The recently released 2023 World Happiness Report by United Nation’s sustainable Development Solution Network, which has been publishing Happiness Index for all countries since 2012 has ranked India in the bottom quartile of countries whose citizens are experiencing a lot of unhappiness. This is a study, which was aimed at implementing Bhutan’s concept of measuring Gross Happiness Index instead of traditional measure of economic prosperity through GDP. It is almost a decade since this report is coming out and putting Nordic countries on the top of the charts every other year. It has received considerable flak in terms of ranking of India, which in the 2023 study was put up at 126 out of 137 surveyed countries. This ranking has raised eyebrows among experts and the general public alike, as it appears to contradict the nation’s rich cultural heritage and the diverse factors that contribute to its citizens’ happiness. This article, examines the methodology employed by the above happiness report and finds out the reasons why this report may not accurately capture the complexities of happiness in India.
• Not considering the cultural variations in a country so diverse as India: The World Happiness Report relies heavily on the Cantril ladder, a subjective measure of well-being. This approach assumes that the concept of happiness is universally understood and experienced similarly across cultures. However, cultural differences in the expression and perception of happiness might result in biased evaluations. In India, where happiness may be more closely tied to factors such as spirituality, community, and familial bonds, the Cantril ladder may not accurately capture the true levels of happiness.
• Very limited determinant factors, especially Macro conditions: The report considers a limited set of variables (GDP, life expectancy, generosity, social support, freedom, and corruption) in its assessment of happiness. While these factors are undoubtedly significant, they do not provide a comprehensive picture of the diverse aspects that contribute to happiness. India’s unique cultural, spiritual, and social dimensions, which may play a significant role in happiness, are overlooked by this methodology. Along with this, the report doesn’t capture any micro conditions impacting happiness of Individuals.
• Missing factors critical for Individual happiness: Factors like emotional regulations, depth of relationships (which the longest study on happiness by Harvard considers the most important factor), achievements goals, work and social life hasn’t found any consideration. That means that this report actually misses on the most important factors which impacts individual’s happiness and focuses on factors which are beyond the control of citizens. Since it has such an imbalance towards countries who has higher GDP, it is obvious that the study works with a hypothesis that those countries which are poor might not be in the top rankings when it comes to happiness. This is akin to a pronouncement that poor people can’t be happy.
• Disregard for intra-national heterogeneity: The report puts countries like Lithuania, Romania etc. at the top quartile of the chart, which might have a population less than a tier 3/tier 4 city of India and comparing them with India is like comparing apples to oranges. India as a country is characterized by significant regional disparities in economic development, social norms, and cultural practices. The World Happiness Report’s methodology does not take these disparities into account, which could lead to an oversimplification and misrepresentation of the country’s happiness levels. In India, people from different faiths, languages and customs stay and have their own social structure and needs. Clubbing all this into one number might be not correct.
Methodological limitations in data collection and sample representativeness: The report is based on data from the Gallup World Poll, which may be subject to limitations in terms of respondents’ understanding of survey questions, participation willingness, and sample representativeness. Given India’s linguistic and cultural diversity, these factors could significantly influence the country’s ranking. If we look at the sample from India, the report talks about three year rolling sample of 3000 people. For a country with a population of 1.4 billion, taking a sample of 3000 is quite insignificant. Also, there is no description of the socio economic, geographic or any demographic information is given leaving us to guess, who were those 3000 people from whom this data was collected. Just imagine it was students or house wives or people in urban areas ONLY, then the entire result is biased and doesn’t provide an accurate information on India’s Happiness.
No science applied for assigning weightage to factors: The report assigns equal weightage to the six factors under consideration, which may not accurately reflect their relative importance in determining happiness. For instance, in the Indian context, the weightage assigned to GDP may not be as pertinent as the emphasis placed on social support and family ties. A more nuanced weighting system, considering the specific cultural context, would be more appropriate. Even if we look at GDP, India is one of the fastest growing countries in the world and will become one of the top 5 country in the world in terms of economic growth but still it doesn’t make any difference to our happiness according to this report. In that context, the report is very contradictory and doesn’t provide any scientific explanation of why equal weight was applied for calculation of ranking of a country.
Inadequate consideration for differing developmental stages: The World Happiness Report compares countries at various stages of development, leading to potentially misleading comparisons. As a developing nation with a large population and significant income inequality, India faces unique challenges that are not captured by the report’s methodology. Comparing India to developed countries with higher GDPs and more advanced social welfare systems may not provide an accurate representation of the actual well-being experienced by individuals in the country. Even if we consider GDP, India as a country is on a growth trajectory and ranks at fifth largest economy of the world. The growth in the economic activities and subsequent rise of income levels in India are completely missed by this report. At the same time, if we see countries like Venezuela and Serbia, which are grappling with inflation are ranked above India. Paradox of this report is that it set out to change the way we looked at the progress of any country, beyond economic indicator and ends of including the same economic indicator as one of the determining factors in creating the rank. A more context-sensitive approach that accounts for these disparities would offer a more valid comparison of happiness levels across nations.
Another factor of importance is the way a country is ruled, whether it is a democratic country aur authoritarian or a monarchy rules it, seemingly it does not matter and the study takes a unilateral view on governance and that might not be a right approach to determine happiness of a country.
Counterintuitive ranking of conflict-affected and economically challenged countries: The World Happiness Report places countries like Pakistan, Ukraine, Sri Lanka, and Iraq above India, despite these nations grappling with ongoing conflicts, political instability, and economic crises. This counterintuitive ranking raises concerns about the validity and sensitivity of the report’s methodology, as it does not appear to adequately capture the impact of these significant challenges on the well-being of the population. Such discrepancies call into question the report’s ability to provide an accurate and meaningful assessment of happiness across nations, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive and context-sensitive approach to measuring happiness. Very surprisingly the country from which UN adopted this entire concept does not find a top rank in the report. How come a country which is focusing on gross happiness Index right from the beginning is not featuring in top 25 is a question in itself. It clearly shows that the current report is tilted towards factors on which Nordic countries are strong on, hence giving them unfair advantage. By the way the countries which are on top of the list are also the highest users of anti-depressants, producers of weapons, witnessing highest rates of suicides, abortions and divorces still ranking at the top of the list. This counterintuitive ranking is not something which sits well with the names behind the report and it definitely needs to probe for the intent and objective behind the way things are displayed.
In summary, the World Happiness Report’s methodology presents several critical shortcomings when applied to a country as diverse and complex as India. The reliance on subjective measures, the limited scope of determinant factors, and the disregard for intra-national heterogeneity and differing developmental stages are just a few of the issues that undermine the validity of India’s low ranking. Additionally, the counterintuitive positioning of conflict-affected and economically challenged countries above India further highlights the report’s limitations.
Given these concerns, it is essential to approach such subjective reports with caution and take their conclusions with a pinch of salt. While the World Happiness Report offers insights into certain aspects of well-being, it does not provide a comprehensive picture of happiness, particularly for a nation as diverse as India. Policymakers, researchers, and the public should be wary of reading too much into these rankings and should instead focus on more context-sensitive, comprehensive assessments of well-being. By adopting a nuanced understanding of happiness, we can better inform policy formulation and foster meaningful improvements in well-being for all.
What we recommend:
• We need a study, which takes into consideration, the huge diversity of the country and measures happiness at a granular level before coming out with an aggregate score of India as a country. We can have a study, which measures happiness at a district/block level and aggregation of it gives of India score.
• We need to include both Macro (governance, healthcare, economic activities etc.) along with Micro conditions (Health, Relationships, Work life etc) into consideration to give us a comprehensive understanding of happiness.
• Sample selected for interviews should have demographic quotas, which should represent India in the way it is. For example, we need to have data by age, gender, education, place of stay, income, nature of work to ensure there is no question on the representation of the samples approached and interviewed.
• Instead of relying on a cantril ladder question, we need to ask a direct question on happiness from respondents and explain the question in their native language. That will ensure, we have response from people who understand what is being asked and at the same time are comfortable in responding to it.
• The study needs to take into consideration the cultural nuances and long held beliefs on happiness. In some context, it is not good to talk about your happiness and some cultures encourages display of happiness despite the circumstances one is. This needs to be captured well in a study.
• Focus should also be on providing insights for corrective actions through different stakeholders. A driver analysis should tell us which out of many factors asked has a higher impact on happiness and where people should focus if they want to increase happiness.
• Effort should be to provide insights at different levels, at a country level, at state level, at district level and also at block level. There should be recommendation at each level and also actions for individuals (like rituals around gratitude and physical wellbeing), so that a movement on improving happiness is brought in.
This article studies ideas from the recent literature on the economics of happiness. India now ranked 126th in the world. That places the country below of all the other developing or underdeveloped nations. This article raises questions about that assessment. It reviews the new work on happiness, economics, considers implications for policy makers, and examines where India lies in international subjective well-being rankings. India performs fairly poor on a range of happiness indicators. This is a paradox. Our purpose is not to reject Happiness development Index methods, but to raise questions and to argue that much remains to be understood in this important area. More broadly, happiness equations have the potential to allow us to offer a remarkable tool for policy makers.
Leave a Comment