A Comparative Study of Different Energy Efficiency of OECD and Non-OECD Countries

• Published in: Tropical Conservation Science
• Main Authors: Li, Ying, Chiu, Yung-Ho, Wang, Lihua, Liu, Yi-Chu, Chiu, Ching-Ren
• Other Authors: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Sichuan University project
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: SAGE Publications 2019
• Subjects: Iceland
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1940082919837441; http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1940082919837441; http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full-xml/10.1177/1940082919837441

Greater and greater attention is being paid to air pollution problems, because of their negative impact on the environment and human health. This article measures energy efficiency, carbon dioxide emissions efficiency, and particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) concentration efficiency to compare the energy efficiency differences between Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries and non-OECD member countries from 2010 to 2014 using a metafrontier dynamic Data Envelopment Analysis model. We calculate technology gap ratio and input and output efficiency values to measure the energy efficiencies of each economy, finding that (a) OECD countries have a technology gap ratio of 1 or very close to 1; and except for the United Arab Emirates and Singapore, both of which exhibit annual improvements, the non-OECD countries have a significant need for efficiency improvements; (b) the average technology gap ratio of OECD is higher than that of non-OECD countries; that is, while OECD countries’ technology gap ratio (TGR) changes are relatively stable, non-OECD countries’ TGRs are gradually increasing; (c) non-OECD countries have large PM 2.5 concentration efficiency gaps, with the annual efficiencies in China, India, and Nepal being less than 0.2; (d) Switzerland, Denmark, France, the United Kingdom, Iceland, Luxembourg, Norway, the United States, and the United Arab Emirates all have new and traditional energy efficiency values of 1; and (e) Botswana, Algeria, and Cambodia have poor traditional energy efficiencies, but better new energy efficiencies, whereas Hungary, South Korea, Slovakia, and Slovenia have poor new energy efficiencies and better traditional energy efficiencies.