Using Capabilities as an Alternative Indicator for Well-being
- 559 Downloads
This paper examines the potential of self-reported information on capabilities as an alternative indicator and aggregator for well-being. We survey a population of 18 year old first-year Bachelor students in applied economics and business studies and demonstrate a way in which capabilities can be measured on the level of life domains as well as on the general level of ‘life as a whole’. The data confirm the theoretical hypothesis that the set of capabilities is larger than the achieved functionings. We investigate and compare which variables influence general capabilities and satisfaction with life. We find that both concepts are equally depending on the ‘mood of the day’. On the other hand, we find some diverging influences that call for a debate on the (policy) relevance of different well-being concepts and their determining variables. The capabilities interpretation of well-being points to an important role of the parents (especially when they are divorced or rather strict) while the information on satisfaction is more related to personal and situational characteristics (such as not being single or the number of family visits).
KeywordsWell-being Capabilities Life satisfaction Measurement of well-being Survey Students
We would like to thank Tom Florin and Roeland Sercu for facilitating the data-gathering, an anonymous referee and the participants at the ‘New Directions in Welfare’ conference in Oxford (2009) for valuable comments and suggestions. This research benefits from the project WELLBEBE (SD/TA/09A) off the Belgian Science Policy.
- Alexander, J. M. (2009). Capabilities and social justice, the political philosophy of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- Boarini, R., Johansson, A., & d’Ercole, M. M. (2006). Alternative measures of well-being. OECD Social, Employment and Migration. Working paper no. 33, 37 p.Google Scholar
- Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Deneulin, S. (2009). An introduction to the human development and capability approach. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
- Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2006). Review of research on the influences on personal well-being and application to policy making, Report for Defra, 193 p.Google Scholar
- Easterlin, R. (2005). Building a better theory of well-being. In L. Bruni & L. Porta (Eds.), Economics and happiness, framing the analysis (pp. 29–61). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Fleurbaey, M. (2008). Fairness, responsibility and welfare. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis (5th ed.). US: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Kaufman, A. (2006). Capabilities equality, basic issues and problems. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Kuklys, W. (2005). Amartya Sen’s capability approach. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Layard, R. (2005). Happiness, lessons from a new science. London: Allan Lane.Google Scholar
- O’Sullivan, G. (2010). The relationship between hope, eustress, self-efficacy and life satisfaction among undergraduates. Social Indicators Research. doi: 10.1007/s11205-010-9662z.
- Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2008). Research methods for business students. Harlow: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1984). The living standard. Oxford Economic Papers, 36, 74–90.Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. Nussbaum & A. K. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
- Verbeek, M. (2000). A guide to modern econometrics. West-Sussex: Wiley.Google Scholar