All papers
Beyond GDP-But for Real: A Decision‑Grade Framework for Multidimensional Well‑being Indicators
This extended abstract argues that the “Beyond GDP” agenda has reached institutional maturity, but still lacks a genuinely decision-ready use of multidimensional well-being indicators in public policy. While the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi framework, OECD work, and Italy’s BES have broadened the scope of what should be measured, indicators often remain descriptive and only weakly connected to budgeting, evaluation, and accountability. This creates two risks: “indicator washing” and opaque syntheses in which weights and trade-offs remain implicit.
To address this gap, the paper proposes DGWI (Decision-Grade Well-being Indicators), a conceptual and auditable framework aimed not at building another composite index, but at defining the minimum conditions under which existing indicator systems can credibly support public decisions. The study explores what distinguishes descriptive from decision-grade indicators, which methodological and governance conditions make them usable across planning and evaluation, and how BES and OECD initiatives can be combined without undermining transparency or legitimacy.
Through comparative document analysis and theory-building, the paper develops a protocol based on credibility, salience, legitimacy, actionability, equity, and robustness. Its key claim is that measuring well-being is no longer enough: indicators must be embedded in explicit decision routines, thresholds, responsibilities, and ex post learning mechanisms.