ON April 9, I had written to the press and posed the question: “Can Malaysia take up the challenge to adopt the UN Happiness Index? Yes we can and we should!” Thus, like all or most Malaysians, I am very encouraged that our Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak officially announced a Malaysian Happiness Index last Saturday, and also rated Malaysia’s Happiness Index at 7.55 on a scale of 10 and graded it a B Plus! This announcement is a major step forward in our socio-economic and even political policy and planning. It transforms the traditional emphasis on economic measurement of national and the individual well-being and progress to a much more meaningful and holistic measurement of our national progress. No more then should we give almost exclusive attention to the Gross National Product (GNP) as the almost only measurement of our progress, but move more purposefully towards quantifying our quality of life and our advancement in more human terms, that relate more directly to our human welfare.
However, while we warmly welcome this new policy transformation, we must raise questions of how this new Malaysian Happiness Index and its rating have been devised and rated so specifically at B plus? Malaysians would want to know what constitutes the index and how has it been assessed? Have the Malaysian public, professionals, academicians and all interested parties, been consulted about the methodology, and quality of this important index. In short, has there been adequate transparency, accountability and integrity shown to ensure the credibility and public acceptability of this vital index. After all, this index could well determine the future direction of our economy and our national well-being and future? Thankfully, we are told that multi-components of the index, such as the crime rate, pollution, traffic woes, maternity leave and possibly even family happiness, have been taken into account
But the question arises as to whether some other very significant and even overriding issues have been seriously considered in compiling this index. For instance, have we included national unity, poverty of the bottom 40%, the widening income disparities, human rights, racial and religious polarisation and understanding and a host of components that normally would be covered in any sound Happiness Index. Unless and until we include major structural and policy transformations for the fair implementation of current affirmative action policies, that should be based on income and basic needs that benefit all Malaysians, the index will become unacceptable, disuniting and even destabilising. Hence we must take the bull by the horns otherwise national, societal and individual happiness and real national unity will continue to evade us all.
As we must all be aware, the United Nations has its own professionally and universally accredited and acceptable Happiness Index. In that index, Malaysia was ranked 51 out of 156 countries last year. Hence Malaysians will want to know how our own internal index compares in methodology, quality and professional integrity, with the UN index? This kind of cross reference is essential to improve the credibility, acceptability and respect for our own Malaysian-made Happiness Index.
TAN SRI RAMON NAVARATNAM
Chairman, Asli Center of Public Policy Studies
