Sir, - John Waters (News Features, August 12th) made a very interesting point about to our current method of measuring GDP when he said the waste disposal industry may soon contribute more to GDP than does agriculture.
GDP is purely an accounting exercise and is certainly not a good indicator of "standard of living" or "quality of life". This method of measuring economic growth rewards a wasteful, polluting and individualistic society. If a ship spreads waste oil on our coastline, the consequent cleanup is regarded as a contribution to GDP with little reference, if any, to the impact on amenity and wildlife. In a similar way there are no indicators to show the negative impact of inefficient use of resources, waste production, and air, noise and visual pollution.
Therefore, when I hear that we will soon be boasting one of the richest per capita economies in the EU, I cannot help posing the question: "at what cost?" The average US citizen consumes something like 30 times as much of the limited resources of the earth as a person in a less developed country. How far are we going to be behind the US in this respect in few years at our present rate of "progress"? Perhaps it is only when more and more people have personal experience of the NIMBY (not in my back yard) phenomenon that "negatives" in relation to GDP will be given more credence. Where are the incentives for waste reduction, energy conservation and sustainable transport initiatives? We would be better served by our policy makers if the ecological/ sustainable village concept referred to by Michael Viney (Weekend, same date) was given more encouragement. - Yours, etc.,
L. O Meachair, Ceanannus, Co na Mi.