life balance, health, life satisfaction, safety, civic engagement, environment, community and education (OECD 2014a).
In an ongoing, non-representative online questionnaire, the OECD asks visitors
to their website (oecdbetterlifeindex.org) to weigh the importance of these
dimensions. Regardless of country or age group people put health, education,
life-satisfaction and work—life balance highest. Income is the second lowest and
community the least important. This of course is a snapshot of opinion of a small
group of people who are probably already interested in the issue or they would not
have ended up on the website. Also, this approach is strongly focused on today’s
experience of life and lacks indicators that could delve deeper into the sources of
what could sustain delivery on those dimensions in the future. The environment, for
example, is reduced to nothing more than clean water and clean air.
The OECD’s How’s Life? 2013 report has therefore added a long section on this
in which it discusses how measuring social, environmental, human and economic
capital stocks is essential to securing quality of life in the future (OECD 2013b).
Yet, this economic perspective leaves one with the impression of a basic collection
of input factors rather than a systemic understanding of how the various dimensions
relate to each other and co-develop as embedded systems. This is the strength of the
Bhutanese approach, with its focus on values and culture.
Maybe the most innovative feature of the GNH strategy, however, is the fact that
the survey results inform the core of government practice. Five-year policy plans
respond to findings that can be differentiated by region, gender, profession, age
group, etc., to identify which interventions and resource allocations are important to
support those reporting the least happiness (Ura et al. 2012: 8–11). They are formulated in multilevel, multi-stakeholder processes and local consultations while
each new law is evaluated in terms of its impacts on GNH dimensions and indicators. Important strategy plans include complete electrification, tripling
hydro-power generation, improved independence in food provision, 100 % organic
agriculture, a low ecological footprint, economic diversification, reduction in the
use of fossil fuels for transport and the development of sustainable expensive
tourism (Bertelsmann Stiftung 2013: 61–83; Ura et al. 2012: 1–15). All of these
strategies are assessed from the holistic GNH view.
Since Bhutan’s surveys have only been done twice to date, clear trends within
these metrics are hard to map. But on conventional measurement schemes its
development is better than other South Asian and comparable states worldwide in
terms of poverty reduction, improving HDI rates, constant economic growth and
successful environmental protection. The prior GNH framework has also guided a
stable and still ongoing transition since the 1970s that involved moving from an
absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy and finally into a constitutional
democracy. This process was initiated by the fourth king and finished by Jigme
Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck, the fifth and current monarch in 2008, when a widely
discussed constitution was signed into law and first elections were held.
Since the 1980s, Bhutan’s life expectancy has gone up by 20 years, its birth rate
has gone down from 6.55 to 2.4 children per woman, infant mortality has halved
and years spent in school have gone up by seven to the OECD average of 11 years.
4.3 Pioneering Governments: Beyond GDP Measures as Development Frames
135
Précédent

- 153/201

Suivant