[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/rwipos/56.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wie geht es uns? Die W3-Indikatoren für eine neue Wohlstandsmessung

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Christoph M.
  • aus dem Moore, Nils
Abstract
Der Wohlstand einer Gesellschaft lässt sich nicht allein mit Hilfe ökonomischer Größen messen - weder sein Niveau noch die jüngste Entwicklung. Für die statistische Berichterstattung wird daher deutlich mehr benötigt, als lediglich die Wirtschaftsleistung zu erfassen. Bereits im Jahr 2013 hat eine vom Deutschen Bundestag eingesetzte Enquete-Kommission ein neues System für die Wohlstandsmessung in Deutschland vorgeschlagen, die W3-Indikatoren. Diesen Indikatorensatz sollte die Große Koalition jetzt nutzen, wenn sie das Thema Gutes Leben in den Mittelpunkt ihrer Regierungsarbeit stellt. Der W3-Indikatorensatz umfasst in drei gleichberechtigten Säulen die Dimensionen Materieller Wohlstand, Soziales und Teilhabe sowie Ökologie. Ein durchdachtes System aus Leitindikatoren und Warnlampen berücksichtigt sowohl die Vielschichtigkeit der menschlichen Existenz als auch die Anforderungen an eine einfache Kommunizierbarkeit. Eine Gewichtung, welche Kriterien für den Wohlstand des Einzelnen am wichtigsten sind, überlässt der Indikatorensatz bewusst dem jeweiligen Betrachter. Denn eine politische Normierung der individuellen Vorstellungen von Lebensqualität ist weder machbar noch wünschenswert.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Christoph M. & aus dem Moore, Nils, 2014. "Wie geht es uns? Die W3-Indikatoren für eine neue Wohlstandsmessung," RWI Positionen 56, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:rwipos:56
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/95942/1/78187811X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sonja C. Kassenboehmer & Christoph M. Schmidt, 2010. "Beyond GDP and Back: What is the Value-Added by Additional Components of Welfare Measurement?," RatSWD Working Papers 167, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    2. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    3. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2010. "The worldwide governance indicators : methodology and analytical issues," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5430, The World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Renz, Timon, 2021. "Development policy based on happiness? A review of concepts, ideas and pitfalls," FZG Discussion Papers 75, University of Freiburg, Research Center for Generational Contracts (FZG).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph M. Schmidt & Nils aus dem Moore, 2014. "Wie geht es uns? Die W3-Indikatoren für eine neue Wohlstandsmessung," RWI Positionen, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, pages 16, 03.
    2. repec:zbw:rwipos:056 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Joshua C. Gellers & Christopher Jeffords, 2015. "Procedural Environmental Rights and Environmental Justice: Assessing the Impact of Environmental Constitutionalism," Economic Rights Working Papers 25, University of Connecticut, Human Rights Institute.
    4. Monica Violeta Achim & Sorin Nicolae Borlea & Codruţa Mare, 2018. "Geocentric Behavior Dimension of the Organization’ Performance in the Context of Globalization," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 401-420, January.
    5. Jong-Han Yoon, 2014. "Conditions for successful public policies of sustainable development: institutional capacity, democracy, and free trade," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 252-266, July.
    6. Bofinger, Peter & Buch, Claudia M. & Feld, Lars P. & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Wieland, Volker, 2013. "Gegen eine rückwärtsgewandte Wirtschaftspolitik. Jahresgutachten 2013/14 [Against a backward-looking economic policy. Annual Report 2013/14]," Annual Economic Reports / Jahresgutachten, German Council of Economic Experts / Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, volume 127, number 201314, February.
    7. Sofien Tiba & Mohamed Frikha, 2020. "Sustainability Challenge in the Agenda of African Countries: Evidence from Simultaneous Equations Models," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 1270-1294, September.
    8. Mehmet Maksud Onal & John K. Ashton, 2021. "Is the Journey more Important than the Destination? EU Accession and Corporate Governance and Performance of Banks," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1516-1535, November.
    9. Mechthild Donner & Anne Verniquet & Jan Broeze & Katrin Kayser & Hugo de Vries, 2021. "Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products," Post-Print hal-03004851, HAL.
    10. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    11. Kapeliushnikov, Rostislav & Kuznetsov, Andrei & Demina, Natalia & Kuznetsova, Olga, 2013. "Threats to security of property rights in a transition economy: An empirical perspective," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 245-264.
    12. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    13. Jim Butcher, 2006. "The United Nations International Year of Ecotourism: a critical analysis of development implications," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 6(2), pages 146-156, April.
    14. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.
    15. Rakesh Sambharya & Martina Musteen, 2014. "Institutional environment and entrepreneurship: An empirical study across countries," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 314-330, December.
    16. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    17. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    18. Megan Devonald & Nicola Jones & Sally Youssef, 2022. "‘We Have No Hope for Anything’: Exploring Interconnected Economic, Social and Environmental Risks to Adolescents in Lebanon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    19. Rigby, Dan & Woodhouse, Phil & Young, Trevor & Burton, Michael, 2001. "Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 463-478, December.
    20. Michael Howes & Liana Wortley & Ruth Potts & Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Julie Davidson & Timothy Smith & Patrick Nunn, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    21. Shiferaw, Bekele & Holden, Stein, 1999. "Soil Erosion and Smallholders' Conservation Decisions in the Highlands of Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 739-752, April.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:rwipos:56. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rwiesde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.