PAKISTAN has climbed 75 positions in a new international ranking. The Sustainable Human Development Index (SDHI) placed the country at 61st position against 136th place in the UN sponsored Human Development Index (HDI).

Sri Lanka launched a new index in August 2008, to measure human development SHDI that ranked countries on a criteria based on what it termed ‘a more holistic approach to growth’. This is in contrast to United Nation’s HDI developed at the start of the last decade of the last century.

Coinciding with the Saarc Summit in Colombo held recently, the new index was unveiled by Patali Champika, minister of environment and natural resources in a press conference on the sideline of the marathon pre summit meetings.

The minister said that the new index incorporates missing dimensions of development in the new criteria. It has been prepared by the Sri Lankan ministry of environment.

Brazil, which ranks 70 on HDI clinched the top slot in the SHDI. The rankings of all Saarc countries improved in the new index. India moved up the ladder from 128th on HDI to 59th on SHDI. Sri Lanka from 99th to 27th and Nepal from 142nd to 59th .

Other Asian economies also gained position in the new index. China is promoted from 81st in the HDI to 48th in the SHDI.

The developed countries lost their lead in the new index as Japan is down from 8th to 50th. UK from 16 to 55, Australia from 3rd to 11th , Norway from 2nd to 10th and USA from 12th to 94th .

Explaining the motivations that led to development of SHDI the minister explained: “The degree of impact caused by human activities on environment and the impact on the process of climate change are also critical aspects that need to be considered when assessing the net degree of development”.

“We are of the view that a comprehensive assessment of development which include all these dimensions, would provide a more realistic picture of human development”, Minister Ranawaka said.

The concept of human development, though is much complex than any composite index can measure, these indices present alternatives to income as a sole measure of development. They provide relevant entry points into information contained in indicator tables covering a wide range of issues.

Unfortunately, the index developed in Asia did not attract much attention in a world pre-occupied by more pressing immediate issues of concern. Even the member nations of Saarc, who gained in rankings in the new index did not take it too seriously, for now at least. Nothing worth mentioning appeared in India beside the news of the announcement.

There is a lot of discussion at all levels over the issue of ‘sustainable development’. The definition is still vague as it seems to mean too many things to a wide variety of interest groups.

Many people in government and the corporate sector contacted for comments did not know about the index so they were not in a position to form an opinion. Generally, however, many were inclined towards UN’s Human Development Index as being more credible criteria of ranking accepted the world over. They, however, did not see any harm in keeping the issue of defining development alive to make it closer to peoples aspiration.