A/HRC/4/WG.2/TF/2 page 16 (d) Preliminary concluding remarks on the three partnerships assessed 67. In conclusion, based on deliberations during its third meeting, the task force is of the view that there is considerable room for improvement in terms of rendering these partnerships compliant with the right-to-development criteria. At the same time, there are a number of areas where a human rights perspective, and in particular one based on the right to development, could contribute to improving these partnerships. Mutual accountability and ownership, among the key principles of all three partnerships, are considered two such areas. Furthermore, the criteria highlight important gaps in the areas of non-discrimination and focus on the poorest and most marginalized, adequate stakeholder participation, and human rights impact assessments, social safety nets, and the extent of support from international donors in this area. 68. The task force would welcome continued dialogue with these three partnerships, in order to explore further their perceived strengths and weaknesses from the perspective of the right-to-development criteria, and also to enhance the lessons the task force thus far has learned from these processes, for the purposes of further refining the criteria themselves. 2. Refinement of the criteria and other methodological considerations 69. The task force considered several preliminary methodological issues which needed to be addressed with a view to enhancing the rigor with which the criteria are applied. During the discussions in plenary session regarding the application of the criteria to the selected partnerships, three concerns emerged. One concerned the overlap among the criteria, due in part to the interrelated and indivisible nature of human rights as emphasized in articles 6 (2) and 9 (1) of the Declaration on the Right to Development. The second was that operationalizing the criteria required the application of some form of qualitative and quantitative measures, such as the aforementioned subcriteria and performance benchmarks to facilitate determination of the extent to which the criteria had been met by partnership stakeholders. And thirdly, some criteria may need redefining so as to avoid ambiguity and overlaps. 70. Notwithstanding these concerns, it was felt that any amendments of the criteria should be done in a comprehensive manner, upon completion of the piloting exercise, because of their indivisibility, as explained above. Consistent with the normative structure of the Declaration on the Right to Development, their application by partnership stakeholders might be greatly facilitated if they were reordered or regrouped in a more logical fashion and accompanied by an implementation checklist that would facilitate a more in-depth analysis of global partnerships in their specific context. 71. It was determined that some criteria had to do with establishing an enabling environment for development, others with processes, and finally some with the desired development outcomes themselves. The task force also deemed it desirable to further refine and progressively develop the criteria by identifying, as mentioned above, sub-criteria and performance benchmarks. The task force sees merit in moving towards a tripartite conceptual framework for rights-based indicators, which is increasingly used in the human rights world, namely with a focus on the structural features conducive to the enabling environment or structure, along with criteria of