Environmental Audit CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by the British Psychological Society
The British Psychological Society, incorporated by Royal Charter, is the learned and professional body for psychology and psychologists in the United Kingdom. We are a registered charity with a total membership of just over 50,000.
Under its Royal Charter, the objective of the British Psychological Society is “to promote the advancement and diffusion of the knowledge of psychology pure and applied and especially to promote the efficiency and usefulness of members by setting up a high standard of professional education and knowledge”. We are committed to providing and disseminating evidence-based expertise and advice, engaging with policy and decision makers, and promoting the highest standards in learning and teaching, professional practice and research.
The British Psychological Society is an examining body granting certificates and diplomas in specialist areas of professional applied psychology
1. Introduction
1.1 The Society warmly welcomes the Government’s decision to make well-being a key element of Government strategy. This stance is clearly one that has enormous support across scientific and academic disciplines, across civil society more generally, and internationally.
1.2 The Society and its members are active supporters of both the Office for National Statistics’ efforts to analyze relevant data and the Government’s efforts to implement the relevant results in policy-making.
1.3 The Society supports the broad thrust of the emergent strategy from the ONS although we would welcome greater clarity as to how this strategy, and the data generated, are to be implemented in each Government Department. Specifically, we would recommend –that each Department has a devolved departmental strategy to implement the well-being agenda, an identified lead official with strong links to the ONS. The Society also recommends that each Department consider the appointment of an appropriately qualified professional to advise on how well-being could be prioritized in each Department.
1.4 In summary, the Society:
Supports the Government’s plans to utilise the results of well-being research and analysis in policy making.
Beieves well-being is a multi-dimensional construct that must be measured using multiple items.
Believes the work of ONS could be developed to look at the causal and functional functional relationships of well-being.
Believes the current measurement strategy of the ONS is limited and should be expanded in scope.
Believes greater involvement of those with relevant expertise is necessary.
2. The Government’s Plans to Utilise the Results of the Available Well-being Research and Analysis in Policy Making
2.1 The Society is supportive of the Government’s plans to utilise well-being research and analysis in policy making. However, we believe that it is important to move away from a purely GDP measure of success in policy making and implementation. Well-being is a multi-dimensional construct and must therefore be measured using multiple items.
2.2 The Society believes that the work of the ONS could usefully be developed to look at the causal and functional relationship between elements of well-being. Well-being includes both feeling good and functioning well (ie perception of how well one is functioning). There is general agreement that a well-being measure needs to cover hedonic well-being (feeling good), eudaimonic well-being (functioning well) and overall evaluation (usually measured in terms of life satisfaction). A well-being measure also needs to consider objective factors (such as housing quality, income, access to green spaces etc) on the one hand, and possible consequences of high and low well-being (prevalence of mental health problems, employment days lost to illness, etc). These relationships are complex, but it is important to understand them, to better design potential policies.
2.3 The Society believes all parts of central and local Government should support, in their policy making, the enhancement of well-being. Well-being should be seen both as an over-arching aim of Government and each element of civic society has a role to play in protecting and enhancing well-being. Caution is always wise in policy-making when, as in this area, multiple factors interact in complex (and sometimes unexpected) ways, but that argues for greater communication between agencies (perhaps coordinated by the Cabinet Office).
2.4 We believe that well-being is a matter for all agencies of Government. In Whitehall, this speaks to the role of the Cabinet Office in setting strategic goals and monitoring Departmental progress towards targets. In local government, well-being is now a key role for the newly-established Health and Well-Being Boards (established under Statute law in each higher-tier local authority). Some consideration should be given to how these Boards could both develop and coordinate their strategies.
2.5 Psychologists work across many Government agencies—in the armed forces, in mental health services and physical health services, in education and in the criminal justice services and in support for employers and employees. The Society welcomes the emphasis on occupational health services but stresses that occupational psychology should be seen as a service that can prevent the development of mental health problems as well as ameliorate them. Occupational Psychology can also promote positive well-being (with all the consequent benefits to the UK economy as well as individuals). These considerations—amelioration of problems, preventative work and the promotion of positive well-being—apply equally to all domains of psychological practice; in clinical and counselling psychology, in health psychology, educational psychology and forensic psychology as well as occupational psychology.
2.6 Psychologists have expertise in behaviour-change, not only in health and mental health, but more widely. This applies to individual, family, group, organisation and society-wide interventions, as well as skills areas as diverse as resilience training, management and leadership development, job and organisation design as well as measurement and even therapy. The Society therefore welcomes discussion of a multi-disciplinary portal to include other professions in a new Occupational Health Service.
3. What the Government is doing to get the Right Analytical Skills and Training (including Social Science Skills), to Reflect Well-being thinking and to Address all Aspects of Sustainable Development; and how in Practical terms to make such an Approach Operational in Departments’ Policy-making Processes
3.1 From a psychological perspective, well-being is understood as a multi-dimensional and multi-faceted construct and it must therefore be measured using multiple items.
3.2 In addition, psychologists understand that people actively evaluate (hence well-being possessing an additional evaluative element) objective aspects of their lives—their income, access to health services, environmental quality. This implies that well-being, from a governmental or policy perspective also comprises an element of objective indicators. As such, the current measurement strategy developed by ONS is a good start—as it contains elements of each facet. It appears to lack, however, a strategic or thematic structure—these elements are included on what looks to be a somewhat ad hoc basis.
3.3 We believe that the four key questions currently used by the ONS to measure subjective well-being represent a positive start, but are very limited in their coverage of the construct. They currently only measure overall subjective evaluation (life satisfaction), feelings (happiness and anxiety), and a single question about functioning/eudaimonic well-being, namely the extent to which people think that what they do is worthwhile. We believe the ONS questions need to be extended to cover other key elements of functioning, including engagement, optimism, self-esteem, positive relationships, etc.
3.4 The Society recognises that there are very real practical constraints, and that there is a great benefit from consistency of practice both nationally and internationally. Research has suggested robust frameworks for the definition of well-being, for example, Huppert FA, So TCC (2011), “Flourishing across Europe: application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being.” Social Indicators Research has developed and validated specific measures of well-being, most notably the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS). This has been given serious consideration by the ONS Technical Advisory Group on Measuring National Well-being. Other measures such as the BBC Well-Being Scale also have good psychometric properties.
3.5 In order to reflect wellbeing thinking in policy-making processes, the Government should include psychology-based evidence around wellbeing and include those with wellbeing expertise in its policy-making processes. This could be done through a number of routes:
Ensure that psychology evidence about wellbeing is brought to bear when making policy decisions—perhaps by having a default question for policy-making decision processes to consider whether wellbeing has been fully considered.
Provide learning and development for policy-makers on psychology and wellbeing as a standard part of their professional development.
Bring in external experts to provide evidence around wellbeing during the policy-making process.
Consult actively and specifically with experts to provide input on relevant wellbeing considerations during the policy-making process.
Include experts in the teams working on new policy initiatives and on policy implementation.
4. What Particular Areas of Policy making the Government should now open up to the Results of the Well-being Analysis and Research, and on which Areas of Policy-making it should Exercise Caution
4.1 The Society believes that a particular area of policy making the Government should open up is in relation to employment and workplaces: There is an enormous amount of evidence about wellbeing in the workplace and in relation to work; this includes a well-developed understanding of the work-related drivers of wellbeing, both in terms of how work and workplace issues can enhance wellbeing and in terms of the ways in which workplace issues can reduce employee wellbeing. Many of the areas covered by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have links to wellbeing and policy-making in these domains and could therefore benefit from considering wellbeing, for example:
people management and leadership;
working hours;
flexible working;
skills strategies; and
stress prevention and managing mental health in the workplace (see NICE guidance).
5. How the ONS work might be further Expanded or Adjusted to Reflect Well-being Research and Metrics being Developed Elsewhere
5.1 The Society believes the four ONS subjective well-being questions represent a promising start, but are very limited in their coverage of the construct. They only measure evaluation (life satisfaction), feelings (happiness and anxiety), and a single question about functioning/eudaimonic well-being, namely the extent to which people think that what they do is worthwhile.
5.2 We believe that the ONS questions should be extended to cover other key elements of functioning, including engagement, optimism, self-esteem, positive relationships, etc. The ONS work to date has not given sufficient attention to the links between work and wellbeing. This element of their work could usefully be expanded to reflect the work of a range of psychologists and other social scientists who have been measuring workplace wellbeing and its links to other work-related factors.
5.3 For example, employment is currently included within the ONS “what we do” domain and the only measures are of whether people are in work and satisfied with their job. In addition to these areas, it would be advisable to explore other relevant aspects of work, for example: workplace and work-related factors that influence well-being (eg demands, respect, control/autonomy, support, relationships, bullying, role, change, justice, resources); and subjective work-related well-being—including, but not limited to, job satisfaction. This might require that additional questions be added to some of the current measures, though some of the information could be drawn from the existing Workplace Employment Relations Study (WERS) survey data.
6. What Lessons for Considering Social and Human Capital in National Statistics Reporting and Policy Making could be Drawn from the Separate Work already under way on Natural Capital, Including the Operation of the Natural Capital Committee
6.1. No comments
References
Huppert FA, So TCC (2011). “Flourishing across Europe: application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being.” Social Indicators Research
14 June 2013