WELLBEING | “It is time we focused not just on GDP, but on GWB – general wellbeing,” said PM David Cameron at the press conference announcing that his government is about to start measuring the wellbeing of the in British people. PHOTO: CROWN COPYRIGHT, THE PM’s OFFICE.
In a recent episode of the popular satirical news show 10 O’Clock Live comedian David Mitchell embarked on one his by now quite infamous rants. This time it was directed at a new organisation called Action For Happiness. Although still a relatively unknown movement to many, it is quickly gaining ground in the British collective consciousness. Launched only in April 2011, it has one noble, but complicated aim: to create a happier society.
“Action for Happiness is a movement for positive social change. We are bringing together people from all walks of life who want to play a part in creating a happier society for everyone,” is the message that welcomes you when you visit their website. You are also introduced to 10 keys to happier living while being encouraged to “Take Action!” to make yourself happier.
On first appearance it may seem like a run of the mill, slightly cheesy self-help guide, with Mitchell describing its followers as “reaching for trite answers”. The most cynical of us may even argue that the mere fact that it can so easily be used as fodder for contemporary satire suggests that it should perhaps not be taken very seriously as an initiative.
JOY AND CONTENTMENT
However, dig a little deeper and you will soon discover that the project is indeed very serious and boasts some very high profile and credible backing. One of the main thinkers behind Action for Happiness is esteemed economist Lord Richard Layard, founder and director of the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics and a pioneer within happiness and wellbeing economics.
“We want a society that generates as little physical and mental pain as possible and as much joy and contentment,” he argues. And while he acknowledges that some people may have difficulty using the term happiness, because it is subjective, he believes that is an important reason why the movement is needed. “Many people resist taking subjective experience seriously enough. Our society would be happier if it took happiness more seriously and gave it greater priory.”
Action for Happiness has attracted the support of the National Trust, MIND and Citizens UK, among other influential pressure groups. Even the Dalai Lama is a fan. Perhaps more importantly, they have got the people in power on board. All major British parties now support the movement, and Prime Minister David Cameron has said that “it is time we focused not just on GDP but on GWB – general wellbeing.”
In fact, Cameron and his government have set out on a mission to measure the wellbeing of the British people in hope of using the results for policy purposes. The government’s Budget 2010 Report stated that “the Government is committed to developing broader indicators of well-being and sustainability”, and last November Cameron asked the Office of National Statistics to produce measures to gauge general wellbeing.
The ONS has now started the process of measuring national happiness, with experimental, subjective wellbeing questions (that is, how people assess their own wellbeing) being added to the Integrated Household Survey from April 2011 onwards. “We now have a programme of work to analyse and publish data on subjective wellbeing,” Rachael Hicks, Media Relations Officer for the ONS told Global Knowledge.
WHAT REALLY MATTERS
However, the project has not been without its critics, even outside late night comedy satire. There are those who have labelled it “woolly and impractical”, saying that happiness is a vague and subjective concept that is difficult to measure and even more difficult to use in policy-making.
Mark Williamson, the Director of Action for Happiness strongly refutes these claims, as he told us: “A lot of the sceptics believe that wellbeing and happiness cannot be measured because it is subjective and therefore not of value. We would argue that that is wrong. A lot of the things that we measure are subjective. Take consumer confidence, for instance; subjective but very useful data.”
He further argues that actually asking people how they really feel is a very useful and important tool in policy-making. Instead of paternalistically telling people how they should feel based on certain indicators, such as income, Action for Happiness believes in asking people how the really feel. “It’s about adding to the mix things that really matter to people in their lives,” he says.
And they seem to have a point. Nobody is claiming that income and economic security is unimportant. However, what we have seen in developed countries in the past decades is that there has been massive economic and material growth. At the same time this has not made people significantly happier.
“Up to a certain point material growth is connected to happiness. However, when you get past that point economic growth stops having a measurable positive impact on our wellbeing,” Williamson explains.
ATTACK | “We face an unprecedented attack on our future before it has even begun,” said outgoing National Union of Students president Aaron Porter in his speech at the rally in October 2010.
EDUCATION AND HAPPINESS
Looking at the indicators used to measure different levels of wellbeing, there are a few that pop up again and again, such as income, health and access to work. And of course, there is also the category of education. In the Human Development Index it is measured through levels of adult literacy. In the Millennium Development Goals it is measured through levels of enrolment in primary and secondary education. In the Better Life Index it is measured through educational attainment of the adult population and through literacy amongst 15-years old students.
The OECD argues that education has a “strong influence” on people’s wellbeing. Higher levels of education correspond with getting better job and earning higher wages as well as with better health and increased longevity. Educated individuals also participate more actively in politics and in the community where they live, they commit fewer crimes and rely less on social assistance. In society as a whole better education leads to higher GDP growth, higher tax revenues and lower social expenditures.
The question then arises: if education is such an important part of our wellbeing, and the British government aims to take these factors of wellbeing into consideration in future policy, how does this correspond with the government’s decision to cut funding for education in general and higher education in particular?
UNHAPPY STUDENTS
There appears to be somewhat of a paradox. If we go back only a few months to October of last year, when parliament was preparing for the crucial vote on higher education funding, one of the biggest collective student movements for generations descended on London. Some 50 000 students took part in the demonstration and, although mostly peaceful, it was clear that it was it was a manifestation of the unhappiness that many students were feeling with regard to the proposed cuts.
“We face an unprecedented attack on our future before it has even begun. This government’s assault on education is an attack on every single student, every individual teacher, every individual lecturer, every individual college, every individual university. An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us,” said outgoing National Union of Students president Aaron Porter in his speech at the rally, to thunderous applause and cheers from the crowd. He appeared to have hit a nerve. Students saw the proposed cuts as an attack on them, and on their future. In short, they were not happy.
York University Student Union President Tim Ngwena, who led a delegation of more than 400 students to the protests in London, points out that he feels students united around this issue because they felt the opportunity for an education was being taken away from them; an opportunity he sees an important part of wellbeing.
“The Human Development Index, the most standard measure of wellbeing across countries, places education as a key part of any country’s development. If we stop or harm education policy, then the long term effect will inevitably be that development of that country will suffer.” Ngwena finds it “ironic” that the same government that cut funding for education wants to know more about wellbeing.
“Maybe they should have done it the other way round? Do the research on wellbeing and what effects it, then thought about education policy? It is pretty clear that the two are linked.”
UNCERTAINTY
As of yet there has not been any conclusive evidence suggesting a clear link between higher education in particular and happiness. However, higher education, or the lack of it, may blend into other factors that we know to influence wellbeing.
“There is a connection to a certain extent,” Williamson says. “Education plays a part in determining what kind of job you can get and your financial situation. Your financial situation is connected to your wellbeing and happiness. Additionally, education can stimulate you intellectually and help you get a job you like and are motivated to do. In that sense there can be a connection between education and happiness.”
As for the education cuts, he believes that they touch on a very important factor that causes people to be unhappy: uncertainty. One of the drivers of unhappiness is uncertainty about the future. Public spending cuts are bad for happiness in general, not just in terms of cuts to education.
“Cuts to education may lead to fears of unemployment, which is one of the biggest drivers of unhappiness, and not just for financial reasons. So, unhappiness related to education may have more to do with fear of unemployment and the uncertainty that comes with that, rather than people being unable to attain high levels of education in itself,” said Williamson.
Although the ONS has not finished gathering all the information for the report yet, we are told that education will definitely play a role in measuring the nation’s wellbeing. In the first instance, the analysis of answers to the subjective wellbeing questions in the IHS will take into account the level of educational attainment, which respondents also report in the survey.
“As part of the recent wellbeing national debate, the Office for National Statistics did engage for example with colleges, universities, the NUS, children's organisations and the Department for Education,” Hicks could further inform us.
“It was clear from the debate that it is important to include the wellbeing of children and young people in our assessment of the wellbeing and progress of the UK. We are now taking this forward. The National Statistician will be reporting on the findings of the national debate and on the way forward.”
This issue is a complex one, but the fact that it is being taken seriously at both national and international level suggests it is one that will be important in the years to come.
Next article: Northern Bliss