Skip to main content

login

An initiative of Swinburne Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University

Australian Policy Online
Research & Evidence Base

Swinburne Institute for Social Research

Search form

  • Topics
  • Sections
  • Collections
  • Browse
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contribute
  • Subscribe
  • Research
  • Commentary
  • Audio
  • Book Reviews
  • Guides
  • Video
  • Websites
  • Events
  • Jobs
  • Courses
  • Calls
  • Notices
  • Book Listings
  • Creative & Digital
  • Economics
  • Education
  • Environment
  • Health
  • Indigenous
  • International
  • Justice
  • Politics
  • Social Policy
  • Urban Policy & Design
  • Community
  • Cultural diversity
  • Families & households
  • Gender & sexuality
  • Immigration & refugees
  • Population
  • Poverty
  • Religion & faith
  • Social inclusion
  • Social problems
  • Welfare
  • Youth

You are here

Home » Social Policy

Can nations measure well-being?

Peter Shergold | Centre for Social Impact
09 December 2011 | The attempt to measure quality of life over time and between places is still in its infancy, writes Peter Shergold for the Centre for Social Impact.

It was in May 1968 that Robert Kennedy, with characteristically brilliant oratory, identified the abject failure of governments to measure the quality of life afforded their people.  The traditional statistic – per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) – “does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play;  it does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials …  It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”  Listen to the speech on YouTube:  it will raise the hairs on the back of your neck.

Two generations on, governments are struggling to address Kennedy’s challenge.  As not-for-profits increasingly seek to measure social returns on investment, and companies to give quantitative dimension to societal as well as financial value, give a thought to the world’s statisticians.  Frustrated with the shortfalls of GDP as an indicator of wellbeing, they are struggling to find alternative means to measure progress in the quality of people’s lives.

It’s not a moment too soon.  Democracy is under challenge.  Levels of trust in politicians are worryingly low.  Less remarked upon is the lack of public confidence in official statistics.  In France and the UK, for instance, only one-third of citizens believe official figures.

Not surprisingly there is a renewed sense of urgency amongst government statisticians.  In May this year the OECD, as part of its 50th anniversary celebrations, launched the Better Life Index.  It builds on a French initiative, the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, led by renowned American economist Joseph Stiglitz, which reported in 2010.    The Commission concluded that for many purposes there were better economic statistics than a measure of production, GDP:  levels of real household income, for example, or the extent of income inequality.  It is not that GDP is a wrong measure but that it is often inappropriate as a measure what people care about.  In many instances data on social or environmental wellbeing is more relevant. 

The Better Life Index seeks to respond to the Commission’s challenge.  It measures 11 dimensions, with 1-3 indicators in each:  housing, income, jobs, education, the environment, governance, health, life satisfaction, safety and work-life balance.  It’s proposed to add more criteria in the future.

The challenge, of course, is how to address the relative importance of such indices of well-being.  The OECD deftly sidesteps the problem by making the index interactive.  Each visitor can weight the variables on-line as they want and share their views with others via Twitter or Facebook.  This is statistics in the age of social media.

Read more >

 

Image: stevenharris / flickr

Coverage
Australia
Worldwide
Permanent URL
http://apo.org.au/node/27417
Views
21510

Topics

  • Creative & Digital
    • Culture & society
  • Economics
    • Economic policy
    • Income & wealth
    • Work/life balance
  • Environment
    • Sustainability
  • Urban Policy & Design
    • Housing
  • Health
    • Community health
    • Mental health
    • Wellbeing
  • International
    • International issues
  • Justice
    • National security
    • Rights
  • Politics
    • Public policy
  • Social Policy
    • Community
    • Cultural diversity
    • Families & households
    • Religion & faith
    • Social inclusion

Keywords

Happiness
Social capital

More like this

  • Wellbeing quantified
  • Human development report 2010
  • Sharing the wealth of the lucky country
  • Bigger cities, bigger slums
  • Global liveability report: August 2012

Advertisement

Most viewed this week

The law and technology behind Australia's internet filtering
Women in leadership: understanding the gender gap
Summary of Australian Indigenous health, 2012
Australia’s country towns 2050: what will a climate adapted settlement pattern look like?
The critical decade 2013: climate change science, risks and responses

Subscribe

Subscribe    Twitter @ozpolicyonline    Facebook AustralianPolicyOnline

Australian Policy Online © apo.org.au 2013             Email: admin@apo.org.au | Phone: 03 9214 5609

Policy Online is an initiative of the Swinburne Institute for Social Research in partnership with: RMIT University | ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation (CCI) | Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) | School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington | National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF)