Measuring and Monitoring the Quality of Life

Transcription

1 Measuring and Monitoring the Quality of Life Heinz-Herbert Herbert Noll GESIS- Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences Social Indicators Research Centre (ZSi) indicators European University Institute, Workshop on Well-being and its various measurements, April 21-22, 22, 2010

2 Structure of Presention Quality of Life: What Does it Mean? Some Conceptualizations Quality of Life: How to Measure and Monitor? Three Approaches Quality of Life Research: Some Examples

3 Quality of Life - A Yardstick for Individual and Societal Well-Being normative conceptualisation of the good life and society goal of societal development in postindustrial societies

4 Quality of life: a new paradigm? Most people would probably agree that there is more to life than money, but it is unlikely they would agree on how to define the quality of life. There have been many attempts at measuring this by looking for objective ways of capturing what is inherently a subjective concept. Recent advances in a variety of social sciences, however, have suggested that there are reliable and replicable ways of ascertaining certain aspects of well-being and quality of life, and relating subjective perceptions to objective phenomenon, such as market based activities. Joseph Stiglitz: Progress, what progress? OECD Observer No 272, March 2009

5 Societal Background for Emergence of Quality of Life - Concept Child of the 1960s Doubts about material wealth and economic growth as the major goals and indicators (GDP) of societal progress Focus on downsides of economic growth growth ("social costs", e.g. Mishan) and private wealth ("public poverty", Galbraith) in policy debates. Observation of diminishing marginal utility of material wealth and doubts whether more economic wealth would make live really better (more better); thus call for quality rather than quantity! structural and value changes towards post-materialism and the postindustrial society. quality of life emerged as the new, multidimensional developmental goal of affluent, postindustrial societies Präsident Lyndon B. Johnson : The task of the Great Society is to ensure our people the environment, the capacities, and the social structures to pursue their individual happiness. Thus the Great Society is concerned not with how much, but with how good - not with the quantity of goods but with the quality of their lives (Johnson 1964).

6 Selected Definitions of Quality of Life "I have come to the conclusion that the only defensible definition of quality of life is a general feeling of happiness" (Milbrath 1978) Quality of life... (may be) defined as subjective well-being and personal growth in a healthy and prosperous environment (Lane 1996) Quality of life includes all major life domains and covers not only the various dimensions of the material well-being of individuals, but also immaterial and collective values like freedom, equity, preservation of natural fundamentals of life as well as responsibility for future generations (Noll 1997). "Quality of life is both objective and subjective. Each of these two axes comprises several domains which, together, define the total construct. Objective domains are measured through culturally relevant indices of objective well-being. Subjective domains are measured through questions of satisfaction." (Australian Center on quality of Life)

7 Characteristics and Ambiguities of the QoL -Concept multidimensional rather than unidimensional different from wealth and material standard of living either in the sense of going beyond material wealth by including also immaterial and collective components like freedom, equity, social capital, self-actualization, happiness etc. or in the sense of a contradiction to material wealth, emphasizing post-materialist, critical views of the affluent society (limits to growth, ecological concerns, sustainability etc.) focussing on the good life of individuals and / or the good society covering objective living conditions and / or subjective well-being

8 In order to measure quality of life, one must have a theory of what makes up a good life (Cobb 2000: 6) Two Major Approaches of Conceptualizing and Measuring Quality of Life: Swedish Level of Living Approach American Subjective Quality of Life Approach

9 Swedish Level of Living Approach Social Policy oriented; strongly influenced by Richard Titmuss Concept of welfare and quality of life focussing on resources : "individuals command over, under given determinants mobilizable resources, with whose help he/she can control and consciously direct his/her living conditions" (Erikson 1974). Resources include, e.g.income, Wealth, Education, Health, Physical and Mental Abilities, Social Capital, Power etc. The individual citizen is considered as an active, creative being, and the autonomous definer of his own end. The resources are mere means to the latter" (Thålin, 1990) The combination of resources and determinants governs the individual s conditions. These in turn, in combination with the individual s aspiration level, govern his wellbeing (Erikson) Measurement and monitoring of Quality of Life exclusively based on objective indicators Strong affinity to Amatiya Sen s concept of Quality of Life (capabilities, functionings)

10 capabilities - approach by Amartya Sen: based on a view of living as a combination of various doings and beings, with quality of life to be assessed in terms of the capability to achieve valuable functionings (Sen, 1993: 31). Functionings represent parts of the state of a person in particular the various things that he or she manages to do or be in leading a life.... Some functionings are very elementary, such as being adequately nourished, being in good health, etc.... others may be more complex, but still widely valued, such as achieving self-respect or being socially integrated (Sen, 1993: 31). Capabilities - approach developed as part of the Human Development Programme of United Nations

11 American Quality of Life Approach strongly influenced by social psychology und 'mental health research', emphasising the subjective perceptions and feelings of individuals as an independent dimension of reality among others influenced by social psychology of W.I. Thomas: "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences The Human Meaning of Social Change (Campbell/Converse 1972): Crucial question: do people perceive social change as beneficial and progress? "Subjective Well-Being" is considered as the ultimate goal and yardstick to be used to assess the current state and development of a society tradition of utilitarian philosophy (Bentham); "pursue of happiness" explicit goal manifested in the American constitution Notion of quality of life as a direct experience of individuals: "The Quality of Life must be in the eye of the beholder" (Campbell 1972). The individual citizen is considered to be the best expert of his own Quality of Life Measurement and monitoring of Quality of Life primarily based on subjective indicators such as happiness and satisfaction

12 Erik Allardt (1972) Quality of Life Combination of three classes of needs Having = Material dimensions of level of living; e.g. economic resources, housing conditions, employment conditions, environmental conditions. Loving = Dimensions of belonging and social relations; e.g. family, relatives, friends and other social networks, membership, volunteering etc. Being = Availability of options, participation and self actualization, e.g. political participation, fulfilling work and leisure activities.

13 German Approach (W. Zapf): Quality of Life as a Combination of Objective Living Conditions and Subjective Wellbeing Typology of Welfare Positions Objective Living Conditions Subjective Well-Being good bad Good Well-Being Dissonance Bad Adaptation Deprivation Source: Zapf 1984, p. 25

14 Quality of Persons - A Resource for Life Quality? (Robert E. Lane,1996) quality of life not only a state, but also a process which includes subjective and objective elements. Differential capacity and competences of individuals to add quality to their lives e.g. depending on education and characteristics of personality

15 Measuring and Monitoring QoL

16

17 QoL - Measurement at Different Levels of Aggregation

18 Quality of Life - Surveys National, e.g. Australian Unity Wellbeing Index Survey Sweden: Level of Living Survey Germany: Welfare Survey Cross-National, e.g. European Values Study Eurobarometer European Social Survey European Quality of Life Survey

19 Survey-Data for Comparative European Quality of Life Research European Values Study - 4 waves of data collection: 1981; 1990; 1999/2000; 2008/2009 (45 countries) Eurobarometer - EU Commission - since 1973 Standard EB + Central and Eastern EB +CCEB European Social Survey - since 2002/2003 every two years; round 3 = 25 countries; round 4 = 28 countries Additional information in rotating modules: Wave 2: Family, Work and Well-being (data release September 2005) Wave 3: Personal and Social Well-being (data release September 2007) Wave 4: Welfare attitudes in a changing Europe (data release September 2009) European Foundation's 'Quality of Life Survey' (EQOLS) ; 28 Countries (EU 25 + current CC) ; ( EU 27 + current CC+Norway)

20 Database: European Social Survey

21

22 Approaches to Measure SWB Conceptual Alternatives: Happiness (affective WB) Satisfaction (cognitive WB) - life satisfaction - domain satisfactions Hedonic Measures Autonomy Meaningful Life Personal Growth Self-Acceptance etc. Eudaimonic Mesures Other Concepts, e.g. distress, anxiety

23 Source: nef: National Accounts of Well-being

24 New Survey Methods: Experience Sampling Method: assessment of experiences in natural settings, in real-time (or close to the occurrence of the experience being reported), and on repeated time occasions. Day Reconstruction Method designed to collect data describing the experiences a person has on a given day, through a systematic reconstruction conducted on the following day. Key Advantages of Both Approaches: Joint assessment of activities and subjective experiences Information about the duration of each experience variety of additional opportunities for analysis Major Problem Difficult and costly to implement in large scale population surveys

25 Social Indicators & Indicator Systems

26 What are Social Indicators? - Some Definitions Statistics...and other forms of evidence - that enable us to assess where we stand and are going with respect to our values and goals. (Bauer 1966) measures of social well-being which provide a contemporary view of social conditions and monitor trends in a range of areas of social concern over time. (McEwin/Povah 1993) Social Indicators are used to identify social problems that require action, to develop priorities and goals for action and spending, and to assess the effectiveness of programmes and policies. (United Nations 1994) social indicators are an important tool for evaluating a country s level of social development and for assessing the impact of policy (Atkinson et al. 2002)

27 Two Basic Functions of Social Indicators & Indicator Systems Measurement of Well-Being To measure and monitor improvements or deteriorations of living conditions and the quality of life. Monitoring of Social Change To measure and monitor structural changes and progress in modernization.

28 Indicator Systems - Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life Indicators (U.S.) - European System of Social Indicators (GESIS) - OECD Social Indicators - EU-Open-Method-of-Coordination (OMC) Indicators

29 Approaches of Indicator (System) Construction Data Driven Data Indicators Classification of Indicators e.g. Eurostat s list of social Indicators Policy Driven Policy concerns policy objectives Indicators Data e.g. Indicators in EU-Open Method of Coordination Concept Driven Concept Measurement Dimensions Indicators Data e.g. European System of Social Indicators (EUSI)

30 European System of Social Indicators: Conceptual Framework Individual Level Societal Level Welfare Measurement Quality of Life - living conditions - subjective well being Quality of Society Sustainability - natural capital - human capital Social Cohesion - disparities, inequalities, exclusion - social relations, ties, inclusion Monitoring Social Change Values and Attitudes e.g. - postmaterialism - gender roles - party preferences etc. Social Structure e.g. - demographic - social class - employment etc.

31 Dimensional Structure of the European System of Social Indicators Life Domains Dimensions of Welfare and General Social Change Measurement Dimensions Subdimensions Indicators

32 Additional Elements of Systems Architecture Indicators: objective (outcomes, resources, conditions, inputs); subjective (outcomes) Coverage EU - Member States + Norway, Switzerland, Japan, United States Periodicity of Observation Starting with the early 1980s; Yearly observations, as far as data are available Level of Regional Disaggregation: NUTS-1 level or similar level if data availability allows Data Sources: Aggregated Data: for example EUROSTAT - Databases Microdata: for example ECHP, EU-SILC, ESS, Eurobarometer, ISSP, EVS/WVS, EQLS, Working-Conditions-Surveys,

33

34

35 New Social Indicators Monitor - SIMon provides online access to time series data from two indicator systems German System of Social Indicators European System of Social Indicators

36 Composite Quality of Life - Indices Some Examples Human Development Index (UNDP) The Economist Intelligence Unit s quality-of-life index The Happy Planet Index (nef) Living-Conditions-Index European System of Social Indicators (Gesis-ZSi)

37 Definition Index: An Index is a number that is a composite of two or more numbers. Indices... combine different measures in a single measure (Kerlinger 1986: 140) An index is a variable, who's values result from an arithmetic operation based on a number of other variables (Diekmann 1995: 208; translation HHN)

38 Why Well-Being / Quality of Life - Indices? allow for comprehensive measurement answer the request for condensed information by 'policy makers' improve the chance to get into the media (compared to complex indicator systems) allow to make multi-dimensional phenomena uni-dimensional and to compare QoL in a transitive way (Ranking)

39 Composite Indices allow to make multi-dimensional phenomena uni-dimensional Advantage of uni-dimensionality allows to compare situations across time or across nations etc. in a transitive way and allows clear cut answers to questions like Are living conditions getting better or worse across time? Do Italians enjoy a better quality of life than Germans? Is population subgroup A better off than population subgroup B?

40 General Problems of Constructing Composite Indices from Single Indicators: how to identify the relevant dimensions of a theoretical construct to be measured and summarised by an index? which and how many indicators are to be selected? how to compare apples and pears, or how to standardise indicators (e.g. income, life expectancy, air pollution)? which calculus shall be used to combine indicators to a composite index (e.g. multiplicative or additive) shall indicators be weighted and how can we generate weights to be used?

41 Economist Intelligence Unit s quality-of-life-index Material Wellbeing (GDP per person, at ppp in $) Health (life expectancy at birth, years) Political Stability and Security (political stability and security ratings) Family Life (divorce rate converted into index of 1 - lowest - to 5 highest - divorce rates) Community Life (dummy variable taking value 1 if country has either high rate of church attendance or trade-union membership; zero otherwise) Climate and Geography (latitude, to distinguish between warmer and colder climates) Job Security (unemployment rate, %) Political Freedom (average of indices of political and civil liberties. Scale of 1 (completely free) to 7 (unfree)) Gender Equality (ratio of average male and female earnings, latest available data)

42 Starting Point life satisfaction scores (1-10) World Value Survey 1999/2000 Dependent variable in multiple regression including just mentioned and additional macro-variables resulting beta-coefficients used to calculate 'predicted life satisfaction scores' = Quality of Life Index

43

44 Quality of Life Research»...tries to define what a good life is and how well reality meets these standards«(veenhoven 1997) not only measurement, but also theoretical as well as empirical analysis of QoL

45 Source: P. Schyns 2003

46 Key Questions of Research on Subjective Well-Being: General: what are the components of and how to model SWB (overall; domain-specific)? how to measure SWB? Is SWB a state or a trait (e.g. personality vs. external factors)? what is the level of SWB on average and for various populations; how does it change across time? what are the correlates and predictors of SWB? Comparative Research: what are the crossnational differences in SBW (levels, changes)? are there specific patterns of country differences? how are country differences to be explained? to which extent may correlates and predictors of SWB be generalised across countries?

47 what is the level of SWB on average and for various sub-populations; how does it change across time?

48

49 Database: German Socio Economic Panel Study

50 Database: German Socio Economic Panel Study

51 SWB = variable state or invariable trait? homeostatic theory of SWB departs from observation that despite very different circumstances of living, the World s populations have an average level of life satisfaction that varies only about 20 percent. This is a strong indication that life satisfaction is not free to vary over its entire range (Cummins 2001) life satisfaction and subjective OoL-scores consistently yield a mean of 75 and a standard deviation of 2.5. That is life satisfaction and subjective OoL-scores across population samples usually fall into the % scale maximum range (Cummins et al.)

52

53 Explanation suggested: active internal homeostasic system manages to maintain SWB for each individual within a set point range, that is each person has an in-built set-point for their normal level of SWB In consequence: limited role of external circumstances for explaining levels of SWB - under maintenance conditions... there should be no systematic relationship between the objective circumstances of people s lives and their SWB - If people experience an event which depresses their SWB below threshold, homeostatic control should improve their levels of SWB over time.

54 However, set-point theory at least to some degree contra-factual: variations across time, across countries, across status categories, and across individual life course underestimated; e.g. SOEP: close to 20% have recorded substantial and apparently more or less permanent changes in their life satisfaction during the last 20 years (Headey 2007) variations correlate to considerable degree with external circumstances, (living conditions) impact of adaptation mechanisms or system of homeostatic control limited and thus overestimated by this theory Impact of life events (e.g. marriage, divorce, health impairments); adaptation mechanisms work, but sometimes slow and incomeplete

55 Impact of life events: divorce Database: German Household Panel Study; Source: Andress 2004

56 Selected Correlates / Determinants of SWB - Gender: Usually little - if at all - difference between men and women - Age, Age differences not very pronounced; some studies (Blanchflower/Oswald 2007) found U-shaped life course pattern (minimum in middle ages, ca. mid 40s); - Health: Strong positive association (probably two-way) - Education: Affects well-being directly and indirectly. Direct influences include the positive effect on self-confidence and self-estimation. Indirect influences refer to higher employment probability, better job quality, higher expected salary and better health - Income - Religion Positive effect of religiosity (denomination, churchgoing, prayer) on SWB: "At least in terms of life satisfaction, religion is the opium of the people" (Clark/Lelkes 2009:17) - Inequality According to Alesina et al. (2004) large negative effect of income inequality on SWB, but only in Europe, not U.S. - Culture Only few explicit studies (e.g. Diener/Suh 2000); usually treated as 'black box'; some evidence for culturally determined differences in expressing dissatisfaction (e.g. mediterranean vs. scandinavian countries) - Impact of life events, e.g. unemployment, marriage, divorce, retirement, health impairments

57 SWB - Causes and Correlates Example Income: Does Money Buy Happiness? 4 Perspectives: - Within Nation Correlations - Crossectional - Between-Nation Differences - Crossectional - Income Change Individual Level Across Life Time - Income Change National Level Across Time

58 Life Satisfaction by Household-Income* Germany 2004 Predicted values on scale EURO * Equivalised HH-Income, modified OECD Scale Database: SOEP

59 10 Between-Nation Differences: Life Satisfaction by GDP per Capita (in PPP) 9 Life satisfaction U A BG BY HR PL EST RUS SK CZ HU M SLO P GR ES A FIN S GB D F B DK IS IRL L GDP per capita 2000

60

61

62 Ireland GDP/capita Life Satisfaction France 1973= Database: Eurobarometer; OECD 400,0 350,0 300,0 250,0 200,0 150,0 100,0 50,0 0,0 Income Change National Level Growth in income and wealth not accompanied by corresponding increase of SWB! GDP/capita Life Satisfaction =100

63 180,0 170,0 160,0 150,0 140,0 GDP/capita Life Satisfaction Greece 1981= ,0 120,0 110,0 100,0 90,0 80, Portugal = GDP/capita Life Satisfaction Database: Eurobarometer; OECD

64 Why don t we get happier across time, when we have more? not generally true, but Two processes at work: 1) mechanism of rising aspirations and expectations: the more we get the more we want or hedonic treadmill : more and more income and material wealth is required to maintain the same level of SWB (at least diminishing marginal returns of income and material wealth) 2) alternative explanation: it is not average absolute income growth that matters, but relative improvements compared to standards of comparison (Relative Income Hypothesis) frog-pond-effect = people derive satisfaction from being a big frog in a small pond! In other words: only above average friends, neighbours, colleagues income growth makes people feel better in terms of SWB.

65 Easterlin Paradox however challenged recently: our time series comparisons, as well as evidence from international panel data, appear to point to an important relationship between economic growth and growth in subjective well-being. taken as a whole, the time series evidence is difficult to reconcile with earlier claims that economic growth yields no boost to happiness. Thus, we conclude that the accumulation of new data (and our re-analysis of earlier data) has not been kind to the Easterlin Paradox. Our findings clearly falsify this strong form of adaptation those enjoying materially better circumstances also enjoy greater subjective well-being. However, milder forms of adaptation are potentially consistent with our findings. (Stevenson / Wolfers 2008)

66 How to Explain Life Satisfaction in Germany? Results from a multiple regression analysis (Noll/Weick 2010) Three models: 1st model: socio-demographic and socio-economic predictor variables only: Region (West/East), household income, household size, age, family status, level of education, main activity; 2nd model: additional predictor variables: subjective health, religious denomination, frequency of meeting socially, availability of person(s) with whom to discuss things intimately, feeling of safety in neighbourhood; 3rd model: additional predictor variables related to confidence in welfare state institutions and trust in political system: worries that income in old age will not be adequate to cover later years, trust in parliament, trust in legal system;

67 Results in Short: Model 1: Unemployment -; living in East Germany - Income +; higher education +, retirement + Age: lowest satisfaction level in middle ages; R 2 =.19 Model 2: Effects by each additional variable, strongest single effect by subjective health Poor health -; feeling unsafe in neighborhood -; having no one to talk -; Beeing catholic/protestant +; meeting friends/relatives frequently +; Negative effect of living in East-Germany considerably reduced; slight exponential increase of life satisfaction across age (rather than U-shaped pattern) R 2 =.28 Model 3: Worries that income in old age won t be adequate -; trust in parliament & legal system + Initial strong negative effect of living in East Germany dissapears almost completely; R 2 =.33

68 The End thank you! mailto: