ABSTRACT

This article articulates how and why feminist economists can move the quality of life literature forward and help it become a solid part of the social sciences rather than a subject whose perceived value fluctuates with political winds. Readers are challenged to consider and critique a proposed set of expectations to clearly define the field and set standards of excellence. Examples of this approach are provided from the experiences of an economic research firm striving to build on these guidelines in its work with nonprofit and for-profit organizations that design, fund, evaluate, and/or deliver programs that impact quality of life.

KEYWORDS

Quality of life, socio-economic measures, indicators, meta-analysis, empirical strategists

Any quality of life assessment will include indicators of economic well-being. Therefore, economists have much to offer the quality of life indicators movement. This article articulates a strategy for integrating economics into the quality of life literature in order to enhance our understanding of the inherent interdependence of social and economic conditions. In the United States most social indicators have developed independently of economic indicators. One mechanism for catapulting quality of life studies into the mainstream of scholarly work and public discourse is to bring economists and other social scientists together to explore and enhance the existing research on measuring quality of life. This type of integration is integral to the feminist perspective on economic thought and practice.

The article begins with a discussion of how and why feminist economists can move the quality of life literature forward so that it become a solid part of the social sciences rather than a subject whose perceived value fluctuates with political winds. Toward this end, readers are challenged to consider and critique a proposed set of strategies or expectations to define clearly the field and set standards of excellence. Examples of this approach are provided from the experiences of a research firm striving to build on these guidelines in its work with organizations that design, fund, evaluate and/or deliver programs that impact quality of life.

Contributions of Feminist Economists to the Literature

By publishing a special volume on quality of life indicators, Feminist Economics is assuming a leadership role in the developing field of economic indicators to measure quality of life. This effort is appropriate because, in the United States and perhaps elsewhere, economic indicators have historically served as national benchmarks of health, stability, and growth. Our well-being is monitored by such data streams as the daily Dow Jones Industrial Average, monthly unemployment figures, and quarterly statistics on gross domestic product and commerce.

Therefore, one way to introduce new measures of well-being is through national systems of accounting designed by economists. A primary reason that alternative measures of socio-economic well-being of the nation have not taken hold is because there is no constituency that demands such estimates on a regular basis. In contrast, traditional economic measures are regularly used by business people, bankers, hedgers, and speculators. Some say if the government did not pay for and provide these statistics, they would be created and updated on a regular basis by the private sector as evidenced by the advent of secondary financial and business indicators.

Out of this observation comes my first recommendation for feminist economists interested in contributing to the international quality of life literature. For this effort to move forward and take hold, we need to identify both a constituency that believes such information is vitally important to a nation and a willing benefactor to pay for this research, which can be expensive. The constituents and benefactors may be one and the same.

When presenting our work to potential constituents, we can articulate how quality of life indicators differ from extant socio-economic data of which there is an abundance. The quality of life literature is much narrower in scope, theory, methodology and conceptual frame than established economic fields of study (e.g., public welfare, poverty). Scholars are seeking new, inventive ways to articulate and/or describe well-being. Thus, it is important that the economics profession not overpower the quality of life literature with our way of thinking. We offer only a piece of the bigger picture on the human condition, albeit an important piece.

Another reason for Feminist Economics to pursue the study of socio-economic indicators is the uniquely feminine approach to the subject. Some scholars posit that empirical, verifiable, scientifically-based economic statistics emanate from masculine-dominated disciplines such as physics, mathematics, and economics. Human-based, qualitative, process-driven, social statistics emanated from female-dominated professions such as social work and philanthropy. Carefully-crafted quality of life indicators provide a middle-ground in which both hard and soft numbers enter into the discussion simultaneously.

There is a danger, however, and a risk assumed when we explore the deep issues surrounding quality of life. The Welfare Reform Act of 1996 provides an example from the political arena. Local indicators projects are uncovering the direct and indirect effects of the loss of the federal safety net for the poorest of the poor whose quality of life is eroding. Too often history demonstrates the temptation to walk away from the painful truth revealed in well-crafted quality of life indicators and hide behind traditional economic indicators, which often tell another story. Thus a second recommendation for feminist economists entering this field is to carefully explore the outcomes of proposed research on quality of life and build consensus on what is to be examined and how the information will be used, well before the study begins. Once the results are in, stand your ground and not give way to forces advocating alterations of the findings.

Expectations for Economic Research on Quality of Life

If the quality of life indicators literature is to advance, add value to our knowledge about the human condition, and take hold, my third recommendation is that we adopt a set of strategies or expectations to clearly define the field and set standards of excellence. I propose that the test of this burgeoning literature on quality of life be five-fold:

• First, that the literature acknowledges and builds on existing knowledge not only from the economics profession, but also from related social sciences that examine elements that fall under the domain of economic aspects of quality of life, such as income, employment, poverty, and social mobility. Let’s learn from our predecessors in this field.
• Second, that the literature goes beyond standard theoretical, methodological and empirical approaches to measuring social-environmental-economic conditions in an effort to include that which is currently unaccounted for such as the household sector and non-market economies. We do not need to reinvent the wheel and/or recycle our articles in this new field of economic study. Rather, scholars are expected to demonstrate the novelty and value-added by their contributions.
• Third, that the expressed aim be to make the invisible visible. Hence the literature favors approaches that are creative, exploratory, inclusive, even daring, idiosyncratic, experiential, and straight-forward. We welcome meta-analysis that includes subjective measures and indirect measures of well-being.
• Fourth, that the quality of life literature must be applicable to real life and drawn from specific, verifiable knowledge, experience, and data rather than from abstract, unduly constrained models and assumptions about life. Tangible outcomes of the research must be evident.
• Fifth, that the approach be nonjudgmental, whereby the indicators are not deemed good or bad by the researchers, but rather are grounded in the human experience of the user whatever that may be. Solid research will allow the users to apply the information in order to ascertain the degree to which quality of life has improved or deteriorated over time.

This last expectation may indeed prove to be the hardest for economists to grasp because we have been trained to think in terms of "better or worse" scenarios rather than to remove the subjective valuations and simply provide meaningful, well-crafted indicators for the user to implement and discern meaning and value. Nowhere is this more evident than in the increases in GDP, which for most economists is a positive sign. However, for those whose quality of life has eroded in recent years as the GDP rose in the United States (e.g., laid-off workers and nonstockholders), advances in GDP are not to be heralded. As the saying goes, "Who is to say that a life of enlightened poverty is inferior to one of indolent wealth?"

Conclusion

Because of the inherent connection between a person’s quality of life and economic standing, feminist economists have much to offer the burgeoning field of quality of life indicators. They have an opening to establish some expectations or strategies to both advance the field and help it become an accepted part of the social sciences.

The approach presented in this article is currently being tested by a research firm located sixty miles from Washington, DC, in the Blue Ridge Mountains of the Harpers Ferry National Historical Park in West Virginia, USA. The firm, FLYNN RESEARCH, is an experienced group of empirical strategists that meets the measurement and reporting needs of organizations that plan, fund, evaluate and/or design programs that impact quality of life. We do this by designing custom algorithms, research methodologies, and tools to make information meaningful, including innovative models, surveys, databases, analyses, reports, and systems applications.

Our premise is that organizations called upon to use the language of statisticians and economists to describe their functions and contributions do not need traditional statistics, but do need measures that help make the invisible visible. Toward this end, we first always consider ways to unbundle the information generated, rather than develop indices that mask the underlying phenomena. Life is too complex to be expressed in a single number. Second, we combine measurement with an assessment of what the statistics mean to the people being measured. Evaluation research, in contrast, excludes any subjective valuation or input from the observed. Third, we explicitly build on humanistic values propounded by earlier generations of relativist anthropologists, rather than ignoring the values that drive any kind of measurement. In so doing, we describe and portray through meta-analysis the subjective lives of people from different cultures. Our greatest service is to help groups develop a straightforward, yet rigorous and analytical lexicon to articulate what is important to them, which in the end almost always mirrors their construct of quality of life.