Unless you are writing a chess engine, I don't think that information will be applicable.
Many grandmasters have stated that in positions where pure calculation is not possible, that they evaluate the position (including position, king safety, developement and pawn structure) based on experience, intuition, and comparison to known positions.
How about some sort of simplified version. One that only gives the basic outline to keep some simplicity, while it gives more than just a material judgement.
To quantify development you could count how many squares the developed pieces control, and how valuable those squares are.
Pawn structure would include number of pawn islands (fewer the better), and space. Maybe a penalty for weak squares or backward pawns.
King safety can be quantified in at least three ways 1) king is completely safe 2) king is going to be mated 3) king is going to be attacked and defender must give up X amount of material to defend or counterattack successfully.
There is a rough points system in place to help people determine if they a winning to a certain extent. 1-pawn, 3-minor pieces, 5-rook and 9-queen.
I know many people use an ajusted version of this which I think goes along the lines of 1-pawn, 2.25-knights, 2.5-bishops, 0.5-bishop pair, 5-rook and 9-queen. That may not be it exactly, but it is something along those lines.
Now, I think it would be good if we could come up with a more complicated point system that took into account position, king safety, developement and pawn structure plus the points for material that already has a system. That way we could mathematically calculate the winning side in a game and by how many points. Any suggestions for how many points anything good be worth?