IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does a better protected environment enhance happiness in European countries?


  • Marcella D'Uva

    () (University Parthenope of Naples)

  • Mariangela Bonasia

    () (University of Naples Parthenope)

  • Oreste Napolitano

    () (University Parthenope of Naples)

  • Elina De Simone

    () (University Parthenope of Naples)


The promotion of a sustainable development and the safeguard of citizens? wellbeing through the international cooperation is one of the fundamental scope of many multilateral environmental agreements. In particular, the Parties who ratified the Aarhus Convention recognized the importance of an ample environmental protection for human well-being of present and future generations. They also stated that the right of everyone is to live in an environment appropriate to their own health. Therefore, the pursuit of happiness and well-being cannot represent a secondary objective in environmental decision-making (United Nations, 2011; Tofallis, 2019). Providing that environmental factors affect human well-being (MacKerron and Mourato, 2013), an interesting question may concern the actions that policy makers can take to promote a safer environment and, as a consequence, to improve the quality of life of the citizens. The answer to this question may offer important policy implications for controlling pollution and environmental degradation that generate negative externalities. The linkage between environmental degradation and well-being has been explained as both a relational and environmental failure of market societies. The capacity to generate growth is negatively affected by mass dissatisfaction in rich societies deriving from an excessive depletion of environmental and social assets, as growth does not necessarily lead to happiness (Bartolini, 2007, p. 351). Hence, public spending on environmental protection responds to a worsening in the quality of life caused by overexploitation of natural resources and aims to restore happiness by providing a more sustainable community development. The role of public expenditure is thus to provide those goods like environmental protection and pollution abatement which, by securing a more sustainable future, may increase the citizens? well-being. The aim of our paper is to study the long-run relationship between per capita environmental protection expenditure (EPE) and happiness at the European level. To our knowledge, this link remains unexplored. We use a dynamic panel heterogeneity analysis through an autoregressive distributed lag model estimated by the dynamic fixed effect, the mean group and the pooled mean group estimators. The sample covers 19 countries in the period 1997-2016. Our results highlight the existence of a direct long-run equilibrium between happiness and environmental protection expenditure. The policy implication suggested by our findings is that government expenditure on environmental protection may not only offer a solution to market failure but, by increasing happiness, could also improve the quality of social life.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcella D'Uva & Mariangela Bonasia & Oreste Napolitano & Elina De Simone, 2020. "Does a better protected environment enhance happiness in European countries?," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 10012458, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
  • Handle: RePEc:sek:iacpro:10012458

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2020
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    environmental protection expenditure; happiness; long-run relationship; dynamic fixed effect; mean group; pooled mean group;

    JEL classification:

    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:sek:iacpro:10012458. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Klara Cermakova). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.