观点GDP

The perils in the search for the perfect GDP alternative

Statistical agencies trip up when they attempt to weigh the values of good and bad in society

As Europe was miserably shivering with thermostats turned down and energy costs surging during the winter of 2022-23, the good news was that we in Britain were boosting net inclusive income per head. Everyone in the country moaning about broken public services is mistaken — their quality has been improving. And for almost two decades, the “inclusive” measure of capital (the nation’s wealth including human, natural and fixed capital) has not changed more than 2.1 per cent from its 2005 level in the face of global financial crises, pandemics and periods of austerity.

If you think these statistics are irrational, irrelevant or even nonsense, do not take it out on me or the UK’s Office for National Statistics, which produced these official figures earlier this month. The guilty party is those that hold the very popular view that we must ditch headline measures such as GDP and aim to rectify all the long known faults with this statistic.

Ever since Robert F Kennedy senior castigated GDP in 1968, saying “it measures everything . . . except that which makes life worthwhile”, statisticians have wanted to create holistic measures of wellbeing that included not only material market outcomes, but the quality of public services, unpaid household chores, the pollution of the planet’s air and waterways, cultural ecosystems, intellectual property and the degradation of our atmosphere by greenhouse gases. This, proponents have argued, would force politicians to have the right priorities and create a better society.

您已阅读40%(1522字),剩余60%(2278字)包含更多重要信息,订阅以继续探索完整内容,并享受更多专属服务。
版权声明:本文版权归manbetx20客户端下载 所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×