|
on Economics of Happiness |
|
Issue of 2024‒03‒11
three papers chosen by |
| By: | Lukas Leitner; |
| Abstract: | The subjective well-being (SWB) method has become a popular tool to estimate the willingness to pay for non-market goods. In this method, the willingness to pay measure contains the ratio of two coefficients (of the nonmarket good and consumption), which are both estimated in a regression on subjective well-being. Computing confidence intervals for such ratios turns out to be error-prone, in particular when the consumption coefficient is imprecisely estimated. In this paper, five different ways of computing the confidence intervals are compared: the delta, Fieller, parametric bootstrapping, and bootstrapping method, and a numerical integration of Hinkley’s formula. Using a large number of simulated SWB data sets, confidence intervals and their coverage rates are computed for each method. The findings suggest that the delta method is accurate only if the consumption coefficient is estimated with very high precision. All other methods turn out to be more robust, with minor differences in accuracy. |
| Date: | 2023–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hdl:wpaper:2310&r=hap |
| By: | Cristina Pereira; Herm\'inia Gon\c{c}alves; Teresa Sequeira |
| Abstract: | Traditionally, European social policies have focused on material well-being and social justice, neglecting subjective indicators. This review systematically examines the scientific understanding of well-being, its indicators, and its relationship with governance. It suggests that political systems and institutions significantly impact well-being, and that subjective indicators should be incorporated into public policy decisions. The findings advocate for a more holistic approach to well-being measurement, encompassing both objective and subjective dimensions. |
| Date: | 2024–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2401.17047&r=hap |
| By: | Foliano, Francesca; Tonei, Valentina; Sevilla, Almudena |
| Abstract: | A wide-ranging public debate surrounds how pandemic lockdown measures differentially impacted individuals and which precise mechanisms – whether financial-, health-, or policy-driven – predominate in determining these effects. Using a nationally representative 24-h diary survey covering the first two years of the pandemic, we explore potential mechanisms underlying changes in well-being. We exploit the variation in the stringency of the social restrictions implemented by the UK government during this period and use an event-study methodology to net out the impact of social restrictions from other pandemic effects. We find that well-being dropped by 47 % (for men) and 71 % (for women) of a standard deviation during the strictest lockdown and that it took longer to revert to pre-pandemic levels than previously estimated. This finding holds after we account for financial conditions and changes in local infection and death rates, suggesting that the time use–related changes driven by social restrictions dominate financial and health shocks in driving the overall well-being effects during the pandemic. Our detailed data on time allocation and individual preferences over the activities undertaken throughout the day suggest that the drop in well-being was primarily associated to a drastic reduction in time spent in leisure with non–household members or outside the home, a category with greater weight in the well-being of women. |
| Keywords: | well-being; life satisfaction; social isolation; time use; instantaneous enjoyment; Covid-19; coronavirus |
| JEL: | I10 I18 |
| Date: | 2024–04–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:121996&r=hap |