IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/csb/stintr/v16y2015i3p373-396.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Office for National Statistics Experience of Collecting and Measuring Subjective Well-Being

Author

Listed:
  • Lucy Tinkler

Abstract

The UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) started measuring subjective well-being in 2011 as part of the ONS Measuring National Well-being programme. The aim of the Measuring National Well-being programme is to measure the quality of life and progress of the UK. This article explores the development of the ONS subjective well-being measures, data collection methods, data presentational considerations, overview of findings, and latest developments. It discusses the way in which user engagement has been key to the development of the ONS subjective well-being statistics.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucy Tinkler, 2015. "The Office for National Statistics Experience of Collecting and Measuring Subjective Well-Being," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 16(3), pages 373-396, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:csb:stintr:v:16:y:2015:i:3:p:373-396
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://index.stat.gov.pl/repec/files/csb/stintr/csb_stintr_v16_2015_i3_n3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ed Diener, 1994. "Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 103-157, February.
    2. John F. Helliwell, 2011. "How Can Subjective Well-being Be Improved?," New Directions for Intelligent Government in Canada: Papers in Honour of Ian Stewart, in: Fred Gorbet & Andrew Sharpe (ed.),New Directions for Intelligent Government in Canada: Papers in Honour of Ian Stewart, pages 283-304, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.
    3. Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers, 2008. "Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 39(1 (Spring), pages 1-102.
    4. Pudney, Stephen, 2010. "An experimental analysis of the impact of survey design on measures and models of subjective wellbeing," ISER Working Paper Series 2010-20, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. Helliwell, John F., 2003. "How's life? Combining individual and national variables to explain subjective well-being," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 331-360, March.
    6. Angus Deaton, 2012. "The financial crisis and the well-being of Americans," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(1), pages 1-26, January.
    7. Stephen Hicks & Lucy Tinkler & Paul Allin, 2013. "Measuring Subjective Well-Being and its Potential Role in Policy: Perspectives from the UK Office for National Statistics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 73-86, October.
    8. Daniel Kahneman & Alan B. Krueger, 2006. "Developments in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    9. Dolan, Paul & Peasgood, Tessa & White, Mathew, 2008. "Do we really know what makes us happy A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 94-122, February.
    10. Paul Dolan & Richard Layard & Robert Metcalfe, 2011. "Measuring Subjective Wellbeing for Public Policy: Recommendations on Measures," CEP Reports 23, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. John F. Helliwell & Christopher P. Barrington-Leigh, 2010. "Measuring and Understanding Subjective Well-Being," NBER Working Papers 15887, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Wilding & Luke Munford & Matt Sutton, 2023. "Estimating the heterogeneous health and well‐being returns to social participation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(9), pages 1921-1940, September.
    2. Allin Paul, 2015. "Official Statistics on Personal Well-Being: Some Reflections on the Development and use of Subjective Well-Being Measures in the UK," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 397-408, September.
    3. Paul Allin, 2015. "Official Statistics on Personal Well-Being: Some Reflections on the Development and Use of Subjective Well-Being Measures in the UK," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 16(3), pages 397-408, September.
    4. Paul Allin, 2015. "Official Statistics On Personal Well-Being: Some Reflections On The Development And Some Reflections On The Development And In The Uk," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 397-408, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lucy Tinkler, 2015. "The Office For National Statistics Experience Of Collecting And Measuring Subjective Well-Being," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 373-396, September.
    2. Tinkler Lucy, 2015. "The Office for National Statistics Experience of Collecting and Measuring Subjective Well-Being," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 373-396, September.
    3. Arie Kapteyn & Jinkook Lee & Caroline Tassot & Hana Vonkova & Gema Zamarro, 2015. "Dimensions of Subjective Well-Being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 625-660, September.
    4. Stephen Hicks & Lucy Tinkler & Paul Allin, 2013. "Measuring Subjective Well-Being and its Potential Role in Policy: Perspectives from the UK Office for National Statistics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 73-86, October.
    5. Christopher Mackie & Conal Smith, 2015. "Conceptualizing Subjective Well-Being And Its Many Dimensions – Implications For Data Collection In Official Statistics And For Policy Relevance," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 335-372, September.
    6. Sibylle Puntscher & Christoph Hauser & Janette Walde & Gottfried Tappeiner, 2015. "The Impact of Social Capital on Subjective Well-Being: A Regional Perspective," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1231-1246, October.
    7. O'Donnell, Gus & Oswald, Andrew J., 2015. "National well-being policy and a weighted approach to human feelings," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 59-70.
    8. Zhenjun Zhu & Zhigang Li & Hongsheng Chen & Ye Liu & Jun Zeng, 2019. "Subjective well-being in China: how much does commuting matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1505-1524, August.
    9. Sarracino, Francesco, 2013. "Determinants of subjective well-being in high and low income countries: Do happiness equations differ across countries?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 51-66.
    10. Sarracino, Francesco & O'Connor, Kelsey J. & Ono, Hiroshi, 2019. "Making economic growth and well-being compatible: evidence from Japan," MPRA Paper 93010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Yuta J. Masuda & Jason R. Williams & Heather Tallis, 2021. "Does Life Satisfaction Vary with Time and Income? Investigating the Relationship Among Free Time, Income, and Life Satisfaction," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 2051-2073, June.
    12. Cristina Sechel, 2019. "Happier Than Them, but More of Them Are Happy:Aggregating Subjective Well-Being," Working Papers 2019008, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
    13. Yasar, Rusen, 2018. "Subjective well-being and income: A compromise between Easterlin paradox and its critiques," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 12, pages 1-23.
    14. Gregor Gonza & Anže Burger, 2017. "Subjective Well-Being During the 2008 Economic Crisis: Identification of Mediating and Moderating Factors," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 1763-1797, December.
    15. Jiayuan Li & John Raine, 2014. "The Time Trend of Life Satisfaction in China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 409-427, April.
    16. Sechel, Cristina, 2021. "The share of satisfied individuals: A headcount measure of aggregate subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 373-394.
    17. Yasar, Rusen, 2017. "Subjective well-being and income: A compromise between Easterlin paradox and its critiques," Economics Discussion Papers 2017-113, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    18. Stutzer, Alois & Frey, Bruno S., 2012. "Recent Developments in the Economics of Happiness: A Selective Overview," IZA Discussion Papers 7078, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Barbara Dluhosch & Daniel Horgos, 2013. "Trading Up the Happiness Ladder," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 973-990, September.
    20. Mikucka, Malgorzata & Sarracino, Francesco, 2014. "Making economic growth and well-being compatible: the role of trust and income inequality," MPRA Paper 59695, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:csb:stintr:v:16:y:2015:i:3:p:373-396. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Beata Witek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gusgvpl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.