1st meeting of the working group constructing indicators of progress/well-being with citizens/communities

Monica BrezziOECD Public Governance and Territorial Policies

Paris 24-25, July 2008

Regional development policies

1. Multidimensional concept of regional well-being as a key factor to support regional opportunities

2. In addressing inequalities, use of both relative measures and absolute measures (minimum agreed standard)

3. Multilevel governance approach, emphasis is given to vertical and horizontal coordination, accountability, local capacity building

RDP aim to improve competitiveness and to expand people’s opportunities through a better use of territorial resources

1. Multidimensional concept of well-being

Source: “OECD Regions at a glance 2007”

Tertiary education attainment

Age-adjusted mortality rate

Elderly dependency rate: North America and rural/urban regions (2005)

Higher than 31%Between 25% and 31%Between 18% and 25%Between 12% and 18%Between 5% and 12%Lower than 5%

2. Addressing inequalities with relative and absolute measures

Share of national GDP generated by the 10% richest regions

54%53%

49%47%

46%44%44%44%

43%42%

41%40%40%

39%39%

37%37%

35%35%

31%30%30%

28%27%

25%24%

22%21%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

TurkeyGreece

PortugalSwedenHungaryFinland

SpainAustria

CanadaNew Zealand

JapanMexico

ItalyUnited States

OECD(27) TotalFrance

United KingdomGermany

KoreaNorwayIrelandPoland

Czech RepublicAustralia

NetherlandsDenmark

Slovak RepublicBelgium

2005 1995

Gini index of inequalities and people affected

Further Steps (synergies with the community indicator project)/1

1. How to influence the Statistical Institutes to make a better use of the information of interest for local community and policy making

Examples: Atlas of the index of multiple deprivation (UK National Statistics)

2. The poor availability of data on some dimensions of well-being and social inclusion at disaggregated territorial level (from official statistics) can make the “only gdp counts” approach regains ground.

3. Use of administrative data as “context information” in the community indicator cycle (starting point

1. Multidimensional concept of well-being

Further Steps (synergies with the community indicator project)/2

1. Explain more clearly the link between individual well-being and influence of the context (place/territory);

2. Inequalities in access to public services are directly linked with region-specific characteristics. Poor access to public services in certain regions undermines the opportunities available to the inhabitants of these regions, and in turn aggravates income inequalities over time.

Example: Supply of relevant services (child and elderly care, education, health, quality of the environment etc.) but also their accessibility and quality. Different needs also according to geography.

3. The definition of ‘ essential standards” (absolute thresholds) must be done through an inclusive process taking into account people expectations. Therefore standards change over time

2. Measuring inequalities

Further Steps (synergies with the community indicator project)/3

More emphasis on the participatory/collaborative nature of the policy process; make citizens engagement part of the everyday business of government

Why through the use of indicators and measures?

1. Conveying information spread among individuals, institutions, agency etc.

2. While doing it, consensus is built on the necessary changes (and how to get there);

3. Ensure that marginal/ more vulnerable groups are also represented

3. Multilevel governance approach