Transcript Inga Jekabsone (University of Latvia)

Title of presentation I Friday, 25 March
2016 I Page 1
WHAT IS WELL-BEING?
LOCAL AUTHORITIES – WELL-BEING
PROVIDERS
DIALOGUE BETWEEN LOCAL AUTHORITY AND
SOCIETY – GUARANTEE OF WELL-BEING
ASSESSMENT OF DIALOGUE BETWEEN MUNICIPALITY AND
SOCIETY
7 POINT SCALE OF
CITIZEN
ENGAGEMENT
Co-responsibility
Co-production
Co-management
Co-governance
An engaged partnership
Formal partnershipv
Minimal engagement
Source: Bloomfield, J. TOGETHER Final Report [online]. URBACT programme, 30.10.2012. – [Accessed 01.09.2013.]. Available:
http://urbact.eu/fileadmin/Projects/Together/outputs_media/TOGETHER_Final_Report_rev.pdf
INTEGRATED GOVERNANCE MODEL FOR MUNICIPALITIES
12 STEPS FOR EVALUATING AND INCREASING WELL-BEING IN
MUNICIPALITIES
1st stage: preparation
2nd stage: research
3rd stage: achievement
of results and durability
Sourse: author’s created figure
LOCAL SUPPORT GROUP – «MUNICIPALITY
FACE»
Farmers
Disabled persons
Local Support Group*
Religion
organizations
Entrepreneurs
Culture/sport organizations
Youngsters
*Salaspils (Latvia) case
Scientists
Formed by
leaders of 35
different
organizations
Seniors
Families
DATA COLLECTION USING FOCUS GROUPS
What is well-being/ ill-being for you?
What could you do to improve your well-being?
Title of presentation I Friday, 25 March 2016 I Page
8
DATA GROUPING BY DIMENSIONS
ACCESS TO
ESSENTIAL
RESOURCES
ATTITUDES AND
INITIATIVE
WELL-BEING/ILLBEING FEELINGS
LIVING
ENVIRONMENT
WELLBEING
PERSONAL
EQUILIBRUM
RELATIONS WITH
AND BETWEEM
ORGANISATIONS
PERSONAL
RELATIONS
SOCIAL
EQUILIBRUM
THE RESULTS OF SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING RESEARCH:
SALASPILS CASE
Social equilibrum
6.00%
Personal relations
6.48%
Well-being/ illbeing feelings
1.77%
Personal
equilibrum
6.84%
Relations with and
between
organisations
8.28%
Attitudes and
initiatives
11.25%
Access to essential
resources
43.64%
Living
environment
15.73%
Source: Results from URBACT II “TOGETHER” project, 35 homogeneous groups, 3867 responses
Research period : January – May, 2011
EXAMPLE OF WELL-BEING INDICATOR:
INDICATOR OF EDUCATION
Ideal situation
Competitive level of education in comparison with other EU countries.
Lifelong learning programs are using.
Good situation
It is possible to educate children. The development groups are available for
children (for 0-3 years). There is a chance for children to spare their free
time.
Medium situation
The educational institutions are available. There are good schools in
sufficient numbers.
Bad situation
No possibilities to improve yourself. Interest groups are not available.
Children are not able to sport, travel, participate in interest education.
Very bad situation
Lack of access to educational institutions (kindergartens, schools).
Source: Results from URBACT II “TOGETHER” project, 35 homogeneous groups, 3867 responses; research period : January – May, 2011
HOW TO IMPROVE THE WELL-BEING?
Society
• Defining
activities
• Indicate
responsibe
persons,
timeframe,
resources
• Realisation of
activities using
co-responsibility
approach
MEMBERS
OF LSG
(SOCIETY)
REALIZATION
OF CERTAIN
ACTIVITY
EMPLOYEES OF
MUNICIPALITY
(LOCAL
AUTHORITY)
Local Authorities
PILOT ACTIONS: SOME EXAMPLES
Day care center
Young scientist
school
Workshops with
seniors
Science week
Technical creativity classes
LESSONS LEARNED
Collaboration
Sustainability
Municipality
Networking
Title of presentation I Friday, 25 March
2016 I Page 15