Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.open.ac.uk/ikd/projects/capabilities-measurement/ .

References

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, J. (1982). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. London: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergsma, A., Poot, G., & Liefbroer, A. (2008). Happiness in the garden of Epicurus. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(3), 397–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchflower, D., & Oswald, A. (2004). Money, sex and happiness: An empirical study. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 106(3), 393–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  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, 2006. 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.

  • 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 

  • Cameron, D. (2010). Wellbeing speech, 25 November 2010. http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/pm-speech-on-well-being/.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, S. (2010). Britons’ wellbeing stable through economic crisis. London, Gallup 2010. http://www.gallup.com/poll/144938/britons-wellbeing-stable-economic-crisis.aspx.

  • Dean, H. (2009). Critiquing capabilities: The distractions of a beguiling concept. Critical Social Policy, 29(2), 261–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton, A. (2012). The financial crisis and the well-being of Americans. Oxford Economic Papers-New Series, 64(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Defra. (2005). Securing the future: Delivering UK sustainable development strategy. London: Department for Environment, food and Rural Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Diener, E., & Ryan, K. (2009). Subjective well-being: A general overview. South African Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 391–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, P., & Peasgood, T. (2008). Measuring well-being for public policy: Preferences or experiences? Journal of Legal Studies, 37, S5–S31.

    Article  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 

  • Doyal, L., & Gough, I. (1991). A theory of human need. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Easterlin, R. (2001). Subjective well-being and economic analysis: A brief introduction. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 45(3), 225–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EHRC. (2007). Fairness and freedom—The final report of the equalities review. London: Equalities and Human Rights Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, S., & Tiwari, M. (2014). The capability approach: From theory to practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. P., & Sarin, R. (1997). Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 375–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, R. F. (1968). Speech: Remarks at the University of Kansas, 18 March 1968. http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Research-Aids/Ready-Reference/RFK-Speeches/Remarks-of-Robert-F-Kennedy-at-the-University-of-Kansas-March-18-1968.aspx.

  • Krishnakumar, J., & Ballon, P. (2008). Estimating basic capabilities: A structural equation model applied to Bolivia. World Development, 36(6), 992–1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepper, J., & McAndrew, S. (2008). Developments in the economics of well-being. London, Treasury Economic Working Paper 4, HM Treasury.

  • Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological Science, 7(3), 186–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirowski, P. (2013). Never let a serious crisis go to waste: How neliberalism survived the financial meltdown, London/New York: Verso Books.

  • Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state and utopia. Malden, MA: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (1997). Capabilities and human rights. Fordham Law Review, 66(2), 273–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • OECD. (2013). How’s life? 2013. Paris, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. http://www.oecd.org/statistics/how-s-life-23089679.htm.

  • O’Neill, J. (1993). Ecology, policy and politics: Human well-being and the natural world. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, J. (2006a). Citizenship, wellbeing and sustainability: Epicurus or Aristotle? Analyse and Kritik, 28, 158–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, J. (2006b). Happiness: Lessons for a new science. New Political Economy, 11(3), 447–450.

  • 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 

  • 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.

  • ONS. (2011b). Measuring subjective well-being for public policy: Recommendations on measures. Newport: Office for National Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • ONS. (2011c). Measuring what matters: National statistician’s reflections on the national debate on measuring national well-being. ONS: Newport.

    Google Scholar 

  • ONS. (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-measuring-national-well-being/art-measuring-national-well-being-annual-report.html.

  • Powdthavee, N. (2010). The happiness equation: The surprising economics of our most valuable asset. London: Icon Books.

    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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, K. (2012). Measuring wellbeing: towards sustainability?. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (2002). Response to commentaries. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37, 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (2004). Capabilities, lists, and public reason: Continuing the conversation. Feminist Economics, 10(3), 77–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, T. (1994). Human development—A new paradign or reinvention of the wheel? American Economic Review, 84(2), 238–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (2009). GDP fetishism. The Economists’ Voice, 6(8), 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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/.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D. (2011). Wellbeing and welfare: A psychosocial analysis of being well and doing well enough. Journal of Social Policy, 40, 777–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, M., & Kelly, G. (2013). Is everybody happy? The politics and measurement of national wellbeing. Policy and Politics, 41(2), 139–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treasury, H. M. (2010). Spending Review 2010 (CM7942). London, October 2010.

  • 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.

  • Veenhoven, R. (2005). Happiness in hardship. In L. Bruni & P. L. Porta (Eds.), Economics and happiness (pp. 243–266). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Weijers, D. (2013). Intuitive biases in judgments about thought experiments: The experience machine revisited. Philosophical Writings, 41(1), 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Research, University of Manchester, Room 2.11, Humanities Bridgeford Street, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK

    Annie Austin

Authors
  1. Annie Austin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annie Austin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Austin, A. On Well-Being and Public Policy: Are We Capable of Questioning the Hegemony of Happiness?. Soc Indic Res 127, 123–138 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0955-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0955-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation