Limitations of macroeconomic indicators to take into consideration environmental monetary values have been recognized by economists for more than three decades. This has been particularly true in relation to Gross National Product (GNP). For many economists GNP (and related indicators) can and must be improved to take changes in environmental goods, services and assets into consideration. Other economists emphasize the need of new indicators to achieve this goal. Among many proposed alternatives one has called international attention: the Gross National Happiness (GNH). Even a country (Bhutan) has established as national goal to achieve a GNH greater than the GNP. United Kingdom and Australia are also committed to producing national measures of subjective well-being In this paper we demonstrate that GNH treatment of environmental issues is not more robust than GNP, neither from a theoretically nor an empirically point of view.
Data/Methods:
Literature review, secondary source data and field work in Bhutan
Results:
GNH treatment of environmental issues does not solve theoretical and empirical limits presented by GNP treatment. As a matter of fact an indicator of GNH is an overly ambitious goal in view of the present state of knowledge and limitations of environmental monetary valuation.