Does globalization and ecological footprint in OECD lead to national happiness

PLoS One. 2023 Oct 24;18(10):e0288630. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288630. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between globalization, ecological footprint, innovation, and subjective wellbeing in the form of happiness, using a comprehensive assessment of OECD countries from 2008 to 2020. The study employs FGLS, Quantile, and Bootstrap Quantile regression estimation to investigate the quadratic effects of globalization, ecological footprint, and the moderating effect of innovation while controlling for renewable energy and population density. Happiness is a multidisciplinary subject, and this study focuses on the economic dimensions of happiness. The findings reveal a nonlinear relationship between ecological footprint and globalization, with negative effects on subjective wellbeing at high levels of ecological footprint and globalization. However, the moderating effect of innovation mitigates these adverse effects, indicating that innovation can help to offset the detrimental impacts of ecological footprint and globalization on subjective wellbeing. The study's implications are significant for policymakers promoting sustainable economic growth while enhancing subjective wellbeing. The findings highlight the importance of investing in innovation and sustainable development to promote subjective wellbeing in the face of increasing ecological footprint and globalization. Additionally, this research contributes to the multidisciplinary understanding of happiness and provides valuable insights for future research in this area.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Carbon Dioxide
  • Economic Development
  • Happiness*
  • Internationality
  • Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development*
  • Renewable Energy

Substances

  • Carbon Dioxide

Grants and funding

This research was supported by The National Social Science Fund of China (Grant.No.21BJY217). Furthermore, The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.