IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v177y2025i2d10.1007_s11205-025-03524-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Where and Whom You Collect Weightings from Matters…” Capturing Wellbeing Priorities Within a Vulnerable Context: A Case Study of Volta Delta, Ghana

Author

Listed:
  • Laurence Cannings

    (University of Southampton)

  • Craig Hutton

    (University of Southampton)

  • Kristine Nilsen

    (University of Southampton)

  • Alessandro Sorichetta

    (Università Degli Studi Di Milano)

Abstract

Wellbeing is a crucial policy outcome within sustainable development, yet it can be measured and conceptualised in various ways. Methodological decisions, such as how different components are weighted, can influence wellbeing classification. Many studies utilise equal weighting, assuming each component is equally important; however, does this reflect communities’ lived experiences? This study outlines a multidimensional basic needs deprivation measure constructed from the Deltas, Vulnerability and Climate Change: Migration and Adaptation (DECCMA) survey dataset in Volta Delta, Ghana. Participatory focus groups, interviews and weighting exercises with communities and District Planning Officers (DPOs) explore different subgroups’ wellbeing priorities. Comparative analysis examines the weights provided across genders, decision-making levels and livelihoods; including farming, fishing and peri-urban groups. Objective survey data is also combined with various subjective weights to explore the sensitivity of the overall deprivation rate and its spatial distribution. Significant weight differences are found between livelihoods, with farming and fishing communities weighting “employment”, “bank access”, and “cooperative membership” higher, whereas peri-urban communities apply a greater weight to “healthcare access”. Differences between decision-making levels are also noted. Community members weight “employment” higher, while DPOs assign a larger score to “cooperative membership”. In contrast, consistent weights emerge across genders. Furthermore, applying community livelihood weights produces lower deprivation rates across most communities compared to DPO or equal nested weights. Overall, significant differences between subgroups’ weights and the sensitivity of wellbeing measurement to weighting selection illustrate the importance of not only collecting local weights, but also where and whom you collect weightings from matters.

Suggested Citation

  • Laurence Cannings & Craig Hutton & Kristine Nilsen & Alessandro Sorichetta, 2025. "“Where and Whom You Collect Weightings from Matters…” Capturing Wellbeing Priorities Within a Vulnerable Context: A Case Study of Volta Delta, Ghana," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 177(2), pages 863-908, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:177:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s11205-025-03524-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-025-03524-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-025-03524-x
    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/s11205-025-03524-x?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.

    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:177:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s11205-025-03524-x. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.