1. Title of presentation I Wednesday, 18 November 2015Wednesday, 18 November 2015 I Page 1

2. W HAT IS W ELL - BEING ?

3. L OCAL A UTHORITIES – W ELL - BEING P ROVIDERS

4. D IALOGUE BETWEEN L OCAL A UTHORITY AND S OCIETY – G UARANTEE OF W ELL - BEING

5. A SSESSMENT OF D IALOGUE B ETWEEN M UNICIPALITY AND S OCIETY Formal partnershipv An engaged partnership Co-governance Co-management Co-production Co-responsibility Minimal engagement 7 POINT SCALE OF CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT Source: Bloomfield, J. TOGETHER Final Report [online]. URBACT programme, 30.10.2012. – [Accessed 01.09.2013.]. Available: http://urbact.eu/fileadmin/Projects/Together/outputs_media/TOGETHER_Final_Report_rev.pdf

6. I NTEGRATED G OVERNANCE M ODEL FOR M UNICIPALITIES 12 S TEPS FOR E VALUATING AND I NCREASING W ELL - BEING IN M UNICIPALITIES Sourse: author’s created figure 1st stage: preparation 2nd stage: research 3rd stage: achievement of results and durability

7. L OCAL S UPPORT G ROUP – «M UNICIPALITY F ACE » Local Support Group* Youngsters Seniors Families Culture/sport organizations Entrepreneurs Disabled persons Scientists Formed by leaders of 35 different organizations *Salaspils (Latvia) case Religion organizations Farmers

8. D ATA C OLLECTION U SING F OCUS G ROUPS What is well-being/ ill-being for you? What could you do to improve your well-being? Title of presentation I Wednesday, 18 November 2015Wednesday, 18 November 2015 I Page 8

9. D ATA G ROUPING BY D IMENSIONS WELL- BEING ACCESS TO ESSENTIAL RESOURCES LIVING ENVIRONMENT RELATIONS WITH AND BETWEEM ORGANISATIONS PERSONAL RELATIONS SOCIAL EQUILIBRUM PERSONAL EQUILIBRUM WELL-BEING/ILL- BEING FEELINGS ATTITUDES AND INITIATIVE

10. T HE R ESULTS OF S UBJECTIVE W ELL - BEING R ESEARCH : S ALASPILS C ASE Source: Results from URBACT II “TOGETHER” project, 35 homogeneous groups, 3867 responses Research period : January – May, 2011

11. E XAMPLE OF W ELL - BEING I NDICATOR : I NDICATOR OF E DUCATION Ideal situation Competitive level of education in comparison with other EU countries. Lifelong learning programs are using. Good situation It is possible to educate children. The development groups are available for children (for 0-3 years). There is a chance for children to spare their free time. Medium situation The educational institutions are available. There are good schools in sufficient numbers. Bad situation No possibilities to improve yourself. Interest groups are not available. Children are not able to sport, travel, participate in interest education. Very bad situation Lack of access to educational institutions (kindergartens, schools). Source: Results from URBACT II “TOGETHER” project, 35 homogeneous groups, 3867 responses; research period : January – May, 2011

12. H OW TO I MPROVE THE W ELL - BEING ? Defining activities Indicate responsibe persons, timeframe, resources Realisation of activities using co-responsibility approach MEMBERS OF LSG (SOCIETY) EMPLOYEES OF MUNICIPALITY (LOCAL AUTHORITY ) REALIZATION OF CERTAIN ACTIVITY Local Authorities Society

13. P ILOT A CTIONS : S OME E XAMPLES Day care center Technical creativity classes Workshops with seniors Young scientist school Science week

14. L ESSONS L EARNED Collaboration Sustainability Networking Municipality

15. Title of presentation I Wednesday, 18 November 2015Wednesday, 18 November 2015 I Page 15