- Communities in Central and South America reported higher happiness
- Researchers claim evidence suggests that economic growth is no longer a prerequisite for happiness.
As the saying goes, 'Money can't buy happiness'.
It has traditionally been perceived as a means to improve people's overall well-being - and global studies have revealed that people living in high-income countries exhibit higher levels of happiness than those living in low-income countries.
However, researchers from Barcelona and Canada argue that the conclusion may not be universally applicable and that polls or surveys tend to gather responses only from individuals in urbanized cities, while neglecting people in small-scale communities where economic influence is minimal and residents' well-being is more closely tied to their natural environment.
According to a survey of 2,966 people from indigenous and local communities in 19 locations worldwide, researchers have now discovered that societies of indigenous peoples and small, local communities are reporting remarkably fulfilling lives despite having limited financial resources.
The researchers noted, 'A key element of our findings... is that life satisfaction in very low-income communities can meet or even surpass that experienced in the highest average levels of material wealth available in societies focused on industrial production and consumption.'
Researchers have found powerful evidence that economic growth is not a necessity for happiness.
The lead author of the study, Eric Galbraith, stated: "Many populations with relatively low monetary incomes report very high levels of life satisfaction, with scores comparable to those in affluent countries."
Sixty-four percent of the households in the survey reported receiving some form of cash income.
Researchers found that high life satisfaction exists 'despite many of these societies having suffered from histories of marginalization and oppression.'
The 19 communities were selected for a research project to determine the awareness of residents regarding the effects of climate change. One part of that project involved a life evaluation questionnaire.
The researchers translated the question into the local languages of the communities they were surveying: 'Considering all aspects, how satisfied are you with your life on a scale from 0 to 10?'
The top score indicated the greatest degree of satisfaction.
All of the societies were heavily reliant on nature to support their daily lives, but they differed greatly in their social, cultural and environmental characteristics. Most of the communities had a relatively low annual per capita income of less than $1,000.
The average life satisfaction score, measured on a scale of 0 to 10 across the societies studied, was 6.8. The lowest score recorded was 5.1, whereas five of the surveyed communities reported a score of eight or higher, qualifying them as among the happiest people globally.
The farming community in Guatemala's Western Highlands ranked highest in happiness, scoring an average of 8.6. The Western Highlands, which comprise the Sierra Madre mountain range, are a mountainous area in Guatemala.
The typical household assets within the community held a value of $3,500.
The lowest-scoring region was among farmers in Chiredzi, Zimbabwe, a town in the southeast with a population of approximately 40,400. The average life satisfaction score in this region was 5.1 and average household assets were valued at $71.
The five communities with happiness scores of eight or higher included: Western Highlands, Guatemala (8.6); Jurua River, Brazil (8.4); Amambay, Paraguay (8.2); Longuimay, Chile (8.1); and Puna, Argentina (8.0).
The report ranked the countries based on a score between 0.0 and 10.0. Norway led the list with a score of 7.8, followed by Denmark with a score of 7.6, and Iceland with a score of 7.5.
The 2023 Global Happiness Report is based on people's own assessment of their happiness, along with economic and social data.
The World Happiness Report asks respondents to rate their lives on a scale from zero, representing the worst possible life, to 10, representing the best possible life.
In the latest report, the United Kingdom fell two positions to 19th, while the United States improved one place to 15th.
Victoria Reyes-Garcia, senior author of the recent study, stated: 'The strong link often found between income and life satisfaction is not universal, and it has been proven that wealth, which is created by industrialized economies, is not the fundamental requirement for humans to lead happy lives.'
The researchers stated this is a positive development for the environment and global efforts towards sustainability because it implies that resource-intensive economic growth is not necessary for people to experience high levels of life satisfaction.
While the research suggests that money does not lead to happiness, the researchers were unable to propose an explanation as to why Indigenous and marginalized communities often report high levels of life satisfaction.
Citing prior studies on related topics, the researchers stated it could be due to familial support, close interpersonal relationships, a sense of spirituality, and connections to the natural environment.
Galbraith added: 'However, it is also possible that different key factors prevail across various societies or, on the other hand, that a particular set of factors holds significant influence everywhere.'
I'd hope that by gaining a deeper understanding of what contributes to a fulfilling existence in these diverse communities, it could enable many people to live more fulfilling lives while navigating the sustainability challenge effectively.
However, I don't see any text to paraphrase. Please provide the original text, and I will paraphrase it for you in International English, keeping the meaning and context intact.
Read more