Skip to Content

Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko, Terra Lawson-Remer and Susan Randolph 2008. "Measuring the Progressive Realization of Human Rights Oblig...

Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko, Terra Lawson-Remer and Susan Randolph 2008. "Measuring the Progressive Realization of Human Rights Obligations: An index of economic and social rights fulfillment"

  • Objective: Index (ESR Fulfillment Index) to evaluate and compare countries on their fulfillment of Economic and Social Rights obligations.
  • Key characteristics: Focused on: rights to education, food, health, housing and decent work; obligation to fulfill; designed for use by the human rights movement.
  • Brief summary: Offers a benchmark for measuring "progressive realization in accordance with maximum available resources" by using cross-country comparisons to assess whether government efforts are adequate. Sets out an index for cross-country comparisons, which focuses on duty-bearer obligations as means to promote ESR and their progressive realization of ESR. The indices (ESRF-1 for low and middle income countries and ESRF-2 for high income countries) rank countries by measuring the relationship between enjoyment of rights and resource capacity of State. This shows what can be done at certain levels of resources - the frontier of possibilities.
  • Best used for: Provides a benchmarks based on cross-country comparisons to measure progressive realization in accordance with available resources.
  • Data required: Composite index made of objective survey-based data with international legitimacy. Gives list of indicators selected for both indices.
  • Possible disadvantages: Lack of inclusion of social security or discrimination data; the index, comprised of available data, serves as a proxy for measuring human rights in question, but does not account for full complexity of problem. Difficulties with missing information e.g, the lack of labor-related data in low income countries, or data on the quality and security of tenure in housing, given that international data sets do not cover these indicators; highly mathematical formula may be too complex for use by average human rights activists.
  • Going forward: Maybe further discussion about fairness of ranking states and  further discussion on whether equal rights enjoyment should be measured by same outcomes or same opportunities would be useful. Possibility of developing index on discrimination in ESR fulfillment to be used in conjunction with this one.
  • Complementary tools: Cross-country comparisons would be well-matched with any tool that focuses more on in-country issues, especially related to elements missed in this tool, such as discrimination.