Place of indicators
To monitor global progress towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), the United Nations Statistical Commission adopted a set of 232 indicators in 2017. These indicators, as defined at that time, aims to act as a basis for monitoring global progress towards SDG. Therefore they do not necessarily apply to all national references, due to the specialties of each country.
Hence the states were invited to establish each indicator for monitoring SDG at the national level, based on their respective priorities, realities, calculation capabilities and status. To end this, France constructed a multi-interest holder work group (unions, research institutes, government institutions, businesses, local and regional officials, public bodies, ministries and statistics departments of ministries) for the national statistical information (CNIS).
After analysis of 232 United Nations indicators, 66 were selected to include in the French sets of indicators and complemented by 32 additional indicators.
Law choice
It presents an assessment of trends in the last five years in 98 national indicators. [1] 17 selected to track France’s progress towards achieving SDG [2],
The applied method here is inspired by one to be used by Eurostat to assess the progress of the European Union. [3]It is possible to determine this with this method Whether an indicator is moving away or away from the target, and at what rate.
However, there is no assessment of how long a given trend can be maintained. While French or European public policies have set quantitative targets for a certain date, the trends seen for each indicator are compared with the theoretical trends required to achieve them within the time frame.
Explain the results
Indicators are displayed as color-coded dots. The color shows whether the indicators have gone in a permanent direction and at what speed. For indicators with a quantitative goal, dots indicate whether the France is on the track to meet the target. Without a quantitative goal, for indicators, dots indicate whether the indicator has moved from the permanent growth target and how fast. Therefore the evaluation method is slightly different for these two types of indicators, as mentioned below.
Table 1: Color Key
- Colour of the dot: green – The indicator’s contribution to achieving the SDGs: favourable
- Colour of the dot: yellow – The indicator’s contribution to achieving the SDGs: moderately favourable
- Colour of the dot: orange – The indicator’s contribution to achieving the SDGs: moderately unfavourable
- Colour of the dot: red – The indicator’s contribution to achieving the SDGs: unfavourable
The indicators for which the trend was not evaluated are indicated in the datavisualization sheets by this symbol:
The calculation method used
1. Preliminary stage: determining method applicability
Some of the 98 SDG monitoring indicators (iSDGs), are disaggregated by several variables [4]For some of these indicators, only one variable can be chosen. But for other indicators, many variable analysis were included (for example: life expectancy with good health for men and life expectancy with good health for women).
Used data is taken from SDG indicator dashboard [5]Changes are seen in a period of five years since the final available price. The trend is assessed only when the available data is included in at least three years and if the “progress” measurement is possible.
The evaluation method uses calculation of the average annual growth rate (AGR) based on the beginning and end indicators seen at the beginning of the period in question.
2. Evaluation method for indicator without quantitative goals
The trend assessment for indicators without quantitative goals is based on the average annual growth rate (AGR) using the following formula:
AGR = (yt/yt0)1/(t-t0)-1
Formula (1)
Where:
- t0 is the baseline year.
- t is the most recent year.
- yt0 is the value of the indicator for the baseline year.
- yt is the value of the indicator for the last year.
Table 2 and figure 1 show the thresholds applied and the resulting symbols, where the desired direction is upwards [6]
Table 2: If there is no quantitative target of indicator, threshold to assess trends
Growth rate (AGR) ≥ 1% : green dot
Growth rate (AGR) < 1 and ≥ 0% : yellow dot
Growth rate (AGR) < 0% and ≥ -1% : orange dot
Growth rate (AGR) < -1% : red dot
Figure 1: Graphic representation of trend assessment thresholds for indicators without quantitative targets
3. Assessment method for indicators with quantitative targets
The trend assessment for indicators with quantitative targets is based on the AGR described above and also takes into account the value of the target. For this type of indicator, the actual (observed) growth rate is compared with the (theoretical) growth rate for the target to have been met in the target year. This comparison does not take into account projections of the indicator possible future developments. The calculation of actual and required indicator trends is based on the following three steps.
Step 1 : calculation of the actual (i.e. observed) annual growth rate
AGRa=(yt/yt0)(1/(t-t0))-1
Formula (2a)
Where:
- t0 is the baseline year.
- t is the most recent year.
- yt0 is the value of the indicator for the baseline year.
- yt is the value of the indicator for the last year.
Step 2 : calculation of the required (i.e. theoretical) annual growth rate
AGRr=(xt1/yt0)(1/(t1-t0)-1
Formula (2b)
Where:
- t0 is the baseline year.
- t1 is the target year.
- yt0 is the value of the indicator for the baseline year.
- xt1 is the indicator value for the target year
Step 3 : calculation of the ratio between the current and required growth rates
Ra/r=(AGRa/AGRr)
Formula (2c)
Table 3 and Figure 2 illustrate the thresholds applied and the resulting color of the dot.
Table 3: Thresholds for assessing trends if the indicator has quantitative targets
- Ratio of actual and required AGR: Ratio ≥ 95% – green dot
- Ratio of actual and required AGR: 95% > Ratio ≥ 60% – yellow dot
- Ratio of actual and required AGR: 60% > Ratio ≥ 0% – orange dot
- Ratio of actual and required AGR: Ratio < 0% – red dot
Figure 2: Graphic representation of trend assessment thresholds for indicators with quantitative targets
4. Calculation of coverage score per SDG
The calculation of average scores for each SDG is based on the calculations described above. For indicators without quantitative targets, the AGR (formula (1)) is used. For indicators with a quantitative target, the ratio of actual growth to required growth (formula (2c)) is used. These values are fed into a scoring function in order to calculate a score ranging from – 5 to 5 for each indicator. This function is different for indicators with and without quantitative targets (Figures 3 and 4). For each SDG, the arithmetic mean score for the indicators whose trend is assessed [7] From 0 (equal to an average score of -5) from 10 to 10 (equal to an average score of 5) to ten -point score is converted.
Figure 3: Scoring function for indicator without quantitative goals, where the desired direction is upwards [8]
Note: Orange dotted lines represent the Agri Threshold used to assess the trend.
- AGR in %≤-2: indicator score=-5
- -2
- AGR in % ≥2: indicator score=5
Figure 4: Scoring function for indicators with quantitative targets
Note: the orange dotted lines represent the thresholds for the actual AGR /required AGR ratio used to assess the trend.
- ratio of actual and required AGR (in %)≤-60: indicator score=-5
- -60
- 60
- ratio of actual and required AGR (in %)≥30: indicator score=5
- 60
Statistics on the datavizualisation of 2023 dashboard indicator, published in July 2024
Among the set of 512 indicators, 114 were selected.
- For 83 of these indicators, trends are evaluated without quantitative target.
- For 16 of these indicators, trends are evaluated with quantitative target
- For 15 of these indicators trends are not evaluated (cf. table 4)
| Reason of non-assessment | Series description |
|---|---|
| Evaluation of progress not possible | 6.i1 – Distributed water that is non-compliant with physico-chemical parameters 6.i2 – Surface water bodies with good ecological status 6.i2 – Surface water bodies with good chemical status 8.i1 – Annual growth rate of real GDP per capita 14.i1 – Coastal and transitional water bodies with good ecological status 15.i2 – Natural habitats with good conservation status |
| Time series too short | 1.i4 – Net housing expenditure to income ratio 3.i7a – Forgone healthcare for financial reasons – medical care 3.7b – Forgone healthcare for financial reasons – dental care 4.i2 – Participation rate of young people and adults, who have left initial education, in education and training 9.i4 – Research personnel (full-time equivalent – FTE) 12.i3 – Food loss and waste per capita 12.i7 – Regional industrial ecology projects 14.i5 – Coral reefs in good or optimal health – Pacific and Scattered Islands 14.i5 – Coral reefs in good or optimal health – Antilles, Mayotte, Réunion |
[4] Example: Monetary poverty rate is monitored at a threshold of 50% and 60%; The prevalence of obesity among adults is monitored for men and women.
[6] When the desired direction is at the bottom, the threshold is multiplied by -1 and the signal (≤, ≥, <,>) The reversal.
[7] When the tendency of several forms of the SDG monitoring indicator is assessed, only the arithmetic mean of their score is taken into consideration when calculating the average score for specific SDGs.
[8] When the desired direction is at the bottom, the threshold is multiplied by -1.
/B_test_configurated>
