Abstract
This paper responds to the recent advocacy of subjective wellbeing in policy evaluation with an investigation of food security in rural Chhattisgarh, India, in 2010–2013. Conceptually, it suggests the need to move beyond a primary focus on happiness to consider a broader-based investigation into people’s subjective perceptions. In particular, it introduces a multi-domain model with some affinities to the capability approach, which asks what people think and feel themselves able to be and do. Methodologically, it suggests that the primary reliance on quantitative measures should be complemented by more qualitative approaches to give a more rounded appreciation of how people view their lives. Three approaches are presented: qualitative analysis of interview text; statistical analysis comparing a single measure of happiness with a broader, domain-based approach; and mixed qualitative and quantitative data generated from an individual case.
Highlights
The momentum behind taking wellbeing as a policy focus continues to grow
Our survey shows over 80% of respondents were receiving Public Distribution System (PDS) rice at Rs 1 or 2 per kilo. 97% of eligible school children were getting their free mid-day meal. 94% of those eligible were receiving the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) health and nutrition scheme for pregnant women, nursing mothers and young children. 97% were eligible for Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGA) and 92% of these had registered for the scheme and received a job card. 82% said they were able to gain work at an appropriate time, and 90% said that they received the correct payment
This paper has argued for a different approach, which seeks not to regulate the subjective but to explore it more on its own terms. It began by considering Amartya Sen’s critique of happiness as an indicator of standard of living. This reflects an underlying contradiction that the subjective indicator is taken as evidence of an objective condition
Summary
The momentum behind taking wellbeing as a policy focus continues to grow. They include broader based indicators of national progress; a positive focus on strengths and aspirations rather than a potentially stigmatising emphasis on problems (White, 2010); a more comprehensive understanding of needs and indicators of policy/programme impact; plus, the promise of direct measures of ‘how people think about and experience their lives’ (OECD, 2013:3). While there is still debate about how to go ‘beyond GDP,’ few would argue that GDP alone is a sufficient indicator of national development. The Human Development Index was launched in 1990. This was followed in 2010 by the Multi-Dimensional Poverty Index (Alkire and Foster, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call