I think the main category the author misses is providing experiences. He lumps "novelist, screenwriter, composer and choreographer" as creating information that

I think the main category the author misses is providing experiences. He lumps "novelist, screenwriter, composer and choreographer" as creating information that is "useful in and of itself", but I think that's a real stretch. Experiences can be directly subjectively enriching to the consumer even if they don't provide any "useful information". By "useful" here, I assume the author means something like "able to be used to produce value later". If I take you on a boat to watch the sunset, I have given you an experience that has value, so I have created some intangible wealth. But I haven't given you anything you could reasonably categorize as "information". It's not like you didn't know sunsets were pretty already. I think this category is important because in many ways it is both the most fundamental and also the most unlimited. Ultimately most of the other categories of wealth exist to eventually provide experiences. Why do I want things? So that I can experience having or using them. Very few material objects in our life exist for purely utilitarian reasons. But the real magic of experiences is that they can provide value without using anything up. When I take you to see the sunset, the sunset is still there for others to see too. When I read a book, the book is still able to be read by others. This is important because as we get closer and closer to using up the resources of the Earth, it's good for us to focus on intangible experiences that don't actually consume anything.