Good Societies

Ron Anderson, Professor Emeritus, Univ. of Minn. (rea@umn.edu)

Full slide presentation is available at http://www.compassionatesocieties.org/ index.php/social-well-being/good-societies

Good Societies Index, Sub-Indexes

Twelve Components* (& Sample Indicators)
1 Economic Sustainability (Income, inequality) 2 Child Well-Being (Often eating with parents) 3 Safety (Few homicides) 4 Health (Self-reported health, incidence of AIDS) 5 Non-Violence (Low arms exports) 6 Integrity & Social Justice (Corruption-free organizations) 7 Civil Society (Freedom of the Press) 8 Compassion (Caregiving time, also hosting refugees)

9 Environmental Sustainability (Emissions, renewables) 10 Education (Reading, graduation rates) 11 Social Sustainability (Subjective well-being, migration) 12 Social Cohesion (Trust, tolerance, union membership)
1

Good Societies Index, 2012

Conceptual Roots:

List of Good Society Index, 2012 Indicators and Sub-Indexes No. Indicator Name
1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2e 3a 3b 3c 3d 4a 4b 4c 4d 5a 5b 5c 5d 6a 6b 6e 6d 7a 7b 7d 7e 8a 8b 8c 8d 9a 9b 9c 9d 10a 10b 10c 10d 11a 11b 11c 11d 12a 12b 12c 12d Inequality-Adjusted Income Low adult poverty Employment Technology Innovation Policy Low child poverty Low percent living in single-parent families Percent often eating evening meal with parent(s) Low Adolescent Fertility Low homicide rate National Security Index Life expectancy Low road fatalities Self-reported good health Low incidence of AIDS Low obesity Low Avoidable Hospital Admissions Contributions to peace Low Armed forces per capita Low military spending per person Low arms exports Corruption-free organizations Index of Corporate Social Responsibility Protection of citizens from surveillance Low prison populations Democracy Index Turnout in national elections Freedom of the press Percent of Women Members of Congress/Parliament Kindness & helpfulness of peers Refugees hosted per citizen Index of aid to developing countries Caregiving Minutes per day Low Carbon Dioxide Emissions Environmental Performance Index Low Municipal Waste Renewables as share of energy used Upper Secondary School Graduation Rates Adult Education Participation Rates Reading Competencies of 15-year olds Teacher Salary Levels Subjective Well-being Public Confidence in Social Institutions Economists Quality of Life Index Migration In-flow Trust Tolerance of community Union membership Families

Index Concepts
Economic Sustainability Economic Sustainability Economic Sustainability Economic Sustainability Child Well-Being Child Well-Being Child Well-Being Child Well-Being Safety Safety Safety Safety Health Health Health Health Non-Violence Non-Violence Non-Violence Non-Violence Integrity & Social Justice Integrity & Social Justice Integrity & Social Justice Integrity & Social Justice Civil Society Civil Society Civil Society Civil Society Compassion Compassion Compassion Compassion Environmental Sustainability Environmental Sustainability Environmental Sustainability Environmental Sustainability Education Education Education Education Social Sustainability Social Sustainability Social Sustainability Social Sustainability Social Cohesion Social Cohesion Social Cohesion Social Cohesion

& Compassion
Good Society Index Scores and its 12 SubIndexes for each of the 20 Richest Countries over Three Million Population
om c ie po ty ne 1. nts Ind Ec on ex ) o
96 106 96 100 117 107 103 100 85 84 97 109 99 115 93 92 106 109 95

Australia Austria Be lgium C anada De nmark Finland France Ge rmany Ire land Italy Japan Ne the rlands Ne w Ze aland Norway Portugal Spain Swe de n

S witzerland UK United S tates

82

mi cS us ta i Ch na ild bil W ity ell Ind -be 3. ex Sa ing fet In yI de nd x ex 4. He a lt h& He 5. No alt h-c n -V are io l en Ind 6. ce ex Int In de egr x ity an 7. dS Ci v il oci So al cie Ju 8. sti ty Co ce Ind mp Ind ex as s ex ion 9. In En de v ir x on me nta 10 .E lS du ust cat ain io n ab 11 ilit .S y oc ial Su 12 s ta So incia ab lC ili t oh yI esi Ov nd on era ex Ind ll ( av ex era ge )G oo dS oci et y Ind ex i2 .
98 101 110 95 106 106 97 92 100 109 111 109 86 106 99 102 104 109 86 72 104 97 95 103 97 96 100 101 98 105 110 105 105 109 94 97 107 108 98 80 100 99 105 106 104 98 98 97 106 96 102 105 100 108 89 97 102 110 101 70 93 111 103 103 103 109 92 102 103 103 112 95 102 102 117 109 93 97 96 101 110 109 114 92 92 96 99 91 106 106 108 97 96 108 105 101 104 100 115 110 84 103 96 85 87 114 108 115 89 97 118 97 87 78 98 107 98 107 103 99 90 104 104 90 100 110 110 114 97 86 118 96 94 91 81 107 92 96 95 106 104 97 88 101 102 91 113 106 109 96 119 111 98 79 98 94 97 99 94 114 89 104 92 97 112 101 108 100 99 88 95 110 101 90 111 102 99 96 98 101 99 102 105 106 93 98 97 96 100 104 102 108 95 96 107 106 93 85 86 103 103 107 109 107 105 117 91 90 107 88 90 85 96 97 96 89 104 108 100 98 109 111 75 94 86 98 108 118 120 93 101 94 94 92 102 111 81 68 91 73

Go o (A d S

ll C

Compassion Index Indicators

Indicator
Kindness & helpfulness of peers

Data Used
Percent of children age 11, 13, 15, who reported kind peers

Source
Health Behavior of School age Children study, 2001

Refugees hosted per citizen

Refugees hosted per 1,000 citizens

UM Refugee Agency Statistical Yearbook, 2008

Government aid to developing countries

Index of Aid to Developing Countries, 2009

Center for Global Development, Commit. To Development Index

Caregiving minutes per day

Government social expenditures in 2005

OECD (2011), Society at a Glance 2011

In a World of
Hypothesis: Compassion is a core attribute of good societies because such people take social responsibilities. . Outcome: True. Countries with greater levels of compassion are high on the Good Society Index. Surprise: Americans, compared to other rich countries, rank both low in compassion and low on the good society index.

Hypothesis: Religious commitment leads to greater compassion. Outcome: False. The correlation by country is between lower religious commitment and compassion. Surprise: The people of the United States, compared to other rich countries, are both quite religious and among those low in compassion.

Wealth
Hypothesis: More compassionate societies tend to accept higher tax burdens because of their concern for others. Outcome: True. Countries with greater levels of compassion have the highest tax burdens. Surprise: The people of the United States, compared to other rich countries, are both low in compassion and have the lowest tax burden of the 20 wealthiest countries.

Hypothesis: Compassion and gender inequality are unrelated.

Outcome: False. The correlation is not strong but countries with higher gender inequality tend to be low in compassion.
Surprise: The United States is the most gender unequal of rich countries due to relatively few women in congress, high adolescent reproduction, and high deaths in childbirth.

Notes on Video of Growth in Gender Equality & Human Development (UN Human Dev. Index, 2011)
Bubble Chart Video starts in 1995

Bubble Chart Video Midway in 2002

Notes on Video of Growth in Gender Equality & Human Development (UN Human Dev. Index, 2011)
Bubble Chart Video Ends in 2011

CONCLUSIONS 1. Remarkable social change over the past 15 years: 2. Most countries moved toward greater development and gender equality. 3. Kuwait and United Arab Emirates made great strides in gender equality. (Watch them stream horizontally to the left across the chart.) 4. China moves erratically upward and sideways. 5. Sweden stands out as the most gender equal and the highest in human development, which is defined here as the geometric mean of GDP, life expectancy, and average years of schooling. 10 6. Gender equality in the USA declined slightly.

Conclusions
1. Quality of life differences among affluent societies obviously can not be explained by economics (wealth or income) alone. 2. How people view their compassionrelated social responsibilities shapes the distribution of wellbeing in societies. 3. Consistent with numerous comparative analysts (such as Lindert (2004), Pontusso (2005), and Kenworthy (2004)) the Nordic countries topped the Good Societies Index. 4. These results confirm that it is not necessary for an affluent society to be an individualistic, antigovernment society.
11

Conclusions (cont.)
5. The USA is not just a step behind other nations. On prison rates, obesity, murders, and defense spending, the USA is not just higher, but two to three times higher than the next highest nation. While critics might argue for selection of different indicators, these results shown here give cause to pause and reflect on how countries like the USA, at the low end of the Good Society Index, could change course and improve the well-being of all its citizens Most of the 20 most affluent countries clustered around the middle range of the continuum of indicators for the Good Society. The fact that few of the countries scored at extremely high points on the indicators suggests how challenging it is for a rich society to become or remain a Good Society. We who enjoy the comfort of living in these rich societies should not forget about the many millions who live with us but struggle daily from homelessness, discrimination, and even hunger. 12

6.

7.

8.