Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:58:41.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Sen’s Concept of the Living Standard applied to the Belgian Unemployed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Erik Schokkaert
Affiliation:
Katholieke Universiteit te Leuven
Luc Van Ootegem
Affiliation:
Katholieke Universiteit te Leuven
Get access

Summary

We try to operationalise Sen’s concept of the living standard using questionnaire data on the economic situation of the Belgian unemployed. We use factor analysis to reduce the number of basic functionings and to avoid possible overlap between them. The factors obtained can be interpreted in a natural and transparent way : they refer to social isolation, general feeling of happiness, physical functioning, microsocial contact, degree of activity and financial situation. Factor scores on these functionings are related in a meaningful way to the socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents.

Résumé

Résumé

Notre article vise à rendre opérationnel le concept de niveau de vie tel qu’il est avancé par Sen, en utilisant des données provenant de questionnaires sur la situation économique des chômeurs belges. L’analyse factorielle est utilisée pour réduire le nombre des “fonctionnements” fondamentaux et d’éviter les recoupements. Les éléments qui ressortent sont : les sentiments d’isolement, de bonheur, de forme physique, de contact micro-social, de degré d’activité et de situation financière. Les scores obtenus sur ces différents facteurs sont significativement reliés aux caractéristiques socio-économiques des personnes interrogées.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 1990 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allardt, E. (1973), A Welfare Model for Selecting Indicators of National Development, Policy Sciences, vol. 4, pp. 6374.Google Scholar
Allardt, E. (1981), Experiences from the Comparative Scandinavian Welfare Study, with a Bibliography of the Project, European Journal of Political Research, vol. 9, pp. 101111.Google Scholar
Basu, K. (1987), Achievements, Capabilities and the Concept of Well-Being, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 4, pp. 6976.Google Scholar
Desai, M. and Shah, A. (1985), An Econometric Approach to the Measurement of Poverty, mimeo, Suntory Toyota International Centre for Economics and Related Disciplines.Google Scholar
De Vos, K. and Hagenaars, A. (1988), A comparison between the poverty concepts of Sen and Townsend, mimeo, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Fisher, F.M. (1987), Household Equivalence Scales and Interpersonal Comparisons, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 61, pp. 369392.Google Scholar
Gorman, W. (1980), The Demand for Related Goods: a Possible Procedure for Analysing Quality Differentials in the Egg Market, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 47, pp. 843856.Google Scholar
Harman, H.H. (1976), Modern Factor Analysis, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lancaster, K. (1966), A New Approach to Consumer Theory, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 74, pp. 132157.Google Scholar
Pollak, R. and Wales, T. (1979), Welfare Comparisons and Equivalence Scales, American Economic Review, vol. 69, pp. 216221.Google Scholar
Sen, A.K. (1983), Poor, relatively speaking, Oxford Economic Papers, vol. 35, pp. 135169.Google Scholar
Sen, A.K. (1984), The Living Standard, Oxford Economic Papers, vol. 36, pp. 7490.Google Scholar
Sen, A.K. (1985), Commodities and Capabilities, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Sen, A.K. et al. (1987), The Standard of Living, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar