1. Set of parameters -economic, educational, health, social integration, etc.- that allow the individual to satisfactorily explore their goals and expectations, that is, to live well according to personal evaluation criteria.
2. Global index/indicator based on the measurement that brings together social and economic variables from different countries or cities, such as minimum wage, pollution level or life expectancy, to position each one in a general ranking. It has been worked on by numerous organizations, such as the OECD, since its first publication in May 2011.
Etymology: Quality, by the Latin forms qualitas, qualitatisas a calque (keeping the meaning) of the Greek ποιότης (poiotes).+ Life, from the Latin liferooted in Indo-European *gwei-‘live’.
Grammatical category: noun fem.
in syllables: ca-li-dad + de + vi-da.
Quality of life
lilen gomez
Professor in Philosophy
The concept of quality of life refers to a set of quantifiable variables through which it is proposed to determine, according to a previously established index, the level of well-being of human beings in a given population. It is an interdisciplinary notion, which covers various areas —not only in terms of its study, but also in terms of its application—, which range from the Social Sciences —such as Sociology, Political Sciences or Social Work—, to the field of Medical Sciences and the integral health of people, as a sphere of intervention of great relevance.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has characterized quality of life as the perception that each individual has about their position in life, within a cultural context and a system of norms and specific values, and in relation to their own values, goals and expectations. According to the WHO, quality of life is determined by six fundamental variables that affect each subject: physical and psychological state, levels of independence, social relationships, personal beliefs, and relationship with the environment.
The idea of quality of life is related to that of comprehensive health, that is, not restricted to the mere absence of disease, but associated with the guarantee of access to universal Human Rights, namely, access to food, a healthy environment, housing, employment, education, among other dimensions. In turn, the determination of the quality of life does not depend only on standardized variables, but personal self-determination occupies a central role in it.
Origins of the concept of quality of life
The notion of quality of life originated in the United States, in the post-war context after World War II (1939-1945). Towards the 1960s, its use spread among social scientists and psychologists, who found relevant results in their research based on the use of this concept for the analysis of the well-being of society. This occurs within the framework of the consolidation of the developmentalist socioeconomic model, of Keynesian stamp, under the so-called “Welfare State”.
At the beginning of the following decade, the concept was installed in other Western countries, as a consequence of the search for an explanation of the social conflict in developed countries, in which, despite registering high levels of production and consumption, this did not guarantee social satisfaction. In the case of the main world powers, the idea of well-being based on the population’s capacity to consume had been reflected, in practice, in a deepening of individualism and consumerism; while, in the rest of the planet, most of the population lacked (a situation that is still in force today) the means to satisfy their basic needs.
From the perspective of German social democracy, the quality of life was associated with the possibility of human freedom, but this could only be guaranteed thanks to solidarity among men. In this sense, it gave an account of a non-material enrichment of existence.
Controversies around the notion
Over time, the idea of quality of life was consolidated as an ideologically subsidiary concept of capitalist economies, through which the developed societies of the so-called “First World” were presented —taking the North American as a paradigmatic example— as an ideal to achieve. As a counterpart, the concept was also used as an instrument of criticism of the economic models of the socialist countries of the time, since they were incapable of guaranteeing the levels of quality of life that the deepening of market economies would ensure.
However, despite the different approaches, it had been demonstrated that the accumulation of wealth by itself, an expression of social progress in the terms of capitalism, did not ensure human well-being either, which was verified from the increasing inequalities that prevented large sectors of the population from accessing the satisfaction of their needs.
Quality of life from the sociological perspective
The concept is strongly linked to the field of sociology, but it is also part of the political debate or everyday conversations, being associated with the level of income and comfort of a person, a family or a group. Sociologists are concerned with studying society in some of its dimensions. And the quality of life of a society can be measured and evaluated based on a series of objective statistical data that allow conclusions to be drawn. If a sociologist wants to know the status of a certain group, they must carry out a series of surveys to collect information on objective and measurable aspects (income level, access to drinking water, type of vehicle, household appliances, educational level, square meters of the dwelling, time devoted to leisure, etc.). The results obtained provide very useful information and serve to specify the standard of living and establish various comparisons (for example, between two different nations).
The sociologist has an approximate idea of the quality of life, since it is based on certain statistical data. However, the sociologist cannot assess the subjective aspects related to quality of life (personal satisfaction or appreciation of one’s own existence). It could be the case that a family has very high objective indices and, at the same time, be an unhappy family. This ambivalent dimension occurs with some frequency, since there are towns that feel very happy despite the fact that their living conditions are technically very deficient.
In the attempt to establish scientific and rigorous criteria, sociologists use different measures (some studies focus on health, others on psychological well-being and others on social conditions).
A quality of life proposal
Apart from sociological analysis and objectivity/subjectivity, it is possible to establish a series of circumstances that could very probably be considered as valid conditions to say that a person or a family enjoys a good quality of life.
– Access to a health system that allows facing a health problem.
– Access to generalized education for the entire population.
– A minimum level of security so that individuals do not have the perception of feeling threatened in their daily lives.
– Have a minimum income level that guarantees access to basic goods (food, clothing and energy for the home).
– Sociopolitical circumstances that allow the exercise of basic freedoms (for example, freedom of expression or religious freedom) and political and economic corruption that is exceptional and not the usual pattern.
The conditions indicated above are a reference, that is, a general orientative proposal without sociological value.
According to the western mentality, it is necessary to measure any reality in an objective way and then draw a series of conclusions. Parameter measurement is useful in many fields (especially in economics). However, measuring quality of life is a debatable idea and not without controversy. The sociological tools are valid up to a certain point, since we must not forget that Western culture lives in a contradictory situation: acceptable general levels if we compare them with some areas of the planet and, in parallel, social problems that question the supposed quality of life (number growing number of people with depression, anxiety or who live in a situation of marginalization and social isolation). Finally, the quality of life as a numerical value that is expressed in a ranking can be misleading information and, as an example, cite Bhutan, a very poor country but which introduced a new measurement parameter: gross internal happiness.
Following