Perceptions of value are as subjective as perceptions of happiness. The difference is that there's more known about what makes people happy than there is about what makes them value things - the usual economic line apparently being based on the rigorous concept of 'Well, they just do', and some hand-waving about rational actors.
I agree that lumping in eco-footprint with other factors is nonsensical.
But let's imagine that we had an economy that took these factors into account in a less contrived way. Would it be more or less successful for the majority of the population than the one based on the metrics we use today?
The underlying issue is, really, how do the concepts we use to analyze economic activity feed back on the economic activity itself?
Something that stands out in Keynes' General Theory, by the way, is the paramount importance of subjective perceptions not only of value, but of future conditions. Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
