Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Social Indicators Research
Published in: Social Indicators Research 3/2017

22-12-2015

Participative Processes for Measuring Progress: Deliberation, Consultation and the Role of Civil Society

Authors: Tommaso Rondinella, Elisabetta Segre, Duccio Zola

Published in: Social Indicators Research | Issue 3/2017

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

A set of statistical indicators able to grasp the progress of a country should, first of all, embody and outline a nationally-shared vision of progress. This may be reached through democratic processes for the definition of the values and priorities which our societies wish to pursue. Today, in front of a long-standing crisis of legitimacy which affects our democracies, the implementation of participative procedures is more than ever needed, and public deliberation is the process through which legitimate choices and decisions should be shaped and made. In this context, civil society may provide fundamental contributions in terms of stimulating social participation, activation of resources, sharing of information and knowledge, so to engender a shared idea of progress and well-being and to help selecting suitable indicators to measure it. This article—which tries to integrate insights coming from theory of democracy and progress indicators’ studies—presents the theoretical issues behind the need for involvement of citizens and organized civil society within participative processes, distinguishing between consultation and deliberation. Moreover, the article analyses, through the lens of Archon Fung’s analytical framework on the varieties of participation processes, some of the most influential experiences of participative definition of national progress indicators in order to assess how the conditions for granting legitimacy have been actually addressed.
previous article A DEA Travel–Tourism Competitiveness Index
next article Empirical Analysis of the Transformation of Economic Growth into Social Development at an International Level

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Literature
Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1963). The civic culture. Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRef
Arena, G. (2008). Cittadini attivi. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Atkisson, A. (Ed.). (1997). The community handbook: Measuring progress toward healthy and sustainable communities. San Francisco: Redefining Progress.
Beck, U. (2000). La società del rischio. Roma: Carocci.
Benhabib, S. (1996). Toward a deliberative model of democratic legitimacy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference. Contesting the boundaries of the political (pp. 67–94). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Bobbio, L. (2002). Le arene deliberative. In Rivista italiana di politiche pubbliche, no. 3, pp. 5–29.
Bohman, J. (1996). Public deliberation. Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Bohman, J., & Rehg, W. (Eds.). (1997). Deliberative democracy. Essays on reason and politics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Centre for Bhutan Studies. (2012). An extensive analysis of GNH index. Thimphu: The Centre for Bhutan Studies.
Chambers, S., & Kymlicka, W. (Eds.). (2002). Alternative conceptions of civil society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
CNEL—Consiglio Nazionale dell’Economia e del Lavoro and Istat—Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. (2013). Rapporto BES 2013. Il benessere equo e sostenibile in Italia. Rome: Istat.
Cohen, J. L., & Arato, A. (1992). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Cohen, J., & Rogers, J. (1995). Secondary associations and democratic governance. In E. O. Wright (Ed.), Associations and democracy. The real utopias project (Vol. I, pp. 7–98). London: Verso.
Cohen, J., & Sabel, C. (1997). Directly-Deliberative Polyarchy. European Law Journal, 3(4), 313–342.CrossRef
Coyle, D. (2014). GDP: A brief but affectionate history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Crouch, C. (2003). Postdemocrazia. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Daly, H., & Cobb, J. (1989). For the common good. Redirecting economy toward community, the environment and a sustainable feature. Boston: Beacon Press.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (1969). Towards a social report. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond. Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ebid, S., & Self, A. (2014). Guidelines of action for stakeholders inclusion and activation of deliberative process. Deliverable 7.3, e-Frame project. www.​eframeproject.​eu.
Edwards, M. (2004). Civil society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Elster, J. (Ed.). (1998). Deliberative democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Erikson, R. (1974). Welfare as a planning goal. Acta Sociologica, 17(3), 273–288.CrossRef
European Commission. (2001). European governance—A white paper. Brussels: COM, 428 final.
European Commission. (2009). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament—GDP and beyond: Measuring progress in a changing world. Brussels: COM, 0433 final.
Fioramonti, L. (2013). Gross domestic problem. The politics behind the World’s most powerful number. London: ZED Books.
Fioramonti, L. (2014). How numbers rule the world. The use and abuse of statistics in global politics. London: Zed Books.
Fraser, N. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109–142). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Fung, A. (2003). Associations and democracy: Between theories, hopes, and realities. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 515–539.CrossRef
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 66–75.CrossRef
Gadrey, J., & Jany-Catrice, F. (2005). Les nouveaux indicateurs de richesse. Paris: Editions La Découverte.
Gastil, J., & Levine, P. (Eds.). (2005). The deliberative democracy handbook. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Giovannini, E. (2009). Bringing statistics to citizens: A ‘must’ to build democracy in the XXI century. In M. Segone (Ed.), Country-led monitoring and evaluation systems. Better evidence, better policies, better development results. Geneva: UNICEF.
Giovannini, E., & Rondinella, T. (2012). Measuring equitable and sustainable well-being in Italy. In F. Allen, M. Aoki, N. Kiyotaki, R. Gordon, J. E. Stiglitz, & J.-P. Fitoussi (Eds.), The global macro economy and finance (pp. 38–57). London: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRef
Goossens, Y. (2007). Alternative progress indicators to gross domestic product (GDP) as a means towards sustainable development. European Parliament: Study IP/A/ENVI/ST/2007-10.
Habermas, J. (1985). Etica del discorso. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Habermas, J. (1986). Teoria dell’agire comunicativo. Bologna: il Mulino.
Habermas, J. (2001a). Prefazione alla nuova edizione. In Id., Storia e critica dell’opinione pubblica. Roma-Bari: Laterza, pp. vii–xliii.
Habermas, J. (2001b) Sovranità popolare come procedura. Un concetto normativo di sfera pubblica. In Id., Morale, Diritto, Politica. Torino: Edizioni di Comunità, pp. 81–103.
Hall, J., Carswell, C., Jones, R., & Yencken, D. (2005). Collaborating with civil society: Reflections from Australia. In OECD, Statistics, knowledge and policy. Key indicators to inform decision making (pp. 434–452). Paris: OECD.
Hall, J., & Rickard, L. (2013). People, progress and participation: How initiatives measuring social progress yield benefits beyond better metrics. Global Choices, 1/2013.
Hardi, P., & Zdan, T. (1997). Assessing sustainable development. Principles in practice. Winnipeg: The International Institute for Sustainable Development.
Innes, J. (1990). Knowledge and public policy: The search for meaningful indicators (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Institute of Well-being. (2009). How are Canadians really doing?. Canada: Institute of Well-being.
Istat—Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. (2011). L’importanza delle dimensioni del benessere per i cittadini. Statistiche report, November 4th, 2011.
Karabell, Z. (2014). The leading indicators. A short history of the numbers that rule our world. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Kroll, C. (2011). Measuring progress and well-being. An opportunity for political parties? International Policy Analysis, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.
Mair, P. (2013). Ruling the void. The hollowing of western democracies. London: Verso Books.
Manin, B. (1987). On legitimacy and political deliberation. Political Theory, 15(3), 338–368.CrossRef
Marcon, G. (2004). Le utopie del ben fare. Percorsi della solidarietà: dal mutualismo al terzo settore ai movimenti. Napoli: L’ancora del Mediterraneo.
Marcon, G. (2005). Come fare politica senza entrare in un partito. Milano: Feltrinelli.
Meadows, D. (1998). Indicators and information systems for sustainable development. A report to the Balaton Group. Hartland Four Corners, VT: The Sustainability Institute.
Meadows, D., Meadows, G., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W, I. I. I. (1972). The limits to growth. New York: Universe Books.
Michalos, A. C., Smale, B., Labonté, R., Muharjarine, N., Scott, K., Moore, K., et al. (2011). The Canadian Index of Wellbeing. Technical report 1.0. Waterloo, ON: Canadian Index of Wellbeing and University of Waterloo.
Nordhaus, W. D., & Tobin, J. (1972). Is economic growth obsolete? In Id., Economic research: Retrospect and prospect. Economic growth (Vol. 5, pp. 1–80). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
Norris, P. (Ed.). (1999). Critical citizens: Global support for democratic governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit. Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
ONS—Office for National Statistics. (2012). Measuring national well-being. First annual report on measuring national well-being. www.​ons.​gov.​uk.
Osberg, L., & Sharpe, A. (2002). An index of economic well-being for selected OECD countries. Review of Income and Wealth, 48(3), 291–316.CrossRef
Oxfam Great Britain. (2012). Oxfam Humankind Index. The Measure of Scotland’s Prosperity: Second results. Oxford: Oxfam Great Britain.
Passerin d’Entrevès, M. (Ed.). (2002). Democracy as public deliberation. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Pencheon, D. (2008). The good indicators guide: Understanding how to use and choose indicators. UK National Health Service Institute for Innovation and Improvement website. www.​institute.​nhs.​uk.
Petrucciani, S. (2014). Democrazia. Torino: Einaudi.
Pharr, S., & Putnam, R. (Eds.). (2000). Disaffected democracies: What’s troubling the trilateral countries?. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Pianta, M. (2001). Globalizzazione dal basso. Economia mondiale e movimenti sociali. Roma: Manifestolibri.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.CrossRef
Redefining Progress. (1998). The community indicators handbook: Measuring progress toward healthy and sustainable communities. San Francisco: Redefining Progress.
Regonini, G. (2005). Paradossi della democrazia deliberativa. Stato e mercato, 25(1), 3–32.
Rondinella, T. (2014). Policy use of progress indicators. In T. Rondinella, M. Signore, D. Fazio, M. G. Calza & A. Righi (Eds.), Map on policy use of progress indicators, e-Frame—European Framework for Measuring Progress, EU FP7 Project, Deliverable 11.1. www.​eframeproject.​eu.
Rondinella, T., & Segre, E. (2014). Index of quality of regional development. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 3169–3174). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRef
Rondinella, T., Segre, E., & Zola, D. (2011). Indicatori di progresso, legittimità e società civile. Il QUARS italiano e altri casi studio internazionali. Rivista delle Politiche Sociali, no. 1/11, pp. 199–217. Roma: Ediesse.
Rosanvallon, P. (2009). La politica nell’era della sfiducia. Troina: Città Aperta Edizioni.
Saward, M. (Ed.). (2000). Democratic innovation. Deliberation, representation and association. London and New York: Routledge/ECPR Studies in European Political Science.
Sbilanciamoci!. (2006). Come si vive in Italia? Indice di Qualità Regionale dello Sviluppo (QUARS) 2006. Roma: Lunaria.
Scrivens, K., & Iasiello, B. (2010). Indicators of ‘Societal Progress’: Lessons from international experiences. OECD statistics working papers 2010/4. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Seers, D. (1969). The meaning of development. International Development Review, 11(4), 3–4.
Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. (2008). Survey on existing approaches to measuring socioeconomic progress. Issue Paper 25/07/08-1, Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and social Progress. www.​stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.​fr.
Valentin, A., & Spangerberg, J. (2000). A guide to community sustainability indicators. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 381–392.CrossRef
Walzer, M. (2003). A better vision: The idea of civil society. In V. Hodgkinson & M. Foley (Eds.), The civil society reader (pp. 306–321). Hanover and London: Tufts University/University Press of New England.
Wright, E. O. (Ed.). (1995). Associations and democracy. The real utopias project (Vol. I). London: Verso.
Metadata
Title
Participative Processes for Measuring Progress: Deliberation, Consultation and the Role of Civil Society
Authors
Tommaso Rondinella
Elisabetta Segre
Duccio Zola
Publication date
22-12-2015
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Social Indicators Research / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0303-8300
Electronic ISSN: 1573-0921
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1207-z

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Social Indicators Research 3/2017 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Examining the Independent Effect of Social Support on Unmet Mental Healthcare Needs Among Canadians: Findings from a Population-Based Study

OriginalPaper

The Long Walk: Considering the Enduring Spatial and Racial Dimensions of Deprivation Two Decades After the Fall of Apartheid

OriginalPaper

A DEA Travel–Tourism Competitiveness Index

OriginalPaper

Cultural Versus Objective Distances: The DBS-EM Approach

OriginalPaper

An Alternative View on Distribution Keys for the Possible Relocation of Refugees in the European Union

OriginalPaper

Running Ahead or Running in Place? Educational Expansion and Gender Inequality in the Labor Market

Premium Partner

    Image Credits