The Open University ’ s repository of research publications and other research outputs The development of capability indicators

The paper is motivated by sustained interest in the capabilities approach to welfare economics combined with the paucity of economic statistics that measure capabilities at the individual level. Specifically, it takes a much discussed account of the normatively desirable capabilities constitutive of a good life, argued to be comprehensive at a high level of abstraction, and uses it to operationalize the capabilities approach by developing a survey instrument which is then used to elicit information about capabilities at the individual level. The paper explores the extent to which these capabilities are covariates of life satisfaction measure (utility) and investigates aspects of robustness and sub-group differences using standard socio-demographic variables as well as a relatively novel control for personality. In substantial terms, we find that there is some evidence of quantitative, but no qualitative, gender and age differences in the capabilities-life satisfaction relationship. Furthermore, we find that indicators from a wide range of life domains are linked to life satisfaction, a finding that supports the multi-dimensional approaches to poverty and quality of life and the view that people do not just value income (opulence in Sen’s language) per se. Our most important contribution, however, is primarily methodological and derives from the demonstration that within the conventions of household and social surveys, human capabilities can be measured with the aid of suitably designed statistical indicators.

[1]  P. Frijters,et al.  How Important is Methodology for the Estimates of the Determinants of Happiness? , 2004 .

[2]  David Clark,et al.  Concepts and Perceptions of Human Well-being: Some Evidence from South Africa , 2003 .

[3]  R. Layard Happiness: Lessons from a New Science , 2005 .

[4]  Sabina Alkire,et al.  Dimensions of Human Development , 2002 .

[5]  S. Alkire Measuring the freedom aspects of capabilities , 2005 .

[6]  Andrew J. Oswald,et al.  Happiness and economic performance , 1997 .

[7]  M. Machina Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty , 1989 .

[8]  Ronald Smith,et al.  Capabilities and Well-Being: Evidence Based on the Sen–Nussbaum Approach to Welfare , 2005 .

[9]  Martin van Hees,et al.  Freedom of choice and diversity of options: Some difficulties , 2004, Soc. Choice Welf..

[10]  M. Nussbaum,et al.  Book reviews , 2002 .

[11]  W. Brouwer,et al.  Acceptability of less than perfect health states. , 2005, Social science & medicine.

[12]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  Theory and decision , 2003 .

[13]  S. Gosling,et al.  A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains , 2003 .

[14]  C. Whelan,et al.  Targeting Poverty: Lessons from Monitoring Ireland's National Anti-Poverty Strategy , 2000, Journal of Social Policy.

[15]  E. Schokkaert,et al.  Sen’s Concept of the Living Standard applied to the Belgian Unemployed , 1990, Recherches économiques de Louvain.

[16]  B. Frey,et al.  Happiness, Economy and Institutions , 2000, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[17]  A. Sen,et al.  Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What's Wrong with Welfare Economics? , 1979 .

[18]  Richard Bellamy,et al.  The morality of freedom , 1988 .

[19]  Ingrid Robeyns,et al.  Selecting Capabilities for Quality of Life Measurement , 2005 .

[20]  Ian Carter,et al.  A Measure of Freedom , 1999 .

[21]  Alessandro Balestrino,et al.  A MULTIDIMENSIONAL ASSESSMENT OF WELL-BEING BASED ON SEN'S FUNCTIONING APPROACH , 2000 .

[22]  Prasanta K. Pattanaik,et al.  On Preference and Freedom , 1998 .

[23]  A. Sen,et al.  The Impossibility of a Paretian Liberal , 1970, Journal of Political Economy.

[24]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Back to Bentham? Explorations of experience utility , 1997 .

[25]  Paul Anand,et al.  Are the preference axioms really rational? , 1987 .