IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v4y2012i12p3206-3233d21725.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Performance of East Asia Summit Countries from the Perspective of Energy Security

Author

Listed:
  • Yudha Prambudia

    (Graduate School of System Design and Management, Keio University, Collaboration Complex, 4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 223-8526, Japan)

  • Masaru Nakano

    (Graduate School of System Design and Management, Keio University, Collaboration Complex, 4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 223-8526, Japan)

Abstract

Energy security is an increasingly important issue for East Asia Summit (EAS) countries. The Cebu declaration on East Asia Energy Security provides a common ground towards improving energy security. However, EAS countries are in a different situation and face different challenges. This leads to varying policies in dealing with energy security. This study provides an analysis of future environmental performance of three EAS countries with distinct socioeconomic and energy conditions from an energy security standpoint. A model which captures complex interrelationships between different aspects of energy security is developed for the study. Aspects related to energy, socioeconomics, and the environment are considered in the model. Policy scenarios which reflect governments’ efforts to improve energy security are developed for simulation. Analysis is performed by comparing each country performances indicated by measures related to CO 2 emissions. The results show that Japan would achieve a very small increase in CO 2 emission growth. China would still produce the largest amount of CO 2 emission, but its growth would decrease significantly. In the contrary, Indonesia’s emission would be the smallest, but its growth would be the fastest. The results indicate that Indonesia’s commitment to the Cebu declaration goal will not be sustained. The study suggests that the Cebu declaration should be moved forward by including legally binding commitments and clear CO 2 emission reduction targets.

Suggested Citation

  • Yudha Prambudia & Masaru Nakano, 2012. "Environmental Performance of East Asia Summit Countries from the Perspective of Energy Security," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(12), pages 1-28, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:4:y:2012:i:12:p:3206-3233:d:21725
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/4/12/3206/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/4/12/3206/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arief Anshory Yusuf & Budy P. Resosudarmo, 2007. "On the Distributional Effect of Carbon Tax in Developing Countries: The Case of Indonesia," Working Papers in Economics and Development Studies (WoPEDS) 200705, Department of Economics, Padjadjaran University, revised Aug 2007.
    2. Lu, Chuanyi & Tong, Qing & Liu, Xuemei, 2010. "The impacts of carbon tax and complementary policies on Chinese economy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7278-7285, November.
    3. A. Greening, Lorna & Greene, David L. & Difiglio, Carmen, 2000. "Energy efficiency and consumption -- the rebound effect -- a survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6-7), pages 389-401, June.
    4. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Mukherjee, Ishani & Drupady, Ira Martina & D’Agostino, Anthony L., 2011. "Evaluating energy security performance from 1990 to 2010 for eighteen countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 5846-5853.
    5. Leung, Guy C.K., 2011. "China's energy security: Perception and reality," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1330-1337, March.
    6. Vivoda, Vlado, 2010. "Evaluating energy security in the Asia-Pacific region: A novel methodological approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5258-5263, September.
    7. Anthony Nasir & Tariq Mahmood Ali & Sheikh Shahdin & Tariq Ur Rahman, 2011. "Technology achievement index 2009: ranking and comparative study of nations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(1), pages 41-62, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yudha Prambudia & Masaru Nakano, 2012. "Integrated Simulation Model for Energy Security Evaluation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 5(12), pages 1-25, December.
    2. Radovanović, Mirjana & Filipović, Sanja & Pavlović, Dejan, 2017. "Energy security measurement – A sustainable approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P2), pages 1020-1032.
    3. Wang, Deqing & Tian, Sihua & Fang, Lei & Xu, Yan, 2020. "A functional index model for dynamically evaluating China's energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    4. Ang, B.W. & Choong, W.L. & Ng, T.S., 2015. "Energy security: Definitions, dimensions and indexes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1077-1093.
    5. Pin Li & Jinsuo Zhang, 2019. "Is China’s Energy Supply Sustainable? New Research Model Based on the Exponential Smoothing and GM(1,1) Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-30, January.
    6. Ditya Agung Nurdianto, 2016. "Economic Impacts of a Carbon Tax in an Integrated ASEAN," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper tp201604t5, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Apr 2016.
    7. Chuang, Ming Chih & Ma, Hwong Wen, 2013. "Energy security and improvements in the function of diversity indices—Taiwan energy supply structure case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 9-20.
    8. Molyneaux, Lynette & Wagner, Liam & Froome, Craig & Foster, John, 2012. "Resilience and electricity systems: A comparative analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 188-201.
    9. Hughes, Larry & Ranjan, Ashish, 2013. "Event-related stresses in energy systems and their effects on energy security," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 413-421.
    10. Yao, Lixia & Chang, Youngho, 2014. "Energy security in China: A quantitative analysis and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 595-604.
    11. Augutis, Juozas & Krikštolaitis, Ričardas & Martišauskas, Linas & Pečiulytė, Sigita & Žutautaitė, Inga, 2017. "Integrated energy security assessment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 890-901.
    12. Narula, Kapil & Reddy, B. Sudhakara, 2015. "Three blind men and an elephant: The case of energy indices to measure energy security and energy sustainability," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 148-158.
    13. Yupei Du & Wenju Wang & Qian Lu & Ziyang Li, 2020. "A DPSIR-TODIM Model Security Evaluation of China’s Rare Earth Resources," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-24, September.
    14. Lin, Boqiang & Raza, Muhammad Yousaf, 2020. "Analysis of energy security indicators and CO2 emissions. A case from a developing economy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    15. Zhang, Long & Bai, Wuliyasu & Xiao, Huijuan & Ren, Jingzheng, 2021. "Measuring and improving regional energy security: A methodological framework based on both quantitative and qualitative analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    16. Liedtke, Stephan, 2017. "Chinese energy investments in Europe: An analysis of policy drivers and approaches," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 659-669.
    17. Larsen, Erik R. & Osorio, Sebastian & van Ackere, Ann, 2017. "A framework to evaluate security of supply in the electricity sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 646-655.
    18. Wang, Kai-Hua & Su, Chi-Wei & Umar, Muhammad, 2021. "Geopolitical risk and crude oil security: A Chinese perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    19. Hancock, Linda & Ralph, Natalie, 2021. "A framework for assessing fossil fuel ‘retrofit’ hydrogen exports: Security-justice implications of Australia’s coal-generated hydrogen exports to Japan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    20. Månsson, André & Johansson, Bengt & Nilsson, Lars J., 2014. "Assessing energy security: An overview of commonly used methodologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-14.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:4:y:2012:i:12:p:3206-3233:d:21725. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.