Characteristics of the population and economic measures that constitute traditional social indicators are compared with more recent “quality of life” measures to demonstrate that social indicators are always value statements at the policy level. The possibility of alternative perspectives is illustrated. It is suggested that an awareness of the assumptions implicit in any given indicator is as important as the data they provide.
The use of the term “social indicator” has been with us only since 1966 (Bauer, 1966). Nonetheless, social indicators have come to hold a place of high esteem in program planning. A United Nations Statistical Office survey documented no less than 29 countries with social trends books published or in preparation (Zapf, 1976). It is estimated that in the United States alone the federal government spent $7.5 billion on social policy and program research from 196.5 to 1975 (Moore, 1977). Increased quantification of social processes seems assured by an available technology, by an available skilled manpower (in part diverted from academic surpluses), and most importantly, by the federal government’s interest in measuring the impact of social interventions and holding service providers accountable for their services. Government efforts at self-scrutiny, planning, and cost efficiency in social programming all call for increased social assessment and evaluation.
