IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i9p3224-d168718.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspectives of Ecological Footprint in European Context under the Impact of Information Society and Sustainable Development

Author

Listed:
  • Simona Ioana Ghita

    (Department of Statistics and Econometrics, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romana Square, 15-17 Dorobanți St., Sector 1, 010552 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Andreea Simona Saseanu

    (Department of Business, Consumer Sciences and Quality Management, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romana Square, 6-8, 010374 București, Romania)

  • Rodica-Manuela Gogonea

    (Department of Statistics and Econometrics, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romana Square, 15-17 Dorobanți St., Sector 1, 010552 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Catalin-Emilian Huidumac-Petrescu

    (Department of Economics and Economic Policies, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romana Square, 15-17 Dorobanți St., Sector 1, 010552 Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

The perspective of ecological footprint, which is a tool for measuring and monitoring the sustainability of the new information society and the higher degree of openness in the European economy powered by the globalization process, was approached from the viewpoint of accelerated technical, scientific, and innovative progress. This research aims at identifying and forecasting patterns of environmental footprint behavior in European countries, depending on factors reflecting the innovation activity, the degree of economic freedom, and EU membership status. In the article, three factors are identified that explain to a large extent the variation of the ecological footprint values: employment in foreign controlled enterprises, eco-innovation index, and region. The statistical and econometric methods used in the analysis are aimed at applying a Proportional-Odds Cumulative Logistic regression model in order to verify the existence of the association between the statistical variables and to forecast the likelihood of changing the ecological footprint from a lower to a higher score under the impact of selected factors by quantifying their influence. The results have led to the conclusion that, by applying the model, both the share of the employed population in the foreign-controlled enterprises and the eco-innovation index will have a significant direct influence on the variability in the ecological footprint (through the odds-ratio). Referring to the EU membership, the model shows that non-EU member countries or newer EU member countries are predominantly assigned low ecological footprint scores.

Suggested Citation

  • Simona Ioana Ghita & Andreea Simona Saseanu & Rodica-Manuela Gogonea & Catalin-Emilian Huidumac-Petrescu, 2018. "Perspectives of Ecological Footprint in European Context under the Impact of Information Society and Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3224-:d:168718
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3224/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3224/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Lenzen & D. Moran & K. Kanemoto & B. Foran & L. Lobefaro & A. Geschke, 2012. "International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 486(7401), pages 109-112, June.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M. & Verbruggen, Harmen, 1999. "Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the 'ecological footprint'," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 61-72, April.
    3. Lukas Figge & Kay Oebels & Astrid Offermans, 2017. "The effects of globalization on Ecological Footprints: an empirical analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 863-876, June.
    4. Sevil Acar & Ahmet Atil Asici, 2015. "Does Income Growth Relocate Ecological Footprint?," Working Papers 938, Economic Research Forum, revised Sep 2015.
    5. Ivan Haščič & Nick Johnstone & Fleur Watson & Christopher Kaminker, 2010. "Climate Policy and Technological Innovation and Transfer: An Overview of Trends and Recent Empirical Results," OECD Environment Working Papers 30, OECD Publishing.
    6. Raphael Calel & Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2016. "Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence from the European Carbon Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 173-191, March.
    7. De Marchi, Valentina, 2012. "Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 614-623.
    8. Bel, Germà & Joseph, Stephan, 2018. "Climate change mitigation and the role of technological change: Impact on selected headline targets of Europe's 2020 climate and energy package," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3798-3807.
    9. Bagliani, Marco & Bravo, Giangiacomo & Dalmazzone, Silvana, 2008. "A consumption-based approach to environmental Kuznets curves using the ecological footprint indicator," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 650-661, April.
    10. Jia, Junsong & Deng, Hongbing & Duan, Jing & Zhao, Jingzhu, 2009. "Analysis of the major drivers of the ecological footprint using the STIRPAT model and the PLS method--A case study in Henan Province, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2818-2824, September.
    11. Eun Kyung Jang & Mi Sun Park & Tae Woo Roh & Ki Joo Han, 2015. "Policy Instruments for Eco-Innovation in Asian Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-29, September.
    12. Kim, Hyeyoung & House, Lisa A. & KIm, Tae-Kyun, 2016. "Consumer perceptions of climate change and willingness to pay for mandatory implementation of low carbon labels: the case of South Korea," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(4), October.
    13. Maria Urbaniec, 2015. "Sustainable Development Indicators in Poland: Measurement and System Evaluation," Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, Centre for Strategic and International Entrepreneurship at the Cracow University of Economics., vol. 3(1), pages 119-134.
    14. Marian Zaharia & Aurelia Pătrașcu & Manuela Rodica Gogonea & Ana Tănăsescu & Constanța Popescu, 2017. "A Cluster Design on the Influence of Energy Taxation in Shaping the New EU-28 Economic Paradigm," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    15. Feng, Y.Y. & Chen, S.Q. & Zhang, L.X., 2013. "System dynamics modeling for urban energy consumption and CO2 emissions: A case study of Beijing, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 44-52.
    16. Cemal Atici, 2009. "Carbon emissions in Central and Eastern Europe: environmental Kuznets curve and implications for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 155-160.
    17. Fiala, Nathan, 2008. "Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 519-525, November.
    18. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    19. Soyoung Park & Se-Yeong Hamm & Hang-Tak Jeon & Jinsoo Kim, 2017. "Evaluation of Logistic Regression and Multivariate Adaptive Regression Spline Models for Groundwater Potential Mapping Using R and GIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-20, July.
    20. Jenerette, G. Darrel & Wu, Wanli & Goldsmith, Susan & Marussich, Wendy A. & John Roach, W., 2006. "Contrasting water footprints of cities in China and the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 346-358, May.
    21. Baabou, Wafaa & Grunewald, Nicole & Ouellet-Plamondon, Claudiane & Gressot, Michel & Galli, Alessandro, 2017. "The Ecological Footprint of Mediterranean cities: Awareness creation and policy implications," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 94-104.
    22. Carola Grebitus & Bodo Steiner & Michele Veeman, 2013. "Personal Values and Decision Making: Evidence from Environmental Footprint Labeling in Canada," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(2), pages 397-403.
    23. Siche, J.R. & Agostinho, F. & Ortega, E. & Romeiro, A., 2008. "Sustainability of nations by indices: Comparative study between environmental sustainability index, ecological footprint and the emergy performance indices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 628-637, July.
    24. Domingo Nevado-Peña & Víctor-Raúl López-Ruiz & José-Luis Alfaro-Navarro, 2015. "The Effects of Environmental and Social Dimensions of Sustainability in Response to the Economic Crisis of European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-15, June.
    25. Richard T. Carson, 2010. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve: Seeking Empirical Regularity and Theoretical Structure," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 3-23, Winter.
    26. Thi Anh Dam & Markus Pasche & Niclas Werlich, 2017. "Trade Patterns and the Ecological Footprint - a theory-based Empirical Approach," Jena Economics Research Papers 2017-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    27. A. Hoekstra & A. Chapagain, 2007. "Water footprints of nations: Water use by people as a function of their consumption pattern," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(1), pages 35-48, January.
    28. Walsh, Conor & O'Regan, Bernadette & Moles, Richard, 2009. "Incorporating methane into ecological footprint analysis: A case study of Ireland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1952-1962, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sorin-Iulian Cioacă & Silvia-Elena Cristache & Mariana Vuță & Erika Marin & Mihai Vuță, 2020. "Assessing the Impact of ICT Sector on Sustainable Development in the European Union: An Empirical Analysis Using Panel Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Haiqian Ke & Shangze Dai & Haichao Yu, 2022. "Effect of green innovation efficiency on ecological footprint in 283 Chinese Cities from 2008 to 2018," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2841-2860, February.
    3. Kęstutis Biekša & Aurelija Zonienė & Violeta Valiulė, 2021. "Sustainable Investment—A Solution to Reduce Environmental Footprint," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, May.
    4. Xiaoman Liu & Jingying Fu & Dong Jiang & Jianwu Luo & Chenxi Sun & Huiming Liu & Ruihong Wen & Xuefeng Wang, 2018. "Improvement of Ecological Footprint Model in National Nature Reserve Based on Net Primary Production (NPP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Umberto Lucia & Debora Fino & Giulia Grisolia, 2022. "A thermoeconomic indicator for the sustainable development with social considerations," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2022-2036, February.
    6. Adriana AnaMaria Davidescu & Simona Andreea Apostu & Andra Madalina Pantilie & Bogdan Florian Amzuica, 2020. "Romania’s South-Muntenia Region, towards Sustainable Regional Development. Implications for Regional Development Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-46, July.
    7. Russell Tatenda Munodawafa & Satirenjit Kaur Johl, 2019. "Big Data Analytics Capabilities and Eco-Innovation: A Study of Energy Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, August.
    8. Umberto Lucia & Giulia Grisolia, 2021. "The Gouy-Stodola Theorem—From Irreversibility to Sustainability—The Thermodynamic Human Development Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-13, April.
    9. Liu, Xiaoxi & Razzaq, Asif & Shahzad, Mohsin & Irfan, Muhammad, 2022. "Technological changes, financial development and ecological consequences: A comparative study of developed and developing economies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    10. Sharma, Rajesh & Sinha, Avik & Kautish, Pradeep, 2021. "Does financial development reinforce environmental footprints? Evidence from emerging Asian countries," MPRA Paper 108161, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2021.
    11. Marco Filippo Torchio & Umberto Lucia & Giulia Grisolia, 2020. "Economic and Human Features for Energy and Environmental Indicators: A Tool to Assess Countries’ Progress towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rodica-Manuela Gogonea & Simona Ioana Ghita & Andreea Simona Saseanu, 2020. "Biocapacity—Premise of Sustainable Development in the European Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    3. Decun Wu & Jinping Liu, 2020. "Threshold Effects of Restraining Factors on China’s Provincial Ecological Footprint in the Process of Urbanization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Ren, Shenggang & Hu, Yucai & Zheng, Jingjing & Wang, Yangjie, 2020. "Emissions trading and firm innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    5. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    6. Silvio Franco & Barbara Pancino & Angelo Martella, 2021. "Mapping National Environmental Sustainability Distribution by Ecological Footprint: The Case of Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Weijiang Liu & Mingze Du & Yuxin Bai, 2021. "Mechanisms of Environmental Regulation’s Impact on Green Technological Progress—Evidence from China’s Manufacturing Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.
    8. Teixidó-Figueras, Jordi & Duro, Juan Antonio, 2015. "The building blocks of International Ecological Footprint inequality: A Regression-Based Decomposition," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 30-39.
    9. Jin, Wei & Xu, Linyu & Yang, Zhifeng, 2009. "Modeling a policy making framework for urban sustainability: Incorporating system dynamics into the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2938-2949, October.
    10. Gu, Qiwei & Wang, Hongqi & Zheng, Yinan & Zhu, Jingwen & Li, Xiaoke, 2015. "Ecological footprint analysis for urban agglomeration sustainability in the middle stream of the Yangtze River," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 86-99.
    11. Stephen Morse & Ioannis N. Vogiatzakis, 2014. "Resource Use and Deprivation: Geographical Analysis of the Ecological Footprint and Townsend Index for England," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(8), pages 1-23, July.
    12. Tilmann Rave & Ursula Triebswetter & Johann Wackerbauer, 2013. "Koordination von Innovations-, Energie- und Umweltpolitik," ifo Forschungsberichte, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 61.
    13. Sevil Acar & Ahmet Atil Asici, 2015. "Does Income Growth Relocate Ecological Footprint?," Working Papers 938, Economic Research Forum, revised Sep 2015.
    14. Wei Sun & Junli Li & Wenxi Qu, 2022. "Sustainability evolution and factors based on ecological footprint: A case study of Rizhao, China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 132-150, March.
    15. Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar & Cañal-Fernández, Verónica & Antomil-Ibias, José, 2014. "Using TOPSIS for assessing the sustainability of government bond funds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-17.
    16. Decun Wu & Jinping Liu, 2020. "Spatial and Temporal Evaluation of Ecological Footprint Intensity of Jiangsu Province at the County-Level Scale," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Syrovátka, Miroslav, 2020. "On sustainability interpretations of the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    18. Mathis Wackernagel & Gemma Cranston & Juan Carlos Morales & Alessandro Galli, 2014. "Ecological Footprint accounts," Chapters, in: Giles Atkinson & Simon Dietz & Eric Neumayer & Matthew Agarwala (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Development, chapter 24, pages 371-396, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Johan Lilliestam & Anthony Patt & Germán Bersalli, 2021. "The effect of carbon pricing on technological change for full energy decarbonization: A review of empirical ex‐post evidence," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), January.
    20. Bel, Germà & Joseph, Stephan, 2018. "Climate change mitigation and the role of technological change: Impact on selected headline targets of Europe's 2020 climate and energy package," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3798-3807.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3224-:d:168718. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.