Author:
Drastichová Magdaléna,Filzmoser Peter,Gajanin Rastko
Abstract
This work evaluates the crucial aspects of sustainable development (SD) related to wellbeing and quality of life, which were measured by twenty-two relevant indicators (indices) in a sample of 31 countries over the period 2010 – 2019. All the pillars of SD are reflected, while the indicators applied either reflect one of these dimensions, i.e. the economic, social or environmental pillar of SD, or two/all of them. Several of these indicators also measure specific aspects encompassed by the particular pillars, which are of great importance for SD and have to be included. These include especially health and inequality, which belong to the social pillar of SD, and are reflected in several indicators used. Furthermore, the indicator of subjective happiness is included as well. Principal component analysis (PCA) and parallel factor analysis (PARAFAC) are the main methods used to analyse relationships between twenty-two indicators (composite indices) reflecting crucial aspects of SD, wellbeing, and quality of life in the sample. Three stages of both analyses were carried out. For both of them similar results were identified. Principal component 1 (for PCA)/component 1 (for PARAFAC) divided the sample into the less and the more developed countries, since the positive contribution was predominantly determined by the socioeconomic, wellbeing and the more complex environmental or SD indicators, which are predominantly the highest (high) in the more developed countries. On the contrary, the negative contribution was determined by the pollution damage indicators, which are the highest in the less developed countries. Principal component 2 (for PCA)/component 2 (for PARAFAC) divided the sample according to a crucial aspect of the social pillar of SD, i.e. quality of health, particularly reflected in Healthy life years at birth (HLY), which has also poor results in the many developed countries. At the third stage this component is determined by the environmental indicators reflecting resource depletion/consumption and also pollution damages in monetary values, being crucial for SD, since a number of them had the highest values in the developed countries.
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference45 articles.
1. ASARA V., OTERO I., DEMARIA F., CORBERA E., 2015, Socially Sustainable Degrowth as a Social-Ecological Transformation, Sustainability Science 10(3): 375-384.
2. ATKINSON A.B., 1970, On the Measurement of Inequality, Journal of Economic Theory 2(3): 244-263.
3. BEEKS J.C., 2016, Which of the current diverse ideas on alternative Economics are the best for adequately and Compre-hensively addressing the great Transition to climate, energy and biodiversity Sustainability? California Institute of Integral Studies, San Francisco, CA.
4. BELING A.E., VANHULST J., DEMARIC F., RABI V., CARBALLO A. E., PELENC J., 2018, Discursive Synergies for a ‘Great Transformation’ Towards Sustainability: Pragmatic Contributions to a Necessary Dialogue Between Human Development, Degrowth, and Buen Vivir, Ecological Economics 144: 304-313, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.025.
5. BENKING H., MEHLMANN M., 2017, #30 Visions of Sustainability – 2017, https://www.academia.edu/41755849/_30_Visions_of_Sustainability_2017?email_work_card=title (26.09.2021).