A potential for better inclusion of wellbeing measures in CBA.
💡 WELLBYs! 💡 Julian King posted his thoughts today on the use of subjective wellbeing measures in cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and you should all go and read it. I have an interesting relationship with CBA. Used well, it provides a structured approach to isolating the net impact of an initiative and comparing options, and adds a lot of value to both decision making and evaluation. Used poorly it produces misleading insights, places too much focus on impacts that are easy to understand and measure, and dilutes the learnings from the analysis by combining measures into one numerical output. I have been following the progression of the broader wellbeing, happiness and quality of life studies over recent years and have had a particular interest in WELLBYs. A WELLBY is a "wellbeing life year" or the subjective wellbeing experienced by a person over a year. As outlined by Julian, it offers a conceptually valid and consistent way of valuing the impacts of intangible factors on overall life satisfaction, which can then be included in a CBA. I've thrown some thoughts together below about where I think the use of WELLBYs are good, and where there are some challenges. Where it is good: ✔ I think where individual wellbeing outcomes are the whole objective of an initiative that is being evaluated, the WELLBY is really useful. This is particularly the case in ex-post analysis where the evaluative approach has been designed from the outset to use this structure. ✔ I do think it better lends itself to cost-effectiveness analysis than CBA (which is probably the same for the similar constructs - QALYs and DALYs). ✔ I think it is better than utilising a new methodology every time when valuing intangible / social impacts. Where I see some challenges: ✖ Inconsistency across CBAs and evaluations - the fundamental unit of measure is different from the broader concept of welfare / utility that is deployed in most CBAs. ✖ I am also yet to be completely convinced that in their current form, the acute subjective wellbeing measures at the individual level are sufficiently correlated with the concept of overall societal wellbeing (or my more favoured concept for individual outcomes - "a life well-lived"). ✖ It is a little bit blunt, wrapping a lot of messy nuance into one measure of individual wellbeing limits the learnings and insight from the analysis (although this is where Julian would rightly suggest a mixed-methods approach to evaluation). Fundamentally, if we are comfortable with DALYs and QALYs and the monetisation of quality of life changes from health or disability status, then I think we have to be comfortable with a broader concept of wellbeing life years. I'm just not yet convinced that subjective wellbeing is the right fundamental unit of measure for many applications of CBA. Julian explores this way better than I can - go and read his article! https://lnkd.in/g_yd_xFd