The EU regional Social Progress Index Paola Annoni European Commission DG for Regional and - Brussels Policy Development and Economic Analysis Unit paola.annoni@ec.europa.eu http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/maps/social_progress
Why an EU regional Social Progress Index? Take up and contribute to the debate on GDP and beyond Allows broader view of development through harmonised data complementing GDP Reflecting social/environmental progress At the regional level Develop an analytical tool for EU Regional Policy Insight into components of regional development (strong variations within countries) A request from the regions to facilitate peer learning Analytical tool for regions to set-up development strategies and monitor their impact At EU level Check: Is Cohesion Policy investing in the right issues?
Focus on Development issues beyond money Factors that enable citizens to realise their potential enabling factors Health Environmental quality Discrimination and tolerance Corruption and Trust Crime and safety Education Deprivation Linked to EU strategy for smart/sustainable/inclusive growth
A DG REGIO project inspired by The Global Social Progress Index http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/ What we did: we maintained the Global SPI framework we adapted the indicator set to better reflect the EU situation we developed our own methodology
Basic Human Needs Foundations of Wellbeing Opportunity Nutrition and Basic Medical Care 1. Premature mortality(<65) 2. Infant mortality 3. Unmet medical needs 4. Insufficient food Water and Sanitation 5. Satisfaction with water quality 6. Lack of toilet in dwelling 7. Uncollected sewage 8. Sewage treatment Shelter 9. Burdensome cost of housing 10. Satisfaction with housing 11. Overcrowding 12. Lack of adequate heating Personal Safety 13. Homicide rate 14. Safety at night 15. Traffic deaths Access to Basic Knowledge 16. Upper-secondary enrolment rate 17. Lower secondary completion only 18. Early school leavers Access to Information and Communications 19. Internet at home 20. Broadband at home 21. Online interaction with public authorities Health and Wellness 22. Life expectancy 23. General health status 24. Standardized cancer death rate 25. Standardized heart disease death rate 26. Unmet dental needs 27. Satisfaction with air quality Ecosystem Sustainability 28. Air pollution-pm10 29. Air pollution-pm2.5 30. Air pollution-ozone 31. Pollution or grime 32. Protected land (Natura 2000) Personal Rights 33. Trust in the political system 34. Trust in the legal system 35. Trust in the police 36. Quality of public services Personal Freedom and Choice 37. Freedom over life choices 38. Teenage pregnancy 39. Young people not in education, employment or training 40. Corruption index Tolerance and Inclusion 41. Impartiality of government services 42. Tolerance for immigrants 43. Tolerance for minorities 44. Attitudes toward people with disabilities 45. Tolerance for homosexuals 46. Gender employment gap 47. Community safety net Access to Advanced Education 48. Tertiary education attainment 49. Tertiary enrolment 50. Lifelong learning
94 correlation coefficient = 0.96 92 90 FI DK 88 86 ES BE UK IE AT DE SE NL Sweden: EU-SPI = 80% Global SPI = 89% 84 PT SI FR 82 IT CZ EE Glo 80 CY PL SK 78 EL HR 76 LV HU LT
Different GDP, similar social level Lorraine Brussels Lorraine, in northeast France, bordering Belgium, Luxembourg and Germany, achieves the same level of social progress as the capital of Belgium Brussels. 12
What is the relevance of this work? The headline index is to raise awareness and draw attention,.. but the real interest is in The three sub-indices The indices for the component The individual indicators The changes over time (to be developed)
Pohjois-ja Ita-Suomi Similar GDP, different social level Bucuresti Ilfov 15
High SPI levels are "attractive" 17
9 correlation coefficient = -0.54 p-value = <0.0001 Sicilia Higher levels of SPI correspond to lower levels of income inequality Ciudad Autónoma de Ceuta 8 Campania Ciudad Autónoma de Melilla Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire 7 6 NordEst SudVest Oltenia Sud Muntenia Severozapaden Severen tsentralen Yugoiztochen Severoiztochen Centru Bucuresti Ilfov Essex Outer London NordVest Vest Yugozapaden Illes Balears Lazio Latvija Attiki Andalucía Eesti Comunidad de Madrid Alentejo Norte Algarve Lisboa Canarias Região Autónoma dos Açores Centro (PT) CastillaLa Mancha Calabria Comunidad Valenciana Dytiki Makedonia Anatoliki Makedonia, Thraki Cataluña Prov. Brabant Wallon Prov. VlaamsBrabant Peloponnisos Dytiki Ellada Ipeiros Voreio Aigaio Aragón Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire S80 5 4 3 2 Sterea Ellada Ionia Nisia Thessalia Extremadura Castilla y León Kent Kýpros East Anglia Kontinentalna Hrvatska Mazowieckie Abruzzo Umbria Île de France Región de Murcia Lódzkie Border, Midland and Western Eastern Scotland Dolnoslaskie Puglia Corse Molise Galicia Wien Marche Cantabria Southern and Eastern KujawskoPomorskie Köln Leicestershire, Rutland and Northamptonshire Lubelskie Podlaskie LanguedocRoussillon Salzburg Drenthe Overijssel Utrecht Slaskie Toscana ChampagneArdenne Lubuskie Picardie Berlin Tirol Bratislavský kraj Kärnten Zeeland Friesland (NL) Hovedstaden Freiburg DélDunántúl HauteNormandie Braunschweig ÉszakMagyarország Malta DélAlföld Bourgogne Moravskoslezsko Prov. Hainaut LänsiSuomi Vzhodna Slovenija Prov. Antwerpen Dresden HelsinkiUusimaa Valle d'aosta/vallée d'aoste Severovýchod Jihovýchod EteläSuomi Chemnitz Jihozápad Leipzig Midtjylland Nordjylland Burgenland (AT) Sjælland Stockholm Sydsverige Östra Mellansverige Norra Mellansverige Övre Norrland Mellersta Norrland 1 0 S80/S20 indicator sources and years: OECD regional level - different years (from 2010 to 2014) EUROSTAT national level - year 2014 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 EU regional SPI (0-100) Net migration indicator: red regions are affected by negative net migration green regions are affected by positive net migration 18
SPI cannot be used for distributing GLOBAL ESIF allocation Mixture of official and other sources (EEA, Gallup) Indicators have different margins of error Each step in the process of setting up a composite indicator has a potential impact: Data standardisation Selecting the right way to combine the indicators into components the components into dimensions the dimensions into the final index Questions of principle (high corruption high funding?)
More info at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/maps/social_progress http://ec.europa.eu/environment/beyond_gdp/news_map_en.html