The workshop on ‘Global Governance by Indicators-Measuring Governance and Stateness’ will bring together scholars and policy-makers to promote mutual understanding and learning about the role of indicators in evaluating the quality of governance and stateness. The workshop will address three fundamental questions: • What do governance and stateness indicators measure? • How are particular metrics created and further developed over time? • How do they impact on decision- and policy-making? First, the workshop aims to debate what is meant and measured by ‘governance’ and ‘stateness’. The discussion will attempt to map how several normative quests have shaped the manner in which indicators have been developed over time. Second, the workshop will approach the technicality of ‘measuring the unmeasurable’, exploring the methodological and conceptual uncertainties faced by some of the most important metrics of governance and stateness. And third, the workshop will debate the implications and use of governance indicators as the basis for political action and instruments capable of influencing policy-making.

1. From Governance Measures to
Governance Goals for the World:
Technics and Politics
David Hulme
University of Manchester
www.manchester.ac.uk/bwpi
www.effective-states.org
Global Governance by Indicators, EUI, Florence
13-14 November 2014

2. Governance goals for the world:
why and how?
• HLP and OWG have included governance,
effective institutions and peace in their goals
• Results-based management theory
underpinning, like MDGs – low trust & control
• SMART – for focus, monitoring, carrots/sticks
• Principles, goals, targets, indicators…MoI
• But, do not forget social norm change and/or
transformation as a covert theory of change

3. Lessons from the MDGs
• Goals were set relatively arbitrarily – unfair to Africa
• Confusion on global or national?
• Goal 8 – SMART goals and powerful actors!
• Growing evidence of goals having a direct impact on
outcomes…enormous attribution problems!
- Economist - several million ‘extra’ children’s
lives saved (well above trend)
– Alison Evans - maternal health in Zambia
• Social norms? UK & 0.7% - EU & accession

4. Governance – concerns and
confusions
• Are governance goals included for their intrinsic or
instrumental (or both) values?
• Complex empirics of quality of governance and
development outcomes - accountable authoritarianism
(S Korea & Malaysia)…un-accountable democracy
(parts of India)
• Underlying myth – development is delivered by saints
in perfectly governed contexts (rather than the reality
of which imperfect folk to support)
• All existing measures are ‘donor serving’
• Endogeneity – businessmen rigging the scores?
‘Governments stuck on CPIA’s of 3.1’.

5. What does the United Nations’ High Level Panel say?
“Illustrative Goals”
• Goal 10: Ensure good governance and
effective institutions – [one goal or two?]
1. Provide free and universal legal identity
2. Freedom of speech, association, peaceful protest
and access to media/information – [voice]
3. Increase public participation in political
processes and civic engagement
4. Guarantee public right to information and gov’t
data – [transparency]
5. Reduce bribery and corruption – [accountability]

6. What does the United Nations’ Open
Working Group say?
• SDGs - Goal 16: Promote peaceful and
inclusive societies for sustainable
development, provide access to justice for all
and build effective, accountable and inclusive
institutions at all levels [no mention of the
G-word]
• Then 10 targets and 2 means of
implementation

7. Sustainable Development Goal 16:
Targets 1-5…rule of law
• 16.1 Significantly reduce all forms of violence and
related death everywhere [rule of law…peace?]
• 16.2 End abuse, exploitation…against children [rule of
law for children]
• 16.3 Promote rule of law…national and international…
and equal access to justice for all [rule of law]
• 16.4 By 2030 significantly reduce illicit financial & arms
flows…combat…organized crime [rule of law]
• 16.5 Substantially reduce corruption & bribery in all
forms [rule of law]

8. Sustainable Development Goal 16:
Targets (cont’d)
• 16.6 Develop effective, accountable and
transparent institutions at all levels
• 16.7 Ensure responsive…participatory and
representative decision-making…at all levels
[global/national/local democracy?]
• 16.8 Broaden & strengthen the participation of
developing countries in the institutions of global
governance [global democracy?]
• 16.9 By 2030 provide legal identity for all
• 16.10 Ensure public access to information and
protect all freedoms…[transparency and UDHR?]

9. Technics: how to set goals and
targets?
• MDGs protocol – goal/target/indicator;minimize;
preference for observed not subjective measures
• Options – (i to iv from MDG protocols)
i. Percentage reduction/improvement in outcome
ii. Universal target achievement
iii. Absolute target achievement
iv. Process-based achievement (is that SMART?)
v. National target setting (is that ‘global’?)
vi. Minimum standard with continuous improvement
for all countries

10. Politics: negotiating room for
manoeuvre with goals
• Unless there is a sea change then UN members will
ensure most SDGs are not mandatory
• Trade-offs will occur over coming months – disguised
as ‘shortening’ 17 goals, 100+ targets and 600+
indicators to 10/12 goals. Especially on global
governance and national democracy.
• State effectiveness seems broadly accepted
• Negotiating tactics – negotiate goals up to principles
and/or down to indicators…or ‘bracket’ text
• Governance data – problem of legitimacy. Will
developing countries accept WB data as independent
of US/Western interests? Donor serving measures?

11. Conclusions
• Developing governance measures for SDGs is not a
linear exercise. One hopes it is progressive…no
guarantees…could break the camel’s back…no SDGs?
From 60 to 600 indicators! Direct and norms routes.
• Goal-setting processes involve technics and politics –
some players are technical…no player is ‘objective’
• Short-term pressure for goals/targets could lead to
‘borrowing’ indicators that later become technically
and/or politically problematic
• We must not neglect longer-term objective of creating
a statistical profession and international standards for
governance…more routine and ‘boring’, like other stats