{"word_count": 744, "character_count": 5350}
[caption id="attachment_618" align="alignright" width="225"] Atlas Schloss Linderhof[/caption]Reference :Géraldine Thiry, Philippe Roman, The Inclusive Wealth Index. A Sustainability Indicator, Really?, FMSHWP-2014-71, juin 2014.Pour télécharger ce document sur HALSHSAbstractAmong recent high-profile propositions to revise national accounts and to provide new indicators of sustainability and well-being, the Inclusive Wealth Framework and the related Inclusive Wealth Index (thereafter IWI), first released during the “Rio+20” Conference, undoubtedly stand out as the most promising endeavour. Built up at the confluence of welfare, development and sustainability economics, the indicator is supposed to bring information about the wealth of nations and their sustainability, in a comprehensive way. The inclusive wealth framework is nevertheless fraught with limitations, due to questionable theoretical assumptions and gaps in data availability. We propose a critical appraisal of the index and its underlying framework. Our conclusion is that these limitations undermine its capacity to reach the goals it was given, and to fulfill the requirements of a satisfactory sustainability indicator. Special emphasis is put on the misleading pretension of (neoclassical) economics to handle highly complex, uncertain and manifold issues, even on theoretical bases renovated by dropping some optimality assumptions. We briefly sketch alternative research avenues, that appear more conducive to the endorsement of strong sustainability, and less prone to economism. Alleged theoretical consistency and elegance should not beguile us when choosing indicators for sustainable and prosperous societies.The authorsGéraldine Thiry is a post-doctoral research fellow at the Collège d’études mondiales (Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme) in Paris. She received her PhD from the Department of Economics at the University of Louvain (UCL) in May 2012. She holds Master’s degrees in Economics and in Political sciences (International relations) from the University of Louvain. Between September 2012 and December 2013, she was researcher in the FP7 European Project « BRAINPOoL » (BRinging Alternative Indicators Into Policies) at the Free University of Brussels (ULB). Her main areas of research are new indicators beyond GDP, the socio-economics of quantification, critical accounting and ecological economics. Philippe Roman is a PhD candidate in Economics at REEDS (University of Versailles Saint-Quentinen- Yvelines, UVSQ). He is currently teaching assistant in economics at the Institute of Latin American Studies (IHEAL, Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3). He holds Bachelors in Sociology and Econometrics from the Ecole normale supérieure Lettres et sciences humaines (ENS LSH, Lyon), and Master’s degrees in International economics (ENS LSH) and Ecological economics (UVSQ). He obtained the Agrégation in Economics and social sciences in 2008. His doctoral work focuses on project appraisal frameworks including sustainability and equity issues, with special emphasis on water development projects. He specifically studies a case of water transfer in Northeastern Brazil.The textText written in the frame of the Chaire of Dominique Méda « Reconversion écologique, travail, emploi et politiques sociales » at the Collège d’études mondiales. The authors are grateful to Isabelle Cassiers, Jean Gadrey, Jean Fabre and Jacques Richard for their careful reading and inspiring comments. They also thank to Gaël Giraud for the time devoted to very constructive and insightful discussions. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013 - MSCA-COFUND) under grant agreement n°245743 - Post-doctoral programme Braudel-IFER-FMSH, in collaboration with the Collège d’études mondiales (FMSH).RésuméDans le paysage des propositions de comptabilité nationale rénovée et de nouveaux indicateurs de bienêtre et de soutenabilité, l’approche de la Richesse Inclusive (Inclusive Wealth Framework) et l’Indicateur de Richesse Inclusive qui lui est associé, lancés en juin 2012 pendant le sommet «Rio + 20», sont particulièrement en vue. Construit à la confluence de l’économie du bien-être, de l’économie du développement et de l’économie de la soutenabilité, l’indicateur est supposé informer, de manière exhaustive (inclusive), sur la richesse des nations et leur soutenabilité. Mais le cadre d’analyse de la Richesse Inclusive présente de nombreux problèmes liés à ses hypothèses et à des insuffisances dans la disponibilité des données. Nous montrons que ces problèmes empêchent l’IWI d’atteindre les objectifs de ses auteurs. Plus fondamentalement, l’IWI ne satisfait pas les conditions d’un bon indicateur de soutenabilité. Nous mettons en question les prétentions de l’économie (néoclassique) à pouvoir traiter des enjeux complexes, incertains et variés, notamment à l’aide d’hypothèses de non-optimalité. Nous évoquons ensuite des pistes de recherche alternatives, dont les fondements nous semblent plus à même de développer une approche forte de la soutenabilité dans une perspective moins économiciste. Le choix de nouveaux indicateurs de prospérité ne doit pas reposer sur des critères d’élégance formelle ou de prétendue cohérence théorique.Pour télécharger ce document sur HALSHS