Talk:Genuine progress indicator

If you have a problem with it, I can recreate it under another name. SweetLittleFluffyThing

Article was created by banned user, but subsequently rewritten and therefore not deleted, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Genuine Progress Indicator.

Maliranta and Määttänen

"Finnish economists Mika Maliranta and Niku Määttänen write that the problem of alternative development indexes is their attempt to combine things that are incommensurable. It is hard to say what they exactly indicate and difficult to make decisions based on them. They can be compared to an indicator that shows the mean of a car's velocity and the amount of fuel left."

The paragraph states a general problem with "alternative development indexes" as perceived by Maliranta and Määttänen. As GDP also combines incommensurable things, the critique also applies to GDP. In the referenced article, there is no justification for the claim, and the section also wanders off topic.

"According to polls, happiness in certain countries has reached its peak already in the 1970s. Maliranta and Määttänen say that people in such countries undoubtedly perceived themselves as being happy already in the 1970s, but if the people of today suddenly should find themselves in that period, most of them would want to return to the present as desperately as many Cubans now attempt to emigrate to the United States regardless of the fact that the distribution of wealth is more equitable in Cuba."

References to polls missing. The factual claim of "most would want" is not supported by any evidence, and has little relevance for GPI. The fictional example is dubious and debatable.

"They add that it indeed seems as if the economy has to grow in order for the people to even remain as happy as they are at present. In Japan, for example, the degree of happiness expressed by the citizens in polls has been declining since the early 1990s, the period when Japan's economic growth stagnated."

The above is the view of the authors expressed in a newspaper opinion piece. The Japan example has problems with the logic of the argument: In this special case, measured happiness, GPI and GDP all have declined. The core of GPI debate is that in those countries where GDP has increased, well-being, measured using GPI, has often declined, and GDP apparently does not measure well development.

As the section is based on debatable opinions of two economists, and does not provide substantial critique on GPI, the section could be removed. 91.152.88.69 (talk) 14:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not agree with economists, you have my sympathies, but that is not a reason to remove sourced content from an article which is currently weakly sourced, or to label it as misleading.

I'm baffled by your objection to comparisons of incommensurable quantities. GDP measures are measures of GDP - they all have the same denominator, a $ or € sign - which is in stark contrast to the comparisons of chalk & cheese (with implicit judgements of relative values & weights) so often found in "alternative" metrics. bobrayner (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The comment was not about agreeing or not with the opinions of two economists; it was about the point that the referenced text contains only unsubstantiated opinions, in this case of two economists. The reference is not a refereed article, it is a short newspaper opinion piece in reader's "letters to the editor" section, written in Finnish. The reference is used in a way that gives a non-Finnish reader the impression that there would have been additional support for the claims in the original article; instead it simply copies the content of the original opinion piece. Because of this, the text can be misleading.

If you are baffled by the fact that GDP measures incommensurable quantities, it may help to check how constant/real GDP is actually computed and how price indexes are used. We rarely talk about absolute GDP; instead, we talk about GDP changes across time. A common error by non-economists is to assume that real GDP is an aggregate sum of money values. This is not the case. The components of GDP are weighted using a very complex and hierarchical aggregation system that results in estimates on consumer price indexes for the various product and service categories (e.g. Golden Delicious apples, apples, fruit, food). In the US, the weights used to be adjusted every ten years and now they are adjusted annually. Chalk and cheese are, indeed, made commensurable and added in GDP, after they are grouped into abstract categories (based on someone's judgments about where they belong) and after their values are adjusted for the estimated price changes. No difference between GDP and GPI here. Both collapse multi-dimensional time-series data into a weighted single-dimensional indicator.

The difference is that GPI also includes some non-market consumption/production and economic effects that are unaccounted for in national accounts and GDP calculations. It also tags some "income" as "cost." The judgments of values and weights can in most cases be made as "objectively" as the weighting and imputing of GDP components, using more or less the same statistical methods. Of course, whether you count, for example, the costs of "crime," "war," or "pollution" positive or negative may depend on how you earn your living. In this sense, "values" enter the equation. This, again, is no different from what happens in GDP. Some things are counted, some not, and different countries use different systems (e.g., in the US illegal goods and services are not counted, whereas imputed incomes from owner-occupied houses are).91.152.88.69 (talk) 23:38, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Finnish economists Mika Maliranta and Niku Määttänen write that the problem of alternative development indexes is their attempt to combine things that are incommensurable. It is hard to say what they exactly indicate and difficult to make decisions based on them. They can be compared to an indicator that shows the mean of a car's velocity and the amount of fuel left." That sound like an indicator to predict how far you car is going at the the current rate. Witch would be very nice :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthias Remes (talk • contribs) 07:55, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Activists

Which Scandinavian nations are activists? All or just some? Is it possible to be a little more specific? To mention them one by one instead?

How to monetize the costs?

There is no explanation of how the various costs are monetized. A marriage is nice, but how much is it worth in $? And what about people who say marriage is not nice? 151.197.244.192 (talk) 04:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

a concept in green economics and welfare economics

Surely not only in crazy "economics" ... don't the Austrian measures like GPP/PPR/GPO count? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.73.167.157 (talk) 03:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Germany and Ireland could be the top 2 countries by Geniune progress indicator?

Germany has the highest export in Europe, second largest exporter in the world, especially the renewable energy, while Ireland has the highest export ratio in the developed world and sustainable high growth rate even it is highly developed.219.151.158.84 (talk) 08:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Income" vs. "capital depletion"

What the heck? People who don't understand economics talk about consumption vs capital accretion as if those where fungible entities. Like, I have 10 units of production and I can consume 8 and invest 2 or I can consume 9 and invest 1. This shows a very naive way of looking at economics, as capital investment might very occasionally by limited by investment funds, but the vast majority of the time, capital investment will be limited by market availability. A more reasonable model is that you actually increase capital production when production for consumption goes up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.72.73 (talk) 23:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Utah (USA) has a GPI study now (since January 2011)

I would like to develop the GPI article by adding the main findings and methodological contributions of the Utah study. BerikG (talk) 04:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC) BerikG[reply]

results/rankings?

So is there no country list with GPI? All the other econ/development metrics: HDI, HPI, Gini coeff, et al have a section or link for the findings or results, has no one ever bothered to measure nations on a large scale with GPI or is it just not on wiki?

108.55.82.13 (talk) 16:31, 31 January 2014 (UTC) tunafizzle[reply]

The GPI is more of a general idea - or a rejection of existing economic measures - rather than a precise and universally agreed metric. This means that we don't have a single definitive list of GPIs for each country, although I'm sure a few commentators will have their own ideas about what numbers should go into a GPI. bobrayner (talk) 17:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate external links

The external links section contained a number of inappropriate links (see WP:ELNO). They might make good sources to support article content so I've moved them here:

Joja lozzo 03:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ready for some updates!

I would like to work on this page for a college project. There are many more US states that have implemented the GPI along with a few follow-up reports. I'd like to add more details in the US section. Also, as I come across other countries' use of the indicator, I'd like to add these as well. I will add links to appropriate pages for things like how to understand better the reasons why it is hard to value things we don't buy at the store (i.e. life, clean water) and how we find ways to do it. I hope that page exists! Any input is appreciated and constructive criticism accepted. MeetingoftheMinds (talk) 01:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@MeetingoftheMinds: Your proposed changes here look pretty good. I've got a few comments:
- It's probably easier to read without state abbreviations (e.g. Maryland can just be spelled out). Also we're in the "Development in the US" section, so it's likely not necessary to specify "the US state of Maryland". Instead I'd recommend linking to Maryland and Vermont in text.
- "In 2009 the US state..." This sentence includes a relatively lengthy quote which is probably better just summarized, as it isn't particularly noteworthy or evocative.
- We mention Maryland chose GPI as a metric, do we know what other metrics they considered and rejected?
- Great Recession can also be linked in prose, likewise Gross state product
- I'm not quite sure what "social well-being has stagnated with any values added being cancelled out by costs deducted, and environmental indicators, while improving slightly, are always considered costs" means.
I think once you've finalized the references and made some of the changes I've suggested above this will be a great addition to the article. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Micro Level

Anyone able to figure out how to calculate, then increase, one's home/apartment and/or business GPI score? TOO, it would also be helpful for people looking to move to an area without an opportunity so visit the area before signing a rental/lease/vacation/retirement/university/college/dorm room agreement. I don't mean a city, county/prefecture, or small "s" (sub-federal) state/province, I mean a building lot or a particular city block. Eg, flowers are nice, but they decrease available water and don't do anything to stop noise, sight, or air pollution at the balcony of a house condemned to overlook a national road/freeway/throughway/turn-pike. 108.13.17.82 (talk) 03:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Genuine progress indicator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Genuine progress indicator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:02, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genuine progress indicator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402150106/http://www.nber.org/~rosenbla/econ302/lecture/GPI-GDP/gpi1999.pdf to http://www.nber.org/~rosenbla/econ302/lecture/GPI-GDP/gpi1999.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:39, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of criticism

Quote: "GDP is relatively straightforward to measure compared to GPI. Competing measures like GPI define well-being, which are arguably impossible to define. " So many things wrong with this last sentence. GPI is conceptually a straightforward correction to GDP. An increase in car accidents and a resulting increase in insurance premiums, growth of insurance companies and an increase in repair shops -- and a resulting increase in GDP -- is not a sign of a functional economy. It's a sign of a badly broken society. Destructive activities, which have measurable costs, are NOT productive. Gpi-v2 (talk) 21:40, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to say almost exactly this. Subtracting the cost of (environmental) depreciation is fairly straightforward and not per se any more "incommensurable" than consumption and gross investment. I could reasonably see criticism with regard to the specific methodology used (fixed return on the value of assets like streets), but what's levied in the criticism section is not particularly substantive.Jokojis (talk) 00:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]