Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Good Governance and Happiness in Nations: Technical Quality Precedes Democracy and Quality Beats Size

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Happiness Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Average happiness differs markedly across nations and there appears to be a system in these differences. This paper considers the role of quality of governance, and in particular the role of technical quality as opposed to democratic quality. A comparison of 127 nations in 2006 shows strong correlations between the quality of governance and average happiness of citizens. The correlation between technical quality and happiness is +0.75 and the correlation between democratic quality and happiness is +0.60. Technical quality correlates with happiness in rich and poor nations, while democratic quality only correlates with happiness in rich nations. The quality of governance appears to be more important for happiness than the size of governments: the relation between quality and happiness is independent of size, while the relation between size and happiness fully depends on quality. The correlation between technical quality and happiness appears to be independent of culture; it exists not only in western nations, but also in Eastern Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, Asia and Africa. This indicates that technically good governance is a universal condition for happiness, and not just a western ideology. Democratic quality adds substantially to the positive effects of technical quality once technical quality has reached some minimal level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a recent discussion see “Governance Indicators: Where Are We, Where Should We Be Going?”, by Kaufmann and Kraay (2008).

  2. The World Bank transforms this information into scores for each of the six sub-indicators with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1 in the original sample of 212 nations and regions (standardized z-scores, approximately between −2.5 and +2.5; indicating relative positions in a specific year, in my sample in 2006).

  3. I will consider the data on governance as “external data”, or as a starting point, without making any effort to explain differences. One observation, however, deserves some attention. We can observe that western nations get the highest scores for government qualities (see Figs. 1, 2). We may speculate that the principle of the separation of three independent powers for legislation, administration and jurisdiction provide for an explanation. This principle of the “Trias Politica” was introduced by Montesquieu in 1748 before the American and French revolution. Since then this principle has had a positive impact on nation building and institutionalization in western nations. It has contributed directly to regulatory quality and rule of law, and, more indirectly, to political stability and control of corruption. In most other nations in the world the struggle against repression by some social class, or a colonial power, has been an alternative driver for nation building and institutionalization. In many nations this has eventually led to the formation of one political party with a very dominant position. In such nations the separation of powers is obviously problematic. Many nations are still in such situations, or in their aftermath.

  4. A zero-order correlation is the correlation between two variables “as such”, without taking into account the effect of any other variable(s). A partial correlation measures the correlation between two variables with the effects of one (or more) variable(s), interaction effects included, controlled or removed.

  5. See footnote 4.

  6. The qualification “linear” is somewhat debatable since one might argue about the level of happiness as a statistical variable: Is it just ordinal or is it interval? Linearity only makes sense if we see happiness as a variable at interval level. I follow this line; knowing that using a 0–10-scale supports this approach.

  7. A linear function explains 57% of the variance (R squared) in average happiness, a quadratic function 58%.

  8. A linear function explains 36% of the variance (R squared) in average happiness, a quadratic function 43%.

  9. I do report the significance in the tables (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01). This is however somewhat debatable. Significance is the chance that the correlation observed in the sample does not correspond with the correlation in the population from which the sample was drawn. My set of nations is not a random sample of all nations; nations were included if the required data was available. I report the significance as produced by SPSS only to facilitate the assessment of differences.

  10. See footnote 4.

  11. I can make the same point by comparing the relation between aspects of size and happiness at different levels of technical quality (same groups as in Table 1). The relation between taxation and happiness is positive at a high level (+0.32) but negative at a low level (−0.21). The relation between government consumption and happiness is positive at the high level (+0.26) but disappears at the low level (+0.05).

  12. The correlation between technical quality and happiness of 0.75 is reduced to +0.70, and +0.11, if controlled for social trust and wealth respectively. For democratic quality the correlation of 0.60 is reduced to 0.58 and −0.01. The partial correlations remain higher for technical quality and this is an additional indication that the impact of technical quality is more “autonomous”, and, as a consequence, more universal.

  13. See footnote 3.

  14. These factors provide for a reasonable explanation of the differences in average happiness in 127 nations in 2006. If these factors are used as independent factors in a linear regression they explain 72% of the variance (adjusted R-square). Adding more factors, like economic freedom, economic openness, social trust, or education, does not substantially improve the explanatory value of the regression.

  15. The correlation between wealth and happiness is +0.80 and between wealth and technical and democratic quality +0.92 and +0.80 respectively. For gender equality these correlations are +0.80, +0.76, and +0.67. For life-expectancy, as an indicator for safety and healthcare, these correlations are +0.73, +0.65, and +0.52.

  16. Three interesting “down-to-earth” options for poor nations are:

    a. The registration of property rights, in particular for real estate, i.e., have a land registry. As has been demonstrated by De Soto (2000) this is an important condition for economic development.

    b. To register people, i.e., set up registrar’s offices, as a necessary condition to organise adequate public education and health services.

    c. To develop and implement general principles of good governance, to achieve decent and respectful relations between government institutions and citizens.

References

  • Bjørnskov, C. (2008). How comparable are the Gallup World Poll Life Satisfaction Data? Journal of Happiness Studies, Published online November 4, 2008.

  • Bjørnskov, C., Dreher, A., & Fischer, J. (2007). The bigger the better? Evidence of the effect of government size on life satisfaction around the world. Public Choice, 130, 3–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantril, H. (1965). The pattern of human concerns. New York: New Brunswick.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Soto, H. (2000). The mystery of capital: Why capitalism triumphs in the west and fails everywhere else. London: Bantam Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterlin, R. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In P. A. David & M. W. Reder (Eds.), Nations and households in economic growth: Essays in honour of Moses Abramovitz. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foreign Policy Magazine. (2007). The failed state index. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. www.foreignpolicy.com.

  • Freedom House. (2007). Freedom in the World, 2007 Edition.

  • Frey, B. S. (2008). Happiness, a revolution in economics. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2005). Beyond outcomes: Measuring procedural utility. Oxford: Economic Papers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwartney, J. D., & Lawson, R. A. (2006). Economic freedom of the world. Annual report. Fraser Institute, Vancouver, Canada. www.freetheworld.com/206/2006dataset.xls.

  • Helliwell, J., & Huang, H. (2008). How’s your government? International evidence linking good government and well-being. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 595–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R., et al. (2004). World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys, 1999–2001 (Computer file) ICPSR version. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research (producer), 2002. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (distributor), 2004.

  • Kaufmann, D. (2005). Back to basics, 10 Myths about governance and corruption. Finance & Development, 42(3), myth 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, D., & Kraay, A. (2008). Governance indicators: Where are we, where should we be going? World Bank Research Observer.

  • Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2008). Governance matters VII: aggregate and individual governance indicators, 1996–2007”. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4654, World Bank 2008. www.govindicators.org.

  • Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. New York, USA: The Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyubomirsky, S., Diener, E., & King, L. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, P. (2005). Making happy people: The nature of happiness and its origins in childhood. London: Fourth Estate, Harper Collins Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • New Economics Foundation. (2004). Well-being manifesto for a flourishing society. http://www.neweconomics.org.

  • NG, Y., & Ho, L. S. (Eds.). (2006). Happiness and public policy. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, J. C. (2005). Level and equality of happiness in nations: Does greater happiness of a greater number imply greater inequality in happiness? Journal of Happiness Studies, 6(4), 397–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schyns, P. (2003). Income and life satisfaction: Chapter 2: Life satisfaction: the concept, its measurability and cross-national comparability. Netherlands: Eburon, Delft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenhoven, R. (1984). Conditions of happiness. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenhoven, R. (1999). Quality of life in individualistic society, a comparison of 43 nations in the early 1990’s. Social Indicators Research, 48, 157–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenhoven, R. (2008a). World database of happiness, item bank. Erasmus University Rotterdam. Assessed March 2009 http://www.worlddatabaseofhappiness.eur.nl.

  • Veenhoven, R. (2008b). World database of happiness, distributional findings in nations. Erasmus University Rotterdam. Assessed March 2009 http://www.worlddatabaseofhappiness.eur.nl.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan C. Ott.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ott, J.C. Good Governance and Happiness in Nations: Technical Quality Precedes Democracy and Quality Beats Size. J Happiness Stud 11, 353–368 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-009-9144-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-009-9144-7

Keywords

Navigation