Life Quality

Quality of Life

 

The URL internet address of this Life Quality page is:

https://www.angelfire.com/space/special4u/lifequality.html

 

as mentioned at many pages:

 

Home Page   special4u.50megs.com

 

Dynamic  About  MAPS

 

Basic Tools  Free or Pay  Money Info

 

Special Europe  Women

 

Low - Normal speed  SPECIAL 4u

 

High Speed  SPECIAL 4u  Special4u

 

 

 

 

Life Quality - Kids’ well-being

in different countries of the world

 

By Pierre André THIBAULT,

 

in Copenhagen, Denmark, 2004, 2005,

 

with Copyrights for the copied, printed,

 

or reproduced texts, articles, images,

 

icons,  pictures,  maps,  photos,  videos,

 

URL internet addresses, and links,

 

as mentioned below.

 

Updated 2007 and 2010.

After 2007, most of the PAT stuff is Copyright © free

If for non-commercial and non-political purpose.

 

 

 

Life Quality at Yahoo

 

Quality of Life at Yahoo

 

Quality of Life at Wikipedia

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_of_life

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Quality_in_the_Municipality_of_H%F6gsby

Life Quality in the Municipality of Hoegsby, Sweden,

at Wikipedia

 

Quality of Life at Wikipiedia

 

Life Quality index at Wikipiedia

 

List of countries by Human Development Index

at Wikipedia

 

Quality of Life at Dmoz

 

http://search.dmoz.org/cgi-bin/search?search=quality+of+life

 

Quality of life at Thesaurus

 

Well-being at Thesaurus

 

Life quality counties at Google

 

Llife quality index at Google

 

Life quality index 2009 at Google

 

Life quality list at Google

 

Life quality factors at Google

 

Life quality in the world at Google

 

Life quality project at Google

 

Many other Life Quality lists at Google

 

Wisp list social indicators ranking at Google

 

 

 

The WISP list

 

The WISP, that is to say the

Weighted Index of Social Progress,

as established by Dr. Richard J. Estes,

Professor of Social Work, his co-workers,

and the students at the School of Social Work,

University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA,

during more than 10 years until about 2003,

has been much discussed and the object of

much controversy, of course, but still remains,

among all the attempts made independently by

many different schools and institutions in many

different countries, probably the most complete

and well-balanced one according to a large

number of experts in that field, worldwide.

 

In other words, there is definitely a large consensus

concerning this matter, as required by the readers of

the Special4u site about the reliability of this WISP work.

 

See examples of part of the study and controversy at: 

 

http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=2101

 

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article642788.ece?service=print

 

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article642788.ece

 

http://www.abelard.org/briefings/quality_of_life.htm

 

Penn School of Social Policy & Practice  From Google

Formerly the University of Pennsylvania School of Social Work,

Penn SP2 offers graduate programs in Social Work, Social Welfare,

Social Policy and Nonprofit…

 www.sp2.upenn.edu - 33k - Cached - Similar pages

 

http://www.sp2.upenn.edu

 

 

About the WISP list 

In AftenPosten, Oslo, Norway

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article642788.ece

Saturday July 17 2004. First published 8 Oct 2003.

By Jonathan Thisdall, Aftenposten, English Web Desk.

 

Sweden and Denmark top in quality of life. 

 

Norway has been the proud winner of surveys studying

and comparing the quality of life around the world,

but now has been left behind by its Scandinavian neighbours,

largely due to a relative lack of social equality.

 

The good news is that Norway was a close third,

newspaper Dagsavisen reports.

 

"Norway has always been among the top five countries.

There is very little difference between the top countries,

and one should remember that when you are on top

of the list, there is only one direction to go",  

Professor Richard Estes at the University of Pennsylvania

told Dagsavisen.

 

Estes is the man behind the international index WISP

which measures the quality of life in 163 nations

using 40 different social indicators.

 

The WISP study for the 1990s has just been published,

with Sweden and Denmark sharing first place,

just ahead of Norway - a sweeping 'victory' for the

Scandinavian way of life, with Nordic neighbours Finland

and the central European nations following after.

 

The USA, which has a higher GNP (Gross National Product),

ended up in 27th place, after all existing European Union

nations and several EU applicants.

 

Afghanistan and nine African nations came bottom of the study.

 

"A country can have a high GNP but at the same time

an unjust distribution of resources and much poverty.

 

The USA is an example of this. Despite a high GNP

a country can have large segments of its population

lacking satisfactory health care, education,

and housing or food," Estes said.

 

"WISP measures human quality of life and well-being.

GNP examines only economic factors.

Even economists dislike it when countries are ranked

according to GNP. WISP takes other factors into account,

such as lifespan, general health levels, working conditions,

access to nature, quality leisure time, democracy and

political participation," Estes said. Norway's decline

from top positions is due to its neighbour’s better

emphasis on equality of status.

 

 

 

By http://www.peterbe.com

9th of October 2003.

"The WISP study for the 1990s has just been published,

with Sweden and Denmark sharing first place,

just ahead of Norway - a sweeping victory for the

Scandinavian way of life, with Nordic neighbours Finland

and the central European nations following after,

measures the quality of life in 163 nations

using 40 different social indicators.

Apparently Swedes and Danes are the most

content people on earth about their quality of life.

This is just a short article noting that USA ends up

on 27th place and Afghanistan and nine African

nations came bottom of the study.”

 

 

The final WISP List,

by Professor Dr. Richard J. Estes, at Yahoo, at Google,

his collaborators and students, at the

School of Social Work, University of Pennsylvania,

Philadelphia, PA, USA:

 

There are 1, 2, or more countries on a same final ranking,

with just a little difference of total final points,

but different scores on other important ranking criteria,

giving them altogether these positions on the list:

 

1 Denmark 107 points at Special4u in English

   and at Wiki in many languages,

1 Sweden 107 points at Wiki in many languages,  

3 Norway 104 points at Wiki in many languages,

5 Finland 101 points at Wiki in many languages…

 

You can Google or check each country of the list

at for exemple Wikipedia,

 

5 Luxembourg 100

5 Germany 100

5 Austria 100

8 Iceland 98

8 Italy 98

10 Belgium 97

11 UK 96

11 Spain 96

13 Netherlands 95

14 France 94

14 Ireland 94

16 Switzerland 93

16 New Zealand 93

18 Japan 91

18 Hungary 91

20 Portugal 90

20 Greece 90

 

22 Australia 89

22 Bulgaria 89

24 Czech Rep 88

25 Slovak Rep 87

26 Canada 86

27 Slovenia 85

27 USA 85

27 Poland 85

 

34 Romania 77

34 Latvia 77

37 Yugoslavia 76

38 Chile 75

39 Lithuania 74

40 Israel 72

41 South Korea 71

41 Ukraine 71

43 Croatia 70

43 Cyprus 70

 

45 Argentina 69

46 Costa Rica 68

47 Russia 67

47 Moldova 67

49 Cuba 65

49 Armenia 65

49 Albania 65

52 Singapore 64

53 Macedonia 63

53 Georgia 63

55 Panama 62

56 Kyrgyz Rep 61

58 Mexico 60

58 Ecuador 60

58 Azerbaijan 60

 

61 Dominican Rep 59

61 Jamaica 59

61 Venezuela 59

61 Kazakhstan 59

70 Guyana 55

71 Thailand 54

71 Turkmenistan 54

73 Brazil 53

73 Sri Lanka 53

73 Colombia 53

73 El Salvador 53

73 Peru 53

78 South Africa 52

78 Uzbekistan 52

78 Lebanon 52

81 Paraguay 51

82 Tajikistan 50

82 Kuwait 50

 

84 Philippines 49

84 Viet Nam 49

84 Malaysia 49

84 Suriname 49

88 Egypt 48

88 Turkey 48

90 Lybia 46

90 Iran 46

92 Indonesia 45

93 Barhain 44

93 Botswana 44

 

115 Oman 29

116 Iraq 28

116 Cambodia 28

116 Gabon 28

119 Ghana 26

120 Zimbabwe 24

121 Pakistan 23

121 Haiti 23

123 Congo Rep 22

 

134 Togo 14

137 Bhutan 13

137 Mali 13

137 Sudan 13

137 Afghanistan 13

137 Gambia 13

141 Mauretania 12

141 Kenya 12

141 Djibouti 12

141 Cote d’ Ivoire 12

 

141 Malawi 9

146 Yemen 8

147 Uganda 7

148 Guinea Bissau 5

 

 

 

 

International Quality of Life Index.

From:

 http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=838 

There have been several attempts at this –

Richard Estes' Index of Social Progress

being probably the most advanced.

 

But most attempts to date have been biased towards

economic rather than ecological considerations, and have

omitted people's own assessments of their well-being.

 

Besides those aims outlined above (click on link above),

the aims of this work are:

to encourage people to consider and evaluate factors

making for overall quality of life;

to encourage leaders and others to take into account

the effects of their actions on quality of life;

to encourage the creation of human scale societies

and aspiration towards non-material values;

and to publicise the best work in this field.

 

 

 

 

 

Some more Links related with Quality of Life:

 

Copenhagen Consensus at Wikipedia

 

Countries digital access

 

http://www.itu.int/newsarchive/press_releases/2003/30.html

 

http://www.bigcities.govt.nz

 

 

 

 

UNICEF children’s well-being

at Google  2007

 

Children's well-being in Europe and North America

The UNICEF has surveyed the well-being of children

in 21 industrialised countries.

 

 

Here is the full ranking 2007:

 

1. The Netherlands       2. Sweden

    in a close lead with a gap to nr 3 and 4.

 

    Clearly nr 1 in Material well-being, Health & Safety,

    and Behaviours & Risks, Sweden makes a fair score

    in Subjective well-being, and a poor one  in Family

    and peer relationships, suggesting beyond any

    statiscal doubt,  deeper psycho-social distortions,

    a rather similar situation as in Finland.

 

    Denmark shows a more even scoring in all fields,

    but not in subjectivity.

  

    Netherlands’ kids having comparatively not so good

    material conditions than Sweden, Denmark,

    and Finland, but the best subjectivity in the world

    giving altogether a win.

 

    See ranking: The lesser points in dissatisfaction,

    the higher position in the comparative international

    ranking, at the opposite of the Wisp list above.

 

3. Denmark

4. Finland

 

5. Spain

6. Switzerland

7. Norway

 

8. Italy

9. Irish Republic

10. Belgium

11. Germany

12. Canada

13. Greece

14. Poland

 

15. Czech Republic

16. France

17. Portugal

18. Austria

19. Hungary

20. United States of America

21. United Kingdom

 

These 2 last worst results, opening for speculations

about the “why?”, suggesting a distortion based on

language, the survey being conducted in English in

anglophone countries by non-English natives,

and the answers being too negatively extensive.

 

Explanation not confirmed by the results of  Canada,

perhaps because of the large French speaking minority,

and because Canada is more “positive” in an

“international subconsciousness”?

 

Biasing by UNICEF non-wasp survey staff unconsciously

“negativist” towards US and UK “wasp big brothers”

is also thinkable, however difficult to grasp.

 

Last possibility being that it can be just like that,

by coincidence, though improbable. Or could be a flaw

somewhere?

 

 

 

 

Compare this international UNICEF

“Kids’ well-being” list from 2007

to the american WISP list above

from the 1990’s to 2003.

 

 

 

 

Global Ideas Bank  Quality of Life

 

28 jan 2006

 

This chapter explores the best ways of measuring quality of life, and publishes some of the

entries received by the Institute for Social Inventions in response to its competition on this

theme.

 

The standard of living is improving, at least in the developed countries. But the quality of

life does not necessarily improve at the same time. Are people happier, more fulfilled, more

creative, more able to develop their potential? Are their relationships, work and leisure as

satisfying? Do they find their neighbourhood and environment as pleasant to live in? Is there

a supportive network of family, friends and neighbours to help in old age or with childcare?

 

Social Indicators Research and other journals have detailed the work on this theme since

the early '70s, but how would you set about measuring quality of life, as opposed to the

standard of living?

 

These were the main questions posed by the Institute's competition, which accepted entries

in any one or more of the following five categories (and the Institute intends to continue

publicising material received in these categories):

 

(1) Idiosyncratic Personal Quality of Life Index if you had to design a questionnaire that

you could fill in once a year, to ascertain from the resulting score to what extent your own

personal quality of life had gone up or down, what would it consist of? The aim here is to

broaden the perspective of social scientists who consider these issues. For instance, some

people might want to assess how close they have been to nature, others to what extent

their spiritual needs have been met or how much they have laughed of late - the questions

can be ones that are fitted to you alone.

 

(2) Individual Quality of Life Index. As above, but the questionnaire should be applicable

to anyone - for instance, a country's cultural differences could be allowed for by getting

respondents to indicate what importance they attach to each question.

 

(3) Quality of Relationships Index. There may be overlap here with the Individual Index,

but the only factor this would measure is the quality of relationships with family, lovers,

neighbours, work colleagues and friends.

 

(4) Neighbourhood Quality of Life Index. This could either be one where inhabitants are

asked to give their subjective assessments, or could be based on more 'objective' exterior

assessment, or it could contain both these elements. The neighbourhood is defined here as

any area that local people would tend to refer to as their immediate neighbourhood, in many

areas not exceeding 1,000 inhabitants. Again the Index should be usable anywhere in the

world. Most such Indexes to date have been from a Western perspective. The hope here is

to draw up an Index that, if widely adopted, might encourage the developing world to avoid

harmful imitation of the worst excesses of the lifestyle of affluent regions. A particularly

satisfactory lifestyle in the third world (assuming basic needs for food, shelter and security

are met) - such as that of a hill tribe in Thailand or a village in Kashmir's Ladakh - might then

be able to score at least as high on a Quality of Life Index as a materially richer area such as

Brixton in London or Easterhouse in Glasgow. The Index can measure negative or positive factors

or both. Ideally it should be one that neighbourhoods would find useful in defending or developing

their areas, and that they could even perhaps administer for themselves.

 

(5) International Quality of Life Index. There have been several attempts at this –

Richard Estes' Index of Social Progress being probably the most advanced. But most attempts to

date have been biased towards economic rather than ecological considerations, and have omitted

people's own assessments of their well-being.

 Besides those aims outlined above, the aims of this work are: to encourage people to consider and

evaluate factors making for overall quality of life; to encourage leaders and others to take into

account the effects of their actions on quality of life; to encourage the creation of human scale

societies and aspiration towards non-material values; and to publicise the best work in this field.

 

Criteria

 

When considering the feasibility of proposals, the Institute bears in mind the following criteria,

where relevant:

 

(1) Would the Index proposed be applicable worldwide, without an inbuilt bias towards higher

ratings for 'First World' countries?

 

(2) Would the Index be reducible to a number, with a resulting league table, even if supplemented

by fuller 'small' print?

 

(3) Would it be largely independent of the economic standard of living?

 

(4) Would it be relatively cheap and simple to administer?

 

(5) Is it likely to prove credible, useful, and feasible (politically and in terms of funding)? Can it be

implemented privately without relying on a United Nations agency or similar?

 

This chapter describes some of the ingredients said to make up this quality of life, and some of the

attempts to measure it that have been made to date, in the hope of inspiring readers to create their

own versions (and to submit them to the Institute).

 

 

 

 

 

For a more sophisticated  design of this page, 

send in your own suggestion and contribution  here.

 

 

Anything from this site may be copied and used

freely if for education, study, research, public,

or private information, or other non-commercial

and non-political uses.

 

Stop unwanted pop-ups, ads, pornography, gambling,

and other disturbing messages, by using Firewall,

Antivirus, Pop-up Blocker, Microsoft Security,

and other Protection  programs.

 

 

Copyright © PAT 2004, 2005. Free of © after 2007.

 

More about this site  Sitemap  Dynamic

 

Email:  wetry2@gmail.com

 

The URL internet address of this

Life Quality - Kids’ best page is:

https://www.angelfire.com/space/special4u/lifequality.html

 

 

Back to:

 

Top of the page

 

Home Page  special4u.50megs.com

 

Dynamic  About  MAPS

 

Basic Tools  Free or Pay  Money Info

 

Special Europe  Women

 

Low - Normal speed  SPECIAL 4u

 

High Speed  SPECIAL 4u  Special4u