That’s Priceless? A Case Study in Monetizing Wellbeing in Impact Evaluation
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Subjective wellbeing valuation is a nascent monetization method designed to address existing challenges in valuation practice. Wellbeing valuation is codified in impact measurement evaluation policy in countries such as the UK, New Zealand, and Australia.
Purpose: This article shares the development of wellbeing valuations using US-specific data and describes the use of these valuations in a Social Return on Investment (SROI) impact evaluation of an arts-based social enterprise in Appalachia. This case illustrates the promise and challenges of integrating subjective wellbeing into impact measurement to capture outcomes prioritized by stakeholders.
Setting: Art-based social enterprise in Appalachian Ohio
Intervention: This social enterprise employs adults with developmental differences as artists through the Creative Abundance Model.
Research Design: Social Return on Investment (SROI) evaluation; exploratory mixed methods to construct outcome chains and evidence outcomes; subjective wellbeing valuation using US-primary data and US-derived WELLBY to monetize outcomes most important to stakeholders
Data Collection and Analysis: Focus groups with stakeholders, ripple effects mapping focus groups, document analysis, stakeholder surveys. Transcripts from focus groups were thematically coded using emergent coding to construct outcome chains. Qualitative data was triangulated with document analysis and quantitative data. Subjective wellbeing valuation data was sourced from MIDUS Refresher I data and Neumman’s (2014) QALY ranges.
Findings: The most important outcome to three stakeholders in the Passion Works case study were found to be wellbeing outcomes. The monetization of those three outcomes using subjective wellbeing valuation replicating the WELLBY method, calculated with representative data from the US yielded values that were then discounted using SROI best practice for accounting for value. Overall, these three wellbeing outcomes alone represent between $654,377.10 and $981,139.20 of value.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Permissions
Authors retain full copyright for articles published in JMDE. JMDE publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY - NC 4.0). Users are allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the work in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes, provided that the original authors and source are credited accurately and appropriately. Only the original authors may distribute the article for commercial or compensatory purposes. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org
References
Adams, T., Bichard, E., Boiardi, P., Cain, R., Carpenter, B., Ebrahim, A., Faivel, S., Freeman, A., Goodspeed, T., Inglis, J., Jefford, S., Kempton, O., Olsen, S., Robertson, S., Wang, L., & Watt, J. (2019a). Standard on applying principle 1: Involve stakeholders version 2.0. Social Value International. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/60dc51e3c58aef413ae5c975/t/60f058babaa9e46167496599/1626364102534/Standard-for-applying-Principle-1.pdf
Adams, T., Bichard, E., Boiardi, P., Cain, R., Carpenter, B., Ebrahim, A., Faivel, S., Freeman, A., Goodspeed, T., Inglis, J., Jefford, S., Kempton, O., Olsen, S., Robertson, S., Wang, L., & Watt, J. (2019b). Standard on applying principle 3: Value the things that matter. Social Value International. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/60dc51e3c58aef413ae5c975/t/67c6d870a3da48266c18ebfc/1741711456742/Guidance-on-applying-Principle-3.pdf
Ashton, K., Parry-Williams, L., Dyakova, M., & Green, L. (2020). Health impact and social value of interventions, services, and policies: A methodological discussion of health impact assessment and social return on investment methodologies. Frontiers in Public Health, 8, 49. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00049 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00049
Bartram, D. (2024). To evaluate the age–happiness relationship, look beyond statistical significance. Journal of Happiness Studies, 25(22). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00728-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00728-9
Berridge, K. C., & Aldridge, J. W. (2008). Decision utility, the brain, and pursuit of hedonic goals. Social Cognition, 26(5), 621–646. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.5.621 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.5.621
Bjørnskov, C. (2010). How comparable are the Gallup World Poll life satisfaction data? Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being, 11(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008-9121-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008-9121-6
Bone, J. K., Fancourt, D., Fluharty, M. E., Paul, E., Sonke, J. K., & Bu, F. (2023), Associations between participation in community arts groups and aspects of wellbeing in older adults in the United States: A propensity score matching analysis. Aging and Mental Health, 27(6), 1163–1172. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2022.2068129 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2022.2068129
Bouchard, M. J., & Rousselière, D. (2022). Recent advances on impact measurement for the social and solidarity economy: Empirical and methodological challenges. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 93, 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12380 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12380
Brown, T. T. (2015). The subjective well-being method of valuation: An application to general health status. Health Services Research, 50(6), 1996–2018. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1475-6773.12294 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12294
Brown, J. A. C., Houthakker, H. S., & Prais, S. J. (1953). Electronic computation in economic statistics. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 48(263), 414–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1953.10483482 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1953.10483482
Caldera Sánchez, A., &. Tassot, C. (2014). An exploration of the determinants of the subjective well-being of Americans during the great recession. (OECD Economics Department Working Paper No. 1158). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jxzc9p57lq3-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/5jxzc9p57lq3-en
Cantril, H. (1964). The human design. Journal of Individual Psychology, 20(2), 129–136. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1965-03010-001
Chazdon, S., Emery, M., Hansen, D., Higgins, L., & Sero, R. (2017). A field guide to ripple effects mapping. University of Minnesota Libraries. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321340208_A_Field_Guide_to_Ripple_Effects_Mapping
Cohen, Mark A. (2008). The effect of crime on life satisfaction. Journal of Legal Studies, 37(3), 9. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/jls/vol37/iss3/9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/588220
Cooney, K. (2016), Legitimation dynamics: How SROI could mobilize resources for new constituencies. Evaluation and Program Planning, 64, 110–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.010
Cordes, J. J. (2017). Using cost-benefit analysis and social return on investment to evaluate the impact of social enterprise: Promises, implementation, and limitations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 64, 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.008
Costa, M. (2013). Social return on investment. In S. O. Idowu, N. Capaldi, L. Zu, & A. D. Gupta (Eds.), Encyclopedia of corporate social responsibility (pp. 2238–2244). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28036-8_734 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28036-8_734
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1985-27000-001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Dlouhy, S., & Mitchell, P. (2015). Upcycling sheltered workshops: A revolutionary approach to transforming workshops into creative spaces. Ohio University Press.
Dolan, P., & Fujiwara, D. (2012, November). Valuing adult learning: Comparing wellbeing valuation to contingent valuation (BIS Research Paper No. 85). Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, UK Government.
Edwards, J. N., & Klemmack, D. L. (1973). Correlates of life satisfaction: A re-examination. Journal of Gerontology, 4, 497–502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/28.4.497
Edwards, R. T., & Lawrence, C. L. (2021). “What You See is All There is”: The importance of heuristics in cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and social return on investment (SROI) in the evaluation of public health interventions. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 19(5), 653–664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-021-00653-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-021-00653-5
Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., & Frijters, P. (2004). How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness? Economics Journal, 114(497), 641–659. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3590299 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2004.00235.x
Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., & van Praag, B. (2002). The subjective costs of health losses due to chronic diseases: An alternative model for monetary appraisal. Health Economics, 11, 709–722. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.696
Frey, B. S., & Gullo, A. (2021). Does Sports Make People Happier, or Do Happy People More Sports?. Journal of Sports Economics, 22(4), 432–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002520985667 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1527002520985667
Frey, B., & Stutzer, A. (2002). The economics of happiness. World Economics, 3(1), 25–42. https://www.bsfrey.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/the-economics-of-happiness.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400829262
Frijters, P. (2021). Measuring subjective wellbeing. In F. Zimmerman (Ed.), The handbook of labor, human resources and population economics. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57365-6_189-1
Frijters, P., Krekel, C., Sanchis, R., & Santini, Z. I. (2024). The WELLBY: A new measure of social value and progress. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03229-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03229-5
Fuertes-Fuertes, I., Cabedo, J. D., & Jimeno-Garcia, I. (2019). Capturing the invisible wealth in nonprofits to overcome myopic perceptions. Sustainability, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010048 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010048
Fujiwara, D. (2014). Measuring the social impact of community investment: The methodology paper. HACT Ideas and Innovation Housing, UK.
Fujiwara, D., Keohane, K., Clayton, V., & Maxwell, C. (2017). Measuring social impact: The technical reference paper. Australian Social Value Bank. https://asvb-media.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2017/08/20170801-ASVB-Technical-Reference-Paper.pdf
Gargani, J. (2017). The leap from ROI to SROI: Farther than expected? Evaluation and Program Planning, 64, 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.01.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.01.005
Glesne, C. (2016). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (5th ed.). Pearson.
Gustafsson-Wright, E., & Painter, E. (2025). Social and development impact bonds by the numbers. Brookings Institution Global Impact Bond Database. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/social-and-development-impact-bonds-by-the-numbers/
Harter, L. M., Pangborn, S. M., Ivancic, S., & Quinlan, M. M. (2017). Storytelling and social activism in health organizing. Management Communication Quarterly, 31(2), 314–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318916688090 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318916688090
Hausman, J. (2012). Contingent valuation: From dubious to hopeless. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(4), 43–56. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23290279 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.26.4.43
Hehenberger, L., & Buckland, L. (2023). How impact measurement fosters the social economy: From measurement of impact to learning and management for impact. In G. Krlev, D. Wruk, G. Pasi, & M. Berhard (Eds.), Social economy science. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192868343.003.0007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192868343.003.0007
Hernández‐Blanco, M., Costanza, R., Chen, H., de Groot, D., Jarvis, D., Kubiszewski, I., Montoya, J., Sangha, K., Stoeckl, N., Turner, K., & van ‘t Hoff, V. (2022). Ecosystem health, ecosystem services, and the well‐being of humans and the rest of nature. Global Change Biology, 28(17), 5027–5040. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16281 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16281
Huang, L., Frijters, P., Dalziel, K., & Clarke, P. (2018). Life satisfaction, QALYs, and the monetary value of health. Social Science & Medicine, 211, 131–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.06.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.06.009
Hurlbut, K, & Brousselle, A. (2025). Arts-based evaluation of the Communities ChooseWell program. Evaluation and Program Planning, 108, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102496 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2024.102496
Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. (2023). 2020–2023 value assessment framework [PDF]. https://icer.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ICER_2020_2023_VAF_102220.pdf(open in a new window)
International Foundation for Valuing Impacts and Value Balancing Alliance. (2024). General methodology 2: Impact measurement and valuation techniques (exposure draft). https://ifvi.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/IFVI_VBA_Exposure-DRAFT_General-Methodology-2.pdf
Jansen, A., Wang, R., Behrens, P., & Hoekstra, R. (2024), Beyond GDP: A review and conceptual framework for measuring sustainable and inclusive wellbeing. Lancet Planet Health, 8, 695–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00147-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00147-5
Jones, B. A. (2017). Invasive species impacts on human well-being using the life satisfaction Index. Ecological Economics, 134, 250–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.002
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. P., & Sarin, R. (1997). Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 375–406. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355397555235
King, J. (2021). Expanding theory-based evaluation: Incorporating value creation in a theory of change. Evaluation and Program Planning, 89, 101963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101963 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101963
Larson L. R., Jennings, V., & Cloutier S. A. (2016). Public parks and wellbeing in urban areas of the United States. PLoS ONE, 11(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153211 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153211
Lawton, R. N., Gramatki, I., Watt, W., & Fujiwara, D. (2021). Does volunteering make us happier, or are happier people more likely to volunteer? Addressing the problem of reverse causality when estimating the wellbeing impacts of volunteering. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22, 599–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00242-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00242-8
Liston-Heyes, C. & Liu, G. (2021). To measure or not to measure? An empirical investigation of social impact measurement in UK social enterprises. Public Management Review, 23(5), 687–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1865435 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1865435
MacLennan, S., Stead, I., & Little, A. (2021a). Wellbeing guidance for appraisal: Supplementary Green Book guidance. HM Treasury: Social Impacts Task Force. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60fa9169d3bf7f0448719daf/Wellbeing_guidance_for_appraisal_-_supplementary_Green_Book_guidance.pdf
MacLennan, S., Stead, I., & Rowlatt, A. (2021b). Wellbeing discussion paper: Monetisation of life satisfaction effect sizes: A review of approaches and proposed approach. HM Treasury: Social Impacts Task Force.
Maier, F., Schober, C., Simsa, R., & Millner, R. (2015). SROI as a method for evaluation research: Understanding merits and limitations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(5), 1805–1830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-014-9490-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-014-9490-x
MeasureUp. (2024). MeasureUp. https://measure-up.org/about-us/
Merriam, S. B. & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Josey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis (4th ed.). Sage.
Muellbauer, J. (1980). The estimation of the Prais-Houthakker model of equivalence scales. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 48(1), 153–176. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1912023
Neumann, P. J., Cohen, J. T., & Weinstein, M. C. (2014). Updating cost-effectiveness: The curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold. New England Journal of Medicine, 371(9), 796–797. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp1405158 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1405158
Nicholls, A. (2018). A General theory of social impact accounting: Materiality, uncertainty and empowerment. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 9(2), 132–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2018.1452785 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2018.1452785
Nicholls, J., Lawlor, E., Neitzert, E., & Goodspeed, T. (2012). A guide to social return on investment. The SROI Network. https://www.socialvalueint.org/guide-to-sroi
Nicholls, J. (2017). Social return on investment: Development and convergence. Evaluation and Program Planning, 64, 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.011
OECD, J. (2023). Subjective wellbeing measurement: Current practice and new frontiers. (OECD Papers on Wellbeing and Inequalities, No. 17). OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/4e180f51-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/4e180f51-en
Orlowski, J., & Wicker, P. (2019). Monetary valuation of non-market goods and services: A review of conceptual approaches and empirical applications in sports. European Sport Management Quarterly, 19(4), 456–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2018.1535609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2018.1535609
Ormiston, J., & Seymour, R. (2011). Understanding value creation in social entrepreneurship: The importance of aligning mission, strategy and impact measurement. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 125–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2011.606331 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2011.606331
Padula, W. V., Chen, H. H., & Phelps, C. E. (2021). Is the choice of cost-effectiveness threshold in cost-utility analysis endogenous to the resulting value of technology? A systematic review. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 19(2), 155–162. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-020-00606-4
Papastergiou, E., Latinopoulos, D., Evdou, M., & Kalogeresis, A. (2023). Exploring associations between subjective well-being and non-market values when used in the evaluation of urban green spaces: A scoping review. Land, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/land12030700 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/land12030700
Patton, M. Q. (2012). Essentials of utilization-focused evaluation. Sage.
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators: Analysis and reporting of survey data (part 3 of 3) (REL 2016–164). US Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED567753.pdf
Persaud, N. (2018). A Practical framework and model for promoting cost-inclusive evaluations. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 14(30), 30. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v14i30.494 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v14i30.494
Powdthavee, N. (2008). Putting a price tag on friends, relatives, and neighbours: Using surveys of life satisfaction to value social relationships. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37, 1459–1480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2007.04.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2007.04.004
Powell, S., Copestake, J., Remnant, F. (2023). Causal mapping for evaluators. Evaluation, 30(1), 100–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890231196601 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890231196601
Pritchard, D., O’Flynn, P. & Noble, J. (2021). Evaluation of coronavirus community support fund: Value for money report. HM Government.
Ricket, A. L., & Goodspeed, T. (2025). Impact measurement for social enterprises: Social return on investment and subjective well-being valuation in the United States. Journal of the International Council for Small Business. https://doi.org/10.1080/26437015.2025.2532775 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/26437015.2025.2532775
Ricket, A. L., Jolley, G. J., Knutsen, F. B., & Davis, S. C. (2023). Rural sustainable prosperity: Social enterprise ecosystems as framework for sustainable rural development. Sustainability, 15(11339). https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411339 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su151411339
Rogers, P. J., Stevens, K., & Boymal, J. (2009). Qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of complex, emergent programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 32(1), 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.08.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.08.005
Roy, M. J., & Teasdale, S. (2022). Monetising social impact: A critique of the ‘financialisation’ of social value. In Social impact measurement for a sustainable future (pp. 211–227). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83152-3_11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83152-3_11
Schneider, P. (2022). The QALY is ableist: On the unethical implications of health states worse than dead. Quality of Life Research, 31(5), 1545–1552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03052-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03052-4
Scriven, M. (1996). Types of evaluation and types of evaluator. Evaluation Practice, 17(2), 15161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-1633(96)90020-3
Sidney, J. A., Jones, A., Coberley, C., Pope, J. E., & Wells, A. (2017). The well-being valuation model: A method for monetizing the nonmarket good of individual well-being. Health Services & Outcomes Research Methodology, 17(1), 84–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-016-0161-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-016-0161-9
Social Value International. (n.d.). Standard on applying principle 2: Understand what changes. Social Value International. https://www.socialvalueint.org/principle-2-understand-what-changes
Social Value UK. (2019). Valuation. Social Value International Practitioner Package. https://socialvalueuk.org/svipractitionerpackage/#:~:text=The%20Social%20Value%20International%20Practitioner,SRO I%20or%20Social%20Impact%20Report
Spear, R. (2024). Evaluating social impact. In Learning about social entrepreneurship and management in times of social transformation (Vol. 66, pp. 127–142). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47708-9_9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47708-9_9
Stiglitz, J. E., Fitoussi, J. P., & Durand, M., (2018). Beyond GDP: Measuring what counts for economic and social performance. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2018/11/beyond-gdp_g1g98ae6.html DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264307292-en
The Treasury. (2023). Guide for departments and agencies using Treasury’s CBAx tool for cost benefit analysis. The New Zealand Government. https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2023-12/cbax-tool-user-guidance-dec23.pdf
University of Wisconsin, Institute on Aging. (2014). Midlife in the United States: A national longitudinal study of health and wellbeing, MIDUS refresher, 2011–2014 [Dataset and codebook]. https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/series/203
Vo, A. T. & Christie, C. A., (2018). Where impact measurement meets evaluation: Tensions, challenges, and opportunity. American Journal of Evaluation, 39(3), 383–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214018778813 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214018778813
Yates, B., & Persaud, N. (2024). Michael Scriven and “the missing half of quantitative evaluation.” Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 20(47), 47. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v20i47.1007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v20i47.1007
Yates, B. T. (2021). Toward collaborative cost-inclusive evaluation: Adaptations and transformations for evaluators and economists. Evaluation and Program Planning, 89, 101993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101993 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101993