Page 429 - Invited Paper Session (IPS) - Volume 1

IPS175 Pietro Gennari et al.
resulted in the categorization of one third of the SDG indicators in the “Tier III
category”, meaning that their methodology was still not internationally
agreed. Initially though, the exact criteria for validating a new method and thus
approving the reclassification of a Tier III indicator, were not known. Only at
the fifth IAEG-SDG meeting in Ottawa (March 2017) were “criteria for Tier III
indicator reclassification” issued, which were manifestly more stringent than
the hitherto unwritten criteria previously used, particularly in their stipulation
that pilot tests had to have taken place in a regionally balanced sample of
6
countries .
The increased severity of the methodological validation process suggests
that many of the indicators reclassified in the initial phase of the process,
would possibly not have qualified for reclassification at a later stage. Indeed,
a few countries have recently questioned the reclassification of some SDG
indicators and have requested that their methodology be once again
reviewed. For now, the IAEG-SDG has discreetly distanced itself from such
requests, under the UN Statistical Commission’s constant drive to “accelerate
the development” of Tier III indicators. There is a strong likelihood, however,
that requests to review the indicator methodology itself may re-emerge
during the 2020 Comprehensive Review process. Greater clarity on how the
IAEG-SDG plans to deal with such requests would be beneficial both for
countries and custodian agencies.
Greater clarity on the Tier III reclassification criteria themselves would also
be beneficial. For instance, the third criterion, regarding “how the
methodology has become an international standard”, presents a strong
paradox: if another international institution has already approved the
methodology as an international standard, then what exactly is the role of the
IAEG-SDG in this regard? Is it to act as an appellate body and either confirm
the decision or reject it? Fundamentally, therefore, the question is whether the
IAEG-SDG is in fact the only body that can decide when an SDG-related
methodology becomes an international standard. Replying to this question
would need to take into account that many UN agencies are governed by
intergovernmental bodies that already have a prerogative to approve
statistical methods and standards in their area of expertise. It would also need
to deal with the fact that many new international definitions and standards
have cascading effects beyond the strict confines of the relevant SDG

6 The criteria for the reclassification of Tier III indicators adopted by the IAEG-SDG in March
2017 are the following: 1) The National Statistical System should be involved in the
methodological development of new indicators; 2) New methods should be pilot-tested in a
sufficient number of countries with comprehensive regional coverage (at least 5 countries, 1 per
region); 3) Information should be provided on how the proposed methodology has become an
international standard; 4) Comprehensive metadata should be provided to UNSD according to
an agreed template.
418 | I S I W S C 2 0 1 9