The Necessary Debate: Economic Growth vs Development in Creative Industries

Amidst all the fuss around old-fashioned new protectionism (aka tariffs, barriers and isolationism), I've been contemplating what I call "The Necessary Debate" in my recent book (link in the comments).

Does economic growth automatically translate to meaningful development that improves lives across society?

The creative economy stands at this very intersection, often generating impressive GDP figures whilst fundamental questions about distribution, access, and genuine wellbeing remain unaddressed.

Growth and development, though often used interchangeably, represent profoundly different concepts. Economic growth is primarily quantitative - measured in GDP increases and market expansion. Development, however, is qualitative - encompassing improvements in quality of life, health, education, and overall wellbeing across the population.

We see this tension playing out in real-world policies. Consider current tariff discussions - higher tariffs may protect certain domestic industries and show up as GDP growth, but what about accessibility of cultural goods, international creative exchange, and the diverse ecosystem that drives innovation? The numbers may improve whilst the cultural landscape contracts.

As I've discovered through my research (explored thoroughly in Chapter 3 of my new book), creative sectors can be powerful drivers of both economic vitality AND social transformation, but only when we're willing to engage critically with difficult questions:

Who benefits from it?

How do we measure value beyond market metrics?

What policies ensure creative growth translates to inclusive development?

Can creative industries help bridge the gap between GDP increases and human flourishing?

This tension between growth and development isn't just academic - it shapes our cities, opportunities, and cultural landscapes. The creative economy offers uniquely promising paths forward, but only if we're willing to have the necessary debate.