IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsw/rswwps/rswwps186.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wie wollen wir zukünftig leben? Internationale Erfahrungen bei der Neuvermessung von Fortschritt und Wohlergehen

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Kroll

Abstract

Der Diskurs über die Neuvermessung von Fortschritt und Wohlergehen gewinnt international zunehmend an Bedeutung. Globale Anstrengungen haben das Potenzial, einen Paradigmenwechsel herbeizuführen, der beeinflusst, wie wir Fortschritt definieren und folglich unser Zusammenleben gestalten. Anhand von Fallstudien aus verschiedenen Ländern mit Vorreitercharakter werden Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten sowie bislang Erreichtes und zukünftige Herausforderungen erkennbar. Durch zahlreiche nationale runde Tische werden derzeit neue Indikatorensysteme zur Messung des Wohlergehens aufgebaut. Solche Maßzahlen können die Bürger zielgenauer über den Fortschritt in ihrem Land informieren und bieten Entscheidungsträgern eine wichtige Leitlinie für politisches Handeln. Wichtig wird in Zukunft sein, dass die Indikatorensysteme an prominenter Stelle in der Sozialberichterstattung verankert werden und mit einer durchdachten Kommunikationsstrategie in die nationalen politischen Debatten eingespeist werden. Besonders effektiv wären dabei eine jährliche »indikatorenbasierte State of the Union Rede« des Regierungschefs und eine institutionalisierte Gesetzesfolgenabschätzung zur Lebensqualität. Wenn die portraitierten Maßnahmen mit Energie weiterverfolgt werden, kann am Ende ein Sieg für evidenzbasierte Politikmaßnahmen und die demokratische Kultur im Sinne von mehr Transparenz und Rechenschaft die Belohnung für die getätigten Anstrengungen sein.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Kroll, 2011. "Wie wollen wir zukünftig leben? Internationale Erfahrungen bei der Neuvermessung von Fortschritt und Wohlergehen," RatSWD Working Papers 186, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    • Handle: RePEc:rsw:rswwps:rswwps186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.konsortswd.de/wp-content/uploads/RatSWD_WP_186.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michela Nardo & Michaela Saisana & Andrea Saltelli & Stefano Tarantola & Anders Hoffman & Enrico Giovannini, 2005. "Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2005/3, OECD Publishing.
    2. Romina Boarini & Åsa Johansson & Marco Mira d'Ercole, 2006. "Alternative Measures of Well-Being," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 476, OECD Publishing.
    3. Ulrich van Suntum & Aloys Prinz & Nicole Uhde, 2010. "Lebenszufriedenheit und Wohlbefinden in Deutschland: Studie zur Konstruktion eines Lebenszufriedenheitsindikators," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 259, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    4. John F. Helliwell & Christopher P. Barrington‐Leigh, 2010. "Viewpoint: Measuring and understanding subjective well‐being," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(3), pages 729-753, August.
    5. Heinz-Herbert Noll, 2011. "The Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi-Report: Old Wine in New Skins? Views from a Social Indicators Perspective," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 111-116, May.
    6. Romina Boarini & Åsa Johansson & Marco Mira d'Ercole, 2006. "Alternative Measures of Well-Being," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 33, OECD Publishing.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Alan B. Krueger, 2006. "Developments in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    8. Dennis Trewin & Jon Hall, 2010. "Developing Societal Progress Indicators: A Practical Guide," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2010/6, OECD Publishing.
    9. Enrico Giovannini & Jon Hall & Adolfo Morrone & Giulia Ranuzzi, 2011. "A Framework to measure the progress of societies," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 121(1), pages 93-118.
    10. Paul Dolan & Richard Layard & Robert Metcalfe, 2011. "Measuring Subjective Wellbeing for Public Policy: Recommendations on Measures," CEP Reports 23, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. John F. Helliwell & Christopher P. Barrington-Leigh, 2010. "Measuring and Understanding Subjective Well-Being," NBER Working Papers 15887, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Moser Andrea & Peter Heike & Fengler Birgit & Strohm-Lömpcke Renate, 2018. "Improving the Quality of Life with Rural Development Programmes in Germany (2007–2013): Evidence from the Evaluation," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 10(2), pages 321-339, June.
    2. Johannes Hirata, 2012. "Zum systematischen Stellenwert von Wirtschaftswachstum: Ziel, Mittel oder weder noch?," RatSWD Working Papers 198, German Data Forum (RatSWD).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carla Collicelli, 2013. "Subjective Indicators in the Health Sector and Their Usefulness in Policy Making," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 87-103, October.
    2. Pillai N., Vijayamohanan & B. P., Asalatha, 2013. "Objectivizing the Subjective: Measuring Subjective Wellbeing," MPRA Paper 45005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Christopher Mackie & Conal Smith, 2015. "Conceptualizing Subjective Well-Being And Its Many Dimensions – Implications For Data Collection In Official Statistics And For Policy Relevance," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 335-372, September.
    4. Nikolova, Milena, 2016. "Minding the happiness gap: Political institutions and perceived quality of life in transition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(S), pages 129-148.
    5. Nikolova, Milena & Graham, Carol, 2015. "In transit: The well-being of migrants from transition and post-transition countries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 164-186.
    6. Pillai N., Vijayamohanan & B. P., Asalatha, 2012. "Women Empowerment: An Epistemic Quest," MPRA Paper 43859, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Rauf Gönenç & Oliver Röhn & Christian Beer & Andreas Wörgötter, 2013. "Responding to Key Well-being Challenges in Austria," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1080, OECD Publishing.
    8. De, Prabal K. & Thamarapani, Dhanushka, 2022. "Impacts of negative shocks on wellbeing and aspirations – Evidence from an earthquake," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    9. van Hoorn, Andre, 2016. "Reliability and Validity of the Happiness Approach to Measuring Preferences," MPRA Paper 79977, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Sarracino, Francesco, 2013. "Determinants of subjective well-being in high and low income countries: Do happiness equations differ across countries?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 51-66.
    11. Winton Bates, 2009. "Gross national happiness," Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, The Crawford School, The Australian National University, vol. 23(2), pages 1-16, November.
    12. Paul Allin & David J. Hand, 2017. "New statistics for old?—measuring the wellbeing of the UK," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(1), pages 3-43, January.
    13. Enrico Giovannini, 2008. "Statistics and Politics in a “Knowledge Society”," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 177-200, April.
    14. Lucy Tinkler, 2015. "The Office For National Statistics Experience Of Collecting And Measuring Subjective Well-Being," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 373-396, September.
    15. Luc Ootegem & Elsy Verhofstadt, 2012. "Using Capabilities as an Alternative Indicator for Well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 106(1), pages 133-152, March.
    16. Stutzer, Alois & Frey, Bruno S., 2012. "Recent Developments in the Economics of Happiness: A Selective Overview," IZA Discussion Papers 7078, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Thomas Carver & Arthur Grimes, 2019. "Income or Consumption: Which Better Predicts Subjective Well‐Being?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(S1), pages 256-280, November.
    18. Francesco Sarracino & Małgorzata Mikucka, 2019. "Consume More, Work Longer, and Be Unhappy: Possible Social Roots of Economic Crisis?," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 14(1), pages 59-84, March.
    19. Giacomo Rotondo, 2013. "Indicatori di benessere: forme funzionali a confronto," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 27-41.
    20. Conal Smith & Christopher Mackie, 2015. "Conceptualizing Subjective Well-Being and its Many Dimensions – Implications for Data Collection in Official Statistics and for Policy Relevance," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 16(3), pages 335-372, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsw:rswwps:rswwps186. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RatSWD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rtswdde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.