A Macro Panel Data Analysis on the Effects of Ageing on Environmental Impact in OECD Countries
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The sustainability of ageing: a macro panel data analysis on the effects of ageing on environmental impact in OECD countries. Carolien Pruim S2527979 Supervisor: dr. T.C. Vogt Master thesis Master Population Studies Population Research Centre Faculty of Spatial Science University of Groningen 28th of January, 2021 Abstract The environment is currently under great pressure. There are several anthropogenic causes labeled as the driving forces behind environmental degradation. One of these drivers that is only briefly touched upon in current literature is population ageing, which is a rapidly increasing phenomenon across the world. In the current literature the debate is often on the influence of ageing on CO2 emissions or energy consumption, whereas literature on a broad spectrum of environmental impact is often lacking. Besides that, the processes of ageing and environmental degradation are happening over time, therefore it is necessary to study the relationship over time. By taking a large time period (T=48) and a large sample of OECD countries (N=28), this study adds to the existing literature as often a small T or a small N is used in similar studies. This study aims to understand the influences of population ageing on environmental impact. However, population ageing is often a process that is closely related to other demographic and economic development factors, such as population growth, economic growth and urbanization. In order to fully understand the impact population ageing has on the environment, the possible influence of the other factors should be considered as well. This study uses a longitudinal panel approach, using a fixed-effects models. The data derives from both the Global Footprint Network and the World Bank. The models analyze the within-country effects of population ageing, population growth, economic growth and urbanization on environmental impact, measured through the Ecological Footprint. The results show that when also taking into account population growth, economic growth and urbanization that population ageing decreases the Ecological Footprint over time, during the time period of 1970 to 2017 for the 28 OECD countries in the sample. This means that in this study population ageing is beneficial to the environment as it decreases resource consumption and pollution on country level. Keywords: Ecological Footprint, population ageing, urbanization, economic development, Environmental Kuznets Curve, demographic transition model. 1 Table of content 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Academic and societal relevance .................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Objective of the research and research questions.......................................................................... 6 1.3 Structure of the thesis ................................................................................................................... 7 2. Theoretical framework ................................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Literature review .......................................................................................................................... 8 2.1.1 Population growth and ageing ............................................................................................... 8 2.1.2 Economics development and urbanization........................................................................... 10 2.2 Theoretical discussion of population and economic development .............................................. 11 2.2.1 Demographic Transition Model and population development ............................................. 11 2.2.2 Environmental Kuznets Curve and Ecological Modernization Theory ................................ 13 2.3 Conceptual model ....................................................................................................................... 14 3. Data and methodology .................................................................................................................. 17 3.1 Dataset ........................................................................................................................................ 17 3.2 Sampling selection ..................................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Data quality and missing values ................................................................................................. 18 3.4 Ethical considerations ................................................................................................................. 18 3.5 Operationalization of the concepts ............................................................................................. 18 3.5.1 Dependent variable: Ecological Footprint ........................................................................... 18 3.5.2 Independent variables .......................................................................................................... 19 3.6 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 20 4. Analysis and Results .................................................................................................................... 22 4.1 Descriptive results ...................................................................................................................... 22 4.2 Macro panel analysis .................................................................................................................. 24 4.2.1 Ecological Footprint and population ageing, model 1 ......................................................... 24 4.2.2 Other explanatory variables, models 2, 3 and 4 ................................................................... 24 4.2.3 Fit of the model ................................................................................................................... 26 5. Conclusion and discussion ........................................................................................................... 28 5.1 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................. 28 5.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................................. 30 Bibliography......................................................................................................................................... 32 Appendix A: OECD countries .............................................................................................................. 37 Appendix B: Statistical output.............................................................................................................. 38 2 Figures Figure 1. Environmental Kuznets Curve (Dinda, 2004). Figure 2. Conceptual model. Source own illustration based on chapter 2. Figure 3. Calculation of the EF by the Global Footprint Network (Lin et al., 2019). Figure 4. The development of the EF and population ageing from 1970 to 2017 for all 28 countries in the sample. Tables Table 1. Summary statistics overall data (source: all tables and graphs in chapter 4 are based on own analysis, unless specified otherwise). Table 2. Regression results of fixed effects model 1. Table 3. Regression results of fixed effects models 1 to 4. Table 4. Regression results of fixed effects model 4 with robust standard errors. List of abbreviations EF Ecological Footprint EKC Environmental Kuznets Curve EMT Ecological Modernization Theory IPAT Impact, Population, Affluence and Technology OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development STIRPAT Stochastic Impacts by Regression on Population, Affluence and Technology 3 1. Introduction All human life depends on nature (Wackernagel et al., 1999), a bold statement but nonetheless carries great implications for the world population. Sustainability is key in maintaining a livable Earth for all, the Earth provides all life on Earth with resources to survive and to be sustainable means to stay within the limits of these resources (Wackernagel et al., 1999; p. 375). In the current global society, humans consume more than the Earth is capable of providing. A term associated with this is the Earth Overshoot Day. This day is defined as the day that humanity demands more from the Earth’s ecological resources than that the Earth is capable of regenerating in a year (Earth Overshoot Day, 2020a). This can be measured for either the world population as a whole or per country. Last year the global Earth Overshoot Day was on July 29th, 2019 (Earth Overshoot Day, 2020b). Estimates for this year, per country, show great differences, per example, the Netherlands and Germany are expected to have used their ecological resources by May 3rd, 2020, the United States of America even reached their Earth Overshoot Day by March 4th, 2020. On the other side of the spectrum countries such as Nicaragua and Iraq are expected to reach their Earth Overshoot Day in December of 2020 (Earth Overshoot Day, 2020c). The question then arises, what causes these differences in consumption of the Earth’s resources between countries? And what needs to be done to reduce the environmental impact of (over)consumption? To understand what influences