Cross-national and historical differences in subjective well-being

BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of population survey data on national subjective well-being which allows comparisons across countries and across periods. Key issues in this work are as follows. Can response to questions on well-being be meaningfully compared across countries and periods? What social conditions are associated with greater well-being both between countries and across periods? Are there lessons for how global well-being might be improved? This review aims to give an overview of this area and its relevance to psychiatric epidemiology. METHODS: Systematic searches of the literature were carried out using eight academic databases between August 2012 and January 2013. RESULTS: Subjective well-being involves multiple components, including cognitive evaluation of satisfaction with life and emotional state, and these are separable from mental ill health. Although there are difficulties in measuring subjective well-being in comparable ways cross-culturally, there is sufficient evidence of validity to make comparisons meaningful. The subjective well-being of nations increases with income per capita, but gains are smaller in higher-income countries. Other national factors that affect well-being include income inequality, social welfare, individualism, democracy and freedom, social capital and physical health. CONCLUSIONS: Economic growth of lower-income nations will improve global subjective well-being. However, this needs to be sustainable or it will reduce the well-being of future generations. Higher-income nations need to focus on other determinants of well-being. Research on cross-national well-being suggests a number of directions that may be profitably pursued in psychiatric epidemiology.