nep-hap New Economics Papers
on Economics of Happiness
Issue of 2017‒09‒24
three papers chosen by

  1. The value of public service broadcasting in Japan: The life satisfaction approach By Okuyama, Naoko
  2. The impact of renewable versus non-renewable natural capital on economic growth By Laura Recuero Virto; Denis Couvet
  3. Decomposing Well-being Measures in South Africa: The Contribution of Residential Segregation to Income Distribution By Florent Dubois; Christophe Muller

  1. By: Okuyama, Naoko
    Abstract: Evaluation of amenities and benefits of public service broadcasting is crucially important with the accelerated convergence of broadcasting and telecommunications and the increasing heterogeneities of media use by individuals. With the use of the microdata provided from a survey carried out by Japanese public service broadcaster, we attempted to elucidate the effect of viewing public service broadcasting on individual well-being using the life satisfaction approach in quantitative, monetized terms. Crucial findings of our analysis include that viewing frequency of public service broadcasting is negatively associated with life satisfaction, even after successfully addressing the endogenous nature of television viewing. It is also found that the detrimental effect of viewing public service broadcasting has a considerable monetary impact. In the sense of studying the demand side, our exploration of the value of conventional viewing of public service broadcasts will provide a valuable comparative benchmark future research in this domain.
    Keywords: Life satisfaction approach,Non-market valuation,Television viewing,Public service broadcasting
    JEL: D61 H41 I31 L82
    Date: 2017
  2. By: Laura Recuero Virto (MNHN and MAEDI); Denis Couvet (MNHN)
    Abstract: This paper examines whether natural capital is a robust determinant of economic growth, distinguishing the contribution of direct and indirect effects in renewable and non-renewable natural capital. Our hypothesis is that renewable natural capital may have a rather indirect but more important impact on economic growth than non-renewable natural capital, particularly through human well-being. In contrast, non-renewable natural capital can be a source of immediate financial wealth, but can have adverse social and environmental effects. To test this hypothesis we use a data set on 83 countries for the period 1960-2009 to compare the relevance of proximate and fundamental theories to explain economic growth. We find some evidence of an indirect negative impact of renewable natural capital in wealth on economic growth through through human well-being and, more precisely, population growth rates and fertility. This is particularly the case for countries with higher levels of human development. In contrast, the share of non-renewable natural capital in wealth has a direct positive impact on economic growth in countries with lower income inequality and higher institutional quality. This finding reflects the effect of capital accumulation in the domestic economy, as capacity constrainst are relaxed. Finally, countries with higher income per capita, higher human development and higher institutional quality have a higher share of higher renewable natural capital per capita, although they also have a lower share of lower renewable natural capital in wealth. Such result emphasises that renewable natural capital is very necessary for people (per capita), hence isa primary concern for empowered countries, although such capital contributes less to wealth, and economic growth, in these countries . Our results question the way ‘wealth’ and economic growth are defined in economics when the effect of natural capital is examined.
    Keywords: natural capital, economic growth, renewable, non-renewable,
    JEL: O44 O47 Q20 Q30 Q32
    Date: 2017–09
  3. By: Florent Dubois (Aix-Marseille Univ. (Aix-Marseille School of Economics), CNRS, EHESS and Centrale Marseille); Christophe Muller (Aix-Marseille Univ. (Aix-Marseille School of Economics), CNRS, EHESS and Centrale Marseille)
    Abstract: Despite the influential work of Cutler and Glaeser [13], whether ghettos are good or bad is still an open and debatable question. In this paper, we provide evidence that, in South Africa, ghettos can be good or bad for income depending on the studied quantile of the income distribution. Segregation tends to be beneficial for rich Whites while it is detrimental for poor Blacks. Even when we find it to be also detrimental for Whites, it is still more detrimental for Blacks. We further show that the multitude of results fuelling this debate can come from misspecification issues and selecting the appropriate sample for the analysis. Finally, we quantify the importance of segregation in the income gap between Blacks and Whites in the post-Apartheid South Africa. We find that segregation can account for up to 40 percent of the income gap at the median. It is even often a larger contribution than education all across the income distribution.
    Keywords: post-apartheid South Africa, generalized decompositions, income distribution, residential segregation
    Date: 2017–05

General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.