The wellbeing economy in practice: sustainable and inclusive growth? Or a post-growth breakthrough?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A wellbeing economy (WE) has gained a wide range of adherents in recent years, although the meanings they give to it vary. One point with conflicting understandings is whether a WE is a post-growth economy. Many environmentalists and other growth critics have long called for a move beyond the pursuit of economic growth as a societal priority and an embrace of an ethic of sufficiency. Some WE proponents highlight not only the WE’s post-growth character but also its ability to bring post-growth ideas into the political mainstream, pointing, for example, to the Wellbeing Economy Governments (WEGo), a partnership of governments with shared ambitions of creating a WE. Does increasing support for a WE represent the long-sought breakthrough for a post-growth, sufficiency-oriented environmental approach? If not, how can efforts to implement a WE be taken further in a post-growth direction? These questions are examined through case studies of countries participating in WEGo, using an analysis of government documents and other sources to determine whether they have adopted a post-growth orientation. Expanding on previous analysis of the three founding WEGo members, this article examines three more recent cases: Finland and Wales, which are both WEGo members, and Canada, which has participated in WEGo gatherings. It confirms previous findings that WEGo nations have taken only limited steps in a post-growth direction, with emerging WE practice amounting at most to a “weak post-growth approach.” However, while previous studies have emphasized conclusions applying broadly to all WEGos, this article identifies greater variation among WE cases. One case, Wales, stands out for moving further in a post-growth direction, including significant sufficiency-oriented policies such as limits on road building, although a commitment to economic growth remains evident. Building on the findings, the article concludes with some options that WEGo nations and others could take to strengthen the WE’s post-growth character.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.063 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".