Summary

  • RCC's proposed Resolution 131 amendment would make Member State data the first source for the ITU ICT Development Index and name UN-system organizations as the fallback when that data is absent.
  • Its new rule requires data from the same time period; the adopted requirement to consult and secure agreement from below-threshold members before supplementing their data remains in the draft.

An index has an empty cell. Before anyone reaches for a convenient spreadsheet, the question is whose numbers are allowed to fill it. RCC addendum 8, posted by the ITU on 23 October, would write an answer into Resolution 131: build the ICT Development Index, or IDI, primarily from Member State data; where those data are absent, turn to UN-system organizations; use observations from the same time period. That last instruction matters when an index puts countries side by side. A fresh figure and a three-year-old one may occupy neighbouring boxes but answer different questions.

The adopted 2022 Resolution 131 already gives official national data priority. It permits other sources in their absence only after advance consultation with national focal points. Where a Member State falls short of the minimum data needed to appear in the IDI, ITU must consult it and seek agreement on how gaps will be supplemented, including by estimates. RCC keeps that latter clause, now numbered after its proposed new source rule. The draft therefore draws a more particular path to a substitute source, while the consent step remains a separate gate.

The timing is unusually sharp. ITU's own IDI page says the 2026 edition appeared on 30 June and the methodology adopted in 2023 runs for four years. An expert-group report from September 2026 is feeding the next consultation with Member States. The proposed source rule would be considered as that measuring system approaches a new method. A technical debate over indicators gets more attention; a rule about which institution supplies an absent figure can change the index just as quietly.

The practical test is the paper trail for each gap. Was there national data for the relevant period? If not, which UN-system series supplied the replacement, and did it match the period used for other countries? For a below-threshold member, what supplementation did the state agree to? Doha's plenipotentiary will decide whether the new sentence belongs in the mandate. The index's credibility lives in those source choices, one empty cell at a time.

Official sources