Helping development agencies obtain more and better information on the results they achieve has been a central part of the work of the Development Co-operation Directorate. However, in the age of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), this work has gained new impetus: the scope and ambition of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is such that every decision of these agencies needs to count towards making people’s lives better.

The Sustainable Development Goal indicator framework is increasingly used in many countries as a shared framework for results and as a guide for development co-operation providers. Its potential to improve results-based management practices and guide development finance is still being explored.

The international development community still does not understand enough about how, where and why the best results happen. Can using the SDG indicators to measure results begin to fill this knowledge gap? This Chapter outlines the issues and reviews progress to-date in integrating SDG indicators into national planning and development co‑operation practices. Case studies in the sectors of education, sanitation and energy access reveal that both governments and providers of development co-operation are increasingly using SDG indicators to guide their efforts. A closer examination of three large recipient countries (Ethiopia, Kenya and Myanmar) suggests that providers are facing four interrelated challenges. First, the cost of using specific SDG indicators varies in relation to indicator complexity. Second, providers that synchronise their country-level results planning with partner countries’ own cycles find it easier to align to and measure SDG indicators. Third, reliance on joint monitoring approaches helps providers reduce the cost of SDG monitoring. Finally, while disaggregating SDG data by gender and by urban/rural dimensions is common, other data disaggregation that could help to leave no one behind is rare.

This chapter examines challenges and opportunities relating to alignment, measurement and use of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Indicator 4.1.1 (education proficiency levels) in development co‑operation from a global perspective and from the perspective of two case study countries: Ethiopia and Myanmar.While data availability for the SDG indicator is growing, its inclusion in country- and sector-level results frameworks is still weak. Instead, most frameworks still emphasise schooling access as the key measure of performance with learning outcomes progressively gaining attention as education policies are updated.The chapter also shows that development co-operation providers are lagging behind in aligning their corporate and country-level results frameworks to SDG 4.1.1.To address these challenges, this chapter recommends that development co-operation providers join forces to support partner country efforts in implementing the cross-national assessments necessary to produce internationally comparable data for SDG 4.1.1.

This chapter examines challenges and opportunities relating to alignment, measurement and use of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Indicator 6.2.1 (Access to safe sanitation and handwashing facilities) to guide development co-operation towards that developmental outcome, from a global perspective and from the perspective of two case study countries: Kenya and Myanmar. Global monitoring arrangements for sanitation and hygiene have been adapted, but inconsistent indicator definitions used by development co-operation providers and partner governments in Kenya and Myanmar limit opportunities for harmonisation, joint measurement and use of SDG results information. As a result, the reporting burden for national stakeholders has increased and data against many providers’ indicators are missing. This chapter recommends that development co-operation providers in the sector should: advocate in sector co-ordination groups for greater alignment to SDG 6.2.1; increase investments in sector-wide monitoring systems; ensure alignment of their project indicators with the official SDG indicator definition; and invest in monitoring systems capable of producing sex‑disaggregated and sub‑nationally disaggregated data, to ensure no one is left behind.

This chapter examines challenges and opportunities relating to alignment, measurement and use of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Indicator 7.1.1 (Access to electricity) in development co‑operation, from a global perspective and from the perspective of two case study countries: Ethiopia and Kenya. The chapter shows that the definition of SDG 7.1.1 in line with well-established measurements of sector performance facilitates adoption at country level. Still, development co-operation providers are using a variety of indicators that are not adequately aligned to the SDG indicator definition. Emphasis on output measures, reliance on survey data-collection methods, a fragmented electricity market, and the use of slightly different definitions make alignment and harmonised measurement of electricity access in Ethiopia and Kenya all the more difficult. The case studies also identify best practice examples of active donor co‑ordination groups in the electricity sector that are led by the government and rely on joint monitoring approaches. These are recommended as a way to enable the use of SDG 7.1.1 as a tool to harmonise collective efforts to expand electricity access for both country governments and providers of development co-operation.

Since 2015, the OECD-DAC Results Community has explored ways to build a more co-ordinated approach to results‑based management which supports harmonisation of indicators and promotes ownership by partner countries. Analysis has focused on how a shared commitment to achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) can translate into increased use of the goals, targets and indicators as a common results framework for both providers of development co-operation and partner countries. This work led to a policy paper and a guidance note (Engberg-Pedersen, 2018[1]; OECD, 2018[2]) that present a menu of SDG targets and indicators that can strengthen providers’ results frameworks, facilitate data collection and use, and offer improved platforms for dialogue with partner countries. A menu of 42 targets was developed, based on those which were: Tier I; relevant to development co‑operation; and based on outcomes. See: https://doi.org/10.1787/24140929.