4.7 Article

The integrated efficiency of economic development and CO2 emissions among Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation members

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 131, Issue -, Pages 765-772

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.097

Keywords

Economic efficiency; CO2 emissions efficiency; Luenberger index

Funding

  1. Program National Natural Science Foundation of China [71173017, 71573016, 71521002]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years, the evaluation of energy, economic and environmental efficiency, employing the data envelopment analysis models, has been a hot topic in academe. When choosing models, people always expect to improve desirable outputs, while reducing undesirable outputs at the same time (e.g. when using a directional distance function model). However, directional distance function models may lead to biased estimations due to different directions given to different units. To overcome this shortcoming, in this paper, we propose another non-radial efficiency evaluation model based on previous literature, which can also improve desirable outputs and reduce undesirable outputs. Then we employ this model to analyse the economic efficiency and CO2 emissions efficiency of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) members. Meanwhile, we also measure the efficiency change by using the Luenberger index, and analyse the reasons for efficiency changes from the perspectives of technical efficiency, and technical, changes. The results indicate that most countries have an extremely high economic efficiency, but relatively low CO2 emissions efficiency and integrated efficiency except for the United States, Japan, and Singapore. According to the Luenberger index, we find an increase in integrated efficiency and CO2 emissions efficiency for most members from 2001 to 2010; however, technical progress is the main contributor. Technical efficiency exhibits a downward trend for most members. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available