Gross domestic product (GDP) – the total monetary or market value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country’s borders in a specific time – is universally used to gauge a country’s economic health. The trouble with GDP is that it was never meant to be an indicator of welfare.

Yet, politicians often define their success in terms of GDP growth on their watch. Even as an economic tool, GDP measurement fails various tests because, by convention, it only looks at output that is bought and sold. The monetisation of productive but unpaid human activities is increasingly being challenged by academics, employers, workers and other societal leaders.

In a Talking Point article in Times of Malta, the director general of the Malta Employers’ Association, Joe Farrugia, outlined the well-known limitations of GDP both as an economic tool and as an indicator of society’s well-being. He rightly argues that we need to talk about GDP.

For a meaningful discussion to occur, it is critically important that trade unions, employers, the voluntary sector and other societal leaders make their voices heard on how the country should measure welfare beyond GDP. Unfortunately, the government has so far failed to instigate a discussion on new metrics to gauge the well-being of our society.

The above-average growth that the country has experienced in the last few years has certainly not meant that income distribution has improved. Many people do not benefit from the increased economic output because they cannot afford to buy most of the goods and services that represent this output.

Fast GDP growth goes hand in hand with increased exploitation of both renewable and non-renewable resources.

The multiple effects of air pollution, traffic congestion, environmental degradation, aesthetic destruction of our core urban centres and other local corollaries of economic growth are not captured in any GDP calculations.

Progressive countries that are seriously committed to the well-being of their societies have started to introduce broader metrics that go beyond measuring production.

The Human Development Index is one such indicator that focuses specifically on people and their capabilities to address the development and welfare of a country. This index measures achievements in three crucial dimensions: health and life expectancy, education and living standards. This latter measure confirms that GDP can still be one of many other indicators of well-being.

An even more popular indicator is the Gross National Happiness Index that builds on four pillars: governance, socio-economic development, cultural preservation and environmental conservation. It would be useful if the government were to commission an independent study to measure the country’s performance according to the criteria of this index and compare it with GDP growth. This would indeed be a critical first step to put people back at the centre of all socio-economic planning for the coming decade.

We need a multitude of indicators to understand how our society’s well-being is evolving. A more comprehensive Social Progress Index should include assessments on nutrition, medical care, safety, education, sustainability, personal rights, freedom and tolerance.

So far, we have only heard vague arguments on the importance of broadening the measurement of elements of well-being. The country’s political leaders may prefer to stay in their comfort zones and not propose tough changes in measuring and monitoring people’s well-being.

Political leaders would genuinely be serving our society if they engaged in some transformational thinking that indeed puts people in the centre of their actions.