Skip to main content
Log in

Capabilities, Subjective Wellbeing and Public Policy: A Response to Austin (2016)

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

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

Access this article

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

References

  • Allan, B. A., & Duffy, R. D. (2014). Examining moderators of signature strengths use and well-being: Calling and signature strengths level. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(2), 323–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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., 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 

  • Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: American’s perceptions of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, A. (2016). On well-being and public policy: Are we capable of questioning the hegemony of happiness? Social Indicators Research, 127(1), 123–138.

    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 

  • Blalock, H. M., Jr. (1964). Causal inferences in nonexperimental research. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blore, J. D., Stokes, M. A., Mellor, D., Firth, L., & Cummins, R. A. (2011). Comparing multiple discrepancies theory to affective models of subjective wellbeing. Social Indicators Research, 100(1), 1–16. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9599-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, B. (1975). Quality of affect and self-evaluated happiness. Social Indicators Research, 2(3), 315–331.

    Article  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 

  • Capic, T., Li, N., & Cummins, R. A. (2017). Confirmation of subjective wellbeing set-points: Foundational for subjective social indicators. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-017-1585-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (2010). Subjective wellbeing, homeostatically protected mood and depression: A synthesis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 1–17. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9167-0.

    Article  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. (2014). Can happiness change? Theories and evidence. In K. M. Sheldon & R. E. Lucas (Eds.), Stability of happiness: Theories and evidence on whether happiness can change (pp. 75–97). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (2016a). The theory of subjective wellbeing homeostasis: A contribution to understanding life quality. In F. Maggino (Ed.), A life devoted to quality of life—festschrift in Honor of Alex C Michalos (Vol. 60, pp. 61–79). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (2016b). Happiness is the right metric to understand the functioning of society. Society, 53(3), 273–277. doi:10.1007/s12115-016-0011-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A., Li, L., Wooden, M., & Stokes, M. (2014). A demonstration of set-points for subjective wellbeing. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 183–206. doi:10.1007/s10902-013-9444-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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).

  • Davern, M., Cummins, R. A., & Stokes, M. (2007). Subjective wellbeing as an affective/cognitive construct. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8(4), 429–449. doi:10.1007/s10902-007-9066-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.

    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 

  • 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.

  • Gannotti, M. E., Minter, C. L., Chambers, H. G., Smith, P. A., & Tylkowski, C. (2011). Self-concept of adults with cerebral palsy. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(10), 855–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gittins, R. (2010). The happy economist: Happiness for the hard-headed. Melbourne: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, T., Weinberg, M. K., & Cummins, R. A. (2014). The dyadic interaction of relationships and disability type on informal carer subjective well-being. Quality of Life Research, 23(5), 1535–1542.

    Article  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, 731–739. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.731.

    Article  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 

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

    Book  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.

  • Joshanloo, M. (2013). A comparison of Western and Islamic conceptions of happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(6), 1857–1874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M., & Annas, J. (2009). Feeling good and functioning well: Distinctive concepts in ancient philosophy and contemporary science. Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(3), 197–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, L. C. H., & Cummins, R. A. (2013). The contribution of job and partner satisfaction to the homeostatic defense of subjective wellbeing. Social Indicators Research, 111(1), 203–217. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9991-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Land, K. C. (1983). Social indicators. Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Land, K. C. (2015). The Human Development Index. In W. Glatzer, L. Camfield, V. Møller, & M. Rojas (Eds.), Global handbook of quality of life: Exploration of well-being of nations and continents (pp. 133–157). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Learmonth, Y. C., Hubbard, E. A., McAuley, E., & Motl, R. W. (2014). Psychometric properties of quality of life and health-related quality of life assessments in people with multiple sclerosis. Quality of Life Research, 23(7), 2015–2023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzen, M., & Cummins, R. A. (2013). Happiness versus the environment—a case study of Australian lifestyles. Challenges, 4, 56–74. doi:10.3390/challe4010056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  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 

  • 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). Wellbeing and policy. London: Legatum Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2013). OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264191655-en.

    Book  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. (2006). Happiness: Lessons for a new science. New Political Economy, 11(3), 447–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Piantadosi, S., Byar, D. P., & Green, S. B. (1988). The ecological fallacy. American Journal of Epidemiology, 127(5), 893–904.

    Article  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 

  • Renn, D., Pfaffenberger, N., Platter, M., Mitmansgruber, H., Höfer, S., & Cummins, R. A. (2009). International Well-being Index: the Austrian version. Social Indicators Research, 90, 243–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161–1178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On Happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.

    Article  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 

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

    Article  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 

  • Sugden, R. (2003). Opportunity as a space for individuality: its value and the impossibility of measuring it. Ethics, 113(4), 783–809.

    Article  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.

  • 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 

  • Tomyn, A. J., & Cummins, R. A. (2011). Subjective wellbeing and homeostatically protected mood: Theory validation with adolescents. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(5), 897–914. doi:10.1007/s10902-010-9235-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomyn, A. J., Weinberg, M. K., & Cummins, R. A. (2015). Intervention efficacy among ‘at risk’ adolescents: A test of Subjective Wellbeing Homeostasis Theory. Social Indicators Research, 120(3), 883–895. doi:10.1007/s11205-014-0619-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Yik, M., Russell, J. A., & Steiger, J. H. (2011). A 12-point circumplex structure of core affect. Emotion, 11(4), 705–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2013S1A3A2054622).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert A. Cummins.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cummins, R.A., Land, K.C. Capabilities, Subjective Wellbeing and Public Policy: A Response to Austin (2016). Soc Indic Res 140, 157–173 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1763-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1763-5

Keywords

Navigation