scholarly journals Beyond GDP: Using Equivalent Incomes to Measure Well-Being in Europe

2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koen Decancq ◽  
Erik Schokkaert
Keyword(s):  
2012 ◽  
pp. 67-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Fleurbaey

The first part of the paper is devoted to the monetary indicators of social welfare. It is shown which methods of quantitative estimating the aggregate wealth and well-being are available in the modern economic theory apart from the traditional GDP measure. The limitations of the methods are also discussed. The author shows which measures of welfare are adequate in the dynamic context: he considers the problems of intertemporal welfare analysis using the Net National Product (NNP) for the sustainability policy and in the context of concern for well-being of the future generations.


2012 ◽  
pp. 32-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Fleurbaey

The second part of the paper is devoted to the non-monetary indicators of social welfare. Various approaches to the study of subjective well-being and happiness are described. The author shows what problems a researcher would encounter trying to analyze welfare on the micro-level and to take account of the cognitive and affective aspects of the individuals assessment of their well-being, as well as the relevance of social relations. The author also shows to what extent the alternative approaches, particularly the analysis of functionings and capabilities advanced by A. Sen are compatible to the modern welfare economics and what prospects the latter has.


2016 ◽  
Vol 136 (3) ◽  
pp. 931-966 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Cavalletti ◽  
Matteo Corsi

2016 ◽  
Vol 106 (9) ◽  
pp. 2426-2457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles I. Jones ◽  
Peter J. Klenow

We propose a summary statistic for the economic well-being of people in a country. Our measure incorporates consumption, leisure, mortality, and inequality, first for a narrow set of countries using detailed micro data, and then more broadly using multi-country datasets. While welfare is highly correlated with GDP per capita, deviations are often large. Western Europe looks considerably closer to the United States, emerging Asia has not caught up as much, and many developing countries are further behind. Each component we introduce plays a significant role in accounting for these differences, with mortality being most important. (JEL D63, E21, E23, E24, I12, O57)


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-165
Author(s):  
V. K. Shrotryia ◽  
Shashank Vikram Pratap Singh

Inclusive development policies and comprehensive strategies are extremely critical aspects of the holistic progress of a nation. The measurement of considerable progress through the indicator/indicators is equally important. What if the selected indicator(s) are inappropriate? It can mislead people and policymakers. That is exactly what is happening to gross domestic product (GDP) as an indicator for measuring the overall progress of any nation. Through this academic article, an attempt has been made to address the following questions. Why do social, environmental, and human-centric indictors reveal an altogether different position concerning the health of the economy? Are we making deliberate mistakes while considering GDP as a gospel indicator for each and everything? Does it reflect the welfare aspects of human beings? Does it accurately reflect the well-being of people? The prolonged followed GDP-driven policies are inadequate for measuring the overall progress of a nation. The progress of a nation cannot be accurately reflected through GDP as an indicator. After an extensive review, the authors found that GDP was intentionally developed for measuring only economic activities which cannot be equated with social or human well-being. The possible outcomes of GDP-driven policies have been reflected through various human, social, and environment-centric indicators, which thoughtfully provide ample grounding to authors to fulminate against the philosophical notion of GDP as a universal indicator for measuring overall national progress/human well-being. This article can add to the literature of “why happiness movement.” This article can provide sufficient theoretical grounds to move beyond GDP and look for some other holistic indicator(s).


Author(s):  
Riccardo Guidotti ◽  
Michele Coscia ◽  
Dino Pedreschi ◽  
Diego Pennacchioli

Author(s):  
David E. Bloom ◽  
Victoria Y. Fan ◽  
Vadim Kufenko ◽  
Osondu Ogbuoji ◽  
Klaus Prettner ◽  
...  

Per capita GDP has limited use as a well-being indicator because it does notcapture many dimensions that imply a “good life”, such as health and equality ofopportunity. However, per capita GDP has the virtues of being easy to interpret andto calculate with manageable data requirements. Against this backdrop, there is aneed for a measure of well-being that preserves the advantages of per capita GDP,but also includes health and equality. We propose a new parsimonious indicatorto fill this gap, and calculate it for 149 countries. This new indicator could beparticularly useful in complementing standard well-being indicators during theCOVID-19 pandemic. This is because (i) COVID-19 predominantly affects olderadults beyond their prime working ages whose mortality and morbidity do notstrongly affect GDP, and (ii) COVID-19 is known to have large effects on inequalityin many countries.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document