About Happiness Rankings – Finland, and Beyond

The World Happiness Report 2025 once again ranks Finland as the happiest country globally for the eighth consecutive year. Nordic nations such as Denmark, Iceland, and Sweden dominate the top spots. Meanwhile, India ranks 118th, despite being the world’s fifth-largest economy and a fast-growing digital powerhouse. Pakistan, with political instability and repeated IMF bailouts, scores higher at 109. This contrast raises questions about how happiness is defined and measured worldwide.

World Happiness Report Methodology

The report uses the Gallup World Poll’s Cantril Ladder, where respondents rate their lives from 0 to 10. It combines six key variables – GDP per capita, social support, life expectancy, freedom to make life choices, generosity, and perception of corruption. These factors aim to capture both economic and social wellbeing. However, happiness remains subjective and influenced by cultural and societal contexts.

Economic Growth vs Perceived Happiness

India’s large and expanding economy contrasts sharply with its low happiness ranking. Economic prosperity alone does not guarantee happiness. Countries with higher GDP may still report lower satisfaction due to rising expectations and social challenges. In India, growing aspirations and media scrutiny can lead to dissatisfaction despite improvements in living standards. Conversely, nations with strong social trust and community bonds often report higher happiness even with modest incomes.

Role of Social Trust and Community

Social trust and community kindness are stronger predictors of happiness than income. Nordic countries benefit from institutional trust, where people believe in fairness and honesty. In India, informal networks like family and local communities provide resilience, compensating for uneven governance. The COVID-19 pandemic brought into light this as many returned to villages seeking social security absent in urban areas. Collective trust differs from the individualistic trust measured by global indices.

Perception Bias in Global Indices

Global rankings may carry biases favouring stable, conformist societies over vibrant democracies. Indian democracy’s openness and self-critical nature can lower its happiness score. Experts argue that indices often rely on Western-centric views, overlooking diverse social structures. Democracies may appear less happy because citizens freely express dissatisfaction, unlike authoritarian regimes where dissent is suppressed.

Emerging Focus on Mental Health and Wellbeing

India is recognising mental health as part of economic and social policy. Initiatives like Tele-MANAS and Mind India promote emotional resilience. Research shows investing in mental health yields high economic returns. Incorporating psychological wellbeing into governance reflects a shift from viewing happiness as a luxury to a necessity for sustainable development.

Pathways to Enhance Happiness in India

India’s growth must be complemented by rebuilding social capital through community spaces and inter-generational ties. Simplifying public services can restore institutional trust. Mental health must be prioritised as an economic asset. These steps can transform economic gains into genuine wellbeing, aligning aspirations with empathy and social cohesion.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Discuss in the light of the World Happiness Report the relationship between economic growth and subjective wellbeing in developing countries.
2. Critically examine the role of social trust and community networks in enhancing national happiness, with examples from Nordic countries and India.
3. Explain the impact of perception biases in global indices on the evaluation of democracy and governance quality.
4. With suitable examples, discuss the importance of mental health policies in national development and economic productivity.

Answer Hints:

1. Discuss in the light of the World Happiness Report the relationship between economic growth and subjective wellbeing in developing countries.

1. Economic growth (GDP) does not directly translate into higher happiness or subjective wellbeing.
2. Developing countries like India show rising aspirations and media scrutiny, which can lower perceived satisfaction despite economic gains.
3. Happiness depends on social factors—trust, freedom, corruption perception—beyond mere income.
4. Countries with modest economies but strong social support (e.g., Nordic nations) often rank higher in happiness.
5. Rising expectations in growing economies can create dissatisfaction, denoting a gap between material progress and perceived wellbeing.
6. Subjective wellbeing is influenced by cultural, social, and psychological factors that economic metrics overlook.

2. Critically examine the role of social trust and community networks in enhancing national happiness, with examples from Nordic countries and India.

1. Social trust and belief in community kindness are stronger predictors of happiness than income or GDP.
2. Nordic countries exhibit high institutional trust—e.g., belief that lost wallets will be returned—reflecting transparent governance.
3. India’s informal networks—family, local communities—provide resilience despite uneven institutional trust.
4. Community bonds became crucial during COVID-19, with migration back to villages underscoring reliance on social capital.
5. Global indices often measure individualistic trust, overlooking collective trust systems prevalent in countries like India.
6. Rebuilding social capital through community spaces and inter-generational ties is vital for improving happiness.

3. Explain the impact of perception biases in global indices on the evaluation of democracy and governance quality.

1. Global indices often rely on Western-centric expert assessments, which may be subjective and opaque.
2. Authoritarian regimes may appear stable due to suppressed dissent, inflating their scores unfairly.
3. Democracies like India are penalized for openness and self-critical public discourse, leading to lower rankings.
4. Perception biases favor calm conformity over democratic vibrancy and pluralism.
5. Such biases obscure the complexity of governance quality and citizen satisfaction in diverse political systems.
6. Recognition of these biases calls for more nuanced, culturally sensitive evaluation frameworks.

4. With suitable examples, discuss the importance of mental health policies in national development and economic productivity.

1. Mental health is increasingly recognized as integral to economic growth and social wellbeing.
2. WHO estimates every $1 invested in mental health yields $4 in economic returns through productivity gains.
3. India’s initiatives like Tele-MANAS and Mind India show the policy shift towards emotional resilience.
4. Improved mental health reduces absenteeism, enhances workplace wellbeing, and supports sustainable development.
5. Addressing mental health bridges the gap between economic ambition and genuine happiness.
6. Mental health policies contribute to social cohesion, reducing stigma and encouraging inclusive growth.