การวิเคราะห์ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างตัวชี้วัดความกินดีอยู่ดีและการ พัฒนาเศรษฐกิจของประเทศไทย

• Main Author: ณิชรัตน์ โรจน์แสงนนท์
• Other Authors: ผศ.ดร.ชูเกียรติ ชัยบุญศรี
• Format: Independent Study
• Language: Thai
• Published: เชียงใหม่ : บัณฑิตวิทยาลัย มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่ 2020
• Online Access: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/69217
• Institution: Chiang Mai University

This independent study has the purpose to investigate the relationship between well-being indicators which were categorized by Robert E. Kuenne. The herein data are the secondary data of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the alternatives to GDP that is HDI, Gini Coefficient and suicide rate of Thailand. The data set employed in this model ranges from 1998 to 2013, 16 observations in total. The study uses econometric models such as Estimate Vector Autoregressive, Impulse Response Function and Make Model to build scenarios of Thailand’s well-being and to analyze whether Thailand should give priority to which issues among GDP HDI imcome inequality or gross happiness of the nation. The result of the study reveals that the increase of GDP has 2 positive relationships with income inequality and gross happiness (subjective well-being) but short term negative effects would occur with human development index and gross happiness during the first 2 years. In case that the GDP growth does not follow target in the year after, it is possible that problems in the section of subjective well-being and human development might escalate and become excessive burdens for the government in the future. In case the government is able to bring all the side effects under control, Thailand still has to spend at least 5 years in solving all the problems that generally come along with GDP boost. On the other hand, if the government focused on enhancing national happiness instead of GDP, according to VAR forcast, the GDP will rise within 2-4 years, but the human development might fall after 6 years. Also, there is no significant relationship between national happiness and income distribution, or that the rise of happiness can make any help to income inequality. Besides, if the government gives priority to income distribution, the result reveals that the more equality of income distribution, the happier the citizen, but there will be slight negative relationships towards human development and GDP growth that it might take at least 5 years to see the syncronization of all indicators’ improvement again. Finally, if the government regards human development as its preliminary strategy, VAR forcast together with impulse response function, shows a postitive relationship with the increase of human development index along with all of the rest of the indicators in this study within 2-3 years. All in all, the study would suggest that the government set human development as the primitive policy; enhancing public heath, more education budget, and eradicating poverty in Thailand, as such strategy, will eventually lead to improvements in other well-being indicators including GDP in the most timesaving and comprehensive maner.