Bil Mariana, Doctor of Economics, Senior Researcher Fellow, Department of Social and Humanitarian Development of Regions, Dolishniy Institute of Regional Research of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Lviv, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4979-4019
e-mail: bmm1983@gmail.com

Mulska Olha, PhD (Economics), Senior Research Fellow, Department of Social and Humanitarian Development of Regions, Dolishniy Institute of Regional Research of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Lviv, Ukraine

ORCID ID: 0000-0002-1666-3971
e-mail: oliochka.mulska@gmail.com

Welfare as a Dominant Economic Growth: the Conceptual and Methodological Basis

Abstract. Introduction. Ukraine has achieved significant economic growth in recent decades, which is causally related to changes in the level of economic deprivation at the level of regions and communities. Welfare has no direct casual connection to economic growth, as it also considers aspects such as socioeconomic inequality, environmental degradation, and access to health and education services, and so on. Life satisfaction and other indicators of subjective well-being correlate with short-run income growth, but there is a moderate long-run relationship between well-being and financial determinants. Absolute income as a financial dominant has a central role in determining social welfare in the terms of economic growth.

The purpose is to deepen the conceptual and methodological basis of the welfare’s study as a dominant economic growth.

The novelty of the paper is based on the selection of theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the gradient ‘welfare-economic growth’ through the prism of financial dominants (income, savings, level of investment capacity, etc.).

It has been proved welfare is a comprehensive indicator that reflects the appropriate level of support of the population on the material, financial, social, cultural, spiritual goods and so on. To use welfare as the dominant economic growth of the country, the need to regulate social standards and state guarantees groups (consumer, socio-infrastructural, social protection, financial, property) has been identified.

There are five levels of well-being assessment: individual, household, community, region, state. It has been substantiated that the assessment of well-being based on GDP per capita, which is used in the vast majority of modern research, has significant shortcomings because it does not consider shadow incomes, migration transfers, household living conditions, leisure time, and household income inequality.

Keywords: welfare; economic growth; income; savings; financial dominants.

References:

1. Dodge, R., Annette, P. Daly, Huyton, J., Lalage, D. Sanders (2012). The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), 222-235. DOI: 10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4 [in English].
2. Human suffering. Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12179239 [in English].
3. Kahneman, D. & Deaton, A. High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Retrieved from https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/107/38/16489.full.pdf [in English].
4. Lee, Y. S. (2020). New general theory of economic development: Innovative growth and distribution. Review of Development Economics, 24, 402-423. https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12654 [in English].
5. Libanova, Е., Osaulenko, О. & Cherenko, L. (2020).  Assessment of Quality of Life in Ukraine on the Basis of Subjective Indicators of Well-being. Warsaw : RS Global Sp. z O.O. [in English].
6. Mulska, & Ivaniuk, U. (2019). Children’s Welfare in Ukraine’s Economy : Analysis and Modelling. Modern Economics, 17, 165-171. https://doi.org/10.31521/modecon.V17(2019)-26. [in English].
7. Popović, М. (2005). Old and new theories of economic growth (I Part). Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), 1(2), 145-166 [in English].
8. Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/statistics/measuring-economic-social-progress [in English].
9. Ruttan, W. V. (1998). The new growth theory and development economics : A survey. The Journal of Development Studies, 35, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220389808422562 [in English].
10. Social progress globally. Retrieved from https://www.socialprogress.org/index/global/results [in English].
11. Steptoe, A., Deaton, A. Stone S. (2015). Subjective wellbeing, health, and ageing. The Lancet. 385, 640-648. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61489-0 [in English].
12. White, C. S. (2010). Analysing wellbeing: a framework for development practice. Development in practice. 20(2). 158-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520903564199 [in English].
13. Amosha, O., Grinevska, S. (2012). Social orientation of the economy: proforma or reality? Economist, 7, 4-7. Retrieved from http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/econ_2012_7_2 [in Ukrainian].
14. Bil, M. М. (2018) Spatial mobility of the population : theory, methodology, practice. Lviv: PAIS. [in Ukrainian].
15. Druzhinina, V.V., Makarov, A.I. (2016). The effectiveness of assessing the welfare of the population at the local level. Efectivna economika, 5. Retrieved from http://www.economy.nayka.com.ua/?op=1&z=4946. [in Ukrainian].
16. Methods of measuring regional human development (2016). Retrieved from http://www.idss.org.ua [in Ukrainian].
17. Parnyuk, V. (2012). Definition of ‘income’ in economic theory. Ekonomika Ukrayiny, 3, 36-48. [in Ukrainian].