Lavish public spending on the well-being of children does not always hit the mark

The Economist:

WHEN the poet William Wordsworth declared that "the Child is father of the Man", he meant that the gifts of childhood endow adults with some of their finest qualities. And many governments, these days, feel that the path to happiness for society as a whole lies through spending on the welfare of its youngest members: their health, education and general well-being. A report* from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a rich-country think-tank, scrutinises these efforts and asks if the aim is being achieved.

With its stress on quantifiable facts, the spirit of the OECD report differs from one by UNICEF, the UN children's agency, in 2007 which made waves by saying children in Britain did badly. UNICEF relied too much on asking youngsters how they felt (did they have "kind and helpful" schoolmates?); the new study stresses meatier things like vaccination and test scores.

With equal rigour, the OECD avoids a single index of child welfare in its 30 member states. Instead, after sifting hundreds of variables, the researchers settled on 21 that coalesce into six categories: material well-being; housing and environment; educational well-being; health and safety; risky behaviour; and quality of school life. Then they ranked countries six times.

Posted by Jim Zellmer at September 4, 2009 4:11 AM
Subscribe to this site via RSS/Atom: Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas