Robert Prescott-Allen: Measuring the Wellbeing of Nations

Sheila Riordon 12 oct 2001
Sheila Riordon is a Quebec-based writer and editor.

The use of indicators to gauge human progress is common and well understood. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the Index of Leading Economic Indicators are two of the best-known examples. Yet, most of the widely cited indicators focus exclusively on economic activity, and even the most progressive of indicators fail to account for key issues of sustainability. The Wellbeing of Nations: A Country-by-Country Index of Quality of Life and the Environment addresses these shortcomings by surveying 180 countries using the Wellbeing Assessment. This unique method combines indicators of human wellbeing, such as health, population, and wealth, with those of environmental sustainability — water quality, species diversity, and energy use — to generate a more comprehensive picture of the state of our world.

The Wellbeing of Nations was launched on October 11, 2001 at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington DC. Sheila Riordon recently interviewed the book’s author, Robert Prescott-Allen.

What is The Wellbeing of Nations about and why did you write it?

The Wellbeing of Nations is about a new view of sustainable development: how to achieve it and how to measure it. I wrote it for three reasons. First, because I thought it would be the most effective way of showing the need to attain high levels of human and ecosystem wellbeing together. Second, to demonstrate the practicality and power of the tools that have been developed to measure wellbeing and sustainability. Third, to stimulate countries and communities to undertake their own assessments of human and ecosystem wellbeing. (Read more about the tools that make up the Wellbeing Assessment and how the method was developed.)

The four indices that make up the Wellbeing Assessment are a welcome addition to the indicators currently used to measure national wellbeing, building on such forerunners as the Human Development Index and Ecological Footprint. Do you think the Wellbeing Assessment will ever come to rival the GDP as a universal measurement against which we assess ourselves and our societies?

I doubt that GDP will be displaced. But I think it can and should be put in its place as a measure of the market economy, so it’s only used for that and not as a proxy for the general condition of society. I’m hoping that the Human Wellbeing Index will become the general measure of societal conditions, the Ecosystem Wellbeing Index the general measure of the state of the environment, and the Wellbeing Index a measurement of the two together. The fourth measurement, the Wellbeing/Stress Index — the ratio of human wellbeing to ecosystem stress — is an important management tool as well because it shows how effective our development efforts are in terms of their impacts on the environment. None of the indices is perfect, but if the four could be used as widely and cursed as roundly as the GDP is, that would be tremendous.

Are we not looking at the need for a massive change in thinking, and do you think the powers-that-be in the current economic system — as well as we, as individuals and collectively as a society — are prepared to make the necessary changes?

On our really good days, we’re trying to promote human wellbeing. Occasionally we have other really good days, and we try to promote ecosystem wellbeing. We’ve never tried to do both at the same time. I hesitate to use a phrase like paradigm shift because it’s overused, but it is in effect going to be a huge paradigm shift if we’re going to achieve human and ecosystem wellbeing together. To answer the second part of your question, I honestly don’t know if individuals and societies are willing to make the necessary changes, but at least the Wellbeing approach provides a means of visualizing the possible.

What were a few of the particularly startling or surprising findings of your research?

The most positive surprise was provided by the Wellbeing/Stress Index. It showed that countries with the same standard of living — such as Austria and Belgium, or Indonesia and China, or Brazil and Mexico — can have significantly different levels of impact on the environment. The fact that human wellbeing is not directly coupled to ecosystem stress gives grounds for hope. Bearing in mind that no country has consciously attempted to achieve a high level of human wellbeing for a low level of ecosystem stress, this means that if we were to attempt it deliberately and consistently, there’s a good chance we could succeed.

How do the September 11 terrorist attacks on US targets relate to the findings of your research, particularly since you use violence as an indicator of human wellbeing?

The atrocities of September 11 were a horrible reminder that no country can disengage from the world. The wellbeing of one nation is intertwined with the wellbeing of the others. The attacks also confirmed the danger of a narrow policy agenda. US President George W. Bush called the atrocities an attack on freedom. More broadly, they were an attack on wellbeing. To attain a high level of wellbeing all nations must pursue a much fuller agenda than they have to date because no dimension of wellbeing is an optional extra. Wealth, freedom, peace, justice, and a diverse, healthy, and productive environment interlock and reinforce each other. All must be sought with equal commitment.

Who do you intend the book for, and how do you envision it being used?

One obvious use of the book is as a teaching tool — for students in public policy, environmental studies, development studies, international relations, resource management — to get across all kinds of ideas about sustainability and how we measure complex things. But from the start, I intended the book to have a wider application than that: to influence the world outside academia where decisions are made that affect the lives of a country’s citizens. My hope, therefore, is that the book will influence politicians, their advisors, people in nongovernmental organizations, and development and environmental policy professionals to make the commitment to human and ecosystem wellbeing a national goal. A major step in this direction would be the preparation of regular national wellbeing assessments to build support for the goal, analyze how to achieve it, and track progress.

See methodology of measuring well being

and the well being indexes of 180 nations measured according to this methodology