Theoretical framework

• Pages: 9-12

Theoretical framework

Benefit s of gender equality th rough infrastruct ure provision: an EU-wid e survey 9

1. Theoretical framework

(5) http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi

(6) http://www.oecd.org/statistics/better-life-initiative.htm

(7) ht tp : // w w w. o ec d be t t er l if e in d ex . or g /# / 11111111111

(8) A brie f conference summary is available for download and more details may be found under 2007 conference, https://ec.europa.

eu/environment/beyond_gdp/2007_conference_en.html

(9) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/beyond_gdp/background_en.html

(10) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infrastructure

The prevailing economic model of the mid-20th

century measured the development and pro-

gress of countries by their economic develop-

ment. Economic growth was the main criterion

for assessing social development, with public

policy strategies centred on the idea that qual-

ity of life improves with increased GDP or per

capita income.

However, the notion that GDP growth is the

main goal of societies has been questioned

since the late 20th and early 21st centur y.

The rst initiative to change the measure of

development was led by the United Nations

Development Programme (UNDP) in 1990, with

the Human Development Index (HDI) (5). The

HDI was created to emphasise that people and

their capabilities should be the ultimate crite-

ria in assessing the development of a country,

not economic growth alone. The initiative was

supported by the Organisation for Economic

Co-operation and Development (OECD) (6), with

the Bet ter Life Index ( 7).

In the European Union (EU) context, the Euro-

pean Commission, European Parliament, Club

of Rome, OECD and the World Wide Fund for

Nature (W WF) hosted the high-level conference

Beyond GDP  (8) in 2007. The objectives were to

clarify the most appropriate indices to measure

progress and to establish how these can best

be integrated into the decision- making process

and taken up by public debate.

The Beyond GDP initiative (9) was about devel -

oping indicators that are as clear and appealing

as GDP but are more inclusive of environmen-

tal and social aspects of progress. Economic

indicators such as GDP were never designed

to be comprehensive measures of prosperity

and well-being. Suitable (adequate) indicators

are now needed to address some of the global

challenges of the 21st centur y, such as climate

change, povert y, resource depletion, health and

quality of life.

According to the model pursued by the EU,

human development and achievements must

be measured by considering European popula-

tions living standards, well-being, equalit y and

capability development. European governments

are now more willing to assess their popula-

tions well-being in order to make decisions that

have a positive impact on the development of

capabilities and satisfaction levels.

Public infrastructure expenditure receives con-

siderable attention in European policy perfor-

mance and commands a large share of the EU

budget.

Infrastructure is the material support for those

parts of our lives in which public spaces and

services are used, as well as communications,

the environment, housing and the economic

activit y serving a country, city, or area (10). It

refers to fundamental facilities and systems,

including those necessary for an economy to

function (Sullivan and Sherin, 2003). It typi-

cally characterises technical s tructures, such as

roads, bridges, tunnels, water supply, sewers,

electrical grids, telecommunications, and can be

dened as the physical components of interre-

lated systems providing commodities and ser-

vices essential to enable, sustain, or enhance

societal living conditions (Fulmer, 2009).

Infrastructure can be broadly dened as long-

term physical asset s that operate in markets