# The Thrivability Index ## A shared open standard for measuring human flourishing. Eight pathways, grounded in cross-cultural research, free to examine, use, and build on. Published under CC BY 4.0 by Human Thriving Inc., a component of Human Aligned Ventures. Website: https://thrivability.ai ================================================================================ THE EIGHT PATHWAYS OF HUMAN FLOURISHING 01 Mental Health A state of wellbeing in which you can realize your potential, cope with normal stresses, work productively, and contribute to your community. 02 Emotional Wellbeing Your capacity to process emotional experience and to recover from it, not the absence of difficult feeling. 03 Social Wellbeing The quality of your close relationships and your sense of belonging. 04 Physical and Biological A positive state of physical wellbeing, including energy and vitality, not merely the absence of illness. 05 Financial Stability A sense of material security and freedom from economic stress. 06 Purpose and Meaning A sense of direction and significance in your life and your work. 07 Personal Growth and Learning Your capacity to develop, adapt, and exercise competence across life and work. 08 Community and Environmental Engagement Your participation in community and civic life, and your connection to place and the natural world. ================================================================================ THE CASE FOR A SHARED STANDARD Human flourishing is among the most important things we can measure. It is also among the least consistently measured. The science is strong. Decades of cross-cultural research in positive psychology, social determinants of health, organizational science, and behavioral economics converge on a consistent set of dimensions that matter for human wellbeing across populations. The Global Flourishing Study at Harvard and Baylor, with Gallup and the Center for Open Science, is one of the largest longitudinal efforts to measure flourishing at global scale, following more than 200,000 people across 22 countries. There is no shortage of ways to think about flourishing. The field holds strong frameworks, each built for its own purpose and carrying its own scope and terms. What has been missing is a single, permissively licensed reference that a researcher, an employer, a city, or a health system can pick up and use now across individuals and populations, without negotiating permissions or rebuilding from scratch. The Thrivability Index is offered as that reference: grounded in the foundational science, structured for use from individuals to populations, and open, because a standard worth having is one anyone can adopt without friction. ================================================================================ HOW THE INDEX IS DERIVED The Thrivability Index measures eight pathways of human flourishing. Each pathway meets three design criteria. CRITERION ONE: Universal necessity The dimension must be essential to human flourishing across cultures, consistently present across populations rather than correlated with wellbeing in only one. The cross-cultural research in positive psychology, the WHO social determinants framework, and the UN Human Development Index converge on dimensions that appear across the diverse populations studied. A dimension that matters in San Francisco but not in Lagos or Seoul does not belong in the index. CRITERION TWO: Independent measurability The dimension must be measurable on its own, without requiring the others. A population can have strong purpose alongside financial instability. An individual can have high physical health and low social wellbeing. This is conceptual and diagnostic independence, not statistical independence, and it is what makes the index diagnostic rather than averaged. CRITERION THREE: Cross-domain relevance The dimension must matter at scale, to the institutions and systems shaping human conditions. A measurement that describes only individuals, or only populations, is incomplete. One rule sits beneath all three. A pathway earns a place only if measuring it does not require deciding whose values are correct. This is why the index includes only what is consistently observed across cultures and leaves out anything contested or value-laden. A standard meant to cross cultures cannot take sides on contested moral content. The restraint is the design. We chose eight as the smallest set we found that meets all three criteria together. The framework draws on five research traditions: positive psychology, self-determination theory, social determinants of health, organizational health science, and behavioral economics. No single tradition covers all eight. The synthesis is the contribution. ================================================================================ HOW THIS RELATES TO THE WIDER FIELD The Thrivability Index does not invent a new account of human flourishing. It takes the shape that decades of research already point to and makes it adoptable. It is worth being plain about the work it stands on. The Global Flourishing Study at Harvard and Baylor, with Gallup and the Center for Open Science, is following more than 200,000 people across 22 countries and measures six domains of flourishing. Seligman's PERMA model, validated across many countries, sets out five elements of wellbeing. Self-Determination Theory, a widely replicated framework in psychology, identifies autonomy, competence, and relatedness as basic human needs. The WHO frameworks on mental health and social determinants, the UN Human Development Index, Ryff's scales of psychological wellbeing, and Putnam's work on social capital each map part of the same territory, and each was built for its own purpose, whether research, clinical practice, or policy. These frameworks converge. The dimensions that recur across this body of work are the ground the index is built on. There is substantial convergence on these recurring dimensions, even where the field still debates the exact set. What it has not produced is an agreed, adoptable form. Open measures exist, several of them, and each was built for its own purpose and carries its own scope or license terms. What is missing is a single reference, permissively licensed for use including commercial use, structured to work from individuals to populations, that a researcher, an employer, a city, or a health system can pick up without negotiating permissions or rebuilding from scratch. That gap, a gap of form rather than of insight, is the one the index fills. Two of the eight deserve a word, because shorter frameworks sometimes set them aside. Personal Growth and Learning earns its place because the capacity to develop and exercise competence is one of the three basic psychological needs in Self-Determination Theory, present across the cultures studied and a distinct predictor of long-term flourishing. Without it, the index cannot describe the part of a life most tied to development, agency, and adaptation, the part most exposed as work and technology change. Community and Environmental Engagement earns its place because close relationships, which the social pathway covers, do not capture how people flourish in groups and in place. Putnam's social capital research ties civic participation to health, economic, and educational outcomes at the population level, and the environmental psychology literature ties connection to nature to wellbeing on its own. Without it, the index cannot describe flourishing at the scale of neighborhoods, cities, and regions, the scale much of it occurs at. One dimension the index leaves out on purpose deserves a word, because well-regarded flourishing research includes it. The Global Flourishing Study counts character and virtue among its domains, and serious traditions, Aristotelian and religious alike, hold that character sits close to the center of a good life. That is a serious position, and including character is a sound choice for a study setting out to map the whole of human flourishing. The index makes a different choice, for a different purpose. It is built to be a shared standard that any culture, sector, or community can adopt without first agreeing on whose account of virtue is the correct one. Measuring character well means deciding which virtues count, and traditions answer that differently and with good reason. So rather than encode one answer into a standard meant to cross all of them, the index measures the conditions and capacities of a flourishing life, the things observable across cultures, and leaves the question of virtue to the traditions, communities, and individuals who are the right ones to hold it. A reader who believes flourishing is incomplete without virtue is not wrong. They are pointing to a boundary the index draws on purpose, so the standard can stay neutral across the very value systems that give virtue its meaning. The dimensions are individually grounded in the peer-reviewed literature, cited with each pathway below. The eight-factor index as a whole is entering its validation phase. We are plain about that distinction, and we invite the proving. ================================================================================ WHAT THE STANDARD IS The Thrivability Index is a framework, a set of definitions, and a shared reference. It is open. Take it, use the eight pathways in your own work, build on it, at no charge, with attribution. The framework belongs to the field. A single score, on its own, says little. The same score set against comparable populations, and tracked over time, becomes something a community can act on. That comparison is the part Human Thriving Inc. builds and offers, for those who want it, by consent and from aggregated signal only, never from individual responses. The framework itself is yours regardless, at no charge. To take the index and use it, see the Methodology page (https://thrivability.ai/methodology), which holds the construction, the evidence, the instrument design, and the open package under a CC BY 4.0 license. To see the standard working on a single person, Try It Yourself (https://thrivability.ai/reading) returns a brief reading of your own shape across the eight pathways. ================================================================================ METHODOLOGY: CONSTRUCTION AND EVIDENCE How the eight pathways were chosen, what the evidence under each one is, how the instrument is designed, and how it is being validated. The framework is open. This is for anyone who wants to examine it, use it, or help prove it. HOW THE INDEX IS CONSTRUCTED The Thrivability Index measures eight pathways of human flourishing. A dimension earns a place only by meeting three criteria together. CRITERION ONE: Universal necessity The dimension is essential to flourishing across cultures, consistently present across the populations studied rather than correlated with wellbeing in only one. The convergent evidence in positive psychology, the WHO social determinants framework, and the UN Human Development Index supports the same recurring dimensions across diverse populations. CRITERION TWO: Independent measurability The dimension can be measured on its own, without requiring the others. A population can hold strong purpose alongside financial instability. A person can hold high physical health and low social wellbeing. This is conceptual and diagnostic independence, not statistical orthogonality, and it is what makes the index diagnostic rather than a single averaged number. CRITERION THREE: Cross-domain relevance The dimension matters at the scale of institutions and systems, not only individuals, so the same standard can describe a person, an employer, and a region. Beneath the three sits one rule: a pathway earns its place only if measuring it does not require deciding whose values are correct. This is why the index includes what is consistently observed across cultures and leaves out what is contested or value-laden. The restraint is the design, and it is what lets the standard cross cultures without taking sides. Eight is the smallest set that satisfies all three criteria together. The framework draws on five research traditions: positive psychology, self-determination theory, social determinants of health, organizational health science, and behavioral economics. No single tradition covers all eight. The synthesis is the contribution. ================================================================================ THE EVIDENCE UNDER EACH PATHWAY Each pathway is grounded in peer-reviewed work, and each is framed as a positive state, a presence of flourishing rather than the absence of a deficit. 01 Mental Health The capacity to meet life's demands, recover from stress, and function well, measured as a positive state rather than the absence of symptoms. Grounded in the WHO's positive definition of mental health, the Global Burden of Disease mental disorders epidemiology, and Keyes's Mental Health Continuum, which has replicated across more than fifty countries. 02 Emotional Wellbeing The capacity to process emotional experience and recover from difficulty, and the balance of positive to negative affect, distinct from mental health. Grounded in Fredrickson's Broaden-and-Build theory, the resilience research of Southwick and Charney, and the positive affect literature associated with the PANAS tradition. 03 Social Wellbeing The quality of close relationships and the presence of belonging and safety. Grounded in Holt-Lunstad's meta-analytic work on social connection and mortality, Baumeister and Leary's Need to Belong, and Keyes's social wellbeing work. Holt-Lunstad's meta-analyses associate social connection with mortality risk on a scale comparable to established physical risk factors. 04 Physical and Biological Subjective physical vitality, energy, and rest, framed as a positive state and connected to the modifiable risk factor literature. Grounded in the WHO definition of positive health, the CDC's modifiable risk factor evidence, and the sleep and metabolic health consensus literature. 05 Financial Stability Experienced security and freedom from financial stress, measured as lived experience rather than income level. Grounded in the WHO social determinants framework and the scarcity research of Shafir and Mullainathan, which identifies cognitive burden, not income alone, as the mechanism. 06 Purpose and Meaning A sense of direction and significance in life and work. Grounded in Seligman's PERMA meaning element, validated across many countries, Ryff's psychological wellbeing purpose subscale, and the intrinsic motivation work of Deci and Ryan's Self-Determination Theory. 07 Personal Growth and Learning The capacity to develop, adapt, and exercise competence across life and work. Grounded in the competence need in Self-Determination Theory, with a thirty-year cross-cultural evidence base, Dweck's growth orientation research, and Ryff's personal growth subscale. This dimension sits outside several shorter frameworks and is one of the two the index adds on purpose, because it describes the part of a life most exposed as work and technology change. 08 Community and Environmental Engagement Participation in community and civic life, and connection to place and the natural environment, distinct from close relationships. Grounded in Putnam's social capital research, McMillan and Chavis's Sense of Community theory, and the nature connectedness literature. This is the second deliberate addition, the dimension that lets the standard describe flourishing at the scale of neighborhoods, cities, and regions. A reader who knows this literature will see two things plainly. Each dimension stands on validated, replicated work. The eight-factor composite, as a single instrument, is new, and is entering validation. ================================================================================ HOW THE INSTRUMENT IS DESIGNED The instrument follows four design requirements. REQUIREMENT ONE: Brevity without sacrifice Two items per dimension, sixteen items for the individual form, three to four minutes to complete. This follows the logic of brief validated measures in the field, for example VanderWeele's Flourish Index, which reaches high internal reliability with ten items across five domains. The index adds two dimensions and holds the same two-items-per-dimension discipline. REQUIREMENT TWO: A 0 to 10 continuous scale throughout No Likert categories, no forced choice. A continuous 0 to 10 scale carries consistent anchors across every item, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely, and is treated as continuous data suited to tracking change over time. The same scale and anchors run through the brief open instrument and the individual reading, so the scale and anchors mean the same thing at every layer. REQUIREMENT THREE: Individual self-report as the primary signal The person rates their own experience. A parallel organizational companion form, described below, rates the conditions an organization creates. Keeping the two instruments parallel but separate is what later makes the comparison between them meaningful. REQUIREMENT FOUR: Plain language at a sixth grade reading level One construct per item, no jargon, no double-barreled questions. This is a precondition for cross-cultural validity and for delivery on a phone across diverse populations. Each of the sixteen items is written to operationalize the validated constructs named under its pathway above. The individual Thrivability score is the average of the eight dimension scores, each scored 0 to 10, with the dimension profile reported alongside the composite, because the composite hides the diagnostic information and the profile is where the signal is. A preliminary threshold for thriving sits around 7 of 10, consistent with where comparable scales place the flourishing range, and that threshold is itself something the validation will test rather than assert. There is also an organizational companion instrument, a parallel sixteen-item form that asks about the conditions an organization creates rather than an individual's experience. Read together, the individual signal and the organizational signal show where conditions and lived experience align and where they diverge. That comparison, and the calibration and certification built on it, is the part Human Thriving Inc. develops and offers. The framework and the brief instrument below are open regardless. ================================================================================ THE VALIDATION PATHWAY This is a validated design, not yet a validated instrument. The items draw from validated scales. The eight-factor composite has not yet been administered to a study population, subjected to confirmatory factor analysis, or tested for measurement invariance across cultures. That is the work this design sets up, and it is the work the index invites others to share. STEP 1: Expert review Two to three measurement scientists in positive psychology, organizational health, or public health measurement review every item for face validity, clarity, and construct alignment. STEP 2: Cognitive interviews Ten to fifteen participants complete the instrument while thinking aloud, surfacing ambiguous items, culturally specific language, and comprehension barriers before wider use. STEP 3: Pilot administration The individual and organizational forms go to a first pilot population, with at least several hundred respondents for stable confirmatory factor analysis, and more again for subgroup and invariance analysis, collected at baseline and again at ninety days. STEP 4: Psychometric analysis Confirmatory factor analysis of the eight-factor structure, internal consistency per dimension, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity against an established flourishing measure on the overlapping dimensions, discriminant validity between adjacent dimensions, and item response theory analysis of item behavior. Measurement invariance across cultures and groups is part of this work and is named as something to be established, not something claimed. STEP 5: Outcome linkage The pilot is designed to connect change in scores to available aggregate outcome data over the same period, the step that would let the index speak to outcomes that institutions track, established through study rather than asserted. Stating the pathway plainly, before any of it is finished, is the point. The forming tense is the credibility. ================================================================================ THE OPEN PACKAGE: TAKE IT AND USE IT The framework is open under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. You may use it, adapt it, and build on it, including commercially, with attribution. What is open, and ready to take now: - The eight pathways and their definitions, as published on the standard. - The three construction criteria and the values rule, so you can see and test the logic of inclusion and exclusion. - The brief open instrument. Rate each of the eight pathways from 0 to 10 against its published definition, where 0 is not at all and 10 is completely. Eight items, a consistent scale, suited to a baseline and to tracking change within a person or a population over time. Rating against the published definition, rather than against any copied item wording, is what keeps this instrument original and free to use. - The methodology, meaning the construction criteria, the design requirements, and the validation pathway. - A citation. Suggested form: Human Thriving Inc. The Thrivability Index, version 1.0, 2026. thrivability.ai. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. What this open package is for: a baseline reading, within-person or within-population tracking, and independent research and validation. What it does not include, and what a result from it should not be presented as: a clinical diagnosis, a certified or comparable benchmark, or a validated composite. Those depend on work still underway. We welcome independent use and independent validation. If you are a researcher who wants to test the instrument, replicate it, or extend it, that strengthens the standard rather than threatening it, and we would value hearing what you find. The framework is open, so anyone may build their own instantiation of it. ================================================================================ THE BRIEF OPEN INSTRUMENT THE THRIVABILITY INDEX: Brief Open Instrument Version 1.0, 2026 · thrivability.ai Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Scale: 0 to 10. Anchor 0 = not at all. Anchor 10 = completely. Scoring: per-pathway score (0 to 10) and overall Thrivability score = the unweighted average of the eight pathway scores. INSTRUCTION TO RESPONDENT: Rate where you are right now on each pathway, against its definition. There are no right answers. 01 Mental Health A state of wellbeing in which you can realize your potential, cope with normal stresses, work productively, and contribute to your community. 02 Emotional Wellbeing Your capacity to process emotional experience and to recover from it, not the absence of difficult feeling. 03 Social Wellbeing The quality of your close relationships and your sense of belonging. 04 Physical and Biological A positive state of physical wellbeing, including energy and vitality, not merely the absence of illness. 05 Financial Stability A sense of material security and freedom from economic stress. 06 Purpose and Meaning A sense of direction and significance in your life and your work. 07 Personal Growth and Learning Your capacity to develop, adapt, and exercise competence across life and work. 08 Community and Environmental Engagement Your participation in community and civic life, and your connection to place and the natural world. CITATION: Human Thriving Inc. The Thrivability Index, version 1.0, 2026. thrivability.ai. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. ================================================================================ THE DEEPER LAYER Behind the brief open instrument sits the fuller sixteen-item form, two validated-lineage items per dimension, paired with the organizational companion instrument, now entering the validation pathway above. The calibration that turns raw scores into a comparable reading, the comparison against relevant populations, and the certification of an official reading are the parts Human Thriving Inc. builds and offers, by consent and from aggregated signal only, never from individual responses. The brief instrument and the framework remain open regardless. ================================================================================ TRY IT YOURSELF To see the framework working on a single person, the Try It Yourself reading (https://thrivability.ai/reading) uses the same eight pathways, the same 0 to 10 scale, and the same anchors, and returns an individual a picture of their own shape across the eight. It is the lightest layer of this standard. The reading is anonymous. You choose a pseudonym — no name, no account. Only your eight anonymous scores, your chosen pseudonym, and the date are recorded. No name, no email, no location, nothing that identifies you. Your scores join a shared picture of how people are thriving. ================================================================================ EMBED AND QR CODE The reading can be distributed in two ways: ONE-LINE EMBED Drop a single script tag on any page. It loads a responsive reading inline that posts to the same anonymous aggregate and links back to thrivability.ai. QR CODE For physical and civic contexts — an event slide, a table card, an employer's onboarding. Someone takes the reading on their phone in the moment. For research collaboration or institutional use, see the Contact page. ================================================================================ CONTACT For research collaboration, validation partnership, or institutional inquiries. Messages go directly to the team. Website: https://thrivability.ai Email via: https://thrivability.ai/contact ================================================================================ LICENSE Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ You are free to: - Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format - Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially Under the following terms: - Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. ================================================================================ END OF DOCUMENT