A/HRC/4/WG.2/TF/2 page 17 process and outcome. This approach underscores the fact that the right to development can be measured both qualitatively and quantitatively in many ways like other human rights, with a view to ensuring its effective implementation. Therefore, the task force rearranged the criteria in order to make them more consistent with this way of thinking, with a view to evolving a measurable framework for periodic assessment of global development partnerships. The criteria appear, reordered, in annex II. 72. In addition to the reordered criteria, the task force included in annex III a provisional and illustrative implementation checklist, which does not depart from the agreed-upon criteria, but rather makes them more useful in eliciting specific information for the review of global partnerships. A solid implementation checklist is necessary in order to evaluate development environments, processes and outcomes. Many pertinent implementation criteria are already in use and readily adaptable for present purposes. 73. In this context, the task force has identified several salient features of the three development partnerships examined which it believes could usefully be reflected in the review of others. Among these are mechanisms of domestic accountability, self-assessment, and regional peer review and monitoring, which should be reflected in the implementation checklist. Further examination of other partnerships would provide the opportunity to identify features that could constitute best practices, appropriately reflecting a right-to-development framework. 74. In applying the criteria on a pilot basis to the three partnerships, the task force concluded that it would be necessary to elaborate a coherent methodology to apply the criteria in a manner that would identify additional examples of good practices and practical steps to enhance the right-to-development compliance of global partnerships. In this way it could build a conceptually and methodologically rigorous operational framework, in line with the concern for practical and action-oriented outcomes expressed by the Working Group in recent years. 75. The task force also considered that building upon comparative experiences in the actual implementation of other monitoring frameworks would help ensure two objectives: first, the application of the criteria could avoid unnecessary duplication of monitoring efforts, and second, the distinctive attributes of the right to development in a practical sense would be revealed. These considerations guided the selection of the processes considered by the task force at its present meeting. 76. Thus, the refinement and application of the criteria provided an initial and qualitative assessment of the three partnerships revealing the potential strengths and gaps in these partnerships from the right-to-development perspective. This corresponds to the recommendation by the Working Group and Human Rights Council that the task force operationalize and progressively develop these criteria. The gain in assessing global development partnerships are also of value to actors in the relevant partnerships themselves, who might integrate them into their own evaluation processes. 77. The task force’s initial assessments of these three processes show promise for aligning global development partnerships with the requirements of the right to development. The exercise further indicates that the criteria would benefit from further elaboration, both in terms of