Thought-Factory.net Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion philosophy.com Junk for code
hegel
"When philosophy paints its grey in grey then has a shape of life grown old. By philosophy's grey in grey it cannot be rejuvenated but only understood. The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of dusk." -- G.W.F. Hegel, 'Preface', Philosophy of Right.
RECENT ENTRIES
SEARCH
ARCHIVES
Library
Links - weblogs
Links - Political Rationalities
Links - Resources: Philosophy
Public Discussion
Resources
Cafe Philosophy
Philosophy Centres
Links - Resources: Other
Links - Web Connections
Other
www.thought-factory.net
'Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainity and agitation distinquish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones ... All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned.' Marx

wellbeing and progress « Previous | |Next »
June 14, 2007

Richard Eckersley, Australia 2 Fellow is part of a research project on wellbeing and economic growth. He is associated with the Wellbeing Manifesto and author of Well and Good. So his material picks up on this earlier post.

He questions the conventional view that prioritises economic growth as the basis for improving quality of life. The concept of material progress regards economic growth as paramount because it creates the wealth necessary to increase personal freedoms and opportunities, and to meet community needs and national goals, including addressing social problems. The equation is one of more with better.

Eckersley asks:

Is it enough to say that, because we are growing richer and living longer, life is getting better? Wealth and health are the main indicators by which we judge progress, and by these measures Australia, and most of the rest of the world, are making good progress. So is all well and good? Not exactly. There is growing evidence that standard of living is not the same as quality of life, and that how well we live is not just a matter of how long we live, especially in rich nations such as Australia.

His argument is that over the past several decades, we have witnessed a profound loss of faith in a future constructed around notions of material progress, economic growth and scientific and technological fixes to the challenges we face. Our lifestyles have come adrift from our values. Consequently, we ought to think less in terms of a ‘wealth producing economy’ and more about a ‘health producing society’, where health is defined as total wellbeing: physical, mental, social, and spiritual.

We need different criteria than GDP and life expectancy. If the goal of progress is to improve quality of life, not just standard of living - or how well we live, not just how long - then we need better measures of quality of life. There seems to be a period in which economic growth (as conventionally measured) brings about an improvement in quality of life, but only up to a point - the threshold point - beyond which, if there is more economic growth, quality of life may begin to deteriorate.

Eckresley says the incoherence that underlies the contemporary ‘official story’ of life in Australia, and which emerges from the research literature, can be expressed in a series of questions and their answers:

1. Is increased material wealth, measured as growth in GDP, the top priority of government? Yes. This is explicit in statements by prime ministers and implicit in the emphasis of government policy.
2. Is increased wealth the top priority of individual Australians? No. Surveys consistently show that prosperity ranks in importance well behind things like family and security.
3. Can the pursuit of economic growth harm civil society? Yes, when it is given priority over other goals. The research shows there is common perception that too much change, greed and materialism – all associated with the push for growth - are contributing to social problems and the loss of a sense of community.
4. Can increased wealth harm personal health and well-being? Yes, when becoming richer takes precedence over other aspects of life. Both public opinion and scientific research show that wealth is a poor predictor of happiness and the desire for riches can be detrimental to well-being.
5. Are current patterns of economic growth environmentally sustainable? No. The overwhelming weight of evidence and expert opinion is that economic growth, as currently defined and derived, is damaging the earth’s natural environment.
He says that beneath the satisfaction of everyday life, Australians are looking for a different paradigm, a new story to define who they are and where they want to go. Instead of one narrowly focused on material progress, they want a coherent vision that expresses a better balance between economic welfare, social equity and environmental sustainability, a vision that reflects the reality that these are, ultimately, inextricably linked.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 7:28 PM |