This paper provides a constructive critique of the work on the Office for National Statistic's Measuring National Well-being project. Recalling Adam Smith's work on happiness highlights how the work in this project, as well as most of the dominant work in the field remains based on an economic utility model of well-being, failing to distinguish between individual- and aggregate-based levels of analysis and continuing to postulate well-being as a form of utility that essentially is the outcome of market interactions only. Using data from the first wave of Understanding Society, this paper will investigate the appropriateness of the approach empirically. A breakdown of the variation in life-satisfaction shows that ranking a split of the UK into 36 regions has little meaning, as there is hardly any variation of life-satisfaction at the regional level. Using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA), an alternative way of engaging with the cross-regional analysis is presented.
EichhornJ (2012a) Happiness for Believers? Contextualising the Effects of Religiosity on Life-Satisfaction.European Sociological Review28(5): p. 583 - 593. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1093/esr/jcr027]
7.
EichhornJ (2012b) Unemployment needs context: How societal differences between countries moderate the loss in life-satisfaction for the unemployed.Journal of Happiness Studies, doi: 10.1007/s10902-012-9402-y. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1007/s10902-012-9402-y]
8.
EvansJ (2011) Findings from the National Well-being Debate. Office for National Statistics working paper.
9.
Ferrer-I-CarbonellA, GërxhaniK (2004) How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness?The Economic Journal114: p. 641–659.
10.
FreyB (2008) Happiness. A Revolution in Economics.Cambridge and London: The MIT Press. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.7551/mitpress/9780262062770.001.0001]
11.
FreyB, StutzerA (2002) Happiness and Economics. How the Economy and Institutions Affect Well-Being.Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
12.
KahnemannD, WakkerP, SarinR (1997) Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility.Quarterly Journal of Economics112(2): p. 375–405. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1162/003355397555235]
13.
KahnemannD, (1999) Objective Happiness. In: KahnemannD, DienerE, SchwarzN (Eds.) Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
14.
MuthéNL, MuthéNB (2005) Chi-square difference testing using the S-B scaled chi-square. Available at: <www.statmodel.com> (accessed 8 January 2012).
15.
MuthéNL, MuthéNB (2010) Difference Testing Using the Likelihood. Available at: <www.statmodel.com> (accessed 8 January 2012).
ParducciA (1995) Happiness, Pleasure and Judgement. The Contextual Theory and Its Applications.Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18.
PittauM, ZelliR, GelmanA (2010) Economic Disparities and Life Satisfaction in European Regions.Social Indicator Research96(2): p. 339 - 361. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1007/s11205-009-9481-2]
19.
RasmussenD (2006) Does ‘Bettering Our Condition’ Really Make Us Better Off?: Adam Smith's Thought.American Political Science Review100(3): p. 309–318. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1017/S0003055406062204]
20.
SchwarzN, StrackF (1999) Reports of Subjective Well-Being: Judgemental Processes and Their Methodological Implications. In: KahnemannD, DienerE, SchwarzN (Eds.) Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
21.
ScollonC, Kim-PrietoC, DienerE. (2003) Experience Sampling: Promises and Pitfalls, Strengths and Weaknesses.Journal of Happiness Studies4(1): p. 5–34. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1023/A:1023605205115]
22.
SmithA (1776/1999) An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.London: Penguin Books.
23.
SmithA (1790/2009) The Theory of Moral Sentiments.London: Penguin Books.
24.
SmithV (1998) The Two Faces of Adam Smith.Southern Economic Journal65(1): p. 1–19. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.2307/1061349]
25.
SpenceA, PowellM, SelfA (2011) Developing a Framework for Understanding and Measuring National Well-being. Office for National Statistics working paper.
26.
StiglitzJ, SenA, FitoussiJ (2009) Report by the Commission on the Measrument of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Available at: <www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr> (accessed 19 December 2011).
ONS (2012b) Analysis of Experimental Subjective Well-being Data from the Annual Population Survey, April to September 2011. Office for National Statistics. Available at <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_257882.pdf> (accessed 12 April 2013)
29.
ONS (2012c) First Annual Experimental Subjective Well-being Results. Office for National Statistics. Available at <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_272294.pdf> (accessed 12 April 2013).
30.
RyanR, HutaV, DeciE (2008) Living Well: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective on Eudaimonia.Journal of Happiness Studies9(1): p. 139 - 70. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1007/s10902-006-9023-4]
31.
RyffC and KeyesC (2008) The Structure of Psychological Well-Being Revisited.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology69(4): p. 719 - 727. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719]
32.
TinklerL, HicksS (2011) Measuring Subjective Well-being. Office for National Statistics working paper
33.
TribeK (1999) Adam Smith: Critical Theorist?Journal of Economic Literature37(2): p. 609 - 632. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1257/jel.37.2.609]
34.
UNDERSTANDING SOCIETY (2011) Understanding Society.The UK Household Longitudinal Study. Available at: <www.understandingsocietiy.org.uk> (accessed 23 December 2011).
35.
VeenhovenR (1984) Conditions of Happiness.Dordrecht: Reidel. [doi://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1007/978-94-009-6432-7]
36.
WaldronS (2010) Measuring Subjective Well-being in the UK. Office for National Statistics working paper.
