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 PWB Living Standard •Assets •Housing •Household per capita income Eco Diversity •Ecological Issues •Responsibility towards environment •Wildlife damage (Rural) •Urbanization issues •Life satisfaction •Positive emotions •Negative emotions •Spirituality Health •Mental health •Self reported health status •Healthy days •Disability GNH Time Use • Work • Sleep Comm Vitality •Donations (time & money) •Community relationship •Family •Safety GG •Gov’t performance •Fundamental rights •Services •Political Participation Culture •Speak native Language •Cultural Participation •Artistic Skills •Driglam Namzha Gross National Happiness Commission, RGoB 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