’Gross National Happiness’ : Romantic dream or serious alternative?

It has been conclusive shown that the paradigm of economic growth, and more specifically,of GDP, is seriously flawed and is providing incentives for socially as well as ecologicallyunsustainable systems (Stiglitz, Sen & Fitoussi 2009, Fioramonti 2017). However, thealternative measurement frameworks that have been suggested have, with some, mostlylocal or regional exceptions, had little impact on policy structure. Largelly, they haveprovided indexes, which enthusiasts have shared in social media, but where impact in actualpolicy making have been marginal. In this paper, the focus will be on the one exception:Bhutan, where the concept of ’Gross National Happiness’, GNH, was coined more than fourdecades ago, but was not operationalized as a policy tool until in the 2000s (Göpel 2016).Bhutan, and the concept of GNH, has been highlighted in a number of contexts such asbiodiversity, carbon neutrality, as well as social dimensions. The question, however, is towhat extent the experience of Bhutan is relevant for industrialized countries. For Bhutan,the process was not about a transition from a fossil-fueled economy, but about having achoice of what direction the country’s development should take (McDonald 2010). Still, theindicators and that have been developed as part of the GNH framework are familliar tothose that work with sustainability indicators in general, with some notable exceptions –such as the emphasis on culture, heritage and spiritual dimensions (Brooks 2013). In thispresentation, the ambition is to discuss the challenges and possibilities of the GNH concept,and to what extent its possible to implement aspects of GNH in industrial/post-industrialcapitalist economies