Apresenta

1
Relevance of Ian Castles's concerns with the
1999 Human Development Report for Brazil Eduardo
Pereira Nunes President of the Brazilian
Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE)
Memorial Seminar for Ian
Castles Side Event of 42nd session of the United
Nations Statistical Commission New York, 22 - 25
February 2011 Wednesday, 23 February, 2011
1
1
1
2
Relevance of the concerns with the 1999 HDR
raised by Mr. Ian Castles
Ian Castles ideas are very inspiring and in my
point of view, this Memorial Seminar is welcome
and will give us an opportunity to discuss once
more about his and our concerns with indicators
released by United Nations Agencies. I would like
to stress that there is a growing cooperation
between IBGE and Brazilian Ministries with UN
Agencies. We are going in the right direction
and we hope to continue working to improve
relationship and the outcomes of these
partnerships.
2
3

• I will basically deal with two major issues
• Disclose the concerns of IBGE related with
  indicators used by the international agencies
• Contribute with our experience in helping cope
  with the same or similar issues disclosed by Mr.
  Castles ... that subsist today

4
First evidence that Mr. Castles concerns in 1999
are still current is the Report presented by
Brazil, Morocco and South Africa which will be
discussed during this 42nd UNSC. This Report
focuses on the same issues.
Report of Brazil, Morocco and South Africa
on Member States concerns with indicators
released by the United Nations agencies Backgroun
d The debate centres on two main concerns
repeatedly raised by Member States concerns
about the choice of indicators and their
methodology on the one hand and concerns about
the choice and use of source data on the other
hand.
A number of issues subsist today, considering
that the PPP issue also highlighted by Castles
has been solved.
5
As disclosed by the exchange of 1999-2001 (Mr.
Castles - HDRO - ESC Statistical Commission),
discrepancies are still often spotted in Reports
issued by international agencies. South African
contribution is a good example. II. Member
States concerns South Africa It is regrettable
that the Human Development Report continues to
carry discrepant results that contradict other
national data As regards Goal 1, on proportion
of population below US 1.25 in South Africa, the
Human Development Index reports 26.2 per cent,
while the Millennium Development Goals Report
records a reducing proportion from 17 per cent,
in 2000, to 9.7 per cent, in 2006. The sources
of data to estimate that Index are not known
We know that there are different objectives for
each Report material and non-material errors ...
and differences. Seeing this South African
contribution, there are indeed material
differences between 26.2 and 9.7. How NSO can
explain these differences to the users? How NSO
can follow the UNSC Fundamental Principle 3 on
Transparence?
6

• What have we been doing to cope with it?
• Coordination and Metadata efforts by countries,
  even though there still a long way to go
• There are also efforts endeavored by UN
  Agencies, like the MDG Labs Project to disclose
  differences
• Example of Bolivia

6
7
Example of Bolivia on How NSO can explain these
differences to the users
Example on How UN Agencies can follow the UNSC
Fundamental Principle 3 on Transparence
8
Three points of criticism that Brazil brings to
this Report
II. Member States concerns BRAZIL (a) the non-use
of the official statistics produced by the
Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics
and Brazilian ministries in the production of the
HD Index and other indicators (b) the lack of
transparency about the data sources used by UNDP
and about the methodological approaches
implemented and assumptions made in calculating
the Index and (c) the lack of cooperation
between UNDP and the Brazilian authorities as
well as between UNDP and the global statistical
community. Brazil finds this practice in
violation to the recommendations adopted in
Economic and Social Council Resolution 2006/6 on
strengthening statistical capacity.
8
9

• BRAZIL
• (a) the non-use of the official statistics
  produced by the Brazilian Institute of Geography
  and Statistics and Brazilian ministries in the
  production of the HD Index and other indicators
• According to our view, why does that happen?
• Problems at the international community level
• Problems at the national administrations level
• What has been done by IBGE to improve the
  relationship?
• Growing integration among Brazilian
  Administrations at the Federal level, with
  highlight to the Brazilian Social Statistical
  Committee (CES) created in 2008 and coordinated
  by IBGE.
• Another successful IBGE initiative is the
  creation of a specific division to answer all
  data demands of international organizations
  (mediated or not by Brazilian diplomacy).

9
10
BRAZIL (b) the lack of transparency about the
data sources used by UNDP and about the
methodological approaches implemented and
assumptions made in calculating the Index IBGE
hopes to see a further improvement in the
creation of metadata and methodological
appendices in publications. We are ready to help
validating these outputs! UNDP's
Multi-dimensional Poverty Index is a recent
example of these dysfunctions concerning
transparency, data imputations, etc. More
communication and cooperation between UNDP and
country members is a good way to develop
analytical skills of countries with incipient
statistical systems. It would be an advantage
for both country and UNDP.
10
11
BRAZIL (c) the lack of cooperation between UNDP
and the Brazilian authorities as well as between
UNDP and the global statistical community.
Brazil finds this practice in violation to the
recommendations adopted in Economic and Social
Council resolution 2006/6 on strengthening
statistical capacity.
Brazil has already made efforts to improve
cooperation from the country side ... as for UNDP
and global statistical community we tend to see a
half full glass ... Quoting Castles in an
article about GDP comparisons We hope that
the arguments we have advanced here will help to
increase awareness, to widen professional debate,
and to extend the area of agreement and
cooperation.
11
12
Twelve years after IAN CASTLES Report on
Development Indicators, when he stressed the
importance of independency, objectivity and
integrity of statistical work for public policy,
mainly at international level, National
Statistical Offices deal with the same issues,
and 2015 is arriving, when all countries should
present your Reports on achievement of MDG! We
need more cooperation to improve International
Statistical System. As UNDP has no enough staff
members to cooperate with all countries, usually,
recruites some independent consultants to make
national estimates, without any conection with
NSO and Ministries, nor transparence. How to
solve this statistical and political
problem? UNSC could create an UNWG, inviting
more developed NSO to cooperate with UNDP to
improve Official National and International
Statistical System, following IAN CASTLES Report.
This Group could be named WG Ian Castles!