We are a better "civilisation" we have cities and borders and defined populations, that IS civilistion in its purest definition. Look it up on wikipedia and you will see "cities, the hallmark of civilisation." Secondly, we are better off, our life expectancy is higher, we have intimate knowledge of science and the world around us, we have medical advacements and we've learned to adapt the environment. We are, in effect, civilisation. They have no such things, the only advancements they have are spears, bows and houses They have knowledge of the world around them yes, but they cannot manipulate it. Technology and understanding (in effect, advancements) I believe are the definition of civilisation.
But seeing as you have chosen to interpret civilisation as some happiness metre based on emotions and the people involved. I will argue your point. We are better because we have the ability to say "I am not happy in my current situation." This in essence is more important than happiness, they can't be anything they want, they are a tribal, hunter gatherer people, they can't acquire happiness, work towards it, change their situation, they remain in the jungle, with their tribe unaware of the fact that there are even other ways of life. Don't dog western civilisation we ARE great, people are so quick to point out the flaws but I'm glad my ancestors crawled out of the forest and created advanced commerce, I'm so glad that we can work our way out of the shitheap should we choose. We can change our situation, our location, everything about ourselves.
There, by the conventional and social means, we are superior to this tribe.