"Can you think about what traits (性格) or qualifying criteria, we should use to determine the standard of our friends' character (no, not whether they are hot or not)?", "How would we measure these traits?" Everyone needs to contribute like the example below.
--TASK--
Let's move our focus to the qualifying criteria used that to determine the 'standard' of a school. Click on the '+' icon, then choose one of the dimensions, and add at least one measurable indicator. e.g., For teaching quality we could use '% of qualified staff.' Type your indicator as the 'subject,' followed by your name, then proceed to explain your reasoning for that choice in the same format as the example(s) below.
Now that we have established some indicators that can be used to measure each dimension of the qualifying criteria, think about your own school, and decide whether the standard of each dimension is 'very low,' 'low,' 'medium,' 'high,' or 'very high'.
--TASK--
Now write three sentences in your book explaining 3 of your scaling decisions, with reference to the indicator you used to decide. Example sentence: "In my opinion, the standard of school facilities in our school is below average, if we measure this by the 'area of the campus'."
--TASK--
"Now that we have dimensions for judging a school's standard, we use them to derive (派生) similar dimensions for judging a country's living standard."
Like the school example, we need to establish measurable indicators for each dimension. So click on the '+' icon, then choose one of the dimensions, and add at least one measurable indicator. e.g., For Education Level we could use '% of the population that goes into tertiary/university education.' Remember to type your indicator as the 'subject,' followed by your name, then proceed to explain your reasoning for that choice in the same format as the example(s) below.
Now that we have established some indicators that can be used to measure each dimension, think about your own country, and decide whether the standard of each is 'very low,' 'low,' 'medium,' 'high,' or 'very high'.
--TASK--
Now write three sentences in your book explaining 3 of your scaling decisions, with reference to the indicator you used to decide. Example sentence: "In my opinion, the education standards in our country are very high when we measure this by the 'mean years of schooling."
The activities above should have given you an idea that standards are really a set of commonly held 'dimensions' (characteristics) and that the 'level' or 'degree' of these standards, be they 'low to high,' differs per country/city.
Therefore, we can define the STANDARD OF LIVING as:
"The level of material comfort in terms of goods and services available to someone or some group"
"Despite all the dimensions and indicators that we discovered above having a significant impact on the 'standard of a school', the schools, media, and parents tend to ignore them and only focus on a single HEADLINE INDICATOR. Can you name it?"
"Let's have a look at the latest IB results in HK schools!!!" and "What do you think about the use of a single average grade to determine quality?", "What about for Universities?"
--INDICATORS OF LIVING STANDARDS--
The World Bank (WB) classifies economies using the criterion of GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP) PER CAPITA. This calculates the total expenditure in the economy (GDP) plus net income from assets abroad, divided by the population size. It then classifies countries in the following way:
1) Why 'GDP'? This measures the total monetary value of all finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific time period. A higher GDP means the country is producing more goods and services, of which a proportion will undoubtedly be items such as food, housing, healthcare, education, and entertainment, which all contribute to an improved standard of living.
2) Why 'Per Capita'? This means "per person." Dividing the total GDP by the population gives an average. This is essential because a large GDP (like China's) doesn't mean much for individual living standards if it's spread across a massive population. Per capita adjusts for population size, giving an 'average' gauge of living standards.
3) Why 'Real'? This is the most critical adjustment. "Real" GDP is adjusted for inflation. It measures the value of goods and services using constant prices from a base year. This allows for meaningful comparisons over time because it isolates actual growth in the quantity of output from mere increases in prices.
4) Why it compares well? In most cases it strongly correlates with key well-being indicators that were identified earlier, such as 'life expectancy,' 'years of schooling etc.... We will now explore this in more depth and extract some data to support our
Your task is to write the first 'why it might...' half of the 'discussion' question below:
"Discuss whether or not GDP per capita is a good indicator of the 'standard of living; in a country. (8)
In your answer you not only define it and explain why it is a good indicator using the points mentioned above, but I want you to include REAL DATA on at least 3 well-being dimensions and their indicator values (e.g., healthcare and life expectancy). You will need to show proof that countries with high GDP per capita figures also have high standard of living indicator values/rankings.
Example sentence starter: "Higher real GDP per capita is a good indicator of the standard of living, as firstly greater GDP implies...;... furthermore, it strongly correlates with well-being indicators. For example, Singapore has a GDP per capita of over $100k and at the same time has the highest 'life expectancy' of around 85 years, as well as..."
⚠️BE PREPARED TO SHARE YOUR WORK!!!!⚠️
--TASK--
"Do you remember that video we watched of the speech by Robert Kennedy on GDP?" "One of the major limitations of using GDP statistics as a measure of well-being was that it doesn't reveal the composition of the goods produced, and includes the $-value of items/activities that negatively impact the standard of living, as well as omits the $-value of items/activities that positively impact the standard of living.", "Can you recall some of these items below?" (Note: there are two slides)
Apart from the unknown composition of GDP, there exist many other limitations that the GDP per capita figure hides that directly impact the standard of living of the average citizen.
As of 2025, Hong Kong has a GDP per capita of ~$56,844 USD. which gives it a top ten global ranking. With this data in mind and your own knowledge of Hong Kong, rank the limitations of GDP listed below in order of what you think is the most 'impactful' on the reliability of this GDP figure in truly reflecting the standard of living of the average Hong Kong resident.
Now write the second 'why it might not'-part of the 8-marker you started above. In your answer use the TOP TWO/THREE limitations that the class ranked above using HK as the real-world example.
Example sentence starter: "Higher real GDP per capita might not be a good indicator of the standard of living, as it also strongly correlates with economic indicators that worsen the standard of living. For example, Hong Kong has a GDP per capita of ~$56,844; however, this high number comes at a cost as..."
"If we wanted to compare which tutor centers are the best, what indicator immediately springs to mind?" "Is this measure the best for working out the well-being and happiness of the students?"
"Now if we look at this school's vision, mission, and motto, what's missing?"
"Clearly, they are more concerned about the 'development' of the 'whole person,' focusing on not only intellectual needs but also emotional, social, physical, and spiritual needs (called 'holistic education').
"So when deciding on a measure of the 'standard of living,' we need to acknowledge the importance of income per capita but also understand that there are other fundamental dimensions of well-being that, when combined, give a better indication of the standard of living."
insert mento meter survey presented as a scales in the form of a development diammond that the students comnplete , it need to show overtime changes we can give them data and they can construct them?????
A more 'holistic' measure that is commonly used is the 'HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX'.
...which includes the following three dimensions:
A Long and Healthy Life: measured by 'life expectancy,'
Access to knowledge: measured by 'mean years of schooling,'
A decent standard of living: measured by 'GNI per capita @PPP,'
The index for each country is scored between O and 1. (l being the most developed.)
"High life expectancy implies..."
...the overall physical well-being of the population is good, including access to healthcare, nutrition, and a healthy environment.
"High mean years of schooling implies..."
...the overall ability of people to empower themselves through finding work, improving their quality of life, and allowing themselves to participate fully in society is good.
"High GNI per capita @ PPP implies that..."
...the purchasing power of citizens allows them to easily be able to satisfy their basic material needs like food, shelter, and security.
Your task is to write the first 'why it might...' half of the 'discussion' question below:
"Discuss whether or not the HDI is a good indicator of the 'standard of living; in a country. (8)
⚠️BE PREPARED TO SHARE YOUR WORK!!!!⚠️
"Is education as important as healthcare?"
EQUAL WEIGHTING OF THE COMPONENTS IS NOT REALISTIC, as they do not necessarily contribute to human development in an equal way.
"What about crime rate, pollution...?"
USING THREE COMPONENTS IS STILL TOO NARROW to be used as an indicator of living standards. For example, the HDI ignores political and economic freedom, which many consider crucial to the standards of living in a country.
"What about income distribution?"
THE HDI STILL DOESN'T DEAL WITH INEQUALITIES IN INCOME and wealth within and between countries, so comparisons of living standards become less meaningful.
Your task is to write the 'why it might not...' half of the 'discussion' question we started above:
⚠️BE PREPARED TO SHARE YOUR WORK!!!!⚠️
Use the graph below to find an example of a country with HIGH GDP PER CAPITA, but a very LOW HDI RANKING. Can you think why this is the case?
--COMPARING LIVING STANDARDS--
[FACTORS]
[INDICATORS]
Generally speaking THE HIGHER THE LEVEL OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME PER PERSON, => GREATER THE ABILITY TO CONSUME GOODS AND SERVICES => THE GREATER THE STANDARD OF LIVING.
GDP PER CAPITA:
GDP divided by population.
GDP generates income as such it shows how much the average person is earning.
The COST OF LIVING refers to THE AMOUNT OF MONEY NEEDED TO COVER BASIC EXPENSES such as housing, food, taxes, and healthcare.
Would you prefer to earn 5000SGD and live in Singapore or 3000SGD and live in India? Even though the income is lower I would definitely prefer to live in India, but why?
The answer is that the fact that India is a very low cost country, the $3000 will afford a person a better standard of living than the $5000 in a high cost country like Singapore.
Therefore to account for difference in price levels we use GDP calculated using PURCHASING POWER PARITY or PPP values
MATERIAL WEALTH refers to the OWNERSHIP OF CONSUMER DURABLE GOODS by the average person, such as cars, jewelry, televisions, mobile phones, washing machines, and home computers.
The greater the level of material wealth, the better the standard of living tends to be.
One well known indicator of material wealth is the OWNERSHIP of MOTOR VEHICLES.
The ability to live a long and healthy life, free from the threat of diseases caused by poor sanitation, lack of access to basic healthcare and educational ignorance all impact the standard of living between countries.
Generally speaking, developed countries have RELATIVELY LONGER LIFE EXPECTANCIES than developing countries.
The length of time spent in EDUCATION most often translates into a greater earning potential, and higher incomes to afford a greater standard of living.
Generally speaking, developed countries have RELATIVELY HIGHER 'MEAN YEARS OF SCHOOLING' than developing countries.
Incomes allow people to consume goods and services however if work, inevitably results in less leisure time and lowers the standard of living.
To measure this we can use the 'average working hours per week' as an indicator. We can see that despite Singapore's high GDP per capita if we factor in the high costs of living as well as the long average hours worked, we get a different view about the standard of living enjoyed by a typical Singaporean.
Pollution has a huge impact on the standard of living. This includes air pollution, noise pollution, river pollution, and land degradation to name but a few. All of these impact the health and sustainability of scarce productive resources.
Clearly, the danger posed by pollution can result in multiple fatalities, heavily impacting the standard of living.
Create an INFOGRAPHIC, (I recommend a 4 column table style) in which you compare the living standards of THREE countries (One developed, one developing, and one LDC), in terms of the factors and indicators listed above. PLUS 3 MORE INDICATORS OF YOUR CHOICE.. You can find the data on the HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT & the COUNTRY REPORTS
8-MARKS
Discuss whether a reduction in government spending on education will reduce living standards.
Discuss whether living standards are likely to be higher in a mixed economy or a market economy.
Discuss whether rapid economic growth always increases living standards.
Discuss whether producing more food will increase living standards.
Discuss whether or not a reduction in unemployment always increases living standards.
Discuss whether or not a decrease in the number of doctors will reduce living standards.
Discuss whether or not protectionism is effective in raising living standards.
Discuss whether or not economic growth always increases living standards.
6-MARKS
Analyse the effects of a rise in unemployment on living standards in a country.
Analyse three ways in which a country’s HDI value could increase.
Analyze how subsidies given to farmers could raise living standards.
Analyze how an increase in labor productivity can increase living standards.
4-MARKS
2-MARKS
Population growth is often an indicator of falling living standards. This is because if the growth rate is larger than the % increase in income, then this implies that average income will fall while the dependency ratio will increase. (The dependency ratio is a measure of the number of dependents aged zero to 14 and over the age of 65, compared with the total population aged 15 to 64.). Generally speaking, developed countries have RELATIVELY LOWER POPULATION GROWTH RATES & DEPENDENCY RATIOS than developing countries.
POPULATION GROWTH (%)
DEPENDENCY RATIO (%)
Without spending on infrastructure such as roads, water pipelines, electricity, sewage treatment etc, the economy can never grow. Generally speaking, developed nations spend a much larger amount on these types of capital goods than developing countries.
Population growth is often an indicator of falling living standards if the growth rate is larger than the % increase in income, as this implies that average income will fall while the dependency ratio will increase.
Population growth is often an indicator of falling living standards if the growth rate is larger than the % increase in income, as this implies that average income will fall while the dependency ratio will increase.
As we have already discussed the primary sector is the most volatile in terms of supply-side shocks as well as being the least income elastic, hence we can expect that countries that have large primary sectors earn lower incomes and have lower standards of living.
Population growth is often an indicator of falling living standards if the growth rate is larger than the % increase in income, as this implies that average income will fall while the dependency ratio will increase.
Population growth is often an indicator of falling living standards if the growth rate is larger than the % increase in income, as this implies that average income will fall while the dependency ratio will increase.
• GDP per capita - LOW
• Life expectancy - LOW
• Literacy rates - LOW
• Population growth - HIGH
• Infrastructure -
Road constructio spending
InTERNET USERS PER 100
Infrastructure refers to the system of transportation and the communications networks necessary for the efficient functioning of an economy, such as buildings, mass transportation, roads, water systems, ICT systems including the internet, airports and power supplies. According to the World Economic Forum, countries with very poor infrastructure include Bosnia and Herzegovina, Angola, Mongolia, Nepal, Lebanon and Chad. Table 21.3 shows the number of internet users per 100 people in 2012.
• Low foreign direct investment - The lack of capital resources also limits the ability of a country to create income and wealth. Foreign direct investment (FDI) refers to cross-border investment made by multinational companies and other investors. Poor countries, with their lack of economic growth and poor infrastructure, do not tend to attract FDI due to the expected high risks and low financial returns.
fdi INVESTMENTS
• Poor health care - Insufficient im·cstmem in health services hinders the ability of
a coumry to de\·clop. Health care expenditure per capita is low in LEDCs. Their
governments are unable to provide preventive and curative health care services
for the mass JX)pulation. According to the World Bank, the United States spends
$8362 per person on health care services, whereas this figure is only $21 in
Burundi, $18 in Niger, $16 in Ethiopia and just $12 in Eritrea.
• Labour productivity - output per worker - LOW to the combination of low literacy, low capital investment and poor health care abour productivity in LEDCs also tends to below.
• Public debt - Public debt refers to the money owed by the government (public sector). In general, LEDCs are far more likely to borrow money to finance their public sector expenditure, so the higher the public debt, the lower a country's standard of living tends to be. This is because the government will need to repay its loans, along with interest payments, rather than using the funds for investment in the economy. However, the huge impact of the global financial crisis has harmed MEDCs and not only LEDCs (sec Table 21.4 below). Japan tops the chart, largely due to the country's devastating earthquake and tsunami of March 2011, the country's worst natural disaster in history. In reality, it is common for LEDCs to pay more for financing their public debts, mainly due to the high- interest rates imposed and partly due to a fall in the value of their currency. This makes repayment of public debt increasingly unsustainable for LEDCs, leading to further borrowing and ever-increasing debts.
• Reliance on primary-sector output - Low-income countries tend to over-rely on the production and export of primary-sector output, such as agricultural products. These tend to ha\'e poor terms of trade in comparison with the export of manufactured products or tertiary-sector services. Table 2 1.5 compares the output from the three sectors of the economy for selected coutries.
• Corruption - A final characteristic of LEDCs is their high degree of corruption. There are huge opportunity costs of civil war, dishonest government officials, fraudulent behaviour and the purchase of arms and weapons. Corruption therefore hinders economic development and results in hugely unequal income distribution.
• Low GDP per capita - For economists, this is probably the key characteristic
of developing countries. GDP per capita is calculated by dividing the gross
domestic product of a coumry by its population to find the income level of the
average person. The lower the GDP per person, the poorer the country rends
to be. According to the World Bank, Luxembourg has the highest GDP per
head at $114508, whereas the Democratic. Republic of Congo has the lowest at
just$231.
• Low life expectancy - Life expectancy measures the number ofyears that the
average person in a country is anticipated to live for, based on statistical trends.
The lower the life expectancy, the poorer the country rends to be. Dara from the
World Bank support this, with the likes ofSierra Leone, Congo, Zambia and
Swaziland all having life expectancy ofbcrwecn 48 and 49 years.
• Low literacy rates - Literacy rates measure the proportion of the population
aged 15 and above who can read and write. Low-income countries have
insufficient investment in education and training, so their literacy rates rend
to be low. This has major consequence for employment, production and
productivity, thus negatively impacting on the GDP of the country. High -income
countries have 100 per cent literacy rates whereas low-income coumries have
very low literacy rates, such as Mali (31 per cent), Chad (34 per cent) and Guinea
(41 percent).
• High population growth- Population growth measures the annual
percentage change in the population ofa country. Poorer countries tend to
have high population growth rates for many reasons: a lack of family planning
and sex education, poor access to contraception and cultural norms (it is
common and widely accepted to have many children in some countries and
cultures).
• Poor infras t ructu re - Infrastructure refers to the system of transportation
and the communications networks necessary for the efficient functioning of
an economy, such as buildings, mass transportation, roads, \irater systems, JCT
systems including the internet, airports and power supplies. According to the
World Economic Fomm, countries with very poor infrasrrncture include Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Angola, Mongolia, Nepal, Lebanon and Chad. Table 21.3 shows
the number ofinterner users per 100 people in 2012.
Low foreign direct investment - The lack of capital resources also limits the
ability ofa country to create income and wealth. Foreign direct im·estment
(FDI) refers to cross-border investment made by multinational companies and
other investors. Poor coumries, with their lack of economic growth and poor
infrastructure, do not tend to attract FDI due to the expected high risks and low
financial returns.
• Poor health care - Insufficient im·cstmem in health services hinders the ability of
a coumry to de\·clop. Health care expenditure per capita is low in LEDCs. Their
governments are unable to provide preventive and curative health care services
for the mass JX)pulation. According to the World Bank, the United States spends
$8362 per person on health care services, whereas this figure is only $21 in
Burundi, $18 in Niger, $16 in Ethiopia and just $12 in Eritrea.
• Low lalxmr productivity - Labour productivity is a measure of the efficiency of
labour in the production process, such as output per worker (see Chapter 11). Due
to the combination of low literacy, low capital investment and poor health care ,
labour productivity in LEDCs also tends to be low.
• High public debt - Public debt refers to the money owed by the government
(public sector). In general, LEDCs are far more likely to borrow money to
finance their public sector expenditure, so the higher the public debt, the lower
a country's standard of living tends to be. This is because the government
will need to repay its loans, along with interest payments, rather than using
the funds for investment in the economy. However, the huge impact of
the global financial crisis has harmed MEDCs and not only LEDCs (sec
Table 21.4 below). Japan tops the chart, largely due to the country's devastating
earthquake and tsunami of March 2011, the country's worst natural disaster
in history.
In reality, it is common for LEDCs to pay more for financing their public debts,
panly due to the high interest rates imposed and partly due to a fall in the value of
their currency. This makes repayment of public debt increasingly unsustainable for
LEDCs, leading to funher borrowing and ever-increasing debts.
• Reliance on prima ry-sector output - Low-income countries tend to over-rely
on the production and export of primary-sector output, such as agricultural
products. These tend to ha\'e poor terms of trade in comparison with the export of
manufactured products or tertiary-sector services. Table 2 1.5 compares the output
from the three sectors of the economy for selected coumries.
• Corruption - A final characteristic ofLEDCs is their high degree of corruption.
There are huge opporumity costs of civil war, dishonest go~·ernment officials,
fraudulent behaviour and the purchase of arms and weapons. Corruption
therefore hinders economic development and results in hugely unequal income
distribution.