Is it a succes?

Criteria for succes:• Is the cycle running?• Have policies changed because of the

indicators?• Will it run again? • And again?

Is it a succes (2)?

And above all:• Is there an increase in well-being?

And:• Is that increase attributable to the use of

indicators?

Lupp in the policy process

1. decision and priority

2. analyze

3. strategi

4. goals and plans of action

5. implementation/action

6. follow-up

7. review

Amsterdam: the meaning for future policy

Decision making

-

Policy design

-

evaluation

Imple-mentation

-- survey- Scenariostudy

Diagnosis

Agenda-setting

- Problemanalysis - Probleminventarisation - (Benchmarking: , National, International, municipal)

- Brainstorm with experts- Feasibiliy study- Comparison of policy instruments

- Participation- Counterexpertise

- Organisational research- Processevaluation-

- Outputmonitor- Outcomemonitor- Effectiveness research

File researchBehavior measurement

- - -

-Output monitor-Outcome monitor-Effectiveness research-File research-Behavior measurement

Summary (1)

the Policy cycle:– Running in various countries– With different speed– With different intensity

Summary (2)

Quality of indicators:• Scope varies a lot• Process is important• Sometimes stakeholders are involved• Entire youth period is rare• Subjective measures: no taboo• Quick and dirty: can also work

MODEL- MAKING – MEASURING INSTRUMENTS

• 8 domains

• 36 subdomains

• Apr. 100 indicators

• Operationalized to survey questions:– 3-year-old: 56 questions

• Mothers are respondents (internet-based questionnaire)– 7-year-old: 64 questions

• Mothers are respondents (internet-based questionnaire)– 11-year-old: 73 questions

• Child is respondent (face-to-face interviews)– 15-year-old: 87 questions

• Teenager is respondent (internet-based questionnaire)– 19-year-old: 92 questions

• Teenager is respondent (internet-based questionnaire)

Summary (3)

Effect of indicators:• Not always evident• Policies are rarely monitored

Iceland:Trends in substance use in 10th grade 1997 - 2009

42

35

3233

2628

26

22

25

18 19

23

19

1615 14 14

1211 12 10

10

1715

12 11 12 13

99 9

76

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009

%

Drunk last 30 days Daily smoking Hashish once or more

Summary (4)

Dissemination:• Local reports seem very powerful, seem to

invoke responsibility• Interaction with data? Attractive!

• So: local dashboards?

Overall score of all communities in the Netherlands

Overallscore 2006

8 tot 28,9 (52)2 tot 8 (80)

-2 tot 2 (110)-8 tot -2 (176)

-13,1 tot -8 (25)

Francis van der Mooren

14 December 2009

Website and database (2)

Summary (4)

Dissemination:

• So: local dashboards?

charles.berg@uni.lu 15

Concluding Remarks by Charles Berg

• Relevance of indicators: both in policy relevant and comparative research

• Contextualise indicators: The indicator construction should be open to a policy making process as well to a process of understanding

• Embed indicator: reading and interpreting in a conversational process

• See indicators as elements in a process of sense making

Why do we do so well?

• We are nicer countries to live in!

• Importance of (supporting) local actors / governments

Thank you!