Advertisement

Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 1–17 | Cite as

Confidence in Subjective Evaluation of Human Well-Being in Sen’s Capabilities Perspective

  • Hamid HasanEmail author
Research Paper
First Online:
  • 81 Downloads

Abstract

While Sen’s capabilities approach provides a framework of justice for an assessment of human wellbeing, it faces a challenge on the operationalisation side in practice. The happiness approach to measuring wellbeing, in contrast, provides a workable framework of subjective wellbeing assessment using the tools of psychology. The present paper proposes a new way of subjective evaluation of capabilities with a critical review of literature on alternative methodologies addressing the issues in operationalizing Sen’s capabilities approach. The paper argues that some of the methodological problems, reviewed in this paper, can be greatly minimized if we consider capabilities of “being achieved”, which is an overall functioning, for the assessment of human wellbeing. The proposed subjective solution to these problems is defended against Sen’s popular criticism on happiness using Sen’s position-dependent argument.

Keywords

Capabilities Functionings Happiness 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alkire, S. (2002). Dimensions of human development. World Development, 30(2), 181–205.Google Scholar
  2. Alkire, S. (2005). Measuring the freedom aspects of capabilities. In Paper given to the American Economic Association Conference, Mimeo Harvard University.Google Scholar
  3. Alkire, S., & Santos, M. E. (2010). Acute multidimensional poverty: A new index for developing countries. OPHI Working Paper 38, UNDP HDRO Background Paper 2010/11.Google Scholar
  4. Anand, P. (2011). Reviews. Capabilities and happiness. In L. Bruni, F. Comim, & M Pugno (Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Economics and Philosophy, 27:175–215.Google Scholar
  5. Anand, P., Hunter, G., Carter, I., Dowding, K., Guala, F., & Hees, M. (2005). The measurement of human capabilities. www.oecd.org/dataoecd/63/37/38363699.pdf.
  6. Anand, P., Krishnakumar, J., & Tran, N. B. (2011). Measuring welfare: Latent variable models for happiness and capabilities in the presence of unobservable heterogeneity. Journal of Public Economics, 95, 205–215.Google Scholar
  7. Anand, P., & van Martin, H. (2006). Capabilities and achievement: An empirical study. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 35, 268–285.Google Scholar
  8. Binder, M., & Broekel, T. (2011). Applying a nonparametric efficiency analysis to measure conversion efficiency in great Britain. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12(2), 257–281.Google Scholar
  9. Binder, M., & Coad, A. (2011). Disentangling the circularity in Sen’s capability approach—An analysis of the co-evolution of functioning achievement and resources. Social Indicators Research, 103(3), 327–355.Google Scholar
  10. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2011). International happiness. NBER Working Paper No: 16668.Google Scholar
  11. Bruni, L., Comim, F., & Pugno, M. (Eds.). (2008). Capabilities and happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Burchardt, T. (2005). Are one man’s rags another man’s riches? Identifying adaptive expectations using panel data. Social Indicators Research, 74, 57–102.Google Scholar
  13. Burchardt, T. (2009). Agency goals, adaptation and capability sets. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10(1), 3–19.Google Scholar
  14. Burchardt, T., & Vizard, P. (2011). Operationalising the capability approach as a Basis for Equality and Human Rights Monitoring in Twenty-first-century Britain. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12(1), 91–119.Google Scholar
  15. Bykvist, K. (2010). Can unstable preferences provide a stable standard of wellbeing? Economics and Philosophy, 26, 1–26.Google Scholar
  16. Colander, D. (2007). Edgeworth’s hedonimeter and the quest to measure utility. Journal of Economic Perspective, 21(2), 215–225.Google Scholar
  17. Comim, F. (2001). Operationalising Sen’s Capability Approach. In Paper prepared for the conference on justice and poverty: Examining Sen’s capability approach. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Comim, F., Qizilbash, M., & Alkire, S. (Ed.). (2008). The capability approach-concepts, measures, and applications. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Dasgupta, P. (1993). An inquiry into wellbeing and destitution. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  20. Diener, E., Lucas, R., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist, 61, 305–314.Google Scholar
  21. Easterlin, R. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? In P. A. David & M. W. Reder (Eds.), Nations and households in economic growth: Essays in honor of Moses Abramovitz. New York: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Edgeworth, F. Y. (1881). Mathematical psychics: An essay on the application of mathematics to the moral sciences. London: C.K. Paul Publisher.Google Scholar
  23. Fisher, I. (1892). Mathematical investigations in the theory of value and prices. New York: Cosimo Classics Publisher.Google Scholar
  24. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 402–435.Google Scholar
  25. Frisch, R. (1932). New methods of measuring marginal utility. Bridgwater: Porcupine Pr.Google Scholar
  26. Hausman, D. M., & McPherson, M. S. (2009). Preference satisfaction and welfare economics. Economics and Philosophy, 25, 1–25.Google Scholar
  27. Human Development Report. (2010). The real wealth of nations: Pathways to human development. New York: UNDP. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/270/hdr_2010_en_complete_reprint.pdf.
  28. Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective wellbeing. Journal of Economic Perspective, 20(1), 3–24.Google Scholar
  29. Krishnakumar, J. (2007). Going beyond functionings to capabilities: An econometric model to explain and estimate capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 8(1), 39–63.Google Scholar
  30. Krishnakumar, J., & Ballon, P. (2008). Estimating basic capabilities: A structural equation model approach applied to Bolivian data. World Development, 36(6), 992–1010.Google Scholar
  31. Kristoffersen, I. (2010). The metrics of subjective wellbeing: Cardinality, neutrality and additivity. Economic Record, 86(272), 98–123.Google Scholar
  32. Krueger, A. B. (2009). Measuring the subjective wellbeing of nations: National accounts of time use and wellbeing. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Krueger, A. B., & Schkade, D. (2008). The reliability of subjective well-being measures. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1833–1845.Google Scholar
  34. Kuklys, W. (2005). Amartya Sen’s capability approach—Theoretical insights and empirical applications. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Nussbaum, M. (2005). Well-being, contracts and capabilities. In L. Manderson (Ed.), Rethinking well-being (pp. 27–44). Perth: API Network.Google Scholar
  37. Oswald, A. J., & Wu, S. (2010). Objective confirmation of subjective measures of human wellbeing: Evidence from The USA. Science, 327, 576–579.Google Scholar
  38. Qizilbash, M. (2011). Sugden’s critique of the capability approach. Utilitas, 23(1), 25–51.Google Scholar
  39. Ramos, X., & Silber, J. (2005). On the application of efficiency analysis to the study of the dimensions of human development. Review of Income and Wealth, 51(2), 285–310.Google Scholar
  40. Robeyns, I. (2000). An unworkable idea or a promising alternative? Sen’s capability approach re-examined. Discussion Paper Series (DPS) 00.30. Center for Economic Studies, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
  41. Robeyns, I. (2003). Sen′s capability approach and gender inequality: Selecting relevant capabilities. Feminist Economics, 9(2–3), 61–92.Google Scholar
  42. Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 93–117.Google Scholar
  43. Robeyns, I. (2006). The capability approach in practice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 17(3), 351–376.Google Scholar
  44. Robeyns, I. (2011). The capability approach. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2011/entries/capability-approach.
  45. Roemer, J. (1996). Theories of distributive justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Sen, A. K. (1971). Choice functions and revealed preference. The Review of Economic Studies, 38(3), 307–317.Google Scholar
  47. Sen, A. K. (1973). Behaviour and the concept of preference. Economica, 40(159), 241–259.Google Scholar
  48. Sen, A. K. (1977). Rational fools: A critique of the behavioural foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6(4), 317–344.Google Scholar
  49. Sen, A. K. (1979). Personal utilities and public judgements: Or what’s wrong with welfare economics. The Economic Journal, 89(355), 537–558.Google Scholar
  50. Sen, A. K. (1984). Resources, values and development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  51. Sen, A. K. (1985a). Wellbeing, agency and freedom: The Dewey Lectures 1984. Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221.Google Scholar
  52. Sen, A. K. (1985b). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  53. Sen, A. K. (1987a). Standard of living. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Sen, A.K. (1987b). Freedom of choice: Concept and content. World Institute for Development Economics Research of the United Nations University, Working Paper, 25.Google Scholar
  55. Sen, A. K. (1990). Justice: Means versus freedoms. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 19(2), 111–121.Google Scholar
  56. Sen, A. K. (1991). Welfare, preference and freedom. Journal of Econometrics, 50, 15–29.Google Scholar
  57. Sen, A. K. (1992). Inequality reexamined. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Sen, A. K. (1993). Positional objectivity. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 22(2), 126–145.Google Scholar
  59. Sen, A. K. (1997). Maximisation and the act of choice. Econometrica, 65(4), 745–779.Google Scholar
  60. Sen, A. K. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Sen, A. K. (2002). Rationality and freedom. Massachusetts: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  62. Sen, A. K. (2004). Dialogue: Capabilities, lists and public reason: Continuing the conversation. Feminist Economics, 10(3), 77–80.Google Scholar
  63. Sen, A. K. (2009). The idea of justice. London: ALLAN LANE, Penguin Group.Google Scholar
  64. Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. P. (2009). Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and progress. http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/rapport_anglais.pdf.
  65. Sugden, R. (1993). Welfare, resources, and capabilities: A review of inequality reexamined by Amartya Sen. Journal of Economic Literature, 31, 1947–1962.Google Scholar
  66. Sugden, R. (2010). Opportunity as mutual advantage. Economics and Philosophy, 26(1), 47–68.Google Scholar
  67. Van Ootegem, L., & Spillemaeckers, S. (2008). With a focus on well-being and capabilities. In Contribution to the 2008 Conference of the HDCA, New Delhi/10-13 September.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Institute of Islamic EconomicsIslamabadPakistan

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options