This does not mean, however, that the progress metrics community is not
continuing its work. Reports like that of the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission on
the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress in 2009 have
already shown a growing consensus that a small dashboard of lead indicators that
are easy to understand would be most helpful. These should mix monetary as well
as physical measures for objective progress. There is still more debate about if and
how to include subjective happiness data from surveys. Some regard it as too vague
and qualitative for statistics, others say that this is indeed the problem: You can
never understand a system and actor motivations if you do not ask people about
their experienced reality (Stiglitz et al. 2009).
One astonishing example supporting the latter argument is the OECD’s 2013
Health at a Glance report in which a question about whether respondents felt
healthy was answered positively by 89.5 % of Americans but only 30 % of
Japanese. According to objective data, however, Japan has the second highest life
expectancy figures in the world and very high scores in terms of the number of
hospital beds, MRI and CT scanners, the length of stay in hospital, and the number
of times people go to the doctor. In the United States life expectancy is four years
shorter and rising much more slowly than in other OECD countries. Its obesity rate
is twice that of others and 15 % of the population live without health coverage,
despite the world’s highest per capita expenditure on health care (OECD 2013a).
So without talking to people directly, much insight about experienced well-being
and need satisfaction may be missed. In addition, the processes of creating indicators with the people whose development they should measure already involve
many mindshifting effects for better understanding of trade-offs or even the possible
overcoming of trade-offs if goals and processes were changed. These effects create
ownership and better acceptance for future policy measures and would rank high in
the categories of social or human capital improvement for economists.
OECD and UNDP consultants Jon Hall and Louise Rickard have studied seven
beyond-GDP indicator processes around the world for the Bertelsmann Foundation.
They have pointed to the following happy side-effects of the bottom-up participation recommended by the UN: the strengthening of democratic processes with the
direct inclusion of the population in the overall goal and purpose-setting of future
policy directions, which also allows for a widening in perspectives on all sides as to
how different single aspects hang together and why they are important to whom;
policy coherence and acceptance are also increased through ongoing processes
toward finding common ground or a clear identification of antagonistic positions
and trade-offs that can then be dealt with explicitly rather than remaining as
unresolved undercurrents. Linking this back to resilience, the study also found that
such processes build capacity for constructive deliberation and enable participants
to become more proactive in other sociopolitical contexts as well (Hall and Rickard
2013: 11–12).
Thus, if carried out in a participatory manner, many such indicator processes
already lead to social benefits and reflexive processes around which values, norms
and the goals a community wants to base its development. It also improves
132
4 Mapping an Emerging New Economic Paradigm in Practice
continuing its work. Reports like that of the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission on
the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress in 2009 have
already shown a growing consensus that a small dashboard of lead indicators that
are easy to understand would be most helpful. These should mix monetary as well
as physical measures for objective progress. There is still more debate about if and
how to include subjective happiness data from surveys. Some regard it as too vague
and qualitative for statistics, others say that this is indeed the problem: You can
never understand a system and actor motivations if you do not ask people about
their experienced reality (Stiglitz et al. 2009).
One astonishing example supporting the latter argument is the OECD’s 2013
Health at a Glance report in which a question about whether respondents felt
healthy was answered positively by 89.5 % of Americans but only 30 % of
Japanese. According to objective data, however, Japan has the second highest life
expectancy figures in the world and very high scores in terms of the number of
hospital beds, MRI and CT scanners, the length of stay in hospital, and the number
of times people go to the doctor. In the United States life expectancy is four years
shorter and rising much more slowly than in other OECD countries. Its obesity rate
is twice that of others and 15 % of the population live without health coverage,
despite the world’s highest per capita expenditure on health care (OECD 2013a).
So without talking to people directly, much insight about experienced well-being
and need satisfaction may be missed. In addition, the processes of creating indicators with the people whose development they should measure already involve
many mindshifting effects for better understanding of trade-offs or even the possible
overcoming of trade-offs if goals and processes were changed. These effects create
ownership and better acceptance for future policy measures and would rank high in
the categories of social or human capital improvement for economists.
OECD and UNDP consultants Jon Hall and Louise Rickard have studied seven
beyond-GDP indicator processes around the world for the Bertelsmann Foundation.
They have pointed to the following happy side-effects of the bottom-up participation recommended by the UN: the strengthening of democratic processes with the
direct inclusion of the population in the overall goal and purpose-setting of future
policy directions, which also allows for a widening in perspectives on all sides as to
how different single aspects hang together and why they are important to whom;
policy coherence and acceptance are also increased through ongoing processes
toward finding common ground or a clear identification of antagonistic positions
and trade-offs that can then be dealt with explicitly rather than remaining as
unresolved undercurrents. Linking this back to resilience, the study also found that
such processes build capacity for constructive deliberation and enable participants
to become more proactive in other sociopolitical contexts as well (Hall and Rickard
2013: 11–12).
Thus, if carried out in a participatory manner, many such indicator processes
already lead to social benefits and reflexive processes around which values, norms
and the goals a community wants to base its development. It also improves
132
4 Mapping an Emerging New Economic Paradigm in Practice