2024 Happy Planet Index Notes

Introduction to the Happy Planet Index (HPI)

The Happy Planet Index (HPI) measures nations' success in achieving sustainable wellbeing.
It assesses the extent to which countries support their inhabitants in living good lives now while ensuring future generations can do the same.
The HPI is grounded in the idea that societies should prioritize sustainable wellbeing for all, utilizing environmental resources efficiently.
It measures socio-ecological efficiency, indicating how much wellbeing is achieved per unit of environmental resources.

Components and Calculation of the HPI

The HPI operationalizes wellbeing as adjusted happy life years, combining life expectancy and self-reported wellbeing.
This metric is then divided by a consumption-based carbon footprint to determine the HPI score.
A fair maximum level of emissions is defined as 3.17 tonnes CO₂e per capita, based on UN Environment Programme estimates for necessary global greenhouse gas emission reductions.

Latest Results and Key Findings

In 2021, no country achieved sustainable wellbeing, defined as high levels of life expectancy and self-reported wellbeing within a fair consumption space.
Vanuatu, an island nation in the South Pacific, achieves the best score with a life expectancy of 70.4 years and a self-reported wellbeing score of 7.1 out of 10, with a carbon footprint well below the globally fair share of 3.17 tonnes CO₂e per capita.
Sweden ranks second, with higher life expectancy (83.0 years) and self-reported wellbeing (7.4 out of 10) but a carbon footprint more than three times larger than Vanuatu's.
Costa Rica, previously topping the HPI, fell to fourth place due to the COVID-19 pandemic's impact but still maintains high wellbeing levels with a carbon footprint of 4.4 tonnes CO₂e per capita.
These top-performing countries have intentionally prioritized sustainable wellbeing over economic growth, such as phasing out fossil fuels or investing in public services.

Critique of GDP and the Importance of Alternative Indicators

The report critiques the over-reliance on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a measure of national success.
It argues that GDP growth does not necessarily lead to improved wellbeing or environmental sustainability, especially in countries with already high GDP levels.
Of the ten countries with the highest per capita GDP, six have below-average HPI scores, suggesting that maximizing GDP does not align with achieving wellbeing within environmental limits.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on HPI

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a decrease in HPI globally due to falls in life expectancy and self-reported wellbeing.
Latin America was the worst affected region, experiencing significant declines in both life expectancy (2.9 years) and self-reported wellbeing (0.4 points out of 10).
East Asia's HPI score increased slightly due to increases in self-reported wellbeing without a significant increase in carbon footprint.
Before the pandemic, HPI scores were generally on an upward trend between 2006 and 2019, driven by increasing life expectancy in sub-Saharan Africa and decreasing carbon footprints in Western Europe.

Inequalities in HPI Within Countries

The report disaggregates HPI scores within countries, comparing scores across income deciles.
The top 10 percent of earners typically have much lower HPI scores due to their significantly larger carbon footprints, which outweigh marginal gains in life expectancy and self-reported wellbeing.
For example, in the USA, the top 10 percent of earners have an average carbon footprint of 68.7 tonnes CO₂e per capita, compared to 23.6 tonnes for the eighth income decile, with minimal corresponding benefits in wellbeing.
Mexico would have an average carbon footprint within fair consumption limits if not for its top 10 percent of earners.
In Costa Rica, the HPI score for the bottom 80 percent is significantly higher, highlighting how inequality contributes to wasteful inefficiency.

Key Lessons from the HPI

Take alternative indicators seriously: Move beyond critiques of GDP and utilize alternative indicators like the HPI.
Create people’s measures of national success: Involve citizens in defining priorities for new indicators through citizen's assemblies.
Communicate a positive vision: Emphasize that good lives within environmental limits are achievable with intentionality and perseverance.
Focus on overconsumption and inequality: Address economic inequalities, as the lifestyles of the wealthiest contribute disproportionately to carbon emissions without significantly improving their wellbeing.

The Importance of Indicators

Indicators shape policy, practice, and public debate.
GDP has become the central indicator in policy decisions and the ultimate yardstick of national success.
However, GDP growth is often linked with environmental damage, making it a problematic goal.

Ecological Limits and Fair Consumption Space

There are natural limits to resource use, and consumption needs to be divided fairly between nations and people.
A fair consumption space is defined as an ecologically healthy perimeter supporting an equitable distribution of resources and opportunities for wellbeing.

The HPI as a Measure of Sustainable Wellbeing

The HPI measures sustainable wellbeing by considering life expectancy, self-reported wellbeing, and carbon footprint.
Countries with high life expectancy and wellbeing combined with a small carbon footprint score best.
The HPI should not replace GDP but rather open up the conversation about measuring progress.

Calculating the HPI

Life expectancy data comes from the UN Population Division.
Self-reported wellbeing data comes from the Gallup World Poll, based on a ladder question about life satisfaction.
Carbon footprint data comes from the World Inequality Database, based on the Global Carbon Atlas and the EORA Global Supply Chain Database.
The HPI is calculated by multiplying life expectancy by self-reported wellbeing and then dividing that by carbon footprint.

The Hot or Cool Institute – A New Home for the HPI

The HPI now resides at the Hot or Cool Institute in Berlin.
This new home emphasizes inequality, links the HPI to ideas for sustainable lifestyles and utilizes recent technical advances in carbon footprinting.

HPI Results: Life Expectancy, Wellbeing, and Carbon Footprint

Countries with high life expectancies are mostly wealthy nations.
Asian countries do well on life expectancy, while Nordic countries dominate in self-reported wellbeing.
The map is reversed when looking at carbon footprint, with countries using more than their fair share coded red.

Patterns and Outliers

There is a relationship between carbon footprint and adjusted happy life years, but it is not linear.
Countries with similar carbon footprints can have very different outcomes.
The goal is to reach the top left-hand corner: with a small carbon footprint and high wellbeing.

Overall HPI Scores

Latin America is well represented at the top of the HPI ranking, but European countries also do very well.
Vanuatu achieves high self-reported wellbeing and moderate life expectancy within a fair consumption space.
Sweden achieves excellent average wellbeing outcomes with a carbon footprint less than Germany and half that of the USA.
Central American countries consistently lead to high efficiency in terms of achieving wellbeing.
No country achieves a good score on all three components in 2021.

GDP vs. HPI

Countries with high GDP per capita do not do particularly well on the HPI.
Average HPI increases with GDP up to a certain point but then falls again.
There is a strong positive correlation between GDP per capita and HPI in the lowest income band (up to $20,000).
Between $20,000 and $50,000, there is almost no correlation.
Beyond $50,000 the correlation is strong and negative.

HPI Over Time

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted HPI, with most regions seeing a drop.
Latin America and South Asia were particularly affected by dramatic falls in life expectancy.
Gradual improvement was seen before the pandemic in some regions due to falling carbon footprints and increasing life expectancy.

HPI by Income Group

Wealthiest individuals are responsible for the greatest emissions.
HPI scores rise at the beginning of the income distribution but decline with income fairly early on for most countries.
Lowest scores for the HPI within a country are typically for the tenth decile.
The marginally higher life expectancies and marginally better self-reported wellbeing amongst the richest decile cannot make up for the considerably larger carbon footprints.

The Carbon Elite

The top 10% of income earners contribute around half of all emissions.
Most of these emissions come from middle and high-income consumption countries in North America and the EU.
Consumption emissions are driven by planes, cars, and large homes.
The national level carbon footprint data used in the HPI includes emissions from consumption, government activities, and business investment.
Roughly 70% of the total emissions of the top 1% of global earners came from investment rather than through their individual consumption in 2019.

Conclusion and Lessons

Good lives don’t have to cost the Earth; sustainable wellbeing is achievable.
GDP does not measure what matters; high GDP does not necessarily lead to high wellbeing.
Inequality is a bad deal for the planet and for countries; overconsumption on the part of the rich is wasteful.
Take alternative indicators seriously; move beyond GDP.
Develop people’s measures of national success; involve citizens in defining what is important.
Communicate a positive vision; show that good lives that don’t cost the Earth are possible.
Focus on overconsumption and inequality; address the excessive consumption of the wealthy.