Researching
Quality of Life in Developing Countries
Laura Camfield
Subjective ‘quality of life’,
namely how people experience and evaluate their lives, is an important
part of WeD’s exploration of the social and cultural construction
of wellbeing in developing countries. But what is subjective ‘quality
of life’? How can we understand the quality of life of people
in developing countries? In Britain, at least in popular culture,
we have a common sense understanding of what quality of life means
which enables us to talk about the effect a new job will have on
our quality of life, to compare one person’s quality of life
with another, or even respond to a researcher’s questions
about our quality of life.
Perhaps it’s easier to say what quality of life
isn’t: It isn’t whether you feel happy or sad at a particular
moment, though this can be very influential on your judgement of
quality of life (as can the weather, apparently, according to Kahneman
and Schkade). Usually it isn’t just one thing, even money,
so we describe quality of life as ‘multi-dimensional’.
It isn’t something that can be judged from outside, even by
a close friend. Most importantly, it cannot be externally defined,
or at least when it is, there’s always space for someone to
say ‘no, that’s not my quality of life you’re
measuring’.
How then can we explore and measure it?
WeD’s approach to quality of life is to move
continually between ‘universal’ theories about the way
the world is, or implicitly should be, to ‘local’ realities.
This enables us to explore what people value, or what they feel
gives quality to their lives. These understandings are then compared
with the ideas of philosophers, policy makers, and people working
in development, with the aim of understanding the differences and
disjunctures between what ‘we’ think is good for ‘them’
and what people want for themselves and their families, in order
to bring them closer together.
Our quality of life research is divided into three
phases; the first was to understand how different people in different
places characterise quality of life. This entailed exploratory data
collection using a mix of methods ranging from semi-structured interviews
to reports from our field researchers living in the sites (‘participant
observation’). This enabled us to explore relationships between
quality of life at different levels, for example, the individual
and their community. The first phase of fieldwork took place in
24 rural, peri-urban, and urban sites in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Thailand
and Peru. It included men and women at different stages of their
lives, for example students and grandmothers, with a range of identities
and experiences.
The second phase involved analysing the data and reflecting
on what we had learned. We also tried to integrate our findings
into the WeD theoretical framework and explore how they connected
to other ideas about quality of life and subjective wellbeing. As
a result we adopted the following definition of quality of life:
The outcome of the gap between people’s goals
and perceived resources, in the context of their environment, culture,
values, and experiences
This brings together the World Health Organisation’s
emphasis on a ‘flesh and blood’ person in a particular
socio-cultural environment with the idea that people’s quality
of life is determined by the ‘gap’ between their expectations
and their reality, as Calman has argued.
There are obviously a number of gaps that are important to people,
for example, between yourself and your neighbours (‘keeping
up with the Jones’), or between what you have and what you
feel you deserve. However, we have chosen to focus on the gap between
what people want to do or be and the resources they have to achieve
this, as this is the most relevant to international development
research and intervention.
Following a week’s workshop with our international
collaborators we then compiled a plan for the remainder of the quality
of life fieldwork. This will involve the development of a ‘suite’
of measures called the WeD-QoL, based on the above definition. The
WeD-QoL includes measures of the following:
· What people want to do or be in order to
feel that they are living a good life (their goals)
· What they think they have or can draw on to enable them
to achieve this (their ‘perceived’ resources)
· How satisfied they are with the way their resources enable
them to fulfil their goals
· How satisfied they are with their life as a whole
· What they value
· Whether they experience more ‘positive’ or
‘negative’ emotions
Most of these measures have been developed using the
responses to the interview and focus group questions asked in the
first phase, but we have also adapted international measures of
‘life satisfaction’ (from Diener) and feelings or mood
(from Watson). These will enable us to compare the happiness and
life satisfaction of people from the WeD sample with those from
other studies. We will also be able to analyse the results of the
WeD-QoL alongside other WeD data so that we can look at the relationships
between people’s quality of life and what they earn or buy
(Income and Expenditure Survey), or between the resources they have
reported (Resources and Needs Questionnaire) and what they perceive
to be their resources.
WeD recognises a number of aspects to the quality
of life research that need to be kept in balance. Firstly the need
to take a ‘grounded’ and pragmatic approach to quality
of life, that connects what people in communities are experiencing
and the way they perceive their experiences, with how these are
measured by experts and policy makers outside the community. Secondly,
the need to preserve the concept’s holism and rich theoretical
and philosophical history, stretching back to Aristotle and the
Buddha.
The first aspect is expressed in the design of the
WeD-QoL, which was particularly influenced by the results of the
fieldwork in Peru. The Peruvian team approached the abstract idea
of quality of life by looking at what people wanted to do or be
in order to feel that they were living a good life. Let’s
take the example of being a successful farmer. To achieve this,
people needed a range of resources from the latest agricultural
equipment to a large, healthy family who could work in the fields.
They also needed support, for example, from relatives or a local
farmers’ association. Personality traits like being cheerful
or generous were also valuable because they helped them maintain
good relationships within their family and community. These relationships
were both enjoyable in themselves and the best way of getting help
at harvest time. The team also asked people to talk about their
happiest and unhappiest memories to get a personal sense of what
was important to people and what types of experience affected the
quality of their lives.
The Peruvian researchers found that while there weren’t
any goals that were applicable to all people in all sites (i.e.
universal), they could talk about universal ‘tendencies’
like needing food, shelter, a partner, and a family. The same thing
applied to resources where everyone mentioned the importance of
communication, good relationships, social connections, and being
able to barter and sell their produce. Typically people got support
from their families (which included friends and neighbours in urban
and peri-urban communities), the government, local charities, and
the church. The only personality traits or ways of behaving that
were valued by everyone were helping each other and being a hard
worker. Interestingly, while the ‘modern’ ideals of
being ‘progressive’ and a ‘professional’
were important to people from peri-urban and urban sites they were
never mentioned by villagers.
The findings from Peru connect with themes identified
in other countries, which also found significant differences between
the perspectives of men and women of different ages, locations,
socio-economic backgrounds, ethnicities, and religions. The most
important areas of life for people in all countries appear to be
your close relationships (family, ‘natal’ family, and
partner), followed by material wellbeing (your income, assets, whether
your basic needs are satisfied, the environment of your home and
community, and your access to local services), and relationships
with your community and the wider world (for example, relatives
living in the cities or overseas and the regional government). Religion
(for example, believing in God or the human potential for enlightenment,
conducting acts of worship, and living ethically) appeared to be
very important in Bangladesh and Thailand and fairly important in
Ethiopia. Similarly, education for themselves and their children
was a priority for people in Bangladesh and Ethiopia, although not
in Thailand or Peru (except in peri-urban areas).
So what does this tell us about quality of life? When
we look at the responses from Peru alongside those from Bangladesh,
Ethiopia and Thailand, we can see that the basic ingredients of
a good life are very similar. For example, having a partner, a family
(and a support network that extends beyond it), a good home, a pleasant
environment, and enough money or other resources not to have to
worry about meeting the daily needs of your family. But the types
of ‘ingredient’ (rice in Thailand or teff in Ethiopia)
and the way they are combined (rice porridge or injera bread) produce
very different ‘recipes’ for a good life. Similarly,
a comparison of responses to questions about people’s goals
from Ethiopia and Bangladesh (both low income countries) suggest
that the main priorities for people from Bangladesh are maintaining
family harmony, getting salaried employment, and being educated,
while for people in Ethiopia they are having your own home, enough
to eat and drink, and being respected by your neighbours.
Curiously the greatest differences are not between
people from different countries but between men and women of different
ages whose different identities or experiences cause them to value
very different things. For example, in Thailand the older generation
wanted to be healthy and able to attend the temple, while young
men wanted good jobs and motorbikes. Similarly, young men in Bangladesh
were the only group whose hopes for the future focused on themselves
(‘becoming rich’), rather than the happiness and prosperity
of their children. WeD’s task will be to investigate how the
diversity of responses to the quality of life research can be used
to help local decision-making and inform wider policy that can better
fulfil its promise of improving people’s quality of life.
Laura Camfield is a WeD Research
Officer, Psychology, at the University of Bath.
|
Wellbeing and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
Julie Newton
The year 2005 will be an important milestone for the
fight against global poverty with the UN review of progress towards
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in September. Activities
including the UK’s Presidency of the G8 and the EU, the Commission
For Africa, and the Make Poverty History campaign have the potential
to add significant momentum towards these goals, especially amongst
Northern policy makers. The MDGs comprise a framework of 8 universal
goals and 18 targets to achieve a minimum level of wellbeing by
2015 agreed upon at the UN Millennium Summit, 2000.
Millennium Development Goals
1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
2. Achieve universal primary education
3. Promote gender equality and empower women
4. Reduce child mortality
5. Improve maternal health
6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
7. Ensure environmental sustainability
8. Develop a Global Partnership for Development
The MDGs are considered “the most broadly supported,
comprehensive, and specific poverty reduction targets the world
has ever established”(Millennium Project, 2005). At the international
level, they provide a powerful means of shaping development policy
both globally and nationally. In spite of overwhelming support from
the public and key political figures, there is still concern over
the ability of such initiatives to effectively contribute to the
eradication of poverty. The Millennium Project report reviewing
progress towards the MDGs states that many regions remain far off
track. It attributes this failure to four overarching reasons: governance
failure, poverty traps, pockets of poverty and specific policy neglect.
The report makes ten recommendations necessary for achieving the
MDGs by 2015 ranging from a big increase in official development
assistance to the realignment of existing development strategies
including “quick win” actions.
Research undertaken by the WeD Research Group will
contribute to these debates by highlighting how such universalist
poverty reduction strategies relate to local realities. A key dimension
of WeD’s research is the tension between universal models
of human welfare and quality of life and the way that people construct
their wellbeing. In particular, the findings will highlight the
diversity and complexity of local experience and the dynamic ways
in which policies interact with local circumstances. Although the
MDGs provide an effective mechanism for mobilising the global community,
policies aimed at their achievement need to be relevant to different
local capacities and contexts, and this entails an effective understanding
of local realities. In particular, WeD is carrying out research
which will provide:
· Detailed information from people within the
four countries (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Thailand and Peru) on how
policies relevant to the MDGs are ‘translated’ and implemented
into the local context and what this means for people in practice.
· Insights into what is important for local people in their
struggles to escape poverty and what the MDGs might be missing out.
For more details see:
-UN Millennium project report at: http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/
-Investing in Development: a practical plan to achieve the Millennium
Development Goals (Sachs, 2005), see http://unmp.forumone.com/
-MDGs and corresponding targets: http://millenniumindicators.un.org/unsd/mi/mi_goals.asp
Julie Newton is a WeD Research
Officer at the University of Bath.
WeD
News: Conferences, Workshops, Books and Reviews
Conferences/Workshops
Attended by WeD
Ian Gough and Geof Wood
(WeD Bath) were invited by the Social Development Division of the
World Bank (February) to present their work on welfare regimes in
developing countries (recently published by Cambridge University
Press). The Bank was interested in the Bath approach for lessons
on how to develop context-specific measures of welfare institutions,
and how to broaden social development thinking beyond the scope
of the Millennium Development Goals.
Ian and Geof also attended the “Words into Action in 2005”
(January) seminar hosted by DFID and UNDP. Development aid, debt
and trade issues were examined with reference to the challenges
and opportunities offered by the review of the MDGs and other key
events in 2005. Keynote speakers included Chancellor Gordon Brown
and Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for International Development
Allister McGregor (WeD director) attended
“Towards 2005 - does the Media Matter in the Fight against
Global Poverty?” conference (November) organised by BBC World
Service Trust and DFID. Key speakers included Gordon Brown, Jeffrey
Sachs and Hilary Benn.
Geof Wood and Julie Newton
(WeD Bath) attended the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) meeting
on “Human rights and the Millennium Development Goals: contradictory
frameworks?” Key speakers were Robert Archer (International
Council on Human Rights Policy) and Simon Maxwell (ODI).
Laura Camfield
(WeD Bath) presented the paper “Living well or living badly:
do national and local experts agree?” (November) at the “International
Society for Quality of Life Studies: Advancing quality of life in
a turbulent world” Philadelphia, USA (November). She participated
in the planning meetings for ISQOLS 2006 and the ISQOLS Encyclopaedia
project. ISQOLS is the main organisation for Quality of Life research
within the social sciences and, like WeD, brings together perspectives
from a number of disciplines. Laura also attended the “Political
Interactions, Research, Advocacy and Representation” conference
(November) at Goldsmiths College, London.
Joe Devine (WeD
Bath) attended an international conference (January) organised by
Cornell/SEWA/EDP/WIEGO on “Membership Based Organizations
of the Poor: Theory, Experience and Policy” in Ahmedabad,
India and presented a paper entitled “Change and the everyday
politics of community based organisations”.
James Copestake
(WeD Bath) presented "Researching the links between economic
development and wellbeing: A view of the Andes" at a seminar
for the School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University
of Reading (January).
TeóFilo Altamirano (WeD
Peru) presented WeD findings at the “Sustainability of International
Migration” conference, Colegio de la Frontera, Tijuana, Mexico
and gave a talk at Colegio de México, Cuernavaca on the “Cost/benefits
of internal and international migration: the case of Peru”
(October). He attended conferences at the University of Valencia,
Spain on “the impact of remittances in rural societies in
Peru” (November) and the International Organisation for Migration
Conference, Buenos Aires on the “Government of the social
and demographic growth of Metropolitan Lima” (December). He
also gave an interview to the local television network on the role
of remittances at the domestic level within the Peruvian economy.
Alula Pankhurst
(WeD Ethiopia) gave an overview of the WeD research agenda to
the local DFID office in Ethiopia (March). He also participated
in a World Bank workshop on Empowerment Issues within Ethiopia
(February).
Publications
Ian Gough and Allister McGregor
edited a special issue of Global Social Policy on “Human
Well-being: Communicating between the Universal and the Local”.
The issue included Ian on “Human Well-being and Social Structures:
Relating the Universal and the Local”, Allister on “Researching
Well-being: Communicating between the Needs of Policy Makers and
the Needs of People” and an article by TeóFilo Altamirano,
James Copestake, Adolfo Figueroa, and Katie Wright-Revolledo’s
on “Universal and Local Understanding of Poverty in Peru”.
See Global Social Policy (December 2004), Vol 4(3), SAGE publications.
Key Dates
Jonathan Dimbleby will
chair a Roundtable discussion organised by the WeD research group
at Bath during the ESRC’s Social Science week (20–24
June) to discuss the crucial question of how to make aid more
effective in the context of key development events in 2005. The
panel will include representatives from DFID, WeD, other development
agencies, the public and the media.
“Pathways to Resilience: an international
conference” hosted by the International Resilience Project,
University of Kings College, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada (15-17
June)
“Rethinking development: local pathways to
global well-being: second international conference on gross national
happiness” at St Francis Xavier University, Antigonish,
Nova Scotia, Canada (20-24June).
Social Policy Association Conference 2005 with the
theme of “Wellbeing and Social Justice”, University
of Bath, UK (27-29 June)
Development Studies Association (DSA) Conference
2005 with the theme of “Connecting People and Places: Challenges
and Opportunities for Development”, The Open University,
Milton Keynes, UK, (7-9 September)
Fifth International conference on the capability
approach with the theme of “Knowledge and public action:
education, responsibility, collective agency, equity”, UNESCO,
Paris, France (11-14 September)
Jorge Yamamoto (WeD Peru) has
been invited to be a speaker at the International Summit of Positive
Psychology 2005, Washington D.C., USA (29 September -1 October).
His invitation to this prestigious event was a result of the organisers
learning about the QoL methodology being used in Peru.
WeD Websites
The WeD-Thailand website is now operational
at: http://www.wed-thailand.org/
The WeD-Ethiopia website has also been recently updated and can
be accessed at: http://www.wed-ethiopia.org/
For a printed copy of the WeD Newsletter, to
obtain an on-line version or for inclusion in the WeD mailing list
please contact j.french@bath.ac.uk
|