Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2018 | 27 | 6 |

Tytuł artykułu

Resource efficiency and productivity changes in the G7 and BRICS nations

Warianty tytułu

Języki publikacji



Energy consumption growth and greenhouse effect deterioration have caused an argument about who should lead the global climate change duty between industrialized and emerging countries. This study investigates the resource efficiency differences between nations in the Group of Seven (G7) and in an association of 5 major emerging economic bodies, including Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS). This study applies the data envelopment analysis approach to finding the BRICS group’s advantages and pointing out what the G7 group should pay attention to in the future. The conclusion shows that the BRICS group has better technical efficiency improvement than the G7 group, and that the BRICS group is moving toward high energy efficiency. Findings show that the G7 suffers from technical deterioration, with some G7 members also presenting the phenomenon of high emissions.

Słowa kluczowe








Opis fizyczny



  • Department of Marketing, Kainan University, Luchu, Taoyuan City, Taiwan
  • Institute of Business and Management, National Chiao Tung University, Taipei City, Taiwan
  • Institute of Business and Management, National Chiao Tung University, Taipei City, Taiwan


  • 1. The State Council of the People’s Republic of China, 2015. British economist upbeat about China’s economy, from
  • 2. HU J.L., WANG S.C. Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy Policy 34, 3206, 2006.
  • 3. HONMA S., HU J.L. Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in Japan. Energy Policy 36, 821, 2008.
  • 4. ZHOU P., ANG B.W., POH K.L. A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 189, 1, 2008.
  • 5. ZHOU P., ANG B.W., HAN J.Y. Total factor carbon emission performance: A Malmquist index analysis. Energ. Econ. 32, 194, 2010.
  • 6. LI L.B., HU J.L. Ecological total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy Policy 46, 216, 2012.
  • 7. MANDAL S.K. Do undesirable output and environmental regulation matter in energy efficiency analysis? Evidence from Indian cement industry. Energy Policy 38, 6076, 2010.
  • 8. YANG H., POLLITT M. The necessity of distinguishing weak and strong disposability among undesirable outputs in DEA: Environmental performance of Chinese coal-fired power plants. Energy Policy 38, 4440, 2010.
  • 9. SUEYOSHI T., GOTO M. DEA approach for unified efficiency measurement: Assessment of Japanese fossil fuel power generation. Energ. Econ. 33, 292, 2011.
  • 10. SUEYOSHI T., GOTO M. DEA radial measurement for environmental assessment and planning: Desirable procedures to evaluate fossil fuel power plants. Energy Policy 41, 422, 2012.
  • 11. SUEYOSHI T., GOTO M. Data envelopment analysis for environmental assessment: Comparison between public and private ownership in petroleum industry. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 216, 668, 2012.
  • 12. FARRELL M.J. The measurement of productive efficiency. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A.-G. 120, 253, 1957.
  • 13. CHARNES A., COOPER W.W., RHODES E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2, 429, 1978.
  • 14. BANKER R.D., CHARNES A., COOPER W.W. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manage. Sci. 30, 1078, 1984.
  • 15. TONE K. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 130, 498, 2001.
  • 16. TONE K. Dealing with undesirable outputs in DEA: A slacks-based measure (SBM) approach. GRIPS Research Report Series, 1, 2003.
  • 17. TONE K. A Hybrid measure of efficiency in DEA. GRIPS Research Report Series, 1, 2004.
  • 18. ZHOU P., ANG B.W., POH K.L. Slacks-based efficiency measures for modeling environmental performance. Ecol. Econ. 60, 111, 2006.
  • 19. ZHOU Y., XING X., FANG K., LIANG D., XU C. Environmental efficiency analysis of power industry in China based on an entropy SBM model. Energy Policy 57, 68, 2013.
  • 20. LU C.C., CHIU Y.H., SHYU M.K., LEE J.H. Measuring CO₂ Emission efficiency in OECD countries: Application of the hybrid efficiency model. Econ. Model. 32, 130, 2013.
  • 21. CHANG Y.T., PARK H.S., JEONG J.B., LEE J.W. Evaluating economic and environmental efficiency of global airlines: A SBM-DEA approach. Transport. Res. D.-Tr. E. 27, 46, 2014.
  • 22. TAO X., WANG P., ZHU B. Provincial green economic efficiency of China: A non-separable input-output SBM approach. Appl. Energ. 171, 58, 2016.
  • 23. CAVES D.W., CHRISTENSEN L.R., DIEWERT W.E. The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity. Econometrica 50, 1393, 1982.
  • 24. FÄRE R., GROSSKOPF S., NORRIS M., ZHANG Z. Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. Am. Econ. Rev. 84, 66, 1994,
  • 25. RAMANATHAN R. An analysis of energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions in countries of the Middle East and North Africa. Energy 30, 2831, 2005.
  • 26. KIM K., KIM Y. International comparison of industrial CO₂ emission trends and the energy efficiency paradox utilizing production-based decomposition. Energ. Econ. 34, 1724, 2012.
  • 27. WEI Y.M., LIAO H., FAN Y. An empirical analysis of energy efficiency in China’s iron and steel sector. Energy 32, 2262, 2007.
  • 28. CHANG M.C. Applying the energy productivity index that considers maximized energy reduction on SADC (Southern Africa Development Community) members. Energy 95, 313, 2016.
  • 29. ZHANG N., ZHOU P., KUNG C.C. Total-factor carbon emission performance of the Chinese transportation industry: A bootstrapped non-radial Malmquist index analysis. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 41, 584, 2015,
  • 30. O’DONNELL C.J., RAO D.P., BATTESE G.E. Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios. Empir. Econ. 34, 231, 2008.
  • 31. LI K., LIN B. Metafroniter energy efficiency with CO₂ emissions and its convergence analysis for China. Energ. Econ. 48, 230, 2015.
  • 32. YAO X., ZHOU H., ZHANG A., LI A. Regional energy efficiency, carbon emission performance and technology gaps in China: A meta-frontier non-radial directional distance function analysis. Energy Policy 84, 142, 2015.
  • 33. CHANG M.C. Room for improvement in low carbon economies of G7 and BRICS countries based on the analysis of energy efficiency and environmental Kuznets curves. J. Clean. Prod. 99, 140, 2015.
  • 34. WANG Q., SU B., SUN J., ZHOU P., ZHOU D. Measurement and decomposition of energy-saving and emissions reduction performance in Chinese cities. Appl. Energ. 151, 85, 2015.
  • 35. WANG Q., ZHAO Z., ZHOU P., ZHOU D. Energy efficiency and production technology heterogeneity in China: A metafrontier DEA approach. Econ. Model. 35, 283, 2013.
  • 36. GUO X.D., ZHU L., FAN Y., XIE B.C. Evaluation of potential reductions in carbon emissions in Chinese provinces based on environmental DEA. Energy Policy 39, 2352, 2011.
  • 37. CHOI Y., ZHANG N., ZHOU P. Efficiency and abatement costs of energy-related CO₂ emissions in China: A slacksbased efficiency measure. Appl. Energ. 98, 198, 2012.
  • 38. WU F., FAN L.W., ZHOU P., ZHOU D.Q. Industrial energy efficiency with CO₂ emissions in China: A nonparametric analysis. Energy Policy 49, 164, 2012.
  • 39. YAO X., WATANABE C., LI Y. Institutional structure of sustainable development in BRICS: Focusing on ICT utilization. Technol. Soc. 31, 9, 2009.
  • 40. World Bank, 2014. Indicators. Available in. (accessed 16.04.14.).
  • 41. DE CASTRO CAMIOTO F., MORALLES H.F., MARIANO E.B., DO NASCIMENTO REBELATTO D.A. Energy efficiency analysis of G7 and BRICS considering total-factor structure. J. Clean. Prod. 122, 67, 2016.
  • 42. DINDA S. Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecol. Econ. 49, 431, 2004.
  • 43. STERN D.I., COMMON M.S., BARBIER E.B. Economic growth and environmental degradation: The environmental Kuznets curve and sustainable development. World. Dev. 24, 1151, 1996.
  • 44. GROSSMAN G.M., KRUEGER A.B. Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 3914, NBER, Cambridge MA. 1991.
  • 45. AKBOSTANCI E., TÜRÜT-AŞIK S., TUNÇ G.İ. The relationship between income and environment in Turkey: Is there an environmental Kuznets curve? Energy Policy 37, 861, 2009.
  • 46. HE J., RICHARD P. Environmental Kuznets curve for CO₂ in Canada. Ecol. Econ. 69, 1083, 2010.
  • 47. FODHA M., ZAGHDOUD O. Economic growth and pollutant emissions in Tunisia: An empirical analysis of the environmental Kuznets curve. Energy Policy 38, 1150, 2010.
  • 48. LEVINSON A. The ups and downs of the environmental Kuznets curve. Rec. Adv. Env. Eco. 119, 2002.

Typ dokumentu



Identyfikator YADDA

JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.