Kate Middleton has asked her wedding guests to donate to an anti-bullying charity, in a tacit admission she was a victim at school. Former classmates have previously revealed how then 13-year-old Kate was forced to leave a private school after being targeted by bullies. Her parents are said to have removed her after just two terms, before sending their daughter to the exclusive Marlborough College part-way through the academic year.
Now the Beatbullying charity has been included in a list of good causes that ‘resonate with’ Kate, 29, and Prince William. While most couples set up a gift list ahead of their big day, the royal couple yesterday asked their 1,900 guests and tens of thousands of well-wishers to donate to one of 26 chosen charities instead.
They include a London Zoo project to save the black rhino in Kenya, where William proposed, and several military charities linked to William’s work as an RAF search and rescue pilot and his new role as a colonel in the Irish Guards.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Elusive Economic Indicator: Quality Of Life Gauge
Money isn't everything. But in measuring the success of nations, it isn't easy to find a substitute.
Political leaders are increasingly expressing dissatisfaction with gross domestic product─a monetary measure of all the goods and services a country produces─as a gauge of a nation's success in raising living standards.
In November, British Prime Minister David Cameron announced plans to build measures of national well-being that would take into account factors such as peoples' life satisfaction, following a similar effort by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
Their efforts cut to the core of what economics is supposed to be about: What makes us better off? How can we all have more of it? Anyone hoping for a clear-cut answer, though, is likely to be disappointed.
'There is more to life than GDP, but it will be hard to come up with a single measure to replace it and we are not sure that a single measure is the answer,' said Paul Allin, director of the Measuring National Well-Being Project at the U.K.'s Office of National Statistics. 'Maybe we live in a multidimensional world and we have to get used to handling a reasonable number of bits of information.
After a session on creating a national success indicator at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association on Friday, Carol Graham, fellow at the Brookings Institution, summed up the situation thus: 'It's like a new science. There's still a lot of work to be done.'
For much of the past four decades, economists have puzzled over a paradox that cast doubt on GDP as the world's main indicator of success.
People in richer countries didn't appear to be any happier than people in poor countries. In research beginning in the 1970s, University of Pennsylvania economist Richard Easterlin found no evidence of a link between countries' income─as measured by GDP per person─and peoples' reported levels of happiness.
More recent research suggests GDP isn't quite so bad. Using more data and different statistical techniques, three economists at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School─Daniel Sacks, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers─found that a given percentage increase in GDP per person tends to coincide with a similar increase in reported well-being. The correlation held across different countries and over time.
Still, for measuring the success of policy, GDP is far from ideal.
Making everybody work 120 hours a week could radically boost a country's GDP per capita, but it wouldn't make people happier. Removing pollution limits could boost GDP per hour worked, but wouldn't necessarily lead to a world we'd want to live in.
One approach is to enhance GDP with other objective factors such as inequality, leisure and life expectancy. In a paper presented Saturday at the American Economic Association meeting, Stanford economists Peter Klenow and Charles Jones found that doing so can make a big difference.
By their calculation, accounting for longer life expectancy, additional leisure time and lower levels of inequality makes living standards in France and Germany look almost the same as those in the U.S., which otherwise leads the pack by a large margin.
Mr. Klenow points out that the calculation is fraught with difficulties. For one, many countries have poor data on crucial factors such as life expectancy.
For the purpose of comparing well-being across countries, asking people how they feel might be better than monetary measures. Angus Deaton, an economist at Princeton University, notes that placing values on the extremely different goods and services consumed in the U.S. and, say, Tajikistan, can be impossible to do in a comparable way. Just asking people about their situation could be much easier and no less accurate.
Surveys already play a meaningful role in the way many countries assess their performance, from consumer confidence in the U.S. to the Netherlands's Life Situation Index, which accounts for factors such as relationships and community involvement.
As part of its effort to gauge well-being, the U.K. plans to add more subjective questions to its household surveys.
But surveys can also send misleading policy signals.
Mr. Wolfers, for example, has found that surveys of women's subjective well-being in the U.S. suggest that they are less happy than they were four decades ago, despite improvements in wages, education and other objective measures. That, he says, doesn't mean the feminist movement should be reversed. Rather, it could be related to rising expectations or greater frankness among the women interviewed.
Peoples' true preferences are often revealed more by what they do than by what they say.
Surveys suggest people with children tend to be less happy than those without, yet people keep having children─and nobody would advocate mass sterilization to improve overall well-being.
'What we care about in the world is not just happiness,' says Mr. Wolfers.
'If you measure just one part of what makes for a full life you're going to end up harming the other parts.'
For the time being, that leaves policy makers to choose the measures of success that seem most appropriate for the task at hand. That's not ideal, but it's the best economics has to offer.
Political leaders are increasingly expressing dissatisfaction with gross domestic product─a monetary measure of all the goods and services a country produces─as a gauge of a nation's success in raising living standards.
In November, British Prime Minister David Cameron announced plans to build measures of national well-being that would take into account factors such as peoples' life satisfaction, following a similar effort by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
Their efforts cut to the core of what economics is supposed to be about: What makes us better off? How can we all have more of it? Anyone hoping for a clear-cut answer, though, is likely to be disappointed.
'There is more to life than GDP, but it will be hard to come up with a single measure to replace it and we are not sure that a single measure is the answer,' said Paul Allin, director of the Measuring National Well-Being Project at the U.K.'s Office of National Statistics. 'Maybe we live in a multidimensional world and we have to get used to handling a reasonable number of bits of information.
After a session on creating a national success indicator at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association on Friday, Carol Graham, fellow at the Brookings Institution, summed up the situation thus: 'It's like a new science. There's still a lot of work to be done.'
For much of the past four decades, economists have puzzled over a paradox that cast doubt on GDP as the world's main indicator of success.
People in richer countries didn't appear to be any happier than people in poor countries. In research beginning in the 1970s, University of Pennsylvania economist Richard Easterlin found no evidence of a link between countries' income─as measured by GDP per person─and peoples' reported levels of happiness.
More recent research suggests GDP isn't quite so bad. Using more data and different statistical techniques, three economists at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School─Daniel Sacks, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers─found that a given percentage increase in GDP per person tends to coincide with a similar increase in reported well-being. The correlation held across different countries and over time.
Still, for measuring the success of policy, GDP is far from ideal.
Making everybody work 120 hours a week could radically boost a country's GDP per capita, but it wouldn't make people happier. Removing pollution limits could boost GDP per hour worked, but wouldn't necessarily lead to a world we'd want to live in.
One approach is to enhance GDP with other objective factors such as inequality, leisure and life expectancy. In a paper presented Saturday at the American Economic Association meeting, Stanford economists Peter Klenow and Charles Jones found that doing so can make a big difference.
By their calculation, accounting for longer life expectancy, additional leisure time and lower levels of inequality makes living standards in France and Germany look almost the same as those in the U.S., which otherwise leads the pack by a large margin.
Mr. Klenow points out that the calculation is fraught with difficulties. For one, many countries have poor data on crucial factors such as life expectancy.
For the purpose of comparing well-being across countries, asking people how they feel might be better than monetary measures. Angus Deaton, an economist at Princeton University, notes that placing values on the extremely different goods and services consumed in the U.S. and, say, Tajikistan, can be impossible to do in a comparable way. Just asking people about their situation could be much easier and no less accurate.
Surveys already play a meaningful role in the way many countries assess their performance, from consumer confidence in the U.S. to the Netherlands's Life Situation Index, which accounts for factors such as relationships and community involvement.
As part of its effort to gauge well-being, the U.K. plans to add more subjective questions to its household surveys.
But surveys can also send misleading policy signals.
Mr. Wolfers, for example, has found that surveys of women's subjective well-being in the U.S. suggest that they are less happy than they were four decades ago, despite improvements in wages, education and other objective measures. That, he says, doesn't mean the feminist movement should be reversed. Rather, it could be related to rising expectations or greater frankness among the women interviewed.
Peoples' true preferences are often revealed more by what they do than by what they say.
Surveys suggest people with children tend to be less happy than those without, yet people keep having children─and nobody would advocate mass sterilization to improve overall well-being.
'What we care about in the world is not just happiness,' says Mr. Wolfers.
'If you measure just one part of what makes for a full life you're going to end up harming the other parts.'
For the time being, that leaves policy makers to choose the measures of success that seem most appropriate for the task at hand. That's not ideal, but it's the best economics has to offer.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Road Warrior: Midas Promotions's Michael Hosking
Another in our series of travel tips for executives who are often on the road.
Michael Hosking
CEO, Midas Promotions
In the Air: 100 flights a year, about twice a week
Areas of transport, mainly from Singapore, Bangkok and Hong Kong. I've also been in England five times this year.
The best hotel in the region: The Ritz-Carlton when I'm in Singapore, the Landmark Mandarin Oriental in Hong Kong, and Amanpuri in Phuket
The best airport in the region: Singapore Changi International, undoubtedly
The best sales process in Singapore and Hong Kong. Check-in and leave my luggage at Hong Kong Station
Better taxis: Probably Singapore
The best route from the airport to the city: Singapore, the city is only 10 to 15 minutes by road
The best frequent flyer lounge: The spring of First Class (Cathay Pacific) living in Hong Kong and Silver Kris First Class Lounge (Singapore Airlines) in Singapore
preferred carrier, Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines
Best Luggage: Samsonite, in soft cover and is lighter and more flexible
Best airline food: eggs Benedict for breakfast in Singapore Airlines. Caviar first class of Cathay and Singapore Airlines
The best coffee in Asia: My espresso machine
The best advice to keep in shape on the road: Eat and drink in moderation
How to beat the jetlag: Drink alcohol in moderation and as much water as possible when in flight. Enter the area mentally next time you board the plane.
How to get an update: Shirt and shoes, be very friendly at check-in and be an airline's frequent flyer
Travel essential equipment: My iPhone and I can watch movies on it. I have also recently started a Kindle.
101 Travel tip: Be patient. International travel is stressful, but just relax.
Michael Hosking
CEO, Midas Promotions
In the Air: 100 flights a year, about twice a week
Areas of transport, mainly from Singapore, Bangkok and Hong Kong. I've also been in England five times this year.
The best hotel in the region: The Ritz-Carlton when I'm in Singapore, the Landmark Mandarin Oriental in Hong Kong, and Amanpuri in Phuket
The best airport in the region: Singapore Changi International, undoubtedly
The best sales process in Singapore and Hong Kong. Check-in and leave my luggage at Hong Kong Station
Better taxis: Probably Singapore
The best route from the airport to the city: Singapore, the city is only 10 to 15 minutes by road
The best frequent flyer lounge: The spring of First Class (Cathay Pacific) living in Hong Kong and Silver Kris First Class Lounge (Singapore Airlines) in Singapore
preferred carrier, Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines
Best Luggage: Samsonite, in soft cover and is lighter and more flexible
Best airline food: eggs Benedict for breakfast in Singapore Airlines. Caviar first class of Cathay and Singapore Airlines
The best coffee in Asia: My espresso machine
The best advice to keep in shape on the road: Eat and drink in moderation
How to beat the jetlag: Drink alcohol in moderation and as much water as possible when in flight. Enter the area mentally next time you board the plane.
How to get an update: Shirt and shoes, be very friendly at check-in and be an airline's frequent flyer
Travel essential equipment: My iPhone and I can watch movies on it. I have also recently started a Kindle.
101 Travel tip: Be patient. International travel is stressful, but just relax.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Rice Winds Up Mideast Visit With No Sign of Progress
The United States' top diplomat has concluded a peace mission to Israel and the Palestinian territories. But she has little to show for it.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice wound up her visit by hosting a trilateral meeting with the Israeli defense minister and Palestinian prime minister. But after two days of talks in Jerusalem and the West Bank there was no sign of progress in peace talks sponsored by the United States.
The headline of the visit was Rice's unusually harsh criticism of Israeli settlement expansion in disputed East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Rice did not speak to reporters before she left Israel. But on Sunday, she was clearly angry over Israeli plans to build 1,300 new homes in East Jerusalem, on land the Palestinians claim for their future capital.
"No party should be taking steps at this point that could prejudice the outcome of a negotiation, and I want to make very clear that the United States will not consider these activities to affect any final status negotiations including final borders; these are to be negotiated between the parties," she said.
Israeli spokesman Mark Regev says there are differences but not a crisis.
"Success isn't guaranteed. There are a lot of sensitive issues on the table, but I can say that we in Israel, and I believe the Palestinian leadership too, are committed to doing the work that needs to be done," said Regev.
Palestinian analyst Mahdi Abdel Hadi is less optimistic. He says settlement activity is eroding support for the peace process.
"Israel is controlling the land and this is creating more hate and more frustration, more anger among the Palestinians," said Hadi.
Disputes over settlements, Palestinian refugees and the status of Jerusalem have put further doubt on the U.S. goal of a peace agreement by the end of the year.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice wound up her visit by hosting a trilateral meeting with the Israeli defense minister and Palestinian prime minister. But after two days of talks in Jerusalem and the West Bank there was no sign of progress in peace talks sponsored by the United States.
The headline of the visit was Rice's unusually harsh criticism of Israeli settlement expansion in disputed East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Rice did not speak to reporters before she left Israel. But on Sunday, she was clearly angry over Israeli plans to build 1,300 new homes in East Jerusalem, on land the Palestinians claim for their future capital.
"No party should be taking steps at this point that could prejudice the outcome of a negotiation, and I want to make very clear that the United States will not consider these activities to affect any final status negotiations including final borders; these are to be negotiated between the parties," she said.
Israel says it has the right to build anywhere in Jerusalem because it will remain the capital of the Jewish state in any final peace agreement.
Israeli spokesman Mark Regev says there are differences but not a crisis.
"Success isn't guaranteed. There are a lot of sensitive issues on the table, but I can say that we in Israel, and I believe the Palestinian leadership too, are committed to doing the work that needs to be done," said Regev.
Palestinian analyst Mahdi Abdel Hadi is less optimistic. He says settlement activity is eroding support for the peace process.
"Israel is controlling the land and this is creating more hate and more frustration, more anger among the Palestinians," said Hadi.
Disputes over settlements, Palestinian refugees and the status of Jerusalem have put further doubt on the U.S. goal of a peace agreement by the end of the year.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Indonesia's Most Active Volcano Erupts
An erupting volcano on Indonesia's Java island has sent ash and hot air onto surrounding villages, injuring at least six people.
Scientists say Mount Merapi, Indonesia's most active volcano, began erupting late Tuesday after days of rumbling that signaled a major eruption was possible.
Journalists in the area reported seeing at least six people being taken to a hospital with burns from the ash and hot air. They said villagers who ignored warnings to evacuate were fleeing in panic. A two-month-old baby died as her mother fled the area.
Before the eruption, Indonesian authorities evacuated several thousand children and the elderly from villages on the volcano's slopes to makeshift shelters. But thousands of other villagers stayed behind to take care of their livestock and crops.
Mount Merapi last erupted in 2006, killing two people. A similar eruption in 1994 killed at least 60 people, while a 1930 eruption killed 1,300.
Scientists say Mount Merapi, Indonesia's most active volcano, began erupting late Tuesday after days of rumbling that signaled a major eruption was possible.
Journalists in the area reported seeing at least six people being taken to a hospital with burns from the ash and hot air. They said villagers who ignored warnings to evacuate were fleeing in panic. A two-month-old baby died as her mother fled the area.
Before the eruption, Indonesian authorities evacuated several thousand children and the elderly from villages on the volcano's slopes to makeshift shelters. But thousands of other villagers stayed behind to take care of their livestock and crops.
Mount Merapi last erupted in 2006, killing two people. A similar eruption in 1994 killed at least 60 people, while a 1930 eruption killed 1,300.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Americans waste more energy in the food they throw away, than Switzerland or Sweden consume in a year
Researchers at the University of Texas, Austin say that points to a painless way to save energy: stop wasting food.
According to a new study in the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, food waste and the energy required to produce it, represent an unrecognized opportunity to conserve energy and reduce climate changing emissions.
Scientists at the Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy set out to answer three questions about the relationship between food and energy use: how much energy is in food, how much food is wasted and how much energy is in the wasted food.
Wasting energy
Michael Webber, the center's associate director and co-author of the study, says between eight and 16 percent of U.S. energy consumption is tied up in food production, transportation, preservation and disposal. "And then we throw away at least a quarter of that food. Some people say even 50 percent."
What Americans spend on food has declined in relative terms for decades. And, because food is so abundant and cheap, Americans are not as concerned about tossing it out.
So, Webber and his colleagues calculated how much energy was needed to produce the trashed food. "We found that there's at least two percent of the nation's energy consumption is embedded in food we throw away. And that ends up being a pretty big number because of how much energy we consume overall as a nation."
Putting brakes on food waste
Two percent is more energy than Switzerland or Sweden consume in a year and the equivalent of about 350 million barrels of oil.
Webber's study suggests that putting the brakes on food waste would be good for the planet and the pocketbook. "It might reduce our emissions. It might reduce our environmental impacts. We just have to find a way to do it so that it is affordable as well. It might be we save money because we are wasting less money on food we don't eat."
Webber says that the study is based on old data badly that needs to be revised. But still he says the numbers are good enough to make a point: food waste is a waste of energy. "I think the next step for us at a research level is to get a better sense of what's going on, get better data, get better scientific analysis. At the same time perhaps we could consider some policy options to reduce the waste."
According to the study, the most wasted foods were fats and oils, dairy products, grains, eggs, fruits and vegetables.
According to a new study in the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, food waste and the energy required to produce it, represent an unrecognized opportunity to conserve energy and reduce climate changing emissions.
Scientists at the Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy set out to answer three questions about the relationship between food and energy use: how much energy is in food, how much food is wasted and how much energy is in the wasted food.
Wasting energy
Michael Webber, the center's associate director and co-author of the study, says between eight and 16 percent of U.S. energy consumption is tied up in food production, transportation, preservation and disposal. "And then we throw away at least a quarter of that food. Some people say even 50 percent."
What Americans spend on food has declined in relative terms for decades. And, because food is so abundant and cheap, Americans are not as concerned about tossing it out.
So, Webber and his colleagues calculated how much energy was needed to produce the trashed food. "We found that there's at least two percent of the nation's energy consumption is embedded in food we throw away. And that ends up being a pretty big number because of how much energy we consume overall as a nation."
Putting brakes on food waste
Two percent is more energy than Switzerland or Sweden consume in a year and the equivalent of about 350 million barrels of oil.
Webber's study suggests that putting the brakes on food waste would be good for the planet and the pocketbook. "It might reduce our emissions. It might reduce our environmental impacts. We just have to find a way to do it so that it is affordable as well. It might be we save money because we are wasting less money on food we don't eat."
Webber says that the study is based on old data badly that needs to be revised. But still he says the numbers are good enough to make a point: food waste is a waste of energy. "I think the next step for us at a research level is to get a better sense of what's going on, get better data, get better scientific analysis. At the same time perhaps we could consider some policy options to reduce the waste."
According to the study, the most wasted foods were fats and oils, dairy products, grains, eggs, fruits and vegetables.
Bush Launches Fundraising Drive for Tsunami Victims
President Bush has launched a nationwide fundraising effort to encourage private contributions for relief groups helping those affected by the devastating earthquake and tsunami in the Indian Ocean.
President Bush says the new fundraising effort will be led by two former presidents, his father, George Herbert Walker Bush, and the last president from the Democratic Party, Bill Clinton.
Accompanied by the two men in the White House Roosevelt Room, Mr. Bush said he is grateful to the former presidents for taking on such an important responsibility.
"In the coming days, President Clinton and Bush will ask Americans to donate directly to reliable charities already providing help to tsunami victims," the president said. "Many of these organizations have dispatched experts to the disaster area and they have an in-depth understanding of the resources required to meet the needs on the ground."
President Bush says Americans are already showing their generosity through contributions to aid groups. He hopes this new effort targeting both individuals and corporations will further complement official U.S. assistance.
"From our own experiences, we know that nothing can take away the grief of those affected by tragedy," he said. "We also know that Americans have a history of rising to meet great humanitarian challenges and of providing hope to suffering peoples. As men and women across the devastated region begin to rebuild, we offer our sustained compassion and our generosity and our assurance that America will be there to help."
President Bush last week promised $350 million in U.S. government assistance for affected countries. That is ten times the $35 million that Washington initially pledged.
That first amount drew some criticism, considering the size and wealth of the United States when compared to other countries' contributions. There was also some criticism of the president himself for not cutting short his Texas vacation and returning to Washington.
Now back at the White House, President Bush is starting the first week of the year with a big push on tsunami relief efforts. He has dispatched a U.S. delegation to the region led by Secretary of State Colin Powell and the president's brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush.
After launching the new fundraising effort, President Bush and former presidents Bush and Clinton visited the embassies of India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Thailand to sign condolence books for those killed.
In an interview with NBC television, President Clinton says the Sri Lankan ambassador told them of an airstrip covered in crates where one of the challenges now is distributing aid that has already arrived. President Clinton says that is why cash contributions are often more useful.
"If you give money, even if it is a small amount of money, it will aggregate up," the former president said. "They will send it to the aid agencies on the ground and then they will spend it right there for what is most needed. And you won't have to worry about the cost and the time delay of physically getting other things overseas."
Both former presidents say they are in this fundraising effort for the long haul and hope Americans realize that any amount of assistance, no matter how small, will help someone somewhere.
President Bush says the new fundraising effort will be led by two former presidents, his father, George Herbert Walker Bush, and the last president from the Democratic Party, Bill Clinton.
Accompanied by the two men in the White House Roosevelt Room, Mr. Bush said he is grateful to the former presidents for taking on such an important responsibility.
"In the coming days, President Clinton and Bush will ask Americans to donate directly to reliable charities already providing help to tsunami victims," the president said. "Many of these organizations have dispatched experts to the disaster area and they have an in-depth understanding of the resources required to meet the needs on the ground."
President Bush says Americans are already showing their generosity through contributions to aid groups. He hopes this new effort targeting both individuals and corporations will further complement official U.S. assistance.
"From our own experiences, we know that nothing can take away the grief of those affected by tragedy," he said. "We also know that Americans have a history of rising to meet great humanitarian challenges and of providing hope to suffering peoples. As men and women across the devastated region begin to rebuild, we offer our sustained compassion and our generosity and our assurance that America will be there to help."
President Bush last week promised $350 million in U.S. government assistance for affected countries. That is ten times the $35 million that Washington initially pledged.
That first amount drew some criticism, considering the size and wealth of the United States when compared to other countries' contributions. There was also some criticism of the president himself for not cutting short his Texas vacation and returning to Washington.
Now back at the White House, President Bush is starting the first week of the year with a big push on tsunami relief efforts. He has dispatched a U.S. delegation to the region led by Secretary of State Colin Powell and the president's brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush.
After launching the new fundraising effort, President Bush and former presidents Bush and Clinton visited the embassies of India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Thailand to sign condolence books for those killed.
In an interview with NBC television, President Clinton says the Sri Lankan ambassador told them of an airstrip covered in crates where one of the challenges now is distributing aid that has already arrived. President Clinton says that is why cash contributions are often more useful.
"If you give money, even if it is a small amount of money, it will aggregate up," the former president said. "They will send it to the aid agencies on the ground and then they will spend it right there for what is most needed. And you won't have to worry about the cost and the time delay of physically getting other things overseas."
Both former presidents say they are in this fundraising effort for the long haul and hope Americans realize that any amount of assistance, no matter how small, will help someone somewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)