--- canonical_url: "https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-42/well-being-and-productivity-a-capital-stocks-approach/" title: "Well-being and Productivity: A Capital Stocks Approach" author: name: "CSLS" url: "https://csls.ca/author/cslc/" date_published: "2026-07-13T08:02:01+00:00" date_modified: "2026-07-13T08:02:01+00:00" post_type: "ipm" summary: "" ipm_issue_period: - "Spring 2022" ipm_keyword: - "Cantril ladder" - "capital stocks" - "cross-country" - "growth accounting" - "life satisfaction" - "natural capital" - "New Zealand" - "productivity" - "social capital" - "TFP" - "well-being" ipm_research_theme: - "Well-being and living standards" ipm_country_focus: - "International" - "New Zealand" featured_image: "https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/IPM_50_banner.webp" status: "publish" --- # Well-being and Productivity: A Capital Stocks Approach Canonical URL: https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-42/well-being-and-productivity-a-capital-stocks-approach/ # Well-being and Productivity: A Capital Stocks Approach [Download full PDF article](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-42-6-Legge-Smith.pdf) Cite this article × Cite this article as: Legge, Jaimie, and Conal Smith. 2022. “Well-being and Productivity: A Capital Stocks Approach.” International Productivity Monitor, No. 42 (Spring 2022): 117–141. https://www.csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-42/well-being-and-productivity-a-capital-stocks-approach/ ## Authors: - Jaimie Legge Victoria University of Wellington - Conal Smith Victoria University of Wellington ## IPM Issue 42 Spring 2022 pp. 117–141 ## Related IPM articles [Efficiency Adjustment of Hours Worked: Two Possible Modifications of a Jorgensen Production Model Barbara Fraumeni Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 103–115](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/efficiency-adjustment-of-hours-worked-two-possible-modifications-of-a-jorgensen-production-model/) [Labour Productivity as a Measure of Technological Change Ulrich Kohli Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 64–81](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/labour-productivity-as-a-measure-of-technological-change/) [The Relationship between Efficiencies Defenses for Mergers and TFP Growth Robin Shaban Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 82–102](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/the-relationship-between-efficiencies-defenses-for-mergers-and-tfp-growth/) [Adult Skills and Productivity: New Evidence from PIAAC 2023 Dan Andrews, Balázs Égert, Christine de La Maisonneuve Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 41–63](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/adult-skills-and-productivity-new-evidence-from-piaac-2023/) [The Potential Impact of Pro-competitive Regulatory Reforms on Productivity and Growth in Canada Gilbert Cette, Jimmy Lopez, Giuseppe Nicoletti, Océane Vernerey Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 3–40](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/the-potential-impact-of-pro-competitive-regulatory-reforms-on-productivity-and-growth-in-canada/) [IPM Issue 49 Editors’ Overview Andrew Sharpe, Bart van Ark, Paul Schreyer Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 1–2](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/) [Appendix: UK Productivity Growth Rates Across Data Vintages and Studies Josh Martin Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 65–73](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/appendix-uk-productivity-growth-rates-across-data-vintages-and-studies/) [The UK Productivity Slowdown: A Review of Timing, Magnitude, and Drivers Josh Martin Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 1–34](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/the-uk-productivity-slowdown-a-review-of-timing-magnitude-and-drivers/) [Opportunities and Risks of Artificial Intelligence for Productivity Francesco Filippucci, Peter Gal, Katharina Laengle, Matthias Schief, Filiz Unsal Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 1–26](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/opportunities-and-risks-of-artificial-intelligence-for-productivity/) [Using Ecosystem Accounting to Integrate the Environment in Measures of Multifactor Productivity Carl Obst Fall 2024 | IPM Issue 47 | pp. 87–108](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-47/using-ecosystem-accounting-to-integrate-the-environment-in-measures-of-multifactor-productivity/) ## Abstract ## Résumé EN FR Copy link Email LinkedIn In the widely used capital stocks approach to conceptualizing intergenerational wellbeing, the well-being of the current generation is considered a function of produced capital, human capital (labour), social capital, and natural capital. Most discussion of the sustainability of levels of well-being into the future is focused on considering whether the quantity of these capital stocks left for future generations will be the same, larger, or smaller than the quantity available to the current generation. However, the efficiency with which the capital stocks are used to produce well-being also matters. Because the capital stocks approach is grounded in a framework with strong parallels to that underpinning growth accounting, total factor productivity (TFP) provides a potentially useful way of examining this issue. This article explores the relationship between well-being and TFP. An econometric approach is used to develop methodologically comparable estimates of traditional TFP (where the output in question is national income) and total well-being productivity (where the output is mean national life satisfaction). The differences between the two measures are compared and the impact on this of confounding factors — including the roles of social capital, natural capital, and cultural bias in responses to subjective well-being measures — is explored. We find that there are large differences in total well-being productivity across countries. More generally, interpreting the capital stocks model in terms of an aggregate production function for well-being produces plausible results. Dans l’approche largement utilisée des stocks de capital pour conceptualiser le bien-être intergénérationnel, le bien-être de la génération actuelle est considéré comme une fonction du capital produit, du capital humain (main-d’œuvre), du capital social et du capital naturel. La plupart des discussions sur la durabilité des niveaux de bien-être dans le futur portent sur la question de savoir si la quantité de ces stocks de capital laissée aux générations futures sera identique, plus grande ou plus petite que celle disponible pour la génération actuelle. Cependant, l’efficience avec laquelle les stocks de capital sont utilisés pour produire du bien-être importe également. Parce que l’approche des stocks de capital est ancrée dans un cadre présentant de fortes similitudes avec celui qui sous-tend la comptabilité de la croissance, la productivité multifactorielle (PMF) constitue un moyen potentiellement utile d’évaluer l’efficience de la production du bien-être. [Download full PDF](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-42-6-Legge-Smith.pdf)