Economic freedom and happiness.
Gropper, Daniel M. ; Lawson, Robert A. ; Thorne, Jere T., Jr. 等
That liberty is necessary for greater happiness and a better life
is a notion deeply rooted in the American sensibility. But is there a
link between greater freedom and greater happiness across countries? In
this article we explore this question by examining the empirical
relationship between liberty, as measured by economic freedom, and
happiness across more than 100 countries.
There is a now a large literature on human happiness and its
measurement. There is even a journal fully dedicated to the study of
happiness. Kahneman, Diener, and Schwartz (1999) offer discussions of
the many interesting theoretical and methodological issues involved in
studying happiness. Kahneman et al. (2004) and Kahneman and Krueger
(2006) discuss the current attempts to measure happiness at the
individual and societal level. Frey and Stutzer (2000) and Wilkinson
(2007) offer interesting reviews and criticisms of the happiness
literature in economics. Norberg (2010) outlines the motivations behind
the development of some of the happiness measures and potential pitfalls
in their use.
There is also a large literature on the concept and measurement of
economic freedom (Gwartney and Lawson 2003). The Economic Freedom of the
World (EFW) index (Gwartney and Lawson 2008) has spawned hundreds of
scholarly articles on the impact of economic freedom on economic growth
and other indicators of human welfare (see, for example, Hall and Lawson
2011, de Haan et al. 2006, Lawson and Clark 2010, Seully 2002, Lawson
and Roychoudhury 2010, Stroup 2008).
Early research tended to find that economic freedom was positively
associated with happiness (Veenhoven 2000, Ovaska and Takashima 2006).
More recent work, however, has been mixed. Bjornskov, Dreher, and
Fischer (2010) argue that the association between measures of
institutional quality (like freedom) and happiness are different between
rich and poor countries. Ott (2010a, 2010b) contends that the
relationship between government size (a component of economic freedom)
mad happiness is contingent on the quality of the governance. Venne
(2009) provides a theoretical argument and empirical evidence that
"freedom of choice" is a strong factor in determining
happiness.
Data, Model, and Results
While happiness research has advanced a great deal in the last
decade, shortcomings in measurement remain. As Norberg (2010) notes,
measures of happiness are less scientific and more subjective than
measures of output, but some analysts still favor them in place of GDP
to guide government policy. He points out that Bhutan used a Gross
National Happiness index, created by the Centre for Bhutan Studies, as a
way to excuse the government's failure to improve poor living
standards, and even to justify repression of minorities in efforts to
create a national identity.
Regardless of the motivations behind the development of happiness
measures, we think it is worthwhile to examine the relationship between
happiness and economic freedom, bearing in mind the limitations of the
measures. We use three measures of happiness in our analysis. The first
measure was originally gathered from Veenhoven's World Database of
Happiness and was based primarily on the results from the World Values
Survey (WVS); however, results from the Latinobarometer and
Afrobarometer were also taken into consideration. The average reported
life satisfaction (happiness) score for this sample was 6.16 (out of a
possible 10), with a range of 3.0 (Burundi) to 8.19 (Denmark).
The second measure of subjective well being comes from the updated
Happy Planet Index 2.0. Released in July 2009, the data from this study
are almost entirely derived from an average of a comprehensive
multinational survey performed by the Gallup Poll and the two most
recent waves of the World Values Survey. The Gallup World Poll posed the
same, commonly used question as in the World Values Survey:
"'All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life
as a whole these days?" Responses were ranked on a scale of zero to
ten. Zero was file least satisfied and ten was file most. The Gallup
poll and WVS average produced 112 observations out of a total of 143 for
the entire study. The remaining observations are unmatched countries
from each study, respectively. The average score for this sample was
6.12, with a range of 2.4 (Tanzania) to 8.5 (Costa Rica). While any
survey questions about how satisfied one is with life are subject to
criticisms about reliability for any given person across different
times, and particularly across different people in widely varying
circumstances, they are nonetheless interesting to examine, and at this
time, they represent the best data available.
The third measure of subjective well-being is simply a combination
of subjective well-being and life expectancy at birth. This measure is
created by dividing the responses to Gallup's life satisfaction
survey by 10 and multiplying by the country's life expectancy.
Referred to as "Happy Life Years," this measure serves to
ensure that both subjective and objective elements of well-being are
captured. It recognizes that a satisfying life is not ideal if it is
very short, but also that a long life is not ideal if it is miserable.
The average score for this sample was 43.62, with a range of 12.5
(Tanzania) to 66.7 (Costa Rica).
The economic freedom data for this study come from the EFW index
(Gwartney and Lawson 2008). For over a decade, the EFW project has been
devoted to measuring the degree of economic freedom for large numbers of
countries. The EFW index uses personal choice (voluntary exchange), the
freedom to enter and compete in markets, and protection of persons and
property as core elements for evaluating a country's economic
freedom. Each country is ranked on a scale of zero to ten. Ten is the
highest degree of economic freedom and zero the lowest. Hong Kong scores
the highest with a rating of 9.0 and the Democratic Republic of Congo is
lowest at 3.8.
Table 1 reports the three happiness measures and the EFW index for
all the countries included in our study. All data are for 2005. Table 2
presents detailed descriptions and sources for all the variables, and
Table 3 provides summary statistics. Figure 1 illustrates the simple
relationship between the EFW index and the Happy Life Years measure of
happiness.
We use the following model to examine the relationship between
measured happiness and freedom:
(1) [H.sub.j] = f([EF.sub.j], [GDPPC.sub.j], [EF.sub.j] x
[GDPPC.sub.j])
where [H.sub.j] is the measured level of happiness for a country,
[EF.sub.j] is the EFW index for the respective country, and
[GDPPC.sub.j] represents GDP per capita. Including GDP per capita is
justified because previous research has shown that happiness depends on
the level of development (Easterlin 2001). We include an interaction
term because the impact of economic freedom on happiness may be
contingent on the level of development and vice versa.
Our specification is quite parsimonious and critics might easily
suggest other variables that could matter for national happiness.
However, most of the potential control variables correlate highly with
either economic freedom, GDP per capita, or both. For example, inflation
may matter, but that is a component part of the economic freedom index.
Unemployment may matter, but as Feldman (2007) shows, countries with
less economic freedom exhibit greater unemployment. Life expectancy,
democracy, and many other indicators are also highly correlated with
both economic freedom and GDP per capita. Thus, we argue that the
included variables of economic freedom and GDP per capita are likely to
capture most of the variation associated with any omitted variables.
Finally, there are often major tradeoffs with data quality and sample
size when including more control variables. In any case, we are not
necessarily arguing that there is a direct causal relationship between
economic freedom, GDP per capita, and the happiness variables.
Nevertheless, the results provide some insights about the contrast
between the nature and characteristics of rich market-oriented economies
and those dominated by government regulation and planning.
Table 4 presents the regression results. Regressions (1), (3), and
(5) omit the interaction term between economic freedom and GDP per
capita. Regardless of the happiness metric used or the specification,
the results are consistent in showing a positive association between
economic freedom and GDP per capita and happiness. According to
regression (3) for example, we find that a one standard deviation
increase in the economic freedom index corresponds to a one-third
standard deviation improvement in the happiness score. * A similar
magnitude increase in GDP per capita yields an increase in happiness of
about 0.4 of a standard deviation. Regressions (2), (4), and (5) include
the [EF.sub.j] x [GDPPC.sub.j] interaction term. The negative sign on
the interaction coefficient indicates that the impact of the one
variable diminishes as the other variable increases.
Table 5, using results from regression (4) in Table 4, shows the
impact of a one standard deviation increase in economic freedom on
happiness at different levels of GDP per capita, as well as the impact
of a one standard deviation increase in GDP per capita on happiness at
different levels of economic freedom. For poorer countries, additional
economic freedom appears to improve happiness, but for very rich
countries additional economic freedom actually correlates with less
happiness. These results appear to be consistent with those of
Bjornskov, Dreher, and Fischer (2010). Similarly, higher GDP per capita
has a more beneficial impact on countries with lower economic freedom,
and as economic freedom increases, the impact of GDP per capita on
happiness diminishes, though it remains positive.
Of course, to the extent economic freedom is a causal factor in
contributing to GDP per capita (Hanke and Waters 1997; Gwartney,
Holcombe, and Lawson 2004, 2006), these results understate the true
impact of economic freedom. The likely endogeneity of GDP per capita is
not an issue that we will address in detail here. If increased economic
freedom causes GDP per capita to increase, as it almost certainly does,
then additional economic freedom will have a direct impact on happiness,
up to a certain point, and an indirect effect operating through
increased GDP per capita.
Statistically speaking, economic freedom and GDP per capita go hand
in hand. The simple correlation coefficient between the EFW index and
GDP per capita is 70.1 percent. See Figure 2 for a scatter-plot and
regression line between the two variables.
From Table 5, we see that a one standard deviation increase in the
EFW index corresponds to a 0.24 unit increase in the happiness index
(when evaluated at the mean level of GDP per capita).
However, for every one standardized unit increase in the EFW index,
the regression line in Figure 2 shows an approximately $11,000 increase
in GDP per capita. By our calculations, this could generate an increase
in happiness of an additional 0.60 units. Thus, the combined effect of a
standardized unit increase in the EFW index on the happiness index is
perhaps as large as 0.84 when one includes the indirect channel through
GDP per capita.
To further illustrate the effects of greater freedom on happiness,
we examine a couple of specific cases. The final column in Table 5 shows
that the effect of a simultaneous increase in both economic freedom and
GDP per capita on happiness appears to be positive throughout the
relevant range of data.
Our results stand in contrast to some earlier authors, such as
Layard (2003: 17) who stated that "once a country has over $15,000
per head, its level of happiness appears to be independent of its income
per head." In a similar conclusion, Frey and Stutzer (2002: 416)
note, "Income provides happiness at low levels of development but
once a threshold (around $10,000) is reached, the average income level
in a country has little effect on average subjective well-being."
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
Consider Sweden, which is both a high-income country (GDP per
capita of $38,500) and, notwithstanding its welfare state reputation, a
reasonably market-oriented economy (EFW rating of 7.4). If Sweden were
to increase its economic freedom to the level of the United States (EFW
rating of 8.0), the projected impact on happiness in Sweden would be
slightly negative. However, if the increase in economic freedom in
Sweden also yielded a GDP per capita akin to that of the United States
($47,000), then the net impact on Swedish happiness would be slightly
positive.
What is more striking, and perhaps more hopeful, is the impact of
increasing freedom on less free and poorer nations. If Mexico (GDP per
capita of $14,200 and EFW rating of 7.0) were to simultaneously increase
economic freedom and GDP per capita to that of the United States, the
impact would be 1.9 units on the happiness (Gallup) scale--more than a
full standard deviation increase in happiness.
Alternatively using the coefficient estimates from regression (6)
in Table 4, we find that if Sweden and Mexico each achieved the same
levels of economic freedom and GDP per capita as the United States, the
predicted improvement in Happy Life Years would be 1.2 and 7.2,
respectively.
Conclusion
Using the best available data for a sample of well over 100
countries, this article finds a positive relationship between national
levels of happiness and economic freedom. GDP per capita also exerts a
strong positive influence on happiness. The statistical impact of both
economic freedom and GDP per capita appears to diminish as the other
increases, but the combined effect of simultaneously increasing both
economic freedom and GDP per capita, particularly for poorer and less
free nations, is positive. Around the world, freer people generally are
wealthier, live longer, and are happier.
References
Abdallah, S.; Thompson, S.; Michaelson, J.; Marks, N.; and Steuer,
N. (2009) The (Un)Happy Planet Index 2.0. Why Good Lives Don't Have
to Cost the Earth. London: New Economics Foundation.
Bjornskov, C.; Dreher, A.; and Fischer, J.A.V. (2010)
"Cross-Country Determinants of Life Satisfaction: Exploring
Different Determinants across Groups in Society." Social Choice and
Welfare 30 (1): 119-73.
De Haan, J.; Lundstrom, S.; and Sturm, J. E. (2006)
"Market-Oriented Institutions and Policies and Economic Growth: A
Critical Survey." Journal of Economic Surveys 20 (2): 157-91.
Easterlin, R. (2001) "Income and Happiness: Toward a Unified
Theory." Economic Journal ill(July): 465-84.
Feldman, H. (2007) "Economic Freedom and Unemployment around
the World." Southern Economic Journal 74 (1): 158-76.
Frey, B. S., and Stutzer, A. (2002) "What Can Economists Learn
from Happiness Research?" Journal of Economic Literature 40 (2):
402-35.
Gwartney, J.; Holcombe, R. G.; and Lawson, R. A. (2004)
"Economic Freedom, Institutional Quality, and Cross-Country
Differences in Income and Growth." Cato Journal 24 (3): 205-33.
--(2006) "Institutions and the Impact of Investment on
Growth." Kyklos 59 (2): 255-73.
Gwartney, J. and Lawson, R. A. (2003) "The Concept and
Measurement of Economic Freedom." European Journal of Political
Economy 19 (3): 405-30.
--(2008) Economic Freedom of the World. Vancouver: Fraser
Institute.
Hall, J., and Lawson, R. A. (eds.) (2011) Economic Freedom: Causes
and Consequences. Hauppauge, N.Y.: Nova Science.
Hanke, S. H., and Walters, S. 1997. "Economic Freedom,
Prosperity, and Equality: A Survey." Cato Journal 17 (2): 117-46.
Kahneman, D.; Diener, E.; and Schwartz, N. (eds)(1999) Wellbeing:
Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Kahneman, D., and Krueger, A. B. (2006) "Developments in the
Measurement of Subjective Well-Being." Journal of Economic
Perspectives 20 (1): 3-24.
Kahneman, D.; Krueger, A. B.; Schkade, D.; Schwarz, N.; and Stone,
A. (2004) "Toward National Well-Being Accounts." American
Economic Review 94 (2): 429-34.
Lawson, R. A., and Clark, J. R. (2010) "Examining the
Hayek-Friedman Hypothesis on Economic and Political Freedom."
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 74 (3): 230-39. Lawson, R.
A., and Roychoudhury, S. (2010) "Economic Freedom and Sovereign
Credit Ratings and Default Risk." Journal of Financial Economic
Policy 2 (2): 149-62.
Layard, R. (2003) "Happiness: Has Social Science a Clue?"
London School of Economics, Lionel Robbins Memorial Lectures 2002/3.
Available at http://cep.lse.ac.uk/events/lectures/layard/ RL030303.pdf.
New Economics Foundation (2006) The (Un)Happy Planet Index: An
Index of Human Well-Being and Environmental Impact. London: New
Economics Foundation.
Norberg, J. (2010) "GDP and Its Enemies: the Questionable
Search for a Happiness Index." CES Policy Brief. Brussels: Centre
for European Studies.
Ott, J. c. (2010a) "Good Governance and Happiness in Nations:
Technical Quality Precedes Democracy and Quality Beats Size."
Journal of Happiness Studies 11 (3): 353-68.
--(2010b) "Greater Happiness for a Greater Number: Some
Non-Controversial Options for Governments." Journal of Happiness
Studies 11 (5): 631-47.
Ovaska, T., and Takashima, R. (2006) "Economic Policy and the
Level of Self-Perceived Well-Being: An International Comparison,"
Journal of Socio-Economics 35 (2): 308-25.
Scully, G. W. (2002) "Economic Freedom, Government Policy and
the Trade-Off between Equity and Economic Growth." Public Choice
113 (1-2): 77-96.
Stroup, M. D. (2008) "Separating the Influence of Capitalism
and Democracy on Women's Well-Being." Journal of Economic
Behavior and Organization 67 (3-4): 560-72.
Veenhoven, R. (2000) "Freedom and Happiness: A Comparative
Study in 44 Nations in the Early 1990s." In E. Diener and E. M. Suh
(eds.) Culture and Subjective Well-Being. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Verme, P. (2009) "Freedom, Happiness and Control."
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 71 (2): 146-61.
Wilkinson, W. (2007) "In Pursuit of Happiness Research: Is It
Reliable? What Does It Imply for Policy?" Cato Policy Analysis, No.
590. Washington: Cato Institute.
* A one standard deviation improvement in the economic freedom
rating is about one unit on the EFW index scale, roughly the difference
between the United States (8.0) and Mexico (7.0). A one-third standard
deviation in the happiness score is nearly a half point on that scale,
roughly the difference between the United States (7.9) and the United
Kingdom (7.4).
Daniel M. Gropper is David and Meredith Luck Professor, Department
of Finance, College of Business, Auburn University. Robert A. Lawson is
Jerome M. Fullinwider Chair in Economic Freedom, O'Neil Center for
Global Markets and Freedom, Cox School of Business, Southern Methodist
University. Jere T. Thorne Jr. is with the Home Depot, and is a graduate
of Auburn University.
TABLE 1
HAPPINESS, ECONOMIC FREEDOM, AND GDP PER CAPITA, BY COUNTRY, 2005
Happiness: Economic
Happiness: Happiness: Happy Life Freedom
Country WVS Gallup Years Index
Albania 5.50 41.70 5.9
Algeria 5.19 5.60 40.10 5.4
Argentina 6.81 7.10 53.40 5.3
Australia 7.29 7.90 63.70 7.9
Austria 7.80 7.80 61.90 7.7
Bahamas 7.71 -- -- 7.0
Bahrain 7.20 -- -- 7.1
Bangladesh 5.70 5.30 33.10 5.8
Barbados 7.29 -- -- 5.8
Belgium 7.29 7.60 60.00 7.2
Belize 6.90 6.60 50.20 7.0
Benin 5.40 3.00 16.70 5.8
Bolivia 5.49 6.50 42.10 6.6
Botswana 5.40 4.70 22.60 6.9
Brazil 6.30 7.60 54.30 5.9
Bulgaria 4.29 5.50 39.80 6.6
Burundi 3.00 2.90 14.30 5.0
Cameroon 5.10 3.90 19.60 5.6
Canada 7.59 8.00 64.00 8.0
Central Afr. 4.89 4.00 17.60 5.1
Rep.
Chad 4.50 5.40 27.00 5.3
Chile 6.51 6.30 49.20 7.7
China 6.30 6.70 48.60 5.9
Colombia 7.20 7.30 53.00 5.6
Congo, Dem. R. 3.30 3.90 18.00 3.8
Congo, Rep. of 5.70 3.60 19.70 4.5
Costa Rica 7.50 8.50 66.70 7
Croatia 5.91 6.40 48.30 6.5
Cyprus 6.90 7.20 56.60 7.5
Czech Rep. 6.39 6.90 52.00 7.0
Denmark 8.19 8.10 62.90 7.7
Dominican Rep. 6.99 7.60 54.20 6.3
Ecuador 5.61 6.40 48.00 5.6
Egypt 4.80 6.70 47.20 6.8
El Salvador 6.60 6.70 47.60 7.5
Estonia 5.10 5.60 40.10 7.8
Fiji 6.69 -- -- 6.3
Finland 7.71 8.00 63.30 7.8
France 6.60 7.10 56.60 6.9
Gabon 6.21 -- -- 5.6
Germany 7.20 7.20 56.80 7.7
Ghana 6.21 4.70 28.00 6.4
Greece 6.30 6.80 54.00 6.8
Guatemala 6.99 7.40 51.80 7.1
Guinea-Bissau 5.40 -- -- 5.3
Guyana 7.20 6.50 42.60 6.4
Haiti 5.49 5.20 30.80 5.8
Honduras 7.20 7.00 48.70 6.5
Hong Kong 6.60 7.20 58.60 9.0
Hungary 5.70 5.70 41.80 7.6
Iceland 7.80 7.80 63.90 7.8
India 5.40 5.50 35.10 6.7
Indonesia 6.60 5.70 39.50 6.4
Iran 6.00 5.60 39.50 6.5
Ireland 7.59 8.10 63.80 7.9
Israel 6.69 7.10 56.80 7.4
Italy 6.90 6.90 55.70 6.9
Jamaica 6.99 6.70 48.50 7.0
Japan 6.21 6.80 55.60 7.4
Jordan 5.10 6.00 43.10 6.9
Kenya 5.61 3.70 19.10 6.9
Kuwait 7.20 6.70 51.60 7.4
Latvia 4.71 5.40 39.10 7.30
Lithuania 4.71 5.80 41.80 7.2
Luxembourg 7.59 7.70 60.10 7.7
Madagascar 5.79 3.70 21.80 5.8
Malawi 4.59 4.40 20.60 5.5
Malaysia 7.41 6.60 48.60 6.8
Mali 5.31 3.80 20.00 5.5
Malta 7.50 7.10 56.00 7.1
Mauritius 6.51 -- -- 7.6
Mexico 6.90 7.70 58.30 7.0
Morocco 5.61 5.60 39.70 6.0
Namibia 6.51 4.50 23.20 6.4
Nepal 5.49 5.30 33.30 5.0
Netherlands 7.50 7.70 61.10 7.8
New Zealand 7.41 7.80 62.30 8.3
Nicaragua 6.30 7.10 51.00 6.3
Niger 4.50 3.80 21.00 5.3
Nigeria 5.49 4.80 22.20 5.7
Norway 7.41 8.10 64.60 7.4
Oman 7.29 -- -- 7.9
Pakistan 4.29 5.60 36.20 5.8
Panama 7.20 7.80 58.50 7.2
Pap. New Guinea 6.30 -- -- 6.3
Paraguay 6.51 6.90 49.00 6.3
Peru 5.61 5.90 41.70 7.1
Philippines 6.39 5.50 38.90 6.5
Poland 5.91 6.50 48.70 6.8
Portugal 6.09 5.90 45.50 7.30
Romania 5.19 5.90 42.60 6.3
Russia 4.29 5.90 38.10 5.5
Rwanda 4.41 4.20 19.10 5.1
Senegal 5.61 4.50 27.90 6.1
Sierra Leone 5.01 3.60 14.80 5.5
Singapore 6.90 7.10 56.50 8.6
Slovak Rep 5.40 6.10 45.10 7.20
Slovenia 6.60 7.00 54.20 6.0
South Africa 5.70 5.00 25.20 6.7
South Korea 5.79 6.30 49.10 7.20
Spain 6.99 7.60 61.20 7.1
Sri Lanka 6.09 5.40 38.60 5.8
Sweden 7.71 7.90 63.20 7.4
Switzerland 8.19 7.70 62.60 8.2
Syria 5.10 5.90 43.40 5.4
Taiwan 6.60 - - 7.20
Tanzania 5.49 2.40 12.50 6.4
Thailand 6.51 6.30 43.50 6.7
Togo 4.89 2.60 15.20 5.0
Trinidad & Tob. 6.90 6.70 46.30 6.6
Tunisia 6.39 5.90 43.30 6.2
Turkey 5.31 5.50 39.40 6.2
Uganda 4.71 4.50 22.30 6.4
Ukraine 3.60 5.30 35.90 5.6
Unit. Arab Em. 4.59 7.20 56.20 7.5
United Kingdom 7.11 7.40 58.60 8.1
United States 7.41 7.90 61.20 8.0
Uruguay 6.30 6.80 51.20 6.7
Venezuela 7.41 6.90 50.40 4.6
Zambia 4.89 4.30 11.50 6.8
GDP per
GDP per Capita
Capita x Economic
Country ($1000x) Freedom
Albania 6.00 35.40
Algeria 7.00 37.80
Argentina 14.20 75.26
Australia 38.10 300.99
Austria 39.20 301.84
Bahamas 28.60 200.20
Bahrain 37.20 264.12
Bangladesh 1.50 8.70
Barbados 19.30 111.94
Belgium 37.50 270.00
Belize 8.60 60.20
Benin 1.50 8.70
Bolivia 4.50 29.70
Botswana 13.30 91.77
Brazil 10.10 59.59
Bulgaria 12.90 85.14
Burundi 0.40 2.00
Cameroon 2.30 12.88
Canada 39.30 314.40
Central Afr. 0.70 3.57
Rep.
Chad 1.60 8.48
Chile 14.90 114.73
China 6.00 35.40
Colombia 8.90 49.84
Congo, Dem. R. 0.30 1.14
Congo, Rep. of 4.00 18.00
Costa Rica 11.60 84.68
Croatia 16.10 104.65
Cyprus 28.60 214.50
Czech Rep. 26.10 182.70
Denmark 37.40 287.98
Dominican Rep. 8.10 51.03
Ecuador 7.50 42.00
Egypt 5.40 36.72
El Salvador 6.20 46.50
Estonia 21.20 165.36
Fiji 3.90 24.57
Finland 37.20 290.16
France 32.70 225.63
Gabon 14.40 80.64
Germany 34.80 267.96
Ghana 1.50 9.60
Greece 32.00 217.60
Guatemala 5.20 36.92
Guinea-Bissau 0.60 3.18
Guyana 3.90 24.96
Haiti 1.30 7.54
Honduras 4.40 28.60
Hong Kong 43.80 394.20
Hungary 19.80 150.48
Iceland 39.90 311.22
India 2.80 18.76
Indonesia 3.90 24.96
Iran 12.80 83.20
Ireland 46.20 364.98
Israel 28.20 208.68
Italy 31.00 213.90
Jamaica 7.40 51.80
Japan 34.20 253.08
Jordan 5.00 34.50
Kenya 1.60 11.04
Kuwait 57.40 424.76
Latvia 17.80 129.94
Lithuania 17.70 127.44
Luxembourg 81.10 624.47
Madagascar 1.00 5.80
Malawi 0.80 4.40
Malaysia 15.30 104.04
Mali 1.20 6.60
Malta 24.20 171.82
Mauritius 12.10 91.96
Mexico 14.20 99.40
Morocco 4.00 24.00
Namibia 5.40 34.56
Nepal 1.10 5.50
Netherlands 40.30 314.34
New Zealand 27.90 231.57
Nicaragua 2.90 18.27
Niger 0.70 3.71
Nigeria 2.30 13.11
Norway 55.20 408.48
Oman 20.20 159.58
Pakistan 2.60 15.08
Panama 11.60 83.52
Pap. New Guinea 2.20 13.86
Paraguay 420 26.46
Peru 8.40 59.64
Philippines 3.30 21.45
Poland 17.30 117.64
Portugal 22.00 160.60
Romania 12.20 76.86
Russia 15.80 86.90
Rwanda 0.90 4.59
Senegal 1.60 9.76
Sierra Leone 0.70 3.85
Singapore 52.00 447.20
Slovak Rep 21.90 157.68
Slovenia 29.50 177.00
South Africa 10.00 67.00
South Korea 26.00 187.20
Spain 34.60 245.66
Sri Lanka 4.30 24.94
Sweden 38.50 284.90
Switzerland 40.90 335.38
Syria 4.80 25.92
Taiwan 31.90 229.68
Tanzania 1.30 8.32
Thailand 8.50 56.95
Togo 0.90 4.50
Trinidad & Tob. 18.60 122.76
Tunisia 7.90 48.98
Turkey 12.00 74.40
Uganda 1.10 7.04
Ukraine 6.90 38.64
Unit. Arab Em. 40.00 300.00
United Kingdom 36.60 296.46
United States 47.00 376.00
Uruguay 12.20 81.74
Venezuela 13.50 62.10
Zambia 1.50 10.20
TABLE 2
DEFINITIONS AND DATA SOURCES
Definitions Sources
Happiness: Self-reported level Abdallah et al. (2009)
WVS of happiness
compiled and www.happyphunetiDdex.org/public-
estimated by the New data/files/happy-planet-
Economics Foundation index-2-0.pdf
from multiple
sources including
the World Values
Survey (WVS). Scores
range from 0 (low)
to 10 (high).
Happiness: Self-reported level New Economics Foundation (2006)
Gallup of happiness
gathered by Gallup www.happyplanetindex.org/
in 2006. All answers public-data/files/happy-
to the question: planet-index-first-global.pdf
"All things
considered, how
satisfied are you
with your life as a
whole these days?"
Scores range from 0
(low) to 10 (high).
Happiness: A combination of a Abdallah et al. (2009)
Happy Life country's
Years self-reported level www.happyplanetindex.org/
of happiness and its public-data/files/happy-
citizens' current planet-index-2-O.pdf
life expectancy at
birth and is used
here as a proxy for
health. Since good
health is often
associated with
happiness and
subjective data
regarding life
satisfaction can
often fall under
some degree of
scrutiny, the
combination of the
two accomplishes
both the task of
providing a little
objectivity in the
measurement and
capturing some
degree of long-term
satisfaction with
life.
Economic Using a scale from 1 Gwartney and Lawson (2005)
Freedom of to 10, the EFW index www.freetheworld.com
the World measures the degree
Index GDP of economic freedom World Bank, World Development
per Capita in the nation. This Indicators
variable measures a
nation's gross http://databank.worldbank.
domestic product per org/ddp/home.do?
capita. The variable Step512&id54&CNO52
is adjusted for
purchasing power
parity and is
expressed in 1,000s
of U.S. dollars.
TABLE 3
SUMMARY STATISTICS
Std.
Variable N Mean Median Minimum Maximum Dev.
Happiness: 119 6.17 6.3 3.00 8.19 1.10
WVS
Happiness: 110 6.12 6.4 2.40 8.50 1.41
Gallup
Happiness: 110 43.62 46.75 12.50 66.70 14.91
Happy
Life
Years
Economic 120 6.65 6.65 3.8 9.0 0.96
Freedom
Index
GDP per 120 16.52 11.80 0.30 81.10 16.01
Capita
TABLE 4
REGRESSION RESULTS
Happiness: Happiness: Happiness: Happiness:
WVS WVS Gallup Gallup
Variable (1) (2) (3) (4)
Intercept 3.191 *** 2.107 ** 2.278 *** 0.248
(4.597) (2.591) (2.660) (0.263)
Economic 0.389 *** 0.548 *** 0.488 *** 0.783 ***
Freedom (3.361) (4.187) (3.408) (5.145)
GDP per 0.024 *** 0.143 *** 0.037 *** 0.272 ***
Capita (3.361) (2.891) (4.395) (4.665)
GDP x EFW -0.016 ** -0.032 ***
(-2.403) (-4.065)
N 118 118 109 109
Adj. [R.sup.2] .398 .422 .497 .561
Happiness: Happiness:
Happy Life Happy Life
Years Years
Variable (5) (6)
Intercept 2.509 -18.830 **
(0.302) (-2.089)
Economic 5.096 *** 8.200 ***
Freedom (3.676) (5.641)
GDP per 0.449 *** 2.921 ***
Capita (5.461) (5.235)
GDP x EFW -0.332 ***
(-4.472)
N 109 109
Adj. [R.sup.2] .577 .641
NOTES: t-statistics in parentheses; ** indicates significance at
the 5 percent level; *** indicates significance at the 1 percent
level.
TABLE 5
THE IMPACT OF ECONOMIC FREEDOM AND GDP PER CAPITA ON HAPPINESS
Impact of 1 Standard
Deviation Increase
in Economic Freedom
Level of on Happiness Score Level of
GDP per at Different Levels Economic
Capita of GDP per Capita Freedom
1 S.D. below 0.51 0.73 5.66
Mean
Mean 16.52 0.24 6.62
1 S.D. above 32.53 -0.25 7.57
Mean
Impact of a
Simultaneous
Increase of 1
Impact of 1 Standard Standard Deviation
Deviation increase in Both Economic
in GDP per Capita at Freedom and GDP per
Different Levels of Capita at Different
Economic Freedom Levels of Economic
Freedom and GDP per
Capita
1 S.D. below 1.46 2.19
Mean
Mean 0.97 1.21
1 S.D. above 0.48 0.23
Mean
FIGURE 1
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC FREEDOM
AND HAPPINESS, BY QUARTILE
Economic Freedom Quartiles
3.8-5.8 29.4
5.9-6.7 40.4
6.7-7.3 47.6
7.4-9.0 57.9
Note: Table made from bar graph.