Case Study: Mexico and The Happy Planet Index ( HPI )

The Happy Planet Index is a measure of the sustainable well-being of a country, at first glance, it surely is
a very interesting attempt at changing our current income-based measures (such as the GDP per capita,
PPP, etc.), but at closer examination it has several problems that I would like to point out.
First of all, I would like to take a look at what factors are taken into consideration when calculating the
HPI of a country: The Wellbeing ( the satisfaction of the residents of each country in regards to their life
overall, on a scale from 0 to 10, based on data collected by the Gallup World Poll ), the life expectancy
( the average number of years a person is expected to live in each country, based on data collected by the
UN ), the inequality of outcomes ( The inequalities between people within a country, in terms of how
long they live, and how happy they feel, based on the distribution in each country’s life expectancy and
wellbeing data, it is expressed as a percentage) and finally, the Ecological Footprint ( The average impact
that each resident of a country places on the environment, based on data prepared by the Global Footprint
Network, it is expressed using a standardized unit: global hectares (gha) per person. The calculation is
roughly equal to (Wellbeing x Life Expectancy x Inequality of outcomes) divided by the Ecological
Footprint. In other words, the HPI is the cost of happiness in units of ecological impact.
One of my problems with the HPI is with its purpose. While reading the HPI reports, literature, etc., it is
clear that the aim of such a concept is to replace other current measures of well being and development,
but then I ask : does the HPI measure ecological efficiency or well being and development, although the
HPI sees them as synonymous I think there is an important distinction to be made between the 2. Now,
I’m not saying that ecological impact doesn’t matter, but accentuating its value in that fashion devalues
the intent of the entire project, which is, to help the world focus on what truly matters. In our case,
Mexico came second of the 2020 results, because it produced the world’s (second) happiest living at the
( second ) lowest rate of ecological impact. Is that really what development’s about?
My first conclusion following this was that the Happy Planet Index definitely isn’t a good measure for
development because too many factors are overlooked, including human rights ( Human rights abuses are
a problem in most of the world, including in some of the high-ranking countries in the Happy Planet
Index results.), corruption ( that can be measured by the CPI ), productivity and employment ( amongst
many others ), although innovative and simple, I think the HPI shouldn’t be regarded as a major measure
of development like the GDP and such.
To conclude my essay, I would like to share my opinion on Mexico. For example, if we take the HDI
(Human development Index), Mexico is rated 0.767 (as of 2019) which is in itself a very acceptable
number. However, I think there are too many factors that stop Mexico from being a developed country
such as corruption ( Mexico has a CPI ( corruption perceptions index ) of 29, placing it towards the
bottom of the rankings ( 130/180 ) and the country’s crime rate ( of 53,31, placing it at 37/133 countries
with the highest crime rate ).

Sources : http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/2019-human-development-index-ranking,
https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi#, https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2019/results/mex#details,
https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp, happyplanetindex.org