Transcript Document
Wellbeing in Two Nova Scotia Communities Halifax June 2008 Mike Pennock Martha Pennock Ron Colman GPI Community Surveys 2002/2003 Glace Bay (1,708) Kings County (1,898) Wellbeing in two contrasting communities in same political jurisdiction Wide range of variables Contrasting Communities Glace Bay Older industrial area Mining and primary industries History of economic instability Kings County Diversified economy Agriculture Manufacturing Government Economic Stability Samples Glace Bay respondents had higher rate of unemployment and lower incomes Kings had higher proportion married Economic Security Glace-Bay Kings Unemployment 26.4 12.7 Part-time 16.6 15.4 Discouraged 40.9 16.3 Long-term 62.3 52.5 Multiple Jobs 5.1 11.0 % Households <$20,000 28 14 Life-Satisfaction GB Kings ChiSquare Very Satisfied 40.3 39.4 Somewhat Satisfied 50.3 53.4 2.24 df=2 P<.32 Dissatisfied 9.3 8.2 Potential for Improved Satisfaction % who would be more satisfied if: Glace Bay Kings p More time with family and friends 29.1 23.2 P<.001 Less stress 39.0 31.2 P<.001 Make a difference to community 11.7 8.7 P<.001 More money 24.7 14.5 P<.001 More Possessions 8.7 3.3 P<.001 Financially secure 38.8 25.5 P<.001 Percent Reporting They Are Very Satisfied With Life 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -20,000 2034,999 3549,999 5069,999 70,000 Glace Bay 25.5 43 35.4 50.2 57.8 Kings 33.2 36.5 34.4 39.3 49.3 Glace Bay Kings Importance of Own Values % rating 8 to 10 GB Kings p Family 95.2 94.4 NS Responsibility 93.2 93.2 NS Freedom 87.5 89.1 NS Friendship 88.4 86.4 NS Financial Security 80.6 72.4 P<.000 Generosity 78.4 73.4 P<.000 Pleasure 70.8 68.6 NS Spiritual 67.2 52.5 P<.000 Career Success 68 58.3 P<.000 Material Wealth 32.4 22.8 P<.000 Importance of Core Values % Rating 8-10 Self Others Family 94.9 55.9 Responsibility 93.3 50.8 Freedom 88.4 80.6 Friendship 87.3 54.2 Financial Security 76.3 76.9 Generosity 75.8 36.6 Pleasure 69.6 76.1 Spiritual 59.5 29.4 Career Success 62.8 92.4 Material Wealth 27.4 67.8 Factor Analysis of Values Scales Social factor (family life, friendship, generosity, spiritual) Materialistic factor (material wealth, financial security, career, pleasure) Factor scores Values and Life Satisfaction % Describing Self as Very Satisfied With Life Quartile Value Score Low on Value Factor 2 3 High on Value Factor Social Values 30.1 36.2 45.4 46.5 P<.000 Material Values 38.6 37.4 38.7 43.4 ns Distribution of Material Value Scores 30 25 20 % 15 respondents 10 GB Kings 5 0 Low 2 3 High Self-Reported Stress 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 GB Kings Very Somewhat Not very Not At All 0 Retired Homemakers Students Unemployed Employed Stress by Activity 80 70 60 50 40 30 GB Kings 20 10 Sources of Stress Kings Too many demands Too many hours Insufficient autonomy Interpersonal conflict Glace Bay Too few hours Risk Fear of layoffs Stress and Employment More two-income families in Kings Two-income families much more highly stressed than one income families Two income families on Kings more highly stressed than in Glace Bay No differences between one-income families Stress and Household Income 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 70,000+ 5069,999 3549,999 2034,999 -20 GB Kings Percentage of workers willing to trade all or part of a future pay increase for shorter work hours 30 25 24.3 20 14.3 15 10 5 0 Kings Glace Bay Health Status No significant difference in selfreported health status GB had higher rate of disabling pain May be attributable to higher rates of arthritis/rheumatism and back problems Strong relationship to income in both communities Query If health status is income related and Glace bay has a much higher proportion of low income respondents, why isn’t their overall health status lower than Kings? Very good to excellent health -20000 2034999 3549999 5069999 70+ GB 33 46 55 58 73 Kings 30 41 52 60 67 Health Status and Income Higher rates across most income groups in Glace Bay As a result, overall rates are equivalent despite the higher rates of low-income in Glace Bay and relationship between health and income Chronic Disease Glace Bay had higher rates on a number of diseases after controlling for differences in age of the populationshigh blood pressure (though not heart disease), bronchitis/emphysema, sinusitis, cancer, ulcers, diabetes and glaucoma. Kings higher rate of allergies- food and non-food Risk Factors No difference in obesity or sedentary lifestyles although Kings more likely to be physically active in leisure Glace Bay has significantly higher current smoke rate but lower eversmoked rate Quit rate much higher in Kings County Preventive Care Blood Pressure Paps Breast Exam Mammogram GB 76 45 35 40 Kings 74 47 45 64 Appear low Kings higher across all income grps Kings very high Benefits 80 70 60 50 GB Kings 40 30 20 10 0 Pension Health Dental Sick Vacation Benefits Part-time workers were less than half as likely to have most benefits Very strong relationship with income Particularly strong in Glace Bay- less than 5% of lowest income (-$20,000) have benefits (12% to 30% in Kings) Mental Health Glace Bay 2+ symptoms 22% Kings 21% Depressed 16% 13% feelings Childhood 33% 33% risk factors Higher in females, young and lower incomes % with depression Depressed feelings associated with child risk factors 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 GB Kings 0 1 # factors 2+ Decision Control 70 60 50 40 GB Kings 30 20 10 0 No or a few Most All Spirituality Glace Bay had higher rates of selfreported spirituality and church attendance Social Support Glace Bay Kings Significant Count on in crisis 95.5 94.4 No Advice 94.6 91.6 Yes Loved 96.8 94.7 Yes Close relative 80.1 1/week 72.9 Yes Neighbour 1/week 63.1 Yes 77.9 Voluntary Glace Bay Kings Significance Group or Organization 29.0 51.6 Yes Not Group or Organization 52.1 59.3 Yes Care-giving outside home 6.5 6.5 No Strongly associated with life-satisfaction Crime and Security Glace Bay reported higher levels of fear and concerns about crime despite being half as likely to have been victimized or to know someone who has been victimized. Understanding the ecological footprint Nova Scotia Footprint Income Quintile Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 6.2 6.6 7.0 8.1 10.7 Household income $/year Average Number of Vehicles per Household Average Kms./ Vehicle/ Year Household Kms Per Year Average Individual Commuting Distance to Work for all commuting members of the household 20,000 1.0 17,777 13,772 14.4 20,000 to 34,999 1.4 19,268 22,629 12.9 35,000 to 49,999 1.5 20,861 27,530 16.4 50,000 to 69,999 1.8 20,966 34,665 14.4 70,000+ 2.0 22,600 40,384 15.9 Total 1.6 20,853 28,916 15.1 - Ecological Attitudes Large majority (80%+) believe their way of life produces too much waste and “most of us” consume more than we need Two-thirds believed they could consume less if they chose Stronger in Kings and among high income (81% could consume less) CONCLUSIONS Levels of wellbeing similar? No significant difference in lifesatisfaction between GB and Kings But GB more likely to believe that their life-satisfaction could be improved by improved material circumstances Therefore- more materialistic values Great expectations? Already have rates of lifesatisfaction that are similar to Kings Yet they expect a greater increase from improved determinants Does GB expect more from income gains than can be delivered? Example of “focusing illusion”? “When people consider the impact of any single factor on their wellbeing- not only income- they are prone to exaggerate its importance. We refer to this tendency as the focusing illusion… Despite the weak relation between income and global life satisfaction or experienced happiness, many people are highly motivated to increase their income.” Daniel Kahneman- Economist, Princeton University Daniel Gilbert: Stumbling on Happiness (2006) “Economies thrive when individuals strive, but because individuals will only strive for their own happiness, it is essential that they mistakenly believe that producing and consuming are routes to personal wellbeing” Stresses reflect local realities Kings Higher stress • Too much work • Two-income families (more of them and more highly stressed than GB) • 25% would trade increases for less time • Unemployment more stressful Glace Bay • Too little work • Job insecurity • 14% would trade increases for less time • Both employment and unemployment are less stressful Value Alienation? Large majority of respondents in both communities believe they are socially motivated individuals living in a materialistic society. Wellbeing and Values Positive social values intrinsically related positive wellbeing while materialistic values were not Consistent with growing research literature Health Status Similar in self-rated health GB has more self-reported health problems Similar in risk factors except GB higher smoking rates Due to lower quit rates Health Status and Income Higher levels of self-rated health in Glace Bay after controlling for income differences Overall ratings are similar, despite differences in income distribution Mental Health Similar rates in GB and Kings Highest rates of problems among females, young people and low income Social Capital GB higher rates of spirituality and social support GB less likely to volunteer (formally or informally) GB higher rate of fear of crime despite lower victimization Glace Bay High levels of wellbeing in GB, despite economic insecurities, probably due to strengths on other determinants- particularly spirituality and social support- and lower levels of stress and higher decision control But greater expectations from improved economic conditions Kings County Higher income and economic security partially due to higher rate of two-income families- at the cost of higher rates of stress Values and alienation Both see themselves as socially motivated but living in a materialistic society Positive social values associated with higher life-satisfaction Conflict between consumption and ecological attitudes Surprises Higher fear of crime and lower rates of volunteerism in GB Both associated with community connectiveness