Criteria

Draft 3.0 of the Beyond2015’s matrix of CRITERIA for a Post-2015 framework is now available! Please rate the draft below and send your feedback by using the form below!!!

Thanks to all for sending your comments on the previous drafts (see draft 1.0 and draft 2.0). A workshop took place in Nairobi, Kenya, on 11-12 June 2013 where comments gathered online and through national deliberations were taken into consideration and new drafts were produced. See here and below draft 3.0:

Criteria matrix (v.3.0)

 

Framework Criteria evaluating overall coherence of the group of goals selected to achieve our purpose and secure progress towards our vision

Goals Criteria

evaluating each goal proposed

Targets Criteria

evaluating the targets identified under each goal

Environmental Sustainability

  1. Does the framework specifically recognise global resource constraints and planetary boundaries?

  2. Does the framework clearly link with existing frameworks and processes?

  3. Does the framework support a model of economic development, production and consumption that is consistent with sustainable development?

  1. Does the goal link with other goals in a coherent way to promote sustainability?

  2. Does the goal address the sustainable management of the natural capital

  1. Do the targets contribute to achieving sustainable development?

  2. Are the targets consistent with agreed international instruments and treaties?

  3. Does the target hold all actors responsible and accountable?

Poverty Eradication

  1. Does the framework clearly define what is meant by poverty and is this a holistic definition?

  2. Does the framework establish the eradication of poverty as a core part of its purpose / vision?

  1. Does the goal contribute to change which will support the eradication of poverty, as defined in the framework?

  1. Do the targets aim at eradicating, and not just reducing, poverty?

  2. Do the targets propose a holistic approach to poverty eradication?

  3. Do the targets ensure that progress towards poverty eradication extend to the whole population and specifically marginalised groups?

Well-being
  1. Does the framework recognise well-being as an important measure of human progress?

  2. Does the framework emphasise the need to shift away from poverty measurement based on income towards one based on well-being?

  1. Does the goal contribute to the framework’s definition of well-being?

tbc

Human Rights

  1. Is the framework consistent with international human rights law and standards throughout?

  2. Does the framework actively contribute to progressive realization of these rights?

  3. Does the framework clearly establish how it will empower individuals to be active agents of change and not passive recipients of “development interventions”?

  1. Is the goal formed clearly in the context of all human rights standards?

  2. Is there a mechanism for meaningful and inclusive participation by all?

  3. Is it clear how the goal itself contributes to the empowerment of marginalised groups?

  1. Do the targets promote the progressive realisation of human rights?

  2.  Do the targets promote people’s empowerment and participation in the monitoring and evaluation of progress?

  3. Does the target include mechanisms to address violations of its provisions?

Equity

  1. Does the framework clearly identify equality of outcomes as part of its narrative?

  2. Does the framework identify specific groups it seeks to ensure are included and does it provide clear rationale for the selection of those groups?

  1. Does the goal focus only on inputs, or on outcomes as well?

  2. Is there clear evidence that marginalised groups have requested this goal?

  1. Are the targets disaggregated to ensure progress not only for the whole population but also for specifically marginalised groups?

  2. Do the targets establish how they include specifically marginalised groups in the monitoring and target setting process?

Global Responsibility

  1. Does the framework clearly establish greater equity in usage of global resources (including inputs such as raw materials / water, and outputs such as energy) as an aim?

  2. Does the framework prioritise the most pressing shared global priorities?

  3. Does the framework clearly establish changes in consumptions patterns required in wealthier countries?

  1. Can the goal be applied in all countries?

  2. Does the goal emphasise the responsibility of governments to other countries as well as their own populations?

  1. Are the targets appropriately contextual or universal?

  2. Can global targets translate to national level targets?

Peace and Security
  1. Does the framework recognise peace and security as major factors that could bring about, impact or impede development?

  2. Does the framework identify and prioritise the specific groups of people (e.g. women, children, vulnerable groups) that mostly need special protection?

tbc

  1. Do the targets take into cognisance specific protection measures for vulnerable people? 

  2. Are the targets appropriately contextual and nationally relevant/applicable?

Accountability
  1. Does the framework set out clear vertical and horizontal accountability mechanisms, inclusive of a range of stakeholders, including people living in poverty and marginalisation?

  2. Do the accountability mechanisms include national oversight, independent review mechanisms, and multi-stakeholder participation including civil society and people living in poverty?

  3. Does it promote good governance and tackle corruption?

  4. Does the framework set out a clear and transparent accountability, reporting and review process?

  1. Is the goal connected to existing accountability mechanisms or is it possible to create such mechanisms in the context of this goal?

  1. Do the targets contribute to the goal and its implementation?

  2. Can the targets be measured or assessed?

  3. Are the targets accountable to people living in poverty, physically challenged persons, the excluded, the marginalised, and other minorities?

Evidence-Based
  1. Does the rationale for the framework demonstrably focus on the experiences of people living with poverty?

  2. Does the framework clearly reference learning from a critical analysis of the national development context?

  1. Is the goal focused on an evidence based approach recognising and empowering marginalised groups?

  2. Do the goals tap into the positive elements of the national development context to build on the current reality?

  1. How do the targets lend themselves to creating feedback and learning?

Effectiveness
  1. Is the framework internally coherent and is it clear how progress against each goal will further progress towards the overall purpose of the framework and to the vision behind the framework?

  2. Does the framework address the structural causes of poverty, inequity and environmental degradation as well as symptoms?

  1. Does the goal reference international development effectiveness frameworks?

  1. Are the targets SMART?

  2. Does the framework have in-built development mechanisms targeting specifically people living in poverty, physically challenged persons, the excluded, the marginalised, and other minorities?

  3. Are the targets ambitious enough to achieve (Beyond 2015’s) relevant values and vision?

Participation
  1. Has the framework demonstrated how it has included stakeholders in its development, particularly people with experience of poverty and marginalisation

  2. Does the framework clearly identify roles and responsibilities and accountability for all stakeholders?

  3. Does the framework address bridging inequality vertically and horizontally between and within countries?

  1. Does the goal include inclusiveness mechanisms?

  2. Does the goal clearly establish how it is linked to marginalised groups’ own suggested goals?

  1. Does the indicator framework as a whole reflect mechanisms for including different state, private, civil society and multinational actors?

  2. Does the framework include mechanisms targeting specifically people living in poverty, physically challenged persons, the excluded, and the marginalised and other minorities?

What is the Criteria Matrix?

In order for the Development Framework to fulfil its purpose and drive sustainable change towards achieving our vision, each of the different post-2015 framework elements (goals, targets, indicators and the overall framework itself), must be consistent with the values.

The Criteria Matrix represents a filter through which proposals for different elements of the post-2015 framework can be assessed and scored against a set of 11 categories which relate directly to our foundation and implementation values. The conceptual basis for this approach is that the values underpinning the framework are interdependent and mutually reinforcing: Together, they represent a holistic approach to achieving progress towards the vision, while also being integral elements of the vision itself. 

How is the Criteria Matrix used?

Based on this holistic approach, within the matrix any element of a proposed post-2015 framework (goal, target, indicator, and the framework itself) can be considered in terms of whether it is coherent with each and every one of the values, while at the same time recognizing that some proposed instruments may relate more directly to certain categories than others.

This means that the matrix should be approached vertically – working from the top to the bottom of a column – and not horizontally from left to right. Each column of the matrix should be used independently of the others, so that the criteria for assessing the Framework, for example, can be considered without reference to the questions in any other columns. Within each column, however, the questions against all 11 values categories need to be addressed for each element being assessed.

Scoring System

 Each question can be scored on a scale of 0 – 5, as follows:

  1. Not mentioned or implied
  2. Implied but not mentioned
  3. Mentioned
  4. Specifically addressed
  5. Emphasised
  6. Prioritised

What now?

You are encouraged to look at the drafts and let us know what you think of them by sending your comments and rate the current versions using the form below.

Whenever the satisfaction levels on these sections dip below 50%, this will trigger an automatic redraft.

This is a great opportunity to contribute to the definition of our common positions going forwards and of the lens through which Beyond 2015 assesses the High Level Panel’s and other UN actors’ reports and positions! 

You will find more information on this process in Beyond2015's Content Strategy here.

All comments

No comments yet.

Tell us what you think

This is a living document, and we encourage you to tell us what you think about the targets.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
 
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Average rating

0.0/100

Document structure

Latest comment

No comments yet.