66th ISI World Statistics Congress

66th ISI World Statistics Congress

From Dashboard to Multi-Level Diagnosis: Alignment and Complementarity between the WIS Framework and the UN Beyond-GDP Indicator System

Conference

66th ISI World Statistics Congress

Format: WSC 2027: IPS Abstract

Abstract

The UN Beyond-GDP framework rests on three pillars: current well-being, equity and inclusion, and sustainability and resilience. The Well-being–Inclusivity–Sustainability (WIS) framework developed by the Beyond-GDP Statistics Institute adopts a three-dimensional structure that is conceptually isomorphic to those pillars, which makes item-by-item alignment feasible rather than requiring a separate system.
The paper makes three contributions. First, it maps WIS 3.0 — 7 first-level dimensions, 24 second-level and 38 third-level indicators, computed for 177 countries over 2010–2024 from regularly published international statistics — onto the dashboard's core well-being domains and its equity and sustainability categories. The mapping identifies where the two systems coincide, where definitions differ, and where coverage is complementary.
Second, it addresses two gaps the UN report leaves open. The dashboard reports levels dimension by dimension but offers no aggregate judgement, because the Expert Group has not agreed on a core composite indicator; and it diagnoses levels but not structure. WIS responds with a three-layer progression — level, structure and synergy — that yields an overall measure, distributional diagnostics (Theil index, Gini coefficient, bottom-line fairness index) and a coupling-coordination assessment of whether dimensions reinforce or crowd out one another, all from the same indicator set.
Third, it addresses a question the UN framework raises but does not answer: the structural roots of distribution. Drawing on a “production–distribution–well-being” transmission chain, the paper links declining labour income shares and digital-economy value capture to the observed divergence between GDP and well-being, and argues that distribution should be treated as the hinge between production and well-being rather than as one dimension among many.
Results for China and comparator countries show how the approach turns a descriptive dashboard into a diagnostic instrument, and the paper discusses what such a diagnostic adds to the UN benchmark without displacing it.