A critical analysis of selected global sustainability assessment frameworks: Toward integrated approaches to peace and sustainability

Abstract

Achieving sustainable development requires peaceful conditions. However, current sustainability impact assessment tools tend to overlook aspects of positive peace, particularly in societies transitioning from conflict. Recent efforts attempt to address this gap, but the examination of how positive peace indicators integrate into major global sustainability assessment (GSA) frameworks remains underexplored. This study evaluates whether GSA frameworks consider positive peace or the elimination of structural violence and enabling societal conditions that sustain peace. We selected eight GSA frameworks for the analysis: Environmental Performance Index, Global Green Economy Index, Green Growth Index, Global Sustainable Competitiveness Index, Happy Planet Index, Planetary Adjusted Human Development Index, Sustainable Development Goals Index, and Sustainable Society Index. We first evaluated the eight GSA frameworks using the Bellagio Sustainability Assessment and Measurement Principles (BellagioSTAMP) covering guiding vision, essential considerations, adequate scope, framework and indicators, transparency, effective communication, broad participation, and continuity and capacity. Then we analyzed consolidated indicators from the frameworks to determine if they pay balanced attention to different sustainability dimensions and integrate positive peace. While evaluation using BellagioSTAMP is generally satisfactory, positive peace is inadequately addressed in some frameworks, despite peace being a prerequisite for sustainable development. The study results can inform the development of assessment frameworks that better integrate the components of peace and sustainability. The study also highlights the importance of positive peace in achieving sustainable development and the need to ensure assessment frameworks inform actions toward building peaceful communities.