Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T17:04:58.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Disappointments and Legacies of Social Indicators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Judith Eleanor Innes
Judith Eleanor Innes
Affiliation:
City and Regional Planning, University of California, Berkeley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The social indicators movement has been a disappointment to its originators. By the late 1970s, at least in the US, the great hopes for social indicators to become a major influence on public policy had been tempered. The outpouring of literature using the term ‘social indicators’ dwindled. Policy scientists turned their attention to other topics or found new labels for their interests. The Social Science Research Council closed its Social Indicators Research Center in Washington, DC and stopped publishing its newsletter. And in the US no annual social report seemed likely to be institutionalized. Many observers decided the social indicators movement was a failure.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , October 1989 , pp. 429 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 SINET Social Indicator Network News, Ferris, Abbott, ed., P.O. Box 24064, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322.Google Scholar

2 Two journals, Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion and Utilization and Knowledge in Society: The International journal of Knowledge Transfer, offer a glimpse of this literature, appearing in a wide range of social science and professional fields, particularly management and public policy.

3 Judith, I.de Neufville, , Social Indicators and Public Policy: Interactive Processes of Design and Use, Elsevier Scientific Publishing, Amsterdam 1975 and second expanded edition, Transaction Books, New Brunswick, NJ., 1990.Google Scholar

4 Nathan, Caplan and Eugenia, Barton. (1978) ‘The Potential of Social Indicators’ Social Indicators Research, 5, 427–456.Google Scholar

5 Brusegard, D. (1978) ‘Rethinking National Reports’, Social Indicators Research, 6, 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar