There is a real head of steam building up behind alternative ways of measuring progress/development. I was at a meeting this week at OECD (where I used to work), for the launch of a new phase of their work on measuring the social outcomes of learning. I was very struck that this phase is set in the broader context of work which follows on from the seminal Stiglitz/Sen/Fitoussi report of a couple of years ago. This report, not very snappily entitled Measuring Economic Performance and Social Progress, was prepared for President Sarkozy – the cynics say to enable him to divert attention from France’s poor performance on traditional GNP measures, but that doesn’t matter. It was a hugely authoritative group (4 Nobels, and many other illustrious social scientists), and gave a real imprimatur to the idea of measuring national performance using broader more realistic criteria.
OECD, not known as the most most radical of organisations, has taken up this baton. Enrico Giovannini, who has Director of Statistics at OECD when I was there, always surprised me by his range of interests. This included active support for including the notion of social capital in policy debates and measurement activities within the OECD. Enrico intiated work on social progress, and this is now guided by Martine Durand, formerly director of the Employment Directorate.
Our meeting, run by the Centre for Educational Research and Development, focussed on how to measure education’s contribution to social progress (ESP). I was asked to contribute something very brief on the potential contribution of longitudinal data sources. The ESP’s advisory group, mainly composed of representatives from 8-10 countries, showed considerable interest in this, and I’m hopeful that we will be able to give a strong longitudinal dimension to this project as it evolves.
The project faces a number of challenges. some of them of general application. The question of causality raised its head of course – how far attributions of different types of social progress can be made to education, or particular forms of education. LS can make stronger claims than many research modes for getting beyond associations and establishing some form of casual realtionships. but I’m struck but how often we function with a dichotomous approach to casuality, whereas I feel it would be more helpful to understand casuality as a term which has varying forms of strength – and maybe not all able to be ranked on a single scale either.