Human Progress & Welfare Need To Go Beyond GDp: UN

Dhurjati Mukherjee

The United Nations recent proposal to move beyond gross domestic product (GDP) is a significant step that economic orthodoxy has governed policy making since the Second World War. In its significant report titled ‘A Compass for Progress for People and Planet’, the UN has evaluated the world has dangerously depended on an index that didn’t really project human progress in totality.

The dominance of GDP emerged in the 1930s and was solidified in post-war international order. It became the universal yardstick of measuring a nation’s performance as it offered a simple measure of economic output. In fact, experts opine this has been a narrow and incorrect conception of collective prosperity. GDP records the value of goods and services produced within an economy and doesn’t reveal how wealth is distributed, whether growth improves lives or whether economic activity is destroying the foundations on which future prosperity depends. Moreover, in calculating GDP, the huge loss per annum due to environmental degradation is not calculated and taken into consideration.

The long-awaited transformation in GDP index has come at an opportune time with an attempt to correct the distortions. The 31 indicators encompass health, education, subjective well-being, social cohesion, inequality, poverty and greenhouse gas emissions among others. They offer a broader assessment of whether societies are delivering meaningful progress, and this has great relevance for Third World countries.

For India, the implications are considerable as it claims to be the fastest-growing economy with a huge population and workforce. However, it continues to struggle with air pollution, public health outcomes, educational quality, gender disparities, widening disparity in incomes etc. China, on the other hand, despite serious concerns regarding political freedom and human rights, performs substantially better across the several indicators. In fact, China’s technical education is of a high standard which is reflected in its manufacturing capacity. This economic growth can’t be treated as an end in itself and the effects of growth need to be critically analysed.

Keeping in view economic challenges and transformation taking place globally, it’s not just calculating GDP from present standpoint but considering welfare objectives of the larger population. Well-known economist Prof. Thomas Piketty recently spoke of Global Justice Project (GJP) wherein the starting point is aspiration in Global South, particularly in India, to reach the same level of prosperity as the Global North. Said he: “we must ban fossil fuels and adopt low-carbon energy,” which needs to be a steady step. This means enormous investments taking place in the next two-three decades in wind turbines, solar panels etc.

He pointed out “we are calling for a global wealth tax rising to 20% a year on billionaires as a component towards a world sovereign fund for these changes with 10% of the world’s capital stock, a global income tax and a world wealth tax, each impacting 1% of the world population”. Further “we are better off with 1.80 C and 5000 euros a month rather than having 10,000 euros and 40 C hotter. Once you cross 30C, particularly in a country like India, you are truly heading towards climate catastrophe – having more income then with such life conditions is hardly very appealing”.

The UN report seeks to solve development and climate challenges for which there is a need to move from global plutocracy to global democracy. Piketty referred to 2024 G-20 summit where Brazil and South Africa pushed for a global wealth tax and wanted India’s support so that Global South coalition for economic and climate justice becomes very strong for Western nations to resist. Global South must create a platform to support these goals and he said: “Our work finds technically and economically these changes bring everyone shared prosperity which are realistic – they are a matter of political will”.

Not just Piketty but many other economists have harped on bringing down inequality and climate disasters. The present GDP doesn’t reflect the welfare aspect or to put it differently, the living conditions of the majority. GDP may be named gross performance indicator (GPI) wherein the conditions of majority are reflected and progress made therein. Similarly, the UN proposal is significant as it doesn’t diminish economic expansion but takes a holistic view of prosperity, judged from the perspective of equitable, sustainable development and capable of improving masses’ lives.

For populous countries like India, the advice has come at an opportune time to reorient strategies, keeping in view both demands and concerns of the majority, which has to struggle for a living. Recall, Mahatma Gandhi had repeatedly insisted upon humans being as a center of planning and development, for development to reach the last man. Achieving socio-economic expansion of a group of businessmen doesn’t project real progress of any country.

Humanity must survive in a somewhat dignified manner and not just say 15 or 20% of the population. Prosperity has to reach all segments, and true inclusiveness must become a part of planning and development process. The rural sector, where majority of India’s population lives and works must be the focus of attention and its transformation needs top priority with adequate financial support from both Centre and states.

Socio-economic transformation requires making development objectives a key priority. Growth must be inclusive, judicious and sustainable and India must pursue this model in action. Moreover, economic governance must be made efficient, and the Centre must enlarge the States’ role. However, it doesn’t appear to be the case with the ruling BJP determined not only to have a Congress-mukt India, but to have double-engine governments, an alignment which would accelerate state development.

The recent case being that of West Bengal. The TMC government was shown the door at the hustings, with Mamata Banerjee losing the state elections. It was not only the anti-incumbency factor, but that people voiced their anger against rampant corruption, false promises and joblessness, among others. At the same time, the BJP’s Hindutva appeal helped the party and is likely to continue doing so.

Modi’s brand of nationalism incidentally has strengthened the party, overshadowing the Congress’ Nyay Path, which presents ‘nationalism’ as positive, inclusive and genuine while rejecting the BJP-RSS version as pseudo-nationalism. Be that as it may, would it deliver meaningful progress for the masses? Is air pollution, public health, educational quality, gender disparities, widening disparity in incomes etc, an issue at all? Human progress must matter and ruling dispensations would do well to go beyond GDP and strive for UN indicators.---INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

New Delhi

22 June 2026