Editing Gross domestic product (section)

===Environment===
{{See also|Eco-economic decoupling}}
[[File:Absolute-decoupling-Growth-and-falling-emissions-all.png|class=skin-invert-image|thumb|upright=1.4|Eco-economic decoupling between GDP growth and [[greenhouse gas emissions]] decrease.]]

Many [[environmentalism|environmentalists]] argue that GDP is a poor measure of social progress because it does not take into account harm to the [[biosphere|environment]].<ref>{{cite news |first=Jeroen |last=van den Bergh |date=13 April 2010 |title=The Virtues of Ignoring GDP |work=The Broker |url=http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/Articles/The-virtues-of-ignoring-GDP |access-date=22 July 2012 |archive-date=24 February 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130224051234/http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/Articles/The-virtues-of-ignoring-GDP |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Jon |last=Gertner |date=13 May 2010 |work=[[New York Times Magazine]] |title=The Rise and Fall of G.D.P. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/magazine/16GDP-t.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220102/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/magazine/16GDP-t.html |archive-date=2022-01-02 |url-access=limited |url-status=live }}{{cbignore}}</ref>

In the language of economics, everything comes down to its monetary value.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Who's Counting? Marilyn Waring on Sex, Lies and Global Economics |url=https://www.cinemapolitica.org/film/whos-counting-marilyn-waring-on-sex-lies-and-global-economics/ |access-date=2024-12-11 |website=Cinema Politica |language=en-CA}}</ref> In essence, GDP rewards behaviors that are detrimental to the environment.<ref name=":3" /> GDP also does not capture certain phenomena impacting citizens' well-being.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bergh |first=Jeroen C. J. M. van den |date=2009-04-01 |title=The GDP paradox |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167487008001141 |journal=Journal of Economic Psychology |volume=30 |issue=2 |pages=117–135 |doi=10.1016/j.joep.2008.12.001 |issn=0167-4870}}</ref> For example, traffic jams could cause GDP to increase as there is a higher consumption of gasoline, however, GDP fails to consider citizens' well-being in terms of the quality of air due to air pollution from the traffic jams.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Progress (France) |first1=Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eogVezBLULYC&dq=criticism+of+GDP&pg=PR34 |title=Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn't Add Up |last2=Stiglitz |first2=Joseph E. |last3=Sen |first3=Amartya |last4=Fitoussi |first4=Jean-Paul |date=2010 |publisher=The New Press |isbn=978-1-59558-519-6 |language=en}}</ref> Various alternatives have been developed(see below).

A 2020 study found that "poor regions' GDP grows faster by attracting more polluting [[production (economics)|production]] after connection to China's expressway system.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=He |first1=Guojun |last2=Xie |first2=Yang |last3=Zhang |first3=Bing |title=Expressways, GDP, and the environment: The case of China |journal=Journal of Development Economics |date=1 June 2020 |volume=145 |page=102485 |doi=10.1016/j.jdeveco.2020.102485 |s2cid=203596268 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304387820300602 |access-date=20 September 2020 |language=en |issn=0304-3878 |archive-date=30 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201030164525/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304387820300602 |url-status=live }}</ref> GDP may not be a tool capable of recognizing how much [[natural capital]] agents of the economy are building or protecting.<ref>{{cite web |title = GDP is destroying the planet. Here's an alternative |url = https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/05/gdp-is-destroying-the-planet-heres-an-alternative/ |date=May 31, 2018 |first1=Pooran |last1=Desai |website = World Economic Forum |access-date = 20 September 2020 |language = en |archive-date = 18 September 2020 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200918234057/https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/05/gdp-is-destroying-the-planet-heres-an-alternative |url-status = live }}</ref>
In 2020 scientists, as part of a [[World Scientists' Warning to Humanity]]-associated series, warned that worldwide growth in [[affluence]] in terms of GDP-metrics has increased [[resource use]] and [[pollutant|pollutant emissions]] with affluent [[global citizen|citizens of the world]] – in terms of e.g. resource-intensive consumption – being responsible for most negative environmental impacts and central to a transition to safer, [[sustainability|sustainable]] conditions. They summarised evidence, presented solution approaches and stated that far-reaching [[Lifestyle (sociology)|lifestyle]] [[Behavioural change theories|changes]] need to [[Technology and society|complement technological advancements]] and that existing societies, economies and cultures [[incentive|incite]] [[overconsumption|consumption expansion]] and that the [[Structural change|structural imperative]] for [[Economic growth|growth]] in [[Competition (economics)|competitive]] [[market economy|market economies]] inhibits [[societal change]].<ref name="phys-affluence">{{cite news |title = Affluence is killing the planet, warn scientists |url = https://phys.org/news/2020-06-affluence-planet-scientists.html |date= June 24, 2020 |first1=Thomas |last1=Wiedmann |first2=Julia K. |last2=Steinberger |first3=Manfred |last3=Lenzen |agency=The Conversation |access-date = 5 July 2020 |website = phys.org |language = en |archive-date = 5 July 2020 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200705161607/https://phys.org/news/2020-06-affluence-planet-scientists.html |url-status = live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title = Overconsumption and growth economy key drivers of environmental crises |url = https://phys.org/news/2020-06-overconsumption-growth-economy-key-drivers.html |date=June 19, 2020 |agency=    University of New South Wales |access-date = 5 July 2020 |website = phys.org |language = en |archive-date = 23 June 2020 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200623220446/https://phys.org/news/2020-06-overconsumption-growth-economy-key-drivers.html |url-status = live }}</ref><ref name="gdp-affluence">{{cite journal |author1=Thomas Wiedmann |author2=Manfred Lenzen |author3=Lorenz T. Keyßer |author4=[[Julia Steinberger]]|title=Scientists' warning on affluence |journal=Nature Communications |date=19 June 2020 |volume=11 |issue=1 |page=3107 |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y |pmid=32561753 |pmc=7305220 |bibcode=2020NatCo..11.3107W |doi-access=free }} [[File:CC-BY icon.svg|50px]]  Text and image were copied from this source, which is available under a [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171016050101/https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |date=2017-10-16 }}.</ref> Sarah Arnold, Senior Economist at the [[New Economics Foundation]] (NEF) stated that "GDP includes activities that are detrimental to our [[economy]] and [[society]] in the long term, such as [[deforestation]], strip mining, overfishing and so on".<ref>{{cite web |title = Why GDP is no longer the most effective measure of economic success |url = https://www.worldfinance.com/strategy/why-gdp-is-no-longer-the-most-effective-measure-of-economic-success |website = World Finance |first1=Courtney |last1=Goldsmith  |access-date = 17 September 2020 |archive-date = 18 September 2020 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200918233815/https://www.worldfinance.com/strategy/why-gdp-is-no-longer-the-most-effective-measure-of-economic-success |url-status = live }}</ref> The number of trees that are net lost annually is estimated to be approximately 10&nbsp;billion.<ref>{{cite news |title=Earth has 3 trillion trees but they're falling at alarming rate |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-science-trees-idUSKCN0R21Z620150902 |url-access=limited |first1=Will |last1=Dunham |access-date=26 May 2020 |work=Reuters |date=2 September 2015 |language=en |archive-date=11 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111230631/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-science-trees-idUSKCN0R21Z620150902 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Carrington |first1=Damian |title=Tree planting 'has mind-blowing potential' to tackle climate crisis |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/04/planting-billions-trees-best-tackle-climate-crisis-scientists-canopy-emissions |website=The Guardian |access-date=26 May 2020 |date=4 July 2019 |archive-date=5 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190705170611/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/04/planting-billions-trees-best-tackle-climate-crisis-scientists-canopy-emissions |url-status=live }}</ref> The global average annual deforested land in the 2015–2020 demi-decade was 10&nbsp;million hectares and the average annual net forest area loss in the 2000–2010 decade 4.7&nbsp;million hectares, according to the [[Global Forest Resources Assessment (FRA)|Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Global Forest Resource Assessment 2020 |url=http://www.fao.org/forest-resources-assessment/2020/en/ |website=Food and Agriculture Organization |access-date=26 May 2020 |language=en |archive-date=20 May 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200520105408/http://www.fao.org/forest-resources-assessment/2020/en |url-status=live }}</ref> According to one study, depending on the level of [[wealth inequality]], higher GDP-growth can be associated with more deforestation.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Koop |first1=Gary |last2=Tole |first2=Lise |title=Deforestation, distribution and development |journal=Global Environmental Change |date=1 October 2001 |volume=11 |issue=3 |pages=193–202 |doi=10.1016/S0959-3780(00)00057-1 |bibcode=2001GEC....11..193K |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959378000000571 |access-date=17 September 2020 |language=en |issn=0959-3780 |archive-date=16 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210416152438/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959378000000571 |url-status=live }}</ref> In 2019 "agriculture and [[agribusiness]]" accounted for 24% of the GDP of Brazil, [[2019 Amazon rainforest wildfires|where a large share of annual net tropical forest loss occurred and is associated with sizable portions of this economic activity domain]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Arruda |first1=Daniel |last2=Candido |first2=Hugo G. |last3=Fonseca |first3=Rúbia |title=Amazon fires threaten Brazil's agribusiness |url=https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.aaz2198 |journal=Science |access-date=17 September 2020 |pages=1387 |language=en |doi=10.1126/science.aaz2198 |date=27 September 2019 |volume=365 |issue=6460 |pmid=31604261 |bibcode=2019Sci...365.1387A |s2cid=203566011 |archive-date=11 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221111153816/https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.aaz2198 |url-status=live }}</ref>

[[Steven A. Cohen (academic)|Steve Cohen]] of the Earth Institute elucidated that while GDP does not distinguish between different activities (or [[lifestyle (sociology)|lifestyles]]), "all consumption behaviors are not created equal and do not have the same impact on [[environmental sustainability]]".<ref>{{cite news |title=Economic growth and environmental sustainability |url=https://phys.org/news/2020-01-economic-growth-environmental-sustainability.html |access-date=20 September 2020 |website=phys.org |language=en |archive-date=3 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201103063216/https://phys.org/news/2020-01-economic-growth-environmental-sustainability.html |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Johan Rockström]], director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, noted that "it's difficult to see if the current G.D.P.-based [[economic model|model]] of economic growth can go hand-in-hand with rapid [[mitigation of climate change|cutting of emissions]]", which nations have agreed to attempt under the [[Paris Agreement]] in order to mitigate real-world impacts of climate change.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Landler |first1=Mark |last2=Sengupta |first2=Somini |title=Trump and the Teenager: A Climate Showdown at Davos |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/climate/greta-thunberg-trump-davos.html |access-date=20 September 2020 |newspaper=The New York Times |date=21 January 2020 |archive-date=7 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200907013852/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/climate/greta-thunberg-trump-davos.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

In 1989, [[John B. Cobb]] and [[Herman Daly]] introduced [[Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare]] (ISEW) by taking into account other factors such as consumption of nonrenewable resources and degradation of the environment. ISEW is roughly defined as: personal consumption + public non-defensive expenditures − private defensive expenditures + capital formation + services from domestic labour − costs of [[environmental degradation]] − depreciation of natural capital.
In 2005, [[Med Jones]], an American Economist, at the International Institute of Management, introduced the first secular Gross National Happiness Index a.k.a. [[Gross National Well-being]] framework and Index to complement GDP economics with additional seven dimensions, including environment, education, and government, work, social and health (mental and physical) indicators. The proposal was inspired by the King of Bhutan's [[Gross National Happiness|GNH]] philosophy.<ref>{{cite web |url = https://www.iim-edu.org/grossnationalhappiness/ |title = Gross National Happiness (GNH) – A New Socioeconomic Development Policy Framework – A Policy White Paper – The American Pursuit of Unhappiness – Med Jones, IIM |date = 10 January 2005 |website = Iim-edu.org |access-date = 4 March 2017 |archive-date = 2 February 2017 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20170202050022/https://www.iim-edu.org/grossnationalhappiness/ |url-status = live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/the-happiness-portfolio-is-no-laughing-matter|title= Happiness Ministry in Dubai|date= 11 February 2016|access-date= 4 March 2017|archive-date= 16 February 2017|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170216193217/http://www.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/the-happiness-portfolio-is-no-laughing-matter|url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.hks.harvard.edu/content/download/67149/1241406/version/1/file/PAE+Beachy_Zorn_2012.pdf|title=Harvard Kennedy School Report to U.S. Congressman 21st Century GDP: National Indicators for a New Era|access-date=2017-03-04|archive-date=2015-07-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150701192803/https://www.hks.harvard.edu/content/download/67149/1241406/version/1/file/PAE+Beachy_Zorn_2012.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>
In 2019, Serge Pierre Besanger published a "GDP 3.0" proposal which combines an expanded GNI formula which he calls GNIX, with a [[Palma ratio]] and a set of environmental metrics based on the Daly Rule.<ref>{{cite news |title=Death by GDP – how the climate crisis is driven by a growth yardstick |url=https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/death-by-gdp-how-the-climate-crisis-is-driven-by-a-growth-yardstick |newspaper=[[The Straits Times]] |date=21 December 2019 |language=en |access-date=22 December 2019 |archive-date=22 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191222041235/https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/death-by-gdp-how-the-climate-crisis-is-driven-by-a-growth-yardstick |url-status=live }}</ref>