After debunking “America is the country of freedom” myth, I tried to debunk “Thailand is the country of smiles” myth. As it happens, Gallup, while doing research for their emotional indices asked people did they smile or laugh yesterday. And this data reveals that Thailand indeed could be called the country of smiles – its result is among the best in the world, however, its poorer brother Laos does better on this list.
But the whole Southeast Asia is indeed the region of smiles!
By the way, where is the secret of Nigeria? Is it Nollywood?
What: Percentage of people who replied that they smiled or laughed yesterday on an interview on emotions. When: 2018 Where: 143 countries of the world Source: Gallup
I have put countries into four categories: – those which have the most positive emotions (big circle – excited) – those which have the least positive emotions (small circle – bored) – those which have the most negative emotions (big square – sad) – those which have the least negative emotions (small square – chill) Then I ranked them according to the World Happiness Report. I did not see any serious contradictions between these two data sets, except one country – Lithuania is quite high on happiness score, but very low on positive experiences, so it is the most bored happy country in the world.
What: Positive and Negative emotions indices based on interviews and Happiness index also based on interviews. When: 2018 Where: 43 countries of the world Source: Gallup for emotions and WHR for happiness
This time I am talking about daily positive or negative emotions, not the long-term reflection on life. This map shows top and bottom countries according to Positive Emotions index (circle) and Negative Emotions index (rectangle). Most of positive emotions (big circles) are in Latin America – they’re so happy and excited. Most of negative emotions (big squares) are in Africa – they’re so sad and depressed. Countries with low negative emotions (small squares) are spread across Eurasia – those people are chillin’. Countries with low positive emotions (small circles) are spread from Central Europe through the Middle East to South Asia. Those people are bored. Chad happens to be both high on negative emotions and low on positive, probably it’s the unhappiest place on the world.
What: Positive and Negative emotions indices based on more than 151,000 interviews with adults in more than 140 countries. When: 2018 Where: 44 countries of the world. Source: Gallup, The 2019 Global Emotions Report
Seems like kind of yes, they do. Some regions rely on polluting industries like the Middle East, some struggle to find their direction like South Asia, but most regions do reduce. Good news for future us.
What: CO2 emissions (kg per 2010 US$ of GDP) and GDP per capita. When: 1970-2014 Where: World regions according to WB Source: WB
As expected – no, there is a nice easily visible downward trend. It’s not the inefficiency of the USA making it one of the biggest polluters, it’s just the amount of production, while China has plenty of space to improve. There are many outliers above the general trend, and they’re mostly Middle East countries with oil plus one pink Brunei, also with oil and Estonia (probably with oil shale?) just beside Saudi Arabia.
What: CO2 emissions (kg per 2010 US$ of GDP) and GDP per capita. Colours mean regions by WB. When: 2014 for emissions, and 2018 for GDP. I did not match the time this time 🙁 Where: 187 countries of the world Source: WB
Since the forest is a net CO2 consumer, maybe there are whole countries covered in forests consuming CO2? Apparently, there are such countries, but they are tiny idyllic worlds mostly spread in the Pacific Ocean with happy exceptions of Bhutan (just beside the world’s largest polluter China) and US Virgin Islands (just beside the world’s second-largest polluter the USA).
What: Emissions of various greenhouse gasses (CO2, CH4, PFCs and so on) expressed in the equivalent of tons of CO2 emissions. When: 2010 Where: The only nine countries with negative emissions at that time. Source: FAO
I know, the data is old, but back in 2010 energy production was the main source of CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. Transport had the potential to overtake the land use and I bet despite all those electromobiles everywhere it did.
And the beautiful thing is – the forest is a net absorber of greenhouse gas! I knew it all along, but it is nice to see it on the graph. And it’s depressing at the same time because its absorption is tiny compared to our emissions.
What: Emissions of various greenhouse gasses (CO2, CH4, PFCs and so on) expressed in the equivalent of CO2 emissions. May not the question mislead – initially I asked about CO2, but then I found stats for all greenhouse gases. “Land use” is emissions by cropland and grassland and is not included in agriculture. “Residential, com., inst.” is emissions by residential, commercial and institutional activities. I believe the weird shape for the forest is due to inconsistency in data rather than actual changes. When: From 1990 to 2010 Where: World aggregate Source: FAO
I was sure that I will get the obvious result again – more development will mean more safety. However, after cherrypicking some regions and drawing a trend line for each, I got the opposite result. Central Asia seems to follow exactly the opposite trend, and Latin America with Sub-Saharan Africa seems to be quite chaotic.
What: Law and Order (L&O) Index compared to Human Development Index (HDI) When: 2019 for L&O and 2017 for HDI Where: 63 countries from Central Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America & Carribean, which have both indices. Source: Gallup for L&O and UNDP for HDI
After seeing Tajikistan and Azerbaijan among the safest countries I expected to see a U shaped distribution where both free countries and suppressed countries enjoy order and stability. However there is a clear line where freedom increases together with law and order, and many exceptions from the trend scattered around.
Also, many regional patterns are visible – blue Europe being at the top left corner, orange Africa and Middle East leaning towards bottom right, and green Latin America – towards bottom left.
What: Law & Order (L&O) Index compared to Human Freedom Index (HFI) When: L&O is 2019 and HFI is 2016, both are most recent indices available at the moment of making the graph Where: 135 countries of the world, that have both indices. For example, there is no Afghanistan on this graph because it does not have an HFI index calculated. Source: Gallup for L&O and “The Human Freedom Index 2018: A Global Measurement of Personal, Civil, and Economic Freedom”
But of course it’s Northern and Western Europe! What surprises me in this graph, it’s that Central Asian countries are relatively safe, Tajikistan being among the safest!
And the least safe is Latin America – or maybe it’s just a low number of Venezuela dragging all of them down.
What: Law & Order Index, which was calculated after telephone and face to face interviews, asking questions like “Do you feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where you live?” and similar. When: 2019 Where: 141 countries of the world Source: Gallup
Visados galvojau, kad Lietuva yra miškų šalis – gal čia ir nėra didžiausias miškų masyvas pasaulyje, visgi esame maži, tačiau procentais miškų pas mus daug!
Pasirodo esame viso labo 61 vietoje pasaulyje su 34,8% mišku padengto žemės ploto. Nors mūsų miškingumo vidurkis šiek tiek didesnis nei Vakarų Europos, bet pasauliniu mastu tai su tokiais skaičiais nieko nenustebinsi. Net latvių ir estų nenustebinsi.