Impact of Social Economy on the Environmental Protection
Abstract
Global challenges and threats, which inevitably affect the entire world community, naturally enhance the interdependence of states, require their joint actions aimed at solving social and economic problems of the world economy. As a result, the influence of social policy in the field of organizing and financing the social sphere, where environmental protection is an important factor, increases. Many processes occurring in the modern economy contribute to an increase in the importance of employers in solving modern problems of sustainable socio-economic development, both nationally and internationally. The level where rising unemployment rates have a significant negative impact on environmental priorities.
References
[1] Acquaye, A., Feng, K., Oppon, E. and Salhi, S. 2017. Measuring the Environmental Sustainability Performance of Global Supply Chains: a Multi-Regional Input-Output analysis for Carbon. Sulfur Oxide and Water Footprints. Journal of Environmental Management, 1 (187): 571–585. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.059
[2] Acquaye A., Genovese A., AAfrifa G., AYamoah F., Oppon E. 2018. A quantitative model for environmentally sustainable supply chain performance measurement. European Journal of Operational Research, 1 (269): 188 – 198.
[3] Bashir, M., et al. 2020. Correlation between climate indicators and COVID-19 pandemic in New York. USA Sci Total Environ, 7 (28): 138 - 149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138835
[4] Bashir, M. and Shahzad, L. 2020. A brief review of socio-economic and environmental impact of Covid-19. Air Qual Atmos Health, 13 (24): 1403-1409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00894-8
[5] Berg, A. and Osiry, J. 2018. Inequality and Unsustainable Growth: Two Sides of the Same Coin. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, 14–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5089/9781463926564.006
[6] Blankenberg, A. and Alhusen, H. 2019. On the Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Literature Review and Guide for the Empirical Economist. Center for European, Governance, and Economic Development Research (CEGE). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139 / ssrn.3473702
[7] Bonanomi, A. and Luppi, F. 2020. European Mixed Methods Comparative Study on NEETs and Their Perceived Environmental Responsibility. Sustainability, 12 (2): 515 – 528. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020515
[8] Chernysheva, T. and Il'yanov, D. 2019. Comparative analysis of labor productivity in Russia and China. Theoretical and Applied Economics, 4 (11): 78 - 89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8647.2019.4.31076
[9] Collivignarelli, M. et al. 2020. Lockdown for Covid-2019 in Milan: what are the effects on air quality? Sci Total Environ, 7 (32): 139 - 159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139280
[10] Glushchenko, G. 2019. Economic Implications of Demographic Shifts. Questions of statistics, 26 (6): 5-20. https://doi.org/10.34023/2313-6383-2019-26-6-5-20
[11] Kenny J. 2020. Economic conditions and support for the prioritization of environmental protection during the Great Recession. Environmental Politics, 29(6): 37-958. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1680074
[12] Marc, A., Hafstead, R. and Williams, C. 2018. Unemployment and Environmental Regulation in General Equilibrium. Journal of Public Economics, 15 (160): 50-65. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.01.013
[13] MeyerIs, A. 2016. Unemployment good for the environment? Resource and Energy Economics, 12 (45): 18-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2016.04.001
[14] Schier, M. and Voigtländer, M. 2016. Soziale Wohnraumförderung auf dem Prüfstand. IW Trends –Viertel jahres schrift zurempirischen Wirtschaftsforschung, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln (IW), 1 (43): 21–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2373 / 1864-810X.16-01-02
[15] Singh, R. and Chauhan, A. 2020. Impact of lockdown on air quality in India during COVID-19 pandemic. Air Qual Atmos Heal, 13: 921-928. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00863-1
[16] Wang, C., Cardon, P., Liu, J. and Madni, G. 2020. Social and economic factors responsible for environmental performance: A global analysis. PLoS, 15 (8): e0237597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237597
[17] Wiedmann, T. and Lenzen, M. 2018. Environmental and social foot prints of international trade. Nature Geosci, 11 (45): 314-321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0113-9
[18] Yang, L., Wang, Y. and Wang, R. 2020. Environmental-social-economic foot prints of consumption and trade in the Asia-Pacific region. Nat Commun, 11(43): 338-343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18338-3
[19] Zhang, Y. 2017. Productivity in China: past success and future challenge. Asia-Pacific Development Journal, 1 (24): 78-89
[20] Official Resource: World Economic Outlook Database. 2020. Available at: https://www.imf.org
[21] Official website of the Committee on Statistics of the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Available at: www.stat.gov.kz
[2] Acquaye A., Genovese A., AAfrifa G., AYamoah F., Oppon E. 2018. A quantitative model for environmentally sustainable supply chain performance measurement. European Journal of Operational Research, 1 (269): 188 – 198.
[3] Bashir, M., et al. 2020. Correlation between climate indicators and COVID-19 pandemic in New York. USA Sci Total Environ, 7 (28): 138 - 149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138835
[4] Bashir, M. and Shahzad, L. 2020. A brief review of socio-economic and environmental impact of Covid-19. Air Qual Atmos Health, 13 (24): 1403-1409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00894-8
[5] Berg, A. and Osiry, J. 2018. Inequality and Unsustainable Growth: Two Sides of the Same Coin. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, 14–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5089/9781463926564.006
[6] Blankenberg, A. and Alhusen, H. 2019. On the Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Literature Review and Guide for the Empirical Economist. Center for European, Governance, and Economic Development Research (CEGE). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139 / ssrn.3473702
[7] Bonanomi, A. and Luppi, F. 2020. European Mixed Methods Comparative Study on NEETs and Their Perceived Environmental Responsibility. Sustainability, 12 (2): 515 – 528. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020515
[8] Chernysheva, T. and Il'yanov, D. 2019. Comparative analysis of labor productivity in Russia and China. Theoretical and Applied Economics, 4 (11): 78 - 89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8647.2019.4.31076
[9] Collivignarelli, M. et al. 2020. Lockdown for Covid-2019 in Milan: what are the effects on air quality? Sci Total Environ, 7 (32): 139 - 159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139280
[10] Glushchenko, G. 2019. Economic Implications of Demographic Shifts. Questions of statistics, 26 (6): 5-20. https://doi.org/10.34023/2313-6383-2019-26-6-5-20
[11] Kenny J. 2020. Economic conditions and support for the prioritization of environmental protection during the Great Recession. Environmental Politics, 29(6): 37-958. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1680074
[12] Marc, A., Hafstead, R. and Williams, C. 2018. Unemployment and Environmental Regulation in General Equilibrium. Journal of Public Economics, 15 (160): 50-65. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.01.013
[13] MeyerIs, A. 2016. Unemployment good for the environment? Resource and Energy Economics, 12 (45): 18-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2016.04.001
[14] Schier, M. and Voigtländer, M. 2016. Soziale Wohnraumförderung auf dem Prüfstand. IW Trends –Viertel jahres schrift zurempirischen Wirtschaftsforschung, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln (IW), 1 (43): 21–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2373 / 1864-810X.16-01-02
[15] Singh, R. and Chauhan, A. 2020. Impact of lockdown on air quality in India during COVID-19 pandemic. Air Qual Atmos Heal, 13: 921-928. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00863-1
[16] Wang, C., Cardon, P., Liu, J. and Madni, G. 2020. Social and economic factors responsible for environmental performance: A global analysis. PLoS, 15 (8): e0237597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237597
[17] Wiedmann, T. and Lenzen, M. 2018. Environmental and social foot prints of international trade. Nature Geosci, 11 (45): 314-321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0113-9
[18] Yang, L., Wang, Y. and Wang, R. 2020. Environmental-social-economic foot prints of consumption and trade in the Asia-Pacific region. Nat Commun, 11(43): 338-343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18338-3
[19] Zhang, Y. 2017. Productivity in China: past success and future challenge. Asia-Pacific Development Journal, 1 (24): 78-89
[20] Official Resource: World Economic Outlook Database. 2020. Available at: https://www.imf.org
[21] Official website of the Committee on Statistics of the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Available at: www.stat.gov.kz
Published
2021-06-04
How to Cite
SUTBAYEVA, Raikhan et al.
Impact of Social Economy on the Environmental Protection.
Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, [S.l.], v. 12, n. 3, p. 690-702, june 2021.
ISSN 2068-7729.
Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/jemt/article/view/6107>. Date accessed: 23 apr. 2024.
doi: https://doi.org/10.14505//jemt.v12.3(51).09.
Section
Article
Copyright© 2023 The Author(s). Published by ASERS Publishing 2023. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of CC-BY 4.0 license.