Sunday, December 2, 2012

Toward a new meaning of success

 Something I've been thinking about lately - and which we've discussed in class - is the idea that our measure of economic success is off. For decades our government and economists have focused so much on growth in Gross Domestic Product without thinking about whether GDP is a worthy measure, or what our true goals are. GDP basically measures how much money changes hands in the economy but doesn't measure all of the other transactions and activities that help to provide quality of life. When someone does a home repair or babysits their grandchildren, GDP measures these as less valuable than, say hiring a repairman or sending kids to daycare, because no money was changed hands. However, I would argue that these activities performed by self or a loved one are more valuable in improving one's happiness.

Even more, is a family dinner, a hike, a bonfire at the beach, or a hug represented in the GDP? Only marginally. GDP seems to only measure one element of the life of a country, and yet it is often held up as THE main indicator of the progress of a country.

So what should we be measuring?

Let's start by examining a few elements that make a good place to live.
  • Personal freedom. 
  • Social mobility. 
  • Support of family and friends. 
  • A healthy environment. 
  • Useful infrastructure. 
  • Access to work and knowledge. 
  • Access to healthy food and quality shelter. 
  • Freedom from crime, fear, and government corruption.
Few of these are measured by traditional economic metrics. What do they all have in common? I would say they are all means to one common end: human happiness.

Toward a measure of gross national happiness

Bhutan has begun to use  "gross national happiness" as its main measure of national success. That is, if the economy is growing by western standards but its people are unhappy, the government must act to improve the quality of life of its citizens. I believe we should consider following this model.

The GNH index used by Bhutan measures the four following pillars:
  • good governance
  • sustainable socio-economic development
  • cultural preservation
  • environmental conservation
Those have been further divided into nine "domains:"
  • psychological wellbeing
  • health
  • education
  • time use
  • cultural diversity and resilience
  • good governance
  • community vitality
  • ecological diversity and resilience
  • and living standards.
I believe that if the United States were to begin incorporating such a measure into our national goals, we would all be better off, and we would do things quite differently. Rather than simply focusing on the bottom line, we would begin to make strides toward the well-being of the economically disadvantaged. Indeed, some of the harmful economic activities so prominent today might begin to lose their luster as we begin to focus more on what truly makes human beings happy.

4 comments:

  1. I'll buy the hate, wear the t-shirt and the bandanna! I too have been thinking about this, especially after our macro read for this week "Challenges for the Twenty-First Century". I know this sounds crazy, but you have to remember I live in a very conservative town and most of the people I know here would laugh this idea down the street. Back to what you might think is crazy but I am going to put it out there....What if the people that wanted to live under these principles could live in certain areas of the US and those that would like to keep the old ways can stay in other parts of the US. Wouldn't it be interesting at least to do a small scale experiment to see what would happen here in the US? I could see this being accepted in many areas of the US.

    Lead the way Shotsy!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here is what I wonder.... is there anyone based here in the United States whom is seriously considering this conversation? Anyone who is actually beginning to take action around this tremendously ignored issue? I would love to actually look into the history of Bhutan to see how this concept materialized, as it is un utterly brilliant one. Aric Ho wrote about it a couple of weeks ago, and I thought that it sounded too goo to be true. Not because I don't fundamentally agree with this belief structure 100%. Unfortunately, this is when the pessimistic side of me begins to kick in, asking if we will ever learn to not only do the right things for the wrong reasons (in the brilliant words of Bob Willard), but simply do the right thing for the right reasons? We have such a tremendously brilliant swath of people in this country, and yet, we cannot seem to dig ourselves out of a paper bag :( What will it take to bring us to this level? Maybe BGI's Cohort 11 could create this as a class project!!! :D

    ReplyDelete
  3. Amen brother! - What else can I say?.. Love it, and I think we BGI'ers need to figure out the leverage points in the system that is our society for introducing this change. I agree with Hava; sounds like a great project!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Christopher, thanks for this post. It's the first time I've actually seen the metrics of Bhutan's system spelled out. You should also check out the Genuine Progress Indicators (GPI), a US-based approach to the same set of issues. It would make a wonderful post at some point to compare and contrast the two approaches.

    Your list of the elements that make a place a good place to live strike me as a list drawn up by a pretty well-off American. The fact that you place "personal freedom" first is particularly telling. That is not to say that you are wrong (please don't take this as a criticism, it's simply an observation). Some would argue that the Anglo-American commitment to personal freedom, or the primacy of the individual, is part of the reason that all of us are suffering now. Your two bottom issues do, in fact, form the base of the Maslow hierarchy, AND they are about as far up as 80% of the world's population dares to dream.

    Check out Manfred Max-Neef's list of basic human needs for another perspective. Here's a Wikipedia link to get you started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_human_needs

    ReplyDelete