ABSTRACT
This chapter integrates the threads of the previous chapters into an overall framework for the empirical study of well-being. It adds a fifth criterion pertaining to the synergetic functioning of the four dimensions. The chapter emphasises three major points. First, such a framework needs to be robust enough to evaluate social institutions. Inter-societal comparisons are possible by employing the notion of interests outlined in Chapter 3 to show the relevance of their relative inescapability in different social contexts. This concept allows for evaluative comparisons between societies without appealing to an ambiguous notion of human nature. Second, such a framework needs to answer the question: ‘Can well-being so defined be measured?’ We show how, in principle, it can be. However, we argue that such measurements cannot constitute an operational definition. Once freed of this expectation, and once liberated from the idea that standardised well-being measures should be performance-targets of public policies, we can defend the assertion that well-being can be measured despite being a pluralistic normative and an intentional concept. Third, we examine the use of narrative methodology to understand better well-being and to show how life-narrative interviews provide a fruitful complimentary method to purely quantitative approaches.
