SNP or Sustainable National Product as a competitive advantage? So how does this work?

Let us first look at GDP as defined from Wikipedia

GDP = consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports), or

GDP = C + I + G + (X-M) or

value of all goods and services produced in a country in one year

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product

SNP in my definition is;

SNP = Renewable (Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + (Exports - Imports)) based on Human-Social-Cultural-Natural-Economic Capital of a country or region or

"Value of all goods and services produced in a country in one year based on the Human-Social-Cultural-Natural-Economic Capital"

Renewable ~Reusable, Recyclable and Repeatable resources such Human-Social-Cultural-Natural-Economic Capital in their natural state.

Measure: Ratio of Input to Output of Renewability

Human Capital ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_capital

Social Capital ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_capital

Cultural Capital ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_capital

Natural Capital ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_capital

Economic Capital ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_capital

How can SNP become a competitive advantage? Let us take a look at some of the leading economic indicators and their impact on the GDPs and leading indicators of countries today….

The Living Company: Habits for Survival in a Turbulent Business Environment by Arie de Geus (215 Pages, Harvard Business School Press, 1997)

"Mr. de Geus quotes a Dutch survey of corporate life expectancy in Japan and Europe that came up with 12.5 years as the average life expectancy of all companies. "The average life expectancy of a multinational corporation — Fortune 500 or its equivalent — is between 40 and 50 years," he writes, noting that a third of 1970's Fortune 500 had disappeared by 1983. (The combination of the Royal Dutch Petroleum Company and the Shell Transport and Trading Company dates to 1907, though the roots of the individual companies go back to the 1800's.)

Such endemic failure is attributed by Mr. de Geus to the focus of managers on profits and the bottom line rather than the human community that makes up their organization. In an attempt to get to the bottom of this mystery, Mr. de Geus and a number of his Shell colleagues carried out some research to identify the characteristics of corporate longevity..."

http://www.businessinnovationinsider.com/2005/11/the_lifetime_of_the_average_sp.php

The lifetime of the average S&P 500 company continues to shrink

In a Powerpoint presentation for KM Asia 2005, John Seely Brown included a graphic (from the book Creative Destruction: Why Companies That Are Built to Last Underperform the Market--And How to Successfully Transform Them) which shows how the average lifetime of a S&P 500 company has steadily declined over the past 100 years or so. Extrapolating into the future, it's clear from the graphic that the typical S&P 500 company is facing a lifetime of less than 15 years. The findings, which originally appeared in 2001, are still jarring almost five years later. Apparently, large S&P 500 companies still have not learned how to innovate their way to success - as a result, they are experiencing ever-shrinking lifetimes.

http://www.strategy-business.com/press/16635507/18728

Economic crises:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_financial_crisis

http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/014/economy.html

Natural crises impact on economies and societies:

graphics.eiu.com/files/ad_pdfs/tsunami_special.pdf

or Environment;

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/08/26/world/asia/choking_on_growth.html

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/kyoto/economic.htm

http://www.accf.org/publications/testimonies/test-impactkyoto-march25-1999.html

http://heapol.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/18/2/172?ck=nck

"The $34 trillion problem[Medicare]
Fortune Magazine ^ | 04 Mar 2008 | Geoff Colvin
Posted on 03/04/2008 2:10:48 PM PST by BGHater

Medicare is poised to wreak havoc on the economy. And our presidential candidates are avoiding the issue. Twice I have asked Alan Greenspan what he considers the greatest threat to the U.S. economy, and both times he has answered immediately with a single word: Medicare. He isn't so worried about the trade deficit and the housing crash; he figures market forces will sort them out. But Medicare is something else - a multi-trillion-dollar problem that's about to get dramatically worse, and one that nobody wants to talk about..."

http://www.emaxhealth.com/10/13999.html

Energy Crisis and impact on the economy

India heading for a major energy crisis
http://www.teriin.org/pub/articles/art22.pdf

http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008/

"About 2.8 billion people or close to the half the world’s population is estimated to survive on less than US$ 2 per day - the “poor” as defined by international agencies such as the IEA, World Bank, UNDP, UNEP and OECD. A key distinguishing feature of the world’s poor is inadequate access to cleaner energy services. The majority of those earning less than US$ 2 per day rely on traditional biofuels to meet the bulk of their energy needs and have no access to electricity. Traditional biofuels meet the bulk of the energy needs of an estimated 2.4 billion people. Some 1.6 billion people have no access to electricity and a significant portion have limited or no access to cleaner and more modern fuels such as kerosene, LPG and natural gas..."

http://www.afrepren.org/Pubs/WorkingPapers/wpp317_sum.htm

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2006/2006-01-29-01.asp

So if one looks at the fundamental leading indicators of measure of progress, the reverse seems true. The cost of spend to ROI to address core Social-Cultural-Natural-Economic challenges don't pan out. This is where SNP is the long term bottom-up inclusive growth that will require changes to business models and leveraging technologies for inclusive bottom-up growth.

So the new indicators will be a competitive advantage as the long term costs of revenue, profitability, ROI, ROE, et al have seemingly greater costs then spend and this means a simple addition and subtractions tells you that these indicators have to be adapted now, for the future as a true measure of progress.

So social-cultural-natural-economic indicators with the prefix of Sustainable such as Sustainable-ROI (SROI), Sustainable-ROE (SROE), Sustainable SG&A (SSG&A), SNP, SDP, Sustainable-Society, Sustainable-Products/ Services, et al will be the true competitive advantage for the near and long term, for costs to later be spent against past revenue will not be accounted for in the manner they are today. That is a Sustainable and Scalable Competitive advantage for a society, company or country.

Sustainable-GAAP(SGAAP) is next!