Some members of the commission believe that the financial crisis and the recession have made a broadening of official statistics more urgent. They think there might have been less euphoria had financial markets and policymakers been less fixated on GDP. That seems far-fetched. Stockmarket indices, soaring house prices and low inflation surely did more to feed bankers’ and borrowers’ exaggerated sense of well-being.

Broadening official statistics is a good idea in its own right. Some countries have already started—notably, tiny Bhutan. There are pitfalls, though. The report justifies wider measures of well-being partly by noting that the public must have trust in official statistics. Quite so; which makes it all the more important that the statisticians are independent of government. The thought of grinning politicians telling people how happy they are is truly Orwellian. Another risk is that a proliferation of measures could be a gift to interest groups, letting them pick numbers that amplify their misery in order to demand a bigger share of the national pie. But these are early days. Meanwhile, get measuring.

第二部分，委员会转向“生活质量”的评判标准。这些标准试图通过超越一项单一的经济资源的指令来抓住富有。其中一项为评定人们的主观意义上的富有——它被划分为对生活总体上的评价（一项“生活阶梯”的得分）和时时刻刻积极和消极情绪的流动。多年以来，研究人员因为一个显而易见的矛盾而钻了牛角尖：持续增长的收入并不会让人们长时间里感觉更幸福。实际上，超越收入，对主观幸福感能起作用的因素，从健康、婚姻状况和年龄到对腐化的洞察力受到了更多的研究。失业的人报出较低的得分，即使计算时包括了他们较低的收入。失业远比钱包对人的打击严重。

第三部分，报道测试了未来一代的富有感。当今活着的人将要经历不可再利用和其他自然资源、机器、建筑物和社会机构的一批货物。他们孩子的人身资本（技能等等）将依靠今天在教育和研究上的投资。假如未来的一代能至少和今天的人一样富有的话，经济互动才能够持续下去。想要找到单一的指标来掌握报道里囊括的全部这些似乎太过雄心勃勃了。那听起来不错。从一个方面来看，统计学家们不得不对环境和信的建筑物的相对价值进行估算，而且，不仅仅是当今的环境和建筑物，还应该是多年以后的。可能，参照广泛的数据是比较明智的。

上一页  [1] [2] [3] [4] 下一页