130 likes | 339 Views
OECD Well-Being Indicators. Romina Boarini OECD Statistics Directorate Evidence-Based Cohesion Policy Conference July 7 th 2011, Gdansk, Poland. Background. Long-standing debate on GDP and beyond OECD Global Project on Measuring the Progress of Societies
E N D
OECD Well-Being Indicators RominaBoariniOECD Statistics Directorate Evidence-Based Cohesion Policy Conference July 7th 2011, Gdansk, Poland
Background • Long-standingdebate on GDP and beyond • OECD Global Project on Measuring the Progress ofSocieties • Manyinternational and nationalinitiativessteering the agenda on well-being • The OECD Better Life Initiative
Well-being indicators and policies Well-being indicators feed into policy by: • Better understanding of the range of factors driving well-being in particular domains and encouraging benchmarking • Evaluating policy trade-offs of policies and improving the consistency of policies • Putting issues which political leaders may have been less attentive to in the past into light, including people’s concerns and expectations and the gaps between reality and perception
The framework: which dimensions, which indicators • Focuses on overall well-being achievements/ outcomes • Well-being is a complex phenomenon, i.e. depends on many factors, their interaction and their relative importance. Thus the framework: • has to be comprehensive • has to go deep (i.e. assess how well-being achievements vary across individuals and how these achievements are correlated across dimensions)
Outcomes • The ultimate objective is enhancing people’s lives and well-being • Focusing on inputs or outputs risks, missing the point • Context statistics can be misleading (ex. GDP)
Criteria for selecting well-being domains and dimensions • Consolidated approach based on : • theory (SSF, OECD and other established research on well-being) • practice (national and international initiatives) • internal consultation (with National Statistical Offices of OECD Member Countries)
Choice of Indicators of Outcomes Based on criteria relating to: • Relevance with respect to the target concept • face-validity [REASONABLE] • easily understood, unambiguous interpretation [NORMATIVE] • amenable to policy changes [~= RESPONSIVE TO POLICY] • possibility of disaggregation • Quality of supporting data [ROBUST] • well-established sources • comparable/standardized definitions • maximum country-coverage • recurrent data collection RED: Barca and McCann, 2011
An evolutionary process [DEBATABLE] • Improvedindicatorsasresearchresultsbecomeavailable and consultationmovesforward • Will include feedback fromvariousinitiatives (e.g. YourBetterLifeIndex) • Will include more countries (e.g. BRICS) and sustainability
Does it make a difference? • International experiencesofM&E • The PISA shock • National experiencesofM&E • Australia: ReviewofGovernmentServicesProvision • UK: SpendingReview & Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets • Community experiencesofM&E • Santa Cruiz: the Santa Cruiz Community Assessment Project
Challenges • Information needs • Building capacity in the administration • Havingstakeholders on board