Environmental Justice and Sustainability

Collin, Robin Morris; Collin, Robert W.

doi:10.1017/9781108555791.010

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In response to this necessity, the academic debate did not take long to appear, integrating it in different domains and areas of applications. In the development theory, sustainability synthetizes the larger perspective in which, besides the human and economic concerns, environmental issues are considered and emphasized as essential for wellbeing and, accordingly, closely linked to the other major societal dimensions (Pohoață et al, 2020;Kowalski and Veit, 2019;Van de Kerk and Manuel, 2008;Collin and Collin, 2015;Springett and Redclift, 2015;Hediger, 1999;Goodland, 1995;Solow, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study on Environmental Wellbeing and Its Main SocioEconomic Factors: Evidence from Romania

Ulman¹,

Căutișanu²

2022

New Trends in Sustainable Business and Consumption

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability especially targets the process of reconciliation and balance among specific tendencies occurring in its economic, human, and environmental dimensions. This study intends to reveal if salient differences between the levels of each dimension are present across a punctual national context, i.e. the Romanian one, in the 2006-2020 period. It also intends to investigate the effects of economic and social sectors on the main weak points of environmental wellbeing, if these are still significant and negative or, contrary, if sustainable path could be found in these links in the same circumstances of analysis. In this way, we centered our debate on environmental performance, found its main vulnerabilities for observing, on one hand, if Romania follows different environmental paths comparatively with the other two dimensions of wellbeing and, on the other hand, the nature of the effects of society's performance (with its economic and social parts) upon it. Particularly, our study aims to respond to a practical need of research in this country, being also possible to represent a support for the policies addressing sustainable development in the Romanian context. Based on descriptive and path analyses, our results showed that, in the case of environmental wellbeing, the most vulnerable indicators are shown to be the ones regarding renewable energy and energy savings. The main susceptibilities in Romania seemed to be in respect to the relationship between (1) energy savings and safe sanitation, healthy life, population growth, public debt, employment and (2) renewable energy and healthy life, population growth, public debt. Accordingly, the two most sensitive environmental indicators were shown to be affected by these human and economic components of wellbeing, recommendations being formulated in the directions of more careful strategical actions for their improvement in such a way of not highly contributing to the degradation of the environment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study on Environmental Wellbeing and Its Main SocioEconomic Factors: Evidence from Romania

Ulman¹,

Căutișanu²

2022

New Trends in Sustainable Business and Consumption

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our opinion, this is not a simple or meaningless approach, but one of high interest for the actual international context. We based our effort on the assertion of Collin and Collin [ 20 ] (p. 214), according to whom “environmental information moves sustainable development to implementation”. This perspective could represent one of the main reasons that potentially make our study of interest for the academic literature, as well as for the political, social, and/or economic spheres.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Human wellbeing is defined as formed by nine components (see Van de Kerk and Manuel [ 21 ], as well as Kowalski and Veit [ 50 ]), analyzed in the literature in relation to the environment, as follows: sufficient amount of food [ 51 , 52 , 53 ], sufficient to drink [ 54 , 55 , 56 ], safe sanitation [ 22 , 53 , 57 ], education [ 22 , 53 , 58 , 59 ], health [ 22 , 53 , 60 , 61 , 62 ], gender equality [ 21 , 23 , 63 , 64 ], income distribution [ 20 , 22 , 53 , 65 , 66 , 67 ], population growth [ 53 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 ], and good governance [ 22 , 53 , 59 , 72 , 73 , 74 ] (see Table 2 ). For example, it was demonstrated that (1) the lack of safe sanitation represents a pollutant factor, negatively influencing environmental wellbeing [ 22 , 57 ], (2) the level of individual education registers positive effects on pro-environmental attitudes [ 58 , 59 , 75 ], while the number of students enrolled in education may influence enviro...…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Performance in EU Countries from the Perspective of Its Relation to Human and Economic Wellbeing

Ulman

Mihai

Căutișanu

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The actual development challenges impose new criteria of national performance evaluation, the concept of wellbeing tending to be measured not just in terms of economic and social dimensions, but also vs. the environment. Accordingly, considering the national environmental performance among the EU countries in 2006–2019 period, we grouped them and concentrated on the clusters registering the highest and lowest levels, analyzing how the components of the human and economic dimensions influence it. Applying panel data models, our main results emphasized that, firstly, for the countries with a better environmental performance, sufficient drinking water, safe sanitation, education, gender equality, and good governance were significant; in the countries with the lowest levels of environmental wellbeing, sufficient food, sufficient to drink, education, and income distribution were insignificant, while the remaining components were relevant. Secondly, in both groups of countries, organic farming and public debt were significant; nevertheless, differences were observed for genuine savings and employment, for which the peculiarities of economic activities seemed to be materialized as different influences upon environmental wellbeing. Our study draws alarm signals regarding the development patterns applied in the EU, seeming to have results that strengthen the sustainable goals, but not sufficient for exceeding the traditional growth-oriented model.

show abstract

“…Although other results indicated a possible relaxation with regard to the environmental impact of offering basic needs, the analysis performed on the 19 postcommunist economies argues against it, as the negative effects on the environment are still present, especially concerning the unsustainable emission of greenhouse gases, encouraging prudence in this regard. Moreover, contrary to other findings is the fact that income distribution affects energy use and greenhouse gases in the situation in which its impact was generally shown to be insignificant or positive Ulman et al, 2021a;Ulman et al, 2021b;Ulman and Cautisanu, 2022;McMichael, 2015;Collin and Collin, 2015;Baloch et al, 2018). These different findings likely arise from the specificities of the selected sample of countries, the still negative effects indicating a lack of equality, efficiency, and eco-friendly solutions adopted in the post-communist countries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Environmental wellbeing in the context of sustainable development: Evidence from post-communist economies

Ulman

Mihai²,

Căutișanu³

et al. 2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considering diverse national contexts, there are differences in the capacity of countries in terms of their ability to attain sustainability in its three main dimensions. The present study puts the economic, social, and environmental indicators face-to-face from 19 post-communist economies across the 2006–2020 period. It emphasizes the main vulnerabilities at the level of the analyzed countries, concentrates on these weak points, and offers concrete explanations regarding the main social and economic factors, exerting a negative influence on them. Consequently, placing climate and energy, with their major components, i.e., energy use, energy savings, greenhouse gases, and renewable energy, at the center of the analysis, as the major weak points of environmental wellbeing within the analyzed group of countries, the nature of the influence of human and economic wellbeing upon each of them is evidenced using panel data-specific methods (pooled, fixed, and random effects). The general results obtained showed the following: 1) the components of environmental wellbeing registered a different evolution among post-communist economies; 2) climate and energy components were the main vulnerabilities in terms of environmental sustainability; 3) these environmental components were closely linked to both components of economic and social dimensions; and 4) the determinants of energy use, energy savings, greenhouse gases, and renewable energy were different in the selected group of countries. This study draws attention to the fact that the patterns of development applied in the group of post-communist economies seem to strengthen sustainable goals, especially with regard to economic and human wellbeing. Moreover, while directing its focus on the main urgent environmental vulnerabilities and encouraging their strengthening by not putting the economic dimension in the center of interest, it supports the theoretical perspective of sustainable wellbeing, based on sustainability and ecological economics.

show abstract

Environmental Justice and Sustainability

Cited by 6 publications

References 17 publications

Study on Environmental Wellbeing and Its Main SocioEconomic Factors: Evidence from Romania

Study on Environmental Wellbeing and Its Main SocioEconomic Factors: Evidence from Romania

Environmental Performance in EU Countries from the Perspective of Its Relation to Human and Economic Wellbeing

Environmental wellbeing in the context of sustainable development: Evidence from post-communist economies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About