Content area
Full Text
Proposals of alternatives often focus on outcome targets (health, education, nutrition), but in fact the process of political participation is far more important and meaningful
Introduction
GDP as an indicator is relatively recent. It was introduced 70 years ago and like many other innovations, is a reflection of its historical context, in its case the period between the Great Depression and World War II. The adoption of the GDP as an indicator was not a neutral choice, but rather the logical consequence of the then prevailing views about the promotion of well-being and development. Since then, however, times have changed, new problems have emerged and new theories and approaches have been developed to address them. Starting from these considerations, the article examines the problems connected with adopting an indicator as an absolute measure of progress. After reviewing the main theories and indicators introduced by literature in the last 60 years, we argue for the adoption of a different approach, based not on externally determined metrics, but on a process that defines goals continuously through review and participation.
In this article, we propose a different approach towards the definition of what determines well-being and consequently the policies needed to pursue well-being as well as the indicators needed to measure progress. We dispute the idea that the determinants of well-being, that is, what improves or worsen the life of a given society, should be a matter of economists debating on the role of growth, on that of schooling or any other factor, and therefore propose a different way of approaching the issue. We do this first by examining the relation between indicators, policies, goals and the concept of well-being, starting from the classic dispute between growth and development. In the subsequent section we highlight the limits of indicators based on paradigms, and propose instead an upside down approach in which goals are determined and re-determined continuously through an open-ended political and democratic process, and indicators are then elaborated to measure the achievement rate of these goals.
Well-being, growth and development: Are they in fact related?
Since its birth, in the 1940s, GDP has been the object both of sharp criticism and of enthusiastic approval and support.1 Disputes have proliferated among economists, highlighting limits and virtues...