University of Southern California
University of Southern California Law and Economics Working Paper Series
Feeding the Illusion of Growth and Happiness: A Reply to Hagery and Veenhoven
Article comments
Abstract only currently available.
The full text of this version of the article is not currently available online.
Abstract
In a rebuttal of Easterlin (1995), Hagerty and Veenhoven (2003) – hereafter H-V analyze data for 21 countries and conclude that “growing national income does go with greater happiness.” But the U.S. experience does not support this conclusion, which they obtain only by mixing together two sets of noncomparable surveys. Moreover, the results of studies of European countries and the U.S. by other scholars do not support their claim either. Furthermore, the experience of 6 out of 7 of their non-European countries fails to support their claim too. Finally, if countries in their analysis with quite similar growth rates are grouped, one finds quite disparate trends in happiness, suggesting that factors other than growth in income are responsible for the differential trends in happiness. Instead of straining to feed the illusion that a focus on economic growth will create happiness, an approach is needed that explores the impact on national trends in life satisfaction, not just of material goods, but also of family life, health, work utility, and the like.
Subject Area
Economics
Recommended Citation
Richard A. Easterlin,
"Feeding the Illusion of Growth and Happiness: A Reply to Hagery and Veenhoven"
(May 2004).
University of Southern California.
University of Southern California Law and Economics Working Paper Series.
Working Paper 8.
http://law.bepress.com/usclwps/lewps/art8
No readers' reactions have been posted for this article. To submit one, copy the URL for this article (http://law.bepress.com/usclwps/lewps/art8) and click here.