Being able to measure people’s quality of life is fundamental when assessing the progress of societies. There is now widespread acknowledgement that measuring subjective well-being is an essential part of measuring quality of life alongside other social and economic dimensions. As a first step to improving the measures of quality of life, the OECD has produced Guidelines which provide advice on the collection and use of measures of subjective well-being. These Guidelines have been produced as part of the OECD Better Life Initiative, a pioneering project launched in 2011, with the objective to measure society’s progress across eleven domains of well-being, ranging from jobs, health and housing, through to civic engagement and the environment.
These Guidelines represent the first attempt to provide international recommendations on collecting, publishing, and analysing subjective well-being data. They provide guidance on collecting information on people's evaluations and experiences of life, as well as on collecting “eudaimonic” measures of psychological well-being. The Guidelines also outline why measures of subjective well-being are relevant for monitoring and policy making, and why national statistical agencies have a critical role to play in enhancing the usefulness of existing measures. They identify the best approaches for measuring, in a reliable and consistent way, the various dimensions of subjective well-being, and provide guidance for reporting on such measures. The Guidelines also include a number of prototype survey modules on subjective well-being that national and international agencies can use in their surveys.
By Martine Durand, Director, OECD Directorate of Statistics - Technological and social innovations are resulting in huge flows of new data every day. This proliferation of so-called “big data” has the potential to change the way information is collected and used to inform policymaking.
The Manual on Statistics of International Trade in Services 2010 (MSITS 2010) - the first issue was published in 2002 - is a joint publication of seven agencies: the UN, EC, IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, UNWTO and WTO. It addresses a growing demand from governments, businesses and analysts for more relevant, detailed and internationally comparable statistics on services trade.
The aim of this OECD workshop on productivity is to examine the role of productivity for growth, including in recovering from the crisis; explore key measurement challenges; assess the determinants of productivity growth and explore the role of policies in shaping productivity performance across countries.
English, PDF, 1,963kb
OECD Work on Measuring Well-Being and Progress towards Green Growth
Statistics Working Paper N. 49 - 2012/5 - We estimate the business-cycles of G7 countries, as defined by an ideal 2-10 year bandpass filter applied to country-specific GDP target series (GDP-BP). The paper shows that efficiency gains by the Multivariate Direct Filter Approach (MDFA)over HP are substantial along the full revision-sequence and they are consistent across countries as well as over time, when referenced against GDP-BP.
Real GDP growth in the OECD area increased by 0.3% in the third quarter of 2012, compared with 0.2% in the second quarter.
English, PDF, 20,386kb
Report on the Comparison of the Hodrick-Prescott Filter and the Multivariate Direct Filter Approach in Composite Leading Indicators Construction - A case for G7 Countries
The EUROSTAT-OECD Methodological manual on purchasing power parities has three aims: first, to explain to those engaged directly in the Programme; second, to enable these practitioners to brief their senior management and significant users - such as politicians, journalists, academics and the like - on the why and how of the Programme and, more importantly, to advise them on the use and interpretation of comparison results; and third,
Statistics Working Paper N. 48- 2012/4 - The paper reviews some national initiatives related to measuring the stock of human capital, indentifies some challenges to be addressed to improve the quality of existing monetary measures of human capital, and suggests developing experimental satellite accounts for education to better understand how human capital is produced and the linkages between education and its non-monetary outcomes.