BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC KINH TẾ TP. HCM

---o0o---
KHOA QUẢN TRỊ

ĐỀ TÀI THAM DỰ CUỘC THI NGHIÊN CỨU KHOA HỌC TRONG LĨNH
VỰC QUẢN TRỊ 2022

Research on factors affecting happiness

MÃ SỐ ĐỘI THI: QT-90

Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, 2022

GVHD: Thạc sĩ Lâm Mạnh Hà
Thông tin các thành viên nhóm:

STT Họ và Tên Lớp – Khóa MSSV

1 Lê Nguyễn Thúy Đình ADC02 – K47 31211025910

2 Nguyễn Đức Thịnh ADC02 – K47 31211020654

3 Vũ Hoàng Thử ADC02 – K47 31211024308

4 Nguyễn Trần Bảo Thiên ADC02 – K47 31211026409

5 Tô Hòa Hải Yến ADC02 – K47 31211025188

 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ...................................................................................................................... 3
1. The reasons for writing .......................................................................................... 3
2. Research’s purpose and methods ......................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 1: RELATED STUDIES AND THEORIES ........................................... 5
1.1. Related Studies .................................................................................................... 5
1.1.1. Happiness definition ..................................................................................... 5
1.1.2. HPI ................................................................................................................. 6
1.1.3. GWB ............................................................................................................... 8
1.1.4. SWB.............................................................................................................. 10
1.2. Theories .............................................................................................................. 13
1.2.1. Top-down perspective ................................................................................ 13
1.2.2. Bottom-up perspective................................................................................ 14
CHAPTER 2: ANALYTICAL METHODS .............................................................. 20
2.1. Objects and scope of the research ................................................................... 20
2.2. Research Methods ............................................................................................. 20
2.3. Description of the data and data processing ................................................... 23
2.3.1. Description of the data ............................................................................... 23
2.3.2. Data processing ........................................................................................... 24
CHAPTER 3: ESTIMATION AND STATISTICAL INFERENCE ...................... 24
3.1. Estimation Model .............................................................................................. 24
3.1.1. OLS Model .................................................................................................. 24
3.2. Verify and correct model defects ..................................................................... 26
3.2.1. Verify T-Test ............................................................................................... 26
3.1.2. Verify the explanatory level of the model. ................................................ 26
3.1.3. Verify model relevance ............................................................................... 26
3.1.4. Verify Multicollinearity.............................................................................. 27
3.1.5. Verify Autocorrelation ............................................................................... 27
3.1.6. Verify the phenomenon of residual variance changes ............................. 27
3.2. Hypothesis testing.............................................................................................. 30
3.2.1. Verify the relevance of results with expectation ...................................... 30
3.2.2. White-Test ................................................................................................... 33
 2

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 35
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 36
APPENDIX................................................................................................................... 37
DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP ....................................................................... 41
THANK YOU ............................................................................................................... 41

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

HPI: Happy Planet Index

GDP: Gross Domestic Product

SWB: Subjective Well-being

OLS: Ordinary Least Squares

GWB: General Well-being

 3

PREFACE

1. The reasons for writing

Happiness is perceived and defined in many ways. Professor Ngo Bao Chau did
put the concept of happiness into the story of the glass of water. If it is said to be half
full, then it is correct, but if it is said to be half empty, it is also true. It all depends on
our perspective and choices. Therefore, happiness is considered a rather abstract and
subjective matter because it depends on the perception of each person in specific
contexts.

This is a topic that attracts many researchers, specifically, many philosophical

theories and religious ideas have found their own way of explaining happiness.

For example, in 1835, Karl Marx used to write that "...the happiest person is the
one who brings happiness to the most people...". Democit argues that happiness is a
pleasant feeling. Epicur said that happiness consists in the absence of fear of death.
Those who follow the Confucian sect, advocate that intellectuals must study well and
bring their talents to help the world and the country. The greatest happiness of a
gentleman is to contribute to society and establish a reputation.

Plato described happiness as something that is unique because we do not want it

for the sake of anything else. It is a “persistent state that emerges from devotion to
wisdom and virtue.” (the pursuit of happiness). Descartes made a fundamental
distinction between things that depend on us, like virtue and wisdom, and those that may
not, such as honors, riches, and health. In an interesting twist on the question of
happiness as contentment or life purpose, Descartes believed that those who were not
only wise and virtuous but also favored by fortune had a greater capacity for
contentment. (the pursuit of happiness)1

The concept of happiness as life satisfaction is also studied and used by NEF (New
Economics Foundation) as one of the three main factors of the Happy Planet Index
(HPI), which will be discussed in more detail in the following chapters of this study.

1 Carol Graham, The Pursuit of Happiness, An Economy of Well-Being

 4

In developing countries, people's income has also increased many times compared
to the previous generation. However, the question is whether people are really happy or
satisfied with their current life or not.

2. Research’s purpose and methods

The concept of happiness as life satisfaction is also studied and used by NEF (New
Economics Foundation) as one of the three main factors of the Happy Planet Index
(HPI), which will be discussed in more detail in the following chapters of this study.

In developing countries, people's income has also increased many times compared
to the previous generation. However, the question is whether people are really happy or
satisfied with their current life or not.

The objective of the research is to analyze and identify the main factors affecting
the happiness or satisfaction index of the people such as: age, sex, health, education
level, marital status marriage, divorce, unemployment, religious beliefs, politics,
regions,... We discover how happiness varies in relation to the variables that we are able
to gather information about. Moreover, the study also provides policy suggestions to
improve people's happiness index.

The research is based on the following hypotheses: Whether income and happiness
are indeed positively related; Whether good health will positively affect happiness;
Whether unemployment and divorce negatively affect happiness and whether factors of
social capital such as belief in religion, politics, etc.. positive influence on happiness.

The study consists of 3 chapters.

Chapter 1: Related studies and theories

Chapter 2: Analytical methods

Chapter 3: Estimation and Statistical Inference

 5

CHAPTER 1: RELATED STUDIES AND THEORIES

1.1. Related Studies

1.1.1. Happiness definition

Happiness can simply be understood as an emotional state characterized by

feelings of joy, satisfaction, contentment, and fulfillment. While happiness has many
different definitions, it is often described as involving positive emotions and life
satisfaction. However, the term led to controversy in the definition aspect.

On the one hand, philosophers and psychologists worldwide have defined it in their
own way. For instance, Daniel Kahneman has defined happiness as "what I experience
here and now". This usage is prevalent in dictionary definitions of happiness. Happiness,
according to Ruut Veenhoven, is the "total appreciation of one's existence as-a-whole.".
2
According to Kahneman, this is more significant to people than recent experience.

On the other hand, Jeremy Bentham, an English philosopher, jurist, and social
reformer had another idea. Bentham defined his philosophy's "fundamental axiom" as
the principle that "it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure
of right and wrong."3 The felicific calculus is an algorithm formulated by him that
calculates the degree or amount of pleasure that a specific action is likely to induce.

In this research, our group will focus mainly on the perspective that happiness is
referred to as hedonic (Ryan & Deci, 2001), the presence of positive emotions, and the
absence of negative emotions. By approaching the problem in this way, we can calculate
related figures objectively.

Happiness Economic

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is an indicator to calculate the total national

income, and is said to be a measure of the "health" of the world's economies. But while
gross national income is not the same as national welfare, a high GDP does not mean a
high level of happiness and social security. Therefore, in 1974 Richard Easterlin, an
American economist, challenged the concept of GDP by looking at survey reports of
people's happiness from 19 countries over the previous three decades and remarked that

2 The concept of happiness - Erasmus Happiness Economics Research Organisation

3 Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) - Competition and Appropriation
 6

GDP and welfare are not as closely related as is commonly thought. The result of
Easterlin's investigation is known as the Easterlin paradox. The Easterlin paradox states
that “when considered in a moment, money and happiness are related. However, over a
long period of time, happiness does not increase as income improves." Since then,
Richard Easterlin has become the main thinker of the concept of Happiness Economics:
“The goal is to maximize happiness, not income.”

Like Richard Easterlin, Richard Layard believes that human happiness is of

paramount importance to society and to individuals themselves. He makes the case that
progressive taxation will make society unquestionably better off from the perspective of
happiness as one of the foremost academic proponents of happiness.He also insists that
the fundamental impulse of a government should be the creation of well-being and not
just wealth. Particularly, three basic principles that support for Layard's perspective
underlie happiness economics:

“The way we judge the situation or the state of a nation is by the happiness of the
people, especially the happiness of the least-happy people.”

“We should try and produce the best state in the world that we can in the way
that we live our lives and the people we touch or could touch. So we should be
trying to produce the largest amount of happiness in the world that we can,
especially taking into account the people who are least happy.”

“Governments should also be trying to produce the greatest happiness in people,

especially preventing misery. That was the view of Thomas Jefferson; I think it
was the right view.”4

1.1.2. HPI

The Happy Planet Index (HPI) introduced by the New Economics Foundation in
2006 combines three elements (life expectancy, well-being and ecological footprint) to
show how efficiently residents of different countries are using environmental resources
to lead long, happy lives. It showed that people can live long, happy lives without using
more than their fair share of the Earth’s resources.

4 Easterlin paradox (1974) Richard Easterlin

 7

How is the HPI calculated?

The HPI is determined by dividing the expected "happy life years" by the resource
consumption of a nation. The average life expectancy is multiplied by the number of
"happy life years," which is determined using both subjective judgments and objective
data and assessed on a scale from 1 to 10. The per capita CO2 footprint is used to
calculate resource usage. The area required to absorb the CO2 emissions produced by a
country as a result of its usage of fossil fuels is referred to as the footprint (oil, natural
gas, coal).
Life Expectancy x Experienced Wellbeing
5
Happy Planet Index =
Ecological Footprint

How is the Happy Planet Index different?

Unlike other indices, such as the Quality of Life Index or World Happiness Report,
the Happy Planet Index does not rank countries in terms of quality of life or happiness.
Instead, it looks at which countries are best at using minimal ‘inputs’ of natural resources
to create the maximum possible ‘outputs’ of long, happy lives – thus delivering truly
“sustainable wellbeing”.

The Happy Planet Index does not consider societies truly successful if they deliver
“good lives” which use more resources than the earth can support OR if they consume
within the Earth’s limits, but have very low levels of wellbeing or life expectancy.

HPI aims to create happy and healthy lives for everyone now and then by reducing
poverty and deprivation. The Happy Planet Index provides a compass to guide nations
towards genuine progress.

What are (according to its proponents) the advantages of the HPI?

- The HPI asks the question of the fundamental “why?” of economic activity. It
suggests that our most important goal should be to lead long and happy lives, while
preserving the ecological foundations this requires. Pure economic growth as expressed
by the GDP should not be an end in itself.

5 The data sources used by the HPI are: UN Human Development Reports for life expectancy, the World Database of Happiness by
R. Veenhoven for life satisfaction and the Global Footprint Network for the ecological footprint
 8

- The HPI offers a clear path to a sustainable, fair future by combining life
satisfaction with ecological aspects.

- The index is based on relatively simple calculations, making it easy to understand

(and therefore to communicate).

- It enables comparisons between countries.

What are (according to its critics) the disadvantages of the HPI?

- The HPI disregards issues such as political freedom, human rights or labour
rights.

- The concept of CO2 footprint is also controversial, in part because it is restricted

to CO2 emissions, ignoring e.g. water consumption.

- The available data is not always satisfactory.

- Misleading name: the HPI is not an indicator of happiness, but of ecological

efficiency in achieving satisfaction in a country.

- Many critics are fundamentally skeptical about the measurability of “subjective

well-being”.

- “Happiness” and “satisfaction” are both subjective and individual, besides being
culturally dependent.

- Another difficulty is the impact of politics on “happiness and satisfaction”. The

question arises as to whether the HPI can be used to assess political measures.
Furthermore, it is perfectly possible for nationalist policies to increase cohesion and
satisfaction in a country; should this be regarded as a positive development?

1.1.3. GWB

One aspect of wellbeing is not having any illness or disease. It encompasses a wide
range of components related to a person's physical, mental, emotional, and social health.
Well-being and happiness are closely related concepts. How you feel about your life and
yourself can be used to define your level of well-being.

The answer is not about having more money. Money and wellbeing are related
because having enough money enhances living conditions and raises social standing.
However, happiness may increase with income—but only to a certain point.
 9

Many people believe that becoming wealthy will hasten the process of making
them happier. However, this is false. Numerous studies from all over the world have
shown that the quality of our interpersonal relationships, rather than the amount of
money we have in the bank, has a greater impact on our level of happiness.

Governments can choose particular policies by keeping track of the wellbeing of a

population. For instance, determining the "poverty line" and determining a population's
median weekly income both help decisions about social assistance reform.

Even if the adjustments may be significant, the wellness movement extends much
beyond changing what is and is not included in GDP. It advocates completely replacing
it with a metric that claims to quantify a population's happiness rather than its material
riches. Some critics believe that the fact that measured happiness has not improved
throughout the years points to a problem in our society that needs to be fixed by
government intervention. As a result of these discoveries, happiness proponents think
they are morally superior. They therefore believe that spreading happiness is a benefit
that is obvious and to which only the most irrational misanthrope could resist.

Policies showing GWB:

- Vietnam begins Covid vaccination for children aged 5-11:

+ While children have been largely spared the direct mortality impacts of the
virus, their access to education, health and protection services has been severely
disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. As vaccines become available, the
pandemic will be brought under control which will, in turn, restore services for
children and help build a better, safer, healthier future for us all.
+ From April 14 2022 to now, The Ministry of Health ordered localities across
the country to speed up the COVID-19 vaccination for children aged 5 to 11 years
old and accelerate the booster dose for people above 18 years old.

- Children orphaned because of Covid grow up in alien environments:

+ More than 2,200 children in HCMC have lost their parents, according to the
city Department of Education and Training.

+ Experts fear that with all attention focused on fighting the epidemic, people
may forget that children orphaned by Covid-19 are also a "hidden pandemic."
 10

+ Many government agencies and organizations have stepped in to help young

children come to terms with this harsh reality.

+ On September 11 the HCMC Department of Labor, Invalids and Social

Affairs announced a monthly subsidy program for orphans affected by Covid-19:
According, VND17.3 billion was disbursed from socialization to care for this
group of children and children living in social protection establishments.
Therefore, each child received an average of VND5-6 million, while orphans of
both parents received VND8-9 million each. In addition to the cash support, the
children also received gifts such as school bags, writing books, school supplies,
and welfare packages including rice, noodles and cooking oil.

+ Many organizations and individuals also commit to sponsoring children until

they turn to 18 years old.

1.1.4. SWB

What Is Subjective Well-Being?

Subjective well-being (SWB), often referred to as self-reported well-being, is how
individuals interpret and assess various facets of their lives. It is frequently used to gauge
one's pleasure and mental well-being and is a reliable indicator of one's longevity, and
good health.
It is now a helpful indicator of the well-being of society. It gives insights that can
be utilized to direct public health, economic, and social policies in addition to providing
psychologists a means to gauge how people feel about their life. Policymakers use
assessments of subjective well-being to evaluate the state of societies and the
effectiveness of social policies.
Construction of SWB
Even though they are closely related, Ed Diener suggested that the different SWB
components constitute unique constructs that must be comprehended separately. So,
rather than being a single distinct construct, SWB may be seen as "a general area of
scientific interest." Although these can affect assessments of SWB, definitions of SWB
often exclude objective elements like material circumstances or health due to the explicit
focus on the subjective aspects of well-being. Thus, SWB definitions emphasize how an
individual assesses his or her own life, including emotional experiences of pleasure and
 11

pain in response to particular occurrences and cognitive assessments of what an

individual perceives to be a happy life. Positive affect, defined as the overall equilibrium
between positive and negative affect and typically measured as the difference between
the two, low negative affect, defined as the experience of unpleasant, distressing
emotions and moods, and "overall affect" or "hedonic balance" are all components of
SWB related to affect. Though not always, there is a strong correlation between high
positive affect and low negative affect.
Types of Subjective Well-Being

Diener's initial definition of subjective well-being placed a strong emphasis on

affective and cognitive well-being. According to some academics, how people feel about
their lives is strongly influenced by another part of well-being that focuses on a sense of
purpose and meaning.
Experienced Well-Being

The frequency and intensity of people's sensations of happiness and joy are
referred to as their experience of well-being. Hedonistic well-being is another name for
this kind of happiness. It includes assessments of general wellbeing that are both
affective and cognitive.
This kind of well-being has a significant impact on health. For instance, studies
have shown that individuals with stronger immune systems are those who frequently
feel good emotions.
Eudaimonic Well-Being

Experienced well-being is the main emphasis of subjective well-being.

Eudaimonic well-being, on the other hand, is a different kind of well-being that can
influence how people view their lives and their level of happiness.
Living a meaningful life is the key to achieving eudaimonic well-being. Important
elements of this kind of subjective well-being include striving for goals, showing
compassion for others, discovering your purpose in life, and living up to your values.
Measurement of SWB
Affective balance and life satisfaction are often assessed individually and
independently.
 12

+ Self-reported data is typically used to calculate life satisfaction.

Questionnaires are a typical way to gauge life satisfaction.
+ A self-reported approach is typically used to measure affective balance as
well. The PANAS is an illustration of an assessment of affective balance
(Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule).
Sometimes just one SWB inquiry tries to get the big picture. In the World
Happiness Report, for instance, respondents are asked to imagine a ladder where the
best possible life for them is at the top and the worst conceivable life is at the bottom.
They are then asked to rank their existing lives on that 0–10 scale.
These assessments of affective balance and life satisfaction have a problem in that
they are self-reported. The issue with self-reports is that the subjects may be lying or at
the very least not being completely honest when completing the questionnaires. Because
they are embarrassed or because they are filling in what they think the researcher wants
to see in the results, participants may be lying or withholding information from the
researcher. To provide more precise results, other measurement techniques have been
utilized to figure out someone's SWB.
Informant reports can be used as an additional source of support or confirmation
that the results of the self-report are true. The closest family and friends of the subject
are requested to complete either a survey or a form with information about the
participant's mood, feelings, and general way of life. The individual may claim in the
self-report to be cheerful, yet according to friends and family, he or she is constantly
depressed. It would be clear that the results would be in conflict, which would produce
unreliable findings.
The ESM, or Experience Sampling Method, is another approach for better
comprehending the actual outcomes. Participants in this study receive a beeper/pager
that will sound at various times throughout the day. The participant will stop what they
are doing whenever the beeper or pager sounds, and report what they are doing, as well
as how they are feeling and how they are feeling right now. Researchers will have a
greater knowledge of the participant's actual emotions, moods, and feelings as well as
how these elements interact with other thoughts and behaviors if they follow this over a
week or month. The Day Reconstruction Method is the third measurement to guarantee
validity. Participants in this study record their daily activities in a diary. The individual
 13

is then prompted to explain each activity and give an account of their feelings, mood,
and any emotions that manifested. So, in addition to the various measuring methods
stated above, a researcher may choose to use self-reports to secure reliable data. A
person is said to have a high degree of SWB if they have a high level of life satisfaction
and a positive affective balance.

1.2. Theories

1.2.1. Top-down perspective

According to the top-down perspective, a person's perception of events is

influenced by their overall personality traits. Consequently, depending on their
persistent personality qualities, people may have a general inclination to perceive life in
either a consistently positive or negative way. According to top-down theories of SWB,
a person's "setpoint" is determined by their genetic propensity to be happy or
dissatisfied. According to the set point theory, a person's birth-time baseline or
equilibrium level of SWB is mostly fixed due to inherited traits. Behavior-genetic
research that demonstrated that positive and negative affectivity has strong heritabilities
provides evidence for this genetic propensity (40 percent and 55 percent respectively in
one study). The idea of set point theory is supported by several twin studies. They do
not, however, rule out the possibility that some people may undergo long-term SWB
alterations.

According to Diener et al., heritability studies have limitations because they only
represent long-term SWB in a sample of individuals living in contemporary western
civilization; they may not apply to SWB in more harsh conditions and do not offer
precise markers of genetic influences.

Furthermore, heritability estimates vary between studies.

Findings showing that personality has a significant impact on long-term SWB

provide more support for a genetically determined propensity to SWB. The dynamic
equilibrium model of SWB is the result of this. According to this approach, personality
serves as a foundation for emotional reactions. People may be significantly moved away
from their baseline by external events, but these movements typically only last a short
while before most people eventually return to their baseline.
 14

1.2.2. Bottom-up perspective

According to a bottom-up approach, good experiences breed happiness. External

events as well as general socioeconomic and demographic factors, such as health and
marital status, are examples of bottom-up impacts. Bottom-up strategies are predicated
on the notion that happiness is a byproduct of meeting basic human wants, which are
seen to be universal. This perspective is supported by research showing that daily
pleasant occurrences are linked to higher positive affect, while daily unpleasant events
or hassles are linked to higher negative affect.

However, research indicates that top-down factors, such as personality, account

for a far larger percentage of the variance in self-reports of SWB than do external events.
Hedonic adaptation is a notion put forth to explain why external events only have a
limited effect on SWB. This theory, which was originally based on the idea of a "hedonic
treadmill," contends that while positive or negative external events may temporarily
increase or decrease feelings of SWB, people eventually grow accustomed to their
situation and tend to return to a personal SWB "setpoint" or baseline level.

The hedonic treadmill theory initially postulated that as people become

accustomed to events, they tend to return to an SWB neutral level (i.e., neither happy
nor unhappy). However, further studies have demonstrated that for most people, the
 15

baseline level of SWB is at least slightly positive because most people report being
generally pleased or having a good mood when no negative events are happening. This
idea has been further refined, demonstrating that people do not adapt to all life situations
equally. Instead, people tend to adjust slowly to some events (such as imprisonment)
and quickly to others (such as the death of a loved one) while not adapting at all to still
other occurrences (e.g. noise and sex).

This graph describes the relationship between life satisfaction (on a scale ranging
from 0 to 10) and GDP per capita of some countries. From the graph we can see that:

- High-income countries such as the US, Singapore, and South Korea (where
GDP per capita is over $40,000) have high levels of happiness and satisfaction
(from 6 to 7 on a 10-point scale).

- However, Vietnam has an average GDP per capita income (under $10,000),
lower than China and Russia, but has similar happiness and satisfaction levels to
China and Russia (between 5 and 6 points)

- Statistics on this issue have shown that GDP per capita is not the only factor
that determines the happiness level of each person or country. Satisfaction or
happiness depends on many other factors such as stability or national security,
policies, social support, etc.

Factors affecting SWB

• Politics

Firstly, those who are happier with their lives may feasibly stop caring about
politics because they have already attained a comfortable degree of disinterest. It has
been suggested that increasing happiness may result in "an emptying of democracy" in
this sense. However, a growing body of research on the "objective benefits of subjective
well-being" has demonstrated that different prosocial behaviors can be significantly
influenced by happiness. For instance, happier people are more inclined to donate to
charities and volunteer in their communities.

• Religion
 16

Religiously attached adults and inactive religious group members are likely to be
less content and less civically involved than people who actively participate in religious
congregations.

• Unemployment

It may be reasonable to infer that persons looking for a job would benefit more
from finding employment. Therefore, a higher unemployment rate would result in more
people experiencing lower utility since they are prevented from enjoying the best level
of leisure or good they could if they found a job.

• Divorced

One study found that when individuals in a low-conflict marriage divorced, they
experienced a decrease in happiness, on average. This study suggests that ending a
marriage that may be unhappy at the time but low in conflict is not a reliable path to
improved happiness. About half of divorces come from low-conflict marriages in which
one or both spouses are unhappy but there isn’t a lot of fighting.

• Marriage

Among the not married, persons who cohabit with a partner are significantly
happier than those who live alone. But this effect is dependent on the culture one lives
in. It turns out that people living together in individualistic societies report higher life
satisfaction than single, and sometimes even married, persons. The opposite holds for
collectivist societies.

• Gender

According to Asian historical and cultural traditions, women tend to be happier

than men because they choose to be more peaceful, especially when there are negative
socio-economic changes.

• Age

The work of Professor Andrew Osvald and colleagues demonstrates that happiness
throughout life is U-shaped, also known as the "happiness curve".

A new study published in the Journal of Economic & Organizational Behavior

(Netherlands) shows that unhappiness is quite low when we are young and increases
 17

gradually and peaks in our late 40s, after there, unhappiness decreases. The study results
also confirm the existence of "midlife crisis" occurring as a common phenomenon in
most countries.

• Education

Many studies show that education has a positive effect on happiness. A study by
Gabriele Ruiu and Maria Laura Ruiu on how income expectations of highly educated
people in Italy affect their perception of happiness. Research has shown that highly
educated workers have a higher average income than others, along with personal income
being one of the factors that have been shown to have a strong impact on the happiness
index.

• Health

A series of studies have shown a close relationship between human health and
happiness so far. This factor has a positive effect on happiness, without health will lead
to unhappiness. A study published in Neurobiology of Aging found that individuals with
high life satisfaction were more likely to have stable heart rates and low blood pressure
than those who were unhappy in life.

People who rate their general health as "good" or "outstanding" tend to experience
better SWB compared to those who rate their health as "fair" or "poor," since there are
strong positive correlations between health and SWB. Self-ratings of general health
were shown to be more strongly correlated with SWB than physician ratings of health
in a meta-analysis. SWB and health may be correlated in both directions. There is proof
that feeling good about oneself influences one's physical and mental well-being.
According to a review of longitudinal studies, baseline subjective well-being categories
including optimism and positive affect were predictive of mortality and longer-term
health status. On the other hand, several studies discovered that baseline depression was
a predictor of death and a worsening of longer-term health conditions. It is challenging
to show causality because baseline health may very well have a causal effect on
subjective well-being. Numerous studies have revealed optimistic feelings and optimism
to be advantageous for immunological and cardiovascular health. It is also known that
changes in immunological and cardiovascular responses are correlated with mood
changes. There is proof that therapies that successfully enhance subjective well-being
 18

can also improve several facets of health. For instance, it has been discovered that
relaxation exercises and meditation can lower blood pressure and boost positive affect.
It's unclear exactly how different sorts of subjective well-being work. For instance, it is
yet unknown how long-lasting the impacts of mood and emotions are on health care. It's
also uncertain if some sort of subjective well-being independently predicts health.
Because it may boost self-esteem and lessen anxiety, meditation can make you happier
and more content.

• Income

The results of some studies indicate that life satisfaction increases with income.
The Maslow's hierarchy of needs is another illustration. People are required to meet
needs at lower levels such as physiological needs for survival, and safety, ... which can
be achieved almost absolutely when people have a stable income or higher in order to
fulfill needs at higher levels and achieve happiness at the summit of the pyramid.
Typically, the rich continue to see unhappiness while the poor always dream of the
happiness of prosperity. As a result, it is difficult to determine who is happier than
whom.

• Work important

Happiness gives workers job satisfaction. When workers are content, they feel
satisfied and a part of the team. Additionally, they enjoy carrying out their everyday
duties and give it their all without feeling burdened.

• Leisure time

Due to the fact that leisure activities offer to fulfill needs and ideals from one's
own life, they have a significant impact on subjective well-being. People increase their
quality of life by engaging in leisure activities, which also foster social connections,
happy feelings, and the acquisition of new skills and information.

• Family important

Researchers from around the world discovered that one of the factors supporting the
importance of family for happiness is support. Additionally, this support is reciprocal: a
study found that nearly 70% of parents turn to their kids for emotional support.
 19

Additionally, research demonstrates that feeling supported can help reduce stress,
depressive symptoms, and low self-esteem.

For emotional well-being, sibling relationships are especially crucial. More than
60% of respondents to a survey said their sibling was their best friend. According to
evolutionary biologists, this may be because we share 50% of our genes, making us
naturally drawn to one another and receptive to it. But there might be some variations
in how family affects happiness depending on our upbringing.

• Friends important

Friendships can have a big impact on your health and well-being, but they aren't
always simple to form or keep.

Good buddies are good for your health. Friends can assist you in celebrating joyful
occasions and providing support during bad times. Friends alleviate isolation and
loneliness while also allowing you to provide needed companionship.

Furthermore, friends can:

- Increase your sense of belonging and purpose.

- Reduce your stress while increasing your happiness.

- Improve your self-esteem and self-confidence.

- Help you cope with stressful circumstances like divorce, serious sickness, job
loss, or the death of a loved one.

- Encourage you to change or prevent bad lifestyle behaviors such as binge

drinking or a lack of physical activity.

HPI Ranking 2019

Life Ecological
Wellbeing HPI
Expectancy Footprint

Mean 73.06 5.53 3.33 44.55

Median 74.65 5.53 2.57 44.7

 20

Ideal 75.1 6 1.51 44.7

Costa Rica (1) 80.3 7 2.65 62.1

Thailand (28) 77.2 6.02 2.64 52.9

Vietnam (48) 75.4 5.47 2.56 48.4

China (94) 76.9 5.14 3.74 41.9

Korea (110) 83 5.9 6.45 39.8

America (122) 78.9 6.94 8.21 37.4

Russia (131) 72.6 5.44 5.46 34.9

Qatar (152) 80.2 6.37 15.04 24.3

Minimum 53.3 2.38 0.52 24.33

Maximum 84.9 7.78 15.04 62.1

Observation 152 152 152 152

CHAPTER 2: ANALYTICAL METHODS

2.1. Objects and scope of the research

- Research objects: The influence of variables such as Age, Gender, Health,

Education, Region, Marriage, Divorced, Unemployment, Religion, Politics, Income,
Work important, Leisure important, Family important and Friends important on the
variable HPI.

- Scope of the research: People living in 59 countries/territories

2.2. Research Methods

This study explains happiness by current life satisfaction (according to World

Value Survey and Happy Planet Index). To analyze the determinants of happiness, we
 21

use multiple regression in SPSS software, thereby considering different levels of

influence that each factor has on happiness. Quantitative research is carried out based
on data sets collected from a questionnaire with 1381 observations.

Regression analysis uses OLS (Ordinary Least Squares) to estimate relationships

between a dependent variable and other independent variables. Among factors affecting
human happiness, we study the dependent relationship between the happiness of each
individual (dependant variable with a scale from 1 – Dissatisfied, to 4 - Very happy)
with factors affecting happiness (independent variables such as Age, Gender, Health,
Education, Region, Marriage, Divorced, Unemployment, Religion, Politics, Income,
Work important, Leisure important, Family important and Friends important)

Within the knowledge of the subject, to verify the dependent relationship model of
"happiness" and the remaining variables, our research team uses the OLS method
(Ordinary Least Squares) together with the support of SPSS, Microsoft Excel, and Word
software to synthesize data and complete this research paper. Here are the basic steps to
build an econometric model:

1. Stating the theory and hypothesis about the relationship between the variables
in the model

2. Model building

3. Choosing the right econometric model

4. Data collection

5. Parameter estimation

6. Hypothesis testing

7. Analyzing the results

8. Showing forecasts and solutions

Sample regression model

HP =  0 + 1 (Politics) +  2 (Religion) +  3 (Unemployment) +  4 (Divorced) +  5

(Marriage) +  6 (Gender) +  7 (Age) +  8 (Education) +  9 (Health) + 10 (Income) +

 22

11 (Work Important) + 12 (Leisure Time) + 13 (Family Important) + 14 (Friends

Important)

Population regression model

HP = ̂ 0 + ̂1 (Politics) + ̂ 2 (Religion) + ̂ 3 (Unemployment) + ̂ 4 (Divorced) + ̂ 5

(Marriage) + ̂ 6 (Gender) + ̂ 7 (Age) + ̂ 8 (Education) + ̂ 9 (Health) + ̂10 (Income) +

̂11 (Work Important) + ̂12 (Leisure Time) + ̂13 (Family Important) + ̂14 (Friends
Important)

According to the formula:

 0 is the intercept of the regression model

 i is the slope of the independent variable

u is the noise term of the regression model

̂ 0 is an estimator of β0

̂ i is an estimate of βi

e is residual = μ̂ (estimate of μ)

The table below provides an interpretation of change and expectations on the link
between dependent and independent variables:

Variables Types Description Expected sign

1 HP
2 Politics
3 Religion
4 Unemployment
Dependent variable
Dependent variable
(Y) with a scale
1 if there is a political
Independent variable organization, 0 +
otherwise
1 if participating in a
Independent variable religious organization, +
0 otherwise
1 if unemployed, 0
Independent variable -
otherwise
 23

1 if divorced, 0
5 Divorced Independent variable -
otherwise
1 if married, 0
6 Marriage Independent variable +
otherwise

7 Gender Independent variable 1 if male, 2 if female +/-

Age variable ranges

8 Age Independent variable +/-
from 18 to 99 by age
Education variable has
9 Education Independent variable 9 levels from 1 (not +
study at all) to 9
Health variable on a
10 Health Independent variable scale from 1 (very bad) +
to 4 (very good)
On a scale from 1
11 Income Independent variable (very low) to 10 ( very +
high)
On a scale from 1
12 Work important Independent variable (very important) to 4 +/-
(not at all important)
On a scale from 1
13 Leisure time Independent variable (very important) to 4 +
( not at all important)
On a scale from 1
14 Family important Independent variable (very important) to 4 +
( not at all important)
On a scale from 1
15 Friends important Independent variable (very important) to 4 +
( not at all important)

Table 1. Expectations for Signals and Variable Interpretation

2.3. Description of the data and data processing

2.3.1. Description of the data

The data used in this study are from the 2017-2022 World Values Survey. This
dataset provides information on individual socioeconomic variables, attitudes and
values related to many aspects of life. Data came from responses given a standardized
questionnaire with 250 diverse questions.
 24

To gain this data, WVS used a sample survey, a system and standardized approach
to collect information through national sample interviews of individuals. Samples were
taken from the entire population 18 years of age and older without an upper age limit
imposed. To obtain a representative national sample, some form of stratified random
sampling procedure is performed based on certain social statistical areas, counties,
census units, electoral divisions, electoral registers or polling stations and central
registers of the population. As an advantage, the WVS survey provides large data and is
well representative of the country sample. Furthermore, it provides information on most
of the variables commonly studied for happiness analysis, such as income, employment,
health or education, as well as on many demographic and social variables such as age,
gender, nationality or religion.

2.3.2. Data processing

Although the entire data set includes 265 variables, we only focused on 10
variables that are mainly analyzed in research on happiness, including: politics, health,
religion, unemployment, divorced, marriage, gender, age, education, region. One
problem with this data is the presence of "no answer" or "unknown" responses in the
questionnaire. Therefore, we have to discard these observations. Initially, the number of
observations was 83975. After skipping, our final data set consisted of 1381
observations. Another problem is the inhomogeneous ordering of survey questions.

For example, in terms of happiness, the order is from “(4) Dissatisfied” to “(1)
Very happy”, while with health, the order is from “(1) Very good” to “(4) Bad”.
Therefore, we have processed, rearranged the order of levels from low to high, from bad
to good for all variables in order to use data.

CHAPTER 3: ESTIMATION AND STATISTICAL INFERENCE

3.1. Estimation Model

3.1.1. OLS Model

With SPSS, using command :

REGRESSION

/MISSING LISTWISE
 25

/STATISTICS COEFF OUTS R ANOVA

/CRITERIA=PIN(.05) POUT(.10)

/NOORIGIN

/DEPENDENT V1

/METHOD=ENTER V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10

/SCATTERPLOT=(*ZRESID ,*ZPRED)

/RESIDUALS HISTOGRAM(ZRESID) NORMPROB(ZRESID).

Variables Regression coefficient Standard error T sig.

Politics .012 .017 .499 .618

Religion .080 .016 3.024 .003

Unemployment -.006 .048 -.232 .817

Divorced .069 .033 2.809 .005

Marriage -.164 .033 -6.564 .000

Gender -.036 .032 -1.480 .139

Age .072 .001 2.716 .007

Education .021 .008 .798 .425

Health .285 .022 11.134 .000

Income -.077 .009 -2.871 .004

Work Important .009 .025 .342 .732

Leisure Time .063 .025 2.462 .014

Family Important .032 .041 1.242 .215

Friends Important .073 .024 2.805 .005
Table 2. Regression result
 26

3.2. Verify and correct model defects

3.2.1. Verify T-Test

We will evaluate whether the regression coefficient of each independent variable

is significant in the model or not based on the t test (student) with the hypothesis H 0:
The regression coefficient of the independent variable X1 is 0. Result :

The variables: Religion, divorced, marriage, age, health, income, leisure time,
friends important all have Sig < 0.05: Reject the hypothesis H0, that is, the regression
coefficient of the variable X1 is significantly different from zero. Statistically, variable
X1 has an impact on the dependent variable.

The variables: politics, unemployment, gender, education, work important and

family important all have Sig > 0.05: Accept the hypothesis H0, which means that the
regression coefficient of the variable X1 is zero statistically, the variable X1 is not. affect
the dependent variable.

Conclusion: the independent variables politics, unemployment, gender, education,

work important and family important have no impact on the dependent variable.

3.1.2. Verify the explanatory level of the model.

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 ,426 ,181 ,173 ,590

Table 3. Model Summary

Adjusted R Square = 0.173, that is, 14 independent variables have influenced

17.3% of the change of HP variable, the remaining 82.7% is the effect of automatic error
natural and out-of-model variables.

3.1.3. Verify model relevance

Hypothesis H0: R2 = 0. The F test is used to test this hypothesis. Test results:

+ Sig < 0.05: Reject the hypothesis H0, that is, R2 ≠ 0 statistically significant,
the regression model is suitable.

Sig > 0.05: Accept the hypothesis H0, that is, R2 = 0 statistically significant, the
regression model is not suitable
 27

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 112,763 14
8,054
Residual 509,625 1463 23,122 ,000
,348
Total 622,388 1477
Table 4. ANOVA

The sig value of the F test is 0.000 < 0.05, therefore, the regression model is suitable.

3.1.4. Verify Multicollinearity

Corresponding to each independent variable, VIF < 10, there is no

Multicollinearity

3.1.5. Verify Autocorrelation

We have n=200, k’=14, dL = 1,528 , dU = 1,824 (based on Durbin-Watson

Statistic: 1 Per Cent Significance Points of dL and dU)

Adjusted R Std. Error of the

Model R R Square Durbin-Watson
Square Estimate

1 ,426 ,181 ,173 ,590 1,916

Table 5.Durbin-Watson Result

Reject H0: Don’t Reject H0: Reject H0:

Positive No evidence of Negative
Inclusive Inclusive
autocorrelation autocorrelation autocorrelation

0 dL dU 2 4 - dU 4 - dL 4

The Durbin-Watson Test:Interpreting the Results

Our Durbin-Waston value is 1,916

Based on The Durbin-Watson Test, dU < d < 2. Therefore, there is no prove of

positive autocorrelation nor negative autocorrelation

3.1.6. Verify the phenomenon of residual variance changes

Using Spearman rank correlation coefficient analysis to test the residual variance
change phenomena.
 28

The sig value of the rank correlation between absres and the independent variables
(Politics, Divorced, Gender, Education, Income, Leisure time and Friends Important) is
greater than 0.05, so the residual variance is uniform, assuming the homoscedasticity is
not violated.

The sig value of the rank correlation between absres and the remaining
independent variables is less than 0.05, which means that there is a possibility of
heteroscedasticity. However, we can tell from the scatter plot that the data is not
excessively divergent and that the scatter plot is generally secure. In light of this,
heteroscedasticity is not significant, the outcome is still useful.
29
 30

3.2. Hypothesis testing

3.2.1. Verify the relevance of results with expectation

Independent variables Pearson Correlation

Politics 0,044

Religion 0,017

Unemployment -0,042
Divorced 0,143

Marriage -0,175

Gender -0,060
Age 0,133

Education -0,091

Health 0,339

Income -0,162

Work important 0,023

Leisure time 0,135

Family important 0,119

Friends important 0,121
Table 6: Pearson Correlation result

From the above table we can observe that:

- 1 = 0.044: All other factors held constant, the mean value of the expected
happiness index of people who participate in a political system is 0.044% higher than
that of people who do not participate in a political system.

The relationship between HP and Politics is a positive relationship, this result is as

expected.

-  2 = 0.017: With all other factors constant, the average value of the expected
happiness index of a person who participates in a religious organization is 0.017%
higher than that of a person who does not join a religious organization
 31

The relationship between HP and Religion is a positive relationship, this result is

as expected.

-  3 = -0.042: With other factors constant, the average value of the expected
happiness index of the unemployed is 0.042% lower than that of a non-employed person.

The relationship between HP and Unemployment is a negative relationship, this

result is as expected.

-  4 = 0.143: With all other factors constant, the mean value of the divorce index's
happiness expectation is 0.143%.

This result is exactly as expected.

-  5 = -0.175: When the marriage index increases by 1% with all other factors
unchanged, the mean value of the expected happiness index decreases by 0.175%.

The relationship between HP and Marriage is negative, this result is as expected.

-  6 = 0.060: With all other factors constant, the mean value of the expected
happiness level of a male citizen is 0.060% higher than that of a female citizen.

This result is exactly as expected.

-  7 = 0.133: When people's age increases by 1% with all other factors constant,
the mean value of people's expected happiness index increases by 0.133%.

The relationship between HP and AGE is positive, this result is as expected.

-  8 = 0.133: When the age of the Vietnamese people increases by 1% with all
other factors constant, the average value of the Vietnamese people's expected happiness
index increases by 0.0133%. The relationship between HP and Health is a positive
relationship, this result is as expected.

-  9 = -0.091: When the education level of the Vietnamese people increases by 1%

with all other factors constant, the average value of the Vietnamese people's expected
happiness index increases by 0.091%.

The relationship between HP and Education is inverse, this result is as expected.

 32

- 10 = 0.339: When the health index increases by 1% with all other factors
unchanged, the average value of the Vietnamese people's happiness expectation
increases by 0.339%.

The relationship between HP and Health is a positive relationship, this result is as

expected.

- 11 = -0.162: With all other factors constant, the average value of the happiness
index expectation of a person with a low income is 16.2% lower than that of a person
with a high income.

The relationship between HP and Income is negative, this result is different from
the initial expectation.

- 12 = 0.023: With all other factors constant, the average value of the happiness
index expectation of a person who does not care about work is 2.3% lower than that of
a person who cares about work. The relationship between HP and Work Important is a
positive relationship, this result is as expected.

- 13 = 0.135: With all other factors constant, the average value of happiness index
expectation of a person without leisure time is 13.5% lower than that of a person with
leisure time.

The relationship between HP and Leisure Time is a positive relationship, this result
is as expected.

- 14 = 0.119: With all other factors constant, the average value of happiness index
expectation of a person who does not value family is 11.9% lower than that of someone
who values family. The relationship between HP and Family Important is positive, this
result is as expected.

- 15 = 0.121: With all other factors constant, the mean value of happiness index
expectation of people who do not value friendship is lower than that of someone who
values friendship by 12.1%. The relationship between HP and Friends Important is
positive, this result is as expected.
 33

3.2.2. White-Test

To estimate the regression equation, use White's weighted least squares method:

Adjusted R Std. Error of the

Model R R Square
Square Estimate
1 ,5186 ,0269 ,052 ,55858
Table 7: Model Summary of auxiliary regression

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model t Sig.
Std.
B Beta
Error
Politics -.020 .041 -.031 -.474 .636
Religion -.002 .089 -.004 -.027 .979
Age .008 .006 .213 1.407 .160
Education .048 .039 .187 1.221 .222
Health -.304 .087 -.403 -3.492 .000
Income -.058 .047 -.188 -1.219 .223
Work -.246 .103 -.277 -2.386 .017
important
Leisure -.165 .100 -.196 -1.644 .100
time
Family -.235 .167 -.167 -1.408 .159
important
Friends -.014 .099 -.017 -.139 .890
important
VV2 .007 .014 .052 .501 .617
VV3 -.003 .015 -.027 -.182 .855
VV4 -.086 .047 -.052 -1.837 .066
VV5 .046 .032 .038 1.437 .151
VV6 -.095 .032 -.082 -2.926 .003
VV7 -.005 .031 -.005 -.172 .863
VV8 - .000 -.179 -1.189 .235
7.357E-
05
VV9 -.004 .003 -.187 -1.235 .217
VV10 .089 .021 .507 4.351 .000
VV11 .005 .005 .161 1.055 .292
VV12 .054 .027 .235 2.039 .042
VV13 .048 .025 .223 1.892 .059
VV14 .074 .046 .192 1.624 .105
VV15 .012 .025 .060 .506 .613
Table 8: Coefficients
 34

Test hypothesis: H0 : a2 = a3 = a4 = … = a25 = 0

H1: at least one of the α is different from zero

The statistic with computed value is: χ²qs = nR ² = 1478*0,0269 = 39,7582

The Critical value is χ² α (k-1)= χ² 0,05 (30-1)= 42,56

Since the calculated value is smaller than the tabulated value, therefore, the null
hypothesis is accepted. Therefore, on the basis of the White general heteroscedasticity
test, there is no heteroscedasticity.
 35

CONCLUSION
Happiness is actually an abstract concept, because each of us has our own
definition of happiness. Of course, because of that, there has been a lot of research to
find the answer to “What makes people happy”. That study aims to suggest
policymakers to come up with policies to improve the quality of life, not only
economically but also spiritually, specifically, the general happiness of the whole
society. With our suggestions, we hope to help improve people's quality of life, and
happiness level.

In order to study this group of us used data from the World Survey Value, then use
a economic model to show the factors that have contributed to the happiness of man.

As hard as we can, this study still has certain restrictions because the group has not
experienced much experience doing research, process the numbers that can cause a
nuisance for the readers, and hope you're understanding.

In the end, for the importance of the subject and the restrictions of our research,
we offer a deeper study of the human happiness that applied to Vietnam. The deeper
research should explain to the cause and the effects of the variables, which gives us the
happiness of the Vietnamese. Furthermore, the study should be performed more often
to provide an update analysis, so it is advisable to offer an update approach in the
conditions of Vietnam.
 36

REFERENCES
[1] Dayana Baez, Skidmore College, Understanding the Relationship between
Unemployment and Happiness: How Healthcare Efficiency Plays a Role in Life
Satisfaction, 2017.

[2] Social Science, Richard Layard on Happiness Economics, 2020

[3] Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Max Roser, Happiness and Life Satisfaction, 2017

[4] Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2009), Subjective well-being: The science of
happiness and life satisfaction, Oxford handbook of positive psychology.

[5] The aim is to maximize happiness, not income, The Economics Book: Big Ideas
Simply Explained (2012), DK, DK Publishing

[6] Carol Graham (2011). The pursuit of happiness, Brookings Institution Press

[7] Subjective well-being - Wikipedia. (2012). Retrieved 15 September 2022

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?curid=34104355
 37

APPENDIX

Life Ladder of life Ecological

HPI
Country Expectancy (Wellbeing) Footprint HPI
rank
(years) (0-10) (g ha)
1 Costa Rica 80.3 7.00 2.65 62.1
2 Vanuatu 70.5 6.96 1.62 60.4
3 Colombia 77.3 6.35 1.90 60.2
4 Switzerland 83.8 7.69 4.14 60.1
5 Ecuador 77.0 5.81 1.51 58.8
6 Panama 78.5 6.09 2.10 57.9
7 Jamaica 74.5 6.31 1.84 57.9
8 Guatemala 74.3 6.26 1.77 57.9
9 Honduras 75.3 5.93 1.58 57.7
10 Uruguay 77.9 6.60 2.62 57.5
11 New Zealand 82.3 7.21 3.87 57.4
12 Philippines 71.2 6.27 1.50 57.1
13 El Salvador 73.3 6.45 2.06 56.3
14 United Kingdom 81.3 7.16 3.95 56.0
15 Peru 76.7 6.00 2.09 55.9
16 Nicaragua 74.5 6.11 2.04 55.2
17 Tajikistan 71.1 5.46 0.96 55.2
18 Netherlands 82.3 7.43 4.59 54.9
Dominican
19 Republic 74.1 6.00 1.93 54.8
20 Armenia 75.1 5.49 1.52 54.7
21 Brazil 75.9 6.45 2.68 54.6
22 Bangladesh 72.6 5.11 0.88 54.5
23 Mexico 75.0 6.43 2.58 54.3
24 Uzbekistan 71.7 6.15 1.88 54.1
25 Kyrgyzstan 71.5 5.69 1.44 53.7
26 Serbia 76.0 6.24 2.69 53.2
27 Nepal 70.8 5.45 1.20 53.1
28 Thailand 77.2 6.02 2.66 52.9
29 Germany 81.3 7.04 4.44 52.7
30 Spain 83.6 6.46 4.14 52.3
31 France 82.7 6.69 4.41 51.8
32 Mauritius 75.0 6.24 2.85 51.5
33 Finland 81.9 7.78 5.76 51.3
34 Senegal 67.9 5.49 1.15 51.2
35 Ireland 82.3 7.25 5.20 51.1
36 Albania 78.6 5.00 1.95 51.0
37 Moldova 71.9 5.80 2.04 51.0
38 Norway 82.4 7.44 5.51 50.9
39 Morocco 76.7 5.06 1.82 50.9
40 Italy 83.5 6.45 4.45 50.7
 38

41 Sweden 82.8 7.40 5.61 50.5

Palestine, State
42 of 74.0 4.48 0.94 50.3
43 Argentina 76.7 6.09 3.19 50.0
44 Indonesia 71.7 5.35 1.74 49.6
45 Cyprus 81.0 6.14 3.97 49.4
46 Venezuela 72.1 5.08 1.59 48.9
47 Greece 82.2 5.95 4.04 48.8
48 Vietnam 75.4 5.47 2.56 48.4
49 Israel 83.0 7.33 6.11 48.2
50 Azerbaijan 73.0 5.17 1.97 48.0
51 Cambodia 69.8 5.00 1.36 48.0
52 Iceland 83.0 7.53 6.46 48.0
53 Slovenia 81.3 6.67 5.05 47.9
Bosnia and
54 Herzegovina 77.4 6.02 3.65 47.8
55 Paraguay 74.3 5.65 2.80 47.6
Congo
56 (Brazzaville) 64.6 5.21 1.05 47.2
57 Japan 84.6 5.91 4.71 47.1
58 Czech Republic 79.4 6.97 5.40 46.8
59 Austria 81.5 7.20 6.05 46.8
60 Sri Lanka 77.0 4.21 1.50 46.8
61 Slovakia 77.5 6.24 4.22 46.6
62 Algeria 76.9 4.74 2.22 46.5
63 Portugal 82.0 6.10 4.78 46.3
64 Romania 76.0 6.13 3.93 46.2
65 Croatia 78.5 5.63 3.64 46.2
66 Liberia 64.1 5.12 1.07 46.0
67 Chile 80.2 5.94 4.44 45.6
68 Singapore 83.6 6.38 5.60 45.5
69 Hungary 76.9 6.00 4.07 45.4
70 Denmark 80.9 7.69 7.05 45.3
71 Iraq 70.6 4.84 1.74 45.3
72 Kenya 66.7 4.62 0.99 45.2
73 Pakistan 67.3 4.44 0.87 45.1
74 Poland 78.7 6.24 4.77 45.0
75 Bolivia 71.5 5.67 2.94 45.0
76 Uganda 63.4 4.95 0.99 44.8
77 Yemen 66.1 4.20 0.52 44.6
78 Georgia 73.8 4.89 2.43 44.3
79 Mozambique 60.9 4.93 0.72 44.2
80 Madagascar 67.0 4.34 0.87 44.2
81 Tunisia 76.7 4.32 2.12 43.9
North
82 Macedonia 75.8 5.02 2.95 43.9
 39

83 Jordan 74.5 4.45 2.03 43.9

84 Iran 76.7 5.01 3.12 43.6
85 Malta 82.5 6.73 6.50 43.5
86 Egypt 72.0 4.33 1.67 43.2
87 Taiwan 80.5 6.54 5.97 43.2
88 Australia 83.4 7.23 7.53 43.1
89 Belarus 74.8 5.82 4.11 42.9
90 Laos 67.9 5.20 2.28 42.8
91 Libya 72.9 5.33 3.21 42.7
92 Belgium 81.6 6.77 6.69 42.5
93 Comoros 64.3 4.61 1.12 42.4
94 China 76.9 5.14 3.74 41.9
95 Malaysia 76.2 5.43 4.07 41.7
96 Ethiopia 66.6 4.10 0.94 41.7
97 Saudi Arabia 75.1 6.56 5.52 41.6
98 Burkina Faso 61.6 4.74 1.06 41.5
99 Benin 61.8 4.98 1.39 41.4
100 Niger 62.4 5.00 1.51 41.4
101 Montenegro 76.9 5.39 4.22 41.3
102 Turkey 77.7 4.87 3.61 41.3
103 Ukraine 72.1 4.70 2.64 40.9
Congo
104 (Kinshasa) 60.7 4.42 0.73 40.5
105 Canada 82.4 7.11 8.15 40.2
106 Bulgaria 75.0 5.11 3.83 40.1
107 Myanmar 67.1 4.43 1.75 40.0
108 Cameroon 59.3 4.94 1.24 39.9
109 Gabon 66.5 4.91 2.32 39.9
110 South Korea 83.0 5.90 6.45 39.8
111 Cote d'Ivoire 57.8 5.39 1.58 39.6
112 Sudan 65.3 4.24 1.34 39.6
113 Ghana 64.1 4.97 2.10 39.5
114 Mali 59.3 4.99 1.41 39.3
115 Rwanda 69.0 3.27 0.61 39.2
116 Lebanon 78.9 4.02 3.05 39.0
117 Malawi 64.3 3.87 0.89 38.7
118 Kazakhstan 73.6 6.27 5.72 38.6
119 Haiti 64.0 3.61 0.62 38.2
120 Guinea 61.6 4.77 1.77 38.1
121 Burundi 61.6 3.78 0.59 37.7
United States of
122 America 78.9 6.94 8.21 37.4
123 Togo 61.0 4.18 1.09 37.3
124 Tanzania 65.5 3.64 1.09 37.0
125 Lithuania 75.9 6.06 6.42 36.9
126 Namibia 63.7 4.44 1.94 36.8
 40

127 Bhutan 71.8 5.20 4.39 36.7

128 India 69.7 3.25 1.22 36.4
129 South Africa 64.1 5.03 2.97 36.2
130 Eswatini 60.2 4.40 1.67 35.3
131 Russia 72.6 5.44 5.46 34.9
132 Mauritania 64.9 4.15 2.24 34.7
133 Estonia 78.8 6.03 7.85 34.4
134 Zambia 63.9 3.31 0.93 34.4
United Arab
135 Emirates 78.0 6.71 8.94 34.3
136 Latvia 75.3 5.97 7.15 34.1
137 Nigeria 54.7 4.36 0.99 34.1
138 Hong Kong 84.9 5.66 8.60 33.9
139 Bahrain 77.3 7.10 9.80 33.6
140 Kuwait 75.5 6.11 7.77 33.3
141 Turkmenistan 68.2 5.47 5.36 33.0
142 Botswana 69.6 3.47 2.66 31.9
143 Luxembourg 82.3 7.40 12.59 31.7
Trinidad and
144 Tobago 73.5 6.19 8.24 31.6
145 Chad 54.2 4.25 1.67 30.4
146 Afghanistan 64.8 2.38 0.73 29.4
147 Sierra Leone 54.7 3.45 0.97 29.0
148 Zimbabwe 61.5 2.69 0.98 28.6
149 Lesotho 54.3 3.51 1.45 27.3
Central African
150 Republic 53.3 3.08 1.21 25.2
151 Mongolia 69.9 5.56 10.08 24.5
152 Qatar 80.2 6.37 15.04 24.3
Table: HPI Ranking 2019
 41

DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP

We commit that the scientific research is the work of our team, not copy from
anyone, because we have researched, read, translated, synthesized and performed by
ourselves. The theoretical content in the research we used some references as presented
in the references section. All figures and references are of clear origin and are legally
cited. If there is any fraud, we will be responsible to the Council as well as the results of
our group's research.

THANK YOU

To carry out and complete this scientific research project, we have received
support, help as well as interest and encouragement from many agencies, organizations
and individuals. Scientific research is also completed based on reference, learning
experiences from related research results, books and specialized newspapers of many
authors at universities, research organizations, and organizations. political office...

First of all, we would like to express our deep gratitude to Mr. Lam Manh Ha – the
direct scientific guide who has spent a lot of time and effort guiding me during the
process of conducting research and completing the research topic of this scientific
research.

We would like to thank the School of Management created such a competition for
us to broaden our horizon and all the teachers working in the school for their dedication
to imparting valuable knowledge and helping students in the process of studying and
researching.