A Framework for Citizen-Centred Social Statistics and Analysis (Working Paper 48)

Economic policy-making has long been more integrated than social policy-making in part because the statistics and much of the analysis that supports economic policy are based on a common conceptual framework – the system of national accounts. People interested in economic analysis and economic policy share a common language of communication, one that includes both concepts and numbers. This paper examines early attempts to develop a system of social statistics that would mirror the system of national accounts, particular the work on the development of social accounts that took place mainly in the 60s and 70s. It explores the reasons why these early initiatives failed but argues that the preconditions now exist to develop a new conceptual framework to support integrated social statistics – and hence a more coherent, effective social policy. Optimism is warranted for two reasons. First, we can make use of the radical transformation that has taken place in information technology both in processing data and in providing wide access to the knowledge that can flow from the data. Second, the conditions exist to begin to shift away from the straight jacket of government-centric social statistics, with its implicit assumption that governments must be the primary actors in finding solutions to social problems. By supporting the decision-making of all the players (particularly individual citizens) who affect social trends and outcomes, we can start to move beyond the sterile, ideological discussions that have dominated much social discourse in the past and begin to build social systems and structures that evolve, almost automatically, based on empirical evidence of ‘what works best for whom’. The paper describes a Canadian approach to developing a framework, or common language, to support the evolution of an integrated, citizen-centric system of social statistics and social analysis. This language supports the traditional social policy that we have today; nothing is lost. However, it also supports a quite different social policy world, one where individual citizens and families (not governments) are seen as the central players – a more empirically-driven world that we have referred to as the ‘enabling society’.

RELIBILITY ANALYSIS OF SIMPLE SLOPES AND SOIL-STRUCTURES WITH LINEAR LIMIT STATES

The first objective of this research was to develop closed-form and numerical probabilistic methods of analysis that can be applied to otherwise conventional methods of unreinforced and geosynthetic reinforced slopes and walls. These probabilistic methods explicitly include random variability of soil and reinforcement, spatial variability of the soil, and cross-correlation between soil input parameters on probability of failure. The quantitative impact of simultaneously considering the influence of random and/or spatial variability in soil properties in combination with cross-correlation in soil properties is investigated for the first time in the research literature. Depending on the magnitude of these statistical descriptors, margins of safety based on conventional notions of safety may be very different from margins of safety expressed in terms of probability of failure (or reliability index). The thesis work also shows that intuitive notions of margin of safety using conventional factor of safety and probability of failure can be brought into alignment when cross-correlation between soil properties is considered in a rigorous manner. The second objective of this thesis work was to develop a general closed-form solution to compute the true probability of failure (or reliability index) of a simple linear limit state function with one load term and one resistance term expressed first in general probabilistic terms and then migrated to a LRFD format for the purpose of LRFD calibration. The formulation considers contributions to probability of failure due to model type, uncertainty in bias values, bias dependencies, uncertainty in estimates of nominal values for correlated and uncorrelated load and resistance terms, and average margin of safety expressed as the operational factor of safety (OFS). Bias is defined as the ratio of measured to predicted value. Parametric analyses were carried out to show that ignoring possible correlations between random variables can lead to conservative (safe) values of resistance factor in some cases and in other cases to non-conservative (unsafe) values. Example LRFD calibrations were carried out using different load and resistance models for the pullout internal stability limit state of steel strip and geosynthetic reinforced soil walls together with matching bias data reported in the literature.