At RealWorth, we try, perhaps not always successfully, to put political partisanship to one side (although a belief that investment delivers long-term social and economic value inevitably carries political implications). Our guiding principle is simpler than party alignment: we judge ideas based on whether they contribute to meaningful social renewal.

We look for a balance of long-term thinking with short-term accounting. We consider whether policies recognise that investment, particularly in people and places, is not a cost to be minimised, but a foundation for future prosperity. Ultimately, we judge whether there is a belief in social value: that economies should serve societies, not the other way round.

It is in this spirit that we view the leader of the Green Party, Zack Polanski’s, suggestion to replace Gross Domestic Product (GDP) with wellbeing as the primary national indicator of success - not as a political endorsement, but as a contribution to an important and overdue conversation.

The Problem With GDP

GDP has long been treated as the definitive measure of a nation’s progress. It tracks the total value of goods and services produced within a country, offering a clean, quantifiable figure that governments and markets alike can monitor.

However, a fundamental issue is that GDP measures outputs, not outcomes. It captures how much is being produced, but not whether that production creates changes in people's lives. For example, it counts expenditure on healthcare but does not capture whether people are healthier. It rises with reconstruction after disasters but ignores the losses incurred. It includes economic activity that may degrade the environment or deepen inequality, so long as it contributes to output.

Polanski’s suggestion is to replace, or at least supplement, GDP with wellbeing as a primary indicator. This would measure success across a broader set of indicators: physical and mental health, growing public services, and strengthening communities. Essentially, this means rather than measuring how much we produce, measuring how well we are living.

A National Wellbeing Framework

Growth should be a means to prosperity and social equity, not the goal itself. Yet policy has long been shaped by its impact on GDP, often prioritising expansion over redistribution. The result is a system that can generate growth (although this has remained stubbornly low, despite successive governments’ best intentions) but has given rise to ever increasing inequality.

Frameworks like the Treasury’s Green Book, designed to account for long-term value, often favour projects with the highest measurable returns, a system which critics argue often directs investment toward already prosperous areas, contributing to the country's significant north-south divide. Meanwhile, long-term investments such as preventative healthcare, early education, nationalisation of public transport, and the green transition are often delayed or deemed too costly.

A recognition of national wellbeing would help correct this by allowing governments, and indirectly, markets, to better recognise and account for the long-term benefits of social investment: healthier populations, stronger communities, and more resilient local economies. Further, it would acknowledge that prosperity is multidimensional: a country can grow economically, while its citizens can still feel insecure, unsafe, or disconnected from each other.

Challenges with Implementation

This new approach is easier said than done. Wellbeing is inherently harder to measure, and a broader set of indicators is less straightforward than a single figure like GDP. Further, it should be stated that economic metrics remain important. Productivity, employment, and output all play a role in assessing national performance.

However, this is not a binary choice, and the challenges are real, but not insurmountable. GDP can remain a useful indicator, just not the primary one. A combined approach allows for clear economic insight alongside a more complete understanding of societal progress.

Conclusion

By redefining success to include a focus on social value and social renewal, we create space for better decisions. Policies can be judged not just on their economic and fiscal impacts, but on their contribution to a more resilient, equitable, and sustainable society. In turn, we can make decisions that build a society that is better for everyone.