, sectors of the economy, types of activity
status and categories of workers and which allow joint, mutually exclusive
measurement of the employed, unemployed and economically inactive.
--The one hour criterion is necessary to cover all regular and
irregular types of employment that may exist in a given country; to have the
total employment corresponding to aggregate production; and to justify the
international definition of unemployment as a total lack of work, so that the
two components of the labour force are mutually exclusive categories.
--Temporary absence from work is a notion which refers to situations
in which a period of work is interrupted by a period of absence, i.e. persons
have already worked at their current activity and are expected to return to
their work after the period of absence.
For paid employment, temporary absence from work is ascertained on the basis
of the concept of formal job attachment according to one or more of the
following criteria: continued receipt of wage or salary; an assurance of a
return to work following the end of the contingency, or an agreement as to the
date of return; the elapsed duration of absence from the job which, wherever
relevant, may be that duration for which workers can receive compensation
benefits without obligation to accept other jobs.
For self-employment, the concept of temporary absence from work is based on
two criteria: the continued existence of the enterprise and the duration of
absence.
--Availability for work means that, given a work opportunity, a
person should be able and ready to work during the survey reference period. In
practice, many countries prefer to use a slightly longer reference period for
availability (not everyone who is seeking work can be expected to take up a
job immediately one is offered).
--Seeking work means having taken specific active steps in a
specified recent period to seek paid employment or self-employment. This
specified period may be longer than the survey reference period (e.g. one
month or the four weeks before it) to take account of the time-lags which
often follow initial steps to obtain work, and during which jobseekers may not
take any other initiatives to find work.
The 1982 international standards introduced a provision which allows for the
relaxation of the seeking work criterion in situations where the conventional
means of seeking work are of limited relevance, where the labour market is
largely unorganised or of limited scope, where labour absorption is at the
time inadequate, or where the labour force is largely self-employed .
--Particular groups: (i) Future starts i.e. persons who have made
arrangements to take up paid employment or to undertake self-employment
activity at a date subsequent to the reference period, if currently available
for work, are to be considered as unemployed whether or not they continue to
seek work. (ii) Lay-offs without formal job attachment but seeking and
currently available for work are to be classified as unemployed. (iii)
Students seeking and available for work are unemployed (the availability of
full-time students seeking full-time work, however, may be questionable). (iv)
Persons seeking and available for apprenticeship are to be classified as
unemployed if the apprenticeship is an economic activity in the sense of SNA.
(v) Beneficiaries of employment creation schemes are unemployed if the
training does not take place within the context of an enterprise nor is
associated with the productive activities of the enterprise, and no formal job
attachment exists; but there is a definite commitment to employment after the
end of the training.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR framework the
unemployment rate (%) has been put into the Driving Force indicators category.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The concept of poverty refers to a long
lasting situation while the number of unemployed can change very fast
depending of various short term circumstances. Therefore, it may be
interesting to use the concept of usual unemployment and usual economically
active population instead of current unemployment and labour force. The
difference is that the survey reference period is a long one (e.g. one year)
and that a person is to be classified in one category (employed, unemployed
or inactive) according to the category in which he or she is classifiable for
the greatest amount of time.
National capacity to collect data related to unemployment varies considerably.
There are often severe problems with data quality. In addition, the informal
sector, and unpaid labour in, for example, households and the agricultural
sector are not captured by this indicator.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The unemployment rate is more meaningful
when shown by age, sex and other relevant variables such as the educational
level, previous work experience etc.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator: Labour force (total number of
persons) and total number of unemployed persons, derived from the same survey.
(b) Data Availability: The availability of the rate of unemployment in
recent years (1992, 1993 or 1994) is ascertained for 80 countries. The sources
are labour force surveys or general household surveys for 57 countries (3 do
not give the distribution by gender; 15 also use employment office statistics
of which 13 provide the distribution by gender); employment office statistics
exclusively for 18 countries (5 do not give the distribution by gender); and
official estimates for 4 countries (3 give the distribution by gender).
(c) Data Sources: See section 7i below.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is the International Labour Office (ILO) of the
United Nations, located in Geneva. The contact point is the Focal Point
for Environment and Sustainable Development, ILO; fax no. (41-22) 798
8685.
7. Further Information
(a) Data:
Yearbook of Labour Statistics, ILO, Geneva;
Bulletin of Labour Statistics (quarterly) and its Supplement
(January/February, April/May, July/August and October/November), ILO,
Geneva;
Statistical yearbooks and other publications issued by the national
statistical offices.
(b) Methodology:
Surveys of Economically Active Population, Employment, Unemployment and
Underemployment -An ILO Manual on Concepts and Methods, ILO, Geneva, 1992.
Sources and Methods: Labour Statistics, Volumes 3 and 5, ILO, Geneva, 1991 and
1990, currently updated.
System of National Accounts 1993, Commission of the European Communities,
International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development, United Nations, World Bank, Brussels/Luxembourg, New York, Paris,
Washington, D.C., 1993;
Current international recommendations on labour statistics, ILO, Geneva, 1988.
See particularly the Resolution Concerning Statistics of the Economically
Active Population, Employment, Unemployment and Underemployment, adopted by
the Thirteenth International Conference of Labour Statisticians (October
1982).
(c) International Conventions and Recommendations:
Labour Statistics Convention (No. 160) and Recommendation (No. 170), 1985.
LEAD AGENCY: ILO
HEAD COUNT INDEX OF POVERTY
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Head Count Index of Poverty.
(b) Brief Definition: The proportion of the population with a standard
of living below the poverty line.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The most important purpose of a poverty measure is to
enable poverty comparisons. These are required for an overall assessment of a
country's progress in poverty alleviation and/or the evaluation of specific
policies or projects. An important case of a poverty comparison is the poverty
profile which shows how the aggregate poverty measure can be decomposed into
poverty measures for various sub-groups of the population, such as by region
of residence, employment sector, education level, or ethnic group. A good
poverty profile can help reveal a number of aspects of poverty-reduction
policies, such as the regional or sectoral priorities for public spending.
Poverty comparisons are also made over time, in assessing overall performance
from the point of view of the poor.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Measures of
poverty are a very significant consideration of sustainable development. The
eradication of poverty remains a major challenge for policy decision makers.
Furthermore, an integrative viewpoint which simultaneously takes account of
development issues, resource use and environmental quality, and human welfare
must be taken if sustainable progress is to be achieved.
The Head Count Index of poverty captures the prevalence of poverty by
measuring the proportion of population for whom consumption (or any other
suitable measure of living standard) is below the poverty line. An increase
in this indicator implies a worsening of the poverty situation with a greater
proportion of the population falling below the poverty line.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: In general, this indicator is linked
to many other sustainable development measures, for example, net migration
rate, adult literacy rate, Gross Domestic Product per capita, and population
living below the poverty line in dryland areas. In particular, the Head Count
Index is closely associated to the Poverty Gap Index and the Squared Poverty
Gap Index which capture successively more detailed aspects of the poverty
situation. The Head Count Index measures how widespread poverty is, the
Poverty Gap Index measures how poor the poor are, and the Squared Poverty Gap
Index measures the severity of poverty by giving more weight to the poorest
of the poor.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A poverty measure is a summary
statistic on the economic welfare of the poor in a society. There is no one
universally accepted single measure of poverty. A number of different
approaches exist (see, for example, the methodology sheets for the Poverty Gap
Index and the Squared Poverty Gap Index). This methodology sheet guides the
reader along certain key issues, such as the different approaches to measuring
individual welfare, without prescribing decisions. Consequently, it is
directed at comparability over time within a given country, as it helps
national practitioners specify poverty indicators that match their specific
situation and preferred approach. However, this is at the expense of
international comparability.
To compute poverty measures, the following questions related to identifying
and defining the poor must be addressed first:
i) How do we measure an individual's economic welfare?
ii) At what level of measured welfare is a person considered poor?
(b) Measurement Methods: The Head Count Index (H) is the proportion of
the population whose economic welfare (y) is less than the poverty line (z).
If q people are deemed to be poor in a population of size n then H=q/n. For
computing the Head Count Index, estimates of individual economic welfare and
the poverty line are required.
i) Measuring Individual Welfare: There are a number of different
approaches to measuring welfare. The approaches differ in terms of the
importance attached to the individual's own judgment of well-being versus a
concept of welfare decided upon by somebody else. The former would focus on
measuring an individual's consumption of a bundle of goods and services. An
example of the latter would be defining welfare by the level of nutritional
intake, even though people do not live on food alone, or make food choices
solely on the basis of nutrition. Approaches in practice also differ according
to how difficult it is to obtain certain types of data in specific settings.
Typically one finds that poverty comparisons in developing countries put a
high weight on nutritional attainments, consistent with the behaviour of poor
people in a specific society. A comprehensive measure of consumption (for
example, total expenditure on all goods and services consumed, including
non-market goods, such as consumption from a farmer's own product) has been
more popular than using current income in the development literature. This is
due in part to the fact that incomes are harder to measure accurately. Current
consumption is also likely to give a better indication than current income of
a household's typical, long-term, economic welfare; income may fluctuate
greatly over time, particularly in rural economies (see Ravallion reference
in section 7a below).
The following methods can be used for measuring individual standards of
living:
--Consumption per equivalent male adult: Since households differ in
size and composition, a simple comparison of aggregate household consumption
can be misleading about the welfare of individual members of the household.
Therefore, for any given household, an equivalence scale is used to
approximate the number of single adults, based on observed consumption
behaviour. There are a number of value judgments embedded in this practice;
for example, differences in needs are reflected in differences in consumption.
Adult females and children are assigned a male equivalence of less than one
since they typically consume less; however, that may not mean that they have
lower "needs" but rather have less power within the household. The existence
of size economies in consumption may also mean that two people can live more
cheaply together than apart (for a further discussion of these issues, see
Ravallion reference in section 7a below).
--Undernutrition: This is a distinct concept, although closely
associated with poverty. Undernutrition can be viewed as a specific type of
poverty, namely food energy poverty. There are a number of arguments for and
against using this as a measure of well-being. A practical advantage is that
this measure does not have to be adjusted for inflation and would not be
constrained by any inadequacy of price data. Measures of child nutritional
status can help capture aspects of welfare, such as distribution within the
household which are not adequately reflected in other indicators. However,
nutrition is not the only aspect that matters to the well-being of people,
including the poor. Thus, poverty comparisons based solely on nutrition alone
may be limited and deceptive.
ii) Defining the Poverty Line: In practice, there are a number of
alternative approaches to defining poverty lines:
--Absolute poverty lines: An absolute poverty line is one which is
fixed in terms of the living standard indicator being used (consumption,
nutrition). It is fixed over the entire domain of comparison, that is, a
poverty line which assures the same level of economic welfare would be used to
measure and compare poverty across provinces or different situations. The
poverty line may still vary, but only so as to measure the differences in the
cost of a given level of welfare. Absolute poverty lines are more common in
developing country literature.
The most common approach to defining absolute poverty lines is to estimate the
cost in each region or at each date of a certain bundle of goods necessary to
attain basic consumption needs (this is called the basic needs approach). The
most important component of basic needs is a recommended food energy intake,
supplemented by essential non-food goods. To measure food energy requirements,
one needs to make an assumption about activity levels which in turn determine
energy requirements to maintain the body's metabolic rate at rest. Once the
food energy intake has been determined, and its cost has been calculated, an
allowance for non-food spending can be added by finding the total expenditure
level at which a person typically attains the food component of the poverty
line. An alternative (lower) allowance for non-food goods is to use the
average non-food spending of people who can just afford the food component of
the poverty line: it can be argued that this is a reasonable lower bound for
the non-food component of the poverty line (see Ravallion reference in section
7a below).
--Relative poverty lines: These have dominated developed country
literature where many studies have used a poverty line which is set at, for
example, 50% of the national mean income. When the poverty line is fixed as
a proportion of the national mean, if all incomes increase by the same
proportion, there would be no change in relative inequalities and the poverty
line would simply increase by the same proportion; that is, the poverty
measure will not change. This can make such poverty lines deceptive for some
purposes, such as assessing whether poor people are better or worse off.
A cross-country comparison of 36 countries, both developed and developing,
revealed that real poverty lines will tend to increase with economic growth,
but they will do so slowly for the poorest countries. Therefore, the concept
of absolute poverty appears to be more relevant to low income countries, while
relative poverty is of more relevance to high income countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of poverty.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: In practice, most applications in
developing countries have used consumption per person. This probably
overstates the extent to which poverty is associated with larger family sizes.
But other aspects of the poverty profile (such as assessments of the regional
or sectoral poverty profiles) tend to be more robust as a measurement choice.
It is important to note that a certain amount of arbitrariness and value
judgement are unavoidable in defining individual welfare and any poverty line.
Therefore, the overall assessment of the poverty situation should pay
particularly attention to how the choices made affect poverty comparisons,
since these are generally what matter most to policy implications. An
increasingly common practice is to recalculate the poverty measures using
various poverty lines, and to test whether the qualitative poverty comparisons
are robust to the choice.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below). In
addition, definitions of poverty are lacking in some countries or vary from
country to country. These problems are diminishing over time as survey
methodologies are improving and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The Poverty Gap Index and the Squared
Poverty Gap Index represent alternative definitions for a poverty indicator
(see section 3c above and the relevant methodology sheets for these
indicators).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Ravallion, M. Poverty Comparisons. Fundamentals in Pure and Applied Economics,
Volume 56, Harwood Academic Press, Switzerland. 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
POVERTY GAP INDEX
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Poverty Gap Index.
(b) Brief Definition: The mean over the population of the proportionate
poverty gap, where the poverty gap is given by the distance of the poor below
the poverty line, as a proportion of the line. The non-poor are counted as
having zero poverty gap.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Fraction bounded by 0 and the Head Count
Index.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The most important purpose of a poverty measure is to enable
poverty comparisons. These are required for an overall assessment of a
country's progress in poverty alleviation and/or the evaluation of specific
policies or projects. An important case of a poverty comparison is the poverty
profile which shows how the aggregate poverty measure can be decomposed into
poverty measures for various sub-groups of the population, such as by region
of residence, employment sector, education level, or ethnic group. A good
poverty profile can help reveal a number of aspects of poverty-reduction
policies, such as the regional or sectoral priorities for public spending.
Poverty comparisons are also made over time, in assessing overall performance
from the point of view of the poor.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Measures of
poverty are a very significant consideration of sustainable development. The
eradication of poverty remains a major challenge for policy decision makers.
Furthermore, an integrative viewpoint which simultaneously takes account of
development issues, resource use and environmental quality, and human welfare
must be taken if sustainable progress is to be achieved.
The Poverty Gap Index measures the depth of poverty in a country or region,
based on the aggregate poverty deficit of the poor relative to the poverty
line. Since the Head Count Index (see section 3c below) is not sensitive to
changes in the status of those already below the poverty line, it is
inadequate in assessing the impact of specific policies on the poor. On the
other hand, the Poverty Gap Index increases with the distance of the poor
below the poverty line, and thus gives a good indication of the depth of
poverty. A decline in the Poverty Gap Index reflects an improvement in the
current situation.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: In general, this indicator is linked
to many other sustainable development measures, for example, net migration
rate, adult literacy rate, Gross Domestic Product per capita, and population
living below the poverty line in dryland areas. More specifically, the poverty
measures discussed in this and two other methodology sheets; namely the Head
Count Index, the Poverty Gap Index, and the Squared Poverty Gap Index; capture
successively more detailed aspects of the poverty situation. The Head Count
Index measures how widespread poverty is, the Poverty Gap Index measures how
poor the poor are, and the Squared Poverty Gap Index measures the severity of
poverty by giving more weight to the poorest of the poor.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A poverty measure is a summary
statistic on the economic welfare of the poor in a society. There is no one
universally accepted single measure of poverty. A number of different
approaches exist (see, for example, the methodology sheets for the Poverty Gap
Index and the Squared Poverty Gap Index). This methodology sheet guides the
reader along certain key issues, such as the different approaches to measuring
individual welfare, without prescribing decisions. Consequently, it is
directed at comparability over time within a given country, as it helps
national practitioners specify poverty indicators that match their specific
situation and preferred approach. However, this is at the expense of
international comparability.
To compute poverty measures, the following questions related to identifying
and defining the poor must be addressed first:
i) How do we measure an individual's economic welfare?
ii) At what level of measured welfare is a person considered poor?
(b) Measurement Methods: The Poverty Gap Index is the mean across the
population of a household poverty measure (weighted by household-size). The
Index takes the value zero if the average economic welfare (for example,
consumption) is above the poverty line, and is measured by the function 1-y/z
if it is at or below the line, where z is the poverty line and y denotes the
mean consumption of the poor. For computing the Poverty Gap Index, estimates
of individual economic welfare (y), and the poverty line (z) are required.
i) Measuring Individual Welfare: There are a number of different
approaches to measuring welfare. The approaches differ in terms of the
importance attached to the individual's own judgment of well-being versus a
concept of welfare decided upon by somebody else. The former would focus on
measuring an individual's consumption of a bundle of goods and services. An
example of the latter would be defining welfare by the level of nutritional
intake, even though people do not live on food alone, or make food choices
solely on the basis of nutrition. Approaches in practice also differ according
to how difficult it is to obtain certain sorts of data in specific settings.
Typically one finds that poverty comparisons in developing countries put a
high weight on nutritional attainments, consistent with the behaviour of poor
people in a specific society. A comprehensive measure of consumption (for
example, total expenditure on all goods and services consumed, including
non-market goods, such as consumption from a farmer's own product) has been
more popular than using current income in the development literature. This is
due in part to the fact that incomes are harder to measure accurately. Current
consumption is also likely to give a better indication than current income of
a household's typical, long-term, economic welfare; income may fluctuate
greatly over time, particularly in rural economies (see Ravallion reference
in section 7a below).
The following methods can be used for measuring individual standards of
living:
--Consumption per equivalent male adult: Since households differ in
size and composition, a simple comparison of aggregate household consumption
can be misleading about the welfare of individual members of the household.
Therefore, for any given household, an equivalence scale is used to
approximate the number of single adults, based on observed consumption
behaviour. There are a number of value judgments embedded in this practice;
for example, differences in needs are reflected in differences in consumption.
Adult females and children are assigned a male equivalence of less than one
since they typically consume less; however, that may not mean that they have
lower "needs" but rather have less power within the household. The existence
of size economies in consumption may also mean that two people can live more
cheaply together than apart (for a further discussion of these issues, see
Ravallion reference in section 7a below).
--Undernutrition: This is a distinct concept, although closely
associated with poverty. Undernutrition can be viewed as a specific type of
poverty, namely food energy poverty. There are a number of arguments for and
against using this as a measure of well-being. A practical advantage is that
this measure does not have to be adjusted for inflation and would not be
constrained by any inadequacy of price data. Measures of child nutritional
status can help capture aspects of welfare, such as distribution within the
household which are not adequately reflected in other indicators. However,
nutrition is not the only aspect that matters to the well-being of people,
including the poor. Thus, poverty comparisons based solely on nutrition alone
may be limited and deceptive.
ii) Defining the Poverty Line: In practice, there are a number of
alternative approaches to defining poverty lines:
--Absolute poverty lines: An absolute poverty line is one which is
fixed in terms of the living standard indicator being used (consumption,
nutrition).
It is fixed over the entire domain of comparison, that is, a poverty line
which assures the same level of economic welfare would be used to measure and
compare poverty across provinces or different situations. The poverty line may
still vary, but only so as to measure the differences in the cost of a given
level of welfare. Absolute poverty lines are more common in developing country
literature.
The most common approach to defining absolute poverty lines is to estimate the
cost in each region or at each date of a certain bundle of goods necessary to
attain basic consumption needs (this is called the basic needs approach). The
most important component of basic needs is a recommended food energy intake,
supplemented by essential non-food goods. To measure food energy requirements,
one needs to make an assumption about activity levels which in turn determine
energy requirements to maintain the body's metabolic rate at rest. Once the
food energy intake has been determined, and its cost has been calculated, an
allowance for non-food spending can be added by finding the total expenditure
level at which a person typically attains the food component of the poverty
line. An alternative (lower) allowance for non-food goods is to use the
average non-food spending of people who can just afford the food component of
the poverty line: it can be argued that this is a reasonable lower bound for
the non-food component of the poverty line (see Ravallion reference in section
7a below).
--Relative poverty lines: These have dominated developed country
literature where many studies have used a poverty line which is set at, for
example, 50% of the national mean income. When the poverty line is fixed as
a proportion of the national mean, if all incomes increase by the same
proportion, there would be no change in relative inequalities and the poverty
line would simply increase by the same proportion; that is, the poverty
measure will not change. This can make such poverty lines deceptive for some
purposes, such as assessing whether poor people are better or worse off.
A cross-country comparison of 36 countries, both developed and developing,
revealed that real poverty lines will tend to increase with economic growth,
but they will do so slowly for the poorest countries. Therefore, the concept
of absolute poverty appears to be more relevant to low income countries, while
relative poverty is of more relevance to high income countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of poverty.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: In practice, most applications in
developing countries have used consumption per person. This probably
overstates the extent to which poverty is associated with larger family sizes.
But other aspects of the poverty profile (such as assessments of the regional
or sectoral poverty profiles) tend to be more robust as a measurement choice.
It is important to note that a certain amount of arbitrariness and value
judgement are unavoidable in defining individual welfare and any poverty line.
Therefore, the overall assessment of the poverty situation should pay
particularly attention to how the choices made affect poverty comparisons,
since these are generally what matter most to policy implications. An
increasingly common practice is to recalculate the poverty measures using
various poverty lines, and to test whether the qualitative poverty comparisons
are robust to the choice.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below). In
addition, definitions of poverty are lacking in some countries or vary from
country to country. These problems are diminishing over time as survey
methodologies are improving and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The Head Count Index and the Squared
Poverty Gap Index represent alternative definitions for a poverty indicator
(see section 3c above and the relevant methodology sheets for these
indicators).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Ravallion, M. Poverty Comparisons. Fundamentals in Pure and Applied Economics,
Volume 56, Harwood Academic Press, Switzerland. 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
SQUARED POVERTY GAP INDEX
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Squared Poverty Gap Index.
(b) Brief Definition: The mean of the squared proportionate poverty gap.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Fraction bounded by 0 and the Poverty Gap
Index.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The most important purpose of a poverty measure is to
enable poverty comparisons. These are required for an overall assessment of a
country's progress in poverty alleviation and/or the evaluation of specific
policies or projects. An important case of a poverty comparison is the poverty
profile which shows how the aggregate poverty measure can be decomposed into
poverty measures for various sub-groups of the population, such as by region
of residence, employment sector, education level, or ethnic group. A good
poverty profile can help reveal a number of aspects of poverty-reduction
policies, such as the regional or sectoral priorities for public spending.
Poverty comparisons are also made over time, in assessing overall performance
from the point of view of the poor.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Measures of
poverty are a very significant consideration of sustainable development. The
eradication of poverty remains a major challenge for policy decision makers.
Furthermore, an integrative viewpoint which simultaneously takes account of
development issues, resource use and environmental quality, and human welfare
must be taken if sustainable progress is to be achieved.
In addition to the Head Count and Poverty Gap Indices, a third measure which
better reflects changes in the severity of poverty is the Squared Poverty Gap
Index. This is defined similar to the Poverty Gap Index except that the
poverty gaps are squared, thus giving the highest weighting to the largest
poverty gap. The need for this Index arises because the Poverty Gap Index may
not adequately capture concerns over distribution changes within the poor. For
example, if a policy resulted in money transfer from someone just below the
poverty line to the poorest person, the Squared Poverty Gap Index will
reflect this change, while the Poverty Gap Index will not.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: In general, this indicator is linked
to many other sustainable development measures, for example, net migration
rate, adult literacy rate, Gross Domestic Product per capita, and population
living below the poverty line in dryland areas. More specifically, the
poverty measures discussed in this and two other methodology sheets; namely
the Head Count Index, the Poverty Gap Index, and the Squared Poverty Gap
Index; capture successively more detailed aspects of the poverty situation.
The Head Count Index measures how widespread poverty is, the Poverty Gap Index
measures how poor the poor are, and the Squared Poverty Gap Index measures the
severity of poverty by giving more weight to the poorest of the poor.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: A poverty measure is a summary
statistic on the economic welfare of the poor in a society. There is no one
universally accepted single measure of poverty. A number of different
approaches exist (see, for example, the methodology sheets for the Poverty Gap
Index and the Squared Poverty Gap Index). This methodology sheet guides the
reader along certain key issues, such as the different approaches to measuring
individual welfare, without prescribing decisions. Consequently, it is
directed at comparability over time within a given country, as it helps
national practitioners specify poverty indicators that match their specific
situation and preferred approach. However, this is at the expense of
international comparability.
To compute poverty measures, the following questions related to identifying
and defining the poor must be addressed first:
i) How do we measure an individual's economic welfare?
ii) At what level of measured welfare is a person considered poor?
(b) Measurement Methods: The Squared Poverty Gap Index is the mean of a
measure (weighted by household-size) that is zero if the household's welfare
(y) is above the poverty line (z), and represented by the squared poverty gap,
that is [1-y/z] x [1-y/z], if y is at or below z.
For computing the above indicator, estimates of individual economic welfare
(y), and the poverty line (z) are required.
i) Measuring Individual Welfare: There are a number of different
approaches to measuring welfare. The approaches differ in terms of the
importance attached to the individual's own judgment of well-being versus a
concept of welfare decided upon by somebody else. The former would focus on
measuring an individual's consumption of a bundle of goods and services. An
example of the latter would be defining welfare by the level of nutritional
intake, even though people do not live on food alone, or make food choices
solely on the basis of nutrition. Approaches in practice also differ according
to how difficult it is to obtain certain sorts of data in specific settings.
Typically one finds that poverty comparisons in developing countries put a
high weight on nutritional attainments, consistent with the behaviour of poor
people in a specific society. A comprehensive measure of consumption (for
example, total expenditure on all goods and services consumed, including
non-market goods, such as consumption from a farmer's own product) has been
more popular than using current income in the development literature. This is
due in part to the fact that incomes are harder to measure accurately. Current
consumption is also likely to give a better indication than current income of
a household's typical, long-term, economic welfare; income may fluctuate
greatly over time, particularly in rural economies (see Ravallion reference
in section 7a below).
The following methods can be used for measuring individual standards of
living:
--Consumption per equivalent male adult: Since households differ in
size and composition, a simple comparison of aggregate household consumption
can be misleading about the welfare of individual members of the household.
Therefore, for any given household, an equivalence scale is used to
approximate the number of single adults, based on observed consumption
behaviour. There are a number of value judgments embedded in this practice;
for example, differences in needs are reflected in differences in consumption.
Adult females and children are assigned a male equivalence of less than one
since they typically consume less; however, that may not mean that they have
lower "needs" but rather have less power within the household. The existence
of size economies in consumption may also mean that two people can live more
cheaply together than apart (for a further discussion of these issues, see
Ravallion reference in section 7a below).
--Undernutrition: This is a distinct concept, although closely
associated with poverty. Undernutrition can be viewed as a specific type of
poverty, namely food energy poverty. There are a number of arguments for and
against using this as a measure of well-being. A practical advantage is that
this measure does not have to be adjusted for inflation and would not be
constrained by any inadequacy of price data. Measures of child nutritional
status can help capture aspects of welfare, such as distribution within the
household which are not adequately reflected in other indicators. However,
nutrition is not the only aspect that matters to the well-being of people,
including the poor. Thus, poverty comparisons based solely on nutrition alone
may be limited and deceptive.
ii) Defining the Poverty Line: In practice, there are a number of
alternative approaches to defining poverty lines:
--Absolute poverty lines: An absolute poverty line is one which is
fixed in terms of the living standard indicator being used (consumption,
nutrition).
It is fixed over the entire domain of comparison, that is, a poverty line
which assures the same level of economic welfare would be used to measure and
compare poverty across provinces or different situations. The poverty line may
still vary, but only so as to measure the differences in the cost of a given
level of welfare. Absolute poverty lines are more common in developing country
literature.
The most common approach to defining absolute poverty lines is to estimate the
cost in each region or at each date of a certain bundle of goods necessary to
attain basic consumption needs (this is called the basic needs approach). The
most important component of basic needs is a recommended food energy intake,
supplemented by essential non-food goods. To measure food energy requirements,
one needs to make an assumption about activity levels which in turn determine
energy requirements to maintain the body's metabolic rate at rest. Once the
food energy intake has been determined, and its cost has been calculated, an
allowance for non-food spending can be added by finding the total expenditure
level at which a person typically attains the food component of the poverty
line. An alternative (lower) allowance for non-food goods is to use the
average non-food spending of people who can just afford the food component of
the poverty line: it can be argued that this is a reasonable lower bound for
the non-food component of the poverty line (see Ravallion reference in section
7a below).
--Relative poverty lines: These have dominated developed country
literature where many studies have used a poverty line which is set at, for
example, 50% of the national mean income. When the poverty line is fixed as
a proportion of the national mean, if all incomes increase by the same
proportion, there would be no change in relative inequalities and the poverty
line would simply increase by the same proportion; that is, the poverty
measure will not change. This can make such poverty lines deceptive for some
purposes, such as assessing whether poor people are better or worse off.
A cross-country comparison of 36 countries, both developed and developing,
revealed that real poverty lines will tend to increase with economic growth,
but they will do so slowly for the poorest countries. Therefore, the concept
of absolute poverty appears to be more relevant to low income countries, while
relative poverty is of more relevance to high income countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of poverty.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: In practice, most applications in
developing countries have used consumption per person. This probably
overstates the extent to which poverty is associated with larger family sizes.
But other aspects of the poverty profile (such as assessments of the regional
or sectoral poverty profiles) tend to be more robust as a measurement choice.
It is important to note that a certain amount of arbitrariness and value
judgement are unavoidable in defining individual welfare and any poverty line.
Therefore, the overall assessment of the poverty situation should pay
particularly attention to how the choices made affect poverty comparisons,
since these are generally what matter most to policy implications. An
increasingly common practice is to recalculate the poverty measures using
various poverty lines, and to test whether the qualitative poverty comparisons
are robust to the choice.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below). In
addition, definitions of poverty are lacking in some countries or vary from
country to country. These problems are diminishing over time as survey
methodologies are improving and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The Head Count Index and the Poverty Gap
Index represent alternative definitions for a poverty indicator (see section
3c above and the relevant methodology sheets for these indicators).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Ravallion, M. Poverty Comparisons. Fundamentals in Pure and Applied Economics,
Volume 56, Harwood Academic Press, Switzerland. 1994.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
GINI INDEX OF INCOME INEQUALITY
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Gini Index of Income Inequality.
(b) Brief Definition: A summary measure of the extent to which the
actual distribution of income, consumption expenditure, or a related variable,
differs from a hypothetical distribution in which each person receives an
identical share.
(c) Unit of Measurement: A dimensionless index scaled to vary from a
minimum of zero to a maximum of one; zero representing no inequality and one
representing the maximum possible degree of inequality.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The Gini Index provides a measure of income or resource
inequality within a population. It is the most popular measure of income
inequality.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: This indicator is
particularly relevant to the equity component of sustainable development.
Income or resource distribution have direct consequences on the poverty rate
of a country or region. Broadly speaking, average material welfare can be
defined by the per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, statistical
averages can mask the diversity that exists within any country. Therefore,
from a sustainable development perspective, it is informative to examine
income and wealth distribution throughout a population. A country can, for
example, have a high per capita GDP figure, but its income distribution so
skewed that the majority of people are poor. This indicator is useful both to
measure changes in income inequality over time and for international
comparisons.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator is linked to several
other sustainable development measures, including the poverty indicators,
women per 100 men in the labour force, GDP per capita, population dynamics in
mountain areas, and sustainable development strategies.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The concept and definition of
this indicator are well understood and readily available. The Gini Index
measures the area between the Lorenz Curve and a hypothetical line of absolute
equality, expressed as a percentage of the maximum area under the line of
perfect equality (see Figure 1 in section 4b below). The Gini Index is
defined as one half of the average value of the absolute differences between
all possible pairs of "incomes".
(b) Measurement Methods: The Lorenz Curve plots the cumulative
percentages of total income received (on the vertical axis) against the
cumulative percentage of recipients, starting with the poorest individual or
household (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: The Lorenz Curve and Gini Index of Income
(Not available on the Internet)
There are a number of choices about data which can influence the precise value
of the Gini Index obtained. For example, a Gini Index for consumption
expenditure will typically be lower in value than one for income, even within
the same population. This is because households smooth their consumption over
time in response to income changes. At any one date, there will be some
households with unusually low incomes and others with unusually high ones;
with some opportunities for saving and/or borrowing. Thus, household
consumption will be less unequal.
It is important how "income" is measured, for example whether it is total
household income or per capita household income, or income per equivalent
adult. In addition, it matters whether or not the incomes are weighted by
household size, since households with lower income per person tend to be
larger. Thus, the income share of the poorest 20% of households will be higher
than the income share of the poorest 20% of persons.
The World Bank, for example, prefers to weight by household size and calculate
the shares held by persons rather than households for most purposes. As a
general rule, the Bank also considers consumption expenditure to be the more
reliable indicator of welfare than income, which can be excessively variable
over time, and is also more difficult to measure accurately, particularly in
developing countries. Looking at the sample of 67 low and middle income
countries for which Gini indices of income are reported in the World Bank's
draft report World Development Indicators, this coefficient ranges from a low
of 22% to a high value of 64%.
There are a number of ways of estimating the Gini Index of income, and the
choice depends in part on the type of data available. Distributional data are
often available in grouped form, such as the income share of the lowest decile
of households, where households are ranked by income per person. To estimate
the Lorenz Curve, and thus the Gini Index, from such data, the World Bank
often uses a software package called POVCAL. Having specified the type of
data, the program calculates both the General Quadratic specification for the
Lorenz Curve and the Beta specification. It then calculates the Gini Index and
various other statistics, including poverty measures for each Lorenz Curve.
The program also advises which is the better specification for the Lorenz
Curve for the specific data used.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: In the DSR Framework, this
indicator represents a measure of the State of income inequality.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The Gini Index is not a very
discriminating indicator. Two very different distributions--one having more
inequality amongst the poor, the other having more amongst the rich--can have
exactly the same Gini Index.
Measurement errors in data sets are thought to be greater for incomes compared
to consumption expenditure, which will add to measured inequality (see section
4b above). Differences between countries in the measured Gini index may thus
reflect in part differences in the welfare measures used.
While the Gini Index of income (in common with most other measures of
inequality) captures information on the pattern of relative levels of
wellbeing in the population, it is independent of any considerations of
absolute living standards. So there is nothing to guarantee that a lower Gini
Index of income entails higher social welfare in any agreed sense, since the
mean income may have also fallen. The Gini Index is at best a partial
indicator, and other measures will be needed to complete the picture of how
levels of economic welfare are evolving in a society.
It should be noted that there are several comparability problems across
countries in the use of data from household surveys (see section 5 below).
These problems are diminishing over time as survey methodologies are improving
and becoming more standardized, but they remain.
(e) Alternative Definitions: There are many other measures of inequality,
with various strengths and weaknesses. These are discussed in Sen (1973) (see
section 7a below).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
The most important source of data on living standards is household surveys.
The results of these surveys can be obtained from government statistical
agencies, often via published reports. About two thirds of the developing
countries have done sample household surveys which are representative
nationally, and some (but certainly not all) of these provide high-quality
data on living standards.
Data can also be obtained from international agencies such as The World Bank
(mostly data for low and middle income countries emerging from the Living
Standards Measurement Study and Social Dimensions of Adjustment Project for
Sub Saharan Africa). Data for developed countries can be obtained from the
Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat), the Luxembourg Income
Study, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency involved is The World Bank (WB). The contact point is the
Chief, Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit, Environment Department,
WB; fax no. (1-202) 477 0968.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Chen, S., G. Datt, M. Ravallion. POVCAL: A Program for Calculating Poverty
Measures from Grouped Data. Poverty and Human Resources Division, Policy
Research Department, Washington DC: World Bank. 1992.
Ravallion, M., and S. Chen. What Can New Survey Data Tell Us About Recent
Changes in Living Standards in Developing and Transitional Economies?. Working
Paper 1. Research Project on Social and Environmental Consequences of
Growth-Oriented Policies, Washington DC: World Bank.
Sen, A. On Economic Inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1973.
The World Bank. World Development Indicators. Draft Report. 1996.
LEAD AGENCY: WORLD BANK
RATIO OF AVERAGE FEMALE WAGE TO MALE WAGE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Ratio of average female wage to male wage.
(b) Brief Definition: Obtained as the quotient of average wage rates paid
to female and male employees at regular intervals for time worked or work done
for particular occupations.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 3: Combating Poverty
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: It is important to have an assessment of remuneration
offered women vis-a-vis their male counterpart to ultimately determine the
level of women's participation in the economy.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: The lower the
ratio of wages offered to women, the less the attraction for women to join the
labor force, which in turn deprives the economy of a vital component of
development.
This disadvantage could also be attributed to inequalities in educational
opportunities for women and the need for policy makers to correct this
inequity. It is generally acknowledged that if women are more educated, it is
likely to result in a corresponding reduction in infant mortality rates.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The indicator has close linkages with
the unemployment rate indicator because both deal with employment as a
principal generator of production. It is also closely linked to indicators
pertaining to education.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The resolution covering
the institution of an integrated system of wages statistics, including defined
earnings and wage rates, was adopted by the Twelfth International Conference
of Labor Statisticians in Geneva in 1973 (see section 7 below).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The UN International Labour
Office (ILO) and the UN System of National Accounts (SNA) provide two sources
for this section.
i) The concept of earnings, as applied in wages statistics, relate to
remuneration in cash and in kind paid to employees, usually at regular
intervals, for time worked; or work done together with remuneration for time
not worked, such as for annual vacation, other paid leave or holidays. Wage
rates, as part of earnings, include basic wages, cost-of-living allowances and
other guaranteed and regularly paid allowances, but exclude overtime payments,
bonuses and gratuities, family allowances and other social security payments
made by employers. Ex gratia payments in kind, supplementary to normal wage
rates are also excluded (ILO).
ii) Wages and salaries, as part of compensation to employees, are payable in
cash or in kind and include the values of any social contributions, such as
income taxes, payable by the employee even if they are actually withheld by
the employer for administrative convenience or other reasons and paid directly
to social insurance schemes, tax authorities, etc. on behalf of the employee.
Wages and salaries in cash include payments at regular intervals,
supplementary allowances payable regularly, payments to employees away from
work for short periods such as holidays, and ad hoc bonuses linked to
performance, commissions, gratuities and tips (SNA).
(b) Measurement Methods: The indicator is measured by taking the average
wage rates per day, week or month received by female employees as a ratio of
the corresponding average wage rates for males. It could be classified
further according to major divisions of economic activity, for example,
agriculture, mining and quarrying, etc., to facilitate measurement of sectoral
impact on the development process. Similarly, breakdowns according to age
classes would provide additional information related to sustainable
development trends.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This indicator deals with the
participation of labor in the economic process, and stresses the importance
of human activities to sustainable development. It fits ideally within the
DSR Framework as a State indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: A serious limitation is the
reliability and comprehensiveness of wage rate data paid to female labor.
Although data is available for many countries, the quality varies
significantly among countries. Wage rates determine total remuneration and
measure women's contribution to total production. However, since most of the
basic remuneration for women's economic and social activities remain
unreported or unrecorded--and even if reported, are grossly undervalued--only
imputations are possible in many countries. The indicator will be greatly
influenced by the selection of wage sectors, and type and level of job. The
cost of collecting the data from questionnaires and surveys can be
significant.
Another limitation is that female wage rates do not tell the whole story.
Wages, particularly for females, may reflect under-employment. Women,
especially in developing countries, may participate in informal activities
where they are not classified as wage earners. They do not receive income in
the SNA sense and therefore these activities are not covered by this
indicator.
(e) Alternative Indicator Definitions: An alternative indicator to the
male-female wage would be the percentage contribution of women to GDP which
measures activities in the production boundary that incorporate the
contribution of women in the economic process as proposed in the 1993 SNA.
This would include the production and processing of agricultural, dairy and
fishery products and flour by milling; weaving, dress making, production of
footwear, baskets, mats, etc..
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
The average wage rates paid to female and male employees provide the basic
information to compile this indicator and are mainly reported by departments
or ministries of labor in most countries. It is obtained either through
questionnaires or surveys from the different economic sectors of the economy.
Average earnings are usually derived from payroll data supplied by a sample
of establishments together with data on hours of work and on employment.
Occasionally, wage indices are reported in the absence of absolute wage data.
In some other cases, information is compiled on the basis of social insurance
statistics. The extent of data availability is published by the ILO in the
Yearbook of Labor Statistics.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The International Labor Office (ILO) is the principal agency and contact point
in the development of this indicator. The contact is the Focal Point for
Environment and Sustainable Development; fax no. (41 22) 798 8685.
7. Further Information
The full text of the resolution listed in section 3e above can be found in
Current International Recommendations on Labor Statistics (Geneva 1988).
Further information can be obtained from other ILO publications, as follows:
An Integrated System of Wages Statistics: A Manual on Methods (Geneva 1979).
Statistical Sources and Methods; Vol. 2 Employment, Wages and Hours of Work
(Establishment Surveys) (Geneva 1987); Vol. 4 Employment, Unemployment, Wages
and Hours of Work (Administrative Records and Related Sources) (Geneva 1989).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
POPULATION GROWTH RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Population growth rate.
(b) Brief Definition: The average annual rate of change of population
size during a specified period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Usually expressed as a percentage.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The population growth rate measures how fast the size of
the population is changing.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Agenda 21
identifies population growth as one of the crucial elements affecting long-
term sustainability (see especially paragraphs 5.3 and 5.16). Population
growth, at both national and subnational levels, represents a fundamental
indicator for national decision makers. Its significance must be analyzed in
relation to other factors affecting sustainability. However, rapid population
growth can place strain on a country's capacity for handling a wide range of
issues of economic, social, and environmental significance, particularly when
rapid population growth occurs in conjunction with poverty and lack of access
to resources, or unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, or in
ecologically vulnerable zones (see paragraphs 3.14, 3.25 and 3.26 of the ICPD
Programme of Action).
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: There are close linkages between this
indicator and other demographic and social indicators, as well as all
indicators expressed in per capita terms (for example, GDP per capita).
Population growth usually has implications for indicators related to
education, infrastructure, and employment. It is also related to human
settlements and the use of natural resources, including sink capacities.
Population growth can increase environmental degradation, although this is not
always the case.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish national or
global targets. A number of national governments have adopted numerical
targets for the rate of population growth. In 1993, 11 percent of governments
considered their rates of population growth to be too low, 45 percent were
satisfied with the rate, and 44 percent considered it to be too high.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available (See 3d
above).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
The underlying concept of population growth rate as an indicator is well-
known. For a country, it is generally based on either (i) an intercensal
population growth rate calculated from two censuses, each adjusted for
incompleteness; or (ii) from the components of population growth (adjusted for
incompleteness, when necessary) during a period, namely, numbers of births,
deaths and migrants.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
As indicated above, the population growth rate can be calculated either from
census data or from registration data (births, deaths and migrants). The
United Nations recommends that countries take censuses every 10 years, and
these data can be used to calculate an intercensal population growth rate.
In recent decades most countries have carried out censuses and is widely
available. For example, 204 countries or areas carried out a census during
the 1990 census decade (1985 to 1994). Data on births, deaths and migrants
may come from national registration systems or from special questions in
demographic surveys and censuses.
National and sub-national census data, as well as data on births, deaths and
migrants, are available for the large majority of countries from national
sources and publications; as well as from special country questionnaires sent
to national statistical offices from the Statistical Division, UN Department
of Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). For all
countries, census and registration data are evaluated and, if necessary,
adjusted for incompleteness by the Population Division, DESIPA as part of its
preparations of the official United Nations population estimates and
projections. Past, current and projected population growth rates are prepared
for all countries by the Population Division, DESIPA and appear in the United
Nations publication, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see item
7, below).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations DESIPA. The contact point is the
Director, Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147.
7. Further Information
Further references include:
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations publication Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Population Division, DESIPA, Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic
Estimation (United Nations Sales No. E.83.XIII.2, New York, 1983).
Population Division, DESIPA, World Urbanization Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations publication Sales No. E.95.XIII.12, New York, 1995).
Population Division, DESIPA, MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software
Package for Mortality Measurement (United Nations, New York, 1988).
Statistical Division/DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook, (United Nations Sales
No. E/F.95.XIII.1, 1995).
For information about government policies regarding this indicator see:
United Nations, World Population Monitoring, 1993 (United Nations Sales No.
E.95.XIII.8., New York, 1995).
United Nations, Results of the Seventh United Nations Population Inquiry Among
Governments (New York, 1995, ST/ESA/SER.R/140).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
NET MIGRATION RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Net migration rate.
(b) Brief Definition: Ratio of the difference between the number of in-
migrants and out-migrants from a particular area during a specified period to
the average population of that area during the period considered.
International and internal migration are discussed separately in sections 4
and 5 below.
(c) Unit of Measurement: The indicator is usually expressed as per
thousand population.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The net migration rate measures geographical mobility of
population. Migration is one of the basic demographic events ~ birth and
death are the others ~ that directly influence the size of population in an
area.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Net migration is
a major force of demographic redistribution. At the international level,
migration (people) is one of three important flows along with commodities
(goods and services), and capital (money), that go beyond the traditional
boundaries of a sovereign state. Within countries, migration both influences
and is influenced by economic, social, environmental and political events.
Increases of net migration linked to a loss of livelihood can be a symptom of
unsustainability.
Migration is often seen as an economic phenomenon~in discussions of labour
migration from rural to urban areas or from the developing countries to the
developed countries, for example. It can also be a political phenomenon, as
with asylum seekers and refugees. Recently, linkages with environmental
factors are receiving increasing attention, as in the cases of "environmental
refugees" and migration to ecologically fragile areas. The significance of
migration to national policy makers does not rest only in its size, but also
in its composition. Such migrant characteristics as age, sex, fertility
level, educational background, occupation, and skill levels have profound
implications for development in both the sending and the receiving areas or
countries.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The net migration rate is considered
to have strong associations with economic, social, and environmental
indicators.
There are close linkages between this indicator and other demographic
indicators, including urbanization-related indicators. In addition, migration
rates can be associated with natural resource depletion, desertification, and
land use change.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish national or
global targets. Nearly all national governments regulate international
migration, and many governments have policies intended to influence internal
migration flows.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: See section 4b below.
(b) Measurement Methods:
i) Net internal migration rate: The net migration rate for particular
areas within a country is usually estimated on the basis of the number of
persons reporting that they changed residence from outside to within the area
of interest during a given period and those reporting that they changed
residence from within to without the area of interest during the same period.
Those reports are usually made only at the time of a census. A few countries
maintaining continuous population registers have access to the required
information on a yearly basis. Both censuses and population registers also
produce information on the total population in the area of interest that
allows the estimation of the denominator for the calculation of a net
migration rate. When reliable direct information about in- and out-migration
is unavailable, net migration can be estimated indirectly, as a residual
factor when other sources of population change~births, deaths, and, in some
cases, changes of boundaries of cities or other units~have been estimated
separately (see section 5b below).
ii) Net international migration rate: Ideally, the net migration rate
for a country should be derived directly from the number of immigrants to and
emigrants from that country over a given period, and a count of the average
population size of the country during that period. However, few countries
gather sufficiently comprehensive international migration statistics on a
continuous basis to allow direct calculation of the net migration rate.
Therefore, the rate must often be estimated indirectly from other information.
The most common estimation approach is to calculate the net migration rate as
the difference between the growth rate of a country's population over a
certain period and the rate of natural increase of that population (itself
being the difference of the birth rate and the death rate). Such calculations
are usually made for intercensal periods. Before estimating the net migration
rate in this way, data must be evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for
differential levels of census under-enumeration between censuses and for
errors in the estimation of the birth or death rates of a country. Other
indicators of migration such as the percentage of the population born outside
the country (a "stock" measure) are often used instead of the net migration
rate.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: The indicator is a subcomponent
of population change. As such it is regarded as a Driving Force indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The definitions of immigrant and
emigrant used by different countries and even for different data sources
within a single country vary considerably, thus compromising the comparability
and interpretation of the indicator. The data are often poorly measured
restricting the usefulness for modelling purposes. Illegal immigrants are
not captured by the census or survey statistics.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Alternative indicators of international
migration, such as the stock of foreign-born persons in a country, are often
used.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
i) Net internal migration rate: Censuses are the major source of
information on internal migration. They vary, however, in the type of data
they collect and the way in which the information obtained is coded and
tabulated. The questions most commonly included in censuses that indicate the
occurrence of some change of residence are: current place residence and place
of residence at a specific time before the census; current and previous place
of residence, and length of stay in current residence; place of birth. Most
countries code place of residence in terms of major geographical subdivision
(state, department, province etc.) although use of a finer subdivision of the
territory is often useful. Some countries record the urban or rural nature
of the place of residence involved. However, net rural-urban migration is
more likely to be derived from indirect estimation procedures than directly
from census data. In general, data on internal migration gathered by censuses
remain underexploited and there is no comprehensive source of information of
net migration rates between different units within countries, except for
countries with a population register.
(ii) Net international migration rate: Direct and comprehensive data on
international migration movements are not available for most countries or
areas of the world. However, the Population Division, UN Department of
Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) takes into
account the available direct and indirect evidence to derive net migration
estimates, which are published as part of the biennial estimates and
projections of population. Population registers are the data sources most
likely to yield the information needed to calculate the net migration rate,
but only a few developed countries maintain such registers. Immigration
statistics derived from the administrative procedures involved in admitting
foreigners for residence do not provide good measures of flows nor are they
sufficiently comprehensive to permit the estimation of migration rates as they
do not reflect the migration of citizens. In a few countries, arrival and
departure statistics derived as part of migration control at ports of entry
provide information on the number of immigrants and emigrants. However, most
countries gathering arrival and departure statistics fail to differentiate
international migrants from other travellers and consequently those data
cannot be used to derive net migration rates.
For both internal and international migration, both absolute data and rate of
change are required by policy makers. The composition of migrants would also
be useful.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations DESIPA. The contact point is the
Director, Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. 1 212 963 2147.
7. Further information
i) Net internal migration rate
Patterns of Urban and Rural Population Growth (United Nations publication,
Sales No. E.79.XIII.9).
Internal Migration of Women in Developing Countries (United Nations
publication, Sales No. E.94.XIII.3).
Courgeau, Daniel, Me'thodes de Mesure de la Mobilite' Spatiale (Institut
National d'Etudes De'mographiques, Paris, 1988).
ii) Net international migration rate
World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (United Nations publication,
Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
1989 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations publication, Sales No.
E/F.90.XIII.1).
Trends in Total Migrant Stock, Revision 1, database maintained by the
Population Division, DESIPA, 1995 (POP/1B/DB/95/1).
Recommendations on International Migration Statistics (United Nations
publication, Sales No. F.79.XVII.18).
Consolidated Statistics of all International Arrivals and Departures: A
Technical Report (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.85.XVII.8).
National Data Sources and Programmes for Implementing the United Nations
Recommendations on Statistics of International Migration (United Nations
publication, Sales No. E.86.XVII.22).
Measuring International Migration: Theory and Practice, International
Migration Review (Staten Island, New York), vol. 21, No. 4 (Winter).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
TOTAL FERTILITY RATE
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Total fertility rate.
(b) Brief Definition: The average number of children that would be born
to a woman in her lifetime, if she were to pass through her childbearing years
experiencing the age specific fertility rates for a given period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: The total fertility rate is usually expressed
as per woman or per thousand women.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance
(a) Purpose: This is one of the most commonly used summary indicators of
the level of fertility. An important property of the total fertility rate is
that it is not affected by the age distribution of the population, although
it can be affected by rapid changes in birth timing.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: The
International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Programme of
Action encourages countries to take the necessary steps to complete a
demographic transition, understanding that an imbalance between demographic
rates and social, economic and environmental goals, together with
unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, has serious implications
for sustainable development. In countries where fertility is still high,
large young populations create major challenges for health services, education
and employment (paragraphs 6.3, 6.4, and 6.6). As such it represents a
leading indicator of future change.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other demographic indicators, particularly with the population growth rate.
The ICPD Programme of Action also emphasizes the interrelationships between
fertility and mortality levels, the empowerment of women, and education
particularly of women and girls.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish specific national
or global targets, although the ICPD Programme of Action encourages
Governments to bring about the demographic transition. Some national
governments have established quantitative goals for total fertility rate. As
of 1993, 12 per cent of governments perceived their levels of fertility as
being too low, 44 per cent as satisfactory, and 45 per cent as too high (sec
DESIPA, World Population Monitoring, 1995 listed in section 7 below).
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: See section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
Where data on births by age of mother are of good quality, or adjustments for
age miss-statement and incompleteness can be made, the total fertility rate
is directly calculated as the sum of age-specific fertility rates, or five
times the sum if data are given in five-year age groups. (An age-specific
fertility rate is calculated as the ratio of annual births to women at a given
age to the population of women of the same age.) When data on births by age
of mother are unavailable from registration systems or maternity history data
in sample surveys, the total fertility rate can be calculated through indirect
methods based on special questions asked in censuses or demographic surveys.
For information on these indirect estimates, see Manual X and U.C. - LITE
(see section 7 below).
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from National and International
Sources
Collected by the United Nations on a regular basis and available for most
countries from vital registration systems or surveys. For all countries,
census and registration data are evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for
incompleteness by the Population Division, Department of Economics and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA) as part of its preparations of the
official United Nations population estimates and projections. Past, current
and projected population growth rates are prepared for all countries by the
Population Division, DESIPA and appear in the United Nations publication,
World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
Most countries tabulate data from birth registration systems at the sub-
national level. Surveys are generally designed to provide estimates for major
regions within countries as well as at the national level. Less frequently
the sample design permits the examining action of this indicator at state,
provincial or lower administrative levels.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations Department of Economics and Social
Information a Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963-2147.
7. Further Information
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Population Division, DESIPA, Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic
Estimation (United Nations Sales No. E.83.XIII.2, New York, 1983).
Population Division, DESIPA, MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software
Package for Mortality Measurement (United Nations, New York, 1988).
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Monitoring, 1993 (United
Nations publication, Sales No. E. 95.XIII.8, New York, 1995).
Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and
Development, Report of the International Conference on Population and
Development, Cairo, Egypt, September 5-13, 1994. (United Nations Document -
A/CONF. 171/13).
Statistical Division, DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations Sales
No.E/F.95.XIII.1,1995).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
POPULATION DENSITY
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Population density.
(b) Brief Definition: The total population size of a country or area
divided by its surface area.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Usually expressed as population per square
kilometer.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 5: Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures concentration of the human
population in reference to space. Population density can be used as a partial
indicator of human requirements and activities in an area. More refined
indicators -- such as number of persons per unit of habitable or cultivable
land -- may be more useful for analytic purposes. Similarly, disaggregation
of the indicator to urban size categories would be useful in conjunction with
other human settlement indicators.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: This indicator
is most useful at the sub-national level. Agenda 21 makes specific references
to population density in relation to desertification (Chapter 12) and to
freshwater and solid wastes in urban areas (Chapters 18 and 21). In rural
areas, demographic factors, working interactively with other factors such as
ecological endowments and commercialization of agriculture, may place pressure
on land resources. Higher or growing population density can threaten
sustainability of protected forest area and ecologically fragile or marginal
land. At the same time, population density is considered by some to be a
driving-force of technological change in production, and high concentration
of population in a limited area is the main defining feature of urban areas.
High concentration of population also means more local demand for employment,
housing, amenities, social security and services, and environmental
infrastructure for sanitation and waste management, which may tax governments'
management ability.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other demographic indicators, particularly the population growth rate, net
migration rate, life expectancy at birth and total fertility rate as well as
human settlement indicators. In order to understand impacts of this
indicator, it should be examined in conjunction with location of resources and
systems of production and distribution. Higher population densities generally
mean increased reliance on resource imports and the export of goods, as well
as environmental impacts such as solid waste disposal, and emissions to air
and water. Areas with high population densities tend to rely on the resources
of less populated hinterlands, and thereby increase the risk of exceeding
regional carrying capacities for stock and sink resources. With sub-national
data, relationships to ecosystems, urban issues, and arable land, for example,
can be addressed at a more local level.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish national or
global targets.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not available (see section
3d above).
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: This indicator is well
established.
(b) Measurement Methods: By definition, population density is calculated
as population size divided by surface area. Surface area data, as collected by
the Statistical Division, UN Department of Economics and Social Information
and Policy Analysis (DESIPA), represent the total surface area, comprising
land area and inland waters (assumed to consist of major rivers and lakes) and
excluding only polar regions and uninhabited islands. In practice, the
definition differs among countries, but is sufficiently comparable for
interpretation and analysis.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: Population density represents a
demographic State indicator.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The significance of the indicator is
limited in countries which serve as international hinterlands importing all
their food and natural resources. Large uninhabited areas, such as deserts,
tend to distort the indicator. Disaggregation to the ecumene, or other sub-
national areas, may be difficult in many countries.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Total land area instead of total area could
represent a useful alternative definition.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
Collected by the United Nations on a regular basis and available for all
countries at the national level. For all countries, the population data,
which provide the numerator for calculating density, are evaluated and, if
necessary, adjusted for incompleteness by the Population Division/DESIPA as
part of its preparations of the official United Nations population estimates
and projections. Past, current and projected population figures for
population density are prepared for all countries by the Population
Division/DESIPA and appear in the United Nations publication, World Population
Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
Population density can be calculated for sub-national areas from census data
available in most countries. The United Nations does not produce sub-
national estimates of population density. However, such estimates are
available from certain regional institutions, such as Eurostat.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead agency is the United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147).
7. Further Information
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Statistical Division, DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations Sales
No.E/F.95.XIII.1, 1995).
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
RATE OF CHANGE OF SCHOOL-AGE POPULATION
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Rate of change of school-age population.
(b) Brief Definition: The average annual rate of change of school-age
population size during a specified period.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Usually expressed as a percentage.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures how fast the school age population
is changing.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential. It
is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the capacity
of people to participate in decision making to address their sustainable
development concerns.
Knowledge of the rate of change in the school-age population assists in
planning for educational facilities and services at the national and local
levels. In most developing countries, growth in the school-age population
represents a major component of the increase in educational services. For
instance, in the least developed countries, between 1990 and 1995, the annual
increase in numbers at the primary and secondary-school ages averaged around
2.5 per cent; the number of enrolled students must grow this rapidly merely
to maintain enrolment ratios at their current levels. However, the school-age
population is not increasing in all countries. Fluctuations in the school-age
population may produce a need to adjust educational resources and
infrastructure.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This indicator has close linkages with
other socioeconomic indicators such as the population growth rate, the
fertility rate, and net migration. The size of the school age population
provides the base (denominator) for calculation of school enrolment ratios.
It could influence education response indicators, such as the share of Gross
Domestic product devoted to education.
(d) Targets: International agreements do not establish specific
national or global targets for this indicator.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: Not applicable, see
section 3d above.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying Definitions
The school-age population is generally defined in three age groups, ages 6-11,
ages 12-17 and ages l8-23, which are used by the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for comparative purposes, since
they correspond to the main educational levels of many countries. Other age
groupings are used in some countries. The population figures should also be
tabulated by sex, as a basis for calculating gender-specific enrolment ratios.
The rate of change of the school-age population for a country is generally
based on an intercensal population growth rate calculated from two censuses,
each adjusted for incompleteness and age mis-statement. For periods
following the most recent census, the changing numbers at each school age can
be estimated, first, by applying estimated survival rates to the adjusted
numbers of persons enumerated at the census. For dates more than 5 or 6 years
since the census, account must be taken of children of school age born since
the census. Finally, it is necessary to estimate the amount of net migration,
which tends to be an important factor for smaller areas, even if it is
unimportant at the national level. The difficulty of estimating the
components of population change make estimates of growth of the school-age
population increasingly subject to doubt as the time since the last population
enumeration increases.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from International and National
Sources
As indicated in section 4 above, the rate of change of population of school
age can be calculated for national and sub-national areas from census data.
The United Nations recommends that countries take censuses every 10 years, and
these data can be used to calculate an intercensal population growth rate.
In recent decades most countries have carried out censuses; 204 countries or
areas carried out a census during the 1990 census decade (1985 to 1994).
National and sub-national census data are available by sex and age for the
large majority of countries from national sources (country publications) as
well as from special country questionnaires sent to national statistical
offices from the Statistical Division of the United Nations Department of
Economics and Social Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). For all
countries, national census data are evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for
incompleteness by the Population Division, DESIPA as part of its preparations
of the official United Nations population estimates and projections. Past,
current and projected school age populations are prepared for all countries
by the Population Division, and appear in the United Nations publication,
World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision (see section 7 below).
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the Indicator
The lead organization is the United Nations Department for Economic and Social
Information and Policy Analysis (DESIPA). The contact point is the Director,
Population Division, DESIPA; fax no. (1 212) 963 2147.
7. Further Information
Population Division, DESIPA, MORTPAK-LITE - The United Nations Software
Package for Mortality Measurement (United Nations, New York, 1988).
Population Division, DESIPA, The Sex and Age Distribution of the World
Populations - the 1994 Revision (United Nations publication, Sales No.
E.95.XIII.2, 1994).
Population Division, DESIPA, World Population Prospects: The 1994 Revision
(United Nations publication Sales No. E.95.XIII.16, New York, 1995).
Statistical Division, DESIPA, 1993 Demographic Yearbook (United Nations Sales
No. E/F.95.XIII.1, 1995).
UNESCO, Trends and Projections of Enrolment by Level of Education, by Age and
by Sex, 1960-2025 (as assessed in 1993), CSR-E-63.
LEAD AGENCY: DESIPA
PRIMARY SCHOOL ENROLMENT RATIO - GROSS
Category: Social
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Primary school enrolment ratio - gross.
(b) Brief Definition: Total enrolment in primary education as a
proportion of the population of primary school-age according to national
regulations.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and
Training.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The gross enrolment ratio is a general indicator of the
level of participation in primary education. It provides at the same time a
measure of the availability and utilization of school places to satisfy the
educational needs of the eligible school-age population.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Development: Education is a
process by which human beings and societies reach their fullest potential.
Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the
capacity of people to address their sustainable development concerns. While
basic education provides the underpinnings for any environmental and
development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential
part of learning. It is also critical for achieving awareness, values, skills
and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective
participation in decision making. It is during the primary educational stage
when children become aware of the basic knowledge and values regarding
sustainable development.
This indicator is used in monitoring the general status and trends of
participation in primary education, and in assessing the relation between
demand and supply of educational opportunities. Gross enrolment ratios of
less than 100% identify situations in which there is a need for more school
places to respond to unsatisfied educational needs, and/or for measures to
encourage increase in enrolment. When the indicator has a value in excess of
100, it highlights the incidence of under-aged and/or over-aged enrolment. As
regards over-aged students, their presence may be explained by late entrance
or the incidence of repetition.
The relevance of this indicator in many developed countries is limited as
primary school is compulsory with an enrolment ratio of usually 100%. If the
enrolment is lower it usually indicates a data problem.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: Education is closely linked to other
indicators reflecting basic needs, capacity building, information and science,
and the role of the major groups. By including under-aged and over-aged
students, gross enrolment ratio can only provide broad indications of the
level of participation and school capacity utilization. For more precise
assessments the net enrolment ratio should be used which is however
conditioned