**1. Introduction**

The concept of happiness has been the subject of critical analysis and writing throughout the history of philosophical and scientific interest witnessed across all cultures. Within the major periods of Western thinking and sociocultural development, the question of what constitutes happiness and how it should be pursued has encountered significant shifts [1]. The earliest Western writings on happiness from ancient Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle viewed happiness as an end goal that is and should be desired and pursued. In this conceptualisation, happiness is fundamentally an internal state achieved through processes related to contemplation, self-fulfillment and acceptance leading to a sense of peace ('psychic harmony'). In many ways this has also been reflected in psychological understanding of happiness. For example, Maslow's hierarchy of needs indicates that optimal living (i.e. a state of happiness) comes from moving towards self-actualisation.

Greek philosophers termed happiness as 'eudaimonia' which suggests not only that it is a product of leading a virtuous life (as opposed to a pleasure-focused one) but therefore that it cannot actually be assessed as such until the end of life. In contrast, later philosophers embedded happiness as achievable during life. For example, Epicurus proposed that happiness can be experienced during life as a product of contentment with simple and meaningful things and overall quality of life (over short-term hedonic pleasures and desires) and by experiencing both positive and negative states. This has also become an important part of modern happiness theories which emphasize the role of negative emotions and events in facilitating emotional and psychological growth.

A second shift in the western conceptualisation of happiness came with the Renaissance and Enlightenment periods. Prior to this, happiness had become defined within Christian worldviews as experienced through pursuing 'truth' and coming to 'know' God. For some such as St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas this would actually only happen in the after-life. The Renaissance began to re-interpret Christian doctrines such that experience of spiritual 'truth' could come from living a positive and moral life. Moreover, this could also be facilitated by positive environments, as in the concept of 'Utopia'. The Enlightenment philosophers such as Kant extended this idea of happiness interpreting it as the experience of freedom to think without religious or social doctrines, and to be able to use your own rational thinking to create a long-term positive quality of life. In addition, happiness was construed as a right and even an obligation such that one should be actively pursuing one's own happiness. This forms the basis for William James' initial psychological conceptualisation of happiness as a positive state that comes from the active participation in life and the attitude that life is worth living.

It is clear that in much of Western philosophical and psychological thinking, happiness was associated with the quality of life, balanced emotional states, and the pursuit of virtue rather than pleasure from external sources. In contrast, in the 20th century this appears to have changed at the societal level with the increasing influence consumerism and media influenced by American culture. That is, if the pursuit of happiness is something to be valued and pursued, then the expression of positive emotion (smiling, looking cheerful) became the indicator that one is indeed experiencing happiness. This has also led to advertising associating consumer products with the expression and end goal of 'being happy'. As a result, the Western socio-cultural conceputalisation of happiness has become tied to external expressions of happiness and consumerism. This is reflected in the current theoretical distinction between 'hedonic' happiness associated with Western populations and 'eudaimonic' happiness now associated predominantly with non-Western populations.

Regardless, recent scientific research suggests that there appears to be a growing shift away from Western understandings of happiness. Numerous studies have attempted to understand the nature of happiness, its antecedents, and its consequences in diverse cultural contexts. For example, Fave et al. [2] found that across Australia, Croatia, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and South Africa, psychological balance and harmony were central to the lay conception of happiness, and family as well as social relations were key life domains in which happiness was experienced. This could be interpreted as an adaptation of the philosophical traditions around happiness as 'psychic harmony' and peace of mind, but with a stronger interpersonal focus.

Globally, a study in Taiwan showed sources of happiness included satisfying the need for respect, harmony of interpersonal relationships, fulfillment of material

### *Understanding Happiness in the Pacific Islands: A Qualitative Study with University Staff in Fiji DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106771*

needs, achievement at work, being at ease with life, taking pleasure at others' expense, sense of self-control and self-actualization, pleasure and positive affect, and health [3]. Likewise, in Bangladesh, relational goals and values were found to play the key role in happiness [4] while, in East Asia, positive daily experiences were more important [5]. Lomas [6] lists several cultural factors that mediate the determinants of well-being, including history, tradition, norms, values, and language. Taken together these findings could suggest that the impact of unemployment on health and well-being seen in the West (e.g. [7–9]) may actually be offset in collectivist cultures where one's role in the community and the support offered by the community is more important for one's sense of happiness. Therefore, when developing national strategies for monitoring and supporting population well-being it would be most effective to build these around a clear understanding of the constituents of well-being within the local context.

The cross-cultural research on well-being and positive psychology has also suggested that while expressions of happiness may be universally recognized [10] the term *happiness* itself may be defined differently and relate to different experiences [11, 12]. For example, among American participants it may reflect their positive emotion and mood state, while in participant groups from the East it refers to good fortune [11]. Wierzbicka [12], has argued that this semantic and conceptual difference in how the word happiness is understood (even across otherwise 'Western' European countries) makes any attempt at universal assessment of happiness less valid. Moreover, in studies of East Asians, Joshanloo [13] found that high arousal positive affective experiences were actively avoided in preference for experiencing happiness as '*cool'* and '*calm*'. These cultural distinctions are reflected in the two-dimensional model of happiness differentiating hedonic from eudaimonic happiness concepts [14, 15]. Moreover, the cross-cultural research has tended to summarize the differences in happiness only across the broad cultural categories of individualist (Western) and collectivist (largely non-Western). That is, hedonic happiness is seen to be prevalent in Western populations, while eudaimonic is better represented in non-Western populations [13, 16]. Moreover, 'collectivist' in this literature is itself often defined only by samples from East Asian populations [17, 18], which is in itself a gross generalization of both 'Asian' and collectivist concepts.

Given these limitations in representation, the evidence base tends to imply a relative homogeneity in conceptions of happiness in non-Western, collectivistic cultures. In contrast, the collectivist cultural category spans a vast range of different economic, political, religious, and historic contexts [19, 20]. For example, the preference for low-arousal emotions found in non-Western Asian participants was not replicated in non-Western Latin American participants [19]. This fundamental diversity within the collectivist or non-Western category may be overlooked in large-scale research findings, reducing the validity of the research conclusions. For example, Gardiner et al. [21] determined that the reliability of emic happiness measures developed specifically for collectivist (Japanese) contexts were less reliable in other collectivist countries in the Middle East and Africa. This highlights the need for nuanced research on happiness to deepen understanding beyond the somewhat superficial individualist/collectivist dichotomy and the need to broaden the cross cultural research on happiness in under-represented countries and cultural groups.

The independent countries of the Pacific Islands, which include Fiji, provide a unique context for exploring such conceptions of happiness. Populations in these small island nations are of interest because of their strong, traditional identity and faith, communal social structures, and environmental contexts. The vast geography of the

South Pacific region means that each nation is relatively culturally isolated, far more than may be the case in neighboring countries in other regions. To date, countries within the Pacific Island region (including Fiji) have tended to be only indirectly included within global psychological research with few studies engaging in specific exploration of individual Pacific Island Populations. For example, some studies make reference to a broader 'Asia Pacific' region which is variously defined as countries including Japan, China, South Korea, Philippines, Indonesia and India [22–24]. Other studies separate countries in Asia from the region of 'Oceania' which tends to be represented predominantly by New Zealand and Australia [25, 26]. However, studying native populations of the Pacific Islands provides important cultural comparisons to the 'Pacific Islander' ethnic groups reported in research from Australia, New Zealand, or the USA. That is, although pacific people may maintain a strong cultural identity, there will likely be differences in the impact of their culture and history between where they would be minority communities within otherwise developed nations rather than indigenous populations within markedly different economic and subsistence contexts.

### **1.1 Happiness in the Pacific Islands region and Fiji**

To date, little research has explored happiness and well-being in the Oceania-Pacific region populations beyond the developed East Asian nations such as China, and Western nations such as Australia and New Zealand. In an extensive review of the literature, Kim et al. [27] determined that of the 863 articles examined, there were 61 from the Oceania region, of which six came from New Zealand, and with none from other Pacific island nations. The World Happiness Report [28] that collates data from 156 countries also only includes New Zealand from the Pacific Island nations, with no further stratification of Pacific cultural groups. This continued to be the case in a large global survey of character strengths [29]. Young-Leslie and Moore [30] noted that the cross-cultural positive psychology literature has predominantly focused on populous nations which subsequently leaves large geographic regions of the world under-represented, including the many countries of the Pacific Islands. Yet, as a center of small, ethnically diverse groups, there could be no better place for studying cultural differences and the impact of social and cultural factors on psychology.

There are a few notable exceptions to this omission of the Pacific Islands in the study of happiness and well-being. The Pacific nation of Vanuatu has included a measure of subjective well-being within national household surveys since 2010 [31]. Associations in the survey data suggest happiness in Pacific Island populations may be driven by specific indigenous factors, such as customary land access including marine and forest resources, engagement in cultural practices and traditional knowledge, active engagement in community leadership, and positive family identity [32]. Young-Leslie and Moore [30] studied the Tongan concept of happiness using a standardized well-being questionnaire and found that positive emotions were significantly associated with traditional social functioning and kinship obligations. Further, two linguistic studies indicate indirectly that the basic *conceptualization* of happiness in Indigenous Pacific populations may be embedded in a collective interdependence with others [33, 34]. Ethnographic analyses of well-being in Pacific Island countries through language and cultural traditions have emphasized that supporting the needs of others is central to individual happiness values and that well-being has indigenous knowledge at its core [33, 34]. Further, words connected with happiness in the native Fijian language such as *Bula Taucoko* and *Sautu* (both: Well-being) inculcate the fulfillment of communal obligations and supportiveness as the foundation to individual happiness [34].

*Understanding Happiness in the Pacific Islands: A Qualitative Study with University Staff in Fiji DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106771*

The fundamental collectivist understanding of well-being has been built into the Vanuatu happiness monitoring project which includes an assessment of *community happiness* alongside the personal ratings from individuals within these communities.

Fiji is an economically-developing country categorized as middle- income based in the Melanesian area of the South Pacific and is comprised of 300 islands. The majority of the 900,000 population live on the two main islands of Viti Levu, which hosts the capital city, Suva, and Vanua Levu. Fiji gained independence from the British in 1970, becoming a democratic nation, although since then it has experienced several political coups; the most recent of which was in 2006. There are two primary ethnic groups: the Indigenous Pacific Islanders, predominantly I-Taukei and Rotuman ethnic groups, and the Indo-Fijians, who came to Fiji as indentured laborers and professional migrants during colonization. Fijians are therefore influenced by a history of indigenous Melanesian beliefs and traditions, alongside the impact of Western colonization and South Asian migration. While Fiji does not currently undertake regular national happiness monitoring, it has received ranking in polls such as Gallup, as one of the world's happiest nations [35]. Further, the strong sense of well-being and sharing of happiness are specifically promoted as part of Fiji's national tourism industry. One example is a recent social media happiness campaign *Bulanaires* [36, 37] which uses the Fijian concept of *Bula* (Life) as seen in the common form of greeting *Bula Vinaka* (Good health) and the country's general reputation for happiness, as a basis for the global promotion of well-being initiatives.

### **1.2 The present study**

The above discussion highlights the impact of culture on the concept and drivers of happiness for individuals, and therefore the nature of subjective well-being as it may be measured and facilitated within a country's population. Models of happiness and well-being now tend to distinguish a collectivist-eudaimonic phenomenon seen in many non-Western countries from an individualist-hedonic phenomenon seen in the west. However, the definition of collectivism in this literature lacks a recognition of the vast diversity in populations and cultures which fall under the 'non-Western, collectivist' heading. This suggests that an investigation of happiness among indigenous people from the Pacific Island nations will be important in overcoming this limitation and providing insights on happiness within a culturally unique context. In the current paper, we provide an initial exploration of the definition, experiences, and outcomes of happiness within a Fijian sample who are from the two major ethnic groups. As a first study on happiness in Fiji we draw on a sample of university staff who may be able to reflect on their understanding of happiness and how it has been influenced by internal and external factors. This may help to elucidate how the conception of happiness could be impacted by post-colonial elements through Western education and urban living, and elements that are indigenous to Pacific people, including a rural upbringing, and village communal identity and associations.

### **2. Methods**

### **2.1 Participants**

Participants were recruited from a population of staff working at the University of South Pacific (USP) Laucala campus, located in Fiji's capital city of Suva. Participants were Fijian nationals of any ethnic background who had predominantly resided

in-country. The sample included 26 participants, 14 identifying as female and 12 as male; 14 as Indigenous Pacific Fijians (7 female, 7 male), 11 Indo-Fijians (6 female, 5 male) and 1 Chinese-Fijian (female). The participants were either academic or professional service staff and all held higher education degrees (Masters or PhD). Participants were identified using an alpha-numeric coding system with two letters referring to ethnicity (Pacific Islander, Indo Fijian, Chinese Islander) followed by a letter referring to gender (Male, Female) and a number based on order of interview.

### **2.2 Procedures and measures**

Interview protocols and questions were discussed with a departmental cultural representative to ensure they would be understood as relevant and appropriate by Fijian participants. Ethical approval for the study was given by the research office of the University of the South Pacific.

Participants took part in semi-structured interviews lasting up to one hour either face-to-face (24 individuals) or via zoom conferencing (two individuals). The interviews covered a range of positive psychological concepts as part of a broader research project. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed by the primary researcher and interviewer, and then coded using online software package Quirkos. The present study primarily analyses a subset of responses from five questions surrounding happiness and life satisfaction. These questions included: "what does happiness mean to you", "what things make you happy nowadays", "what are some happy memories from childhood", "is Fiji a happy place generally", and "on a scale of 1-10 how satisfied with life are you and what gives you that score". Respondents also described elements of their happiness or well-being as part of these responses.

### **2.3 Data analysis**

Thematic analysis was used because of its usefulness in analyzing rich and complex data [38]. The responses were coded over three reading cycles leading to 69 descriptive codes which were then analyzed for emergent themes and connections. The aim was to remain open to the conceptual elements emerging from the Fijian responses and consider their relationships to the indigenous culture. Based on Pratt's recommendations [39], the data were analyzed in an iterative manner, by traveling back and forth between data and theory, with attention to how the data illustrated, expanded, or challenged past theory, illuminated theoretical gaps, or offered theoretical insights. From this analysis, eight general theme mappings were decided surrounding the concept of happiness: having just enough; contentment, peace, and relaxation; adherence to moral norms; individual growth and identity; family and community connection; collective experience; faith and religion; tradition and rural values. Each of these encompassed a network of individual codes and sub-themes. Thematic analysis and interpretation were guided by the primary aims of understanding the conceptualization of happiness experiences and the intrapersonal, social, and historic cultural factors that contribute to happiness in Fijians. In the below section, the themes are explored in the context of the participant responses and discussed within the context of established literature and theory.

### **2.4 Reflexivity**

It is important to understand the context of the interview process and the ways in which the researcher's own cultural experiences and background may be impacting

### *Understanding Happiness in the Pacific Islands: A Qualitative Study with University Staff in Fiji DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106771*

the responses and interpretations discussed. The interviews were conducted by the first author who is of white British ethnicity. She is a resident of Fiji, working within the same university context as the participants. As an expatriate resident, the interviewer has some understanding of the historic, cultural and religious environment of the participants and the social structures of rural communities. Also the need to be open to the multiple roles of socio-cultural and environmental factors in creating the participants perspectives. However, the different cultural background will necessarily impact the depth to which this openness can result in valid exploration and interpretation of meaning. Given this limitation, the choice was made to use university staff as participants to provide a bridge between the interviewer and participants to facilitate shared understanding of the discussion themes.
