AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 90

AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING:

EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN SOCIAL SURVEY

Verda Salman
Asma Hyder

Abstract
This study builds on European Social Survey for the year 2010 to estimate
the well-being functions for 25,677 adults living across the continent. It is
an attempt to explore the determinants of three major dimensions of well-
being i.e., life evaluation, affect and eudaimonia. The paper contributes in
the construction of three unique measures of subjective well-being. Also, it
probes the societal and individual variables that may affect the levels of
satisfaction in life. The proposed indices in the three dimensions of
subjective well-being will help in the revival of policy to improve the overall
condition of the populace. The simultaneous incorporation of three different
measures augments the existent literature. Likewise, the choice of
explanatory variables brings forward some interesting findings. For
instance, education coupled with immigrant status increases life
satisfaction but not necessarily emotional well-being. Similarly, policies
aimed at the social inclusion of minorities carry a hugely positive influence
on all the three stated measures of well-being.

Keywords: Subjective Well-being, life evaluation, eudaimonia, Europe

Introduction
The concept of subjective well-being (SWB) has attracted a lot of interest
from economists, sociologists and psychologists alike. Psychologists often
use SWB as an umbrella term to describe an individual’s perception about
his/her life.1 The literature with regards to SWB has largely focused on the
satisfactory measures that encompass comparative material and physical
prosperity.2 It is still embryonic in its investigations on sentiments and their

1
Ed Diener, Eunkook M. Suh, Richard E. Lucas, & Heidi L. Smith, “Subjective Well-Being:
Three Decades of Progress”, Psychological Review 125 (1999): 276-302.
2
John F. Helliwell, “How's Life? Combining Individual and National Variables to Explain
Subjective Well-Being”, Economic Modeling 20, no.2 (2003): 331-360.
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 91

impact. Of late, there has been an earnest realization that economic policy
requires a multidisciplinary approach which takes cognizance of
contemporary geo-politics with an eye on socio-cultural issues. The
concept of subjective well-being provides equal weight to every discipline
for better policy outcomes.

Economists have singularly focused on GDP as the chief indicator of

growth. Given the multi-dimensional and complex nature of socio-
economic well-being, dependence on any single scale of well-being may
not be very useful. The linkages among different dimensions of well-being
should be quantified and measured for a balanced policy. Thus, broad
governance perspectives that target the collective well-being of society at
large are required along with engrossed material indicators, which are
indispensable for basic needs.

Treaty on European Union (1992) was a formal policy initiative, which

aimed to promote subjective well-being across the European Union. Article
3 of the Treaty deals with the subjective well-being of a citizen. The year
2007 saw the release of Feasibility Study for Well-being Indicators and few
academic conferences on the said agenda. French President Nicolas
Sarkozy formed a commission under Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph
Stiglitz. The commission presented their report GDP and Beyond:
Measuring Progress in the Changing World in 2009.3 The findings of this
report raised several concerns.4

In this paper, the authors analyse the three different dimensions of SWB
instead of merely focusing on life satisfaction or material well-being. The
study distinguishes itself from existing literature by its choice of
independent variables. They include discrimination, policy, cultural and
societal variables, and conventional individual controls. Thus, this approach
offers a dashboard of variables that we used in exploration of all three
dimensions of the SWB of our interest. Furthermore, the authors argue

3
Joseph E. Stiglitz, Amartya Sen and Jean-Paul Fitoussi, “GDP and Beyond: Measuring
Progress in the Changing World”, Report by the Commission on the Measurement of
Economic Performance and Social Progress. 2009.
4
Tom H k, Savatava anou kov , Saamah Abdallah, Charles Seaford, and Sorcha Mahony,
Review Report on Beyond GDP Indicators: Catego- risation, Intensions and Impacts, Final
version of BRAINPOoL deliverable 1.1, A collaborative project funded by the European
Commission under the FP7 programme, 2012 (Contract no. 283024).
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 92

that it is quite possible that one variable which significantly contributes

(positively/negatively) to the equation of life satisfaction might not play
any role in 'affect (feelings and emotions)' and ‘eudemonic (overall
fulfillment in life)’ equations. Section three provides the definition of these
three dimensions. Finally, another contribution of this paper is its
multidisciplinary approach in exploration process. The empirical part of this
paper is to strengthen the argument of urgency of societal and cultural
variables in policy formulation on subjective well-being of citizens. This
scheme of exploration of SWB is based on OECD guidelines for subjective
well-being measurement. There is a further elaboration on measurement
of well-being used in this paper in 'methods' section followed by 'data
description'. The fourth section of this paper presents the results of this
analysis and finally this paper concludes with the discussion on present
policies and their implications for future policy formulation.

Literature review
The concept owes its birth to Bentham's (1781) idea of utility. Initially, the
economists restricted the idea to monetary satisfaction. Since utility
depends on individual levels of consumption, aggregate GDP per capita
became the logical scale for the measurement of an economy's progress
and well-being. Nevertheless, GDP as an objective measure of well-being,
has always remained debatable among researchers and policy makers.

The argument took a new turn with Easterlin’s claim in 1974 that positive
relationship between happiness and income vanishes beyond a certain
level of income.5 Whilst richer people are happier than poorer, richer
nations usually aren't. The introduction of Sen's approach to well-being
moved the debate from utility to capability. Sen's capability approach is
based on three dimensions of functioning, capability and agency; the idea
of what is valuable to an individual, the freedom of attaining valuables and
essentials; and finally the ability to attain what is valuable and
worthwhile. The focus was then shifted from one-dimensional indicators of
well-being to multi-dimensional indicators notably Human Development
Index with its variant forms and Quality of Life Index. Kahneman et al. in

5
Richard Easterlin, “Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical
Evidence” In P. David and M. Reder (eds.), Nations and Households in Economic Growth:
Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz (New York and London, Academic Press, 1974), 89.
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 93

2004 6 also emphasized on the construction of ‘National Well-being

Accounts’ in response to the two puzzles generated by empirical literature;
lesser impact of circumstances of individuals on well-being and evidence
of large differences in reported life satisfaction among various countries.

The discussion on this topic is equally popular across disciplines.

Psychologists presented variety of theories in their attempt to understand
happiness and life satisfaction. These theories range from need/ goal
satisfaction theories (Hedonic theory, Comparison theory, Desire theory)
and Process theories (Flow theory) to predisposition theories (such as big
five traits model). However, there is heightened importance of the subject
among economists because of its role in measurement of consumer
preferences and social welfare.7 Whereas, the issue got the attention of
economists almost three decades ago, the report by three well-known
economists namely Stiglitz, Sen and Fissturui8, multiplied the importance of
the concept of social well-being. Fitoussi and Stiglitz9 emphasised on the
measurement of three social dimensions of progress: the measurement of
the economic product, the measurement of well being, and the
measurement of sustainability.

Empirical evidence during last two decades show that beside

macroeconomic variables, the well-being in Europe is also largely affected
by societal and behavioural variables.10 Many researchers particularly in
Europe and the US like Easterlin et al.11, Diener et al.12 and Inglehart13 have

6
Daniel Kahneman, Alan B. Krueger, David A. Schkade, Norbert Schwarz and Arthur A.
Stone, “Towards National Well-Being Accounts”, AEA Papers and Proceedings 94(2) 2004:
429-434.
7
Bruno S. Frey, Simon Luechinger & Alois Stutzer, “Valuing Public Goods: The Life
Satisfaction Approach”, Public Choice, 138, 2009: 317–345.
8
Stiglitz, Joseph E., Amartya Sen, and Jean-Paul Fitoussi, “Report of the Commission on the
Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress”, CMEPSP 2009.
http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr
9
Fitoussi, Jean-Paul and Stiglitz, Joseph E, “On the Measurement of Social Progress and
Well-being: Some Further Thoughts”, Global Policy, 4(3) 2013: 290-293.
10
Aquib Aslam, & Luisa Corrado, “No man is an island: The inter-personal determinants of
regional well- being and life satisfaction in Europe”, Cambridge Working Paper in
Economics 2007, CWPE 0717.
11
Richard Easterlin, Laura Angelescu McVey, Malgorzata Switek, Onnicha Sawangfa, and
acqueline Smith Zweig, “The Happiness-Income Paradox Revisited”, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 107(52) 2010: 22463–22468.
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 94

challenged the positive relationship between income and life satisfaction.

They advocated that increases in income beyond a threshold level does not
raise happiness.

Data
European Science Foundation presented their recommendations in the last
decade of the twentieth century to monitor the societal and cultural
changes throughout Europe. In early twenty first century, the European
Commission and many research councils joined to conduct the European
Social Survey. Since then, this survey has been conducted after every two
years and helped to study the changes in social values and citizen’s
perspective. The aim of The European Social Survey is to “evaluate the
success of European countries in promoting the personal and social well-
being of their citizens”.14 The authors of this paper consider the European
Social Survey (ESS) round 5, year 2010 for their analysis. The survey
measures the attitudes, beliefs and behavior patterns. The total sample in
this analysis consists of 25,677 individuals. The authors carefully select the
set of individual, household, societal and political variables in their
exploration of determinants of three unique dimensions of well-being.
Annex table 1 provide the summary statistics for all variables used in
analysis.

Table 1: Summary Statistics

Std.
Variable Mean
Dev.
Gender (Base= Male) 0.516 0.499
Age 48.963 18.226
Household size 2.624 1.372
Relationship with husband/wife/partner currently living
with (1=legally married)
2=In a legally registered civil union 0.013 0.114

12
Ed Diener, Marissa Diener, and C. Diener, “Factors Predicting the Subjective Well-Being of
Nations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1995: 851–864.
13
Ronald Inglehart, (1990), Cultural Shift in Advanced Industrial Society, Princeton 1990:
Princeton University Press.
14
Felicia A. Huppert, Nic Marks, Andrew Clark Johannes Siegrist, Alois Stutzer, Joar Vitterso,
Morten Wahrendorf. “Measuring well-being across Europe”, Description of the ESS well-
being module and preliminary findings, Social Indicators Research 91, 2009: 301–315.
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 95

3=Living with partner-not legally recognized 0.143 0.351

4= Living with partner- legally recognized 0.043 0.203
5=Legally separated 0.000 0.021
6= Legally divorced/ civil union dissolved 0.002 0.039
Education level (1= Less than lower secondary education)
2=Lower secondary education completed 0.179 0.383
3=Upper secondary education completed 0.341 0.474
4=Post-secondary non-tertiary education 0.049 0.217
5=Tertiary education completed 0.299 0.457
Employment relation ( 1=Employee)
2=Self Employed 0.113 0.316
3=Working for own family business 0.017 0.129
Household Wealth Deciles (Labor and Non labor income)
st
(1=1 Decile)
nd
2=2 Decile 0.121 0.326
rd
3=3 Decile 0.111 0.314
th
4=4 Decile 0.111 0.315
th
5=5 Decile 0.105 0.307
th
6=6 Decile 0.103 0.305
th
7=7 Decile 0.099 0.299
th
8=8 Decile 0.089 0.286
th
9=9 Decile 0.080 0.272
th
10=10 Decile 0.078 0.269
Member of a group discriminated in this
0.935 0.242
country(Base=yes)
Homosexual Liberty (1=Strongly disagree)
2=Disagree 0.057 0.232
3=Neither agree nor disagree 0.107 0.309
4=Agree 0.394 0.489
5=Strongly agree 0.402 0.490
Citizenship (Base=yes) 0.044 0.205
how often do you meet socially with friends, relatives or
4.927 1.557
work colleagues? (Scale 1-10)
Involved in voluntary work (Base=no) 0.183 0.387
Religiosity 4.549 3.008
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 96

How democratic is country overall? 8.357 11.449

How often, if at all, do you worry about becoming a
victim of
violent crime? (1=All time)
2=Some times 0.155 0.362
3=Occasionally 0.355 0.478
4=Never 0.463 0.499
No. of observations 25677

Average age in this sample size is 48 years. Generally speaking, being alone
appears to be worse for SWB than being part of a partnership. Moreover,
the nature of relationship is important in SWB. The authors include five
different categories of marital relationship (Table 1). The relationship
between income and SWB is very complicated.15 Highest proportion in this
sample is of those who completed the upper secondary education,
followed by those completed their tertiary education. To examine whether
income is playing a role in life satisfaction, affect or eudemonic well-being,
the household income from all sources is incorporated. In order to
distinguish this income variable from one of the considered dependent
variable- life satisfaction– first, we take this variable as wealth which is an
income from all labour and non-labour sources. Secondly, it is taken in
deciles. The idea behind incorporating this variable is that income decile
may increase the life satisfaction but may or may not the other two types
of well-being. These deciles are included in the specification to capture the
relative economic class of the individual thus different from earned income
of individuals.

The social variables we study are the impact of discrimination, the freedom
of living for gays and lesbians,16 the effects of meeting friends and family 17
and the frequency of social interaction.

15
Andrew Clark, Paul Frijters, & Michael Shields, “A Survey of the Income Happiness
Gradient”, Journal of Economic Literature, 46(1) 2007.
16
This variable explains how people feel about it and how much they have freedom to live
or how much in society there is the acceptability for them not to capture exactly the rules
and regulations.
17
Paul Dolan, Tessa Teasgood, and Mathew White, “Do We Really Know what Makes us
Happy? A Review of the Economic Literature on the Factors Associated with Subjective
Well-being”, Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 2008: 94-122.
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 97

Whilst exploring the impact of personal and social variable we also include
some societal variables. The societal variables include the overall degree of
democracy and rule of law in the country. Our analysis also includes the
variable of citizenship (If living in the country of citizenship: yes/no). The
impact of religion is different across geographical areas especially between
US and Europe.18 Thus, we also consider the degree of being religious. The
choice of countries includes two countries from central Europe, three
countries from southern Europe, three countries from eastern Europe, two
from west and one from northern region.

Methods
Given the wide range of diverse definitions on the concept and
measurement of subjective well-being (SWB) variable, we followed a more
comprehensive approach and provide an in-depth analysis. Earlier
empirical literature on subjective well-being restricts its definition to one’s
evaluation of his/her level of satisfaction or simply happiness. Both
happiness and satisfaction, though being an important component of SWB,
are unable to capture its quintessence. In the broader perspective, SWB is
considered to be comprised of three main dimensions namely life
evaluation, affect and eudaimonia.19

Construction of dependent variables

For construction of three dimensions of SWB, we rely on ‘Principal
Component Analysis’ (PCA). All the instruments used in construction of
three dimensions of SWB are measured on 1-4 likert scale (starting from
bad to good). The choice of variables in construction of life evaluation,
affect and eudaimonia is given below.

Life evaluation: Life evaluation is basically the way individuals perceive

their life as a whole. Several studies, particularly Van Praag 20 and
International Well-being Group 21 relate an individual’s overall life

18
John F. Helliwell, and Robert Putnam, “The Social Context of Well-being”, Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society London, 359, 2004:1435–1446.
19
Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD Guidelines on Measuring
Subjective Well-being, OECD Publishing, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/978926419165
5-en.
20
Bernard Van Praag, Paul Frijters, and Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell, "The Anatomy of Subjective
Well-being", Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 51(1) May 2003: 29-49.
21
International Well-being Group, Personal Well-being Index, 4th Edition, Melbourne,
Australian Centre on Quality of Life, Deakin University 2006.
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 98

satisfaction with their assessment of particular aspects of life such as work,

health, environment and leisure. Three important dimensions of income,
work and health of an individual’s life is considered as one’s satisfaction in
these features is closely related to his judgment of entire life satisfaction.
The variables used in construction of this variable are (a) How much
satisfied with job, (b) Feeling about household income now a days, and (c)
How is your health in general? These three questions are from 1-5 scale
and converted into life satisfaction index (continuous variable) through
PCA.

Affect: Affect refers to the feelings or emotions that individuals experience

in their day to day lives. Unlike other components of SWB, affect is bi-
dimensional in nature. Positive affect relates to the pleasant emotions of
happiness and joy. On the contrary, negative affect refers to unpleasant
feelings of depression, loneliness, sadness, anxiety and sleep restlessness.
Positive affect variables have mostly high correlation as compared to
negative affect variables where inter correlation among variables is lower
but positive. Subsequently, an affect measure is generated which combines
both the positive and negative affect measures considering a single
platform ranging from least desirable to most desirable outcomes. To
measure the affect we employ (a) How often were happy in past week (b)
Enjoyed life in past week (c) Felt lonely in past week (d) Felt depressed in
past week (e) Felt sad in past week (e) Felt anxious in past week and (f) How
often sleep was restless in past week.

Eudaimonia: Eudaimonic well-being is related to individual’s perception of

fulfillment in life. It is associated with the extent to which people feel
competence and autonomy in their lives. This concept not only covers a
person’s psychological content with his sense of accomplishment in life but
also in the wider sense that how he perceives his role as a member of the
society. Besides having a meaning and purpose of life, a person’s
eudaimonic well-being is also linked with one’s sense of connectivity with
his surroundings. It explains individual’s satisfaction in terms of their
contribution and impact on their society. To formulate the eudaimonic
well-being index, the following variables were used (a) Have a sense of
direction in life? (b) Your place in society? (c) Allowed to decide how daily
work is organized?(d) Allowed to influence policy decisions about activities
of organization?
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 99

Figure 1 provides a simple explanation of the measurement of subjective

well-being with its three components life satisfaction, affect and
eudaimonic well-being.

Following Dolan,22 determinants of well-being are classified into following

categories:

SWBi = f(personal/family characteristics, material living standard, socially

developed characteristics, relationships, attitudes and beliefs, social policy
and wider economic, social and political environment) (1)
Where, i = 1, 2, 3
And, 1 is for life satisfaction, 2 for affect and 3 represent eudaimonic well-
being.

These variables include age, gender, household size, household wealth

deciles, education level, nature of employment, relationship with partner,
frequency of meetings with friends and family, citizens voluntary work,
religiosity, affiliation with a discriminatory group, homosexual liberty,
citizenship, fear of violent crimes and level of democracy in the country.

22
Paul Dolan, Tessa Teasgood, and Mathew White, “Do We Really Know what Makes us
Happy? A Review of the Economic Literature on the Factors Associated with Subjective
Well-being”, Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 2008: 94-122.
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 100

Results and discussion

The regression estimates of life satisfaction, affect and eudaimonic well-
being are presented in Annex Table 2. The role of all variables mentioned in
previous section is reported ambiguously in literature across space and
time. However, our detailed methodological procedure allows us to do a
deeper exploration in different direction of subjective well-being. Now we
present the discussion on estimates of these three dimensions of well-
being. We start from personal/ family characteristics and then rests of
variables are in order.

Annex Table 2: Estimates of Life Satisfaction, Affect and

Eudaimonic Well-being
Life
Affect Eudaimonia
Satisfaction
Gender (Base=Male) -0.034 -0.102 -0.138*
Age -0.005 -0.002 -0.016
Age_square 0.000 0.000 0.0002*
Household Size -0.011 0.069 -0.065*
Relationship with spouse/partner currently living with (1=legally married)
In a legally registered civil union -0.253 -0.064 -0.079
Living with partner-not legally
0.104 0.114 -0.069
recognized
Living with partner- legally
-0.368* 0.111 -0.437*
recognized
Legally separated -1.254*** -3.024*** 0.292
Legally divorced/ civil union
-0.003 0.107 0.043
dissolved
Education Level (1=Less than lower secondary)
Lower secondary completed 0.219** 0.248 -0.189
Upper secondary completed 0.345*** 0.03 0.022
Post secondary non tertiary
0.498*** 0.05 0.325*
completed
Tertiary completed 0.683*** 0.211 0.334**
Others 1.171* 2.225*** 1.383
Employment relation
(1=Employee)
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 101

Self employed 0.062 0.199 0.947***

Own family business 0.122 0.46 0.722***
st
Household Wealth Deciles (Labor and Non labor income) (1=1 Decile)
nd
2 Decile 0.287* 0.122 -0.035
rd
3 Decile 0.380*** 0.728** 0.095
th
4 Decile 0.544*** 1.061*** 0.407*
th
5 Decile 0.479*** 1.076*** 0.421*
th
6 Decile 0.695*** 0.985*** 0.780***
th
7 Decile 0.930*** 1.051*** 0.734***
th
8 Decile 0.999*** 1.086*** 0.935***
th
9 Decile 0.984*** 1.298*** 1.045***
th
10 Decile 0.999*** 1.402*** 1.291***
Belong to a Discriminatory group
0.195* -0.07 0.099
(base=yes)
Homosexual Liberty (1=Strongly disagree)
Disagree 0.167 0.278 0.376*
Neither agree nor disagree 0.222* 0.768** 0.365*
Agree 0.209* 0.650** 0.415**
Strongly Agree 0.303** 0.700** 0.508***
Citizenship (Base=yes) 0.495*** -0.536* -0.047
Socially meet friends and relatives 0.119*** 0.063* 0.060**
Involved in voluntary work
0.078 0.068 0.325***
(Base=no)
Democratic 0.001 -0.001 0.010*
Worry being a victim of violent crime (1=All time)
Some times 0.182 0.366 -0.024
Occasionally 0.184 0.273 -0.037
Never 0.264* 0.254 0.045
Religiosity -0.006 0.008 -0.018
Constant -1.772*** -1.894** -1.078**

Although the social protection system in Europe has always been

considered as one of the priority agendas in policy, changing world
dynamics, interdependency of countries on each other and globalization,
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 102

the financing of pensions, healthcare and dependency on younger

generation are the challenging issues in Europe. Our results indicate that
the direction of age in all model specifications i.e., life satisfaction, affect
and overall subjective well-being have similar signs as provided in
literature, but not statistically different from zero. Studies propose a U-
shaped relationship between age and SWB, depicting a negative relation of
age with SWB and a positive relation of SWB with age square. SWB is lower
in the middle age with lowest values found between ages 32 to 50. Age
square coefficient is positive and significant in eudaimonic well-being
showing the accomplishment and fulfillment of life regarding
achievements, competence and autonomy comes later in life. Our results
are aligned with observed phenomena in Europe especially for middle-aged
population. For instance, 2005/2006 HBSC surveys report that frequency of
drunkenness increased by 40 % particularly in eastern European countries,
similarly the health and income inequalities increased and also social
environment created the unrest among the middle aged people’s lives. It is
important to mention here that The European Youth Forum that unrest and
improper implementation of young people’s rights is a serous threat in
process of development in Europe.

Most of the empirical literature suggests that gender is not correlated with
the measures of SWB. However, few studies like Alesina23 and Moore24
report that females tend to have higher satisfaction levels as compared to
males. Whilst, Latin America does not exhibit gender effects, men are
happier than women in Russia. 25 However, our results suggest the
insignificant impact of gender on life satisfaction and affect. Also
eudaimonic well-being of females is significantly lower indicating that
females have lesser sense of autonomy and meaning in life. Argyle26 (1987)
also concludes in a survey that there is little gender difference in
satisfaction with life as a whole. There is a still lot of space for gender

23
Alberto Alesina, Rafael Di Tella, and Robert MacCulloch, “Inequality and Happiness: Are
Europeans and Americans Different?”, Journal of Public Economics, 88, 2006: 2009–2042.
24
Moore, K., David, T.J., Murray, C.S., Child, F. and Arkwright, P.D, “Effect of Childhood
Eczema and Asthma on Parental Sleep and Well-being: A Prospective Comparative
Study”, British Journal of Dermatology, 154, 2006: 514–518. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2133.2005.07082.x
25
Carol Graham and Stefano Pettinato, “Frustrated Achievers: Winners, Losers, and
Subjective Well Being in Emerging Market Economies, Journal of Development Studies,
Vol. 38, No.4, April 2002.
26
Argyle, M, The Psychology of Happiness (London: Routledge, 1987).
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 103

policies to improve the eudaimonic well-being among women. The World

Health Organization report of 2016 for European region provides a detailed
agenda on role of healthy women in sustainable development and targets
till 2020. However, still the labor market outcomes, i.e., gender wage
differences and career advancement need priority place in policy.

Enormous amount of literature in psychology and sociology is available on

happiness and relationships. Married people are generally found to be
happier than those who are divorced and separated.27 Marriage besides
providing companionship also brings self-esteem and support.28 Unmarried
partnerships may also provide similar patterns of SWB depending upon the
stability of the relationships and emotions but we haven’t explored this
phenomenon further. The estimates of this study suggest that being in
legal marriage bears positively with all three dimensions of well-being.
European legislation on divorce liberalization has significantly increased the
divorce rate. Likewise, family legislation has made the process of divorce
more smooth.29 However, the results of this study showed higher level of
well-being among legally married couples. They further explain the impact
of divorce liberalization law in most of European countries; only those
couples with high level of marital quality continue with legal marriage and
thus in our empirical estimation their well-being level is significantly higher
than others.

Income is associated positively with SWB.30 Rich people are considered to

be happier as more income increases the opportunity set to consume more
material goods and services. The returns to income are however
diminishing in nature.31 Our first measure of well-being is index of ‘Life
Satisfaction’ and this is already mentioned that income is also part of this

27
David Blanchflower and Andrew . Oswald, “The Rising Well-being of the Young. In Youth
Employment and oblessness in Advanced Countries”, eds. D.G. Blanchflower and R.
Freeman (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000).
28
Bruno Frey and Alois Stutzer, “What Can Economists Learn from Happiness Research?”,
Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2) 2002: 402-435.
29
Betsey Stevenson and ustin Wolfers, “Marriage and Divorce: Changes and Their Driving
Forces”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2) 2007: 27-52; doi:10.1257/jep.21.2.2
30
Alois Stutzer and Bruno S. Frey, “Recent Advances in the Economics of Individual
Subjective Well-Being”, Social Research, 77(2) 2010: 679 - 714.
31
Paul Dolan, Tessa Teasgood, and Mathew White, “Do We Really Know What Makes Us
Happy?”, A Review of the Economic Literature on the Factors Associated with Subjective
Well-being”, Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 2008: 94-122.
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 104

variable. But that component only measures the degree of satisfaction

from his/ her earned income. Considering the importance of income
variable and to avoid any possibility of endogeniety we consider the
relative wealth of household in ten deciles. Thus the income variable is
included in deciles, which comprises total wealth (income earned from
both labor and non labor sources) of the household. The lower decile
shows the lower income class and higher decile show a higher income
group in society. All ten deciles show a positive and significant impact on all
three dimensions of well-being. Thus this fact cannot be denied that
relative income have positive and significant impact of well-being. This
variable also gives a clear indication of difference between lower and
higher decile, which is also an indication of inequalities and its dis-
connects for a society.

Level of education is positively associated with SWB.32 Education level not

only enhances one's orientation towards life but also provides prospects
for better opportunities. It raises one's potential to utilize the available
resources in the best possible way. Every higher level of education
significantly and positively affects life satisfaction. Role of education appear
insignificant with positive sign in affect and eudomanic well being.
Education may not necessarily reduce the feelings of loneliness, restless
sleep or moods. Though the high level of education significantly contribute
toward accomplishments in life, freedom to organize daily work activities
and decision-making power might make self-employment and joining
family business preferable over working as an employee. Thus, self-
employment is likely to generate greater sense of autonomy and
accomplishment in life. Employment status, is insignificant in determining
life satisfaction and affect measure of well being.

Minorities in different shapes, for instance immigrants, LGBT people in

society, religious minorities, certain economic groups living much below a
stand level or any other group belonging to certain ethnicity have
significant impact on subjective well-being. Any citizen being a member of
minority group may have to face difficulties in labour market, social
networks and even in daily life, which significantly influence their
subjective well-being. Policy makers in European countries showed a

32
Philip Oreopoulos, "The Long-Run Consequences of Living in a Poor Neighborhood," The
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4) 2003:1533-1575.
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 105

tremendous interest toward social exclusion/ inclusion. The most

prominent are ‘Europe 2020 strategy’ and ‘Platform Against Poverty and
Social Inclusion’. Also the European Commission called upon the political
cooperation among all the EU countries using ‘Open Method of
Coordination (OMC)’ in the area of social inclusion. Using the OMC all EU
countries will work together for pension, healthcare, labor market policies
to minimize the social exclusion. Social inclusion or exclusion can have
significant impact on well-being.

To examine the impact of social inclusion and exclusion, we use the

acceptability for LGBT community in society. According to Gallup (2007)33
survey the countries with highest level of well-being are those with highest
acceptance of homosexuality. Many public and private health care
organizations all over Europe address the specific needs of lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals. Still, the acceptance of LGBT
individuals in society varies within the continent. The societal acceptance
significantly influences their physical and mental health and also their
subjective well-being.

Legal citizenship of the country in which an individual is residing provides

him with better access to the facilities in a wide range of services and is
likely to enhance SWB. While research shows that people migrate after a
cost benefit analysis and migrating to country with better employment
opportunities increase their standard of living and wealth of their
households. This is also evident from the result of regression equation of
life satisfaction. But on the other hand being in the foreign land increases
loneliness, sadness because of being away from family and friends
decreases the ‘Affect’ well being of individuals. According to Eurostat
(2014) 3.8 million people immigrated to one of the EU-28 member states
during 2014. According to their statistics Germany, United Kingdom,
France, Spain and Italy reported the highest number of immigrants. Beside
Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs of European
Commission, Green paper on EU approach to managing economic
migration and EU adopted Stockholm program all addressed the migration
related issues. Usually all those people who take the initiative to migrate
for economic purposes and also successfully settle in another foreign land

33
http://www.gallup.com/poll/102478/perceived-acceptance-homosexuals-differs-around-
globe.aspx
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 106

usually are skilled and high level of human capital. Thus, after migration
they increase their standard of living and become productive part of
society but their emotional well-being and assimilation at foreign land is
not easy and usually leads toward reducing subjective well-being. Our
empirical results confirm this phenomenon.

Visits to relatives and dear ones are likely to have positive linkages with
SWB. According to survey conducted by Mental Health Foundation in
201034 found that loneliness is a serious concern particularly in youth.
According to other analyses, loneliness is as greater a cause of death as
poverty. Loneliness significantly influences the negative affect. For
instance, it results in depression, stress, anxiety and addiction. Socializing is
an affective way to deal with emotional traumas. It uplifts one's morale in
times of emotional, psychological and financial distress. Interestingly, this
variable ‘socially meet friends and relatives’ increases the eudemonic well-
being of individuals. There are certain programs across Europe for elderly
to reduce the feelings of loneliness, for instance, students volunteer
programs and many NGOs are also working on that. However, the policy
and initiatives to address the loneliness of younger cohort is still nascent.
Similarly involvement in voluntary work contributes toward a meaningful
life and a sense of accomplishment. An individual’s contribution in the
betterment of society enhances psychological well-being.

Increased involvement in religious activities raise the satisfaction levels of

individuals. Religious minded people not only find a sense of purpose but
also get a psychological cushion against unfavorable circumstances.
However, religion is insignificant in all our regression equation. Also the
summary of statistics shows that religiosity lies below average. It means
that most of the individuals in our sample do not consider themselves
religious. The feeling of security is insignificant for all types of well-being.

Political freedom is very important in determining the level of satisfaction

among the citizens. According to Barro,35 political freedom is a luxury good.

34 st
Mental Health Organization, “Relationships in the 21 Century: The Forgotten Foundation
of the Mental Health and Well-being”, http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/publications/
relationships-21st-century-forgotten-foundation-mental-health-and-well-being, Retrieved
on November 28, 2017.
35
Robert Barro, “Determinants of Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Empirical Study”,
1996, NBER Working Paper, 5698.
JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN STUDIES – 33/2 (2017) 107

It leads to a lower rate of growth because it pleads for redistribution. While

comparing eastern or central Europe (Hungary, Poland and Yugoslavia) and
Western Europe (Portugal and Spain), it is quite evident that Eastern
Europe is still far behind in terms of political freedom as compared to its
western counterpart. According to an analysis by Hooghe and Quintelier36
that political participation is still low in younger cohort largely due to low
level of governance, corruption and poor economic performance. Although
political environment is undergoing shifts all over Europe, individual
participation in political and democratic processes requires streamlining of
political and economic institutions. The question that is asked from
respondents is “How democratic is your country?” and measured on 1-10
scale and enters in the specification as a continuous variable. This variable
is significant and has positive effect on eudaimonic well-being. In a
democratic country, people have the opportunity to make their own
decisions and elect representatives of their own volition. The result of this
study confirms this proposition. More recently, Brexit is reshaping the
political environment of Europe. According to Patel and Reh,37 there will be
increased regulatory burden on businesses coupled with smaller EU
budgets and higher taxation. In this situation, it is probable that
governments across the continent will find it difficult to maintain and
enhance the well-being of their citizens.

Conclusion
Well-being of individuals goes beyond their material and physical wealth. It
encompasses a person’s broader evaluation of his life, set of negative and
positive emotional states and a sense of autonomy, accomplishment and
meaning of life. Based on this philosophy, the present study attempts to
address the multidimensional nature of well-being with special emphasis
on social policy. This approach is empirical in nature along with discussion
on present situation and initiatives toward social and economic policy in
European region. Notwithstanding the impact of wealth on all dimensions
of well-being, these results also confirm the importance of relationships

36
Marc Hooghe and Ellen Quintelier, “Political Participation in European Countries: The
effect of Authoritarian Rule, Corruption, Lack of Good Governance and Economic
Downturn”, Comparative European Politics, advance online publication 18 March 2013,
doi:10.1057/cep.2013.3
37
Oliver Patel and Christine Reh, Brexit: The Consequences for the EU’s Political System,
UCL Constitution Unit Briefing Paper, Retrieved on November 13, 2016 from
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/europe/briefing-papers/Briefing-
paper-2
AN INSIGHT INTO SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM EUROPEAN 108

and the policy of social inclusion for all aspects of well-being. While
education plays a vital role in shaping life evaluation, self -employment,
voluntary work and democratic environment of a country are key to
enhance eudaimonic well-being. The results are important for a balanced
policy formulation, for any policy that has more prominence of one variable
than the other may lead toward distress among the citizens. The central
objective of all EU policies is social welfare and its promotion. However,
prevalent socio-economic and political changes complicate the quest for
well-being challenge. Therefore, a more comprehensive policy targeting
vulnerable segments of European society will be much more fruitful.