Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 127, Issue 1, pp 123–138 | Cite as

On Well-Being and Public Policy: Are We Capable of Questioning the Hegemony of Happiness?

  • Annie AustinEmail author
Article

Abstract

Measuring the well-being of citizens has become established practice in many advanced democracies. In the move to go beyond GDP, indicators of subjective well-being (SWB) have come to the fore, and are increasingly seen as providing a ‘yardstick’ to guide public policy. A strong version of this position is that SWB can (and should) provide the sole basis on which to design and evaluate public policy. This article argues that the increasing dominance of the subjective definition of well-being is problematic, and amounts to a hegemony of happiness. The article examines the fundamental assumptions behind different accounts of well-being, and develops a critique of the ‘strong position’ that sees SWB as the ultimate guide for public policy. First, the connections between the modern debate and classical schools of thought are discussed, and the strong Benthamite SWB approach is contrasted with the alternative Aristotelian capabilities approach. Next, the article examines current practice, using the UK’s Measuring National Well-being Programme as a case study. Finally, the article concludes that SWB has questionable legitimacy as a summary indicator of objective quality of life, and does not, on its own, provide a reliable metric for public policy. The capabilities approach, which takes a pluralist perspective on well-being and prioritises freedom and opportunity, offers a richer and more useful foundation for policy.

Keywords

Well-being Life satisfaction Happiness Capabilities approach 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to acknowledge Stephen Jeffares, John O’Neill, Ian Bache, Hillel Steiner, Dan Haybron, Nick Shryane, Lindsay Richards, David Bayliss, an anonymous reviewer, and participants the 2014 International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) conference in Berlin for invaluable feedback on earlier drafts.

References

  1. Anand, P., Hunter, G., Carter, I., Dowding, K., Guala, F., & Van Hees, M. (2009a). The development of capability indicators. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10(1), 125–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anand, P., Hunter, G., & Smith, R. (2005). Capabilities and well-being: Evidence based on the Sen–Nussbaum approach to welfare. Social Indicators Research, 74(1), 9–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anand, P., Santos, C., & Smith, R. (2009b). The measurement of capabilities. In K. Basu & R. Kanbur (Eds.), Festschrift for Prof Amartya Sen. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bache, I., & Reardon, L. (2013). An idea whose time has come? Explaining the rise of well-being in British politics. Political Studies, 61(4), 898–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bentham, J. (1982). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  6. Bergsma, A., Poot, G., & Liefbroer, A. (2008). Happiness in the garden of Epicurus. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(3), 397–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biswas-Diener, R., & Diener, E. (2001). Making the best of a bad situation: Satisfaction in the slums of Calcutta. Social Indicators Research, 55, 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blanchflower, D., & Oswald, A. (2004). Money, sex and happiness: An empirical study. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 106(3), 393–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruni, L., & Porta, P. (2005). Introduction. In L. Bruni & P. Porta (Eds.), Economics and happiness: Framing the analysis (pp. 1–28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burchardt, T. (2006). Happiness and social policy: Barking up the right tree in the wrong neck of the woods. In L. Bauld, T. Maltby, & K. Clarke (Eds.), Analysis and debate in social policy, 2006. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  11. Burchardt, T., & Vizard, P. (2007). Definition of equality and framework for measurement: Final recommendations of the Equalities Review Steering Group on Measurement. London, LSE, Centre for the Analysis of Social Exclusion. CASE paper 120.Google Scholar
  12. Burchardt, T., & Vizard, P. (2014). Using the capability approach to evaluate health and care for individuals and groups in England. In S. Ibrahim & M. Tiwari (Eds.), The capability approach: From theory to practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Cameron, D. (2010). Wellbeing speech, 25 November 2010. http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/pm-speech-on-well-being/.
  14. Clark, A., Frijters, P., & Shields, M. (2008). Relative income, happiness, and utility: An explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic Literature, 46(1), 95–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crabtree, S. (2010). Britons’ wellbeing stable through economic crisis. London, Gallup 2010. http://www.gallup.com/poll/144938/britons-wellbeing-stable-economic-crisis.aspx.
  16. Dean, H. (2009). Critiquing capabilities: The distractions of a beguiling concept. Critical Social Policy, 29(2), 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deaton, A. (2012). The financial crisis and the well-being of Americans. Oxford Economic Papers-New Series, 64(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Defra. (2005). Securing the future: Delivering UK sustainable development strategy. London: Department for Environment, food and Rural Affairs.Google Scholar
  19. Deneulin, S., & McGregor, J. A. (2010). The capability approach and the politics of a social conception of wellbeing. European Journal of Social Theory, 13(4), 501–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting the subjectuve well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 851–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Diener, E., Lucas, R., & Oishi, S. (2009). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In S. Lopez & C. Snyder (Eds.), The handbook of positive pyschology (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Diener, E., & Ryan, K. (2009). Subjective well-being: A general overview. South African Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 391–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dolan, P., & Peasgood, T. (2008). Measuring well-being for public policy: Preferences or experiences? Journal of Legal Studies, 37, S5–S31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Donovan, N., & Halpern, D. (2002). Life satisfaction: The state of knowledge and implications for Government. London: Prime Minister's Strategy Unit.Google Scholar
  26. Doyal, L., & Gough, I. (1991). A theory of human need. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Durand, M., & Smith, C. (2013). The OECD Better Life Initiative: How’s Life? and the Measurement of Well-being World Statistics Conference, Hong Kong, August 26, 2013.Google Scholar
  28. Easterlin, R. (2001). Subjective well-being and economic analysis: A brief introduction. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 45(3), 225–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. EHRC. (2007). Fairness and freedom—The final report of the equalities review. London: Equalities and Human Rights Commission.Google Scholar
  30. EHRC. (2009). From safety net to springboard: A new approach to care and support for all based on equality and human rights. http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/safetynet_springboard.pdf.
  31. Hay, C. (2001). The ‘Crisis’ of Keynesianism and the rise of neo-liberalism in Britain: An ideational institutionalist approach. In J. Campbell & O. Pedersen (Eds.), The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis (pp. 193–218). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Headey, B., & Wearing, A. (1989). Personality, life events, and subjective well-being—Toward a dynamic equilibrium-model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 731–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ibrahim, S., & Tiwari, M. (2014). The capability approach: From theory to practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  35. Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B., Schreiber, C. A., & Redelmeier, D. A. (1993). When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 4(6), 401–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. P., & Sarin, R. (1997). Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 375–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Krishnakumar, J., & Ballon, P. (2008). Estimating basic capabilities: A structural equation model applied to Bolivia. World Development, 36(6), 992–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  40. Lepper, J., & McAndrew, S. (2008). Developments in the economics of well-being. London, Treasury Economic Working Paper 4, HM Treasury.Google Scholar
  41. Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological Science, 7(3), 186–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mirowski, P. (2013). Never let a serious crisis go to waste: How neliberalism survived the financial meltdown, London/New York: Verso Books.Google Scholar
  43. Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state and utopia. Malden, MA: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  44. Nussbaum, M. (1997). Capabilities and human rights. Fordham Law Review, 66(2), 273–300.Google Scholar
  45. Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. O’Donnell, G., Deaton, A., Durand, M., Halpern, D., & Layard, R. (2014). Well-being and policy. Legatum Institute. http://li.com/docs/default-source/commission-on-wellbeing-and-policy/commission-on-wellbeing-and-policy-report—march-2014-pdf-.pdf?sfvrsn=5.
  47. OECD. (2013). How’s life? 2013. Paris, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. http://www.oecd.org/statistics/how-s-life-23089679.htm.
  48. O’Neill, J. (1993). Ecology, policy and politics: Human well-being and the natural world. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. O’Neill, J. (2006a). Citizenship, wellbeing and sustainability: Epicurus or Aristotle? Analyse and Kritik, 28, 158–172.Google Scholar
  50. O’Neill, J. (2006b). Happiness: Lessons for a new science. New Political Economy, 11(3), 447–450.Google Scholar
  51. O’Neill, J. (2008). Sustainability, well-being and consumption: The limits of hedonic approaches. In K. Soper & F. Trentmann (Eds.), Citizenship and consumption (pp. 172–190). London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  52. ONS. (2011a). Measuring national well-being: A discussion paper on domains and measures. Newport, Office for National Statistics. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_240726.pdf.
  53. ONS. (2011b). Measuring subjective well-being for public policy: Recommendations on measures. Newport: Office for National Statistics.Google Scholar
  54. ONS. (2011c). Measuring what matters: National statistician’s reflections on the national debate on measuring national well-being. ONS: Newport.Google Scholar
  55. Powdthavee, N. (2010). The happiness equation: The surprising economics of our most valuable asset. London: Icon Books.Google Scholar
  56. Rawls, J. (1972). A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Rawls, J. (1999). The law of peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Ryff, C. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it—Explorations on the meaning of pyschological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scott, K. (2012). Measuring wellbeing: towards sustainability?. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  61. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Sen, A. (2002). Response to commentaries. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sen, A. (2004). Capabilities, lists, and public reason: Continuing the conversation. Feminist Economics, 10(3), 77–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Srinivasan, T. (1994). Human development—A new paradign or reinvention of the wheel? American Economic Review, 84(2), 238–243.Google Scholar
  65. Stiglitz, J. (2009). GDP fetishism. The Economists’ Voice, 6(8), 1–3.Google Scholar
  66. Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. (2009). Report by the Commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress. www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/.
  67. Sugden, R. (2006). What we desire, what we have reason to desire, whatever we might desire: Mill and Sen on the value of opportunity. Utilitas, 18, 33–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Taylor, D. (2011). Wellbeing and welfare: A psychosocial analysis of being well and doing well enough. Journal of Social Policy, 40, 777–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tomlinson, M., & Kelly, G. (2013). Is everybody happy? The politics and measurement of national wellbeing. Policy and Politics, 41(2), 139–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Treasury, H. M. (2010). Spending Review 2010 (CM7942). London, October 2010.Google Scholar
  71. Trussell Trust. (2013). Biggest ever increase in UK foodbank use: 170% rise in numbers turning to foodbanks in last 12 months. Trussell Trust, 24/4/13. http://www.trusselltrust.org/resources/documents/Press/BIGGEST-EVER-INCREASE-IN-UK-FOODBANK-USE.pdf.
  72. Veenhoven, R. (2005). Happiness in hardship. In L. Bruni & P. L. Porta (Eds.), Economics and happiness (pp. 243–266). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Veenhoven, R., & Hagenaars, A. E. (1989). Did the crisis really hurt? Effects of the 1980–1982 economic recession on satisfaction, mental health and mortality. Rotterdam: Rotterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Weijers, D. (2013). Intuitive biases in judgments about thought experiments: The experience machine revisited. Philosophical Writings, 41(1), 17–31.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cathie Marsh Institute for Social ResearchUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations