shadow_left
Logo
Shadow_R
   


Monitoring implementation in the time dimension
MDG implementaion by Gaptimer Progress Chart 2013 PDF Print E-mail
Wednesday, 14 August 2013

Latest update of the article in the Guardian by Professor Pavle Sicherl available also in the wikiprogress ProgBlog


UNDP Report 2013 in the two page summary overview started the first sentence on the first indicator: ‘The world reached the poverty reduction target five years ahead of schedule.’ The first row of the Gaptimer MDG Progress Chart also shows that the 2015 poverty reduction targets have already been achieved even earlier in three world regions (also China was an excellent performer with time lead of even 13 years, reaching the 2015 target in 2002). This is an update of the publication in The Guardian by Professor Pavle Sicherl based on the older data from the 2012 MDG report and reported ealier on this web page. Monitoring implementation with time distance deviation is like comparing train or bus arrivals with the respective timetables. In the context of the MDGs, it amounts to comparing the time of actual implementation with the time stipulated by the schedule to the 2015 target. We are therefore measuring the gap in time.

Source: Own calculations based on data from UN, The Millennium Development Report 2013, New York   © P. Sicherl, 2013

In general the Gaptimer MDG Progress Chart presents in a single table at a glance results for 100 cases across 10 MDG indicators and 10 units (7 world regions, Developing Regions, China, and India) expressed in time lead or time lag providing stories of the situation from the novel time perspective. There are many green colour fields indicating cases where targets have been reached or indicators are ahead of the line to target, to show the many positive developments in the developing countries. The situation differs among the world regions, but the overall situation shows that the number of cases ahead of the line to target (21+15) is exceeding the number of cases behind (18+14). In absolute terms progress has been made in all selected indicators and in all world regions (though it has been quite uneven across regions as well as across countries within the regions). Furthermore, for countries with delays the application of the overall MDG targets at the regional and national cases may be unrealistic. 

For more detailed analysis, below we provide Excel files of results of time distances in which time lead or time lag from the line to the respective MDG 2015 targets are shown for 112-137 developing countries respectively for the five selected indicators. This monitoring method can be applied much more widely. Firstly, world regions can be exchanged with countries, regions within countries, or socio-economic groups, sectors, etc. Secondly, units could be products of an enterprise, budget activities or operational projects, etc., and with e.g. relevant KPIs as horizontal entries. 


EXCEL FILES of S-time-distances for selected developing countries:

IND4.1 Under-five mortality rate 2011.xls
IND5.1 Maternal mortality ratio 2010.xls
IND7.8t improved drinking water 2011.xls
IND7.9t improved sanitation 2011.xls
IND8.16 Internet users 2012.xls

 

Links to wikiprogress:

 


 
2013 Global Forum on Development PDF Print E-mail
Thursday, 01 August 2013

Intervention of Professor Pavle Sicherl at the Forum

The 2013 Global Forum on Development (GFD) in Paris was designed to promote a better understanding of what the shifting dynamics of poverty means for policies to be pursued by governments, international organisations and others in the post-2015 world.

Within Session 3, Innovative approaches to measuring poverty, well-being and progress, and implications for statistical capacity development; Session 3.2 was dealing with the statistical capacity development in an emerging post-2015 development agenda. Development goals must reflect the realities and priorities of individual countries, but they also need to be measurable.  This implies that statistical capacity development, which was widely neglected when the MDGs were first designed, should have crucial importance for any follow-up framework. Professor Sicherl discussed the evaluation of the MDG implementation in a new way using Gaptimer MDG Progress Chart.

Professor Sicherl also stated that the issue of “how statisticians can take advantage of innovations in data production and dissemination” has to be examined in the broader context; the innovations should include introducing also statistical measures that are transparent and easily understood by everyone. Time distance measure can present one of such measures that produce knowledge and policy messages in a very understandable way to build both objective and subjective perceptions of the overall degree of inequality. The time distance concept can influence the perception and decisions of people when they are assessing their relative position in their surroundings, in the society and across countries over time. In the information age this additional view of the existing data should be evaluated as an important contribution to the more efficient utilisation of the available information in many fields.





 
The Guardian published the time distance method for measuring implementation of MDGs PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 24 June 2013

Gaptimer Progress Chart for World Regions and results for 111-140 countries

The article is available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/ with appropriate links. While setting sensible goals and providing data about implementation are both necessary preconditions for any post-2015 interventions, we also need statistical measures that are transparent and easily understood by everyone. The time dimension of MDG implementation can be presented and analysed in a new complementary way that is very easy to understand and to communicate.

Measuring implementation involves comparing two sets of data: actual developments over time against the implied time path from the starting point to the 2015 MDG target deadline. The discrepancies can be measured in two dimensions; static difference at a given point in time and discrepancies in time (either time lead or time lag). Monitoring implementation is like comparing train or bus arrivals with the timetable provided for each mode of transport. In the context of the MDGs, it amounts to comparing the time of actual implementation with the time stipulated by the schedule to the 2015 target. 

The results in the Gaptimer Progress Chart attached uses the same identifiers as Formula 1 on TV: drivers who score a minus at time distance are shown in green to signify that they are ahead in time; i.e. if the developing world is on track, ahead or behind schedule to achieving MDG goals. It enables the reader to grasp at a glance the world situation for 100 time distance results across 10 MDG indicators and 10 units (7 world regions, Developing Regions, China, and India) to facilitate debate for the past and the post-2015 era.

To facilitate the understanding and use of this method SICENTER has developed a free web tool to monitor implementation of targets with the S-time-distance measure available to international and national organisations, NGOs, experts, businesses, managers, educators, students, interest groups, media, and the general public. It can be used for monitoring implementation in many areas beyond MDGs, like adding a second dimension to comparing actual values with target values, forecast, budget, plan, etc., both at macro and business levels. It is available on http://www.gaptimer.eu/s-t-d_monitoring_tool.html.


 
Upgraded visualisation of the Gaptimer MDG Progress Chart PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 10 September 2012

Gaptimer MDG Progress Chart enables immediate visualisation with 25 graphs


We have upgraded earlier visualisations in two ways. Firstly, by clicking on Gaptimer MDG Progress Chart the readers can reach 25 graphs thus providing user friendly access to better understanding and analysis. Time distances for 100 results for indicators and units are presented in a single summary table. For more detailed analysis we have added 5 graphs and Excel files of calculations in which time distance lead or lag from the line to the respective MDG 2015 targets are shown for 111-140 developing countries respectively. Secondly, interested readers can download the Excel files over the analysed period 1990-2010, analyse all individual country results and select results for those countries that they would like to compare with (e.g. by regions like African countries or simply with neighbouring countries).

Gaptimer Progress Chart of MDG implementation for world regions 



Are we on the track, ahead or behind in time measured by S-time-distance in years 
(+ time lag, - time lead) comparing with the line to the 2015 MDG targets around 2010
Gaptimer MDG Progress Chart   Developing Regions Northern Africa Sub-Saharan Africa Latin America and the Caribbean Eastern Asia Southern Asia South-Eastern Asia Western Asia CHINA INDIA IND 4.1 IND 5.1 IND 7.8t IND 7.9t IND 8.16 Proportion of population living below $1 (PPP) per day (2008) Prevalence of underweight children under-five years of age Net enrolment ratio in primary education Ratio of girls to boys in primary education Under-five mortality rate Maternal mortality ratio Tuberculosis patients successfully treated under short course (2009) Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source, total Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility, total Internet users per 100 inhabitants (2011) The Millennium Development Report 2012 Gaptimer
1. Click on the name of the world region to view the bar chart over the 10 selected indicators
2. Click on the name of the indicator to view the bar chart over the 10 selected units
3. For 5 selected indicators click on the number of the indicator to view the S-time-distance deviation graph for individual developing countries with appropriate data around 2010: 

IND 4.1, Under-five mortality rate, 137 developing countries
IND 5.1, Maternal mortality rate, 127 developing countries
IND 7.8t, Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source (total), 117 countries
IND 7.9t, Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility (total), 111 countries
IND 8.16, Internet users per 100 inhabitants, 140 developing countries

For charts of time distances for individual countries on the axis with the country names only every fourth name of the country could be displayed due to lack of space.


Excel files of calculations of time distance deviations from the lines to target for 111-140 individual developing countries for the 5 selected indicators are available below. Thus a more detailed analysis is possible so that interested readers can download the files, analyse all individual country results and select from the results those countries that they would like to compare with (e.g. by regions like African countries or simply with neighbouring countries). 

EXCEL FILES of S-time-distances for selected developing countries:

 
Visualisation of MDG implementation with Time Distance Progress Chart PDF Print E-mail
Tuesday, 21 August 2012

Are we ahead or behind in time comparing MDG implementation for 10 selected
indicators for World regions, China and India with the line to the 2015 MDG targets?

Time Distance Progress Chart of Millennium Development Goals implementation

We are using data from the UN, The Millennium Development Report 2012, New York, July 2012 and present the MDG implementation in the time distance perspective. The MDG 2012 Progress Chart (United Nations 2012) gives a quick assessment over 16 selected key targets, as it can deal also with qualitative judgments. For a more restricted number of 10 selected indicators for which numerical estimates are available we complement the UN Progress Chart with Time Distance Progress Chart of monitoring the progress of implementation.

Time distance is first and foremost important as an innovative concept of looking at data in a novel complementary and intuitively understandable way. The application to monitoring is easy to understand and to communicate; it is like comparing actual arrivals with the train (airplane, bus) timetable. S-time-distance measures deviation in time showing whether the actual developments are ahead or behind in time from path to the 2015 MDG targets (+ time lag, - time lead).

Are we ahead or behind in time comparing with the line to the 2015 MDG targets?

The table below examines the situation in more details for Developing Regions, 7 world regions, China, and India. The situation differs among the world regions, but the overall situation shows that for about 26% of cases of 10 selected indicators from all 8 MDG areas the 2015 targets were already achieved, for another 24% of cases the actual developments were ahead of the line to the 2015 targets. From about one half of the cases that were lagging behind about 17% were lagging more than 6 years, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. China as the most populated country shows excellent results, for six out of ten indicators it already reached their 2015 MDG targets.

Time Distance Progress Chart of MDG implementation for world regions


For each of the analysed units graphical presentation of MDG implementation are provided in the PowerPoint file below. The table above also allows comparisons of implementation across indicators and regions at a glance. From the health domain the three selected indicators stand out as the cases where the MDG targets (with one exception) have not been achieved in any of the world regions. This is true also for the net enrolment ratio in the primary education where the target of full enrolment was set too high in view of the starting positions.

It should be reasonably easy to incorporate the S-time-distance methodology for monitoring implementation of the MDGs in the work of the UN, the World Bank and other agencies or countries on these issues, both at macro and at micro levels.

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

Results 1 - 15 of 27
 
 
Related Items