what we heard from you
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
What we heard from you:

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 41

What we heard from you: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

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

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'What we heard from you:' - manjit

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
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 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)