Indicator: 16.7.1b

0.a. Goal

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

0.b. Target

Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels

0.c. Indicator

Indicator 16.7.1: Proportions of positions in national and local institutions, including (a) the legislatures; (b) the public service; and (c) the judiciary, compared to national distributions, by sex, age, persons with disabilities and population groups

0.d. Series

Proportions of positions in the public service compared to national distributions (ratio)

0.e. Metadata update

2022-03-31

0.f. Related indicators

This indicator can also be used to monitor SDG target 5.5 on women’s “full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life”^[1], which does not have an indicator specifically focused on decision-making in the public service, and SDG target 10.2 on the promotion of the “social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status”, which only has one indicator measuring economic exclusion^[2].

SDG 5.5.1 – Proportion of seats held by women in national parliaments and local governments; and SDG 5.5.2 – Proportion of women in managerial positions. ↑

SDG 10.2.1 – Proportion of people living below 50 per cent of median income, by age, sex and persons with disabilities. ↑

0.g. International organisations(s) responsible for global monitoring

UNDP Oslo Governance Centre

1.a. Organisation

UNDP Oslo Governance Centre

2.a. Definition and concepts

Definitions:

This metadata is focused only on the public service sub-component of indicator 16.7.1. It measures representation in the public service with respect to the sex, age, disability and population group status of public servants, and assesses how these correspond to the proportion of these groups in society as a whole.

More specifically, this indicator measures the proportional representation of various demographic groups (women, youth, persons with disability, and nationally relevant population groups) across various occupational categories as well as across two administrative levels (national and sub-national).

Concepts:

This indicator builds on various concepts and terms from international statistical standards and classifications as well as normative frameworks:

Institutional units covered: The concepts of ‘General Government Sector’ and ‘General Government Employment’^[3], as found in the 2008 System of National Accounts (SNA) but with some minor modifications^[4], define the boundaries of the institutional units covered under this indicator.
- The following institutional units should be included: All units of central and “state” (or equivalent sub-central level) government, i.e. all ministries, agencies, departments and non-profit institutions that are controlled by public authorities.
- The following institutional units should be excluded: local government units^[5], the military, social security funds, public corporations and quasi-corporations that are owned and controlled by government units.
Administrative levels: As outlined above, this indicator covers employment at both central and sub-central levels of government (but excludes local government). Employment data will therefore be collected at two levels:
- Employment in national/central government; and
- Employment in ‘state government units’, described in the 2008 SNA as “institutional units whose fiscal, legislative and executive authority extends only over the individual ‘states’ into which the country as a whole may be divided”.^[6]
Occupational categories in the public service: Target 16.7 calls for responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. As such, reporting on indicator 16.7.1(b) needs to be done separately for various levels of decision-making. Since there is no international definition of ‘positions’ in the public service and therefore most countries have their own national classification for public service positions, a harmonized set of occupational categories in the public service is needed to ensure the comparability of data reported for this indicator.
- The International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO-08) was used to identify four ‘core’ occupational categories in the public service^[7] found to be relatively typical in every government, namely Managers (ISCO-08 Major Group 1), Professionals (ISCO-08 Major Group 2), Technicians and Associate Professionals (ISCO-08 Major Group 3) and Clerical Support Workers (ISCO-08 Major Group 4).
- Moreover, the rationale of this indicator places a particular focus on ‘front-line service workers’ which frequently interact directly with the public,^[8] such as police personnel, education personnel, health personnel and front-desk administrative personnel. While this list of front-line public service jobs is not exhaustive, these four categories were selected given the substantial portion of public service jobs they account for, and the frequent direct interaction these public servants have with the public.
Appointed/elected positions: In order to ensure consistent reporting, it is important to distinguish positions that are appointed (or elected) by the government or the head of government, and career public servant positions obtained on the basis of merit and seniority. This indicator only considers the latter – i.e. positions held by career public servants, obtained on the basis of merit and seniority. NB: This consideration is most likely to affect positions in the ‘managers’ occupational category. ^[9]
Disability status: To disaggregate public servant data by disability status, it is recommended that countries use the Short Set of Questions on Disability elaborated by the Washington Group.^[10]

It is important to note that data on general government employment is different from data on ‘public sector employment’, calculated under the International Labour Organisation (ILO) framework, which includes employment in public corporations (here to be excluded) ↑

⁴

The following types of government employees are included in the SNA definition of general government, but excluded for the purposes of this indicator: local government units (see also next footnote for further detail), social security funds, military. ↑

⁵

Employment data from local government units should not be collected for reporting on indicator 16.7.1. Even though ‘local government units’, defined in the 2008 SNA as “institutional units whose fiscal, legislative and executive authority extends over the smallest geographical areas distinguished for administrative and political purposes”, are, in principle, part of the general government sector, this metadata does not require reporting on government employment at this administrative level. In order for local government units to be treated as institutional units, the 2008 SNA specifies that they “must be entitled to own assets, raise funds and incur liabilities by borrowing on their own account; similarly, they must have some discretion over how such funds are spent. They should also be able to appoint their own officers, independently of external administrative control.” Since this is not the case in all countries, global reporting on this indicator excludes this administrative level. ↑

⁶

Such ‘states’ may be described by different terms in different countries. In some countries, especially small countries, individual states and state governments may not exist. However, in large countries, especially those that have federal constitutions, considerable powers and responsibilities may be assigned to state governments.” ↑

⁷

ISCO-08 is a tool for organizing jobs into a clearly defined set of groups according to the tasks and duties undertaken in the job. It is the basis for many national occupation classifications and the standard for labour information worldwide. A job is defined in ISCO-08 as “a set of tasks and duties performed, or meant to be performed, by one person, including for an employer or in self-employment”. Occupation refers to the kind of work performed in a job. More specifically, the concept of occupation is defined in ISCO-08 as a “set of jobs whose main tasks and duties are characterized by a high degree of similarity”. ↑

⁸

Diverse representation among front-line service workers is important as it has been found to help raise the quality of public services by improving the understanding of community needs and ameliorating social dialogue and communication with the wider population. (OECD (2009), Fostering diversity in the Public Service, Public Governance and Territorial Directorate – Network on Public Employment and Management) ↑

⁹

This is an important distinction with significant implications for reporting. For instance, appointing more women (or more individuals from a certain disadvantaged population group) to leadership positions that change with elections is fundamentally different (and can be done much more quickly) from promoting women (or a disadvantaged population group) through the ranks to top positions in the public service. As such, if no distinction was made between appointed positions and career public servants, countries deciding to include only on appointed positions may appear more representative than countries reporting on career public servants. ↑

¹⁰

UNDP’s Disability Based Inclusion Report details a pilot study in partnership with the South African statistical office on an approach for using the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning to maintain data on the disability status of personnel within the public service. ↑

2.b. Unit of measure

Ratio

2.c. Classifications

International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) – The indicator recommends the use of the classification to identify the four requested occupational categories in the public services.

System of National Accounts (SNA) 2008 – The indicator recommends the use of the institutional sector of economy definitions to identify and collect information on the institutional units covered in the indicator.

3.a. Data sources

There are no existing international datasets on the public service with the level of disaggregation required for this indicator i.e. first by administrative level – national vs. sub-national, then by occupational category, and thirdly by socio-demographic characteristics. Data for this indicator must therefore be collected at the country level.

The types of national data sources that provide information on the public service include:

Surveys: Very few countries carry out periodic employment surveys specifically focused on the public service. Generally, survey data on public service employment is a subset of more comprehensive employment datasets collected through other national surveys, such as labour force surveys, household surveys, surveys/censuses of economic establishments, etc. National population censuses are a better source in term of coverage and level of disaggregation, but they happen only every ten years. Given the level of disaggregation required for this indicator, it is unlikely that existing survey data will be sufficient to report on this indicator.^[11]
Administrative records: Centralized registries on public servants tend to be more precise (i.e. no sampling error), more up-to-date and more amenable to disaggregation than public service employment statistics derived from surveys. In most countries, several national institutions produce administrative records on public service employment. These typically include:
A Public Service Commission (or related institution such as a Ministry of Public Administration or a Ministry of Finance) maintaining a centralized registry on the public service workforce at the national/central level;
Another institution maintaining a similar registry on the public service workforce at the sub-national level (such as a Ministry of Local Government or of Municipal Affairs);
A Police Services Commission or the like maintaining a centralized registry on police personnel; and
A National Statistical Office (NSO) producing general government employment statistics from labour force survey data, or from administrative data submitted by the above-mentioned national institutions maintaining public service registers.

The most common and most comprehensive method for collecting public servant data is a Human Resource Management Information System (HRMIS), which is typically maintained by a Public Service Commission (or related institution such as a Ministry of Public Administration or a Ministry of Finance). Such systems have been found to produce the most robust data and to have the greatest potential for expansion on various dimensions of disaggregation. Since administrative data produced by a HRMIS is not considered “official” data in its raw form, it is recommended that the national institution maintaining a HRMIS collaborate with the NSO for the latter to provide the necessary quality assurance over the data produced by the public service body.

¹¹

Countries may also want to consult the ILO’s “Quick Guide on Sources and Uses of Labour Statistics”, which reviews various sources that can be used to produce labour statistics, including labour force surveys and national account statistics. With regards to using administrative records, the ILO Guide notes that while such records “were not designed for statistical purposes, they do have a significant underlying statistical potential, and can be used to produce statistics as a by-product.” ↑

3.b. Data collection method

NSOs should coordinate with primary data-producing entities at national and sub-national levels:

Public Service Commissions (or responsible bodies producing public servant data) should submit all relevant data to the NSO. If a different institution produces public service data at sub-national level (such as a Ministry of Local Government or a Ministry of Municipal Affairs), this institution should submit all relevant data to the NSO.
Similarly, if a different institution produces data on police personnel (such as a Police Services Commission or the like), this institution should also submit all relevant data to the NSO.
NSOs, as the main coordinator of the national statistical system, should quality assure the content of the Data Reporting Form before submitting it for SDG reporting at the international level.

3.c. Data collection calendar

Data should be reported to the custodian agency (UNDP) at least once every two years, and annually if possible. This will ensure timely capturing of changes in the composition of the public service.

UNDP will send a data submission request to NSOs in January of every year, requesting data that provides a snapshot of the situation as of 31 December of the preceding year.

3.d. Data release calendar

Data will be reported by UNDP to the international level in April each year, and will provide a snapshot of the situation as at 31 December of the preceding year.

The first full release of data for the indicator will take place in April 2020, on the basis of data as at 31 December 2019.

3.e. Data providers

National Statistical Offices with relevant primary data-producing entities at national and sub-national levels.

3.f. Data compilers

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

3.g. Institutional mandate

UNDP supports public service reforms to promote for inclusive and responsive governance, and particularly leads initiatives to support public service reform in transitions, promoting new and more inclusive social contracts. UNDP engagement also includes supporting the advancement of women’s equal participation and decision-making in political processes and institutions, promoting youth-focused and youth-led development, advance the rights of persons with disabilities, reduction of inequalities and exclusion of indigenous peoples. UNDP Oslo Governance Centre was mandated to support countries to monitor progress on SDG16 and to produce governance statistics which includes the representation and participation in public service.

4.a. Rationale

The public service is the bedrock of government – where the development and implementation of public policies and programmes takes place and where society interacts with the government. In most countries, the public service is also the single largest employer. It is in this context that SDG 16, under its target 16.7, encourages countries to ensure that the public service is representative of the people it serves “at all levels”.

Indicator 16.7.1 focuses on proportional representation in public institutions; it measures the extent to which a country’s public institutions are representative of the general population. Proportional representation (also known as ‘descriptive representation’) in the public service is concerned with the extent to which the composition of the public service mirrors the various socio-demographic groups in the national population. The underlying assumption is that when the public service reflects the social diversity of a nation, this may lead to greater legitimacy of the public service in the eyes of citizens, as public servants resemble the people they provide services to. Proportional representation has been found to be associated with higher levels of trust in public institutions, as people perceive more inclusive policymaking processes to improve the quality and fairness of policy decisions, and to help curb the undue influence of vested interests over decision-making.^[12]

¹²

See OECD (2017), Trust and Public Policy: How Better Governance Can Help Rebuild Public Trust. ↑

4.b. Comment and limitations

Measuring representation: The significance of ‘descriptive’ or ‘proportional’ representation has been challenged in different ways:
- There is the question of why be attentive to some groups (women, young people, minorities, etc.) but not others (the poor, LGBTI, "ethnic" groups who might not be officially recognized, etc.). Moreover, in countries whose populations are a mosaic of many diverse groups (some of which may account for less than 1 percent of the population), an exact reflection of such pluralism in the composition of the public service would be impossible and unnecessary. Finally, descriptive representation has the danger of ultimately becoming an end in itself. Concerns about effective representation should not end once the public service has the appropriate number of public servants representing each minority groups. These public servants should be able to articulate minority concerns and should have the same opportunities as others to have some influence on policy formulation and implementation. Nevertheless, if a public service includes none, or very few, women, young people or minorities, that is probably a worrying sign that the interests of these particular groups are not being heard.
- The age, sex, disability and population group status of individuals holding positions at various levels of decision-making in the public service provide an indication at the symbolic level of the way in which power is shared within an institution. However, there is no certainty that because a Manager is young (or old), a woman (or a man), or belongs to a minority group, s/he will bring to the fore issues of interest to groups with the same socio-demographic profile.
- Tracking the age of public servants offers some measure of youth representation in the public service. However, in most ministries and agencies constituting the public service around the world, leadership positions such as those falling in the category of ‘Managers’ are considered senior functions which require considerable experience, and are awarded on the basis of seniority. This means that such positions are by nature unlikely to be held by individuals in the younger age brackets. As such, for positions falling in the category of ‘Managers’, more relevant insights will be generated on the basis of sex disaggregation, or disaggregation based on disability or population group status.
- Finally, governments use various ways to deliver public services, including through a range of partnerships with the private or not-for-profit sectors, and this indicator does not account for the staffing composition of other such entities which may have been contracted by the government to deliver public services. While in several countries, the large majority of health care providers, teachers and emergency workers are directly employed by the government, in others, public-private service delivery arrangements are in place, which means that many of these professionals are employed by organisations that are not state-owned, or by private contractors. Since this indicator does not account for the outsourcing of public service provision by the government, it may not give a complete picture of the representativeness of those who provide public services – irrespective of who their employer is.
Rationale for computing ratios rather than proportions: It may be noted that the below computation methods lead to ratios rather than simple proportions. The rationale for this is simple: while a simple proportion of ‘young’ public servants is not internationally comparable. For instance, 32% of ‘young’ public servants (34 years old or younger) may be an over-representation of youth in country A where only 20% of the national population (above eligibility age for a public service job) falls in this age bracket (Ratio 3 = 38/20 = 1.6), but in country B where 40% of the national population is 34 years old or younger (and above eligibility age for a public service job), the same 32% would be interpreted as under-representation (Ratio = 32/40 = 0.8). In this example, the figure of 32% is not internationally comparable (it means over-representation in one country and under-representation in another), but the ratios 1.6 and 0.8 are internationally comparable. They help us understand whether 32% of public servants aged 34 years old or less is close to, or far from, proportional representation of this age group in the national population.
Sensitivity of collecting disability and population group data in the public service: In certain contexts, population group status may prove to be a sensitive and politically charged variable. For example, several countries actively restrict or ban identification of ethnic or religious status, in order to protect vulnerable populations or discourage inter-ethnic conflict. In addition, definitions of groups that constitute a minority vary greatly between countries. Furthermore, there is a strong human rights principle that individuals must be able to choose to identify themselves as members of a minority, or not. It would not be appropriate for public service bodies (or any other body) to assume or to assign public servants a certain membership of a particular population group. As such, administrative data collection systems in the public service should allow public servants to self-report on membership of nationally relevant population groups. Similarly, discriminatory perceptions and implicit bias against disability can make the collection of data by public service bodies on this characteristic equally sensitive. This is partly because public servants with disabilities, like everyone else, have a right to privacy and therefore are not under an obligation to reveal a disability. Moreover, in many states, information concerning disability falls under the umbrella of health data and is therefore confidential, thus preventing public service bodies to release this information even on an anonymous basis.^[13]
Normative framework: The indicator calls for disaggregation of positions by age, sex, nationally relevant population groups and disability status. The following international human rights instruments contain provisions on enhancing opportunities for participation by individuals and groups holding such characteristics:
- The universal right and opportunity to participate in public affairs: Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) recognizes “the right and opportunity, without distinction of any kind such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives”. General Comment 25 of the Human Rights Committee elaborates that access to public service employment should be based on equal opportunity and general principles of merit, and that the provision of secured tenure would ensure that persons holding public service positions are free from political interference or pressures.
- Sex: The 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) provides the basis for realizing equality between women and men through ensuring women's equal access to, and equal opportunities in, political and public life, including the right to participate in the formulation of government policy and the implementation thereof and to hold public office and perform all public functions at all levels of government (Article 7). States parties agree to take all appropriate measures to overcome historical discrimination against women and obstacles to women’s participation in decision-making processes (Article 8), including legislation and temporary special measures (Article 4). The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action also call for women’s equal access to public service jobs, by setting a target of a minimum of 30 percent of women in leadership positions.
- Age: The 2015 Security Council Resolution 2250 urges Member States to consider ways to increase inclusive representation of youth in decision-making at all levels in local, national, regional and international institutions and mechanisms to prevent and resolve conflict and counter violent extremism.
- ‘Population group’ status: The Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992) and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) provide that persons belonging to minorities and indigenous peoples have the right to participate in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.
- Disability status: The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006) calls upon State Parties to ensure that persons with disabilities can effectively and fully participate in political and public life on an equal basis with others. Under Article 31 of the Convention, State Parties commit to collecting disaggregated information, including statistical and research data to give effect to the Convention, and assume responsibility for the dissemination of these statistics.
Transposing national classifications of public service jobs into ISCO-08 based occupational categories for the public service: The ISCO-08 based occupational categories proposed above for this indicator are meant to be broad enough to accommodate considerable diversity among national classifications. When transposing their national classifications, countries should strive to respect the criteria listed for each occupational category and the references provided to specific ISCO-08 codes, while noting any divergence when reporting. A list of specific criteria is provided below to guide the transposition from national classifications to the ISCO-08-based occupational categories in the public service prioritized for this indicator.

Table 1: Transposition from national classification into ISCO-08-based occupational categories for bureaucratic positions in the public service

CLASSIFICATION	CORRESPONDING ISCO-08 CODES	CRITERIA
*Bureaucratic positions within the public service*
Managers	1112, 1120, 121	• They are career public servants who have gradually moved up the ranks to top positions. They are NOT appointed by the government or head of government. • This category includes the top public servants (sometimes referred to as Director Generals) just below the Minister or Secretary, but not part of the Cabinet/council of ministers, as well as lower-level managers. • Responsibilities of high-level managers range from providing overall direction to a ministry or special directorate/unit and overseeing the interpretation and implementation of government policies, to determine the objectives, strategies, and programmes for the particular administrative unit/department under their supervision. Lower-level managers manage and evaluate the implementation of these departmental programmes, including budget management functions. They also control the selection of professionals working in their department and evaluate their performance.
Professionals	Mainly 242, possibly 21, 25, 26	• At the central/national level, professionals in the public service perform analytical, conceptual and practical tasks to support government policymaking and service delivery operations. • They typically have some level of leadership responsibilities over a field of work or various projects. • Among other tasks, professionals working at the central level and in ministries review existing policies and legislation in order to identify anomalies and out-of-day provisions, formulate and analyze policy options and make recommendations for policy changes. They can also prepare financial statements and conduct audits; develop and review financial plans and strategies; or develop, implement and evaluate staff recruitment.
Technicians and Associate Professionals	Mainly 33, possibly 31, 34, 35	• Technicians and associate professionals in the public service perform technical and related tasks connected with government regulations and operations. • Among other tasks, they perform mostly technical tasks connected with enforcing or applying government rules, financial accounting, human resource development, specialized secretarial tasks, etc.
Clerical Support Workers	41	• They are sometimes referred to as general office clerks. • They are generally not required to have a university degree, although they may. • They perform a wide range of clerical and administrative tasks such as travel arrangements, preparation of reports and correspondence, money-handling operations, requests for information, and appointments. • Some assist in the preparation of budgets, monitoring of expenditures, drafting of contracts and purchasing or acquisition orders.

Table 2: Transposition from national classification into ISCO-08-based occupational categories for
front-line service workers in the public service

*Front-Line Service Workers*
		Examples
Police Personnel	• Managers: 1112, 121, 134 • Professionals: 241-242, 25 • Technicians and Associate Professionals: 3355, 5412, 5413, 334 • Clerical Support Workers: 41	• Managers (i.e. career public servants – NOT appointed): e.g. Police Inspector-General, police chief constable, police commissioner, police inspector-general, police superintendant, finance manager, human resources manager, policy and planning manager (in a police facility). • Professionals: e.g. Finance professionals, administration professional, information and communications technology professionals (in a police facility). • Technicians and Associate Professionals: e.g. Constable, police officer police patrol office, police inspector and detective, prison guard. • Clerical Support Workers: e.g. General office clerks (in a police facility).
Education Personnel	• Managers: 121, 1345 • Professionals: 231-235, 241-242 • Technicians and Associate Professionals: 531, 334 • Clerical Support Workers: 41	• Managers (i.e. career public servants – NOT appointed): e.g. University dean, college director, school principal, childcare centre manager, finance manager, human resources manager, policy and planning manager (in an education facility). • Professionals: e.g. University and higher education teachers, vocational education teachers, primary/secondary school teachers, primary school and early childhood teachers. • Technicians and Associate Professionals: e.g. Child care workers and teachers’ aides. • Clerical Support Workers: e.g. General office clerks (in an education facility).
Health Personnel	• Managers: 121, 1342, 1343 • Professionals: 22, 241-242 • Technicians and Associate Professionals: 32, 532, 3344 • Clerical Support Workers: 41	• Managers (i.e. career public servants – NOT appointed): e.g. Hospital director, health facility administrator, clinical director, community health care coordinator, aged care service manager, finance manager, human resources manager, policy and planning manager (in a health facility). • Professionals: e.g. Medical doctors, nursing and midwifery professionals, veterinarians, dentists, pharmacists. • Technicians and Associate Professionals: e.g. Health associate professionals, ambulance workers, personal care workers in health services, medical secretaries. • Clerical Support Workers: e.g. General office clerks (in a health facility).
Front-Desk Administrative Personnel	• Managers: 112, 121 • Professionals: 241-242, 25 • Technicians and Associate Professionals: 334, 335 • Clerical Support Workers: 41	• Managers (i.e. career public servants – NOT appointed): e.g. Managing directors of government offices providing a wide range of administrative services, including registration services (e.g. delivery of personal identity documents, various types of licenses, building permits, etc.) taxation, social benefits, customs and border inspection, etc.; finance manager, human resources manager, policy and planning manager (in a government office). • Professionals: e.g. Finance professionals, administration professionals, information and communications technology professionals (in a government office). • Technicians and Associate Professionals: e.g. Customs and border inspectors, government tax and excise officials, government social benefits officials, government licensing officials. • Clerical Support Workers: e.g. General office clerks (in a government office).

¹³

See, for example, the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, 2016/679) which introduced a particularly broad definition of health data and a range of restrictions on processing it. GDPR took effect in all EU Member States in May 2018. ↑

4.c. Method of computation

Indicator 16.7.1(b) aims to compare the proportion of various demographic groups (by sex, age, disability and population groups) represented in the public service, with the proportion of these same groups in the national population. More specifically, the proportional representation of these demographic groups is assessed across various occupational categories as well as across two administrative levels.

When computing these proportions, all the considerations detailed above in the section “concepts and definitions” should be respected, including on institutional units covered, administrative levels, occupational categories and appointed/elected positions.

An online SDG 16 Data Reporting Platform (https://sdg16reporting.undp.org – to be launched in April 2020) was developed by custodian agency UNDP to assist countries in reporting on this indicator, at the level of both national and sub-national government, and on the basis of sex, location (urban/rural), income or expenditure quintiles, age groups, nationally relevant population groups and disability status. Countries should use the online data forms and accompanying guidance provided on this platform to report on this indicator.
Countries are encouraged to report data that is available, understanding that public servant disaggregated data for disability status and nationally-relevant population groups may not be currently available in many jurisdictions. Countries are encouraged to build additional capacities to disaggregate data by these demographic groups.
Information for part-time positions should be given in full-time equivalents and should be counted only for permanent posts actually filled. It is important to consider the part-time or full-time status of posts to address the risk that some target groups may be underemployed and over-reported (e.g. If women are more likely to receive part-time posts than full-time posts, there might be a false impression that women are equally represented in those posts, when in reality they work less than their male counterparts due to their part-time status).

Global reporting on indicator 16.7.1(b) can be done in three steps:

Step 1 requires data producers to compile the raw numbers of personnel in the public service, disaggregated along administrative level, occupational categories, and the various demographic characteristics. The table below provides an illustration of how this “raw” data can be compiled. (NB: For ease of presentation, this table excludes ‘total’ columns and rows, which data producers may wish to include).

Sex

Age group

Disability status

Population subgroup

Male

Female

<35

35-44

45-54

55-64

65+

Disabled

Not disabled

Group A

Group B

Group C

Group D

National level

Police Personnel

Managers

Professionals