IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i2p410-d1562101.html

The Progress and Framework of Ecological Welfare Performance Within the Context of the “Dual Carbon” Goal: A Comprehensive Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Meijuan Hu

    (School of Tourism and Cuisine, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

  • Gong Chen

    (School of Tourism and Cuisine, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

  • Zaijun Li

    (Research Institute of Central Jiangsu Development, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China)

Abstract

The “dual carbon” goal has become a major national strategy, an inherent requirement for high-quality economic development. As a crucial indicator of measuring sustainable development capabilities, ecological welfare performance has emerged as a core tool for enhancing human welfare, achieving sustainable development, advancing ecological civilization construction, and promoting green development. This study focuses on the “dual carbon” goal appeal, clarifies the concept connotation of ecological welfare performance, assesses the research progress of ecological welfare performance, deeply analyzes the internal relationship between the “dual carbon” goal and ecological welfare performance, builds a research framework for ecological welfare performance, and points out the marginal contribution, research prospects, and shortcomings of ecological welfare performance research under the “dual carbon” goal. The findings are as follows: (1) Research on ecological welfare performance has shifted from a single dimension to a multi-dimensional and multi-level comprehensive consideration, involving multiple disciplines. Literature research focuses on four aspects, namely, the connotation and representation of welfare, the interaction between ecosystems and welfare, ecological welfare performance research, and “dual carbon” target and ecological welfare performance research. (2) From the perspective of research hotspots and historical evolution, most scholars pay more and more attention to empirical research and application-oriented research, and it is still necessary to constantly explore new theoretical frameworks and methodologies in the future to better understand the changing rules and driving mechanisms of ecological welfare performance. (3) From the perspective of the ecological welfare performance research framework, an in-depth analysis of the relationship between natural ecological consumption, economic growth, and welfare is carried out. Based on the change in research paradigm, a two-stage ecological welfare performance evaluation framework is constructed to promote the realization of the “dual carbon” goal and the continuous optimization of ecological welfare performance, so as to provide a reference basis for the scientific assessment of sustainable development capacity.

Suggested Citation

  • Meijuan Hu & Gong Chen & Zaijun Li, 2025. "The Progress and Framework of Ecological Welfare Performance Within the Context of the “Dual Carbon” Goal: A Comprehensive Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-22, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:2:p:410-:d:1562101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/2/410/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/2/410/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jie Yang & Zhigang Li, 2024. "Improving Urban Ecological Welfare Performance: An ST-LMDI Approach to the Yangtze River Economic Belt," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    3. Carlotta Balestra & Romina Boarini & Elena Tosetto, 2018. "What matters the most to people?: Evidence from the OECD Better Life Index users’ responses," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2018/3, OECD Publishing.
    4. Wang, Shaojian & Xie, Zihan & Wu, Rong & Feng, Kuishang, 2022. "How does urbanization affect the carbon intensity of human well-being? A global assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 312(C).
    5. Herman E. Daly, 2007. "Ecological Economics and Sustainable Development, Selected Essays of Herman Daly," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12606, June.
    6. Max-Neef, Manfred, 1995. "Economic growth and quality of life: a threshold hypothesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 115-118, November.
    7. Claborn, Kelly A. & Brooks, Jeremy S., 2019. "Can We Consume Less and Gain More? Environmental Efficiency of Well-being at the Individual Level," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 110-120.
    8. Carlotta Balestra & Romina Boarini & Elena Tosetto, 2018. "What Matters Most to People? Evidence from the OECD Better Life Index Users’ Responses," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 907-930, April.
    9. Dasgupta, Partha, 2001. "Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199247882.
    10. Armiento, Mirko, 2018. "The Sustainable Welfare Index: Towards a Threshold Effect for Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 296-309.
    11. Andersson, David & Nässén, Jonas & Larsson, Jörgen & Holmberg, John, 2014. "Greenhouse gas emissions and subjective well-being: An analysis of Swedish households," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 75-82.
    12. Pearce, David W. & Atkinson, Giles D., 1993. "Capital theory and the measurement of sustainable development: an indicator of "weak" sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 103-108, October.
    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. Dietz, Simon & Neumayer, Eric, 2007. "Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and measurement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 617-626, March.
    2. Melgar-Melgar, Rigo E. & Hall, Charles A.S., 2020. "Why ecological economics needs to return to its roots: The biophysical foundation of socio-economic systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    3. Savatore Puglisi & Ionuț Virgil Șerban, 2019. "Beyond Gdp: Which Options To Better Represent Modern Socio-Economic Progress?," Sociology and Social Work Review, International Society for projects in Education and Research, vol. 3(1), pages 17-32, June.
    4. Purnamita Dasgupta, 2008. "Measuring Sustainability with Macroeconomic Data for India," Working Papers id:1574, eSocialSciences.
    5. Muradian, Roldan & Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2001. "Trade and the environment: from a 'Southern' perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 281-297, February.
    6. Zafar Nazarov & Anastassia Obydenkova, 2022. "Public Health, Democracy, and Transition: Global Evidence and Post-Communism," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 261-285, February.
    7. Mohammad Fazle Rabbi, 2025. "A Dynamic Systems Approach to Integrated Sustainability: Synthesizing Theory and Modeling Through the Synergistic Resilience Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, May.
    8. Herziger, Atar & Claborn, Kelly A. & Brooks, Jeremy S., 2020. "Is There Hope for the Double Dividend? How Social Context Can Shape Synergies and Tradeoffs between Sustainable Consumption and Well-Being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Tae‐Hyoung T. Gim, 2021. "Partial least squares regression and importance–satisfaction analyses of the strategic drivers of happiness: A quality of life survey in Seoul, Korea," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 567-599, March.
    10. Mark McGillivray & Simon Feeny & Paul Hansen & Stephen Knowles & Franz Ombler, 2023. "What are Valid Weights for the Human Development Index? A Discrete Choice Experiment for the United Kingdom," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 165(2), pages 679-694, January.
    11. Arrow, Kenneth J. & Dasgupta, Partha & Goulder, Lawrence H. & Mumford, Kevin J. & Oleson, Kirsten, 2012. "Sustainability and the measurement of wealth," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 317-353, June.
    12. Collins, Ross D. & Selin, Noelle E. & de Weck, Olivier L. & Clark, William C., 2017. "Using inclusive wealth for policy evaluation: Application to electricity infrastructure planning in oil-exporting countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 23-34.
    13. Perrings, Charles, 2014. "Environment and development economics 20 years on," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 333-366, June.
    14. Johan Graafland, 2020. "When Does Economic Freedom Promote Well Being? On the Moderating Role of Long-Term Orientation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 127-153, May.
    15. Dorota Weziak-Bialowolska & Matthew T. Lee & Piotr Bialowolski & Eileen McNeely & Ying Chen & Richard G. Cowden & Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2022. "Associations between the Importance of Well-Being Domains and the Subsequent Experience of Well-Being," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Shruti Agrawal & Nidhi Sharma & Rohit Agrawal & Gianpaolo Iazzolino & Maria Elena Bruni, 2025. "Beyond GDP: A Triple Helix Framework for a Happiness Economy," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 67-94, August.
    17. Daniyal Hassan & Steven J. Burian & Rakhshinda Bano & Waqas Ahmed & Muhammad Arfan & Muhammad Naseer Rais & Ahmed Rafique & Kamran Ansari, 2019. "An Assessment of the Pakistan Water Apportionment Accord of 1991," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-17, June.
    18. Baltruszewicz, Marta & Steinberger, Julia K. & Paavola, Jouni & Ivanova, Diana & Brand-Correa, Lina I. & Owen, Anne, 2023. "Social outcomes of energy use in the United Kingdom: Household energy footprints and their links to well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    19. Alan Randall, 2022. "How Strong Sustainability Became Safety," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    20. McGrath, Luke & Hynes, Stephen & McHale, John, 2019. "Augmenting the World Bank's estimates: Ireland's genuine savings through boom and bust," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:17:y:2025:i:2:p:410-:d:1562101. 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.