Maybe it's just me, but I found something quite sad about "The Happiness Equation: The Surprising Economics of Our Most Valuable Asset" by Nick Powdthavee. Now, don't get me wrong; I have no problem with the idea of happiness research per se, whether that be focused on the psychology or the economics of that most elusive of human conditions. Nor do I have any violent emotional reactions to the idea of placing a monetary value on happiness, nor to any of the various "shocking" conclusions that Dr Powdthavee and his colleagues have reached during the course of their research and which he reports in this book. Anyone who has spent any time at all working with the bereaved, the long term unemployed, or simply the generally disgruntled will readily confirm that the things that upset people the most are rarely the things which they claim to care about the most. We are odd and irrational beings when it comes to deciding what it is we want or don't want and what we think will make us happy; "The Happiness Equation" reports that for all that, we remain moderately consistent (and more or less the same as each other) in that irrationality.
Other reviewers have complained that the book contains nothing that isn't both bleedingly obvious and known about for a very long time. I disagree; I learned quite a few interesting things about myself and my fellow humans that I had not previously known. It was also nice to have many of the things that I had acquired a gut-feeling about over the years confirmed through solid research. Dr Powdthavee also does a good job in writing for the lay reader, keeping the statistical jargon to a minimum and explaining the research methodology in clear and comprehensible language.
So where, then, does the problem lie?
Well, for one thing, there is very little real meat in this book (not something I normally complain about as a vegetarian, but you know what I mean). I could not decide whether the issue is that Nick Powdthavee feels that there is a constant need to shy away from discussing the actual economics of happiness because some of his previous experiences have demonstrated quite sharply that the English are, by and large, singularly ill disposed towards such things and that the subject therefore needs to be approached obliquely, if at all, and not dwelt upon for long. Or whether, in fact, he simply doesn't have a great deal to say. Either way, he himself seems to be uncomfortable disclosing both his intent and his findings and, to my mind at least, the book is pervaded by a disconcerting tone of defensiveness, tempered with an air of self denigration. I couldn't help feeling too that the book lacked focus and direction, for all that the author clearly lays out his road map at the beginning of the book.
In summary, the book presents a good position statement on the current state of the systematic study of the economics of happiness, and it could serve as an interesting introduction for those new to the subject, provided the reader can tolerate the personal asides to which the author is prone. Personally, I found the book oddly unsatisfying, leaving me disappointed overall. Maybe I just thought I wanted something different.
