What we heard from you
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 41

What we heard from you: PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

What we heard from you:. Reviews by International Experts in Living Conditions Research. General remarks on Q’aire. Focus on problematic living cond. Missing issues: poverty, exclusion, working conditions, material living standards Reduce redundancy Improve N-S comparability

Download Presentation

What we heard from you:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

What we heard from you

What we heard from you:

Reviews by International Experts in Living Conditions Research

General remarks on q aire

General remarks on Q’aire

  • Focus on problematic living cond.

  • Missing issues: poverty, exclusion, working conditions, material living standards

  • Reduce redundancy

  • Improve N-S comparability

    • Use European indicators: OECD, Nordic, ECHP, Norbalt, Euromodule, ISSP, WVS, ILO…

General remarks

General remarks

  • Develop & add new complementary indicators to capture problems related to transitory/local social/ economic welfare problems encountered b indigenous populations

  • Reduce background data on ethnic identity, language, education, family, or use additional paper/pencil Q’aires

General comments

General comments

  • Regarding concern about not doing anything unique – not our intent

  • Internationally (N/S) comparable section

    • Housing, employment, income, health, family, education

  • Unique Arctic section

    • Traditional skills, language, religion, activities, family nearby

    • What makes people happier in settlements?

    • What makes people happier in the city?

    • Importance placed on Arctic elements

Technical matters

Technical Matters

  • One shared database available to all?

  • Concerted common reporting? Who coordinates the database?

  • No open-ended questions!

  • Satisfaction scales require 5-10 pts. (0-10)

  • Use standardized questions/response categories, when possible

  • Much more remains to be done, Further conceptualization as well as coordination

  • Restart: intense work with small research group.

General comments1

General comments

  • 1st impression: complicated project

  • 2nd impression: more complicated!

  • Not just a usual level of living conditions survey: also hh prod., lifestyles, spiritual life, ethnographic study, int’l comparative, statistical study, funding demand driven

  • Needs to be more focused based on priorities – decisions made before cuts

General comments2

General comments

  • Q’s with frequency response categories are not sufficiently precise (eg Q.A8)

  • Organization: you might bring information from other parts of Q’aire forward to hh section

  • Anticipate criticism:

    • Representative sample?

    • Use internationally validated questions

  • Survey needs to speak to governments: poverty, suicide, alcoholism, cultural preservation

General comments3

General comments

  • To meet time constraints, consider cutting questions for which there are already aggregate data

  • Condense activity and importance items into one question each



  • Departs more than the other sections from well-known LC surveys.

    • Names

    • Subsistence economy

  • Question if it will yield what you need

  • Subsistence section – doesn’t look at hh’s as givers. HH map isn’t best vehicle to get information. Y/N not sufficient.

  • Also misses current information: eg current employment, marriage status, total hh income



  • A2: Don’t understand intent of question. (relatives in comm.)

  • A9: ? Value (How large a part does F.

  • Subjective WB questions missing: family life

  • Missed information on social networks (ie friends)



  • You are inventing a new reporting period: 12 months. You need to specify volume of employment over that time (eg FTE months ILO categories)

  • What about education and unemployment in the hh chart?



  • Review context: need to cut by a factor of 5.

  • Identified main themes and suggest cuts/streamlining to meet time goal.

  • Profile that keeps variables that have policy significance

  • Continuation of part A

Background mobility

Background: mobility

  • Mobility: What are appropriate reference points?

  • Place names: how translate into something comparable over Arctic and with the south? (eg size, type – perhaps incorporating mobile reference point).

  • Saami questions: a lot of circularity: father, mother. In between Q’s to R. Family cohesion Q. loaded. Economic hardship Q could be asked of everyone.

Background mobility1

Background: mobility

  • Overlap in life migration and being away from home during course of year.

  • Could reduce details

  • Moving Q’s: close Q’s based on pretest results.

  • Take into account choices: are people being pushed as well as pulled?

  • What about accommodating people living nomadic lifestyle in moving Q’s?

Background language

Background: language

  • Special to this survey. You might have table format to simplify.

  • What about other language in your area? Bilingual ability=choice

  • Use of language: important, but choice factor should be incorporated

  • Access services: do people want to do this?

Background education

Background: education

  • Gender bias

  • Lack of herding items

  • Reference: children’s interest. Instead, aim at perceived importance

  • Overlap with lifestyle Q’s

  • Look at int’l surveys: highest level of R, mother, father. Can streamline to minimize circularity of Q’s for each level.

  • Pre-school Q may be important as well

Background education1

Background: education

  • Education language – maybe one Q.

  • Financial aid – not important in all areas

  • Parental support – important contextual variable

  • Q on importance of higher educ. – parallel Q on traditional educ.

Background education2

Background: education

  • Theme: are lifestyle choices forced or voluntary?

  • Competency in indigenous knowledge and in surrounding context



  • What is being met by lifestyle? Work, religion, health….

  • Split it up in separate sections: activities, outlook on life, health

  • Q’s about work: reduce to 1 closed-ended question on work pattern

  • Participation in cultural life: list activities mixing spheres with freq. categories: regularly, sometimes, never.

Lifestyle saami perspective

Lifestyle- Saami perspective

  • What if there are no movies available? “No” means different things.

  • Many questions aren’t relevant

  • Options on conception of nature inadequate

  • Spirituality Q’s – some not really relevant



  • Smoking and drinking: mix into list to reduce response bias

  • Missing major question on long-standing illness, permanent handicap – small additional questions.

  • List of illnesses is quite different from most surveys.

  • Drop suicide Q’s – unreliable infor. And ethical issue to avoid.



  • List of health symptoms: more approp. To developing countries?

  • What about lifestyle diseases?

Outlook on life

Outlook on life

  • Identity questions: can’t ask people directly about identity

  • Rate several aspects of identity on a simple scale.



  • Current: satis/dissat. With why follow-up, incl. discrimination Q.

  • Scale is not appropriate because satis. is a continuum and a dichotomy doesn’t pick up the average

  • 10-point scale works all over the world and doesn’t take more time.

  • Why question: ask of everybody or nobody

  • Important to use both happiness and depression type Q’s



  • Resembles ILO but normal way of doing it is to present all possible categories including all types of activity and non-activity (4 categories of work, unempl., training, housework) plus why not active.

  • Need measurement of unemployment (temporary? Large periods over last 5 years?)

Quality of working life

Quality of working life

  • No information

  • Instrumental attitude toward work: does work have intrinsic

  • Job seeking questions are unnecessary.



  • Missing data on assets – instead you are looking at use

Leisure greenland perspective

Leisure: Greenland perspective

  • also important to include activities that involve nature, not just in the city

Regionally specific items

Regionally-specific items

  • Index – method will work. You start by saying what you are trying to measure.



  • D71: interest = change to importance

  • Make importance Q’s symmetrical for all dimensions

  • Satisfaction Q’s: housing, jobs, public safety, etc. = also ask importance

  • Vote Q



  • Security – there are standard questions for this

  • Political resources – similar to Nordic countries, has additional items for special situations

  • Housing – much too large

  • Material living conditions indicators not defined in a consistent way (own vs. use vs. purchase). Make it all assets

  • Income section but ECHP version is “smarter”, probably more efficient.



  • Need several measures of vulnerability to poverty: both objective and subjective measures.

Environment saami perspective

Environment- Saami perspective

  • In some ways, we are very far away from the indigenous reality

  • Time critical periods –

  • Much work that is unseen – checking, planning

  • Distinguish between different political systems

Reflections on your ideas

Reflections on your ideas

Technical matters1

Technical matters

  • Yes, one database

  • Common reporting, yes and regional and specialized as well

  • Yes, intense work required

Open ended questions

Open-ended questions

  • Primarily used to generate closed-ended categories



  • Suicide Q’s use open-ended Q? Self-administered section

Next steps

Next Steps

Next steps1

Next steps

  • Bring together what we have learned from:

    • you,

    • From standardized instruments you have suggested

    • from the pretests, and

    • what we have not shared with each other

  • Use our time-constraint as the means of setting priorities – taking into account balance of different dimensions

Next steps2

Next steps

  • Adopt common interviewing styles, rules

  • Iterative pilot testing with shared results

  • Major, task-oriented workshop

  • Common code book, including planned indices

Open ended questions1

Open-ended questions

  • Pitz: this is an important issue not to be dismissed lightly

  • Peter: Important to see in terms of more than one study

  • Joachim – invitation of handwritten material proved to be successful (35-40% of sample)

  • Login