We have to look back to the year 750 AD, the end of the Omayyad Caliphs 1, to see the "Islamic world" acting as an united power. The probability of an emergence of a pan-Islamic foreign policy is to be discussed in this essay, which means a foreign policy that involves all Muslim countries and allows them to speak with one voice. Joint policy aims can only be formulated when the interests differ just slightly. The Islamic countries however have few common goals. Firstly this essay will discuss economic, and secondly political and cultural factors. Thirdly the structure of the states will be considered, and finally religious influences will be evaluated. It will be shown that obstacles impeding a collective foreign policy outweigh the driving forces in its favour by far.
Economic issues regularly have a strong impact on foreign policy strategies. The interlinkages between the areas of politics and economics are often so complex, that even one major common aim of two states might not be enough to produce a consensus between them on one policy programme. There might be joint interests like issues concerning oil if we talk about Indonesia and Kuwait, for instance. The differences in their goals, however, are too great to bring them together. Kuwait is rich and tries to retain its wealth, while Indonesia struggles with economic difficulties, inflation and local uprisings. The archipelago depends on the support of the world bank while the Kuwaitis do not know any problems of that kind. Nevertheless there are attempts to combine several nations′ economic interests with one another. OPEC, while not all of its member have an Islamic population (although its most influential and powerful ones do), is a fine example of how international co-operation might work. All participants of that organisation produce oil, and they founded this alliance to raise the world oil price by organised behaviour 2. History shows that this was quite effective in the beginning. Yet this is not enough to be optimistic to create promising prospects for a pan-Islamic co-operation. Since Venezuela has a Christian population, not all OPEC states are Islamic; the organisation can therefore not be seen as a fine prototype for a purely Muslim alliance. Additionally the development of OPEC continued less successfully - in terms of forming a combined foreign policy strategy - than it began. The partnership was solely focused on oil and did not include other economic or political topics.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Relevant Definitions:
Sustainability
Capital Stocks
Agenda 21
Indicators
Capital Stocks according to the CSD proposal (Agenda 21)
Indicators within the four categories
General part
Social category
Economic category
Environmental category
Institutional category
Conclusion
Bibliography
Books and Articles
Internet
Research Objectives and Topics
This paper examines how sustainability can be measured through the theoretical model of capital stocks, specifically focusing on the indicator list proposed by the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) in response to Agenda 21. The research aims to identify the strengths and weaknesses of these indicators when applied to real-world scenarios, while considering the interdependencies between social, economic, environmental, and institutional dimensions.
- Theoretical evaluation of capital stock models and weak sustainability.
- Analysis of the CSD indicator framework and its categorization.
- Critical assessment of the sufficiency and applicability of indicators across various nations.
- Exploration of the trade-offs between environmental emphasis and other socio-economic factors.
- Identification of gaps in response dimensions and data availability.
Excerpt from the Book
Relevant Definitions: Sustainability
Sustainability is best described by the statement of the Brundtland Commission in 1987 : “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Turner,Pearce&Bateman, p.54,1994). A prerequisite for this claim is the maintenance of social, economic and environmental sustainability (Goodland,1995).
For are a better understanding of sustainability we first have to explain/ clarify what we mean by capital stocks.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: This chapter introduces the theoretical framework of capital stocks as a tool for measuring sustainability and outlines the scope of the investigation regarding the CSD indicators.
Relevant Definitions: This section provides foundational definitions for key terms, specifically explaining the concepts of sustainability, capital stocks, the Agenda 21 framework, and the general purpose of indicators.
Capital Stocks according to the CSD proposal (Agenda 21): This chapter details the transition to a four-category approach of capital stocks—social, economic, environmental, and institutional—under the CSD proposal.
Indicators within the four categories: This chapter provides an in-depth critical analysis of the specific indicator sets for each category, evaluating their practical feasibility and structural transparency.
Conclusion: This final chapter synthesizes the findings, highlighting the limitations of the weak sustainability assumption and proposing improvements for future comparative performance assessments between nations.
Keywords
Sustainability, Capital Stocks, Agenda 21, CSD, Indicators, Weak Sustainability, Natural Capital, Human Capital, Social Capital, Economic Growth, Environmental Policy, Development Goals, Policy Responses, Resource Management, Sustainable Development.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper focuses on the practical application of the CSD indicator list, derived from Agenda 21, to measure sustainability through the lens of capital stock theory.
Which thematic categories are central to the study?
The study centers on four categories: social, economic, environmental, and institutional, which collectively represent the different forms of capital in a society.
What is the primary goal of the analysis?
The goal is to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the CSD's recommended indicators, determining whether they accurately measure a country's progress toward sustainable development.
Which methodology is employed in this evaluation?
The authors use a qualitative assessment approach, analyzing the structure and sufficiency of the indicators while applying criteria related to data availability, relevance, and country-specific applicability.
What topics are explored in the main body?
The main body covers the definitions of various capital stocks (natural, man-made, human, and social), the historical context of Agenda 21, and a detailed critique of the indicator sets assigned to each of the four main categories.
What are the primary keywords associated with this work?
Key terms include sustainability, capital stocks, Agenda 21, indicator systems, and weak sustainability.
Why is "weak sustainability" considered a problematic theoretical root?
The authors note that weak sustainability relies on the assumption of perfect substitutability between different forms of capital, which is questionable when considering the replaceability of non-renewable resources with human or man-made capital.
What limitation does the paper identify regarding the CSD's indicator list?
A significant limitation is the lack of "response indicators" in many chapters, which are essential for measuring the impact of policy decisions on sustainable development goals.
- Quote paper
- Peter Tilman Schuessler (Author), Kristian Kanthak (Author), 2002, How to measure the sustainability of capital stocks? Indicators used by Agenda21, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/8915
