If we have learnt one thing over the past year it's the danger of thinking gravity can be defied. The challenge everyone now faces, from political leaders and CEOs right down to those in charge of the family finances, is to determine which aspects of life are likely to hold good in the future and which need a fundamental rethink. The normal default mechanism is to revert to what we know and trust, but as many politicians and economists around the world are finding out the hard way, this is not sufficient.
At a minimum we need to re-calibrate the principles that have driven the capitalist model for the past fifty years, although for some much more radical ideas need to be embraced.
For many, the re-calibration process is already in train as they question the value equation at the heart of their lives. The highly charged debating about banking bonuses is a good example, in part because it has challenged how and over what time frame to measure performance. The substance of the debate has also re-surfaced difficult questions about how society values different people’s contributions and how much anyone needs to consume to be truly happy.
So as I sat and listened to a fascinating debate last week I reflected upon the real legacy of the NICE decade, the decade of easy money, consumption and inflated asset prices. The debate was organised by the University of Cambridge’s programme for sustainability leadership. The topic of discussion was "Financing the future - City at the Crossroads; Business as usual or Plan B". While now is not the time to summarise all that was discussed I wanted to highlight the contribution of Sargon Nissan of the New Economics Foundation and the Foundation's work in creating ‘The Happy Planet Index’. The index is an innovative new measure that shows ecological efficiency with which human well-being is delivered. The index strips the view of the economy to its absolute basics, what we put in (resources) and what comes out (human lives of different length and happiness).
At the heart of the analysis is a simple issue: we are all consuming too much in our lives and this increasing consumption has not led to happier lives, in fact the contrary is true. The resulting index of 178 nations reveals the world has a long way to go - no country achieves an overall high score. For those who want to know more, the UK is ranked 108 out of 178, US 150, France 129 and Germany 81.
Now for most of you, in what I would describe as today's mainstream, this analysis may appear fanciful, shallow and not of the real world. But if we stop and reflect for a moment, one has to question whether the crude measurement systems we have so carefully constructed over many decades are part of our current problems rather than being part of the solution. If my crystal ball is right about the mega shift in societal expectations over the next decade, we should be spending more time considering the underlying factors that drive the ‘Happy Planet Index’ than we do on last month's shift in GDP or even worse the level of the FTSE index at 5.00pm today. Here speaks a new age accountant, not a politician!
David
If we look at the countries at the top of the list according to HPI, the majority of the top 10 are latin and central american countries. From my humble point of view, one of a colombian citizen, we are not in the best shape as society could be and it is odd to state we are better than other societies in terms of HPI. Please don't get me wrong. I totally agree about the points you made on consumption patterns and truly happiness, however the results can lead to other conclusions. Taking account of my shallow knowledge about HPI, maybe these 'top countries' haven't had the opportunities to 'lower their HPI scores', so their high ranking are not a choice of will (Costa Rica could be an exception) but a economic / social limitation to deplete the resources, yet. At last, is good but I think this HPI value has to be a choosen path not a mere coincidence.
Posted by: Andres Romero Cortina | 26 February 2009 at 16:04