Why Bhutan’s First National Gross Ecosystem Product Matters

Bhutan’s September 2026 adoption of Gross Ecosystem Product (GEP) gives nature a place in national economic accounting. Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay announced a GEP of approximately $6.2 billion for 2024 during New York Climate Week. The significance is not just the figure: Bhutan and Stanford’s Natural Capital Alliance are developing a system intended to update the measure and use it to inform sustainable growth and financing.11517

What GEP measures—and what the $6.2 billion means

GEP assigns a monetary value to ecosystem services produced within a defined area during an accounting period, typically a year.18 In Bhutan, the measure concerns benefits associated with forests, rivers, soils, and landscapes.15 A Bhutan National Statistics Bureau workshop, held with technical support from Stanford’s Natural Capital Project, discussed valuation topics including carbon sequestration, water yield, sediment retention, agriculture, forestry, and tourism. The available workshop description does not establish how much each contributed to the final $6.2 billion estimate.38

Stanford described Bhutan’s GEP as “about twice” its GDP.1 For a same-year comparison, a reported 2024 GDP of $3.35 billion makes the $6.2 billion GEP approximately 1.85 times as large. The World Bank lists $3.58 billion for 2025, a different year, against which the GEP figure would be about 1.73 times as large.2830 These comparisons show the scale of the estimate, not that Bhutan could add $6.2 billion to GDP: GEP and GDP measure different things, and some nature-dependent production can appear in both.18

Why national adoption is the milestone

The move takes GEP beyond an isolated valuation. Stanford says it is working with Bhutan’s government on a system to regularly update the national metric and use it to shape and finance sustainable economic growth.17 Bhutan’s National Statistics Bureau has also convened technical work on GEP estimates and future accounting priorities.38 Those plans indicate how nature’s contributions could become more visible in policy choices; the cited material does not establish which budget or investment decisions have already changed.

GEP also sits alongside, rather than replaces, Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness approach: one puts a monetary value on ecosystem services, while the other is a broader way of thinking about progress and wellbeing.121821 Stanford’s Gretchen Daily framed the connection by saying that human progress and nature are “not in conflict, but rather inseparable.”1 Bhutan’s carbon-negative status adds context, although the World Bank describes it as one of the world’s very few carbon-negative countries—not the only one.40

The wider lesson is about making nature count in decisions, not declaring a new form of GDP. China has already led extensive GEP innovation and applications, according to Stanford; Bhutan’s distinction is its national adoption of the metric.117 Its longer-term impact will depend on whether regularly updated accounts meaningfully inform policy and financing—the purpose Stanford and Bhutan have set out, rather than an outcome the announcement alone can prove.17