Comparative Analysis of Eco-Innovation Index—A Case Study of Slovakia, Czech Republic, and Poland

Abstract

This article presents a comparative analysis of eco-innovation across the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Poland. Eco-innovation, defined as the development and application of new products and processes that contribute to environmental sustainability, is essential for addressing global environmental challenges. The study examines several dimensions of eco-innovation, including eco-innovation outputs, eco-innovation activities, resource efficiency, and socio-economic outcomes. Through a detailed assessment of these dimensions, the research highlights the performance and progress of each country in implementing eco-innovations. The findings reveal significant differences in eco-innovation outputs and activities, with implications for resource efficiency and socio-economic benefits. Ultimately, the article ranks the three countries based on their overall eco-innovation performance, providing insights into their respective strengths and areas for improvement. This comparative analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of eco-innovation dynamics in Central Europe and offers policy recommendations to enhance environmental sustainability in the region.

1. Introduction

In an era of growing climate challenges and the drive to transform economies towards sustainable development, the role of countries’ eco-innovations is becoming increasingly important. The Eco-Innovation Index, developed by the European Commission, is one of the key tools for measuring countries’ progress in implementing green technologies, policies, and practices. This article focuses on comparing the eco-innovation ability of Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia—three Central and Eastern European countries with a common political heritage, a similar level of economic development, and membership in the European Union. The analysis aims to identify factors influencing the position of each of these countries in the eco-innovation activities and to assess the effectiveness of the pro-ecological actions taken.

Monitoring the eco-innovation capacity of countries is crucial for several reasons—environmental, economic, and political. Here are the main reasons why it is important for promoting sustainable development: assessing competitiveness, environmental policy-making, international comparison and cooperation, and protecting health and quality of life. The examination of the eco-innovation activities through an eco-index about energy is necessary, given the significant impact of the energy sector on the environment. Energy production and consumption are among the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions, as well as other forms of environmental pollution. The eco-index allows for an objective assessment of the environmental performance of various energy sources and represents an important tool in decision-making on the transition to sustainable and low-carbon energy solutions. At the same time, it provides a basis for assessing the effectiveness of public policies and investments, and allows for comparison of performance between countries or companies in the context of international climate commitments. At a time when ESG criteria are becoming increasingly important, it is becoming a key indicator for a sustainable development strategy.

The determinant of the development of each country is not only its human capital and natural capital, but also innovation and the system of financial support [1]. Nowadays, innovation and innovative activities are an important element of companies’ activities and their strategies [2,3,4]. Innovative activities focus mainly on processes [2,5,6], but they can help to create a more resource-efficient economy.

Many studies have been conducted to determine the determinants of eco-innovation, where they were analyzed at a general level [7,8,9,10]. There is consistency in the literature that eco-innovation depends to a greater or lesser extent on regulation [11,12]. However, there is still great variation in the definitions of innovations that contribute to reducing the negative impact of human activity on the environment [10]. The mentioned results in terms such as eco, sustainable, environmental, green, and renewable are used interchangeably in the context of innovation [13,14].

The issue of climate change and the role of innovation in mitigating its negative effects are current and researched [15,16,17,18,19]. The impact of innovation on renewable energy is still being discussed. Some studies show that process innovations negatively affect the development of renewable energy [20]. Technological innovations are positively associated with carbon dioxide emissions [21]. Research also shows that the low level of renewable energy in the energy mix of Central and Eastern European countries is due to a low level of innovation, not to a lack of commitment. That is why the importance of constantly increasing the level of innovation of the entire economy is also emphasized. It is the basis for a successful energy transformation [22]. From the perspective of the goals of implementing the European Green Deal and the Sustainable Development Goals, and climate change, the issue of innovations replacing the share of energy from fossil fuels with renewable energy in the European Union seems desperately significant. It shows that this area is still research-oriented.

Innovations, especially eco-innovations, help develop products or services, processes, and new technologies. They also help to develop business models that are needed to change production and consumption patterns. Nowadays, a key element of the Circular Economy Action Plan is supporting innovative projects related to resource efficiency and the circular economy. A significant indicator of innovation in the field of environmental protection is the eco-innovation index. It is one of the thematic indicators in the European Union’s Resource Efficiency Scoreboard.

Eco-innovation is a relatively recent construct in the literature, which more and more researchers and academics consider as one of the strategies that generates a higher level of sustainable and business performance. According to Maldonado-Guzman and Garza-Reyes [23], little is known about the influence of eco-innovation practices on sustainable performance and business performance. Xavier et al. [24] highlighted the potential of eco-innovation as a management strategy, finding that companies face organizational barriers to the implementation of eco-innovation. The presented contribution tries to provide information on how to overcome such barriers. At the same time, eco-innovation (EI) has been recognized as a key element in carrying out the transition from a linear to a circular system of production and consumption. However, according to de Jesus et al. [25], there is no comprehensive understanding of the connections between CE and EI. In their study, they filled this gap from the view of macro, meso, and micro levels. Cheng and Shiu [26] pointed out how open innovation (OI) increases eco-innovation performance. Their results indicate that in highly dynamic environments, alliance management capability complements inbound/outbound strategies to increase eco-innovation performance in dynamic environments. Jo et al. [27] evaluated the validity of an eco-innovation index developed to support the sustainable development goal from the view of TBL—triple bottom line—in 49 Asia–Europe countries, and found that TBL significantly explains eco-innovations, and that many nations still have room to improve their competitiveness through eco-innovations. Nations with unbalanced eco-innovation growth are urged to implement new strategies to balance their growth. Therefore, this research contributes to extending research on eco-innovation.

It has a great contribution to studying EI from the view of individual countries. Measuring eco-innovation at the national level and making comparisons across countries may allow us to benchmark performance and foster policy learning. M.S. Park et al. [28] assessed two indices developed in two different regions—the Republic of Korea and the European Union—and found both are promising, having great potential to contribute towards sustainable development goals. B. Peyravi et al. [29] studied eco-innovation performance in Lithuania, presenting the positive impact of eco-innovation activities in the EU on Lithuania, and vice versa. Lithuania was affected positively by the eco-innovation activities of other EU nations, and its position is among the lowest in terms of eco-innovation adoption. According to O. Fikirli et al. [30], Turkey has a better position in some of the components of the Eco-IS Index than the EU countries; on the other hand, in some components, Turkey lags behind these countries. To increase eco-innovation performance and to get ahead of the mean of Eco-IS components for EU countries, Turkey needs to increase the proportion of researchers and public spending on research and development. Eco-innovation has been facilitated in developed countries, specifically OECD members and European countries, through action plans. Recently, eco-innovation policies have emerged in developing countries. Thus, Jang et al. (2014) [31] analyzed eco-innovation policies in 17 Asian countries, indicating there are similar and different policy approaches to eco-innovation in Asian countries. A. Ryszko (2017) studied the situation in Poland, finding pivotal drivers of the product and EI speed, number, and quality [32]. L. Lesakova and P. Laco [33] assessed the eco-innovation performance during the last three years in Slovakia using the eco-innovation index and found the main measurements to improve the state in the mentioned area through comparison with the EU 28-average. Modern innovation policy is becoming increasingly environmentally oriented. E. Loucanova and M. Nosalova [34] tried to find the current situation in EI development in Slovakia, showing that, in general, Slovakia is in the group of countries that are moderate innovators. Similarly, the goal of the presented paper is to find out the EI position in all V4 (Vysegrad group) countries. B. Dziura [35] researched the eco-innovation development of the Slovak Republic as a small advanced economy, showing that the progress of Slovakia towards eco-innovation development is ranked as below average by the EU. Moreover, the study found the main obstacles to EI development in Slovakia: low educational power, high outflow of young and well-educated population, difficulties in starting new businesses, etc.

The situation in V4 in 2010–2015 was studied by J. Baran et al. [36], who found the relation to average values achieved in the EU member states. The goal of the presented paper is to find out how the situation from 2015 to the present time has changed.

EI is important to study not only at the national level but also at the level of the organizational unit. Such a case was studied, for example, by G. Ciobanu et al. [37], who stated that the objective of eco-innovation is to accelerate sustainable industrial production, when decision-makers must support innovation, mainly in SMEs, and in green small- and medium-sized enterprises [37]. The topic of eco-innovation is very important, especially in SMEs from developing economies. Pachero et al. (2018) [38] identified what the determinant factors for the successful adoption of eco-innovation in Brazilian SMEs are, considering the regulations affecting the sector, and where the SMEs operate, and providing the information for academics, policymakers, and practitioners to improve eco-innovative practices. Small- and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises (SMMEs) are under pressure to adopt eco-innovation to improve their operations. This was studied by D.Y. Geng et al. [39] in China, revealing that the implementation of eco-innovation and environmental and economic performance improvements are different between eco-innovation planners and adopters. Also, S.I. Ceptureanu et al. [40] studied SMMEs (SME manufacturing companies) in Romania, finding that eco-innovation capability has a direct and positive effect on sustainability-driven innovation practices, encouraging SMMEs to adopt cleaner production practices, waste handling, and recycling.

The other level to study EI is from the view of the industrial sector, where EI is used. For example, A. Alvarez-Herranz et al. [41] dealt with a special area of EI, considered that energy innovation accumulates over time, and presented empirical evidence on how energy innovation contributes to reducing energy intensity and environmental pollution as well. Eco-innovation in energy sectors in Slovakia was studied by J.H. Vicianova et al. [42], comparing the EI performance in EU countries, confirming the relationship between investments in environmental technologies and increasing sales of ecological products and services, which provide opportunities for EI development in Slovakia. M. Abu Toha and S.K. Johl [43] studied the eco-innovation practices of the energy sector in Malaysia and found that there is an upward or downward trend in the energy sector in terms of disclosing eco-innovation practices. Y.J. Miao et al. [44] studied the EI situation in the area of tourism in Pakistan and found an association between eco-friendly performance and how the employees perceive the importance of EI. G. Maldonado-Guzman and J.A. Garza-Reyes [23] studied EI particularly in the automotive and auto parts industry, indicating that eco-innovation practices have a positive influence on both sustainable performance and business performance. Finally, it is important to study EI from the view of the post-pandemic situation, since the development of eco-innovations is influenced presently by the post-COVID-19 pandemic [45]. E. Loucanova and M. Olsiakova [46] studied such influence in the area of logistics about GDP and found that GDP belongs to key factors, enabling effective eco-innovation support.

In this connection, the article has two purposes. First, it analyzes three poorly developing countries in terms of five thematic areas. Secondly, it shows the ranking of the average level of the index for the thematic area and compares the achieved eco-innovation index of the analyzed countries with each other and with EU member states. Finally, it is worth asking the question of what actions must be taken at the level of the analyzed EU member states to influence the taking of actions and the introduction of eco-innovations.

2. Materials and Methods

The research sample consists of three countries: the Slovak Republic, the Czech Republic, and Poland. Justification for selecting countries for analysis (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) is as follows:

• Common historical and political conditions.

All three countries belonged to the Eastern Bloc in the past, which means a similar starting point of the economic transformation after 1989. This allows for a more honest comparison of the pace and effects of implementing ecological innovations in the context of a similar industrial heritage and economic structure.

• Similar level of economic development.

Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia belong to the group of Central and Eastern European countries and show a similar level of GDP per capita and sectoral structure of the economy. This allows for an assessment of differences in the effectiveness of pro-ecological policies without the strong influence of economic factors.

• Membership in the European Union.

All three countries have been members of the EU since 2004, which means that they are subject to the same legal framework, funds, and objectives of the sustainable development policy and the Green Deal. Therefore, it is possible to analyze to what extent they use the same instruments to develop eco-innovations.

• Regional similarities and rivalry.

As neighboring countries, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia often cooperate and compete economically, as well as in terms of innovation and energy transformation. Comparing their achievements in the eco-innovation index is important for understanding regional dynamics and opportunities for cross-border cooperation.

• Differences in eco-innovation index scores.

Despite similarities, these countries achieve different scores in the eco-innovation index. Analyzing these differences can help identify success factors and barriers to the development of green innovation in the Central European region.

The analyzed countries are considered underdeveloped, they are located next to each other, and in the study conducted by [47], they were defined as “lightweight eco-innovation” (Slovakia and Czech Republic) and “grinding/desperate eco-innovation” (Poland). The best results were achieved in the Czech Republic, the worst in Poland. So, it was decided to compare these countries with each other. Data collection was performed using the quantitative method. For the study, data were obtained from Eurostat, the Statistical Office of the European Union. The pan-European statistics published there allow comparisons to be made between countries.

This study compares the last five years, i.e., 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021, of the mentioned EU countries, which belong to the group of underdeveloped countries. The methodology of the conducted research is presented in Figure 1, which includes several stages.

The three countries covered by this study were compared based on collected statistical data on thematic areas, in particular, eco-innovation inputs, eco-innovation activities, eco-innovation outputs, resource efficiency outcomes, and socio-economic outcomes.

Eco-innovation input and eco-innovation output are key pillars of assessing the eco-innovation performance of countries—for example, within the Eco-Innovation Index (EIO Index), developed by the European Environment Agency (EEA) and used by the European Commission. Their importance compared to other eco-indices lies mainly in their focus on the process and results of eco-innovation, i.e.,:

• Eco-Innovation Input → What a country invests in supporting eco-innovation. The index includes the following:
  • Public and private investments in research and development in the field of eco-technologies;
  • Financing from green funds;
  • Number of researchers, scientific teams, and workplaces focused on eco-innovation;
  • Policy instruments and support such as subsidies, tax breaks, or green public procurement.

Its importance lies in pointing out the country’s potential for the future development of eco-innovation, helping to identify basic capacities and the institutional background and focusing on the preparatory phase before concrete outputs are generated.

2.

Eco-Innovation Output → What a country actually produces as a result of eco-innovation.

This index includes the following:

• Number of patents for eco-technologies;
• New green products and services;
• Share of eco-technologies in exports;
• Commercialization of eco-research.

The significance of the index lies in pointing to the concrete results and impacts of investments and policies; the index measures efficiency and innovation in the market and serves as an indicator of technological progress and the green business sector (Eurostat Manual, 2024) [48].

Data from the Present State of Problem

This subchapter will focus on the documents that shape the strategic framework focused on green entrepreneurship. The first document is a document regarding environmental policy, which has its strategy up to the period 2030. This document, known as Greener Slovakia, was produced by the Ministry of the Environment of the Slovak Republic and serves as a replacement for an older document that fulfilled the policy vision from 1993. A Greener Slovakia can respond to various challenges, most often related to climate and economic trends. The document aims to maintain the use and protection of natural resources, air protection, and the green economy itself. Key objectives include the continuation of the construction of sewage networks, which will increase the proportion of clean wastewater, so that by 2030, the proportion in urban settlements will be 100% and, conversely, in smaller settlements, it will be around 50%. Another objective is to increase the amount of green space so that, especially in regional towns, residents will have access to green space within ten minutes or so. The strategy is also to focus on other objectives:

-

Increasing the proportion of agriculture that is organic and that will account for approximately 14 percent;

-

A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of around 45 percent, which can be compared with 2005;

-

In the transport sector, the birth of sustainable solutions;

-

The cessation of coal-fired electricity generation;

-

Applying measures to ensure less risk of flooding in the country.

Within the framework of the green economy, the strategy provides for the following:

-

Increasing the recycling rate of municipal waste;

-

Reducing landfilling;

-

Public procurement to account for 70 percent of total public procurement;

-

Increasing support for green innovation;

-

Bringing Slovakia closer to the EU average in terms of energy complexity (Circular Slovakia, 2024; Ministry of Living environment Slovakia) [49].

The second strategic document is the so-called vision associated with the strategy for the development of Slovakia until 2030, which was compiled in 2019 by the mandate of the then Deputy Prime Minister for Informatization. This document points to challenges that are international, which Slovakia is still struggling with today and will certainly continue to struggle with. This strategy documents the conditions that need to be fulfilled for the creation of a system through which it will be easier to plan and organize public administration at the national level. It is divided into four programs dealing with development:

-

Natural and human resources, where it is necessary to mention that it is necessary to prevent the burden on the environment by substances that pollute it. In connection with the only defined objective is to reduce the production of emission gases, then also to improve the adaptation of communities to the adverse effects of climate change, that is, by 2030 to reduce the damage caused by floods and to create measures to retain water through surface runoff to a level of approximately 25%. As the last objectives, we can add the change in the intensity of our economy and the change to a clean energy sector;

-

Innovations in the field of sustainable economy, which is all about the overall change in the economy and maximizing the use of our resources;

-

A better quality of life for all of society—a significant vision is to have an impact on passenger transport’s share of total transported volume at around 35%;

-

Lastly, multi-level governance that will be delivered closer to citizens [50].

The third document of the strategy is the strategy to focus on the low-carbon development of Slovakia with a time horizon up to 2030 and to present what Slovakia should look like in these years up to 2050. Economic experts, as well as ministers from the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economy, discussed this document in more detail. Collaborators at the Slovak University of Technology and the Slovak Academy of Sciences were also helpful. Together, they have sought to demonstrate the country’s commitment to avoiding the impacts of climate change, and this document therefore clearly describes and defines the measures that will be used to achieve that outcome. According to the analysis, definitions were developed. The first model counts on the impact of measures that have already been implemented in practice; the second model, on the contrary, counts on impacts that have been adopted but unfortunately have not yet had the opportunity to be implemented, but it is possible that the implementation will take place but based on newly changed legislation. If the species model is implemented, this strategy foresees targets where greenhouse gas emissions will be around 50% compared to 1990. The strategy also includes reducing CO₂ emissions in sectors that fall under the European system, where these allowances are traded. They should be reduced by almost 54% compared with 2005. Emissions in sectors that do not fall directly into the scheme should fall by almost 20% compared with 2005. If this prediction were to be realized and the share of renewables were to reach 19 percent and energy efficiency were to reach 28.5 percent, this would mean that our country would be ahead of the targets set by the EU. Another plan that they have formulated for this strategy is that if the Slovak economy is decarbonized, it will require additional investments over the next 10 years. This means that at EUR 8 billion, and from 2031 to 2050, these figures may increase by EUR 188 billion, which means that these investments represent about 4.2% of GDP per year, and these are investments that will be financed by the public sector, businesses, and private individuals [49].

The penultimate speech was made in 2019 by the Ministry of Economy in conjunction with the response to the regulation from the EU, which is Regulation 2018/1999, which talks about EU governance and climate action. This plan from the Ministry has been renewed, complementing the energy policy in Slovakia, and has been in force since 2014. The following objectives are set to be met:

-

Greenhouse gas emissions in ETS sectors are expected to fall by 20% compared to 2005;

-

Energy efficiency will reach 30%;

-

The share of renewables and its impact will have by 2030 an overall value of 19%;

-

Within transport, these sources will reach 14%.

The Eco-Innovation Index plays an important role in assessing the level of advancement of countries in the transition to a low-emission, resource-efficient, and sustainable economy. It is a comprehensive indicator that not only measures the level of technological innovation related to environmental protection, but also takes into account aspects such as the effectiveness of public policies, market support, research and development activities, and social awareness. Thanks to this, the index enables a multidimensional analysis of the ability of countries to implement green solutions and monitor progress in achieving climate and energy goals.

The importance of the index also results from its comparative function—it allows for identifying leaders and countries lagging in the implementation of eco-innovations, which can inspire the transfer of good practices and shape the directions of support under the EU cohesion policy. For public decision-makers, enterprises, and research institutions, the index is a diagnostic and prognostic tool, indicating both strengths and areas requiring intervention. In the context of the energy transformation and the European Union Green Deal, its role as an instrument for assessing progress in sustainable development takes on particular importance.

3. Results

We have chosen the performance of small- and medium-sized enterprises in three countries: the Slovak Republic, the Czech Republic, and Poland. We have compared these performances to each other.

3.1. The Slovak Republic

Based on a source from the Green Action Plan and the promotion of green business in the Slovak Republic, Slovakia is just below the EU average in this performance comparison [50]. Slovakia reports results in areas where businesses want to earn more and more of their turnover from selling products that are green or similar green services. The share is 26%, and with the EU, it is 20% above average. We can also see a good average for SMEs creating offers to produce these green products and services. We can talk about 30%, and the average is 25%. On the other hand, the share of enterprises receiving support from public sources to produce green products was rated the worst, and in this connection, Slovakia describes the second-worst percentage result in the entire EU. For the measures that have been introduced about the business of small- and medium-sized enterprises, we can state that the highest percentage, 58%, is energy saving, followed by water saving, and, in third place, waste minimization. With lower percentages are measures such as recycling, selling waste materials, renewable energy, and products that are easier to use and repair. These measures were developed to achieve greater efficiency in the use of resources. The preferences of SMEs in Slovakia and the forms of their support are also significant as they strive to gain resource efficiency. Slovakia reports here results that are three times better than, for example, the EU average. The eco-innovation activities in which Slovakia has been involved are what we can evaluate best. The individual parts of the innovation performance are as follows [Figure 2]:

Eco-innovation inputs: the public finances that financed research and development in 2018 recorded only 0.08% of GDP, and specifically in the environmental area, only 0.01% of GDP. These values show that compared to the European average, these are very low.

Eco-innovation outputs: information from 2016 shows that in that year, only almost 3.30 patents were issued in Slovakia per million inhabitants, but even so, these figures are below the significant European average of almost 13.5 patents per million inhabitants.

Eco-innovation activities: SMEs are lagging in designing products that are easily sustainable, and therefore only 0.15% of the enterprises surveyed produce these products. However, Slovakia has issued the certificates that have been awarded, namely ISO 14001.

3.2. The Czech Republic

Similarly to Slovakia, SMEs in the Czech Republic are also performing below average in environmental terms compared to the EU. The results that turned out to be the best seem to be those that assess the profit from the sale ability of green products and services. We can talk about 28% of enterprises, which compares with 20% of the European average. As far as the production of these products is concerned, the Czech Republic is improving more and more, as the market share increased in 2018, with a 6% market share. Supporting SMEs in increasing resource efficiency, we also see improving results. On the other hand, the worst results are in enterprises that, despite public funding support for the production of green products, were only 8%, but the European average was almost 26%. If we look at the assessments of the European Commission, it evaluates the Czech Republic as a country with positive results, which, similarly to the Slovak Republic, has adopted several measures that will improve many areas of the development of the green economy in the country.

The percentage measures are waste and its minimization with a value of 64%, then energy saving with a percentage of 61%, and last but not least, water and material saving. Furthermore, recycling and reusing materials, selling waste materials or energy, and using them from renewable sources are also mentioned. As far as eco-innovation is concerned, the Czech Republic achieves results that can be assessed as below average when compared with the European average. With the comparison between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, the components of the index score for achieving better efficiency differ significantly. For the Czech Republic, we will talk about five components, whereas for the Slovak Republic, there were only three components in number. The Czech Republic has the best results in the area of innovation activities and socio-economic outputs, and, on the contrary, the lagging results are measured in the area of outputs and outcomes, focusing on resource utilization. At the same time, the rankings are as follows (Figure 3):

Eco-innovation outputs: public expenditure that focused on R&D on the environment and energy sector in 2018 was 0.5% of GDP, which can be assessed as equal to the European average.

Eco-innovation activities: SMEs in the Czech Republic were actively involved in the implementation of innovations and the design of products and services. This is 0.33% of enterprises interested in offering sustainable products, and therefore, the Czech Republic ranked higher among EU countries due to this fact. In addition, as in Slovakia, the Czech Republic has been awarded a high number of ISO 14001 certificates.

Eco-innovation input: patents per million inhabitants was 6%, which is considered to be far below average.

Results focused on resource efficiency: The country lags behind in efficiency, but still, material productivity is almost EUR 1.8 per kg, which is, however, below average. Energy production is similarly low. Higher productivity can be seen for water.

Socio-economic results: the Czech innovating SMEs focused on ecology are successful in exporting products, where the Czech Republic achieved a 0.8% share of exports in 2018, which means that the share is higher than any other country in the EU.

3.3. Poland

The third country in this article is Poland. The overall performance of Polish SMEs in the environmental field for the analysis period is above the EU average. Although Poland achieved good results in providing support for increasing the efficient use of resources (54%) and for the production of green products (31%), the share of these enterprises was lower than the EU average (89%).

In the case of saving materials, Poland looks slightly better than the EU average (60% compared to 57% of the EU average), as well as in the case of water saving (49% versus 47%). However, it is lagging in measures aimed at recycling (24% compared to 42% of the average) and the use of energy from renewable sources (4% versus 14%).

In comparison to the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, Poland has five components of the index score for achieving better efficiency. The overall performance of Poland in every aggregate component scores significantly below average results—the most significant lag in eco-innovation inputs and eco-innovation activities. This is an outgrowth of the overall low rate of investment in innovations and the low innovativeness of the Polish economy. There is only one socio-economic component in which Poland recorded good results. The rankings are as follows (Figure 4):

Eco-innovation outputs: Public expenditure on R&D in the environment and energy sector reached just 0.02% of GDP in 2018. Poland ranked lower than the European average.

Eco-innovation activities: In contrast to Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland have a poor rating because of the low number of ISO 14001 certificates awarded. The European average reaches a value of 172 companies per million inhabitants, whereas in Poland it was only 77 companies. Not many SMEs (0.17%) have introduced eco-innovation for producing environmentally sustainable products. In this component, Poland is also far below the European average (0.25%).

Eco-innovation output: a low share of registered eco-innovation patents and a low number of published academic publications in the field of eco-innovations in Poland resulted in a very poor rating within this component as well.

Results focused on resource efficiency: Within this summary component, the country also received a very low rating. The European average for long-term low material productivity was equal to the level of EUR 2.28 per kilogram, whereas Poland has exactly half of it. Water productivity is also low. Only in the case of energy productivity did Poland reach results closer to the EU average.

Socio-economic results: Only in this aggregate component of the index did Poland receive a high rating. There is a relatively large segment of SMEs, focusing on an environmental business, which employ 1% of all employees and participate in total exports by 0.6%.

4. Discussion

A comparison of the average levels of indicators (average of the analysis periods) obtained by the analyzed countries in individual eco-innovation areas was a complement to the case study. A ranking was performed for each area (

Table 1. Ranking of the average level of the index for thematic area and country in the 2017–2021 period.

Country	Eco-Innovation Inputs	Eco-Innovation Activities	Environmental Results	Socio-Economic Results	Eco-Innovation Index
Poland	2	3	3	3	3
Czech Republic	1	1	2	1	1
Slovak Republic	3	2	1	2	2

). Then, the frequency of a specific place in the ranking by a given country was tabulated (

Table 2. The frequency of a specific place in the ranking for the thematic area in the 2017–2021 period.

Country	1st Place	2nd Place	3rd Place
Poland	0	1	4
Czech Republic	4	1	0
Slovak Republic	1	3	1

). It showed that the Czech Republic achieved the highest results in four of the five areas analyzed, and none of them had the lowest average index value. The only area in which it took second place in terms of average was Environmental results. It can be said that the situation of this country is better in the context of eco-innovation than the other two countries. The Slovak Republic is in the middle. It has achieved/gained only one highest indicator value (Environmental results) and one lowest value (Eco-innovation inputs). In other areas, it occupied the middle place. Poland is in the worst situation—it did not receive the highest value in any of the areas, but was ranked last in four areas. The only area where it finds itself between the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic is Eco-innovation inputs.

It should be mentioned that eco-innovation refers to various innovations that reduce the impact on the environment or use natural resources more effectively. They are essential to achieving the goals of the European Green Deal and the transition to a climate-neutral and circular economy. Looking more broadly at the time range (comparing 2013 and 2022, Figure 5) and based on the above analysis results and the statistical comparison of eco-innovation in the analyzed countries, it should also be noted that all analyzed countries have done a good job in recent years and have recorded significant improvements in resource efficiency and environmental and climate-related initiatives.

In terms of the eco-innovation performance of individual EU member states in 2013 and 2022, the Czech Republic ranks in the middle of the group, the Slovak Republic ranks 7th from the bottom, and Poland ranks penultimate. After Poland, only Bulgaria takes last place. Index scores improved for all EU member states except Romania. Greece achieved the greatest growth. The main reason for its result was the increase in government funds and expenditure on research and development (R&D) in the field of environment and energy.

Examples of initiatives related to the environment and climate may include the following.

In the Czech Republic, the “National Strategy for Intelligent Development” (NSIR) was adopted in 2018, which emphasizes the promotion of research, development, and innovation in the field of environmental technologies. According to the European Commission, the Czech Republic ranks among the EU’s medium-developed countries regarding environmental innovation. In 2020, a report on eco-innovation in the Czech Republic was published, focusing on waste treatment, renewable energy, and clean technologies in industry. The report showed that 1200 green technologies were registered in the Czech Republic in 2018. Therefore, the Czech Republic immediately jumped to a high level in the field of eco-innovation and eco-businesses.

Slovakia has relatively low investment in research and innovation, including in the area of eco-innovation, within the EU. In 2019, the “Strategy of Intelligent Specialized Entrepreneurship of Slovakia” (SISPSR) was released, which emphasizes the promotion of research, development, and innovation in the field of environmental technologies. According to the European Commission, Slovakia ranks among the medium-developed EU countries in the field of eco-innovation. In 2020, a report on environmental innovation in water management in Slovakia was published, which showed that several environmental technologies are being developed in Slovakia, such as wastewater treatment plants, pumping stations using renewable energy sources, and pollution reduction technologies.

Like the Czech Republic, Poland has in recent years placed a strong emphasis on promoting eco-innovation within its industry. In 2019, the “National Development Plan” (NDP) for the period 2016–2020 was released, which set environmental protection goals, including the promotion of eco-friendly technologies. According to the European Commission, Poland ranks among the EU’s medium-developed countries in terms of eco-innovation. In 2020, a survey on eco-innovation was conducted in Poland, which showed that the areas of renewable energy, energy saving, and greenhouse gas emission reduction are particularly developing in Poland. Many initiatives in Poland support eco-innovation, such as grant programs for innovative projects and training programs for businesses.

5. Conclusions

In the field of eco-innovation, Poland has been significantly below the average in comparison to Europe for a long time (since 2010). The most significant fact is that Poland lags in eco-innovation expenditures and eco-innovation activities.

The environmental area has been gaining more and more interest in each country in recent years, e.g., due to the shift away from coal, the Green Deal policy, climate neutrality introduced in EU guidelines and documents, and the decarbonization strategy. Governments are preparing a framework for strategic support for environmental protection, more efficient use of resources, green business, eco-innovation, and the circular economy. The general trend in society is becoming more and more aware of the risks, the growing consumer demand for ecological products and services, and the desire of companies to save on operating and production costs, which are only some of the reasons for launching many ecological initiatives.

Nowadays, entrepreneurs face difficulties in developing green products and services in less developed countries, as described and analyzed in this article. Many entrepreneurs in these countries are creative, well-educated, and innovative people, so they can run their responsible and sustainable business models, but they need capital. Environmental sustainability is related to the financial means to achieve it, and these are influenced by several factors, e.g., the level of development of the country, existing infrastructure, political will, technological readiness, and sustainability goals. For example, according to the IEA (International Energy Agency), to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030 (Net Zero), the estimation of the global investment is over USD 4 billion annually to 2030 [53]. That is why there is a need for programs to support building green entrepreneurship, e.g., subsidies include EU funds available for 2021–2027, Horizon Europe [54,55], especially in countries like the Slovak Republic, Poland, and the Czech Republic.

We hope that this general trend, new strategies, and programs in this area will allow us to improve the condition of green business in the Slovak Republic, as well as the Czech Republic and Poland, shortly.

This article is limited to the comparison of only three countries through an eco-index. The Eco-innovation Index (and its Input/Output components), in contrast to other indexes (state of environment, environmental performance and SDG 12—Sustainable Consumption and Production), focuses specifically on innovation potential and outputs from an ecological perspective—i.e., not only how a country protects nature, but how it develops technological solutions for this protection [56,57].

The research area also needs analysis of more factors, such as the GDP and population of the countries, which would be the future orientation of the research as suggested by Costantini et al. (2023) [58]. We should also analyze whether these conclusions apply to other countries and regions with similar or different levels of economic development, and the possible differences, for example, with the EU situation [59], compared with China [60], since China has a positive and significant linkage with the sustainable development index and eco-index. This will also be subject to future publications.

Application of Results and Research Significance: Our work clearly demonstrates the application of results in the area of innovation capabilities and their impact on socio-economic aspects. We aimed to elaborate on this topic within the chosen scope and believe that the contributions of our results are evident even without further modifications.