Keywords
Subjective Well-Being
Philosophical Traditions
Social Indicator Models
Capability Approach
Multidimensional Framework
How to Cite
Abstract
Quality of Life (QOL) has emerged over time as one of the central but persistently debated concepts across development studies, social sciences, health sciences and public policy. Although it is widely used, its conceptual complexity lies in the fact that there is no single perspective that encompasses observable quality indicators, subjective well-being, social participation, and freedom. Existing literature has produced multiple analytical frameworks that are not only fragmented but also insufficiently integrated. This paper revisits the evolution of the QOL concept and argues that the field has evolved not merely through a definitional shift but through a gradual widening of the analytical framework through which human well-being is assessed. In this process, philosophical traditions, social indicator models, health-related QOL frameworks, subjective well-being, capability approach, and recent multidimensional and integrative models have each contributed important but fragmented insights. This paper focuses on the argument that QOL is best assessed as a layered framework that integrates material well-being and institutional support, capabilities and functionings, emotional states, and the influence of cultural and social constructs. This framework validates the relevance of earlier approaches in explaining QOL while demonstrating that no single approach is independently sufficient. Further, it identifies major gaps in literature including fragmentation of concepts, weak integration of subjective and objective dimensions, insufficient focus on inequality and cultural contexts
References
1. Anand, P., Hunter, G., Carter, I., Dowding, K., Guala, F., & Van Hees, M. (2005). Capabilities and well-being: Evidence based on the Sen–Nussbaum approach to welfare. Social Indicators Research, 74(1), 9–55.
2. Beaumont, J. (2011). Measuring national well-being: A discussion paper on domains and meas-ures. Office for National Statistics.
3. Clark, D. A. (2005). Sen’s capability approach and the many spaces of human well-being. Journal of Development Studies, 41(8), 1339–1368.
4. Cookson, R. (2005). QALYs and the capability approach. Health Economics, 14, 817–829.
5. Dasgupta, P. (1999). Valuation and evaluation: Measuring the quality of life and evaluating policy. University of Cambridge.
6. Galloway, S., Bell, D., Hamilton, C., & Scullion, A. (2005). Well-being and quality of life: Measuring the benefits of culture and sport: A literature review and think piece. Scottish Executive Social Research.
7. Georgiou, J. (2009). Quality of life indicators: The objective-subjective interrelationship that exists within one’s place of residence in old age. Asian Social Science, 5(9), 1–18.
8. Holmes, S. (2005). Assessing the quality of life—Reality or impossible dream? A discussion paper. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 42, 493–501.
9. Liu, B. C. (1975). Quality of life: Concept, measure and results. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 34(1), 1–13.
10. Malkina-Pykh, I. G., & Pykh, Y. A. (2008). Quality of life indicators at different scales: Theoretical background. Ecological Indicators, 8, 854–862.
11. Mandzuk, R. N., & MacMillan, D. E. (2005). A concept analysis of quality of life. Journal of Orthopedic Nursing, 9, 12–18.
12. Nussbaum, M. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Harvard University Press.
13. Robeyns, I. (2005). The capability approach: A theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 93–117.
14. Sandoe, P. (1999). Quality of life: Three competing views. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2(1), 11–23.
15. Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. North-Holland.
16. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
17. Susniene, D., & Jurkauskas, A. (2009). The concept of quality of life and happiness: Correlation and differences. Engineering Economics, 3, 58–66.
18. Ventegodt, S., Merrick, J., & Andersen, N. J. (2003a). Measurement of quality of life I: A methodological framework. The Scientific World Journal, 3, 950–961.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 South India Journal of Social Sciences