What Are the Secrets Behind Finnish Happiness?

An interview by Anaïs Kaluza with Happiness Researcher and Psychology Professor Markku Ojanen of Tampere University, Finland (Originally in Die Zeit)

Finnish happiness analyzed by the Finnish Happiness Researcher Markku Ojanen, a former professor at Tampere University in Finland. This interview by Anaïs Kaluza first appeared in "Die Zeit" magazine.

What is your perception: How is the result of the World Happiness Report received in Finland? I have the impression that many Finns themselves find it hard to believe the results. If you share that impression: What might be the reason for this?

When the first positive results came, the common reaction was to say, this is not possible, we have too many problems for this to be true. We are melancholic, withdrawn, envious people with low self-esteem. Our suicide rates are high. It is a bit of a mystery, but it has been common in Finland to belittle oneself even if one does not really believe it. We value modesty, though this concerns mainly middle-aged and older people. Social media is something else!

I would like to overturn those four myths about the Finnish mentality. Actually – I have done many studies of these traits – Finnish people are optimistic, relatively extroverted and have high self-esteem. Envy is a difficult to study, but I am sure Finnish people are not exceptional in this trait.

2. The World Happiness Report uses the Cantril Ladder to measure satisfaction – it's a cognitive evaluation of one's life circumstances. Could you tell me what exactly, very concretely, might lead Finns to be so content overall? (I know that Finland generally has relatively high levels of income and opportunity equality, that citizens have comparatively strong trust in the state, corruption is low, and that they feel free. But which concrete details of the welfare state and everyday life might play a central role in this satisfaction?)

It is very difficult to single out a factor causing the first position, because many positive factors correlate strongly. Those factors mentioned in the questions are true of other Nordic countries, and to a large extent, of other countries too. These objective well-being factors explain why Finland is among top five countries, but which is the X-factor that elevates Finland to the top? My answer to this question is speculative. Perhaps the answer is a stoic attitude to life spiced up by being satisfied with what one has got. One might add to these Finland’s soft transactional norms: You need not smile to everybody, and can live to a large extent as you please.

3. In terms of living conditions and the welfare state, Finland likely compares well to other Nordic countries. I therefore wonder what distinguishes Finland from Denmark, Norway, or Sweden – and might explain the especially high satisfaction. Do you have any thoughts on this?

It might be just those factors I mentioned: a stoic attitude, and moderate or even low ambitions. After the wars, our starting position was much lower than those three countries, but have since gained a lot. Actually, my own candidates for the first position are Iceland and Norway, but this is a subjective opinion.

4. In the course of my research so far, I've often read and heard that Finns are considered modest – that money and status play a less important role than in other (European or even Nordic?) countries, and that people compare themselves less to others. What is your view on this? Could that also be a factor in their satisfaction? Is there any scientific evidence for this – studies that compare Finnish mentality to that of other countries?

I think this is true, but scientific evidence for it is meagre. However, there is a study by Jan Delhey et al which includes a status seeking index in Europe based on European Social Survey. Finland really had the lowest status seeking score. The same low average value was also in Iceland and France.

Delhey, J., Schneickert, C., Hess, S., & Aplowski, A. (2022). Who values status seeking? A cross-European comparison of social gradients and societal conditions. European Societies, 24(1), 29-60.

5. If modesty could play a role: Where does it come from? Are there historical developments that might explain why people in Finland are more easily content with less? What are your thoughts on that?

Finland was one of the poorest countries at the end of the 1800’s, but has since gained a lot. The wars against the Soviet Union were also hard blows, though the same concerned many other countries, too. Finland was for a long time a much less urbanised country than other Western countries. Perhaps an old collective mentality prevailed longer than in other Nordic countries: a hope that life stays as it is and does not get worse. City people wish for something better. These kind of mentalities do not change in one or two generations.

6. How do you explain the fact that Finland scores worse when happiness is measured as an emotion? What might be the reason for this? Why is happiness as a cognitive life evaluation more pronounced, and happiness as an emotion – like joy – weaker?

Emotional happiness (versus cognitive happiness) requires close-knit relationships, as is true of traditional collective cultures, which are among the best in emotional happiness. We do not have big joyful carnivals or festivals. Our celebrations are basically rather solemn ones. The prevailing attitude of my childhood (I lived in a small village) was to be responsible and diligent, and to do your work well. Nothing good comes from those who laugh at stupid or empty things. We had “talkoot” (the whole village working together), but these were quite serious matters, though one could eat well in those days.

7. Research shows that social relationships are a key predictor of happiness as an emotion – that social bonds are very important for feeling happy. During my research, I've gotten the impression that in Finland (similarly to Germany but different e.g. from Latin American countries), the focus is on the nuclear family, and that large communities or everyday encounters with others, including strangers, do not shape daily life. What is your take on this? Could that play a role?

Yes, it does. Quite many agree with the saying “family is the worst”. Families were very important in my childhood, but that changed rapidly. They have gotten smaller, and people left for cities – and for Sweden. I wonder why strong emotions have been something to fear. This is on display especially well in religious meetings, where people sing joyful hymns with solemn faces. Has the life of Finnish people truly been so hard?

8. How do you explain the paradox that Finland ranks number one in happiness or life satisfaction – and at the same time a considerable share of the population struggles with mental health issues? Suicide rates, depression, and alcoholism are noticeably higher than in quite some other (European) countries that rank lower in the Happiness Report.

This has been a perennial problem for me. Suicide rates do not tell about happiness, but rather about secularity and freedom. There are lot of mental problems, which should have an effect on national happiness, but do not. We have to remember that these problems are difficult to compare due to somewhat different diagnostic practices. In those less happy countries, there are lot of political and social problems that Finland does not have to the same degree. I have noticed in my research that Finnish people do not easily give up. Although they do have serious problems, they say they are quite satisfied with their lives.

9. And even though the situation has clearly improved in recent decades: What explains the higher psychological burden in Finland? (Does the darkness in winter or mentality play a particular role here?)

I do not quite agree with “the higher psychological burden”. There is a recent book called Hyviä uutisia Suomesta (Good news from Finland). The conclusion of the well-being experts is that there are a lot of good things in Finland. Darkness and winter do not have any marked effect, and our stoicism and low status-seeking mentality are big assets toward happiness.

An addendum: some personal ideas

In my research I have used a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 is very unhappy and 100 very happy. One can use any number, 0 and 100 included. During the past 30 years over 8000 Finnish people have completed this scale. I have similar scales about hope, meaning, personal control and many other well-being factors. The average of happiness in this scale is about 72-74. The result is of course similar to World Happiness Report, though perhaps not as good.

Although many negative and positive life events do have an effect on happiness, I think much depends on your basic attitude. This attitude must be to a great extent genetic. There are a lot of people who have difficult problems, but say they are happy and also those who do not have so many problems but say they are unhappy – luckily this group is much smaller than the previous one. Of course very hard life events so lower happiness, which can be easily seen when we compare good and bad countries.

My scepticism about measuring happiness has somewhat increased. Quite often I feel that the results are too good. Perhaps social desirability is working here. It is not easy to admit that I am an unhappy person. This critique can be countered by observing the behaviour of the majority of Finnish people. They seem to be reasonably satisfied with their life and do not go around clenching their teeth. If we were unhappy, our daily interactions would be much worse.

Categories: : Asahi and Psychology, Interview, FInnish Happiness, Finland