Reader TTS

The word “Growth”, endlessly repeated by politicians during the present election campaign, is doing a lot of heavy lifting.  Faith, Growth, but rarely Charity, are the cardinal virtues

displayed for the mass media.   When all the promises are ‘fully costed” but fall short of balancing, Growth is the shared panacea. The trouble is growth post-Brexit, Covid and Putin’s war

looks feeble. No politician is reckless enough to explain exactly what they mean by Growth – though there are clues in the “Kick-start Economic Growth” section of the Labour Party Manifesto.

  Obviously, something organic and getting bigger — not to be mistaken for the magical money tree. Economists created a value they could express as a single figure. How else would we all

know if the economy, more precisely GDP (Gross Domestic Product), was getting bigger, smaller or remaining unchanged? Not that there has ever been a clear consensus on what should be

included in GDP. We still hang onto something of Margaret Thatcher’s homely simile that the national economy is like a huge domestic budget and managed in the same way. It isn’t. And,

incidentally, domestic labour is one of the productive activities that economists leave out of GDP measurements.  Were it to be included, the ILO (International Labour Organisation) estimate

that unpaid domestic work and caring would amount to 9% of global GDP ($11 trillion) of which women’s domestic labour makes up more than two thirds, or 6.6%. Surprisingly, despite their

prominence today, Growth and GDP are a relatively recent concern of economists.  The history of Growth as a concept is set out in the opening chapters of Daniel Susskind’s brilliantly

accessible _Growth: The Reckoning _(Allen Lane, 2024).  It was the economic crisis of the Great Depression (1929-1939) that triggered the search for some simple measurement of economies. 

During the Second World War the question of what proportion of the overall economy could safely be devoted to war production became pressing.  “The American people have learned during the

war the measure of their productive capacity’, President Roosevelt triumphantly declared to Congress in January 1945”.  And it was not long before measures of Growth expressed as GDP were

regarded as important indicators of who was winning the Cold War.  Now, as the current election campaign nears the end, Growth has been established as the panacea for national decline. So

today we have figures for GDP per capita over time telling us whether there is Growth or “Degrowth”.  And because economics dominates our political thinking about what matters — while

economists keep at arm’s length other things that matter, which they label as “externalities” — public political debate does not engage with questions about the price paid for Growth. Since

the industrial revolution, whose origins lie at the end of the 18th century, what is now described as Growth brought unprecedented prosperity to much of the world, (Africa is an exception),

reducing poverty, dramatically improving education, enabling leaps forward in public health, feeding vastly increased numbers of people.  But, looking at the UK – and not only the UK –

nearly all these advances are now either stalled or going into reverse. The damage arising from blinkered, ungoverned Growth includes the fast-approaching climate catastrophe caused by

carbon emissions, the degradation of our natural environment, the possibility of nuclear holocaust, narrowly averted at least twice in the last century, ill-health caused by industrialised

food, and growing inequality.   The Growth dilemma is never “fully costed”.  The Growth dilemma is never raised in the barrage of interviewers’ questions about the economy on radio and TV. 

Growth as economic panacea remains a deceptive proposition, unless its hidden trade-offs are acknowledged, shared with citizens for deliberation, and mitigated by government action.  This is

not the only message of Susskind’s revealing book, but it is certainly the most important one. Susskind sets Growth within the context of the common good, rather than in short-term

party-political la-la-land.  He poses fundamental questions about what kind of society, in what kind of the world, do we, our children and grandchildren want to live in?  Something you might

have expected political leaders to talk about.  And expected the electorate to want to hear about. Where _Growth: The Reckoning_ is doubly helpful is in resetting Growth within a discussion

of trade-offs, rather than a simple binary argument, and in proposing a direction of travel for social and economic development.  Perhaps it is most insightful in its vision of Growth as

meaning more than increasing the production of material _things_ — and _money_ — by adding _ideas _and_ innovation _to the mix and proposing other ends to pursue.   Susskind wants to

redirect and redefine Growth, not get rid of it.  He distinguishes this approach from the temptation to insert socially desirable activities into the old, tired model which is yielding

diminishing returns. What is considered socially desirable poses moral questions liable to be treated in a technocratic manner or left to market forces.  This is not as theoretical as it

sounds.  As an example, Susskind uses the pool of networked ideas existing at the time of the Covid outbreak in early 2020 in the world of medical research which, with government funding,

created vaccines in an extraordinarily short time.  And here the moral dimension of this innovation was evident, in the failure to supply the global South adequately.  Susskind delves more

deeply into this terrain with an interesting discussion of intellectual property – the ownership of ideas – “the most important toolbox that societies have to shape the creation and

distribution of ideas”. Balancing the costs of Growth, sacrificing one benefit for another, requires the widest possible deliberation and consultation. To achieve Growth, the Government must

provide incentives, the necessary means — such as a healthy, educated workforce — and an enabling atmosphere.   Yes, that other most repetitious campaign word: “a plan”.  It must include

investment in research and development, and in public-private partnerships – which has some positive references in the Labour Manifesto and in James Naughtie’s exceptional exploration of

Growth and innovation in _The World at One_ on 23 June.   Susskind also calls for citizen involvement, in the form of civic assemblies to generate and evaluate new ideas, but also to nurture

comprehension of what is at stake, as well as support for progressive forms of government intervention. Susskind’s believes in “the innovative genius of humankind”.  His book sustains a

refreshing balance of ideas, academic analysis and down-to-earth realism, drawn from his work in the policy unit at No. 10.  The gulf between his book’s clarity, understanding, and vision

and the mind-numbing repetition of the word Growth that political leaders, right now, feel obliged to utter under questioning is shocking. Have these six weeks locked in

party-political-media inanity been democracy at work?  If you don’t think so, send Daniel Susskind’s _Growth: The Reckoning_ to whoever gets elected in your constituency. A MESSAGE FROM

THEARTICLE _We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to

continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation._