Knowledge Exchange Platform (KEP) Workshop 2 - UK Work on Well-Being - Harman Sagger James Juniper Thomas Colwill.pdf

OECD Knowledge Exchange Platform on Well-being Metrics and Policy Practice (KEP): Virtual Workshop 2, 3 October 2024

Integrating multidimensional well-being evidence and principles in policy decision-making tools

1. Embedding Wellbeing into
Research and Evaluation
OECD WISE Knowledge Exchange Platform
3rd October 2024

2. Introduction

3. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Harman Sagger
Head of the of Culture and
Creative Industries Analysis
Team, DCMS
Introduction to UK Government Wellbeing Analysis
Board & why is measuring wellbeing so important for
DCMS?
Thomas Colwill
Senior Economist, Historic
England
Heritage capital and wellbeing
Jamie Juniper
Head of Evaluation and
Evidence, Sport & Gambling,
DCMS
Sport and physical activity and wellbeing -social return
on investment
Introduction

4. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
DCMS and the Wellbeing Analysis Board
Chaired by Urvashi Parashar, the Director of Analysis at
DCMS, the Wellbeing Analysis Board is a cross-Government
board that works towards:
•Advocating for the operationalisation and acceptability of
wellbeing valuation and measurement more firmly within
appraisal and evaluation.
•Improving the delivery of wellbeing analysis across
government, actively drawing in external expertise.
•Promoting wellbeing analysis inside and outside government
Supplementary guidance for the Green Book:
•Provides an outline of where, when and how wellbeing
concepts, measurement and estimation may contribute to the
appraisal of social, or public value in each stage of appraisal.

5. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
UK’s Government has published guidance on how to
implement wellbeing analysis into decisions making

6. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Valuing wellbeing for decision making
Guidance outlines WELLBY (short for ‘Wellbeing-adjusted Life Year’). It is defined as a
change in life satisfaction of one point on a scale of 0-10, per person per year. It
recommends a value of £13,000 per ‘WELLBY’.

7. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Why is measuring wellbeing so important for DCMS?
Driving Growth and Enriching Lives for the whole population is at the heart of DCMS
•The benefits our sectors can have on society extend past their economic contribution and
individual achievements.
•Our sectors can contribute to an improved sense of wellbeing through a number of factors that
influence the quality of life.
–For instance, wellbeing is used in Civil Society and Youth in a number of ways, including
monetising outcomes in evaluation VfM analysis and in estimating the value of
volunteering and reducing loneliness.
•Wellbeing also drives productivity and economic growth. At both regional and whole-of-England
level, life satisfaction looks more like an ‘output’ of increased productivity from 1-27%.

8. Culture and
Heritage

9. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
DCMS Culture and Heritage Capital Programme
●Launched in January 2021 with our CHC
Framework, setting out the ambition of the
programme.
●Moving beyond standard economic
measurestowards measuring the full
impact of culture and heritage on standard
of living SCBA.
●Like natural capital, the value from culture
and heritage can be seen from the
perspective of stocks and flows, using a
systems approach.

10. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Forthcoming research on health and wellbeing
& WELLBY
Source: Frontier Economics

11. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Historic England: Heritage Capital and Wellbeing

12. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Existing research on cultural heritage and wellbeing
The relationship between wellbeing and cultural heritage has traditionally been understood
through a limited number of channels, primarily focusing on active participation.
•Wheatley & Bickerton (2019): Frequent visits to historic attractions improve life satisfaction in
the UK.
•Macdonald et al. (2023): Heritage site exposure is linked to reduced mental distress.
•Hansen et al. (2015): Cultural activities boost health, life satisfaction, and mental health in
adolescents.
•Ateca-Amestoy et al. (2021):Engagement with heritage (volunteering, visits) increases life
satisfaction.
•Mak et al. (2021): Cultural event participation improves mental health in deprived areas.
Yet, the most frequent interaction with heritage happens not through active participation,
but in the everyday experiences of simply living among it

13. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Research question
Therefore, we set out to understand the following
research questions:
1.Is there an association between the density of
cultural heritage assets and their proximity to
residential areas, and self-reported life
satisfaction scores, after controlling for
individual and regional factors?
2.How do different types of NHLE-listed heritage
assets (e.g. listed buildings, scheduled
monuments, historic parks and gardens)
influence self-reported life satisfaction scores?

14. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
What data did we utilise?

15. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
How did we measure levels of cultural heritage?

16. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Higher cultural heritage density associated with increased life
satisfaction, even after controlling for key factors

17. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Grade II buildings were the driving force behind this effect

18. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Cultural heritage boosts life satisfaction and provides
economic value
●We estimate that in England, this contributes to an average Well-Being-
Year (WELLBY) of approximately £515 for individuals aged 16 and
over.
●Aggregated across England, we estimate this value to be approx. £28
billion.
●Currently, we lack sufficient evidence to differentiate these findings
among various types of heritage assets.
●This association persists after controlling for factors typically associated
with happiness, including income, health, and socioeconomic,
demographics and local effects.

19. Sport and
Physical Activity

20. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Evolution of social value in sport & physical activity

21. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Social Return on Investment in Sport
●Model of the social and economic return on investment in community sport and
physical activity in England, published in 2020 using 2017/18 data
○Collaboration between Sport England, Sheffield Hallam Sports Industry Research
Centre (SIRC) and DCMS
£1 investment in community sport → return of almost £4 in social value
●Updating the modelto reflect new evidence and to include the latest HMT advice on
appraising wellbeing -the WELLBY
○Collaboration between Sport England, Sheffield Hallam SIRC, the Institute for Sport
at Manchester Metropolitan University, State of Life and DCMS

22. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Social Return on Investment in Sport
●The updated model will consider both the primary value and secondary value
of sport and physical activity on wellbeing:
PRIMARY VALUE
SECONDARY VALUE
The direct benefit and value of
improved wellbeing to individuals
The wider value to society,
including the state

23. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Research approach: Primary Value
●Regression analysisto estimate the relationshipbetween activity or sport
volunteeringwith anindividual’s life satisfaction
○Feasible due to a wealth of cross-sectional datafrom the Active Lives Survey
(Sport England) for both Adults and Children and Young People
○Adults: use 2018/19 -2021/22 data with a sample size of 240,000
○Children and Young People: using 2017/18 -2022/23 data with a sample size
of 270,000 of 11-16 year olds
●Analysis estimates how a collection of factors -not just physical activity levels -affect
the outcome of life satisfaction
●Results can also estimate how a change in different factors can impact life
satisfaction

24. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
Factors influencing life satisfaction
●Number of control variables that are important determinants of wellbeing,
informed by Fujiwara and Campbell (2011):

25. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
How will results be used?
●The results will show:
○If there is a significant relationshipbetween different activity levelsand
wellbeing,when compared to the inactive population
○What the value of this is, by applying value of a WELLBY (£13,000 as per
HMT guidance)
○Where feasible, how the wellbeing valueof being active varies between
different demographics
○Value of government investment in sport and physical activity

26. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
How will results be used?
Advocacy and case-
making
Measurement and
accountability
Informed decision-
making
Consistency and
alignment
Evidence base

27. Cross-Cutting
Questions

28. Embedding Wellbeing in Research and Evaluation
Restricted Use -À usage restreint
•What training or skills development are needed for different types of well-
being-informed policy tool?
•What type of data and evidence are needed to underpin well-being-informed
policy tools?
•Which areas of government decision making could benefit from a more
widespread use of well-being-informed policy tools?
•What is the need for/role of co-appraisal/co-evaluation that engages non-
government actors?