Global Governance, Legal and Constitutional Affairs

Independent Expert Advisory Group Members
The Secretary General’s Independent Expert Advisory Group on the
“Data Revolution for Sustainable Development”

Secretary-General Meets Co-Chairs of the Secretary-GeneralÕs Independent Expert Advisory Group on the Date Revolution for Sustainable Development.

Enrico Giovannini (Italy)

Co-Chair

A Professor of Economics and Statistics at University Tor Vergata of Rome since 2002, Professor Giovannini was the Minister of Labor and Social Policies in Italy from April 2013 to February 2014. He was previously President of the Italian Statistical Institute (Istat) and Director of Statistics and Chief Statistician of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).



Robin Li (China)

Co-Chair

Robin Li is co-founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Baidu, the Chinese Nasdaq-listed internet search company. He was previously a staff engineer for Infoseek and a senior consultant for IDD Information Services. Mr. Li also acts as the vice chairman of the internet Society of China (ISC).



TCA Anant (India)

TCA Anant is the Chief Statistician of India, with concurrent responsibility as the Secretary of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. He is also a co-Chair of the Friends of the Chair Group on Broader Measures of Progress. He was previously a professor of economics at the Delhi School of Economics, and a member of the advisory committee on regulations under the Competition Commission of India.



Shaida Badiee (Iran)

Shaida Badiee is the Co-Founder and Managing Director of Open Data Watch. During her tenure as Director of the World Bank’s Development Data Group, flagship statistical products were launched such as the World Development Indicators and Global Development Finance. In 2010, she led the World Bank’s Open Data Initiative to provide full and free access to the World Bank’s extensive statistical databases. Prior to that, she played a key role in the creation and operation of PARIS21.



Carmen Barroso (Brazil)

Carmen Barroso is the Regional Director, International Planned Parenthood Federation, Western Hemisphere Region. She has served on the Millennium Project Task Force on MDG 3 and the Brazilian Commission on Reproductive Health, and currently serves on the board of the International AIDS Alliance, is co-chair of PAHO’s Panel on Gender and Health, and is a member of the Independent Expert Review Group of the Global Strategy on Women and Children’s Health, appointed by the UN Secretary-General.



Robert Chen (US)

Robert Chen directs the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) at Columbia University’s Earth Institute. He also manages the NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center, which develops and disseminates interdisciplinary data and indicators related to human-environment interactions. His current research focuses on earthquake risk assessment, environment and security, climate adaptation, data integration and stewardship, and sustainability education.



Choi Soon-hong (Republic of Korea)

Choi Soon-hong served as United Nations Chief Information Technology Officer from 2007 to 2012, where he was in charge of all substantive and operational needs relating to information and communications technology of the United Nations. He was previously with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), where he served in numerous technical and business operations and team leadership positions.



Nicolas de Cordes (Belgium)

Nicolas de Cordes is Vice President of Marketing Vision at Orange France Telecom Group. An expert of the telecom industry, he joined Orange France Telecom in London where he headed the Mobile Strategy Practice before moving to Paris to lead the Group Strategy Team covering all lines of business. He was previously Head of Consumer Marketing with Mobistar, the Belgian mobile subsidiary of Orange.



Fu Haishan (China)

Fu Haishan is the Director of the Development Data Group at The World Bank. She was previously the Director of the Statistics Division of United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). Prior to that, she was the Chief of Statistics at the Human Development Report Office of United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).



Johannes Jütting (Germany)

Johannes P. Jütting is the Manager of the PARIS21 Secretariat within the OECD’s Development Co-operation Directorate, where he leads the partnership’s work in supporting developing countries to strengthen capacity to better produce and use statistical data for policy-making and the monitoring of development outcomes. He was previously Head of the Global Development Team at the OECD Development Centre.



Pali Lehohla (South Africa)

Pali Lehohla is the Statistician-General of South Africa, a position he held since 2000. He was the chair of PARIS21and the Chair of the United Nations Statistics Commission. He was the founding chair of the Statistics Commission of Africa (StatCom Africa) and he is the Chair of the African Symposium for Statistical Development (ASSD). He was the Vice President of the International Statistics Institute (ISI). He is the sponsor of the Young African Statistician (YAS) movement. Pali Lehohla sees Africa’s bright future through the lens of numbers and believes that the Civil Registration and Vital Statistics movement remains an important vehicle by which Africa can know and understand itself. Pali Lehohla holds a BA double major in Economics and Statistics from the University of Lesotho and a post-graduate diploma from the UN Regional Institute for Population Studies at the University of Ghana.

Tim O’Reilly (US)

Tim O’Reilly is the founder and CEO of O’Reilly Media Inc. A thought leader in technology and innovation, he is also a partner at O’Reilly AlphaTech Ventures, a venture firm, and board member of Safari Books Online, PeerJ, Code for America, and Maker Media.



Sandy Pentland (US)

Sandy Pentland is the Toshiba Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. A pioneer in organizational engineering, mobile information systems, and computational social science, Professor Pentland’s research focuses on harnessing information flows and incentives within social networks, the big data revolution, and converting this technology into real-world ventures. He is founder and director of the Human Dynamics group, and the Media Lab Entrepreneurship Program.



Rakesh Rajani (Tanzania)

Rakesh Rajani is the Head of Twaweza, an initiative to enhance access to information, citizen agency, and public accountability in East Africa. He was previously the founding Executive Director of HakiElimu, an independent organization that promotes citizen engagement in education in Tanzania.



Juliana Rotich (Kenya)

Juliana Rotich is the co-founder and Executive Director for Ushahidi, an open-source software project which uses crowdsourced geolocation, mobile phone, and web reporting data to provide crisis reporting and information. Rotich is also a founder of iHub, a Nairobi tech space and Mobisoko, a mobile marketplace for language and location relevant apps in Africa.



Wayne Smith (Canada)

Wayne R. Smith is the Chief Statistician at Statistics Canada. He was previously Assistant Chief Statistician in the agency’s Communications and Operations division, Director General of Regional Operations, Director of Special Surveys Division Branch, and Director of Communications Division.



Eduardo Sojo Garza-Aldape (Mexico)
Eduardo Sojo Garza-Aldape is the President of the Board of Governors of the National Institute of Statistics and Geography of Mexico. He previously served as Chief Economic Advisor to President Vicente Fox and as Secretary of Economy in the cabinet of President Felipe Calderón.



Gabriella Vukovich (Hungary)

Gabriella Vukovich is the President of the Hungarian Central Statistical Office. She currently serves as the Acting Chair of the 45th Session of the UN Statistical Commission. A specialist in Population and Development, she was previously the Head of the Population Census Department in the Hungarian Central Statistical Office.



Alicia Barcena (ECLAC)

Alicia Bárcena is the Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). She previously served as the Under-Secretary-General for Management at United Nations Headquarters in New York, Chef de Cabinet and Deputy Chef de Cabinet to the former Secretary-General Kofi Annan.



Robert Kirkpatrick (Global Pulse)

Robert Kirkpatrick is the Director of the UN Global Pulse, an innovation initiative of the Secretary-General to harness Big Data for a revolution in humanitarian action and sustainable development. His work in government, UN agencies, NGOs and the private sector has focused on developing solutions at the intersection of technology, policy and social change. He was previously Lead Architect for Microsoft’s Humanitarian Systems Team.



Eva Jespersen (UNDP)

Eva Jespersen is the Deputy Director, Human Development Report Office at UNDP. Prior to joining UNDP, she worked at the UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre in Florence where, as chief of the unit for research on social and economic trends and policies she led two flagship reports, the Social Monitor and the Report Cards on child wellbeing.



Edilberto Loaiza (UNFPA)

Edilberto Loaiza is a Social Demographer working as Sr. Adviser for Monitoring and Evaluation in the Technical Division of UNFPA in New York. Before joining UNFPA in 2009, Mr. Loaiza spent ten years working in UNICEF at the Strategic Information Section (SIS) where he coordinated the data production, analysis and dissemination for the areas of child mortality, education and child protection



Katell Le Goulven (UNICEF)

Katell Le Goulven is the Chief of Policy Planning at UNICEF where she was previously Head of Multilateral Affairs. Before joining UNICEF, she held senior positions with the United Nations Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability, the International Commission on Climate Change and Development, and the International Task Force on Global Public Goods.



Thomas Gass (ex officio)

Thomas Gass is the Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and Inter-Agency Affairs in UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Previously, as Ambassador and Country Director of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation in Nepal, he established the Embassy of Switzerland in the country and served as its Head of Mission.



Amina J. Mohammed (ex officio)

Amina J. Mohammed is Assistant Secretary-General and the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on Post-2015 Development Planning. She previously served as Senior Special Assistant to the President of Nigeria on the Millennium Development Goals in three administrations. In 2005 she was charged with the coordination of the debt relief funds ($1 billion per annum) towards the achievement of Millennium Development Goals in Nigeria.

DSG Photo OP-crop
IMAGE: l-r top row: Wayne Smith (Canada), Eva Jespersen (UNDP), Edilberto Loaiza (UNFPA), Fu Haishan (China), Thomas Gass (ex officio), Nicolas de Cordes (France), Pali Lehohla (South Africa), Gabriella Vukovich (Hungary), Johannes Jütting (Germany), Robert Chen (US), Shaida Badiee (Iran), Eduardo Sojo Garza-Aldape (Mexico)
l-r bottom row Robert Kirkpatrick (Global Pulse), Katell Le Goulven (UNICEF), Alicia Barcena (ECLAC), Claire Melamed (Secretariat), DSG, Enrico Giovannini (Italy), Amina J. Mohammed (ex officio), Carmen Barroso (Brazil), Sandy Pentland (US),

December 15, 2014
by Jennifer Poole

Data Revolution

Making the data revolution a gender data revolution

By Shaida Badiee and Claire Melamed

If there was a competition for the most repeated and least reliable statistic in the development business, then the oft-repeated ‘fact’ that 70% of the world’s poor are women might just win it. It might be true, it might not. But, shockingly and surprisingly given how often it’s used, there’s not really any way of knowing if it’s true.

worldfish-data-entry-bangladeshThe ubiquity and uncertainty of the 70% figure tells us two things about the data revolution. Firstly, that people want good data on gender – the over use of this dubious statistic indicates a demand out there that needs to be filled. Secondly, that at the moment we don’t have it – in many countries we don’t even know how many women there are, let alone how poor, or how healthy, or how well educated they are, or what work they do, or how they spend their time. The data revolution must be gendered.

Gendering the data revolution means thinking about gender at two levels. Firstly, of course the data itself. In the IEAG report, we pointed out how ‘gender inequality and the undervaluing of women’s activities and priorities in every sphere has been replicated in the statistical record’.

Currently, data suffer from several gender blind spots. Firstly, too often gender simply isn’t recorded. This makes data much less useful than it could be. Knowing the number of people in a country living under $1.25 a day, for example, is one thing. But if, say 80% of those people are women, then that implies a very different set of problems and solutions to if the split is 50-50 between women and men. If most recorded violence is domestic violence against women, this implies very different policies to if violence is mainly men attacking other men. Gender disaggregated data is needed to make women visible and to make good policy. In this respect, gender is just one of many blind spots in much of the data that are produced – numbers on disability, or ethnicity, for example, are also often lacking but are essential for diagnosing and solving the inequalities and exclusion that drive poverty.

It’s not just women themselves who are invisible. Some of the issues most important to their lives are also uncounted and therefore invisible in policy agendas. Labour market statistics designed by women, for example, would almost certainly take into account time spent on domestic work. Surveys in Kenya, Mozambique and Liberia, for example, found that over half of all women cited childcare responsibilities as a constraint on them achieving their livelihood ambitions. In Kenya the figure was over 80 per cent.

Not measuring the realities of the working lives of half the population will mean worse employment policy. Attempts to increase productivity through, for example, offering workers more training, will be of no use to people whose time is already unacceptably squeezed between the different types of work they are required to do. Employment policy using data collected with a gender lens looks different in significant ways – and the same is true of other areas.

Collecting data that more accurately reflects the experiences of women, and that provides policy makers with the raw materials for better, more gender sensitive, policy, is one part of the gender data revolution. But there is a second – putting data in the hands of women themselves.

The data revolution is not for just more data about people – it’s also more data for people – putting data and information in the hands of women themselves, so they have the tools to demand accountability. In many countries, women have less education, and, when they have the chance to specialise, are less likely to do maths, economics or computing than their male counterparts. If new technology is one of the defining characteristics of the data revolution then women are lagging behind there too – in Africa, Asia and Latin America women’s mobile phone ownership is less than men’s, often a lot less.

How can the data revolution be a gender data revolution? There are two priorities

Women need to become more visible in data. This means collecting more data, through well-functioning civil registration systems, it means disaggregating all data by gender as a matter of course, and it means collecting data on the things that matter most to women’s lives.
Women need to become active users of data. Many already are. But data literacy programmes must make a special effort to reach out to girls and women, compensating for the often unstated social norms that reserve maths, computing and similar disciplines for boys and men.

There is much hype and hope around the data revolution. For it to be made real, the revolution needs initiatives like Data 2x, showing, again and again, that without paying attention to half the world’s population, the hype will be just hype and the hope will not be realised. The data revolution must be gendered, can be gendered, and will be gendered.
image: A woman enters data in a logbook, Bangladesh (CC Worldfish)
Share this:

November 7, 2014
by UN Datarev

Data Innovation
Data Revolution
qualitative data

The Data Revolution for Human Development
07 November 2014
By Selim Jahan

Data Revolution

A World That Counts, the report by the UN Secretary General’s Data Revolution Group, was released yesterday. And it might come as no surprise that the report has strong links with UNDP’s Human Development Report Office: Eva Jespersen, our Deputy Director, was a member of the Independent Expert Advisory Group that prepared it, as was Haishan Fu who is now with the World Bank but used to be our chief statistician. Moreover Enrico Giovannini, the co-chair of the group is also a good friend to this office and one of our key advisors.

The report contains much that is important to global development. But what, I have been pondering, might the data revolution mean for human development and human development reporting in particular? Three ideas occur immediately.

First, this office understands very well the importance of data for both decision-making and analytical debate. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a remarkable example of the power a simple measure can wield to reframe debate towards genuine development outcomes, and away from a singular monetary measure of progress such as per capita income. But while the HDI has been a success we have never claimed that it is a perfect encapsulation of human development. The HDI reflects just three basic aspects of human development – a long, healthy and creative life, knowledge, and a decent standard of living. Now, in a more data rich world one could mount a strong argument for the index also to include so much more that is important to people: measures of voice, equality, sustainability, security, freedom and dignity would all help paint a richer picture of human development. But such data are not yet available in most countries. At least not yet. I hope the data revolution will change that.

Second, looking beyond the global Human Development Reports, I would like to remind you that UNDP has been involved in the production of some 700 national human development reports at the country level. These reports, which are country-led and usually produced in collaboration with national governments, have tackled a myriad of topics through a human development lens at the national level. And they always are built on data, often with disaggregation and innovative analysis. Of course such evidence-based analysis is vital to ensuring the reports’ robustness and usefulness. But I believe that the conversations about what data to use, that are a key part of the process of analysis and writing a report, are often also beneficial to human development. When handled well, and involving many stakeholders, they can develop capacity within a country, provide a platform for democratic dialogues and “make the business of government easier”, as a2013 report from Germany’s Bertelsmann Foundation argued. The data revolution has the potential to enrich such conversations – and the ensuring reports – enormously.
graph 2

Third, and most pressingly, the data revolution is already having a direct impact on human development. Remember that human development has been defined as “expanding the choices of people to lead lives they value”. Access to good information is an important part of expanding our choices. Not only does it enable citizens to better hold their leaders accountable, but it can help all of us to take better decisions in our day to day lives that can be very important: which school to send our children to, which hospital to visit if we fall ill, where to look for work, and so on. But, just as with any valuable resource, access to good information is not equally distributed around the world. In many places the available data range from poor to non-existent. But, even when good data are available, many people lack the basic skills to access or understand it. This has to change. And so I am pleased that the report pays considerable attention to the principles that should underpin the revolution so it benefits all rather than create a data-elite.

I am reminded of a quotation from Eric Hoffer, the American moral philosopher, who pointed out that “We used to think that revolutions are the cause of change. Actually it is the other way around: change prepares the ground for revolution.” The change that inspired the data revolution is clearly happening. And so what is important now, as this report rightly points out, is that we make sure that the coming revolution leads to the world having the right information, at the right time, to build accountability and make good decisions and so improve lives.

Selim Jahan is the Director of UNDP Human Development Report Office. This blog post originally appeared on the Human Development Report website

‘A World That Counts: Mobilising The Data Revolution for Sustainable Development’ report by the Expert Advisory Group on a Data Revolution for Sustainable Development (IEAG)

Top image: Secretary-General reads A World That Counts at handover meeting on 6th Nov 2014

October 8, 2014
by UN Datarev

Data Innovation
Data Revolution

You Say You Want A Revolution

a mural of the famous beatles lyrics

Last year the United Nations Secretary General’s High Level Panel Report on the Post-2015 Development Agenda called for a “data revolution”.

“You say you want a revolution” sang John Lennon. “Well you know, we all want to change the world”. The Beatles may have been singing about the political protests of the 1960s but their song was echoed in some of the reactions to the High Level Panel’s call. No one is against the need for more – and more reliable – data to inform development analysis, monitoring and policy making. Indeed, the call for better data has been a mantra for many years. But a number of voices asked what a revolution would look like and to what purpose? They noted that, in some countries at least, plenty of data are collected but not used. The challenge is also about creating a “data liberation” and stimulating a greater demand for – and capacity to use – data.

And so the United Nations Secretary General formed an Independent Advisory Expert Group (IAEG) on “Data revolution for development”. Our group has been asked to craft a framework on what the “data revolution for development” would mean in practice, what institutional and governance implications this would entail and what are the funding implications. Specifically, our Group has been asked to consider how to fill data gaps and strengthen national statistical capacities. We have also been asked to consider what new opportunities might be afforded from both innovation and new data – including Big Data – and how this might complement existing statistical systems. How, we are asking, can data best support the sustainable development goals process, and strengthen accountability across the world?

This is a challenging task. Even more challenging is our timeline: we have been asked to report by the beginning of November, and last week the group held its first meetings in New York and consulted with a wide range of people from Civil Society.

It is also an important task, particularly for those with an interest in human development. Data has always been fundamental to United Nations Development Programme’s human development reporting. The reports have prided themselves on ensuring that their analysis and recommendations were based on reliable data, while the reports are also a key custodian of development data, with the Human Development Index (HDI) the most famous data item.

Human development is much broader than the measures within the HDI. Income, longevity and knowledge (measures of which together comprise the HDI) are essential components of human development but by no means the only components. Participation, voice and freedom, particularly empowerment and agency; human security; equity; and sustainability are all also fundamental to human development. These facets are fundamental perhaps. But they are often not easy to measure, both

conceptually – how could one measure generalised empowerment for example?; and
statistically – how could one accurately measure change in biodiversity when so much is unknown about so many species?

Can a data revolution really help? Our answer, so far at least, is a cautious – a very cautious – “yes” to both areas.

Much has already been said about Big Data and our Group is paying close attention to it. As is now well known the world is creating enormous and unprecedented amounts of data. Even in 2010 (when much less data was being produced than today), Google chief Eric Schmidt argued that the globe was creating as much data every two days as had been created between the dawn of civilization and 2003! Citizens, businesses and public and private institutions are the engine of this process, providing data on just about anything imaginable. In parallel, sensors, satellites and other tools produce real-time data on the environment, people’s movements and more. While others are analyzing social media data to try to gauge anything from a community’s subjective wellbeing to rising food prices.

This all has considerable potential to allow us to measure those aspects of human development that count, but are not yet counted. Big Data also holds the promise of producing statistics almost instantaneously – so called “nowcasting” – and allowing disaggregation to levels of details hitherto undreamt of outside of a population census. But we also need to understand better the risks of Big Data and to agree global principles to ensure it is used wisely and ethically.

All of this will help improve decision making. But Big Data alone will not be enough. Many countries still lack basic data about their economic, social and environmental conditions. Data on key aspects of people’s wellbeing are still missing, especially for the most vulnerable and for the “invisible” groups. Moreover, even where data are available, decisions are often not based on evidence. Related to this a lack of data literacy also needs to be addressed: far too many people do not have the skills necessary to understand and use data. And this is important not only for the quality of their decisions, but also for their ability to hold policy makers accountable. Media, when they report statistics at all, sometimes still inaccurately report data. And so the “statistics, knowledge and policy” chain is broken in several places.

Another key concern that official statisticians understand better than most is the importance of data privacy. For every potential benefit Big Data offers, there is an equal but opposite risk that an unscrupulous government or group might use the same data to do harm rather than good. Imagine, for example, how much more terribly efficient ethnic cleansing might be with the help of big data. We must be cautious as we move forward.

And so while it is much too early to speculate on what our final report might say, we do believe that whatever the revolution holds, it must not become a struggle between anancient regime of traditional official statistics and a new Big Data Republique. A worthwhile revolution will provide a means for Big Data scientists and official statisticians to work together as partners and complement one another. Fraternity, quality, privacy! will be our motto.

Enrico Giovannini is the co-chair of the IAEG and is a professor at Tor Vergata University in Rome. He was previously the Italian Minister for Labour and Social Policy, the head of the Italian Statistics Office (ISTAT) and Chief Statistician and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.

Eva Jespersen is UNDP’s representative on the IAEG. She is deputy director of the Human Development Report Office and earlier guided a number of data initiatives at UNICEF’s Innocenti Research Centre.
Image: A mural depicts the famous Beatles lyrics, CC by Victor Saez

This post was originally featured on the UNDP HDRO website

November 18, 2014
by UN Datarev

Data Revolution

The week after the revolution…still counting.

By Dr Claire Melamed, Independent Expert Advisory Group Secretary

It’s just over a week since we launched ‘A World that Counts’. The day itself went by in a flash – from the (very) early morning skype calls, via a press conference at the UN Spokesperson’s briefing, to the 11th hour arrival of the printed reports and the moment of actually handing over the report to the UN Secretary-General. The day was rounded out with a packed briefing with UN member states, and a reception in New York showcasing the global data revolution in action.

So that was that. Now what? As we say ourselves, ‘revolutions do not begin with reports’, and the same is true of press conferences and parties. What matters is what happens over the next weeks and months as the ideas and proposals in the report start to percolate through into the thinking and actions of those who have the power to create change. How is it going so far?
Secretary-General Meets Co-Chairs of the Secretary-General’s Independent Expert Advisory Group on the Date Revolution for Sustainable Development.One week on

Well, firstly we’ve had great deal of interest in the report, with over 5,000 people downloading or reading it online so far, and higher demand than we can meet for physical copies from UN missions and IEAG members hosting their own data revolution events.

There have been at least 25 blog posts and articles written about the report over the past few days. I expect there are more to come, but one week on seems a useful moment to summarise the responses so far to A World That Counts.

We’ve had a lot of political support for the report, with warm words for the report from the South African ambassador to the UN, arguing strongly that action should be taken to, as he put it ‘end the scandal of invisibility’. The Tanzanian mission was also supportive, calling the report ‘timely and compelling’, and saying ‘its relevance cannot be overstated’. The Peruvian, Brazilian and Mexican missions also welcomed the report, agreed it was very useful, and the Mexican mission in particular wanted us to get straight on with the idea of creating SDG data labs to start working out how to measure and monitor new goals. Many others have said to us privately how much they like the report and support the recommendations.

The central message of ’A World that Counts’, about the huge inequalities in data availability and use between countries, people, and public and private sectors, were well represented in the press coverage:  in the Financial Times and the Economist, and in Corriere della Serra.

Mostly civil society has been supportive – though inevitably many people wanted us to go further. We all welcome this – it’s important that people keep raising the level of ambition. There’s still a long way to go and this is just the beginning.

Most of the criticism was directed at the short consultation period – our explanation (and apology!) for that is here.  There is also an interesting debate developing on two issues – the first is the relative role of individuals and organisations in using data for accountability.  Some criticised the report’s focus on data for people in general, arguing that it is civil society organisations that are really in the best position to make use of data, while others, in contrast, wanted us to talk more about increasing people’s capacity to use and collect data.  A second emerging debate  concerns the relative weight that should be given to international processes and national level organisations as the drivers for change – is it right to focus on the SDGs as the opportunity, or should the report have talked more about a broader set of national level opportunities and processes?

The organisations that work in the area of transparency and open data varied in their responses to the reports’ approach to standard setting.  For some, it was the aspect of the report they particularly welcomed, while others thought that we should have gone further.

The group and the secretariat are all delighted at the interest and debate that the report has generated. The discussion – and the disagreement in particular – is how ideas are tested, and refined, and improved.

But the talk, however invigorating, is not the final indicator of success. Success will come with action not with words. This is the next phase. Watch this space.
Top image: The Independent Expert Advisory Group meet with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to handover their report on a data revolution for sustainable development.
Second image: IEAG Co-chair presents the report to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

October 14, 2014
by Jennifer Poole

Data Revolution
qualitative data
rights

A Rights-based Revolution?

by IEAG MEMBERS CARMEN BARROSO & KATELL LE GOULVEN

As data become more central to sustainable development, the immense scope for data to empower people is becoming apparent. But alongside this opportunity are clear risks, as people around the world question the accessibility and privacy implications of the new world of data. At the heart of issues like these—both the potential and the risks— are rights. Some members of the panel have been asking: what would a rights-based approach to the data revolution entail?

using a mobileWe know we are not alone in asking these questions. The panel’s initial consultations revealed a shared concern for data-related rights. Indeed, around the world, issues of rights and data are being hotly debated by citizens, legislative bodies, civil society, and the private sector. As we attempt to map the landscape of rights and data, we therefore seek your help!

If you have thoughts, expertise, or concrete examples on the following set of questions, please share with the panel by commenting below or by emailing them to undatarevolution@gmail.com with the subject line “rights-based data revolution.”
How do rights intersect with the process of collecting, analyzing and disseminating data?

Initial consultations have resulted in the following set of rights related to data. What is missing? Which rights should be prioritized in the context of the Panel’s report?

Right to an identity (right to be counted)
Right to privacy (in Europe: right to be forgotten)
Right to participation
Freedom of expression/ speech
Ownership: right to own your personal data
Right to access data about you (re-use, sale of data)
Principles of consent
Right to due process (how data is used, ie. how to regulate the algorithm)
Protection from discriminatory uses of data
Right to non-discrimination and equality (how data hides or shows inequalities among subgroups of the population)

What existing rights regulation, policies, or frameworks could be applied to data for development?

This might include frameworks from other sectors, ie. the right to be counted in the Convention on the Rights of the Child; or from other fields, ie. frameworks for ethical use of DNA data. What gaps should be highlighted in the report, ie. areas where “new data” require altogether new norms, frameworks, and policies for a rights-based approach to the data revolution?
How can data empower people?

Many advocate for an SDG monitoring framework that is participatory and empowering to citizens. Can data provide voice? What IEAG recommendations would ensure that data support the right to participation, both in terms of data collection and data access?
Statistical averages can hide inequalities but granular data can infringe on privacy.

As decision-makers use data to target policies and programs, data needs to be disaggregated in different ways—for example by gender, geography, age and income level— to ensure we understand the circumstances of different segments of the population. The more granular the data, the more powerful the potential to address the needs of all. But there is a concern that such disaggregation might infringe on people’s right to privacy. What recommendation should the IEAG make to reconcile this dilemma?
What are we missing?

Please tell us any other thoughts you have on a rights-based framework for the data revolution.


Carmen Barroso is the Regional Director, International Planned Parenthood Federation, Western Hemisphere Region.
Katell Le Goulven is the Chief of Policy Planning at UNICEF.
IMAGE: Using the u-report self-reporting mobile tool (UNICEF)
Share this:

On Friday 26th September, the Independent Expert Advisory Group held a Townhall event and some in-depth sessions centered around a specific topic of the data revolution, with members of civil society, academia and the private sector. These served as a listening session for IEAG members, with representatives from over 60 civil society organisations in attendance.

October 3, 2014
by Jennifer Poole

Data Revolution

Independent Expert Group on Data Revolution has kick-off meeting during General Assembly Week

MeeThe Independent Expert Advisory Group (IEAG) on a data revolution for sustainable development was convened last week at UNHQ 25th-26th September, during General Assembly, for two day-long sessions. Below is a brief overview of the various sessions and some of the issues discussed.

Inaugural Meeting of Independent Expert Advisory Group at UNHQ

The group reviewed their mandate and agreed that it included defining what a data revolution for development means, suggesting measures to close data gaps, and seeking opportunities for new innovations and data sources while strengthening accountability at all levels. The group discussed the substance and timing of the report to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, due in early November.

During the initial discussion, group members highlighted several important issues including what the group means by the data revolution for development. Many members of the group view this concept as more of an evolution or accelerated data evolution, rather than a completely new paradigm, while others focused on the possibilities associated with big data and privately produced information.

Members of the group highlighted the fact it is imperative to ensure that the data is of sufficient quality and that because the mandate is for a data revolution for development, the goal of the data revolution should be to provide a framework for and investment in data that helps in achieving the SDGs and in monitoring and accountability.

The idea that the information demand for the SDGs will exceed the capability of data collection efforts was underscored. Even developed countries would need help in improving their efforts. Members mentioned that there are two things that are distinct: technological progress (which is inevitable) and what this progress means for official statistics. The role of National Statistical Systems in this new world could be an important point of discussion regarding the data revolution.

Other recurring themes during the discussion were the increase in the generation of data in the private sector and the implications of that for questions of the regulation and management of information, and a continual focus on the purpose of data for decision making, for accountability and for tracking progress. The group highlighted the need to align the frequency and format of data collection to decision making cycles in the public sector and elsewhere.

Meeting with Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson

Mr. Eliasson presented his idea of what the data revolution should be and it involves measures to close data gaps and to strengthen national statistical capacity to respond to the demands of a complex development agenda. He also mentioned the need to leverage new, non-traditional data like big data and that a data revolution of about far more than data and statistics, but also about how they are used.

The group then commented on Mr. Eliasson’s presentation and asked him questions including how this report can be made most useful in order to impact decisions, the process over the next several years, and on data as a human right. Mr Eliasson responded by directing the group to look at the OWG outcome document to see that countries feel the need for transformative change.

Read the Deputy Secretary-General’s full remarks at this event

Civil Society Outreach Day

A gathering of civil society and expert group

On Friday 26th September, the Independent Expert Advisory Group held a Townhall event and some in-depth sessions centered around a specific topic of the data revolution, with members of civil society, academia and the private sector. These served as a listening session for IEAG members, with representatives from over 60 civil society organisations in attendance.

Open Data and Accountability

One of the main issues discussed in this session was making data more open, potentially through Freedom of Information Acts, however, a problem is that even when these laws exist, many times they are not implemented. There was agreement among the entire group that data that is not confidential should be openly available. One big issue here is the capacity of people to find and understand the data that exists.

Discussion of possible open data standards created on the international level; the Open Government Partnership could be used as a model. A second issue with open data that was discussed was the risk of spreading data that is not high quality. A potential solution to this was the proposal of creating some sort of audit agency for open data and statistics. The European Union currently has something similar in place and an audit is conducted every five years. Many of the members emphasized that this audit must be done by an independent organization. Overall there was consensus in this meeting that there is a need for more open data, but that in order to make this a reality, efforts need to be made to ensure this data is of a high quality and that there is accountability of the data producers to protect confidentiality and privacy concerns.

Measuring the Sustainable Development Goals

This session was designed to discuss how the data revolution can be leveraged to make measurement of the SDGs more feasible. Some of the participants from civil society stated that there will be a need to move beyond quantitative indicators to more qualitative measures for measuring human rights-based targets. There was a strong point made that a lot of data currently exists but is not shared. For instance, many NGOs collect survey data at the local level but this data is not shared with NSOs or government agencies. Participants stressed that better coordination amongst a wide array of partners could go a long way to improving the measurement of the SDGs.

The importance of inclusiveness was discussed in relation to gathering data. Many times those people or groups most in need of measurement are not measured due to the difficulty of measuring them, the data revolution needs to ensure that all people and groups are included. Administrative records are an important source of information and this information needs to be made available to National Statistical Offices (NSOs) .

Another point for measuring the SDGs is that it will be important to have an adaptive monitoring system that will enable those involved to development new techniques to account for those being excluded. Feedback loops would help with this.

Finally, the point was made that maybe instead of data being seen as supporting and monitoring other sectors of development, data should be viewed as a development objective in and of itself. Finally, there was a great deal of consensus that there needs to be less of a focus on global aggregates and global reporting and more emphasis on data at the national and local level.
Challenges and Opportunities of Big Data and New Technologies

One of the biggest problems with big data is that currently it is almost all solely in the hands of the private sector. How can this data be made more public? The point was made that this fact is troubling from a development perspective as the private sector has very different objectives to the public sector and is not necessarily invested in the post-2015 agenda.

There was broad agreement that norms need to be developed around big data and that there needs to be trust in the confidentiality and reliability of this data.

Another issue is that it is very difficult to infer causality with big data and as a result, big data will not be a panacea for the availability of development data. There was no real agreement on how to address big data, other than it will be an important part of the future and needs to be closely examined.

Finally, the point was made that there are equity issues with big data, as the digital divide can exacerbate the ability to collect information using big data.
IMAGE 1: INDEPENDENT EXPERT ADVISORY GROUP INAUGURAL meeting
Image 2: Independent Expert Advisory Group speak with Civil Society representatives in themed sessions, this one focused on the challenges and opportunities of Big Data and innovations.