happiness inequality in europe · the empirical analysis is been performed with data from a sample...

HAPPINESS INEQUALITY IN EUROPE

Eduardo Bericat University of Seville

Conference on Social Monitoring and Reporting in Europe

Social Change and Continuity - Monitoring and Reporting on Societal Trends in the 21st Century

Villa Vigoni, 2016

Presentation: In the origins of modernity, the English philosopher and social reformer Jeremy Bentham argued that the ultimate goal of all societies was to achieve "the greatest happiness of the greatest number". However, as modern development gained ground, happiness as the fundamental goal of society was gradually replaced by economic wealth, computed as GDP. Currently, the relative delegitimation of modern values, as well as the evidence that wealth and economic development are not, by themselves, capable of resolving all social and human problems, are resituating happiness at the centre of social, political and personal agendas in developed countries. Furthermore, the relentless advance of globalisation, the disturbing acceleration of technological development, and the economic-financial crisis of 2008, have revived political, public and scientific interest in social inequality. But we again find that a complex phenomenon, social inequality, is interpreted as, reduced to and equated with a mere difference in economic resources. In this context, the aim of this paper is to explore, describe and estimate the existing inequality of happiness in European countries. Research on subjective well-being, usually based on "happiness" and/or "satisfaction with life" scales, has mainly focused on individuals’ level of happiness, but not so much on its social distribution. The empirical analysis is been performed with data from a sample composed of the 2006 and 2012 waves of the European Social Survey (ESS) (n=95165; 28 European countries), and applying the Socioemotional Well-Being Index (SEWBI), a multidimensional measurement model of happiness. The SEWBI allows us to estimate happiness inequality with the same indicators usually employed for measuring economic inequality. That is, we present indicators based on the median, as the at-risk-of-unhappiness rate (relative unhappiness); on different unhappiness thresholds, as the emotional and severe emotional deprivation (absolute unhappiness); or on the social distribution of the total happiness or unhappiness of a country, as the happiness Gini coefficient or the happiness quintile share ratio (S80/S20). This way, we can compare income and happiness inequality in European countries.

Three basic research orientations

(theoretical and practical)

A) BEYOND GDP AND INCOME B) BEYOND LEVEL OF HAPPINESS C) BEYOND LIFE SATISFATION AND HAPPINESS SCALES (LS&H scales)

HAPPINESS

HAPPINESS INEQUALITY

MULTIDIMENTIONAL MEASURES OF EMOTIONAL WELL-BEING

Basic research orientations A)   BEYOND GDP AND INCOME Taking seriously “subjective well-being” as a key measure of personal and societal progress. An important question: Income and/or happiness? It is really hard to answer this question because through “money” you can get many diferent life resources (inputs), while happiness may be considered a final good (outputs).

Another important question: Why do we have so huge amount of data about income, but almost none about happiness. Usually, just one or two question, if any: - how happy would you say you are? - how satisfied are you with your life as a whole nowadays?

HAPPINESS

Basic research orientations B) BEYOND LEVEL OF HAPPINESS HAPPINESS INEQUALITY

Why do we attach so much importance to income inequality, and so little to happiness inequality?

Income distribution and monetary poverty:Distribution of income

EUROSTAT>DATA>Data Navigation Tree EUROSTAT>DATA>Data Navigation Tree

Income distribution and monetary poverty:Monetary poverty

Eurostat estimates pleanty of indicators on income inequality, but … very few (or none) about happiness or happiness inequality

Some social scientists began studying inequality in happiness some years ago, and some others have followed in their footsteps. Veenhoven,R.(1990),Inequalityinhappiness,inequalityincountriescomparedbetweencountries,Paper12thWorkCongressofSociology,Madrid,SpainVeenhoven(2005)InequalityofHappinessinNaIons(specialissueoftheJournalofHappinessStudies,vol.6). But all of them use life satisfaction or happiness scales, and all of them use the standard deviation (or the variance) as their preferred measure of hapiness inequality.

Basic research orientations C) BEYOND LIFE SATISFACCIÓN AND HAPPINESS SCALES (LS&H scales)

a)  Even though life satisfaction and happiness scales have proven its reliability and validity through a huge amount of analysis made so far,

- Veenhoven, R. (1991), Is Happiness Relative? Social Indicators Research, 24:1-34. - Diener, E. Et al (1999), Subjective Well-being: Three Decades of Progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2): 276-302. - Diener, E. (1984), Subjective Well-Being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3):542-575. - Diener, Inglehart & Tay (2012), Theory and Validity of Life Satisfaction Scales. Social Indicators Research, - Tay, Chan, Diener (2013), The Metrics of Societal Happiness. Social Indicators Research.

b) It is essential going one step further and advancing beyond these single-items measures.

MULTIDIMENTIONAL MEASURES OF EMOTIONAL WELL-BEING

b) LIFE SATISFACTION AND HAPPINESS SCALES

Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are?

Al l th ings cons idered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole nowadays? Please answer using this card, where 0 means extremely dissatisfied and 10 means extremely satisfied.

Method: global self-report

1) LS&H scales are cognitive valuation of life, but happiness is an emotional state. 2) LS&H scales are like “black boxes”: we do not know nothing about the imputs nor the outputs. 3) A single score is likely to over-simplify the phenomenon of SWB. 4) LS&H scales are not cardinal measures.

5) A multiple-item measurement will offer more valid, robust and reliable results. 6) Happiness is not an single emotion (like joy, rage or fear), but a meta-emotion composed of many emotional states (affective structure) 7) Last, but not least … If happiness is so relevant, why use one and only one variable to measure it?

Some reasons for going beyond LS&H univariable scales

Some Multidimensional Measures of Subjective Well-Being (SWB)

- Ecological Momentary Perspective (EMA). (Kahnemanm 1999; Shiffman et al. 2008). - Day Reconstruction Method (DRM). (Kahneman et al. 2004)

- The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) (Tennant et al, 2007) - The PANAS Scale (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule) (Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988) - Flourishing Scale (Diener, et al, 2010) - Affect Balance Scale (Bradburn, 1969) - The Socioemoctional Well-Being Index (SEWB) (Bericat, 2014)

Empirical operationalization European Social Survey, 2006, 2012. - Module on Personal and Social Wellbeing proposed by Felicia Huppert (Huppert et al. 2005, 2010). - 20 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Cyprus, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, Finland, France, United Kingdom, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland,

Portugal, Sweden, Slovenia and Slovakia) - Sample size: 37,043 respondents Measurement Model - Exploratory Factor Analysis. - Common Factor Analysis (In contrast to principal component analysis, which aims to maximise the explanation of total variance, factor analysis distinguishes between common variance and

unique variance, exclusively maximising the explanation of the common variance) - Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Figure. Socioemotional Well-Being Index (SEWBI). Dimensions and Emotional States

Hap

pine

ss (s

ocio

emot

iona

l wel

l-bei

ng)

3 0 0

2 8 0

2 6 0

2 4 0

2 2 0

2 0 0

1 8 0

1 6 0

1 4 0

1 2 0

1 0 0

8 0

6 0

4 0

2 0

06543210

Figure 1. Social distribution of happiness in Europe

% Population (EUR-20, 2006-12)

Página 1

Máx.

Mean

Min.

Happiness is not evenly distributed among European citizens

Europe-20 (EUR-20): Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom.

Happiness inequality in Europe

Happiness inequality in Europe

While many Europeans are living happily (17,8%), in a good mood (30,6%), or at least pretty satisfied (32,5%), many others experience their life as clearly

unsatisfactory (12,2%) or radically unhappy (6,9%).

In sum, nearly one out of five European people (19,1%) are excluded from happiness.

Hap

pine

ss (s

ocio

emot

iona

l wel

l-bei

ng)

3 0 0

2 8 0

2 6 0

2 4 0

2 2 0

2 0 0

1 8 0

1 6 0

1 4 0

1 2 0

1 0 0

8 0

6 0

4 0

2 0

06543210

Figure 1. Social distribution of happiness in Europe

% Population (EUR-20, 2006-12)

Página 1

Satisfied (189,8)

Unsatisfied (147.5)

Happy (261,8)

Content (226,6)

Unhappy (96,1)

(244)

(211)

(164)

(126)

Status factor

Situation factor

Power factor

Self factor

TABLE.THEEMOTIONALSTRUCTUREOFHAPPINESS

TYPOLOGY

Happy Content Satisfied Unsatisfied Unhappy Total

SAD

Noneoralmostnoneofthetime 90.8 76.1 38.8 10.4 2.1 53.6%Someofthetime 9.1 23.4 58.2 75.7 35.9 39.3%Mostofthetime 0.1 0.3 2.4 12.1 38.9 5.0%Alloralmostallofthetime 0.0 0.2 0.6 1.9 23.1 2.1%

DEPRESSED


LONELY


HAPPY


ENJOYEDLIFE


FEELVERYPOSITIVEABOUTMYSELF

Agreestrongly 46.4 15.5 7.7 3.7 2.8 16.2%Agree 50.9 75.8 68.4 46.4 22.8 61.7%Neitheragreenordisagree 2.6 7.4 18.7 33.4 26.3 14.7%Disagree 0.1 1.1 4.8 14.6 37.8 6.3%Disagreestrongly 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.9 10.3 1.1%

ALWAYSOPTIMISTIC

Agreestrongly 46.0 14.7 7.3 3.1 2.9 15.7%Agree 48.6 68.5 54.3 29.7 14.4 51.9%Neitheragreenordisagree 4.5 12.9 26.1 37.1 22.5 19.3%Disagree 0.8 3.4 11.2 26.0 42.3 10.9%Disagreestrongly 0.2 0.4 1.0 4.1 17.9 2.2%

HADLOTOFENERGY


CALMANDPEACEFUL


Source:EuropeanSocialSurvey.EUR-20,2006+2012

TABLE. HAPPINESS AND UNHAPPINESS IN EUROPE. 2012

Happy (%)

Content (%)

Satisfied(%)

Unsatisfied(%)

Unhappy (%)

Ust+Uhp(%)

Hungary 9.3 20.4 36.1 19.6 14.6 34.2

Bulgaria 17.1 22.7 29.7 16.2 14.4 30.6

Lithuania 8.3 21.9 39.4 23.0 7.4 30.4

Portugal 18.8 22.7 32.7 15.9 9.9 25.8

Spain 16.1 24.7 33.8 16.4 9.0 25.4

Ukraine 15.0 25.2 34.8 17.0 8.0 25.0

Albania 7.6 21.1 47.5 14.8 9.0 23.8

Italy 13.7 25.5 37.0 14.6 9.2 23.7

RussianFed. 10.0 29.3 37.0 16.6 7.1 23.7

CzechRep. 19.5 26.8 30.1 14.4 9.3 23.6

Kosovo 13.3 29.0 35.1 17.8 4.8 22.6

Estonia 14.8 29.1 35.0 13.9 7.3 21.2

Poland 21.4 28.7 29.0 12.9 8.1 20.9

France 18.5 26.5 34.6 13.2 7.2 20.4

Cyprus 27.4 24.6 28.2 11.5 8.4 19.9

Slovakia 17.8 28.5 34.6 14.5 4.7 19.1

U.Kingdom 18.4 32.3 31.5 11.7 6.1 17.8

Israel 21.5 27.1 33.7 11.8 5.9 17.7

Belgium 16.9 33.3 32.7 11.2 5.9 17.1

Austria* 20.5 29.6 35.1 10.9 3.9 14.8

Ireland 28.9 32.7 24.8 9.4 4.2 13.6

Netherlands 26.5 34.4 26.5 8.4 4.2 12.6

Germany 23.3 37.2 27.9 7.4 4.3 11.6

Sweden 27.3 33.6 27.9 7.8 3.4 11.2

Iceland 26.5 36.5 25.9 7.7 3.4 11.1

Finland 20.1 39.7 29.5 7.6 3.0 10.7

Slovenia 27.0 39.6 23.1 7.0 3.3 10.3

Denmark 32.5 34.4 23.5 6.3 3.3 9.6

Switzerland 27.4 37.0 26.7 6.6 2.2 8.8

Norway 26.9 39.8 25.2 5.4 2.6 8.0

Total 17.07 29.47 33.05 13.40 7.02 20.4

*2006

Source:ESS,2012

Happiness inequality within nations

Happiness inequality between nations

Excluded from happiness in Europe (Unsatisfied+ Unhappy)

Happiness inequality Between nations U n h a p p i n e s s i s ve r y u n e q u a l y distributed across European Countries. Can we build a united Europe without a minimal amount of socio-emocional cohesion between countries?

Happiness inequality within nations While some European citizens live happily and enjoying life, many others feel sad, depressed, lonely, not proud of themself, pessimistic, stressed or anxious, without vital energy, unhappy and not enjoying life at all. Without a minimal amount of happiness equality, will we be capable of weaving the social cohesion that Europe need?

Inequality in Europe Indicators: 1)  Gini coefficient 2) At-risk-of-poverty rate 3) Quintile share ratio (S80/S20) 4) Deprivation and severe deprivation

Inequality in Europe (1)

INCOME GINI COEFFICIENT (IGC)

AND

HAPPINESS GINI COEFFICIENT (HGC)

Income gini coefficient = gini coefficient of equivalised disposable income - EU-SILC survey Happiness gini coefficient = gini coefficient of Socioemotional Well-Being Index (SEWBI) – ESS survey

TABLE.HAPPINESSANDINCOMEGINICOEFFICENTS.EUROPE,2006AND2012

Happiness Incomeginicoefficient ginicoefficient

2006 2012 2006 2012Belgium 13.3 12.1 27.8 26.5Bulgaria 16.1 16.8 31.2 33.6Cyprus 12.5 14.6 28.8 31CzechRepublic 14.6 25.3 24.9Denmark 10.6 10.6 23.7 26.5Estonia 12.2 12.8 33.1 32.5Finland 10.7 10.1 25.9 25.9France 13.7 13.2 27.3 30.5Germany 11.2 10.9 26.8 28.3Hungary 14.4 15.9 33.3 27.2Iceland 10.5 26.3 24Ireland 11.2 11.7 31.9 29.9Italy 14.1 32.1 32.4Lithuania 12.9 35 32Netherlands 11.0 11.0 26.4 25.4Norway 10.1 9.5 29.2 22.5Poland 14.7 13.9 33.3 30.9Portugal 14.7 14.8 37.7 34.5RussianFederation 13.5 12.1 Slovakia 14.0 12.3 28.1 25.3Slovenia 10.6 10.3 23.7 23.7Spain 12.6 14.4 31.9 34.2Sweden 11.5 11.1 24 24.8Switzerland 10.2 9.5 28.8UnitedKingdom 12.5 12.2 32.5 31.3Source:ESS,2006,2012

-  Income inequality is higher than happiness inequality.

(aprox. 2.3 times) -  Both income inequality (from 29.36

to 28.61) and happiness inequality (from 13.2 to 12.9) decline slightly from 2006 to 2012.

-  Cyprus (17%), Spain (14%) and Hungary (11%) are the countries where happiness inequality has grown the most from 2006 to 2012.

-  Denmark and Netherlands kept their happiness gini coefficient constant (10.6 and 11.0, respectively)

-  Switzerland (9.5) and Norway (9.5) are the most egalitarian countries in term of emotional well-being.

-  Bulgaria (16.8) and Hungary (15.9) are the most unequal.

Eurostat

BELGIUM

BULGARIA

SWITZERLAND

CYPRUS

CZECH REPUBLIC

GERMANY

DENMARK

ESTONIA

SPAIN

FINLAND

FRANCE

UNITED KINGDOM

HUNGARY

IRELAND

ICELAND

ITALY

LITHUANIA

NETHERLANDS

NORWAY

POLAND

PORTUGAL

SWEDEN

SLOVENIA

SLOVAKIA

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

(-)

N

CO

ME

GIN

I C

OE

FFIC

IEN

T (

IGC

) (+

)

(-) HAPPINESS GINI COEFFICIENT (HGC) (+)

INCOME AND HAPPINESS GINI COEFFICIENTS EUROPE, 2012

Pearson’ correlation coefficient (2012) = 0,64

Compare:

Higher IGC, but same HGI Switzerland – Norway Germany – Sweden Spain – Czech Rapublic


AT-RISK-OF-POVERTY RATE (ARPR)

AND

AT-RISK-OF-UNHAPPINESS RATE (ARUR)

At-risk-of-poverty rate: The share of persons with an equivalised disposable income below the risk-of-poverty threshold, which is set at 60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers). At-risk-of-poverty threshold: The threshold is set at 60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers). It is expressed in Purchase Parity Standards (PPS) in order to take into account differences in cost of living across EU Member States. At-risk-of-unhappiness rate: The share of persons with a socioemotional well-being below the risk-of-unhappiness threshold, which is set at 60 % of the national median socioemotional well-being (SEWEI). At-risk-of-unhappiness threshold: The threshold is set at 60 % of the national median socioemotional well-being (SEWEI).

TABLE.AT-RISK-OF-POVERTYANDUNHAPPINESSRATES.EUROPE,2012

HAPPINESSINEQUALITY INCOMEINEQUALITY

ARUR(60%) ARUR(70%) ARPR(60%)Value(%) Threshold Value(%) Threshold Value(%) Threshold(€)

Albania 7.4 114 11.5 133

Austria* 3.9 126 7.9 148 12.6 10,713

Belgium 5.9 126 11.0 147 15.3 12,168

Bulgaria 12.0 118 18.2 138 21.2 1,716

Cyprus 9.0 127 15.2 149 14.7 10,156

CzechRepublic 8.3 123 14.9 143 9.6 4,675

Denmark 4.5 138 9.4 161 12.0 16,310

Estonia 6.5 123 11.7 144 17.5 3,592

Finland 4.0 132 7.7 154 13.2 13,619

France 6.4 123 11.8 144 14.1 12,362

Germany 5.0 132 8.9 154 16.1 11,757

Hungary 10.8 112 16.3 130 14.3 2,818

Iceland 4.3 134 9.1 156 7.9 11,617

Ireland 5.1 134 10.3 156 15.7 11,447

Italy 7.0 118 12.5 138 19.5 9,587

Kosovo 4.2 121 8.4 141

Lithuania 4.4 113 9.4 132 18.6 2,602

Netherlands 5.4 133 10.1 155 10.1 12,337

Norway 3.7 135 6.6 158 10.0 24,045

Poland 8.2 126 14.8 147 17.1 3,036

Portugal 8.1 119 13.7 139 17.9 4,994

RussianFederation 5.3 120 11.2 140

Slovakia 4.4 124 9.4 144 13.2 4,156

Slovenia 4.4 136 9.1 158 13.5 7,273

Spain 7.2 119 13.5 139 20.8 8,321

Sweden 4.6 134 9.3 156 14.1 14,832

Switzerland 2.6 134 5.8 156 15.9 23,644

Ukraine 6.2 120 12.3 140

UnitedKingdom 6.3 127 12.4 148 16.0 11,500

*2006 Source:ESS,2012.

-  Pearson’ correlation coefficient (2012) (ARUR-60% / ARPR-60% = 0,42

The “unhappy” type threshold is 126, so the ARUR threshold (60%) in many european countries are below this baseline. Given that the at-risk-of-unhappiness rate intends to be a relative measure of inequality, we propose the ARUR (70%) as the best indicator.


INCOME QUINTILE SHARE RATIO (IQSR) (S80/S20)

AND

HAPPINESS QUINTILE SHARE RATIO (HQSR) (S80/S20)

-  Income quintile share ratio: the ratio of total income received by the 20 % of the population with the highest income (top quintile) to that received by the 20 % of the population with the lowest income (lowest quintile). Income must be understood as equivalised disposable income.

-  Happiness quintile share ratio: the ratio of total amount of happiness experienced by the 20 %

of the population with the highest happiness (top quintile) to that received by the 20 % of the population with the lowest happiness (lowest quintile). Happiness must be understood as socioemotinal well-being (SEWBI).

TABLE.INCOMEANDHAPPINESSQUINTILESHARERATIOS.EUROPE2006,2012

HAPPINESSQUINTILESHARERATIO

INCOMEQUINTILESHARERATIO

2006 2012 2006 2012Albania 2.00 :Austria* 1.8 1.8 3.7 3.7Belgium 2.1 1.9 4.2 4.0 Bulgaria 2.3 2.5 5.1 6.1 Cyprus 1.9 2.2 4.3 4.7 CzechRepublic 2.2 3.5 3.5 Denmark 1.8 1.8 3.4 3.9 Estonia 1.9 2.0 5.5 5.4 Finland 1.8 1.7 3.6 3.7 France 2.1 2.0 4.0 4.5 Germany 1.8 1.8 4.1 4.3 Hungary 2.2 2.4 5.5 4.0 Iceland 1.7 3.7 3.4 Ireland 1.8 1.9 4.9 4.7 Italy 2.1 5.4 5.6 Kosovo 1.8 : Lithuania 1.9 6.3 5.3 Netherlands 1.8 1.8 3.8 3.6 Norway 1.7 1.7 4.8 3.2 Poland 2.2 2.1 5.6 4.9 Portugal 2.2 2.2 6.7 5.8 RussianFederation 2.0 1.9 : Slovakia 2.1 1.9 4.1 3.7 Slovenia 1.7 1.7 3.4 3.4 Spain 2.0 2.2 5.5 6.5 Sweden 1.9 1.8 3.6 3.7 Switzerland 1.7 1.6 : 4.4 Ukraine 2.2 2.0 : UnitedKingdom 2.0 1.9 5.4 5.0 *2006

Source:ESS2006,2012

-  Pearson’ correlation coefficient (2012) = 0,61

European countries that increase hapiness inequality from 2006 to 2102.

European countries with the highest happiness inequality in 2012.

European countries with the lowest happiness inequality in 2012.

-  Material Deprivation rate: the percentage of population with an enforced lack of at least three out of nine material deprivation items in the 'economic strain and durables' dimension.

-  Depth of material deprivation: the unweighted mean of the number of items lacked by the materially-deprived population (at least three out of the nine items retained for the definition of the 'Material deprivation rate' indicator)

-  Severe Material Deprivation rate : severely materially deprived persons have living conditions severely constrained by a lack of resources, they experience at least 4 out of 9 following deprivations items: cannot afford i) to pay rent or utility bills, ii) keep home adequately warm, iii) face unexpected expenses, iv) eat meat, fish or a protein equivalent every second day, v) a week holiday away from home, vi) a car, vii) a washing machine, viii) a colour TV, or ix) a telephone.


MATERIAL DEPRIVATION RATE (MDR)

AND

EMOTIONAL DEPRIVATION RATE (EDR)

-  Emotional Deprivation rate: the percentage of population with an undesired lack of at least three out of nine emotional states essential for the “socioemotional well-being”.

-  Depth of emotional deprivation: the unweighted mean of the number of items lacked by the emotionally-deprived population (at least three out of the nine items retained for the definition of the Emotional deprivation rate' indicator)

-  Severe emotional Deprivation rate: severely emotionally deprived persons have living subjective conditions severely constrained by a lack of positive feelings and the presence of negative feelings essential for the socioemotional well-being. They experience at least 4 out of 9 following emotional states: “depresion”, “loneliness”, “sadness” (most or all the time); “happiness”, “enjoyment of life” (never), “pride” (nor-nor, disagree, strongly disagre), “optimism” (diseagree, strongly disagre), “lot of energy” (never), “calm” (never) .

TABLE.MATERIALANDEMOTIONALDEPRIVATION.EUROPE,2012

DEPRIVATION DEPTHOFDEPRIVATION SEVEREDEPRIVATION

Emotional Material Emotional Material Emotional MaterialAlbania 14.7 : 4.4 : 8.7 :

Austria* 8.1 10.0 4.2 3.5 4.5 3.6

Belgium 11.5 12.5 4.1 3.8 5.8 6.3

Bulgaria 18.6 61.6 4.7 4.4 13.2 44.1

Cyprus 12.4 31.5 4.5 3.6 7.7 15.0

CzechRepublic 16.0 16.8 4.1 3.6 8.7 6.6

Denmark 5.0 6.9 4.3 3.5 2.6 2.7

Estonia 11.3 21.3 4.4 3.7 6.8 9.4

Finland 5.1 8.9 4.2 3.5 2.5 2.9

France 11.7 12.8 4.1 3.6 5.8 5.3

Germany 6.4 11.3 4.3 3.6 4.1 4.9

Hungary 22.4 44.8 4.4 4.0 14.5 26.3

Iceland 6.1 6.8 4.1 3.4 3.1 2.4

Ireland 5.3 24.9 4.2 3.5 2.9 9.8

Italy 14.2 25.2 4.3 3.8 7.8 14.5

Lithuania 10.1 34.4 4.2 3.9 5.7 19.8

Netherlands 7.2 6.5 4.2 3.5 4.0 2.3

Norway 4.4 4.5 4.0 3.6 2.2 1.7

Poland 14.1 27.8 4.4 3.7 8.3 13.5

Portugal 13.8 21.8 4.5 3.6 8.9 8.6

RussianFederation 13.5 : 3.9 : 7.2 :

Slovakia 7.6 22.7 4.1 3.7 4.2 10.5

Slovenia 5.3 16.9 4.0 3.6 2.8 6.6

Spain 14.5 16.3 4.3 3.5 8.3 5.8

Sweden 5.4 4.4 4.3 3.4 3.5 1.3

Switzerland 4.1 3.6 4.0 3.3 2.1 0.8

Ukraine 18.4 : 4.0 : 10.1 :

UnitedKingdom 9.1 16.6 4.1 3.7 4.7 7.8*2006

Source:EU-SILCandESS.

The share of people affected by material deprivation is, in some countries, much greater than the share of emotional deprivation. However, in another countries, the percentages of both ma te r i a l and emo t i ona l deprivation are quite similar.

Changes in Happiness Inequality. Europe2006-2012.

Social distribution of Happiness

Relative Unhappiness

Absolut Unhappiness

remains constant

has grown slightly

has decreased slightly

TABLE.HAPPINESSINEQUALITYINEUROPE,2006AND2012.

Indicators

Europe-20*

2006 2012

HappinessGiniCoefficient(HGC) 12.763 12.736HappinessQuintileShareRatio(HQSR) 1.985 1.984

At-Risk-of-Unhappiness-Rate(ARUR-70%)Value: 11.90% 12.32%

Threshold: (144.2) (148.3)

EmotionalDeprivation(ED) 10,6% 10,3%

ExcludedfromHappines(EfH) 20.1% 18.0%

Unhappy 7.2% 6.5%

Unsatisfied 12.9% 11.5%

Satisfied 34.3% 30.7%

Content 30.4% 30.9%

Happy 15.2% 20.4%

Mean 199.4 205.2

StandardDeviation 45.958 47.107

Source:ESS,2006,2012*Europe-20(EUR-20):Belgium,Bulgaria,Cyprus,Denmark,Estonia,Finland,France,Germany,Hungary,Ireland,Netherlands,Norway,Poland,Portugal,Slovakia,Slovenia,Spain,Sweden,Switzerland,UnitedKingdom.

HAPPINESS INEQUALITY

BETWEEN AND WITHIN

SOCIAL GROUPS

- GENDER

- AGE

-  … others social groups

The level of happiness inequality characteristic of a social group in a country depends on the extent to which i ts socio- inst i tut ional s tructure determines the life conditions of the members of that group. The higher the level of happiness inequality within a group, the less the social influence over life conditions of its members.

TABLE.HAPPINESSINEQUALITYINEUROPE,2006AND2012,BYSEX.

Indicators

Europe-20*

2006 2012

Male Female Male Female

HappinessGiniCoefficient(HGC) 11.450 13.791 11.417 13.752

HappinessQuintileShareRatio(HQSR) 1.841 2.103 1.833 2.100

At-Risk-of-Unhappiness-Rate(ARUR-70%)Value: 8.38 15.12 8.97 15.32

Threshold: (144.2) (148.3)

EmotionalDeprivation(ED) 7.7 13.2 7.5 12.7

ExcludedfromHappines(EfH) 15.4 24.4 13.6 21.9

Unhappy 4.9 9.3 4.2 8.5

Unsatisfied 10.5 15.1 9.4 13.4

Satisfied 33.2 35.3 29.2 32.1

Content 34.0 27.1 33.6 28.4

Happy 17.4 13.3 23.6 17.5

Mean 205.9 193.4 211.9 199.1

StandardDeviation 42.78 47.91 43.70 49.17

Source:ESS,2006,2012*Europe-20(EUR-20):Belgium,Bulgaria,Cyprus,Denmark,Estonia,Finland,France,Germany,Hungary,

Ireland,Netherlands,Norway,Poland,Portugal,Slovakia,Slovenia,Spain,Sweden,Switzerland,United

Kingdom.

GENDER INEQUALITY IN HAPPINESS

TABLE.HAPINESSQUINTILESHARERATIOOFEUROPEANCOUNTRIES(HQSR,s80/s20),BYAGE(2006+2012)

TOTALPOPULATION 65YEARSANDOVER 18-34YEAR

Rank Country Value Rank Country Value Rank Country Value

1 Switzerland 1.68 1 Iceland 1.59 1 Slovenia 1.632 Norway 1.69 2 Norway 1.66 2 Switzerland 1.663 Finland 1.74 3 Switzerland 1.67 3 Finland 1.684 Iceland 1.75 4 Denmark 1.75 4 Estonia 1.725 Denmark 1.76 5 Ireland 1.83 5 Denmark 1.736 Slovenia 1.76 6 Finland 1.83 6 Lithuania 1.747 Germany 1.81 7 Sweden 1.83 7 Israel 1.748 Netherlands 1.81 8 Netherlands 1.84 8 Kosovo 1.749 Sweden 1.83 9 Germany 1.86 9 Albania 1.76

10 Austria 1.84 10 U.Kingdom 1.88 10 Netherlands 1.7711 Kosovo 1.84 11 Kosovo 1.97 11 Norway 1.7712 Ireland 1.84 12 Lithuania 1.98 12 Spain 1.7813 Estonia 1.94 13 Slovenia 2.00 13 Germany 1.8014 Lithuania 1.94 14 Austria 2.09 14 Ireland 1.8015 U.Kingdom 1.95 15 France 2.10 15 Ukraine 1.8116 Israel 1.97 16 Albania 2.14 16 Austria 1.8217 RussianFed. 1.97 17 Belgium 2.15 17 RussianFed. 1.8318 Belgium 1.98 18 Estonia 2.17 18 Portugal 1.8319 Slovakia 1.99 19 Slovakia 2.21 19 Sweden 1.8520 Albania 2.00 20 RussianFed. 2.23 20 Iceland 1.8721 France 2.06 21 Italy 2.28 21 Slovakia 1.8922 Spain 2.07 22 Israel 2.31 22 Belgium 1.9023 Cyprus 2.08 23 Spain 2.39 23 Cyprus 1.9224 Ukraine 2.10 24 Cyprus 2.40 24 Poland 1.9225 Italy 2.12 25 Portugal 2.41 25 France 1.9226 Portugal 2.18 26 CzechRep. 2.47 26 U.Kingdom 1.9527 Poland 2.18 27 Ukraine 2.57 27 CzechRep. 1.9728 CzechRep. 2.20 28 Poland 2.58 28 Bulgaria 1.9929 Hungary 2.29 29 Hungary 2.63 29 Italy 2.0130 Bulgaria 2.43 30 Bulgaria 2.80 30 Hungary 2.02

Totalsample 2.013 Totalsample 2.247 Totalsample 1.864Country'average 1.960 Country'average 2.120 Country'average 1.827

Source:ESS,2006+2012

Some european countries (see Sweden, U. Kingdom, France or Italy) show a singular pattern of happiness inequality. In these countries, the happiness inequality of young people is relatively higher than that of the older ones. This might mean that these European societies control or determine relatively more the life conditions of the elderly than that of the youngsters. Why does this happen? What are the social and political consequencies of this pattern for society as a whole and for young people themselves?

In general, the level of happiness inequality of youngsters is lower than the average, while that of the elderly people is higher.

Some conclusions: Happiness is very unevenly distributed in Europe, not only between but also within countries. Income inequality is higher than happiness inequality (about 2.3 times according gini coefficients), but emotional inequality is vitally much more relevant. Happiness inequality has remained constant in Europe from 2006 to 2012. However, the evolution varies a lot from one country to another. Europeans on the top 20% of the social distribution of happiness are 1.9 times happier than people on the bottom 20%. The percentage of Europeans experiencing emotional deprivation goes from 22.4% or 18.6% (Hungary and Bulgaria, respectively), to 5.3% or 5.4% (Ireland and Sweden, respectively). Aproximately, one out of five Europeans (20.1% in 2006 and 18.0% in 2012) are excluded from happiness.

Some final remarks: Happiness is at least so important as wealth, and therefore the study of happiness inequality is as much crucial as that of income inequality. Beyond any doubt, human happiness is a really complex phenomenon and hardly comprehensible. The future development of a truly social science of happines needs more than just one variable as the only empirical path to reach the truth. Only some pioneering social surveys, like the European Social Survey (ESS), or the European Quality of Life Survey (EQLS), have already included questions about the feelings of the individuals. Hope that many others social surveys will follow their example and will include, at least, little batteries of questions about feelings, affects and moods which enable us to analyse human emotionality, that is, the way human beings feel amid their huge variety of situation and conditions of life.

Thank you very much

for your attention

Criticism, suggestions and comments:

Eduardo Bericat [email protected]

happiness inequality in europe · the empirical analysis is been performed with data from a sample...

Documents