everyone thought these economies would grow steadily. At that time, no one is interested

in an idea of sustainable investment. Environment is a relatively recent arrival at the trade

negotiating table .After the outbreak of the Asian financial crisis, many scholars have

turned to investigate the idea seriously. Ironically, high economic growth and free trade

without adequate policies to safeguard the environment can lead to increased degradation

which is unsustainable to resources availability, while the financial crisis, in turn, can lead

to� commodities flooding the market, depressing the price. The spiral concludes with even

more production to raise export earnings again and to over-exploitation of� resources .

�

�������� From economic view, sustainable development consists of many issues. First, an

economy should have a steady rate of growth of output. Second, the economy should have

low inflation rate and third, it should be able to cope with its external debt or otherwise

they will face a currency crisis, just like Asian countries. Also monopoly and

non-transparent regulations will not lead to a continual development and equality of

income is required. The achievement of sustainable development will require substantial

capital investments in the economies of the developing world. A great deal of this capital

must therefore be earned by developing countries through increased access to markets in

the developed world whose potential export revenue is deficit each year because of

barriers to trad in the North. Trade liberalization is therefore a necessary, if not sufficient,

condition for sustainable development, providing additional capital for investments in

social justice and the protection of the environment. This development in economic can

lessen the severity of� fulfilling the minimum needs of the people, removing poverty and

marginalization, problems like unemployment, basic health services and so on.

�

��������� Economic growth through exploitation of natural resources will not lead to

sustainable development. This conclusion comes from a simple fact that every country has

limited resources. Although, some economy have abundant resources and continue

growing, they will face that it requires more and more resources to grow for the same rate

of growth.

��������� This phenomenon is known in economics as law of diminishing return. The law said

that as we use more and more of that resource the less the marginal product of output.

Thus, for an economy to keep growing, it must continually improve its technology and

quality of its resources or even create more resources themselves, such as technical

know-how, or human capital.

�

������� Many economies grow very fast, but the benefits fall only on certain groups of people,

while most people are perhaps worst-off. This led to wider income gap between the rich

and the poor, and between rural and cities. This economic growth should not be called

development, since basically development means improved well being of most if not all

people. This kind of growth cannot continue indefinitely, since most people will do

something to change it. In the past, they turn from a capitalist economy to a socialist one

or a communist. In present time, it is not sure what will be the outcome. In conclusion, this

kind of growth is unstable and will lead to political disorder someday.

�

��������� Monopoly and non-transparency will never lead to sustainable development. This is

very clear from the recent financial crises. East and South East Asia had grown very

rapidly for couples of decades. As their economies grew, they hid their problems, namely

inefficiency from monopoly by large banks or industrial groups and corruption arisen from

non-transparency of government regulations. When these economies face a lower growth

rate, the above problems worsen the situation. Current financial crises can be partially

explained by these two underlying problems.