Informed in its approach by studies from the Kingdom of Bhutan, which rode out the global economic downturn of 2008 by transferring from a monarchy to a constitutional monarchy, the UN uses Bhutan as a vehicle through which it seeks to promote an alternative way of viewing the world. One that is not driven predominantly by economic models. Bhutan operates on the philosophy that Gross National Happiness takes precedence over Gross National Product. In recent years, Bhutan has become the poster child for an alternative measure of prosperity, and the UN is promoting this new way of viewing the world. According to the UN, the Gross National Happiness Index "takes the view that sustainable development should take a holistic approach towards progress and give equal importance to non-economic aspects of well-being".
What the Happy Planet Index suggests is that we can't keep growing the GDP at the expense of the environment because something has to give.
But how do we measure success beyond GDP? Consider the Happy Planet Index, which ranks countries, and gives them a grade based on the extent that they "produce long, happy sustainable lives" for their citizens. The catch is that the overall score is based not just on the life expectancy, but on the ecological footprint as well. Countries where life expectancy is high but ecological footprint is also high, receive a low score.
In other words, it's a measure of sustainable well-being. Not economic well-being.
What the Happy Planet Index suggests is that we can't keep growing the GDP at the expense of the environment because something has to give. Its proponents argue: "A society that achieves wellbeing now, but consumes so much that the same resources are not available for future generations can hardly be considered successful."
Among Western nations, New Zealand ranks 28th out of 151 countries on the Happy Planet Index, and the United States polls in at 105th.
Since complex civilisations evolved thousands of years ago, the world has constantly been in a cyclical nature of rise and collapse, but this election year let's see if we can reject being sidelined by debates about the flag and other incidental matters, and move the debate towards issues that will affect our long-term survival as an ecologically — as well as economically — sustainable country.
• Dana Wensley has a PhD in law and ethics from King's College (London), and specialises in commenting on social and political issues.