IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i11p6096-d564313.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

G-Donic Happiness: An Alternative to Hedonic and Eudemonic Happiness for Sustainable Consumption

Author

Listed:
  • Necati Aydin

    (Department of Finance, College of Business, Alfaisal University, Riyadh 11533, Saudi Arabia)

  • Hayat Khan

    (Department of Finance, College of Business, Alfaisal University, Riyadh 11533, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

This paper provides a spiritual perspective on happiness referred to as the G-donic approach to happiness which is fundamentally different from the hedonic and eudemonic approaches. The G-donic approach identifies the importance of the spiritual self and argues that it embodies the technology that converts physical resources into happiness. We argue that with G-donic preferences, it is possible to achieve a higher level of happiness with moderate consumption. The G-donic approach encourages living a virtuous life by fulfilling the biological, social, emotional, intellectual, moral, and spiritual needs in a balanced manner. It urges spiritual people to go beyond phenomenal reality to perceive transcendental reality in pursuit of authentic happiness. We use a multi-dimensional human nature model to highlight the relevance and importance of this approach, and modify standard utility models to show how it might result in higher happiness with lower consumption and compare and contrast it with outcomes under hedonic and eudemonic approaches to happiness. The G-donic approach contends that resources and spirituality are substitutes, as well as complements and that a reasonable approach to happiness should seek an optimal mix of both. Unlike popular convention, this deviation from hedonic pleasure due to lower consumption does not result in lower happiness. In fact, we show that, theoretically, it results in an overall increase in happiness as any loss in hedonic is compensated by greater eudemonic and G-donic rewards which increases utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Necati Aydin & Hayat Khan, 2021. "G-Donic Happiness: An Alternative to Hedonic and Eudemonic Happiness for Sustainable Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6096-:d:564313
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6096/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/6096/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 817-869.
    2. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Nielsen, Ulrik H. & Sørensen, Erik Ø. & Tungodden, Bertil & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2013. "Give and take in dictator games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 280-283.
    3. Hayat Khan, 2018. "Islamic economics and a third fundamental theorem of welfare economics," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 723-737, March.
    4. David K. Levine, 1998. "Modeling Altruism and Spitefulness in Experiment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(3), pages 593-622, July.
    5. Daniel Kahneman & Alan B. Krueger, 2006. "Developments in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    6. Cox, James C. & Friedman, Daniel & Gjerstad, Steven, 2007. "A tractable model of reciprocity and fairness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-45, April.
    7. Richins, Marsha L & Dawson, Scott, 1992. "A Consumer Values Orientation for Materialism and Its Measurement: Scale Development and Validation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(3), pages 303-316, December.
    8. Ottone, Stefania & Ponzano, Ferruccio, 2005. "An Extension to the Model of Inequity Aversion by Fehr and Schmidt," POLIS Working Papers 51, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    9. M. Sirgy, 1998. "Materialism and Quality of Life," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 227-260, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David F. Carreno & Nikolett Eisenbeck & James Greville & Paul T. P. Wong, 2023. "Cross-Cultural Psychometric Analysis of the Mature Happiness Scale-Revised: Mature Happiness, Psychological Inflexibility, and the PERMA Model," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1075-1099, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pikulina, Elena S. & Tergiman, Chloe, 2020. "Preferences for power," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    2. Gächter, Simon & Kölle, Felix & Quercia, Simone, 2022. "Preferences and perceptions in Provision and Maintenance public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 338-355.
    3. Urs Fischbacher & Simeon Schudy, 2014. "Reciprocity and resistance to comprehensive reform," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(3), pages 411-428, September.
    4. Simon Gächter & Daniele Nosenzo & Martin Sefton, 2013. "Peer Effects In Pro-Social Behavior: Social Norms Or Social Preferences?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 548-573, June.
    5. Daniel Woods & Maroš Servátka, 2019. "Nice to you, nicer to me: Does self-serving generosity diminish the reciprocal response?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 506-529, June.
    6. Cox, James C. & Friedman, Daniel & Gjerstad, Steven, 2007. "A tractable model of reciprocity and fairness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-45, April.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 2004. "Fairness and Incentives in a Multi‐task Principal–Agent Model," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(3), pages 453-474, October.
    8. Leibbrandt, Andreas & López-Pérez, Raúl, 2012. "An exploration of third and second party punishment in ten simple games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 753-766.
    9. Güth, Werner & Kocher, Martin G., 2014. "More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 396-409.
    10. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    11. Christian Thoeni & Simon Gaechter, 2011. "Peer Effects and Social Preferences in Voluntary Cooperation," Discussion Papers 2011-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    12. James C. Cox & Daniel Friedman & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2008. "Revealed Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(1), pages 31-69, January.
    13. Nicklisch, Andreas & Wolff, Irenaeus, 2012. "On the nature of reciprocity: Evidence from the ultimatum reciprocity measure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 892-905.
    14. Reuben, Ernesto & van Winden, Frans, 2008. "Social ties and coordination on negative reciprocity: The role of affect," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 34-53, February.
    15. López-Pérez, Raúl, 2009. "The Power of Words: Why Communication fosters Cooperation and Efficiency," Working Papers in Economic Theory 2009/01, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain), Department of Economic Analysis (Economic Theory and Economic History).
    16. Dhaene, Geert & Bouckaert, Jan, 2010. "Sequential reciprocity in two-player, two-stage games: An experimental analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 289-303, November.
    17. Kurt A. Ackermann & Ryan O. Murphy, 2019. "Explaining Cooperative Behavior in Public Goods Games: How Preferences and Beliefs Affect Contribution Levels," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, March.
    18. Krawczyk, Michal & Le Lec, Fabrice, 2021. "How to elicit distributional preferences: A stress-test of the equality equivalence test," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 13-28.
    19. López-Pérez, Raúl, 2009. "Followers and leaders: Reciprocity, social norms and group behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 557-567, August.
    20. Kranz, Sebastian, 2010. "Moral norms in a partly compliant society," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 255-274, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:6096-:d:564313. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.