I have some impression that sometimes, happiness researchers and economists just live in two different worlds. Different languages assumptions etc.
The sad part is that much of the happiness research is not adopted by policy makers, because economists have much more power. But also that the language differs so much.
It touches on:
Convincing, as some happiness research is not conducted the way to "force" the conclusionson skeptics.
Usefulness, as it is hard for psychologists to offer practical economic advice etc. + considering reality of markets etc.
Good heart. The value gaop is sometimes quite high. And psychologists talking on values, life etc. can hardly sound rational to an economist ear. There is enough strong data that would convince even the most cynical "maximizer" economist about stuff. But once "nice" words enter the discussion some start feeling strange.
An interdisciplinary center is very needed to integrate psychological hard proved findings with practical and theoretical maximization principles of economics etc. etc. as well as considering the practical (various intersts, dynamics etc.) forces in the way of positive change. Decision making perspective is also criucial whenever things relate to real persons making decisions.
A conference integrating the parties, would also help. provided it is with the purpose of mutual learning and cooperations as mentioned above.