Skip to main content

Sociopolitical and economic elements to explain the environmental performance of countries

Environmental Science and Pollution Research volume 24, pages 3006–3026 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

The present research explains environmental performance using an ecological composite index as the dependent variable and focusing on two national dimensions: sociopolitical characteristics and economics. Environmental performance is measured using the Composite Index of Environmental Performance (CIEP) indicator proposed by García-Sánchez et al. (2015). The first model performs a factor analysis to aggregate the variables according to each analyzed dimension. In the second model, the estimation is run using only single variables. Both models are estimated using generalized least square estimation (GLS) using panel data from 152 countries and 6 years. The results show that sociopolitical factors and international trade have a positive effect on environmental performance. When the variables are separately analyzed, democracy and social policy have a positive effect on environmental performance while transport, infrastructure, consumption of goods, and tourism have a negative effect. Further observation is that the trade-off between importing and exporting countries overshadows the pollution caused by production. It was also observed that infrastructure has a negative coefficient for developing countries and positive for developed countries. The best performances are in the democratic and richer countries that are located in Europe, while the worst environmental performance is by the nondemocratic and the poorest countries, which are on the African continent.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Antweiler W, Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2001) Is free trade good for the environment? Am Econ Rev 91(4):877–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audigier F (2000) Basic concepts and core competencies for education for democratic citizenship. Council for Cultural Co-operation, Council of Europe, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett S, Graddy K (2000) Freedom, growth, and the environment. Environ Dev Econ 4:433–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beladi H, Chao CC, Hazari BB, Laffargue JP (2009) Tourism and the environment. Resour Energy Econ 31:39–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benchekroun H, Chaudhuri AR (2014) Transboundary pollution and clean technologies resource and energy. Economics 36:601–619

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernauer T, Koubi V (2006) Effects of political institutions on air quality. Ecol Econ 68:1355–1365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilgen S (2014) Structure and environmental impact of global energy consumption. Renew Sust Energ Rev 38:890–902

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond P (1999) Basic infrastructure for socio-economic development, environmental protection and geographical desegregation: South Africa’s unmet challenge. Geoforum 30:43–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bravo G (2014) The human sustainable development index: new calculations and first critical analysis. Ecol Indic 37:145–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley R (2011) Tourism and environment. Annu Rev Environ Resour 36:397–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns S, Newson C (2006) Predict and decide. Aviation, climate change and UK policy. Environmental Change Institute, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson F, Lundström S (2001) Political and economic freedom and the environment: the case of CO2 emissions. In: Working papers in economics 29, second version. Department of Economics, Göteborg University, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  • Caviglia-Harris JL, Chambers D, Kahn JR (2009) Taking the “U” out of Kuznets a comprehensive analysis of the EKC and environmental degradation. Ecol Econ 68:1149–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman L (2007) Transport and climate change: a review. J Transp Geogr 15:354–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole MA (2007) Corruption, income and the environment: an empirical analysis. Ecol Econ 62:637–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costabile F, Allegrini I (2008) A new approach to link transport emissions and air quality: an intelligent transport system based on the control of traffic air pollution. Environ Model Softw 23(3):258–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cracolici MF, Cuffaro M, Nijkamp P (2010) The measurement of economic, social and environmental performance of countries: a novel approach. Soc Indic Res 5:339–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl R (1994) A democratic dilemma: system effectiveness versus citizen participation. Political Science Quarterly 109(1):23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damania R, Fredriksson PG, List JA (2003) Trade liberalization, corruption, and environmental policy formation: theory and evidence. J Environ Econ Manag 46(3):490–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Haan M (2002) Disclosing international trade dependencies in environmental pressure indicators: the domestic consumption perspective. In: De Bresson C (ed) 14th international conference on input–output techniques. Montréal, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Dessens O, Anger A, Barker T, Pyle J (2014) Effects of decarbonising international shipping and aviation on climate mitigation and air pollution. Environ Sci Pol 44:1–10

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diakoulaki D et al (1995) Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: the critic method. Comput Oper Res 22(7):763–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinda S (2005) A theoretical basis for the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecol Econ 53:403–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbie M, Dail D (2013) Robustness and sensitivity of weighting and aggregation in constructing composite indices. Ecol Indic 29:270–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duarte R, Mainar A, Sánchez-Chóliz J (2010) The impact of household consumption patterns on emissions in Spain. Energy Econ 32:176–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faiz A (1993) Automotive emissions in developing countries-relative implications for global warming, acidification and urban air quality. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 27(3):167--186

  • Farzin YH, Bond CA (2006) Democracy and environmental quality. J Dev Econ 81:213–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredriksson P, Vollebergh HRJ, Dijkgraaf E (2004) Corruption and energy efficiency in OECD countries: theory and evidence. J Environ Econ Manag 47:207–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorino DJ (2011) Explaining national environmental performance: approaches, evidence, and implications. Policy Science 44:367–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Sánchez IM, Almeida TAN, Camara RPB (2015) A proposal for a composite index of environmental performance (CIEP) for countries. Ecol Indic 48:171–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Moltó MJ, Varvarigos D (2013) Emission taxes and the adoption of cleaner technologies: the case of environmentally conscious consumers. Resour Energy Econ 35:486–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladstone W, Curley B, Shokri MR (2013) Environmental impacts of tourism in the Gulf and the Red Sea. Mar Pollut Bull 72:375–388

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gössling S (2000) Sustainable tourism development in developing countries: some aspects of energy use. J Sustain Tour 8(5):410–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gössling S (2002) Global environmental consequences of tourism. Glob Environ Chang 12:283–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulliver J, Briggs DJ (2004) Personal exposure to particulate air pollution in transport microenvironments. Atmos Environ 38(1):1–8

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta A (2010) Transparency in global environmental governance: a coming of age? Global Environmental Politics 10(3):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajduová Z, Andrejovskýa P, Beslerová S (2014) Development of quality of life economic indicators with regard to the environment. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 110:747–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halkos GE, Tzeremes NG (2014) Public sector transparency and countries’ environmental performance: a nonparametric analysis. Resour Energy Econ 38:19–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He G, Zhang L, Lu Y (2009) Environmental impact assessment and environmental audit in large-scale public infrastructure construction: the case of the Qinghai–Tibet railway. Environ Manag 44:579–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu A, Lloyd A, Emerson JW (2013) What progress have we made since Rio? Results from the 2012 environmental performance index (EPI) and pilot trend EPI. Environ Sci Pol 33:171–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • House F (2014) Freedom in the world 2014: the annual survey of political rights and civil liberties. Rowman & Littlefield

  • Huber E, Ragin C, Stephens JD (1993) Social democracy, Christian democracy, constitutional structure, and the welfare state. Am J Sociol 99(3):711–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerret D, Shvartzvald R (2012) Explaining differences in the environmental performance of countries: a comparative study. Environmental Science & Technology 46:12329–12336

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehtonene M (2004) The environmental-social interface of sustainable development: capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecol Econ 49(2):199–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Q, Reuveny R (2006) Democracy and environmental degradation. Int Stud Q 50:935–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindstedt C, Naurin D (2010) Transparency is not enough: making transparency effective in reducing corruption. International Political Science Review 31(3):301–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machado G, Schaeffer R, Worrell E (2001) Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil: an input–output approach. Ecol Econ 39:409–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsden G, Rye T (2010) The governance of transport and climate change. J Transp Geogr 18:669–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason M (2008) Transparency for whom? Information disclosure and power in global environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics 8(2):8–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midlarsky M (1998) Democracy and the environment: an empirical assessment. J Peace Res 35:341–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongelli I, Tassielli G, Notarnicola B (2006) Global warming agreements, international trade and energy/carbon embodiments: an input–output approach to the Italian case. Energy Policy 34:88–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mukherjee S, Chakraborty D (2013) Is environmental sustainability influenced by socioeconomic and sociopolitical factors? Cross-country empirical analysis. Sustain Dev 21(6):353–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munksgaard J, Pedersen KA, Wien M (2000) Impact of household consumption on CO2 emissions. Energy Econ 22:423–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller DB, Liu G, Løvik AN, Modaresi R, Pauliuk S, Steinhoff F, Brattebø H (2013) Carbon emissions of infrastructure development. Environmental Science & Technology 47:11739–11746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murakami F, Sulzbach A, Pereira GM, Borchardt M, Sellitto MA (2015) How the Brazilian government can use public policies to induce recycling and still save money? J Clean Prod 96:94–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obiedkov S, Klimushkin M, Shabanova M, Zaytsev D (2013) A multidimensional model for analyzing democratic development in central and Eastern Europe. Transit Stud Rev 20(2):191–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2008) Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide. OECD Publishing, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Ryan R, de Miguel CJ, Millerc S, Munasinghe M (2005) Computable general equilibrium model analysis of economywide cross effects of social and environmental policies in Chile. Ecol Econ 54:447–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pemstein D, Meserve SA, Melton, J (2010) Democratic compromise: A latent variable analysis of ten measures of regime type. Polit Anal 18(4):426–449. doi:10.1093/pan/mpq020

  • Schmitt RJ, Osenberg CW (1996) Detecting Ecological Impacts: Concepts and Applications in Coastal Habitats. Hardcover Editor

  • Roca J (2003) Do individual preferences explain the environmental Kuznets curve? Ecol Econ 45:3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocheleau J (1999) Democracy and ecological soundness. Ethics and the Environment 4(1):39–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultink G (2000) Critical environmental indicators: performance indices and assessment models for sustainable rural development planning. Ecol Model 130:47–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva VP, Werf HMGV, Spies A, Soares SR (2010) Variability in environmental impacts of Brazilian soybean according to crop production and transport scenarios. J Environ Manag 91:1831–1839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjöstedt M, Jagers SC (2014) Democracy and the environment revisited: the case of African fisheries. Mar Policy 43:143–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Söderbaum P, Brown J (2010) Democratizing economics. Pluralism as a path towards sustainability Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Ecological Economics Reviews 1185:179–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stroup, Richard L., 2003. Economic Freedom and Environmental Quality. Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 73–90.

  • Suh S (2004) Functions, commodities and environmental impacts in an ecological–economic model. Ecol Econ 48:451–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan Y (2014) Transparency without democracy: the unexpected effects of China’s environmental disclosure policy, governance: an international journal of policy. Administration and Institutions 27(1):37–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolmasquim MT, Machado G (2003) Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 8(2):139–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vieira J, Moura F, Viegas JM (2007) Transport policy and environmental impacts: the importance of multi-instrumentality in policy integration. Transp Policy 14:421–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welsch H (2004) Corruption, growth and the environment: a cross-country analysis. Environ Dev Econ 9:663–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann T, Lenzen M, Turner K, Barrett J (2007) Examining the global environmental impact of regional consumption activities – part 2: review of input–output models for the assessment of environmental impacts embodied in trade. Ecol Econ 61:15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong JK (2015) A dilemma of green democracy. Political Studies. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12189

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams PW, Ponsford IF (2009) Confronting tourism’s environmental paradox: transitioning for sustainable tourism. Futures 41:396–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolsink M (2010) Contested environmental policy infrastructure: socio-political acceptance of renewable energy, water, and waste facilities. Environ Impact Assess Rev 30:302–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao C (2013) Public attitudes toward science and technology and concern for the environment: testing a model of indirect feedback effects. Environ Behav 45:113–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • York R, Clark B (2010) Critical materialism: science, technology, and environmental sustainability. Sociol Inq 80(3):475–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, F. E.C., 2000. International trade and industrial emissions in Brazil: an input–output approach. XIII International Conference on Input–Output Techniques, Macerata, Italy, 2000. Available in: http://policy.rutgers.edu/cupr/iioa/iioa.htm.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior/Brazil (CAPES) for financial support.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Federal University of Campina Grande, R. Aprigio Veloso, 882, B. Universitario, Campina Grande, PB, 58.429-900, Brazil

    Thiago Alexandre das Neves Almeida

  2. University of Salamanca, Campus Miguel de Unamuno. Edificio FES, Av. Francisco Tomás y Valiente, s/n, 37007, Salamanca, Spain

    Thiago Alexandre das Neves Almeida & Isabel-María García-Sánchez

Authors
  1. Thiago Alexandre das Neves Almeida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isabel-María García-Sánchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thiago Alexandre das Neves Almeida.

Additional information

Highlights

Sociopolitical and international trade increases environmental performance.

Democracy and social policy have a positive effect on environmental performance.

Transport, infrastructure, tourism, and consumption of goods cause ecological damage.

The best environmental performances are in the democratic and richer countries.

Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Almeida, T.A.d., García-Sánchez, IM. Sociopolitical and economic elements to explain the environmental performance of countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24, 3006–3026 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-8061-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-8061-7

Keywords

  • Environmental performance
  • Sociopolitical characteristics
  • Economic aspects