Prosperity, Sustainability and the Measurement of Wealth

Abstract

Gross domestic product (GDP) and household income measures provide invaluable metrics of economic activity in an economy, but they tell us little about the sustainability of the economic trends. National wealth accounting can be utilised to determine the size of the underlying productive base, which provides insight into the sustainability of economic activities and indicates the potential for intergenerational well-being. An empirical methodology was developed to measure wealth and then used to analyse multiple Asian countries. A common theme found across the Asian countries was the depletion of natural capital (forests, minerals and energy) and the development of human and produced capital. A strong correlation between growth in GDP per capita and wealth per capita was also found, but there are instances of GDP growth and wealth growth having different signs.

Relationship(s) between obesity and inflammatory bowel diseases: possible intertwined pathogenic mechanisms

“…On a global, national level, IBD rates are linked with more education and social status. Generally, countries with increased gross domestic products (GDP; the total value of goods produced and services provided in a country during 1 year [15]) have higher IBD rates. On the other hand, rural attributes including growing up on a farm, exposure to farm animals and pets are linked with lower rates of disease.…”

Measuring long‐term sustainability with shared socioeconomic pathways using an inclusive wealth framework

“…Nondeclining inclusive wealth represents a suitable definition of sustainable development in the wealth framework under the assumptions that V ( t ) converges with an economic forecast at t and is a differentiable function at K ( t ) (Arrow et al, ; Mumford, ). The future stock of assets will depend on the previous‐period stock.…”

“…This study extends previous wealth calculations proposed by Arrow et al () by considering more renewable types of wealth by including fisheries as marine natural capital. Previous studies also did not provide a future path for wellbeing and inclusive wealth (see also Acar & Gultekin‐Karakas, ; Mumford, ; UNU‐IHDP & UNEP, ; World Bank, ; Yamaguchi, Sato, & Ueta, ). This study represents the first attempt to simulate trajectories of future wellbeing along the newly developed shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) based on an estimation of the historical association between socioeconomic conditions and inclusive wealth.…”

A Philosophy for the Science of Well‐Being, by AnnaAlexandrova (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2017), pp. xiii + 196

“…In order to compare two people's well‐being, then, some medium is required that is interpersonally cardinal and can be exchanged or proxy for the various goods that make up these well‐being mixes. Income and prices perform this function rather elegantly in neoclassical economic frameworks, whereas direct measures of SWB struggle with the interpersonally cardinal requirement (Mumford, ).…”