Official statistics for measuring well-being at national and regional level in EU: some

comments from users

Pilar Martin-Guzman and María GilUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid

Well-being

• A multidimensional concept

• Experienced by individuals

• But within a particular social and cultural context

Two different approaches to well-being

• Hedonic: associated with subjective happiness and the experience of pleasure

• Eudemonic: engagement of individuals in certain activities chosen according to their values and preferences. Availability of material and social resources to carry out these activities

The selection of indicators for the measurement of well-being

• A difficult task

• General agreement does not exist

A possible choice

• Monetary access to goods and services: wealth, disposable income, consumption.

• Basic life conditions: education, labour status and working conditions, household and living conditions, health, mobility, environment and sustainability.

• Social life conditions: leisure, friends, neighbours, cultural and sport life, social and political participation and contribution, victimisation rate.

• Subjective perceptions on the physical, economic and social aspects of well-being.

Main statistcal sources available in Spain

• Surveys: National Institute of Statistics (INE), EUROSTAT, Central Bank of Spain

• Registers: Income Tax Declarations, others

Surveys implemented by INE

• Household Budget Surveys of 1973, 1980, 1990

• Continuous Household Budget Survey, 1998-2005

• Household Budget Survey 2007

EUROSTAT

• European Community Household Panel (ECHP) 1994-2001

• Survey on Income and Living Conditions, 2004, 2005, 2006

Central Bank of Spain

• Household Financial Survey, 2002, 2005

Administrative registers

• Survey on Income Tax records 2002,2003,2004

• Panel on Income Tax records 1999-2004

• Others

Possibilities and limitations according to

• the choice of the main monetary variable• the feasibility of comparisons and

analysis at regional level • the suitability of data for longitudinal

studies• the coverage of the main indicators

usually linked to the concept of well-being, and

• the quality of the data obtained

The choice of the main monetary variable

• Expenditure: Household Budget Surveys

• Income: ECHP, SILC 2004, 2005,2006, HBS 1973, 1980, 1990

• Income+ Wealth: Household Financial Survey

• Subjective information: ECHP, SILC, HBS1990, continuous HBS

The feasbility of comparisons and analysis at regional level

• All HBS

• ECHP 2000

• SILC 2004, 2005, 2006

• Survey and Panel on Income Tax records

Suitability of data for longitudinal studies

• ECHP

• SILC

• Continuous HBS (only two years)

• Current HBS (only two years)

• Panel on Income Tax registers

The coverage of the main indicators

• HBS: from 1990 on, problems with subjective information, income

• From ECHP to SILC: problems with non-monetary deprivation indices, use of pulic services

The quality of the data obtained

• Current HNS: imputation of income

• SILC 2004: imputation of income

Some conclusions

• No perfect source. But SILC has many advantages

• Trend towards simplification of questionnaires: need to combine data from different sources

• Official statistics should be of public access, without restrictions.

• A new survey needs time: first waves sometimes problematic

• Transparency of producers on quality issues is highly appreciated by researchers