Metadata Factsheet
PDF Generated On: Wed May 07 2025 17:54:20 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time)
1. Indicator name
10.1 Proportion of agricultural area under productive and sustainable agriculture
2. Date of metadata update
2024-09-30 10:55:00 UTC
3. Goals and Targets addressed
3a. Goal
N/A
3b. Target
Headline indicator for Target 10. Ensure that areas under agriculture, aquaculture, fisheries and forestry are managed sustainably, in particular through the sustainable use of biodiversity, including through a substantial increase of the application of biodiversity friendly practices, such as sustainable intensification, agroecological and other innovative approaches, contributing to the resilience and long-term efficiency and productivity of these production systems, and to food security, conserving and restoring biodiversity and maintaining nature’s contributions to people, including ecosystem functions and services.
4. Rationale
1. The approaches to framing and defining sustainable agriculture vary in terms of their coverage of the three primary dimensions of sustainability, i.e. economic, environmental and social, and in terms of the scale that is used to assess sustainability, i.e. from field and farm scales, to national and global scales. Some approaches consider different features of sustainability, for example whether current practices are economically feasible, environmentally friendly and socially desirable. Other approaches focus on particular practices such as organic, regenerative or low-input agriculture and can equate these with sustainable agriculture. The conclusion from a literature review associated with the methodological development of this indicator is that the multi-dimensional approach developed by FAO in 1988 is a meaningful framing of the concept. Thus, sustainable agriculture can be considered as “the management and conservation of the natural resource base, and the orientation of technological and institutional change in such a manner as to ensure the attainment and continued satisfaction of human needs for present and future generation. Such development (in agriculture, forestry and fishing etc.) conserves land, water, plant and animal genetic resources, environmentally non-degrading, technically appropriate, economically viable and socially acceptable.” (FAO, 1988)
5. Definitions, concepts and classifications
5a. Definition
2. The indicator is defined by the formula:
Area under productive and sustainable agriculture/ Agricultural land area
3. This implies the need to measure both the extent of land under productive and sustainable agriculture (the numerator), as well as the extent of agriculture land area (the denominator).
4. The numerator captures the three dimensions of sustainable production: environmental, economic and social. It corresponds to agricultural land area of the farms that satisfy the sustainability criteria of the 11 sub-indicators selected across all three dimensions[1].
5. The denominator in turn the sum of agricultural land area (as defined by FAO) utilized by agricultural holdings that are owned (excluding rented-out), rented-in, leased, sharecropped or borrowed. State or communal land used by farm holdings is not included. Please see the methodological document[2] prepared by FAO for a more detailed explanation.
6. The scope of the indicator is the agricultural farm holding, and more precisely the agricultural land area of the farm holdings, i.e. land used primarily to grow crops and raise livestock. This choice of scope is fully consistent with the intended use of a country’s agricultural land area as the denominator of the aggregate indicator. Specifically, the following are:
7. Included within scope:
(a) Intensive and extensive crops and livestock production systems.
(b) Subsistence agriculture.
(c) State and common land when used exclusively and managed by the farm holdings.
(d) Food and non-food crops and livestock products (e.g. tobacco, cotton, and sheep wool).
(e) Crops grown for fodder or for energy purposes.
(f) Agro-forestry (trees on the agriculture land areas of the farm) and Aquaculture, to the extent that it takes place within the agricultural land area of the farm as secondary activities. For example, rice fish farming and similar systems.
Excluded from scope:
(a) State and common land not used exclusively by the farm holding.
(b) Nomadic pastoralism.
(c) Production from gardens and backyards. Production from hobby farms
(d) Holdings focusing exclusively on aquaculture.
(e) Holdings focusing exclusively on forestry.
(f) Food harvested from the wild.
9. Concepts: The literature review (Hayati, 2017) identified a large number of potential sustainability themes across the three dimensions of sustainability and, for each theme, usually a large number of possible sub-indicators. The key considerations in the selection of themes are relevance and measurability. In terms of relevance, the relationship between the associated sub-indicator and sustainable agriculture outcomes at farm level should be strong. Following this approach, only sub-indicators that are responsive to farm level policies aimed at improving sustainable agriculture are considered. In terms of measurability, only a “core” set of themes and sub-indicators for which measurement and reporting is expected in the majority of countries are selected.
10. A key aspect of all approaches to measuring sustainable agriculture is the recognition that sustainability is a multi-dimensional concept, and that these multiple dimensions need to be reflected in the construction of the indicator. This implies that SDG indicator 2.4.1 must be based on a set of sub-indicators that cover these three dimensions.
11. Through a consultative process that has lasted over two years, 11 themes and sub-indicators have been identified, which make up SDG 2.4.1.
Please see the annex of the official metadata sheet (https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-02-04-01.pdf) for a detailed description of the sub-indicators.
[1] The 11 sub-indicators and the methodology to calculate each of them are described in the official SDG 2.4.1 Metadata sheet (https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-02-04-01.pdf). The detailed description of the development process for the eleven sub-indicators is described in the Methodological note (https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e344e3ee-4630-49c1-98a8-b1f5df3dcb8f/content)
[2] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e344e3ee-4630-49c1-98a8-b1f5df3dcb8f/content
5b. Method of computation
12. Steps undertaken to develop the methodology of the indicator include:
(a) Determining the scope of the indicator: The scope of indicator is the agricultural farm holdings, and more precisely the agricultural land area of the farm holdings, i.e. land used primarily to grow crops and raise livestock. Forestry, fisheries and aquaculture activities may be included to the extent that they are secondary activities conducted on the agricultural area of the farm holdings, for example rice fish farming and similar systems.
(b) Determining the dimensions to be covered: Indicator includes environmental, economic and social dimensions in the sustainability assessment.
(c) Choosing the scale for the sustainability assessment: Indicator is farm level with aggregation to higher levels.
(d) Selecting the data collection instrument(s). It is recommended that indicator be collected through a farm survey.
(e) Selecting the themes within each dimension, and choosing a sub-indicator for each theme. The sub-indicators should satisfy a number of sustainability criteria (described in annex 1 for each sub-indicator in the methodological document[1]).
(f) Assessing sustainability performance at farm level for each sub-indicator: Specific sustainability criteria are applied in order to assess the sustainability level of the farm for each theme according to the respective sub-indicators.
(g) Deciding the periodicity of monitoring the indicator. It is recommended to be collected at least every three years.
(h) Modality of reporting the indicator. The set of sub-indicators are presented in the form of a dashboard. The dashboard approach offers a response in terms of measuring sustainability at farm level and aggregating it at national level.
13. The methodology proposes reporting of indicator through a national-level dashboard, presenting the different sub-indicators together but independently. The dashboard approach offers several advantages, including the possibility of combining data from different sources and identification of critical sustainability issues, facilitating the search for a balance between the three sustainability dimensions. As a result, countries can easily visualize their performance in terms of the different sustainability dimensions and themes, and understand where policy efforts can be focused for future improvements.
14. Computation of results and construction of the dashboard are performed for each sub-indicator separately using the “traffic light” approach already defined for each sub-indicator: aggregation at national level is performed for each sub-indicator independently, by summing the agricultural land area of each agricultural holdings by sustainability category (red, yellow or green), and reporting the resulting national total as percentage of the total national agricultural land area of all agricultural farm holdings in the country. In practice, the reported value of the indicator is determined by the results of most limiting sub-indicator in terms of sustainability performance.
[1]See the SDG metadata for SDG indictor 2.4.1 accessible from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-02-04-01.pdf
5c. Data collection method
15. A questionnaire has been sent to all countries annually since 2020 (http://www.fao.org/sustainabledevelopment-goals/indicators/241/en/). Furthermore, in order to facilitate data collection by countries, a data collection module[1] has been designed, which contains the core set of questions necessary to obtain the data for the indicator. If farm surveys already exist within a country, these questions can be integrated into existing instruments in order to minimize the burden to national statistical offices in data collection.
16. All data collection activities will be done through the National Statistical Office (NSO) or the offices designated (Ministry of Agriculture in some countries) to collect data for this indicator. FAO, together with the Global Strategy to improve Agriculture and Rural Statistics (GSARS), have developed the capacity development material necessary for this indicator, including a methodological guide[2], an enumerator manual[3], data entry guidelines[4], calculation procedure document[5], sampling guidance[6] and an e-learning course[7] to train country NSO and other relevant staff on the indicator.[1] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/4cb138eb-c887-4463-b6c4-34d94b6de5c3/content
[2] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e344e3ee-4630-49c1-98a8-b1f5df3dcb8f/content
[3] The conversion from local units to hectares is given in detail in the enumerator manual: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/03d673ed-6360-47b6-9ac0-e8ca1eac35e0/content
[4] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/6599bf25-e0af-46c7-b756-c420cf839d90/content
[5] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8a9fb2b2-604c-4e1d-b1b9-37192e226bce/content
[6] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/7935a029-2a50-4a75-8ee4-72125fe660c0/content
5d. Accessibility of methodology
17. The methodological, support documents, update on capacity development activities etc. can be found at this link: https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals-...
5e. Data sources
18. In order to propose a manageable and cost-effective solution, a requirement stressed by several countries during the consultations, the methodology offers a single data collection instrument for all sub-indicators: the farm survey.
19. In the process of capacity development, several countries have suggested using existing data sources or alternative data sources on the grounds that these instruments can be more cost-effective and sometimes provide more reliable results than farm surveys. These instruments include remote sensing, GIS, models, agricultural surveys, household surveys, administrative data or environmental monitoring systems.
20. Often, environmental data are collected through environmental monitoring systems, including remote sensing. Yet many countries do not have the capacity or resources to do so, and therefore these data are sparse or non-existent.
21. The methodology considers the possibility to use such instruments, subject to a series of criteria to ensure data quality and international comparability. Other data sources may also be used to complement and/or validate farm survey results. The methodology note also recommends that countries complement the farm survey with a monitoring system that can measure the impact of agriculture on the environment (soil, water, fertilizer and pesticide pollution, biodiversity, etc.) and on health (pesticides residues in food and human bodies). This will provide additional information and help crosscheck the robustness of the indicator with regard to the environmental dimension of sustainability. In this respect, FAO has initiated work streams on alternative data sources to improve reporting of the indicator. In addition, FAO has also commenced development of a proxy approach to report on the indicator as an interim solution to bridge the data gaps while countries get ready to adopt and implement the farm survey based methodology. The proxy approach is under development, once the proposal is finalized, tested and approved and endorsed by IAEG-SDG, it will be shared with member states.
5f. Availability and release calendar
22. Although new data may not be available annually for each country, all new information are expected to be released annually through FAO SDG portal and UNSD.
5g. Time series
23. Indicator measures progress towards more sustainable and productive agriculture over a three year periodicity because for many sub-indicators, it is likely that changes will be relatively limited from one year to another. Furthermore, the 3-year periodicity will enable countries to have three data points on the indicator before 2030.
5h. Data providers
24. National Statistical Offices, Ministries of Agriculture or national offices designated by countries will be responsible for collecting and reporting data for this indicator.
5i. Data compilers
National Statistical Offices or designated offices within countries will be responsible for collecting and compiling data for this indicator. They will in turn report to FAO, which provides capacity development, conducts quality control and disseminates the information through the FAO SDG portal. FAO will in turn report the regional and global estimates to the international statistical community and UNSD.
5j. Gaps in data coverage
25. The indicator is new and complex and thus current data coverage of the indicator is low. Few countries have reported the entire dashboard, several reported a sub-set of the sub-indicators and the majority have yet to provide data. The data coverage will improve over time (in the short to medium term), thanks to the capacity development efforts that include both regional and national trainings and bilateral technical assistance to member states.
5k. Treatment of missing values
26. Partial non-response at individual level (farm holding) will be imputed using appropriate statistical techniques, such as nearest-neighbour algorithms. The decision on whether to impute or not and the choice of the method is a function of the nature of the variable to impute and the amount and type of data available for the imputation, such as the availability of auxiliary data coming from different sources (e.g. surveys, administrative information). It is important to clearly distinguish missing data from non-applicable events. As specified above and in the sub-indicator methodology sheets, some sub-indicators can be recorded as “Not applicable” for a given farm. In this case, the farm will be considered sustainable from the perspective of the given sub-indicators.
6. Scale
6a. Scale of use
Scale of application: Global, Regional, National
28. Scale of data disaggregation/aggregation:
(a) Global/ regional scale indicator can be disaggregated to national level: No
(b) National data is collated to form global indicator: Yes
6b. National/regional indicator production
6c. Sources of differences between global and national figures
29. Data on the official SDG indicator 2.4.1 is currently scarce, as countries still build their capacity to adapt their agricultural surveys to collect the necessary information. As a provisional, stop-gap solution, the UN Statistical Commission has approved the use of a proxy (https://unstats.un.org/UNSDWebsite/statcom/session_55/documents/2024-36-FinalReport-E.pdf) for monitoring progress towards productive and sustainable agriculture, based on widely available national-level statistics. The proxy consists of seven sub-indicators capturing the three dimensions of sustainability (environmental, economic and social) in the agricultural sphere and shall be used as a “practical interim solution” while FAO continues to work with countries “to strengthen capacity-building activities for the official indicator”. For information on the SDG Indicator 2.4.1 Proxy "Progress towards productive and sustainable agriculture", please seewww.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals-data-portal/data/indicators/indicator-241-proxy-progress-towards-productive-and-sustainable-agriculture/en.
6d. Regional and global estimates & data collection for global monitoring
6d.1 Description of the methodology
30. The indicator methodology proposes reporting of the indicator through a national-level dashboard, presenting the different sub-indicators together but independently.
31. Computation of results and construction of the dashboard are performed for each sub-indicator separately using the “traffic light” approach already defined for each sub-indicator. In practice, the reported value of the indicator is determined by the results of the most limiting sub-indicator in terms of sustainability performance.
6d.2 Additional methodological details
32. Several levels of analysis will be undertaken with the data received from member countries. Time series of unsustainability for the entire world (both % and area) will allow progress towards a sustainable agriculture worldwide to be measured and tracked. Charts by regions will show the % of unsustainability comparing the results of the same triennium, comparison will be done also analysing the results of three country groups: developed economies, economies in transition, and developing economies. A map will be used to display the % of unsustainability, considering a given year or triennium, to have an immediate visualization of the most critical countries. A similar map will show the distance to the target of sustainability.
6d.3 Description of the mechanism for collecting data from countries
33. National Statistical Offices, Ministries of Agriculture or designated offices within countries will be responsible for collecting and compiling data for this indicator. They will in turn report to FAO who will conduct quality control and disseminate the information through FAO SDG portal. FAO will in turn report to the international statistical community and UNSD.
34. A questionnaire is sent by email to all countries annually since 2020 (https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/faoweb/s...).
35. The email is sent to the National focal point relevant to the indicator, National focal point for generic SDG and Heads of NSO. With copy to FAO Representative, Country, Regional and Sub-regional offices, FAO Regional Statisticians in the Region and in the Sub-regional offices, staff officially nominated to be in “CC” of all indicator communications and ESS-Registry, with a deadline for returning the filled in questionnaire within 4 weeks.
36. Special cases for Bahrain, Brazil, Cuba, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Nicaragua, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Yemen, Myanmar, Afghanistan for which the dispatch will be addressed according to the “Data Collection Phase” guidelines (Statistical Standard Series, endorsed by the IDWG-TTF on Statistics, 15 November 2019, Revised 16 June 2023).
37. Once the questionnaires are received a validation process is done through the check of the person who replied with the questionnaire returned: indicator focal point / FAO local office / Regional Statistician might be contacted to clarify if the questionnaire returned is considered valid or not.
38. The received questionnaires are analysed in all their parts. Namely, checking individually, both manually and automatically through an R script, standard rules (unit, text out of the spaces, time series, outliers, inconsistencies, anomalies, missing data).
7. Other MEAs, processes and organisations
7a. Other MEA and processes
39. The indicator is the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator 2.4.1 and is linked with SDG Goal 2 and targets 2.3.1, 2.4.1, 2.3.2 and 5.a.1
7b. Biodiversity Indicator Partnership
No
8. Disaggregation
40. Proposed disaggregation
(a) Household and non-household sector farms
(b) Crops, livestock and mixed
(c) Irrigated and non-irrigated
41. Although not a mandatory variable for international reporting for SDG 2.4.1, the indicator can in principle be disaggregated by gender of the farm holder. This information is not, and will not be publicly available as a default in FAO and UNSD databases and reporting systems. Nevertheless, a question on gender disaggregation of data is incorporated into the SDG 2.4.1 questionnaire, accompanied by guidance for countries to collect and report information on the gender of the holder of the agriculture holding. Therefore, for national policy-making purposes, the country has the necessary tools, guidance and thus the capability to produce disaggregated estimates by gender should countries wish to collect and report sex-disaggregated data on 2.4.1 at the national level.
9. Related goals, targets and indicators
10. Data reporter
10a. Organisation
Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Statistics Division, Agri-environment team
10b. Contact person(s)
Francesco Nicola Tubiello : Francesco.Tubiello@fao.org
Arbab Asfandiyar Khan: Arbab.Khan@fao.org
SDG241-Indicator@fao.org
1. Indicator name
10.1 Proportion of agricultural area under productive and sustainable agriculture
2. Date of metadata update
2024-09-30 10:55:00 UTC
3. Goals and Targets addressed
3a. Goal
N/A
3b. Target
Headline indicator for Target 10. Ensure that areas under agriculture, aquaculture, fisheries and forestry are managed sustainably, in particular through the sustainable use of biodiversity, including through a substantial increase of the application of biodiversity friendly practices, such as sustainable intensification, agroecological and other innovative approaches, contributing to the resilience and long-term efficiency and productivity of these production systems, and to food security, conserving and restoring biodiversity and maintaining nature’s contributions to people, including ecosystem functions and services.
4. Rationale
1. The approaches to framing and defining sustainable agriculture vary in terms of their coverage of the three primary dimensions of sustainability, i.e. economic, environmental and social, and in terms of the scale that is used to assess sustainability, i.e. from field and farm scales, to national and global scales. Some approaches consider different features of sustainability, for example whether current practices are economically feasible, environmentally friendly and socially desirable. Other approaches focus on particular practices such as organic, regenerative or low-input agriculture and can equate these with sustainable agriculture. The conclusion from a literature review associated with the methodological development of this indicator is that the multi-dimensional approach developed by FAO in 1988 is a meaningful framing of the concept. Thus, sustainable agriculture can be considered as “the management and conservation of the natural resource base, and the orientation of technological and institutional change in such a manner as to ensure the attainment and continued satisfaction of human needs for present and future generation. Such development (in agriculture, forestry and fishing etc.) conserves land, water, plant and animal genetic resources, environmentally non-degrading, technically appropriate, economically viable and socially acceptable.” (FAO, 1988)
5. Definitions, concepts and classifications
5a. Definition
2. The indicator is defined by the formula:
Area under productive and sustainable agriculture/ Agricultural land area
3. This implies the need to measure both the extent of land under productive and sustainable agriculture (the numerator), as well as the extent of agriculture land area (the denominator).
4. The numerator captures the three dimensions of sustainable production: environmental, economic and social. It corresponds to agricultural land area of the farms that satisfy the sustainability criteria of the 11 sub-indicators selected across all three dimensions[1].
5. The denominator in turn the sum of agricultural land area (as defined by FAO) utilized by agricultural holdings that are owned (excluding rented-out), rented-in, leased, sharecropped or borrowed. State or communal land used by farm holdings is not included. Please see the methodological document[2] prepared by FAO for a more detailed explanation.
6. The scope of the indicator is the agricultural farm holding, and more precisely the agricultural land area of the farm holdings, i.e. land used primarily to grow crops and raise livestock. This choice of scope is fully consistent with the intended use of a country’s agricultural land area as the denominator of the aggregate indicator. Specifically, the following are:
7. Included within scope:
(a) Intensive and extensive crops and livestock production systems.
(b) Subsistence agriculture.
(c) State and common land when used exclusively and managed by the farm holdings.
(d) Food and non-food crops and livestock products (e.g. tobacco, cotton, and sheep wool).
(e) Crops grown for fodder or for energy purposes.
(f) Agro-forestry (trees on the agriculture land areas of the farm) and Aquaculture, to the extent that it takes place within the agricultural land area of the farm as secondary activities. For example, rice fish farming and similar systems.
Excluded from scope:
(a) State and common land not used exclusively by the farm holding.
(b) Nomadic pastoralism.
(c) Production from gardens and backyards. Production from hobby farms
(d) Holdings focusing exclusively on aquaculture.
(e) Holdings focusing exclusively on forestry.
(f) Food harvested from the wild.
9. Concepts: The literature review (Hayati, 2017) identified a large number of potential sustainability themes across the three dimensions of sustainability and, for each theme, usually a large number of possible sub-indicators. The key considerations in the selection of themes are relevance and measurability. In terms of relevance, the relationship between the associated sub-indicator and sustainable agriculture outcomes at farm level should be strong. Following this approach, only sub-indicators that are responsive to farm level policies aimed at improving sustainable agriculture are considered. In terms of measurability, only a “core” set of themes and sub-indicators for which measurement and reporting is expected in the majority of countries are selected.
10. A key aspect of all approaches to measuring sustainable agriculture is the recognition that sustainability is a multi-dimensional concept, and that these multiple dimensions need to be reflected in the construction of the indicator. This implies that SDG indicator 2.4.1 must be based on a set of sub-indicators that cover these three dimensions.
11. Through a consultative process that has lasted over two years, 11 themes and sub-indicators have been identified, which make up SDG 2.4.1.
Please see the annex of the official metadata sheet (https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-02-04-01.pdf) for a detailed description of the sub-indicators.
[1] The 11 sub-indicators and the methodology to calculate each of them are described in the official SDG 2.4.1 Metadata sheet (https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-02-04-01.pdf). The detailed description of the development process for the eleven sub-indicators is described in the Methodological note (https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e344e3ee-4630-49c1-98a8-b1f5df3dcb8f/content)
[2] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e344e3ee-4630-49c1-98a8-b1f5df3dcb8f/content
5b. Method of computation
12. Steps undertaken to develop the methodology of the indicator include:
(a) Determining the scope of the indicator: The scope of indicator is the agricultural farm holdings, and more precisely the agricultural land area of the farm holdings, i.e. land used primarily to grow crops and raise livestock. Forestry, fisheries and aquaculture activities may be included to the extent that they are secondary activities conducted on the agricultural area of the farm holdings, for example rice fish farming and similar systems.
(b) Determining the dimensions to be covered: Indicator includes environmental, economic and social dimensions in the sustainability assessment.
(c) Choosing the scale for the sustainability assessment: Indicator is farm level with aggregation to higher levels.
(d) Selecting the data collection instrument(s). It is recommended that indicator be collected through a farm survey.
(e) Selecting the themes within each dimension, and choosing a sub-indicator for each theme. The sub-indicators should satisfy a number of sustainability criteria (described in annex 1 for each sub-indicator in the methodological document[1]).
(f) Assessing sustainability performance at farm level for each sub-indicator: Specific sustainability criteria are applied in order to assess the sustainability level of the farm for each theme according to the respective sub-indicators.
(g) Deciding the periodicity of monitoring the indicator. It is recommended to be collected at least every three years.
(h) Modality of reporting the indicator. The set of sub-indicators are presented in the form of a dashboard. The dashboard approach offers a response in terms of measuring sustainability at farm level and aggregating it at national level.
13. The methodology proposes reporting of indicator through a national-level dashboard, presenting the different sub-indicators together but independently. The dashboard approach offers several advantages, including the possibility of combining data from different sources and identification of critical sustainability issues, facilitating the search for a balance between the three sustainability dimensions. As a result, countries can easily visualize their performance in terms of the different sustainability dimensions and themes, and understand where policy efforts can be focused for future improvements.
14. Computation of results and construction of the dashboard are performed for each sub-indicator separately using the “traffic light” approach already defined for each sub-indicator: aggregation at national level is performed for each sub-indicator independently, by summing the agricultural land area of each agricultural holdings by sustainability category (red, yellow or green), and reporting the resulting national total as percentage of the total national agricultural land area of all agricultural farm holdings in the country. In practice, the reported value of the indicator is determined by the results of most limiting sub-indicator in terms of sustainability performance.
[1]See the SDG metadata for SDG indictor 2.4.1 accessible from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-02-04-01.pdf
5c. Data collection method
15. A questionnaire has been sent to all countries annually since 2020 (http://www.fao.org/sustainabledevelopment-goals/indicators/241/en/). Furthermore, in order to facilitate data collection by countries, a data collection module[1] has been designed, which contains the core set of questions necessary to obtain the data for the indicator. If farm surveys already exist within a country, these questions can be integrated into existing instruments in order to minimize the burden to national statistical offices in data collection.
16. All data collection activities will be done through the National Statistical Office (NSO) or the offices designated (Ministry of Agriculture in some countries) to collect data for this indicator. FAO, together with the Global Strategy to improve Agriculture and Rural Statistics (GSARS), have developed the capacity development material necessary for this indicator, including a methodological guide[2], an enumerator manual[3], data entry guidelines[4], calculation procedure document[5], sampling guidance[6] and an e-learning course[7] to train country NSO and other relevant staff on the indicator.[1] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/4cb138eb-c887-4463-b6c4-34d94b6de5c3/content
[2] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e344e3ee-4630-49c1-98a8-b1f5df3dcb8f/content
[3] The conversion from local units to hectares is given in detail in the enumerator manual: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/03d673ed-6360-47b6-9ac0-e8ca1eac35e0/content
[4] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/6599bf25-e0af-46c7-b756-c420cf839d90/content
[5] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8a9fb2b2-604c-4e1d-b1b9-37192e226bce/content
[6] https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/7935a029-2a50-4a75-8ee4-72125fe660c0/content
5d. Accessibility of methodology
17. The methodological, support documents, update on capacity development activities etc. can be found at this link: https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals-...
5e. Data sources
18. In order to propose a manageable and cost-effective solution, a requirement stressed by several countries during the consultations, the methodology offers a single data collection instrument for all sub-indicators: the farm survey.
19. In the process of capacity development, several countries have suggested using existing data sources or alternative data sources on the grounds that these instruments can be more cost-effective and sometimes provide more reliable results than farm surveys. These instruments include remote sensing, GIS, models, agricultural surveys, household surveys, administrative data or environmental monitoring systems.
20. Often, environmental data are collected through environmental monitoring systems, including remote sensing. Yet many countries do not have the capacity or resources to do so, and therefore these data are sparse or non-existent.
21. The methodology considers the possibility to use such instruments, subject to a series of criteria to ensure data quality and international comparability. Other data sources may also be used to complement and/or validate farm survey results. The methodology note also recommends that countries complement the farm survey with a monitoring system that can measure the impact of agriculture on the environment (soil, water, fertilizer and pesticide pollution, biodiversity, etc.) and on health (pesticides residues in food and human bodies). This will provide additional information and help crosscheck the robustness of the indicator with regard to the environmental dimension of sustainability. In this respect, FAO has initiated work streams on alternative data sources to improve reporting of the indicator. In addition, FAO has also commenced development of a proxy approach to report on the indicator as an interim solution to bridge the data gaps while countries get ready to adopt and implement the farm survey based methodology. The proxy approach is under development, once the proposal is finalized, tested and approved and endorsed by IAEG-SDG, it will be shared with member states.
5f. Availability and release calendar
22. Although new data may not be available annually for each country, all new information are expected to be released annually through FAO SDG portal and UNSD.
5g. Time series
23. Indicator measures progress towards more sustainable and productive agriculture over a three year periodicity because for many sub-indicators, it is likely that changes will be relatively limited from one year to another. Furthermore, the 3-year periodicity will enable countries to have three data points on the indicator before 2030.
5h. Data providers
24. National Statistical Offices, Ministries of Agriculture or national offices designated by countries will be responsible for collecting and reporting data for this indicator.
5i. Data compilers
National Statistical Offices or designated offices within countries will be responsible for collecting and compiling data for this indicator. They will in turn report to FAO, which provides capacity development, conducts quality control and disseminates the information through the FAO SDG portal. FAO will in turn report the regional and global estimates to the international statistical community and UNSD.
5j. Gaps in data coverage
25. The indicator is new and complex and thus current data coverage of the indicator is low. Few countries have reported the entire dashboard, several reported a sub-set of the sub-indicators and the majority have yet to provide data. The data coverage will improve over time (in the short to medium term), thanks to the capacity development efforts that include both regional and national trainings and bilateral technical assistance to member states.
5k. Treatment of missing values
26. Partial non-response at individual level (farm holding) will be imputed using appropriate statistical techniques, such as nearest-neighbour algorithms. The decision on whether to impute or not and the choice of the method is a function of the nature of the variable to impute and the amount and type of data available for the imputation, such as the availability of auxiliary data coming from different sources (e.g. surveys, administrative information). It is important to clearly distinguish missing data from non-applicable events. As specified above and in the sub-indicator methodology sheets, some sub-indicators can be recorded as “Not applicable” for a given farm. In this case, the farm will be considered sustainable from the perspective of the given sub-indicators.
6. Scale
6a. Scale of use
Scale of application: Global, Regional, National
28. Scale of data disaggregation/aggregation:
(a) Global/ regional scale indicator can be disaggregated to national level: No
(b) National data is collated to form global indicator: Yes
6b. National/regional indicator production
6c. Sources of differences between global and national figures
29. Data on the official SDG indicator 2.4.1 is currently scarce, as countries still build their capacity to adapt their agricultural surveys to collect the necessary information. As a provisional, stop-gap solution, the UN Statistical Commission has approved the use of a proxy (https://unstats.un.org/UNSDWebsite/statcom/session_55/documents/2024-36-FinalReport-E.pdf) for monitoring progress towards productive and sustainable agriculture, based on widely available national-level statistics. The proxy consists of seven sub-indicators capturing the three dimensions of sustainability (environmental, economic and social) in the agricultural sphere and shall be used as a “practical interim solution” while FAO continues to work with countries “to strengthen capacity-building activities for the official indicator”. For information on the SDG Indicator 2.4.1 Proxy "Progress towards productive and sustainable agriculture", please seewww.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals-data-portal/data/indicators/indicator-241-proxy-progress-towards-productive-and-sustainable-agriculture/en.
6d. Regional and global estimates & data collection for global monitoring
6d.1 Description of the methodology
30. The indicator methodology proposes reporting of the indicator through a national-level dashboard, presenting the different sub-indicators together but independently.
31. Computation of results and construction of the dashboard are performed for each sub-indicator separately using the “traffic light” approach already defined for each sub-indicator. In practice, the reported value of the indicator is determined by the results of the most limiting sub-indicator in terms of sustainability performance.
6d.2 Additional methodological details
32. Several levels of analysis will be undertaken with the data received from member countries. Time series of unsustainability for the entire world (both % and area) will allow progress towards a sustainable agriculture worldwide to be measured and tracked. Charts by regions will show the % of unsustainability comparing the results of the same triennium, comparison will be done also analysing the results of three country groups: developed economies, economies in transition, and developing economies. A map will be used to display the % of unsustainability, considering a given year or triennium, to have an immediate visualization of the most critical countries. A similar map will show the distance to the target of sustainability.
6d.3 Description of the mechanism for collecting data from countries
33. National Statistical Offices, Ministries of Agriculture or designated offices within countries will be responsible for collecting and compiling data for this indicator. They will in turn report to FAO who will conduct quality control and disseminate the information through FAO SDG portal. FAO will in turn report to the international statistical community and UNSD.
34. A questionnaire is sent by email to all countries annually since 2020 (https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/faoweb/s...).
35. The email is sent to the National focal point relevant to the indicator, National focal point for generic SDG and Heads of NSO. With copy to FAO Representative, Country, Regional and Sub-regional offices, FAO Regional Statisticians in the Region and in the Sub-regional offices, staff officially nominated to be in “CC” of all indicator communications and ESS-Registry, with a deadline for returning the filled in questionnaire within 4 weeks.
36. Special cases for Bahrain, Brazil, Cuba, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Nicaragua, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Yemen, Myanmar, Afghanistan for which the dispatch will be addressed according to the “Data Collection Phase” guidelines (Statistical Standard Series, endorsed by the IDWG-TTF on Statistics, 15 November 2019, Revised 16 June 2023).
37. Once the questionnaires are received a validation process is done through the check of the person who replied with the questionnaire returned: indicator focal point / FAO local office / Regional Statistician might be contacted to clarify if the questionnaire returned is considered valid or not.
38. The received questionnaires are analysed in all their parts. Namely, checking individually, both manually and automatically through an R script, standard rules (unit, text out of the spaces, time series, outliers, inconsistencies, anomalies, missing data).
7. Other MEAs, processes and organisations
7a. Other MEA and processes
39. The indicator is the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator 2.4.1 and is linked with SDG Goal 2 and targets 2.3.1, 2.4.1, 2.3.2 and 5.a.1
7b. Biodiversity Indicator Partnership
No
8. Disaggregation
40. Proposed disaggregation
(a) Household and non-household sector farms
(b) Crops, livestock and mixed
(c) Irrigated and non-irrigated
41. Although not a mandatory variable for international reporting for SDG 2.4.1, the indicator can in principle be disaggregated by gender of the farm holder. This information is not, and will not be publicly available as a default in FAO and UNSD databases and reporting systems. Nevertheless, a question on gender disaggregation of data is incorporated into the SDG 2.4.1 questionnaire, accompanied by guidance for countries to collect and report information on the gender of the holder of the agriculture holding. Therefore, for national policy-making purposes, the country has the necessary tools, guidance and thus the capability to produce disaggregated estimates by gender should countries wish to collect and report sex-disaggregated data on 2.4.1 at the national level.
9. Related goals, targets and indicators
10. Data reporter
10a. Organisation
Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Statistics Division, Agri-environment team
10b. Contact person(s)
Francesco Nicola Tubiello : Francesco.Tubiello@fao.org
Arbab Asfandiyar Khan: Arbab.Khan@fao.org
SDG241-Indicator@fao.org
Feedback: UNEP-WCMC is keen to ensure that our data is accurate and up to date. We welcome any feedback on the quality, reliability, and accuracy of the information on this site. If you see any errors or missing information, please get in touch.