The authors argue that the welfare
inferences drawn from subjective answers to questions on
qualitative surveys are clouded by concerns about the
structure of measurement errors and how latent psychological
factors influence observed respondent characteristics. They
propose a panel data model to high-quality panel data for
Russia for 1994-96, they find that some results widely
reported in past studies of subjective well-being appear to
be robust but others do not. Household income, for example,
is a highly significant predictor of self-rated economic
welfare; per capita income is a weaker predictor. Ill health
and loss of a job reduce self-reported economic welfare; per
capita income is a weaker predictor. Ill health and loss of
a job reduce self-reported economic welfare, but demographic
effects are weak at a given current income. And the effects
of unemployment is not robust. Returning to work does not
restore a sense of welfare unless there is an income gain.
The results imply that even transient unemployment brings
the feeling of a permanent welfare loss, suggesting that
high unemployment benefits do not attract people out of work
but do discourage a return to work.
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: |
Ravallion, Martin,
Lokshin, Michael |
Format: | Policy Research Working Paper
biblioteca
|
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2000-03
|
Subjects: | AVERAGE GROWTH,
AVERAGE INCOME,
CAUSAL EFFECT,
DATA MODEL,
DATA SET,
DATA SETS,
DEFLATORS,
DEMOGRAPHIC EFFECTS,
DEPENDENT VARIABLE,
DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS,
DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION,
DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS,
ECONOMETRIC MODEL,
ECONOMETRICS,
ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES,
ECONOMIC GROWTH,
ECONOMIC REFORMS,
ECONOMIC SURVEYS,
ECONOMIC WELFARE,
ECONOMICS LITERATURE,
EXPENDITURES,
EXPLANATORY POWER,
EXPLANATORY VARIABLE,
EXPLANATORY VARIABLES,
FARMS,
GDP,
GDP PER CAPITA,
GNP,
GROUP MEANS,
GROWTH RATE,
GROWTH RATES,
HOUSEHOLD INCOME,
HOUSEHOLD INCOMES,
HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS,
HOUSEHOLD SIZE,
HUMAN RESOURCE,
INCENTIVE EFFECTS,
INCOME,
INCOME COMPONENTS,
INCOME EFFECT,
INCOME GROWTH,
INCOME INEQUALITY,
INCOME MEASURES,
INCOME SOURCES,
INCOMES,
INDIVIDUAL INCOMES,
LEISURE,
MEAN INCOME,
MEASUREMENT ERROR,
MEASUREMENT ERRORS,
MEASURING INEQUALITY,
NEGATIVE COEFFICIENT,
NEGATIVE CORRELATION,
NEGATIVE EFFECT,
NEGLIGIBLE DIFFERENCE,
NORMAL DISTRIBUTION,
PER CAPITA INCOME,
POLICY DISCUSSIONS,
POLICY MAKING,
POLICY RESEARCH,
POOR,
POSITIVE CORRELATION,
POVERTY LINE,
POVERTY LINES,
POVERTY MEASURE,
POVERTY RATE,
PRIVATE TRANSFERS,
PUBLIC GOODS,
REAL INCOME,
REAL WAGES,
RELATIVE INCOME,
RELATIVE POSITION,
RISING INEQUALITY,
SAVINGS,
SIGNIFICANT EFFECT,
SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE,
SOCIAL SECURITY,
SUBJECTIVE ASSESSMENTS,
SUBJECTIVE DATA,
UNEMPLOYMENT,
UTILITY FUNCTION,
WAGES, |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2000/03/437971/identifying-welfare-effects-subjective-questions
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19849
|
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|