From the perspective of the developing regions where energy demand will grow the most, there was a clear ``winner,'' the high-growth Case A. The ecologically driven Case C did not find widespread appeal, despite its explicit focus on international equity including massive resource transfers from North to South. Thus in Asia and several other developing regions, such as Latin America and the Caribbean (LAM) and the Middle East and North Africa (MEA), there was a clear preference for the vigorous development represented by Case A, characterized by high rates of economic growth with developing countries quickly ``catching up.'' There were differences of opinion about how quickly the high-growth path of Case A could unfold, with regional aspirations generally favoring short- to medium-term economic growth rates even above those of Case A.
The recent experience of Central and Eastern Europe (EEU) and the newly independent state of the former Soviet Union (FSU) demonstrates that economic growth can by no means be taken for granted. The recessions in EEU and FSU during the 1990s have been deep and severe. The overall paths of the recessions were anticipated quite closely in all scenarios, but, unfortunately, both the scenarios and recent developments suggest that the process of recovery will be a long one. In EEU, per capita GDP recovers to 1990 levels by 2010. In FSU, 1990 levels of per capita income are reached again between 2010 and 2020. However, by that time the same amount of GDP per capita as in 1990 represents a considerable increase in personal income and welfare as a result of the overall economic shift away from smoke-stack industries toward consumer goods and services.