I. >> H
uman Rights and Indicators: Rationale and Some Concerns
>> Human rights indicators - notion and rationale
Consider figure IV, which presents a crosstabulation of the four categories of indicators:
quantitative, qualitative, fact-based and judgementbased. It illustrates the opportunities for using
different categories of indicators in undertaking
human rights assessments. Each category has its
potential use (see also discussion in chap. III on
data-generating mechanisms), yet ideally if there
is a choice the preference would be for indicators
from quadrant A over C, and B over D, or AC over
BD, and A over the rest. In other words, when each
of the four quadrants has something to offer by way
of relevant information and indicators on the subject being assessed, the said order of preference is
likely to make the assessment more objective and
acceptable to the parties involved. However, in
general, in the context of this Guide there is a
tendency to use information from quadrant
A, C and to some extent B. Regarding the
indicators in quadrant B, the focus is on the
category of subjective indicators that can be more
easily obtained through statistically representative
surveys like the “percentage of individuals who
feel safe walking alone at night” (example 1).18
Moreover, information and indicators that are
fact-based and quantitative in nature (quadrant A) can provide a sense of magnitude and
overcome certain bias in information generation
and its interpretation that other non-quantitative
and judgement-based information and indicators
may not. This makes it worthwhile to use further
fact-based and quantitative information and
indicators, to the extent that their use adds value
to the human rights assessments.
3
Performance and compliance
indicators
In recent years, having accepted the objective of
mainstreaming human rights in their mandated
activities, including development cooperation activities, the United Nations system’s agencies and programmes have been seeking tools and monitoring
methodologies that could help them in assessing
their performance on the said objective. A need
for such tools and related indicators has also been
expressed by donors who want to use human rights
standards to guide their assistance programmes in
the recipient countries. The approach, in such cases,
has been to bring in human rights cross-cutting norms
of non-discrimination and equality, participation and
accountability in supporting the implementation of
the ongoing activities. There have also been some
attempts at modifying the mandates or stated programming objectives by referring to specific human
rights standards.
As a result, indicators have been identified and
toolkits developed that use what are essentially
performance indicators. The primary objective of
performance indicators is to allow the verification
of changes produced by development intervention
relative to what was planned. They are based on
programming principles and terminologies (such as
input-output-outcome-impact categorization of indicators, see also chap. V, sect. A 2) and anchored
essentially in the respective programme activities.
Such indicators can be used to monitor the performance of programme activities and to assess their
conformity to some of the cross-cutting human rights
norms.19 However, performance indicators, though
helpful in furthering an approach based on human
rights in development programming, capture only
some aspects of the cross-cutting human rights
18. The importance and meaning of surveys based on representative population samples and statistically sound methodology are
highlighted further in chapter III.
19. UNDP, “Indicators for human rights based approaches to development in UNDP programming: a users’ guide”, March 2006.
Available from http://web.undp.org/oslocentre/docs06/HRBA%20indicators%20guide.pdf.
Human Rights Indicators
19