Archive:On the right track – Sustainability and quality of life high on the agenda of Statistics Netherlands
This Statistics Explained article is outdated and has been archived - for recent articles on sustainable development see here.
- Published in Sigma - The Bulletin of European Statistics, 2010/02
In recent years, Statistics Netherlands has been actively engaged in efforts to measure sustainable development and the quality of life in the country. In fact, in the Netherlands, intensive work in this field was started years before the publication of the Stiglitz Report, as Gosse van der Veen, Director-General of Statistics Netherlands, told Sigma.
Could you give your view as to why the Stiglitz Report is important?
The Stiglitz Commission Report has gained a great deal of attention from economists, social scientists, policymakers and statisticians because of the potential impact on the measurement of (social) welfare, well-being and sustainable development. It is important because it demonstrates an impressive overview of the literature that has accumulated over the last few decades and even centuries. The strength of the Report is that, under the guidance of a number of very influential scientists, it is convincingly argued that these different disciplines are all related to the measurement of ‘progress’ in the broadest sense of the word.
For Statistics Netherlands, the following passage of the Stiglitz Report is very important: ‘The assessment of sustainability is complementary to the question of current well-being or economic performance and must be examined separately… Both pieces of information are critical and need to be displayed in distinct, clearly visible areas of the dashboard’. Statistics Netherlands also subscribes to these very fundamental principles. In the upcoming sustainability monitor, a separate dashboard for the quality of life and a separate dashboard for sustainable development will be provided. However, we have added a third dashboard, which covers the impact of the Netherlands on other countries. We feel that that was given too little attention in the Stiglitz Report.
Has Statistics Netherlands already launched any projects which could be considered as first steps in the implementation of the Stiglitz Report?
Statistics Netherlands started work on the sustainability monitor in the summer of 2007, well before the Stiglitz Report was published. However, the history of Statistics Netherlands in this field goes much further back. Notable contributions were the Green National Income by Roefie Hueting (in the 1970s) and the pioneering work on Environmental Accounting by Mark de Haan and Steven Keuning.
It is therefore fair to say that Statistics Netherlands has a long tradition in this field. Since a lot of our recent work on the Sustainability Monitor is also based on the same literature which the Stiglitz Report cites, it came as no surprise that the Report confirmed that we were ‘on the right track’. It would therefore not be entirely accurate to say that the work at Statistics Netherlands is a direct result of the Report. What is however incontrovertible is that our work obtained a considerable boost after the Report was published. Sustainability and quality of life were already high on the agenda, but became even more prominent after September 2009.
Already in 2008, Statistics Netherlands had started a programme for statistics on sustainable development. Currently, over 12 full-time equivalents (FTE) are assigned to the development of the Sustainability Monitor, as well as new statistics on environmental accounts, energy statistics, time use, human capital accounts and social capital, to name but a few. Fortunately, given the level of interest in the field, we have been able to start certain projects through government programmes and Eurostat grants (for which we are very grateful). All in all, this means that about a third of the 12 FTE are financed through external sources. To me, this is further proof of the importance that society places on this topic.
What are Statistics Netherlands’ key priorities in regard to the implementation of the Stiglitz Report recommendations? And what projects do you envisage in short and longer terms?
Statistics Netherlands subscribes to almost all of the recommendations of the Stiglitz Commission. In fact, many of the recommendations were already in place when the Report came out. In some cases, the Stiglitz Report convinced us to intensify or scale down certain areas of our statistical programme.
Clearly the most important task is to create dashboards to measure the ‘progress’ of societies. Through the Sustainability Monitor, we have now created three separate dashboards: quality of life, intergenerational sustainability and the international dimension. Our results will be published in March of 2011 (also in English).
However, there is also a lot of work to do in terms of the underlying statistical base of our indicator system. We are developing in many different directions, but I would like to single out the following:
1) social capital.
It is now generally accepted that social capital is a true capital stock. What is however undeniable is that it is very hard to measure. I am pleased to say that we are making good progress in the conceptual and practical implementation of social capital;
2) international dimension.
The Stiglitz Report said very little about the international relationships between countries. Nevertheless, through trade and other interactions, (western) countries have great impact on the sustainability in other countries. We are developing statistics and methods to create indicators for this dimension. We are also working closely together with the World Input-Output Database (WIOD) project which bundles official statistics for economic, environmental and trade statistics for the world;
3) satellite accounting.
The national accounts system is probably one of the most successful statistical systems to date. As the Stiglitz Commission rightly pointed out, the system is far broader than the calculation of GDP. There is also an extensive set of satellite accounts which provide an excellent basis for further measurement of progress. We already have an extensive system of environmental, labour, tourism and growth accounts, but are expanding them with time use, human capital and social capital. These satellite accounts have the benefit of producing indicators that are comparable to GDP, but can also serve as a data source for sustainability modelling (by the policy institutes);
4) long time series.
Progress, and particularly sustainable development, are phenomena which manifest themselves over long time periods. Although business cycles influence both in the short term, true structural changes manifest themselves over the long term. It is therefore very important that we create long time series for a number of key indicators of progress.
These are goals which we wish to achieve by the end of 2011. However, there are also possibilities for some spin-offs of our work for the longer term. An example is the issue of inequality in societal developments, which is also an important component of the Stiglitz Report. A pilot project has already started for this issue. Another example is the use of our system for sustainability reporting by companies.
What are the challenges ahead as far as the implementation goes?
Statistics Netherlands considers two topics forthcoming from the recommendations as priority challenges:
1) we intend to work more on the visualisation of our work.
The Dutch indicator set of quality of life and sustainable development included a great number of indicators. The large amount of information is needed to address this issue properly. However, special visualisation techniques are needed in order to summarise the main implications of our work in such a way that policymakers and society will be able to identify the main trends by looking at one, simple summary table;
2) in cooperation with other government agencies, we plan to develop a set of policy indicators.
Monitoring (i.e. giving a summary of the ‘state of the nation’ in terms of its sustainability) is one thing, but giving policymakers an idea as to how certain negative trends can be overcome is an issue which needs to be tackled. This can only be done if Statistics Netherlands, policy institutes, as well as certain Ministries (Environmental Affairs, Economic Affairs, Finance and Foreign Affairs) work together.
Could you explain possible changes in data collection and analysis following the recommendations of the Stiglitz Report?
One potential, but ambitious goal would be to harmonise the data collection on objective and subjective indicators. There is an increasing call for data on ‘gross national happiness’; however, if we follow this road we end up with a one-dimensional indicator which, in the end, might not be very useful. We would rather like to break down perception indicators (on life satisfaction) into different social domains (such as health, education, income) and make a systematic comparison between objective indicators (how healthy are the people?) and subjective indicators (how satisfied are we with our health status?). This will enable us (a) to find out which aspects of life contribute most to the life satisfaction (and therefore welfare) of people and (b) to make it possible to track down the extent to which perceptions are based on actual changes (for example, often we see that people feel increasingly unsafe in society, whereas actual indicators on the number of crimes show improvement).
If you had to attach priorities to different statistical developments in the coming years, what are the areas in which you would invest?
Measuring Sustainability and Quality of Life is clearly one of the key challenges of our time. Nevertheless, society also demands other information. To make sure that Statistics Netherlands is in tune with the most recent demands of society, we have adopted a number of statistical programmes. Resources are made available to produce new additions to our statistical portfolio. Examples include: the housing market, productivity, knowledge economy, social dynamics, social cohesion, an ageing society, globalisation and security.
How important is it to have a common approach at ESS level to the work in this field?
For the analysis of sustainability, well-being and welfare, it is very important that results and indicators can be compared with those of other countries. Two steps are required in the harmonisation process:
1) adoption of a common dashboard.
At the moment, countries and institutes all have very divergent methods to measure progress. Although it will be difficult, we believe it is important that a common framework is adopted and implemented by all countries. The Task Force for Measuring Sustainable Development (TFSD) and Sponsorship Group for Progress should be the prime bodies in which this harmonisation takes place;
2) collection and harmonisation of data.
The necessary data need to be collected, and even more importantly, need to be harmonised in order to make proper international comparisons possible. Of course, Eurostat is already doing a lot of work in this field. What is particularly important is the work which is done on the ‘quality profiles’ of the indicators so that users have a clear view of the limitations in the data. More could be done on the collection of data on satellite accounts and inputoutput tables.
Any specifically Dutch issues and challenges?
In the Dutch context we see three challenges:
- it seems good to invest more in the contacts with different actors in the field of sustainable development. Employees of statistical bureaus are of course used to working with people at ministries and other government institutes, but in this case, the importance of this interaction is even greater;
- we would like to stimulate other government agencies or universities to use our indicators for models on which policy forecasting can be based. This will enhance the usefulness of our measurement system;
- a problem in the international setting may be the fragmentation of this topic. Many task forces, working groups, initiatives and sponsorship groups by many different institutions have been created to tackle this problem. On the one hand, this is positive because it again proves that we are doing important work. On the other hand, it is far from optimal in terms of coherence and efficiency. Statistics Netherlands will do its bit to search for means of cooperation which will improve this situation. There may be an important role for Eurostat to play in this coordination.
Further Eurostat information
Publications
- SIGMA - The Bulletin of European Statistics, 02/2010: GDP & Beyond; Focus on measuring economic development and well-being
- Sustainable development in the European Union - 2009 monitoring report of the EU sustainable development strategy
Database
- Indicators
Dedicated section
Other information
- GDP and Beyond: Measuring progress in a changing world (Commission Communication COM final 433/2009)