Social Indicators Research

, Volume 115, Issue 2, pp 623–635 | Cite as

Agent-Based Simulations of Subjective Well-Being

  • Jacopo A. BaggioEmail author
  • Elissaios Papyrakis


There has been extensive empirical research in recent years pointing to a weak correlation between economic growth and subjective well-being (happiness), at least for developed economies (i.e. the so-called ‘Easterlin paradox’). Recent findings from the behavioural sciences and happiness literature link this paradoxical relationship to negative externalities on utility imposed by social comparison (i.e. relative income with respect to others) and adaptation (habituation to own income in the past). We believe that the type of economic growth (pro-poor, pro-middle, pro-rich, neutral), in combination with sensitivity to social comparison and past income, is a key determinant of happiness trajectories and future utility levels. With the use of agent-based simulations we examine the long-term dynamics of subjective-well-being by focusing attention on the type of growth process rather than the mere size of income growth. We generally find that pro-middle (and balanced) growth corresponds to much higher levels of long-term happiness in comparison to pro-rich growth.


Happiness Income redistribution Simulations 


  1. Akay, A., & Martinsson, P. (2011). Does relative income matter for the very poor? Evidence from rural Ethiopia. Economics Letters, 110, 213–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrow, K., & Dasgupta, P. (2009). Conspicuous consumption, inconspicuous leisure. Economic Journal, 119, 497–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Axelrod, R. (1997). Advancing the art of simulation in the social sciences. Complexity, 3, 16–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balisacan, A. M. (2007). Why does poverty persist in the Philippines? Facts, fancies, and policies. In R. Severino & L. Salazarl (Eds.), Whither the Philippines in the 21st Century?. Singapore: ISEAS Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2000). Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. NBER working paper no. 7487.Google Scholar
  6. Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(Suppl. 3), 7280–7287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyce, C. J., Brown, G. D. A., & Moore, C. S. (2010). Money and happiness: Rank of income, not income, affects life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 21, 471–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Breckling, B., Middelhoff, U., & Reutera, H. (2006). Individual-based models as tools for ecological theory and application: Understanding the emergence of organisational properties in ecological systems. Ecological Modelling, 194, 102–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brereton, F., Clinch, J. P., & Ferreira, S. (2008). Happiness, geography and the environment. Ecological Economics, 65(2), 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brockmann, H., Delhey, J., Welzel, C., & Yuan, H. (2009). The China puzzle: Falling happiness in a rising economy. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10, 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Camfield, L., Choudhury, K., & Devine, J. (2009). Well-being, happiness and why relationships matter: Evidence from Bangladesh. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10, 71–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Choudhary, M. A., Levine, P., McAdam, P., & Welz, P. (2011). The happiness puzzle: Analytical aspects of the Easterlin paradox. Oxford Economic Papers, 64, 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, A. E., Frijters, P., & Shields, M. A. (2008). Relative income, happiness, and utility: An explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic Literature, 46, 95–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clark, A., & Postel-Vinay, F. (2009). Job security and job protection. Oxford Economic Papers, 61, 207–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dasgupta, P., & Mäler, K. G. (2000). Net national product, wealth, and social well-being. Environment and Development Economics, 5, 69–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. DeAngelis, D. L., & Mooij, W. M. (2005). Individual-based modeling of ecological and evolutionary processes. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematic, 36, 147–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Di Tella, R., Haisken-De New, J., & MacCulloch, R. (2010). Happiness adaptation to income and to status in an individual panel. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 76, 834–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Di Tella, R., & MacCulloch, R. (2008). Gross national happiness as an answer to the Easterlin paradox? Journal of Development Economics, 86, 22–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Diener, E. (2006). Guidelines for national indicators of subjective well-being and ill-being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 1, 151–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dockery, A. M. (2005). The happiness of young Australians: Empirical evidence on the role of labour market experience. Economic Record, 81, 322–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). 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, 94–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Easterlin, R. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 27, 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Easterlin, R. (2001). Income and happiness: Towards a unified theory. Economic Journal, 111, 465–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Easterlin, R. (2004). The economics of happiness. Deadalus, 133, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Easterlin, R. (2005). Building a better theory of well-being. In L. Bruni & P. L. Porter (Eds.), Economics and happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Easterlin, R. (2007). The escalation of material goods: Fingering the wrong culprit. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 31–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Easterlin, R., & Angelescu, L. (2009). Happiness and growth the world over: Time series evidence on the happiness-income paradox. IZA discussion paper no. 4060.Google Scholar
  28. Easterlin, R., Angelescu, L., Switek, M., Sawangfa, O., & Smith Zweig, J. (2010). The happiness-income paradox revisited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 22463–22468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Easterlin, R., & Sawangfa, O. (2008). Happiness and growth: Does the cross section predict time trends? Evidence from developing countries. In E. Diner, J. Heliwell, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), International differences in well-being. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Frederick, S., & Loewenstein, G. (1999). Hedonic adaptation. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Foundations of Hedonic Psychology: Scientific perspectives on enjoyment and suffering. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  31. Frey, B. (2008). Happiness: A revolution in economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Galán, J. M., Izquierdo, L. R., Izquierdo, S. S., Santos, J. I., del Olmo, R., & López-Paredes, A. (2009). Errors and artefacts in agent-based modelling. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 12(1), 1.Google Scholar
  33. Graham, C. (2011). Adaptation amidst prosperity and adversity: Insights from happiness studies from around the world. World Bank Research Observer, 26, 105–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Henrickson, L., & McKelvey, B. (2002). Foundations of “new” social science: Institutional legitimacy from philosophy, complexity science, postmodernism, and agent-based modeling. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(Suppl 3), 7288–7295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hovel, K. A., & Regan, H. M. (2008). Using an individual-based model to examine the roles of habitat fragmentation and behavior on predator–prey relationships in seagrass landscapes. Landscape Ecology, 23(Suppl. 1), 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Howarth, R. B. (2003). Climate change and relative consumption. In E. Jochem, D. Bouille, & J. Satahye (Eds.), Society, behavior, and climate change mitigation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  37. Johns, H., & Ormerod, P. (2007). Happiness, economics and public policy. London: The Institute of Economic Affairs.Google Scholar
  38. Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. (2004). Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion. Science, 312, 1908–1910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kandil, H. (2012). Why did the Egyptian middle class march to Tahrir Square? Mediterranean Politics, 17, 197–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kelegama, S. (2004). Economic policy in Sri Lanka: Issues and debates. New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  42. Kimball, M., & Willis, R. (2006). Utility and happiness. University of Michigan, mimeo.Google Scholar
  43. Knight, J., & Gunatilaka, R. (2010). The rural–urban divide in China: Income but not happiness? Journal of Development Studies, 46, 506–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Knight, J., & Song, L. (2009). Subjective well-being and its determinants in rural China. China Economic Review, 20, 635–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Layard, R., Mayraz, G., & Nickell, S. (2010). Does relative income matter? Are the critics right? In E. Diener, J. Helliwell, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), International differences in well-being. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Levinson, A. (2009). Valuing public goods using happiness data: The case of air quality. NBER working paper no. 15156.Google Scholar
  47. Luechinger, S. (2009). Life satisfaction and transboundary air pollution. Economics Letters, 107, 4–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Macy, M. W., & Willer, R. (2002). From factors to actors: Computational sociology and agent-based modeling. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McBride, M. (2001). Relative-income effects on subjective well-being in the cross-section. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 45, 251–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Moro, M., Brereton, F., Ferreira, S., & Clinch, J. P. (2008). Ranking quality of life using subjective well-being data. Ecological Economics, 65(3), 448–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ng, Y.-K. (2003). From preference to happiness: Towards a more complete welfare economics. Social Choice and Welfare, 20, 307–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nonaka, E., & Holme, P. (2007). Agent-based model approach to optimal foraging in heterogeneous landscapes: Effects of patch clumpiness. Ecography, 30, 777–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pugno, M. (2009). The Easterlin paradox and the decline of social capital: An integrated explanation. Journal of Socio-Economics, 38, 590–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ravallion, M. (2004). Pro-poor growth: A primer. World bank policy research working paper no. 3242, World bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  55. Rayo, L., & Becker, G. S. (2007). Habits, peers and happiness: An evolutionary perspective. American Economic Review, 97, 487–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sen, A. (1976). Real national income. Review of Economic Studies, 43, 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Senik, C. (2009). Direct evidence on income comparisons and their welfare effects. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 72, 408–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. P. (2010). Mismeasuring our lives: Why GDP doesn’t add up. New York, NY: New Press.Google Scholar
  59. Stutzer, A. (2004). The role of income aspirations in individual happiness. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 54, 1359–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Treichel, V. (2005). Tanzania’s growth process and success in reducing poverty. IMF working paper no. 05/35, International Monetary Fund, Washington.Google Scholar
  61. Tsai, M.-C. (2009). Market openness, transition economies and subjective wellbeing. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10(5), 523–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. UNU-WIDER (2008). World Income Inequality Database, Version 2.0c, May 2008.Google Scholar
  63. van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2009). The GDP paradox. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(2), 117–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. van Praag, B. M. S., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2008). Happiness quantified: A satisfaction calculus approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Veenhoven, R. (2002). Why social policy needs subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 11, 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Vemuri, A. W., & Costanza, R. (2006). The role of human, social, built, and natural capital in explaining life satisfaction at the country level: Toward a National Well-Being Index (NWI). Ecological Economics, 58, 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Welsch, H. (2006). Environment and happiness: Valuation of air pollution using life satisfaction data. Ecological Economics, 58, 801–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Welsch, H. (2009). Implications of happiness research for environmental economics. Ecological Economics, 68, 2735–2742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wilensky, U. (1999). Netlogo Center for connected learning and computer-based modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
  70. Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why more equal societies always do better. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  71. Wolbring, T., Keuschnigg, M., & Negele, E. (2011). Needs, comparisons, and adaptation: The importance of relative income for life satisfaction. European Sociological Review (forthcoming).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity, School of Human Evolution and Social ChangeArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.School of International DevelopmentUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  3. 3.Institute for Environmental StudiesVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations