Özet:

Purpose- In this study, an international welfare comparison is made for OECD members together with selected thirty eight countries using purchasing power parity (PPP) based on GDP per capita and better life index (BLI) parameters which is prepared by OECD as an alternative to welfare measurement. The purpose of this study is to research relations between national income and human welfare that is generated according to BLI criteria’s.   Methodology- For this study, 2016 year data is used. The reasons are: Latvia and South Africa countries are added in 2016 and 2016 year is the latest edition for BLI which is renewed itself year by year. In addition when BLI is compared with GDP, reasons of being preferred PPP numbers are:  One of the variables of BLI which is income criteria and its indicators incomes and fortunes of households are calculated by PPP based PPP gives opportunity to comparison of real good and services eliminating the differences of price level among countries in calculation of PPP, economic factors such as currency fluctuations, interest rates and capital flows are not taken into account rather than just National income, PPP based GDP per capita is more personal like BLI. Findings- The result obtained from this study is that when it examined carefully, countries with high national income per capita cannot score high in terms of BLI values. At first glance, it can be asserted that there is a strong positive relation between GDP per capita and BLI parameters by saying that countries like Norway, Switzerland and Sweden are at the top both in national income per capita and BLI based rankings or countries like South Africa, Mexico, Brazil, Turkey are at the bottom both in national income per capita and BLI based rankings. However, if there was a strong positive relation between  GDP per capita and BLI Luxembourg, which is by far the best in national income per capita ranking, wouldn’t be placed rank number twelve in average BLI values ranking. Similarly, New Zealand, which is placed rank number twenty in national income per capita ranking among thirty eight countries, wouldn’t be placed rank number seven in average BLI values ranking. These tangible examples are not limited to a few countries. For example, Ireland, which ranks fourth in GDP per capita rankings, ranks sixteenth in average BLI values rankings Denmark, which ranks twelfth in the national income per capita, ranks third in terms of average BLI values rankings. Conclusion- A country’s high level of national income does not necessarily mean that it is at a level of contemporary civilization. If it is asked to evaluate a country in terms of welfare perspective not just only monetary value of produced goods and services in that country shouldn’t be taken into account  but also factors such as education, justice, employment, security, environment and social connections should be taken into account from a wider perspective.

Anahtar Kelimeler: