IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

(English) Can the Economics of Happiness Revive the Economics of Welfare (Italiano) L’economia della felicità può rinnovare l’economia del benessere?

  • AndreaSalvatore Antonio Barbieri
Registered author(s):

    (English) This article questions the increasing use of “happiness” or “subjective well-being” in order to evaluate public policies and social conditions. In more scientific words, can the blossoming economics of happiness revive the economics of welfare, which is said to be dying? The first section puts economics of happiness in the history of economic thought. The second part presents the methodological arguments and proofs of happiness data relevance, as well the results that open on welfare economics renewal and unusual political recommendations. The last part concludes that happiness is a useful criterion to evaluate society’s state, but should not be the only one: happiness data can allow avoiding paternalism and ethnocentrism, for example, but happiness economics face several and serious challenges that should prevent researchers from transforming satisfaction scores into the only barometer of public action. (Italiano) Lo scopo di questo lavoro è quello di esaminare le questioni che solleva l’utilizzo di dati sul “benessere soggettivo” per valutare le politiche pubbliche. In termini più accademici, si tratta di determinare in quale misura l’economia della felicità, in piena espansione, può contribuire a rinnovare l’economia del benessere, che secondo alcuni autori sarebbe in una fase di stallo. Per capire meglio le implicazioni di questa questione, la prima parte dell’articolo situa l’economia della felicità e l’economia del benessere nella storia del pensiero economico. La seconda parte presenta le argomentazioni metodologiche dell’economia della felicità e il suo contributo al rinnovamento delle raccomandazioni delle politiche economiche e dell’economia del benessere. L’ultima parte sottolinea che la felicità è un criterio utile, ma non può essere l’unico criterio per giudicare lo stato della società: se l’economia della felicità vuole evitare una forma di paternalismo o di etnocentrismo, le incertezze metodologiche che ancora la circondano, e le obiezioni in linea di principio ci invita a non fare della felicità il solo barometro dell’azione pubblica.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.irpps.cnr.it/e-pub/ojs/files/journals/4/articles/95/public/95-354-1-PB.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by National Research Council, Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies in its series IRPPS Working Papers with number 60:2014.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2014
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:cnz:wpaper:60:2014
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Via Palestro, 32, 00185 - Rome
    Phone: (+39) 06 492724200
    Fax: (+39) 06 49383724
    Web page: http://www.irpps.cnr.it/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Phelps, Charlotte D., 2001. "A clue to the paradox of happiness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 293-300, July.
    2. Ruut Veenhoven, 2003. "Hedonism and Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 437-457, December.
    3. Corneo, Giacomo, 2005. "Work and television," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 99-113, March.
    4. Runt Veenhoven, 2002. "Why Social Policy Needs Subjective Indicators," Social Indicators Research, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 33-46, June.
    5. Sen, Amartya K, 1979. "Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What's Wrong with Welfare Economics?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 89(355), pages 537-58, September.
    6. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1950. "A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58, pages 328.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cnz:wpaper:60:2014. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sveva Avveduto)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.