Believe it or not, Taiwan’s first national happiness index shows the country rating close to the middle among the 37 countries assessed, ranking higher than Japan and South Korea in Asia. However, upon reflection, one might ponder if the index reflects the true experience of people living here.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) told officials in February last year to gauge the nation’s living conditions. On Friday, the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) released the results of more than a year of research on people’s degree of satisfaction with their wellbeing, with Taiwan taking 19th place among 34 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), plus Russia and Brazil.
The government’s national happiness index gauges satisfaction with healthcare, safety, housing, income, jobs, education, environment, governance and work-life balance. DGBAS officials said the results showed that Taiwanese enjoy a “moderate level” of happiness as measured against their peers in other countries. In addition, Taiwan’s overall happiness score of 6.64 points is higher than that of most of the Asian areas assessed, except Hong Kong and Singapore, which are not OECD nations, the DGBAS said.
The government claims the launch of a national happiness index is part of its efforts to go beyond using only GDP growth to perceive public happiness and move closer to people’s daily lives. However, the DGBAS’ research has left many people shaking their heads, considering their persistent concerns about stubbornly stagnant salaries, rising housing prices, falling spending power, pension worries and fear of jobs being lost to companies abroad.
Moreover, regardless of how hard the DGBAS worked to get an idea of people’s subjective perceptions and their happiness, and regardless what elements the agency took into consideration in designing the index, it is a fact that the public sense of wellbeing is closely linked to the government’s performance and, in this case, that government inefficiency and lack of direction has created more anxiety about the future, not less.
Perhaps, at a time when the nation’s wealth gap is widening, youth unemployment remains high and the once robust economy has stalled, the government does not want the public to know how deep despair runs in this nation. Rather, it seems the government aims to tell the public through the release of the “happiness” data that their lives are not too bad in that Japan ranks 22nd and South Korea 28th in the index.
This is not a good response to the public’s expectations about the future and will not help eliminate anxiety, because some results of the research — like Taiwan ranking fourth in the income category and placing third for safety — deviate from people’s day-to-day experience.
People work more and earn less, but feel happier? How can it be? Unless Taiwanese are exceptionally good at finding happiness during hard times and are capable of enduring what others cannot, the government has a responsibility to tell the public how it came up with data that seem inaccurate and hence risks credibility. Yet, as dubious as the research may be, the more important question of what the government will do next remains. There has been no clarity on how the government will move forward to deliver better policies to improve people’s wellbeing, based on the research results.
Whether government officials like it or not, public service involves public scrutiny and so does the compilation of the national happiness index, even if the research turns out to not have been statistically invalid. The point is that the government needs to be closely in touch with the public’s true experiences.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
RSS