IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/cepdps/dp2048.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Easterlin paradox at 50

Author

Listed:
  • Ekaterina Oparina
  • Andrew E. Clark
  • Richard Layard

Abstract

We use Gallup World Poll data from over 150 countries from 2009-2019 at both the individual and country levels to revisit the relationship between income and subjective wellbeing. Our inspiration is the paradox first proposed by Easterlin (1974), according to which higher incomes are associated with greater happiness in cross-sections yet increases in a country's GDP per head do not increase its average wellbeing. In our analysis subjective wellbeing (or happiness) is measured by the Cantril ladder on a 0-10 scale. Across individuals, other things equal, one unit of log income raises subjective wellbeing by 0.4 points. In other words, doubling income raises wellbeing by 0.3 points out of 10. Across countries, a crude regression of log income on per capita income gives a higher coefficient of 0.6. But, once social variables like health and social support are introduced, the picture changes. In rich countries, income no longer has a significant effect, either in country cross-sections or in time series: higher income only matters due to its correlation with the social variables. For low-income countries the result is also clear cut - income raises happiness in both cross-section and time series, whether the social variables are controlled for or not. For middle income countries the result is mixed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ekaterina Oparina & Andrew E. Clark & Richard Layard, 2024. "The Easterlin paradox at 50," CEP Discussion Papers dp2048, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  • Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp2048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp2048.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel W. Sacks & Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Subjective Well-Being, Income, Economic Development and Growth," NBER Working Papers 16441, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Angus Deaton, 2008. "Income, Health, and Well-Being around the World: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll," Working Papers 1124, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Health and Wellbeing..
    3. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & Richard Layard, 2023. "Wellbeing: science and policy," CentrePiece - The magazine for economic performance 656, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. John F. Helliwell & Robert D. Putnam, 1995. "Economic Growth and Social Capital in Italy," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 295-307, Summer.
    5. Andrew E. Clark & Paul Frijters & Michael A. Shields, 2008. "Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(1), pages 95-144, March.
    6. Ekaterina Oparina & Sorawoot Srisuma, 2022. "Analyzing Subjective Well-Being Data with Misclassification," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 730-743, April.
    7. Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson & James A. Robinson, 2001. "The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1369-1401, December.
    8. Angus Deaton, 2008. "Income, Health, and Well-Being around the World: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 53-72, Spring.
    9. Clark, Andrew E. & Oswald, Andrew J., 1996. "Satisfaction and comparison income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 359-381, September.
    10. Jakob Svensson, 2005. "Eight Questions about Corruption," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(3), pages 19-42, Summer.
    11. Bartolini, Stefano & Sarracino, Francesco, 2014. "Happy for how long? How social capital and economic growth relate to happiness over time," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 242-256.
    12. Easterlin, Richard A. & O'Connor, Kelsey J., 2020. "The Easterlin Paradox," IZA Discussion Papers 13923, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Barr, Nicholas, 2004. "Economics of the Welfare State," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 4, number 9780199264971, Decembrie.
    14. David G. Blanchflower, 2021. "Is happiness U-shaped everywhere? Age and subjective well-being in 145 countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(2), pages 575-624, April.
    15. Treisman, Daniel, 2000. "The causes of corruption: a cross-national study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 399-457, June.
    16. Easterlin, Richard A., 1974. "Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence," MPRA Paper 111773, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Paolo Mauro, 1995. "Corruption and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 681-712.
    18. Caspar F. Kaiser & Maarten C. M. Vendrik, 2019. "Different Versions of the Easterlin Paradox: New Evidence for European Countries," Springer Books, in: Mariano Rojas (ed.), The Economics of Happiness, chapter 0, pages 27-55, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Oparina, Ekaterina & Clark, Andrew E. & Layard, Richard, 2024. "The Easterlin paradox at 50," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126798, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Mikucka, Malgorzata & Sarracino, Francesco, 2014. "Making economic growth and well-being compatible: the role of trust and income inequality," MPRA Paper 59695, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Duha T. Altindag & Junyue Xu, 2017. "Life Satisfaction and Preferences over Economic Growth and Institutional Quality," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 100-121, March.
    4. Proto, Eugenio & Rustichini, Aldo, 2012. "Life Satisfaction, Household Income and Personality Traits," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 86, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    5. Stefano Bartolini & Francesco Sarracino, 2014. "It's not the economy, stupid! How social capital and GDP relate to happiness over time," Papers 1411.2138, arXiv.org.
    6. BARTOLINI Stefano & SARRACINO Francesco, 2011. "Happy for How Long? How Social Capital and GDP relate to Happiness over Time," LISER Working Paper Series 2011-60, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER).
    7. Proto, Eugenio & Rustichini, Aldo, 2015. "Life satisfaction, income and personality," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 17-32.
    8. Mikucka, Malgorzata & Sarracino, Francesco & Dubrow, Joshua K., 2017. "When Does Economic Growth Improve Life Satisfaction? Multilevel Analysis of the Roles of Social Trust and Income Inequality in 46 Countries, 1981–2012," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 447-459.
    9. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & George Ward & Femke De Keulenaer & Bert Van Landeghem & Georgios Kavetsos & Michael I. Norton, 2018. "The Asymmetric Experience of Positive and Negative Economic Growth: Global Evidence Using Subjective Well-Being Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(2), pages 362-375, May.
    10. Zhang, Yinjunjie & Xu, Zhicheng Phil & Palma, Marco A., 2017. "Misclassification Errors of Subjective Well-being: A New Approach to Mapping Happiness," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258553, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Barrington-Leigh, C.P., 2024. "The econometrics of happiness: Are we underestimating the returns to education and income?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    12. Bahadır Dursun & Resul Cesur, 2016. "Transforming lives: the impact of compulsory schooling on hope and happiness," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 911-956, July.
    13. Eugenio Proto & Aldo Rustichini, 2012. "Life Satisfaction, Household Income and Personality Theory," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 453, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    14. Ozan Eksi & Neslihan Kaya, 2017. "Life Satisfaction and Keeping Up with Other Countries," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 199-228, February.
    15. Sun Youn Lee & Fumio Ohtake, 2021. "How Conscious Are You of Others? Further Evidence on Relative Income and Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 3321-3356, December.
    16. Thomas Markussen & Maria Fibæk & Finn Tarp & Nguyen Do Anh Tuan, 2018. "The Happy Farmer: Self-Employment and Subjective Well-Being in Rural Vietnam," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 1613-1636, August.
    17. Cai, Shu & Park, Albert, 2016. "Permanent income and subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 298-319.
    18. Antje Mertens & Miriam Beblo, 2016. "Self-Reported Satisfaction and the Economic Crisis of 2007–2010: Or How People in the UK and Germany Perceive a Severe Cyclical Downturn," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 537-565, January.
    19. Nicholas Otis, 2017. "Subjective Well-Being in China: Associations with Absolute, Relative, and Perceived Economic Circumstances," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 885-905, June.
    20. Tobias Pfaff & Johannes Hirata, 2013. "Testing the Easterlin Hypothesis with Panel Data: The Dynamic Relationship between Life Satisfaction and Economic Growth in Germany and the UK," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 554, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    subjective wellbeing; income; GDP; Easterlin paradox; public goods;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp2048. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/discussion-papers/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.