Skip Navigation


The World Bank Research Observer Advance Access originally published online on August 11, 2005
The World Bank Research Observer 2005 20(2):201-231; doi:10.1093/wbro/lki010
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/2/201    most recent
lki010v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Graham, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / THE WORLD BANK. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org.

Insights on Development from the Economics of Happiness

Carol Graham

Carol Graham is senior fellow in the Economic Studies Program at the Brookings Institution and professor in the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, College Park; her email address is cgraham{at}brookings.edu.

The literature on the economics of happiness in developed economies finds discrepancies between reported measures of well-being and income measures. One is the so-called Easterlin paradox: that average happiness levels do not increase as countries grow wealthier. This article explores how that paradox—and survey research on reported well-being in general—can provide insights into the gaps between standard measures of economic development and individual assessments of welfare. Analysis of research on reported well-being in Latin America and Russia finds notable discrepancies between respondents’ assessments of their own well-being and income- or expenditure-based measures. Accepting a wide margin for error in both types of measures, the article posits that taking such discrepancies into account may improve the understanding of development outcomes by providing a broader view on well-being than do income- or expenditure-based measures alone. It suggests particular areas where research on reported well-being has the most potential to contribute. Yet the article also notes that some interpretations of happiness research—psychologists’ set point theory, in particular—may be quite limited in their application to development questions and cautions against the direct translation of results of happiness surveys into policy recommendations.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.