Search

This paper examines the asymmetric and long-run effect of energy productivity on the quality of the environment in Finland. Finland, as one of the Nordic countries, is a major contributor to the global drive to achieve decarbonization by 2050. In effect, this study seeks to contribute to the strides by querying the extent to which shocks in energy productivity make or mar the sustainability of the Finland environment from 1990:Q1 to 2019:Q4. The other impacts of financial development, economic growth, and trade openness are considered in the model estimated by using the novel hidden panel cointegration and nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) methodology. The results reveal a significant asymmetric equilibrium cointegration relationship among the variables over long-run time horizons; energy productivity utilization enhances the quality of the environment in Finland over the long run while trade openness, financial development, and economic growth contribute to environmental degradation in Finland in the long term. In particular, a 1% positive and negative fluctuation in energy productivity lowers carbon emissions by 1.79442% and 0.84799% in the long term. Whereas 1% change in trade openness, financial development, and economic growth trigger CO 2 emissions (CO 2 E) by 1.15298%, 0.271365%, and 2.93402% in Finland's economies. The results of the frequency domain causality model corroborate the NARDL results. On the basis of these empirical findings, this study suggests that policymakers in Finland should consider the asymmetric behavior among these variables in setting their trade, environmental, growth, and energy policies. [Display omitted] • The effect of energy productivity on environmental degradation in Finland is examined. • Nonlinear ARDL, Fourier ADL cointegration and frequnecy domain causality tests are employed. • Energy productivity leads to lower environmental degradation in Finland. • Energy productivity causes environmental sustainability at different frequencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecotechnologies have the potential to reduce the use of finite resources while providing a variety of co-benefits to society, though they often lack in market competitiveness. In this study, we investigate the sustainability of ecotechnologies for recovering carbon and nutrients, and demonstrate how a so-called "bottom-up" approach can serve as a decision-making instrument. Based on three case study catchments with a focus on domestic wastewater in Sweden and Poland, and on manure, grass and blackwater substrates in Finland, we apply a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) on system alternatives derived from a participatory process. After drawing on an initial systematic mapping of relevant ecotechnologies, the scope of the CBA is determined by stakeholder suggestions, namely in terms of the considered assessment criteria, the physical impacts and the utilised data. Thus, this CBA is rooted in a localised consideration of ecotechnologies rather than a centralised governmental approach to systems boundaries. The key advantage of applying such a bottom-up approach is that it has gone through a robust participatory selection process by local stakeholders, which provides more legitimacy to the decisions reached compared with traditional feasibility studies. Despite considering the revenues of the recovered products as well as the provision of the non-market goods CO2 mitigation and reduced eutrophication, findings from this study indicate that the benefits of the considered ecotechnologies are often outweighed by their costs. Only anaerobic digestion of agricultural wastes appears to be economically feasible under the current conditions, highlighting that further efforts and incentives may be required to mainstream ecotechnologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]