Advertisement

Quality & Quantity

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 1141–1163 | Cite as

Sustainability, welfare and efficiency of nations

  • C.-H. DiMariaEmail author
Article
  • 124 Downloads

Abstract

Adjusted net saving (ANS) has emerged as a leading indicator of sustainability. In addition, changes in ANS translate into changes in welfare (Hamilton in World Bank Econ Rev 13(2):333–356, 1999). This document uses a new data envelopment analysis model to assess efficiency of countries taking into account not only GDP creation but also sustainability and welfare by adding ANS in the set of desirable outcomes. Given that ANS can be negative a new anti-efficiency DEA model allowing for negative data recently proposed by DiMaria (2018) is used. Combining efficiency and anti-efficiency greatly increases discrimination of countries and proposes a more accurate ranking of countries.

Keywords

Data envelopment analysis Negative output Anti efficient frontier Weak sustainability Welfare 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledge the support of the Observatoire de la Compétitivité, Ministère de l’Economie, DG Compétitivité, Luxembourg and STATEC.

References

  1. Aida, K., Cooper, W.W., Pastor, J.T., Sueyoshi, T.: Evaluating water supply services in Japan with RAM: a range-adjusted measure of inefficiency. Omega 26(2), 207–232 (1998)Google Scholar
  2. Akerlof, G.A.: An Economic Theorist’s Book of Tales. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984)Google Scholar
  3. Arestis, P., Chortareas, G., Desli, E.: Financial development and productive efficiency in OECD countries: an exploratory analysis. Manch. Sch. 74(4), 417–440 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. Bekker, S.: Flexicurity in the European semester: still a relevant policy concept? J. Eur. Public Policy 25(2), 175–192 (2018)Google Scholar
  5. Börsch-Supan, A., Bucher-Koenen, T., Kutlu-Koc, V., Goll, N.: Dangerous flexibility retirement reforms reconsidered. Econ. Policy 33(94), 315–355 (2018)Google Scholar
  6. Brundtland, G.H.: Our Common Future. Technical report, World Commission on Environment and Development, United Nations (1987)Google Scholar
  7. Ceccobelli, M., Gitto, S., Mancuso, P.: ICT capital and labour productivity growth: a non-parametric analysis of 14 OECD countries. Telecommun. Policy 36(4), 282–292 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. Charnes, A., Cooper, W., Rhodes, E.: Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2(6), 429–444 (1978)Google Scholar
  9. Charnes, A., of Texas at Austin. Center for Cybernetic Studies, U., Cooper, W., Rousseau, J., (U.S.), N.S.F., Semple, J.: Data Envelopment Analysis and Axiomatic Notions of Efficiency and Reference Sets. Research report (University of Texas at Austin. Center for Cybernetic Studies). Center for Cybernetic Studies, University of Texas at Austin (1987)Google Scholar
  10. Chen, L., Wang, Y., Lai, F., Feng, F.: An investment analysis for China’s sustainable development based on inverse data envelopment analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 1638–1649 (2017)Google Scholar
  11. Clinch, J.P., Dunne, L., Dresner, S.: Environmental and wider implications of political impediments to environmental tax reform. Energy Policy 34(8), 960–970 (2006). Social and political responses to ecological tax reform in EuropeGoogle Scholar
  12. Cooper, W.W., Pastor, J.T., Borras, F., Aparicio, J., Pastor, D.: BAM: a bounded adjusted measure of efficiency for use with bounded additive models. J. Prod. Anal. 35(2), 85–94 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. Dasgupta, P., Maler, K.-G.: Net national product, wealth, and social well-being. Environ. Dev. Econ. 5(1), 69–93 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. DiMaria, C.-H.: Sustainability matters. Qual. Quantity 48(3), 1257–1269 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. DiMaria, C.-H.: An indicator for the economic performance and ecological sustainability of nations. Environ. Model. Assess. (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-018-9626-2
  16. Dong, B., Wei, W., Ma, X., Li, P.: On the impacts of carbon tax and technological progress on China. Appl. Econ. 50(4), 389–406 (2017)Google Scholar
  17. Dyckhoff, H., Allen, K.: Measuring ecological efficiency with data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 132(2), 312–325 (2001). Data envelopment analysisGoogle Scholar
  18. Emrouznejad, A., Yang, G.: A survey and analysis of the first 40 years of scholarly literature in DEA: 1978–2016. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 61, 4–8 (2018)Google Scholar
  19. Gavin, M.K.: Labor Market Rigidities and Unemployment: The Case of Severance Costs. Technical report (1986)Google Scholar
  20. Goulder, L.H., Parry, I.W.H.: Instrument choice in environmental policy. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 2(2), 152–174 (2008)Google Scholar
  21. Grzebyk, M., Stec, M.: Sustainable development in EU countries: concept and rating of levels of development. Sustain. Dev. 23(2), 110–123 (2015). SD-15-0022Google Scholar
  22. Guan, J., Zuo, K.: A cross-country comparison of innovation efficiency. Scientometrics 100(2), 541–575 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. Hamilton, K.: Genuine savings rates in developing countries. World Bank Econ. Rev. 13(2), 333–356 (1999)Google Scholar
  24. Hanley, N., Dupuy, L., McLaughlin, E.: Genuine savings and sustainability. J. Econ. Surv. 29(4), 779–806 (2015)Google Scholar
  25. Hediger, W.: Sustainable development and social welfare. Ecol. Econ. 32(3), 481–492 (2000)Google Scholar
  26. Henderson, D.J., Russell, R.R.: Human capital and convergence: a production-frontier approach. Int. Econ. Rev. 46(4), 1167–1205 (2005)Google Scholar
  27. Lepinteur, A.: The shorter workweek and worker wellbeing: evidence from Portugal and France. Labour Econ. (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2018.05.010
  28. Lewis, J., Giullari, S.: The adult worker model family, gender equality and care: the search for new policy principles and the possibilities and problems of a capabilities approach. Econ. Soc. 34(1), 76–104 (2005)Google Scholar
  29. Liu, G., Brown, M.T., Casazza, M.: Enhancing the sustainability narrative through a deeper understanding of sustainable development indicators. Sustainability 9(6), 1078 (2017)Google Scholar
  30. Loayza, N., Schmidt-Hebbel, K., Servn, L.: What drives private saving across the world? Rev. Econ. Stat. 82(2), 165–181 (2000)Google Scholar
  31. Lopez, J.H., Schmidt-Hebbel, K., Servn, L.: How effective is fiscal policy in raising national saving? Rev. Econ. Stat. 82(2), 226–238 (2000)Google Scholar
  32. Lovell, C.K., Pastor, J.T.: Units invariant and translation invariant DEA models. Oper. Res. Lett. 18(3), 147–151 (1995)Google Scholar
  33. Morse, S.: Developing sustainability indicators and indices. Sustain. Dev. 23(2), 84–95 (2015). SD-14-0072.R3Google Scholar
  34. Pillarisetti, J.: The World Bank’s genuine savings measure and sustainability. Ecol. Econ. 55(4), 599–609 (2005)Google Scholar
  35. Premik, F., Stanisawska, E.: The impact of inflation expectations on polish consumers spending and saving. East. Eur. Econ. 55(1), 3–28 (2017)Google Scholar
  36. Pullinger, M.: Working time reduction policy in a sustainable economy: criteria and options for its design. Ecol. Econ. 103, 11–19 (2014)Google Scholar
  37. Ray, S.C., Desli, E.: Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries: comment. Am. Econ. Rev. 87(5), 1033–1039 (1997)Google Scholar
  38. Ray, S.C., Kim, H.J.: Cost efficiency in the US steel industry: a nonparametric analysis using data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 80(3), 654–671 (1995). Productivity analysis: parametric and non-parametric applicationsGoogle Scholar
  39. Shen, W., Zhang, D., Liu, W., Yang, G.: Increasing discrimination of dea evaluation by utilizing distances to anti-efficient frontiers. Comput. Oper. Res. 75, 163–173 (2016)Google Scholar
  40. Song, M., An, Q., Zhang, W., Wang, Z., Wu, J.: Environmental efficiency evaluation based on data envelopment analysis: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16(7), 4465–4469 (2012)Google Scholar
  41. Swan, T.W.: Economic growth and capital accumulation. Econ. Rec. 32(2), 334–361 (1956)Google Scholar
  42. van der Horst, D.: NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy 35(5), 2705–2714 (2007)Google Scholar
  43. Victor, P.A.: Indicators of sustainable development: some lessons from capital theory. Ecol. Econ. 4(3), 191–213 (1991)Google Scholar
  44. Wei, C., Ni, J., Sheng, M.: China’s energy inefficiency: a cross-country comparison. Soc. Sci. J. 48(3), 478–488 (2011). Chinese economy: issues and challengesGoogle Scholar
  45. Yamada, Y., Matsui, T., Sugiyama, M.: An inefficiency measurement method for management systems. J. Oper. Res. Soc. Jpn. 37(2), 158–168 (1994)Google Scholar
  46. Zhou, H., Yang, Y., Chen, Y., Zhu, J.: Data envelopment analysis application in sustainability: the origins, development and future directions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 264(1), 1–16 (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre Administratif Pierre WernerSTATEC ResearchLuxembourgLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations