Why set yourself a numerical minimum? How is reading a couple of dozen little books better than reading several very long books that take the same amount of time? Quality vs. quantity, I say!
To each her/his own.
I like the idea of having a numerical goal to keep me motivated to read. I am not suicidal over having failed to reach my goal last year; I won't be suicidal if I fail to meet this year's goal. Having a numerical goal will, however, keep me more on the straight and narrow when I'm tempted to fritter more of my time away on FB and the like. And who says my quantity somehow negates quality? And who says a frivolous book now and then is a bad thing anyway?
Out of the 21 books I read, here's the breakdown:
Biography/True Stories: 7
Inspirational/Philosophy/Psychology: 5
Science: 1 (overlaps, really, to 3)
Poetry/Essays: 3
Short Stories: 1
Politics: 1
Fantasy: 1
Classics: 1
Fluff: 1 (historical fiction)
I don't think that's too bad of a track record. And, since I'm choosing my own books (as opposed to having them chosen for me), I derive a great deal of edification, pleasure, entertainment, and joy out of them. Usually.
But, again, to each her own.