image

Modelling the Influence of Durable Goods Possession on Subjective Wellbeing of Households

Download Paper PDF: Download pdf
Author(s):
Abstract:

The purpose of this study is to indicate new developments in households' subjective wellbeing perception. Typology of households is determined depending on their endowment with durables. The determinants of subjective wellbeing include material, financial and immaterial factors, which all are elements of quality of life. Crucial material wealth factors influencing the perceived wellbeing level are the type of households, possession of the house, principal place of residence and a car. New phenomena that aroused at the end of the second decade of the 21st century, circular and sharing economy elements are appreciated as an innovative, additional source of households' wellbeing perception. The analytical econometric tool used here is the multinomial logit model with unordered categories. The typology of households is constructed, depending on their material wealth. There exists a substantial share of households claiming they are not interested in possession of analysed goods. It is considered a proxy measure of a percentage of a new type of families whose decisions are based on circular- and sharing-economy attitude. The analysis for selected material goods indicated influence potency of crucial factors on households' situation. The strength of the impact of individual characteristics was measured. The findings may be important policy design factor.


Copyright© 2020 The Author(s). This article is distributed under the terms of the license CC-BY 4.0., which permits any further distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


How to cite:

Dziechciarz–Duda, M. (2020). Modelling the Influence of Durable Goods Possession on Subjective Wellbeing of Households. Journal of Applied Economic Sciences, Volume XV, Winter, 4(70), 801 – 812. https://doi.org/10.57017/jaes.v15.4(70).08

References:

[1] Akaike, H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control AC-19, 716–723. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705

[2] Amendola, N., Vecchi, G. Durable Goods and Poverty Measurement, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 7105/2014, Washington, http://hdl.handle.net/10986/20612 (accessed December 5, 2020).

[3] Bhat, C. 1995. A Heteroscedastic Extreme Value Model of Intercity Mode Choice, Transportation Research, 29: 471–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-2615(95)00015-6 

[4] Brooks, R., Harris, M., Spencer, C. 2007. An Inflated Ordered Probit Model of Monetary Policy: Evidence from MPC Voting Data, Monash University.

[5] Brückweh, K. 2016. The Head of Household. A Long Normative History of a Statistical Category in the UK Administory. Journal for the History of Public Administration, 1: 107–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ADHI-2018-0006

[6] Cramer, J. 2011. Logit Models from Economics and Other Fields, Cambridge University Press.

[7] Czapiński, J., Panek, T. 2015. Eds. Social Diagnosis. Integrated Databases, Social Diagnosis. Questionnaires, http://diagnoza.com/index-en.html (accessed on 30 April 2020). 

[8] Diener, E. 1984. Subjective Wellbeing. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3): 542–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2350-6_2

[9] Diewert, W. 2009. Durables and owner-occupied housing in a consumer price index, In Diewert, W., Greenlees, J., Hulten, C. Eds. Price Index Concepts and Measurements, University of Chicago Press.

[10]  Dziechciarz, J., Dziechciarz Duda, M. 2017. Non-Metric Data in Household Durable Goods Analysis. Selected Aspects. Folia Oeconomica, 4/330: 111–128. https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6018.330.08

[11]  Dziechciarz, J., Dziechciarz-Duda, M., Przybysz, K. 2010. Household possession of consumer durables on background of some poverty lines, In Locarek-Junge, H., Weihs, C. Eds. Classification as a Tool for Research Springer, Berlin, 735–742.

[12]  Elliott, J. 1980. Wealth and Wealth Proxies in a Permanent Income Model, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 95/3: 509–535. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1885091

[13]  Greene, W. 2018. Econometric Analysis, 8th Ed. Pearson. 

[14]  Greene, W., Hensher, D. 2010. Modeling Ordered Choices. A Primer, Cambridge University Press.

[15]  Grimes, A. Hyland, S. 2020. Measuring cross‐country material wellbeing and inequality using consumer durables. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 1. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjpe.12237

[16]  Halcoussis, D. 2005. Understanding Econometrics, South-Western, Cincinnati.

[17]  Hensher, D., Rose, J., Greene, W. 2005. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer, Cambridge University Press.

[18]  Louviere, J., Hensher, D., Swait, J., Adamowicz, W. 2000. Stated Choice Methods Analysis and Applications, Cambridge University Press.

[19]  McFadden, D. 1974. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour, In Zarembka, P. Ed. Frontiers in Econometrics, Wiley, New York, 105–142.

[20]  Principles and Recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses, 2015. United Nations Statistics Division, New York. 

[21]  Pyatt, F. 1964. Priority Patterns and the Demand for Household Durable Goods, Cambridge University Press.

[22]  Roser, M. 2019. Human Development Index (HDI). Available at: ourworldindata.org/human-development-index (accessed on 21 April 2020).

[23]  Schwarz, G. 1978. Estimating the dimension of a model, Annals of Statistics 6/2: 461–464. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136

[24]  Sirgy, M. 2012. The Psychology of Quality of Life. Hedonic Wellbeing, Life Satisfaction, and Eudaimonia, Springer, Berlin. 

[25]  Sirgy, M. 2018. The psychology of material well-being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 13, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-017-9590-z

[26]  Smith, A. 1937. The Wealth of Nations (1776). Reprint edition, Modern Library, New York.

[27]  Stiglitz, J., Fitoussi, J., Durand, M. 2018. Beyond GDP. Measuring what Counts for Economic and Social Performance, OECD, Paris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264307292-en

[28]  Stiglitz, J., Fitoussi, J., Durand, M. 2018. For Good Measure. Advancing Research on Well-Being Metrics Beyond GDP, OECD, Paris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264307278-en

[29]  Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., Fitoussi, J. 2009. Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Available at: ec.europa.eu/Eurostat/documents/118025/118123/ Fitoussi+Commission+report (accessed April 21, 2020).

[30]  Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., Fitoussi, J. 2009. The Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress Revisited, OECD, Paris. Reflections and Overview, OECD. https://hal-sciencespo.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01069384 (accessed December 17, 2020).

[31]  Train, K. 2009. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

[32]  Winkelmann, R. 2005. Subjective well-being and the family: results from an ordered Probit model with multiple random effects. Empirical Economics, 30/3, 749–761. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-005-0255-7

[33]  Zahoor, A., Zainab, E. 2011. Classification of Households with Respect to Poverty by Using Cluster Analysis, Proc. ICCS–11, Lahore, Vol. 21, 369–381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4604.6728

*** Better Life Index, OECD, 2019. www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org (accessed on 30 April 2020).

*** Supplemental Measures of Material Wellbeing. Basic Needs, Consumer Durables, Energy, and Poverty, 1981 to 2002, 2005. Volume 3, US Census Bureau, Washington. https://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p23-202.pdf (accessed December 17, 2020).

*** Glossary of Statistical Terms. 2006. OECD, Paris. Available at: https://stats.oecd.org/glossary/