Importance Recently, the interest in the idea that economic growth is an insufficient and inadequate indicator of human progress has renewed. The researchers conclude that it is time to shift the emphasis from measuring the economic production to measuring the well-being. The term well-being is interchangeably used with such terms as quality of life, happiness, life satisfaction, prosperity. Objectives The aim of the research is to scrutinize basic approaches to measuring the well-being. Methods To accomplish this objective, I analyzed scientific and methodological papers, original reports of various official bodies, organizations, research groups that developed approaches to measure well-being on a regular basis. Results I identified two main approaches to measuring the well-being, i.e. construction of data panel and construction of indices that correct or replace GDP (an index of subjective well-being, a composite index of well-being). The benefit of indices is their visualization. However, the construction of only one measure entails the problem of weighing the index components. Data panel is a more detailed and impartial approach, though it is unsuitable to assess changes in the well-being over time and gives a mixed picture, when some well-being components show improvement, and others – deterioration. Conclusions and Relevance A solution that would be able to reconcile the supporters of the two approaches to measure the well-being could be the simultaneous construction of both a data panel and a composite index. Weighing the different components of well-being could be conducted with involvement of all stakeholders.
Keywords: living standards, well-being, human progress, research method, quality of life index
References:
Van den Bergh J. The GDP Paradox. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2009, vol. 30, iss. 2, pp. 117–135. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2008.12.001
Wilson J., Tyedmers P. Rethinking What Counts. Perspectives on Well-being and Genuine Progress Indicator Metrics from a Canadian Viewpoint. Sustainability, 2013, no. 5(1), pp. 187–202. doi: 10.3390/su5010187
Easterlin R. Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence. In: Nations and Household in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz, David P., Reder M. (Eds). New York, Academic Press, 1974.
Cobb C.W., Rixford C. Lessons Learned from the History of Social Indicators. San Francisco, Redefining Progress, 1998.
Nordhaus W., Tobin J. Is Growth Obsolete? In: The Measurement of Economic and Social Performance, Moss. M. (Ed.), NBER Book Series Studies in Income and Wealth, 1973, pp. 509–564.
Daly H., Cobb J. For the Common Good. Boston, Beacon Press, 1989, 492 p.
Talberth J., Cobb C., Slattery N. The Genuine Progress Indicator 2006. A Tool for Sustainable Development. Oakland, CA, Redefining Progress, 2007, 33 p.
Lancy A., Gruen N. Constructing the Herald/Age – Lateral Economics Index of Australia's Well-being. The Australian Economic Review, 2013, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 92–102. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8462.2013.12000.x
Fleche S., Smith C., Sorsa P. Exploring Determinants of Subjective Well-being in OECD Countries: Evidence from the World Value Survey. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 2011, no. 921. doi: 10.1787/5kg0k6zlcm5k-en
Deaton A. The Financial Crisis and the Well-being of Americans. Oxford University Press, Oxford Economic Papers, 2012, no. 64(1), pp. 1–26. doi: 10.3386/w17128
Diener E., Lucas R., Schimmack U., Helliwell J.F. Well-being for Public Policy (Oxford Positive Psychology Series). Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009, 256 p.
Dolan P., Layard R., Metcalfe R. Measuring Subjective Wellbeing for Public Policy: Recommendations on Measures. CEP Special Reports. Centre for Economic Performance. London School of Economics and Political Science, 2011.
Kroll C. Measuring Progress and Well-being: Achievements and Challenges of a New Global Movement. Berlin, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2011. Available at: Link.
Aivazyan S.A. [About the methodology of measuring the synthetic categories of life quality of the population]. Ekonomika i matematicheskie metody = Economics and Mathematical Methods, 2003, no. 2, pp. 33–53. (In Russ.)
Akhremenko A., Evtushenko S. [The quality of life of Russian regions: A politological aspect, methodology and methods of measurement]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 12: Politicheskie nauki = Bulletin of Moscow University, Series 12: Political Science, 2010, no. 1, pp. 67–83. (In Russ.)
Veenhoven R. World Database of Happiness: Continuous Register of Research on Subjective Appreciation of Life. In: Challenges for Quality of Life in the Contemporary World: Advances in Quality-of-Life Studies, Theory and Research, Glatzer W., VonBelow S. and Stoffregen M. (Eds.). Dordrecht, the Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Social Indicators Research Series, 2004, vol. 24.
Gregory R. Summing up. In: Eckersley R. (Ed.) Measuring Progress: Is Life Getting Better? Melbourne, CSIRO Publishing, 1998, pp. 365–370.
Aivazyan S.A. Integral'nye indikatory kachestva zhizni naseleniya: ikh postroenie i ispol'zovanie v sotsial'no-ekonomicheskom upravlenii i mezhregional'nykh sopostavleniyakh [Integral indicators of quality of life: Their construction and utilisation in socio-economic governance and inter-regional comparisons]. Moscow, CEMI RAS Publ., 2000, 118 p.
Saisana M., Tarantola S., Saltelli A. Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Techniques as Tools for the Quality Assessment of Composite Indicators. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 2005, no. 168(2), pp. 307–323. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2005.00350.x
Fukuda-Parr S. The Human Development Paradigm: Operationalizing Sen's Ideas on Capabilities. Feminist Economics, 2003, vol. 9, iss. 2-3, pp. 301–317. doi: 10.1080/1354570022000077980
