Managing for Sustainable Development Results approaches should maximise the impact of efforts towards achieving social, economic and environmentally sustainable development that leaves no one behind.
OECD (2019[1]) Managing for Sustainable Development Results, Guiding Principle 1
The promise to Leave No One Behind (LNOB) is at the core of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It is rooted in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which commits all UN Member States to eradicate poverty, discrimination and exclusion, and to reduce the inequalities that undermine the potential of individuals and humanity as a whole (UNDP, 2022[2]). It is underscored by the twin promise to “reach the furthest behind first”, requiring States to reach the poorest of the poor, combatting discrimination and rising inequalities within and amongst countries, and their root causes. Instead of a sole focus on extreme poverty, as was the case with the Millennium Development Goals, Agenda 2030 and LNOB encompass the reduction of all forms of inequality (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2016[3]).
Most development actors consider that “LNOB is not only necessary for reasons of justice – to improve equity; tackle exclusion, discrimination and inequality; and promote human rights and the social, political and economic participation of disadvantaged groups – but also because a more inclusive society supports social cohesion, governance, security and economic growth, improving quality of life for all and making the Sustainable Development Goals achievable” (OECD, 2018[4]).
LNOB is often translated into programming through targeted actions and programmes that focus on specific LNOB groups. Targeted approaches can provide quick and visible results while empowering the rights-holders. Many development organisations combine this targeted approach with a mainstream one. Mainstreaming LNOB can provide more long-term and sustainable results by removing barriers to inclusion and building countries’ capacities (OECD, 2018[4]).
LNOB should be integrated into results frameworks. This requires further action in strategic, operational, relationship and performance management to adopt an adaptive, flexible and context-specific programming approach to account for the complexities of this cross-cutting issue.
Clearly define and communicate the concept of LNOB and LNOB commitments
Conduct a context and exclusion analysis to identify LNOB target groups and locations
Integrate LNOB into the results chain and select indicators
Monitor progress on LNOB
Clearly defining the concept of LNOB and communicating to all stakeholders what the implications for the development programme are is important, as there is no single agreed definition of LNOB. However, there are many commonalities across LNOB concepts and approaches. LNOB definitions often favour specific policy angles ranging from reducing poverty to diminishing inequalities, fighting discrimination, ending exclusion and promoting human rights-based approaches. The definitions often focus on broad categories of excluded groups such as women and girls, people with disabilities, children or youth (OECD, 2018[4]). LNOB concepts often focus on intersectionality and call for a multidimensional approach. The individuals defined as at risk of being the furthest left behind are deprived across multiple dimensions and face multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination (see Box 7.1).
The UN Shared Framework for Action on Leaving No One Behind sets out a conceptual framework for LNOB which addresses horizontal and vertical inequalities, inequalities between countries and intergenerational equity. The inequality dimensions are evaluated in terms of equality in opportunities and outcomes, equity and fairness as well as non-discrimination. It mandates UN agencies to focus on three interrelated concepts:
Equality: the imperative of moving towards substantive equality of opportunities and outcomes for all groups;
Non-discrimination: the prohibition of discrimination against individuals and groups on the grounds identified in international human rights treaties; and
Equity: The broader concept of fairness in the distribution of costs, benefits and opportunities (UN, 2017[5]).
In the SDC’s conceptualisation, people who are left behind are those who, first, are subject to extreme poverty according to the OECD-DAC multidimensional poverty index (which covers five dimensions: economic, human, socio-cultural, political and protective), and/or, second, are excluded from sustainable development processes on the basis of origin, ethnicity, religion, race, disability, economic status, age, sex and gender and other grounds of exclusion. Who is excluded depends on the respective target group (SDC, 2018[6]).
SDC has laid out four specific LNOB commitments: 1) focusing on people living in poverty, giving special consideration to the poorest of the poor, and recognising the multiple dimensions of poverty; 2) aiming for transformative change by tackling exclusion, discrimination and inequality; 3) ensuring that populations left behind or at risk of being left behind are considered in all new SDC co-operation and thematic strategies; 4) enhancing information systems and the production of disaggregated data that reveal the challenges of those left behind and strengthen the relationship between duty-bearers and rights-holders.
GIZ considers the eradication of poverty, inequality and the LNOB principle as mutually reinforcing. It defines poverty as a multidimensional phenomenon that, besides economic poverty, includes aspects such as education, health, nutrition, sanitation, political and social participation, as well as specific forms of freedom. Inequality refers to both intra-state and inter-state inequality. For GIZ, to leave no one behind means specifically including those that would otherwise fall through the cracks. The concept is seen as highly contextual and, inter alia, includes people that suffer from multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, GIZ, 2021[7]).
The LNOB concept needs to be contextualised to be useful in specific country and regional contexts. At a global level, for example, those left behind could be the poorest 20% of the population, but in the context of a specific project, the definition might focus on those who are excluded from the specific services, spaces or interventions that the project seeks to address (SDC, 2018[6]).
Context and exclusion analyses serve to identify LNOB target groups and locations. Assessments can be based on qualitative and quantitative data from local, bilateral or international sources. It is crucial to include local stakeholders and draw from local knowledge in order to capture local sensitivities appropriately. Development partners have adopted different approaches to this analysis, but generally, exclusion analysis helps to answer the following questions: Who is (or is at risk of being) poor, excluded or left behind? From what? Why? By whom? When and/or where does poverty/inequality/exclusion occur? (See Box 7.2).
It is essential that all the dimensions of inequality are taken into account when conducting context and exclusion analyses. These dimensions include gender, race, ethnicity, faith, socio-economic status, class, caste, geographic location, age, ability, sexual orientation, religion and migration status. Specific attention should be paid to the different axes of inequality, including socio-economic situation, race, age and gender, and the potential compounding effects of these inequalities when they intersect. Applying an intersectional lens helps identify where individuals or groups are situated along each axis and can help to identify those who are most likely to be left behind.
Analyse data from a range of sources, including the Global Multidimensional Poverty Index, regional statistical offices, national human rights institutions, international human rights mechanisms and civil society organisations, and draw from local knowledge as much as possible.
In some contexts, data availability can be a major challenge and excluded populations are often undercounted or not represented at all. These blindspots must be factored in.
When identifying LNOB groups, apply inclusive approaches and seek the views of diverse stakeholders, including those who may lack a voice.
Avoid: Making a symbolic, not meaningful effort (tokenism) to include stakeholders that are generally under-represented or excluded from consultative or decision-making processes.
Apply an intersectional lens and aim to understand how LNOB groups might experience multiple sources of deprivation or intersecting inequalities.
When planning projects that will support LNOB groups who are at risk and marginalised by country authorities, plan carefully and take precautions in order to protect these groups from further risks. This might entail:
not disclosing the identity of vulnerable groups in data collection or targeting less politically sensitive groups first, in order to open pathways for work with other at-risk groups (OECD, 2018[4]).
partnering with other organisations that represent a specific interest of the government, e.g. the ILO, since country authorities are typically interested in employment policies.
mixing in other target groups who are not subject to the same discrimination as the main target group and enjoy rights that the LNOB group does not, e.g. organise a workshop on freedom of expression in a country where artists enjoy that right, but journalists do not, and put forward the importance of this right from the perspective of the artists.
Put in place relevant mitigation measures to protect vulnerable groups, e.g. by setting up a safeguard system which considers the unintended effects of interventions on specific groups.
Some positive experiences and lessons for monitoring LNOB follow.
GIZ’s exclusion analysis
In its LNOB indicator toolkit, GIZ provides the following questions to lead the context and exclusion analysis:
Who is (or is at risk of being) poor, excluded or left behind? (Who is the target group of the intervention?)
Are there regional differences?
Which definition of poverty/inequality/LNOB is recommendable for the specific context? Which dimensions of poverty/inequality/exclusions exist?
What is the target group excluded from?
Why? What is the main (or underlying) cause of poverty/inequality/exclusion?
By whom?
When does exclusion occur?
Where does exclusion occur?
What are the needs of the target groups?
Swiss Agency for Development Co-operation’s exclusion analysis
When mapping areas of exclusion, the SDC uses poverty assessments and analyses relating to power, gender, fragile contexts and political economy. It specifically analyses power relations by considering the following questions:
Who holds the power?
What is the relationship of the poor and excluded groups with other groups, the government, markets and civil society?
What needs to be changed?
What does the government concretely do (or fail to do) for the left-behind segments of the population in its country or in global political dialogues, international norms and initiatives?
Which reform actors could be mobilised to facilitate access to excluded groups, to enhance the representation of their interests and to co-design actual initiatives?
What scope for action does the SDC have for influencing the political will of the government and the political economy conditions that need to be changed for effective and sustained results?
Sources: GIZ (2021[7]), Indicators Matter to LNOB, https://www.poverty-inequality.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/GIZ-2021-Indicators-Matter-to-LNOB_EN.pdf; SDC (2018[6]), SDC Guidance on Leave No One Behind, https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Development/SR/visit-to-switzerland/sdc_2018_lnob.pdf
The Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), developed by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, can be a helpful tool for contextual analysis. It examines how people experience poverty in multiple, overlapping ways and identifies acute deprivations in health, education and standard of living across 10 indicators related to SDGs 1,2,3,4,6,7 and 11 (UNDP and OPHI, 2022[8]). The MPI can help to identify groups who are experiencing the most severe deprivations and thus help to reach those who are furthest behind.
Enabel (2020), Ex-ante Equity Assessment Tool - a tool to identify groups left behind and to apply an equity lens to interventions’ design and monitoring and evaluation
SDC (2018), Swiss Agency for Development Co-operation Guidance: Leave No One Behind
OECD (2021), Understanding the multidimensional nature of poverty covers Sida’s approach and tools for Multidimensional Poverty Analysis.
OECD (2022), Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women and Girls - Guidance for Development Partners
OECD (2022), Operationalising Leaving No One Behind, Good Practice Note for UN Country Teams, UN Sustainable Development Group
OPHI (2022), Global Multidimensional Poverty Index, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative
As a cross-cutting issue, progress on LNOB is more difficult to monitor than progress on a specific sector of intervention (e.g. education or health). Therefore, when designing the results framework for a programme or a project, LNOB indicators should be included at all levels of the results chain to reflect the LNOB focus throughout.
Measuring progress on leave no one behind also has specific implications, in particular in selecting LNOB indicators. Engaging target groups and project partners directly in formulating the indicators is important to ensure that they reflect multidimensional deprivation in the respective context.
LNOB indicators can measure absolute disadvantage, e.g. the percentage of refugees and asylum seekers without access to basic sanitation – or relative disadvantage, e.g. the percentage-point difference of refugees and asylum seekers without access to basic sanitation compared to the national average (UNICEF, 2021[8]).
A good LNOB indicator is either:
targeted – providing information about a specific group within a population, e.g. the proportion of girls who do not have access to education;
disaggregated – providing information on different sub-groups, enabling comparisons to be made between at least two groups, e.g. the proportion of girls who do not have access to education by disability, migratory status and ethnic origin;
group-difference based – assessing outcomes between a group left behind and the rest of the population, e.g. the percentage-point difference between the proportion of girls who do not have access to education and the rest of the population. (UNICEF, 2021[8])
Data availability can be a major challenge and must be considered when deciding the level of disaggregation for LNOB indicators. Agenda 2030 calls for data to be disaggregated, where relevant at least, “by income, sex [and gender], age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability and geographic location” (UN, 2020[9]).
Some actors propose including more factors that are common sources of discrimination. For example, religion, health status , marital and family status (UN, 2017[5]). While improving data availability is an important policy objective for supporting LNOB, choices about indicator disaggregation need to be pragmatic (see Box 7.3).
Finland disaggregates all indicators by sex, disability and age. Sex-disaggregated data is generally available, age-disaggregated data exists less, and finding data disaggregated by disability is challenging.
GIZ has set a minimum requirement that every indicator in the results framework be disaggregated by gender and one other vulnerability factor. SDC has adopted the same approach.
The Caribbean Development Bank always disaggregates by gender, and for some projects by age and disability in addition.
While LNOB does not have its own designated targets and indicators in the SDGs, it is reflected in a number of the goals, including most importantly, those calling to end poverty (SDG 1) and counter inequalities (SDG 10). For example, SDG target 10.2 reads “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or economic or other status.”
When development partners and governments align the indicators for their results frameworks as much as possible with the SDGs, this brings all partners together around shared results. All SDGs can be useful for measuring inequalities if disaggregated as either targeted or group-difference indicators to reflect LNOB. In addition, many SDG indicators directly measure economic, social, political and global inequality and discrimination, all of which are important elements of LNOB.
The following is an exemplary, non-exhaustive list of SDG indicators capturing LNOB (UN, 2017[5]):
Indicators on discrimination include all those on SDG 5 and many of those on SDG 10, specifically:
5.1.1 Whether or not legal frameworks are in place to promote, enforce and monitor equality and non-discrimination on the basis of sex
10.3.1 Proportion of the population reporting having personally felt discriminated against or harassed within the previous 12 months on the basis of a ground of discrimination prohibited under international human rights law
Indicators relevant for income and economic inequalities
10.1.1 Growth rates of household expenditure or income per capita among the bottom 40 per cent of the population and the total population
10.2.1 Proportion of people living below 50 per cent of median income, by age, sex and persons with disabilities
8.5.2 Unemployment rate, by sex, age group and persons with disabilities
Indicators relevant for social inequalities:
1.3.1 Proportion of the population covered by social protection floors/systems, by sex, distinguishing children, unemployed persons, older persons, persons with disabilities, pregnant women, newborns, work injury victims and the poor and the vulnerable
1.a.2 Proportion of total government spending on essential services (education, health and social protection)
Indicators relevant for political inequalities:
16.7.2. Proportion of the population who believe decision-making is inclusive and responsive, by sex, age, disability and population group
16.10.1 Number of verified cases of killing, kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture of journalists, associated media personnel, trade unionists and human rights advocates in the previous 12 months
Indicators relevant for global inequalities:
13.b.1 Number of least developed countries and small island developing states that are receiving specialised support, and amount of support, including finance, technology and capacity-building, for mechanisms for raising capacities for effective climate-change-related planning and management, including focusing on women, youth and local and marginalised communities
16.8.1 Proportion of members and voting rights of developing countries in international organisations
Integrate LNOB objectives in the national development plan or in country strategy and programmes.
Avoid: Including LNOB objectives only as a separate category, as this lens should be applied across sectors and priority areas – building on the diagnostics of roots causes of exclusion, inequalities and marginalisation.
Include qualitative and/or quantitative LNOB indicators at each level of the results chain, considering at which level of the results chain it is supposed to measure change: i.e. at the input, process, output, outcome or impact level. Privilege disaggregated outcome and impact indicators.
Ensure LNOB indicators are context-specific, provide information about defined groups within a population, and are adapted to the particular level of intervention, i.e. national, sub-national, programme or project-level.
Make (regular) indicators more LNOB-sensitive by including further disaggregation characteristics or combining multiple characteristics to reflect intersectionality and the multidimensionality of LNOB. In doing so, ensure data is available or easy to collect.
Align the results frameworks of programme- and project-level interventions with the results frameworks established by governments to ensure country ownership in LNOB definition and measurement.
Align with the SDG indicators where possible, as this can support more co-ordinated approaches across development partners.
Engage LNOB target groups in the indicator formulation and include their perspectives in the logic of the intervention.
Establish a reliable baseline data and realistic target for each LNOB indicator and develop a data-collection and monitoring plan.
Support capacities to produce inclusive, accessible, and disaggregated data systems and prioritise support to administrative data systems – such as civil registration – that include the whole population.
Canada (2021), Global Affairs Canada’s approach to feminist evaluation practices, in particular, GAC’s approach to including the voices of those left being.
GIZ (2021), Indicators matter to LNOB: An Indicator Toolbox to leave no one behind in fighting poverty and inequality
UNFPA (2022), Guidance on integrating the principles of leaving no one behind and reaching the furthest behind in UNFPA evaluations
UNICEF (2021), A Guidance Note for Leaving No One Behind
GPEDC (2022), Bern Call to Action (section on LNOB)
Monitoring development partners’ efforts in addressing LNOB is a first important step. Two DAC policy markers track development co-operation activities that target gender equality and disability as principal or significant objectives: the OECD/DAC gender equality policy marker and the OECD-DAC policy marker on the inclusion and empowerment of persons with disabilities. Even though not all LNOB dimensions are covered, these markers help track LNOB commitments and are key accountability tools in the context of the 2030 Agenda. They can contribute to identifying gaps between policy and financial commitments and incentivise efforts to close them.
However, policy markers cannot and do not intend to measure the outcome or impact of a programme or project. They must be complemented by monitoring and evaluation instruments to assess this.
Monitoring and evaluating results for LNOB can be challenging, as the underlying poverty and inequality dynamics can be hard to capture, and the changes required to produce results on LNOB objectives often only become visible as transformational change occurs over the long term. Availability of data also represents a challenge, as it can be difficult to collect and it can be outdated, limited or even biased. Due to these challenges, many donors emphasise performance information (e.g. the type and number of activities supported) to demonstrate how well they conduct development co-operation, rather than focusing on achieving development results (UNDP, 2022[2]).
As mentioned above, multidimensional and inclusive approaches are key to addressing LNOB, to enabling sustained escapes from poverty and to preventing impoverishment, and should be streamlined in all aspects of programming, including in the monitoring and evaluation of projects and programmes. Iterative and mixed methods – relying on quantitative and qualitative data reflecting lived experiences – are critical to measuring progress in a way that captures the multidimensional and intersecting aspects of LNOB. A combination of tools, mixed methods and frameworks are therefore required to monitor programme implementation and track progress on LNOB. Dedicated strategic evaluations at the organisational level can also help assess the success of mainstreaming LNOB and evaluate the overall effectiveness and impact of this approach in leaving no one behind.
Look for the most recent available data from various sources – interpret data with caution and triangulate information, as some data can contain biases.
Use qualitative data and evidence gleaned from focus groups or interviews with individuals from LNOB groups, as these can provide valuable knowledge on transformative change and the views of LNOB groups.
Avoid: Generalising from narrow evidence. Qualitative methods based on focus groups and interviews offer in-depth and insightful perspectives on the root causes of exclusion and marginalisation, which can then be generalised by applying other qualitative and quantitative methods adjusted on the basis of these insights (with a view to generating relevant metrics for future systematic monitoring of change).
Ensure that the monitoring captures any unintended consequences of projects and programmes on the situation of excluded groups and people.
Include civil society and local stakeholders in the monitoring and evaluation process so that their views can inform the evaluation of results. Such inclusive approaches can help account for complexity and volatility in poverty and inequality dynamics while bringing local knowledge to the forefront to promote more sustainable impact. Local actors can also play a key role in signalling unintended consequences on LNOB.
To evaluate a programme’s contribution to overall progress on LNOB in a given context, use system-level indicators. These indicators track progress of institutions and policies on LNOB.
Foster co-ordination between public agencies, research institutes, civil society and development partners, as this can help overcome data challenges, produce rapid assessments, improve the use of evidence and raise political will around LNOB.
(In addition to the above), report against the DAC policy markers on gender equality and disability.
Monitoring LNOB at programme level. While monitoring LNOB in results frameworks matters most at project level due to its contextuality, headquarters can quantitatively monitor the overall LNOB focus of their programmes. Examples include GIZ’s portfolio analysis of the number of projects which include LNOB in their results frameworks and SDC’s monitoring, at the programme level, of the number of people from LNOB groups that benefit from projects.
Using the DAC Evaluation criteria. The DAC evaluation criteria can be used as entry points to ask pertinent questions in order to deepen understanding about the extent to which interventions have promoted progress on LNOB: how, in what ways, and for whom. Reflecting on the multi-dimensional and inter-generational nature of poverty and inequalities, the criteria looking at relevance (e.g. is the intervention reaching the poorest/most vulnerable people?), effectiveness (e.g. do interventions sufficiently account for differential results across groups?) and sustainability (e.g. to what extent does the intervention allow people benefiting from it to maintain their graduation out of poverty?) are especially relevant.
GPEDC Monitoring Framework and LNOB. LNOB is part of the revised Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation's monitoring framework, a review carried out in 2023. The monitoring framework includes aspects of inclusiveness in the development of country-level strategies and the use of distributional analysis by development partners to define intervention targets and indicators. While the monitoring framework does not address the monitoring of LNOB progress directly, it gives useful information on the availability of appropriate data and the use of data-based assessments for reaching the marginalised for participating countries (GPEDC, 2022[10]).
UNDP (2022), Formative evaluation - Integration by UNDP of the Principles of Leaving No One Behind
GIZ (2021), Indicators Matter to LNOB: An indicator toolbox to leave no one behind in fighting poverty and inequality
OECD (2016), Handbook on the OECD/DAC Gender Equality Policy Marker
UN (2022), Operationalizing Leaving No One Behind - Good Practice Note for UN Country Teams
SDC (2018), Swiss Agency for Development Co-operation Guidance: Leave No One Behind
OECD (2021), DAC Evaluation Criteria
GPEDC (2023), Monitoring Guidance: LNOB indicators for development effectiveness (2023-26).
Has the contextual analysis been conducted at a sufficiently granular and disaggregated level?
Do the contextual analysis and results framework take into account multidimensionality and the intersectionality of different inequalities?
Have key stakeholders and LNOB target groups been consulted during the contextual analysis and in the selection of indicators?
Have LNOB-sensitive indicators been integrated at every level of the results chain?
Can some of the LNOB-sensitive SDG indicators be used?
Where there are data availability challenges, has the project/programme foreseen ways to support further data collection and/or data collection at a disaggregated level?
Have relevant mitigation measures to protect vulnerable LNOB groups from risks and unintended consequences relating to the project/programme been put in place?
Have qualitative data-collection methods been put in place to help capture the views of local populations and LNOB groups during monitoring and evaluation?
[7] Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, GIZ (2021), Indicators Matter to LNOB, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, GIZ, https://www.poverty-inequality.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/GIZ-2021-Indicators-Matter-to-LNOB_EN.pdf.
[10] GPEDC (2022), Revised proposal: New Global Partnership Monitoring Framework, Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation, https://www.effectivecooperation.org/RevisedMonitoringFramework.
[1] OECD (2019), Managing for Sustainable Development Results: Guiding Principles, Best Practices in Development Co-operation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/44a288bc-en.
[4] OECD (2018), Development Co-operation Report 2018: Joining Forces to Leave No One Behind, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/dcr-2018-en.
[6] SDC (2018), SDC Guidance on Leave No One Behind, SDC, https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Development/SR/visit-to-switzerland/sdc_2018_lnob.pdf.
[9] UN (2020), Global indicator framework adopted by the General Assembly in A/RES/71/313 (Annex), UN, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Global%20Indicator%20Framework%20after%202022%20refinement_Eng.pdf.
[5] UN (2017), Leaving No One Behind: eqaulity and non-discrimination at the heart of sustainable development, a Shared United Nations System Framework for Action, United Nations, https://unsceb.org/sites/default/files/imported_files/CEB%20equality%20framework-A4-web-rev3.pdf.
[2] UNDP (2022), Formative Evaluation of the Integration by UNDP of the Principles of “Leaving No One Behind”, https://erc.undp.org/evaluation/documents/download/21854.
[8] UNICEF (2021), Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH): A Guidance Note for Leaving No One Behind, https://www.unicef.org/media/102136/file/LNOB-in-WASH-Guidance-Note.pdf.
[3] United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2016), Global Sustainable Development Report 2016, United Nations, https://doi.org/10.18356/9789210574952.