Urging The Department Of Business, Economic Development, And Tourism To Submit An Annual Hawaii Genuine Progress Indicator Report To The Legislature No Later Than Thirty Days Prior To The Convening Of Each Regular Session, Beginning With The Regular Session Of 2027.
H.R. 181 is a House Resolution urging the Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT) to provide the Legislature with an annual Hawaii Genuine Progress Indicator (HI GPI) report at least 30 days before each regular session, starting with the 2027 session. The resolution frames the HI GPI as a broader measure of progress than Gross Domestic Product because it incorporates economic, social, and environmental factors affecting overall well-being in Hawaii.
The resolution specifies what the annual report should contain. At a minimum, DBEDT is urged to include an executive summary, trend analysis for the economic, social, and environmental components of the HI GPI, a methodology overview, a policy implications section, and a detailed data appendix with tables, charts, and sources. It also asks DBEDT to post the report publicly online and send copies to the relevant House and Senate committee chairs, as well as transmit a certified copy to the DBEDT director.
Because H.R. 181 is a resolution rather than a bill, it does not directly amend Hawaii statutes or create enforceable legal duties. Its practical effect would be to encourage DBEDT to institutionalize an annual reporting schedule and to standardize the content and distribution of the HI GPI report for legislative use. The resolution would primarily affect DBEDT, the Legislature, and the committees with jurisdiction over economic development, budget, and the environment by increasing the flow of policy-relevant data and analysis.
The overall sentiment reflected in the resolution is favorable toward using broader, more holistic economic measures in policymaking. The bill text emphasizes that traditional metrics like GDP do not fully capture social welfare or environmental sustainability, and it presents the HI GPI as a useful tool for evidence-based decision-making. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no recorded opposition or formal debate to indicate a divided sentiment.
The main point of contention implied by the resolution is methodological and policy-oriented rather than partisan: whether Hawaii should rely on a broader welfare index like the HI GPI instead of, or alongside, traditional economic indicators such as GDP. The resolution anticipates concerns about transparency and comparability by requiring methodology explanations, data sources, and trend reporting. Any disagreement would likely center on the usefulness, complexity, and policy implications of the HI GPI framework, but no specific objections, amendments, or opposing viewpoints are included in the available record.