For this assignment, you are to survey any 5 people about their regrets. To prompt their comments, give them this specific scenario: If you knew you were dying, what five regrets would you have about
11 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF HAPPINESS RESEARCH fter 35 years of intensive research, what have investigators discovered that adds significantly to the teachings of that champion of happiness, Jeremy Bentham? Essentially, researchers have succeeded in doing what Bentham could not accomplish: to devise a way of measuring how happy people are and how much pleasure or pain they_ derive from the ordinary events and conditions of their lives. As a result, investiga tors are often able to reach conclusions that can help lawmakers decide wh.i,ch legislative programs are most likely to improve the well-being of the citizenry. It is true that many of these findings merely ·echo what some philosopher or theologian said centuries ago. Nevertheless, since prominent thinkers have so often disagreed with one another in discussing happiness, the new research does a valuable service by providing empirical evidence to suggest which insights are correct and which seem to be invalid.
Investigators have achieved this result by the simple technique of asking individuals either to describe their feelings at particular times during the day or to estimate how happy or satisfied they feel about the lives they are leading. The answers may not always be accurate. When collected from large numbers of people, however, they give a fairly reliable picture of what conditions and experi ences of life tend to be associated with happiness or distress, how intensely people feel such emotions, and how long the sentiments last. The findings correlate significantly with independent evidence of happiness ranging from activity in the brain to the estimates of friends and relatives. All in all, they seem at least as accurate as many of the statistics commonly used by policy-makers in Wash ington and other centers of government. SIGNIFICANCE OF HAPPINESS RESEARCH I 205 The results of this research are reassuring in several critical re spects. The vast majority of Americans appear to be happy most of the time. Even in the lowest income quartile of the popula-.
tion, more than 80 percent profess to be more happy than not.
Moreover, the happiness they feel does not seem to come primar ily from mere pleasure-seeking or from selfishly looking out for number one. Rather, apart from such basic conditions· as how well people feel, how much freedom they enjoy, and whether they possess the necessities and comforts of life, the most important sources of happiness seem to include having close relationships with family and friends, helping others, and being active in com munity, charitable, and political activities. Thus, the successful pursuit of happiness promises not merely to be self-serving but to contribute to a better, stronger, more caring society. At the same time, happy people tend to live longer, enjoy better health, work more effectively at their jobs, and contribute more to strong, ef fective democratic government and flourishing communities. All in all, therefore, happiness seems to represent a most appropri ate goal for a government to pursue, just as Bentham maintained more than two centuries ago.
Would it really make much practical difference, however, if gov ernments began to pay serious attention to the findings of happi ness scholars? Very little, public officials might reply. After all, in a democracy, lawmakers know they are accountable to the vot ers and must pay close attention to what their constituents want.
Almost everything the government does is meant in one way or another to increase the well-being of the citizenry. Legislators do not have to read academic studies to figure out what people need.
The people themselves are the best judge of that, and common sense and opinion polls will suffice to keep their representatives informed of what they want.
At first glance, this response seems plausible. Surely, lawmakers know a lot about the needs of the people they represent. They hardly need researchers to tell them that married couples tend to be happier than people who are divorced or separated, or that people who lose their jobs are unhappy, or that individuals who are depressed or in chronic pain feel miserable. 206 I CHAPTER 11 True enough. Yet research on happiness contradicts this com monsense view on one crucial point. People do not always know what will give them lasting satisfaction. They tend to focus too much on their initial response to changes in their daily lives and overlook how soon the pleasure of a new car or a pay raise or a move to warmer climes will disappear and leave them no happier than before. Conversely, they often fail to realize how quickly they will adapt to most of the misfortunes that befall them once the initial shock has passed away.
The prevailing culture accentuates these misimpressions. A vast barrage of commercial advertising reinforces the continuing desire for more goods and services by emphasizing the immediate enjoy ment they will bring. In a materialistic society that places great em phasis on the things money can buy, success is frequently measured in financial terms, w4ile wealth and the possessions it provides become an important source of status and respect from neighbors and peers. Earning the wherewithal to satisfy these desires often leads to WQrry and stress while requiring constant attention and long hours of work that diminish family life and limit the time for more satisfying pursuits.
Since business executives and corporations are well supplied with money and organizational skills, commercial interests and priorities have a potent influence in government circles. Backed by this political clout and by the public's constant desire for more goods and services, economic growth becomes the highest priority on the domestic agenda. Environmental policy, labor policy, tax policy, and much else must be shaped to satisfy the imperatives of an expanding economy. Education reform is dominated by the need to prepare a more effective workforce. Other aspects of life that contribute to well-being, such as marriage, child-rearing, and leisure receive less attention and must usually give way when they conflict with economic goals. How might these priorities be affected if policy-makers began paying serious attention to the research on happiness? Clearly, the most profound question raised by this new body of work is whether growth should retain such a dominant place on the do mestic agenda. What several investigators have done is to chal- SIGNIFICANCE OF HAPPINESS RESEARCH I 207 lenge prevailing policies at their core by marshaling evidence to show that the constant preoccupation with growth has not helped Americans become any happier over the past 60 years despite the doubling and redoubling of the Gross Domestic Product.
Happiness scholars are not the first to raise this issue. Philoso phers have questioned the value of accumulating wealth and pos sessions for at least 2,500 years, while scientists began to express concern several decades ago about the effects of continued eco nomic growth on natural resources and the environment. But the claims of philosophers were assertions unaccompanied by evidence. As for the scientists' forebodings, the more alarming predictions of impending doom were usually refuted by subsequent events, while more restrained, carefully documented warnings could be satisfied by measures that did not seriously interfere with growth itself. In contrast, a number of happiness researchers have marshaled em pirical evidence that calls in question not just the side effects of economic activity but the value of growth itself. Not all happiness investigators share these doubts, and analysts have made persuasive arguments on both sides of the question. If it should turn out, however, that growth no longer adds significantly to the happiness of Americans, both policy-makers and the gen eral public may eventually have to consider whether it is sensible to invest so much time and. effort and put the environment to so much risk in a ceaseless struggle to expand the output of goods and services.
For now and in the foreseeable future, however, there is little chance that researchers will bring about drastic changes in eco nomic policy. Even if it should turn out that growth does not bring added happiness, there is no way at present to stop the economy from growing without creating problems that would outweigh any hoped-for benefits. The necessary changes in behavior and outlook would be so profound and the practical and political problems so numerous and difficult that such a transformation would probably take generations.
For the time being, then, the doubts researchers have raised about the value of growth are likely to have more modest effects.
At most, they may persuade policy-makers to be more skeptical of 208 I CHAPTER ll those who assume that maximum growth should be the overriding goal to which all other domestic policies must accommodate and to become more attentive to other aspects of life that can contrib- ute importantly to well-being.
With such a change of emphasis in mind, government officials could draw upon the new research to rethink their priorities and make a more balanced effort to promote well-being. For example, happiness research reinforces the importance of programs to strengthen marriage and family; encourage active forms of leisure; cushion the shock of unemployment; guarantee universal health care and a more secure retirement; improve child care and pre school education; treat mental illness, sleep disorders, and chronic pain more effectively; and focus education policy on a broader set of goals. Progress on these fronts could well do more for well being than such familiar proposals as redistributing income, put ting more people in prison, subsidizing even further the retirement savings of the well-to-do, or promoting the kind of suburbaniza tion that brings longer commutes and added traffic. One can easily think of other policies to consider beyond the ones described in this volume. Environmental policy is a prime example, not only because of the long-term risk of catastrophic damage from global warming but also because at least one longitudinal study has found that reductions in air pollutants such as lead and nitrogen dioxide lead to perceptible gains in happiness. 1 In law enforcement, happiness research would suggest paying more attention to groups affected by crime, such as residents in inner-city neighborhoods who live in fear of being beaten, robbed, or shot; or victims of crime who would benefit from enforceable rights to be informed of progress in apprehending their wrongdoer and to appear in court to submit their views on plea bargains and sentences. 2 Even more could be done to improve well-being by requiring a more thought ful and more rigorous review with greater Congressional partici pation before entering into major wars, such as those in Iraq and Vietnam, that have caused so much death, injury, and psychological harm, not to mention such vast destruction and expense. 3 In contemplating this altered agenda, lawmakers should be pleased to discover how little it would cost the nation. Some im- SIGNIFICANCE OF HAPPINESS RESEARCH I 209 portant measures, notably universal health care, would require substantial sums to implement properly. But other useful steps, such as more extensive premarital counseling, more effective relief of chronic pain, more attention to crime victims, and a broader set of educational goals, would be far less expensive. Better yet, such valuable measures as universal preschool, or public :financing of elections, or proper attention to sleep disorders and depression, though they would require initial investments, could more than pay for themselves eventually. Still other initiatives, such as efforts to discourage earmarks or revise sentencing policies for victim less crimes, would reduce government outlays almost immediately.
Any success in avoiding unnecessary wars, of course, would yield far greater savings. Overall, then, a comprehensive effort to pro mote well-being is one of the few important government initiatives that could ultimately cost the public little or nothing. If obstacles to such reforms exist, they are more likely to involve a lack of po litical will than a shortage of money.
Still another important item in a revised political agenda would be a fresh look at government itself. One of the more interesting :findings from the research on happiness is how much the quality of government and the trust and confidence people have in their public officials contribute to well-being. With this insight in mind, efforts to improve the government's performance and increase re spect for its work take on added significance, especially at a time like the present when public confidence and trust have sunk to such low levels. Sustained improvement in the quality of public policy will be very hard to achieve. But lawmakers could take some practical steps to build greater confidence in the political process through measures to reduce the influence of money and special interests and to curb redistricting abuses, unethical practices, pork barrel earmarks, and other efforts by politicians to place their own reelection above the general welfare.
Helpful as these reforms would be, they are unlikely by them selves to bring about a substantial increase in trust and confidence.
For that to happen, the media, along with schools and colleges, will need to educate the public to counteract the widespread ten dency to expect too much of government, exaggerate its faults, 210 I CHAPTER 11 and overlook its accomplishments. In recent decades, these atti tudes, reinforced by an insufficient understanding of our Constitu tional system and its effects on policy-making, have contributed to a widespread cynicism toward politics that hampers the work of government and ultimately diminishes the public's well-being. The remedy is surely not to promote some sort of mindless patriotism or to ignore the errors and misadventures of our public officials.
Rather, schools, colleges, and the media all need to take the re sponsibility for civic education more seriously and give the public a more balanced, realistic appreciation of how the political and policy-making processes work and why they often involve such prolonged arguments and awkward compromises. .
Beyond these specific changes, almost any successful effort tom crease happiness will require greater understanding by the people of the actual sources of well-being. Despite the many possibilities for useful government initiatives, no democratically elected gov ernment can stray too far from the wishes of the voters, no mat ter how enlightened its officials may be and how committed they are to furthering the well-being of their constituents. If Americans have a farilty perception of what will bring them lasting satisfac tion, policy-makers will find it hard to do a great deal for them. One modest but important step that the government could take to increase understanding would be to publish annual reports on the well-being of the American people using the best survey methods and the. most comprehen_sive data available. Such infor mation would regularly call attention to the subject and stimulate debate about the findings. Over time, public awareness would in crease and people's conception of national progress might come to include much more than the familiar measures of economic growth, stock market trends, unemployment, and standardized test scores that currently attract so much attention from policy makers and the media.
More information and increased public awareness, though help ful, will not suffice to realize the full potential for increasing hap piness. People must also have a better appreciation of the causes of their own happiness and dissatisfaction. Governm~nt cannot as sume this responsibility for them. In a democracy, public officials SIGNIFICANCE OF HAPPINESS RESEARCH I 211 have only a limited power to increase well-being. They can do a lot . to relieve suffering by mounting more effective efforts to deal with chronic pain and depression, avoid needless wars, or limit financial risk. It is much more difficult for governments to change behavior in positive ways that will bring about stronger marriages, greater civic engagement, more active uses of leisure, or closer social ties. Policy makers can offer incentives and create opportunities, but education will ultimately accomplish more than legislation in helping people to pay more informed attention to these aspects of their lives.
At present, both our schools and our colleges are doing less than they should to help young people acquire the variety of interests or recognize the kinds of experience that are most likely to contribute to a full and satisfying life. In crafting an education policy, officials have focused too heavily on the need to train a productive work force at the expense of other reforms that could do as much or more to increase well-being. Most educators try to take a broader view, but multiple pressures lead them to concentrate primarily on vocationally oriented knowledge and skills. To serve their students well, schools and colleges need encouragement to adjust their pri orities and do more to cultivate a breadth of interests and convey the kinds of knowledge that students need to make wiser choices about their lives.
For education, then, as for many other areas of public policy, the study of happiness could have important implications. Its potential value can only grow. Serious empirical research on happiness is only a few decades old and hence is still in its infancy compared with most other fields in the social sciences. Over time, its meth ods will improve and its findings will become more reliable and detailed. New research will throw fresh light on more and more facets of human experience and trace the effects of more and more conditions of life on the well-being of different groups of people.
Thus, the policy implications described in this book offer only a preliminary glimpse at what may eventually come to light.
At this point, it is still too early to tell how much attention policy makers will eventually give to such research. Yet even if they never pay much heed, the study of happiness promises to contribute in another important way. Until now, the results of the new research 212 CHAPTER 11 have barely entered the consciousness of the general public. As the work matures and a clearer consensus emerges around its central findings, a wider debate is likely to occur not only over the role of growth but over larger questions about how to use our abundance "to live wisely, and agreeably, and well." 4 Whatever Congress does or does not do, such discussion, nourished by a growing body of research, is bound to contribute to the evolution of society and the refinement of its values. That alone will be an accomplishment of enduring importance to humankind. And in the fullness of time, who knows? Public policy may even begin to change as well. NOTES Introduction 1. Quoted in Vijay K. Shrotryia, "Happiness and Development: Public Policy Initiatives in the IGngdom of Bhutan," in Yew-Kwang Ng and Lok Sang Ho (eds.), Happiness and Public Policy: Theory, Case Studies, and Implications (2006), pp. 193,201. 2. See, e.g., Jigme Y. Thinley, "Gross National Happiness: A Paradigm for In telligent Urbanism" (paper submitted at 3d International Conference on Gross National Happiness, Bangkok, Thailand, January 3-5, 2007); Brook Lerner, "Bhutan's Novel Experiment," National Geographic (March 2008), p. 124.
3. Daniel Kaufman, Aart Kraay, and Massin10 Mastruzzi, "Governance Mat ters VI: Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996-2006," World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4280 (July 2007), pp. 76-93. 4. The treatment ofNepalis in Bhutan is described by Tessa Piper, "The Exodus of Ethnic Nepalis from Southern Bhutan," 14 Refugee Survey Quarterly (1995), p. 52.
5. See, e.g., Vijay K. Shrotryia, note 1; Brook Lerner, note 2; Bob Frame, "Bhutan: A Review of Its Approach to Sustainable Development," 15 Develop ment in Practice (2005), p. 216.
6. See Raksha Arora, "A Well-B.eing Report Card for President Sarkozy," http:// www.gallup .com/po 1111 0 3 79 5 !WellBeing- Report -Card- President-Sarkozy.aspx (January 17, 2008). 7. Nick Donovan and David Halpern, Life Satisfaction: The State of Knowl edge and Implications for Government (2002). David Cameron is quoted in Rana Foroohar, "Money v. Happiness: Nations Rethink Priorities," Newsweel< (April 5, 2007), p. 3. 8. Darrin M. McMahon, Happiness: A History (2006), pp. 200-221. 9. Ibid., p. 261.
10. Jeremy Bentham, Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (J. H. Burns and H.L.A. Hart, eds., 1996), pp. 39-40. 11. Ibid., pp. 38-41. 12. See chapter 1 for further discussion.
13. Richard A. Easterlin, "Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence," in Paul A. David and Melvin W. Reder (eds.), Na tions and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor ~f Moses Abramo witz (1974), p. 89; and Easterlin, "Feeding the Illusion of Happiness: A Reply to Hagerty and Veenhoven," 74 Social Indicators Research (2005), p: 74.
