Key Tasks

The list of tasks below will not necessarily be carried out in succession.  Some will be carried out simultaneously.

Task 1 
The project will begin with extensive desk research and a literature review to examine the existing state of knowledge of social indicators, to identify gaps and to inform the future course of the Research Activity.  Conversations and interviews will be held with specialist groups in the field (up to five such meetings during the course of this task), and data will be quarried and re-analysed as necessary to assess existing measures.  The output of this phase of work will be a report containing the conceptual framework of the Activity, a review of existing knowledge of the field in Europe and beyond, a summary of data already available, and a broad agenda of appropriate avenues to follow (Deliverable 1).  This paper will form the basis of subsequent consultations and discussions with specialist groups (see Task 2).

Task 2

Further meetings with specialist teams will be held (another 6 - 8 such meetings during this phase) to begin the process of reducing the variety of possible indicators under consideration to a more realistic and manageable level.  In between these meetings, a meticulous process of defining and developing in embryonic form a long list of potentially suitable indicators within various domains.  Some of these indictors are likely to have been field-tested in different settings, in which case the data they have generated will need to be assessed and possibly (re-analysed).  Other potential indicators will have technical or substantive flaws, and may need development work in the form of field tests in some ESS countries as part and parcel of their R4 fieldwork.  Other possible indicators will be discarded during this phase because they will have already shown themselves to be unworkable or uninteresting.

Task 3

The third task will be to produce the first shortlist of potential new social indicators - some behaviourally or factually based, others attitudinal - accompanied by a further report on their provenance and potential utility (Deliverable 2).  Three or four further meetings will be held during this phase with specialists in the relevant fields to obtain feedback and criticism, a summary of which will be produced for wider consumption (Deliverable 3).

Task 4

Taking account of the feedback and criticism contained in Deliverable 3, the penultimate stage of the Activity will begin with a new honed down proposal (Deliverable 4), containing details of the revised shortlist of proposed indicators, the case for each of them against possible alternatives, their theoretical justification and technical properties.  Again a number of meetings (two or three) are likely to be necessary with specialist groups or individuals to refine certain indicators prior to the final proposal.  Further discussion and consultation will of course be conducted in written correspondence. 

Task 5

Following this further stage of consultation, a final proposal will be made and circulated, containing a refined and fully justified list of proposed social indicators (Deliverable 5).  This proposal will be circulated not only to all the consultative groups but much more widely in order to attract the greatest possible interest and constructive criticism.  

Task 6

Not far in advance of the publication of the final set of proposals, a large conference will be convened (in month 57) comprising 50 or so specialists in the field.  Its aim will be to build a head of steam behind the proposal and to take account of any remaining objections or proposed refinements.  The conference will be attended by about 50 people, most of whom will already feel some ownership of the project.

Apart from the costs of the final conference and travel/subsistence/interim meetings, JRA4 will be a highly labour-intensive activity.  The leadership of the project will be handled at professorial level within both City and SCP.  This is necessary partly in order to deal intensively with people at similar levels in other organisations and networks all over Europe, but also because the Research Activity aims to break fresh ground and to solve a range of difficult substantive and methodological problems that have remained unsolved for many years.

The combined professorial input in both institutions amounts to just over one and a half days per week throughout the life of the Activity, while the researcher roles in both institutions amount to around three-quarters of a person.

As to the division of work between City and SCP, this cannot be resolved too far in advance.  SCP has a team of people who have been working on ‘objective' indicators, and therefore has existing expertise to be deployed in the early stages of the project in particular, in preparation for the first deliverable.  City will not only coordinate and shape the JRA as a whole, but it will also be especially involved in those parts of the work that will seek to clarify what should be the substantive and technical properties of enduring social indicators.  The two groups will, however, work together on all aspects of the project, communicating by telephone, email and at face to face meetings.

As far as travel to meetings is concerned, we have allowed for an average of four trips per year to specialist substantive teams and for a conference towards the end of the grant period of 50 specialists from different parts of Europe and America.          

Milestones:

Month 14 - Conceptual framework and information document prepared

Month 20 - Selection of specialists for initial consultation

Month 46 - Written consultation phase and further meetings

Month 56 - Final consultation phase complete

Month 57 - Conference to finalise and launch proposed indicators

Month 59 - Finalisation of proposed social indicators