In the last two decades, the world's gross domestic product (GDP) has increased by 50 per cent, whereas inclusive wealth has increased by a mere 6 per cent. In recent decades, GDP-driven economic performance has only harmed inclusive wealth like human capital; and natural capital like forests, land and water. While the world's human capital which stands at 57 per cent of total inclusive wealth grew by only 8 per cent, the natural capital which is 23 per cent of total inclusive wealth declined by 30 per cent worldwide in the last two decades.

Correct Option (B)

The passage highlights a significant disparity: while the world's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased by 50% in the last two decades, inclusive wealth, which encompasses human and natural capital, grew by only 6%. Crucially, natural capital declined by 30%, and human capital saw a modest 8% increase. This indicates that economic growth driven solely by GDP has occurred at the expense of broader wealth components, particularly natural capital, thereby undermining long-term sustainability. Therefore, the most crucial inference is that an economic model focused exclusively on GDP growth is neither desirable nor sustainable, as it depletes essential capital for future well-being.

Incorrect Options:

• Option (A) is incorrect because while natural capital has indeed declined, the passage's primary critique is not merely to prioritize natural capital in isolation. It critiques the overarching GDP-driven growth model that negatively impacts all components of inclusive wealth, including natural capital.
• Option (C) is incorrect because the passage does not assert that the overall economic performance of countries is unsatisfactory. Instead, it critiques the metric (GDP) used to define and measure this performance, demonstrating its inadequacy in reflecting true wealth and sustainability.
• Option (D) is incorrect because, similar to natural capital, while human capital growth has been slow (8%), the passage does not conclude that the world's most pressing need is simply "more human capital." The overarching argument points to the flawed economic model that undervalues and depletes various forms of capital, rather than a specific deficit in one type of capital.