Could a range of statistics be used to measure a country’s wellbeing rather than GDP?

Success, good marks, top ranks can never be substituted for good health. It is a common saying that "health is wealth." If this is true for us as individuals, then analogously it is true for an entire nation.

Ideally, the health of a nation can be monitored by having a range of statistics except the GDP, which is merely the measure of the economic profits. What about factors like - environmental conditions, green cover, CO2 production, social well being and literacy?

Thus I agree, that a range of statistics should be used to measure a country's well being.

Such statistics are already used , for a long time undeveloped countries were considered poor 'mainly',because of high crime, child mortality and illiteracy rates.

GDP is not currently the only measure of the health of a 'currency' even, why would it be the only measure of the well being of a country? Have you heard of the economist's Big-mac index or www.nationmaster.com?

the question asked is of 'could' not 'should' and the answer is that they already 'are' used to measure the well-being of a country.