Yes. But it is important to make sure that this is not done at the expense of other countries/ geographical regions

Sure, but you need to define your terms or this discussion can't really go anywhere.

The way I understand it, Sustainable Economic Growth is very close to being an oxymoron, and when you add 'pro-ecological', you're running the risk of creating a chimera and a unicorn at the same time.

I'm going to use Development, instead of Growth, and (skipping about 3 pages of discussion) get to:

Sustainable Development = an increase in quality of life within a community between two points in time, using the skills of the population and the ecological services from the landmass it manages, in a manner that can be maintained in perpetuity.

Sustainable Social Development = an increase in the quality of life of a community between two points in time by increasing how effectively people are able to use their time to meet their needs, while ensuring no subset of the community receives a greater burden than benefit from any development initiative.

Sustainable Ecological Development = an increase in the quality of life of a community between two points of time by restoring or enhancing the ecosystem services that provide resources and absorb waste from the biomes being managed, while ensuring that a non-declining portion of each biome is maintained as a ‘wilderness’ that is neither a sink for wastes nor a source for resources.

Sustainable Economic Development = an increase in the quality of life between two points in time by increasing specialization and productivity of the population, while reducing the internal barriers to trade of critical resources and the external barriers to co-management of critical resources, and retaining a sufficient financial reserve to address economic disruptions.

That increase in productivity and specialization, and reduction in internal and external barriers, will lead to Economic Growth, but as a side-effect of the rest, so if one were to try to pursue Sustainable Development, one could say they are getting "sustainable pro-ecological economic growth "

I do agree that if you simplify your question as well as the terms used in it, the discussion would develop better.

Is Carbon a national problem? Are our earthly resources a national issue? This a rhetorical question, I hope? To start with: we have to agree on national and international standards and definitions, talking about these issues. Sustainability will have to be be measured and reported about, based on the six capitals (see IIRC) and we should internationally standardise our way of working doing so. Thinking in six capitals and calculating all true costs will help us immensely to do the right things and do the things right in the future!! so we will have to organises ourselves asap!!