Quality of life vs cost of living
In early December 2022, the Social Weather Stations (SWS) released its third quarter survey on whether the quality of life of Filipinos had improved or worsened compared to a year ago. The survey was not commissioned and has been fielded 146 times since April 1983. It was released as a public service, and was the first SWS survey done under the administration of President Marcos.
The findings essentially noted that around 30 percent of respondents said the quality of their life got better, 29 percent said it had gotten worse, and 41 percent considered no change at all.
In a press release dated March 22, 2023, the Philippine Statistics Authority granted the National Economic and Development Authority (Neda) clearance to conduct a national and regional survey research to estimate a quality of life index for the Philippines. The activity will be done by a third-party organization commissioned by Neda, with results expected in the first week of September this year.
The press release gives no indication if this Neda survey was a response to the SWS survey. But it seeks responses that will determine the quality of life of Filipinos, and the importance and satisfaction of each quality-of-life domain. It also seeks to develop a framework for effectively measuring the welfare and well-being of Filipinos to supplement gross domestic product and gross national income data. Compared to the SWS survey, the Neda survey looks to go a bit deeper in figuring out quality of life perceptions among Filipinos by delving into various, though still unspecified or defined, quality of life domains.
There’s nothing wrong with a quality-of-life survey. To some extent, it does help in gauging people’s perceptions and sentiments on the quality of their current life. But in terms of figuring out what needs to be done to address quality of life issues, especially where and how to improve it, the SWS does not provide much insight beyond hunger being a key metric, and that the higher the education level of the respondent, the more positive the outlook.
To improve quality of life, it’s important to know what specific areas need to be addressed and worked on. The SWS survey doesn’t identify those, and until we see the results of the Neda survey, we don’t know if the latter would be able to do so as well. Furthermore, determining quality of life is highly subjective. Perceptions and expectations of an individual’s quality of life will vary, not only in terms of their individual personality, but also across the various social strata. For example, those at a higher income level will definitely have a different view and expectation from those at mere subsistence level.
This is why I find that focusing more on the cost of living, as compared to people’s perception of their quality of life, is a more effective and practical way to tackle the issue. Cost of living and individual or family income will provide a baseline to work from, and will help minimize subjectivity in the evaluation of the challenges and the process of coming up with solutions. What we want out of our life will vary between individuals, but what we all face on a daily basis is the obligation, and to some a challenge, of being able to—at the very least—cover our daily living expenses.
It would be preferable for policymakers and lawmakers to dedicate more time and effort to the issue of cost of living and wages, rather than looking at the issue from the context of improving the quality of life. Find and implement ways and means to keep the cost of living down, so there would be some extra amount in our disposable income available for wants, once basic necessities or needs are met. Given this extra, it would be up to people to figure out for themselves how to use it to improve their quality of life.
—————-
Moira G. Gallaga served three Philippine presidents as presidential protocol officer, and was posted as a diplomat at the Philippine consulate general in Los Angeles, and the Philippine Embassy in Washington.
