Ranking EU Countries According to Their Level of Success in Achieving the Objectives of the Sustainable Development Strategy
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results and Discussion
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
CSD | Commission on Sustainable Development |
EU | European Union |
MENA | Middle East and North Africa |
OECD | The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development |
References
- Brundtland, G.; Khalid, M.; Agnelli, S.; Al-Athel, S.; Chidzero, B.; Fadika, L.; Hauff, V.; Lang, V.; Lang, I.; Shijun, M.; et al. WCED-World Commission on Environment and Development. In Our Common Future; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1987; Available online: http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf (accessed on 20 February 2016).
- United Nations Sustainable Development. United Nations Conference on Environment & Development, Agenda 21, Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3–14 June 1992. Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2016).
- Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies, 3rd ed.; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 21 December 2012—Implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development and of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. 27 February 2013. Available online: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/67/203&Lang=E (accessed on 21 February 2016).
- United Nations, Commission on Sustainable Development. Report on the Twentieth Session (13 May 2011 and 20 September 2013); United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2013; Available online: http:// www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=E/CN.17/2013/4&Lang=E (accessed on 21 February 2016).
- Radojičić, Z.; Išljamović, S.; Petrović, N.; Jeremić, V. A novel approach to evaluating sustainable development. Probl. Ekorozw.-Probl. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 7, 81–85. [Google Scholar]
- Išljamović, S.; Jeremić, V.; Petrović, N.; Radojičić, Z. Colouring the socio-economic development into green: I-distance framework for counties’ welfare evaluation. Qual. Quant. 2015, 49, 617–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milenkovic, N.; Vukmirovic, J.; Bulajic, M.; Radojicic, Z. A multivariate approach in measuring socio-economic development of MENA countries. Econ. Model. 2014, 38, 604–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeremić, V.; Seke, K.; Radojičić, Z.; Jeremić, D.; Marković, A.; Slović, D.; Aleksić, A. Measuring health of countries: A novel approach. Health MED 2011, 5, 1762–1766. [Google Scholar]
- Jeremić, V.; Bulajić, M.; Martić, M. A fresh approach to evaluating the academic ranking of world universities. Scientometrics 2011, 87, 587–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popović, B.; Maletić, R. Grouping of municipalities of the Republic of Serbia based on development of small and medium agribusiness. Economics of Agriculture. 2008, pp. 151–161. Available online: http://www.ea.bg.ac.rs/images/Arhiva/2008/Broj%202%20-%202008%20=%20Issue%202%20-%202008.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2016).
- Maletić, R.; Popović, B. Ranking of Vojvodina municipalities based on efficiency of SMEs in agribusiness. Agroekonomika 2014, 43, 39–49. [Google Scholar]
- Maletić, R.; Popović, B. A Ranking of Serbian Districts Based on the Efficiency of SMEs in Agribusiness. Proceedings of the “Agriculture and Rural Development-Challenges of Transition and Integration Processes”, Belgrade, Serbia, September; Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade: Belgrade, Serbia, 2013; pp. 151–163. [Google Scholar]
- Halog, A.; Manik, Y. Advancing integrated systems modelling framework for life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 2011, 3, 469–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kudoh, Y.; Sagisaka, M.; Chen, S.S.; Elauria, J.C.; Gheewala, S.H.; Hasanudin, U.; Romero, J.; Sharma, V.D.; Shi, X. Region-Specific Indicators for Assessing the Sustainability of Biomass Utilisation in East Asia. Sustainability 2015, 7, 16237–16259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santiago-Brown, I.; Metcalfe, A.; Jerram, C.; Collins, C. Sustainability Assessment in Wine-Grape Growing in the New World: Economic, Environmental, and Social Indicators for Agricultural Businesses. Sustainability 2015, 7, 8178–8204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OECD. OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2008; Available online: http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/environment/oecd-environmental-outlook-to-2030_9789264040519-en#page1 (accessed on 8 March 2016).
- OECD. OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2012; Available online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264122246-en (accessed on 9 March 2016).
- World Bank Data. Available online: http://data.worldbank.org/ (accessed on 21 November 2015).
- Eurostat. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database (accessed on 22 November 2015).
- Ivanović, B. Discriminant Analysis; Science Books: Belgrade, Serbia, 1963. [Google Scholar]
- Ivanović, B. A Method of Establishing a List of Development Indicators; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 1973. [Google Scholar]
- Ivanović, B.; Fanchette, S. Grouping and Ranking of 30 Countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, Two Distance-based Methods Compared; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 1973. [Google Scholar]
- Ivanović, B. Classification Theory; Institute for Industrial Economic: Belgrade, Serbia, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Jeremić, V.; Išljamović, S.; Petrovic, N.; Radojičić, Z.; Marković, A.; Bulajić, M. Human development index and sustainability: What’s the correlation? Metal. Int. 2011, 16, 63–67. [Google Scholar]
- Campisi, D.; de Nicola, A.; Farhadi, M.; Mancuso, P. Discovering the impact of ICT, FDI and human capital on GDP: A cross-sectional analysis. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2013, 5, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Espina, P.Z.; Arechavala, N.S. An assessment of social welfare in Spain: Territorial analysis using a synthetic welfare indicator. Soc. Indic. Res. 2013, 111, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahdavi, S.; Alanis, E. Public expenditures and the unemployment rate in the American states: Panel evidence. Appl. Econ. 2013, 45, 2926–2937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Markusen, J. Putting per-capita income back into trade theory. J. Int. Econ. 2013, 90, 255–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davidson, E.A. You can’t Eat GNP: Economics as if Ecology Mattered; Perseus: Cambridge, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Cracolici, M.F.; Cuffaro, M.; Nijkamp, P. The Measurement of Economic, Social and Environmental Performance of Countries: A Novel Approach. Soc Indic Res. 2010, 95, 339–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nolte, E.; McKee, C.M. Measuringthe health of nations: Updating an earlier analysis. Health Aff. 2008, 27, 58–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chew, H.E.; Ilavarasan, P.V.; Levy, M.R. The Economic Impact of information and communication technologies (ICTs) on microenterprises in the context of development. EJISDC 2010, 44, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
- Miranda, L.C.M.; Lima, C.A.S. Trends and cycles of the internet evolution and worldwide impacts. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2012, 79, 744–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koster, F. Economic openness and welfare state attitudes: A multilevel study across 67 countries. Int. J. Soc. Welf. 2013, 21, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartmann-Hirsch, C. The State of the Luxembourg’s Welfare State: The Effects of the Crisis on a Corporatist Model Shifting to a Universalistic Model. CEPS/INSTEAD Working Papers. 2010. Available online: http://www.statistiques.public.lu/catalogue-publications/working-papers-CEPS/2010/44-2010.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2016).
- Alestalo, M.; Hort, S.E.O.; Kuhnle, S. The Nordic Model: Conditions, Origins, Outcomes, Lessons. Hertie School Governance Working Paper No. 41. 2009. Available online: https://www.hertie-school.org/fileadmin/images/Downloads/working_papers/41.pdf (accessed on 25 February 2016).
- Nordic Centre for Welfare and Social Issues. Focus on the Nordic Welfare Model. 2013. Available online: http://www.nordicwelfare.org/PageFiles/7117/Nordic_Welfare_Model_Web.pdf (accessed on 25 February 2016).
- Maletić, R.; Maletić, P.; Kreca, M.; Popović, B. Comparative analysis of ranking municipalities in Vojvodina using DEA and I-distance methods. Int. J. Agric. Stat. Sci. 2013, 9, 471–480. [Google Scholar]
CSD Indicator Themes | CSD indicators | Source |
---|---|---|
1. Poverty | 1.1 People at risk of poverty or social exclusion (% of total population) | Eurostat |
1.2 Improved sanitation facilities (% of population with access) | The World Bank | |
1.3 Improved water source (% of population with access) | The World Bank | |
2. Health | 2.1 Life expectancy at birth, total (years) | The World Bank |
2.2 Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) | The World Bank | |
2.3 Immunisation, DPT (% of children ages 12–23 months) | The World Bank | |
2.4 Immunisation, measles (% of children ages 12–23 months) | The World Bank | |
3. Education | 3.1 Early dropouts-education and training (% of the population aged 18–24 with a lower secondary education at most) | Eurostat |
3.2 Lifelong learning (% of the persons aged 25–64 who stated that they received education or training in the last 4 weeks) | Eurostat | |
3.3 Tertiary educational attainment age group 30–34 (% of the population aged 30–34 who have successfully completed tertiary studies ) | Eurostat | |
4. Demographics | 4.1 Population growth (annual %) | The World Bank |
5. Atmosphere | 5.1 PM 2.5 air pollution, population exposed to levels exceeding WHO guideline value (% of total) | The World Bank |
5.2 Greenhouse gas emissions (in CO2 equivalent) | Eurostat | |
6. Land | 6.1 Forest area (% of land area) | The World Bank |
7. Economic Development | 7.1 GDP per capita, PPP (current international $) | The World Bank |
7.2 Employment to population ratio, 15+, total (%) | The World Bank | |
7.3 Internet users (per 100 people) | The World Bank | |
7.4 Landline subscriptions (per 100 people) | The World Bank | |
7.5 Mobile telephone subscriptions (per 100 people) | The World Bank | |
7.6 Research and development expenditure (% of GDP) | Eurostat |
Indicators | R |
---|---|
GDP per capita, PPP (current international $) | 0.896 ** |
Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1000 live births) | 0.859 ** |
Population growth (annual %) | 0.804 ** |
Internet users (per 100 people) | 0.761 ** |
People at risk of poverty or social exclusion (%) | 0.717 ** |
Life expectancy at birth, total (years) | 0.697 ** |
Lifelong learning (%) | 0.686 ** |
Research and development expenditure (% of GDP) | 0.588 ** |
Improved sanitation facilities (%) | 0.512 ** |
Tertiary educational attainment age group 30–34 (%) | 0.473 * |
Employment to population ratio, 15+, total (%) | 0.424 * |
Landline subscriptions (per 100 people) | 0.403 * |
Greenhouse gas emissions (in CO2 equivalent) | 0.394 * |
Improved water source (% of population with access) | 0.345 |
PM 2.5 air pollution (% of total) | 0.266 |
Immunisation, DPT (% of children ages 12–23 months) | 0.235 |
Education and training dropouts (%) | 0.190 |
Forest area (% of land area) | 0.155 |
Mobile telephone subscriptions (per 100 people) | 0.094 |
Immunisation, measles (% of children ages 12–23 months) | 0.062 |
Country | I-squared Distance | Rank |
---|---|---|
Luxembourg | 95.32 | 1 |
Sweden | 70.44 | 2 |
Finland | 62.35 | 3 |
Netherlands | 51.94 | 4 |
Denmark | 51.24 | 5 |
France | 47.57 | 6 |
Germany | 47.37 | 7 |
Slovenia | 45.77 | 8 |
Austria | 44.55 | 9 |
United Kingdom | 44.42 | 10 |
Czech Republic | 43.43 | 11 |
Belgium | 43.05 | 12 |
Cyprus | 42.36 | 13 |
Malta | 40.81 | 14 |
Ireland | 40.54 | 15 |
Italy | 37.37 | 16 |
Spain | 36.58 | 17 |
Estonia | 36.49 | 18 |
Portugal | 35.30 | 19 |
Slovak Republic | 33.45 | 20 |
Greece | 33.23 | 21 |
Poland | 28.74 | 22 |
Hungary | 28.39 | 23 |
Croatia | 26.94 | 24 |
Latvia | 21.82 | 25 |
Lithuania | 20.29 | 26 |
Bulgaria | 17.42 | 27 |
Romania | 14.84 | 28 |
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Janković Šoja, S.; Anokić, A.; Bucalo Jelić, D.; Maletić, R. Ranking EU Countries According to Their Level of Success in Achieving the Objectives of the Sustainable Development Strategy. Sustainability 2016, 8, 306. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040306
Janković Šoja S, Anokić A, Bucalo Jelić D, Maletić R. Ranking EU Countries According to Their Level of Success in Achieving the Objectives of the Sustainable Development Strategy. Sustainability. 2016; 8(4):306. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040306
Chicago/Turabian StyleJanković Šoja, Svjetlana, Ana Anokić, Dana Bucalo Jelić, and Radojka Maletić. 2016. "Ranking EU Countries According to Their Level of Success in Achieving the Objectives of the Sustainable Development Strategy" Sustainability 8, no. 4: 306. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040306