Happiness
How happy are South Africans? And does it matter?
By Hein Augustyn
I recently came across this essay I wrote at Stellenbosch University where I studied politics and I decided to share it, not only to show off my skills with SPSS, the statistical package for social sciences, a computer program that social scientists can use to generate fascinating statistics to bolster their claims, be they true or not, but also as a testimony to show how far I have changed my mind, how far I have grown since those heady student days when I, as a not so young, but definitely dumb, would-be scholar was inundated by leftist literature along with my fellow learners. At places where I feel it necessary, I will add some now much more mature comments to chastise my younger, stupid, immature, naive self. It goes like this:
Abstract
Happiness or subjective well-being has become increasingly important as a measure of social progress and development. An increasing body of literature is available on the subject with some good suggestions on what governments can do to improve the happiness of their citizens. Yet, very little has been written about happiness in South Arica. This paper takes a broad approach by first looking at a variety of factors which have been found to influence happiness in other countries. It will then compare that to findings in South Africa using data from the World Values Survey. Some factors that are purely of interest to the author have also been included. It is not an exhaustive study, nor is it the final word on the subject. I will conclude by making some suggestions on what government can do to improve the levels of subjective well-being in South Africa, or whether happiness is something that governments, which ultimately consist out of people, should concern themselves with in the first place (spoiler: I now think they should not).
Introduction
The rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are enshrined in the Constitution of the United States of America (USA) and deemed to be inalienable rights given to all human beings by their Creator (The Charters of Freedom, 2015). The authors claim that governments were created to secure these rights.
Some took this to heart. Bhutan is a small country situated in the eastern Himalayas between Tibet to the North and India to the South (Kingdom of Bhutan, 2015). It is also the first country in the world to consider the Gross National Happiness (GNH) of the population to be more important than the Gross National Product (GNP) (Tshering, 2013). Their “four pillars” of GNH consist out of:
1) good governance and democratization,
2) stable and equitable socioeconomic development,
3) environmental protection and
4) the preservation of their culture (Bok, 2010)
— all admirable goals, well within the realm of governance, all admirable goals if you are predominantly a Buddhist culture, with Buddhists who try to obliterate their ego so that they can achieve Nirvana, but if you are a cutthroat capitalist, trying to make it big, that just ain’t gonna cut it. Now that I think about it, equitable socioeconomic development sounds a lot like socialism, socialism which is so similar in form to communism and fascism. Perhaps they should just let free markets work their magic.
Similarly, in 2009, the then French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, proposed including measures of happiness and well-being in the country’s measures of economic progress (Sameul, 2009). That sounds like a great way to expand the already bloated bureaucracy and enlarge the purview of government officials, something that should be avoided in my now much, much more conservative and more mature view.
Correspondingly, the United Nations(UN) whose very name is a lie, since the nations are certainly not united, otherwise there would be no need for the organization, the United Nations, that gathering place of ignominious, leftist loons, which is often dominated not by free countries, but by the worst of the worst, the United Nations that spreads the poison of socialism by any means possible, published its first report on global happiness in 2012 (World Happiness Report, 2015). They called for sustainable development with a balance between economic, social and environmental objectives, since, when societies pursue Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at all costs, overriding environmental and social considerations, the results are often negative for human well-being. I beg to differ. This reflects the growing importance of happiness as a measure of social progress and as a goal of public policy.
Interestingly, far more people consider themselves to be happy and say that they are satisfied with life, than unhappy and dissatisfied (Inglehart, 1997). Happiness levels are also rising in most countries (Inglehart&Welzel, 2005). Not surprisingly, the biggest increase has been in high-income countries. It seems that material well-being and that GDP is important after all.
In contrast, former communist countries are the least likely to experience an increase in happiness. The lowest levels of subjective well-being ever recorded, was in the former Soviet states of Russia, Belarus and Bulgaria, in the year before the governments in all three societies collapsed. A large change in the level of subjective well-being of a society is unusual and might thus indicate that drastic changes are forthcoming (Inglehart, 1997).
Research has shown that subjective well-being rises with increased economic development (Bok, 2012). You don’t say! Inglehart (2000) writes that rich people as a whole, tend to be happier than poor people, and on average, the level of well-being is almost always higher in wealthy countries, than in poorer ones. Who could have predicted that?
Additionally, happiness does show a strong relationship with economic development, but only up to a point (Inglehart, 2000 and Bok, 2010). As societies develop and industrialize, there is a large increase in the overall levels of happiness and life satisfaction. Above a certain level, however, the curve levels off. Above a threshold of $6000 (in 1991 dollars) of Gross National product per capita, there is almost no longer any relationship between wealth and subjective well-being (Inglehart, 1997). Above this point, non-economic aspects such as quality of life, become increasingly more important than a relentless pursuit of economic growth. Ah, but you first have to get there.
Among the advanced industrial societies, there is almost no relationship between income level and subjective well-being any more. Tell that to the poor. The levels of subjective well-being have also stayed more or less constant in the European Union countries, since 1973 (Inglehart, 1997). Well, when was the last time something great came out of the European Union?
This might be because at those levels of income, starvation is no longer a big concern and survival seems more certain. In conditions like that more people with post-materialist values emerge for whom further economic gains, no longer increases subjective well-being. Indeed, for them, further economic growth that is harmful to the environment and detracts from the quality of life, can lead to a decrease in subjective well-being (Inglehart, 1997). That said, Europe is beautiful and there are some magnificent green spaces. They should come and take a look at how the environment gets degraded in some of the poorer countries.
This is part of the modernization process as people in advanced societies move from predominantly materialist values to post-materialist values. As survival becomes more certain with higher levels of income, people tend to place more value on self-expression and quality of life, than on economic and physical security (Inglehart, 2000).
This is based on the idea that a person’s priorities reflect the socioeconomic environment. There is also a time lag, since our basic values are thought to be formed before we become adults and remains relatively stable throughout our life (Inglehart, 1997). Changes in the values of society, thus mainly takes place when the new generation becomes more prominent with the dying off of the old. As the ratio of post-materialists to materialists increase, there is a shift in values towards a more tolerant society with regards to homosexuals and foreigners, more gender equality and an increasing demand for participation in decision-making in political and economic life (World Values Survey, 2015).
Post-materialist values also place a greater emphasis on cultural issues and environmental protection, even if these clash with the relentless drive for more economic growth. It is also characterized by freer sexual norms, less acceptance of rigid religious rules and dogma, and less need and respect for authority and absolute rules (Inglehart, 2000). I, for one, have come to see the value in religious dogma, and have returned to the faith of my forefathers.
But what makes people happy?
A sense of happiness is to a large extent inherited from our parents (Diener& Suh, 2000). Thus some people have a natural predisposition to being generally happy. However, Inglehart et al. (2008) write that happiness is affected at least as much by social and economic factors as by psychology and genes.
Factors other than our inherited temperaments that are associated with happiness (Bok,2010) include:
Moreover, the UN World Happiness report (2015) adds that three-quarters of the differences in happiness among countries can be accounted for by differences in GDP per capita, social support, healthy years of life expectancy, interpersonal trust, perceived freedom and generosity. Incomes, social support and healthy life expectancy are the three most important factors. In South Africa there is so much corruption that interpersonal trust is at a low. People cannot be free without money in their pockets, and the high levels of unemployment, artificially created by the government’s inflexible and racist labor laws are a major obstacle to happiness in South Africa.
Inglehart (1997) concurs that prosperity and also security are conductive to subjective well-being. Citizens in nations with more progressive taxation also reported higher levels of subjective well-being (Oishi&Diener, 2014). That may be so, but it might not lead to the highest levels of prosperity.
Additionally, Tavits (2008) found that people report higher levels of subjective well-being when the political party that they favour is in power and when the government is performing well. When the government is corrupt, however, having the party you favour in power does not improve subjective well-being. Governments can thus have a strong influence on the subjective well-being of their citizens by the way they govern. I am definitely not happy with the way the South African government is performing and their high levels of corruption is a great cause of unhappiness for many. The best thing they can do, is to lose the next elections and let better, more qualified people take the reigns. The Left has been left loose in the country for long enough.
Free choice also has a big impact on happiness according to Inglehart et al. (2008). Increased economic development, democratization and increased levels of social tolerance have increased the extent to which people feel that they have free choice. This has contributed to higher levels of happiness all over the world. Human happiness thus flourishes in conditions of free choice (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005). Like I mentioned before, without money in their pocket, South Africans’ freedom is limited, but luckily they have the free choice to vote the ANC out of power during the next elections. Use it.
Other studies also found that emotional well-being is more strongly associated with free time and use of time, than with just economic conditions (Oishi&Diener, 2014). The unemployed have oodles of free time. I hope they are filling it well. Since I am doing my own thing and not working for someone else, I have found that I use my time much, much more productively. You should do the same.
Interestingly, some studies found that citizens of wealthy nations reported experiencing less meaning in life, than citizens of poorer countries. Richer countries also tend to have a higher suicide rate than poorer countries (Oishi&Diener, 2014). Thus, if we use “meaning in life” as an indicator of subjective well-being, there is an inverse relationship with Gross Domestic Product per capita.
Which are the happiest countries in the world?
Currently Switzerland is ranked as the happiest place on the planet (Boyer, 2015). Incidentally, Switzerland is also the world’s largest consumer of chocolates (McCarthy, 2015). Coincidence? I think not. Switzerland is closely followed by Iceland, Denmark, Norway and Canada — all cold countries. It is, however, not purely a matter of climate, since Russia comes in at 64th, well below warmer countries like Israel, Mexico, Oman and Brazil. The five least happy countries are Togo, Burundi, Syria, Benin and Rwanda, not surprisingly several of them are African countries, south of the Sahara, the poorest, least developed part of the planet.
Just like many countries used to admire the United States of America and other economic powerhouses, many are now looking up to Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland to show the way forward towards a happier future (Oishi&Diener, 2014). But should happiness be our goal? What about greatness? I think greatness is much more important to aspire to than happiness. Happiness seems to me like something an immature person would seek out.
Why should happiness matter to policy-makers?
Some have argued that an ideal society is one whose citizens are happy, satisfied and living meaningful lives (Oishi&Diener, 2014). According to them, all public policy should be aimed at improving the subjective well-being of citizens. Measuring subjective well-being after policies have been implemented helps to see how effective they are and whether societies are progressing towards its ideal. In most countries, however, public policy is not guided by what is best in the interest of the public, but by the interests of certain powerful economic and political groups(Oishi&Diener, 2014). However, everything governments do should be aimed at improving the well-being of their citizens. That is why they exist.
According to Bok (2010), happy people are more likely to be healthy, happily married, work effectively, be civic-minded, tolerant, generous and good citizens. Research also shows that the way to lasting happiness includes performing acts of kindness and civic engagement that are beneficial to the whole of society (Bok, 2010). Happiness is at the top or near the top of most people’s life goals (Bok, 2010). Perhaps individuals know best what can make them happy or if, like me, sometimes they don’t know what will make them happy, perhaps it is best to let people figure that out for themselves. Let people be who and what they are.
Societies with a high level of subjective well-being are more likely to be stable democracies than countries with low levels of subjective well-being (Inglehart, 2000). High levels of subjective well-being seems to play an important role in the survival of democracy. If people feel that life under a certain regime has been good, it enhances support for that regime (Inglehart, 1997). Overall feelings of well-being thus play an important role in legitimizing a regime. I still can’t figure out why the people of South Africa have not voted out the corrupt, racist, Marxist ANC government that have rapaciously looted and destroyed the country.
Before the fall of the Soviet empire, Eastern Bloc countries recorded big falls in levels of subjective well-being. Although no data is available, it is thought that the same happened with the Weimar Republic in Germany whose collapse let to the Nazis coming to power and eventually helped precipitate World War Two (Inglehart, 1997).
When people are unhappy with the politics in their country, they may vote for a different party, but when they are dissatisfied with their lives, they may reject the regime or even the entire political community or the political system, as happened in countries of the Soviet Union (Inglehart, 1997). Thank God they did, but the lesson the West seems to have drawn from the demise of socialism in the East is that what the West needs is more socialism. Although it only rarely happens that levels of dissatisfaction reach such high levels, it is important for governments to monitor the subjective well-being of their populations and to keep the people happy. That is what I wrote at university. I no longer think that. I think governments should respond to the needs of their citizens, insofar as the necessary, and only the necessary services that government provides, but that the happiness of the people should be left to the people themselves.
Surprisingly, several studies have shown that there is no correlation between income inequality and subjective well-being (Oishi&Diener, 2014). Studies in the USA showed, however, that Americans were happier in the years when there was less income inequality, because in those times they felt they could trust people more (Oishi&Diener, 2014). Environmental issues should also be considered, since economic indicators like Gross Domestic Product (GDP), does not take into account the cost of economic activities (Oishi&Diener, 2014). Air pollution, for example, has been found to affect subjective well-being negatively.
One of the problems is that human beings generally do not know what will give them lasting satisfaction (Bok, 2010), and the problem for any democratically elected government is that they cannot stray too far from the wishes of their electorate if they want to stay in power (Bok, 2010). Powerful business lobbies also push their profit-making agendas to the fore, as they should. This can be seen in debates on television and radio where economic policy is almost always portrayed as a choice between capitalism and the discredited alternative of Soviet communism. This ignores the fact that there is a spectrum of choices in between and that some social democracies function very well. Yet, the voice of business is often the strongest in condemning alternatives that would lead to a more equal distribution of wealth in the country. Again, that is what I wrote at university, but I now think that capitalism is the best way to go.
How happy are South Africans?
According to the World Happiness Report for 2015, we are ranked 113th in the world, below war-torn Iraq, Ukraine, the Palestinian Territories, and even below our poor neighbours such as Lesotho and Mozambique. Zimbabwe, with all its economic and social problems, and a tyrannical leader, was ranked at 115th, just two places below South Africa!
Conceptualization and operationalization
Happiness and satisfaction with life has often been used interchangeably and they are closely related (Inglehart et al., 2008). An increase in one variable also tends to lead to an increase in the other and vice versa. For Inglehart (2008) they reflect different yet complimentary sides of “subjective well-being”.
Diener and Scollon (2014) write that happiness has also been used interchangeably with subjective well-being. According to them these terms refer to how people evaluate their lives in feelings and thoughts. It might be about what is going on right now or it might refer to a longer view. There is some debate over the terms, but due to a lack of space I do not want to go into it too deeply. Happiness has been defined as a feeling of joy, contentment or well-being (Vocabulary.com, 2015)
Satisfaction with one’s life is one of the best indicators of subjective well-being (Inglehart, 1997). Over the previous few decades, scientist have been measuring how happy people are, by asking them how satisfied they are with the lives they are leading (“very”, “fairly”, “not at all”, etc.) or by asking them how pleasant or disagreeable they find certain activities throughout the day (Layard, 2010).
Although respondents may not always be forthright or accurate, if it is asked from a large enough sample of people, a fairly accurate picture can be gained of what makes people happy, how intense they experience it, and for how long it lasts (Bok, 2010). This approach is more democratic and from the bottom up, since people are asked directly, instead of using economic figures or other social indicators supplied by some economist or snooty scientist (Oishi&Diener, 2014).
For this study I will use the World Values Survey. It can be argued that the question on there, number V10 refers more to how the respondent is feeling right now as opposed to V23 that takes a longer view. I will take the terms happiness, satisfaction and subjective well-being to all refer to feelings of joy, contentment and well-being, with happiness being how you are feeling right now and satisfaction with your life obviously referring to a longer view.
Several studies that use the World Values Survey to study happiness, uses either the one or the other of the following questions:
V10: “Taking all things together, would you say you are: 1) very happy 2) rather happy 3) not very happy or 4) not at all happy?”
V23: “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days? Using a scale where 1 means you are ‘completely dissatisfied’ and 10 means you are ‘completely satisfied’ where would you put your satisfaction with your life as a whole?”
Inglehart (1997) combines the two factors in a complex calculation to determine the level of subjective well-being: his subjective well-being index reflects the average of the percentage in each country who describe themselves as “very happy” or “happy” minus the percentage who describe themselves as “not very happy” or “unhappy”; and the percentage placing themselves in the 7–10 range, minus the percentage placing themselves in the 1–4 range, on a 10-point scale on which 1 indicates that one is strongly dissatisfied with one’s life as a whole, and 10 indicates that one is highly satisfied with one’s life as a whole. According to him, this is a much more accurate indicator of subjective well-being than using each of its components separately.
I, with the help of Professor C.L. Steenekamp, will construct an index of subjective well-being, using a simpler formula:
I first reverse coded V10 so that 1 means “not at all happy” and 4 means “very happy”. Then I recoded the scale of V23 so that 1 to 3 means “very dissatisfied”, 4 to 5 means “dissatisfied”, 6 to 7 means “satisfied” and 8 to 10 means “very satisfied”. I then combined them in a subjective well-being index which runs from 2 to 8. This, I then recoded so that it reflects a 7 point scale which runs from 1 which means “poor/low subjective well-being” to 7 which means “good/high subjective well-being”. I used this scale as my dependent variable.
South Africa
First of all I will look at overall levels of happiness and subjective well-being in South Africa by doing cross-tabulations. I only reported the percentage of respondents who replied that they are “very happy” and “very satisfied” with their lives. I then used the subjective well-being index (SWB) to compare the mean scores. I did an inferential analysis to test whether a real relationship exists or whether the descriptive results are due to chance.
I traced levels of subjective well-being over time using the consecutive waves of the World Values Survey. Since happiness is linked to democratic governance (Inglehart et al. 2008) I would expect the level of overall happiness to increase after 1994 when South Africa had its first free and inclusive democratic elections.
Perceived Happiness (% very happy):
1982: 27.1% 1990: 27.2% 1996: 41.3% 2001: 43.1% 2006: 47.6% 2014: 40.2%
Satisfaction with life (% very satisfied):
1982: 44.3% 1990: 49.6% 1996: 37.2% 2001: 38.9% 2006: 53.5% 2014: 41.4%
SWB (Mean): 1982: 5.13 1990: 5.00 1996: 4.89 2001: 5.03 2006: 5.45 2014: 5.15
GDP growth % (World Bank, 2015)
1982: -0.4% 1990: -0.3% 1996: 4.3% 2001: 2.7% 2006: 5.6% 2014: 1.4%
(All of this was supposed to be nicely presented in a table, but I could not figure out how to transfer it to Medium).
It seems that after the democratic election in 1994, the percentage of respondents that reported that they are very happy increased considerably. Tongue-in-cheek, the survey was done shortly after South Africa won the Rugby World Cup in 1995, so it is not certain whether success on the rugby field or democratic elections had the highest impact on improved levels of happiness. Conversely, the percentage of respondents who reported that they are very satisfied with their lives decreased considerably in that same year. The overall level of subjective well-being was also at its lowest (4.89) in 1996, despite the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growing at a relatively healthy 4.3%.
The percentage of those reporting to be very happy increased to a high of 47.6% in 2006, before dropping to 40.2% in 2014. This is still higher than the USA (36.2%) and not far below Sweden (42%). Satisfaction with life also peaked with a mean of 5.45 in 2006, before dropping down to 5.15 in 2014.
There seems to be no clear relationship between the growth of GDP and the levels of subjective well-being measured in South Arica. In both 1982 and 1990 the country was experiencing negative economic growth (World Bank, 2015), yet the subjective well-being was higher than in 1996 when the country was growing at 4.3%. That said, the highest level of subjective well-being (5.45) was measured in 2006 when the economy was growing at a healthy 5.6%.
Currently our level of subjective well-being is measured as 5.15, compared to 4.68 in Russia and 5.68 in Brazil, which are some of our partners in BRICS. We also seem to experience higher levels of subjective well-being than our African neighbour Zimbabwe (4.93), but not as high as Nigeria (5.20). Other countries of interest include the USA (5.66) and Sweden with a high score of 5.83.
South Africa: 2014
Zimbabwe: 2011
Gender gap
I was interested in finding out if there was perhaps a gender gap in happiness? In a patriarchal society like South Africa (ENCA, 2013) you might expect that women are unhappier than the males. Or do they accept their lot and find happiness in other ways?
Perceived Happiness (% Very Happy):
Male: 41.2%, Female: 39.2%
Satisfaction with life (% very satisfied):
Male: 41.5%, Female: 41.4%
SWB (Mean):
Male: 5.17, Female: 5.13
41.2% of the male respondents reported that they are very happy, compared to 39.2% of the female respondents. There are thus slightly more males that are very happy as opposed to females. 41.5% of the males reported that they are very satisfied with their lives as opposed to 41.4% of females. There is thus very little difference in satisfaction with life.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for men is 5.17 and 5.13 for women. Thus both men and women experience moderate to high subjective well-being, with men only slightly higher. The median for both men and women is 5, which indicates that the data is positively skewed for both. The standard deviation for men is 1.691 and 1.590 for women; indicating a moderate amount of variation among respondents. However, gender does not have a statistically significant impact on subjective well-being, since the p-value is bigger than 0.05 (.457). From here on I will only report the mean scores of subjective well-being for the sake of brevity. I will also shorten “satisfaction with life” to “satisfaction” and “perceived happiness” to “happiness” in the tables.
Ethnic group
Is there a difference in subjective well-being between the different ethnic groups?
Happy:
Black: 37.7%, White: 58.4%, Coloured: 39.0%, Indian: 40.5%
Satisfaction
Black: 38,5%, White: 62.2%, Coloured 41.3%, Indian: 40.5%
SWB:
Black: 5.04, White: 5.97, Coloured: 5.10, Indian: 5.12
There is also a small, but growing percentage of Asians in South Africa, so perhaps Indian should be changed to Asian, but I used the categories the researchers at the World Values Survey used.
58.4% of White respondents reported that they are very happy as opposed to only 37.7% of Black respondents. The other ethnic groups fall somewhere between these two. Similarly, 62.2% of White respondents reported that they are very satisfied with their lives, as opposed to only 38.5% of Blacks.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for Blacks is 5.04 as opposed to 5.97 for Whites, 5.10 for Coloureds and 5.12 for Indians. All the groups thus seem to report a moderate to high level of subjective well-being, with the Whites being the highest (5.97). Blacks have the lowest mean. Thus, perhaps government should concentrate more on consulting with them and try to find out what they want, in order to improve their level of subjective well-being so that they can catch up with the other ethnic groups. Whites have by far the highest level of subjective well-being.
Ethnicity does impact on the level of subjective well-being as the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .033 which means that only 3.3% of the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by ethnicity.
Marital status
Bok (2010) writes that couples who are married tend to be happier than people who are single, divorced, separated, or living together out of wedlock. Stack and Eshleman (1998) reported similar findings. Married people tend to live longer, are less likely to become depressed and to commit suicide, and they tend to be healthier than people who are single. Marriage seems to improve the immune system and helps people overcome adversity. I would thus expect married South African to be happier than their single compatriots.
Happiness:
Married: 44.1%, Living together: 35.3%, Divorced: 44.6%,
Separated: 42.9%, Widow: 33.5%, Single: 39.1%
Satisfaction:
Married: 47.2%, Living together: 32.9%, Divorced: 44.6%,
Separated: 50%, Widow: 39%, Single: 39.5%
SWB (Mean):
Married: 5.35, Living together: 4.91, Divorced: 5.53,
Separated: 5.21, Widow: 4.94, Single: 5.08
44.1% of Married respondents reported that they are very happy, but contrary to my expectations, an even larger percentage (44.6%) of divorced respondents reported that they are very happy. Surprisingly 39.1% of singles also reported that they are very happy, while only 35.3% of respondents who are living together as married reported to be very happy. Of those who reported that they are very happy, however, 36.6% are married, as opposed to 46.5% who are single. Thus a larger percentage of those who reported to be very happy, are single, as opposed to being married.
Most of the groups seem to be experiencing moderate to high levels of subjective well-being. Interestingly, divorced respondents seem to experience the highest levels of subjective well-being (mean score of 5.53). Perhaps it is a great relief to be free from the shackles of an unhappy marriage. Married respondents have the second highest mean score (5.35) though.
The two groups experiencing the lowest levels of subjective well-being seem to be widows and those living together as married. Relationship status does impact feelings of subjective wellbeing as the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .010 which means that only 1% of the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by marital status.
Employment
This is an easy one. Studies have found that unemployed people are considerably less happy than the employed (Bok, 2010). I would expect employed South Africans to be much happier than the unemployed ones. I recoded variable V229 into employed or unemployed. Those who are retired I took out since I am only interested in those who can and still want to work.
Perceived Happiness:
Employed: 46.8%
Unemployed: 30.8%
Satisfaction with life:
Employed: 47.0%
Unemployed: 32.4%
SWB:
Employed: 5.44
Unemployed: 4.71
Not surprisingly, 46.8% of those who are employed are very happy as opposed to 30.8% of those who are unemployed. 47% of those who are employed are also very satisfied with life as opposed to 32.4% of those who are unemployed.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who are employed is 5.44 and 4.71 for the unemployed. Thus, those who are employed experience higher subjective well-being than those who are not employed.
Employment status does impact feelings of subjective wellbeing as the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .049 which means that only 4.9% of the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by employment status.
Nevertheless, government should make employment a priority. Perhaps the time has come for them to relax some of the strict labour laws that protect the few that are employed, but keep the rest from getting a job. Those who are unemployed in countries with generous unemployment benefits such as France, for example, are considerably happier than those living in nations with less generous unemployment benefits (Oishi&Diener, 2014).
Surprisingly, research has also shown that even employed people were happier in nations that offer generous unemployment benefits (Oishi&Diener, 2014), surprising since they are the ones paying for it. Perhaps they don’t quite understand that. Mental health issues such as depression cost nations a lot in terms of lost work hours as well as health care. Governments would thus do well to take this in consideration when debating unemployment issues and policies(Oishi&Diener, 2014). It is important to create pleasant and fair working environments, something that is sorely lacking in many companies.
Social Class
I would expect respondents of a higher social class to experience higher levels of subjective well-being.
Happy:
Upper class: 76.6%, Upper middle class: 61.7%, Lower middle class: 42.2%,
Working class: 42.6%, Lower class: 28.3%
Satisfaction
Upper class: 71.9%, Upper middle class: 62.3%, Lower middle class: 45.9%,
Working class: 44.1%, Lower class: 29.1%
SWB:
Upper class: 6.37, Upper middle class: 6.03, Lower middle class: 5.44,
Working class: 5.39, Lower class: 4.49
Indeed, 76.6% of those who consider themselves upper class reported that they are very happy, whereas only 28.3% of the lower classes reported the same. Similarly 71.9% of the upper class reported being very satisfied with their lives as opposed to 44.1% of the working class and only 29.1% of the lower class.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who consider themselves to be upper class is 6.37 as opposed to 6.03 for those who consider themselves upper middle class, 5.44 for those who consider themselves lower middle class, 5.39 for those who consider themselves working class and 4.49 for the lower classes.
Social class does impact subjective well-being as the p-value is .000. The Eta Squared is .128 which means that 12.8% in the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by social class as opposed to only 3.3% which can be explained by ethnicity. This could be an indication that government should shift their focus from race to policies that decrease the inequalities between the classes in this country (Seekings, 2008) if they wish to significantly improve the subjective level of well-being of its citizens. That is what I wrote, but I now believe that inequality is necessary, healthy and desirable. If it makes some folks unhappy, so be it.
领英推荐
Religion
This is a controversial topic. Bok (2010) claims that religion provides happiness for many people, mainly based on research carried out in the USA. However, according to Inglehart and Welzel (2005) the USA is an outlier among industrialized countries, since it is very religious, whereas in most developed countries, secularization has taken place and there is a bigger emphasis on post-materialist values. In subsistence societies, survival is uncertain and people have a stronger need to believe in a higher power that will make sure that things turn out well (Norris &Inglehart, 2004). As societies develop, we gain more control over the environment and the strong need for rigid religious dogma and rules fade. Post-materialist values lead to people being freer to choose how they want to live their lives and to more tolerant societies in general.
Since South Africa is considered to be very religious (Kotzé and Steenekamp, 2009), very conservative and not very tolerant, I will look at the relationship between religion and happiness. Even though most South Africans claim to be Christian, they clearly do not live those values, since otherwise there would not be so much corruption, crime, and especially murders. I would argue that, in line with Inglehart’s theory of development (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005), organized religion restricts people’s freedom of choice and it makes people socially less tolerant, since it advocates absolute values. It thus contributes to a less tolerant society and restricts people’s freedom and work against the development of post-materialist values. Although the power of the church is much less than it used to be, it still plays a prominent role in the lives of South Africans. A good example of this is the controversy raging over the debate in the Dutch Reformed Church on whether they should allow gay marriages (Areff, 2015). I don’t think intolerant views do much to improve the subjective well-being and happiness of homosexuals. Inglehart and Welzel (2005) also argue that living in a tolerant society increases happiness for everyone.
Emancipative values, that free us up to be happy, are linked to secular values in rich countries and linked to religious values in low-income countries(Norris &Inglehart, 2004). When existential constraint on human survival lessens, personal deliverance shifts from religious salvation to secular freedom (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005). Both of these are based on human dignity, autonomy and choice. Freedom is based on equality and individual freedom (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005).
Happiness:
Religious people: 40.6%, Not religious: 38.0%, Atheists: 44.8%
Satisfaction:
Religious people: 43.5%, Not religious: 33.4%, Atheists: 39.7%
SWB
Religious people: 5.22, Not religious: 4.88, Atheists: 5.25
40.6% of religious respondents reported that they are very happy, compared to 38.0% of those who are not religious. Surprisingly 44.8% of atheists reported being very happy. Similarly, 43.5% of respondents who are religious reported they are very satisfied with their lives as opposed to 33.4% who are not religious and 39.7% who are atheists.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who are religious is 5.22, compared to 4.88 for those who are not religious and 5.25 for convinced atheists. Thus, surprisingly, atheists seem to have the highest level of subjective well-being, closely followed by religious people.
Those who consider themselves not religious, but also are not convinced atheists, experience the lowest levels of subjective well-being. Perhaps because of all the uncertainty and doubt? Religion may thus be a sure path to salvation in the next life, but it is not necessarily the path to happiness in this one. Perhaps the clearest lesson from this is that you are more likely to be unhappy if you lack the conviction of a convinced atheist or the religious fervour of the true believer. Perhaps this is because those people lack the certainty provided by religious dogma or the clear rejection of it. This could be an interesting subject for further research. I myself am becoming more religious every day, since I have come to value and appreciate it.
Religion does impact subjective well-being as the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .007 which indicates that only .7% of variance in subjective well-being can be explained by whether the respondents consider themselves religious or not.
Tolerance
Does social tolerance have an influence on subjective well-being? Inglehart (2003) has written that in many societies homosexuals are the least liked group. Thus question V40 in the World Values Survey can be reliably used to measure levels of social tolerance in a society. It asks respondents to indicate whether they would mind to have homosexuals as neighbours. If they mentioned yes, I will consider them to be intolerant. I ran a frequency on V40 to see which percentage of respondents are tolerant and intolerant. Then I proceeded as usual.
Happiness:
Tolerant: 41.7%, Intolerant: 37.7%
Satisfaction
Tolerant: 41.9%, Intolerant: 40.7%
SWB
Tolerant: 5.21, Intolerant: 5.06
37.8% of the respondents mentioned homosexuals as people they do not want as neighbours as opposed to 62.8% who did not mention this. Thus about two-thirds of the respondents are tolerant towards homosexuals.
41.7% of those who are tolerant reported being very happy as opposed to 37.7% of those who are intolerant. Similarly, 41.9% of those who are tolerant reported being very satisfied with their lives as opposed to 40.7% of those who are intolerant.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who are tolerant is 5.21, compared to 5.06 for those who are intolerant. Those who are tolerant thus seem to have slightly higher levels of subjective well-being than those who are intolerant.
Tolerance does have an impact on subjective well-being as the p-value is .007. However, the Eta Squared is .002 which indicates that only .2% of variance in subjective well-being can be explained by political tolerance. For the good of society though, it still remains a good policy goal to attempt to improve the levels of tolerance.
Trust
Generalized trust is an important component of a healthy democratic culture (Dalton, 2014). Given the high levels of corruption in the country, I expect to find low levels of trust. I did a cross-tabulation with V24 and a comparison of means.
Happy:
Trust: 33.8%, Don’t trust: 42.1%
Satisfaction
Trust: 23.7%, Don’t trust: 46.8%
SWB
Trust: 4.68, Don’t trust: 5.29
42.1% of those who feel that you have to be careful with other people compared to 33.8% of those who said most people can be trusted. Similarly a large 46.8% of respondents who said you have to be careful with other people felt very satisfied with their lives compared to only 23.7% of those who said most people can be trusted.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who feel you can trust others have a mean score of 4.68, compared to 5.29 for those who feel you have to be careful of other people.
Trust does have an impact on subjective well-being as the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .026 which means that only 2.6% of the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by interpersonal trust. Paradoxically, there thus seems to be an inverted relationship between interpersonal trust and feelings of subjective well-being in South Africa. Strange indeed.
Health
How people feel about their health seems to be closely correlated to happiness (Bok, 2010). How people self-report on their health seems to have a bigger effect on their happiness than medical tests, for example (Bok, 2010). Only a few diseases seem to take a lasting toll on happiness: depression, chronic pain and the onset of a fatal disease like AIDS or cancer affect happiness the most. In a country with one of the highest rates of new HIV/AIDS infections, I would expect health to have a very negative impact on subjective well-being (Malan, 2014).
Happy:
Very good health: 61.7%, Good health: 26.3%,
Fair health: 17.5%, Poor health: 12.3%
Satisfaction:
Very good health: 55.0%, Good Health: 33.7%,
Fair health: 25.6%, Poor health: 17.6%
SWB (Mean)
Very good health: 5.79, Good health: 4.89, Fair health: 4.28, Poor health 3.21
Not surprisingly, 61.7% of those in very good health report that they are very happy. This declines rapidly as only 26.3% who consider themselves to be in good health also reported being very happy. Of those who are in poor health only 12.3% reported being very happy.
Similarly, 55.0% of those who are in very good health report being very satisfied with their lives as opposed to 33.7% of those who consider themselves to be in good health. Only 17.6% of those in poor health reported that they are very satisfied with their lives.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who are in very good health is 5.79, compared to 4.89 for those in good health, 4.28 for those in fair health and 3.21 for those in poor health. As expected, the state of subjective well-being thus decreases as the respondents’ state of health declines.
Subjective state of health does impact subjective well-being as the p-value is .000. The Eta Squared is .166 which means that 16.6% in the variance of subjective well-being can be explained by subjective state of health. Government should thus make the health of citizens a priority. This is an incentive to improve the public health service and to not meddle with the private health sector, because otherwise it will become as bad as the public health services, and South Africans will have nowhere to turn.
Education
Is ignorance bliss or are more educated South Africans happier than those with less education? I recoded V248 to reflect four categories: Those with no formal education, a primary education, a secondary education and those with a tertiary education.
Happy:
None: 29.3%, Primary: 31.4%, Secondary: 40.0%, Tertiary: 56.8%
Satisfaction:
None: 26.3%, Primary: 32.1%, Secondary: 41.6%, Tertiary: 57.1%
SWB:
None: 4.12, Primary: 4.78, Secondary: 5.16, Tertiary: 5.81
Only about a third (29.3%) of those with no education reported being very happy as opposed to 56.8% of those with a tertiary education. Similarly, only 26.3% of those with no education reported being very satisfied with their lives as opposed to 57.1% of those with a tertiary education.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those with no formal education is 4.12, compared to 4.78 for those with a primary education, 5.16 for those with a secondary education and 5,81 for those with a tertiary education. Thus those with a higher education level tend to experience a higher level of subjective well-being. This is probably because of more chances and opportunities in life brought on by their higher levels of education.
Education level does impact feelings of subjective well-being, since the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .032 which means that only 3.2% of the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by educational level.
It shows, however, that government should make education a priority and more accessible to citizens. This ties in nicely with the student protests that are going on across the country in an effort to keep study fees down (Areff, 2015). The quality of education also needs to be improved.
Political Partisanship
Tavits (2008) writes that if the party that you vote for is in power, it increases levels of subjective well-being. If they are corrupt, however, it does not. I would thus expect that those who vote for the African National Congress (ANC) would report higher levels of subjective well-being than the opposition. If not, there might be some corruption killing the mood. I recoded V228 into two groups to reflect the ruling party and the opposition.
Happiness:
Ruling party: 38.2%, Opposition: 44.7%
Satisfaction:
Ruling party: 39.6%, Opposition: 49.3%
SWB:
Ruling party: 5.08, Opposition: 5.37
Only 38.2% of those who said they would vote for the ruling party reported to be very happy as opposed to 44.7% of the opposition. Similarly, 39.6% of ruling party supporters reported that they are very satisfied with life as opposed to 49.3% of the opposition.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who support the ruling party is 5.08, compared to 5.37 for the opposition. Perhaps the ANC supporters are not happy with how their party is performing in government or there might be corruption afoot. Since Tavits (2008) found that corruption impacts negatively on subjective well-being, this might warrant further enquiry. I smell a rat. In fact, I smell several.
Partisanship does impact subjective well-being as the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .006 which means that only 0.6% of the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by political partisanship.
Left/Right Political Scale
Does where you place yourself on the political scale affect your level of subjective well-being? Who are happiest — those on the right or those on the left? I divided that ten-point scale of V95 into two halves which I labelled Left (1–5) and Right (6–10) respectively.
Happy:
Left: 32.8%, Right: 45.7%
Satisfaction:
Left: 33.1%, Right: 46.5%
SWB:
Left: 4.76, Right: 5.42
Surprisingly only 32,8% of those who consider themselves to be on the Left reported being very happy as opposed to 45.7% of those on the Right. Similarly, 33.1% of those on the Left reported being very satisfied as opposed to 46.5% of those on the Right. This is surprising as the government of the day is supposed to be on the Left and I would have expected those on the Right to be unhappier than those on the Left. Perhaps other factors are the reason. I recently heard Dennis Prager, a conservative talk-show host in America, mention that those on the political Left seem to be much unhappier than those on the Right despite the fact that the left-wing Democrats are in control of the country. This might be because of the belief that the world is coming to an end because of Climate change, as well as several left-wing cultural practices, like advocating that women should leave the house and work instead of raising their children, promoting promiscuity, and advocating abortion, which is, after all, a form of murder.
On a seven-point scale, where 1 means low/poor subjective well-being and 7 being high/good subjective well-being, the mean score for those who consider themselves on the Left is 4.76, compared to 5.42 for those on the Right. It thus seems if those on the right are experiencing higher levels of subjective well-being than those on the Left in South Africa. Perhaps the government is not far-Left enough with their policies to satisfy those on the Left or it might be that those on the Right are the haves, while those on the Left are the have nots, or as I like to call them, the doers and the do-nots.
Political orientation does have an impact on subjective well-being as the p-value is .000. However, the Eta Squared is .039 which means that only 3.9% of the variance in subjective well-being can be explained by political orientation.
Conclusion
This study has not being exhaustive, but it does point the way to some interesting research in the future, for example the effect of corruption, age, size of town, rural versus urban habitat, materialist versus post materialist values, the importance of friends and family as well as culture on subjective well-being.
Clearly happiness or subjective well-being is important. Governments would do well to monitor it and to make it a priority, or so I thought when I wrote this paper long ago at university. Now I think that happiness is none of the government’s business and just another excuse for them to expand and poke their noses into people’s lives where it does not belong.
There was clearly a marked increase in the levels of perceived happiness among South Africans after the elections of 1994 and the end of Apartheid. People were hopeful and thought things would go better. Boy, were they wrong.
What could our government do to improve our sense of well-being?
Government should do their best to make the country flourish, to grow economically rich, and the best way to do that is to allow for free markets.
Other than that?
Nothing or as little as possible, you dolts. Stay out of our lives. Government should be kept to a minimum. Protect us against foreign invaders, protect us against crimes, and protect us against the potholes in our roads, make sure that we have sufficient, clean, running water, and electricity a hundred percent of the time. Other than that?
Maybe a minimum level of welfare, a warm plate of food and a place to sleep for the homeless at a token fee. Help them find work. That is best done by freeing up the private sector and, in the words of the great British statesman Winston Churchill, letting money fructify in the pockets of the people.
Government should focus on economic growth — up to a point. I wrote “up to a point” at university, but now I think governments should focus on economic growth. I do not think climate change is an existential threat, but rather a cynical lie by the Left to usher in Socialism. That said, taking better care of the environment should also be a priority. Protecting the endangered African wildlife, such as Rhinos and other endangered species should be a priority, since it is not done as effectively as it could and they are wonderful assets that can draw tourists from all over the globe to stimulate the economy and infuse it with their moolah.
Generous unemployment benefits and higher employment rates should be policy priorities, I wrote in my naivete. Now I think, government should forget about the unemployment benefits and focus on higher employment rates — let the free market work its magic. Getting rid of rigid labour laws would be a good start, nay, not only a good start, but essential. Progressive taxation is also important, I thought back then (Oishi&Diener, 2014), but now I am more partial to a flat low rate.
Bok (2010) advocates programs to strengthen marriage and family and active leisure pursuits. Along with better unemployment insurance, universal health care, improved pre-school education, effective treatment of mental disorders and chronic pain, and an education policy that aims at more than just turning out good little “worker-bees”, but also good citizens. But that is in a rich industrialized country like the USA. He is effectively advocating for the “nanny-state.” It will not be the government who pays for all these lavish benefits, but the tax-payer, who might want to spend their hard-earned money in other ways. So no, now that I am slightly older I disagree strongly with Mr. Bok and my younger, stupid self.
To that I would add, more effective crime fighting. South Africa is plagued by crime and corruption should also be limited and eradicated as far as possible. Government officials should be held accountable for their crimes, something that is sorely lacking in this banana republic on the southern tip of Africa.
Government should improve the public healthcare system since perceived status of health has such a strong impact on subjective well-being, but since they mess up whatever they touch, they should stay far, far away from the private health care. Otherwise that will sink to the same level as the public one, which means that health-care will all but cease to exist, and then you will see how unhappy people can be.
Since education level has also been shown to impact strongly on subjective well-being, government should make it as accessible as possible and improve the education that they do give. It has gotten so bad that students in the final year of middle-school need adults to read their questionnaires for them and if they don’t understand something these adults need to assist them. My generation, not the greatest generation by any stretch of the imagination, never had need of such aid, and the education system is rotten from the bottom all the way up to the top, even the universities. I, for one, feel so dissatisfied with my university education, even though I completed a Master’s degree and only opted out of doing a doctorate because I have no wish to go into academics, that I am supplementing my education with additional courses, left, right, and center, in an effort to become a more rounded, better-educated person with the kind of education I expected to get from a liberal arts college in the first place.
The best way to develop the people of a country is through education (Todaro& Smith, 2006). Amen to that, you two. This goes hand in hand with health. These two factors work in a reciprocal way, in that people who are more educated tend to be healthier, since they make better lifestyle choices that impact on their health. They are also more likely to have a better paying job, so that they will be able to take better care of themselves and their dependents. In a similar way, healthy people can concentrate better, learn easier and are more likely to succeed in their educational endeavours. It’s like a beautiful, virtuous circle. My textbook on development economics touted these two factors, education and health, as the two magical drivers of human development. I would add motivation, drive, and sheer, bloody-minded guts and grit to that.
Perhaps the strongest lesson from this paper is that the South African government should move beyond race and instead focus on policies that decrease the inequality between the classes, since class was shown to have a much stronger impact on subjective well-being than ethnicity. That is what I wrote in my silliness back then. I was such a silly billy. Over time I have come to realize that the only way to decrease the inequality between the classes is to cut down the best, the doers, the movers and the shakers that any society needs if it is to flourish — a very communist, socialist, fascist, dictatorial and tyrannical thing to do. So no, let there be inequality, let those who do best and deserve it, flourish and let merit rule.
That said, Blacks seem to manifest the lowest levels of subjective well-being. Government should thus consult with them to attend to their specific grievances so that their well-being can increase and thus push up the average for the country. However, This should not happen at the cost of equal rights for all the citizens under the law. In fact, I think governments should stay out of the happiness business, let their citizens be people, and let them figure out how to be happy for themselves.
In my view, the best the government can do to increase the happiness of South Africans is to create the conditions that allow the economy to flourish. After learning much more about economics, I have come to agree with Dr. Arthur Laffer, a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the economic consultant to President Ronald Reagan, the American president who presided over the most prosperous time in American history, that the five pillars of a prosperous country are:
o a low rate, broad-based, flat tax.
o spending restraint on the government.
o sound money.
o minimal regulations.
o free trade.
Once you go beyond the one-sided, leftist-infused economics taught at universities, the economics of Joseph Stiglitz and company, once you read Adam Smith, Hayek, and Ayn Rand, you start to question what you’ve been taught. I want to expound on that, but that is best left for another essay. Nevertheless, any government would do well to learn from Dr. Arthur Lafer and his ilk. The proof is in the pudding.
These suggestions are nothing new, but they can now be shown to have a definite impact on subjective well-being through statistical analysis. The subjective well-being of South African is something that the ANC government will ignore at their peril.
Let’s hope the people of South Africa vote them out soon. I hope this essay shows off my prowess with SPSS and statistics, because I really fell in love with it when I saw what it can do, and I hope it shows how far I have grown, because otherwise, what would be the point of education?
If you like what you just read, please follow me on Medium and share this with your friends. If you did not, I thank you for reading this far and I hope you will like my next post.
Thank you.
Bibliography
Areff, A. (2015). News24: Dutch Reformed Church disobeys Christ on gay marriage — Christian group. [Online] Available from: https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Dutch-Reformed-Church-disobeys-Christ-on-gay-marriage-Christian-group-20151012 . [Accessed: 10th of November 2015].
Areff, A. (2015). Times live: Students protest against fee hikes across South Africa. [Online] Available from: https://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2015/10/20/Students-protest-against-fee-hikes-across-South-Africa. [Accessed: 15th of November 2015].
Bok, D. (2010).The politics of happiness: What governments can learn from the new research on happiness. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Boyer, L. (2015). US News: These Are the 20 Happiest Countries in the World. [Online] Available from: https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/04/24/world-happiness-report-ranks-worlds-happiest-countries-of-2015 . [Accessed: 5th of November 2015].
Dalton, R.J. (2014) Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, 6th Edition. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Diener, E. and Scollon, C. N. (2014). The what, why, when, and how of teaching the science of subjective well-being. Teaching of Psychology. Vol. 41 (2). Pp. 175–183.
Diener, E. and Suh, E. M. (eds.) (2000). Culture and subjective well-being. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
ENCA. (2013).Patriarchal system holds women back. [Online] Available from: https://www.enca.com/south-africa/patriarchal-system-hold-women-back . [Accessed: 23rd of November 2014].
Inglehart, R. (2000). Globalization and postmodern values. The Washington Quarterly.Vol. 23 (1), pp. 215–228
Inglehart, R. (2003). How Solid is Mass Support for Democracy — and How Can We Measure It? [Online] Available from: https://folk.uio.no/berasch/Inglehart-PS.pdf . [Accessed: 22nd of November 2015].
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press
Inglehart, R., Foa, R., Peterson, and Welzel, C. (2008). Development, Freedom, and rising happiness. Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 3 (4). Pp. 264–285.
Inglehart, R. and Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change and democracy: The human development sequence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kingdom of Buthan (2015). [Online] Available from: https://www.kingdomofbhutan.com/kingdom/kingdom_1.html . [Accessed: 5th of November 2015].
Kotzé, H. and Steenekamp. C.L. (2009). Values and democracy in South Africa: Comparing elite and public values. [Online] Available from: https://sun025.sun.ac.za/portal/page/portal/Arts/Departments/political_science/docs/Tab/ValuesFinal2.pdf . [Accessed: 22nd of November 2015].
Layard, R. (2010) Measuring subjective well-being. [Online] Available from: https://www.sciencemag.org/content/327/5965/534 . [Accessed: 22nd of November 2015].
Malan, M. (2014). SA has highest number of new HIV infections worldwide — survey. Mail and Guardian.[Online]. Available from: https://mg.co.za/article/2014-04-01-sa-holds-highest-number-of-new-hiv-infections-worldwide-survey . [Accessed: 23rd of November 2015].
McCarthy, N. (2015).Forbes: The World’s Biggest Chocolate Consumers[Online]Available from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2015/07/22/the-worlds-biggest-chocolate-consumers-infographic/ . [Accessed: 5th of November 2015].
Norris, P. and Inglehart, R. (2004). Sacred and secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oishi, S. and Diener, E. (2014). Can and should happiness be a policy goal?. Policy insights from the behavioural and brain sciences. [Online] Available from: https://bbs.sagepub.com/content/1/1/195.abstract . [Accessed: the 12th of November 2015].
Sameul, H. (2009). The Telegraph: Nicolas Sarkozy wants to measure economic success in ‘happiness’.[Online] Available from: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/6189530/Nicolas-Sarkozy-wants-to-measure-economic-success-in-happiness.html . [Accessed: 9th of November 2015].
Seekings, J. (2008). The continuing salience of race: Discrimination and diversity in South Africa. Journal of contemporary African studies. Vol. 26 (1). Pp. 1–25.
Stack, S. and J.R. Eshleman (1998). Marital status and happiness: a 17-nation study. Journal of Marriage and the Family. Vol 60. Pp. 527–536.
Tavits, M. (2008). Representation, corruption, and subjective well-being. Comparative Political Studies. Vol. 41 (12). Pp. 1607–1630.
The Charters of Freedom. (2015).Declaration of independence. [Online] Available from: https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html . [Accessed: 9th of November 2015].
Todaro, P. and Smith, S. C. (2006). Economic Development: 6th edition. Harlow: Pearston Education Limited.
Tshering, G. (2013).The Bhutanese Guide to Happiness: Words of Wisdom from the World’s Happiest Nation. Sydney: Hachette Australia Pty. Limited.
Vocabulary.com (2015). Happiness. [Online] Available from: https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/happiness . [Accessed: the 22nd of November 2015].
World Bank (2015).Public data[Online] Available from: https://www.google.co.za/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&idim=country:ZAF:AUS:NZL&hl=en&dl=en . [Accessed: the 21st of November 2015]
World Happiness Report (2015). World Happiness Report 2015. [Online] Available from: https://worldhappiness.report/ . [Accessed: 5th of November 2015].
World Values Survey (2015). Findings and insights. [Online] Available from: https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSContents.jsp . [Accessed: 5th of November 2015].