Interplays of Institutional, Economic, Social and Environmental Systems in Sustainable Development in Latin America-Journal of Sustainability Research-CSCIED科技核心评价数据库-手机版

Interplays of Institutional, Economic, Social and Environmental Systems in Sustainable Development in Latin America

Interplays of Institutional, Economic, Social and Environmental Systems in Sustainable Development in Latin America

ES评分 0 浏览量：459 下载量：0

DOI	10.20900/jsr20250007
刊名	Journal of Sustainability Research JSR
年，卷(期)	2025, 7(1)
作者	Patricia Hernández-Medina*,
作者单位	Department of Economics, National University of Chimborazo, Chimborazo 060110, Ecuador ;
Abstract	This research seeks to identify the direct effects and interactions of the economic, social, environmental and institutional dimensions or systems on sustainable development for 16 Latin American countries between 2007 and 2019. The sustainable development index (SDI) proposed by Hickel (2020) is used as the dependent variable, as are the pillars of Legatum’s prosperity index, grouped into the indicated dimensions (explanatory variables). A dynamic panel data model is estimated using the generalised method of moments. The results indicate that business conditions, economic quality, health and education have positive and significant direct effects on the SDI. It is corroborated that the interactions between institutional and economic, as well as institutional and social, and economic and social dimensions have a positive effect on the SDI, although only the first interaction is statistically significant. As for the other interactions, the results show negative signs and only the interactions between the environmental dimension and the economic dimension and social dimension, respectively, are statistically significant. For Latin America, improvements in the SDI are associated with the economic and social dimensions (weak sustainability). This is reinforced by the strengthening of the institutional framework but with higher levels of CO2 emissions and material footprint, whose indirect effects along with the rest of the dimensions condition the possibility of achieving better results in terms of sustainability.
KeyWord	sustainable development; institutionalism; economic dimension; social dimension; environmental dimension; dynamic panel data; generalised method of moments
基金项目
页码	-

参考文献
相关文献

1.Pérez M. Conceptualización sobre el Desarrollo Sostenible: operacionalización del concepto para Colombia
[Conceptualizing Sustainable Development: operationalizing the concept for Colombia]. Punto Vista. 2012;3(5):139-58. Spanish.

2.Brundtland G. Nuestro Futuro Común
[Our Common Future]. New York (US): Organización de las Naciones Unidas (ONU); 1987. Spanish.

3.Pearce DW, Atkinson GD. Are national economies sustainable? Measuring Sustainable Development. London (UK): CSERGE; 1992.

4.Daly H. Toward some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecol Econ. 1990;2(1):1-6.

5.Munasinghe M. Environmental economics and sustainable development. Washington (US): World Bank Publications; 1993.

6.Pearce D. Economics and environment: essays on ecological economics and sustainable development. Cheltenham (UK): Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.; 1999.

7.Sen A. El desarrollo como Libertad: Los fines y los medios del Desarrollo
[Development as Freedom: The ends and means of development]. Buenos Aires (Argentina): Editorial Planeta; 2000. Spanish.

8.Durán D, Gogan L, Artene A, Durán V. The components of sustainable development - a possible approach. Procedia Econ Finance. 2015;26:806-11.

9.Jovovic R, Draskovic M, Delibasic M, Jovovic M. The concept of sustainable regional development – institutional aspects, policies and prospects. J Int Stud. 2017;10(1):255-66.

10.Ruggerio C. Sustainability and sustainable development: A review of principles and definitions. Sci Total Environ. 2021;786:1-6.

11.Sepúlveda S. Metodología para estimar el nivel de desarrollo sostenible de territories
[Methodology for estimating the level of sustainable development of territories]. San José (Costa Rica): Instituto latinoamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura; 2008. Spanish.

12.Rosales R. La Asociatividad como estrategia de fortalecimiento de las PyMes
[Associativity as a strategy to strengthen SMEs]. Rev capít SELA. 1997;51:311-9. Spanish.

13.Alburquerque F. Desarrollo económico local y descentralización en América Latina
[Local economic development and decentralization in Latin America]. Rev CEPAL. 2014;82:157-71. Spanish.

14.Coraggio J. Economía Social y Solidaria: El Trabajo antes que el capital
[Social and Solidarity Economy: Work before capital]. Quito (Ecuador): Ediciones Abya-Yala; 2011. Spanish.

15.Rodríguez M. Nuestro planeta, nuestro future
[Our planet, our future]. Bogotá (Colombia): Penguin-Random House; 2019. Spanish.

16.Fernández C, Unamuno A, Urjidi I. Capital social organizacional: la capacidad auto-regenerativa de las organizaciones
[Organizational social capital: the self-regenerative capacity of organizations]. Ekonomiaz. 2005;59:48-69. Spanish.

17.Román R, Gómez A, Smida A. El capital social organizacional de la pequeña empresa innovadora. Un ensayo de medición en las ciudades de Cali y Medellín
[Organizational social capital of innovative small businesses. A measurement test in the cities of Cali and Medellín]. Estud Gerenc. 2013;29:356-67.

18.Esparcia J, Escribano J, Serrano J. Una aproximación al enfoque del capital social y a su contribución al estudio de los procesos de desarrollo local
[An approach to the social capital approach and its contribution to the study of local development processes]. J Reg Res. 2016;34:49-71. Spanish.

19.Platje J. An institutional capital approach to sustainable development. Manag Environ Qual. 2008;19(2):222-33.

20.Glass L, Newig J. Governance for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: How important are participation, policy coherence, reflexivity, adaptation and democratic institutions? Earth Syst Governance. 2019;2:1-14.

21.Gökhan H, Aytekin A. Effects of sustainable governance to sustainable development. Oper Res Eng Sci Theor Appl. 2022;5(2):117-51.

22.Ullah A, Pinglu C, Ullah S, Hashmi SH. Nexus of regional integration, socioeconomic determinants and sustainable development in belt and road initiative countries. PLoS One. 2021;16(7):e0254298.

23.Gallopín G. Sostenibilidad y desarrollo sostenible
[Sustainability and sustainable development]. Santiago de Chile (Chile): Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL); 2003. Spanish.

24.Arias F. Desarrollo sostenible y sus indicadores
[Sustainable development and its indicators]. Rev Soc Econ. 2006;11:200-29. Spanish.

25.Gudynas E. Desarrollo sostenible: una guía básica de conceptos y tendencias hacia otra economía
[Sustainable development: a basic guide to concepts and trends towards another economy]. Otra Econ. 2010;4(6):43-66. Spanish.

26.Mensah J. Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent Soc Sci. 2019;5(1):1-21.

27.Beckerman W. Sustainable Development: Is it a useful concept? Environ Value. 1994;3:191-209.

28.Costanza R, Daly L, Fioramonti L, Giovannini E, Kubiszewski I, Fogh Mortensen L, et al. Modelling and measuring sustainable wellbeing in connection with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Ecol Econ. 2016;130:350-5.

29.Issa-Salwe A. Applying Systems-Based Approach to Sustainable Development Goals. J Sustain Dev Stud. 2023;16:1-12.

30.Holden E, Linnerud K, Banister D. The Imperatives of Sustainable Development. Sustain Dev. 2017;25(3):213-26.

31.Eisenmenger N, Pichler M, Krenmay N, Noll D, Plank B, Schalmann E, et al. The Sustainable Development Goals prioritize economic growth over sustainable resource use: a critical reflection on the SDGs from a socio‑ecological perspective. Sustain Sci. 2020;15:1101-10.

32.López I, Arriag A, Pardo M. La dimensión social del concepto de desarrollo sostenible ¿La eterna olvidada
[The social dimension of the concept of sustainable development: The eternally forgotten one]? Rev Esp Sociol. 2018;27(1):25-41. Spanish.

33.Lehtone M. The environmental–social interface of sustainable development: capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecol Econ. 2004;49:199-214.

34.Li R, Li L, Wang Q. The impact of energy efficiency on carbon emissions: Evidence from the transportation sector in Chinese 30 provinces. Sustain Cities Soc. 2022;82:103880.

35.Wang Q, Zhang F, Rogrong L, Sun J. Does artificial intelligence promote energy transition and curb carbon emissions? The role of trade openness. J Clean Prod. 2024;447:141298.

36.Wang Q, Hub S, Rongrong L. Could information and communication technology (ICT) reduce carbon emissions? The role of trade openness and financial development. Telecommun Policy. 2024;48(3):102699.

37.Wang Q, Sun T, Li R. Does artificial intelligence promote green innovation? An assessment based on direct, indirect, spillover, and heterogeneity effects. Energy Environ. 2023. doi: 10.1177/0958305X2312205

38.Wang Q, Sun J, Korkut U, Li R, Tevfik M. Digital economy and carbon dioxide emissions: Examining the role of threshold variables. Geosci Front. 2024;15:101644.

39.Hickel J. The sustainable development index: Measuring the ecological efficiency of human development in the anthropocene. Ecol Econ. 2020;167:106331.

40.Legatum Institute. The Legatum Prosperity Index. London (UK): The Legatum Institute Foundation; 2021.

41.Legatum Institute. Full Data Set—Legatum Prosperity Index. Available from: https://www.prosperity.com/download_file/view/4440/2025. Accessed on 6 Jan 2025.

42.Arellano M, Bond S. Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud. 1991;58(2):277-97.

引用本文

Patricia Hernández-Medina*. Interplays of Institutional, Economic, Social and Environmental Systems in Sustainable Development in Latin America, Journal of Sustainability Research. 2025; 7; (1). https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20250007.

文献评论

相关学者

相关机构