GNP becomes an obsolete measure of progress in a society
striving to meet people’s needs as efficiently as possible and with the least
damage to the environment. What counts is not growth in output, but the
quality of services rendered. (1) Bicycles and light rail, for instance, are
less resources--intensive forms of transportation as automobiles are, and
contribute less to GNR. (2) But shift to mass transit and cycling for most
passenger trips would enhance urban life by eliminating traffic jams, reducing
smog, and make cities safer for pedestrians. (3) GNP would go up, but overall
wellbeing would increase--underscoring the need for new indicators of
progress. Likewise, investing in water-efficient appliances and
irrigation systems instead of building more dams and diversion canals would meet
water needs with less harm to the environment. (4) Since massive water
projects consume resources them efficiency in vestments do, GNP would tend
to decline. But quality of life would improve. (5) It becomes clearly
that striving to boost GNP is often inappropriate and counterproductive. As
ecologist and philosopher Garrett Hardin puts it. (6) "For a statesman to try
to maximize the GNP is about as sensible as for a composer of music to try to
maximize the number of note in a symphony." Abandoning
growth as an overriding goal does not mean forsaking the poor. (7) Rising
incomes and material consumption are essential to improving well-being in many
of the Third World. (8) But contrary to that political leaders imply, global
economic growth as currently pursued is not the solution to poverty. Despite
the fivefold rise in world economic output since 1951, 1.2 billion people more
than ever--live in absolute poverty today. More growth of the sort engineered in
recent decades will not save the poor, only a new set of priorities
can. Formidable barriers stand in the way of shifting from
growth to real progress as the central goal of economic policy. (9) Vision
that growth conjures up of an expanding pie of riches is a powerful and
convenient political too! Because it allows the tough issues of income
inequality and skewed wealth distribution to be avoid. (10) People assume
that as far as there is growth, there is hope that the lives of the poor
can be bettered without sacrifices from the rich. The reality,
however, is that achieving an environmentally sustainable global economy
is not possible without the rich limiting their consumption in order to leave
room for the poor to increase theirs.