The Human Pursuit of Well-Being: A Cultural Approach
CAN WE GET HAPPIER THAN WE ARE? Ruut Veenhoven I. Brdar (ed.). The Human Pursuit of Well-Being: A Cultural Approach, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-1375-8_1. © Springer Science, 2011, New York, pp. 3-38.
1 INTRODUCTION
What is the final goal of public policy? Jeremy Bentham (1789/1970) would say: greater happiness for a greater number. He thought of happiness as subjective enjoyment of life; in his words, it is “the sum of pleasures and pains.” In his time, the happiness could not be measured. It was, therefore, difficult to assess how happiness could be furthered and to determine whether attempts to do so were successful or not. Hence, happiness remained a subject of philosophical speculation.
Today, we can do better. Social scientists have found that happiness can be mea- sured using questions about life-satisfaction, and they have gone on to apply such questions in large-scale surveys of general population worldwide. In this paper I take stock of their findings.
2 HOW HAPPY ARE WE? Most inhabitants of modern society are happy. This is seen from their responses to the question: “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole nowadays? Please indicate using a number from 0 to 10. where 0 is “extremely dis- satisfied’ and 10 ‘extremely satisfied’.” The responses to this question in Germany are depicted in Fig. 1.1. More than 50% of the Germans rate their life at seven or higher and fewer than 15% of Germans rate their lives at five or below five. Studies that use slightly different questions have yielded similar results. The average “school mark” that Germans give for their quality of life is currently 7.2 1. Rank of Happiness in Nations How does German happiness rank in comparison to other nations? Some illustrative findings are presented in Table 1.1, and although Germany falls in the middle of this list, it is actually in the top range for the world. As one can see, average happiness varies between 8.2 (Denmark) and 3.3 (Zimbabwe), and with 7.2, Germany ranks high in the five-point interval between the highest and lowest average happiness. Trend of Happiness in Nations Survey research on happiness started in the late 1940s and took off in the early 1970s. Until recently, it was difficult to discern a pattern in the data; changes over time tend to be small and our view of the trend is often blurred by minor variations in sampling and questioning. Now that we have more and better data, a pattern of rising happiness has begun to emerge (Veenhoven & Hagerty. 2006). Some illustrative cases are presented in Fig. 1.2.
Correspondence: Prof. Dr. Ruut Veenhoven Erasmus University Rotterdam, Faculty of Social Sciences, P.O.B. 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. www2.eur.nl/fsw/research/veenhoven Printed version : www.SpringerLink.com
vrijwilliger
Rectangle
www2.eur.nl/fsw/research/veenhoven
www.SpringerLink.com
3 GREATER HAPPINESS POSSIBLE? Can public policy create greater happiness? Several scientists think not. Some psychologists maintain that happiness is largely inborn or at least embedded in stable personality. Hence, a better society will not yield happier citizens, This view is known as the “set point” theory (Lykken, 1999). Some sociologists draw the same conclusion, because they think happiness depends on social comparison and that one is not better off than the neighbors if conditions for everybody improve. In this vein, the case of the USA is often mentioned as an example: material wealth would have doubled there since the 1950s, while average happiness seems to have remained at the same level (Easterlin, 1995). These scientists are wrong, both empirically and theoretically. Empirical Indications There is a clear relation between average happiness and societal quality. Think of the case of Zimbabwe in Fig. 1.1. where this country is at the bottom with an average of 3.3. Apparently, people cannot live happily in a failed state, even if their neighbors suffer in a similar way. The correlations in Table 1.2 show that this is no exception; differences in quality of society explain about 80% of the variation in average happiness in the present day world.
Average happiness has changed in most nations and typically for the better (Veenhoven & Hagerty. 2006). Figure 1.2 depicts a gradual rise of happiness in Denmark over the last 30 years and a dramatic fall in average happiness in Russia, following the Ruble Crisis of 1995. Clearly, happiness is not fixed to a set point!
Figure 1.2 also shows that greater happiness is possible in most nations of the world. Average happiness is currently highest in Denmark, with an average of 8.2. What is possible in Denmark should also be possible in other countries. We cannot object that Danish happiness is a matter of genetic endowment or national character, because Fig. 1.2 shows that happiness has improved in Denmark since 1973.
Present-day happiness in Denmark may be close to the maximally possible level. If so. there is still a long way to go for most nations of this world, since the world’s average happiness is now about 5.5. If we ever reached the maximum of average happiness, there is still the possibility to extend the duration of our happiness and create more happy life years for a greater number (Veenhoven. 2005). Theoretical Underpinning The erroneous idea that greater happiness is not possible has its roots in erroneous theories about the nature of happiness. One of these mistaken theories i s that happi- ness is merely a matter of outlook on life and that this outlook is set in fixed disposi- tions, which are part of an individuals’ personality as well as of their national character. Another faulty theory is that happiness results from cognitive comparison, in particular from social comparison. Elsewhere, I have shown that these theories are wrong (Veenhoven, 1991, 1995).
My alternative theory of happiness holds that we appraise life on the basis of affective information in the first place. We experience positive as well as negative affects, and in appraising how much we like the life we live, we assess to what extent the former outbalances the latter. This theory fits Bentham’s concept of happiness as “the sum of pleasures and pains.” In my view, positive and negative affects signal the gratification of basic human needs, so in the end, happiness is determined by need gratification. Elsewhere, I have discussed this theory in more detail (Veenhoven. 2009).
Ruut Veenhoven 2 Can we get happier than we are?
4 HOW CAN HAPPINESS BE RAISED?
Apparently, greater happiness for a greater number is possible. How can this be achieved? I see possibilities at three levels: (1) at the macro-level of society. (2) at the meso-level of organizations, (3) at the micro-level of individual citizens.
4.1 Macro-level: Improving the livability of society Happiness also depends on the quality of the wider society. As we have seen in Table 1.1, there are wide differences in happiness across nations, and these differences are clearly linked to societal qualities, some of which are presented in Table 1.2.
Will further economic growth make us happier? Table 1.2 suggests so. because happiness is strongly correlated with the wealth of the nation. Yet. material affluence appears to be subject to the law of diminishing return, and economic growth yields more happiness in poor nations than in rich nations. This is not to say that economic development does not add to happiness at all in rich nations. Happiness is still on the rise in affluent nations, and it is well possible that this rise is linked to economic growth, directly or indirectly. We simply do not know what the underlying links are, as yet.
Still another reason to keep the economy going is that the “playing” may be as important as the prizes. Happiness is not only found in consumption, it is also found in productive activity. Like most animals, we have an innate need to use our potentials. The biological function of this need is to keep us sharp, in the human case, in particular, to keep the brain in shape. The human species evolved under the conditions of a hunter-gatherer existence that involved a lot of challenge. In today’s conditions, as an industrial society, we still need some challenges and most of us find them mainly in our work life. In this perspective, we belter not follow Layard’s (2005) advice to discourage economic competition, though there is a point in keeping the competition nice and leaving room for other arenas in society.
The data in Table 1.2 do not suggest that a reduction of income differences will add to happiness; the zero-order correlation is close to zero, and when the wealth of the nation is taken into account, we even see a positive effect of income inequality. Though income inequality may be unfair, we can apparently live with it. Likewise, the data do not suggest that happiness can be advanced by increasing the offerings of a welfare state. At first sight, (here is some correlation between expenditures for social security and happiness in nations, but the statistical relationship disappears when we take into account that big spending nations tend to be richer. For instance, happiness is fairly high in Sweden, and Sweden is known for its extended welfare stale; yet. it is equally high in Iceland, which scores equally high and spends much less on social security (Veenhoven, 2000; Ouweneel, 2002).
The greatest gains seem to be possible in the realms of freedom and justice. Good governance also appears to contribute much to average happiness in nations, irrespective of the political color of the parties in the saddle.
4.2 Meso-level: Improving the livability of institutions Another source of happiness is the institutional settings in which we spend most of our time, such as at work or at school. Systematic improvements in those realms will probably add to the average happiness of a nation.
This requires that we know which settings produce the most happiness, for example, determine the kind of…
