Well-Being Measures

for Public PolicyEd DienerUniversity of Illinois, andSenior Scientist, The Gallup Organization

United Nations Development ProgramOctober 8, 2008

Subjective Well-Being (SWB)People’s evaluations of their lives – in both

thoughts and feelings. For example:

Life satisfactionMarital, work, & health satisfactionPleasant emotions, e.g. Joy, affection, & trust Low negative emotions, e.g., anger &

depression

Overview

Subjective well-being helps reveal the progress of societies – quality of life

It provides useful new information to policy makers-- with some policy examples

Also SWB directly benefits societies – health, longevity, prosperity, and peace

Finally, I will answer objections

• GallupWorld Poll

0: Worst Possible Life

10: Best Possible Life

9

7

8

6543

2

1

Culture and Well-Being

WHY SWB?Why not just measure

income, education, and longevity – the HDI?

Limitations of Existing Indicators, Including the HDI

1. What they do not measure

e.g., TrustAir pollutionGender equalityJob securityGreen urban spaceCrimeetc.

Characteristics of Nations Missed by HDI?

UNDP Human Development Index (2003)

1.0.9.8.7.6.5.4.3.2

Affe

ct B

alan

ce (P

os. A

ffect

ove

r Neg

.)80

60

40

20

0

-20

Honduras

Armenia

Gaza/W. Bank

SWB measures more than the HDI:Correlates of National Life Satisfaction

• Income .82• Longevity .73

• Political stability .52• Trust other people .48• Unemployment -.44• Time with family/friends .41

Example: Crime

• Assault rate adds to the prediction of Life Satisfaction beyond the HDI

2. HDI Has Low CeilingDifferentiation only for less developed nations

3. Need ever-expanding lists of measures to capture all elements of quality of life

How to include them all?How to weight them?

How large a list?• Commuting time• Factory emissions• Greenery • Support for science• Literary achevements• Support for the arts• Litter rates• Quality of roads• Building safety• Rape rates• Parks• Tertiary education• Education gender equality• Income equality• Unemployment rate• Inflation rate• Political corruption• Business corruption• Child abuse• Infant mortality• Longevity• AIDS rates• School dropout rate• Juvenile delinquency• Free time• Youth sports participation• Recycling rates• Exercise rates• Consumption of junk foods• Consumption of animal protein• Locally grown produce• Etc• Etc• Etc• Etc• Etc• Etc• Etc• Etc

How to Weight?• Health, education, equality, crime,

pollution – all weighted the same?

Example: U.S.A. Cities333 cities – many can be rated first OR last, depending on weighting of indicators!

4. Whose List to Use?• Amartye Sen; Martha Nussbaum?

U.S. “experts” (elites)

U.S. example: The fine arts versus roller-derby

SWB measures are democratic -- from the people -- what they value and weight

SWB Weights and Integrates The Things About Which People

Care, the Optimal Weights, and The

Direction of Influence!

5. Also measurement problems with economic and other

measures

• Subjectivity in contents – GDP • Missed – black & grey markets, &

bartering• Unreliable in poor nations• How to integrate different approaches

to measuring GNP

6. Other Measures Miss Something Very Important!

HDI Robots – educated, long-living with money

Don’t we want more than orderly worker-bees?

Don’t we also want people leading meaningful and rewarding lives?

Why SWB ?• It is people’s evaluations of their lives – surely we

want these to be positive! Democratic!

• People rate it as very important, even the most important. They want it!

• Well-being is a core component of mental health, and mental illness likely largest cause of illness-related misery in the 21st century

• Behavioral benefits of well-being

Importance Ratings (1-9)Happiness Wealth Health

OVERALL (28 nations) 8.0 6.8 7.9

Chile 8.6 6.9 8.1Singapore 8.4 7.1 8.0Egypt 8.1 7.6 8.0USA 8.1 6.7 7.6Japan 7.4 6.6 7.8

Disease Burden• Misery burden from mental illnesses

likely to be largest by 2020, yet missed by longevity statistics

– Autism, Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder

– This burden reflected by SWB indicators

BUT

Is happiness good? Is it functional?

The Error of Flaubert

To be stupid, selfish, and have good health are three requirements for happiness, though if stupidity is lacking, all is lost.

Gustave Flaubert

Our Research Shows that Happiness is Beneficial

Flaubert 180 degrees off

Social Benefits of Being Happy

• More friends• Better and longer marriages• Social capital: Trust

Work Benefits• Higher supervisor ratings at work• Better “organizational citizens”• Higher incomes

• USA• Australia• Russia

Societal Benefits

• Volunteering

• Pro-peace attitudes

• Cooperative

Health Benefits of SWB

1. IllnessImmune, cardiovascular, etc.

2. Longevity

Longevity: The Nun Study Danner, Snowden, & Friesen, U Kentucky

1. Nuns autobiographies at age 22Expression of positive emotions

2. Happy and less happy nuns living in same life circumstances through lifespan

How long do they live?

Longevity in The Nun Study

Survival Rate at Age: 85 94

Most Cheerful Quartile 90% 54%

Least Cheerful 34% 11%

Longevity boost – about 10 years!

Danner, Snowdon, & Friesen

Psychologists

Happy live about 6 years longer

Predicting National Mean Life Expectancy

Corr. Beta r B

GDP/Capita .66 .12Health Expenditures .47 .01Life Satisfaction .76 .65

Predicting National Life Expectancy

When control GDP and Health Expenditures first:

SWB – Affect and Life Satisfaction – add16% more variance in predicting longevity!

In sum: National Accounts of Well-Being

• People believe well-being is important

• It leads to several desirable outcomes

• It helps with social capital

• We ought to be measuring it!

Policy Examples

• Economics– Unemployment

• Environment– Commuting– Air pollution

Slow & Incomplete Adaptation to Unemployment (Mostly Re-Employed, and Controlling for Income)

5.8

6

6.2

6.4

6.6

6.8

7

7.2

Past Prior Yr. Fired 1 Yr. 3 Yrs.

The Environment: Commuting

Life Satisfaction is consistently lower for those who have long commutes

Rising commute time resulting in higher incomes does not raise LS

The Environment: Smokestack Emissions

Life satisfaction

Quasi-experimental study in Germany

Objections1. Can’t measure “happiness” validly

-- must look at “behavior”2. People adapt to their conditions3. Happy pigs and happy mafia4. Happiness is an individual affair; we

don’t want paternalism

Measurement – Objectivity?

SWB measures have proven validity

The: “Would you move?”Diener Measure of Validity

Life Evaluation LadderIdeal to Worst (10 to 0)

Denmark 8.0Finland 7.7Switzerland 7.5 Netherlands 7.5Spain 7.2Ireland 7.1

Togo 3.2Cambodia 3.6

Sierra Leone 3.6Georgia 3.7Zimbabwe 3.8West Bank 4.7

Measurement Validity:SWB Measures Correlate With:

Suicide (individual and national)Physiological (brain, hormones, immune)Informant reports (family and friends)Interview ratingsReaction-time to stimuli tasks

Surveys in Economics• Survey measures used in GNP

• Subjective decisions about how to sum those numbers

• Subjective reports do have issues, yes, but no more than counting

• Examples: Education, Unemployment, Eastern bloc

Objection 2: Adaptation:Life Satisfaction & Disability

• People adapt to bad and good conditions

–The “Happy Poor”–Happy Slaves?

Adaptation?

5.8

6

6.2

6.4

6.6

6.8

7

7.2

-2 Yrs. -1 Yr. 0 +1 Yr. +3 Yrs. +5 Yrs.

-2 Yrs.-1 Yr.0+1 Yr.+3 Yrs.+5 Yrs.

3. Happy Mafia & Pigs?• Bad people, dumb people, etc. can be

happy

• Yes, and they can be: Rich Educated Long-lived tooHappiness is NOT the only value; other

things matter too

Other Values More Important?

For example: capabilities & functionings

Maybe, but so what? This does not mean SWB is

not also very important!

4. Paternalism

CLAIM• Happiness is an individual

affair, not the business of governments

Paternalism?94 % of Danes are Above

97 % of Togolese

Ladder of Life Scores

109876543210

Perc

ent o

f Res

pond

ents 50

40

30

20

10

0

DENMARK

TOGO

Conclusions• SWB can simultaneously reflect many

desirable aspects of life

• In addition, it is valuable for nations; it helps functioning!

• It can be validly measured

• It can add information for policy and individual decisions beyond existing measures

Using SWB Measures

• OECD• E.U.• Stats Canada• C.D.C. in USA

The Gallup Organization would give the U.N. data for two (more?) years:

• Ladder for 140+ nations• Positive emotions of nations• Negative emotions (e.g., depression) of nations

References

Well-being for public policyDiener, Lucas, Schimmack, & Helliwell (2009), Oxford U Press

Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-beingPsychological Science in the Public InterestDiener and Seligman, 2004

“The most authoritativeand informative bookabout happiness ever ^written”

Thank You!

•Questions?•Discussion?

Societal Policies?Pleasant Emotions—Enjoyment etc.

Highest Lowest

New Zealand 88 % Georgia 43 %Ireland 88 % Pakistan 48 %Netherlands 87 % Armenia 49 %Costa Rica 87 % Palestine 50 %UK 86 % Sierra L. 51 %

OECD Nations Affect Balance (PA –NA)Women Men

Ireland .69 .66New Zealand .65 .66Sweden .65 .61Netherlands .62 .63Canada .62 .61Denmark .61 .61Australia .61 .61Austria .61 .60Mexico .60 .62Norway .60 .58Switzerland .58 .57U.S.A. .56 .61U.K. .56 .54Finland .53 .52

Women Men

Japan .53 .43Germany .52 .56Belgium .51 .57France .50 .51Poland .50 .50Spain .48 .58Czech Rep. .48 .50S. Korea .44 .35Italy .42 .42Hungary .41 .48Slovak Rep. .41 .39Greece .31 .42Portugal .30 .44Turkey .17 .20

More on Diminishing Returns:

US probability sample .12

Calcutta slum dwellers .45

Calcutta sex workers .67

15 Highest on Ladder• Denmark 8.0 • Finland 7.7• Switzerland 7.5 • Netherlands 7.5 • Canada 7.4 • Norway 7.4 • Sweden 7.4• Australia 7.4• New Zealand 7.3• Belgium 7.3 • United States 7.2 • Israel 7.2• Venezuela 7.2• Spain 7.2• Ireland 7.1

Lowest Life Ladder

• Benin 3.3• Cambodia 3.6• Sierra Leone 3.6• Tanzania 3.7• Georgia 3.7• Uganda 3.7• Niger 3.7• Ethiopia 3.8• Burkina Faso 3.8• Zimbabwe 3.8• Cameroon 3.9• Madagascar 4.0• Kenya 4.0• Mali 4.0

UNDP Human Development Index (2003)

1.0.9.8.7.6.5.4.3.2

Glo

bal J

udgm

ent o

f Life

(Lad

der)

9

8

7

6

5

4

3Benin

Cambodia Georgia

Armenia

Latvia

Sri Lanka

Proposal for National Indicators of Well-Being – and International Indicators

• Long overdue• Resistance – based on outmoded

philosophy & data• Ignorance of newest findings

Health Research FundingDisease burden computations:

• Life Years and

• Misery– Use SWB instead of Willingness-to-pay

Paul Dolan, UK health economist

4. Optimal Amount?Can there be too much

or too little?

Examples:• Divorce rate• Percent in science & engineering• Tertiary education for all

Example: Divorce Rate• Is 0 percent good?

– No freedom

• Is 55 percent better?– Unstable relationships & childrearing

• Optimum level– Reflected in well-being