Endeavouring to promote sustainability and citizens' well-being, and attempting to avoid or at least mitigate catastrophic climate change; the European Union adopted in 2019 the “Green Deal” as a new ...growth strategy, to thus become the first climate-neutral continent by 2050. As an intermediate 2030 target, it set the goals of at least 40% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, an increase to 32% share for renewable energy, and 32.5% increase in energy efficiency. Reaching these targets was estimated to require investments of €260 billion/year till 2030, which is 1.94% of EU's annual gross domestic product in 2020. The aim of this paper is to introduce a perspective that attempts to analyse relationships between two exceptionally important and ambitious simultaneous goals of the Green Deal: to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, as well as the Sustainable Developments Goals, all based on the sustainability environmental, economic and social pillars. The study shows that the link between these two goals, including the cost-benefit effects for all citizens, should be made clearer. Without adequate understanding and monitoring of the consequences of each action, and quantitative indicators for the environmental, economic and social sustainability pillars, the attainment of the goals would be subject to high uncertainty. With ongoing global changes and problems within and surrounding the European Union, implementation of the Green Deal without the noted adjustments poses a potential risk to sustainable development and to the European Union unity. Transition to climate neutrality can be sustainable only if supported by conviction and accord.
•The carbon neutrality - sustainable development link must be evidence-based.•The Green Deal focuses inadequately on social dimensions of SD.•Its high cost should be born without major risk to the SDGs.•Need for quantitative socio-economic targets, continuous monitoring and evaluation.•The proposed support mechanisms is unlikely to reach all vulnerable groups.
Currently, there is no single accepted methodology for measuring energy security, while the prevailing scientific attitude is that energy security should be defined and quantified in a way to be able ...to follow rapid developments on the global economic and geopolitical scene. Considering the fact that the national economies represent an integral part of a dynamic international economy where external shocks (global financial and economic crisis, political conflicts, war, etc.) have the impact on energy prices and energy security in general, the paper proposes a new geo-economic concept of energy security. The new approach differs from the existing ones as regards the fact that, in addition to basic indicators, it takes into account sovereign credit rating as a measure of economic, financial and political stability - as one of the decisive factors which determines global energy trade and the ability of national economies to be stable and secure when it comes to energy. Determination and testing of Geo-economic Index of Energy Security was conducted by using the Principal Component Analysis in the European Union and in the selected countries of the world, over a period of ten years (2004–2013). The measured values of a newly proposed Geo-economic Index of Energy Security demonstrate significant deviations from the data obtained by using usual indicators of energy security. Observed individually, GDP per capita has the greatest impact on the change in final value of Geo-economic Index of Energy Security, while the impact of sovereign credit rating is slightly less. The study has shown that the least impact on energy security is exerted by energy dependence (which is traditionally used as a proxy indicator of energy security) and production of energy from renewable sources (which is defined by the EU policy as one of the methods for the improvement of energy security). Due to the results obtained, it is necessary to conduct further analysis of sovereign credit rating and to review the type and significance of the impact of Energy Dependence indicator as a measure of energy security in general.
The main objective of this paper is to define а new energy security indicator with the long-term sustainability and to test it in a sample of 28 European Union countries for the period 1990–2012, as ...well as to determine the level of impact of six different indicators on energy security. The previous methodologies for measuring of energy security have been mainly focused on security of supply, while not taking into account environmental indicators and the social component. The newly proposed indicator, Energy Security Index, differs from the existing measuring methods precisely in a way that it includes environmental and social aspects. Energy Security Index recorded a decline in values in most countries in the period 1990–2000. In the period 2000–2008, the values became positive, and after 2008 some countries reported again gradual deterioration. The Index value varies by year, and the biggest positive changes were recorded in the case of the Netherlands, Slovenia and Spain. The four economically strongest EU countries (the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy) recorded significantly less fluctuations in energy security over 23 years, compared to other countries. The data for France and Denmark show that an increased share of energy from nuclear and renewable sources can compensate even increased energy import dependence. The assessment of impact of individual indicators on Energy Security Index was conducted by using Principal Component Analysis and showed that Energy Intensity, GDP per capita and Carbon Intensity have the greatest impact. The countries of the former Eastern Bloc are facing particular challenges of energy security, which is primarily related to the rapid economic growth and, at the same time, a high degree of dependence on import of energy generating products. In terms of energy security, the most stable transition was reported in Hungary and Poland.
Background
The paper aims at gaining insight into the implementation of the process of sustainable energy transition in the countries of Central Asia: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, ...Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Information and scientific studies on the situation in these countries is scarce. On the other hand, these are resource-rich countries, some are exporters, and all are energy transit countries. The main aim of the paper was realized by applying the energy policies and regulatory framework analysis, defining priorities and monitoring selected indicators prescribed by the
International Energy Agency
.
Methods
The following methods were used in the quantitative analysis:
measurement of data intercorrelation
;
Pearson test of correlation
;
principal component analysis
(with rotation method:
Oblimin with Kaiser normalization
);
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy
,
Bartlett’s test of sphericity
and
t-test
. The period covered by the quantitative analysis: 1990–2018, provided that the available data for 2019 or 2020 were used in certain cases.
Results
Sustainable energy transition is, at the analysis of policies and data, at a low level. There is no adequate regulatory framework in these countries. The energy transition takes place exclusively within the framework of providing enough energy, without regard to sustainability, while even energy exporting countries are not making efforts to achieve a sustainable energy transition.
Conclusions
There are no indications that the energy transition in the countries of Central Asia will take place according to the standards of the European Union or global bodies. On the other hand, having in mind the natural resources of the mentioned countries and the specific geopolitical position, monitoring the changes is of special importance. The impact of changes on sustainability can be determined mainly ex post.
Background
The aim of this paper is to reconsider the necessity for the green transition and the key preconditions for the implementation of a circular economy in Western Balkan countries. With the ...objective of the research in mind, the method of analysis and synthesis was applied to determine (1) regulatory and institutional prerequisites for the green transition; (2) the need for the Western Balkan countries to redefine the model of sustainable economic growth towards the green transition; (3) the development opportunities for recovery defined in the Green Agenda for the Western Balkans; and (4) the possibility of implementing the circular economy in the Western Balkans.
Main text
The main findings of the research indicate that: (1) the countries of the Western Balkan region, following the example of the EU, should define a national strategic approach to the green transition with an accompanying action plan and regulatory framework; (2) the biggest challenge of the green transition is the reform of the energy sector and the restructuring of the energy-intensive economy; (3) the countries have untapped potential in renewable energy sources and report the improvement of energy efficiency; (4) the circular economy can boost the green transition, because the countries of the region have a five-time lower value of resource productivity than the average of the EU, while the generation of waste (excluding major mineral wastes) per GDP unit is lower compared to the EU; (5) cross-sectoral governance should be more coordinated.
Conclusions
The green transition might be a development opportunity for the Western Balkans, which should enable sustainable economic growth as well as energy security and environmental protection. However, the implementation of the Green Agenda is not easy, because the region faces the problem of underdeveloped regulatory and institutional capacities that might provide not only the base for long-term planning but also financial resources for the efficient implementation of projects. In addition, it is essential to understand the principles of the Green Agenda and the interaction of all activities that should enable the achievement of defined goals.
Sustainability analysis practice has so far proved that measurement of the level of sustainable development (SD) is associated with a large number of methodological difficulties and limitations, ...related mainly to the selection of indicators, data processing and interpretation of the results. This study is based on an assumption that SD should be measured in ways that depend on the level of development of the country, i.e., it is highly recommended to develop separate sets of indicators to be used for highly developed, medium-developed and poor countries. To that end, we carried out the study on a sample of 13 Southeast European (SEE) countries, and Germany and the Russian Federation for comparison—which are at different levels of development and overall political and socio-economic ambients. The research includes analysis by three different approaches to SD, each based on different sets of indicators: a “GDP approach” which is traditional, and in which economic and GDP-based indicators hold the dominant role; a “Beyond-GDP approach” that reduces the use of economic indicators while increasing the share of social indicators and those based on natural resources; and an “SDG-based approach” that is mainly using indicators of quality of life as defined by the United Nations (UN) SDG. The analysis was performed using the method of composite indicators. Groups of 20 indicators were selected according to their suitability to each of the 3 above-described approaches. The study objective leads to examining ways for measuring development, to suggest new ones, recommend approaches to sustainability planning for the considered SEE countries and beyond, to contribute to the analysis methodology (by assessing usability and reliability of certain indicators and of linkages between them), as well as to rank the countries’ levels of SD under these approaches. Some of the main conclusions are: (a) the indicators having the highest potential impact on the level of SD were foreign direct investments, public debt, energy imports, total natural resources rents, terrestrial and marine protected areas, vulnerable employment, and the Corruption Index; (b) use of the Inclusive Wealth Index is encouraged, so it is important to advance proper methodologies for its measurement; (c) Slovenia and Hungary were the highest-ranked SEE countries under all three approaches, just under Germany; and (d) the ranking order under the SDG-based approach could be used to identify the prioritization of development effort and funding that countries should apply and receive for meeting the SDG. Recommendations for further sustainability measurement were made based on the study’s findings.
The main objective of this paper is to analyze model settings of the International Energy Security Risk Index developed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The study was performed using stepwise ...regression, principal component analysis, and Promax oblique rotation. The conclusion of the regression analysis shows that Crude Oil Price and Global Coal Reserves are sufficient to explain 90% of the variance of the Index. However, if a model that explains 100% of the variance of the Index is chosen and other variables are added, Global Coal Reserves loses importance due to the presence of other parameters in which it is contained. Regardless of the chosen model of analysis, it is evident that there is room for revising the Index and removing variables that do not contribute to its precision. The research showed that the main disadvantage of the variables that make up the Index rests with the fact that the variables are of different degrees of generality, that is, one parameter is contained in other parameters (unclear which other). The research covers data for 25 countries over a 26-year period, with the first year of the research being 1980 and the last 2016 (the latest available report).
Background
Decarbonisation of the European economy is one of the main strategic goals of energy transition in the European Union (EU), which aims to become a leader in this process by 2050 and to ...include other European countries making thus the European continent the first carbon neutral region in the world. Although decarbonisation is an important goal of the EU, the models for monitoring the progress of this process have not yet been clearly defined, and views on the social, economic, and security implications in terms of prioritising decarbonisation are conflicting. The main objective of this paper is to determine the methodological correctness of the existing method of decarbonisation monitoring, to develop a new monitoring model indicating the differences in the EU and European countries that are non-EU and to point out the underlying social, economic and security implications that must certainly find their place in the decision-making process in this field.
Results
The main results showed that there is no clearly defined model for monitoring the success of decarbonisation, while the indicators that are commonly used for this purpose make a model that, as the analysis shows—is methodologically incorrect. In the case of EU countries, the following indicators proved to be the most reliable:
consumption-based CO
2
and
share in global CO
2
. For non-EU countries, the best monitoring indicators are
CO
2
per unit of GDP
,
consumption-based CO
2
, and
renewable energy consumption
. These indicators can explain 99% of the variance in decarbonisation success.
Conclusions
The basic conclusion of the paper is that even before the implementation, the decarbonisation monitoring model should be defined and methodologically tested, and the use of a single model for all EU countries or for all countries is not recommended. It is proposed to simplify the monitoring model, with an emphasis on monitoring of
consumption-based CO
2
, which proved to be the most efficient in all sampled countries. The current method of monitoring is based exclusively on environmentally related indicators while ignoring the fact that decarbonisation is associated with almost all aspects of development. The additional social, economic and security aspects need to be developed and included in the further monitoring process.
Although the issue of energy security stands high on the scale of the European Union's priorities, there has been no single accepted definition of energy security thus far. In light of the global ...economic crisis and political instability, the issue of energy security is directly linked to geopolitical and macroeconomic stability. This paper offers a new method of measuring energy security, which unlike the existing indicators of energy stability, in addition to economic and environmental indicators, also includes the political and social aspects within the composite indicator of country risk. The new Energy Security Index (ESI) is defined based on the application of Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Analysis of the values of a new ESI indicator shows that energy security is greatly influenced by GDP per capita, country risk, carbon intensity, energy intensity, final energy consumption per capita and electricity prices, while the least importance rests with the share of renewable sources in energy consumption and energy dependence. The values of the Index by country are stable over the entire observed period, but significant differences are noticeable between countries. The highest index values are reported in Luxembourg, Sweden, Finland and Denmark, and the lowest in Bulgaria, Romania, Estonia and Poland. With the aim of robustness check, the results of EU member states rankings were compared to country rankings based on the Energy Trilemma Index. Compared to country rankings based on the Energy Trilemma Index, three countries recorded the same rank (Denmark, Check Republic and Bulgaria), and the biggest deviation of 9 ranking position was reported by Luxembourg. The results of the research show that there is a statistically important difference in the value of energy security index between the observed groups of countries classified according to the level of macroeconomic stability.
•New approach to energy security quantification, which includes social and political aspects.•Ranking of EU-28, based on new energy security index, is calculated.•Energy security is greatly influenced by GDP per capita and country risk.•Share of renewables in consumption doesn’t have high impact on energy security.•Countries with higher macroeconomic stability have higher energy security index.
PDF
