Easterlin Paradoksunun Geçerliliği: Seçili Geçiş Ekonomileri Örneği

Öz

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.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mutluluk Ekonomisi
• Easterlin Paradoksu
• Panel Veri Analizi
• Gelir Dağılımı
• Gelişmişlik

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

Öz

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.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• happiness economics
• Easterlin Paradox
• panel data analysis
• income distribution
• development

Kaynakça

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
3. 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
4. Beja, E. L. (2018). Testing the easterlin paradox: Results and policy implications. Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, 2(2), 79-83.
5. Blanchflower, D.G. ve Oswald A. (2002), Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1359 –1386.
6. 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.
7. Clark, A., R. Layard and C. Senik (2012), The causes of happiness and misery, World Happiness REPORT Edited by John Helliwell, Richard Layard and Jeffrey Sachs.
8. Deaton, A. (2008) Income, Health and Well-Being around the World: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. Journal of Economic Perspectives .Vol. 22. 53–72

9. 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.
10. Dobnik, F. (2011). Energy consumption and economic growth revisited: structural breaks and cross-section dependence. Available at SSRN 1981869.
11. Duesenberry, J. S. (1949). Income, Savings, and the Theory of Consumer Behaviour. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
12. 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.
13. Easterlin, R.A. (1995), Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27, 35-47.
14. Easterlin, R.A. (2016). Paradox Lost?, USC Dornsife Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 16-02.
15. Easterlin, R.A. ve Kelsey J. O. (2020), The Easterlin Paradox, IZA DP No. 13923.
16. 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.
17. Jin, O. S. ve Wunnava, P. V. (2020). Feeling Richer and Happier? Self-Perceived Economic Welfare and Life Satisfaction: Evidence of 'Easterlin Paradox' from Russian Longitudinal Data, GLO Discussion Paper, No. 625, Global Labor Organization (GLO), Essen
18. Kahneman D., A. B. Krueger , D. Schkade, N. Schwarz and Stone A. A. (2006). Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer? A Focusing Illusion, Working Papers 77, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies.
19. Kızılarslan, Ş. ve Usta, D. (2021). Easterlın paradoksunun alternatif bir yaklaşımla incelenmesi: panel kesirli polinomiyal modeller. Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23(2), 533-550.
20. Lakshmanasamy, T. ve Maya, K. (2020). Is it income adaptation or social comparison? The effect of relative income on happiness and the Easterlin paradox in India. The Indian Economic Journal, 68(4), 477-495.
21. Li, L. ve Shi, L. (2019). Economic growth and subjective well-being: analyzing the formative mechanism of Easterlin Paradox. The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 6(1), 1-19. Doi: 10.1186/s40711-018-0090-9.
22. Lipset, S. M. (1960). Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.
23. Mentus, V. ve Vladisavljević, M. (2021). Easterlin paradox revisited: Do increases in income bring higher levels of income satisfaction?. Sociologija, 63(2), 220-235. Doi:10.2298/SOC102220M
24. Oishi, S. ve Kesebir, S. (2015). Income inequality explains why economic growth does not always translate to an increase in happiness. Psychological science, 26(10), 1630-1638. Doi: 10.1177/0956797615596713
25. Opfinger, M. (2016). The Easterlin paradox worldwide. Applied Economics Letters, 23(2), 85-88. , Doi: 10.1080/13504851.2015.1051650
26. Pala, A. (2020). Energy and economic growth in G20 countries: Panel cointegration analysis. 739898418.
27. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. University of Cambridge, Faculty of Economics, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics No. 0435.
28. Pigou, A. C. (1951), Some Aspects Of Welfare Economics, The American Economic Review , Jun., 1951, Vol. 41, No. 3, 287- 302.
29. Pollak, R.A. (1976). Interdependent Preferences. American Economic Review, 66(3), 309-320.
30. Sacks, D. W., B. Stevenson, and Wolfers J. (2010). Subjective Well-Being, Income, Economic Development and Growth. No. w16441. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
31. Sedaghat Kalmarzi, H., Fattahi, S. ve Sohaili, K. (2021). Testing the Easterlin Paradox in the Framework of Resource Curse Hypothesis: A Case Study of the OPEC Countries. Journal of Applied Economics Studies in Iran, 10(38), 1-14. Doi: 10.22084/AES.2020.23088.3201
32. Slag, M., Burger, M. J. ve Veenhoven, R. (2019). Did the Easterlin Paradox apply in South Korea between 1980 and 2015? A case study. International Review of Economics, 66(4), 325-351. Doi: 10.1007/s12232-019-00325-w
33. Starkauskienė, V. ve Galinskaitė, A. (2015). Subjective Well-being and Income: Analysis and Evidence on Easterlin Paradox. Applied Economics: Systematic Research, 9(2), 49-64. Doi: 10.7220/AESR.2335.8742.2015.9.2.3
34. Stevenson, B. ve Wolfers J. (2008). Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 1–87.
35. Swamy, P. A. (1970). Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 311-323.
36. Şener, S. (2022). Legatum Refah Endeksi Göstergeleri ve Verileri Kullanılarak Refahın Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri İle Değerlendirilmesi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 17(1), 46-70.
37. Inglesi-Lotz, R., Chang, T. ve Gupta, R. (2015). Causality between research output and economic growth in BRICS. Quality & Quantity, 49(1), 167-176.
38. Vandendriessche, D. (2013). Europe on the path of progress: Evidence against the Easterlin paradox in the short and long terms. Master Thesis, Université Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne.
39. Veenhoven, R. (1991), Is Happiness Relative? Published in: Social Indicators Research, 24, 1-18.
40. Veenhoven, R. ve Vergunst, F. (2014). The Easterlin illusion: economic growth does go with greater happiness. International Journal of Happiness and Development, 1(4), 311-343.
41. Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 69: 709–748.