We are in the midst of a statistical revolution

This blog, by Donato Speroni , looks at how two important conferences  sum up ten years of work in this area.  

“We have to find a new narrative that goes beyond the Beyond GDP research” 

This sentence by Enrico Giovannini, in his key note speech at the “Moving beyond GDP in European economic governance” expert conference in Brussels on 10 October, summarises the state of the art. We have the well-being indicators, developed at national and international level in the last ten years; we are in the midst of a “statistical revolution” that will give us new instruments to measure progress and compare it between nations; but all this formidable data sets will be of limited use if it is not transferred into new political goals. Yes, but which goals?

In theory, we know what we want: that the economy continues to grow, but that growth should be inclusive (leaving no one behind) and sustainable (without compromising the ability of future generations to have a better future). But is this really possible?

Two visions clashed in the Brussels conference, captured in the strategic moment of the passing of the baton between the old and the new European Commission. The first view, more optimistic, believes in the effective possibility of promoting a sustainable and inclusive growth to ensure the well-being of citizens.

The second, more drastic view, thinks that in Europe the time for growth is over and supports a more rapid and dramatic change in lifestyle and investments. Through this discussion, the search for new statistical parameters has stimulated political debate on the vital issue of the European contribution to a better world.

Provided by the BRAINPOol project

It is clear that "to pursue a sustainable and inclusive growth" or "to change the development model" involve alternative policy priorities, different numerical targets and indicators. For example, if the goal of sustainable growth can be achieved with a gradual change (along with many other interventions) from fossil fuels to renewables, the alternative strategy requires a faster innovation in the pattern of development and results in accelerated efforts to change both the energy mix and the level of energy consumption. Very briefly, on the one hand we have a gradual reformism, on the other hand a revolution; it is clear that these processes cannot be measured with the same parameters, because it is not just a problem of quantity indicators, but also of different goals.

"Growth is structurally disappearing from the European Union?"

Even if we do not endorse Serge Latouche’s “Happy degrowth” theory, we need to know which results are realistically achievable in the situation we will have to face in the next few years. Tony Long of WWF presented at the Brussels conference an elaboration on the average growth in France over the past decades, which shows increasingly poor results. In his view, the new European Commission should initiate long-term macro-economic analysis, to answer the question: "Growth is structurally disappearing from the European Union?" The relationship between employment and technology is another important question to which we are unable to respond. Co-President of the Club of Rome Anders Wijkman pointed out that up to ten years ago productivity and employment grew in parallel, but now the productivity improvements have no longer a positive impact on jobs.

For many people, however, "growth is like a religion," said the Belgian Philippe Lamberts (Member of European Parliament, Green). "Many people are not willing to accept the facts (for instance about climate change) because they live in their own world". On the other hand, as pointed out the same Wijkman, even those who are convinced of the need for change are not in a position to express a narrative of transition: there is no comprehensive proposal on how to move from the existing mechanisms into a system actually more sustainable and inclusive: we have a collection of good intentions but few effective decisions and measurable effects.

The uncertain outcome of this process derives also from the fact that the European economic crisis puts us in uncharted territory, as it become evident in another conference -  the Strategic Forum 2014 on Intragenerational and Intergenerational Sustainability, organised by the International Economic Association (IEA) and the International Statistical Institute (ISI), together with the  “High-Level Expert Group on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress” (that is, the working group hosted by the OECD and commonly called "Stiglitz 2"), supported by the Bank of Italy, the Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance (EIEF)  and SAS, that was held in Rome on September 23 and 24. 

Many of the documents, downloadable from the Forum programme, can help us to understand what is happening in Europe. In a series of very interesting slides, Martine Durand from OECD showed the long-term costs of the recession: even in countries that, on the basis of 2013 data, seemed to have passed the crisis, the conditions of households and the level of investment have not returned to pre-crisis levels. Not to mention the social effects of the lack of confidence in governments and the decrease in the level of satisfaction with life, especially noticeable in the country’s most in need such as Greece and Italy.

From the meeting emerged a stronger concern for sustainability. The social one first, which reflects a situation perhaps even more dangerous than environmental sustainability, for there are many signs that we are heading towards an explosive world (the "perfect storm"). Not only because of the conflicts that already afflict countries in Europe or those geographically close to us, but for the internal contradictions in our economic system: the lack of an adequate safeguard for human capital; the growth of unemployment induced by new technologies that cannot be underestimated and that shrinks the middle class; the frightening increase in inequality in our systems: all issues that go beyond the everlasting controversy about the limits of the public budgets.

It is not even enough to advocate greater investments in schools, because we must first understand what types of schools can prepare young people to find a satisfactory role in this new world, as pointed out by the governor of the Bank of Italy, Ignazio Visco with a short but effective intervention.

In conclusion, I think that the work done by statisticians and economists in these ten years gave us the tools to build a better world, with more inclusive and sustainable well-being for all. But now we need a vision: we have to decide which world we want, to realistically consider the limits of growth, and how we can build it.

Donato Speroni

@dospe

Citizen engagement in well-being statistics, an example of good practice

This post by David Skutenko provides an example of good practice in citizen engagement in well-being and progress statistics in Australia and explain the role technology can play. This post is the Australian Bureau of Statistics contributions to the current  Wikiprogress' online discussion on "Engaging citizens in well-being and progress statistics.

Do you have any examples of good practice in citizen engagement in well-being and progress statistics?

A decade on from its first publication of Measures of Australia’s Progress (MAP) and in response to the burgeoning domestic and international interest in measuring progress and wellbeing, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) considered it was timely to review whether MAP was still measuring those aspects of life that matter most to Australians. In 2011-2012, we undertook a broad-ranging consultation that asked Australians ‘What is important to you for national progress?’ The feedback the ABS received was in the form of aspirational statements. 

The ABS’s method for bringing the consultation feedback together has been iterative. That is, following each phase of the consultation process, the ABS has undertaken a careful and methodical thematic analysis of the feedback received; drawing out and grouping common themes, articulating the important elements of those ideas and refining the aspirations and views expressed by participants. The outcome has been a set of aspirations for national progress that has evolved throughout the consultation process that the ABS hopes resonate with Australians.

In consultation with our Expert Reference Group, we decided upon a multi-faceted consultation model with people drawn from the areas of society shown below. The government, community, business and academic sectors were all represented, as were particular groups through representatives of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. A balance of representation across the various sectors was sought as was a gender and age balance. The following diagram shows the MAP consultation groups and channels.

We consulted directly with around 1000 people and indirectly with many more through social media, utilizing participant networks. We also gathered information through one point of contact who then gathered input from a range of constituents. We used a multi-stream consultation, targeting a variety of audiences. This provided us with a wide representation of views within a limited budget.

The consultation was launched through a national statistical conference by the Australian Statistician where Australians were invited to participate through submissions, workshops and a variety of social media tools. This launch was accompanied by a feature article and media releases.

The whole of the consultation process, including the results, has been reported back to Australians in Measures of Australia’s Progress – Aspirations for our nation: a conversation with Australians about progress 2013 ABS cat.no 1370.0.00.002.

Another key contributor to the success of the MAP consultation was having a clear consultation model. This tool allowed us to visually represent key concepts to participants , such as Progress as an unambiguous movement of society in a positive direction toward an identified aspiration or goal. We also used it to clarify the stages of the consultation that the ABS and participants would contribute to (i.e. Participants provided the aspirations for progress whilst ABS will provide the measures). We used this model to convey and explain the purpose of the consultation - to establish what was important for progress - and that looking at available measures was a subsequent activity. In this way we ensured that the feedback would provide all of the important areas of progress, without reference to whether or not they are currently measurable.

Lessons learned from the MAP consultation were that it's important to engage and include the media in any campaign, both traditional and social. As ABS was launching into the 'new' social media space we learned to be guided by our staff who had skills in this area and listened to their advice about using more informal language and tone and allowing for humour. With such a quick response tool as social media we needed to be prepared and had 3 months worth of conversations starters, prominent Australian contributions, articles of interest etc. With this, we also found that we needed to be flexible enough to respond to conversation threads, rather than ploughing on with our pre-arranged blog schedule. The MAP 2.0 blog needed a dedicated staff member to ensure that the ABS and participants received the benefits that we wanted.

Championship of the consultation within the media, from our prominent Australians and by our ABS leaders also ensured that interest in the project was high and obstacles were removed early. Rather than talking to our traditional data users, we chose to engage in a much broader based consultation. This approach delivered us the broad ranging views that we needed in order to refresh MAP and gather new ideas about progress.


What role can technology play in improving citizen engagement with well-being and progress statistics?

We used multiple modes to contact our audiences, for example social media (which captured a younger cohort), online, paper, face to face, interactive, media. Many of these processes were able to be undertaken simultaneously which helped make the process efficient, in terms of time and cost.

The MAP consultation aimed to promote a conversation about progress. Even though blogs are one of the oldest social media tools, they have many advantages as an engagement tool, and the MAP 2.0 blog proved a successful way of inspiring interest in the topic of national progress, and enabling us to quickly gain insights into people's views on progress. The blog allowed a range of responses from short replies to more lengthy and complex replies. One aspect of promoting interest in the blog and the consultation was to post contributions from prominent Australians, from entrepreneurs through to sports people. Media outlets picked up on these contributions and a series of interviews and radio talk back sessions followed, further promoting and broadening 'the conversation' about progress. ABS Facebook and twitter were used to channel people to the MAP 2.0 blog. We felt our social media campaign was successful with many 1000's of website hits and page visits and hundreds of quality comments that we could use.

We developed a list of MAP Community contacts during the consultation and used these to tap into further online networks. We linked to relevant progress and wellbeing sites, particularly by developing innovative infographics that captured interest and imagination, for example our Progress MAP below. 

Click map to enlarge. 

We developed and produced an promotional video, using contributions from our prominent Australians, to capture the aspirational spirit of the consultation. This was shown at forums and online.

David Skutenko

Director, Social and Progress Reporting, ABS

Wikiprogress and partners invite you to participate in an online discussion from 22 – 30 April 

Engaging citizens in well-being and progress statistics

• How can citizen engagement improve the development and use of well-being and progress statistics?

• Do you have any examples of good practice in citizen engagement in well-being and progress statistics?

• What role can technology - such as mobile apps or interactive web platforms - play in improving citizen engagement with well-being and progress statistics?

To leave a comment, click here and scroll to the section entitled “Contribute!”

Here is the short link to the page: http://bit.ly/1itMg6L 
Follow the Twitter hashtag #CitizenEngagement and #StatsForAll

You may contact us or send comments via:

Email (info@wikiprogress.org)

The ProgBlog

Wikiprogress on Facebook

Wikiprogress on Twitter

We are already in a Beyond-GDP world, but we need a compass

This blog, written by Donato Speroni, provides some highlights from the final conference of the BRAINPOoL project which prove useful for moving beyond GDP. The post is based on an article published on numerus.corriere.it and is part of the Wikiprogress Series on Data and Statistics.

Being a journalist and blogger about statistics and politics, I have been following the “Beyond GDP” (B-GDP) research since the 1st OECD Forum on “Statistics, Knowledge and policy” in Palermo in 2004. We all know that the need to find new ways for measuring progress was outlined almost 50 years ago by Robert Kennedy and that the research became a global effort from 2009, after the publication of the Stiglitz Report. The economic crisis dramatized the need for new parameters, because it changed the values contributing to an acceptable well-being, while sustainability is also becoming a growing concern.

Everywhere new statistics were provided, dashboards and composite indicators were tested, but the real problem was the limited use of these experiences by decision makers, especially at national level. The whole “measuring progress initiative” was risking to run aground, to remain a stimulating intellectual exercise with no impact on the real word.

In this framework, the final conference of the BRAINPOoL project on March 24 in Paris set a turning point. BRAINPOoL means “bringing alternative indicators into policy”, and the European Commission finances the project. The Paris meeting included two panel discussions, the first hosted personalities who had governmental or political responsibilities (Enrico Giovannini, Helen Goodman, Chantal Jouanno and Mikael Jungner), the second hosted economists and civil service directors from different countries (Jan Verschooten, Gus O’Donnell, Andrew Dean, Volker Schmitt, Wanda Gaj, Stefan Kooths), under the Chair of Martin Durand, OECD chief statistician. 

Here are some outputs that I found particularly interesting and stimulating:

• Testimonials who held effective political and administrative power confirm that the adoption of B-GDP indicators might really change the priorities of political action. For example, labour market policy might be different if explicitly driven by the aim of maximising well-being. Today’s politicians mainly look at employment and unemployment rates. The use of alternative indicators would show greater importance for a work-life balance, quality working conditions and job security.

• Inequalities impair the adoption of alternative indicators. The have-nots, who should benefit more from the B-GDP policies, cannot afford a trade-off between actual economic benefits, however limited, and future improvements of the social or environmental context. Talking about alternative indicators does not win votes.

• In order to go beyond these difficulties, we need a “new narrative”. The alternative indicators should be presented in an effective and understandable way, putting the accent on the risks that we are taking if we stick to the traditional political targets. Data like GDP or unemployment are important, but place the attention on the short-term goals of political action. B-GDP indicators envision problems and collective interventions that might have an influence on the quality of life after five years or more, well beyond the electoral cycle. This contrast is evident if we take into consideration the environmental changes or the deterioration of the human and social capital of a community. A new narrative must be capable of arousing interest and engagement in the media, in public opinion and hence in political leaders, presenting the future effects of these current unsolved problems. Without this narrative, the short-term problems to be dealt with before the next elections will always prevail.

• We need social and environmental data just as timely as the economic data. Almost all the social data comes out yearly, while the economic figures come out quarterly or monthly. Instead, “we want to know in real time how many people are alone at Xmas” as was said in Paris. Polls are not enough; we need reliable information, based on adequate investments in social statistics. In the UK, Margaret Thatcher decided to cut the social surveys because she did not want too many figures about poverty while she was implementing free market policies. Now (I think) we still need policies based on the free market (for instance, cuts in public spending), but we also want to know as soon as possible the social consequences in order to manage timely interventions.

• In any case, the ideological quarrel about GDP should be scrapped. Tax revenues, public deficits and European policies aimed at reducing the sovereign debts all depend on the trends of the domestic product. GDP determines the dimension of public expenses and of social contributions. Therefore, it is a bad mistake (and a lost battle) to present GDP indicators and policies as a banner for “anti-market economics”.

• The core of B-GDP is finding a way to enhance people’s satisfaction with their lives. It cannot be done without stronger policy interventions. This means having public powers which care about citizens’ relations, long life training and maybe people’s capacity to “extract happiness” from their condition. Do we really want this “invasive” public action? This is the real political issue, which requires common sense and “middle of the road” answers. We probably cannot accept ideologies in favour of knocking down State intervention with the wrong idea that the free market will “someday” overcome excessive inequalities in incomes, health or instruction. Most of us want public powers that protect the right to pursue happiness, but not many of us want a government telling its citizens “how to be happy” and “how to behave for their own good”. It’s a delicate political balance.

• We need B-GDP models, as we have models based on GDP, but we do not know how to put the social data into these models. It would be even more difficult to include the environmental data about phenomena which cannot be priced, like biodiversity. Econometric models are not perfect and their predictions are often wrong, especially in these times of crisis, but they are employed to evaluate different alternatives in fiscal and monetary policy. National and international institutions have their own models, constantly updated. Now we would need to enlarge these systems of equations in order to obtain a “well-being forecast”, which should tell us, if new public decisions might increase or decrease collective quality of life, distances between social classes, preservation of natural or cultural resources, or even warn us of the risks of social unrest or environmental catastrophe. It’s a big challenge.

The general impression after the Paris debate was that we are already “beyond GDP”, because political decisions do not depend only on growth and other economic factors. We currently have many statistical indicators which might help in this process, much more than ten years ago, However, decision makers use them randomly, following their own convenience without any effective consensus on the choice of the data considered important in the political debate. We are in a B-GDP Europe, but we still don’t have a compass to help us find our way. This is an important topic for the next European elections and for the incoming Commission in Brussels. The BRAINPOoL process offered a lot of food for thought and needs to be continued.

In a short time, another important B-GDP project will come to a conclusion: the E–Frame project by the National statistics institutes will produce a “Handbook for the use of alternative indicators”. Italy has an important role in this process, with the leadership of E-Frame by Istat (together with Statistics Netherlands) and the new national Bes indicators for equitable and sustainable well-being. I hope that the government in Rome will give adequate attention to the B-GDP issues during the Italian semester of the European presidency starting on July 1st of this year.

- Donato Speroni
@dospe

See Also:

• Review report on Beyond GDP indicators: categorisation, intentions and impacts 
• Barriers to the use of alternative (‘beyond GDP’) indicators in policy making and how they are being overcome and can be overcome
• The National Well-being Project
• New Economics Foundation

 

Invitation to join the Online Discussion on "Civil Society and Actions to Promote Well-being"

This post is an invitation to join the Wikiprogress Latin America online discussion on "Civil Society and Actions to Promote Well-being". You're invited to share your knowledge and experiences regarding well-being programmes in Latin America.

Civil Society and Actions to promote well-being

The OECD Mexico Centre, el Seminario Satisfacción Subjetiva con la Vida y la Sociedad (SAVISO)-UNAM-IIS, International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding, Alternativas y Capacidades A.C., Wikiprogress and Wikiprogress América Latina 

 invite you to join this online discussion

from 1 April 09:00 until 16 April 22:00 (GMT)

This discussion will be a unique opportunity to reflect and exchange best practices, research and experiences on the topic. 


Leading Questions:

• In Latin America, what community programmes and civil society activities are held in order to promote well-being?

• How is the impact of well-being programmes being evaluated?

• What factors and attributes contribute to the success of the programs identified?

• What are the main lessons learned from these programmes? What recommendations could be made ​​from these experiences?

• What are some obstacles faced in Latin America for the implementation and effectiveness of programmes that seek to promote well-being?

We invite you to leave your comments in Spanish, Portuguese, English or French in the section entitled “Contribuye” of the discussion webpage. To participate, click here. 

Here is the link to the page: http://bit.ly/1gl42wf and the hashtag in Twitter is #SociedadCivilYAcciones 

We will also be joining with the parallel event of the “International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding” held during the First High Level Meeting on Global Partnership for Effective Cooperation. Join the event and contribute!

1. How can civil society use the New Deal to hold governments accountable to citizens?
2. How can the New Deal Peace and state building goals (PSGs) be made applicable to middle income countries in Latin America?

If you would like to join the discussion use the hashtag #newdeal on Twitter.

For more information we invite you to contact us at:

Email: latam@wikiprogress.org

Blog: http://wikiprogressal.blogspot.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/WikiprogressAmericaLatina

Twitter: https://twitter.com/WikiLATAM

One day a year for happiness?

This blog, by Wikichild co-ordinator Melinda George, celebrates the second anniversary of the UN's International Day of Happiness. It provides background for the day as well as several initiatives to measure happiness and well-being in the UK and the EU. The post is a part of the Wikiprogress series on Happiness.

“When we contribute to the common good, we ourselves are enriched. Compassion promotes happiness and will help build the future we want.” – Ban Ki-moon, 1st annual International Day of Happiness 

The 20th March 2014, is the 2nd annual UN International Day of Happiness. This day was launched as a result of the UN resolution 65/309 which invites its member states “to pursue the elaboration of additional measures that better capture the importance of the pursuit of happiness and well-being in development with a view to guiding their public policies.” 

The focus on happiness is a result of a movement towards a more holistic approach to development and progress. This happiness and well-being approach looks further into various areas of life such as good governance, protection and preservation of the environment, the promotion of global cultures, and fair and equitable economic development. 

See this quote from the World Happiness Report: 

But it is not just wealth that makes people happy: Political freedom, strong social networks and an absence of corruption are together more important than income in explaining well-being differences between the top and bottom countries. At the individual level, good mental and physical health, someone to count on, job security and stable families are crucial.

In line with International Day of Happiness, the United Kingdom Office of National Statistics released a report on Tuesday entitled “Measuring National Well-being, Life in the UK, 2014”. This report provides a snapshot of well-being in the UK regarding 10 domains, along with European comparisons. These domains include both objective and subjective data. Overall, a large majority (77%) are satisfied with their life in the UK. Alongside the report, an interactive wheel and adjustable graphs by region are available to revel in the data a little longer.

The European Union’s Eurostat released a similar online report on Wednesday in light of this UN day. The report “Quality of life indicators” provides data about well-being using its “8+1” quality of indicators framework. Eight of these dimensions concern the functional capabilities citizens should have available to effectively pursue their self-defined well-being, according to their own values and priorities. The last dimension refers to the personal achievement of life satisfaction and well-being. The report discusses trends over time and differences between countries, demographic groups and age. 

Overall EU life Satisfaction, 2011

There are many ways in which you can become involved in this UN Day of Happiness. For instance, share a photo to your social media channel using the hashtag #happinessday, and it will be added to the happiness wall here. After all, we have so much to be happy about! 

- Melinda George

Wikichild co-ordinator

See also:

Gross National Happiness

World Happiness Report 2013

World Database of Happiness

World Happiness Index