Nobel Laureate: Examine Alternatives to GDP

Nobel laureate John Sulston posited at the AAAS meeting that it may be time to look for alternatives to GDP as measures of well-being. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

“I’m pleased that some economists and sociologists are beginning to talk about, for example, alternative measures of human well-being—alternative that is to GDP, on which the world runs.”

So said John Sulston at the AAAS meeting in Washington on February 20th. He won the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 2002. He talked about connections among population, the environment and economics.

“We know that our current system of economics are incomplete. And so we have for example, when we’re considering food, we have huge wastage. An awful lot of food is thrown away. This you can call a spillover. It doesn’t sort of enter into our economic system because it’s a consequence of running things in a highly competitive way: the free market, global pricing and so on. These things lead to spillovers, which is the wastage of food.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"Now, you can take the view that this doesn’t matter, and that’s what we’ve done in the past, just as we’ve been energy profligate we’ve been food profligate. It does matter if we’re coming up to the limit and we have to calculate how we’re going to stop people starving or indeed give them a better life.”

—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe