Emitting Happiness? Using Model-Based Cluster Analysis to Group Countries by Wealth, Development, Carbon Emissions, and Happiness

This exploratory study uses model-based cluster analysis to group sixty-one countries based on statistical similarities in terms of happiness, development, income, and carbon emissions. Model-based cluster analysis is appropriate for an initial identification of a pattern that is worthy of further investigation. A key finding is that there may be a Kuznets curve for happiness. The Kuznets curve graphs the proposition that, as an economy develops, economic inequality first increases and then decreases. Similarly, the authors find that clusters of countries at the extremes of the lowest and highest average levels of development and income have the highest self-reported levels of happiness. Clusters of countries in the middle of the development and income spectrum have the comparatively lowest average levels of happiness. Further, carbon emissions are not perfectly associated with happiness. For example, between two clusters with the highest average levels of development, income, and happiness there is a 43 % difference in carbon emissions. A highly developed cluster has roughly the same mean carbon emissions as a cluster with 83 % less income, and the least developed cluster has 93 % of the happiness as the most developed cluster yet 86 % less carbon emissions. Despite limitations of both data and methodology, the overall pattern—that there may be a happiness Kuznets curve and that development, income, and carbon emissions are not associated lockstep with happiness—contributes to the literature on decoupling development from growth in emissions.

Utilitarians and egalitarians have different priorities. Utilitarians prioritize the greatest level of happiness in society and are prepared to accept inequality, while egalitarians prioritize the smallest differences and are willing to accept a loss of happiness for this purpose. In theory these moral tenets conflict, but do they really clash in practice? This question is answered in two steps. First I consider the relation between level and inequality of happiness in nations; level of happiness is measured using average responses to a survey question on life satisfaction and inequality is measured with the standard deviation. There appears to be a strong negative correlation; in nations where average happiness is high, the standard deviation tends to be low. This indicates harmony instead of tension. Secondly I consider the institutional factors that are likely to affect happiness. It appears that level and equality of happiness depend largely on the same institutional context, which is another indication for harmony. We may conclude that the discussion between utilitarians and egalitarians is of little practical importance. This conclusion implies that increasing income inequality can go together with decreasing inequality in happiness and this conclusion provides moral support for Governments developing modern market economics

The Wellbeing–Consumption paradox: Happiness, health, income, and carbon emissions in growing versus non-growing economies

Several studies have shown that living close to a park is associated with high levels of happiness. However, there is a possible difference in the level of happiness between living close to a park (0-400 meters radius) compared to living far from the park (400-1.000 meters radius). Therefore, this study aims to compare the influence of Place Attachment on the level of happiness for people living near a park, especially residential parks in some housing areas in Malang City. Place Attachment in this study defined as a bond between an individual and a particular setting. The study demonstrates a positive influence of Place Attachment on the level of happiness of people living near the park. Respondents who live close to a park (R = 0.441; Happiness Level = 97.8%; Average Happiness = 6.833) tend to have a higher level of happiness compared to respondents who live far from a park (R = 0.326; Happiness Level = 69.9%; average Happiness = 4.148). This result shows the urgency to reconsider the provision standard of residential parks in Indonesia which only suggests one residential park for every 1,000 meters radius.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Breast Cancer: A Multilevel Perspective

Imposing versus Enacting Commitments for the Long‐Term Energy Transition: Perspectives from the Firm

One of the ideological foundations of the modern welfare states is the belief that people can be made happier by providing them with better living conditions. This belief is challenged by the theory that happiness is a fixed ‘trait’, rather than a variable ‘state’. This theory figures both at the individual level and at the societal level. The individual level variant depicts happiness as an aspect of personal character; rooted in inborn temperament or acquired disposition. The societal variant sees happiness as a matter of national character; embedded in shared values and beliefs. Both variants imply that a better society makes no happier people.Happiness can be regarded as a trait if it meets three criteria: (1) temporal stability, (2) cross-situational consistency, and (3) inner causation. This paper checks whether that is, indeed, the case.The theory that happiness is a personal-character-trait is tested in a (meta) analysis of longitudinal studies. The results are: (1) Happiness is quite stable on the short term, but not in the long run, neither relatively nor absoloutely. (2) Happiness is not insensitive to fortune or adversity. (3) Happiness is not entirely built-in: its genetic basis is at best modest and psychological factors explain only part of its variance.The theory that happiness is a national-character-trait is tested in an analysis of differences in average happiness between nations. The results point in the same direction: (1) Though generally fairly stable over the last decades, nation-happiness has changed profoundly in some cases, both absolutely and relatively. (2) Average happiness in nations is clearly not independant of living conditions. The better the conditions in a country, the happier its citizens. (3) The differences cannot be explained by a collective outlook on life.It is concluded that happiness is no immutable trait. There is thus still sense in striving for greater happiness for a greater number.KeywordsLiving ConditionAbsolute StabilitySocial Indicator ResearchGreat HappinessAverage HappinessThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Doing well by doing good. The relationship between formal volunteering and self-reported health and happiness

The link between age and happiness has been the subject of numerous studies. It is still a matter of controversy whether the relationship is U-shaped, with happiness declining after youth before bouncing back in old age, or not. While the effect of age has been examined conditional on income and other socio-demographic variables, so far, the interactions between age and income have remained insufficiently explored. Using data from the European Social Survey, this article shows that the nature of the relationship between age and happiness varies strongly with different levels of relative income. People in the lowest decile of the income distribution experience a ‘hockey stick’: a deep decline in self-reported happiness until around age 50–55 and a small bounce back in old age. The classic U-curve is found mostly in the middle-income ranks. For people at the top of the income distribution, average happiness does not vary much with age. These results demonstrate the important role of income in moderating the relationship between age and happiness.

Issue Editor Foreword

markdownabstract__Abstract__ One of the ideological foundations of the modern welfare states is the belief that people can be made happier by providing them with better living conditions. This belief is challenged by the idea that happiness tends to remain at the same level and will therefore hardly change when living conditions improve. This counter intuitive thought draws to two theories of happiness. One theory holds that happiness is a fixed “trait,” rather than a variable “state.” This theory figures both at the individual level and at the societal level. The individual level variant depicts happiness as an aspect of personal character, rooted in inborn temperament or acquired disposition and is commonly referred to as the “set point” theory of happiness. The societal variant sees happiness as a matter of national character, embedded in shared values and beliefs. This variant has been called “folklore theory.” Both variants imply that a better society makes no happier people. The second theory holds that happiness is a matter of comparison and that different standards of comparison are involved, such as described in Michalos (1985) “ multiple discrepancies theory” of happiness. In that context it is then assumed that standards tend to shift over time and that these shifts nullify the effects of improvements in living conditions. This is seen to lead us in a “hedonic treadmill,” where we remain equally happy subjectively in spite of progress in an objective sense (e.g., Brickman & Campbell, 1971). This idea of stable happiness figures in several discussions, one of which is the debate on the value of economic growth. In that context the “ Easterlin Paradox” holds that average happiness in nations has remained at the same level over the last decade in spite of constant economic growth (Easterlin, 1974).

PurposeThis study aims to explore the challenges of providing primary health care (PHC) to Afghan immigrants in Tehran as an important global human right issue.Design/methodology/approachIn this exploratory study, a total of 25 purposively selected PHC providers, including physicians, psychologists and midwives, were approached for face-to-face, semi-structured interviews, lasting 30 min on average. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.FindingsThe most common challenges of providing PHC to Afghan immigrants were categorized at individual, organizational and societal levels. Communication barriers and socioeconomic features emerged at the individual level. The organizational challenges included mainly the lack of insurance coverage for all immigrants and the lack of a screening system upon the immigrants’ arrival from the borders. At the societal level, the negative attitudes toward Afghan immigrants were causing a problematic challenge.Research limitations/implicationsThe main limitation was the possibility that only health-care professionals with particular positive or negative perspectives about immigrants enter into the study, because of the voluntary nature of participation.Practical implicationsFindings can help policymakers adopt evidence-informed strategies for facilitating PHC provision and improving the access to health care in immigrants as a global human right concern.Social implicationsThis study alerts about undesirable consequences of certain attitudes and behaviors of the society toward immigrant health.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the first studies conducted in PHC centers in Tehran Province that explores the challenges of providing PHC to Afghan immigrants.

This article presents a study of the relationship between self-reported happiness and selfassessed health status at the individual level, using the Religion, Health, and Young Emancipation ISSP survey for Uruguay in 2008. Probit estimates suggest that better selfassessed health status is highly correlated with greater levels of self-reported happiness. In order to control for the observed heterogeneity, models are estimated using matching methods. Results show that individuals who report themselves to be in good health have a probability of being at the highest level of happiness between 18 and 29 percentage points higher than individuals who report worse health.

There are substantial differences in happiness in nations. Average happiness on scale 0–10 ranges in 2006 from 3.24 in Togo to 8.00 in Denmark and the inequality of happiness, as measured by the standard deviation, ranges from 0.85 in Laos to 3.02 in the Dominican Republic. Much of these differences are due to quality of governance and in particular to ‘technical’ quality. Once a minimum level is reached, rising technical quality boosts average happiness proportionally. Good governance does not only produce a higher level of happiness, but also lowers inequality of happiness among citizens. The relation between good governance and inequality of happiness is not linear, but follows a bell shaped pattern, inequality of happiness being highest in nations where the quality of government is at a medium level. The relation between the size of government and average happiness depends heavily on the quality of government; good-big government adds to happiness but bad-big government does not. Possible explanations of these findings are discussed.

Partnerships as vehicle to facilitate change for environmental improvement is a topic that has received only limited theoretical attention. Specifically, extant literature has not systematically unfolded the scale of change (“what”) in relation to the change focus (“how”) and required partner composition (“who”). This paper thus applies change theories to analyze environmental partnership approaches to trigger change at the firm, industry, and societal levels. It explores how partnerships target these levels by using a process, product, policy, or awareness-related focus, by leveraging partner diversity, and by following specific change paths to scale up impact. Empirical results show that change through partnerships starts in the early 1990s at industry level, which is mostly associated with a service focus. When moving to the firm and societal levels, partner diversity becomes more important, as does the technology/process focus to facilitate change at firm level and the policy focus to facilitate change at the societal level.