Factors affecting Germany’s green development over 1990–2015: a comprehensive environmental analysis

  • Hasan RüstemoğluEmail author
Research Article


This study was aimed at providing a comprehensive environmental analysis of Germany from 1990 to 2015. First, an ecological footprint analysis of the country was conducted using bio-capacity and ecological footprint data. Second, possible decoupling of the country’s economic growth and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions was examined using the decoupling factor adopted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Third, the factors affecting aggregated and sector (electricity and heat production) emission changes were identified using the Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index (LMDI) method. The empirical findings revealed that Germany experienced a slowly decreasing ecological deficit over the entire period. The decoupling-factor calculations showed absolute decoupling of the country’s real GDP and CO2 emissions. Based on the LMDI calculations, per capita income and population had increasing impacts on aggregated emissions, whereas energy intensity and carbon intensity curbed them substantially. For electricity and heat production, economic activity was the only CO2-accelerating factor observed in the study period. In addition, the fuel structure effect, pollution effect, and electricity intensity considerably reduced the emissions of electricity and heat production. It, therefore, is possible to conclude that Germany is an impressive example of environmental sustainability for other nations.


Carbon dioxide emissions Ecological footprint Decomposition analysis Environmental sustainability Decoupling Green development 



  1. Ang BW (2005) The LMDI approach to decomposition analysis: a practical guide. Energy Policy 33:867–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ang BW (2015) LMDI decomposition approach: a guide for implementation. Energy Policy 36:233–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ang BW, Liu FL (2001) A new energy decomposition method: perfect in decomposition and consistent in aggregation. Energy 26:537–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagliani M, Galli A, Niccolucci V, Marchettini N (2008) Ecological footprint analysis applied to a sub-national area: the case of the province of Siena (Italy). J Environ Manag 86:354–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Daly HE (1990) Toward some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecol Econ 2:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Earth System Research Laboratory (2018) Global monitoring system. Trends in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Retrieved from Access date: August 2018
  7. Freitas LC, Kaneko S (2011) Decomposing the decoupling of CO2 emissions and economic growth in Brazil. Ecol Econ 70:1459–1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Global Footprint Network (2017) Advancing the science of sustainability. Ecological footprints and reserves. Retrieved from Access date: October 2017
  9. Hatzigeorgiou E, Polatidis H, Haralambopoulos D (2008) CO2 emissions in Greece for 1990–2002: a decomposition analysis and comparison of results using the arithmetic mean Divisia index and logarithmic mean Divisia index techniques. Energy 33:492–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kwon TH (2005) Decomposition of factors determining the trend of CO2 emissions from car travel in Great Britain (1970–2000). Ecol Econ 53:261–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lise W (2006) Decomposition of CO2 emissions over 1980–2003 in Turkey. Energy Policy 34:1841–1852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lopez NS, Sumabat AK, Yu KD, Hao H, Li R, Geng Y, Chiu ASF (2016) Decomposition analysis of Philippine CO2 emissions from fuel combustion and electricity generation. Appl Energy 164:795–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mahony TO, Zhou P (2012) The driving forces of change in energy-related CO2 emissions in Ireland: a multi-sectoral decomposition from 1990 to 2007. Energy Policy 44:256–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2002) The OECD environment program. Retrieved from Accessed October 2017
  15. Papagiannaki K, Diakoulaki D (2009) Decomposition analysis of CO2 emissions from passenger cars: the case of Greece and Denmark. Energy Policy 37:3259–3267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pardo CS, Perez SM, Morales GR (2012) Decomposition of energy consumption and CO2 emissions in Mexican manufacturing industries: trends between 1990 and 2008. Energy Sustain Dev 16:57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Paul S, Bhattacharya RN (2004) CO2 emission from energy use in India: a decomposition analysis. Energy Policy 32:585–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Renn O, Marshall JP (2016) Coal, nuclear and renewable energy policies in Germany: from the 1950s to the “energiewende”. Energy Policy 99:224–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rodriguez BS, Drummond P, Ekins P (2017) Decarbonizing the EU energy system by 2050: an important role for BEECS. Clim Pol 17:93–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rugani B, Roviani D, Hild P, Schmitt B, Benetto E (2014) Ecological deficit and use of natural capital in Luxembourg from 1995 to 2009. Sci Total Environ 468–469:292–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rüstemoğlu H (2016) Ekonomik büyümenin çevresel maliyeti: Türkiye ve İran ölçeğinde CO2 emisyonlarinin belirleyicileri (environmental cost of economic growth: the determinants of CO2 emissions in Iran and Turkey). ITOBIAD 5:2151–2168Google Scholar
  22. Rüstemoğlu H, Rodriguez A (2016) Determinants of CO2 emissions in Brazil and Russia between 1992 and 2011: a decomposition analysis. Environ Sci Pol 58:95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Timilsina GR, Shrestha A (2009) Factors affecting transport sector CO2 emissions growth in Latin American and Caribbean countries: an LMDI decomposition analysis. Int J Energy Res 33:396–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2017) Greenhouse gas inventory data. Retrieved from Access date: October 2017
  25. United States Energy Information Administration (2015) Germany’s key energy statistics. Retrieved from Access date: October 2017
  26. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2017) Air topics. Retrieved from Access date: August 2018
  27. Wackernagel M, Kitzes J, Moran D, Goldfinger S, Thomas M (2006) The ecological footprint of cities and regions: comparing resource availability with resource demand. Environ Urban 18:103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wei YM, Liu LC, Fan Y, Wu G (2007) Using LMDI method to analyze the change of China’s industrial CO2 emissions from final fuel use: an empirical analysis. Energy Policy 35:5892–5900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. World Bank (2017) World development indicators. Retrieved from Access date: October 2017
  30. Yoo SH, Lim HJ, Kwak SJ (2009) Industrial CO2 emissions from energy use in Korea: a structural decomposition analysis. Energy Policy 37:686–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhang YJ, Da YB (2015) The decomposition of energy-related carbon emissions and its decoupling with economic growth in China. Renew Sust Energ Rev 41:1255–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative SciencesCyprus International UniversityNicosiaTurkey

Personalised recommendations