Green growth and OECD countries: measurement of country performances through distance-based analysis (DBA)

Abstract

When we measure countries’ socioeconomic development, the standalone National Income approach does not to reflect well-being of the citizens. An analysis of a country's welfare should consider the combination of different aspects such as economic indicators, environmental and resource productivity, and economic opportunities. In the light of these discussions, the concept of green growth arose as a contemporary approach to reframe the mainstream growth model and to re-evaluate many of the investment decisions in meeting agricultural, energy and water needs and the resource demands of economic development. This paper evaluates the green growth performance of OECD countries by applying the I-distance method by integrating the economic, social, and environmental aspects of countries’ performances simultaneously. Using multivariate I-distance approach, selected green growth indicators and numerous different variables have been synthesized into one value. According to our analysis, Sweden, Luxemburg, Norway and Denmark occupy the top places by their outstanding green performance. On the other hand, Mexico, Poland and Greece are placed at the bottom as a consequence of their relatively weak environmental performance.

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

References

  1. Ateş, S. A. (2015). Development planning in twenty-first century: The case of green growth strategy in South Korea In Economic planning and industrial policy in the globalizing economy (pp. 345–354) Springer.

  2. Bagheri, A., & Hjorth, P. (2005). Monitoring for sustainable development: A systemic framework. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(4), 280–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Costanza, R., Erickson, J., Fligger, K., Adams, A., Adams, C., Altschuler, B., & Kelly, J. (2004). Estimates of the genuine progress indicator (GPI) for Vermont, Chittenden County and Burlington, from 1950 to 2000. Ecological Economics, 51(1), 139–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cracolici, M., Cuffaro, M., & Nijkamp, P. (2010). The measurement of economic, social and environmental performance of countries: A novel approach. Social Indicators Research, 95(2), 339–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9464-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dasgupta, P. (2008). Nature in economics. Environmental and Resource Economics, 39(1), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Distaso, A. (2007). Well-being and/or quality of life in EU countries through a multidimensional index of sustainability. Ecological Economics, 64(1), 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Djurovic, I., Jeremic, V., Bulajic, M., & Dobrota, M. (2017). A two-step multivariate composite I-distance indicator approach for the evaluation of Active Ageing Index. Journal of Population Ageing, 10(1), 73–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Duraiappah, A. (2014). Editorial. Dimesions, 4(1), 2–3.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Duraiappah, A., & Fernandes, C. (2014). GDP Reexemined. Dimesions, 4(1), 33–35.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hobijn, B., & Franses, P. H. (2001). Are living standards converging? Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 12(2), 171–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0954-349X(00)00034-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hugé, J., Le Trinh, H., Hai, P. H., Kuilman, J., & Hens, L. (2010). Sustainability indicators for clean development mechanism projects in Vietnam. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 12(4), 561–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ivanovic, B. (1977). Classification theory. Belgrade: Institute for Industrial Economic.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ivanovic, B., & Fanchette, S. (1973). Grouping and ranking of 30 countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, two distance-based methods compared. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jänicke, M. (2012). “Green growth”: From a growing eco-industry to economic sustainability. Energy Policy, 48, 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jeremic, V., Bulajic, M., Martic, M., Markovic, A., Savic, G., Jeremic, D., & Radojicic, Z. (2012). An evaluation of European countries’ health systems through distance based analysis. Hippokratia, 16(2), 170.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Jones, R. S., & Yoo, B. (2011). Korea’s green growth strategy: Mitigating climate change and developing new growth engines. New York: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jovanovic, M., Jeremic, V., Savic, G., Bulajic, M., & Martic, M. (2012). How does the normalization of data affect the ARWU ranking? Scientometrics, 93(2), 319–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kararach, G., Nhamo, G., Mubila, M., Nhamo, S., Nhemachena, C., & Babu, S. (2018). Reflections on the green growth index for developing Countries: A focus of selected African countries. Development Policy Review, 36, 432–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kasztelan, A. (2017). Green growth, green economy and sustainable development: Terminological and relational discourse. Prague Economic Papers, University of Economics, Prague, 2017(4), 487–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim, S. E., Kim, H., & Chae, Y. (2014). A new approach to measuring green growth: Application to the OECD and Korea. Futures, 63, 37–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kivezevic, S., Jeremic, V., Zarkic-Joksimovic, N., & Bulajic, M. (2012). Evaluating the Serbian banking sector: A statistical approach. Metalurgia International, 17(1), 171–174.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kuznets, S. (1973). Modern economic growth: Findings and reflections. The American Economic Review, 12, 247–258.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kuznets, S., & Murphy, J. T. (1966). Modern economic growth: Rate, structure, and spread. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lee, C. M., & Chou, H. H. (2018). Green growth in Taiwan—An application of the oecd green growth monitoring indicators. The Singapore Economic Review, 63(02), 249–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lyytimäki, J., Antikainen, R., Hokkanen, J., Koskela, S., Kurppa, S., Känkänen, R., & Seppälä, J. (2018). Developing key indicators of green growth. Sustainable Development, 26(1), 51–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mathews, J. A. (2012). Green growth strategies—Korean initiatives. Futures, 44(8), 761–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mihailovic, N., Bulajic, M., & Savic, G. (2009). Ranking of banks in Serbia. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research ISSN: 0354–0243 EISSN: 2334–6043, 19(2).

  28. Milenkovic, N., Vukmirovic, J., Bulajic, M., & Radojicic, Z. (2014). A multivariate approach in measuring socio-economic development of MENA countries. Economic Modelling, 38, 604–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2014.02.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S., & Olsson, L. (2007). Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics, 60(3), 498–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Niemeijer, D., & de Groot, R. S. (2008). A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecological Indicators, 8(1), 14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. OECD. (2011e). Towards green growth monitoring progress : OECD indicators (pp. 141). http://encompass.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/checkIP.cgi?access=gateway_standard%26url=http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264111356-en.

  32. OECD. (2014). The environmental and resource productivity of the economy (pp. 53–78). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264202030-7-en

  33. OECD. (2018). Green Growth Indicators. Retrieved 15 May, 2018, from http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=GREEN_GROWTH

  34. Radojicic, Z., Isljamovic, S., Petrovic, N., & Jeremic, V. (2012). A novel approach to evaluating sustainable development. Problemy Ekorozwoju: Studia filozoficzno-sozologiczne, 7(1), 81–85.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Samuelson, P. A., & Nordhaus, W. D. (2009). Economics. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Scrieciu, S., Rezai, A., & Mechler, R. (2013). On the economic foundations of green growth discourses: The case of climate change mitigation and macroeconomic dynamics in economic modeling. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 2(3), 251–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2010). Mismeasuring our lives: Why GDP doesn’t add up. London: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. UNCTAD. (1970). United Nations Conference on Trade and Development Research Division (Vol. The Research Memorandum No. 41). Geneva: United Nations.

  39. UNEP. (2011). Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication: Geneva.

  40. Zaman, K., Bin, A. A., Khan, A., Bin, M. N. M. R., Hamzah, T. A. A. T., & Hussain, S. (2016). Dynamic linkages among energy consumption, environment, health and wealth in BRICS countries: green growth key to sustainable development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 56, 1263–1271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seyithan Ahmet Ates.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ates, S.A., Derinkuyu, K. Green growth and OECD countries: measurement of country performances through distance-based analysis (DBA). Environ Dev Sustain (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01285-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • I-distance method
  • OECD countries
  • Green growth
  • Sustainable development
  • Beyond GDP