Redefine value

Global wealth has surged, with world GDP growing from $4.5 trillion to over $100 trillion in 50 years, boosting life expectancy and comfort worldwide. However, these benefits are not shared equally. The richest 10 per cent of the world population owns 76 per cent of global wealth, while the poorest half of the population holds just 2 per cent. Additionally, increasing wealth above needs for a decent life does not always increase happiness. Loneliness, for instance, is a growing epidemic, affecting about 20 per cent of older adults in places like China, Europe, Latin America and the US. Meanwhile, we are pushing our planet to its limits. For instance, global land degradation is increasing, impacting not just livelihoods but the ability of people to put food on the table. If more wealth does not guarantee more well-being, why prioritize economic growth?

Forests are one example of how we put economic value before other values. Forests support biodiversity, as well as human health and well-being. However, in some places, deforested land is valued up to 7.5 times more than forested land, leading to strong economic pressure on forests and to deforestation. This can only happen because we tend to value our forests for their productivity while overlooking their value for providing space for biodiversity to thrive and people to enjoy.

Similarly, our own value is often tied to our productivity, too. Income is an indicator of social status, creating differences in how a person is treated by others. Work that does not create immediate financial benefits but has a high social value, such as nursing or social work, is often underpaid. The undervaluing of care work is especially pronounced when it is domestic work, such as laundry, cooking and caring for children or the elderly. This labour disproportionately falls on women and girls, who perform about 12.5 billion hours of unpaid care work daily, which would be worth over $10 trillion per year if paid at minimum wage.

We need to find ways to consider and balance many different values, looking beyond economic indicators. For instance, instead of measuring progress predominantly by economic output and consumption, we could assess trends in happiness or resilience to guide our decision-making. One example of this is the use of the Gross National Happiness (GNH) index in Bhutan. It tracks factors like health, psychological well-being and ecological diversity and resilience, among others, and uses those to shape policies and decision-making. For instance, Bhutan was quite successful in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic with a focus on public health and social support over economic indicators in its response – a strategy guided by the GNH approach.

We can also create systems that recognize non-economic values. Forests, for example, offer far more than just timber and land – they are vital to sustaining biodiversity and well-being. They absorb an estimated net 7.6 billion tonnes of CO2 annually, 1.5 times the annual emissions of the US.

Additionally, spending time in forests or other green spaces is associated with lower blood pressure and reduced anxiety and depression. In countries like Canada, New Zealand and Japan, doctors even give out “green prescriptions” to promote health by spending time in nature.

Instead of a world driven by attempts to continuously grow the economy, we can create one that prioritizes a diverse set of values such as people’s happiness and environmental health where we focus more on compassion and care, aiming for equal opportunities for all, so everyone has the chance to lead a life of dignity and fulfillment, in harmony with a healthy planet. To do this, we will need to use resources sustainably and live within our environmental and planetary means. As such, we can redefine what “value” means for us, so in the end, we can better prioritize those things that truly secure the well-being of the planet as a whole.