#10 Weiner - The Geography of Bliss

 Is Gross National Happiness a comparative, or perhaps even better, indicator of development with regards to the archetypal GDP and GNP?

 

The Geography of Bliss - Eric Weiner

It wouldn't really be fair to call this a review, seeing as I've only read 200 of the 403 pages constituting this book, however I wanted to write as an expansion of one area raised which I found interesting; I will too provide reasoning for my not finishing. (At least this will be a shorter post, unlike the one below...!).

 

Why I won't be finishing The Geography of Bliss:

1. I didn't really enjoy or engage with Weiner's narrative style, and found the jaunty tone too forced/shallow at times.
2. I can't speak for his summative conclusions having not read the epilogue, but his method of searching for 'the happiest place in the world' and the reasons validating the differing levels of happiness found in different countries thus far in the novel seem to lack great depth or breadth. From what I've perceived, he travels to the country and attempts to immerse himself in the culture, but persistently focuses on meeting with US natives who have been based in said country for a period of time, hinting perhaps at bias in his evidence; there are several cited scientific studies and philosophical analogies, however I couldn't really get into it. Part of the problem could be the high quality of the book I read preceding this one - Jared Diamond no less! (I feel really mean writing this - I'm sorry!)

On a lighter note, the area of interest raised: Bhutan's Gross National Happiness.

See here for its dedicated website.

 

I first came across Bhutan's Gross National Happiness (GNH) a couple of months ago when reading, (I think it may have been Palin's work), but it was mentioned only in passing so it didn't really jump out at me. Coming across it a second time, I thought, 'Hey, I recognise this!' and, given its unorthodox nature, decided to research it further.

 

Typically, the paralleled indicators of development utilized in most countries are those of the GDP and GNP (as well as per capita); GDP (Gross Domestic Product) refers to the total value of a country's production and services by its citizens within one year based within the country itself, whereas the GNP (Gross National Product) refers to the same total value but with regards to citizens based both within the country and abroad. Inevitably, although used to evaluate the quality of life and standard of living for a country, both the GDP and GNP are objective indicators of development in that they focus on economic factors. GNH, as employed conversely in Bhutan, is an indicator more of the social and subjective well-being of a population.

 

GNH was initially introduced in 1973 by Bhutan's Fourth King, Jigme Singye Wangchuk, but didn't entirely take root until the King was interviewed by The Financial Times in 1983, with the headline of the article reading - Bhutan King: Gross National Happiness More Important Than Gross National Product (information sourced from TGOB, Weiner, page 106). What exactly does the GNH index constitute? As its website illustrates;

"The concept implies that sustainable development should take a holistic approach towards notions of progress and give equal importance to non-economic aspects of wellbeing. The concept of GNH has often been explained by its four pillars: good governance, sustainable socio-economic development, cultural preservation, and environmental conservation. Lately the four pillars have been further classified into nine domains in order to create widespread understanding of GNH and to reflect the holistic range of GNH values. The nine domains are: psychological wellbeing, health, education, time use, cultural diversity and resilience, good governance, community vitality, ecological diversity and resilience, and living standards. The domains represents each of the components of wellbeing of the Bhutanese people, and the term ‘wellbeing’ here refers to fulfilling conditions of a ‘good life’ as per the values and principles laid down by the concept of Gross National Happiness." - GNH website article

 I think Wangchuk has a point.

Although GNP and GDP have both proven effective as indicators of development, I think it perhaps too shallow to merely base the well-being of a population on its level of economic wealth; as an objective indicator of the provision of health care, education, employment and other services they are both perfectly suitable and sustainable. However, when considering subjective indicators of development, such as the nine domains cited above by GNH, perhaps we should reassess merely using money as a basis. At its heart lies the popular question; can money really buy happiness?

 

"GDP doesn't register, as Robert Kennedy put it, 'the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, or the intelligence of our public debate.' GDP measures everything, Kennedy concluded, 'except that which makes life worthwhile.' Nor does GDP take into account unpaid work, the so-called compassionate economy. An elderly person who lives in a nursing home is contributing to GDP, while one cared for by relatives at home is not. Indeed, he may even be guilty of reducing GDP if his care-givers are forced to take unpaid leave from work."

- page 105

 

Weiner points out research into this very question, which suggests that money can buy happiness - up to a certain point. This point translates into around $15,000 a year. Beyond this, he writes, the 'link between economic growth and happiness evaporates'. In other words, obviously a certain level of wealth is going to transcribe into happiness given that it is essential for the development of a country in terms of provision of services and facilities; without these services, one's quality of life/standard of living dramatically falls. On the contrary, beyond this point, to relate happiness one-dimensionally with money is to reflect the largely materialistic and hedonistic culture of the modern world.

 

I think excessive wealth, or the desire for materialism, is in fact an idolatrous fallacy in itself. It's common to think, 'Oh, once I get X and Y then I'll be happy.' But I don't think happiness should be placed on external, especially materialistic, factors. How sustainable is that, really? Inevitably, we fall into a cycle of always placing happiness in a distant place alongside the attainment of Z, and feeling the need to work continuously towards this unattainable goal of purchasing contentment hence never actually enjoying what we have been blessed with. For example, if your original aim was to gain a £50 pair of shoes, in the future you won't derive the same level of satisfaction from a £50 pair of shoes - you'll idolize a £70 pair, then a £100 pair and so forth (Wiener alludes to such a cycle in Dubai, alongside the analogy of a purse).

 

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." - Matthew 6:19-21

 

This is beginning to develop into a large tangent... So fundamentally, beyond a certain level, economic factors should not be the sole representative of a population's development/well-being; it is suitable as an indictor of one dimension, economic development, but not environmental or social. I think a sustainable and effective option for future indications of development levels, may be to utilize both the GNP/GDP and a more subjective indicator such as the GNH. It would be unwise however, to explicitly replace indicators such as the GDP with the GNH; such seems both unsustainable and even perhaps cynical.

 

Thus far, GNH has only been used officially in Bhutan. Although some sceptics believe that, with the new administration of Bhutan in 2013 abandoning the campaign to spread GNH worldwide in favour of focusing on Bhutanese residents' well-being, they too have begun to favour more traditional indicators.  

 

The GNH is an intriguing idea, nonetheless.

 

C