I will be attending a presentation by an old friend, Tom Barefoot, tomorrow night in Northampton on Gross National Happiness.
It is happening at the Media Education Foundation offices at 60 Masonic Street, Northampton, MA at 7:00 pm. Come.
A group of Vermonters have been meeting to formulate ways to assess whether their communities are succeeding or not, whether people in the state are happy, and growing happier or less so.
Many factors affect one’s sense of well-being. The measurement of well-being is by definition subjective, and therefore any standard definition will be subject to criticism. The choice though is whether to measure something that provides a great deal of objectively comparable information, or to neglect to measure what is important.
I looked at the GNHUSA website and the methodology that they use to measure happiness, and frankly my impression is that it needs work. They have a link to a “sustainable Seattle” questionnaire that also seemed a little thin to me (that’s my code for needing work).
I have an alternative.
It is also simple, and is derived from Maslow’s heirarchy of needs. It is a measure of results, not of causes.
1. Survival:
To what extent did you successfully meet the following needs over the past month, and expect to over the next month (0 – 9)
A. Food 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B. Water 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
C. Shelter 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
D. Warmth 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
E. Free from Illness/health 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
F. Sleep/rest 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
G. Work 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2. Safety/security
To what extent did you successfully meet the following needs over the past five years and expect to over the next five years?
A. Food 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B. Water 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
C. Shelter 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
D. Warmth 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
E. Free from Illness/health 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
F. Sleep/rest 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
G. Work 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
H. Safety from bodily harm 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
I. Safety from persecution 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
3. Love/Belonging
To what extent did you successfully meet the following needs over the past five years and expect to over the next five years?
A. Close friends 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B. Multiple acquaintences 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
C. Close family 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
D. Fulfilling love relationships 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
4. Esteem
To what extent did you achieve your goals for self-respect and respect of others over the past five years?
A. Career and/or life achievements 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B. Mastery of a profession or craft 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
C. Development of confidence 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
D. Respect of others’ accomplishment 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
E. Respect of you 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
5. Self-Actualization
To what extent did you achieve your goals for self-fulfillment, in action and experience?
A. Ethics 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B. Creative expression 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
C. Design/problem solving 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
D. Peacemaking 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
E. Acceptance and magnaminity 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
F. Sincerity 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
G. Study 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
H. Work life in the “zone” 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
I. Sense of humor, irony 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
J. Self-motivation, determination 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
K. Self-reflection 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
6. Spirituality
To what extent did you realize spirituality in contemplation and action? To what extent did you inspire others?
A. Sense of unity of all things and
your connection to ALL 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B. Sense of truth 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
C. Sense of beauty 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
D. Life of heartful passion 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
E. Sense of harmony 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
F. Sense of surrender/agency 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
G. Inner courage 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
H. Contemplation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
If you are willing, fill out the enclosed questionnaire, e-mail it back to me, I’ll enter the data into an analytic “happiness” spreadsheet and I’ll tell you how happy you are. (a joke, not really. I think the measure is representative.)
rswitty@verizon.net.
The data and interpretation varies by age. Students tend to be very confident of their survival, security, belonging needs, but have not yet experienced sustaining esteem building accomplishments. Unemployed tend to score low. Elderly tend to score low.
I think that largely reflects reality, how happy people really are.
The top score is around 120, the lowest around 1. If social welfare is the measure of the success of an economy, this scoring institutionalizes the assumption that a fully actualized financially secure person generates at maximum 120 times the well-being of a poor and depressed and alone person.
It does suggest that if resources can be dedicated to near universal survival and security, that that realizes a higher impact on community welfare than highly educating and nurturing a single person.
Whats the right number, the accurate difference between the optimal and the minimal happiness in the world? 120, 240, 24000? Hard to know.
It is a certainty that a relatively small amount of resources creating a safety net makes a BIG difference in social welfare. Whether charity or government should make that safety net is an open question.
And, whether we, through our employment, our charitable institutions or through our governance, are realizing optimal social welfare per the activity in our economy, is another profound question.
In measuring social welfare, as distinct from individual welfare, it is also an open question whether scores of youth should be weighted comparably to scores of elderly. Maybe we should weight the scoring socially by years of life expectancy remaining (squareroot of 25+ life expectancy. I at 56 would be weighted at the squareroot of 55 – 7.6, while my 19 year old son weighted at the squareroot of 82 – 9.1, while my 86 year old mother would be weighted at the squareroot of 25 – 5.0). I know. I’ll never be elected president for my advocacy for “death panel” social welfare scoring.
The primary concept of referencing social well-being as the measure of success or failure of an economy/society rather than secondary measures like GDP or cumulative gross net worth, is sound, more than sound.
The question now is to develop tools that are credible enough to be trusted sufficiently to be used, and then relied on (and always refined).
There is a tendency to attempt to measure cause in too great a detail, to the point that the metric itself embodies specific sets of values that are not universal in fact, and then represent an imposition of the values by the measurement. In this exercise we need to measure. We live in a democracy with contending worldviews and definitions of success. To the extent that the measure itself is free from bias, it will be relevant, accepted, used.