Journals / MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2023 / Cilt: 12 Sayı: 4

The Validity of the Easterlin Paradox: Example of Selected Transitional Economies

Easterlin Paradoksunun Geçerliliği: Seçili Geçiş Ekonomileri Örneği

Pages
1372–1382
Publication Date
2023-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Ultimately, the validity of the Easterlin Paradox has been proven.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There are many different views on the source of happiness.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, the 2007-2019 period data of eight selected (Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia) transition economies are used.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Ultimately, the validity of the Easterlin Paradox has been proven.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007-2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Mutluluk Ekonomisi · Easterlin Paradoksu · Panel Veri Analizi

Abstract

There are many different views on the source of happiness. In the happiness economy, income is shown as the most important source of happiness. For this reason, the relationship between income and happiness has been a subject that has been discussed for years, and especially the Easterlin Paradox has come to the fore as a first. The Easterlin Paradox argues that happiness is positively correlated with income, both within and between countries, to a certain extent, but there is no relationship between happiness and income in the long run. In this study, it is aimed to test whether there is a relationship between income and happiness, in short, whether the Easterlin Paradox is valid. For this purpose, the 2007-2019 period data of eight selected (Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia) transition economies are used. Ultimately, the validity of the Easterlin Paradox has been proven.

Özet

Mutluluğun kaynağına ilişkin pek çok farklı görüş bulunmaktadır. Mutluluk ekonomisinde gelir, mutluluğun en önemli kaynağı olarak gösterilmektedir. Bu sebeple gelir ve mutluluk arasındaki ilişki yıllardır tartışılagelmiş bir konu olmuş ve bu konuda özellikle de Easterlin Paradoksu bir ilk olarak öne çıkmıştır. Easterlin Paradoksu, hem ülke içerisinde hem de ülkeler arasında belirli bir düzeye kadar mutluluğun gelirle pozitif ilişkisi olduğunu, ancak uzun dönemde mutluluk ve gelir arasında bir ilişkinin olmadığını ileri sürmektedir. Bu çalışmada gelir ve mutluluk arasında bir ilişki olup olmadığı kısacası Easterlin Paradoksunun geçerli olup olmadığının test edilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla seçili sekiz (Bulgaristan, Estonya, Letonya, Litvanya, Macaristan, Romanya, Slovakya, Slovenya) geçiş ekonomisinin 2007-2019 dönemi verilerinden yararlanılmıştır. Sonuçta Easterlin Paradoksunun geçerliliği kanıtlanmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

TURGUT, E., GÖKTEN, Y. S., UÇAN, O. (2023). The Validity of the Easterlin Paradox: Example of Selected Transitional Economies. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 4, 1372–1382. https://ajindex.com/articles/966510

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Abramovitz, M. (1959) The welfare interpretation of secular trends in national income and product. In The Allocation of economic resources: Essays in honor of Bernard Francis Haley (M. Abramovitz et al.). Stanford, California: Stanford Univ. Press., 1-22.
  2. Angeles, L. (2011). A closer look at the Easterlin paradox. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(1), 67-73. Doi:10.1016/j.socec.2010.06.017 Beja, E. L. (2014). Income growth and happiness: Reassessment of the Easterlin Paradox. International Review of Economics, 61(4), 329-346. Doi: 10.1007/s12232-014-0211-y Beja, E. L. (2018). Testing the easterlin paradox: Results and policy implications. Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, 2(2), 79-83.
  3. Blanchflower, D.G. ve Oswald A. (2002), Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1359 –1386. Celik, S., Aslanoglu, E., and Uzun, S. (2010). Determinants of consumer confidence in emerging economies: a panel cointegration analysis. Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economies, 12. Clark, A., R. Layard and C. Senik (2012),
  4. The causes of happiness and misery, World Happiness REPORT Edited by John Helliwell, Richard Layard and Jeffrey Sachs. Deaton, A. (2008)
  5. Income, Health and Well-Being around the World: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. Journal of Economic Perspectives.Vol. 22. 53–72
  6. Di Tella, R., and MacCulloch, R. (2008). Gross national happiness as an answer to the Easterlin Paradox?. Journal of Development Economics, 86(1), 22-42.
  7. Dobnik, F. (2011). Energy consumption and economic growth revisited: structural breaks and cross-section dependence. Available at SSRN 1981869. Duesenberry, J. S. (1949).
  8. Income, Savings, and the Theory of Consumer Behaviour. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
  9. Easterlin, R.A. (1974), Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence, Editors Paul A. David, Melvin W. Reder, Nations and Households in Economic Growth, Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz, Academic Press, 89-125.
  10. Easterlin, R.A. (1995), Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27, 35-47.
  11. Easterlin, R.A. (2016). Paradox Lost?, USC Dornsife Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 16-02.
  12. Easterlin, R.A. ve Kelsey J. O. (2020),
  13. The Easterlin Paradox, IZA DP No. 13923. Easterlin R.A, L. A. McVey, M. Switek, O. Sawangfa and Zweig, J. S. (2010). The happiness–income paradox revisited, PNAS, 107 (52), 22463–22468.
  14. Jin, O. S.