IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v162y2022i1d10.1007_s11205-021-02832-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting the Sustainable Economic Welfare Growth in China: Provincial Assessment Based on the ISEW

Author

Listed:
  • Xincheng Zhu

    (Chongqing University)

  • Yulin Liu

    (Chongqing University)

  • Xin Fang

    (Hawaii Pacific University)

Abstract

Traditional GDP calculations exclude the ecological environment and natural resource depletion, arguing that sustained economic growth can lead to sustained welfare improvements. The Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW) is a monetary measure of sustainability and economic welfare aimed at overcoming some of the limitations of GDP. Given the significant impact of industrial development, the demographic composition, and the balance of payments in economic growth and sustainable economic well-being, we propose an improved ISEW method (SE-ISEW), where the structural index is used instead of the Atkinson index as a measure of structural imbalance. This study calculates and compares the ISEW and SE-ISEW for 30 provinces in mainland China from 1997 to 2017 and discusses highly controversial methodological assumptions related to income inequality, long-term environmental damage, and nonrenewable energy consumption. Findings show that China's GDP is larger than ISEW and SE-ISEW respectively. Moreover, the “relative threshold effect”—increases in social welfare are slower than the expansion of economic scale—has been found in many provinces. In the case of rapid economic growth, the gap between GDP and ISEW or SE-ISEW has increased over time. This study reveals an unbalanced development of China's economic growth and sustainable welfare growth and provides a new way of thinking about structural transformation.

Suggested Citation

  • Xincheng Zhu & Yulin Liu & Xin Fang, 2022. "Revisiting the Sustainable Economic Welfare Growth in China: Provincial Assessment Based on the ISEW," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 279-306, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:162:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11205-021-02832-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-021-02832-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-021-02832-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-021-02832-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yi Wen & Jing Wu, 2019. "Withstanding the Great Recession Like China," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 87(2), pages 138-182, March.
    2. Posner, Stephen M. & Costanza, Robert, 2011. "A summary of ISEW and GPI studies at multiple scales and new estimates for Baltimore City, Baltimore County, and the State of Maryland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1972-1980, September.
    3. Costanza, Robert & Erickson, Jon & Fligger, Karen & Adams, Alan & Adams, Christian & Altschuler, Ben & Balter, Stephanie & Fisher, Brendan & Hike, Jessica & Kelly, Joe, 2004. "Estimates of the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) for Vermont, Chittenden County and Burlington, from 1950 to 2000," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 139-155, November.
    4. Brent Bleys, 2013. "The Regional Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare for Flanders, Belgium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-28, February.
    5. Campagne, Benoît & Poissonnier, Aurélien, 2018. "Structural reforms in DSGE models: Output gains but welfare losses," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 397-421.
    6. William D. Nordhaus & James Tobin, 1973. "Is Growth Obsolete?," NBER Chapters, in: The Measurement of Economic and Social Performance, pages 509-564, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Suman Ghosh & Ravi Kanbur, 2008. "Male wages and female welfare: private markets, public goods, and intrahousehold inequality," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(1), pages 42-56, January.
    8. Howarth, Richard B. & Kennedy, Kevin, 2016. "Economic growth, inequality, and well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 231-236.
    9. O'Mahony, Tadhg & Escardó-Serra, Paula & Dufour, Javier, 2018. "Revisiting ISEW Valuation Approaches: The Case of Spain Including the Costs of Energy Depletion and of Climate Change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 292-303.
    10. Olivier Blanchard & Francesco Giavazzi, 2006. "Rebalancing Growth in China: A Three‐Handed Approach," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20, August.
    11. Syrovátka, Miroslav & Schlossarek, Martin, 2019. "Measuring development with inequality: How (should) aggregate indicators of development account for inequality?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Hui Jin & Xinyi Qian & Tachia Chin & Hejie Zhang, 2020. "A Global Assessment of Sustainable Development Based on Modification of the Human Development Index via the Entropy Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    13. Jackson, Tim, 2019. "The Post-growth Challenge: Secular Stagnation, Inequality and the Limits to Growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 236-246.
    14. Saraceno, Chiara, 2019. "Retrenching, recalibrating, pre-distributing. The welfare state facing old and new inequalities," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 35-41.
    15. Bleys, Brent & Whitby, Alistair, 2015. "Barriers and opportunities for alternative measures of economic welfare," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 162-172.
    16. Max-Neef, Manfred, 1995. "Economic growth and quality of life: a threshold hypothesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 115-118, November.
    17. Stockhammer, Engelbert & Hochreiter, Harald & Obermayr, Bernhard & Steiner, Klaus, 1997. "The index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) as an alternative to GDP in measuring economic welfare. The results of the Austrian (revised) ISEW calculation 1955-1992," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 19-34, April.
    18. Neumayer, Eric, 2000. "On the methodology of ISEW, GPI and related measures: some constructive suggestions and some doubt on the 'threshold' hypothesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 347-361, September.
    19. Eisner, Robert, 1988. "Extended Accounts for National Income and Product," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 1611-1684, December.
    20. Jackson, Tim & Victor, Peter A., 2016. "Does slow growth lead to rising inequality? Some theoretical reflections and numerical simulations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 206-219.
    21. Pulselli, Federico Maria & Ciampalini, Francesca & Tiezzi, Enzo & Zappia, Carlo, 2006. "The index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) for a local authority: A case study in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 271-281, November.
    22. England, Richard W., 1998. "Measurement of social well-being: alternatives to gross domestic product," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 89-103, April.
    23. Lawn, Philip A., 2003. "A theoretical foundation to support the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and other related indexes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 105-118, February.
    24. Brennan, Andrew John, 2008. "Theoretical foundations of sustainable economic welfare indicators -- ISEW and political economy of the disembedded system," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 1-19, August.
    25. Talberth, John & Weisdorf, Michael, 2017. "Genuine Progress Indicator 2.0: Pilot Accounts for the US, Maryland, and City of Baltimore 2012–2014," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1-11.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sidan Li & Shibing You & Duochenxi Liu & Yukun Wang, 2023. "National Quality and Sustainable Development: An Empirical Analysis Based on China’s Provincial Panel Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-22, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yulin Liu & Xincheng Zhu & Yuhao Wang, 2023. "Revisiting and evaluation of the index of sustainable economic welfare based on artificial intelligence: data from 30 Chinese provinces from 2003 to 2019," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 3123-3152, April.
    2. Long, Xianling & Ji, Xi, 2019. "Economic Growth Quality, Environmental Sustainability, and Social Welfare in China - Provincial Assessment Based on Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 157-176.
    3. Rugani, Benedetto & Marvuglia, Antonino & Pulselli, Federico Maria, 2018. "Predicting Sustainable Economic Welfare – Analysis and perspectives for Luxembourg based on energy policy scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 288-303.
    4. Van der Slycken, Jonas & Bleys, Brent, 2020. "A Conceptual Exploration and Critical Inquiry into the Theoretical Foundation(s) of Economic Welfare Measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    5. Bleys, Brent & Whitby, Alistair, 2015. "Barriers and opportunities for alternative measures of economic welfare," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 162-172.
    6. Daniel Francisco Pais & Tiago Lopes Afonso & Ant nio Cardoso Marques & Jos A Fuinhas, 2019. "Are Economic Growth and Sustainable Development Converging? Evidence from the Comparable Genuine Progress Indicator for Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Countries," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(4), pages 202-213.
    7. Jonas Van der Slycken & Brent Bleys, 2020. "Cost-shifting Versus “Full” Accountability: Dealing with Cross-time and Cross-boundary Issues in the ISEW and GPI. An application to Belgium," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 20/1003, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    8. Posner, Stephen M. & Costanza, Robert, 2011. "A summary of ISEW and GPI studies at multiple scales and new estimates for Baltimore City, Baltimore County, and the State of Maryland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1972-1980, September.
    9. Jonas Van der Slycken & Brent Bleys, 2021. "Towards ISEW and GPI 2.0, part I: developing two alternative measures of economic welfare with distinct time and boundary perspectives for Belgium," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 21/1026, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    10. Beça, Pedro & Santos, Rui, 2010. "Measuring sustainable welfare: A new approach to the ISEW," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 810-819, February.
    11. Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert & Gorko, Nicole E. & Weisdorf, Michael A. & Carnes, Austin W. & Collins, Cathrine E. & Franco, Carol & Gehres, Lillian R. & Knobloch, Jenna M. & Matson, Gayle E. & , 2015. "Estimates of the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) for Oregon from 1960–2010 and recommendations for a comprehensive shareholder's report," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-7.
    12. Mirko Armiento, 2016. "The Sustainable Welfare Index for Italy, 1960-2013," Working Papers 1601, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Department of Economics, Society & Politics - Scientific Committee - L. Stefanini & G. Travaglini, revised 2016.
    13. Pulselli, Federico Maria & Ciampalini, Francesca & Tiezzi, Enzo & Zappia, Carlo, 2006. "The index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) for a local authority: A case study in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 271-281, November.
    14. Hayashi, Takashi, 2015. "Measuring rural–urban disparity with the Genuine Progress Indicator: A case study in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 260-271.
    15. Jonas Slycken & Brent Bleys, 2023. "Towards ISEW and GPI 2.0: Dealing with Cross-Time and Cross-Boundary Issues in a Case Study for Belgium," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 557-583, August.
    16. Armiento, Mirko, 2018. "The Sustainable Welfare Index: Towards a Threshold Effect for Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 296-309.
    17. Daniel Ştefan Armeanu & Georgeta Vintilă & Ştefan Cristian Gherghina, 2017. "Empirical Study towards the Drivers of Sustainable Economic Growth in EU-28 Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, December.
    18. Pulselli, Federico M. & Bravi, Mirko & Tiezzi, Enzo, 2012. "Application and use of the ISEW for assessing the sustainability of a regional system: A case study in Italy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 766-778.
    19. Günseli BERIK, 2020. "Measuring what matters and guiding policy: An evaluation of the Genuine Progress Indicator," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 159(1), pages 71-94, March.
    20. Menegaki, Angeliki N. & Tugcu, Can Tansel, 2017. "Energy consumption and Sustainable Economic Welfare in G7 countries; A comparison with the conventional nexus," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 892-901.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:162:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11205-021-02832-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.