Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 109, Issue 3, pp 355–376 | Cite as

Beyond GDP: Classifying Alternative Measures for Progress

  • Brent BleysEmail author
Article

Abstract

Both the potential pitfalls of macro-economic policies focused on stimulating economic growth and the problems involved in using GDP as a measure of well-being or economic welfare have long been recognized by economists and researchers from other social sciences. Therefore, it is no surprise that alternative measures for policy-making have been developed and promoted since the early 1970s. Over the past 5 years, the development of these measures has gained momentum both politically and academically. However, most research efforts concentrate on the development and promotion of individual indicators, while paying less attention to the wide range of indicators already available and to theoretical insights. As a result, few classification schemes of alternative measures exist today to help policy-makers in selecting a proper set of indicators. This paper first looks into the different classification schemes available in the literature and outlines the weaknesses in each of these. Afterwards, an alternative classification scheme is introduced that draws on the notions of well-being, economic welfare and sustainability. A further sub-categorization is built on the different approaches that are used to quantitatively capture the notions. By focusing on the underlying concepts that the different measures aim to quantify, the alternative classification scheme overcomes the drawbacks of the existing schemes. Finally, 23 alternative measures for policy-making are reviewed and organized into the newly developed classification scheme.

Keywords

Beyond GDP Indicators Classification scheme Well-being Economic welfare Sustainability 

References

  1. Afsa, C., Blanchet, D., Marcus, V., Pionnier, P.-A., Rioux, L., Mira d’Ercole, M., et al. (2008). Survey of existing approaches to measuring socio-economic progress. Paris, France: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.Google Scholar
  2. Alkire, S. (2002). Dimensions of human development. World Development, 30(2), 181–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, R. (2005). Measuring country performance and state behavior: A survey of composite indices. UNDP/ODS background paper. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme, Office of Development Studies.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, R. (2008). A survey of composite indices measuring country performance: 2008 update. Working paper. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme, Office of Development Studies.Google Scholar
  5. Bleys, B. (2009). Beyond GDP: The index of sustainable economic welfare. Ph.D. thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium.Google Scholar
  6. Boarini, R., Johansson, A., & Mira d’Ercole, M. (2006). Alternative measures of well-being. Social, employment and migration working papers 33. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  7. Clarke, M. (2005). Assessing well-being using hierarchical needs. WIDER research paper 2005/22. Helsinki, Finland: United Nations University-WIDER.Google Scholar
  8. Cobb, C., Halstead, T., & Rowe, J. (1995). The genuine progress indicator: Summary of data and methodology. San Francisco, CA: Redefining Progress.Google Scholar
  9. Conceição, P., & Bandura, R. (2008). Measuring subjective wellbeing: A summary review of the literature. UNDP development studies—working paper. New York, NY: Office of Development Studies, UNDP.Google Scholar
  10. Costanza, R., Farley, J., & Templet, P. (2002). Background: Quality of life and the distribution of wealth and resources. In R. Costanza & S. Jorgensen (Eds.), Understanding and solving environmental problems in the 21st century: Toward a new, integrated hard problem science (pp. 221–258). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Costanza, R., Hart, M., Posner, S., & Talberth, J. (2009). Beyond GDP: The need for new measures of progress. The Pardee papers no. 4—January 2009. Boston, MA: Boston University.Google Scholar
  12. Daly, H. (1991). Steady state economics. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  13. Daly, H., & Cobb, J. (1989). For the common good. Redirecting the economy toward community, the environment and a sustainable future. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  14. Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: economic, social and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1–2), 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dietz, S., & Neumayer, E. (2007). Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and measurement. Ecological Economics, 61(4), 617–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ekins, P., & Simon, S. (2003). An illustrative application of the CRITINC framework to the UK. Ecological Economics, 44(2), 255–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ekins, P., Simon, S., Deutsch, L., Folke, C., & De Groot, R. (2003). A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability. Ecological Economics, 44(2), 165–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Estes, R. (1984). The social progress of nations. New York, NY: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Estes, R. (1997). Social development trends in Europe, 1970–1994: Development prospects for the New Europe. Social Indicators Research, 42(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Esty, D., Levy, M., Srebotnjak, T., & de Sherbinin, A. (2005). 2005 Environmental sustainability index: Benchmarking national environmental stewardship. New Haven: Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy.Google Scholar
  21. Farley, J., Costanza, R., Templet, P., Corson, M., Crabbe, P., Esquivel, R., et al. (2002). Consensus: Quality of life and the distribution of wealth and resources. In R. Costanza & S. Jorgensen (Eds.), Understanding and solving environmental problems in the 21st century: Toward a new, integrated hard problem science (pp. 259–302). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fisher, I. (1906). The nature of capital and income. New York, NY: Kelley.Google Scholar
  23. Gasper, D. (2004). Human well-being: Concepts and conceptualizations. Discussion paper 2004/06. Helsinki, Finland: United Nations University, World Institute for Development Economics Research.Google Scholar
  24. Gasper, D. (2005). The ethics of development: From economism to human development. New Delhi, India: Vistaar Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Goossens, Y., Mäkipäa, A., Schepelmann, P., van de Sand, I., Kuhndtand, M., & Herrndorf, M. (2007). Alternative progress indicators to gross domestic progress (GDP) as a means towards sustainable development. IP/A/ENVI/ST/2007-10. Brussel, Belgium: Policy Department, Economic and Scientific Policy (European Parliament).Google Scholar
  26. Hagerty, M., Cummins, R., Ferriss, A., Land, K., Michalos, A., Peterson, M., et al. (2001). Quality of life indexes for national policy: Review and agenda for research. Social Indicators Research, 55(1), 1–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hamilton, K. (1994). Green adjustments to GDP. Resources Policy, 20(3), 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hicks, J. (1939). Value and capital. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hueting, R. (1995). Estimating sustainable national income. In W. Van Dieren (Ed.), Taking nature into account: Toward a sustainable national income (pp. 206–230). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Jackson, T. (2004). Chasing progress: Beyond measuring economic growth. London, UK: nef.Google Scholar
  31. Keune, L., Elzinga, T., & Ruyter, T. (2006). Meta Economische Verkenningen—Voorstel voor de Ontwikkeling van een Duurzame en Solidaire Macro Economische Verkenning ±. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Attac/Voor de Verandering/XminY.Google Scholar
  32. Lawn, P. (2003). A theoretical foundation to support the index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW), genuine progress indicator (GPI), and other related indexes. Ecological Economics, 44(1), 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. New York, NY: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  34. Marks, N., Simms, A., Thompson, S., & Abdallah, S. (2006). The happy planet index: An Index of human well-being and environmental impact. London, UK: nef.Google Scholar
  35. Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(2), 370–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Max-Neef, M. (1992). Development and human needs. In P. Ekins & M. Max-Neef (Eds.), Real-life economics: understand wealth creation (pp. 97–213). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Morris, M. (1979). Measuring the conditions of the world’s poor: The physical quality of life index. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  38. Neumayer, E. (1999). The ISEW: Not an index of sustainable economic welfare. Social Indicators Research, 48(1), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Neumayer, E. (2003). Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms. The John Robert Seeley lectures. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  40. Neumayer, E. (2004). Indicators of sustainability. In T. Tietenberg (Ed.), International yearbook of environmental and resource economics 2004/2005 (pp. 139–188). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  41. Nordhaus, W., & Tobin, J. (1972). Is growth obsolete? In N. B. of Economic Research (Ed.), Economic growth (pp. 1–80). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. The John Robert Seeley lectures. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Offer, A. (2003). Economic welfare measures and human well-being. In P. David & M. Thomas (Eds.), The economic future in historical perspective (pp. 371–399). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Osberg, L., & Sharpe, A. (1998). An index of economic well-being for Canada. Research paper R-99-3E, Applied Research Branch, Human Resources Development Canada.Google Scholar
  45. Osberg, L., & Sharpe, A. (2002). An index of economic well-being for selected OECD countries. Review of Income and Wealth, 48(3), 291–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Repetto, R., Magrath, W., Wells, M., Beer, C., & Rossini, F. (1989). Wasting assets: Natural resources in the national income and product accounts. Washington, DC: World Resource Institute.Google Scholar
  48. Samuelson, P. (1961). The evaluation of ‘social income’: Capital formation and wealth. In F. Lutz & D. Hague (Eds.), The theory of capital (pp. 32–57). London, UK: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  49. Schokkaert, E. (2007). The capabilities approach. Discussion paper CES 0734. Leuven, Belgium: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Center for Economic Studies.Google Scholar
  50. Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North Holland.Google Scholar
  51. Sen, A. (2004). Capabilities, lists and public reasoning: Continuing the conversation. Feminist Economics, 10(3), 77–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress. Paris, France: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.Google Scholar
  53. Tobin, J. (2005). Fisher’s the nature of capital and income. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 64(1), 207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. UN. (2003). Handbook of national accounting, integrated environmental and economic accounting. New York, NY: United Nations.Google Scholar
  55. UN, EU, IMF, OECD and World Bank. (2005). Integrated environmental and economic accounting 2003. New York, NY: United Nations, European Union, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the World Bank.Google Scholar
  56. UNECE, OECD, & Eurostat (2008). Measuring sustainable development. Report of the joint UNECE/OECD/Eurostat working group on statistics for sustainable development. New York, NY: United Nations.Google Scholar
  57. Van de Kerk, G., & Manuel, A. (2008). A comprehensive index for a sustainable society: The SSI—the sustainable society index. Ecological Economics, 66(2), 228–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Van den Bergh, J. (2009). The GDP paradox. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(2), 117–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Veenhoven, R. (1996). Happy life expectancy: A comprehensive measure of quality-of-life in nations. Social Indicators Research, 39(1), 1–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Veenhoven, R. (2002). Why social policy needs subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 58(1), 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Veenhoven, R. (2004). Subjective measures of well-being. WIDER research paper 2004/7. Helsinki, Finland: United Nations University, WIDER.Google Scholar
  62. Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint. Reducing human impact on earth. Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
  63. Wesselink, B., Bakkes, J., Best, A., Hinterberger, F., & ten Brink, P. (2007). Measurement beyond GDP. Background paper for the conference beyond GDP: Measuring progress, true wealth, and the well-being of nations. Available at http://www.beyond-gdp.eu/download/bgdp-bp-mbgdp.pdf [viewed on May 12, 2011].
  64. Zolotas, X. (1981). Economic growth and declining social welfare. New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Business and Public AdministrationUniversity College GhentGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations