A NEW INDICATOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE: A CITIZEN CENTERED AND OPEN DATA ORIENTED APPROACH

Emmanouil FragkoulisPanagiotis Kokkinakos

Ourania MarkakiSotirios Koussouris

John Psarras

Central and Eastern European e|Dem and e|Gov Days 2016 - Budapest, May 2016

• Concept of prosperity indicators in general and the characteristics these ought to have in order to be considered as fair and effective.

• Distinction between subjective and objective indicators, highlighting the importance of subjectivity towards effectively measuring prosperity and well-being in general.

• Blending the best aspects and structural elements of existing indicators and further utilising open data, come up with a new indicator.

Scope and Objective of this paper

Issues with GDP - Prosperity (1/2)

• GDP utilized to indicate prosperity at a national level.• Criticism – prosperity cannot be expressed with financial

terms only

• ‘’Gross National Product – if we judge the United States of America by that – that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage.  It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them.  It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl.  It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities.....Yet the gross national product 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 neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.’’ (JFK’s speech at the University of Kansas 18/3/1968)

Issues with GDP - Prosperity (2/2)

• Conferences take place-Committees are created-New indicators are suggested in order to include every single aspect of it

• Attempt GDP replacement - No one has succeed it so far

• All problems start from the definition - Absence universally accepted definition of prosperity

Definitions of wellbeingMultiple definitions of wellbeing:

‘“Wellbeing is no less than what a group or groups of people collectively agree makes ‘a good life’’’. (Whiting and Ereaut 2008)

“Wellbeing is more than just happiness. As well as feeling satisfied and happy, well-being means developing as a person, being fulfilled, and making a contribution to the community’’. (Shah and Marks)

• “This is a dynamic state, in which the individual is able to develop their potential, work productively and creatively, build strong and positive relationships with others, and contribute to their community’’. (Foresight Mental Capital and Wellbeing 2008)

Vast majority of them describe rather than define the concept of Wellbeing.

A new definition of Wellbeing

Resources Challenges

Social

Physical

Psychological

Wellbeing Social

Physical

Psychological

Rachel Dodge 2012

Indicators

• Compound index–Combine individual indicators

• Prosperity = individual affair->subjective concept->Subjective Indicators

• Financial status information->Objective Indicators

• Emphasis on subjective indicators

Importance of Subjective Wellbeing

Good feelings e.g. happiness, joy,

contentment, satisfaction

Improved personal and

material conditions e.g. Good health, income, resilience, personal support networks

Stronger society and economy e.g. Social cohesion, high productivity, reduced spending

on poor health

Selection of pillars

• World Bank• World Economic

Forum• OECD

• United Nations• European Commission

• New Economics Foundation

• Sustainable Society

Foundation• Freedom House

• IMD

19 entities

18 indicators

• Corruption• Governance• Civil rights • Education• Health• Social

security etc.

Steps calculating the new index

Definition of wellbeing

Analysis of current

situation

Pillars selection

Calculation

Verification

Index of Social Welfare10 Pillars - 17 sub-indices

• 2/3 subjective indices – Quality of services provided

• 1/3 objective indices – Percentage of GDP a country devotes to social welfare benefits

• Equal weighting for pillars and sub-indices levels (all have the same importance)

• Measurement scale=0-100 for both the overall index and its pillars. Better comparisons and highlight differences over time/states. It is the original measurement scale of most sub-indices.

Index of Social Welfare structure

Index of Social Welfare

Health SystemHealth expenditure %GDP

Health care quality % satisfied

EducationEducation expenditure % GDPEducation quality % satisfied

Environmental Care Municipal waste treatment (recycling + composting)Satisfied with government efforts to preserve environment

Security Personal security and private property rights are adequately protected

Benefits for vulnerable groups

Social expenditure % GDPSatisfaction with government efforts to deal with the poor

Freedom and Social Rights Freedom in the world Index

Labor and Entrepreneurship

Business FreedomLabor Freedom

Governance and Corruption Prevention

Corruption Perceptions IndexGovernment effectiveness

Culture General government expenditure on recreation, culture and religion % GDP

Infrastructures Quality of overall infrastructureInvestment in inland transport infrastructure % GDP

Data sources

• Trusted sourcesWorld BankGallup World PollUnited NationsOECDWorld Competitiveness YearbookFreedom HouseTransparency InternationalEurostatWorld Economic Forum

Calculation for 4 countries

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

37.7

53.857.8

43.5

Index of Social Welfare

Greece France Germany Italy

Results of 4 well-known indicators compared to Index of Social Welfare

 

Human Development Index

Happy Planet Index Social Progress Index Prosperity Index

Germany 0,911 47,2 84,04 2,658

France 0,884 46,5 80,82 2,065

Italy 0,872 46,4 77,38 1,065

Greece 0,853 40,5 74,03 0,076

Diachronic analysis for Greece

2012 2013 2014 201535.0

36.0

37.0

38.0

39.0

40.0

41.0

42.0

43.0

44.0

45.0

Index of Social Welfare

Conclusions

• New indicator of Social Welfare (quantitative and qualitative aspects)

• Calculated for 4 countries (2015) and for Greece for 4 consecutive years(2012-2013-2014-2015)

• Exploitation of open public data

• Index can be calculated for many countries(If there are available and credible raw data)

• Dynamic (Weighting can be altered depending on the users’ needs)

Thank you for your attention

Questions?