Why better is less

Quality provisioning beats growth

Photo by Pascal Debrunner on Unsplash

Doing better than GDP

Let’s talk about something that few people talk about. It’s the idea that provisioning quality, making sure everyone has access to what they truly need, matters more than chasing GDP numbers. In other words, it’s not about growing bigger. It’s about growing smarter.

GDP measures production but ignores unpaid caregiving, environmental costs, and well-being, a flaw even its creator, Simon Kuznets himself warned, “the welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income.”

But if we think of provisioning systems as the real things people need, like healthcare, education, housing, and electricity. When these systems work well and are universal, many social thresholds can be met using relatively low resources. Meaning you don’t need a sky‑high GDP to ensure people get what they need.

Take decent living standards in the form of things like safe housing, clean water, enough food, and basic healthcare. One study estimated that provisioning these for 8.5 billion people would require only about 30 percent of today’s global energy and resource use. That leaves a big budget for the planet.

So basics can be met at a modest scale. That’s one clear message.

But there’s more. Another insightful study looked at 106 countries to find out what makes need‑satisfaction efficient. It found that equity, democratic quality, reliable electricity, and strong public services all help societies meet needs while using much less energy. Contrast that with economic growth and resource extraction, which turned out to be linked with poor need‐satisfaction and high energy use.

That one finding is powerful. Improving justice, governance, and service quality can get us much further than just pushing for more GDP. People’s well‑being can rise while environmental strain falls.

So the message here is not “do less”. It’s “do better.”

Quality Over Quantity

We can also link this to another concept: the shape of well‑being versus resource use. A recent analysis argues that well‑being rises steeply at low levels of resource use, then flattens out, and beyond a point may even fall. It’s an S‑curve. Developing countries are on a steep slope, so resource increases help. Richer countries are on the flat part; more resources no longer add real value. In fact, excess use may worsen outcomes.

What does that tell us? It means there are diminishing returns to growth. Past a certain point, more just means waste and damage.

Why Wellbeing Wins

Now, let's bring in a broader perspective from ecological economics. That framework asks: what if we shifted from a worldview focused on GDP to one centered on well‑being and planetary limits? This approach emphasizes provisioning systems, fairness, public health, and broader measures like the Genuine Progress Indicator or similar indexes that combine social and environmental factors. To quote a recent paper on the subject:

“... ecological economics aligns well with public health goals, including concern for equality and redistribution. Ecological economics offers an opportunity to make the transition to an economic system that is designed to promote human and planetary health from the outset, rather than one where social and environmental externalities must be constantly corrected after the fact.”

All of this leads to a simple conclusion: better is less. A more caring, equitable, efficient society that focuses on quality provisioning can give people what they need in areas like health, education, housing, and electricity, without blowing past planetary boundaries.

Imagine instead of building highways or huge shopping malls, we invest in clinics and schools, public housing, renewable energy infrastructure that’s local, and clean public transit. That creates well‑being in a way that is resource-light and sustainable.

Let me illustrate with Finland and the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI). In Finland, GDP kept rising after the 1990s recession, while GPI stayed flat or fell. That means growth was not improving well‑being. It was likely causing environmental or social harm that GDP ignored. That’s exactly the kind of criticism of growth we need more of.

It may sound counterintuitive, but we don’t need endless growth to live well. We need the right services, equitable access, and sustainable infrastructure to act as provisioning systems designed with well‑being as the goal.

Let’s Get Practical

So what are the practical steps?

1. Measure well-being (GPI, HDI), not just GDP.

2. Strengthen universal public services (healthcare, education).

3. Invest in community-centered infrastructure.

4. Prioritize equity to reduce resource waste.

The goal of degrowth is often misunderstood as a call for deprivation, but in truth, it is the opposite. It is a call for a richer life lived within our collective means. A life where people have the time and resources to care for one another, where the essentials of well-being are guaranteed, and where the natural systems that support us are respected rather than depleted. It imagines a world where health, education, and security are not luxuries tied to economic growth, but basic conditions of human dignity. In this framing, sufficiency does not mean scarcity. It means living well without overshooting what the Earth can sustain.

The Garden

A simple metaphor captures this better than charts or policy debates. Consider a garden. At first, a little fertilizer helps the soil flourish and the plants grow strong. But adding more and more does not keep improving the yield. At some point, it burns the roots, poisons the water, and destroys the very system it was meant to enhance. A healthy garden requires balance: good soil, enough water, light, and careful tending. The aim is not endless expansion of biomass, but resilience, variety, and nourishment. A thriving garden is not measured in how many tons of leaves it produces, but in the richness and health it provides to everything within it.

Our societies are no different. Endless growth, whether measured in GDP or consumption, eventually tips into harm. Pushing production higher destabilizes climate systems, erodes ecosystems, and weakens the social bonds that hold communities together. By contrast, provisioning that emphasizes balance and quality builds resilience. When healthcare, housing, education, and clean energy are designed as public goods, they act like good soil and water in the garden: they create the conditions for flourishing. They sustain lives without requiring endless extraction.

This is why provisions matter. They are the careful tending of our shared garden. They nurture people rather than depleting resources. They build health, learning, and trust rather than leaving well-being hostage to volatile markets. And when we shift our attention from maximizing output to nourishing needs, we find that less can be better. Less waste, less stress, less inequality. In exchange, we gain cleaner air, stronger communities, and the time to focus on what matters most. That discovery is not a loss. It is a liberation.

The conclusion is both pragmatic and hopeful. A society organized around provisioning quality rather than GDP growth can secure well-being within planetary limits. It can deliver security, dignity, and care without demanding that the Earth absorb impossible levels of extraction. The transition may be difficult, since it challenges powerful interests and long-standing habits, but the reward is a future where life is resilient and sustainable. Better is less. And that is not just good news for people, it is the path to a thriving planet for generations to come.

---