Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 435–454 | Cite as

Transport and CO2: Productivity Growth and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the European Commercial Transport Industry

  • Lisann Krautzberger
  • Heike Wetzel


In the last decades transport activities persistently increased in the EU27 and were strongly coupled to growth in gross domestic product. Like most production processes, they are inevitably linked with the generation of environmentally hazardous by-products, such as CO2 emissions. This leads to the question of how to promote a sustainable transport sector that meets both environmental protection targets and economic requirements. In this context, the objective of this paper is to compare the CO2-sensitve productivity development of the European commercial transport industry for the period between 1995 and 2006. We calculate a Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index to investigate the effects of country-specific regulations on productivity and to identify innovative countries. Our results show a high variation in the CO2-sensitive productivity development and a slight productivity decrease on average. Efficiency losses indicate that the majority of the countries were not able to follow the technological improvements induced by some innovative countries.


European transport industry Carbon dioxide emissions Productivity growth Malmquist-Luenberger index Directional distance functions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abadir K, Talmain G (2001) Depreciation rates and capital stocks. Manch Sch 69(1):42–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chambers RG, Chung Y, Färe R (1996) Benefit and distance functions. J Econ Theory 70(2): 407–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chambers RG, Chung Y, Färe R (1998) Profit, directional distance functions, and nerlovian efficiency. J Optim Theory Appl 98: 351–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chung Y, Färe R, Grosskopf S (1997) Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. J Environ Manag 51(3): 229–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coelli TJ, Lauwers L, Huylenbroeck G (2007) Environmental efficiency measurement and the materials balance condition. J Prod Anal 28(1): 3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Diewert W (1980) Capital and the theory of productivity measurement. Am Econ Rev 70(2): 260–267Google Scholar
  7. Domazlicky BR, Weber WL (2004) Does environmental protection lead to slower productivity growth in the chemical industry?. Environ Resour Econ 28: 301–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. EU KLEMS (2008) EU KLEMS growth and productivity accounts. 29 June 2011
  9. European Commission (2011a) EU transport in figures; statistical pocketbook. 28 July 2011
  10. European Commission (2011b) WHITE PAPER: Roadmap to a single european transport area—towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system. 29 June 2011
  11. European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport (2008) European energy and transport, trends to 2030—Update 2007. 27 June 2011
  12. European Communities (2009) EU action against climate change. Leading global action to 2010 and beyond. 27 June 2011
  13. European Environment Agency (2010) Final energy consumption intensity (ENER 021)—Assessment published Sep 2010. 27 June 2011
  14. Eurostat (2009a) Manual for air emissions accounts 23 July 2011
  15. Eurostat (2009b) Panorama of transport; eurostat statistical books. 28 July 2011
  16. Eurostat (2011) Air emissions accounts by activity. 27 June 2011
  17. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Norris M, Zhang Z (1994) Productivity growth, technological progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. Am Econ Rev 84(1): 66–82Google Scholar
  18. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Pasurka CA (2001) Accounting for air pollution emissions in measures of state manufacturing productivity growth. J Reg Sci 41(3):381–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Färe R, Primont D (1995) Multi-output production and duality: theory and applications. Kluwer Academic, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Førsund FR (2009) Good modelling of bad outputs: pollution and multiple-output production. Int Rev Environ Resour Econ 3(1): 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Görzig B (2007) Depreciation in EU member states: empirical and methodological differences. EU KLEMS working paper series, working paper nr. 17. 27 June 2011
  22. Jeon BM, Sickles RC (2004) The role of environmental factors in growth accounting. J Appl Econ 19(5): 567–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kumar S (2006) Environmentally sensitive productivity growth: a global analysis using Malmquist-Luenberger index. Ecol Econ 56: 280–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Luenberger DG (1992) New optimality principles for economic efficiency and equilibrium. J Optim Theory Appl 75(2): 221–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. OECD (2001) Measuring productivity. OECD manual. Measurement of aggregate and industry-level productivity growth. 27 June 2011
  26. OECD (2011a) OECD STAN database for structural analysis. 27 June 2011
  27. OECD (2011b) OECD. StatExtracts. 27 June 2011
  28. Oh D, Heshmati A (2010) A sequential Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index: environmentally sensitive productivity growth considering the progressive nature of technology. Energy Econ 32: 1345–1355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pethig R (2006) Non-linear production, abatement, pollution and materials balance reconsidered. J Environ Econ Manag 51(2): 185–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shephard RW (1970) The theory of cost and production functions. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  31. Shephard RW, Färe R (1974) The law of diminishing returns. Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie 34: 69–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shestalova V (2003) Sequential Malmquist indices of productivity growth: an application to OECD industrial activities. J Prod Anal 19: 211–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thirtle C, Piesse J, Lusigi A, Suhariyanto K (2003) Multi-factor agricultural productivity, efficiency and convergence in Botswana, 1981–1996. J Dev Econ 71: 605–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tulkens H, Vanden Eeckaut P (1995) Non-parametric efficiency, progress and regress measures for panel data: methodological aspects. Eur J Oper Res 80: 474–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. UNFCCC (2011) Greenhouse gas inventory data. 27 June 2011
  36. Yörük BK, Zaim O (2005) Productivity growth in OECD countries: a comparison with malmquist indices. J Comp Econ 33(2): 401–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics, Institute of Energy EconomicsUniversity of CologneCologneGermany

Personalised recommendations