Skip to main content

Discussion Spaces

Discussion Questions & Comments

Kristin Eitel, IOM

Q.1 How has GCM implementation advanced sustainable development and socio-economic recovery from COVID-19 at the national and/or local levels?

(Please provide specific examples)

Jul 15, 2022
Paddy Siyanga …

Q.2 What are some promising practices to align GCM and SDG reporting?



Jul 15, 2022
Joanne Irvine

Q.3 What is needed at the local, national, and regional levels to strengthen the alignment of GCM implementation, follow-up and review with the achievement of the 2030 Agenda?



Jul 15, 2022
Katy Barwise

Q.4 What recommendations do you have for the development of indicators to measure GCM progress and its contribution to the 2030 Agenda? What key things should the indicators measure?

Please share your recommendations.

Jul 15, 2022
Timo Schmidt

To avoid reinventing the wheel, the development of indicators should build on existing efforts towards effectively monitoring and evaluating the implementation of GCM commitments over time, using available data and indicators as well as guidance. SDG Targets and Indicators already provide a good starting point for this purpose. Looking at the topic of human mobility in the context of disasters, climate change and environmental degradation, for example, one of the domains (domain 5) of SDG Indicator 10.7.2 focuses on the mobility dimensions of crises, including those linked to disasters and environmental factors, which links to GCM Objective 5. Similarly, in relation to GCM Objective 2, other SDG Targets and Indicators may be relevant, include those aiming to monitor national disaster risk reduction policy efforts (indicators 1.5.3; 11.b.1 and 13.1.2), national climate change adaptation efforts (indicator 13.2.1) and national marine and terrestrial ecosystem management efforts (indicators under Goals 14 and 15, in particular 15.9.1). 

However, building on existing efforts alone will not be sufficient, at least not to develop a more accurate understanding of GCM implementation. Existing frameworks offer valuable guidance and insights into possible methodologies for policy monitoring and indicator development, but they do not include tailored indicators that could be directly applied to monitor the implementation of GCM commitments. 

To make the existing indicators "fit for purpose", they may therefore need to be further refined. This point is also what led to the development of an ‘Analytical Framework for Monitoring and Reporting on the Implementation of GCM commitments related to Addressing Human Mobility Challenges in Disaster and Climate Change Contexts’ (available here alongside the mapping report, indicators and other documents:, which is part of the UN Migration Network Workplan 2021-22, specifically Thematic Priority 4 on Climate Change and Migration. The analytical framework draws on available frameworks and existing relevant indicators to offer a possible approach for monitoring and reporting on GCM commitments specific to human mobility in the context of disasters, climate change and environmental degradation. Building on the lessons, recommendations and the methodology from this project could make a valuable contribution to developing a 'limited set of indicators' under the GCM.

Finally, to honour the multisectoral nature of the GCM in line with its 360-degree and people-centred vision of international migration, it is important to incorporate the GCM's key guiding principles in the indicator framework. Following consultations and input by relevant experts and stakeholders, this was also done under the GCM baseline mapping project, which includes thematic snapshots on human rights-based approaches, gender responsiveness, child sensitivity, and the whole-of-government approach (with focus on local government inclusion). 

For more information, please see the documents referred to above here: 

For a shorter overview of the key insights (rather than the methodology) from the report, see: 

In reply to by Katy Barwise

Aug 06, 2022
Elaine Lebon-M…

We fully agree with the call to not reinvent the wheel and acknowledge that there are many existing sets of indicators that measure different aspects of migration governance such as KNOMAD’s toolkit for measuring policy and institutional coherence for migration and development, IOM’s Migration Governance Index (MGI), and the Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX). A common feature of these indicators sets, however, is that they focus primarily on policy on paper. The toolbox of indicators currently available narrows the evaluation of migration governance to the legal domain, with limited attention given to concretely assessing implementation. However, a policy measure might seem effective and adequate in recognizing rights to migrants de jure. However, if the required resources are lacking, then practical implementation may be ineffective and migrants de facto unable to exercise such rights. This example points to the necessity of a new and updated tools for analysis consistent with the complexity and multidimensionality of the current system of migration governance. ​

The Advancing Migration Governance (AdMiGov) Indicators contribute towards filling this gap by building on existing indicators and drawing on empirical insights from primary research to develop indicators that aim to better measure implementation within a broader assessment of good migration governance at the national level. Building on a conceptual framework that breaks down the constituent features of good migration governance, the AdMiGoV indicators assess how systematically policies and practices are implemented to identify different types of gaps, including: 1) normative gaps of compliance with global standards (GCM, GCR and SDGs); 2) implementation gaps between formal regulatory frameworks (“on paper”) and practical implementation (“in practice”); and 3) thematic gaps related to specific aspects and dimensions in need of improvement. This innovative set of indicators has the potential to become a strong evidence base that can be used for different purposes and by different actors to identify implementation gaps and to advocate for, and implement, policy change.

While perhaps beyond the scope of the "limited set of indicators", called for by the SG and UN Member States, and certainly still in need of refinement to test their applicability beyond Europe, the ADMIGOV indicators may prove to be a useful tool for Member States as they conduct further national voluntary reviews ahead of the next round of regional reviews in 2024. 

Further details can be found in the following publications:

In reply to by Katy Barwise

Sep 16, 2022
Migration Netw…

Q.5 How can we encourage subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, in accordance with their respective mandates, to contribute to the review of the implementation of the Global Compact?



Jul 15, 2022

About the Migration Network Hub

What is the Migration Network Hub?

The Hub is a virtual “meeting space” where governments, stakeholders and experts can access and share migration-related information and services. It provides curated content, analysis and information on a variety of topics.

The Hub aims to support UN Member States in the implementation, follow-up and review of the Global Compact for Migration by serving as a repository of existing evidence, practices and initiatives, and facilitating access to knowledge sharing via online discussions, an expert database and demand-driven, tailor-made solutions (launching in 2021).

What content is displayed in the Hub?

The Hub aims to help you find information on migration, ranging from policy briefs and journal articles, existing portals and platforms and what they offer, to infographics and videos. The different types of resources submitted by users undergo peer review by a panel of experts from within the UN and beyond, before being approved for inclusion in the Hub. To provide guidance to users based on findings of the needs assessment, the content is ordered so that more comprehensive and global resources are shown before more specific and regional ones. Know a great resource? Please submit using the links above and your suggestion will be reviewed. Please see the draft criteria for existing practices here.

Apply to join the Peer Review Roster

Content submitted to the Migration Network Hub is first peer reviewed by experts in the field from both the UN and beyond. Applications are welcomed to join the roster on an ongoing basis. Learn more here.

Apply Now

Contact us

We welcome your feedback and suggestions, please contact us

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this discussion are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Network on Migration and its members. The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the discussion do not imply expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations or the United Nations Network on Migration concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or boundaries.

*References to Kosovo shall be understood to be in the context of United Nations Security Council resolution 1244 (1999).