View article

The proposition that an extended net–or genuine–saving has a central place in any portfolio of indicators purporting to measure the sustainability of development appears now to be firmly established (UNECE 2007; StIglItz, SEN aNd FItOUSSI 2009; WORld BaNk 2010). Nevertheless, a number of outstanding issues remain. Chief among these is a question as to whether (or how) international trade affects the way in which we should think about measuring the development prospects of individual (but open) economies.

There are several candidate mechanisms whereby trade might influence sustainable development (dUpUy 2011; OlESON 2011). These include: the capital gains (or changing terms of trade more generally) on traded extracted natural resources (VINCENt, paNayOtOU aNd HaRtWICk 1997) as well as remaining resource stocks (aRROW Et al. 2010); and the possibility of trade in resources at prices which are “too low”(OlESON 2011) perhaps because trade encourages resource depletion to be “too fast”(eg, klEppER aNd StäHlER 1998). In addition, considerations about “openness” also includes transboundary pollution where countries impose burdens on each other and this, in turn, has implications for the distribution of (comprehensive) wealth (HaMIltON aNd atkINSON 1996; aRROW Et al. 2010).