A Theory of Relativity of Cultures, Incomes and Happiness

IF 0.4 Q4 ECONOMICS
Tobias F. Rötheli
{"title":"A Theory of Relativity of Cultures, Incomes and Happiness","authors":"Tobias F. Rötheli","doi":"10.1177/0260107921989905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concepts of cultural relativism (introduced by Franz Boas) and hedonic relativism introduced by Richard Easterlin are reference points of a theory that addresses international differences in per capita incomes and variations in the contribution of income to happiness. The pivotal concept in this study is diligence. Painstaking effort, that is, diligence, is needed to produce high quality goods and services. The downside of such efforts lies in the psychological burden that comes with the necessary high level of self-control of the individual worker and the required organisational feedback mechanisms in firms. We present two competing views concerning the determination of diligence. The first, anthropologically inspired, hypothesis states that a society’s cultural forces such as cognitive styles, organisational traditions and religion determine the level of diligence. One implication of this perspective is that societies can have income levels that are either too high or too low relative to the welfare optimum. The second view holds that diligence is determined in a maximising way, balancing the gains and pains of diligence in the economic realm. Cross-country data are studied in order to assess the two competing views. The econometric evidence indicates that it is the maximising view that can explain key aspects of the data. JEL: D63, P5, Z1","PeriodicalId":42664,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0260107921989905","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0260107921989905","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The concepts of cultural relativism (introduced by Franz Boas) and hedonic relativism introduced by Richard Easterlin are reference points of a theory that addresses international differences in per capita incomes and variations in the contribution of income to happiness. The pivotal concept in this study is diligence. Painstaking effort, that is, diligence, is needed to produce high quality goods and services. The downside of such efforts lies in the psychological burden that comes with the necessary high level of self-control of the individual worker and the required organisational feedback mechanisms in firms. We present two competing views concerning the determination of diligence. The first, anthropologically inspired, hypothesis states that a society’s cultural forces such as cognitive styles, organisational traditions and religion determine the level of diligence. One implication of this perspective is that societies can have income levels that are either too high or too low relative to the welfare optimum. The second view holds that diligence is determined in a maximising way, balancing the gains and pains of diligence in the economic realm. Cross-country data are studied in order to assess the two competing views. The econometric evidence indicates that it is the maximising view that can explain key aspects of the data. JEL: D63, P5, Z1
文化、收入与幸福的相对论
文化相对主义(由弗朗茨·博阿斯提出)和享乐相对主义(由理查德·伊斯特林提出)的概念是一个理论的参考点,该理论解决了人均收入的国际差异和收入对幸福贡献的变化。本研究的关键概念是勤奋。生产高质量的商品和服务需要艰苦的努力,即勤奋。这种努力的不利之处在于,在企业中,个体员工必要的高度自我控制和必要的组织反馈机制带来了心理负担。我们就勤勉的确定提出了两种相互矛盾的观点。第一种假说受到人类学的启发,认为一个社会的文化力量,如认知方式、组织传统和宗教,决定了勤奋的程度。这一观点的一个含义是,相对于最优福利,社会的收入水平可能过高或过低。第二种观点认为,勤奋是以一种最大化的方式决定的,在经济领域平衡勤奋的收益和痛苦。为了评估这两种相互竞争的观点,我们研究了跨国数据。计量经济学证据表明,最大化观点可以解释数据的关键方面。Jel: d63, p5, z1
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The explosion of information and research that has taken place in recent years has had a profound effect upon a variety of existing academic disciplines giving rise to the dissolution of barriers between some, mergers between others, and the creation of entirely new fields of enquiry.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信