UNDP's New Framework for Measuring Democratic Governance

I have long been interested in policy frameworks and indicators to measure progress related to women. David Stillman's doctoral dissertation on "Population-related Policies in Togo and Ghana: A Framework for Analysis" identified some 70 types of policies that influenced fertility, mortality or migration, whether or not that was their intended consequence. He went on to carry out research at the United Nations on policies relating to the advancement of women. I was a member of a WHO Committee on Family Health Indicators, and also worked on research methodology for quality of care. I was therefore very interested to read about the new UNDP framework for selecting "pro-poor" and "gender sensitive" indicators, to be used at the national and sub-national levels. Sixty-pages long, it is intended to assist policymakers to monitor and evaluate democratic governance at the country level. The full title is:
Measuring Democratic Governance: A Framework for selecting pro-poor and gender sensitive indicators One question is -- How does this framework relate to the MDGs and monitoring of achievement of MDGs #1 on poverty and # 4 on gender equality?

Well laid-out and clearly written, the framework starts with two basic principles of democracy drawn from International IDEA’s Democracy Assessment Framework (the State of Democracy Project), which have been used to identify the democratic values that underlie pro-poor and gender sensitive indicators. The values are: 1. Popular control over public decision making and decision makers and 2. Equality between citizens in the exercise of that control. Mediating values include participation, representation, accountability, transparency, responsiveness, efficiency and equity.

Two definitions are important: Pro-poor monitoring focuses on those living in poverty. The authors note the following governance indicators that might be considered pro-poor: (i) Disaggregated by poverty status (ii) Specific to the poor (iii) Implicitly pro-poor and (iv) Chosen by the poor. Gender sensitive monitoring should track changes in women’s empowerment and in gender equality. The following ndicators might be considered gender sensitive: (i) Disaggregated by sex (ii) Gender specific (iii) Implicitly gendered, and (iv) Chosen separately by men and women.

The framework then gives examples of application to parliamentary development; electoral systems and processes; human rights; justice; decentralised governance for development; and public administration reform and anti-corruption. A final section discusses the process for selecting indicators, including stakeholders to be involved.

UNDP has long experience with its Human Development Index, which results in its annual Human Development Reports, and with country-level sub-reports and the regional Arab Human Development Report (2002). It will be interesting to learn how the new framework for measuring democratic governance stacks up, how it will be used, and by whom.