Capabilities, Subjective Wellbeing and Public Policy: A Response to Austin (2016)
- 308 Downloads
It has recently been claimed that Sen’s capabilities approach can be used to advise the formation of public policy related to human wellbeing. It has also been proposed that measures of subjective wellbeing are inadequate for this purpose. These ideas are examined in relation to capabilities, using the same reference material as the proposing author. The theory of subjective wellbeing homeostasis is used as the alternative framework by which to understand the potential of subjective wellbeing for policy advice. This examination reveals an almost complete lack of evidence that capability measurement could fulfill the suggested role. While subjective wellbeing has more potential for this purpose, caveats to its employment for policy advice are also evident.
KeywordsCapabilities Subjective wellbeing Public policy Measurement Homeostasis Theory
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2013S1A3A2054622).
- Anand, P., Santos, C., & Smith, R. (2009b). The measurement of capabilities. In K. Basu & R. Kanbur (Eds.), Festschrift for Prof Amartya Sen (pp. 283–310). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1964). Causal inferences in nonexperimental research. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
- Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H. Appley (Ed.), Adaptation-level theory: A symposium (pp. 287–302). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- 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 (pp. 145–164). Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
- 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. http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/CASEpaper120.pdf.
- 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 (pp. 148–170). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Cummins, R. A. (2013). Subjective wellbeing homeostasis. In D. S. Dunn (Ed.), Oxford bibliographies Online. http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199828340/obo-9780199828340-0167.xml.
- Cummins, R. A., Woerner, J., Weinberg, M., Collard, J., Hartley-Clark, L., & Horfiniak, K. (2013). Australian Unity Wellbeing Index: -Report 30.0—The wellbeing of Australians: Social media, personal achievement, and work. Melbourne: Australian Centre on Quality of Life, School of Psychology, Deakin University. http://www.acqol.com.au/reports/survey-reports/survey-030-report-part-b.pdf.
- Cummins, R. A., et al. (2017). Why self-report variables inter-correlate: The role of Homeostatically Protected Mood. Journal of Wellbeing Assessment (submitted).Google Scholar
- DEFRA. (2005). Securing the future: delivering UK sustainable development strategy. London: Department for Environment, food and Rural Affairs.Google Scholar
- Donovan, N., & Halpern, D. (2002). Life satisfaction: The state of knowledge and implications for Government. London: Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit.Google Scholar
- Easterlin, R. A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In P. David & M. Reder (Eds.), Nations and households in economic growth (pp. 89–125). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Eiser, J. R., & Stroebe, W. (1972). Categorization and social judgement. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Equalities and Human Rights Commission. (2007). Fairness and freedom-The final report of the equalities review. London: Author.Google Scholar
- Gittins, R. (2010). The happy economist: Happiness for the hard-headed. Melbourne: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
- Helson, H. (1964). Adaptation-level theory: An experimental and systematic approach to behavior. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
- Huxley, A. (1932). Brave new world. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
- International Wellbeing Group. (2013). Personal wellbeing index manual (Vol. 5). Melbourne: Deakin University. http://www.acqol.com.au/iwbg/index.php.
- International Wellbeing Group. (2016). http://www.acqol.com.au/iwbg/wellbeing-index/pwi-a-english.pdf.
- Land, K. C., Lamb, V. L., & Zang, X. (2017). Objective and subjective indices of well-being: resolving the Easterlin paradox. In G. Brule & F. Maggino (Eds.), Metrics of subjective well-being. New York: Springer. (in press).Google Scholar
- Lepper, J., & McAndrew, S. (2008). Developments in the economics of well-being: Treasury Economic Working Paper 4. London: HM Treasury.Google Scholar
- Merriam-Webster. (2016). Online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com.
- Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state and utopia. Malden, MA: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- O’Donnell, G., Deaton, A., Durand, M., Halpern, D., & Layard, R. (2014). Wellbeing and policy. London: Legatum Institute.Google Scholar
- Office for National Statistics. (2011). Measuring subjective well-being for public policy: Recommendations on measures. Newport: Office for National Statistics.Google Scholar
- Office for National Statistics. (2012). Measuring national well-being: Life in the UK 2012. Newport: Office for National Statistics. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/wellbeing/measuring-national-well-being/first-annual-report-on-measuringnational-well-being/art-measuring-national-well-being-annual-report.html.
- 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
- Rawls, J. (1972). A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Rawls, J. (1999). The law of peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
- Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
- Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the Wealth of Nations (1 edn, Vol. 2). London: W. Strahan. http://books.google.bg/books?id=C5dNAAAAcAAJ&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q&f=true Retrieved Sept 09 2014.
- Srinivasan, T. (1994). Human development-A new paradign or reinvention of the wheel? American Economic Review, 84(2), 238–243.Google Scholar
- Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2010). Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress. Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/rapport_anglais.pdf.
- Sugden, R. (1993). Welfare, resources, and capabilities: a review of inequality reexamined by Amartya Sen. Journal of Economic literature, 31, 1947–1962.Google Scholar
- Tinkler, L., & Hicks, S. (2011). Measuring subjective well-being. UK: Office for National Statistics http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/user-guidance/well-being/wellbeing-knowledge-bank/understanding-wellbeing/measuring-subjective-well-being.pdf.
- Weijers, D. (2013). Intuitive biases in judgments about thought experiments: The experience machine revisited. Philosophical Writings, 41(1), 17–31.Google Scholar
- WHO Regional Office for Europe. (2012). Measurement of and target-setting for well-being; Second meeting of the expert group, Paris, 25–26 June 2012. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.Google Scholar