I wrote recently about how it might make us feel happier to re-evaluate the balance between our work and home lives, as well as the importance we place on material possessions. Following this I came across an article published in The Observer which looks at some related issues and draws an important conclusion: our pursuit of unsustainable, material growth is not making us happier. The article questions the value we place on the goal of growing GDP – something which has in recent times been termed a “false god” by Adair Turner, chief executive of the Financial Services Authority. He points out that growth is not only bad for the environment, but that improvements in standards of living do not directly translate to improvements in human welfare or happiness.
The “Happy Planet Index” (HPI) produced by the New Economics Foundation (Nef) uses data on the well-being and environmental aspects of human activity, plus economic growth, to measure whether countries achieve sustainable, happy lives for their citizens. According to this measure we in the UK are down in 74th place. More strikingly the overall conclusion that Nef draws is that economies which are growing quickly, such as China and India, were not only more environmentally friendly 20 years ago, but were also happier than they are today.
In the world of Psychology, Ed Diener and his team have really led the way in researching this area so it’s good to see others beginning to listen and come to the same important conclusions – i.e. that it’s time to rethink our economic priorities. Diener’s research (e.g. 2004) has shown that although economic output has risen steeply over the past decades, there has been no rise in life satisfaction over that same period, and that there has been a substantial increase in the incidence of depression and distrust. Once an economy is developed and strong enough so that basic needs for survival are met, differences in well-being are less frequently about income, and more to do with the quality of social relationships and enjoyment at work. There is also support for this view from the influential David Blanchflower – Professor of Economics and Happiness at Dartmouth College in the US and member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee.
I’ll be interested to see where all this takes us. As The Observer article says, it’s won’t be an easy or quick solution to promote such a paradigm shift, but I think it’s absolutely necessary. The policy director at Nef states plainly, “you can’t have infinite growth in a world of finite resources.” This makes perfect logical sense, so why is this the very thing that we seek and promote? Let me know what you think!
http://diener.socialpsychology.org/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jan/10/economic-growth-feel-good-factor
This is so true.
I have been known to say that man moved to the city in order to get a job and earn a good living so he could take that money and move back to where he came, the lake, the country, the ranch, the beach and the mountain. Funny that the pursuit of happiness leads us back to where we were most happy.
The most expensive homes are those with the best views of nature, the water, mountains and beaches. All the places we started our journey.
I like the King of Bhutan’s formulation that his country’s national wealth should be measured , not by GDP, but by GNH -Gross National Happiness. It would be a good starting point for any country to copy this ideal.
http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/