26
votes
Finland has remained the happiest country in the world for the seventh year in a row, according to the annual World Happiness Report published on Wednesday
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- Finland ranked world's happiest country for seventh year - DW - 03/20/2024
- Word count
- 534 words
If I'm being honest, I probably let these reports bother me more than they should. For some reason, they just never sit well with me. I thought about it a bit this morning and I believe the reason they don't (sit well with me) is that I don't believe they are comparing apples to apples.
I questioned myself whether there was a comparison at all or if I was only inventing one. Specifically the comparison being countries ranked higher on the list versus the good ol' US of A. I concluded that, yes, there is a comparison. I can't count the number of times that reports like this are cited to show how great life is in some other country while, simultaneously, pointing out how it isn't so great in the US. So, whether the purpose of the report is a comparison or not (their rankings notwithstanding), I believe the effective use of the report is for comparison.
That brought me back to why I don't like the comparison and why I don't think it is apples to apples. One of the biggest things that struck me is that every single country ranked higher than the US is smaller, with most being significantly smaller. The average population of the top 10 countries is 9 million and the mean is 5.5 million. No country ranked higher than the US has even half the population. Removing Australia, Canada, and the UK, every other country has 5% of the US population or less (most significantly less) -- Finland is 1.6% of the population as compared to the US.
Thinking about something similar, a common theme is how much better it is to work for a small, mom and pop, employer than for a huge corporation. While that, generally, may be true, the things that a mom and pop employer do to drive up employee satisfaction just aren't possible at scale.
I believe the same holds true for the drivers of this happiness data. It just doesn't hold up at scale. Take Finland, multiply its population (and land mass) by a factor of 60. Then, boost its racial diversity from the current 13.8% to 52.7% (matching the US). Now I think you have an entirely different story going on in Finland.
Could be. Maybe you would get a better picture if you would compare the US on a per state level. As I suspect that there are also differences. Also, some of those policies that might not work at a bigger scale might work on a state level as well.
Then there is also the fact that quite a few of these countries are also EU members and in that regard.
Ultimately, to be frank, I don't think that saying it must be scale is a productive way of thinking about it. It is an easy way to dismiss things over something that might not even matter.
Finally, I do think the comparison to the US is simply one born out various historic circumstances. For a long time, the US was seen as a benchmark for quality of living. It also is the country with the biggest economy in the world. So it makes sense to put that in a comparison as well.
In the end, isn't it better to look at this from a perspective of what the US might improve rather than see it as a sort of underhanded jab and personal insult?
Yeah, I don't think this is a bad thing to compete over in a way, but more than anything, looking at happiness, live expectancy, quality of life etc. can teach us about ourselves if we compare it in a productive way.
In a weird way, I'd argue that the fact that we compare these numbers is in the long arc of human history absolutely phenomenal. For millennia the primary concern was survival, quality metrics of life were secondary. And while much of humanity still suffers in horrible living conditions out of selfish interests (both domestically and foreign), taking a step back it's mind blowing.
I hear you, but I think understanding the "whys" is probably a big point of the study. It's not supposed to scale to make up for differences in the metrics of the population, it's supposed to be a snapshot to show what current rates of happiness are, which can possibly then be studied. In this case, one of the points we could arrive at/study is that it's more likely for a small to moderate size nation to score high on happiness ratings - now we can try to figure out why that might be.
The US is a behemoth of a nation, both in population and landmass; I could imagine that it's hard for them to be agile and make decisions to improve the quality of life for their citizens from a policy perspective. But I don't think it's sensible to say "Aww man, if Finland had the same demographic distribution and geography that we do, they wouldn't rank so high!" I mean - maybe? But it doesn't really matter because that's not the point of the study. If that's the study you want to see, make it happen! I'd be interested to view the results, but curious as to how the data points could be adjusted for scale.
Yes you're letting it bother you more then you should, I live in one of the countries high on the list and I can't see how this would be a jab at America, let alone specifically. Secondly life isn't that perfect here lol. For some reason a lot of Americans seem to want to be the best at literally everything, and I think that's going to be impossible sadly. Finland definitively doesn't have the economy or tech the USA has for example. Life is quieter, and that has its pros.
I've looked into the Happiest Report a little more. Here's a key quote:
Based on this, am I right to dismiss this report altogether? If I am reading this correctly, the results are solely based on individuals in the country reporting, on a scale of 0-10, their perceived happiness.
If this is true, could things like Americans generally being more cynical drag down the score for the US? Are Finnish people more inclined to be more happy with their lot in life?
Not to be glib, but how else are you going to measure happiness without people self-reporting? If United States citizens are generally more cynical, wouldn't it follow that they are less happy?
No, you are not correct in wanting to dismiss it based on that quote. As that would mean you are cherry picking your data to fit your own ideas.
Its true that measurements are based on respondents assessments of their own lives. However these are then correlated with various life factors. Metrics used include GDP per capita, social support, healthy life expectancy, freedom to make life choices, generosity, and perceptions of corruption.
There is much more to it, but that is also very easy to find if you are actually looking for it.
Look, it really seems to me that you are taking this very personal somehow. Something you seem.be overlooking is that the US still ranks in the top 20. Around countries like Germany and France. Not somewhere near the bottom at 142 next to Afghanistan.
So, why does it still bother you so much?
Minor quibble, but no, it doesn't.
Previously, the US was 15th; this year, it dropped 8 places to 23rd. Coincidentally (?), Germany was right below, in 16th, and also dropped exactly 8 places, to 24th.
As an American living in Germany, this statistical tidbit has really hit me.
I think the problem is more fundamental.
Look at it this way, you either accept that this indeed is a report that's supposed to measure happiness or that this is just a collection of responses to specific questions.
In the second case, we have a "a thermometer is measuring the temperature of the thermometer" situation. It's not a happiness report, it's a collection of data largely around life and lived experiences, and in order to simplify and publicize it, it got smacked with the "Happiness Report" moniker.
In the first case, you open up a vast field of further questions, qualifications and controls this should have.
a) The answers do not appear to be weighted at all. “Have you donated money to a charity in the past month?” gets a 0-10 score. “Did you experience the following feelings during A LOT
OF THE DAY yesterday? How about Sadness?” gets a 0-10 score. Why is donating to charity related to happiness? I could be happy like a pig in shit and never give anything to anyone because that's simply not part of my character.
b) No accounting for cultural bias. Let's take two extreme stereotypes and pretend they're 100% real. The distant, introverted, reserved Fin and the loud, open, extroverted Greek. Given the exact same quality of life I bet their answers would be wildly different. For any given thing one might be more prone to say "yeah it's fine" the other might be more prone to say "it's completely terrible". One might think a life where all their basic needs are met is pretty great and nothing to complain about, therefore they're happy. The other might associate happiness with active celebration. One might have a "can't complain" mentality, the other might have a "complain constantly about everything" mentality.
Personally I ascribe to the first explanation. It's just a bunch of questions and the report measures the answers to those questions, only to then get labelled as the be-all end-all report on Happiness. The final ranking doesn't really mean anything.
Yep. Every system has inefficiencies at scale, and governments are the worst for a whole slew of reasons, mostly relating to being a common locus of power and being insanely hindered by "Feel good" laws/procedures.
I find it odd that your proposed solution is basically to ignore the positives and introduce irrelevant variables that are not accounted for, and vice versa for the USA. These happiness scores are self-reported so it should disregard diversity by design.
Taking that into account, doesn't it simply imply that smaller countries do perhaps fare better when it comes to welfare, health, and happiness and that the USA may just be a little too large for its own good? Which is then reflected in the overall happiness.
Aside from already measuring per capita, what good does it do to level the playing field further? Countries are different.
As I recall reading about this the last time this survey floated around, the Finns have a different definition of "happiness", leaning closer to balanced contentment than how other folks might interpret it more as a continual state of euphoria.
I'm curious how many they surveyed in each country. My country Australia should be dropping out of top 20 let alone stay in top 10. The rental housing issues are really hitting the headlines every few days.It's literally the biggest issue aside from inflation. And has been for a longtime.
Interesting related article in Axios Why Americans over 60 are so happy. They pull in some extra sources too. There’s the optimistic (old age isn’t that bad, don’t fear growing old) mixed with the more pessimistic (maybe the older generation just got a bigger slice of the pie) to consider.