Improving Wellbeing Should Be Our Global Priority

This post is written by Mark Williamson, Director of Action for Happiness*. This blog is  part of the Wikiprogress Series on Subjective Well-being. 

People's daily experiences and concerns differ enormously around the world. While a farmer in Angola prays for a good harvest, a manager in Greece worries about losing her job. And while a mother in Egypt comes to terms with life in a conflict zone, a doctor in Denmark struggles with work-related stress.

But there is one thing that unites people's experiences in every country: they all involve human beings who want their experience of life to be good rather than bad. We share a universal desire for wellbeing. This is more than just a survival instinct; we want to be happy and have the best possible lives for ourselves and those we love.

Whether we're aiming to alleviate poverty in Africa, end conflict in Syria or reduce stress in US workplaces, the fundamental reason we care about these things is that they are bad for human wellbeing. They cause suffering and pain. Similarly, if we're aiming to boost economic activity, reform our education system or cut public sector spending, we should only do so if we believe this will ultimately be good for people's wellbeing. Wellbeing provides a common lens through which we can look at the many challenges and opportunities in our world and decide on our collective priorities.

This is the central idea behind a groundbreaking report published today - the World Happiness Report. Launched in the midst of a major debate about what the world's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) should be for 2015-2030, the report argues that people's 'subjective wellbeing' - their self-reported sense of happiness with life - should be a central measure of progress for every nation. It is a substantial piece of work edited by, among others, the influential development economist Jeff Sachs.

Recent years have seen a huge growth in wellbeing research and we now have valuable data from all around the world about people's levels of life satisfaction. Not only can wellbeing be measured in a reliable and meaningful way, the findings have great relevance for public policy and global priorities. What was once seen as a sideshow is now a mainstream movement, with support from influential figures such as UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon and former head of the UK civil service, Lord Gus O'Donnell.

To illustrate how relevant the wellbeing data is for global issues, let's return to those four examples in my introduction, as they all relate to countries with interesting findings. Firstly, the farmer in Angola. Although Sub-Saharan Africa is the region with the lowest wellbeing (it is home to 9 of the bottom 10 countries, the other being Syria), there are a few green shoots. Over the last five years, Angola has actually seen the largest improvement in wellbeing globally, as it continues to regain stability after its terrible 27 year civil war.

However, for the manager in Greece and mother in Egypt, the trends are less encouraging. Unsurprisingly, these are the two countries that have seen the largest falls in wellbeing over the last five years. Of all the countries affected by the Eurozone crisis, Greece has been the hardest hit. Its drop in wellbeing is greater than would be predicted simply from falls in income, reflecting wider problems from loss of trust and social cohesion. And in Egypt, the significantly lower wellbeing surely reflects the Egyptian people's suffering under the Mubarak regime and the ongoing struggles since the 2011 uprising.

Finally, what about the Danish doctor? Well, she's at least fortunate to live in Denmark, the country which once again tops the world wellbeing league, closely followed by Norway. With Sweden also in the top 5, we might well ask how these Northern European nations always seem to deliver world-beating levels of wellbeing. Yes they have fairly high GDP per capita, but they're far from the top of that league. More tellingly, they have some of the highest levels of interpersonal trust and lowest levels of inequality.

The World Happiness Report also provides another extremely compelling reason to prioritise wellbeing, and the research here is really quite startling. It shows that happier people tend to be healthier, recover from illness more quickly and live longer. At work, they perform better, exhibit more creativity, are absent less often and are better at cooperation and collaboration. And in wider society, they have better relationships, exhibit more pro-social behaviour, have greater self-control, engage in less risk-taking behaviour and are more likely to have a positive impact on others. So happier people are not lazy, naïve, inward-looking or selfish, as some sceptics suggest; they are actually more economically productive, healthy, socially-minded and generous.

So what practical changes might we make if we adopted wellbeing as a global priority? Of all the suggestions in the report, the most notable is the call for a fundamental shift in our approach to mental health. Worldwide, depression and anxiety disorders account for up to a fifth of the entire burden of illness. This causes huge misery and involves massive costs due to lost output and worse physical health. Yet even in rich countries, less than a third of people who are mentally ill receive the treatment they need - and in poorer countries the proportion is lower still. This is really shocking, especially considering we now have cost-effective therapies that have been proven to help. Do politicians focus more on physical health, employment or income because they feel uncomfortable talking about mental health? If so, this has to change. Making treatment for mental illness more widely available may well be the single most reliable and cost effective way to improve national wellbeing.

What then should be the world's development goals for the coming years? Making wellbeing our global priority would surely underpin, rather than undermine, existing sustainable development aims. It would also provide a consistent means to track how successful countries are in delivering improvements in people's quality of life. The reason that existing goals like universal education, gender equality, maternal health and sustainability matter so much is because they are all fundamental to human wellbeing. 

Wellbeing isn't some luxury for the privileged few, it's the thing all of us want most for ourselves and the people we care about - whether in a field in Angola or an office in London. It should be at the heart of every discussion of local, national or global priorities.

Mark Williamson is Director of Action for Happiness.

This article was first posted 9 September on the Huffington Post website, here. 

*Action for Happiness is a movement of people taking action in their personal lives, homes, workplaces and communities - to help create a happier society. The movement has tens of thousands of members from a wide range of backgrounds including community leaders, parents, teachers, business leaders, students, policy makers, researchers, health experts and more. Action for Happiness provides information, inspiration and resources to help its members make a difference, all based on the latest empirical scientific evidence relating to happiness, wellbeing and resilience.

Good news, we're slightly happier.But why?

This post was written by Mark Williamson, Director of Action for Happiness* . This blog is  part of the Wikiprogress Series on Subjective Well-being. 

How satisfied are you with your life? It's a question we've probably all pondered at times. But for the last two years it's also been one of a handful of new "subjective wellbeing" questions which the Office for National Statistics has been asking people all over the UK.

You may be surprised to learn that the UK is now leading the way in terms of officially measuring the wellbeing of its citizens. We're at the forefront of a growing global movement where people are recognising that there's more to a good society than just economic growth - and that we need measures of progress which reflect the quality of life as people actually experience it.

On the 30th of July we saw something rather remarkable on two counts. Firstly, the publication of the very first official year-on-year comparisons of UK wellbeing, a landmark moment in this new era of measuring what matters. And secondly, we had the unexpected news that, as a nation, we've actually become happier and less anxious over the last 12 months. Not hugely happier, but a statistically significant step in the right direction nonetheless.

The proportion of people giving a high life satisfaction score (7 or more out of 10) rose from 75.9% in 2012 to 77% in 2013. And the proportion of people giving a low (i.e. positive) score for "feeling anxious" (3 or less out of 10) rose from 60.1% to 61.5%. That sounds promising, but how has this improvement in average wellbeing been distributed across the population? Well, the ONS hasn't yet provided a regional breakdown, but it does appear that the people with the lowest wellbeing have seen some of the benefit. For example, the proportion of people with a very low life satisfaction score has fallen from 6.6% to 5.8% and the proportion with a very high (i.e. negative) score for "feeling anxious" has fallen from 21.8% to 20.9%. Encouragingly, it's not just a case of the fairly happy folks getting even happier.

So what's going on here? Is this an "Olympics bounce", a reflection of a slightly improving economic outlook or something else? In a separate recent analysis, the ONS explored the factors that most affect our personal wellbeing and identified three that appear to make the biggest difference. The first is whether we perceive our health to be good. The second is our employment status, with unemployment clearly being very detrimental to wellbeing. And the third is our marital status, with people who are married or in civil partnerships being happier than those who aren't. Of these, the most likely contributor to recent improvements in national wellbeing is the slight reduction in unemployment over the last year, which is clearly welcome, although levels remain worryingly high.

But I believe the ONS analysis is missing some vitally important contributors to wellbeing. Research suggests that the external circumstances of our lives generally have a smaller impact on our happiness than our attitudes and actions. And at Action for Happiness, our review of the latest evidence has identified ten areas where actions we take as individuals tend to increase our wellbeing. We call these the Ten Keys to Happier Living. They include having positive relationships and strong social connections, giving to others, being mindful, staying physically active, taking a resilient approach to adversity, pursuing life goals and being part of something bigger than ourselves. These are the real drivers of wellbeing just as much as having a job, good health or being married.

The ONS identified the Jubilee celebrations and Olympics as factors that may have contributed to our boost in wellbeing since last year. I suspect this may indeed be true. But if so, this is not thanks to our love of the Royal Family or our outstanding sporting success. It's because these events encouraged actions which helped us to connect in our communities, to share enjoyable times together and to feel part of something bigger. Although these once-in-a-lifetime events won't be repeated any time soon, there's still so much more we can do to create and maintain those community connections and that positive and outward-looking spirit.

Finally, the ONS has also uncovered some rather startling findings regarding people's levels of anxiety. Some of the most anxious people are those who, you might imagine, have least to worry about. For example, people in higher professional occupations report more anxiety than those in lower supervisory and technical occupations. People with the highest levels of education are more anxious than people with lower educational attainment. And most surprisingly, people who live in the least deprived areas actually report higher levels of anxiety than those who live in the most deprived areas. This is a timely reminder that anxiety, and indeed depression, are classless and affect people from all walks of life. Many of those we hold up as role models and paragons of success are actually trapped in busy and stressful lives where they feel under constant pressure and unhappy. As Arianna Huffington says, it's time for us to redefine what we mean by success.

So this move towards measuring wellbeing should be warmly welcomed. It's a call for governments to place a greater focus on the things that affect people's quality of life - and nothing could be more important. But it's also a reminder for each of us that real success and happiness come from a balanced life, with time to connect with the people around us and to focus on the things that matter.

Mark Williamson is Director of Action for Happiness.

This article was first posted on the Action for Happiness website, here. 

*Action for Happiness is a movement of people taking action in their personal lives, homes, workplaces and communities - to help create a happier society. The movement has tens of thousands of members from a wide range of backgrounds including community leaders, parents, teachers, business leaders, students, policy makers, researchers, health experts and more. Action for Happiness provides information, inspiration and resources to help its members make a difference, all based on the latest empirical scientific evidence relating to happiness, wellbeing and resilience.