In this fourth edition of “The Well-being of Children in the UK”, Jonathan Bradshaw and colleagues at the University of York have once again challenged researchers, policymakers and practitioners to consider both the absolute and relative outcomes for children in the UK. They do so across a rich set of indicators and demographics that suggest policy modifiability, yet seem resistant to change. It is not a happy read; with predominantly frustratingly slow progress in terms of the wellbeing (positive and negative) of children in the UK over time, and compared with other countries. Bradshaw has been leading the child wellbeing indicator effort in the UK and internationally for the past 30 + years and was instrumental in the development of the UNICEF reporting framework which informs (but interestingly was not used) for the indicator reporting in this book (UNICEF, 2017). Indeed, it is this framework that has formed the basis for the follow up UNICEF reports that have provided critical data for those advocating for children in many countries.

The chapters themselves are an attempt to balance the positive and negative aspects of children's health, development and wellbeing; although, as is often the case, the reporting is dominated by risk factors and adverse outcomes. This continues to be a challenge in reporting children's wellbeing where the ability to report on positive subjective and objective measures of wellbeing is limited by the research and measures available at scale. In this edition, there are 11 core topic chapters: demography, child poverty and deprivation, physical health, subjective well-being and mental health, education, housing and the environment for children, children's time and space, children and young people in care, child maltreatment, childcare and early years; and children, crime and correction. These are all topics with a strong focus on issues of social policy interest.

There are some interesting gaps. For instance, the chapter on subjective well-being and mental health is an example of the tension in reporting subjective wellbeing together with mental illness (perceived potentially as opposites). However, there is an emerging research supporting mental health as a positive construct – separate from wellbeing (Kvalsvig et al., Reference Kvalsvig, O'Connor, Redmond and Goldfeld2014, Rougeaux et al., Reference Rougeaux, Pearce, Deighton, Law and Hope2017). This has been conceived as part of a dual continuum enabling children to have both mental illness and mental wellbeing. Publications in Australia and UK suggest these measures may be implementable at scale, although are not yet available. In another example, despite what we know about the importance of the early years and child development, there is a paucity of child development data available in most countries (UNICEF, 2013). There is a clear dissonance between the evidence for early childhood development (ECD), clearly summarised in chapter eleven, and the data available to demonstrate impact (i.e. reporting is limited to Early Childhood Education and Care attendance) with few data available on quality of services, the home learning environment or ECD itself. This issue may gain traction with the need to report ECD for the 2015 Sustainability Development Goals (Goal 4).

What this book clearly highlights in its international comparisons is that high income countries could and should be doing better. The cross country comparisons mean that researchers and policymakers in other high income countries should be regarding their own results in comparison to the UK, with its considerable social and welfare policies, and asking why the UK does well in some areas and not on others. Within the UK there are hints at policies that have shown regional success e.g. differences in impact of education policies for low income children (based on free lunches) in London versus other areas (chapter six), suggesting that regional reporting may be increasingly important for books such as these if they are to have true local utility. Inclusion of a regional analysis of the Sure Start sites over time would be very interesting to determine the potential impact of this enormous UK social policy investment.

Overall this book provides a “deep dive” into the data and UK policies relevant to children's wellbeing. Although targeted to policy makers and service providers, its very strength, being its depth and richness, may preclude its take-up in these arenas. How best to translate this extraordinary richness into a cohesive narrative for policymakers and practitioners remains an ongoing challenge given the complexity of the nexus between policy and outcomes. Interactive web versions of data books and reports in the future may improve the utility of in-depth and rich reporting. Nevertheless this book does and should have importance to postgraduate students particularly those in social policy, public health or education areas of study; providing a vital context both for the UK itself and for the UK's position in the global context. The examples of success through either regional or national policy should generate discussion about what is possible and what needs to be measured into the future. Finally, the next chapter for the UK may well be the impact of “Brexit” on children's wellbeing. No doubt Bradshaw's next book may speak volumes in this regard.