India’s 118th Happiness Rank Fuels Bias Backlash

Introduction

Happiness is subjective, yet it has become a global yardstick through the World Happiness Report. When India was placed 118th out of 147 countries in the 2025 edition of this report, many Indians reacted with surprise, displeasure, even indignation. The report not only evaluates quality of life but triggers debate about what “happiness” really means—and whether such rankings are fair, biased, or misleading. This blog explores the incident, its causes, implications, and whether we should take it at face value.

History / Context

• The World Happiness Report is published annually by the Wellbeing Research Centre at the University of Oxford, in partnership with Gallup, the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, etc. 

• It uses data (often averages from recent years) to rank countries based on self-reported life evaluations plus measured scores on factors such as GDP per capita, social support, health and life expectancy, freedom to make key decisions, perceptions of corruption, generosity, etc.

• In the 2025 report, India improved from 126th in the previous year to 118th. 

Why India’s 118th Rank Has Sparked Backlash

Several reasons why this rank upset many people in India:

• Comparison with War-Torn/Conflict Regions
  India being ranked below countries like Pakistan, Palestine, Ukraine led to many questioning how war-ravaged or conflict zones could appear “happier” than India. It feels counterintuitive to many. 

• Pride & National Self-Image
  A rising economy, increasing global influence, advanced space missions, technological progress: people feel India has made substantial achievements. The low happiness score seems to clash with that sense of progress. 

• Questioning the Methodology
  Many critics argued that the survey methodology might not capture India’s cultural and social dimensions of happiness adequately. They point to strong community bonds, family ties, spiritual or religious satisfaction, resilience even under hardship—factors possibly under-weighted in such global indices. 

• Expectation vs Perception Gap
  Indians might expect to rank higher and feel that their own subjective experience of happiness or well-being is better than what the numbers suggest. When perception doesn’t match numbers, backlash is natural.

What Does the Report Say & The Process Behind It

To understand why India got 118th, these are some of the key factors the report looks at, and how India fared:

• Life Evaluation (Cantril Ladder): people rating their lives overall. India’s average life evaluation score is low. 

• GDP per capita: India ranks relatively low among countries because while its economy is large, per capita income is still modest compared to many nations.

• Social Support: This includes having someone to count on in times of trouble. India ranks poorly in social support.

• Healthy Life Expectancy: India has been improving but still trails many higher-ranked countries. 

• Freedom to make life choices: Some measure of how much people feel free to make decisions that affect their lives.

• Generosity: Indians scored somewhat better on generosity or charitable acts. 

• Perceptions of corruption: High perceived corruption reduces happiness scores. India does not score well on this. 

Key Points & Drawbacks

Key Points

• Despite ranking low, India has improved from 126 to 118, indicating some progress. 

• Many of the top countries are the same Nordic or high income, high social trust, low corruption, high welfare states, which set a high bar. 

• The report emphasizes that happiness is not just material prosperity — social support, generosity, trust etc. matter a lot. 

Drawbacks / Criticisms of the Index or Its Use

• Cultural Biases: Surveys and indices often rely on Western models of satisfaction or well-being. They may under-represent factors important in India like spiritual satisfaction, extended family networks, traditions etc.

• Survey Limitations: Self-reporting can be influenced by mood, current events, or expectations. Respondents may under- or over-state their happiness.

• Neglected Local Variation: India is huge and diverse. Conditions in urban metros vastly differ from rural or remote areas. A national average may mask pockets of high happiness or severe unhappiness.

• Temporal & Contextual Fluctuations: Happiness can change with recent events — economic downturns, health crises, climate issues etc. Some rankings may lag behind or not fully capture up-to-date situations.

Latest Reactions & Updates

• Social media was ablaze with criticism, jokes, memes. Many Indians expressed disbelief. 

• Prominent voices (spiritual leaders, public intellectuals) said the report overlooked India’s strengths: resilience, social bonding, cultural richness. 

• Some media outlets published analyses exploring why India lagged, pointing to inequality, healthcare access, corruption, lack of social support etc. 

• Debate about whether India should make policy changes targeted at improving the metrics that influence happiness: e.g. better mental health services, stronger welfare safety nets, corruption control, enhancing public trust.

Important & Significance Factors

Advantages of Having Such a Report / Reactions

• It draws attention to non-economic metrics of well-being; reminds policy makers that economic growth is only one part of human welfare.

• Sparks public debate; can drive reforms in health, social infrastructure, mental health, societal inclusion.

• Helps citizens understand where things might be going wrong and who they can hold accountable (e.g., local governance, civic trust etc.).

Disadvantages / Possible Negative Effects

• May demoralize citizens if taken cynically: “If we are rated low, what’s the use?”

• Could lead to distorted policy if governments try to “game” metrics rather than genuinely improve well-being.

• May fuel political blame games: different parties may use the ranking to guilt or embarrass opponents rather than constructive action.

Positive & Negative Outcomes

Positive

• Opportunity for introspection: India can examine where it is falling behind — e.g. healthcare, corruption, social support — and intervene.

• A chance to invest more in mental health, community welfare, ensuring freedoms and transparency.

• May promote stronger social programs or community level bonding, which might raise happiness over time.

Negative

• The comparison with war-torn regions could be misleading and cause anger rather than constructive response.

• Overemphasis on rankings can distract from ground realities which are complex and multifaceted.

• Risk that media sensationalism overshadows the nuanced findings (e.g. India improved, certain metrics are positive, etc.).

Final Thoughts & Conclusion

India’s rank of 118th in the World Happiness Report 2025 is a wake-up call. It doesn’t mean India is miserable, but it suggests there are significant gaps between what people expect or deserve in terms of well-being, and what they actually experience. The backlash is partly justified: people feel under-represented, or think that the metrics don’t reflect what makes life meaningful in India.

But instead of just reacting in indignation, this moment can be used productively. Improving health outcomes, reducing inequality, building trust in institutions, expanding social support, tackling corruption, strengthening mental health infrastructure — these are real areas where India can improve its “happiness score”. Also, ensuring that future studies capture cultural, local, and emotional dimensions unique to India will make the findings more relatable.

In conclusion: while the low ranking is disappointing, it's not the final verdict. It’s a chance to pause, reflect, and act. If India can address underlying issues rather than just arguing over numbers, it can move up in future reports — and, more importantly, improve actually how people feel about their lives.