Organisatsioonidel on oma koht ühiskonnas ning eri tüüpi organisatsioonidel on veidi erinev koht. Vaimne tervis on ehk midagi sellist, millele võiks valitsemisel suuremat tähelepanu pöörata. Põhjuseid selleks on küllaga. Siinviidatud tekst on kasulik juba ainuüksi tähelepanu juhtimise pärast.

Konteksti avamiseks:

Aside from a duty to improve the happiness or life satisfaction of communities, governments have an interest to do so because, on the individual level, heightened subjective well-being is associated with individual immunity, longevity, and healthier social relationships (Diener and Chan 2011; Howell, Kern, and Lyubomirsky 2007). On a more communal level, greater subjective well-being is also associated with increasing citizen engagement in democratic practices and trust in institutions – helping to strengthen the state in turn (Hudson 2006). A key question remains: what elements of community life might be amenable to policies that promote the subjective well-being of community members?


We test the hypothesis that nonprofit organizations have meaningful consequences for the communities in which they are located by examining the association between nonprofit organizations and community subjective well-being between 2009 and 2012. We measure five dimensions of subjective well-being – engagement, disengagement, positive emotions, negative emotions, and negative relations – using data from Twitter in 1,330 U.S. counties.

Aga mis on subjektiivne heaolu? Siin artiklis defineerivad autorid seda järgmiselt:

subjective well-being […] refers to the various ways in which people evaluate their lives positively. In the emotional realm, it involves positive feelings and experiences in relation to what is happening and few negative or unpleasant experiences […] Unlike economic indicators, which locate a person’s well-being primarily in the material realm of marketplace production and consumption, well-being indicators assess the full range of inputs to the quality of life, from social relationships to spirituality and meaning, from material consumption to feelings of relaxation and security.

Mittetulundusühingud ja heaolu:

Nonprofits […] are oriented toward social ends and serve the common good by emphasizing community need over profit (Barman 2016; Sanger 2004). As an important component of civic infrastructure, nonprofits should improve a community‘s subjective well-being through three mechanisms: service provision, advocacy, and the development of social capital.

Mõned järeldused:

Reciprocal findings indicate little evidence that existing levels of subjective well-being within a community influence per capita nonprofit counts, but other community characteristics which we include as controls might influence the effectiveness of nonprofit civic infrastructure in the promotion of subjective well-being. For example, results from exploratory analyses suggest that nonprofits may have a stronger influence on subjective well-being in more rural areas. […] our analysis suggests that the nonprofit sector is also a useful sector for public investment because, in an era of concern with government fostering well-being (Marwell and Calabrese 2015), such investments should return improvements to communities‘ subjective well-being. Policy-makers have several levers to return such improvements. Nonprofits are funded through a combination of program service revenue (e.g., museum admission, tuition), government grants, and donations, each of which is amenable to investment or regulation.

Ressler, R. W., Paxton, P., Velasco, K., Pivnick, L., Weiss, I., & Eichstaedt, J. C. (2021). NonProfits: A Public Policy Tool for the Promotion of Community Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.