For three or four years now, one hears in the ecological scene much about growth critique, sufficiency, the de-growth movement, etc. - not only in Germany, but, as far as I can see, in almost all developed countries. However, nothing has happened. At the same time we heard until recently a lot about the term gross national happiness. In eco-circles I was enthusiastically told about the small Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan and its most admirable attempt, to measure and increase gross domestic happiness rather than the gross domestic product. Even in the German print media a couple of articles have appeared on this topic.
For both me and my eco-friends it
was remarkable that this attempt had been made in Bhutan, which in every
respect was still a very underdeveloped country, where the first road was built
in only 1962. Since then I have collected more articles about this topic, but
did not have time to read them all. The great events of the world – the
Arab Spring, the civil war in Syria, the Shia-Sunni conflict in Iraq, the
conflict over Iran's nuclear program, the failed climate conferences, the
Occupy movement, etc. – occupied my attention completely. But actually the
much more interesting topic of Bhutan and its gross domestic happiness stayed
in the back of my mind. I thought for the time being, its origins must lie
in Buddhism, the religion of the majority and of the king, including the
elite. It is after all a very pacifist and redemption and sacrifice oriented
religion.
But for some time, I have been
feeling motivated to deal with this topic again. This was triggered off by
the terrible events in Burma, also a predominantly Buddhist country. In
the last year there were several murderous pogroms against the Muslim minority,
especially against the dark-skinned "Rohingyas" – all committed by
Buddhist mobs, egged on by a monk. Apparently, in Burma, the effect of
Buddhism on the behavior of the Buddhist majority and the rulers was not real,
or it was not strong enough to make it impossible for the pogroms to take place. This
led me to ask whether the same was true of Bhutan? I knew Bhutan also had
a problem with minorities of Nepalese origin. But my main interest was the
gross domestic happiness. I began to read the reports I had saved about
the country.
King Wangchuck first expressed the idea of gross domestic happiness
in 1972. That was a year before the
appearance of Fritz Schumacher's famous book Small is Beautiful, in
which there is a chapter on Buddhist economics. The king said in a speech:
"Gross national happiness is more important than gross national product"
(quoted in Wikipedia ). At first it seemed like an impromptu remark, not
to be taken seriously in the long-term. But for the king, who had
initiated the process of development in his country, it was serious. He
wanted to signal the intention that Bhutan's development would be consistent
with Buddhist spiritual values and culture. He said that Bhutan must
ensure that prosperity is fairly shared among all members of society; that
there is a proper balance between prosperity and preservation of the cultural
tradition; that the environment was protected and that the government governs
responsibly.
There were then over the years,
some corresponding policy decisions. A sophisticated instrument was
developed to measure the general happiness. Such measurements have also
been carried out. It was decided that 60 percent of the country would have
to be covered with forests. There was a decision against mass
tourism. Only a small number of tourists were welcome in the country
annually. A dress code required that men dressed traditionally. After the
introduction of democracy in 2008, the first elected Prime Minister Jigme
Thinley intensified this policy. The sale of tobacco and tobacco products
was banned. The use of plastic bags was also prohibited. During
religious holidays, which can also extend to one month, no meat was allowed to
be sold. Automobiles were heavily taxed, and there was a car-free day every
month.
Until 1960 there was no public
education system in Bhutan. There are now schools everywhere, for each
stage. In the public health care system, for non-acute sufferings,
patients have the choice between western medicine and traditional
medicine. While the per capita income of the Bhutanese remains one of the
lowest in the world, between 1984-1998 their life expectancy increased by 19
years to 66 years.
In an Internet article I found the following sentences about the capital: "Thimphu is a pleasant
walking city, with none of the chaotic warrens present in many Indian cities.
Its people are cheerful, its merchants show none of the pushiness common in
South Asia, and even its stray dogs seem benign. There are no slums"
(Harris 2013). Prime Minister Thinley said, "Material
well-being is only one component. That doesn't ensure that you're at peace with
your environment and in harmony with each other" (Revkin 2013).It all sounded wonderful, in our sense. Bhutan stood as a
model of sustainable development. It seemed to be a happy, yes happy society on
the way.
But then came the
disappointment. I read that Prime Minister Thinley has lost the election
in the summer of 2013, and the new Premier Tshering
Tobgay, a mechanical engineer trained in the U.S., has given up the idea of
gross domestic happiness. “Rather than talking about happiness” he
said, “we want to work on reducing the obstacles to happiness” (Harris 2013). He
repealed some of the prohibitions and decrees, which had been imposed on the
people by the previous government, e.g. the occasional car-free days and the
traditional dress code for men. He realized that it would be difficult to
maintain the traditional culture in an era of rapid urbanization.
In fact, while the majority of the Bhutanese still
lives as subsistence farmers, an increasing number of them are leaving their
traditionally built mud and wood houses in isolated villages and moving to the
towns, where many new modern houses are being built. “Who wants to do
subsistence farming and get up at 4 in the morning and carry water if you don’t
have to?” asked a member of the royal family. “Once you educate the people,
nobody is going to live the same miserable life their parents did” (Harris
2013).
As a consequence,
unemployment is very high. The new
prime minister lamented that many of the youth are voluntarily unemployed. He also spoke of increasing political
corruption that he wanted to fight.
The two industries that Bhutan has to pay for its
modernization, and imports of almost everything necessary from India, are tourism
and hydroelectric power. The latter is
sold in large part to India, and the country wants to develop this sector
further. But the necessary construction
works, also those necessary for infrastructure development, are almost entirely
in the hands of Indian companies and workers. At
first, it had to be so, because too few Bhutanese had the necessary know-how. Now, however, this is because the educated
and urbanized Bhutanese youth consider building work beneath their dignity.
So it is no wonder that Bhutan's national debt is
very high and continues to grow. There
was even a currency crisis and a threat from India to stop further financial
assistance.
The experiment in a small country to increase its
gross domestic happiness instead of gross domestic product has thus failed, for
the time being. Will it be just a small
and short episode in world history? Bhutan
has ultimately taken the usual route of an underdeveloped country towards development
and modernization – with the well-known problems: the contradiction between
development and environmental protection (hydropower too harms the environment)
and the contradiction between modernization and traditional Buddhist culture.
Also, Bhutan has not been spared the usual
problem with minorities. As in Burma,
the teachings of Buddhism have not been any help in Bhutan. The expulsion of the Hindu-Nepalese minority
has brought Bhutan a bad name. How can
you build a happy society, so the criticism goes, if it only blesses the
Buddhist majority?
We need to understand that in today's world no
country is an island. In particular,
the siren song of development in the neighboring countries of India and China
is too enticing. Anyhow, today, for purely
economic reasons, no country, especially a small country like Bhutan, can pursue
an independent economic policy. Also
culturally and socio-politically, the influence of the rest of the world is too
strong, and the promise of a consumer society too tempting.
Referring to the global ecology crisis, in the
1990s, the then very famous Brazilian environmentalist José Lutzenberger said: "In the Third World, nothing will
happen if nothing happens in the First World." Back then I was of the same
opinion. The failed experiment in Bhutan
again confirmed Lutzenberger’s view. But
who knows, maybe something will happen again in the First World, with many
talking already about de-growth. People
will probably try again to increase the gross domestic happiness in the world,
rather than the gross domestic product.
Literature:
Harris, Gardiner (2013) “Index of Happiness? Bhutan’s New Leader Prefers
More Concrete Goals”. In The New York
Times International (online),
October 4, 2013.
Revkin, Andrew C. (2013) “Can
Bhutan Achieve Hydropowered Happiness?”. In The
New York Times International (online), December 10, 2013.
Wikipedia : Article on gross national happiness.
