Examples of using Draft indicator in English and their translations into Russian
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
III. Specific comments on draft indicators.
Draft indicators O-9 and O-10 could then be merged.
There was a broad consensus among Parties on draft indicator O-2.
Draft indicators submitted to the Executive Body in 2015.
A number of countries favoured merging draft indicators O-15 and O-16.
Draft indicator O-15: Number of countries implementing NCSA action plans.
May 2006- Fourth meeting of the EG to finalize the draft indicators;
Parties agree that draft indicator O-20 is based on a correct interpretation of the outcome.
One Party believed that this information could be included in draft indicator O-18.
This draft indicator gathered some fairly critical comments on its relevance to Outcome 2.3.
The present document reproduces comments received by the Secretariat on the draft indicators of commercial fraud.
Draft indicator O-10: Number of internationally recognized reports on biophysical and socio-economic trends.
It was agreed that delegates would send their comments on the draft indicators in writing to the secretariat by 20 January 2006.
Both draft indicators provide a measure of the results of mainstreaming but not of the mainstreaming process itself.
Some Parties stated that this indicator would be areplication of indicator O-6, and recommended the use of draft indicator O-6 for Outcome 2.4.
If this draft indicator were retained, therefore, it would be preferable to focus on effectiveness of communication rather than on the level of awareness.
One Party stated that the evaluation of funding sources other than the GEF involves evaluation of GM activities;it would be better, therefore, if this indicator were merged with draft indicator O-20.
One Party felt that prior to applying draft indicator O-11, the identification, description and assessment of driving forces and their relevance was required.
Certain countries opposed the idea of using the"size of a list" as an indicator, and would have preferred to have solid information on activities carried out by such networks andorganizations similar to the formulation of draft indicator O-10.
Draft indicator O-3: Number, type, and area of DLDD related work(advocacy, awareness raising, education) of CSOs and science and technology institutions.
To demonstrate national application of the draft indicators, the Government of China invited ESCAP to organize a national workshop to train professionals and practitioners involved in ageing issues.
Draft indicator O-2: Percentage of relevant official international documents and decisions that contain substantial statements, conclusions and recommendations on DLDD issues.
An amendment to this draft indicator was suggested:"Number of countries implementing NCSA action plans with annual country reports on the different steps of implementation of components of the action plan.
Draft indicator O-14: Number, type and expertise of science and technology institutions, organizations and networks dealing with specific knowledge domain that support the UNCCD.
The draft indicators proposed by the IIWG do not refer to engagement; they also seem to duplicate the information collected under outcome 3.5 through CONS-O-11.
Alternative draft indicator O-10: Increase in number of country Parties reporting on relevant reliable indicators and its associated baseline values.
Draft indicator O-11: Percentage of decision-makers at global, regional, sub/regional and national levels who can explain interactions between biophysical and socio-economic factors;
Draft indicator O-20: Reported cases on innovative models(private sector, market/based mechanisms, trade, foundations and CSOs etc.) for financing of land degradation or desertification.
Draft indicator O-4: Percentage of affected country Parties that have assessed policy, financial and socio-economic drivers of desertification/land degradation and barriers to SLM, and recommended appropriate measures to remove these barriers.
Draft indicator O-1: Percentage of key stakeholders at international, national and local levels who are aware of DLDD issues and the synergies with climate change adaptation/mitigation and biodiversity conservation.