Gross National Happiness Commission

Report
GNH: Concept and Operationalization:
Presented to the Consultative workshop on Measuring Progress in
Post-2015 Development Framework : Environmental Performance
Indicators and Environmental Welfare Indicators
10-12 December 2013, Incheon, Republic of Korea
GNH – An Introduction
GNH – Index/survey findings and its
Application
GNH Policy Screening Tool – Its
Application & GECDP Mainstreaming
Conclusion - Questions
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
2
GNH is a “development approach that seeks to achieve a
harmonious balance between material well-being and the spiritual,
emotional and cultural needs of our society.”
GNH is based on the belief that since happiness is the ultimate desire
of every citizen, it must be the purpose of development to create
the enabling conditions for happiness
GNH based on four pillars: 1. Sustainable and Equitable
Socio-Economic Development, 2.Enivronmental
Conservation, 3.Preservation and Promotion of Culture
and 4. Good Governance
The Four Pillars are Specified by Nine Dimensions
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
3
“Bhutan’s journey with GNH began more than four decades ago
and more elaborate and precise metrics to measure GNH has
been underway since 2008”
Gross National Happiness Commission (GNHC) created to
mainstream GNH
GNH indicators and Policy Screening Tools developed
GNH Survey carried out every three years to assess our
journey towards GNH
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
4
“A composite statistic to measure Bhutan’s progress in
enhancing the happiness of the people based on a holistic
framework made up of 9 domains and 33 indicators”
The GNH Index, its domains and indicators will be used
to guide Bhutan’s development :
draw attention to areas that need to be addressed, basis for resource
allocation etc.
mainstream GNH into new policies & plans by screening the
policies and projects using the GNH Policy and Project Screening
Tools (PST)
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
5
Living Standard
•Assets
•Housing
•Household per
capita income
Eco Diversity
•Ecological Issues
•Responsibility
towards
environment
•Wildlife damage
(Rural)
•Urbanization
issues
Comm Vitality
•Donations (time
& money)
•Community
relationship
•Family
•Safety
PWB
•Life satisfaction
•Positive emotions
•Negative
emotions
•Spirituality
Health
•Mental health
•Self reported
health status
•Healthy days
•Disability
GNH
GG
•Gov’t
performance
•Fundamental
rights
•Services
•Political
Participation
Culture
•Speak native
Language
•Cultural
Participation
•Artistic Skills
•Driglam Namzha
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Time Use
• Work
• Sleep
Education
•Literacy
•Schooling
•Knowledge
•Value
Value
Safety
Speak native language
Family
Disability
Mental health
Urbanization issues
Responsibility towards…
Life satisfaction
Government performance
Healthy days
Assets
Self reported health status
Ecological issues
Sleep
Negative emotions
Community relationship
Fundamental rights
Artisan skills
Driglam Namzha
Positive emotions
Wildlife damage (Rural)
Political participation
Household per capita income
Spirituality
Literacy
Housing
Donations (time & money)
Work
Services
Schooling
Cultural participation
Knowledge
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
90%
80%
70%
60%
0%
Value
Safety
Speak native language
Family
Disability
Mental health
Urbanization issues
Responsibility towards…
Life satisfaction
Government performance
Healthy days
Assets
Self reported health status
Ecological issues
Sleep
Negative emotions
Community relationship
Fundamental rights
Artisan skills
Driglam Namzha
Positive emotions
Wildlife damage (Rural)
Political participation
Household per capita income
Spirituality
Literacy
Housing
Donations (time & money)
Work
Services
Schooling
Cultural participation
Knowledge
100%
Bhutanese enjoy highest
sufficiency in values,
safety, native language,
family, mental health,
etc.
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
The indicators in which
Bhutanese lack sufficiency
are knowledge, participation
in festivals, schooling,
donations, literacy and
housing.
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB



Of the nine domains, Bhutanese have the most sufficiency in
health, followed by ecology, and psychological wellbeing but
lacks in GG and Education
Urban areas do better in health, living standards and
education, but lacks sufficiency in GG and community vitality.
conversely Rural areas do better in community vitality, cultural
resilience, and good governance but lacks sufficiency mainly
in education and living standards
Happiness is higher among people with a primary education
or above than among those with no formal education, but
higher education does not affect GNH very much
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB


Unmarried people and young people are among the
happiest
The ranking of Dzongkhags by GNH differs significantly
from their ranking by income and multidimensional
poverty. Zhemgang for example, do far better in GNH
than in income.
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB

Sufficiency Threshold
◦ Shows how much is needed to enjoy sufficiency in each
of the 33 indicators

Happiness Threshold
◦ 50%, 66%, 77%
◦ Unhappy, narrowly happy, extensively happy, and
deeply happy
◦ 41% of the population under 66%

.
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
According to 2010 GNH Survey results
RURAL PLACES
URBAN PLACES
COMMUNITY
VITALITY
Policy and program response from the Government:
• Establishment of recreation centers, children’s parks, Mani Dungkhors etc
• Eg: centenary park at Changlimithang, Chanjiji etc
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
13
Good
18.21%
A verage
46.84%
Poor
34.96%
Possible policy and program responses by the Government:
• more culture content in education
• national and local holidays to promote attendance at these festivals
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
14
The GNH Policy Screening Tool
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
WHAT IS GNH POLICY SCREENING
TOOLS?
What is it?
The GNH policy
screening tools is
an application to
assess/review all
draft policies
through a GNH
Lens
What
does it
provide?
Specific
recommendatio
ns and
feedback to
review the
policy within
nine GNH
domains
What is
it not?
NOT- the
determining
factor for
approving/end
orsing a policy
Linkage Between Variables and GNH Indicators
22 variables
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Equity
Economic Security
Material wellbeing
Engagement in productive
activities
Decision-making opportunity
Anti Corruption
Legal Recourse
Rights
Gender
Transparency
Skills and Learning
Public Health
Water and Air Pollution
Land degradation
Bio-Diversity Health
Social support
Family Interaction
Leisure
Culture
Values
Spiritual pursuits
Stress
9 GNH Domains
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Living standard
Good Governance
Education
Health
Ecology
Community vitality
Time use and balance
Culture
Psychological wellbeing
151 variables
(2010 survey)
Calculatio
n
1
2
3
4
Negative
Uncertain
Neutral/Not
Applicable
Positive
Rationale and
Mitigation/Alternativ
es
Rational
e
Rational
e
Screening Process
1. A heterogeneous group comprising of people with skills/qualifications in
various areas is formed.
2. Effort are made to ensure NCWC,RUB, and NEC are present for all
screening exercises. Rest of the group dependent on the draft policy being
discussed.
3. Transparent: No limitations who can participate.
4. Try to have a minimum of 15 participants.
5. Representatives of the proponent sector presents the draft policy to the
screening group.
6. Screening conducted during a joint sitting in the past, however shifted to
individual screenings.
7. Results submitted to RED, Consolidated and Presented to the GNH
Commission.
1. Experiences from Field Testing – GNH Policy
Screening Tools
Bhutan’s Accession to WTO
Voting based on discussions among 24 GNHCS officers
•
Results: 19 for joining WTO – 5 against
GNH Policy Screening Tools used by the same 24 GNHCS officers
• Results: 19 against joining WTO – 5 for
•Conclusion: Policy is Not GNH Favorable
Approved Policies
Draft Policies
NHRD Policy 2010
Tertiary Education Policy 2010
National Irrigation Policy 2011
National Health Policy 2011
National Youth Policy 2011
RNR Research Policy 2011
CSMI Policy 2012
Thromde Finance Policy 2012
Mineral Development Policy
MSME Policy
National Education Policy
National OHS Policy
National Population Policy
FNS Policy
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
21
21
An Example: The Mineral Development Policy
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Variable Scores (GNHC): Mineral Development Policy
4.00
3.60
3.47 3.47 3.47
3.50
3.07
3.00
2.50
3.33
3.13
3.27
2.93
2.87
2.80
2.27
2.40
2.40
2.20
2.33 2.33
2.73 2.67
2.87
2.60 2.53
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
23
Domain Scores GNHC: Mineral Development Policy
4.0
3.6
3.5
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Living
Good
standard
Governance
Education
Health
Ecology
Community
Time Use
Vitality
and Balance
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Culture
Psychological
Wellbeing
24

Rationales
◦ No specific provision
◦ Mining activities may favor men over women
◦ Women may suffer indirectly (separation)

Alternatives/Mitigation Measure
◦ May need specific provisions on the advancement of
gender equality (preference could be given to
women for specific jobs)
◦ Promote female participation in HRD
◦ Awareness on health and sexual issues
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
25
• Rationales
– Mining will never be 100% clean
– No limit on number of mines
– Increased mining activities will lead to increased
green-house gas emissions, use of fossil fuels,
water a
• Alternatives/Mitigation Measure
– Strategic Assessment of the mining master plan
needed
– May need to zone areas for mining operations
– Need to review costing methods of mineral
resources
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
26
Based on the Following Rationales:
 Mainstreaming has to take place throughout the
policy and planning process from formulation to
implementation for reasons of sustainability,
effectiveness, and efficiency (assuming the
process itself is fairly good)
 Need to take a holistic view
 Need to be Proactive
 Everyone is responsible
 The ‘Stage or Level’ within the process determines
what action should be taken and associated
indicators
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Based on the Following Rationales:
 The actions taken are ‘interconnected’ and
‘inter-dependent’
 Individual actions may contribute towards
GECDP Goals, but it would not be ‘sufficient’
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Based on the Following Rationales:
 The actions taken are ‘interconnected’ and
‘inter-dependent’
 Individual actions may contribute towards
GECDP Goals, but it would not be ‘sufficient’
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Preparatory
Phase
Finding the entry points and making the case
• Finding champions at the institutional level –
policy & planning agencies, human settlement
&construction sector, Industries, finance, local
government, training providers, etc.
Phase 1
Integrating
GECDP
into
national
development processes
• Influencing policy processes
• Planning processes (both national and LG
levels)
Phase 2
Sensitization & building implementation
capacity
• Develop GECDP indicators and integrate
with existing monitoring systems;
• Engage in budgeting process
• Capacity building strategy
30





Creating awareness across all levels of
government
Assessment of the Policy and Planning Process
and Identification of windows of opportunity
Influencing Planning Guidelines and Key Result
Areas to integrate GECDP and other cross cutting
concerns
Identification of GECDP and Other Cross Cutting
Concerns within the central sectors and local
governments and recommending interventions
Comments on draft 11th FYP & Mainstreaming
frameworks for Sectors & LGs)
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB


Review of policies for integration of GECDP
and other cross cutting concerns
Providing support and inputs into the
Introduction of GECDP modules in the
curriculum of tertiary institutes: RIM, CST &
Sherubtse College
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
Gross National Happiness
GNH
Pillars
National
Key
Result
Areas
(NKRAs)
Delivered
by
Pillar 3 :
Pillar 4: Good
Conservation and
Governance
Sustainable
Environment
Mgnt. 12
8 Carbon
neutral/
Improved public
Green &
climate
service delivery,
motivated public
resilient
9
13 servants GPMS
development
promoted and
Poverty +
Democracy and
preserved.
Sustainable Mgt &
Reduced/MDG
Governance
7 Indigenous wisdom, utilization
of
+ Achieved
14 strengthened
arts and crafts
10 natural resources
Gender friendly
Food Secure & promoted for
Integrated
water
environment for
sustainable rural
sustainable
utilization & Mgt 15 Women’s
Full Employment livelihood
11
participation
Imp.
disaster
Needs of
Corruption reduced
Pill 1: Sustainable Pill. 2: Presv.
and equitable
and promotion
socio-eco. Dev. of culture
1 Sustained
6 Historical, cultural
economic
property and
2
Bhutanese identity
growth
3
4
5
Vulnerable
Group
addressed
resilience & Mgt
mainstreamed
Health, Education
Transport,Communications,Human Settlement, Construction
Tourism, Private Sector, Trade & Investment, Agriculture, Energy
Culture, Governments (Central ministries/Agencies/Local
Government)
33
Does the dzongkhag
include the 4 Class A
Thromdes?
and Thromdes
/municipalities
Plz.
see
34
For Further clarification, please visit
www.grossnationalhappiness.com
www.gnhc.gov.bt
Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB
35

similar documents