shadow_left
Logo
Shadow_R
   


Monitoring implementation in the time dimension
Pavle Sicherl at OECD conference Data Designed for Decisions PDF Print E-mail
Thursday, 18 June 2009

Time distance offers a novel perception of world disparities and of the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals

This is the presentation of Pavle Sicherl at the joint OECD and Institute for International Design conference, June 18-20, Paris.

In the ‘Beyond GDP’ chain Statistics-Knowledge-Policy we need new concepts and
indicators, but also new understandable statistical measures facilitating very diverse
groups of stakeholders to build their perceptions of the situation.

S-time-distance is such a novel statistical measure providing new insights to many
problems. Expressed in time units it is readily understood by policy makers,
managers, media and general public, thus an excellent presentation and
communication tool for policy analysis and debate.

S-time-distance measures the distance between the points in time (lead or lag in
time) when the two compared countries reach the same level of the indicator X. In
measuring the overall “position” and “progress” among and within countries the new
dimension succeeds in finding new stories about development gaps from existing
data. It complements prevailing static measures by telling new more complex stories
in simple terms.

The new story of this added dimension of the disparity in the world is found by
showing how many years earlier were the present values for 160-200 countries
attained in Sweden as a long-term benchmark. For GDP per capita one half of the
countries (80 countries) were lagging Sweden by more than 70 years (36 countries
even for more than 160 years). Yet for internet users per 100 inhabitants the
corresponding value was 10 years, even though the static disparities were high. The
perceptions of the degree of disparity may be very different in static terms and in time
distance pointing to broader conclusions and semantics important for policy
considerations.

Cross-fertilization: Gaptimer meets Gapminder. Time gap measure animation
example is provided in the Gapminder Community graph.

Application to monitoring implementation of targets with time distance is shown
for Millennium Development Goals. Free web monitoring tool is available for users at
the world, country, regional and local levels.

The presentation is available at  Sicherl presentation DD4D ver 2.ppt


 
Novel monitoring method looks at delays for Lisbon targets PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 29 September 2008

The Time Distance Perspective to the Commission's Report

This paper presents the application of the novel broader two-dimensional monitoring system to analyse the implementation of targets for selected structural and sustainable development indicators for the EU. It can be used across many indicators as well as across and within countries in many fields.

S-time-distance measure as the new added dimension deals with lead or lag in time of the actual attainment in a given year against the line to target (it is like tracking in time the actual arrivals in comparison with the train timetable). The degree of implementation for the two EU targets specified in the Commission Report showed that the total employment rate for EU27 was in 2007 about 2.8 years behind the line to target; for the share of the R&D expenditures in GDP S-time-distance indicates that the time delay was more than 6 years in a 6 year period, the value in 2006 was even lower than the starting value in 2000.  

For the later the total disappointment holds even for the reduced targets in the National Reform Programmes. For 7 countries with nearly 40 percent of the EU population the value in 2006 was lower than in 2000. Results by countries are presented. This is not a good indication for the long-term position of EU in the world.

The analysis for 12 selected structural and sustainable development indicators for EU15 across 7 SD themes shows that the four indicators with the greatest delays in time are related to long-term issues: sustainable transport (theme 7), share of R&D in GDP (theme 1), total greenhouse emissions and share of electricity from renewable resources (theme 6 climate change and energy). Again, their values were worse at the end of the period than in the starting year. This type of analysis can be repeated in the EU case for all 27 countries across a greater selected number of available indicators with established targets.  

These results present the situation in transparent terms with clear interpretability also to general public, which can as well facilitate understanding of the situation, need for stronger commitment and broader participation in the Lisbon process. SICENTER prepared a FREE WEB MONITORING TOOL to empower a broad range of stakeholders (such as international and national organizations, NGOs, experts, managers, educators, students and media) in Europe and in the world with an excellent presentation and communication tool that is easily understood and can support decision-making as well as influence public opinion across many fields of concern.

 
Official development assistance alert - a point for the G8 Summit PDF Print E-mail
Thursday, 26 June 2008
G7 Countries Average is lagging 5 years behind the line to the UN 2015 target.

For the net official development assistance 2007 was another disappointing year. The indicator percentage of gross national income devoted to official development assistance (ODA/GNI) was studied in relation to the assumed line to the UN 2015 target of 0.7%.  Several of the analysed countries are not officially committed to this target but a common benchmark allows also for the relative comparisons of the assistance effort. S-time-distance measure was used to get an easily understandable overview of the situation of whether the 22 DAC countries are on- or off- the track to this MDG target.  

Tracking the timetable for reaching the UN target with time distance showed how widely the performance in 2007 was off the track: the delay of 5 or 4 years for G7 as a group and for DAC total, respectively, is a drastic underachievement.  In the seventh year the ODA/GNI value was at the level supposed to be achieved already in 2002 and 2003, respectively, on the line to the UN target. Also the hypothetical projections for 2010 by the OECD-DAC Secretariat indicate that no radical breakthrough is in sight as the time gap would stay unchanged: 5 and 4 years, respectively; the percentage shortfall would amount to 54% for the USA and 59% for Japan. Public awareness of these facts should be instrumental for public pressure on the governments for far-reaching improvements in this domain.

There is a wide gap between the development assistance efforts among the observed 22 countries.  The ODA/GNI value in the 5 European countries that have already reached the 0.7% target is in relative terms four times higher than in the last group where it is below 0.2%. It is sad that the latter group devoting less than 0.2% of their GNI for official development aid includes 57% of the population of the DAC countries. Furthermore, the whole 88% of population is in the countries with values below 0.4% and between 2-7 years behind the line to target. They need to find the political will to do much better, especially the G7 countries. It is hoped that the forthcoming G8 Summit in Japan can make an important contribution to remedy this unacceptable situation.  

Annex tables and graphs provide detailed information on individual countries as well as enable the comparisons across them. They are prepared using the free GAPTIMER monitoring tool for calculation and graphing of S-time-distance deviations from the line to target. S-time-distance methodology allows numerous stakeholders to benefit from this novel statistical measure for policy debate for many issues and at various levels. 

It provides the official organisations as well as the media and NGOs with an additional analytical and presentation tool for continuous monitoring of the implementation of the established targets at world, regional, national, sub-national and business levels.
 


Text: G7 lags the UN 2015 target by 5 years.pdf

Annex tables: Annex tables with 2010.pdf

Annex graphs by countries: Annex Graphs ODA_GNI.pdf
 
Seminar on S-TIME-DISTANCE at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, Seattle PDF Print E-mail
Sunday, 27 April 2008
Pavle Sicherl presented S-Time-Distance – A Novel Generic Statistical Measure Providing New Insights from Existing Data at the seminar of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle on April 15, 2008.

 
China is about 50 years behind EU27 and USA about 22 ahead of it for GDP per capita PDF Print E-mail
Sunday, 09 March 2008
There is a rapid convergence in the east-west direction but not in the west-west direction.

Pavle Sicherl prepared for EUROCHAMBRES the analysis for their Time Distance Study 3. It shows the time gaps for the EU in relation to the United States and China. For GDP per capita the 2007 value for China was attained by EU27 about 50 years ago and in the USA about 70 years ago. For Internet users per capita the time lag is not larger than a decade.  

Dynamically also for GDP per capita the time distance is expected to be reduced dramatically. China is catching up with both EU and US greatly outpacing their global economic counterparts. Using ‘what-if’ calculations the present values for EU27 can be reached in 12 to 18 years if China continues to sustain the present high growth rates; even with just 5% growth of GDP per capita this can be done by 2030. Beyond that, China may attain full equalization with EU27 in less than 20 years if the respective growth differential would stay at about 7%; even with a much smaller difference in growth between China and the EU, for example of 3%, China would catch up between 2046 and 2066. Similar calculations with the US are available.

Europe has a long way to go to catch up with the US and is way beyond the original Lisbon targets. With respect to original Lisbon targets S-time-distance shows that EU27 is behind the line to these targets for 2 years for GDP growth, for 3 years for total employment rate and for more than 6 years for R&D in GDP. At present it is behind the US for 22 years for GDP per capita, for 18 years for GDP per employed, for 30 years in R&D per capita and 4 years in Internet users per capita. For several indicators it was shown that even if EU27 would succeed to grow faster than the US, for realistic differences the convergence is a long time away. For instance, the extremely negative EU performance in terms of R&D investment is well illustrated by a hypothetical 1% EU higher growth, for which the catch up with the US would materialize in 2086.

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

Results 16 - 29 of 29
 
 
Related Items