The Recent Dangers for European Happiness: Is Homeostatic Resilience Sufficient?

Applied Research in Quality of Life https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-023-10178-9 The Recent Dangers for European Happiness: Is Homeostatic Resilience Sufficient? Georg P. Mueller1 Received: 1 January 2023 / Accepted: 27 April 2023 © The International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) and Springer Nature B.V. 2023 Abstract In the literature on life satisfaction the author came across the hypothesis that happiness oscillates around a set point given by nurture and nature. This assumption implicitly supposes a homeostatic mechanism, which implies resilience against unhappiness. The present paper aims at the exploration and quantitative description of this resilience at the national level, which may be challenged by military conflicts, pandemics, energy crises, etc. In particular, the researcher would like to know, for which European countries the postulated resilience really exists, where the related national set points are, and whether there are limits of unhappiness below which the homeostatic set points cannot be reached anymore. In order to tackle these research questions, country-specific time series of annual happiness between 2007 and 2019 are analyzed by linear and quadratic regressions, where the current national happiness is the independent and the related following level of happiness the dependent variable. By analyzing the resulting regression equations, it is possible to identify and analyze its mathematical fixed points. Depending on whether they are stable or not, they are either homeostatic set points (equilibria) or critical limits, where homeostasis is destroyed. The present empirical analysis reveals that more than 50% of the analyzed European countries have no homeostasis of happiness. Consequently, these countries are psychologically vulnerable with regard to depressing developments like energy crises or pandemics. The remaining cases do often not display the classical form of homeostasis: they have either a shifting set point or only a narrow range, within which the homeostasis of happiness is maintained. Thus, there are only a few European countries with unlimited resilience against unhappiness and a set point that is stable over time. * Georg P. Mueller 1 Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland 13 Vol.:(0123456789) G. P. Mueller Keywords Set point theory · Homeostasis · Resilience against unhappiness · Autoregression · International comparisons Introduction and Overview Personal happiness is permanently challenged by unexpected events beyond our own control: death of a family member, birth of a child, loss of job, or a promotion at the workplace are just a few examples related to the ups and downs of individual happiness. Similarly, the happiness of whole societies may also be affected by unforeseeable developments. The EU countries e.g. were recently exposed to Covid-19, the Ukrainian war, energy shortages, inflation, etc. The question is, whether these developments have a lasting negative effect on the collective happiness of the Europeans. The existing literature, mainly focused on individuals, is rather ambiguous with regard to the long-term effects of happiness shocks.1 Cummins postulates that there is a homeostatic mechanism, which maintains happiness at the level of a so-called set point (see Cummins et al., 2012; Cummins, 2013). Veenhoven (2014), Headey et al. (2014), and Veenhoven and Kegel (2022) doubt about the temporal stability of this set point, arguing that empirical studies show a secular trend towards increased collective happiness. The critique of Easterlin (2003) is even more radical: he argues that the mentioned homeostatic stability of happiness varies with the concerned lifedomain. According to him, it exists mainly for financial matters and less for nonpecuniary domains like e.g. health and family life. In view of the controversial theoretical discussion and the lack of empirical evidence with regard to the homeostasis of collective happiness of whole societies, the present article tries to find out in which European countries there is a homeostatic mechanism at work that makes them resilient against unhappiness.2 For this purpose, country-specific time series of annual happiness between 2007 and 2019 are analyzed by linear and quadratic regressions, where the current national happiness is the independent and the related following level of happiness the dependent variable. By analyzing the resulting regression equations it is possible to identify and analyze its mathematical fixed points. If at least one of them is stable, there exists a homeostatic set point and the regression coefficients can be used in order to calculate the strength of the equilibrating mechanism, which brings the country back to this set point. If there is no stable equilibrium at all, the country is probably not resilient against external shocks of happiness. Furthermore, unstable fixed points can be used in order to identify the limits of resilience, below which the homeostatic self-stabilization does not work anymore. 1 By a positive or negative happiness shock we understand in this article a rapid and externally induced positive or negative change of happiness. 2 Following Bröckling (2017: paragraph 2) homeostasis and resilience are in this article used as synonyms. 13 The Recent Dangers for European Happiness: Is Homeostatic… Fig. 1  a An exemplary linear function f(H) with a homeostatic return to the set point. Legend: H+ = f(H) = a + b * H, where b < 1. b An exemplary linear function f(H) with no homeostatic set point. Legend: H+ = f(H) = a + b * H, where b>1 a: An exemplary linear function f(H) with a homeostatic return to the set point. b: An exemplary linear function f(H) with no homeostatic set point. Methodological Considerations Analyses Based on Linear Regression Functions The simplest regression function for identifying homeostatic self-stabilization is the linear equation H+ = f(H) = a + b ∗ H (1) where H is the current and H + the future happiness and a and b are coefficients, which have to be estimated from observational data. The intersection of the lines H+ = H and H + = f(H) (see Fig. 1a, b) defines the mathematical fixed point where the equality H = f(H) holds. If b < 1, the fixed point is generally a stable equilibrium (see Fig. 1a) and corresponds to the homeostatic set point of happiness. Any 13 G. P. Mueller deviance from this set point by a positive or negative shock triggers a stepwise return to this equilibrium, as the dynamics of Fig. 1a show. Thus, in Fig. 1a there is unlimited resilience3 against unhappiness. In Fig. 1b with b > 1 this is obviously not the case, as the intersection of the lines H+ = H and H+ = f(H) is an unstable equilibrium: any disturbance in the form of a small positive or negative shock drives happiness away from this point. It is important to note that happiness shocks are generally at random (white noise) and not cor (...truncated)