The Future of
Social Statistics
Martine Durand
OECD Chief Statistician
Seminar on Shifting Paradigms
New York, 18 February, 2011
Overview
– Where have we come from?
– How has the OECD responded?
– The current environment : where are we
now?
– Which set of indicators?
– Challenges ahead
2
Where have we come from?
“The focus of social indicators is to measure levels of living,
and social and economic factors considered to influence
levels of living”, UN Handbook on Social Indicators, 1989
“A sound system of social statistics is vital to the effective
development of social policy, to informed decisionmaking on policy issues, and to the evaluation of the
impact of social and economic policy”, UNSC Expert
Group, 1996
“There is a need for more internationally agreed statistical
standards and guidelines, and for improved frameworks
in which to summarize policy outcomes”, UNSC Expert
Group, 1996
3
Where have we come from?
Social statistics and indicators are about...
 both a discrete set of domains (demography, employment,
health, education, social and family policies, welfare
systems, physical security, etc...)
 and a specific way of looking at these and other (economic)
domains, focusing on differences in conditions among
population groups and on distributions rather than on
aggregates only
 household income is an economic statistic
 income gap between men and women is (also) a social statistic
 the distribution of household income is (also) a social statistic
4
Where have we come from?
... Social statistics also combine different perspectives...
Outcomes
(skills, poverty, health status)
Outputs
(beneficiaries, take-up rates,
benefit levels, graduation rates)
Inputs and processes
(spending, programme features)
Context
(demography, socio-economic characteristics, labour
market)
5
Where have we come from?
... Importantly, social statistics are about PEOPLE
 basic demographic and contextual statistics
are the first things any government collects...
– Oldest surviving Census data comes from
China (Han Dynasty, 2AD )
– The Doomsday Book (commissioned by
William the Conqueror in 1086)
6
Where have we come from?
 And outcome measurement has a long
history, predating that of official economic
statistics
 “Life and Labour of the People” (1889); statistical
analysis of poverty in London, Charles Booth
 “Recent Social Trends in the US” (1933); two-volume
report released by the Hoover Committee on Social
Trends, chaired by Wesley C. Mitchell (NBER)
7
Where have we come from?
Statistical map of
Whitechapel,
London, 1886
Red is
upper socioeconomic areas
Black is
“semi-criminal”
areas
Source: Charles Booth,
1889
8
Where have we come from?
Despite long-standing interest in social
statistics ...
...Still widespread perception that social
statistics are ‘soft’ as compared to ‘hard’
economic statistics because they lack an
additive and integrated accounting structure
such as the SNA
9
Where have we come from?
Following the development of the SNA, there
have been several attempts to develop
frameworks for social statistics:
– System of Social and Demographic Statistics,
UNSD
– Social Indicators Movement
10
Where have we come from?

System of Social and Demographic Statistics
(1975) prepared by Richard Stone for UNSD
–
Ambition: to develop a ‘system’ for social statistics
matching the SNA
–
How: to create an accounting framework for social
statistics focusing on flows between different states
–
Objective: measures of inputs, outputs, and
outcomes in a single framework
11
Where have we come from?

The attempt failed due to:
– Differences among countries in state of development of
social statistics and national priorities
– No agreement on common concepts, definitions and
measurement instruments
– Lack of a single common metric for integration and
aggregation of fundamentally different domains
– Cost of collecting some of the data
– Lack of clear policy relevance for a social accounting
framework
12
Where have we come from?

The Social Indicators Movement in the
1970s
– strong push towards measuring social outcomes in a
more systematic way (e.g. social contacts, health status,
time use)
– did not attempt to produce an over-arching accounting
framework for all social activities
13
Where have we come from?
 In the 1970s, the OECD also had a significant
work programme around social indicators:
– Measuring Social Well-Being: A Progress Report on
the Development of Social Indicators, OECD, 1976.
 Social Accounting Matrices
– introduced extra detail for specific socio-economic
issues into the national accounts framework
14
Where have we come from?
 These attempts also failed to produce a stable set
of social statistics
– despite best intentions, many indicators were still inputbased or of too limited scope with no overall
framework for guiding social policy and tracking the
impact of social programmes
– the key policy challenges of the 1980s were largely seen
to be economic rather than social in nature and social
indicators were therefore viewed as a ‘luxury’ rather than
a necessity
15
Where have we come from?
 Important lessons to be learned :
– crucial to articulate what is being measured and why to
be useful for policy decision-making
– limited applicability of accounting and integrated
frameworks to social statistics
16
Where have we come from ?
Integrated framework
for economic statistics
 Strong linkages between
economic statistics and
economic policy issues (e.g.
labour, prices, national
accounts, government finance
and balance of payments)
allowing economic policy
monitoring
 Single (additive) metric
 Integrated accounts
Framework for social
statistics
 Some policy domains are
interconnected (e.g.
employment , gender gaps,
poverty), but not all. Difficult
to monitor “overall” social
policy
 No single metric (and
controversies on valuation
for non-market activities)
 Minimum set of subjectmatter statistics and
indicators
17
Where have we come from?
 Important lessons to be learned :
– crucial to articulate what is being measured and why to
be useful for policy decision-making
– limited applicability of accounting and integrated
frameworks to social statistics
– frameworks for social statistics need to be sufficiently
flexible to be adapted to countries with different social
concerns
better to develop an analytical rather than
an accounting framework
18
How has the OECD responded?
Since the late 1980s, the OECD’s
response has therefore been pragmatic
and policy focused:
– Developing indicators linked to clear policy
objectives in specific domains
19
How has the OECD responded?
 In several areas, the OECD has developed a
reliable reporting system based on comparable
concepts and definitions, e.g.:
–
–
–
–
Social expenditure database (SOCX)
Health Data, System of Health Accounts
PISA, Education Indicators
Family Database
 Working in close collaboration with national
experts (INES, Health data correspondents)
 Covering contextual, input, output and outcome
indicators
20
How has the OECD responded?
Social expenditures consistent reporting of public
and private social expenditures in key domains
Public and private social expenditure as percentage of GDP in 2007
Public
Private / Privé
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
21
How has the OECD responded?
Health care quality indicators: comparison
of health systems performance across a number of key
dimensions
22
How has the OECD responded?
PISA: measures of standardised performance in reading
science and math among students aged 15
Ratio between mean scores of students in the top and bottom decile of the distribution of reading scores
Year 2006
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
23
How has the OECD responded?
Family Database: an on-line database of family
outcomes and policies
24
The current environment
 Renewed interest in measuring and monitoring
outcomes in a more encompassing/less discrete
way:
– International initiatives (MDGs, HDI, OECD Measuring Progress,
Stiglitz report and follow-up; UNECE/OECD/Eurostat Task Force
on Sustainable Development)
– National initiatives (e.g. State of the USA, Measuring Australia’s
Progress, UK National Well-Being, etc)
– Go beyond social field (economic; environmental)
 In contrast to the Social Indicators Movement, most
current initiatives have a coherent analytical
framework indicating what is being measured and
why
25
The current environment
 Interest in measuring social outcomes is driven by:
– citizens’ and governments’ strong demand for more
information on what really matters to people beyond economic
aggregates
– evidence-based policy and the use of measurable policy
targets for evaluations and impact assessments
– increased ability to measure key outcomes that were regarded
as inherently un-measurable only a few years ago
– cross-country comparisons of performance as populations are
tied more closely together through globalisation and governments
wish to understand better the roles of institutions and drivers
26
Where are we now?
Is the progress/well-being measurement
agenda a new paradigm for social
statistics?
Can it represent the new unifying
framework for social statistics?
27
Where are we now?
Measuring progress: an encompassing framework
focusing on people’s well-being and outcomes
Material
well-being
Regrettables
GDP
People’s overall
well-being
Capital stocks
Physical, natural, human, social
28
Where are we now?
Similar to, but broader in scope than, the
Social Indicators Movement :
– Not only what happens in society from the perspective of
governments, but also what happens in governments from
the perspective of citizens
– Not only conditions of people but also those of the
environment where people live (exposure to
environmental hazards, pollution, housing) as they affect
their well-being
– Not only people’s objective conditions but also subjective
feelings about them
29
Where are we now?
It DOES NOT provide a comprehensive
unifying accounting framework for all
social statistics as Richard Stone
attempted in the 1970s…
…but it DOES provide a clear
conceptual framework for outcomes
indicators
30
Which set of indicators?
What outcome indicators are we talking about?
– measures that are relevant for a broad range of
societies but can be ‘declined’ in different ways to reflect
national concerns
– measures that are relevant for designing evidence-based
policies
– a tool for social monitoring and
reporting (needed for periodic
medical check-up to assess the
patient’s condition)
31
Which set of indicators ?
 Are these measures in competition with other
initiatives (MDGs, EU2020, targets in national
planning documents, e.g. India)?
 The answer is NO :
– Progress measures : the entire car dashboard (e.g.
indicators of speed, gasoline left, oil pressure, road
conditions), i.e. continuous reporting based on a
comprehensive set of measures
– MDGs : focus more on “red light”
indicators on the dashboard signalling
‘critical conditions’ (e.g. lack of gasoline)
and need for immediate action
32
Which set of indicators?
 What needs to be done? Recommendations from
the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission :
– Extend the measurements of economic resources, putting
more emphasis on the resources of households and
their distribution
– Develop measurements of subjective well-being and
quality of life, as well as of inequalities in their
distribution
– Produce information that allows better assessments of the
sustainability of growth, [and develop indicators of
environmental impact of economic activities]
33
What is the OECD doing?
 During OECD 50th Anniversary (“better policies
for better lives”), publication of “How’s Life?”
report
 Accompanied by a number of methodological
projects done under the auspices of CSTAT, in
collaboration with other international
organisations
 Aim is to improve existing indicators and build
34
new ones
What is the OECD doing?
“How’s Life?” will present existing comparable
indicators for OECD and selected emerging
countries (the “low hanging fruits”)
 “How is Life?” draws on the SSF recommendations
– primary focus is on measuring people’s well-being
– Material conditions
– Quality of life
– secondary focus is on measuring sustainability
– Key capital stocks
 Work in progress: will evolve over time
35
What is the OECD doing?
Well-Being Dimensions
Quality of life
Material well-being
– Income and wealth
– Jobs and earnings
– Housing
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Health status
Education and skills
Work and life balance
Civic engagement and
governance
Social connections
Environmental quality
Personal security
Subjective well-being
36
What is the OECD doing?
 Choice of indicators under each dimension based
on common set of criteria:
– Validity/Relevance (of the available measures w.r.t. the
outcomes of interest?; are they amenable to policy change?)
– Cross-country comparability of information
– Depth (information on distribution of outcomes)
– Well-established sources (is the information from
official/reliable sources?)
– Recurrence of data collection
 Indicators assessed against each of these criteria:
adequate (√), limited (~) and missing (X)
37
What is the OECD doing?
Recurrence
Wellestablished
sources
Depth
Availability
of
comparable
data
Validity/
Reliability
Material Conditions
√
√
~
√
√
Health Status
√
√
~
√
√
Education and Skills
√
√
√
√
√
Work and Life Balance
√
√
√
√
√
Political Participation
~
√
~
~
~
Social Connections
~
√
√
~
√
Environmental Quality
~
~
~
~
√
Personal insecurity
√
~
~
~
√
Subjective well-being
√
~
√
X
√
38
Challenges ahead
 Work required to build a common/minimum set of
headline indicators
 Need to fill in statistical gaps, but:
– National statistical systems are under pressure to deliver
progress/well-being indicators at the same time as NSOs’
budgets are being squeezed and priorities in social
fields conflict with other domains
39
Challenges ahead
 Developing relevant indicators in new or underdeveloped domains
– In some domains indicators are not available or only
provide averages or only cover specific at-risk populations
– Need to build new valid indicators based on common
definitions and concepts; important to establish priorities
and timeframes
Way forward: UNECE /Eurostat/OECD TF work
on SD; INSEE/Eurostat Sponsorship; UN Regional
Commissions; launch new research projects ?
40
Challenges ahead
 The case of subjective indicators
– For some aspects of well-being both perceptions and
reality matter for analysis and policies; need for objective
indicators and information on values that people attach to
various dimensions
– Most NSOs already collect subjective information in some
of their surveys (General Social Survey, Time Use Survey),
but this information is often not comprehensive and not
comparable internationally
Way forward: OECD Guidelines for developing
SWB indicators in collaboration with Eurostat/EU
SILC, EQLS, UK, US
41
Challenges ahead
 Official v.s. non-official sources
– In some domains, the only type of comparative
information that currently exists is through non-official
sources
Way forward:
• Expand the scope of official instruments: Household
Surveys; LFS; Time Use Surveys; EU SILC
• Use non-official sources if NSOs judge that data are of
sufficient quality and cheaper; work with (semi) private
providers (e.g. EQLS) ?
42
Challenges ahead
 Depth and Consistency : use of micro-data and
common standards and definitions
– Matching of various survey-based and administrative data
to assess outcomes for population subgroups, and to
allow analysis of causality and policy impacts
– Make micro data available to research community
– Differences in underlying concepts and definitions limit
integration at country-level and cross-country
comparability
Way forward: OECD expert groups on joint
distribution of income, consumption and wealth; on
integrating inequalities in NA (with Eurostat); on microdata access
43
Challenges ahead
 The challenges just outlined require serious
methodological work in a number of areas
 A number of IOs and countries have started new
projects that will address some of them
 Those need to be shared and coordinated to ensure
maximum coherence and consistency in standards
and definitions across instruments used to collect
indicators
44
Conclusions
– Past international attempts to design a fully
integrated framework for social statistics have failed
– More pragmatic approach restricted to specific
domains has had some success both at country and
international level
– Today, there is renewed and strong interest for a
more encompassing framework focusing on
outcomes
– Measuring Progress and SSF follow-up represent a
great opportunity to move ahead
– Not without challenges, but these can be addressed
45