Subjective Well-Being and the Measurement of Poverty by Grace
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Subjective Well-being and the Measurement of Poverty By Grace Kelly MRes, BSc (Hons) A dissertation submitted as the sole requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) In the School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work Queen’s University Belfast November 2014 Abstract Within the United Kingdom, assessments of societal progress have traditionally been made according to objective measures such as Gross Domestic Product, unemployment rates and more recently, poverty levels. However, there has been a discernable shift towards measures of subjective human conditions, sometimes referred to as ‘quality of life’, sometimes ‘happiness’ or ‘well-being’ and on occasion, ‘welfare’. This is reflective of a worldwide concern about the limitations of economic measures and the growing desire for complementary subjective measures to inform policy making. This thesis is concerned with the level of enthusiasm and speed at which these alternative subjective measures have being embraced and the consequences this poses for objective measures of poverty based on low income and material deprivation. From an anti-poverty perspective, the possibility that subjective self-reported satisfaction levels come to take priority over objective measures of poverty is a major concern. This is because reflective measures like life satisfaction and overall well-being have been shown to be vulnerable to the phenomenon of adaptation and social comparisons, where people rate their situation with that of similar others and relative to what they have come to expect (Burchardt, 2013). Conversely, the way in which deprivation is measured by the ‘enforced lack’ criterion (Mack and Lansley, 1985) has itself been critiqued by some along similar lines to adaptive preference formation (McKay, 2004; Halleröd, 2006; Crettaz and Suter, 2013). Therefore, resistance to the promotion of subjective perceptions of well-being in favour of objective measures of low income and deprivation cannot be validated without an exploration of the ‘enforced lack’ criterion along similar grounds. Much of the qualitative work examining the concept of adapted preferences within the poverty literature does so from the viewpoint of resourcefulness and agency amidst persistent pressures and strains (Kempson et al., 1994; Kempson, 1996; Scharf et al., 2002, 2005; Dean and Shah, 2002; Orr et al., 2006; Flint, 2010; Hickman et al., 2014). Fewer qualitative studies have examined the extent and intensity of adaptation and the degree to which reference group choices affect people’s experience of this phenomenon. Moreover, empirical evidence on how poverty indicators are affected by these processes is ‘still surprisingly scarce’ (Crettaz and Suter, 2013: 140). 1 Hence, the intention of this research is to address the gap in the existing knowledge base on the role that social comparisons, adaptation and expectations command over reported levels of perceived deprivation. It does so through the lens of Walter G. Runciman’s (1966) concept of relative deprivation. This study uses a mixed methods approach to carry out this investigation. Findings from interview data carried out with 51 respondents from low income families, together with quantitative analysis of a large random sample survey of the Northern Ireland population, are analysed to examine whether and how social comparisons affect perceptions of objective conditions. Results reveal that people often make comparisons with similar others, either in a lateral or downward manner. As a result, expectations are lowered with aspirations and preferences being adapted to people’s material and financial constraints. The study concludes that the ‘enforced lack’ measure of deprivation is the most effective in identifying individuals at risk of material deprivation. Meanwhile, levels of overall life satisfaction are argued to be particularly vulnerable to adaptation processes. This is because people rate their satisfaction relative to the quality of their personal relationships, rather than using a more reflective view of life overall. 2 Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................... 1 List of tables ............................................................................................................................. 7 List of figures ............................................................................................................................ 7 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 8 Chapter one - Introduction ......................................................................................... 9 1. Study overview ..................................................................................................................... 9 2. Rationale ............................................................................................................................ 12 3. Aims and objectives ........................................................................................................... 13 4. Research questions ............................................................................................................ 14 5. Thesis structure .................................................................................................................. 14 Chapter Two - Towards subjectivity .......................................................................... 18 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 18 2. Background summary ........................................................................................................ 18 3. Section One: Political and intellectual influences .............................................................. 21 I. The contribution of psychology .................................................................................. 21 II. Measuring Subjective well-being ............................................................................... 22 III. The contribution of economics ................................................................................. 24 IV. Behavioural economics ............................................................................................. 26 V. The contribution of influential advocates of human development and global sustainability .................................................................................................................. 29 4. Section Two: The operationalisation of subjectivity .......................................................... 34 I. How subjectivity has been translated into government policy .................................. 34 II. Nudge policy making .................................................................................................. 38 III. Randomised Control Trials ........................................................................................ 42 IV. Behavioural conditionality ........................................................................................ 44 5. Overview ............................................................................................................................ 46 Chapter three - Subjective relative deprivation ......................................................... 48 1. The origins of subjective relative deprivation.................................................................... 49 2. The direction of social comparisons .................................................................................. 57 3. Adaptive preference formation ......................................................................................... 62 4. Negative thinking and lowered expectations .................................................................... 65 5. Overview ............................................................................................................................ 69 3 Chapter Four - Objective relative deprivation ............................................................ 70 1. Absolutist needs ................................................................................................................. 70 2. Relative deprivation ........................................................................................................... 72 3. Conceptual poverty ............................................................................................................ 77 4. Poverty and Social Exclusion (PSE) ..................................................................................... 79 5. Adaptation and the measurement of poverty ................................................................... 81 6. Overview ............................................................................................................................ 88 Chapter Five – Methodology ..................................................................................... 90 1. Research design ................................................................................................................. 90 I. Literature review ......................................................................................................... 90 II. Research strategy ....................................................................................................... 92 2. Reliability and validity .......................................................................................................