카테고리 글 보관함:행복DB

Anand, P., Hunter, G., &Smith, R. (2005). Capabilities and well-being: evidence based on the Sen–Nussbaum approach to welfare. Social Indicators Research, 74(1), 9-55.

  One of the most significant theoretical contributions to welfare analysis across a range of disciplines has been the development of the capabilities framework by Sen and others. Motivated by the claim that freedom should play a key role in social evaluation, the capabilities framework suggests that we consider what it is that people are …

더 보기 “Anand, P., Hunter, G., &Smith, R. (2005). Capabilities and well-being: evidence based on the Sen–Nussbaum approach to welfare. Social Indicators Research, 74(1), 9-55.”

Tatzel, M. (2002). “Money worlds” and well-being: An integration of money dispositions, materialism and price-related behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(1), 103-126.

  Psychological aspects of money—attitudes, material values, and spending—are brought together in an integrated model of consumption patterns. Tightness with money combined with high materialism predicts value-seeking bargain hunting; looseness with money combined with high materialism predicts price-seeking conspicuous spending; tightness with money combined with low materialism predicts price aversion and reluctance to spend; and …

더 보기 “Tatzel, M. (2002). “Money worlds” and well-being: An integration of money dispositions, materialism and price-related behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(1), 103-126.”

Frey, B. S., Benz, M., &Stutzer, A. (2004). Introducing procedural utility: Not only what, but also how matters. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics JITE, 160(3), 377-401.

  People not only care about outcomes; they also value the procedures that lead to the outcomes. Procedural utility is an important source of human well-being. This paper aims at introducing the concept of procedural utility into economics, and argues that it should be incorporated more widely into economic theory and empirical research. Three building …

더 보기 “Frey, B. S., Benz, M., &Stutzer, A. (2004). Introducing procedural utility: Not only what, but also how matters. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics JITE, 160(3), 377-401.”

Stutzer, A., &Frey, B. S. (2008). Stress that doesn& #39;t pay: The commuting paradox. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 110(2), 339-366.

People spend a lot of time commuting and often find it a burden. According to standard economics, the burden of commuting is chosen when compensated either on the labor or on the housing market so that individuals’ utility is equalized. However, in a direct test of this strong notion of equilibrium with panel data, we …

더 보기 “Stutzer, A., &Frey, B. S. (2008). Stress that doesn& #39;t pay: The commuting paradox. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 110(2), 339-366.”

Van Praag, B. M., &Baarsma, B. E. (2004). Using happiness surveys to value intangibles: The case of airport noise. The Economic Journal, 115(500), 224-246.

We assess the monetary value of the noise damage, caused by aircraft noise nuisance around Amsterdam Airport, as the sum of hedonic house price differentials and a residual cost component. The residual costs are assessed from a survey, including an ordinal life satisfaction scale, on which individual respondents have scored. The derived compensation scheme depends …

더 보기 “Van Praag, B. M., &Baarsma, B. E. (2004). Using happiness surveys to value intangibles: The case of airport noise. The Economic Journal, 115(500), 224-246.”

Fong, C. (2001). Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution. Journal of Public economics, 82(2), 225-246.

   Preferences for redistribution may be influenced by values and beliefs about distributive justice as well as by self-interest. People may prefer more redistribution to the poor if they believe that poverty is caused by circumstances beyond individual control. Therefore, beliefs about the causes of income may affect demand for redistribution. Alternatively, the effect of …

더 보기 “Fong, C. (2001). Social preferences, self-interest, and the demand for redistribution. Journal of Public economics, 82(2), 225-246.”

Brockner, J., &Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures.

  The authors suggest that procedural and distributive factors interactively combine to influence individuals’ reactions to their encounters with other people, groups, and organizations. Results from 45 independent samples (reviewed herein) show that (1) level of procedural justice is more positively related to individuals’ reactions when outcome fairness or valence is relatively low and (2) …

더 보기 “Brockner, J., &Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: interactive effects of outcomes and procedures.”

Van Herwaarden, F., Kapteyn, A., &Van Praag, B. (1977). Twelve thousand individual welfare functions: A comparison of six samples in Belgium and The Netherlands

  The paper summarizes evidence with respect to the individual welfare function of income. Moreover a number of new empirical results is presented. Data are used from six surveys in Belgium and The Netherlands. The relationships considered appear to be stable across the different samples. The implications of the results for social policy are briefly …

더 보기 “Van Herwaarden, F., Kapteyn, A., &Van Praag, B. (1977). Twelve thousand individual welfare functions: A comparison of six samples in Belgium and The Netherlands”