Beyond GDP: Tracking and Evaluating National Contributions to Social and Environmental Sustainability
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) emerged as a convenient measure of national economic activity during the Great Depression. It was subsequently adopted by international development economists to track developing countries’ progress so that, despite its severe deficiencies, it became ‘locked in’ by habit, convenience, and policy makers’ preferences.
Purpose: This article conceives of GDP as a social intervention fit for evaluation. It shows that the GDP has had a pervasive and pernicious influence on policy making. Since past strategies aimed at dethroning the GDP have failed, it proposes new, evaluator-driven approaches designed to undermine the GDP’s dominance in the global market economy.
Setting: The Stiglitz report commissioned in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis launched a ‘Beyond GDP’ movement. Since then, public alarm about the GDP growth addiction has escalated: the drawbacks of GDP as a free-market policy tool have become self-evident as the rich get richer, the ranks of the poor swell and the future of the planet hangs in the balance.
Research Design: Not applicable.
Data Collection and Analysis: For the twenty largest economies in the world, the article estimates climate change discounts to the GDP based on official CO2 emissions statistics and a social cost of carbon estimate derived from a 2015 survey of eminent climatologists. It also draws on composite indexes generated by four reputable social research organizations to rank countries for their contributions to the 5 Ps of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): people, planet, prosperity, peace, and partnership.
Findings: Pending the results of on-going efforts to upgrade worldwide statistics focused on the 169 SDG targets, the proposed GDP discounts help track progress towards the SDGs. But monitoring is not enough. In a policy world dominated by vested interests, the new ‘Beyond GDP’ indicators should be combined with principled, evaluator-directed evaluations.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Permissions
Authors retain full copyright for articles published in JMDE. JMDE publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY - NC 4.0). Users are allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the work in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes, provided that the original authors and source are credited accurately and appropriately. Only the original authors may distribute the article for commercial or compensatory purposes. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org
References
1. World Bank. (n.d.). Global Economic Prospects. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/global-economic-prospects
2. Kuznets, S. (1934). "The welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income." National Income, 1929-1932. 73rd US Congress, 2d session, Senate document no. 124, page 7.
3. Arndt, H. W. (n.d.). Economic Development: The History of an Idea. The University of Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL, p.1.
4. Thomas, V., et al. (2000). The Quality of Growth. Published for the World Bank. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1596/0-1952-1593-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1596/0-1952-1593-1
5. Dasgupta, P. (2021). The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. HM Treasury, London. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/962785/The_Economics_of_Biodiversity_The_Dasgupta_Review_Full_Report.pdf
6. Kennedy, R. F. (1968). Remarks at the University of Kansas, March 18, 1968. Retrieved from https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/the-kennedy-family/robert-f-kennedy/robert-f-kennedy-speeches/remarks-at-the-university-of-kansas-march-18-1968
7. [Note on COVID-19 statistics comparing the United States and New Zealand as of May 2021]
8. [Note on Net national income compilations by international organizations]
9. United Nations Volunteers. (n.d.). State of the World's Volunteerism Report. Retrieved from https://unv-swvr2018.org/
10. Encyclopaedia Britannica. (n.d.). Richard Stone. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Richard-Stone
11. Sen, A., Fitoussi, J. P., & Stiglitz, J. (2010). Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn't Add Up. The New Press. Retrieved from http://www.tinyurl.com/y63bg5dj
12. [Note on Gross National Happiness in Bhutan and related international developments]
13. [Note on sustainable development indicator initiatives as of 2011]
14. United Nations. (n.d.). System of Environmental Economic Accounting. Retrieved from https://seea.un.org/content/about-seea
15. [Note on greenhouse gas emissions trends in developed vs. developing countries, 2000-2018]
16. Krugman, P. (2021). Wonking out: Alexander Hamilton and post-Covid America. Paul Krugman's Newsletter, New York Times, July 3, 2021.
17. Ventriss, C. (2000). New Public Management: An examination of its influence on contemporary affairs and its impact on shaping the intellectual agenda of the field. Administrative Theory & Praxis, Taylor and Francis, 22(3), 500-518. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2000.11643468 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2000.11643468
18. Berg, A., & Ostry, J. D. (2011). Inequality and Unsustainable Growth: Two Sides of the Same Coin? IMF Staff Discussion Note 11/08. Washington DC: International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781463926564.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5089/9781463926564.006
19. Fioramonti, L. (2017). The World After GDP: Politics, Business and Society in the Post Growth Era. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
20. Anderson, K. (2011). [Quote on climate change models]. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/feb/24/models-climate-policy-optimistic
21. [Reference to a Lancet article] Retrieved from https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2542-5196%2820%2930223-0
22. European Commission. (n.d.). Citizens support for climate action. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/clima/citizens/support_en
23. Pew Research Center. (2020). U.S. concern about climate change is rising, but mainly among Democrats. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/16/u-s-concern-about-climate-change-is-rising-but-mainly-among-democrats/
24. Demaria, F., D'Alisa, G., & Kallis, G. (2015). DEGROWTH: A Vocabulary for a New Era (E-BOOK). Routledge.
25. Science Daily. (2017). [Article from November 10, 2017]. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/11/171110113941.htm
26. Fouquet, R. (Ed.). (2019). Handbook on Green Growth. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788110686 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788110686
27. Gemmill-Herren, B., Baker, L. E., & Daniels, P. A. (Eds.). (2021). True Cost Accounting for Food: Balancing the Scale. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003050803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003050803
28. [Note on various organizational frameworks for impact measurement]
29. World Economic Forum. (2020). Measuring Stakeholder Capitalism: Towards Common Metrics and Consistent Reporting of Sustainable Value Creation. White Paper. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_IBC_Measuring_Stakeholder_Capitalism_Report_2020.pdf
30. [Reference to page 63 of a previously cited work]
31. Hoekstra, R. (2019). Replacing GDP by 2030: Towards a Common Language for Well-being and Sustainability Community. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108608558 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108608558
32. van den Berg, R. D., Magro, C., & Adrien, M. H. (Eds.). (2021). Transformational Evaluation for the Global Crises of Our Times. International Development Evaluation Association (IDEAS), Exeter, United Kingdom.
33. [Note on the five worst polluters in absolute terms]
34. [Note on the Biden administration's social cost of carbon figure]
35. [Note on India's contribution to greenhouse gases]. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2018/9/26/17897614/climate-change-social-cost-carbon
36. Howard, P., & Sylvan, D. (2015). Expert Consensus on the Economics of Climate Change. Institute for Policy Integrity, NY University School of Law. Retrieved from https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/expertconsensusreport.pdf
37. United Nations Statistics Division. (n.d.). SDG Indicators. Retrieved from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/
38. Gennari, P., & Navarro, D. K. (2020). Are we serious about achieving the SDGs? A Statistician's perspective. SDG Knowledge Hub, International Institute for Sustainable Development. Retrieved from https://sdg.iisd.org/commentary/guest-articles/are-we-serious-about-achieving-the-sdgs-a-statisticians-perspective/
39. OECD. (2019). Measuring Distance to the SDG Targets 2019: An Assessment of Where OECD Countries Stand. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/a8caf3fa-en https://doi.org/10.1787/a8caf3fa-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/a8caf3fa-en
40. [Note on quote attributed to Carveth Read (1883-1931)]
41. [Note on shared heritage of certain countries]
42. Kahneman, D., & Deaton, A. (2010). High Income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011492107 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011492107 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011492107
43. Patton, M. Q. (2011). Developmental Evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. Guilford Press, New York, NY.
44. [Note on climate change as a common pool good]
45. Mann, M. E. (2021). The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back the Planet. Public Affairs, Hachette Books, New York, NY.
46. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763
47. Espinola-Arredondo, A., & Munoz-Garcia, F. (2011). Free riding in international environmental agreements: A signalling approach to non-enforceable treaties. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 23(1), 111-134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629810391073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629810391073
48. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (n.d.). [Document reference]. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/ttclear/misc_/StaticFiles/gnwoerk_static/tn_meetings/fecf05347525429cb21cc66dd9dbc16d/6522dd9d1a2d497a8453a64c0a456172.pdf
49. Schoenefeld, J. J., Hildén, M., & Jordan, A. J. (2018). The challenges of monitoring national climate policy: learning lessons from the EU. Climate Policy, 18(1), 118-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1248887 https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1248887 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1248887
50. Patton, M. Q. (2020). Blue Marble evaluation, Premises and Principles. The Guilford Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.31244/zfe.2020.02.09 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31244/zfe.2020.02.09
51. van den Berg, R. D., & Cando-Noordhuizen, L. (2017). Action on climate change: what does in mean and where does it lead to? In J.I. Uitto (Ed.), Evaluating Climate Change for Sustainable Development (Chapter 2). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-43702-6_1 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43702-6_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43702-6_2
52. Parsons, T. (1968). Professions. International Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences (Vol. 12). The Free Press and Macmillan, New York, pp. 536-547.
53. Davidson, E. J. (2005). Marketing Evaluation as a Profession and a Discipline. Editorial. Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Evaluation, January. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v2i2.117 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v2i2.117
54. Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism: The Third Logic. Polity Press, Cambridge.
55. Picciotto, R. (2011). The logic of evaluation professionalism. Evaluation, 17(2), 165-180. Sage. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389011403362 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389011403362