Happiness, not money, is the proper economic measure, one British economist says

• INSTEAD of measuring the success of the economy, the government should be measuring how happy we are, an eminent British economist and former Labour adviser has claimed.
• In his new book Happiness, Richard Layard, who advised the Labour Party on unemployment issues from 1997 to 2001 and who is founder of the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics, urges the government to monitor our happiness as closely as it monitors gross domestic product (GDP).
• Layard said: "We need a regular monitoring of the well-being of the nation.
• Despite all the efforts of the government, human happiness has not improved because they are neglecting national happiness in favour of national income.
• These indices of happiness, he says, could then be used to influence public policy in line with what makes people happy and to direct it away from what contributes to their unhappiness.
• The economist's theories are based on the research of Daniel Kahneman, who was awarded the 2002 Nobel Prize in economic sciences for his pioneering work integrating psychological research into economics.
• From that, Layard developed a rationale which he calls the new science of happiness, bringing together findings from psychology, neuroscience, economics, sociology and philosophy.
• Some of the ways in which the government could make us happier, Layard believes, could be promoting family-friendly practices at work, subsidising activities that encourage community life, eliminating unemployment and spending more money on treating mental illness.
• According to Layard, mental illness is the largest single cause of misery in the Western world, contributing to more unhappiness than poverty, even when the link between poverty and depression is considered.
• He said: "Mental health is a key part of health, but it is more than that.
• He said: "I think it's progress that economics is expanding, taking into account psychological considerations, where at one time this was regarded as a taboo.