You are not logged in.

Is the Genuine Progress Indicator really genuine? Considering well-being impacts of exports and imports

Clarke, Matthew 2007, Is the Genuine Progress Indicator really genuine? Considering well-being impacts of exports and imports, International journal of environment, workplace and employment, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 91-102, doi: 10.1504/IJEWE.2007.017877.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Is the Genuine Progress Indicator really genuine? Considering well-being impacts of exports and imports
Author(s) Clarke, Matthew
Journal name International journal of environment, workplace and employment
Volume number 3
Issue number 2
Start page 91
End page 102
Publisher Inderscience Publishers
Place of publication Olney, England
Publication date 2007
ISSN 1741-8437
Keyword(s) exports
genuine Progress Indicator
GPI
imports
open economy
pollution havens
well-being
Gross National Income
GNI
Gross Domestic Product
GDP
environmental valuation
natural capital
ecosystem services
national welfare
Summary The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) is estimated as if nations operate within a closed economy. Therefore, in terms of coverage, the GPI is most analogous to Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Indeed, within the relevant literature, these two indicators are most often contrasted. However, consideration should be given to adapting the GPI, so it has more in common with Gross National Income (GNI). As with GDP, the GPI is concerned only with a particular physical location. Yet, it may be more effective if the GPI was freed from these physical boundaries in a similar manner to GNI. The GPI should be concerned more with the 'ownership' of the costs and benefits associated with economic growth than with the 'location' of those costs and benefits. Those that derive the most benefit from exploitation of the environment are often physically removed from the location of that damage. The GPI does not consider the net consumers of the negative externalities of environmental costs, merely the producers. Currently, however, the structure of the GPI allows a nation to enjoy, without penalty, the benefits of importing goods from countries which bear a disproportionately large cost of environmental degradation. This results in an overstatement of the real progress experienced by the county importing 'dirty goods'. This paper will investigate how certain GPI adjustments may be adapted to overcome this present shortcoming. However, the purpose of this paper is not only to empirically implement this new approach, but also to stimulate debate as to its potential merit.
Language eng
DOI 10.1504/IJEWE.2007.017877
Field of Research 140202 Economic Development and Growth
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice ©2004-2006, Inderscience Enterprises Limited
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30007857

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of International and Political Studies
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 7 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 850 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 29 Sep 2008, 08:56:53 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.