Filed under: events, ideas, publication | Tags: article, economics, lifestyle, news, overwork, publication, social, society, time, vacation, work
Notice of Release, November 23, 2010
Does Money Matter? Evidence Shows that Mental and Physical Health, Stress, and Sense of Belonging Trump Income as Determinants of the Happiness of Canadians
The Centre for the Study of Living Standards (CSLS) released today on factors influencing the happiness or life satisfaction of Canadians. The report, prepared in partnership with the Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity (ICP), was based on data for 70,000 Canadians from Statistics Canada’s Community Health Survey. It provides a comprehensive analysis of the happiness landscape in Canada, quantifies the many variables that determine happiness, and explains the variation in happiness across provinces, CMAs and health regions.
The key findings of the study are highlighted below.
· There is relatively little variation in average happiness in Canada both over time and across space. In 2009, 92.1 per cent of the population 12 and over reported that they were either satisfied or very satisfied with their lives, compared to 91.4 per cent in 2008, 91.9 per cent in 2007, 91.8 per cent in 2005, and 91.3 per cent in 2003. Based on a scale of 1 to 5, the average level of happiness of the Canadian population 20 and over in 2007-8 was 4.26.
· At the provincial level, life satisfaction ranged from a high of 4.33 in Prince Edward Island to a low of 4.23 in Ontario, a total range of 0.10 points (2.5 per cent) out of a potential maximum variation of four points. At the level of the 32 CMAs, average happiness ranged from a high of 4.37 in Sherbrooke, Quebec, to a low of 4.15 in Toronto, Ontario, a range of 0.22 points or 5.5 per cent. At the level of the 121 health regions, average happiness ranged from a high of 4.42 in Kings County, Prince Edward Island to a low of 4.12 in the City of Toronto Health Unit, a range of 0.30 points or 7.5 per cent.
· A one-unit increase in perceived mental health (measured on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is poor mental health and 5 is excellent mental health) raises the proportion of individuals that are very satisfied with life by 17.0 percentage points. Said another way, the effect for the average person of a one-unit increase in mental health on happiness is equivalent to the effect of a 309 per cent increase in household income on happiness.
· Perceived health status was also an economically significant determinant of happiness. A one-unit increase in health status increases the proportion of individuals that are very satisfied with life by 8.8 percentage points. Such a change is equivalent to a 157 per cent increase in household income.
· High levels of stress level were associated with lower life satisfaction. Specifically, a one-unit increase in stress (measured on a 5-point scale) decreases the proportion of individuals that are very satisfied by 7.7 percentage points. In terms of household income, this is equivalent to the effect of a 136 per cent decrease on happiness for the average person.
· An individual’s sense of belonging to their local community was also an important determinant of individual life satisfaction. A one-unit increase in sense of belonging (measured on a 4-point scale) increases the proportion of individuals that are very satisfied with life by 6.5 percentage points. Relative to the effect of household income, such a change is equivalent to a 116 per cent increase in income for the average person.
· Unemployment had a negative impact on people’s happiness. Relative to household income, moving from unemployment to employment has the same impact on happiness as a 151 per cent increase in income for the average person.
· Although household income was statistically significant at the one per cent level, it carries less economic significance for happiness than the variables highlighted above. Specifically, a ten per cent increase in household income from the mean increases the proportion of individuals that are very satisfied with life by only 0.6 percentage points.
· Geographical variation in happiness in Canada arises for two main sources: differences in the means of variables associated with life satisfaction and the importance of those variables in the life satisfaction regressions. Although sense of belonging was not the most economically significant variable in our models of life satisfaction, the variation in this variable across geographical units was quite large and this factor was key to explaining regional differences in happiness.
The report provides strong support for the 2009 Stiglitz report commissioned by French President Nicholas Sarkozy that recommended greater emphasis be placed on happiness relative to GDP in the development of public policy.
To address this emerging issue of the role of happiness in public policy, the CSLS and the ICP are organizing a conference on this topic in Ottawa on December 1, 2010. Speakers include John Helliwell, Don Drummond, Mel Cappe, and Alan Nymark.
For additional information, please contact:
Centre for the Study of Living Standards
111 Sparks Street, Suite 500
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5B5
Filed under: activism, artists, contemporary art, events, ideas | Tags: activism, art, artists, contemporary art, economics, event, ideas, labour, lectures, other exhibitions, social, society, time, work
This looks great and I’m disappointed I’ll be missing it as I was in Stockholm in October and will be returning in January…
The seminar series at Iaspis discusses the image of work, the worker and the workplace in relation to diverse strategies within contemporary art. What roles are played by spatial organisation and activism? What concepts are the descriptions of artistic production and labour framed by? What ideologies are involved in the production of the artistic subject? Is the artist a role model for the contemporary “post-fordian” worker—flexible, creative, adaptable and cheap—a creative entrepreneur within an advanced service economy?
The first seminar treats contemporary and historical images of labour, and reflects on what type of “worker” the artist could be. On the Conditions of Production brings up the organisation of work within the art world. The third seminar discusses what role art can play—politically and socially—in relation to the public realm and spatiality. Artists, curators, activists, architects and researchers are contributing to the seminars.
The program is curated by Michele Masucci (artist), Annika Enqvist, Cecilia Widenheim and Jonatan Habib Engqvist (Iaspis). For further information http://www.iaspis.se
Seminar#1: Representations of Labour
20 November 10 am – 6 pm
What is the image of work? How and by whom has this image been produced? What are the means of production involved in artistic representations of workers, workers movements and the workplace? What are the theoretical and practical challenges in these representations? How is the role of the artist presented and what kind of “worker” is the artist? The seminar addresses what work is and has been through experiences of work and questions concerning migration, economy, class and technology.
Participants include: Annika Eriksson (artist, Berlin), Kirsten Forkert (artist/researcher, London), Ingela Johansson (artist, London), Stefan Jonsson (writer, Stockholm), Maria Lind (curator, Stockholm), Sarat Maharaj (writer, London/Malmö), Pratchaya Phinthong (artist, Bangkok), Joanna Sokolowska (curator, Lodz), Nina Svensson (artist, Stockholm)
Seminar#2: On the Conditions of Production
27 November 2 pm – 6 pm
28 November 10 am – 5 pm
A two day workshop hosted by a research group initiated by BAC (Baltic Art Center) in Visby. What are the general terms of production in society at large? How does economy, cultural politics and media relate to art? What does alienation imply in an increasingly socially oriented production process? What is the distribution of labour within the art world; what are the pros and cons of today’s system? Could one imagine an open working process, independent from predefined expectations? How can one organise a production-based residency today? The Open Call for Contributions aims at opening the ongoing research process and add to the discussion. In order to contribute and participate, please register by email to email@example.com
Participants include: Kajsa Dahlberg (artist, Berlin), Kim Einarsson (director Konsthall C, Stockholm/Berlin), Mattìn (artist, Berlin), Michele Masucci (artist, Stockholm), Lisa Rosendahl (director BAC, Visby/Berlin), Fredrik Svensk (writer and critic, Göteborg), Alexei Penzin (philosopher, Moscow) and contributing practitioners.
Seminar#3: Art for Social and Spatial Change
3 December, 5 – 9 pm
4 December, 10.30 am – 5.30 pm
Two days revolving around the question of what it means to take action today. The conversations include intersectional perspectives on labour and the so-called creative industry. What are our possibilities to act within an artistic practice in social, spatial and political change? In what way are conflicts concerning work expressed in the workspace and in society? How is public space staged in the private? How can emancipatory political projects such as the feminist and queer movements separate themselves from an increasing commodification of political and social subjects? Is it possible to imagine a “movement” in the sense of a collective process of the transformation of reality today?
Participants include: Lars Bang Larsen (writer and curator, Barcelona), Franco Berardi (researcher, Bolongna), Ana Betancour (professor architecture, Göteborg), Catharina Gabrielsson (architect and reseacher, Stockholm), Helena Mattsson (ass. professor and architect, Stockholm), Raqs Media Collective (artists and activists, New Dehli), Nina Power (researcher, Roehampton) and Judith Revel (philosopher, Paris) among others.
On display, “Chinese Business” by Mladen Stilinović (Iaspis, 2009)
The series takes place at Iaspis in relation to the exhibition Image at Work produced
by XpoSeptember in collaboration with Index, The Romanian Culture Institute and Moderna Museet.
Iaspis, Swedish Arts Grants Committee
Maria skolgata 83, 2nd floor
Filed under: ideas | Tags: ideas, lifestyle, overwork, self-sacrifice, social, society, time, work, working
This reached my inbox via Abby some time ago, but didn’t make it to the blog because I was waiting until I could bring myself to preface it with some commentary. After so many months (many, many month) I find the concept of Family 360 no less repugnant and I figure I’ll just leave the link for someone else to find and comment on.
Example of what is so repugnant:
“The strains within today’s families are taking a serious toll, not only on families themselves, but on workplace productivity and effectiveness.”
All I really have to say is: “screw workplace productivity” because, when it comes down to it, making money for other people is hardly worth this type of sacrifice.
According to Wikipedia, in the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth and the top 1% owned 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation’s wealth. It also reports that a 2006 study by the Federal Reserve System shows that, from 1989 to 2004, the distribution in the United States had been changing with indications there was a greater concentration of wealth held by the top 10% and top 1% of the population.
With this in mind, why should anyone focus on fitting their personal life into a business paradigm? Its not going to offer any gain, whatsoever. Instead, we should focus on having a better life. And, if that means spending time with family on terms that are mutually beneficial to all family members without intervention by an employer, then surely that will be more fulfilling and worthwhile.
Here, follow this link and be grossed out even more: http://www.family360.com