Flourishing vs. Happiness: Study Reveals Surprising Global Well-Being Rankings

A groundbreaking global study has revealed striking discrepancies between countries traditionally ranked as “happiest” and those where people are actually flourishing across multiple dimensions of well-being. The Global Flourishing Study, published on April 30 in Nature Mental Health, found that Indonesia, Mexico, and the Philippines top the flourishing rankings—nations that don’t appear in the World Happiness Report’s top 20—while traditionally “happy” countries like Sweden and the United States rank only in the middle of the flourishing spectrum.

These unexpected findings emerge from research involving more than 207,000 people across 22 countries and Hong Kong, conducted by Harvard University’s Human Flourishing Program and Baylor University’s Institute for Studies of Religion in partnership with Gallup. “The uniqueness of the Global Flourishing Study is the size: We are following 207,000 participants around the world in over 40 different languages on the six inhabited continents,” study leader Dr. Byron Johnson of Baylor University told CNN.

Beyond Happiness: A Holistic View of Well-Being

While traditional happiness measurements focus primarily on life satisfaction, the Global Flourishing Study takes a more comprehensive approach by examining six distinct domains: happiness, health, meaning, character, relationships, and financial security. This multidimensional assessment reveals that countries ranking high in economic measures don’t necessarily excel in areas like meaning, character, or relationship quality.

“While people in richer, developed countries reported feeling more financially secure and better about how their life was going, these developed countries didn’t tend to rank as highly in other categories such as meaning, relationships or prosocial character,” according to CNN. This finding raises profound questions about development priorities, with lead researcher Tyler VanderWeele asking: “How can we carry out economic development without compromising meaning and purpose and relationships and character?”

Young Adults Struggling Globally

Across the six domains of flourishing, young adults (ages 18-29) consistently report lower scores than older age groups—a pattern that appears most pronounced in wealthy nations. “Perhaps one of the more troubling features of this data is that we find when we aggregate across the 22 countries, flourishing tends to increase with age, so that the youngest individuals are reporting the lowest levels of flourishing,” VanderWeele told CNN.

This challenges the traditional U-shaped happiness curve where youth and old age were thought to be the happiest periods. “Instead of a U-shaped relationship, flourishing is flat until about age 50 and increases thereafter,” researchers told Deseret News. “This pattern holds not only overall, but also when looking at most specific indicators of well-being, such as optimism, inner peace, meaning and balance.”

Cultural Differences in Flourishing Patterns

While the global trend shows young adults struggling more than older generations, significant cultural variations emerge across countries. In Tanzania and Poland, the pattern reverses, with flourishing actually decreasing after age 60, according to CBC News. This suggests that cultural factors and social structures may significantly influence how well-being changes throughout the lifespan.

Gender patterns also vary significantly by country. “The Global Flourishing Study team also found many countries did not see a substantial difference in flourishing across sexes, although men flourished more than women in Brazil, whereas women flourished more than men in Japan,” CBC News reported. These variations highlight the importance of culturally sensitive approaches to enhancing well-being.

Rethinking Economic Development

The study raises profound questions about how societies prioritize different aspects of well-being. While economic prosperity clearly contributes to financial security and some aspects of life satisfaction, it doesn’t necessarily translate to greater meaning, stronger relationships, or better character development—dimensions that contribute significantly to overall flourishing.

“This raises important questions with regard to how can we carry out economic development without compromising meaning and purpose and relationships and character,” VanderWeele told CNN. The findings suggest that policymakers may need to broaden their focus beyond economic indicators to include measures of social connection, purpose, and character when assessing national progress.

Measuring Individual Flourishing

The researchers offer a practical tool for individuals to assess their own flourishing through 12 core questions covering all six domains. Questions include: “I am always able to give up some happiness now for greater happiness later,” “I am content with my friendships and relationships,” and “How often do you worry about safety, food, or housing?” according to US News.

This self-reflection tool has already shown practical benefits. VanderWeele shared an example with CNN of “one respondent [who] said that she had been thinking about committing to a volunteering activity for some months, and after going through and realizing she was missing a deeper sense of purpose, she decided to make a commitment to this volunteering activity.”

Long-Term Research Underway

The current findings represent just the first wave of what will be a five-year longitudinal study. “Wednesday’s report is just the start, said researchers, who will follow up with the people surveyed every year for five years to see how levels of flourishing change and to investigate further the factors that make for a good life,” CNN reported.

This ongoing research aims to better understand the dynamic nature of flourishing across cultures and identify interventions that might enhance well-being in culturally appropriate ways. The researchers hope these findings will inform both individual choices and policy decisions, potentially transforming how societies measure success and progress beyond simple economic metrics.

Felix Cheung, assistant professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, emphasizes that structural solutions are essential for addressing population-level well-being challenges. “When one person is unhappy, that’s an individual issue,” he told US News. “But when the population isn’t happy, that’s a structural problem, and a structural problem requires structural solutions.”