To measure the human rights principle of non-discrimination it is necessary to capture disparities in the enjoyment of the right(s) under review. Again, socioeconomic indicators are well suited to do this, as they are often disaggregated by characteristics such as sex, age, educational attainment, ethnicity and race, location, income quintile, and other relevant social groups, although availability and comparability of disaggregated data on these and other grounds of relevance to human rights can be a significant problem. Nevertheless, disaggregated data is a powerful tool to highlight inequalities across population groups, as well as to identify possible determinants of the right under assessment. Furthermore, disaggregating indicators by multiple demographic characteristics may permit analysis of intersecting or compound forms of discrimination. CESR’s Factsheets on Egypt, Guatemala, Spain and the USA, for example, have represented multiple disaggregated data in the form of statistical tree diagrams to graphically visualize intersecting disparities and highlight the relative weight of factors such as gender, ethnicity and geographical location in shaping educational outcomes. Examining outcome indicators over time and calculating their rates of change can help uncover whether adequate progress has been made, if there has been any stagnation or backsliding in outcomes, and when the state can be expected to reach a particular benchmark. Of course, this sort of time series analysis is dependent on the regular collection of longitudinal and disaggregated data, which, in practice, is not always readily available. Again, country comparisons may be used to judge the reasonableness of a state’s rate of progress, while disaggregated data can highlight whether or not progress is equitable and disparities are being reduced. The analysis in this first step interprets descriptive statistics in light of relevant human rights standards to measure the extent of the realization of the right in the country. By highlighting patterns and trends in the experiences of individuals or groups, this analysis helps judge the reasonableness of outcomes achieved by the state. This provides a significant amount of initial information, however examining outcomes alone is not determinative of the state’s compliance with its obligation to fulfill. As we highlighted above, poor outcomes might constitute prima facie non-compliance. However, given their contingency on resources and the fact that the results of policies and programs are not always wholly within the state’s control, it is also necessary to analyze the state’s conduct. For example, although there might be disparities among population groups, governments may be making genuine efforts to close these gaps and eliminate historic discrimination. Thus, the next step in the OPERA framework assesses the commitments and efforts that have been made by the state to realize the right(s) under review. Step 2 – Policy Efforts: Assessing state commitment and efforts to fulfill ESC rights Summary of Step 2 Element Identify legal and policy commitments Human Rights Principles Obligation to take steps Types of Assessment Techniques Identify international commitments and national constitutional and legislative provisions that give effect to them. Verify the existence of specific laws and policies on the right and compare their provisions to international standards. Assessing compliance with the obligation to fulfill economic, social and cultural rights 17