An Assessment of the Valuation Methods Used to Calculate the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and Sustainable Net Benefit Index (SNBI)
Received: 01 August 2003 Accepted: 26 January 2004 DOI:
10.1007/s10668-005-7312-4 Cite this article as: Lawn, P.A. Environ Dev Sustain (2005) 7: 185. doi:10.1007/s10668-005-7312-4 Abstract.
For some time now, ecological economists have been putting forward a ‘threshold hypothesis’ – the notion that when macroeconomic systems expand beyond a certain size, the additional cost of growth exceeds the flow of additional benefits. In order to support their belief, ecological economists have developed a number of similar indexes to measure and compare the benefits and costs of growth (e.g., the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare and the Genuine Progress Indicator). In virtually every instance where an index of this type has been calculated for a particular country, the movement of the index appears to reinforce the existence of the threshold hypothesis. Of late, a number of observers have expressed concerns about whether these alternative indexes reflect concrete reality or the prejudices of ecological economists. In view of these concerns, this paper closely examines the valuation methods used in the calculation the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, the Genuine Progress Indicator, and the Sustainable Net Benefit Index. It is argued that a consistent and more robust set of valuation techniques is required in order for these alternative indexes to gain broad acceptability.
Keywords genuine progress indicator index of sustainable economic welfare national income valuation methods
*Readers should send their comments on this paper to: BhaskarNath@aol.com within 3 months of publication of this issue.
References Abramowitz, M. 1979 ‘Economic growth and its discontents’ Boskin, M eds. ‘Economics and Human Welfare.’ Academic Press New York Google Scholar Atkinson, A. 1970 ‘On the measurement of inequality’ Journal of Economic Theory. 2 244 263 CrossRef Google Scholar Atkinson, G. 1995‘Measuring sustainable economic welfare: A critique of the UK ISEW, Working Paper GEC 95-08’ Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment Norwich and London Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics: (1992). Unpaid Work and the Australian Economy: Occasional Paper, Catalogue No. 5240.0, Canberra, AGPS
Bishop R. (1993). Economic efficiency, sustainability, and biodiversity. Ambio.
May: 69–73 Castaneda, B. 1999 ‘An index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) for Chile’ Ecological Economics. 28 231 244 CrossRef Google Scholar Daly, H. 1991‘Steady-State Economics’2 Island Press Washington, DC Google Scholar Daly, H. 1996‘Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development’ Beacon Press Boston Google Scholar Daly, H., Cobb, J 1989‘For the Common Good’ Beacon Press Boston Google Scholar Diefenbacher, H. 1994 ‘The index of sustainable economic welfare in Germany’ Cobb, C. Cobb, J. eds. ‘The Green National Product.’ UPA New York. Google Scholar Easterlin, R. 1974 ‘Does economic growth improve the human lot?’ David, P. Weber, R. eds. ‘Nations and Households in Economic Growth.’ Academic Press New York Google Scholar El Serafy, S. 1989 ‘The proper calculation of income from depletable natural resources.’ Ahmad, Y. El Serafy, S. Lutz, E. eds. ‘Environmental Accounting for Sustainable Development.’ World Bank Washington, DC Google Scholar Fisher, I. 1906‘Nature of Capital and Income’ A. M. Kelly New York Google Scholar George, S. 1988‘A Fate Worse than Debt’ Grove New York Google Scholar Guenno, G., Tiezzi, S. 1998‘An Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare for Italy. Working Paper 5/98’ Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei Milan Google Scholar Hamilton, C. 1999 ‘The genuine progress indicator: methodological developments and results from Australia’ Ecological Economics. 30 13 28 CrossRef Google Scholar Hamilton, K. 1994 ‘Green adjustments to GDP’ Resources Policy. 20 158 168 CrossRef Google Scholar Hamilton, K. 1996 ‘Pollution and pollution abatement in the national accounts’ Review of Income and Wealth. 42 291 304 CrossRef Google Scholar Howarth, R., Norgaard, R. 1990 ‘Intergenerational resource rights, efficiency, and social optimality’ Land Economics. 66 1 11 Google Scholar Jackson, T., Stymne, S. 1996‘Sustainable Economic Welfare in Sweden: A Pilot Index 1950-1992’ Stockholm Environment Institute Stockholm Google Scholar Jackson, T., Laing, F., MacGillivray, A., Marks, N., Ralls, J., Styme, S. 1997‘An Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare for the UK, 1950–1996’ University of Surrey Centre for Environmental Strategy Guildford Google Scholar Lawn, P. 1998 ‘In defence of the strong sustainability approach to national income accounting’ Environmental Taxation and Accounting. 3 29 47 Google Scholar Lawn, P. 1999 ‘On Georgescu–Roegen’s contribution to ecological economics’ Ecological Economics. 29 5 8 Google Scholar Lawn, P. 2000‘Toward Sustainable Development: An Ecological Economics Approach’ Lewis Publishers Boca Raton Google Scholar Lawn, P. 2000 ‘Ecological tax reform: Many know why but few know how’ Environment, Development, and Sustainability.’ 2 143 164 Google Scholar
Lawn P. (2002). How Well do Resource Prices Serve as Indicators of Natural Resource Scarcity?, Flinders University Working Paper in Economics, 2002–2006
Lawn, P. 2003 ‘A theoretical foundation to support the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and other related measures’ Ecological Economics. 44 105 118 CrossRef Google Scholar Lawn, P., Sanders, R. 1999 ‘Has Australia surpassed its optimal macroeconomic scale: finding out with the aid of ‘benefit’ and ‘cost’ accounts and a sustainable net benefit index’ Ecological Economics. 28 213 229 CrossRef Google Scholar Leipert, C. 1986 ‘From gross to adjusted national product’ Ekins, P. eds. ‘The Living Economy: A New Economics in the Making.’ Routledge & Kegan Paul London Google Scholar Maler, K. 1991 ‘National accounts and environmental resources’ Environmental and Resource Economics.’ 1 1 15 Google Scholar Max-Neef, M. 1995 ‘Economic growth and quality of life’ Ecological Economics.’ 15 115 118 CrossRef Google Scholar Moffat, I., Wilson, M. 1994 ‘An index of sustainable economic welfare for Scotland, 1980-1991’ International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. 1 264 291 Google Scholar Neumayer, E. 1999 ‘The ISEW – Not an index of sustainable economic welfare’ Social Indicators Research. 48 77 101 CrossRef Google Scholar Neumayer, E. 2000 ‘On the methodology of the ISEW, GPI, and related measures: Some constructive suggestions and some doubt on the threshold hypothesis’ Ecological Economics. 34 347 361 CrossRef Google Scholar Norgaard, R. 1990 ‘Economic indicators of resource scarcity: a critical essay’ Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 19 19 25 CrossRef Google Scholar Pearce, D. 1993‘Blueprint 3: Measuring Sustainable Development’ Earthscan London Google Scholar
Redefining Progress: (1995). Gross production vs genuine progress’, Excerpt from the Genuine Progress Indicator: Summary of Data and Methodology, San Francisco, Redefining Progress
Rosenberg K. and Oegema T. (1995). A Pilot ISEW for The Netherlands 1950–1992, Amsterdam Instituut Voor Milieu – En Systeemanalyse
Rymes T. (1992). Some Theoretical Problems in Accounting for Sustainable Consumption, Carleton Economic Papers, 92-02
Stockhammer, E., Hochreiter, H., Obermayr, B., teiner, K. 1997 ‘The index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) as an alternative to GDP in measuring economic welfare : The Result of the Austrian (revised) ISEW calculation 1955-1992’ Ecological Economics. 21 19 34 CrossRef Google Scholar
United Nations Statistical Division: (1993). Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting, Handbook of National Accounting, Series F, No.61, New York