Sustainable development has broad dimensions and is primarily measured with verifiable improvement and betterment in all facets of material, social and moral life.
Why is one country categorized as developed while another is undeveloped or underdeveloped? What are the main characteristics of growth and development? Development depends on specifically determined parameters. The more these parameters are addressed, the higher is the developed status of a country in question.
The main manifestations of development come with delivery of the basic needs of the people including food, clothing, housing, healthcare, education, social, economic and judicial security, socioeconomic and political stability, respect for human rights in line with the UN charter, and transparency of ownership and investment rights.
Many countries lack the above-mentioned features. This implies that in these countries poverty, unemployment and injustice are a norm rather than the exception, and freedoms in their different universal forms and manifestations are encroached upon.
It is obvious that failure to comprehend the true nature and implications of development could mislead both politicians and decision-makers. Because of this lack of vision and foresight, over the past several years we have been preoccupied with the question whether political development should take precedence over economic progress or vice versa.
Therefore, due to this unwanted and unhelpful preoccupation we were unable to attain the levels of growth necessary for sustainable development. Some of our prime sectors did achieve decent levels of development, but others still lag behind internationally acceptable norms.
A litany of policies in the post-revolution era, including economic regulations, stability measures and reforms may have produced positive indices in socioeconomic and political domains to some decree. However, the sad part is that none of these policies have helped ensure socioeconomic justice as would have been expected.
The crux of the matter is that due to the pursuit of flawed economic policies, the volume of liquidity has ballooned to unprecedented levels, inflation has remained stubbornly high while distribution of wealth and resources is unfair and unacceptable.
One may ask does the Fourth Economic Development Plan (2005-2010) contain instruments for curbing the yawning gap between the haves and have nots and help ensure the much publicized socioeconomic justice?
Currently some 10 percent of the high-income bracket accounts for 76 percent of national revenues and a massive 51 percent of the people account for a meager 6 percent of the revenues. The present condition rightly demands that the fourth plan facilitate creation of a liberal and open economy, boost competitiveness and inject new blood into our tired and unattractive private enterprise.
Only when material and moral opportunities are distributed fairly among the public, the people will find the necessary incentive to contribute to development and help raise productivity levels.
Fair and transparent distribution of resources and income also helps curb state control over the national economy and make room for a dynamic private sector seen as the engine of growth in developed and developing economies.
If and when this happens, to meet its current costs and expenditures the government will have to remain content with its legal right to collect taxes, impose tariffs and charge its services.
Furthermore, the government will use oil revenues, a significant part of which belongs to future generations, for building infrastructure and procuring the present and future needs of society. It must also see the inherent wisdom of ceding ownership of the stable of state institutions to private ownership to help improve competitiveness, efficiency and transparency, and stimulate growth in key economic spheres by creating jobs and encouraging investments in the manufacturing sectors.