对英国引入主观幸福感官方衡量标准的思考

Paul V. Allin
{"title":"对英国引入主观幸福感官方衡量标准的思考","authors":"Paul V. Allin","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780197512531.003.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From 2011 onward, surveys by the UK’s national statistics office have included four subjective well-being questions. This is specifically so that summary statistics about subjective well-being inform a broader assessment of national well-being along with other, largely objective measures, as well as anticipating policy needs. This chapter reviews how and why the four questions were chosen. The author focuses on their “practical utility,” a concept fundamental to all official statistics. He reports some progress in policy take-up of well-being statistics, though little media coverage, and a lack of evidence about whether people are thinking differently about their goals and their well-being based on well-being measures. Official statisticians must engage more with politics, policy, businesses, academia, and public opinion, thereby helping to stimulate demand for their outputs, including well-being measures. The author also questions how national well-being measures can be determined nationally while benefitting from international cooperation and standards.","PeriodicalId":423496,"journal":{"name":"Measuring Well-Being","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on the Introduction of Official Measures of Subjective Well-Being in the United Kingdom\",\"authors\":\"Paul V. Allin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780197512531.003.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"From 2011 onward, surveys by the UK’s national statistics office have included four subjective well-being questions. This is specifically so that summary statistics about subjective well-being inform a broader assessment of national well-being along with other, largely objective measures, as well as anticipating policy needs. This chapter reviews how and why the four questions were chosen. The author focuses on their “practical utility,” a concept fundamental to all official statistics. He reports some progress in policy take-up of well-being statistics, though little media coverage, and a lack of evidence about whether people are thinking differently about their goals and their well-being based on well-being measures. Official statisticians must engage more with politics, policy, businesses, academia, and public opinion, thereby helping to stimulate demand for their outputs, including well-being measures. The author also questions how national well-being measures can be determined nationally while benefitting from international cooperation and standards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":423496,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Measuring Well-Being\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Measuring Well-Being\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780197512531.003.0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Measuring Well-Being","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780197512531.003.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从2011年起,英国国家统计局的调查包含了四个主观幸福感问题。具体而言,这是为了使关于主观福祉的简要统计数据与其他主要是客观的措施以及预测政策需要一起,为更广泛地评估国民福祉提供信息。本章回顾了这四个问题是如何以及为什么被选中的。作者关注的是它们的“实际效用”,这是所有官方统计的基本概念。他报告说,在福利统计数据的政策采纳方面取得了一些进展,尽管媒体报道很少,而且缺乏证据表明,人们是否根据福利指标对自己的目标和福祉有不同的看法。官方统计人员必须更多地与政治、政策、企业、学术界和公众舆论接触,从而帮助刺激对其产出的需求,包括福祉指标。作者还质疑如何在受益于国际合作和标准的同时确定国家福利措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reflections on the Introduction of Official Measures of Subjective Well-Being in the United Kingdom
From 2011 onward, surveys by the UK’s national statistics office have included four subjective well-being questions. This is specifically so that summary statistics about subjective well-being inform a broader assessment of national well-being along with other, largely objective measures, as well as anticipating policy needs. This chapter reviews how and why the four questions were chosen. The author focuses on their “practical utility,” a concept fundamental to all official statistics. He reports some progress in policy take-up of well-being statistics, though little media coverage, and a lack of evidence about whether people are thinking differently about their goals and their well-being based on well-being measures. Official statisticians must engage more with politics, policy, businesses, academia, and public opinion, thereby helping to stimulate demand for their outputs, including well-being measures. The author also questions how national well-being measures can be determined nationally while benefitting from international cooperation and standards.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信