Are happy states sustainable states? Can we make sustainability happy?

A report from Live Science

http://www.livescience.com/15673-happiest-states-2011-gallup.html

The results are preliminary for 2011, with the year's complete rankings for U.S. states by Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index expected to come out early next year. 

The well-being Index score is an average of six factors, including included life evaluation (self-evaluation about your present life situation and anticipated one in five years); emotional health; work environment (such as job satisfaction); physical health; healthy behavior; and basic access (access to health care, a doctor, a safe place to exercise and walk, as well as community satisfaction).  

"Top 10" States (3 states tied and so are included in the top 10):

• Hawaii: 71.1

• North Dakota: 70.5

• Alaska: 69.4

• Nebraska: 68.4

• Minnesota: 68.3

• Colorado: 68.3

• Utah: 68.1

• New Hampshire: 67.9

• Iowa: 67.9

• Kansas: 67.8

• Vermont: 67.8

• Maryland: 67.8

At the bottom, West Virginia fared worst on life evaluation and physical health, two areas in which the state's residents have seriously struggled since the launch of the Well-Being Index in 2008, according to Gallup officials. Kentucky took the bottom spot for emotional health, while Mississippi is again at the bottom on basic access, as it has been in three previous years. 

My observations:  historically, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa, and Vermont have been characterized as politically liberal, or at least have had strong communal tendencies.  Omaha has been powered by a city-owned and operated power company (Omaha Power and Light), and other Midwest states have a traditional of community support and help due to their agrarian base.  Iowa has legalized gay marriage as part of its liberal, community-oriented philosophy.

In a previous post about Canadian communities and sustainability, access to social support services and strong communities were seen to be part of the sustainability picture.  Access to services, esp. medical care and safe areas to exercise make people happier.  

Sustainable Canadian cities

from the Toronto Globe and Mail:

"A 2007 study, Mission Possible: Successful Canadian Cities, by the Conference Board of Canada, identified four cornerstones: a strong knowledge economy to attract business investment and a talented and skilled labour force; a connective physical infrastructure (i.e., a transportation system that can effectively move goods and people); environmentally sustainable growth based on sound planning and industrial ecology principles; and social cohesion, the critical components of which are attractive and accessible housing, a low crime rate, effective immigrant settlement, comprehensive cultural and entertainment amenities (not the least of which are libraries, which act as community centres as much as places to borrow books), and a strong social safety net."

from:  http://bit.ly/nDM2AS

This list is interesting.  Note that environmental concerns, cultural activities such as art and music (not sports) and a social safety net built on social cohesion are key elements.  I would have trouble believing that a California study would reach the same result, and I will search for a study in order to compare.

To review:

1.  knowledge to attract business. Schools for business, but also biotech?

2.  connected infrastructure, including transportation.  Mass transit that's cheap and accessible?

3.  environmentally responsible growth.  But why keep emphasizing growth?

4.  social cohesion.  Get people into houses, keep crime down, given them entertainment and access to knowledge?

Sounds good to me.