Happiness, beyond measure
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/gross-national-happiness-bandwagon-bhutan-uae-madhya-pradesh-4527025/
Written by Bibek Debroy
|
Published:February 16, 2017 12:37 am
People are jumping on to the Gross National Happiness bandwagon, in an attempt to capture something that remains elusive
What is common to Bhutan, Venezuela, the United Arab Emirates (UAE)
and Madhya Pradesh? All of them have a ministry/department for
happiness. Bhutan is talked about the most, with the idea of GNH (Gross
National Happiness) presented as some kind of alternative to GDP (gross
domestic product). GNH is built into Bhutan’s constitution, in Article
9, on Principles of State Policy. What is invariably quoted is Article
9.2: “The State shall strive to promote those conditions that will
enable the pursuit of Gross National Happiness.” However, this follows
Article 9.1: “The State shall endeavour to apply the Principles of State
Policy set out in this Article to ensure a good quality of life for the
people of Bhutan in a progressive and prosperous country that is
committed to peace and amity in the world.”
Operationally, what does this mean? Those who mention Bhutan talk
about GNHI (Gross National Happiness Index), administered by the Centre
for Bhutan Studies and GNH Research. GNHI is based on four pillars
(political, economic, cultural and environmental) and nine domains
(which can be skipped for present purposes). There were surveys in 2010
and 2015 to determine how Bhutan performed on GNHI. Hence, along a
happiness/unhappiness continuum, progress could be measured and one had
an aggregate measure that was an alternative or supplement to GDP, based
on subjective responses to questionnaires that were then aggregated. To
state the obvious, Bhutan has a population of around 7,50,000.
But I don’t think the alternative or supplementary summary measure is
the point. The point is the Planning Commission and Committee of
Secretaries being subsumed in the Gross National Happiness Commission
(GNHC). In other words, feedback received from GNHI surveys is factored
into government policies and public expenditure priorities, reflected in
central and local body plans. More than the aggregate measure, if I
have understood the idea right, this suggests decentralised planning to
me. Ascertain the needs of gram panchayats/urban local bodies. Use those
local plans to aggregate and move up to a block level, district level
and national plan. If we get too fixated on the alternative to the GDP
idea, we lost sight of this process, the operational and much more
important part.
After a lot of sarcastic comments and dark humour in 2013, I haven’t
heard much about Venezuela’s vice ministry of supreme social happiness.
Perhaps it just vanished, because of chaos and general uncertainty. The
initial idea seems to have been to converge anti-poverty programmes
directed at disabled, homeless, poor and old-age pensioners. Unlike
Bhutan, you don’t ask people what their priorities are. Given the
ideology of the government, you know what people want, or should want.
At best, you synergise across schemes. This also illustrates why
discussions on happiness that mention both Bhutan and Venezuela in the
same breath are misleading.
I don’t think it is fair to place UAE in the same bracket either. In
2016, UAE announced a new ministry (and minister of state) for
happiness. It may be early days, but so far, all this ministry seems to
have done is to train officers from federal and local government to
become “chief happiness and positivity officers”. I am not sure the UN
General Assembly Resolution of July 19, 2011 was a very good idea: “(1)
Invites Member States to pursue the elaboration of additional measures
that better capture the importance of the pursuit of happiness and
well-being in development with a view to guiding their public policies;
(2) Invites those Member States that have taken initiatives to develop
new indicators, and other initiatives, to share information thereon with
the Secretary-General as a contribution to the United Nations
development agenda, including the Millennium Development Goals”.
Irrespective of what is done to public policy formulation, people are
jumping on to the bandwagon of measuring and pushing something that is,
at best, elusive. The UN’s World Happiness Report, an annual feature
since 2012, is based on diverse indicators across GDP per capita, social
support, healthy life expectancy, freedom to make choices, generosity
and perceptions of corruption (trust). Measure a country’s distance from
the perfect dystopia and you have a rank and a score. In 2016, India
had a rank of 118 out of 150 countries.
If citizens are happier in a certain country, presumably people would
want to migrate there, given a choice. In 2016, the top three countries
were Denmark, Switzerland and Iceland and both Nepal and Bangladesh
have higher ranks than India. It is worth checking out the number of
Indian immigrants to these five countries. Among India’s states, Madhya
Pradesh was the first one to start a happiness department in 2016. It is
early days there too. At the moment, the focus is on volunteers
training people to positively impact the lives of others. This is thus
an attempt to bring about behavioural changes in people, not behavioural
changes within government.
Such disparity across three countries and a state should remind you
of the clichéd blind men and the elephant and perhaps of John Godfrey
Saxe’s poem too. Most people will remember how the poem starts. “It was
six men of Indostan..” And this is how it ends: “So, oft in theologic
wars/ The disputants, I ween/ Rail on in utter ignorance/ Of what each
other mean/ And prate about an Elephant/ Not one of them has seen!” For
happiness too, theology is a good expression, because that’s what the
fetish about measurement has reduced it too. The means of measurement
have become more important than the end.
The writer is a member of Niti Aayog. Views are personal
**********
No comments:
Post a Comment