Well-being achievement in Pacific Asia

The world has undergone rapid and tremendous change in recent decades. While many nations have achieved ever-higher per capita incomes, and higher well-being according to traditional measures, they have also experienced profound internal change. This change has lead to widespread concerns regarding social exclusion, human security, levels of personal satisfaction and happiness. Other countries have faired much less well, as according to many well-being measures they are worse off than they were 10 or 20 years ago. Life expectancies, for example, have fallen dramatically in many countries and are likely to fall substantially in others. The incidence of income poverty is higher today in many countries than it was ten years ago. Worldwide, more than a billion people currently live on less than one dollar per day. Social science research on living standards, human well-being and quality of life has come a long way over recent years, altering in response to changing global conditions, new research priorities, new conceptualisations and improved data resources. Twenty five years ago, national well-being achievement comparisons relied very heavily, and in some circles exclusively, on measures of income per capita. The same exercise would today be based a range of indicators, including summary measures of human well-being such as the well-known Human Development Index (UNDP, 2005). This is consistent with the commonly accepted view that human well-being is best treated as a multidimensional concept along the lines advocated by Sen (1985, 1993), Stewart (1985), Doyal & Gough (1991), Ramsay (1992), Cummins (1996), Narayan et al. (2000) or Nussbaum (2000) and others, as summarised in Alkire (2002). This view tends not to reject the relevance of income based or economic measures per se, simply positing that there is more to well-being achievement than simply increasing incomes. The widespread acceptance that well-being is multidimensional has more recently been accompanied by another important recognition. This relates not so much to current levels of well-being, but to the likelihood of declines in future levels. This recognition has spawned a rapidly growing literature on what is now termed as ‘vulnerability’. The vulnerability literature has primarily been concerned with the likelihood of individuals falling below the poverty line, be it defined in terms of income, consumption or health. Among the influential early vulnerability studies are Ravallion (1998), Jalan & Ravallion (1998) and Dercon & Krishnan (1999), each of which distinguished between transient and chronic poverty.

Non-economic well-being achievement in Pacific Asia

It is well known that income per capita and most widely reported non-economic well-being achievement measures are highly correlated among countries. Yet many countries exhibit higher achievement in the latter than predicted by the former. The reverse is true for many other countries. This paper commences by extracting the inter-country variation in a composite of three widely reported educational and health status indicators not accounted for by variations in income per capita. This extraction is interpreted inter alia as a measure of non-economic well-being. Using data for a sample of Pacific Asian countries, the paper then looks at correlations between this extraction and a number of new or less widely-used well-being measures, in an attempt to find the measure that best captures these achievements.

Fuzzy well-being in Pacific Asia

This paper develops a framework that uses fuzzy-set theory to measure human well-being. Fuzzy sets allow for gradual transition from one state to another while also allowing one to incorporate rules and goals, and hence are more appropriate for measuring outcomes that are ambiguous. Such ambiguity is an inherent characteristic of cross-country achieved well-being assessments. This framework is used to provide a fuzzy representation of the well known Human Development Index (HDI) and its three components. Fuzzy HDI estimates for 14 Pacific Asian countries are provided and compared with non-fuzzy estimates. Quite large differences in rankings emerge. The paper concludes by suggesting that fuzzy measures should be used more widely to measure achieved well-being outcomes.

Achieving growth in the Pacific islands : an introduction

The Small Island Developing States (SIDS)1 in the Pacific, spread out over an area of 30 million square kilometres of ocean, and home to over 9 million people, face a complex and unique set of development challenges. As small, highly open economies they are particularly susceptible to external shocks, including fluctuations in import prices and export earnings in particular. Remoteness from major ports and export markets, low levels of connectivity with the outside world and susceptibility to natural hazards further complicate matters and have resulted in the Pacific islands being amongst the most vulnerable economies in the world. In spite of their increasing integration into global markets, most face further challenges owing to very limited absorptive capacities, limited resources, inadequate technology, lack of infrastructure and poor economic management and institutional capabilities. As a consequence, economic growth and related outcomes in most remain heavily reliant on external resources, typically including at least one of aid, migrant remittances, and foreign direct investment (FDI) (AusAID 2008 and McGillivray et al. 2008). The particular constraints and growth challenges of Pacific SIDS are too often overlooked in the development research literature. Moreover, the policy debate on how to promote and achieve growth in the Pacific islands can benefit from a deeper understanding of the nature and consequences of these often unique, combination of constraints. This Focus is devoted to development challenges facing these islands, specifically relating to the achievement of economic growth, and draws on five papers that were presented or tabled at the World Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER) ‘Fragility and Development’ research project meeting held in Fiji in December 2006.

Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in aquaculture; a review of practices and implications in the Asia Pacific

Global and Asian aquaculture have witnessed a ten-fold increase in production from 1980 to 2004. However, the relative percent contribution to production of each of the major commodities has remained almost unchanged. For example, the contribution of freshwater finfish has declined from 71 to 66 percent in Asia but has remained unchanged globally over the last 20 to 30 years. This fact has dictated trends in the use of fish as a feed for cultured stocks. The growth in the sector has gone hand in hand with an increasing dependence on fish as feed, either directly or indirectly. In a number of countries in the Asia-Pacific region, the aquaculture sector has surpassed the capture fisheries sector in its respective contributions to the gross domestic product (GDP). Aquaculture’s increased contribution to national GDPs can be taken as a clear indication of the contribution of the sector to food security and poverty alleviation. The use of finfish and other aquatic organisms as a feed source can be through direct utilization of whole or chopped raw fish in wet form, through fishmeal and fish oil in formulated feeds, and/or as live fish, although the latter is uncommon and the overall amounts used are relatively small. In the first two categories, the fish used are often termed “trash fish/low-value fish”. Although attempts have been made to define this term, all definitions have a certain degree of ambiguity and/or subjectivity. In this regional review, the amount of fish used as feed sources based on the above categories was estimated primarily from the production data, supported by assumptions on the inclusion levels of fishmeal in formulated feeds and observed feed conversion efficiencies for both formulated feeds and for stock fed trash fish/low-value fish directly. A scenario for the use of fish as feed was developed by starting from the levels of aquaculture production recorded in 2004 and assuming increases in production volumes of 10, 15 and 20 percent by 2010, respectively, for the three trajectories. In parallel, the pattern of wild fish use as feed was projected to change as fish and shrimp farmers increasingly replace farmmade feeds by incorporating trash fish/low-value fish with manufactured feeds that include fishmeal. Also, the fishmeal inclusion rates in manufactured feeds are falling slowly, and this has been incorporated into the projections. The regional review also deals with the production of fishmeal using trash fish/low-value fish in the Asia-Pacific region. Regional fishmeal production as a whole is relatively low when compared with that of major fishmeal-producing countries such as Chile, Iceland and Norway, amounting to approximately 1 million tonnes per year. However, there is a trend towards increasing the use of fish industry waste, such as from the tuna canning industry in Thailand. The fishmeal produced in the region is priced considerably lower than globally traded fishmeal, but its quality is poorer. Total fishmeal use in Asian aquaculture in 2004 was estimated as 2 388 million tonnes, the highest proportion of this being used for crustacean aquaculture (1 418 million tonnes). Based on growth predictions (to year 2010) in the sector and improvements to feed quality and management, it is expected that the quantity of fishmeal used in Asian aquaculture will be slightly less than at present. An estimated 240 000 tonnes of fish oil is used in Asian aquaculture, principally in shrimp feeds. Based on production estimates of commodities in 2004 that rely on trash fish/low-value fish as the main feed source, this regional review suggests that Asian aquaculture currently uses between 2 465 and 3 882 million tonnes, an amount that is predicted to decrease to between 1.890 and 2 795 million tonnes by 2010. The use of trash fish/low-value fish and fishmeal by the aquaculture sector has been repeatedly adjudicated as a non-sustainable practice, and globally the sector is seeking to reduce its dependence on fish as feed through improved feed management practices and development of better quality feeds and feed formulations using alternative ingredients. Over the next few years, decreases in the use of trash fish/low-value fish are also expected to be achieved through better conversion of raw materials into fishmeal and fish oil during the reduction processes. The “way forward” in addressing the issue of the use of fish as feed in aquaculture in the Asia-Pacific region includes the need for a concerted regional research thrust to reduce the use of fish as feed sources in aquaculture, as has been achieved in the animal husbandry sector. Secondly, there is a need to increase farmer awareness on the use of trash fish as feed. This is achievable, considering the similar progress that has been made by the region’s shrimp farming sector, which almost exclusively involves small-scale practitioners who are often clustered in a given locality. The analysis also suggests that the use of trash fish/low-value fish in aquaculture may be compatible with improving food security and alleviating poverty. In Asia, trash fish/low-value fish is mostly landed in areas where there are other suitable fish commodities for human consumption. To make the trash fish/low-value fish suitable and available for human consumption would involve some degree of value-adding and transportation costs, which are likely to increase the price to beyond the means of the consumer, particularly in remote rural areas. Under such a scenario, the direct or indirect use of this perishable resource as a feed source to produce a consumable commodity appears to make economic sense and appears to be the most logical use for overall human benefit. In this manner, trash fish/low-value fish contributes to food security by increasing income generation opportunities and hence contributes to poverty alleviation. Another factor that needs to be taken into account is the large numbers of artisanal fishers who harvest this raw material. The continued use of trash fish/low-value fish, therefore, allows these fishers to maintain their livelihoods¹. Admittedly, this is an area that warrants more detailed investigation, from resource use, livelihoods and economic viewpoints.

Guiding policy change to reduce diet-related disease in the Pacific

Research was undertaken in Fiji and Tonga to identify the most promising policy interventions to improve diets and non-communicable diseases. The participatory approach combined with modelling enabled evidence-informed decision-making by stakeholders. The framework developed is practical and systematic and is recommended for use in other countries in the region.

Predicting time trade-off health state valuations of adolescents in four Pacific countries using the assessment of quality-of-life (AQoL-6D) instrument

Objectives: Pacific Obesity Prevention in Communities (OPIC) is a community-based intervention project targeting adolescent obesity in Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, and Tonga. The Assessment of Quality of Life Mark 2 (AQoL-6D) instrument was completed by 15,481 adolescents to obtain a description of the quality of life associated with adolescent overweight and obesity, and a corresponding utility score for use in a cost–utility analysis of the interventions. This article describes the recalibration of this utility instrument for adolescents in each country.

Methods: The recalibration was based on country-specific time trade-off (TTO) data for 30 multiattribute health states constructed from the AQoL-6D descriptive system. Senior secondary students, in a classroom setting, responded to 10 health state scenarios each. These TTO interviews were conducted for 24 groups, comprising 279 students in the four countries resulting in 2790 completed TTO scores. The TTO scores were econometrically transformed by regressing the TTO scores upon predicted scores from the AQoL-6D to produce country-specific algorithms. The latter incorporated country-specific “corrections” to the Australian adult utility weights in the original AQoL.

Results: This article reports two methodological elements not previously reported. The first is the econometric modification of an extant multi-attribute utility instrument to accommodate cultural and other group-specific differences in preferences. The second is the use of the TTO technique with adolescents in a classroom group setting. Significant differences in utility scores were found between the four countries.

Conclusion: Statistical results indicate that the AQoL-6D can be validly used in the economic evaluation of both the OPIC interventions and other adolescent programs.