A/HRC/42/38 D. Monitoring and evaluation 92. The Declaration on the Right to Development provides that development should be carried out in a manner in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized (art. 1 (1)) and, as already mentioned in paragraph 7 above, it also recognizes that the human person is the central subject of development. In other words, development gains that do not benefit the human person fall short of fulfilling the right to development. 93. The present guidelines identify different methods of evaluating the impact of development programmes on human beings, such as through community monitoring, human rights impact assessments, national institutions and crowdsourcing. Incorporating constituents in the process of monitoring and evaluation increases legitimacy and ensures that programmes are carried out in accordance with rights holders’ priorities. In one Latin American country, for example, the institutionalization of a civil society forum to work alongside its development bank had the effect of increasing transparency for as long as the forum was operational.7 Most notably, access to information about the bank’s projects was improved. 94. Furthermore, the guidelines recognize the need to expand the traditional ways of assessing policies, from relying primarily on quantitative outcomes, such as number of jobs created or the gross domestic product (GDP), to incorporating qualitative ones. An example of a good practice in this area came from a Western European country, where policymaking bodies are required to show they have assessed a policy’s impact on equality in the country before instituting the policy. The findings of the assessment must be published and are subject to public scrutiny according to that State’s national legislation. 95. The guidelines also acknowledge factors that hinder accurate assessments of development programmes and propose ways to overcome those shortcomings. 96. Accordingly, the recommendations set out below address ways of ensuring that development programmes are human rights-based and people-centred, both in their outcomes and their implementation. National level 97. States and international organizations should measure development by considering not only GDP but also by taking into account the impact of policies on well-being and the environment. Diverse and more precise measurements of inequality – not just income inequality – should be developed. 98. States should evaluate the quality of the outcome of development programmes. 99. States should identify methods to effectively collect data on the environmental impacts of development policies. 100. States should develop methodologies and parameters to measure development, including within the framework of the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, in a participatory manner with the involvement of civil society organizations, including academia, development practitioners, social workers and community leaders. Traditional and indigenous knowledge should be taken into consideration where appropriate. 101. States should make adequate efforts to measure the processes that have a bearing on the human rights of development policies. 102. In assessing progress towards achieving Goal 1 of the Sustainable Development Goals and its targets, States should examine the multidimensional 8 elements of poverty. 7 8 12 The forum had begun as a civil society initiative. It was later integrated as a bank institution, but institutional support for the forum eventually waned. “Multidimensional poverty encompasses the various deprivations experienced by poor people in their daily lives – such as poor health, lack of education, inadequate living standards, disempowerment,