courses-img1News
International Respiratory Medicine Conference 2024 JEMP2024 NextGen Omics US 2025 A Topic Collection Dedicated to JEMP 2024 9th Asian Conference on Civil, Material and Environmental Science The 4th Climate, Weather and Water Forum International Conference of the German Society for Plant Sciences Emerging concepts and Novel Mechanisms in Organ Fibrosis Workshop ECB-IBS 2024 Five Editors-in-Chief Featured in the List of "Highly Cited
Sign in Register Submit

Journals Article Details

Ecological Civilization-logo
Submit to Ecol. Civiliz.
Review Open Access

Desperately Seeking Sustainable Human Well-Being: A Review of Indicators, Concepts, and Methods

Ecological Civilization. 2024, 1(2), 10004; https://doi.org/10.35534/ecolciviliz.2024.10004
Uma U. Baysal *    Paul C. Sutton   
Department of Geography and the Environment, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80210, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Received: 13 Feb 2024    Accepted: 18 Mar 2024    Published: 01 Apr 2024   

Full-Text HTML Full-Text PDF Download PDF

Abstract

Evaluating progress in human development and well-being is imperative for policymakers to assess the impact of their policies. Traditional measurement methods focus mostly on economic growth and socio-economic objectives, often neglecting vital components of the natural environment, particularly the ecological determinants essential for the sustainability of human well-being. The tension between sustainability and development becomes apparent as the recognition of the dependence of human well-being on the natural environment and ecosystem services is crucial for safeguarding the environment for present and future generations. This highlights the necessity for indicators that capture the intricate relationship between human well-being and environmental changes while addressing the challenges posed by the tension between sustainable practices and traditional development models. This paper presents a literature review examining the domains, dimensions, and indicators related to the sustainability of human well-being regarding economic, social, and natural environments. Emphasizing the multidimensional nature, this paper highlights the drawbacks of relying solely on socioeconomic indicators for assessment. The review explores diverse concepts and methodologies proposed to evaluate the components and multidimensional factors influencing the sustainability of human well-being. Ultimately it offers a holistic understanding serving as a foundation for further research and policy development.

Keywords

Human well-being; Sustainable development; Ecosystem services; Assessment; Indicators; GDP; Ecological Footprint

References

1.
Alkire S. Dimensions of human development. World Dev. 2002, 30, 181–205. [Google Scholar]
2.
Diener E. Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 34. [Google Scholar]
3.
Diener E, Suh EM, Lucas RE, Smith HL. Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 1999, 125, 276. [Google Scholar]
4.
Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann. Intern. Med. 1993, 118, 622–629. [Google Scholar]
5.
Kahneman D, Krueger AB. Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. J. Econ. Perspect. 2006, 20, 3–24. [Google Scholar]
6.
Filomena M. Challenges, Needs and Risks in Defining Wellbeing Indicators. A Life Devoted to Quality of Life: Festschrift in Honor of Alex C. Michalos; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2016; Volume 60; pp. 209–233.
7.
McNaught, Allan. Defining wellbeing. In Understanding Wellbeing: An Introduction for Students and Practitioners of Health and Social Care; Lantern Publishing Ltd: Banbury OX, UK; 2011; pp: 7–23.
8.
Ronen T, Kerret D. Promoting sustainable wellbeing: Integrating positive psychology and environmental sustainability in education. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6968. [Google Scholar]
9.
Dietz T, Rosa EA, York R. Environmentally efficient well-being: Rethinking sustainability as the relationship between human well-being and environmental impacts. Human Ecol. Rev. 2009, 16, 114–123. [Google Scholar]
10.
Zhang S, Zhu D, Shi Q, Cheng M. Which countries are more ecologically efficient in improving human well-being? An application of the Index of Ecological Well-being Performance. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 129, 112–119. [Google Scholar]
11.
Costanza R, Hart M, Talberth J, Posner S. Beyond GDP: The need for new measures of progress. In The Pardee Papers; Boston University: Boston, MA, USA, 2009. 
12.
King MF, Renó VF, Novo EM. The concept, dimensions and methods of assessment of human well-being within a socioecological context: a literature review. Soc. Indic. Res. 2014, 116, 681–698. [Google Scholar]
13.
Rogers DS, Duraiappah AK, Antons DC, Munoz P, Bai X, Fragkias M, et al. A vision for human well-being: Transition to social sustainability. Curr. Opin. Env. Sust. 2012, 4, 61–73. [Google Scholar]
14.
Wang C, Wang X, Wang Y, Zhan J, Chu X, Teng Y, et al. Spatio-temporal analysis of human wellbeing and its coupling relationship with ecosystem services in Shandong province, China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2023, 33, 392–412. [Google Scholar]
15.
Diener E. Subjective well-being. Psychol. Bull. 1984, 95, 542. [Google Scholar]
16.
Summers JK, Smith LM, Case JL, Linthurst RA. A review of the elements of human well-being with an emphasis on the contribution of ecosystem services. Ambio 2012, 41, 327–340. [Google Scholar]
17.
World Health Organization. The world health report 2000: Health systems: improving performance. World Health Organization. Available Online: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/924156198X (accessed on 3 January 2024).
18.
Grouzet FM, Lee ES. Ecological well-being. In Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2014; pp. 1784–1787.
19.
Cummins RA. Personal income and subjective well-being: A review. J. Happiness Stud. 2000, 1, 133–158. [Google Scholar]
20.
James G. Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement and Moral Importance; Clarendon press: Oxford, NY, USA, 1986; pp 40–53.
21.
Dolan P, Peasgood T, White M. Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. J. Econ. Psychol. 2008, 29, 94–122. [Google Scholar]
22.
Kahneman D, Diener E, Schwarz N. Well-Being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology; Russell Sage Foundation: Manhattan, NY, USA, 1999; pp 3–26, 213–230.
23.
Costanza R, Daly L, Fioramonti L, Giovannini E, Kubiszewski I, Mortensen LF, et al. Modelling and measuring sustainable wellbeing in connection with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Ecol. Econ. 2016, 130, 350–355. [Google Scholar]
24.
Ivković AF, Ham M, Mijoč J. Measuring objective well-being and sustainable development management. J. Knowl. Manag. Econ. Inf. Technol. 2014, 4, 1–29. [Google Scholar]
25.
Lutz W, Striessnig E, Dimitrova A, Ghislandi S, Lijadi A, Reiter C, et al. Years of good life is a well-being indicator designed to serve research on sustainability. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e1907351118. [Google Scholar]
26.
Chaaban J, Irani A, Khoury A. The Composite Global Well-Being Index (CGWBI): A new multidimensional measure of human development. Soc. Indic. Res. 2016, 129, 465–487. [Google Scholar]
27.
Porter JR, Purser CW. Measuring relative sub-national human development: An application of the United Nation’s Human Development Index using geographic information systems. J. Econ. Soc. Meas. 2008, 33, 253–269. [Google Scholar]
28.
Pelenc J, Ballet J. Strong sustainability, critical natural capital and the capability approach. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 112, 36–44. [Google Scholar]
29.
Sen A. Capability and well-being. In The Quality of Life; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1993; pp. 30–53. 
30.
Easterlin RA, O’Connor KJ. The Easterlin Paradox. In Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics; Springer International Publishing: Berlin, Germany, 2022; pp. 1–25.
31.
Stevenson B, Wolfers J. Economic growth and subjective well-being: Reassessing the Easterlin paradox (No. w14282). Natl. Bureau Econ. Res. 2008, 39, 1–102. [Google Scholar]
32.
Stieglitz J, Jaeggi AV, Blackwell AD, Trumble BC, Gurven M, Kaplan H. Work to live and live to work: Productivity, transfers, and psychological well-being in adulthood and old age. In Sociality, hierarchy, health: Comparative biodemography: A collection of papers. National Academies Press (US). 2014, Available Online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK242449/ (accessed on 2 February 2024).
33.
Van den Bergh JC. The GDP paradox. J. Econ. Psychol. 2009, 30, 117–135. [Google Scholar]
34.
Dynan K, Sheiner L. GDP as a measure of economic well-being. Hutchins Cent. Work. Paper 2018, 43, 53. [Google Scholar]
35.
Kuznets S. National Income, 1919–1935; NBER: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1937.
36.
Marcuss RD, Kane RE. US national income and product statistics. Surv. Curr. Bus. 2007, 87, 2–32. [Google Scholar]
37.
McCulla SH, Smith S. Measuring the economy: A primer on GDP and the national income and product accounts. Washington, D.C.: US Dept. of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2007. Available Online: https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/methodologies/nipa_primer.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2024)
38.
Fioramonti L. Gross Domestic Problem: The Politics Behind the World’s Most Powerful Number; Zed Books: London, UK, 2013; pp: 82–119.
39.
Kubiszewski I, Costanza R, Franco C, Lawn P, Talberth J, Jackson T, et al. Beyond GDP: Measuring and achieving global genuine progress. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 93, 57–68. [Google Scholar]
40.
Costanza R, Kubiszewski I, Giovannini E, Lovins H, McGlade J, Pickett KE, et al. Development: Time to leave GDP behind. Nature 2014, 505, 283–285. [Google Scholar]
41.
Giannetti BF, Agostinho F, Almeida CMVB, Huisingh D. A review of limitations of GDP and alternative indices to monitor human well-being and to manage ecosystem functionality. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 87, 11–25. [Google Scholar]
42.
Raworth K. Why it’s time for Doughnut Economics. IPPR Progress. Rev. 2017, 24, 216–222. [Google Scholar]
43.
Jonathan S, Adrian VJ, Aaron DB, Benjamin CT, Michael G, Hillard SK. Work to Live and Live to Work: Productivity, Transfers, and Psychological Well-Being in Adulthood and Old Age. Sociality, Hierarchy, Health: Comparative Biodemography: A Collection of Papers; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; pp. 197–222. 
44.
Easterlin RA. Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In Nations and Households in Economic Growth; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974; pp. 89–125.
45.
Zawojska A. Looking beyond the traditional concept of economic growth: alternative meanings and measures of nations’ economic and social progress. Reg. Bus. Stud. 2011, 3, 339–352. [Google Scholar]
46.
Van den B, Jeroen CJM. Abolishing GDP (February 2007). TI Discussion Paper No. 07-019/3, Available Online: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=962343 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.962343 (accessed on 3 September 2023).
47.
Bandura R, Del Campo CM. A survey of composite indices measuring country performance: 2006 update. UNDP, Office of Development Studies. 2006. Available online: https://www.eldis.org/document/A43097 (accessed on 24 March 2024).
48.
Cobb C, Glickman M, Cheslog C. The genuine progress indicator 2000 update. Redefining Progress Issue Brief. 2001, Available online: http://www. progress.org/publications/2000_gpi_update.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2024). 
49.
Bagstad KJ, Berik G, Gaddis EJB. Methodological developments in U.S. state-level genuine progress indicators: Toward GPI 2.0. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 45, 474–485. [Google Scholar]
50.
Gross National Happiness USA. Available Online: https://gnhusa.org/genuine-progress-indicator (accessed on 13 October 2023).
51.
Berik G. Measuring what matters and guiding policy: An evaluation of the Genuine Progress Indicator. Int. Labour. Rev. 2020, 159, 71–94. [Google Scholar]
52.
Krueger AB, Stone AA. Measuring subjective well-being: Progress and challenges.  Science 2014, 346, 42. [Google Scholar]
53.
Bhanojirao VV. Human development report 1990: Review and assessment. World Dev. 1991, 19, 1451–1460. [Google Scholar]
54.
Sagar AD, Najam A. The human development index: A critical review. Ecol. Econ. 1998, 25, 249–264. [Google Scholar]
55.
Kerényi Á. The better life index of the organisation for economic co-operation and development. Public Finance Q. 2011, 56, 518. [Google Scholar]
56.
Nikolaev B. Economic freedom and quality of life: Evidence from the OECD’s Your Better Life Index. J. Private Enterp. 2014, 29, 61–96. [Google Scholar]
57.
Durand M. The OECD better life initiative: How’s life? and the measurement of well‐being. Rev. Income Wealth 2015, 61, 4–17. [Google Scholar]
58.
Kasparian J, Rolland A. OECD’s ‘Better Life Index’: can any country be well ranked? J. Appl. Stat. 2012, 39, 2223–2230. [Google Scholar]
59.
Koronakos G, Smirlis Y, Sotiros D, Despotis DK. Assessment of OECD Better Life Index by incorporating public opinion. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2020, 70, 100699. [Google Scholar]
60.
Mizobuchi H. Incorporating sustainability concerns in the Better Life Index: Application of corrected convex non-parametric least squares method. Soc. Indic. Res. 2017, 131, 947–971. [Google Scholar]
61.
Costanza R. The dynamics of the ecological footprint concept. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 32, 341–345. [Google Scholar]
62.
Walter VR, Harold AM. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis; Island Press: Washington DC, USA, 2005, Available online: https://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf (accessed on 6 January 2024).
63.
Costanza R, De Groot R, Sutton P, Van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, et al. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environ. Chang. 2014, 26, 152–158. [Google Scholar]
64.
Prescott-Allen R. The Well-Being of Nations: A Country-by-Country Index of Quality of Life and the Environment, 1st ed., Island press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001; pp 107–147.
65.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2001. Available online: https://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.html (accessed on 24 January 2024).
66.
Costanza R, McGlade J, Lovins H, Kubiszewski I. An overarching goal for the UN sustainable development goals. Solutions 2014, 5, 13–16. [Google Scholar]
67.
Daily GC, Postel S, Bawa K, Kaufman L, Peterson CH, Carpenter S, et al. Perspectives on Nature’s Services. In Nature’s Services, 7th ed.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1997.
68.
Painter-Morland M, Demuijnck G, Ornati S. Sustainable development and well-being: A philosophical challenge. J. Bus. Ethics. 2017, 146, 295–311. [Google Scholar]
69.
Smith LM, Case JL, Smith HM, Harwell LC, Summers JK. Relating ecosystem services to domains of human well-being: Foundation for a US index. Ecol. Indic. 2013, 28, 79–90. [Google Scholar]
70.
Parris TM, Kates RW. Characterizing and measuring sustainable development. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2003, 28, 559–586. [Google Scholar]
71.
Brundtland GH Our Common Future World Commission on Environment and Development. Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf (accessed on 26 March 2024). 
72.
Knight K, Rosa EA, Schor JB. Reducing Growth to Achieve Environmental Sustainability: The Role of Work Hours. In Capitalism on Trial; Edward Elgar Publishing: Northampton, MA, USA, 2013.
73.
Reid WV, Mooney HA, Cropper A, Capistrano D, Carpenter SR, Chopra K, et al. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being-Synthesis: A Report of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
74.
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015. Available Online: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (accessed on 20 December 2023). 
75.
Rees WE. Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out. Environ. Urban. 1992, 4, 121–130. [Google Scholar]
76.
Abdallah S, Thompson S, Michaelson J, Marks N, Steuer N. The Happy Planet Index 2.0: Why good lives don’t have to cost the Earth. 2009. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/47529286_The_Happy_Planet_Index_20_Why_Good_Lives_Don’t_Have_to_Cost_the_Earth (accessed on 25 March 2024).
77.
Leemans R, De GRS. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. 2003. Available Online: http://pdf.wri.org/ecosystems_human_wellbeing.pdf (accessed on 2 February 2024). 
78.
Ewing B, Moore D, Goldfinger S, Oursler A, Reed A, Wackernagel M. The Ecological Footprint. Atlas 2010. Oakland: Global Footprint Network, 2010. Available Online: https://www.footprintnetwork.org/content/images/uploads/Ecological_Footprint_Atlas_2010.pdf (accessed on 27 March 2024).
79.
Rockstrom J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson A, Chapin FS, Lambin E, et al. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol. Soc. 2009, 14, 32. [Google Scholar]
80.
Garnåsjordet PA, Aslaksen I, Giampietro M, Funtowicz S, Ericson T. Sustainable development indicators: from statistics to policy. Environ. Policy Gov. 2012, 22, 322–336. [Google Scholar]
81.
Costanza R, Patten BC. Defining and predicting sustainability. Ecol. Econ. 1995, 15, 193–196. [Google Scholar]
82.
Dwyer L. Tourism development to enhance resident well-being: A strong sustainability perspective. Sustainability 2023, 15, 3321. [Google Scholar]
83.
Dwyer L. Tourism development and sustainable well-being: A Beyond GDP perspective. J. Sustain. Tour. 2023, 31, 2399–2416. [Google Scholar]
84.
Pirgmaier E. The neoclassical Trojan horse of steady-state economics. Ecol. Econ. 2017, 133, 52–61. [Google Scholar]
85.
Steinberger JK, Pirgmaier E, Lamb WF, Weisz H, Bailey D, Hall S, et al. Prioritising well-being on a finite planet: A research manifesto. 2017, Available Online: https://static.sustainability.asu.edu/giosMS-uploads/sites/25/2017/05/Steinberger-etal.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2024) 
86.
Toth G, Szigeti C. The historical ecological Footprint: From over-population to over-consumption. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 60, 283–291. [Google Scholar]
87.
Van den BJC, Verbruggen H. Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the ‘ecological footprint’. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 29, 61–72. [Google Scholar]
88.
Wackernagel M, Onisto L, Bello P, Linares AC, Falfán IS L, Garcı́a JM, et al. National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 29, 375–390. [Google Scholar]
89.
Wackernagel M. Ecological Footprint and Appropriated Carrying Capacity: A Tool for Planning toward Sustainability. Doctoral Dissertation, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada, 1994; pp. 62–95.
90.
Wackernagel M, Rees W. Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth; New Society Publishers: Gabriola Island, BC, Canada, 1998; Volume 9, pp 40–55.
91.
Wackernagel M, Monfreda C, Moran D, Wermer P, Goldfinger S, Deumling D, et al. National footprint and biocapacity accounts 2005: the underlying calculation method. 2005. Available Online: https://elearning.humnet.unipi.it/pluginfile.php/101792/mod_resource/content/0/Footprint%20Method%202005.pdf (accessed on 26 October 2023). 
92.
Bondarchik J, Jabłońska-Sabuka M, Linnanen L, Kauranne T. Improving the objectivity of sustainability indices by a novel approach for combining contrasting effects: Happy Planet Index revisited. Ecol. Indic. 2016, 69, 400–406. [Google Scholar]
93.
Deaton A. Income, health, and well-being around the world: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. J. Econ. Perspect. 2008, 22, 53–72. [Google Scholar]
94.
United Nations Millennium Declaration. United Nations, Department of Public Information. 2000. Available Online: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/united-nations-millennium-declaration (accessed on 30 September 2023).
95.
Cox D, Frere M, West S, Wiseman J. Developing and using local community wellbeing indicators: Learning from the experience of Community Indicators Victoria. Aust. J. Soc. Issues 2010, 45, 71–88. [Google Scholar]
96.
The U.S. Climate Vulnerability Index. Available online: https://climatevulnerabilityindex.org (accessed on 15 November 2023).
97.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Environmental justice index (EJI). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available online: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandhealth/eji/index.html (accessed on 20 November 2023).
98.
Anand S, Sen A. Human Development Index: Methodology and Measurement. 1994. Available Online: https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-index-methodology-and-measurement (accessed on 25 March 2024) 
99.
Cobb CW, Cobb JB, Carson CS. The Green National Product: A Proposed Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare; University Press of America: Lanham, MD, USA, 1994; pp. 49–79.
Creative Commons

© 2024 by the authors; licensee SCIEPublish, SCISCAN co. Ltd. This article is an open access article distributed under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).