Page 60 - The Importance of Common Metrics for Advacing Social Science Theory and Research

The Importance of Common Metrics for Advancing Social Science Theory and Research: A Workshop Summary
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/13034.html

48 THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMON METRICS

which created the indices against which progress and the capability of its
own government are measured. Prewitt also pointed to the global project
Measuring the Progress of Societies, which is hosted by the Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and run in collabora-
tion with other international and regional partners. It is illustrative of the
recognized importance of significant economic, social, and environmental
indicators beyond GDP, such as measures of subjective well-being, orga-
nizational capacities, and innovation, to assess societal progress, he said.
He noted that in the OECD conversation about progress, there is always a
footnote that participating countries ought to define measures in their own
way, thus undercutting the OECD’s drive for standardization.
Turning to Snipp’s presentation, Prewitt observed that the U.S. stan-
dardization of races into five categories in 1977 reflected patterns that trace
to 220 years earlier, an indication of what he termed “bureaucratic inertia.”
He commented that the race classification system in the United States has
attached itself successively to different policy regimes, from those that sup-
ported the Three-Fifths Rule (which drove American history for the first
60 years), to immigration restrictions, to affirmative action. Even in the
2010 census, he observed, the race classification is still based on historical
patterns of discrimination.
Prewitt indicated that there is little theoretical basis for the race clas-
sification system in use today. He stated that it is impossible to standardize
the race measure, especially cross-culturally. He noted that all the presenta-
tions in this session made the same major point about the need for theory
and the need for public purpose. The latter, including the relevant measures,
must be embedded in a conversation with the population, not just among
statisticians.
Regarding the genomic revolution and its impact on classifications,
Prewitt commented that genomic projects conducted around the world are
being forced into the coding schemes of the United States—specifically, the
OMB classifications. He expressed concern about current directions and
“rebiologizing race.” Prewitt saw the challenge as going beyond scientific
standardization to focus on how such a system would be used, as well as
its political and policy implications.
Barbara Schneider (Michigan State University) agreed with Prewitt
about the lack of adequate research about administrative data. As more
longitudinal data are being collected, she asked how these new data will
be integrated into measures that have been based primarily on surveys.
Prewitt commented that the big issue regarding administrative data is the
potential ability to cross data sets from education with those on health and
social services.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.