𝐄𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥- 𝐆𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐧 𝐍𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬, 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲

Bhutan’s economic growth, reported at 7.5 percent for 2024, appears on the surface to mark a strong rebound. It suggests recovery, renewed momentum and a return to stability. Yet the reality that unfolds in daily life feels markedly different. There is little in the streets, markets or conversations with workers and business owners that reflects the vitality those figures promise.

At the heart of this growth lies the electricity sector- dominated by state operations and driven largely by the completion of a major hydropower project. While such infrastructure adds considerable weight to national output and export value, it remains distanced from the everyday economy. It does not create wide employment, nor does it stimulate the kind of entrepreneurial energy that would spread prosperity more evenly. Growth derived from large, capital-intensive state ventures risks concentrating benefits at the top, rather than distributing them through job creation and income gains.

This makes the question more urgent: is the nation truly recovering, or are people simply adjusting to a slower, less dynamic economy? There is a quiet resignation across sectors- an adaptation to prolonged economic fatigue that can too easily be mistaken for resilience. The visible caution in spending, the hesitancy in private investment, and the thinning of formerly active service sectors point to a public still unsure about the future.

In particular, the private sector continues to bear the long shadow of past disruptions. While hospitality has seen modest revival, other services especially entertainment, retail and creative industries remain deeply affected. The transformation in consumer behaviour, shaped both by necessity and digital habits, has eroded confidence in these sectors. Foot traffic has dwindled. Operating costs continue to rise. And with demand still subdued, many businesses find survival a daily calculation.

If growth does not translate into tangible change for ordinary people, then its meaning becomes questionable. In countries where recovery has been more inclusive, such as Vietnam or Finland, growth has been led by strategic investments in people, small enterprises and future-facing industries. Vietnam’s emphasis on labour-intensive manufacturing and its support for local firms created millions of jobs. Finland, recovering from a deep crisis in the 1990s, rebuilt through education and innovation, empowering its citizens to participate in the economy rather than wait for its benefits to reach them.

Bhutan, by contrast, continues to rely on a narrow base. Hydropower and external trade provide essential revenue, but they do not create the vibrant domestic demand, business diversity or entrepreneurial opportunity needed for shared prosperity. The structure of imports and exports reflects this imbalance growth driven by energy exports, while domestic production remains limited and import dependency continues.

There is an urgent need to redefine the direction of the economy. Real recovery must begin with people. Policies must focus on strengthening small businesses, improving access to finance, reducing bureaucratic barriers, and building skills that match future opportunities. Investment must shift from high-visibility projects toward sectors that offer employment, self-reliance and dignity.

More fundamentally, the country must develop a deeper economic philosophy, one that values participation over mere performance, and broad well-being over selective gains. Growth, when shaped by the private sector, innovation and local enterprise, tends to circulate more widely and generate long-term benefits.

The headline figure of 7.5 percent will remain just that- a headline- unless the growth it represents finds meaningful expression in daily life. Without thoughtful and inclusive policies, the risk remains that economic expansion continues without economic transformation. And in that gap, a nation may adjust, but it will not truly rise.