| Number 414 | August 7, 2008 |
|
This Week: Measuring Human Development in the USA
|
|
Greetings, This issue of Nygaard Notes is all about Human Development in the United States. Never heard the term? I explain it here, and give some excerpts from a major report on the subject that just came out and was ignored by all the influential people in this country. The two best recent attempts (that I know of) to measure "how we are doing" in this country are "The Measure of America: American Human Development Report 2008-2009," which is the subject of this issue, and the report from earlier this year called "The Social Health of the States 2008." Once again, thanks to all who contributed to the just-completed Nygaard Notes Pledge Drive. I love ALL the readers of Nygaard Notes, and Pledge Drive time is a time when I especially appreciate those of you who are able and willing to provide the material support that makes this project continue to grow and thrive. Thank you! May you all reach your full potential, Nygaard |
|
This month's Nygaard Notes is all based on a report released last month called "The Measure of America: American Human Development Report 2008-2009." The following words are from the foreword to that report, written by economist and philosopher Amartya Sen: "The United States is, in most ways of counting, the wealthiest nation in the world, and yet its accomplishments in longevity, secure health, fine education, and other such basic features of good living are considerably below those of many other—often much poorer—countries. What is no less extraordinary is that the relative position of the United States has been steadily falling over the years as the powerful growth of the U.S. economy fails to be adequately translated into better lives for Americans, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds. The human development approach can be put to excellent use in America, both because that perspective is so important for the problems of this country and because the approach has been so widely neglected here." |
|
Back in Nygaard Notes #248 I quoted a Latin American general talking about his military-ruled "economic success story." He commented that "The economy is doing great, but the people in it aren't." Back then, in the midst of the last campaign for U.S. president, I brought that sentiment home with the hopeful claim that "more and more people are beginning to notice that ‘President' Bush always talks of his tax-cut and budget plans as being intended to spur ‘economic growth,' which is quite different than ‘economic well-being.'" Well, here it is, four years later, and I could write essentially the same words again. While the media is filled with stories about McCain or Obama and "economic growth," it's far more difficult to find stories that mention either candidate and the phrase "economic well-being" (15 times more difficult in the case of McCain; 30 times more difficult for Obama.) On July 16th the candidates were handed a golden opportunity in the middle of the campaign to discuss the economic well-being of their fellow citizens. Both candidates chose to ignore it, if they even noticed it. I am talking about the release of a major report called "The Measure of America: American Human Development Report 2008-2009." Growth Is Not the Goal Many economists around the world have noted that there is not a direct relationship between economic "growth" and the welfare of the people in an economy. Twenty years ago—in an earlier, but not all that different, era—some economists noted the disconnect between prevailing economic wisdom and observed reality, and this gave rise to a different approach to measuring the state of nations and peoples. It is called the Human Development approach. The United Nations Development Program explains the "Origins of the Human Development Approach" like this: "The Human Development approach arose in part as a result of growing criticism to the leading development approach of the 1980s, which presumed a close link between national economic growth and the expansion of individual human choices. Many, such as Dr. Mahbub ul Haq, the Pakistani economist who played a key role in formulating the human development paradigm, came to recognize the need for an alternative development model due to many factors, including: 1) Growing evidence that did not support the then prevailing belief in the ‘trickle down' power of market forces to spread economic benefits and end poverty; 2) The human costs of Structural Adjustment Programmes became more apparent; 3) Social ills (crime, weakening of social fabric, HIV/AIDS, pollution, etc.) were still spreading even in cases of strong and consistent economic growth, and; 4) A wave of democratization in the early 90's raised hopes for people-centred models." The point is that those concerned about human welfare cannot simply promote "growth" in the economy. There's more to it, and the American Human Development Report 2008-2009 gives us a chance to have a look beyond "the economy" and see how "the people in it" are doing. Let's have that look right now. |
|
"The Measure of America: American Human Development Report 2008-2009" (AHDR) was released last month by the American Human Development Project, which describes itself as "a nonpartisan, non-profit initiative," and which is funded by a variety of foundations, plus Oxfam America and the Social Science Research Council. Here's the opening paragraph from the executive summary of the report: "Economists, politicians, journalists, and ordinary citizens have many ways to track how America is doing. Monitoring the stock market, watching real estate prices, keeping an eye on interest rates—to follow these figures is to see how the country is progressing in one way or another. But we all have a harder time when trying to look at the big picture: on the whole, are things getting better or worse, and for whom? To answer these questions and to gauge how they stack up compared to their neighbors, countries worldwide have embraced an idea that captures key dimensions of national well-being in one framework: human development." Nygaard Notes first reported on the concept of "human development" ‘way back in 1999. I talked about the United Nations Human Development Report (UNHDR), the Index of Social Health, the Genuine Progress Indicator, and others. The first UNHDR was published in 1990. The UN reminds us that "Human development has always been flexible and ‘open-ended' with respect to more specific definitions. There can be as many human development dimensions as there are ways of enlarging people's choices. The key or priority parameters of human development can evolve over time and vary both across and within countries." This year is the first year there has been an American Human Development Report, which is an attempt to apply the measurement to The World's Only Superpower, and as such should be of particular interest to United Statesians. While adapted to the particulars of this wealthy industrial economy, the AHDR follows the lead of the UNHDR in that it "emphasizes the everyday experience of ordinary people and the degree to which they have the freedom, access, and opportunity to live a decent life." How Are We Doing? Highlights of the Report appear elsewhere in this issue of the Notes, but a few headlines (from outside the United States) give a hint of the basic message. The Chinese news agency Xinhua led off their story by saying, "A new report released here Thursday shows huge disparities among Americans in health, education and income." The London Guardian had this lengthy headline: "Development: US Fails to Measure up on 'Human Index': Nation Slumps from 2nd to 12th in Global Table: Richest Fifth Take Home $168,000, Poorest $11,000" Their lead paragraph went like this: "Despite spending $230m (£115m) an hour on healthcare, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of almost every other developed country. And while it has the second-highest income per head in the world, the United States ranks 42nd in terms of life expectancy." When attempting to assess something, comparison is useful. We can compare over time—that is, how we were doing yesterday to how we are doing today. We can also compare over space—that is, how we are doing compared to people or nations elsewhere. Since this is the first American HDR, it doesn't allow us to compare over time (except by glancing at past international rankings). But the Report "provides a single measure of well-being for all Americans, [allowing us to compare results] by state and congressional district, as well as by gender, race, and ethnicity." The folks at the American Human Development Project say that the purpose of the Report is to "stimulate fact-based public debate about and political attention to human development issues in the United States and to empower people with an instrument to hold elected officials accountable for progress on issues we all care about: health, education and income." In order for such accountability to come into play, however, the information in reports such as "The Measure of America" need to become part of the public discussion, and that begins with receiving attention in the media that most people see or hear every day. There was no such coverage of this report, nor any similar report, to my knowledge. Earlier this year, for example, the Institute for Innovation in Social Policy at Vassar College released a similar "report card" called "The Social Health of the States 2008." This excellent report was also ignored. You can read it on the Internet. The fact that such reports are available online for motivated people to go and read for themselves does not address the basic problem, which is the overall shape and range of the public discussion on the issue. That shape and that range continue to be severely limited due to the reliance of most people on the mass commercial media for their news. Take the present case as an example. Despite the availability of the report, on the Internet and in book form, I would venture a guess that if one were to go out tomorrow on any street in the U.S. and ask 100 people, not one would have heard of "The Measure of America." I doubt that any of them will have heard the phrase "human development," for that matter. That's the power of the media. Following are a few excerpts from the document. |
|
Highlights from the American Human Development Report 2008-2009 |
|
What Is Human Development? "Human development is about the real freedom ordinary people have to decide who to be, what to do, and how to live. "The human development approach seeks a holistic measure of a country's progress. In the United States, the state of the nation is often expressed through Gross Domestic Product, daily stock market results, consumer spending levels, and national debt figures. But these numbers provide only a partial view of how we are faring." Comparisons "Comparisons [of the U.S. with other] affluent nations reveal some awkward truths. First, others have achieved better outcomes in many vital areas, including infant mortality and longevity, than we have. Second, they have achieved superior results with less spending per capita." "Comparisons among different groups of Americans reveal much about who is being left out of improvements in health, education, and living standards: African American babies are two and a half times more likely to die before age one than white babies; Latinos are twice as likely to drop out of high school as African Americans and almost four times more likely to drop out than whites; and the earnings of American women are about two-thirds of men's earnings. Structures "The same economic and social structures that help the wealthy stay at the top of the economic ladder can limit the upward mobility of those at the bottom. Human Security "Security from natural disasters has received a great deal of attention in a post-Katrina America coming to terms with the extreme weather events often associated with climate change. But a different kind of security is the chief preoccupation of millions of Americans: security in one's own home and neighborhood. "Human security was comprehensively explored for the first time in the 1994 Human Development Report. A human security approach expands the concept of security from nations to individuals, from protection of national assets from foreign aggression to protection of individual rights to physical safety and health, basic freedoms, and economic security. "Human security entails protection of the vital core of human lives from critical threats. It is defined as safety from chronic threats, such as discrimination, unemployment, or environmental degradation, as well as protection from sudden crises, including economic collapse, environmental disaster, violence, or epidemic. Human insecurity can be a product of human actions or natural events, or of an interaction between the two. Infrastructure as Security "Investing in infrastructure and emergency systems to mitigate risk saves lives. In California, $8 billion has been spent since 2000 just on retrofitting the state's bridges to withstand serious earthquakes; public and private expenditures dedicated to other aspects of earthquake preparedness, like retrofitting houses and office buildings and educating the public about how to stay safe during earthquakes, are doubtless greater still. What difference does this investment make? Compare the impact of two roughly similar earthquakes in different parts of the world. Sixty people perished in 1994 in a magnitude 6.7 earthquake in Northridge, California. In southeastern Iran in 2003, roughly 31,000 people lost their lives in a slightly less powerful earthquake (magnitude 6.6). Most of those killed in Iran died when their buildings collapsed. "How many lives would have been saved in New Orleans and along the Gulf Coast if Hurricane Katrina had been met by adequate levees, restored wetlands, and a realistic emergency evacuation plan? What To Do? [This is from the press release that accompanied the publication of the Report.] "The report includes an eight-point human development agenda that touches on major areas in which action is needed to raise the American Human Development Index score in the coming years. These are: 1. Promote prevention and public health. For more, I recommend going to the website of the AHDR. |
