7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 15

32 The use of indicators by the Committee on EconomiRights and the IBSA methodology for monitoring coand social rights

An even more ambitious view is that indicators could b

Economic Social and Cultural Rights to breathe new li

implementation of the International Covenant on Ec

Rights by a process through which each State party wo

the Committee and set well-de1047297ned objectives to be ach

mission of its next report The methodology is referred

four steps (a) the choice of appropriate indicators (b) th

benchmarks ie objectives to be realized within a de1047297ne

ie the discussion of those benchmarks between the Ccerned with a view both to adopting objectives ambitio

istic (d) assessment following the expiration of the time

a departure point whether the benchmarks agreed upon

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 25

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 35

494 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

Rights ndash the Example of the Right to Healthrsquo in S von Schorleme

Vereinten Nationen im Lichte globaler Herausforderungen (Heidepp 345ndash58 The Committee notes for example the commitmen

Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation to halve by th

people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water

Declaration) and the proportion of people who do not have acce

the periodic reporting procedure the Committee will engage in

State party Scoping involves the joint consideration by the Stat

of the indicators and national benchmarks which will then providuring the next reporting period In the following 1047297ve years the

national benchmarks to help monitor its implementation of the

subsequent reporting process the State party and the Committe

th b h k h b hi d d th f dif

Rights ndash the Example of the Right to Healthrsquo in S von Schorleme

Vereinten Nationen im Lichte globaler Herausforderungen (Heidepp 345ndash58 The Committee notes for example the commitmen

Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation to halve by th

people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water

Declaration) and the proportion of people who do not have acce

the periodic reporting procedure the Committee will engage in

State party Scoping involves the joint consideration by the Stat

of the indicators and national benchmarks which will then providuring the next reporting period In the following 1047297ve years the

national benchmarks to help monitor its implementation of the

subsequent reporting process the State party and the Committe

th b h k h b hi d d th f dif

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 45

495 Indicators and benchmarks

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obParties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obarties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 55

496 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 25

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 35

494 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

Rights ndash the Example of the Right to Healthrsquo in S von Schorleme

Vereinten Nationen im Lichte globaler Herausforderungen (Heidepp 345ndash58 The Committee notes for example the commitmen

Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation to halve by th

people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water

Declaration) and the proportion of people who do not have acce

the periodic reporting procedure the Committee will engage in

State party Scoping involves the joint consideration by the Stat

of the indicators and national benchmarks which will then providuring the next reporting period In the following 1047297ve years the

national benchmarks to help monitor its implementation of the

subsequent reporting process the State party and the Committe

th b h k h b hi d d th f dif

Rights ndash the Example of the Right to Healthrsquo in S von Schorleme

Vereinten Nationen im Lichte globaler Herausforderungen (Heidepp 345ndash58 The Committee notes for example the commitmen

Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation to halve by th

people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water

Declaration) and the proportion of people who do not have acce

the periodic reporting procedure the Committee will engage in

State party Scoping involves the joint consideration by the Stat

of the indicators and national benchmarks which will then providuring the next reporting period In the following 1047297ve years the

national benchmarks to help monitor its implementation of the

subsequent reporting process the State party and the Committe

th b h k h b hi d d th f dif

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 45

495 Indicators and benchmarks

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obParties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obarties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 55

496 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 35

494 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

Rights ndash the Example of the Right to Healthrsquo in S von Schorleme

Vereinten Nationen im Lichte globaler Herausforderungen (Heidepp 345ndash58 The Committee notes for example the commitmen

Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation to halve by th

people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water

Declaration) and the proportion of people who do not have acce

the periodic reporting procedure the Committee will engage in

State party Scoping involves the joint consideration by the Stat

of the indicators and national benchmarks which will then providuring the next reporting period In the following 1047297ve years the

national benchmarks to help monitor its implementation of the

subsequent reporting process the State party and the Committe

th b h k h b hi d d th f dif

Rights ndash the Example of the Right to Healthrsquo in S von Schorleme

Vereinten Nationen im Lichte globaler Herausforderungen (Heidepp 345ndash58 The Committee notes for example the commitmen

Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation to halve by th

people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water

Declaration) and the proportion of people who do not have acce

the periodic reporting procedure the Committee will engage in

State party Scoping involves the joint consideration by the Stat

of the indicators and national benchmarks which will then providuring the next reporting period In the following 1047297ve years the

national benchmarks to help monitor its implementation of the

subsequent reporting process the State party and the Committe

th b h k h b hi d d th f dif

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 45

495 Indicators and benchmarks

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obParties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obarties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 55

496 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 45

495 Indicators and benchmarks

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obParties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

assumption that article 2(1) of the Covenant places an unequiv

States Parties the intensity of which is balanced against the obarties 1047297nd themselves Here while all States must strive to rea

countriesrsquo obligations depend on an assessment of their speci1047297

with reference to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)-in

with access to improved sanitationrsquo while State Party A belong

nations may have to demonstrate that its percentage of popula

sanitation improved from 50 to 60 during a given reporting

to the group of the most highly developed countries may have timproved from 92 to 95 during that same reporting period

period 1047297ve years later if State A on assessment by the Commit

a 52 level of improved sanitation 8 short of the benchmark

f t b t k i t id ti H h d St t P t

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 55

496 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

7252019 [522] Casebook 492-496

httpslidepdfcomreaderfull522-casebook-492-496 55

496 Ful1047297lling human rights and progressive realization

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period

aspect of these benchmarks Finally the Committee has to unde

outcome benchmarks For instance it may be very dif1047297cult to crof a particular outcome situation if the state has met its struct

comprehensive assessment also requires to take the factors into

or can only in1047298uence with a great dif1047297culty

hellip The IBSA process thus has a Janus-type appearance it look

past reporting period it looks forward in order to target future

realization of rights Looking back it may force the State party t

certain targets were not met or could not be met and this will realistic new benchmarks for the next reporting period