Mo Money Mo Problems? Economic Freedom and Subjective Happiness in Europe, 2010–2020

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2025-02-26 DOI:10.1007/s10902-025-00877-5
Pål E. Martinussen, Geir H. Hilland
{"title":"Mo Money Mo Problems? Economic Freedom and Subjective Happiness in Europe, 2010–2020","authors":"Pål E. Martinussen, Geir H. Hilland","doi":"10.1007/s10902-025-00877-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>It is widely held that economic freedom is fundamental for a society’s prosperity and growth, and neoliberalism has now become the dominant ideology in shaping our world. While a large literature on economic freedom has documented mainly favourable impacts on economic outcomes, only a handful of studies have examined the link between economic freedom and life quality. Building on the most recent data available on European countries, we combined the Index of Economic Freedom from the Frasier Institute with data from the World Bank, Varieties of Democracy and the European Social Survey in the period 2010–2020, allowing for a multilevel analysis of a total of nearly 199,000 respondents from 28 countries. At the individual level, the analysis controlled for the respondents’ demographic background, socio-economic status and social trust. At the country level we controlled for levels of democracy through a composite index. The results for the aggregate models indicate that there is a reversed U-shaped curvilinear association between economic freedom and happiness. However, the results of the disaggregate models, where we tested the associations between each of the individual components of economic freedom and happiness, indicate a reversed U-shape for only one of the five components, sound money. The one-sided focus on minimal government in the research and discourse on economic freedom seems mis-specified. By treating economic freedom as a general composite measure, we run the risk of dramatically over-simplifying the processes at play. Recent developments in multilevel methods and improved access to data should inspire further studies of how economic freedom can serve and benefit citizens’ well-being and thus contribute to well-functioning societies.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"99 37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-025-00877-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is widely held that economic freedom is fundamental for a society’s prosperity and growth, and neoliberalism has now become the dominant ideology in shaping our world. While a large literature on economic freedom has documented mainly favourable impacts on economic outcomes, only a handful of studies have examined the link between economic freedom and life quality. Building on the most recent data available on European countries, we combined the Index of Economic Freedom from the Frasier Institute with data from the World Bank, Varieties of Democracy and the European Social Survey in the period 2010–2020, allowing for a multilevel analysis of a total of nearly 199,000 respondents from 28 countries. At the individual level, the analysis controlled for the respondents’ demographic background, socio-economic status and social trust. At the country level we controlled for levels of democracy through a composite index. The results for the aggregate models indicate that there is a reversed U-shaped curvilinear association between economic freedom and happiness. However, the results of the disaggregate models, where we tested the associations between each of the individual components of economic freedom and happiness, indicate a reversed U-shape for only one of the five components, sound money. The one-sided focus on minimal government in the research and discourse on economic freedom seems mis-specified. By treating economic freedom as a general composite measure, we run the risk of dramatically over-simplifying the processes at play. Recent developments in multilevel methods and improved access to data should inspire further studies of how economic freedom can serve and benefit citizens’ well-being and thus contribute to well-functioning societies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
6.50%
发文量
110
期刊介绍: The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?
期刊最新文献
Improving Wellbeing Through Local Communities: A Mixed Methods Study on the Role of Relationship Building Gratitude Training for Promoting Subjective Well-Being: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Journaling to a Personalized Menu Approach Wanting to be Happy Fosters Happiness by Promoting Savoring: A Daily Diary Study Mo Money Mo Problems? Economic Freedom and Subjective Happiness in Europe, 2010–2020 Does Time Heal All Wounds? Life Satisfaction Trajectories in Australian Middle-Aged Women Before and After Relationship Dissolution
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1