Abstract
As we have seen, the Commission’s final report outlines a comprehensive framework by defining some guidelines by: (a) identifying the limits of GDP as an indicator of economic performance and social progress, including measurement problems; (b) considering what additional information might be required for the production of more relevant social progress indicators; and (c) assessing the feasibility of alternative measurement and presentation tools. The report argues that GDP should not be completely eliminated by the options for measuring progress, but must be integrated with other information. In particular, the Committee defines three major areas in which indicators should be developed: economic conditions, quality of life and sustainability. In the European scene, but not only, there are many initiatives that aim at measuring the progress of countries and well-being through different conceptual frameworks and by using several indicators. This work intends to analyze some of those relevant initiatives by comparing and confronting them to the Commission’s recommendations, in order to check what already fits the commission recommendations and what still needs to be defined in that perspective.

Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We have also considered the opportunity to include United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in this analysis. Actually, this comparison turned out to be not appropriate for our purposes since the MDG is oriented to goals measures much more than monitoring measures.
Each dimension refers to one goal dimension, respectively:
-
(a)
reduction of disparities and inequalities and fighting social exclusion
-
(b)
strengthening of connections and social ties including the enhancement of social capital.
-
(a)
http://lysander.sourceoecd.org/vl=8034723/cl=21/nw=1/rpsv/factbook2009/index.htm
http://oberon.sourceoecd.org/vl=2639866/cl=72/nw=1/rpsv/fact2009/
http://www.oecd.org/site/0,3407,en_21571361_34374092_1_1_1_1_1,00.html
http://lysander.sourceoecd.org/vl=23854683/cl=45/nw=1/rpsv/factbook2009/index.htm
http://www.oecd.org/document/62/0,3343,en_21571361_34374092_34420734_1_1_1_1,00.html.
Giovannini et al. (2009).
Reference
Berger-Schmitt, R., & Noll, H.-H. (2000). Conceptual framework and structure of a European system of social indicators. EuReporting Working Paper No. 9. Mannheim: Centre for Survey Research and Methodology (ZUMA) – Social Indicators Department.
Giovannini, E., Hall, J., Morrone, A., Ranuzzi, G. (2009). A framework to measure the progress of societies. Draft OECD working paper. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/40/46/43631612.pdf.
Zapf, W. (1975). Le système d’indicateurs sociaux: Approches et problèmes. Revue Internationale des Sciences Sociales, XXVII(3).
Zapf, W. (1984). Individuelle Wohlfahrt: Lebensbedingungen und Wahrgenommene Lebensqualität. In W. Glatzer & W. Zapf (Eds.), Lebensqualität in der Bundesrepublik (pp. 13–26). Frankfurt a. M, New York: Campus.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maggino, F., Ruviglioni, E. Preaching to the Choir: Are the Commission’s Recommendations Already Applied?. Soc Indic Res 102, 131–156 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9735-z
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9735-z

