Happiness and GDP

The Legault government is obsessed with the idea of ​​eliminating, within 15 years, the gap between the real GDP per capita of Quebec and that of Ontario1. Should this really be one of our priority national objectives?


Let’s talk about it a bit.

First of all, it must be said that the GDP (gross domestic product) is an old measure whose use is declining almost everywhere in the world. Its use is declining because it is essentially a silent indicator of activity as to the effects of that same activity on the environment, health…or people’s happiness. It is a “flow indicator”, nothing more.

Some 25 centuries ago, Aristotle already distinguished between economy (oikonomia) – the search for balance in the home – and chrematistics (chrèmatistikos) – the search for profit for profit’s sake. To focus only on GDP is to err on the side of chrematistics.

Does chrematistics bring happiness?

For 10 years now, the Gallup polling firm has been measuring people’s perception of happiness in almost every country in the world.

Only one of the 15 happiest countries according to its World Happiness Report, Germany, is also in the top 15 countries for GDP. A good GDP therefore does not seem to bring happiness.

So if not GDP, what welfare indicator should we use?

Amartya Sen, Indian economist and philosopher, Nobel laureate in economics and father of the “school of abilities”. For him, real development is increasing our capacity to act, individually and collectively.

A person might be rich, but if he is disabled and has no access to anything because the world around him is not suited to his needs, he and his country would be at the bottom of the development ladder.

If an Ontarian must devote a large part of his income to paying for daycare for his little ones, university tuition for the older ones and electricity, he may well, at the start, “have more money in his pocket he has less leeway, less “ability” than a Quebecer (which is why many Ontarians move from Ottawa to Gatineau).2

It was Sen’s work that led to the development of the Human Development Index (HDI), published annually by the UN. This index is made up of several data: life expectancy, education and GDP in purchasing power parity.

When comparing the list of the top 15 countries for GDP and, this time, for HDI, only Germany (again!) is among the two. No, GDP does not mean well-being and perhaps not even “development”.

Several countries, universities and research centers have proposed indices that are more likely to reflect the real challenges facing societies: the Genuine Progress Indicator, the Bhutan version of the Gross National Happiness Index, the well-being index of the OECD, etc. In short, the government of Quebec could use much more interesting indicators than the GDP, and they exist, especially here.

Last year, the G15+ collective, a group of economic, trade union and environmental organizations, undertook a vast project to choose indicators that would make it possible to go beyond indicators of wealth or unemployment.3 to judge the evolution of Quebec: number of low-income people, wage gap between men and women, recycled materials, wastewater treatment, household debt, GDP, etc.

When a mayor, a minister, a prime minister, a state, determines an objective, the whole administrative machine is set in motion to enable him to achieve it. We spend money, we establish programs, we give grants, all of this based on the indicators chosen, because they are the ones that will ultimately determine the success or failure of the government.

The choice of indicators is not at all, but not at all, theoretical. The actions to be taken to change the HDI or even the indicators chosen by the G15+ are not necessarily the same as if we want to improve our GDP.

To move the GDP and catch up with Ontario, the government will seek to increase productivity, increase working hours, perhaps increase training for workers, invest in research and development, perhaps reduce regulations, etc. .

To improve the Quebec indicators determined by the G15+, the government should invest in health, the environment, education or even in the fight against inequalities, an element at the heart of Quebec’s work. The choice of the target is therefore crucial.

Our national objective must go beyond the idea of ​​increasing economic activity and instead put the economy at the service of the common good, thus aiming more at the well-being, if not the happiness of people.

In 2016, the magazine News wondered if the happiness gene was Quebecois, because, according to a survey, we were the second happiest people in the world.4 GDP will not help us to come first. Indicators like those proposed by the G15+, yes.


source site-58