Ayush Verma
‘’Running the same system harder or faster will not change the pattern as long as the structure is not revised’’ (Meadows et al 2004).
Post Developmentalism is a school of thought rooted in questioning the conventional paradigm of progress. Arturo Escobar locates the use of post-development thinking in criticizing the European hubris of economic modernity, arguing that economic growth and material accumulation are insufficient tools to measure societal development (1995). The wellbeing and mental health crisis in Western states is perhaps a salient example of the growth mantra failing to induce progressive well-being outcomes; highlighting the ramifications of blindly believing in economic modernity.
The NHS estimates that more than 1.8 million people await mental health treatment (2023), with 1 in 4 citizens in the UK likely to be suffering with poor mental health (Mind Charity, 2024). These statistics are the result of a year-on-year increase, with the British Medical Association highlighting that between 2017-2022, young people in particular had a huge spike in reported mental health issues. Likely further exacerbated by the COVID 19 pandemic, the number of 17–19-year-olds who were suffering from poor mental health rose from 10 percent in 2017 to 26 percent in 2022 (BMA, 2022).
Traditionally happiness and mental health are assigned to civil society, and policy prescriptions towards these issues reflect this hubris. Unhappiness isn’t tackled by policy as a systemic issue, even though many argue that it is precisely that. Western government policy is centered around improving the material conditions of its nation, with macroeconomic objectives such as increasing GDP and productivity, alongside the development of state provisions and infrastructure. Creating socio-economic opportunities is fundamentally a defining role of the state, but a psychological analysis of well-being highlights that opportunity alone is insufficient to induce happiness. Our focus on wellbeing cannot be simply realised as offshoots of economic prosperity. Martin Seligman’s experiments involved giving participants 8-week programmes on ‘mindfulness’ and ‘wellbeing’, where he observed that these participants gained larger increases in dopamine and perceived wellbeing than participants who had received entirely new jobs (2011). Suggesting a state led mindfulness programme may be a far-fetched approach due to the contested nature of happiness as a concept.
‘’Rather unfortunately, it appears to be rather difficult to describe and present the intrinsic and instrumental values of happiness without making some proportion of happiness researchers unhappy’’ (Alkire, 2013)
Nevertheless, Seligman’s research highlights that economic and ‘material’ changes, especially in a western context, only contribute to a small fraction in the overall transformation of an individual's wellbeing. Following on, it is clear that policy approaches to well-being must principally be more multifaceted, rather than centering purely around creating higher quality material outcomes.
But why must states be involved with something as qualitative and subjective as mental health, happiness and wellbeing in the first place? Are bottom-up approaches in civil societies not the solution to creating tailored and specific community outcomes? While it can be argued that emotional well-being and happiness are too abstract to become state targets, history suggests otherwise. Small state neoliberal approaches, as seen in the US, have assigned the issue of unhappiness onto charities, civic society or the private medical industry have been far less successful at curbing the ‘unhappiness epidemic’ than big government (Helliwell et al, 2019). Scandinavian nations for example perform exceptionally well, not exclusively due to the presence of large welfare systems and labour policies (Meik, 2017) but also due to state led prioritisation of providing pro-mental health initiatives and generating a ‘well-being culture’. The compounding impact of macro-level cultural pushes towards wellbeing, alongside micro-level policies can create positive well-being outcomes which are sustained and prioritised. The example of ‘Lagom’ in Sweden, alongside its workplace laws are the epitome of this compounding impact.
Perceived free time is one of the largest drivers of happiness and well-being—not necessarily the quantitative amount of free time a citizen has but rather how much they feel they have (Zhang et al., 2023). For example, two workers who both work 40-hour weeks have extremely differing perceived amounts of free time depending on how much flexibility they have in choosing when, where, and how often they work—essentially, having autonomy over the 40 hours is crucial in providing the feeling that they have more free time than they quantitatively do (Zhang et al., 2023). Beyond this, decreasing the total number of working hours again has a positive correlation with happiness—this includes cutting down on total contractual hours and the total amount of unpaid overtime (Shahidi et al., 2024). ‘Lagom’ is a Swedish philosophy, approximately translating to ‘balance’ or ‘just the right amount’ (Brülde & Linton, 2020). Lagom advocates for moderation and control, with the state particularly using the philosophy to promote environmental sustainability, work-life balance and wellbeing in particular (Johansson, 2019). The Swedish government achieves this balance through discouraging excessive working hours by legislating extensive vacation policies and normalising a 30–35-hour work week, whilst also implementing widespread work-from-home policies (Johansson, 2019). Lagom discourages hoarding and the ‘excess’, with the state prioritising the creation of a corporate culture which prioritises quality of life
Beyond specific macro-level policies of systemic top-down happiness cultures or micro-level interventions in the workplace, this article seeks to question our general approach to societal wellbeing and asks western policy makers to look elsewhere for inspiration. Bhutan’s ‘GNH policy screening’ formula is centered around evaluating all new government policy to ensure to meet well being driven criteria. This is legislated and conducted by the ‘Gross National Happiness Commission’ which define themselves as an, ‘Institution that promotes and enables an environment for all Bhutanese to be happy and steer national development towards promotion of happiness for all Bhutanese guided by the philosophy of GNH’ (2024).
This policy evaluation is processed through the use of 27 indicators and measures policies against 9 key domains: psychological well-being, health, education, time use, cultural diversity, good governance, community vitality, ecological diversity, and living standards (Ura et al., 2012). Each policy is rated and scored depending on its ability to induce collective wellbeing for the local population, with geographical context included to the best of the ministry's ability. Policies that score poorly are reviewed, where they may either be outright rejected or revised to be ‘more happiness-inducing’ (Royal Government of Bhutan, 2013). In essence every government legislated policy whether it’s economic, social or environmental must be happiness compliant; either improving public wellbeing or at the very least not decreasing it. This imposes the strongest semblance of a pro-human policy approach, ignoring anything which purely provides value through market or political gains.
This policy paper seeks to introduce new approaches and discussions to our contemporary development paradigms but is aware of the contextual complexities of reforming Western governance processes. The paper however wishes to advocate for a more human approach to how we view policy; inciting conversations around repositioning happiness and wellbeing to the center of public policy and seeking inspiration from around the world.
Bibliography
Alkire, S. (2013) Happiness and Well-Being: Concepts and Measurement. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative.
Brülde, B. and Linton, S. (2020) Lagom: Balancing life through moderation. Stockholm: Swedish Academic Press.
British Medical Association (BMA). (2022) Mental health crisis: Young people’s rising concerns. Available at: https://www.bma.org.uk (Accessed: 22 January 2025).
Escobar, A. (1995) Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gross National Happiness Commission (GNHC). (2024) Philosophy of Gross National Happiness. Available at: https://www.gnhc.gov.bt (Accessed: 22 January 2025).
Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R. and Sachs, J. D. (2019) World Happiness Report 2019. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R. and Sachs, J. D. (2023) World Happiness Report 2023. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
Johansson, P. (2019) ‘The role of lagom in Swedish public policy: A case study of work-life balance,’ Nordic Journal of Social Research, 8(2), pp. 45–63.
Martin, S. (2011) Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being. New York: Atria Books.
Meadows, D. H., Randers, J. and Meadows, D. L. (2004) The Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update. London: Earthscan.
Meik, W. (2017) The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living. London: Penguin Random House.
Mind Charity. (2024) Statistics on Mental Health. Available at: https://www.mind.org.uk (Accessed: 22 January 2025).
OECD. (n.d.) Better Life Index: Measuring well-being and progress. Available at: https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org (Accessed: 22 January 2025).
Oishi, S. and Diener, E. (2014) ‘Can and Should Happiness Be a Policy Goal?’, Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), pp. 195–203. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2372732214548427 (Accessed: 18 January 2025).
Royal Government of Bhutan. (2013) The GNH Policy Screening Tool: A practical guide. Thimphu: Gross National Happiness Commission.
Shahidi, F. V., Zafar, S. and Denier, N. (2024) ‘Unpaid overtime and mental health in the Canadian working population,’ American Journal of Industrial Medicine. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajim.23622.
Thinley, J. Y. (2007) ‘What is Gross National Happiness?’, keynote address at the Second International Conference on GNH, Nova Scotia, Canada.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (n.d.) Human Development Index (HDI). Available at: https://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi (Accessed: 22 January 2025).
Ura, K., Alkire, S., Zangmo, T. and Wangdi, K. (2012) A short guide to Gross National Happiness Index. Thimphu: Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH Research.
Wiking, M. (2017) The Hygge Life: Embracing the Nordic Art of Coziness and Contentment. New York: Harper Design.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2021) Guidelines on mental health at work: A rights-based approach. Geneva: WHO.
Zhang, M., Wang, F. and Li, Y. (2023) ‘Overtime work, job autonomy, and employees' subjective well-being: Evidence from China,’ International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. Available at: https://europepmc.org/article/MED/37139369.
コメント