Marketing social, indicadores de bienestar y ODS. Análisis de la cuenta oficial del gobierno de España @desdelamoncloa

  1. Galiano Coronil, Araceli 1
  2. Ortega Gil, Manuela 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Cádiz
    info

    Universidad de Cádiz

    Cádiz, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04mxxkb11

Journal:
Retos: Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía

ISSN: 1390-8618,  1390-6291

Year of publication: 2019

Volume: 9

Issue: 18

Pages: 219-238

Type: Article

DOI: 10.17163/RET.N18.2019.03 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Retos: Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía

Abstract

Social platforms are new instruments for gathering information and raising awareness, an opportunity for social marketing to use these resources in decision making of governance. Through these platforms, such as Twitter, governments can obtain useful information from other users in making decisions to improve the welfare of society and to promote sustainable development. It can also raise awareness among citizens about those policies that are necessary for welfare and sustainable development. Therefore, in this work it is made a descriptive study of the content of the messages published by @desdelamoncloa, the official account of the Spanish government, and its relation with the sustainable development objectives (SDG) and the Sustainable Welfare Indicator. Using the methodology of content analysis, from the qualitative and quantitative perspectives, the results show that the most published SDGs are not the most popular ones. Likewise, the conversational messages, in which well-being is related to gender equality and inequalities, stand out. In addition, it has been found that the impact has been greater in the SDGs included in the Welfare element.

Bibliographic References

  • Aboelmaged, M. (2018). Predicting the success of Twitter in healthcare: A synthesis of perceived quality, usefulness and flow experience by healthcare professionals. Online Information Review, 42(6), 898-922. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-01-2017-0018
  • Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo (AECID). (2019). La Agenda 2030. El reto de los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible, 15 de mayo del 2019. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/29ZqPSq
  • Andreasen, A. (1994). Social Marketing: Its Definition and Domain. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 13(1), 108-114. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F074391569401300109
  • Angulo, N. (2010). Pobreza, medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible. Nómadas,Revista Crítica de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas, 26(2), 1-11.
  • Asheim, G. (2010). The relationship between welfare measures and indicators of sustainable development. En T. Aronsson & K.-G. Löfgren (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Accounting (pp. 237-256). England: Edward Elgar Publishing LTD. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849805704
  • UN General Assembly (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York, Estados Unidos: United Nations.
  • Bain, J., & Chaban, N. (2017). An emerging EU strategic narrative? Twitter communication during the EU's sustainable energy week. Comparative European Politics, 15(1), 135-155. https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2016.17
  • Bernhardt, J., Mays, D., & Hall, A. (2012). Social marketing at the right place and right time with new media. Journal of Social Marketing, 2(2), 130-137. https://doi.org/10.1108/20426761211243964
  • Chisholm, E., & O’Sullivan, K. (2017). Using Twitter to Explore (un)Healthy Housing: Learning from the #Characterbuildings Campaign in New Zealand. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 14(11), 1424. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390%2Fijerph14111424
  • Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2011). International happiness: A new view on the measure of performance. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(1), 6-22. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.25.1.6
  • Chen, J., Goldstein, M., Asch, S., Mackey, L., & Altman, R. (2017). Using social media to monitor mental health discussions-evidence from Twitter. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 24(3), 496-502. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocw133
  • Chua, H., Allem, P., Unger, J., Cruz, T., Akbarpour, M., & Kirkpatrick, M. (2019). Strategies to find audience segments on Twitter for e-cigarette education campaigns. Addictive Behaviors, 91, 222-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.11.015
  • Colditz, J., Welling, J., Smith, N., James, A., & Primack, B. (2019). World Vaping Day: Contextualizing vaping culture in online social media. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(2), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817702753
  • Costanza, R., Daly, L., Fioramonti, L., Giovannini, E., Kubiszewski, I., Mortensen, L. F., & Wilkinson, R. (2016). Modelling and measuring sustainable wellbeing in connection with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Ecological Economics, 130, 350-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.07.009
  • Costanza, R., McGlade, J., Lovins, H., & Kubiszewski, I. (2014). An overarching goal for the UN sustainable development goals. Solutions, 5(4), 13-16.
  • Coulthard, S., Johnson, D., & McGregor, J. A. (2011). Poverty, sustainability and human wellbeing: a social wellbeing approach to the global fisheries crisis. Global Environmental Change, 21(2),. 453-463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.003
  • Di Tella, R. D., MacCulloch, R. J., & Oswald, A. J. (2003). The macroeconomics of happiness. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 809-827. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465303772815745
  • Di Tella, R., Haisken-De New, J., & MacCulloch, R. (2010). Happiness adaptation to income and to status in an individual panel. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 76(3), 834-852. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2010.09.016
  • Di Tella, R., MacCulloch, R. J., & Oswald, A. J. (2001). Preferences over inflation and unemployment: Evidence from surveys of happiness. American economic review, 91(1), 335-341. https://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.1.335
  • Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2009). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist, 61(4), 305-314. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.305
  • DiMaria, C. (2019). Sustainability, welfare and efficiency of nations. Quality & Quantity, 53(3), 1141-1163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0809-3
  • Domegan, C., Kollins, K., Stead, M., McHugh, P., & Hughes, M. (2013). Value co-creation in social marketing: functional or fanciful. Journal of Social Marketing, 3(3), 239-256. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSOCM-03-2013-0020
  • Dooley, J., Jones, S., & Iverson, D. (2012). Web 2.0: an assessment of social marketing principles. Journal of Social Marketing, 2(3), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1108/20426761211265195
  • Duarte, T., & Jiménez, R. E. (2007). Aproximación a la teoría del bienestar. Scientia et Technica, 13(37), 305-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.22517/23447214.4107
  • Durana, D., Artenea, A., Gogana, L., & Durana, V. (2015). The Objectives of Sustainable Development - Ways to Achieve Welfare. Procedia Economics and Finance, 26, 812-817. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00852-7
  • Easterlin, R. A., McVey, L. A., Switek, M., Sawangfa, O., & Zweig, J. S. (2010). The happiness-income paradox revisited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(52), 22463-22468. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1015962107
  • Fisher, C. (2010). Happiness at work. International journal of management reviews, 12(4), 384-412. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00270.x
  • Fownes, J., Yu, C., & Margolin, D. (2018). Twitter and climate change. Sociology Compass, 12(6), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12587
  • Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2018). Economics of happiness. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75807-7
  • Froding, K., Eriksson, C., Elander, I., & Geidne, J. (2007). Partnership for healthy neighbourhoods: City Networking in Multilevel Context. European Journal of Public Health 15(4), 317-331. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0969776408095108
  • Gallopín, G. (2003). Sostenibilidad y desarrollo sostenible: un enfoque sistémico. Santiago de Chile: CEPAL.
  • Gerdtham, U. G., & Johannesson, M. (2001). The relationship between happiness, health, and socio-economic factors: results based on Swedish microdata. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 30(6), 553-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-5357(01)00118-4
  • Golbeck, J., & Hansen, D. (2014). A method for computing political preference among Twitter followers. Social Networks, 36, 177-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2013.07.004
  • Griggs, D., Stafford-Smith, M., Gaffney, O., Rockström, J., Öhman, M. C., Shyamsundar, P., ... & Noble, I. (2013). Policy: Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature, 495(7441), 305-307. https://doi.org/10.1038/495305a
  • Hestres, L. (2014). Preaching to the choir: internet-mediated advocacy, issue public mobilization, and climate change. New Media & Society, 16(2), 323-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813480361
  • IAB Spain & Elogia (2018). VIII Estudio anual de redes sociales 2018. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2J95UhE
  • Kotler, P. (2011). Reinventing marketing to manage the environmental imperative. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 132-135. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.132
  • Kotler, P., & Levy, S. (1969a). Broadening the Concept of Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 33(1), 10-15. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F002224296903300103
  • Kotler, P., & Levy, S. (1969b). A New Form of Marketing Myopia: Rejoinder to Professor Luck. Journal of Marketing, 33(3), 55-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/1248483
  • Krippendorff, K. (1990). Metodología de análisis de contenido. Teoría y práctica. Barcelona, España: Paidós Comunicación.
  • Liu, H. Y., Kobernus, M., Broday, D., & Bartonova, A. (2014). A conceptual approach to a citizens’ observatory–supporting community-based environmental governance. Environmental Health, 13(1), 107. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-13-107
  • Luttmer, E. F. (2005). Neighbors as negatives: Relative earnings and well-being. The Quarterly journal of economics, 120(3), 963-1002. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/120.3.963
  • McGregor, S., & Mourao, R. (2016). Talking Politics on Twitter: Gender, Elections, and Social Networks. Social Media + Society, 2(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2056305116664218
  • Menéndez, A.; Saura, J., & Álvarez, C. (2018). Understanding #WorldEnvironmentDay User Opinions in Twitter: A Topic-Based Sentiment Analysis Approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(11), 2537. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112537
  • Mikulcic, H., Klemes, J., & Duic, N. (2016). Shaping sustainable development to support human welfare. Clean Technologies and Enviromental Policy, 18(6), 1633-1639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-016-1269-x
  • Moll de Alba, E. (2015). Análisis comparativo de la utilización de Twitter como canal de comunicación para las principales editoriales estadounidenses y españolas (tesis doctoral). Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, España.
  • Momete, D. (2017). Rational Development as a Sustainable Progress Welfare Vector: A Cross-Country Analysis. Sustainable Development, 25(3), 189-199. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1645
  • Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Estados Unidos: Sage.
  • Pearce, W.; Holmberg, K.; Hellsten, I. y Nerlich, B. (2014). Climate change on Twitter: topics, communities and conversations about the 2013 IPCC Working Group 1 report. PLoS One, 9(4), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094785
  • Pershad, Y., Hangge, P., Albadawi, H., & Oklu, R. (2018). Social Medicine: Twitter in Healthcare. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 7(6), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm7060121
  • Ravina Ripoll, R., Villena Manzanares, F., & Gutiérrez Montoya, G. A. (2017). Una aproximación teórica para mejorar los resultados de innovación en las empresas desde la perspectiva del “Happiness Management”. Retos. Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 7(14), 113-129. https://doi.org/10.17163/ret.n14.2017.06
  • Rodrigo-Cano, D., Picó, M.J., & Dimuro, G. (2019). Los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible como marco para la acción y la intervención social y ambiental. Retos. Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 9(17), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.17163/ret.n17.2019.02
  • Rodríguez, R., & Ureña, D. (2011). Diez razones para el uso de Twitter como herramienta en la comunicación política y electoral. Comunicación y pluralismo, (10), 89-116.
  • Rogers, D. S., Duraiappah, A. K., Antons, D. C., Munoz, P., Bai, X., Fragkias, M., & Gutscher, H. (2012). A vision for human well-being: transition to social sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(1), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.01.013
  • Rojas, M. (2009). Economía de la felicidad: hallazgos relevantes respecto al ingreso y el bienestar. El trimestre económico, 76(303), 537-573. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20857218
  • Saxton, G., & Waters, R. (2014). What do Stakeholders Like on Facebook? Examining Public Reactions to Nonprofit Organizations’ Informational, Promotional, and Community-Building Messages. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(3), 280-299. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.908721
  • Sammarco, P. (2018). V informe del uso de las redes sociales en España, Social Media Family (SMF), 20 de febrero del 2019. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2BR2FHL
  • Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. P. (2008). Informe de la Comisión sobre la Medición del Desarrollo Económico y del Progreso Social. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2v0ZJmy
  • Urbina, M., Gutiérrez, L., Ermani, R., Lozano, R., & Finkelman, J. (2017). La transición de los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio a los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible desde la perspectiva de los determinantes sociales de la salud y la equidad en salud. Gac Med Mex, 153(6), 697-730.
  • Vergara, C., & Ortiz, D. (2016). Desarrollo sostenible: enfoques desde las ciencias económicas. Apuntes del CENES, 35(62), 15-52. https://doi.org/10.19053/22565779.4240
  • Zhang, Z., & Ahmed, W. (2019). A comparison of information sharing behaviors across 379 health conditions on Twitter. International Journal of Public Health, 64(3), 431-440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-018-1192-5
Data source: Dialnet