Table 5

Feeling of well-being (SWB3), environment and public services

Model 1Model 2Model 3
VariableCoefStd.ErrCoefStd.ErrCoefStd.Err
Income group 20.460*0.1850.5266**0.2290.641**0.305
Income group 30.2150.1800.3761*0.2200.2750.279
Income group 40.1530.1800.1610.2190.2230.302
Income group 50.1430.1720.393*0.2130.2380.277
# Children−0.878***0.260−1.085***0.327−0.5930.390
# Children squared0.510***0.1900.644***0.2360.4050.288
Laugh0.467***0.0880.354***0.1010.247*0.133
Service sport 2−0.327**0.1650.2870.2010.3290.264
Service sport 30.688***0.1750.587***0.2150.509*0.277
Service culture 20.651***0.1990.622**0.25280.619*0.329
Service culture 31.032***0.2080.912***0.2650.934***0.340
Service transport 20.08960.146
Service transport 30.630***0.151
Environment 20.424***0.157
Environment 31.167***0.213
# Observations984642428
# Parameters273030
Log-likelihood−751.067−468.234−314.255
Pseudo R20.1220.1420.144
AIC1556.13996.48688.51

Note(s): Model 1 corresponds to regression with socioeconomic, lifestyle variables and externalities from public services (Sport, Culture). Model 2 corresponds to regression with the same variables as in Model 1 and with an additional variable on public transport (Transport), reducing observations from 984 to 642. Model 3 corresponds to regression with the same variables as in Model 1 but with environmental externality (Environment). If we keep public transport (Transport) in Model 3, there are only 220 observations left. All explanatory variables are exogenous based on the variable addition test (Wooldridge, 2014). Significance levels: *10%, ** 5% and *** 1%. Other nonsignificant variables used in the estimations are Median income, Age, House Ownership,Female, Engagement, SWB_indi_coll. The complete table with all variables is reported in  Appendix 2 (Table A4)

Source(s): Table by the authors

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal