Bhutan 2010 GNH_Index_3

The 2010 Gross National
Happiness Index : Part III

The Centre for Bhutan Studies
2011

Part III:
Increasing Happiness
1. GNH Index and Policy: concern for Unhappiness
2. Insufficiencies by Dzongkhag
3. Insufficiencies by region
4. Insufficiencies by gender
5. Insufficiencies by age group
6. Insufficiencies by marital status
7. Insufficiencies by occupational group
8. Policy recommendations
9. Sustaining GNH

The GNH Index is formulated to provide an
incentive to Increase Happiness.

Civil servants, business leaders, and citizens
of Bhutan may ask, ‘how can I help to
increase GNH?’

The GNH Index can help them answer this
question in practical ways.

Increasing GNH
“Our nation‟s Vision can only
be fulfilled if the scope of our
dreams and aspirations are
matched by the reality of our
commitment to nurturing
our future citizens.”

HM Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck, the
5th King of Bhutan

Increasing GNH
To Increase happiness, we need to ask a
new set of questions.

We have to identify people who are not yet
happy.

And we have to ask, where do they lack
sufficiency? What must more be done?

This analysis is of direct relevance for policy.

National GNH Index: .737 using
the happiness threshold of 66%

GNH Index by income group (Household per capita income)
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8 GNH Index increases with
income per capita
0.75
• Bhutan still has a significant
0.7 share of people not able to
0.65 meet basic physical needs
• some relationship is
0.6
organic, because income is an
0.55 indicator measured in the
0.5 GNH Index and is also
correlated with
assets, housing, and
education.

National
headcount ratio:

59% of Bhutanese do not fulfil
the threshold of being happy in
6 or more than 6 domains.

According to the GNH
Index, they are „not-yet-happy‟.

Of course, happiness is deeply
personal. Some of these people
may regard themselves as fully
flourishing. That is why we need
to discuss GNH widely in Bhutan.

National Breadth
(Lack of
sufficiency):
Of the Bhutanese who are
unhappy, on average they have
insufficiency in 43% of the
domains (roughly equal to 4
domains)

Proportion of people deprived/unhappy

3,76,975 59%

60%

1,66,124 Indicator:
50% Psychological
wellbeing, Healt
1,46,956 h, Time
40% use, Culture, Ec
26% ology, Commun
ity
30% 23% vitality, Good
Governance and
Living
20% Indicator: standards
Indicator: Health, Educatio
Consumption n and Living
10% per capita Standards

0%
National Poverty line Multidimensional Gross National
2007 Poverty Index 2010 Happiness Index 2010

.

0%
10%
20%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

30%
Life satisfaction
Positive emotions
Negative emotions
Spirituality
Self reported health…
Healthy days
Disability
Mental health
Work
Sleep
Schooling
Literacy
Value
Knowledge
% insufficiency amongst the unhappy

Artisan skills
Speak native language
Cultural participation
Driglam Namzha

Fundamental rights
Services
Political participation
Donations (time &…
Community relationship
Family
Safety
vary?

Ecological issues
Responsibility…
unhappy people.

Wildlife damage (Rural)
higher, it means that

Urbanization issues
% insufficiency amongst the happy

When the blue bars are

Life satisfaction is much
First, a birds eye view of

Assets
happy vs unhappy people.
How do their achievements

higher among the unhappy.
For example, insufficiency in
insufficiency is higher among

Household per capita…
Housing

0%
10%
20%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

30%
Life satisfaction
Positive emotions
Negative emotions
Spirituality
Healthy days
Disability
Mental health
Work
Sleep
Schooling
Literacy
Value
Knowledge

Artisan skills
Driglam Namzha

Fundamental rights

Let’s look further.
Services
Family
have less sufficiency than unhappy.

Safety
Ecological issues
Responsibility…
But some are relatively close; others very different.

Urbanization issues

Assets
Across all indicators we see that there is no indicator in which

orange bars are higher than blue – none in which ‘happy’ people

Housing

0%
10%
20%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%

30%
Life satisfaction 100%

Positive emotions
Negative emotions well-being
Spirituality
Self reported health status
Healthy days
Psychological Health

Disability
Mental health
Work
Sleep
Time Use

Schooling
Literacy
Value

Knowledge
Artisan skills
Driglam Namzha
Government performance
Fundamental rights
Services
well-

that the

Donations (time & money)
Looking at

have higher
insufficiency.
psychological

d time, we see

The groups are
closest in sleep.
being, health, an

‘unhappy’ always

Family
% insufficiency amongst

Schooling
Literacy
Value
e unhappy

Education
Knowledge
Artisan skills
Culture

Driglam Namzha
Fundamental rights
Services
Governance

Family
Safety
Ecological issues
Responsibility towards…

Urbanization issues
Assets
Household per capita income
Housing
In

e, and

highest
Driglam

Political

Both have

education.
Namzha, and

participation.
different in of

deprivations in
groups are least
governance, the

Value, Language,
education, cultur

In
community, ecol
ogy, and living
standard, the
Community Ecology Living strong
Standard
differences are in
wildlife damage
and in living
standard.

Happy people’s
insufficiencies in

Housing
Assets
Ecological issues
Driglam Namzha

Fundamental rights



Urbanization issues
Safety
Services

Family

community and
ecology are
otherwise rather
close and in
urbanization, alm
ost equal.

0%
10%
20%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

30%
Life satisfaction
Positive emotions
Negative emotions
Spirituality
Healthy days
Disability
Mental health
Work
Sleep
Schooling
Literacy
Value
Knowledge

Artisan skills
Driglam Namzha

Fundamental rights
Services
Family
Safety
Ecological issues
Responsibility…
Next we analyse the blue bars – the insufficiencies of
unhappy people – and ask, how can we reduce them?

Urbanization issues

Assets
Housing

Percentage contribution to unhappiness
Health is the lowest Health
contributor to 6% Education
Community
unhappiness followed vitality 16% Education is the
by community vitality 7% highest contributor to
Ecological unhappiness
diversity and
resilience
8%
Living standards
14%
Psychological
wellbeing
11%

Time use
14%
Good
Cultural diversity Governance
and resilience 13%
11%

Domain contribution to unhappiness
Communi Health
Education
Contribution of Education indicators to
ty vitality 6%
Ecological 7% 16% unhappiness
diversity
and
resilience
Living
8%
standards Knowledge
Psycholog 14% 15.0% 6.2%
ical
wellbeing Schooling
11% Time use
Cultural 14% 10.0% 4.8% Literacy
diversity Good
and Governan Value
resilience ce 5.0% 4.2%
11% 13%
0.2%
0.0%
Percentage of people who are not-yet-happy and lack sufficiency
58%
60%
45%
39%
40%

20%
2%
0%
Value Literacy Schooling Knowledge

Communi Health
Contribution of Living standard indicators to
ty vitality
7%
6% Education
16% unhappiness
Ecological
diversity
and 14.0% Housing
resilience
8%
Living
standards
5.7%
Psycholog 14%
ical 9.0% Household per
wellbeing
11% Time use 5.1% capita income
Cultural 14%
diversity Good 4.0% Assets
and
resilience
Governan
ce
2.8%
11% 13%

-1.0%


39%
35%
40%
30% 19%
20%
10%
0%
Assets Household per Housing
capita income

Contribution of Time use indicators Contribution of Good Governance
to unhappiness indicators to unhappiness
Services

15.0% Political
100%
7.2% participation
80% 8.7% 10.0%
60% Work Fundamental
4.6% rights
40% Sleep 5.0%
4.8% 1.1% Government
20% 0.0%
0.6% performance
0%

59%

50% 40% 43%
38%
40%
30% 22% 21%
20%
10%
0% Government Fundamental Political Services
Sleep Work performance rights participation

Cultural diversity and resilience indicators to Psychological wellbeing indicators to unhappiness
unhappiness
Cultural Spirituality
participation
12.0% 10.0%
Artisan skills 4.9% Life satisfaction
10.0% 5.6% 8.0%
8.0%
6.0% Driglam 6.0% 2.2% Positive
3.3% Namzha emotions
4.0% 4.0% 2.1%
2.0% 2.1% Speak native Negative
0.3% 2.0% 1.8%
0.0% language emotions
0.0%

43% 34%
45% 35% 29%
40% 25%
35% 24% 30% 25%
30%
25% 25%
20%
15%
10%
3% 20% 15%
5%
0% 15%
10%
5%
0%
Life Negative Positive Spirituality
satisfaction emotions emotions

Community vitality indicators to Ecological diversity and resilience
unhappiness indicators to unhappiness

Donations (time Wildlife
& money) 10.0% damage (Rural)
8.0%
Community 8.0% Urbanization
6.0% 4.5% relationship
6.0% 5.5% issues
Family
4.0%
4.0% Ecological
2.1% 1.5%
2.0% Safety 2.0% issues
0.8%
0.4% 0.5%
0.0% 0.0% Responsibility
towards
environment
34%
35%
32%
35%
30% 24%
25% 30%

20%
25% 19%
20%
15%
15% 9% 11%
10% 6%
3% 10%
5% 5%
0% 0%
Safety Family Community Donations Urbanization Responsibility Ecological Wildlife
relationship (time & issues towards issues damage
money) environment (Rural)

Communi Health
Contribution of Health indicators to
ty vitality
7%
6% Education
16% unhappiness
Ecological
diversity
and
Healthy days
resilience
Living
8%
standards 6.0%
Psycholog 14% 2.4% Mental health
ical 5.0%
wellbeing
11% Time use 4.0%
Cultural 14% 1.6% Disability
diversity Good
3.0%
and
resilience
Governan
ce
2.0% 1.2%
11% 13%
1.0% 0.9% Self reported
health status
0.0%


18% 20%
20%
12%
15% 9%
10%
5%
0%
Disability Mental health Healthy days Self reported
health status

0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Spirituality

wellbeing
Positive emotions

Psychological
Negative emotions
Life satisfaction

Health
Healthy days
Mental health
Disability

use
Sleep

Time
Work
Knowledge
Schooling

Education
Literacy
Value

and
Driglam Namzha

Cultural
diversity

resilience
Artisan skills
Services

Good
Fundamental rights

Governance
whether they are happy or not yet happy.

vitality

Family
Community

Safety
and

Ecological issues
diversity

resilience
Ecological

Total percentage of people who lack sufficiency in the indicators –

Urbanization issues
Housing
Living

standards

Assets

Total percentage of people who lack sufficiency
More than 50% of the
100.0% Bhutanese are insufficient in
90.0% 3 of the 4 indicators of
80.0% Education.
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%

Education Ecolog
Psychological Time Cultural
diversi
wellbeing use diversity
and
Health and Good Community
resilien
resilience Governance vitality

Literacy Schooling
Literate Illterate HS education Diploma/Cer Bachelors
(till degree tificate, 0.69 Degree, 2.45 Post
2nd yr), 4.21 Graduate, 0.
48
MS
education
(X), 7.50

LS education
46% (VIII), 5.36

54% Primary No formal
education education, 6
(VI), 13.75 5.56

Knowledge
Knowledge of local legends and folk tales Knowledge and understanding in local
Good tshechus and festivals
10% Very good Very good
Good
2% 2%
10%

Very poor
Average 37%
Very poor
23% Average
23% 37%

Poor
Poor
28%
28%
Knowledge and understanding in
traditional Bhutanese songs
Very good
4%

Good Very poor
17% 32%

Average
22%
Poor
25%

Knowledge (contd.)

Knowledge and understanding on Knowledge of Constitution
transmission of HIV/AIDS
Not at all Very good
5% 2%
Good
Good 12%
understan
Just heard Very poor
ding
of it 33%
31%
21%
Average
24%

Some
understan
Poor
ding
29%
43%

Total percentage of people who lack sufficiency

100.0% More than 40% of the
90.0%
Bhutanese are insufficient in
2 of the 4 indicators of Good
80.0%
Governance
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%

Education Ecolog
Psychological Time Cultural
diversi
wellbeing use diversity
and
Health and Good Community
resilien
resilience Governance vitality

Services
River, pond, Spring
lake, streams Source of water 2%
Very
Quality of drinking water Poor
, rainwater Unprotected poor 5%
2% Others well 2% Neither
0% 0%
Protect well good
1% nor poor
Piped-in
dwelling Public 10%
25% outdoor tap
21% Very good
38%
Piped water
outside
house Good
49% 45%
Dump Dump in
on open
Waste disposal method forest
air Others 1%
Dump in
1% 1% rivers/strea
Municipal ms
garbage 1%
pick-up
Composting 15%
26%

Burning
55%

Ele Do you have electricity in your Distance to nearest health care
ctri
household? centre
city
0%
More than
No 60 mins or 60 mins
28% less than 60 walk to
mins walk nearest
to nearest health care
health care centre
centre 37%
Yes 63%
72%


Will you participate in the next In the past 12 months, how many
No general election? times have you attended zomdues
4% Don' (meetings)?
know
3%

Never
37%

Once or
more
Yes
63%
93%

Fundamental rights
Do you feel that you have right to Do you feel you have the right to
freedom of speech and opinion? Don't vote?
Don't No know No
know 8% 1% 1%
1%

Yes Yes
91% 98%

Do you feel you have the right to join Do you feel you have the right to
political party of your choice?
form tshogpa?
Don't
Don't know No know No
2% 6%
5% 12%

Yes
Yes
92% 83%

Do you have right to equal access Do you have right to equal pay
and apportunity to join public for work of equal value?
service?
Don't Don't
know No
know No
3% 12%
4% 15%

Yes
Yes
85%
81%
Are you free from discrimination based on
race, sex, raligion language etc.?
Don't know No
2% 12%

Yes
86%

Percentage of not-yet-happy people by district

Higher percentage of not-yet-happy people Lower percentage of not-yet-happy people

Paro Psychological wellbeing
Sarpang
Dagana
Health
Tsirang
Punakha
Haa Time use
Thimphu
Gasa Education
Zhemgang
Chukha
Wangdue… Cultural diversity and
resilience
Bumthang
Samtse Good Governance
Mongar
Pema Gatshel
Community vitality
Tashigang
Lhuntse
Tashi Yangste Ecological diversity and
Trongsa resilience
Samdrup Jongkhar Living standards
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

.

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Life satisfaction
Spirituality

wellbeing
Negative emotions

Psychological
Positive emotions
Disability
Mental health

Health
Healthy days
Sleep

use
Time
Work
Value
Paro

Literacy
Schooling

Education
Knowledge

and
Driglam Namzha

Cultural
Artisan skills

diversity

resilience
Fundamental rights

Good

Governance
Services
Samdrup Jongkhar

Safety
Family
vitality

Community

Ecological issues
and

diversity

resilience
Ecological

Urbanization issues
Living

Assets
standards

Housing
Percentage of Bhutanese who are not-yet-happy and lack sufficiency in indicators

.

Percentage of not-yet-happy people

0.9
Population in hundred thousands

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

.

Pema Thimphu
Punakha, 9,278 Haa, 6,198
Where do the Gatshel, 9,108 Chukha
Gasa, 1,681
unhappy Samtse
people live? Dagana, 9,431 Tashigang

Samdrup Jongkhar
Thimphu Trongsa, 9,567
Mongar
and Chukha Bumthang, 9,734
Sarpang
are home to Tsirang, 9,760 Thimphu, 52,910 Wangdue Phodrang
the highest Lhuntse, 10,432 Paro
number of Zhemgang, 10,54 Tashi Yangste
unhappy 4
Chukha, 42,431 Zhemgang
people…. Tashi
Lhuntse
Note Chukha Yangste, 12,124
Paro, 16,886 Tsirang
and Samtse, 36,574
Bumthang
Thimphu
Trongsa
also house Wangdue Dagana
the highest Phodrang, 18,646
Punakha
number of
Pema Gatshel
happy Sarpang, 20,231
people! Tashigang, 34,168
Haa

They are big Mongar, 23,034
Samdrup
Gasa

dzongkhags. Jongkhar, 30,450

Average insufficiencies amongst the not-yet-happy
Those living in Samdrup Jongkhar, Lhuentse, Tashi Yangste, and
Trongsa experience insufficiency in the most indicators at the same
time.

Higher insufficiencies Lower insufficiencies

70% 63%

50%
60%
44% 42%
50%
More unhappy people in rural
40% areas! Rural
30% Urban

20%

10%

0%
Percentage of not-yet- Average insufficiency
happy
.

67%
70%
In Rural areas, not-
yet-happy people‟s
60% 55%
average „shortfall‟ 43% 41%
50% about the same
is
as urban shortfall.
40%
Rural
This
30% is good news. Urban

It
20% suggests less
disparity in
10%
unhappiness by
region.
0%
Percentage of unhappy Average insufficiency
people
.

Contribution of the domains to Unhappiness at the national level, for
urban areas and for rural areas
100%
16% 15% 12%
90% Education
7%
80%
15% 14% Living standards
15%
70%
14% Time use
60% 13%
16%
Good Governance
50% 13% 13%
12% Psychological
40% 11%
11% wellbeing
30% 14% Cultural diversity and
11% 11% resilience
20% 8% Ecological diversity
8% 8%
5% and resilience
10% 6% 6%
Health
7% 11%
6%
0%
Community vitality
Rural National Urban
.

100%
16% 15% 12%
90% Education
7%
80%
15%
70%
14% Time use
60% 13%
16%
Good Governance
50% 13% 13%
12% Psychological
40% 11%
11% wellbeing
30%
Urban Areas have 14% Cultural diversity and
highest insufficiency in
11% 11% resilience
20% Governance, Time 8%
8% Ecological diversity
8%
use, and Culture. 5% and resilience
10% 6% 6%
Health
7% 11%
6%
0%
Community vitality
.

100%
16% 15% 12%
90% Education
7%
80%
15%
70%
14% Time use
60% 13%
16%
Good Governance
50% 13% 13%
12% Psychological
40% 11%
11% wellbeing
30% Rural Areas have
14% Cultural diversity and
11% 11% resilience
highest
20% 8% Ecological diversity
8% 8% insufficiency in
5% and resilience
10% 6% 6% Education and Health
7% 11%
Living Standards.
6%
0%
Community vitality
.

Percentage of Bhutanese who are not yet happy and lack sufficiency
in Education and Good Governance indicators
Value

Government
Literacy
performance

Political Rural
Schooling
participation Urban
National

Fundamental
Knowledge
rights

Services

.

Percentage of Bhutanese who are not-yet-happy and lack sufficiency
in Cultural diversity and resilience and Community vitality
indicators
Safety
50%

Cultural 40%
Family
participation
30%

20%

10%
Community Rural
Artisan skills 0%
relationship
Urban
National

Donations (time &
Driglam Namzha
money)

Speak native
language
.

in Living standards indicators
Assets
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% National
0% Rural
Urban

Household
Housing per capita
income

.

GNH Index by gender

0.8

0.78 0.783

0.76

0.74 0.737

0.72
0.704
0.7

0.68

0.66

Female
National
Male

.

Significant tests for GNH indices for gender
0.800

0.780

0.760

0.740

0.720

0.700

0.680
Lower
0.660 boundary
Male Female GNH index

Upper
boundary

.

67%
70%

60%
51% 67% of women
are unhappy.
44%
50% 42%
About 51% of
40%
men are Male
30%
unhappy. Female

20%

10%

0%
Percentage of not-yet-happy Average insufficiency
people

67%
70%
Not-yet-happy
51%
60%
people‟s average 44%
42%
„shortfall‟ (lack
50%

40% sufficiency) is
of Male
the almost same
30% Female

for men and
20%
women.
10%

0%
Percentage of unhappy Average insufficiency
people

Contribution of the domains to unhappiness by gender

Health

Community vitality

6% 8% 8% 11% 11% 13% 13% 13% 16% Ecological diversity and
Female
resilience
Psychological wellbeing

Cultural diversity and
resilience
Good Governance
5% 7% 9% 10% 12% 13% 14% 14% 15%
Male
Time use

Living standards

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Education

The contribution to unhappiness in men and women by the
respective domains is similar

in Health and Psychological wellbeing indicators

Disability
40%

Life satisfaction 30% Mental health

20%

10% Male
Negative Female
0% Healthy days
emotions
National

Positive Self reported
emotions health status

Spirituality

GNH Index by age group
0.8

0.78

0.76

0.74

0.72

0.7

0.68 GNH is highest
among those
0.66 aged 21-25

0.64

0.62

0.6
<=20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65

.

Domain contribution to unhappiness by age group
Psychological wellbeing
61-65 9% 9% 11% 18% 10% 7% 15%

56-60 10% 8% 14% 17% 10% 6% 15% Health

51-55 10% 8% 14% 17% 10% 6% 14%
Time use
46-50 11% 6% 14% 17% 10% 6% 15%
Education
41-45 10% 5% 16% 16% 11% 6% 14%

11% 6% 14% 16% 11% 7% 14%
36-40
resilience
31-35 11% 5% 15% 15% 11% 8% 13% Good Governance

26-30 12% 4% 14% 14% 13% 9% 12%
Community vitality
21-25 12% 4% 14% 12% 13% 10% 11%
Ecological diversity and
<=20 13% 4% 11% 11% 14% 11% 13% resilience
Living standards
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Young people are better educated, healthier, and have relatively good living
standards. Older people do better in culture, governance, community, and
psychological well-being.
.

Percentage of the not-yet-happy in Psychological wellbeing indicators
45%
41% Spirituality
40% 37%
37% Positive emotions
36% 35%
35% 34% Negative emotions
30%
30% 29% 28% 27% 27%
25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%
<=20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65

Percentage of the not-yet-happy in Health indicators
45%

40%
35% Healthy days
Disability
30% Mental health

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%
<=20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65

Percentage of the not-yet-happy in Community vitality indicators
80%
Donationa (time & money)

70% Community relationship
Family
60% Safety

50%

40%
The not-yet happy still have very
30% high and stable achievements in
family and safety – except the
20% very young. Community
decreases with age.
10%

0%
<=20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65

Percentage of the not-yet-happy in Community vitality indicators

70%
Work
Sleep
60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
<=20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 >65

Percentage of not-yet-happy Note: results are illustrative only
GNH Index
Average insufficiency amongst the not-yet-happy
90%
81%
80%
73%
70%
64%
60% 58%

50%
50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Never married Married Divorced Separated Widowed

Contribution of domains to unhappiness by marital status

Widowed 10% 9% 11% 18% 9% 13% 6% 8% 15% Psychological wellbeing

Health

Separated 10% 9% 11% 16% 11% 13% 8% 9% 14%
Time use

Education
Divorced 11% 7% 13% 16% 9% 14% 8% 8% 14%
resilience

Married Good Governance
11% 6% 14% 16% 11% 13% 7% 8% 14%

Community vitality

Never married 12% 5% 12% 11% 15% 15% 9% 9% 11% Ecological diversity and
resilience
Living standards
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Contribution of domains to unhappiness by marital status

Widowed 10% 9% 11% 18% 9% 13% 6% 8% 15% Psychological wellbeing

The contrast between
Health
married, divorced, separ
Separated 10% 9% 11% 16% 11% 13% 8% 9% 14% ated, and widowed is
Time use
not very big.
Education
Divorced 11% 7% 13% 16% 9% 14% 8% 8% 14% Widowed and Divorced
enjoy a little lessand
Cultural diversity
resilience
culture.
Married Good Governance
11% 6% 14% 16% 11% 13% 7% 8% 14%
Never married to show
aCommunityprofile of
different vitality
deprivations
Never married 12% 5% 12% 11% 15% 15% 9% 9% 11% Ecological diversity and
resilience
Living standards
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Note: The survey is not representative by
occupational group, and some of the occupational
categories are very small. So these results must be
understood to be ‘illustrative’ but not definitive.
Further research would be required to verify their
accuracy.

Percentage of not-yet-happy people
GNH Index
Average insufficiency amongst the not-yet-happy people
1
0.9 88%

0.8
69%
0.7
0.6 56% 58%
51% 53%
49% 50%
0.5
41% 42%
0.4 37%
27% 29%
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

.

Contribution of domains to unhappiness by occupational status
Psychological
Civil servants 12% 4% 14% 8% 18% 18% 12% 5% wellbeing

Monk/Anim 6% 14% 5% 16% 15% 16% 11% 17% Health

GYT/DYT member 10% 7% 16% 16% 11% 10% 6% 13%
Time use
School… 13% 5% 11% 7% 17% 17% 12% 9%

Trader/Shopkeep… 12% Education
5% 19% 13% 14% 14% 11% 5%

Unemployed 15% 4% 11% 10% 15% 19% 12% 8% Cultural
diversity and
Gomchen 6% 8% 11% 13% 7% 16% 8% 20%
resilience
Good
Corporate employee 10% 5% 17% 10% 15% 17% 11% 9% Governance
RBG/RBA/RBP 10% 3% 20% 12% 15% 16% 10% 9% Community
vitality
Others 11% 4% 14% 15% 14% 15% 9% 12%
Ecological
House wife 12% 6% 13% 15% 11% 16% 12% 8% diversity and
resilience
Farmer 11% 6% 13% 17% 10% 12% 6% 16% Living
standards
National Work… 10% 4% 16% 16% 11% 18% 9% 12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Percentage of the not-yet-happy in some of the Psychological wellbeing indicators
- monk/anim have lowest insufficiencies.
50%
45% Positive emotions
40% Negative emotions
35%
Spirituality
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%

Who can increase GNH?

•Life satisfaction
•Positive emotions
•Negative emotions • Political participation
Community effort • Services
•Self reported health
•Number of healthy days • Government
performance
•Disability
• Donations • Fundamental rights
•Mental health
•Safety • Literacy
•Work
•Community relationship •Schooling
•Sleep
•Cultural participation •Knowledge
•Responsibility towards
•Wildlife damage •Value
environment
•Driglam Namzha •Zorig Chusum skills
•Speak native language
•Assets •Urban issues
•Housing •Ecological issues
•Family
•Household per capita
income
Government effort
Individual/House
hold effort

Individuals are linked out

performance
•Disability
•Mental health
•Work
•Sleep
environment
•Family
income
Government effort
Individual/House
hold effort

Communties affect others

performance
•Disability
•Mental health
•Work
•Sleep
environment
•Family
income
Government effort
Individual/House
hold effort

And so does government

performance
•Disability
•Mental health
•Work
•Sleep
environment
•Family
income
Government effort
Individual/House
hold effort

GNH is created when different groups
work to do what they do best.
Meaningful
Government/ work, services, products
Corporation/
Private

Community/ Meaningful
Civil society/ relationships, collective
action, models
Religious

Sharing, relationships, a
uthentic self-
Individual/ direction, shaping own
happiness
Household

GNH Index highlights- Education

 Education is the highest contributor to
unhappiness as per GNH Index

 Bhutanese have more than 50% insufficiency in 3
of the 4 indicators

 The highest insufficiency being in the
knowledge indicator. Bhutanese experience low
levels of knowledge in cultural & historical
aspects of the country & in health and politics.

Proportion having insufficiency in Education indicators
• Knowledge comprises of
4-sub indicators which are
observed to be relatively
low in the country
Schooling (45%) irrespective of any
demographic characters

Value Literacy
Education (52%)
(3%)
Weights:
Schooling and
literacy higher
weights
•Knowledge of local legends and folk stories
Knowledge •Knowledge of local tshechus
(93%) • Knowledge of traditional Bhutanese songs
• Knowledge of Constitution
•Knowledge of HIV/AIDS

Education is the highest contributor to unhappiness

Proportion having insufficiency in Education indicators

Schooling (45%) • Literacy and schooling are
•
conventional indicators for
which policies are already in
lined for its advancement

Value Literacy
Education (52%)
(3%)
Weights:
Schooling and
literacy higher
weights
•Knowledge of local legends and folk stories
Knowledge •Knowledge of local tshechus
(93%) • Knowledge of traditional Bhutanese songs
• Knowledge of Constitution
•Knowledge of HIV/AIDS

Bhutan 2010 GNH_Index_3

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Bhutan 2010 GNH_Index_3

Similar to Bhutan 2010 GNH_Index_3 (15)

More from Centre for Bhutan Studies

More from Centre for Bhutan Studies (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Bhutan 2010 GNH_Index_3