IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aep/anales/4644.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Happiness vs. welfare functions: an analysis for the elderly in Argentina

Author

Listed:
  • D'elia Vanesa Valeria
  • Karczmarczyk Matilde

Abstract

This study aims to measure the evolution of the aggregate well-being of elderly people in Argentina during 2003-2023 using the more traditional abbreviated social welfare functions and the more recent hedonometer tool. Results show that both indicators have similar patterns: welfare increases during 2003-2011 and has been falling ever since. However, the reasons of this behavior differs in each presidency term. Moreover, we show that the happiness of pensioners measured from public opinion positively correlates with the well-being measured through income and distribution indexes. This result is relevant for policy makers.

Suggested Citation

  • D'elia Vanesa Valeria & Karczmarczyk Matilde, 2023. "Happiness vs. welfare functions: an analysis for the elderly in Argentina," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4644, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    • Handle: RePEc:aep:anales:4644
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://aaep.org.ar/works/works2023/4644.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Jakob & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2014. "Green growth, degrowth, and the commons," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 30(3), pages 447-468.
    2. Amartya Sen, 1976. "Real National Income," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(1), pages 19-39.
    3. Fleurbaey, Marc & Blanchet, Didier, 2013. "Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199767199.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mariana Conte Grand & Carolina Coloma Conte-Grand, 2020. "Una nota sobre la evolución del bienestar en la Argentina desde la década de 1990 al presente," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 733, Universidad del CEMA.
    2. Creutzig, Felix, 2020. "Limits to Liberalism: Considerations for the Anthropocene," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Ulrich Schmidt & Philipp C. Wichardt, 2019. "Inequity aversion, welfare measurement and the Gini index," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(3), pages 585-588, March.
    4. Marc Fleurbaey & Stéphane Zuber, 2021. "Fair Utilitarianism," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 370-401, May.
    5. Michael Jakob & William F. Lamb & Jan Christoph Steckel & Christian Flachsland & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2020. "Understanding different perspectives on economic growth and climate policy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    6. van den Bergh, Jeroen, 2023. "Climate policy versus growth concerns: Suggestions for economic research and communication," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    7. Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio & Teixidó Figueras, Jordi, 2013. "International Equity on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and World Levels: an integrated analysis through distributive welfare indices," Working Papers 2072/220758, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    8. Gordon Anderson, Alessio Farcomeni, Maria Grazia Pittau and Roberto Zelli, 2019. "Multidimensional Nation Wellbeing, More Equal yet More Polarized: An Analysis of the Progress of Human Development Since 1990," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 44(1), pages 1-22, March.
    9. Oded Stark & Wiktor Budzinski, 2021. "A social‐psychological reconstruction of Amartya Sen’s measures of inequality and social welfare," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 552-566, November.
    10. Géraldine Thiry, 2015. "Beyond GDP: Conceptual Grounds of Quantification. The Case of the Index of Economic Well-Being (IEWB)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 313-343, April.
    11. Anthony B. Atkinson & Andrea Brandolini, 2010. "On Analyzing the World Distribution of Income," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 24(1), pages 1-37, January.
    12. Antoinette Baujard & Muriel Gilardone, 2017. "Sen is not a capability theorist," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Jo Thori Lind & Karl Moene, 2011. "Miserly Developments," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(9), pages 1332-1352, June.
    14. Andrew E. Clark, 2015. "SWB as a Measure of Individual Well-Being," Working Papers halshs-01134483, HAL.
    15. McLaughlin, Eoin & Ducoing, Cristián & Hanley, Nick, 2024. "Challenges of wealth-based sustainability metrics: A critical appraisal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    16. Kohl, Miriam & Richter, Philipp M., 2023. "Unilateral tax policy in the open economy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    17. Andrew E. Clark & Conchita D’Ambrosio & Simone Ghislandi, 2016. "Adaptation to Poverty in Long-Run Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(3), pages 591-600, July.
    18. Klasen Stephan & Fleurbaey Marc, 2018. "Leaving No one Behind: Some Conceptual and Empirical Issues," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Simon Friederich & Jonathan Symons, 2023. "Operationalising sustainability? Why sustainability fails as an investment criterion for safeguarding the future," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(1), pages 61-71, February.
    20. Rafael Salas & Juan Rodríguez, 2013. "Popular support for social evaluation functions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 985-1014, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D3 - Microeconomics - - Distribution

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aep:anales:4644. 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: Juan Manuel Quintero (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeppea.html .

    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.