Easterlin paradox

Last updated

The Easterlin paradox is a finding in happiness economics formulated in 1974 by Richard Easterlin, then professor of economics at the University of Pennsylvania, and the first economist to study happiness data. [1] The paradox states that at a point in time happiness varies directly with income both among and within nations, but over time happiness does not trend upward as income continues to grow: while people on higher incomes are typically happier than their lower-income counterparts at a given point in time, higher incomes don't produce greater happiness over time. One explanation is that my happiness depends on a comparison between my income and my perceptions of the average standard of living. If everyone's income increases, my increased income gives a short boost to my happiness, since I do not realize that the average standard of living has gone up. Some time later, I realize that the average standard of living has also gone up, so the happiness boost produced by my increased income disappears. It is the contradiction between the point-of-time and time series findings that is the root of the paradox: while there is a correlation at a fixed point, there is no trend over multiple points. That is, in the short run, everyone perceives increases in income to be correlated with happiness and tries to increase their incomes. However, in the long run, this proves to be an illusion, since everyone's efforts to raise standards of living lead to increasing averages, leaving everyone in the same place in terms of relative income. Various theories have been advanced to explain the Paradox, but the Paradox itself is solely an empirical generalization. The existence of the paradox has been strongly disputed by other researchers.

Contents

Richard Easterlin has updated the evidence and description of the Paradox over time. His most recent contribution is from 2022. [2] There is also a free working paper version. [3]

Evidence

The original evidence for the paradox was United States data. Subsequently, supporting findings were given for other developed nations, [4] and, more recently, for less developed countries and countries transitioning from socialism to capitalism. [5] The original conclusion for the United States was based on data from 1946 to 1970; later evidence through 2014 confirmed the initial finding — the trend in United States happiness has been flat or even slightly negative over a roughly seven decades stretch in which real incomes more than tripled.

The time series conclusion of the paradox refers to long-term trends. As the economy expands and contracts, fluctuations in happiness occur together with those in income, [6] [7] but the fluctuations in income occur around a rising trend line, whereas those in happiness take place around a horizontal trend.

Possible explanations

A couple of explanations for the paradox have been offered.

The first explanation draws on the effect of social comparison. The effect of additional money on how we feel about our lives is not just about how wealthy we are in absolute terms, but how wealthy we are compared to other people. [8] [9]

The second explanation appeals to hedonic adaptation and the fact that people get used to having more income and higher living standards. [10] [11] For example, the theory of hedonic adaption would suggest that progress from iPhone 5s, to iPhone 6s, to iPhone 7s, to iPhone 8s and so on, have not made a lasting improvement to happiness.

Criticism

Objections to the paradox focus on the time series generalization, that trends in happiness and income are not related. In a 2008 article economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers state that “the core of the Easterlin paradox lies in Easterlin’s failure to isolate statistically significant relationships between average levels of happiness and economic growth through time,” and present time series evidence of a significant positive statistical association between happiness and income. [12] A 2012 article by the same authors and Daniel Sacks returns to this time series criticism with new data, though at times the article asserts that the paradox is a contradiction between two types of cross-section evidence — data for persons and for countries. [13] Outside of economics, two founding fathers in the study of self-reported happiness, Ed Diener in psychology, and Ruut Veenhoven in sociology, have each, with their collaborators, also presented evidence of a significantly positive time series relationship. [14] [15] A rebuttal by Easterlin points out that these studies do not focus on identifying long term trends; rather, they are based on time series that are short or have only two observations — in both cases, insufficient observations to establish a trend. The positive association they present is that between the fluctuations in happiness and income, not the trends. [16]

It is sometimes said that the flattening of the happiness trend occurs after some minimum level of income. [17] While cross-sectional data supports a curvilinear relationship between income and happiness in Chinese [18] and Asian samples, [19] time series for China and Japan, both of which start from low income levels, give no indication of a threshold. [20] [21]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Happiness</span> Mental state, noted for pleasant emotions

Happiness is a positive and pleasant emotion, ranging from contentment to intense joy. Moments of happiness may be triggered by positive life experiences or thoughts, but sometimes it may arise from no obvious cause. The level of happiness for longer periods of time is more strongly correlated with levels of life satisfaction, subjective well-being, flourishing and eudaimonia. In common usage, the word happy can be an appraisal of those measures themselves or as a shorthand for a "source" of happiness. As with any emotion, the precise definition of happiness has been a perennial debate in philosophy.

Positive psychology studies the conditions that contribute to the optimal functioning of people, groups, and institutions. It studies "positive subjective experience, positive individual traits, and positive institutions... it aims to improve quality of life."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Veblen good</span> Luxury good for which the demand increases as the price increases

A Veblen good is a type of luxury good, named after American economist Thorstein Veblen, for which the demand increases as the price increases, in apparent contradiction of the law of demand, resulting in an upward-sloping demand curve. The higher prices of Veblen goods may make them desirable as a status symbol in the practices of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure. A product may be a Veblen good because it is a positional good, something few others can own.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic materialism</span> Excessive desire to acquire and consume material goods

Economic materialism can be described as either a personal attitude that attaches importance to acquiring and consuming material goods or as a logistical analysis of how physical resources are shaped into consumable products.

The productivity paradox, also referred to as the Solow paradox, could refer either to the slowdown in productivity growth in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s despite rapid development in the field of information technology (IT) over the same period, or to the slowdown in productivity growth in the United States and developed countries from the 2000s to 2020s; sometimes the newer slowdown is referred to as the productivity slowdown, the productivity puzzle, or the productivity paradox 2.0. The 1970s to 1980s productivity paradox inspired many research efforts at explaining the slowdown, only for the paradox to disappear with renewed productivity growth in the developed countries in the 1990s. However, issues raised by those research efforts remain important in the study of productivity growth in general, and became important again when productivity growth slowed around the world again from the 2000s to the present day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Layard, Baron Layard</span> British economist (born 1934)

Peter Richard Grenville Layard, Baron Layard FBA is a British labour economist, programme director of the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, and co-editor of the World Happiness Report.

The hedonic treadmill, also known as hedonic adaptation, is the observed tendency of humans to quickly return to a relatively stable level of happiness despite major positive or negative events or life changes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andrew Oswald</span> British economist and academic

Andrew Oswald is a Professor of Economics and Behavioural Science at the University of Warwick, England. He is an ISI highly cited researcher and has been a professorial fellow of the ESRC. He is currently a member of the board of reviewing editors of Science. He held previous posts at Oxford, the London School of Economics, Princeton, Dartmouth and Harvard. Andrew Oswald serves as the chair of the IZA Institute Network Advisory Group.

The economics of happiness or happiness economics is the theoretical, qualitative and quantitative study of happiness and quality of life, including positive and negative affects, well-being, life satisfaction and related concepts – typically tying economics more closely than usual with other social sciences, like sociology and psychology, as well as physical health. It typically treats subjective happiness-related measures, as well as more objective quality of life indices, rather than wealth, income or profit, as something to be maximized.

Prosperity is the flourishing, thriving, good fortune and successful social status. Prosperity often produces profuse wealth including other factors which can be profusely wealthy in all degrees, such as happiness and health.

Richard Ainley Easterlin is a professor of economics at the University of Southern California. He is best known for the economic theory named after him, the Easterlin paradox. Another of his contributions is the Easterlin hypothesis about long waves of baby booms and busts.

Degrowth or post-growth economics is an academic and social movement critical of the concept of growth in gross domestic product as a measure of human and economic development. Degrowth theory is based on ideas and research from a multitude of disciplines such as economics, economic anthropology, ecological economics, environmental sciences and development studies. It argues that the unitary focus of modern capitalism on growth, in terms of monetary value of aggregate goods and services, causes widespread ecological damage and is not necessary for the further increase of human living standards. Degrowth theory has been met with both academic acclaim and considerable criticism.

Edward Francis Diener was an American psychologist and author. Diener was a professor of psychology at the University of Utah and the University of Virginia, and Joseph R. Smiley Distinguished Professor Emeritus at the University of Illinois, as well as a senior scientist for the Gallup Organization. He is noted for his research over the past thirty years on happiness, including work on temperament and personality influences on well-being, theories of well-being, income and well-being, cultural influences on well-being, and the measurement of well-being. As shown on Google Scholar as of April 2021, Diener's publications have been cited over 257,000 times.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Relational goods</span>

Relational goods are non-material goods that can only be produced and consumed within groups, and which are intrinsically linked to relationships and interaction. Popular examples include the enjoyment of a football game in a stadium, where the collective enjoyment of the game adds a relational good in terms of excitement and enjoyment to all in the stadium. This constitutes an experience that cannot be had when watching alone. Other examples include group charity work, friendship or reciprocal love. Relational goods can be necessary for the optimization of an activity like the football game example. On the other hand, like Nussbaum suggest, a relational good may be the relationship in itself, with the good being dependent on the existence of the relationship. Friendships is an example of a relationship in which the value that come from the relationship are tied up in the existence and maintenance of the relationship.

Life satisfaction is the evaluation of a person's quality of life. It is assessed in terms of mood, relationship satisfaction, achieved goals, self-concepts, and self-perceived ability to cope with life. Life satisfaction involves a favorable attitude towards one's life—rather than an assessment of current feelings. Life satisfaction has been measured in relation to economic standing, degree of education, experiences, residence, and other factors.

Bernard Marinus Siegfried van Praag is a Dutch economist, and distinguished university professor at the University of Amsterdam, noted for researching the measurement of welfare, as well-being and happiness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carol Graham</span> American economist

Carol Graham is the Leo Pasvolsky Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, a College Park professor at the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, a research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), and the author of numerous books, papers and edited volume chapters.

Subjective well-being (SWB) is a self-reported measure of well-being, typically obtained by questionnaire.

Well-being is a multifaceted topic studied in psychology, especially positive psychology. Biologically, well-being is highly influenced by endogenous molecules that impact happiness and euphoria in organisms, often referred to as "well-being related markers". Related concepts are eudaimonia, happiness, flourishing, quality of life, contentment, and meaningful life.

Money worship is a type of money disorder. The core driver of this behaviour is the belief that having more money will lead to greater happiness in the afterlife. Individuals with this disorder are obsessed with the idea that obtaining more money is necessary to make progress in life and, at the same time, convinced that they will never have enough money to fulfil their needs or desires. Younger, single and low-net worth individuals are more likely to engage in this behaviour, which has also been linked to a higher probability of carrying over credit card debt from month to month. It has been suggested that young adults are most susceptible to money worship due to their higher impressionability from social forces such as social media and peer groups.

References

  1. ↑ Easterlin (1974). "Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence" (PDF). In Paul A. David; Melvin W. Reder (eds.). Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
  2. ↑ Easterlin; O'Connor (2022). "The Easterlin Paradox". In Klaus F. Zimmermann (ed.). Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics. Switzerland: Springer Nature. pp. 1–25. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-57365-6_184-2. ISBN   978-3-319-57365-6.
  3. ↑ Easterlin; O'Connor (2020). "The Easterlin Paradox" (PDF). IZA Discussion Paper Series (13923).
  4. ↑ Easterlin, Richard (1995). "Will Raising the Incomes of All Increase the Happiness of All". Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 27 (1): 35–48. doi:10.1016/0167-2681(95)00003-B. S2CID   10132706.
  5. ↑ Easterlin, Richard (2017). "Paradox Lost?". Review of Behavioral Economics. 4 (4): 311–339. doi:10.1561/105.00000068. S2CID   219967822.
  6. ↑ DiTella, R., R. J. MacCulloch, and A. J. Oswald (2001). "Preferences Over Inflation and Unemployment: Evidence from Surveys of Happiness". American Economic Review. 91 (1): 335–341. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.23.7315 . doi:10.1257/aer.91.1.335. S2CID   14823969.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  7. ↑ Wolfers, Justin (2003). "Is Business Cycle Volatility Costly? Evidence from Surveys of Subjective Well-Being" (PDF). International Finance. 6 (1): 1–26. doi:10.1111/1468-2362.00112.
  8. ↑ Clark, Andrew E.; Frijters, Paul; Shields, Michael A. (2008). "Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles". Journal of Economic Literature. 46 (1): 95–144. doi:10.1257/jel.46.1.95. hdl: 10419/34701 . ISSN   0022-0515. S2CID   1744957.
  9. ↑ Ehsan, Latif (2015). "Happiness Adaptation to Income: Evidence from Canada" (PDF). Economics Bulletin. 35 (3).
  10. ↑ Diener, Ed; Lucas, Richard E.; Scollon, Christie Napa (2009), Diener, Ed (ed.), "Beyond the Hedonic Treadmill: Revising the Adaptation Theory of Well-Being", The Science of Well-Being: The Collected Works of Ed Diener, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 103–118, doi:10.1007/978-90-481-2350-6_5, ISBN   978-90-481-2350-6 , retrieved 2022-07-14
  11. ↑ Graham, Liam; Oswald, Andrew J. (2010-11-01). "Hedonic capital, adaptation and resilience" (PDF). Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 76 (2): 372–384. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2010.07.003. ISSN   0167-2681.
  12. ↑ Stevenson, B., and J. Wolfers (2008). "Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox" (PDF). Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 1: 1–87. doi:10.1353/eca.0.0001. JSTOR   27561613. S2CID   244381151.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. ↑ Sacks, D. W., B. Stevenson, and J. Wolfers (2012). "Subjective Well-Being, Income, Economic Development, and Growth." In …and the Pursuit of Happiness: Well-Being and the Role of Government (PDF). London: Institute of Economic Affairs. pp. 59–97.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  14. ↑ Diener, E., L. Tay, and S. Oishi (2013). "Rising Income and the Subjective Well-Being of Nations". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 104 (2): 267–76. doi:10.1037/a0030487. PMID   23106249. S2CID   3255125.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  15. ↑ Veenhoven, R. and F. Vergunst (2014). "The Easterlin Illusion: Economic Growth Does Go with Greater Happiness" (PDF). International Journal of Happiness and Development. 1 (4): 311–343. doi:10.1504/IJHD.2014.066115.
  16. ↑ Easterlin, Richard (2017). "Paradox Lost?". Review of Behavioral Economics. 4 (4): 311–339. doi:10.1561/105.00000068. S2CID   219967822.
  17. ↑ Layard, R., A. Clark, and C. Senik (2012). "The Causes of Happiness and Misery". In World Happiness Report 2012. Sustainable Development Solutions Network.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  18. ↑ Monnot, Matthew (2017). "Marginal Utility and Economic Development: Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Aspirations and Subjective Well-Being Among Chinese Employees". Social Indicators Research. 132: 155–185. doi:10.1007/s11205-015-1153-9. S2CID   142987986.
  19. ↑ Monnot, M. J.; Beehr, T. A. (2022). "The Good Life Versus the "Goods Life": An Investigation of Goal Contents Theory and Employee Subjective Well-Being Across Asian Countries". Journal of Happiness Studies. 23 (3): 12–15–1244. doi:10.1007/s10902-021-00447-5. S2CID   239678199.
  20. ↑ Easterlin, Richard (1995). "Will Raising the Incomes of All Increase the Happiness of All". Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 27 (1): 35–48. doi:10.1016/0167-2681(95)00003-B. S2CID   10132706.
  21. ↑ Easterlin, R. A., F. Wang, and S. Wang (2017). "Growth and Happiness in China, 1990-2015." In World Happiness Report 2017. Sustainable Development Solutions Network.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Further reading

Clark, A., P. Frijters, and M. Shields (2008). “Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles,” Journal of Economic Literature: 46(1), 95-144.

Beja, E. (2014). “Income Growth and Happiness: Reassessment of the Easterlin Paradox,” International Review of Economics: 61 (4), 329-346.

DeNeve, J., D. Ward, G. Keulenaer, B. van Landeghem, G. Kavetsos, and M. Norton (2018). “The Asymmetric Experience of Positive and Negative Economic Growth: Global Evidence Using Subjective Well-Being Data,” Review of Economic Statistics: 100 (2), 362-375.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.