nach oben

Social Indicators Research

Erschienen in:

01.10.2013

A Happy Nation? Opportunities and Challenges of Using Subjective Indicators in Policymaking

verfasst von: Christian Kroll, Jan Delhey

Erschienen in: Social Indicators Research | Ausgabe 1/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This article seeks to combine decades of academic research with emerging policy demands by systematically assessing the state of the knowledge on using subjective indicators in public policy. In particular, it outlines opportunities that arise from a new focus on subjective information as a basis for policy decisions and challenges that ought to be overcome. The paper presents pros and cons of using subjective (versus objective) indicators, and it discusses six ways in which information on citizens’ subjective well-being (SWB) can advance the policymaking process: Monitoring progress, informing policy design, policy appraisal, examining the divergence of objective and subjective quality of life, ranking public institutions and allocating resources, as well as informing development strategies and goals. In doing so, best practice examples are presented and put in context. Finally, subjective measures “beyond SWB” are discussed and a new measure for the overall satisfaction with society is suggested. The next frontier for research and practice will be to build on the potential outlined here and to address the deficits in order make the most out of subjective indicators and the unique value they can add to the policymaking process.

Vorheriger Artikel Subjective Social Indicators: Benefits and Limitations for Policy Making—An Introduction to this Special Issue

Nächster Artikel The Multiple Uses of Subjective Well-Being Indicators

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

The main exception here is variable selection in the regression model where experts do influence the result of the model. Hence, it should be done with utmost care and neutrality.

We are grateful to Ruut Veenhoven for this suggestion.

Allardt, E. (1993). Having, loving, being: An alternative to the Swedish model of welfare research. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 88–94). Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRef

Bartolini, S., Bilancini, E., and Pugno, M. (2008). Did the Decline in Social Capital Depress Americans’ Happiness? Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economica Politica, Siena, n. 540—Agosto 2008.

Berger-Schmitt, R. (2002). Considering social cohesion in quality of life assessments. Concept and Measurement. Social Indicators Research, 58, 403–428.CrossRef

Bjornskov, C. (2010). How comparable are the Gallup World Poll life satisfaction data? Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 41–60.CrossRef

Bulmahn, T. (2000). Das vereinte Deutschland—Eine lebenswerte Gesellschaft? Zur Bewertung von Freiheit, Sicherheit und Gerechtigkeit in Ost und West. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 52, 405–427.CrossRef

Chiesi, A. M. (2002). Social Cohesion and related concepts, In N. Genov, Advances in sociological knowledge(235–253). International Social Science Council, Paris.

Cummins, R. A., Eckersley, R., et al. (2003). Developing a national index of subjective wellbeing: The Australian Unity Wellbeing Index. Social Indicators Research, 64, 159–190.CrossRef

Delhey, J. (2004). Life satisfaction in an enlarged Europe. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.

Delhey, J. (2010). From materialist to post-materialist happiness? National affluence and determinants of life satisfaction in cross-national perspective. Social Indicators Research, 97(1), 65–84.CrossRef

Delhey, J., Böhnke, P., et al. (2002). Quality of life in a European perspective. The Euromodule as a new instrument for comparative welfare research. Social Indicators Research, 58(1), 161–176.CrossRef

Delhey, J., & Kroll, C. (2012). A “happiness test” for the new measures of national well-being: How much better than GDP are they?. Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB): WZB Discussion Paper.

Delhey, J., Newton, K., et al. (2011). How general is trust in ‘most people’? Solving the radius of trust problem. American Sociological Review, 76(5), 786–807.CrossRef

Diener, E., & Kahnemann, D. (2009). The Easterlin paradox revisited, revised and perhaps resolved. SINET Social Indicators Network News, 100, 1–3.

Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social, and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40, 189–216.CrossRef

Dolan, P., Layard, R., & Metcalfe, R. (2011). Measuring subjective well-being for public policy. London: Office for National Statistics.

Easterlin, R. A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In P. A. David & M. W. Reder (Eds.), Nations and households in economic growth (pp. 89–125). New York: Academic Press.

Easterlin, R. A. (2003). Building a better theory of well-being. IZA Discussion Paper. Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit. Bonn.

Eckersley, R. (2000). The state and fate of nations: implications of subjective measures of personal and social quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 52, 3–27.CrossRef

Eckersley, R. (2011). Whatever happened to western civilization. The cultural crisis, 20 years later. The Futurist (Nov–Dec), 16–22.

Etzioni, A. (1968). The active society. A theory of societal and political processes. London and New York: Collier-Macmillan.

Ferriss, A. L. (1988). The uses of social indicators. Social Forces, 66, 601–617.

Fujiwara, D., & Campbell, R. (2011). Valuation Techniques for Social Cost-Benefit Analysis: Stated Preference, Revealed Preference and Subjective Well-Being Approaches. Her Majesty’s Treasury and Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), London.

Gasper, D. (2010). Understanding the diversity of conceptions of well-being and quality of life. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 39, 351–360.CrossRef

Gertner, J. (2010). The Rise and Fall of the G.D.P. New York Times, MM60.

Gross National Happiness Commission Bhutan. (2012). GNH Screening Tool. Retrieved 26 November, 2012, from http://www.gnhc.gov.bt/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/GNH-Screening-Tool.pdf.

Halpern, D. (2010). The hidden wealth of nations. Cambridge: Polity.

Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., et al. (Eds.) (2012). World Happiness Report, The Earth Institute (Columbia University), CIFAR, and Centre for Economic Performance (London School of Economics).

Kahneman, D., Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Freely available online through the PNAS open access option (www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/ 10.1073/pnas.1011492107).

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

Keyes, C. L. M., Fredrickson, B. L., et al. (2012). Positive psychology and quality of life. In K. C. Land, A. C. Michalos, & M. J. Sirgy (Eds.), Handbook of social indicators and quality of life research (pp. 99–112). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRef

Kroll, C. (2011a). Different things make different people happy: Examining social capital and subjective well-being by gender and parental status. Social Indicators Research, 104(1), 157–177.CrossRef

Kroll, C. (2011b). Measuring progress and well-being: Achievements and challenges of a new global movement. Berlin: Friedrich Ebert Foundation.

Kroll, C. (2013). Global development and happiness: How can data on subjective well-being inform development theory and practice? Institute of Development Studies Working paper.

Kroll, C., Layard, R. (2011). Happiness matters. Social Europe Journal. Retrieved November 2011, from www.social-europe.eu/2011/11/happiness-matters.

Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. New York: Penguin.

Layard, R. (2006). Happiness and public policy: A challenge to the profession. Economic Journal, 116, C24–C33.CrossRef

Layard, R., Nickell, S., et al. (2010). Does relative income matter? Are the critics right? In E. Diener, J. F. Helliwell, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), International differences in well-Being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Matheson, J. (2011). National statistician’s reflections on the national debate on measuring national well-being. London: Office for National Statistics.

Michalos, A. C. (1985). Multiple discrepancies theory (MDT). Social Indicators Research, 16, 347–413.CrossRef

Myers, D. G. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people. American Psychologist, 55(1), 56–67.CrossRef

Nettle, D. (2005). Happiness. The Science behind your Smile. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Noll, H. -H. (2000). Konzepte der Wohlfahrtsentwicklung: Lebensqualität und “neue” Wohlfahrtskonzepte. Berlin: WZB Discussion Papers.

Norris, P. (Ed.). (1999). Critical citizens: Global support for democratic government. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Oswald, A., Wu, S. (2010). Objective confirmation of subjective measures of human well-being: Evidence from the USA. Science, 327(5965), 576–579.

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Ringen, S. (2006). Reflections on Inequality and Equality. WZB Discussion Papers. Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB).

Schiefer, D., van der Noll, J., et al. (2012). Cohesion radar: Measuring cohesiveness. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Foundation.

Sen, A. (1991). The standard of living. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stevenson, B., Wolfers, J. (2008). Economic growth and subjective well-being: Reassessing the Easterlin paradox. Brookings papers on economic activity.

Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., et al. (2009). Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress, Paris.

Thomas, W. I., & Thomas, D. S. (1928). The child in America. Behavior problems and programs. New York: Knopf.

Van der Maesen, L., & Walker, A. C. (2005). Indicators of social quality: Outcomes of The European scientific network. European Journal of Social Quality, 5(1/2), 8–24.CrossRef

Veenhoven, R. (2001). Why social policy needs subjective indicators. Discussion Paper Series Social Science Research Center Berlin, Berlin.

Veenhoven, R. (2004). Subjective measures of well-being. In M. McGillivray (Ed.), Human well-being: Concept and measurement (pp. 214–239). Houndsmill: Palgrave McMillan.

Veenhoven, R. (2012). Happiness, also known as “life satisfaction” and “subjective well-being”. In K. C. Land, A. C. Michalos, & M. J. Sirgy (Eds.), Handbook of social indicators and quality of life research (pp. 63–77). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRef

Veenhoven, R., & Hagerty, M. (2006). Rising happiness in nations 1946–2004. Social Indicators Research, 79, 421–436.CrossRef

Zapf, W. (1984). Individuelle Wohlfahrt: Lebensbedingungen und wahrgenommene Lebensqualität. In W. Glatzer, W. Zapf (Eds.), Lebensqualität in der Bundesrepublik, (pp.13–26). Frankfurt a. M. and New York: Campus.

Zapf, W. (2000). Social reporting in the 1970s and in the 1990s. Social Indicators Research, 51, 1–15.CrossRef

Titel: A Happy Nation? Opportunities and Challenges of Using Subjective Indicators in Policymaking
verfasst von: Christian Kroll
Jan Delhey
Publikationsdatum: 01.10.2013
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Social Indicators Research / Ausgabe 1/2013
Print ISSN: 0303-8300
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0921
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0380-1

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2013

Minimising Misery: A New Strategy for Public Policies Instead of Maximising Happiness?

Measuring Subjective Issues of Well-Being and Quality of Life in the European Statistical System

The Impact of Adaptive Preferences on Subjective Indicators: An Analysis of Poverty Indicators

The Multiple Uses of Subjective Well-Being Indicators

Measuring Subjective Well-Being and its Potential Role in Policy: Perspectives from the UK Office for National Statistics

“Così è (se vi pare)”: Remarks on Subjective Well-Being from a Resource-Based Perspective