1. Introduction

The importance of quality of life in various fields such as medicine, sociology, economics and psychology has recently become a source of focus for economic development policy makers in developed countries, which are now recognised as the leading countries for the classification of global happiness.

Where Harman (13-18) (1999) points out that this concept emerged in the mid-1960s, and was widely used in various studies as one of the indicators of interest in individual welfare in all fields. The concept of quality of life, The quality of life, the quality of raw materials, the quality of married life, the quality of the last age, the quality of education, the quality of the future, the quality of life, the quality of life, the quality of life.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Quality of Life Concept

The number of Muftahim Jawdat Al Hayat varied according to the nature and specialisation of the authors who dealt with this subject:

Where does Karl Rove: »(Ruff) that the quality of life is a definite sense of good and also monitor the behavioral indicators that indicate the high levels of satisfaction with one's self and his life in general and his quest for the achievement of personal goals estimated and valuable and meaningful for him and his independence in determining the direction and path His life and the establishment of positive social relations with others. "The quality of life is linked to the general sense of happiness, tranquillity, and peace of mind (Ryff et al., 2006: 85-95).

Rubin (2000) recognised the quality of life as "the integration and integration of several trends in the physical, psychological and social aspects of the individual, including both cognitive compartments, which include satisfaction and emotional components, including happiness". Bonomi et. al. (2000) emphasize that quality of life is a broad concept that is influenced by interrelated aspects of subjective and objectivity, related to the state of health and the individual's mental state, the degree of autonomy he enjoys, and the social relations he has, about his relationship to the environment in which he lives.

Katsching (1997) asserts that standards for quality of life depend on self-assessment and objective assessment of quality. The quality of life plays a pivotal role in the various services provided to the community. The strong emotional relationship between Quality and the quality of the individual and its environment, and the relationship between the feelings and feelings of the individual and the importance of the environment and cultural factors as determinants of quality of life. (Cummins, 1994: 969).

The definition of the World Health Organization (1998) as the closest definitions to the general meaning of this concept is seen as the quality of life is seen as: the individual's perception of his own situation in life in the context of culture and the patterns of values in which he lives and the extent to which he matches his goals, his concerns about his physical and psychological health, his level of independence, his social relations, his beliefs and his relationship to the environment.

2.2. Quality of Life Dimensions

After reviewing many of the definitions of quality of life, we found that there is no specific and precise definition of quality of life based on the researchers, as Greg Bognar2005, Park et al., Et al. "Taylor et Racine1991", "Dennis" et al. 1993 Studies indicate that the quality of life is synonymous with the level determined by the quality of life standards and that the quality of life generally refers to psychological life, even though environmental conditions are included in some definitions, Its assessment under three conditions is:

1) Through the self-esteem of satisfaction with life in general (happiness or enjoyment).

2) Self-assessment of satisfaction in certain areas or aspects (work, health, relationships with others)

3) Demographic data for quality of life (social indicators, resources or barriers).

It is usually determined in two indicators: the subjective dimension and the objective dimension. However, the majority of researchers focused on the indicators of the objective dimension of quality of life and includes a set of observable indicators and direct measurements such as working conditions, income level, social and economic status and the amount of support available from the network of social relations. However, research findings show that the focus on the quality of life indicators is only a small fraction of the variance in the overall quality of life estimates, hence two dimensions of quality of life are determined:

Self-dimension: It means the extent of personal satisfaction with life, a person's sense of happiness.

Objective-dimension: Includes (physical and psychological health, social relations, community activities, work, philosophy of life, leisure time, the standard of living, family relations, education) (Ghandour, 2007: 27).

While other researchers see three dimensions of quality of life, including the quality of psychological life, one of the components of the quality of public life:

- Self-interest: personal evaluation through satisfaction and happiness.

- Substantive aspect: Job evaluation.

- External conditions: social stimuli. (Christian, 2003: 52).

Lauten argues that the concept of quality of life is multi-dimensional, including:

"What is evident with the description of" Craig A. Jackson 2010 and is called the 3 B's and is as follows:

A) Being

B) Belonging

C) Process: Becoming

The following table details the sub-components of these areas.

Table (1). Quality of life areas

2.3. Behavioral Competence

Control and control of the environment Cognitive quality of life, perceived quality of life and quality of mental life Juniker et al. (2004) asserts that after quality of mental life is the central component of quality of life in general, namely free from symptoms of psychological disorder, positive self-esteem, emotional balance, Life is a product of mental health.

Philes and Perry (1995) put forward a three-element model of quality of life, reflecting interaction:

A) Life conditions: They include the objective description of individuals and their living conditions.

B) Personal satisfaction with life: It is a sense of satisfaction with the circumstances of life or way of life.

Rosen (1995) finds that the quality of life includes four dimensions, which are included in the measure prepared for this purpose: conscious psychological pressure, emotion, psychological unity, and satisfaction.

C) Personal values and personal ambition: They include the relative value or importance of the individual to the various conditions of objective life or the quality of life itself.

2.4. Quality of Life Indicators

The quality of life is high, but it remains the most important, according to Fallowfield:

1. Psychological indicators: It is the feeling of the individual anxiety and depression or compatibility with the disease or feeling happy.

2. Social indicators: It is evident through personal relationships and quality, as well as the individual exercise of social and recreational activities.

3. Professional indicators: The degree of satisfaction of the individual about his profession and his love for him and the ability to carry out his functions and ability to comply with the duties of his work.

4. Physical and physical indicators: The individual complains about his health and co-existence with pain, sleep and appetite in lunch and sexual ability.

Figure (1). Basic Factors of the quality of life

Here, the role of life and the different experiences that we experience at each stage of our lives play a vital role in the fact that our vision of quality is fixed or changed, although each person has his or her specific expectations.

3. Synthesis of Literature

3.1. Theoretical Trends

The theoretical trends used to describe and interpret the quality of life; there are four main trends in interpreting the quality of life:

A) Social orientation

B) Medical direction

C) Psychological direction

3.1.1. The Social Trend

Refers to several aspects and from a perspective that focuses on the family and society, and the relations of individuals and the requirements of civilization, population, income and labour, and job pressures and other social variables. Where more attention should be paid to the quality of social relations than to the number of relations.

The most important areas in the social trend:

1. Population: Sociologists when they are interested in studying the quality of life focus on external indicators such as: the formula of births and deaths and victims of various diseases, the quality of housing, levels of education for individuals, society and level of absorption and acceptance in different stages of education in addition to the level of income.

2. Work: The concept of quality of life is linked to the work or occupation of the individual and there are important determinants that can be considered in this regard to have an impact on the realization of this concept procedural such as: working conditions, the same and the financial return and what can be provided by work Of opportunities for professional mobility and professional status, which has an impact on the life of the individual in relation to the profession, and the quality of supervision and the relationship of fellowship is one of the effective factors in achieving this concept, it affects the satisfaction of the worker. (Ghandour, 1999).

3.1.2. Medical Direction

It aims to improve the quality of life of individuals suffering from various physical, psychological or mental diseases through counselling and therapeutic programs and providing psychological and psychological support for them. The quality of life research of the Health Department of the University of Toronto, Canada, says that the ultimate goal of studying the quality of life and applying it to people's lives a life of quality, meaning and is enjoyed (Saleh Ismail Abdullah, 2010).

The World Health Organization (WHO) has summed up these considerations by saying that adding years to life is an extraordinary victory, unless there is an added life to these years (Who, 1998).

3.1.3. The Psychological Trend

Consciousness as a fundamental determinant of quality of life. The quality of life is an expression of the self-perception of the individual. Life for man is what he perceives. All the variables of the social orientation mentioned above depend on the individual's assessment of the objective physical indicators of his life. The concept of values, the concept of self-perception, the concept of needs, the concept of attitudes, the concept of ambition, the concept of expectation and the concept of self-esteem, are based on concepts of consent, concord, and mental health (Rapheal and others, 1996: 66).

3.2. Development by Adopting Alternative Measures of GDP in Measuring the Quality of Life

The period of debate about the importance of GDP as a measure of the quality of people's lives dates back to the same period as the scale itself, and this is well illustrated by the famous quotation of Robert F. Kennedy. Kennedy: "Gross national product measures everything, except for what makes life worthwhile." GDP engineers, Simon Kuznets and Richard Stone, acknowledged the faces. While GDP growth is critical to achieving several important objectives, such as eradicating extreme poverty, to adequate funding for social programs and public investment, it should always be seen as a means to achieve other goals rather than as a measure of well-being. From being an end in itself.

In recognition of the vulnerability of GDP to the absorption of essential dimensions of human life, a strong movement has emerged to move beyond GDP and to place greater emphasis on other measures capable of accommodating people's living conditions and quality of life. A wide range of research and statistical efforts have been developed to provide alternative or complementary measures to human progress (see Stiglitz et al., 2009; OECD, 2011). Many countries have also developed frameworks for measuring the quality of life. However, measuring the quality of life is not an end in itself.

In order for quality-of-life indicators to contribute to improving people's lives, policy makers and the general public must use them to make decisions, but what has been recorded about how these indicators are used or whether they are already used in policy arrangements is much lower.

3.3. Developing Quality of Life Standards - Beyond GDP

Long-term GDP has been accepted as the primary measure of economic performance and well-being. It is a measure of economic production and not of people's quality of life. It does not absorb important characteristics of life elements such as leisure times, social cohesion or the quality of the work environment, nor does it reflect inequalities, which are important for assessing the quality of life. Driven by changes in the volume of economic production on the balance of resources that achieve the sustainability of quality of life over time, in this regard has been working on many frameworks and initiatives. Specifically, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has been active in supporting this initiative. In 2001, it developed a framework for measuring the quality of life, which in turn reflects and supports the development of measurement frameworks at the national level.

3.4. OECD Initiative for a Better Life

In 2011, the Statistics Department of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) developed a framework for measuring quality of life, designed in consultation with Member States, taking into account the recommendations of the Committee on Measuring Economic Performance and Social Progress (Stiglitz, Sen, and Vitusi, 2009) National and international levels. This framework defines 11 basic dimensions of people's lives, "ranging from health, education and skills to the quality of the local environment, personal safety and quality of personal life, as well as more physical dimensions such as income, wealth, housing, etc. Four stocks of resources (natural, human, economic and social) have been highlighted because they are important for the sustainability of quality-of-life outcomes over time.

Figure (2). OECD framework on quality of life concepts

3.5. Using of Quality of Life Measures in Economic Development Policy Arrangements

The development of quality-of-life initiatives and indicator sets is a general step towards building the evidence base and developing a shared understanding of what contributes to a better life. However, gathering enough information about people's lives is not enough to achieve the ambition of improving policy and decision-making. Compiling data, measuring the quality of people's lives, measuring them regularly, and then publishing them is a prerequisite. The non-use of these indicators to develop policies for a better life reduces their value.

3.6. The Difference between the Quality of Life Methodology and the Post-GDP Methodology for Development

Many quality-of-life indicators already play a solid policy role and are used throughout the policy cycle. The jobs, revenues, educational attainment, affordability of housing and health outcomes are often closely monitored by the ministries responsible for these areas. So, how does it differ, and why does it differ when it comes to public policy from a quality of life perspective? How can policy-making be different-or better? Some potential value-added aspects of taking quality-of-life indicators into account in the policy context include:

• Providing a complete picture: specifically drawing attention to outcomes that are important to people's living conditions and quality of life, and which are not normally taken into account in the routine analysis of public policy.

• Support strategic alignment of results across the government: Cooperation and coherence between different parts of government are key at all stages of the policy cycle. Government agencies usually work in the form of independent units, where they focus on the resources and outputs for which they are directly accountable and without referring to the broader impacts of their actions, they tend to focus on the results for which they are directly responsible.

• Highlighting disparities and diversity of experiences by providing data on individuals: Unlike many aggregated metrics that focus on the performance of economies as a whole, the focus on people and outcomes at the individual and household levels can analyse disparities, disadvantage and vulnerability, and groups With varying results over time.

• Think about both the quality of life today and resources for tomorrow: One of the most significant criticisms of domestic output is whether economic growth is sustainable over time or if growth is achieved sustainably, without the environmental or social costs that offset the benefits Overall social growth, which would undermine the stability of this future growth. For this reason, the broad economic, environmental and social coverage of the quality of life measures is a major advantage.

• Promoting public debate: This allows for a discussion based on a common basic concept of good life among all stakeholders, politicians, civil society, the business sector and policy makers.

• Enhancing the assessment of the impact of public policy programs on people's lives: Encourage various government departments to take into account a wide range of quality-of-life outcomes and impacts, helping to make trade-offs and side effects between policies clearer. An agreement on dimensions and indicators that reflect people's quality of life simplifies external accountability measures, such as parliamentary oversight, oversight agencies, and civil society, by creating a common language and consensus on the results measured.

3.7. Pilot Experiences of Using the Quality of Life Index in Development

Many countries have undertaken the task of conducting public consultations as part of the process of developing quality-of-life measurement frameworks. To provide a clear way to show commitment to the quality of people's lives by discovering what is important to the general public in order to know and measure it. In this context, we can present several international experiences of standards of quality of life and ways to contribute to national development.

3.7.1. France: New Wealth Indicators

On April 14, 2015, Parliament passed a law stipulating that the government submit a report on "new wealth indicators" to Parliament on an annual basis. The report should address the progress made in the light of the "new wealth indicators" and also include an assessment of the impact of the major reforms enacted in the previous year.

For these indicators. The timing of the report was determined to coincide with the development of the national budget. At the time the bill was proposed, several previous initiatives had already raised public awareness and policy makers.

The new Wealth Indicators Act was first introduced on October 14, 2014 by a group of three parliamentarians led by Eva Sass, a senator from the Green Party, and the National Assembly and the Senate unanimously approved the bill, , In conjunction with the Parliament's discussions on the budget law, some MPs felt that it should be published in June after Parliament had approved the final public spending for the previous year The final version of the law, which was approved on 14 April 2015: "The government provides annually To parliament, in the third The report presents the development of new wealth indicators over the past years on inequality, quality of life and sustainable development, as well as a qualitative or quantitative assessment of the major reforms initiated in the previous year, current and next year. Comparing these new indicators with GDP, and the report could be put forward for discussion in parliament. "

In the opinion of Deputy Eva Sass, who initiated the bill, two issues of vital importance in the law are:

1. The Code will not specify the list of indicators, and instead, the indicators should be chosen after a large national consultation involving researchers, representatives of civil society, international organisations and experts. There was an additional need for questionnaires to ensure that the indicators accurately reflected the views of citizens.

2. The report can be discussed in the plenary session in Parliament at the request of the Government, in order to allow for the study of new wealth indicators in conjunction with discussions on the budget law.

The final set of indicators presented in June 2016 was the result of extensive consultations, including a working group that laid the groundwork for public consultations, and broad tripartite public consultations, including an online questionnaire, a telephone questionnaire and dedicated workshops. At the end of the consultations, France's Strategic Vision Board and the Economic, Social and Environmental Council published a list of ten topics measured using 15 indicators, and recommendations were made for the Government to adopt 10 of these indicators (the Strategic Vision Body of France and the Economic, Social and Environmental Council) Suggesting more than one indicator of some of these issues, which allowed the Government to choose between them, and the list of indicators is shown in table 2.

Table 2. New wealth indicators in France

3.7.2. Sweden: New Standards of Quality of Life

A dedicated framework for measuring the quality of life has recently been introduced in the Swedish Budget Act, through the use of a limited set of indicators. Sweden, however, has previous experience in using the set of indicators for accountability and policy monitoring under the Environmental Quality Objectives Program.

1.2. Environmental quality objectives in Sweden - Early application of post-GDP measures in policy: Sweden's use of "beyond GDP" measures in policy development is essential by integrating sustainable development indicators into environmental policy. In 1999, the Swedish Parliament approved a new architecture for environmental policy design by defining 15 environmental quality targets. The Ministry of Environment and Energy stated that the responsibility for achieving these goals is a shared responsibility and rests with a range of actors, including public authorities, non-governmental organisations, the business sector, families and individuals. Some 25 government agencies are responsible for monitoring and evaluating a specific set of environmental quality targets, while eight agencies are directly responsible for achieving these goals.

The identification of environmental quality targets is based on a set of indicators of sustainable development. The Swedish government and parliament have been able to integrate these indicators in a meaningful manner in the policy cycle of policy assessment and agenda development. However, there are some challenges in the implementation phase. Environmental quality goals, as an ambitious environmental agenda, did not define policy priorities in a resource-friendly manner.

Table (3). New standards of Quality of Life

Available, which reduced their effectiveness (OECD, 2014). The other challenge is the institutional autonomy of local governments, which leads to significant differences in their implementation capacity, causing some apparent inconsistencies in implementation.

3.7.3. New Quality of Life Standards - Implementation of the Quality of Life Framework in the Budgeting Process

Building on its experience in integrating GDP indicators into public policy through environmental quality objectives, the Swedish government recently developed new standards of quality of life, focusing on the long-term sustainability of economic growth as well as the quality of life and quality of life for citizens. The conceptual framework involved takes into account the multiple dimensions of people's lives and the resources that sustain a better life and society.

Indicators are also related to United Nations Agenda 2030 and sustainable development goals, which, as a list of policy commitments agreed upon by world leaders, emphasize common responsibilities for a sustainable future. The framework called "New Standards for Quality of Life" was introduced in the draft spring 2017 budget. The budget preparation process in Sweden consists of two distinct phases, the spring fiscal policy in April, where the total amounts of the fiscal policy are set, followed by the Government Budget Bill, which separates allocations for the next budget year (OECD, 2017b). The annual budget is one of the key parts of the policy-making process and is characterized by active cooperation within the Government, and after the introduction of the draft budget for the spring, the budget priorities are negotiated and policy measures discussed widely. For the year 2014 and 2015 by authorizing Sweden's Statistics Authority to develop a quality-of-life framework, in consultation with government agencies, and then propose a set of indicators that will be based on available data and will take into account gender equality and equality between different population groups and areas where possible. 15 new quality of life in the draft spring 2017. The indicators are divided into three categories: economic, environmental and social, each of which consists of five indicators, a combination of personal and objective criteria.

The development and delivery of this framework is a signal from the Swedish Government to all agencies at all levels of government to adopt them in their key policy-making processes. More specifically, the Government expresses its intention to incorporate new standards of quality of life in the following ways (Lundin, 2017)

• Monitoring socio-economic development.

• Providing data for policy options and considerations.

• Supporting the assessment of the effects of government reforms.

• Presented as supplemental performance indicators annually in the Spring Budget Project.

The Ministry of Finance has led the coordination and action on new standards of quality of life. The dissemination of the Framework has attracted considerable interest from various stakeholders and academics. A framework review is planned for future publications and the integration of these indicators into expenditure areas.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

Numerous national quality-of-life initiatives and mechanisms for using quality of life measures have been developed within the framework of policy and development arrangements. Despite the differences between national experiences, there are some common factors. The context is also important, both political and procedural, and each study describes new developments on how quality of life measurement affects policy making, despite a number of obstacles: Brin Paul, See Seaford and Perry, 2014 Obstacles are political obstacles include the lack of legitimacy for the development of new indicators, the weak definition of the conceptual formula and the absence of a strong political need to consider "beyond GDP", i.e. a limited demand for alternative quality of life indicators from the political level.

Indicators: These are mainly related to the methodology used to measure the quality of life and sustainability, as well as the absence of consensus on a specific set of indicators to be used as a measure of the quality of life.

Structural and practical barriers: These constraints relate to support and incentives within the policy-making process and to the use of quality-of-life frameworks, as well as institutional reluctance to change and poor linkages with potential users and stakeholders.

The dynamic differentiation in the Quality of Life mass and influencers supposed to be driven by different tools. These differentiations can be seen by the national statistical offices that also deal with defined statistics and specific methodologies that allow comparisons and scrutiny of both QoL and sustainable development.

Further research should help in finding solutions to the many challenges that emerged through this review of national experiences of development through a quality-of-life reference.

The process of evaluating the "success" of quality of life measures in influencing policymaking and development will only be possible if:

ο We identified and identified the expected impact. It is very difficult to determine the impact on policy-making from a single indicator.

ο Evidence-based policy development requires repeated progress in data collection, dissemination, analysis and policy testing. Sustainable use of quality of life standards over time is a challenge.

ο Structural barriers can hamper integration. For example, government agencies and ministries tend to focus on the outcomes for which they are directly responsible, even within the quality of life framework. This may cause marginalization of dimensions that, although important to people's lives, are not under the responsibility of any government agencies.

ο Causation in the context of public policy is a difficult issue. The availability of ideal experimental conditions for determining causes and consequences is rare when we try to improve people's lives in a fair and balanced manner through key national policy decisions.

Collecting the right types of data at the right times is crucial to building the necessary evidence base. Policies that target specific outcomes may unintentionally affect a wide range of other factors or may cause unintended consequences. Another challenge arises in the case of quality of life standards because as a result of the multidimensional nature of quality of life it will be challenging to identify and clarify the interrelationship between the various measures of quality of life.