The Brussels Policy Briefing n. 54 on ”Sustainable agriculture: where are we on SDGs implementation?” took place on 27th February 2019 (European Commission, Charlemagne Building, Alcide de Gasperi Room, Rue de la Loi 170, 1040 Brussels).

1. Overview of FAO’s Work on SDGs
Focus – SDG Indicator 2.4.1
Arbab Asfandiyar Khan
Economist
FAO ESS Division

2. OVERVIEW OF THE GLOBAL INDICATOR
FRAMEWORK
 GIF (232 indicators) endorsed in July 2017
 UNSC is responsible for the SDG monitoring framework
 Custodian international agency is assigned for each indicator
 IAEG-SDG to prepare an initial proposal and oversee this work
through to 2030
• 28 countries representing their respective regions;
• International organizations as observers;
• Meets twice a year (last meeting 5-8 November 2018)
=> The process has been fully led by countries

3. CLASSIFICATION OF INDICATORS IN THREE
TIERS
 Based on the level of methodological development and the
availability of data
TIER LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
I • Established methodology/international standards exist
• Most countries are regularly producing data (>50% of
countries/ population in each region)
II • An established methodology/international standards exist
• Most countries are still not regularly producing data (<50%
of countries/ population in each region)
III • Established methodology/international standards do not
yet exist or are still being tested

4. STATUS OF SDG INDICATORS UNDER FAO
CUSTODIANSHIP
As of November 2015 (21 SDG indicators)
Goal Indicators
Goal 2 (Food
security, Nutrition,
Sustainable
Agriculture) 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.4.1 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.a.1 2.c.1
Goal 5 (Gender
equality) 5.a.1 5.a.2
Goal 6 (Use of
Water) 6.4.1 6.4.2
Goal 12
(Sustainable
Consumption and
Production) 12.3.1
Goal 14 (Oceans) 14.4.1 14.6.1 14.7.1 14.b.1
Goal 15 (Life on
Land) 15.1.1 15.2.1 15.4.2
Tier # of indicators
I 3
II 5
III 13

5. STATUS OF SDG INDICATORS UNDER FAO
CUSTODIANSHIP
As of January 2018
Goal Indicators
Goal 2 (Food
security, Nutrition,
Sustainable
Agriculture) 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.4.1 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.a.1 2.c.1
Goal 5 (Gender
equality) 5.a.1 5.a.2
Goal 6 (Use of
Water) 6.4.1 6.4.2
Goal 12
(Sustainable
Consumption and
Production) 12.3.1
Goal 14 (Oceans) 14.4.1 14.6.1 14.7.1 14.b.1
Goal 15 (Life on
Land) 15.1.1 15.2.1 15.4.2
FAO started with 13 Tier III indicators, it now has only 1 left.
Tier # of indicators
I 12
II 8
III 1

6. GOAL 2 - END HUNGER,
ACHIEVE FOOD SECURITY
AND IMPROVED NUTRITION
AND PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE
AGRICULTURE

7. GOAL 2 (NO HUNGER) – INDICATORS UNDER FAO
CUSTODIANSHIP
Indicator # Indicator Title Target
2.1.1 Prevalence of undernourishment
2.1
2.1.2
Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the
population, based on the Food Insecurity Experience
Scale (FIES)
2.3.1
Volume of production per labour unit by classes of
farming/pastoral/ forestry enterprise size
2.3
2.3.2
Average income of small-scale food producers, by sex
and indigenous status
2.4.1
Proportion of agricultural area under productive and
sustainable agriculture
2.4
2.5.1
Number of plant and animal genetic resources for food
and agriculture secured in either medium or long-term
conservation facilities 2.5
2.5.2
Proportion of local breeds classified as being at risk,
not-at-risk or at unknown level of risk of extinction
2.a.1
The agriculture orientation index for government
expenditures
2.a
2.c.1
Indicator of food price anomalies [The proposed
indicator of food price anomalies measures the number
of “Price Anomalies” that occur on a given food
commodity price series over a given period of time.]
GOAL 2 comprise of 14 indicators of which FAO is

8. CORPORATE CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES FOR SDG INDICATORS
2016-18
E-LEARNING COURSES
GLOBAL, REGIONAL AND NATIONAL TRAINING
WORKSHOPS
SDG DATA & COMMUNICATION PORTAL
NEW FAO vision for 2019-2030: Scale up
capacity development support to maximize
country reporting

9. Hunger
Women’s equal rights
to land ownership
Severity of food
insecurity
Public Investment in
agriculture
Food price volatility
Access rights for
small-scale fisheries
Water stress
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.a.1
2.c.1
14.b.1
6.4.2
5.a.2
E-learning courses published, freely available
online2.5.1 2.5.2
Conservation of plant
and animal genetic
resources
5.a.1
Forest area and
sustainable forest
management
15.1.1 15.2.1

10. Severity of food
insecurity Food price volatility
Access rights for
small-scale fisheries
2.1.2 2.c.1 14.b.1
E-learning courses published, freely available
online
 Spanish
 French
 Spanish
 French
 Russian
 Spanish
 French
 Russian
 Arabic

11. E-learning courses under development
Water use efficiency
Productivity and
income of small-scale
food producers
Agricultural
sustainability
Global food losses
Value added of
sustainable fisheries
Fish stocks
sustainability
12.3.1
6.4.1
2.3.1 2.3.2
2.4.1
14.4.1
14.7.1
Coming soon

12. GLOBAL AND REGIONAL TRAINING
WORKSHOPS 2016-2018
Aims: Enlarge the pool of SDG monitoring
experts
Facilitate South-South cooperation
Facilitate pilot testing of new methods
 40+ training workshops in 2017
and 2018
 120 countries attended one or
more workshops from all regions of
the world
Result: Increased number of reporting coun

13. By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and
implement resilient agricultural practices that increase
productivity and production, that help maintain
ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to
climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and
other disasters and that progressively improve land and
soil quality
13
TARGET
2.4:

14. INDICATOR 2.4.1
Defined as the “Proportion of agricultural area under productive and
sustainable agriculture”, which is expressed as:
𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎 =
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒
𝐴𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎
Reflects the multiple dimensions of sustainability
Measured at farm level
Allows measurement of progress towards more productive and sustainable
agriculture
14

15. STEPS TO DEVELOP THE
INDICATOR
1) Determining the scope
2) Determining the dimensions to be covered (sustainability)
3) Choosing the scale
4) Selecting the data collection instrument(s).
5) Selecting the themes to be covered, choosing a sub-indicator
for each theme.
6) Developing the criteria to assess sustainability performance
for each sub-indicator
7) Deciding the periodicity of monitoring the indicator
8) Developing modality of reporting the indicator
15

16. SUB-INDICATORS
No. Theme Sub-indicators
1 Land productivity Farm output value per hectare
2 Profitability Net farm income
3 Resilience Risk mitigation mechanisms
4 Soil health Prevalence of soil degradation
5 Water use Variation in water availability
6 Fertilizer risk Management of fertilizers
7 Pesticide risk Management of pesticides
8 Biodiversity Use of biodiversity-friendly practices
9 Decent employment Wage rate in agriculture
10 Food security
Food insecurity experience scale
(FIES)
11 Land tenure Secure tenure rights to land
16

17. ASSESSING SUSTAINABILITY
LEVELS
17
1. Green: ‘desirable’
2. Yellow: ‘acceptable’
3. Red: ‘unsustainable’
Criteria established by thematic experts, will be fine tuned
in light of results of the proposed tests
Helps measure progress

18. REPORTING THROUGH A
DASHBOARD
18
Example of results for country X in year Y
Note: This dashboard is only a simulation and is not from real data

19. NEXT STEPS FOR SDG
INDICATOR 2.4.1
Extended pilots ongoing in Bangladesh
Finalizing documentation
Farm survey questionnaire (PAPI and CAPI versions)
Enumerator’s manual
Calculation procedures
Preparation of training material and e-learning courses is
in progress
Advocacy and training workshops (global, regional and
national) planned in different regions
SDG data & communication portal
Rolling out in countries
19

20. THANK YOU
http://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/en/
Contact us:
Arbab.khan@fao.org;
Amy.Heyman@fao.org;
Francesco.Tubiello@fao.org;

21. Education
for all
Anytime
Anywhere
Free of
charge
Transfer of
skills and
competences
Multilingual
500,000
learners
throughout
the world
Public
good
All SDGs
and SDG 4
FAO E-learning Center
www.fao.org/elearning

22. CRITERIA FOR THE CHOICE
OF THEMES AND SUB-
INDICATORS
22
Policy relevance
Universality
International comparability
Measurability
Cost effectiveness
Minimum cross-correlation

23. SCOPE
Included within the scope
Crop and livestock production systems
 Non-food crops and livestock (example crops such as tobacco, cotton, and livestock raised for non-food products like sheep for
wool).
 Crops grown for fodder or for energy purposes.
Agro-forestry (trees on the farm).
Aquaculture, to the extent that it takes place within the agricultural area. For example,
rice-fish and similar systems.
Both intensive and extensive production systems (including subsistence agriculture).
Excluded from the scope
State and common land used commonly by several agriculture holdings.
Production from gardens and backyards.
Production from hobby farms.
Land used exclusively for aquaculture.
Forest and other wooded lands.
Food harvested from the wild. 23

24. AGGREGATE INDICATOR (AT
NATIONAL OR OTHER LEVELS)
𝑆𝐷𝐺241 𝑑 = min
𝑛:1−11
(𝑆𝐼 𝑑 𝑛)
𝑆𝐷𝐺241 𝑎+𝑑 = min
𝑛:1−11
(𝑆𝐼 𝑑+𝑆𝐼 𝑎) 𝑛
𝑆𝐷𝐺241 𝑢 = max
𝑛:1−11
(𝑆𝐼 𝑢 𝑛)
SDG241d = proportion of agricultural land area that have achieved the
‘desirable’ level
SDG241a+d = proportion of agricultural land area that have achieved at
least the ‘acceptable’ level
SDG241u = proportion of agricultural area that is ‘unsustainable’
24

25. PREFERRED INSTRUMENT
FOR DATA COLLECTION
Preferred instrument for data collection is a farm survey
questionnaire
Aligned with efforts supported by FAO to develop farm surveys
as the most relevant instrument for agricultural data (AGRIS)
Questionnaire designed as a module that contain the minimum
set of questions needed to assess 2.4.1.
These questions can be integrated into existing farm surveys
Can be complemented with contextual information from other
data sources
Suggested periodicity: 3 years
17

26. CONDITIONS FOR USING
ALTERNATIVE DATA SOURCES
Respects the stratification (farm type, agricultural areas,
etc.)
Captures the same phenomenon as the proposed farm
survey
At least same quality as the farm survey
Compliant with international/national standards and
classifications systems internationally comparable
Data available at the same level of territorial
disaggregation as the farm survey
Reference year and periodicity homogenous across the
sub-indicators
20