Welfarism vs. Extra-Welfarism: controversial tenets and novel applied methods

We argue that major problems of current extra-welfarism are at an applied science level, since existing measures of wellbeing/health, including celebrated extra-welfarist and multidimensional welfare tools, are still too similar in terms of analytical aims and technical features, to methodology under welfarism. Thus, they fail so far in capturing and addressing vital extra-welfarist concerns.
Two novel methods for economic evaluation of well-being/health (under Robust Model Evaluation) are introduced, and their technical features discussed, to infer ethical and epistemological considerations. These methods hold valuable properties (i.e., multidimensionality and robustness) that can overcome conceptual, epistemic, and pragmatic shortcomings of welfarist and current extra-welfarist measures.
We conclude that scientific practices in welfare/health economics applying these methods can truly be alternative to welfarism and better represent extra-welfarism in theory and practice. Thus, they can be regarded as an expression of a new-fangled paradigm for wellbeing/health research that we label as Extra-Welfarism in Practice.