Read the 1st two paragraphs on the origin of GNH at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_national_happiness
and watch a short 8’38’’ video on "Happiness in Bhutan" at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/4782636.stm
Other useful references:
1)http://tutor2u.net/economics/content/topics/livingstandards/measuring_sol.htm
2)http://www.bized.co.uk/virtual/dc/copper/theory/th11.htm
3) http://www.bized.co.uk/virtual/dc/farming/theory/th3.htm
You should then be able to engage your friends and respond to the following question:
1) Discuss whether Gross National Happiness is a good measure of living standards..
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
GNH measures the general well-being, or happiness of people, while GDP measures the economic well-being of the people. In some areas GDP and GNH are actually conflicting as in the case of external costs, cutting down a forest could bring more economic gains as trees can be sold as timber but there are also externalities such as release of large amount of C02 which could lead to global warming and eventually affect human happiness. I think that living standards should include both GNH and GDP so that GNH can offset the increase in GDP that are good economically but detrimental to human happiness.
ReplyDeleteBhutan is one of the least developed countries among Haiti and Bangladesh yet it is one of the happiest nations in the world. A country that is not developed with low GDP may not be happy because of the problems that poverty etc. brings. But living standards are subjective as a country with high GDP may not be happy since they are constantly pushing themselves to work harder; so how high a country's SOL is is actually dependent on the people themselves, whether they are contented.
Therefore, as GDP is inaccurate to be the measures of living standards, GNH should be included.
I do agree that the Gross National Happiness is one of the gauges we can use to see the development in the standard of living, however we should take note that the definitions of standard of living does not necessarily include the amount of happiness each person feels, it is how much material wealth each person has and alternatively, the quality of life. But happiness being intangible is subjective and is hard to place a value on. Moreover, what one person thinks will make her happy might not make another happy. Hence this is an index that can be used, but to judge how much civilisation has developed holistically, and not as a gauge of whether standards of living have changed, because they might not have any direct correlation with each other.
ReplyDeleteGNH is used to gauge standard of living and quality of service and goods that people from a certain society receive. E.g the number of patients that one doctor attends to. GNH is measured using real national income per capita. However it is not accurate indicator because a government is able to twist the definition of GNH into a way that suits the interest of the country. Thus, there is a need to take the level of GNH with a pinch of salt, and cross refer with other indicators such as Human Developemet Index ( HDI ), Human Poverty Index or Human Suffering Index. Also, happiness cannot be measured directly, people in poor countries can be content with life and be happy, while people living in wealthy countries can be dissatisfied with life and be unhappy.
ReplyDeleteGNH is an indicator of the psychological aspect of people's SOL.It generally measures how happy people feel about their current situation. However, it doesn't necessarily reflect how well people's material needs are met. For example, people in Bhutan feel much happier than people in certain more developed countries. Yet they do not enjoy as high level of material satisfaction as well as healthcare as their contemporaries in the more developed countries. In fact, the economic growth in Bhutan is much slower than other countries.
ReplyDeleteThough happiness of people is one of the final objectives of social, economic and political development, other things like national income should also be considered when formulating policies. This is to ensure there is economic foundation for future happiness of the people. This is because it is more unlikely for people who live in slums to feel happy than people who live in apartments. Hence, we should not merely consider short-run happiness but also need to think about the future.
In addition, it is hard to quantify value of happiness in terms of money as happiness is intangible. Hence we need more tangible indices such as GDP to complement GNH. Furthermore, what makes one person happy may not make another person happy. Thus it is difficult for policymakers to decide what can produce the most amount of happiness among the population. Therefore, indices like GDP can play roles of gauges when making policies.
oh no! my name got problem when being shown!! =[ anw my id is "m&m" fyi.
ReplyDeleteGNH is a very useful tool when it comes to measuring the 'happiness' of the people in a country. Although some people may disagree and say that one man's happiness cannot be measured or quantified, the GNH can provide a good gauge as to the standard of living(SOL) and quality of life that people from a certain society receive. It can also serve as a means to compare the happiness between countries. Although the GNH is not internationally recognized as an indicator of happiness, the people of Bhutan seems to believe in it very strongly. The reason for this is because, while most countries are using GDP to measure the happiness of its people, the GDP itself has many flaws in indicating the true level of happiness of the people. For a start, the GDP measures the amount of commerce in a country, and not the level of happiness of its people. It counts remedial and defensive expenditures (such as military costs and cleaning up of pollution costs etc.) as positive contributions to commerce. However, does these contributions really increase the level of happiness in its people? To take military costs as an example, military costs may instill a sense of homeliness and reassurance to the people, but in real, this hardly makes an individual more happier. To accurately measure the economic well-being of a country, such costs have to be deducted and other non-market benefits (such as volunteering and physiological support)should be added in, as they are also important indicators of the level of happiness of the people.
ReplyDeleteThe Bhutanist government hence came up with the concept of GNH, as an indicator of the level of happiness of its people. The Centre for Bhutan Studies constructed a single number index for Gross National Happiness that can be broken down into individual component indicators that are useful for different sectors for planning and technical purposes at the ministerial and departmental levels. Through this system, the Bhutan government then made many changes in its policies and laws, in an attempt to makes its people happier. Although GNH is a complex concept and ideal, its practical implication in making the people of Bhutan more happier seems to be very unconventional and completely different from that of most other countries. It focuses more on the social well-being of its people than the financial well-being of its people. To conclude, I think that while the GNH is a better indicator of happiness than the GDP, what it really comes down to at the end of the day, is still really what makes a person happy?
I feel that for a good measure of living standards, both Gross National Product (GDP) and Gross National Happiness (GNH) should be used. A balance should be struck between using GDP and GNH. Firstly, real GDP per capita reflects the amount of goods and services available for consumption per head. When there is an increase in real GDP per capita, this means that there is a greater amount of goods and services available for people's consumption, resulting in an improvement in standard of living and hence, economic growth. However, by using real GDP per capita to measure standard of living, this may seem like progress is measured against mere economic transactions, rather than in a holistic and social manner. Besides, a growth in real GDP does not mean that economic development is taking place, although economic growth is taking place. Standard of living should be measured by both economic growth as well as economic development. Economic development includes improvements in literacy rates, poverty rates etc, which are the more social aspects. Hence, to measure economic development, GNH can then play a part to measure the social and psychological well-being of people in countries. Bhutan, which is the only country to consider GNH, has banned tobacco, plastic bags, TV channels such as MTV, on the grounds that this will hinder GNH. Even though this may have resulted in economic development, with say the increase in educational level of Bhutanese, as students are now able to concentrate on homework without watching MTV, however, people are less well off financially than they could have been. Hence, this is where real GDP has to be taken into consideration as well, so as to ensure that the real national output does increase, resulting in economic growth and people to be better off financially.
ReplyDeleteZTY said...
ReplyDeleteIt is undeniable that GNH is a good indicator of the standard of living of people as it reflects how happy or satisfied a person is. However, it cannot solely measure the quality of life of people since psychological satisfaction alone is not enough for a high quality of life, financial capability plays an important role as well. This is why GDP must still be used as a gauge to measure the progress of a country. The people in the richest countries may not be the happiest ones, but those living in poor countries are generally not happy since they have to struggle to eke out a living. Thus I personally feel that GDP and GNH are complementary and both of them should be used to measure the standard of living of people in a country.
GDP measures the economic development of a country, however, it has its limitations as well. For example, it only measures the actual increase of national output but fail to consider the rising cost of living and inflation. GNH also has its own limitations. For instance, it measures the psychological well-being of a person which is not enough to indicate the progress of a country, economic progress is crucial as well. Therefore, it is obvious that neither of them alone is sufficient to reflect the development of a country, we need to consider both of them to gauge a country's progress.
GNH is a better indicator of national income statistics as compared to GDP. As the old saying goes, 'Money makes the world go round', seen in everyone's pursuit for happiness in money. However, in an increasingly globalised and competitive world, does money really bring us the happiness we need? For example, a multi-millionaire works long hours in the office and this sacrifices leisure time for relaxing and basically enjoying one's life. This in turn will make the person not satisifed in his job and life, hence reducing the standard of living. He may also be suffering from high levels of stress in work and at home and this will lead to the development of diseases in the future. Does money really bring us happiness? In Bhutan, GNH is one of the highest in the world and it is a clear indication that money is not necessary in making one happy. GDP also does not take into account negative externalities, as there may even be an increase in GDP to the extra costs incurred in clearing up forests! With climate change from global warming due to the effects of deforestation, how can one be living in a place of high standards with constant rain? Hence, GNH is a more accurate indicator as compared to GDP.
ReplyDeleteGNH is a better indicator of SOL as compared to GDP. As GDP only measures the consumption of the people and an assumption that high consumption equals to high standard of living is being made here. However, a high GDP may mean that government is expenditure is high. take for example US. the government spends a large percentage of its GDP on defence which does not really increase the SOL of the country. moreover, GDP does not take into account negative externalities which affects the welfare of the people. moreover, GDP also does not show the inflation and unemployment rate of the country which also determines the SOL.
ReplyDeleteI feel the GNH should be used hand in hand with GDP to get a more accurate picture of the SOL of a country
I feel that GNP is a good indicator as it measures the level of sastifaction the people have in their country. This is important as the GDP cannot display this. The GDP is affected by the more wealthy people in the country, hence a country with high GDP may still have poorer people, with low SOL and are unhappy about it. However with GNH, the happiness level of the country would directly imply the SOL of the citizens. More a more accurate estimate of SOL, both the GDP and GNH should be used together.
ReplyDeleteAt present, to measure the standard of living in a country, we use real national income per capital (divide GDP by total population). However, this may not be accurate as the goods produced in a country may be exported to other countries, so the locals may not get to consume it. A more accurate way of measuring standard of living in a country, in my opinion, should be a combination of measuring both Gross National Happiness and GDP per capita. This is because GNH takes into other factors such as the well being of the people, the level of happiness etc. Standard of living should not just focus on the money aspect because having lots of money does not equate to happiness.
ReplyDeleteGNH is a holistic indicator that balances the material with the spiritual for the benefit of the greater society. I believe that GNH is a good indicator of the standard of living of people in a counry. While there are currently many using GDP related indicators such as monetary exchange rates and economic growth to determine the standard of living of people, GDP merely reflects the quantity and quality of the output of a country. Therefore by using GDP to gauge and measure the standard of living of people might be inaccutate as GDP is higly biased towards the production and consumption in a society. This does not take into consideration how much the people need these goods and services and how much they want them. Thus, GDP does not measure the well-being of people but it measures the total sum of the monetary value of market transactions.
ReplyDeleteGNH is the main indicator in showing one's happiness level from how much one enjoys a good quality of life and standard of living. This is a good approach to try and quantify the psychological aspect of nation's population instead of using GDP. Though the GDP can tell us how well developed a country is, it is unable to tell us how well a quality of life the nation's people are enjoying.
ReplyDeleteHowever, using the GNH is limited as it takes into account one's emotional and mental status at that point. This may make the GNH prone to fluctuations in one's mood. For example, an external event, such as a car breakdown, could agitate one for the time being, making the test that he or she is doing biased as feelings will come into the picture.
To counter this, perhaps a large sample could be taken to ensure a wide spread of data and allow the computing team to have a better and more accurate picture of that country's quality of life.
Basically, Gross National Happiness (GNH) attempts to measure quality of life/social progress in more holistic and pyschological term as compared to GDP or GNP which really, in hindsight, just measures the ECONOMIC VALUE of the consumption and/or output of the country in terms of goods and services. It fails to measures how much TRUE benefits are actually derived from these goods and services as well as other intangible but significant costs (that would affect SOL) such as loss of spiritual well-being, noise, a less gracious society, pollution...etc In this case, GNH would cover the areas GDP does not cover and when used together, can provide a better judgement on a country's SOL.
ReplyDeleteBut one drawback about GNH is that "happiness" is a very subjective term/yardstick as compared to pure economic transactions like in GDP and hence, GNH will be very hard to measure (perhaps incurring high administrative costs) and might be rather inaccurate. This might very well be the reason why GNH has not been given much recognition as compared to the widely used GDP / GNP indicators.
However, it is still a useful tool that can be cross-referenced to GDP to have a rough gauge how economic/tangible transactions/growth have translated to actually benefitting the people and improving their SOLs.
GDP per capita is currently used to measure a country's standard of living. This takes into account the goods produced in the country which are exported out and not consumed by the domestic market. Thus making it an inaccurate measure of the SOL. GNH is a good indicator of SOL as it takes into account the people's welfare. However, it is difficult to place a value on "happiness" as it is subjective. What is deemed to make a one person happy may not have the same on someone else.
ReplyDeleteHence, I feel that to get a more accurate SOL, both GDP and GNH should be used.
GDP per capita can be used to some extent, reflect the living standards of people in the country since it measures consumer's expenditure in the expenditure approach. SOL is defined as the availability of goods and services to citizens in the country, hence the C portion of calculating national income does capture SOL. However, some other components like government expenditure and net exports might actually distort the value of GDP if we are considering SOL, since exports are goods and services made available to foreigners, and government expenditure, which includes military spending and cleaning up costs on top of improving infrastructure and upgrading skills. If military spending is sustantial, then the GDP per capita would be inaccurate in measuring SOL as no goods and services were made available in this spending. This is especially so in a closed economy like North Korea.
ReplyDeleteGNH, on the other hand, measures living standards in a whole new way outside of just goods and services. It includes other social standards such as the crime rate, infant mortality, life expectancy, sanitation facilities. This is what psychologists are more concerned about, i.e the general "happiness" of the citizen, and not just whether their material wants are satisfied. In reality, governments should consider this holistic view of "happiness" when implementing policies to really achieve development. Hence GDP per capita should be used in tandem with other more holistic indices like HDI, GNH to push a country to more than just economic growth.
Cyberwee said ...
ReplyDeleteStandard of Living can be determined in 2 ways: Societal and personal.
Societal: Indicators of development such as GDP/capita, Literacy rate, Life expectancy, focus on tertiary/quaternary industries
(Reflects how developed and advanced a country is, neglecting the feelings and emotions of the people)
Personal: GNH, society can be advanced yet the people may not be happy due to stress, hectic pace of living, and other factors. (This, however, may not determine the advancement of a country. Morever, GNH may be biased and is not easy to measure accurately)
The best indicator would be one that takes into consideration both societal and personal effects. As such, both hard and soft factors are addressed.