London School of Economics and Political Science

About: London School of Economics and Political Science is a education organization based out in London, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Politics. The organization has 8759 authors who have published 35017 publications receiving 1436302 citations.

Measuring Subjective Wellbeing: Recommendations on Measures for use by National Governments

Abstract: Governments around the world are now beginning to seriously consider the use of measures of subjective wellbeing (SWB) – ratings of thoughts and feelings about life – for monitoring progress and for informing and appraising public policy. The mental state account of wellbeing upon which SWB measures are based can provide useful additional information about who is doing well and badly in life when compared to that provided by the objective list and preference satisfaction accounts. It may be particularly useful when deciding how best to allocate scarce resources, where it is desirable to express the benefits of intervention in a single metric that can be compared to the costs of intervention. There are three main concepts of SWB in the literature – evaluation (life satisfaction), experience (momentary mood) and eudemonia (purpose) – and policy-makers should seek to measure all three, at least for the purposes of monitoring progress. There are some major challenges to the use of SWB measures. Two related and well-rehearsed issues are the effects of expectations and adaptation on ratings. The degree to which we should allow wellbeing to vary according to expectations and adaptation are vexing moral problems but information on SWB can highlight what difference allowing for these considerations would have in practice (e.g. in informing prioiritisation decisions), which can then be fed into the normative debate. There are also questions about precisely what attention should be drawn to in SWB questions and how to capture the ratings of those least inclined to take part in surveys, but these can be addressed through more widespread use of SWB. We also provide some concrete recommendations about precisely what questions should be asked in large-scale surveys, and these recommendations have been taken up by the Office of National Statistics in the UK and are being looked at closely by the OECD.

Who speaks for the future of Earth?: how critical social science can extend the conversation on the Anthropocene

Abstract: This paper asks how the social sciences can engage with the idea of the Anthropocene in productive ways. In response to this question we outline an interpretative research agenda that allows critical engagement with the Anthropocene as a socially and culturally bounded object with many possible meanings and political trajectories. In order to facilitate the kind of political mobilization required to meet the complex environmental challenges of our times, we argue that the social sciences should refrain from adjusting to standardized research agendas and templates. A more urgent analytical challenge lies in exposing, challenging and extending the ontological assumptions that inform how we make sense of and respond to a rapidly changing environment. By cultivating environmental research that opens up multiple interpretations of the Anthropocene, the social sciences can help to extend the realm of the possible for environmental politics.

The macroeconomic effects of fiscal policy

Abstract: We investigate the macroeconomic effects of fiscal policy using a Bayesian Structural Vector Autoregression (B-SVAR) approach. We identify fiscal policy shocks via a partial identification scheme, but also: (i) include the feedback from government debt; (ii) look at the impact on the composition of output; (iii) assess the effects on asset markets; (iv) use quarterly data; and (v) analyse empirical evidence from the US, the UK, Germany and Italy. The results show that government spending shocks, in general, have a small effect on Gross Domestic Product (GDP); lead to important ‘crowding-out’ effects; have a varied impact on housing prices and generate a quick fall in stock prices. Government revenue shocks generate a mixed effect on housing prices and a small and positive effect on stock prices. The empirical evidence also suggests that it is important to explicitly consider the government debt dynamics in the model.