Beyond GDP: Conceptual Grounds of Quantification. The Case of the Index of Economic Well-Being (IEWB)

Abstract

Today, though the need for new indicators of progress is broadly recognized, no consensus has arisen on a successor to gross domestic product (GDP). Various quantification options are debated. While some intend to improve current indicators by completing or adjusting them to new constraints, others think that new indicators of progress are liable, if well-designed, to catalyse a transition toward a new societal model, less reliant on growth. Up to now, the normative stakes related to quantification options, though crucial for “what we measure affects what we do”, are scattered among the debates and do not appear clearly to actors. Our paper aims therefore to offer a systematic understanding of the normative impacts of generic quantification choices. To that end, we analyse the index of economic well-being (IEWB). For each dimension of this composite indicator, the analysis—which aims to be easily transposed to other indicators—sheds light on the variety of normative implications resulting from its conceptual and methodological apparatus. This concomitantly leads us to question in depth the relevance of some theoretical hypotheses underlying the IEWB to coherently account for economic, social and ecological issues. The paper’s conclusion suggests that alternative conceptual frameworks, such as ecological economics and the capability approach, are liable to carry more coherent indicators of progress.