IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v136y2018i3d10.1007_s11205-016-1538-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Matters Most to People? Evidence from the OECD Better Life Index Users’ Responses

Author

Listed:
  • Carlotta Balestra

    (OECD Statistics Directorate)

  • Romina Boarini

    (OECD Statistics Directorate)

  • Elena Tosetto

    (OECD Statistics Directorate)

Abstract

The OECD Better Life Index is an interactive composite index that aggregates a country’s well-being outcomes through the weights defined by online users. This paper analyses these weights by analysing the responses given by close to 88,000 users since 2011 to date. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, it investigates the factors shaping users’ preferences over a set of 11 well-being dimensions, while most of the previous empirical works in the area have focused on factors affecting support for a specific well-being domain (e.g. redistribution, environmental concerns) at a time. Second, it provides insights into users’ preferences for a large group of countries, which differ in terms of culture and living conditions. Third, a finite mixture model (FMM) approach is used to test for heterogeneity in the effect of satisfaction levels on the weight attached to a given BLI dimension across sub-population groups. Various empirical models are used to identify responses’ patterns and see whether they can be accounted for respondents’ characteristics and their perceived level of well-being. The paper finds that health, education and life satisfaction are the aspects that matter the most in OECD countries. Descriptive statistics show that men assign more importance to material conditions than women; while women in general value quality of life more than men. Environment, housing, civic engagement, safety and health become more important with age, while life satisfaction, education, work-life balance, jobs and income are particularly important for those younger than 35. There are also regional patterns in users’ findings, for instance civic engagement is particularly important in South America, while safety and work-life balance matter tremendously in Asia-Pacific. Furthermore, an additional analysis carried out on a subset of observations finds that for several well-being dimensions (i.e. jobs, housing, community, health, education, civic engagement, safety, life satisfaction and work-life balance) there is a positive and linear relationship between individual preferences and self-reported satisfaction in those dimensions. Finally, the check for heterogeneity in the relationship of satisfaction to preferences in well-being dimensions, via an FMM analysis, reveals that, in the case of income and education, two classes of individuals with distinct effects of satisfaction levels on preferences are identified.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlotta Balestra & Romina Boarini & Elena Tosetto, 2018. "What Matters Most to People? Evidence from the OECD Better Life Index Users’ Responses," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 907-930, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:136:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11205-016-1538-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-016-1538-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-016-1538-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-016-1538-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew E. Clark & Yarine Fawaz, 2015. "Retirement and the Marginal Utility of Income," Working Papers halshs-01189009, HAL.
    2. B. Douglas Bernheim, 2009. "Behavioral Welfare Economics," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 267-319, 04-05.
    3. Murtin, Fabrice & Boarini, Romina & Cordoba, Juan Carlos & Ripoll, Marla, 2017. "Beyond GDP: Is there a law of one shadow price?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 390-411.
    4. Koen Decancq & Dirk Neumann, 2014. "Does the Choice of Well-Being Measure Matter Empirically?: An Illustration with German Data," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 717, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    5. André Decoster & Peter Haan, 2010. "Empirical Welfare Analysis in Random Utility Models of Labour Supply," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 340, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    6. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Alex Rees-Jones, 2012. "What Do You Think Would Make You Happier? What Do You Think You Would Choose?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2083-2110, August.
    7. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2009. "Beyond Revealed Preference: Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 51-104.
    8. Koen Decancq & María Ana Lugo, 2013. "Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Wellbeing: An Overview," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 7-34, January.
    9. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Nichole Szembrot, 2014. "Beyond Happiness and Satisfaction: Toward Well-Being Indices Based on Stated Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2698-2735, September.
    10. Fleurbaey, Marc & Schwandt, Hannes, 2015. "Do People Seek to Maximize Their Subjective Well?Being?," IZA Discussion Papers 9450, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Koen Decancq & Erik Schokkaert, 2016. "Beyond GDP: Using Equivalent Incomes to Measure Well-Being in Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 21-55, March.
    12. Leonardo Becchetti & Luisa Corrado & Maurizio Fiaschetti, 2013. "The heterogeneity of wellbeing “expenditure” preferences: evidence from a simulated allocation choice on the BES indicators," CEIS Research Paper 297, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 12 Nov 2013.
    13. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Alex Rees-Jones, 2014. "Can Marginal Rates of Substitution Be Inferred from Happiness Data? Evidence from Residency Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(11), pages 3498-3528, November.
    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. Eni Dardha & Nicky Rogge, 2020. "How's Life in Your Region? Measuring Regional Material Living Conditions, Quality of Life and Subjective Well-Being in OECD Countries Using a Robust, Conditional Benefit-of-the-Doubt Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 1015-1073, October.
    2. Dimitris Zavras, 2022. "Studying the Experience of the Confinement Measures Implemented during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Greece," World, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Tae‐Hyoung T. Gim, 2021. "Partial least squares regression and importance–satisfaction analyses of the strategic drivers of happiness: A quality of life survey in Seoul, Korea," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 567-599, March.
    4. Johan Graafland & Harmen Verbruggen, 2022. "Free-Market, Perfect Market and Welfare State Perspectives on “Good” Markets: an Empirical Test," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 1113-1136, April.
    5. Johan Graafland, 2020. "When Does Economic Freedom Promote Well Being? On the Moderating Role of Long-Term Orientation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 127-153, May.
    6. Zafar Nazarov & Anastassia Obydenkova, 2022. "Public Health, Democracy, and Transition: Global Evidence and Post-Communism," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 261-285, February.
    7. Clemens Hetschko & Louisa von Reumont & Ronnie Schöb, 2019. "Die Schwierigkeit, soziale Wohlfahrt zu messen: Einbettungseffekte im OECD Better Life Index," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 72(18), pages 24-26, September.
    8. Dorota Weziak-Bialowolska & Matthew T. Lee & Piotr Bialowolski & Eileen McNeely & Ying Chen & Richard G. Cowden & Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2022. "Associations between the Importance of Well-Being Domains and the Subsequent Experience of Well-Being," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Mark McGillivray & Simon Feeny & Paul Hansen & Stephen Knowles & Franz Ombler, 2023. "What are Valid Weights for the Human Development Index? A Discrete Choice Experiment for the United Kingdom," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 165(2), pages 679-694, January.
    10. Larry Dwyer, 2023. "Tourism Development to Enhance Resident Well-Being: A Strong Sustainability Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-16, February.
    11. Zhipeng Zhu & Junyi Li & Ziru Chen, 2023. "Green space equity: spatial distribution of urban green spaces and correlation with urbanization in Xiamen, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 423-443, January.

    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. Marko Ledić & Ivica Rubil, 2021. "Beyond Wage Gap, Towards Job Quality Gap: The Role of Inter-Group Differences in Wages, Non-Wage Job Dimensions, and Preferences," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 523-561, June.
    2. Alpaslan Akay & Olivier Bargain & H. Xavier Jara, 2020. "‘Fair’ welfare comparisons with heterogeneous tastes: subjective versus revealed preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(1), pages 51-84, June.
    3. DECANCQ, Koen & FLEURBAEY, Marc & SCHOKKAERT, Erik, 2014. "Inequality, income, and well-being," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2014018, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    4. Adler, Matthew D. & Dolan, Paul & Kavetsos, Georgios, 2017. "Would you choose to be happy? Tradeoffs between happiness and the other dimensions of life in a large population survey," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 60-73.
    5. Mattauch, Linus & Hepburn, Cameron, 2016. "Climate policy when preferences are endogenous – and sometimes they are," INET Oxford Working Papers 2016-04, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    6. David A. Comerford & Leonhard K. Lades, 2022. "Responsibility utility and the difference between preference and desirance: implications for welfare evaluation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(2), pages 201-224, February.
    7. Akay, Alpaslan & Bargain, Olivier & Jara Tamayo, H. Xavier, 2023. "Experienced versus decision utility: large-scale comparison for income-leisure preferences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117746, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Andrew E. Clark, 2015. "SWB as a Measure of Individual Well-Being," Working Papers halshs-01134483, HAL.
    9. Diaz, Lina & Houser, Daniel & Ifcher, John & Zarghamee, Homa, 2023. "Estimating social preferences using stated satisfaction: Novel support for inequity aversion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    10. Koen Decancq & Marc Fleurbaey & François Maniquet, 2019. "Multidimensional poverty measurement with individual preferences," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 17(1), pages 29-49, March.
    11. Daniel J Benjamin & Jakina Debnam Guzman & Marc Fleurbaey & Ori Heffetz & Miles Kimball, 2023. "What do Happiness Data Mean? Theory and Survey Evidence," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(6), pages 2377-2412.
    12. Akay, Alpaslan & Bargain, Olivier & Jara, Xavier, 2017. "Back to Bentham, Should We? Large-Scale Comparison of Experienced versus Decision Utility," IZA Discussion Papers 10907, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Dolan, Paul & Kavetsos, Georgios & Krekel, Christian & Mavridis, Dimitris & Metcalfe, Robert & Senik, Claudia & Szymanski, Stefan & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2019. "Quantifying the intangible impact of the Olympics using subjective well-being data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Adrian Chadi & Clemens Hetschko, 2021. "How Job Changes Affect People's Lives — Evidence from Subjective Well‐Being Data," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 59(2), pages 279-306, June.
    15. Janina Nemitz, 2022. "Increasing longevity and life satisfaction: is there a catch to living longer?," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 557-589, April.
    16. Elias, Julio & Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario, 2016. "Efficiency-Morality Trade-Offs in Repugnant Transactions: A Choice Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 10187, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Schwandt, Hannes, 2016. "Unmet aspirations as an explanation for the age U-shape in wellbeing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 75-87.
    18. Paul Dolan & Georgios Kavetsos & Christian Krekel & Dimitris Mavridis & Robert Metcalfe & Claudia Senik & Stefan Szymanski & Nicolas R. Ziebarth, 2016. "The Host with the Most? The Effects of the Olympic Games on Happiness," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1599, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    19. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Nichole Szembrot, 2013. "Aggregating Local Preferences to Guide Marginal Policy Adjustments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 605-610, May.
    20. Decancq, Koen & Nys, Annemie, 2021. "Non-parametric well-being comparisons," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).

    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:spr:soinre:v:136:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11205-016-1538-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.