幸福理论与幸福政策:方法论视角

IF 1.7 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Economic Methodology Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI:10.1080/1350178X.2020.1868780
Roberto Fumagalli
{"title":"幸福理论与幸福政策:方法论视角","authors":"Roberto Fumagalli","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2020.1868780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the recent well-being literature, various theory-free accounts of well-being have been proposed to ground informative evaluations of policies’ welfare implications without relying on any specific theories of well-being. In this paper, I provide a methodological assessment of theory-free accounts and argue that, despite these accounts, grounding informative evaluations of policies’ welfare implications frequently requires policy makers to rely on specific theories of well-being. Policy makers should ground their evaluations of policies’ welfare implications on explicit specifications of what theories of well-being they rely on and should openly acknowledge the theory-dependent character of their evaluations rather than aiming to provide theory-free welfare evaluations.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"28 1","pages":"124 - 133"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theories of well-being and well-being policy: a view from methodology\",\"authors\":\"Roberto Fumagalli\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1350178X.2020.1868780\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In the recent well-being literature, various theory-free accounts of well-being have been proposed to ground informative evaluations of policies’ welfare implications without relying on any specific theories of well-being. In this paper, I provide a methodological assessment of theory-free accounts and argue that, despite these accounts, grounding informative evaluations of policies’ welfare implications frequently requires policy makers to rely on specific theories of well-being. Policy makers should ground their evaluations of policies’ welfare implications on explicit specifications of what theories of well-being they rely on and should openly acknowledge the theory-dependent character of their evaluations rather than aiming to provide theory-free welfare evaluations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46507,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Methodology\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"124 - 133\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2020.1868780\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2020.1868780","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

在最近的福祉文献中,已经提出了各种无理论的福祉账户,以在不依赖任何特定的福祉理论的情况下对政策的福利影响进行信息评估。在本文中,我提供了对无理论账户的方法论评估,并认为,尽管有这些账户,对政策福利影响的基础信息评估往往需要政策制定者依赖特定的福利理论。政策制定者应该将他们对政策福利影响的评估建立在他们所依赖的福利理论的明确规范之上,并且应该公开承认他们的评估依赖于理论的特征,而不是旨在提供无理论的福利评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Theories of well-being and well-being policy: a view from methodology
ABSTRACT In the recent well-being literature, various theory-free accounts of well-being have been proposed to ground informative evaluations of policies’ welfare implications without relying on any specific theories of well-being. In this paper, I provide a methodological assessment of theory-free accounts and argue that, despite these accounts, grounding informative evaluations of policies’ welfare implications frequently requires policy makers to rely on specific theories of well-being. Policy makers should ground their evaluations of policies’ welfare implications on explicit specifications of what theories of well-being they rely on and should openly acknowledge the theory-dependent character of their evaluations rather than aiming to provide theory-free welfare evaluations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Journal of Economic Methodology is a valuable forum which publishes the most current and exciting work in the broad field of economic methodology. The Journal of Economic Methodology addresses issues such as: ■Methodological analysis of the theory and practice of contemporary economics ■Analysis of the methodological implications of new developments in economic theory and practice ■The methodological writings and practice of earlier economic theorists (mainstream or heterodox) ■Research in the philosophical foundations of economics ■Studies in the rhetoric, sociology, or economics of economics
期刊最新文献
Economic methodology to preserve the past? Some reflections on economic theories and their dueling interpretations. Beyond uncertainty: reasoning with unknown possibilities (Elements in Decision Theory and Philosophy) Paternalism for rational agents Experimental approach to development economics: a review of issues and options Economic models and their flexible interpretations: a philosophy of science perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1