Conference PaperPDF Available

The Climate Effect of Digitalization in Production and Consumption in OECD Countries

  • Institute for Ecological Economy Research, Berlin, Germany; Humboldt University Berlin; Technical University Berlin

Abstract and Figures

How does increasing digitalization affect the environment? A number of studies predict that digitalization will ultimately reduce environmental degradation but seem to overestimate the emission-reducing effects of digitalization through increases in resource efficiency, while underestimating substantial rebound effects and negative environmental impact of the construction and maintenance of complex digital infrastructures. Additionally, the environmental benefits of decreasing consumption of one-time usage goods may be outweighed by the environmental costs of the production of ICTs and the increasing use of digital technologies. This paper analyzes the relationship between degrees of countries' level of digitalization and environmental indicators by use of a panel data set of 37 economies. It is the first paper to differentiate between emissions associated with a country's production and those connected to a country's consumption, accounting for emissions related to exports and imports. The level of digitalization in production is approximated by companies' investments in digital technologies. The chosen indicator to measure consumers' proclivity to digital technologies is online shopping behaviour. We address the problem of changes in unobserved heterogeneity by using the recently developed Group Fixed Effects estimator. Results indicate that the beneficial environmental effects of digitalization on reducing climate gas emissions slightly outweigh the undesired environmental effects, both in production and consumption. Ultimately, we find that increases in digitalization have a net positive effect on the natural environment.
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Climate Effect of Digitalization in
Production and Consumption in OECD
Thomas Kopp1and Steffen Lange2
1The University of G¨
ottingen, Platz der G¨
ottinger 7, 37073 G¨
ottingen, Germany
2Institute for Ecological Economy Research, Potsdamer Str. 105, 10785 Berlin, Germany
Abstract—How does increasing digitalization affect the
environment? A number of studies predict that digital-
ization will ultimately reduce environmental degradation
but seem to overestimate the emission-reducing effects of
digitalization through increases in resource efficiency, while
underestimating substantial rebound effects and negative
environmental impact of the construction and maintenance
of complex digital infrastructures. Additionally, the envi-
ronmental benefits of decreasing consumption of one-time
usage goods may be outweighed by the environmental costs
of the production of ICTs and the increasing use of digital
This paper analyzes the relationship between degrees of
countries’ level of digitalization and environmental indica-
tors by use of a panel data set of 37 economies. It is the
first paper to differentiate between emissions associated
with a country’s production and those connected to a
country’s consumption, accounting for emissions related
to exports and imports. The level of digitalization in
production is approximated by companies’ investments
in digital technologies. The chosen indicator to measure
consumers’ proclivity to digital technologies is online shop-
ping behaviour. We address the problem of changes in
unobserved heterogeneity by using the recently developed
Group Fixed Effects estimator.
Results indicate that the beneficial environmental effects
of digitalization on reducing climate gas emissions slightly
outweigh the undesired environmental effects, both in pro-
duction and consumption. Ultimately, we find that increases
in digitalization have a net positive effect on the natural
Keywords: ecological footprint, digitalization, environ-
mental throughput, industry 4.0.
There is a widely-held consensus among politicians and
economists that increases in digitalization will have a
net-positive effect on the environment. The German
Department of Trade and Industry claims that digital-
ization improves an economy’s ecological sustainabil-
ity by increasing resource and energy use efficiencies
(ENERGIE, 2015). According to the Association of Ger-
man Engineers, digitalization may result in increases
in resource efficiency of up to 25% (RESSOURCENEF-
FIZ IE NZ, 2017). And the ’Global e-Sustainability Initia-
tive’, an international network of IT companies, argues
that digitalization has the potential to decrease global
carbon emissions by an impressive 20% (GESI and
Looking closer at these studies reveals that such pre-
dictions are founded upon weak empirical bases. Some
publications simply postulate the likely potential of digi-
talization to decrease environmental pressures with little
subsequent quantitative analysis (FORSCHUNG, 2014;
Others, while based on more concrete empirical cal-
culations, nevertheless overestimate positive effects and
underestimate negative ones (GESI and ACCENTURE,
2015), for a discussion see HI LTY and BIE SE R (2017).
The scientific literature on the environmental effects of
ICT usually differentiates between effects on different
levels. Most taxonomies have in common that they
include first higher order effects (RØP KE, 2012; HORNER
et al., 2016a; POHL et al., 2019). The definition of first
order effects is similar throughout the literature. It entails
the energy, resource use and emissions associated with
the production life cycle. This entails the production, use
phase and disposal of ICT.
However, the entire environmental effects of ICT in-
volve additional mechanisms (ARVESEN et al., 2011;
HAKANSSON and FINNVEDEN, 2015). Such higher order
effects are manifold. Which effects are incorporated
into the analysis and how they are systemized varies
II Literature review
throughout the literature. Some of these effects tend to
have positive and some to have negative environmental
consequences. A recent list of effects includes substi-
tution effects, optimization effects, beneficial effects,
direct rebound effects, indirect rebound effects, induction
effects, sustainable lifestyles and practices, transforma-
tional rebound effects, induction effects and systemic
transformation and structural economic change (POHL
et al., 2019). Several authors do not further categorize
these higher order effects (B ¨
2014; POHL et al., 2019). However, there exist also
several categorizations amongst the higher order effects.
BERKHOUT and HE RTI N (2004) differentiate between
indirect and systemic effects and HORNER et al. (2016a)
between application and systemic effects. Many authors
differentiate between two levels of higher order effects
(i.e., second and third order). This categorization has
first been introduced by BERKHOUT and HERTIN (2001).
HILTY and A EBISCHER (2015) see the life cycle effects
of production, use and disposal at the first order level,
referring to them as direct effects. At the second order,
so-called enabling effects include process optimization,
media substitution, and externalization of control. Me-
dia substitution means that with increased digitalization
information is distributed through new forms of media,
for example replacing books by tablets or Kindles, or re-
placing audio playback devices with streaming services.
Externalization of control captures all processes that are
out of the hands of consumers or businesses using a
specific technology, such as the need to regularly acquire
new hardware due to software update cycles. Third
order effects are labelled systemic effects and encompass
rebound effects, emerging risks and transition towards
sustainable patterns of production and consumption.
Accurately measuring the effect of digitalization on
the environment using these different classifications of
effects is a challenging task (HE IJ UN GS et al., 2009;
2015). It would be possible to investigate the life-cycle
impacts, as well as the productivity increases, on a
microeconomic scale by estimating changes in environ-
mental productivity for the production of specific goods
and services, or by measuring the energy and resources
used to produce and use ICTs. However, even this is
a difficult task (HI LTY, 2015). Estimating the effect of
digitalization on labor productivity and economic growth
is even more difficult, as various other factors come
into play. Digitalization takes place within a certain
historic situation of the world economy. The fact that
economies undergo a multitude of transformations and
macroeconomic shocks parallel to digitalization makes
it even more complicated to measure each of the three
mechanisms as along with the overall effect of digi-
talization. Indeed, it is difficult to clearly separate the
environmental effects caused by digitalization from those
effects caused by other key factors, like the continuing
globalization of world trade, economic policies aimed at
climate change and environmental threats, urbanization,
and population growth, among others.
Due to these challenges in measuring the environmental
effects of digitalization directly, an alternative method
– complementary to the existing ones in the literature
– is to compare economies within the same historic
setting through a differences in differences approach.
Do economies experiencing faster digitalization increase
or decrease their environmental throughput compared to
economies with slower digitalization over the same time
Nearly no studies exist on the macro level to allow for
capturing both negative and positive effects of digital-
ization on biosphere use with an explicit differentiation
between production and consumption effects. One of few
existing studies providing such evidence is SCH ULT E
et al. (2016), who assess the effects of increasing ICT use
on energy consumption in production through a cross-
country panel data analysis. Our approach adds to the
existing body of knowledge by explicitly differentiating
between the environmental effects of increasing digital-
ization caused by production and consumption.
The life-cycle impacts of ICT use have been subject to a
number of investigations. The production and application
of ICTs themselves require a substantial input of raw
materials and energy. However, existing studies on the
natural resource costs associated with the production and
employment of ICTs are limited.
According to a recent study by MALMODIN et al. (2018),
the use of ICTs accounts for 0,5% of global material
use. However, these numbers vary highly concerning the
specific material being considered. Indeed, ICT accounts
for 80-90% of depletion of certain materials, such as
indium, gallium and germanium. Several studies have
investigated ICT’s effects on the demand for energy.
ANDRAE (2015) estimate that the use of ICTs accounted
for 8% of global energy use in 2010 and expect this share
to rise strongly in the coming years. VAN HED DE GH EM
et al. (2014) estimate that the share of global energy
III Methodology
consumption due to a certain subset of ICTs (communi-
cation networks, personal computers, and data centres)
grew from 3.9% to 4.6% in 2012 alone. These numbers
certainly show that such direct effects of ICTs must be
considered when estimating whether growing levels of
digitalization serve to increase or decrease environmental
throughput over time.
Many examples of increases in environmental produc-
tivity through increased ICT use have been observed.
More efficient movement of robots can decrease their
energy use in manufacturing.1In one of the first studies
on the subject, LE NNART SO N and BENGTSS ON (2016)
find that improvements in robotic movement efficiency
are associated with a decrease in energy consumption of
up to 40%. COROA MA et al. (2012) find that replacing
in-person business meetings with virtual conferences
could decrease the carbon footprint of such meetings by
37% - 50%. Electronic invoicing can decrease energy
use compared with traditional invoicing methods and
switching to online newspapers and magazines rather
than consuming conventional print publications can have
a substantial and far-reaching positive environmental
impacts as well (MOBERG et al., 2010). Various studies
have investigated the environmental effects of online
vs. offline retailing at the micro level (HORNER et al.,
2016b; MANGIARACINA et al., 2015; LO ON et al., 2015).
Which one is more efficient depends on various factors
such as population density and the specific conditions
of delivery, implying that online shopping can actually
be more environmentally harmful than traditional retail.
The same is true for media substitution regarding online
video streaming compared to renting DVDs (SHEHAB I
et al., 2014).
In addition, rebound effects can also be observed. In
a nutshell, rebound effects refer to the phenomenon
where an increase in production efficiency leads to a
lowering of consumer prices. This, in turn, leads to
higher demand, resulting in an expansion of total pro-
duction. The corresponding increase in natural resource
use may overcompensate the ecological efficiency gains,
leading to a net-increase of biosphere use (BERKHOUT
et al., 2000). An overview of the literature on rebound
effects in regards to ICT usage is provided by GOS SA RT
(2014). If digitalization helps to increase energy and
resource productivities, the costs for energy and other
resources decrease. Economically speaking, this means
that the production function shifts downwards, a new
equilibrium of lower price and higher quantity is reached,
1Note that this refers to robot steerage, not the introduction of robots.
and consumers have more income to spend on other
goods and services. This implies that the energy and
natural resources saved through increased productivity
can be used for other productive purposes, either to
produce more of the same goods and services or to
produce additional other goods and services. Many au-
thors have found evidence for rebound effects in different
areas of the digital economy, including COROAM A et al.
(2012), MOKHTARIAN (2009), and AR NFALK et al.
(2016) for virtual meetings and video conferencing, and
OR JE SS ON RIVERA et al. (2014a) for production of
ICT hardware. Another example is in the increasing
efficiency of processing units. The so called “Koomey’s
law” states that the energy efficiency of processing units
doubles every 1.5 years (KOO ME Y et al., 2011). If the
amount of processing units would stay the same, energy
use by such units would decrease along a logarithmic
pattern with a half-life of 1.5 years, quickly approaching
very low levels. But at the same time, the amount of
computations of the processing units produced and used
grows over time. The bottom line is that the growth in the
number of processing units is higher than the rate of in-
crease in productivity. This impressive growth can at least
partly be explained by technological developments. The
newer, more efficient units allow for media substitution,
resulting in more aggregate use. For example, with the
larger and more energy-intensive processing units in the
1990s, it was simply not feasible to invent a functional
In summary, the existing research suggests that digi-
talization has the potential to increase environmental
productivity in many economic areas. But even if this
holds true, the production and maintenance of a digital
infrastructure (first order effects) and potential rebound
and other higher order effects could outweigh the benefits
described by the first mechanism, possibly leading to
an increase in total environmental throughput after all.
Only by an aggregated analysis that takes all mechanisms
into account can we investigate whether digitalization
increases or decreases environmental throughput.
A. Estimation method
This analysis relies on the recently introduced Group
Fixed Effects (GFE) estimator. It was developed by BO N-
HOMME and MA NR ES A (2015) and has been used by
few studies so far (GRU NE WALD et al., 2017; KOPP and
DOR N, 2018). Its development has been motivated by
III Methodology
problems with conventional panel fixed-effect analysis,
which implicitly assumes unobserved heterogeneity be-
tween countries to stay constant over time. To tackle this
issue, in the first stage the GFE assembles all countries
into groups, according to the changes in the observables.
In the second stage the panel estimation is exercised,
supplemented by dummy variables for each of the groups
instead of individual country effects. The GFE also
solves the problem of low degrees of freedom in fixed-
effect panel estimations, which require a big number of
dummy variables (one dummy per section, e.g. country).
Since the GFE bundles all countries within a relatively
small number of groups (all literature reviewed that
employs the GFE estimator relies on less than ten groups
(BONHOMME and M ANRES A, 2015; GRUNEWALD et al.,
2017; KOP P and DORN, 2018)), the number of covariates
decreases strongly.
Four control variables are included, following
GRUN EWALD et al. (2017) and KOPP and DORN
(2018): the share of the population living in urban areas,
as well as the shares of the GDP being generated in
the agriculture, the manufacturing, and service sectors,
respectively. This leads to the following equation to
be estimated, for both production and consumption
where stands for climate gas emissions and
for the level of digitalization.2denotes each
country’s GDP. is a cross term capturing
interaction effects between GDP and the measure of
digitalization on the outcome variable.3is the vector
of control variables and the vector of
the respective coefficients . stands
for the coefficients of the GFE-groups, of which one is
omitted from the estimation due to collinearity. is a
constant and an error term. The dependent and the
key explaining variables are described in the following
2The identification of the digitalization effect is laid out in the next
3This allows for the possibility that the effect of one of the variables
depends on the state of the other, i.e. that digitalization may affect
biosphere use in richer countries systematically different than it does
in less well-off countries.
B. Identification strategy
The effects of digitalization can be decomposed into
those effects related to the production of goods and
those related to the consumption of goods. The former
includes increased technical efficiency due to the use of
ICT in production processes, while the latter refers to
changing consumption patterns, such as the switch from
conventional analogous and offline practices to digital
and potentially online ones. To allow for a differentiation
between the effects of these two areas we approach
the question from two sides, first from the production
perspective and then from the consumption perspective.
To measure production-side effects, we measure all re-
sources that are used in one country’s industrial pro-
duction and investigate how deeply resource use in that
country is affected by the country’s level of industrial
digitalization. This level of digitalization is captured by
the total yearly investments of all firms in information
and communication technology. Environmental through-
put is proxied by each country’s emissions.
The analysis on the consumption side considers all
resources used during the production of the goods con-
sumed in one certain country (even if produced abroad)
and associates them with a measure of digitalization on
the consumer side in one country. Defining an aggregate
measure to account for all aspects of digitalization on the
consumer side is complicated, as it encompasses several
dimensions. This means, generally speaking, that new or
additional products and services are consumed that were
not previously imagined to complement or substitute
existing ones. This also includes the purchasing process
itself, which is involved in every purchasing act, and
might therefore serve as an effective proxy for the
consumers’ openness to new technology and willingness
to use them. This paper therefore proxies digitalization
on the consumption side by the share of individuals who
ordered consumer articles online during the last three
months.4The environmental throughput caused by the
consumption of goods in a country is proxied by the
sub-index emissions of the ecological footprint. The
critical difference between the two measures of biosphere
use is that the former captures the emissions pro-
duced within the countries while the latter also accounts
for emissions imported and exported through trade.
4As this decision is controversial some critical reflections and ideas
on alternatives to this measure are provided in the “Outlook” section
IV Results, discussion, and outlook
C. Data
On the production side the key explanatory variable,
the digitalization in a country’s production, is the sum
of all investments made by all companies into ICT
infrastructure and software that is used for more than
one year. This variable is provided by the OECD (2017).
The dependent variable is emissions generated
by all production processes carried out in one country,
proxying the environmentally detrimental output caused
by production. This variable, as well as the controls, were
taken from the World Development Indicators, provided
by the World Bank. Descriptive statistics of all variables
entering the production side regression are provided in
Table (I).
TABLE I: Summary statistics of all variables entering
the production side regression.
mean sd min max
6.56 1.33 4.65 9.96
lnICTinvest 2.73 0.39 1.03 3.48
lnGDP 23.10 1.20 21.03 26.04
Urban 77.56 7.58 57.92 88.91
Manu 17.52 4.15 9.06 27.80
Agri 2.95 2.08 0.55 11.68
Serv 61.39 6.05 44.60 76.38
318 observations
So on the production side the following model is esti-
where subscript indicates the production side coeffi-
On the consumption side the key explanatory variable is
the share of people who used the internet to purchase
goods or services during the last three months. The
data were provided by EuroStat, the statistics service
of the European Commission (EU RO STAT, 2018). We
generated the dependant variable based on the carbon
sub-index of the ecological footprint (EF), provided by
the Ecological Footprint Network (LI N et al., 2016).
Unlike other accounts of emissions the EF captures not
only the ones produced in one country, but also accounts
for the ecological backpack carried by all goods imported
and exported. Since the database provides the EF in the
form of “global hectares”, it was converted back to
emissions, based on average sequestration capacity of
forests, which is the measure used to construct the EF in
the first place. The control variables are the same as for
the production side. Descriptive statistics of all variables
entering the consumption side regression are provided
in Table (II). The values diverge slightly from the ones
provided in table (I); because – due to different data
availabilities – the countries included in the analysis vary
TABLE II: Summary statistics of all variables entering
the consumption side regression.
mean sd min max
lnEFP 5.77 1.36 2.43 7.88
lnOnlineShopping -1.57 0.85 -3.91 -0.33
lnGDP 22.00 1.52 18.03 24.39
Urban 72.62 12.84 49.69 97.82
Manu 13.72 4.48 4.08 24.83
Agri 2.36 1.68 0.25 9.03
Serv 62.75 7.03 42.92 78.31
177 observations
The consumption side is estimated as follows:
where subscript indicates the consumption side coef-
The countries entering the analysis, their descriptives
and group assignments are displayed in Table (V) in
the appendix. For the production side, the panel covers
the years 1990-2009 and for the consumption side 2008-
2014. The number of observations per group is displayed
in Table (IV) in the appendix.
A. Results
Results of both regressions are displayed in table (III).
The inclusion of the interaction terms impedes a straight-
forward interpretation by simply observing the estimated
IV Results, discussion, and outlook
coefficients. To facilitate an intuitive interpretation, fig-
ures (1) and (2) visualize the effect of digitalization
within the range of the GDP and digitalization levels
in the data in the form of heatmaps.
TABLE III: Regression results.
(1) (2)
lnICTinvest -3.835***
lnGDP ICTinvest 0.171***
lnOnlineShopping -2.055***
lnGDP OnlineShopping 0.0826***
lnGDP 1.577*** -0.190
(0.000139) (0.706)
lnGDP -0.0195** 0.0247**
(0.0456) (0.0331)
Urban 0.0290*** 0.00841***
(0) (0.00283)
Manu 0.00705* 0.0412***
(0.0888) (4.63e-06)
Agri 0.0669*** 0.157***
(0) (4.83e-08)
Serv -0.0231*** 0.00433
(2.88e-09) (0.549)
Assignment1 -0.438*** 0.742***
(0) (3.61e-09)
Assignment2 0.448*** 0.879***
(0) (0)
Assignment3 0.734*** 0.801***
(0) (0)
Assignment4 0.253*** 0.424***
(0) (1.64e-05)
-21.12*** -4.855
(6.41e-06) (0.395)
Observations 318 177
0.989 0.957
pval in parentheses
*** p 0.01, ** p 0.05, * p 0.1
B. Discussion
Figure (1) shows that the effects of digitalization in
production on emissions depend on the level of GDP
in a given country. In the lower quartile of the GDP
distribution, increasing levels of digitalization lead to
a reduction in environmental throughput, while for the
upper quartile the opposite is true. At the sample mean
the effect is more ambiguous.
On the consumption side (Figure 2) the effects appear
clearer: digitalization leads to a reduction in environmen-
tal throughput. However, the effect grows weaker as GDP
Fig. 1: Effects of lnICT-Investments and lnGDP on CO emissions
produced within the country.
The shading indicates the size of the EF of the respective measure.
The dots represent the distribution of lnICT-investments and
of all countries in our sample.
Fig. 2: Effects of lnOnline-Shopping and lnGDP on CO emissions
(including imported emissions).
The shading indicates the size of the EF of the respective measure.
The dots represent the distribution of and
of all countries in our sample.
For both production and consumption, the effects of
digitalization on environmental throughput appear to
be relatively small compared with the effects of GDP.
Nevertheless, the effect may still be substantial. To fully
understand the marginal effects, we differentiate the
parametrized equations with respect to their respective
measurements of digitalization, ICT investments, and
online shopping behaviour.
Differentiating equation (1) with respect to yields
On the production side, equation (4) yields -0.22 at the
sample mean. At this point in the data, an increase in ICT
investments by 10% (that is, by 1.65) would decrease
by 0.3664. This amounts to 5.6% of all CO
emissions caused in production, ceteris paribus.
The computation is the same on the demand side. At
the sample mean, an increase in Online Shopping by
10% would decrease caused through a country’s
consumption by 3.4%, ceteris paribus.
C. Outlook
The global effects of digitalization are widespread and
far-reaching in scope, encompassing multiple industries
and sectors (HILTY et al., 2014; WILLIAMS, 2011;
ORJESSON RIVERA et al., 2014b). This work specif-
ically focuses upon two aspects central to digitalisation.
On the production side, we focus on the life cycle
impacts reflected through the ever-increasing use of
digital hardware, proxied by firms’ ICT investments. On
the consumption side, digitalization manifests itself in a
general proclivity and openness of consumers towards
digitalization (second and third order effects), which
can be measured effectively through online shopping
However, one potential caveat of this study that must be
taken into account is the potentially questionable validity
of online shopping behaviour as a proxy for consumer
openness towards digital services. To account for this
potential weakness, the next step is to expand upon the
study by testing our results for robustness by adding more
dimensions on the consumer side, in order to provide a
more complete picture of consumer-side digitalization.
This can be achieved by executing our existing analysis
with an index composed of data on more second-order
effects, including media substitution, process optimiza-
tion, and externalization of control. These can include
data on internet penetration rates, average internet speed,
share of Netflix subscriptions vs. DVD rentals, quantity
of decentralised energy systems/smart grids, sales of
Amazon Kindles, inter alia. These data would then need
to be normalized and aggregated to an index.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is one of
the first to analyze the impact of increased digitalization
on environmental throughput at the macroeconomic level.
It is the first paper that differentiates between consump-
tion and production side effects. We make use of a unique
dataset linking national CO emissions to digitalization
in production and net CO levels after trading to data
on digitalization levels in consumption. To answer the
research questions, we apply the newly developed Group
Effects estimator.
The results of this study provide the first evidence of
its kind that the CO -decreasing benefit of digitalization
might outweigh its environmental costs. Indeed, there
is evidence that the net effect of digitalization on CO
emissions and environmental throughput are in fact pos-
itive. However, supplemental research is required to test
the robustness of these results against a wider range of
digitalization measures on the consumption side.
ANDRAE, Anders S G (2015). “Method based on market
changes for improvement of comparative attributional
life cycle assessments”. en. In: The International Jour-
nal of Life Cycle Assessment 20.2, pp. 263–275. I SS N:
0948-3349, 1614-7502.
Pontus GR¨
ON VALL (2016). “Green IT in practice: vir-
tual meetings in Swedish public agencies”. In: Journal
of Cleaner Production. Advancing Sustainable Solu-
tions: An Interdisciplinary and Collaborative Research
Agenda 123, pp. 101–112. IS SN: 0959-6526.
ARVESEN, Anders, Ryan M. BRIGHT, and Edgar G.
HERTWICH (2011). “Considering only first-order ef-
fects? How simplifications lead to unrealistic technol-
ogy optimism in climate change mitigation”. en. In:
Energy Policy 39.11, pp. 7448–7454. I SSN: 03014215.
BERKHOUT, Frans and Julia HE RTI N (2001). Impacts of
Information and Communication Technologies on En-
vironmental Sustainability: speculations and evidence.
report to the OECD. Tech. rep.
(2004). “De-materialising and re-materialising: digital
technologies and the environment”. en. In: Futures
36.8, pp. 903–920. IS SN: 00163287.
BERKHOUT, Peter H G, Jos C MUSK EN S, and Jan W
VELTH UIJSE N (2000). “Defining the rebound effect”.
In: Energy policy 28.6, pp. 425–432.
ephane and Elena MANRESA (2015).
“Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity in Panel Data”. In:
Econometrica 83.3, pp. 1147–1184. IS SN: 00129682.
ORJESSON RIVERA, Miriam, Cecilia H ˚
Asa SV EN FE LT, and G¨
oran FINNVEDEN (2014a).
“Including second order effects in environmental as-
sessments of ICT”. In: Environmental Modelling &
Software. Thematic issue on Modelling and evaluating
the sustainability of smart solutions 56, pp. 105–115.
IS SN: 1364-8152.
– (2014b). “Including second order effects in environ-
mental assessments of ICT”. In: Environmental Mod-
elling & Software. Thematic issue on Modelling and
evaluating the sustainability of smart solutions 56,
pp. 105–115. IS SN: 1364-8152.
ORJESSON RIVERA, Miriam, Cecilia H ˚
Asa SV EN FE LT, and G¨
oran FINNVEDEN (2014). “In-
cluding second order effects in environmental as-
sessments of ICT”. In: Environmental Modelling &
Software. Thematic issue on Modelling and evaluating
the sustainability of smart solutions 56, pp. 105–115.
IS SN: 1364-8152.
BUNDESREGIERUNG, Die (2014). “Digitale Agenda
2014–2017”. In: ed. by Bundesministerium f¨
Wirtschaft und ENERGIE, Bundesministerium des IN-
NE RE N, and Bundesministerium f ¨
ur Verkehr und dig-
COROAM A, Vlad C, Lorenz M HILTY, and Martin BIR -
TE L (2012). “Effects of Internet-based multiple-site
conferences on greenhouse gas emissions”. In: Telem-
atics and Informatics. Green Information Communica-
tion Technology 29.4, pp. 362–374. ISS N: 0736-5853.
ENERGIE, Bundesministerium f¨
ur Wirtschaft und (2015).
Industrie 4.0 und Digitale Wirtschaft. Impulse f¨
Wachstum, Besch ¨
aftigung und Innovation. Berlin:
EURO STAT (2018). Digital Economy and Society
Vanessa BACH, Markus BERGER, Gerhard
Annekatrin LEHMANN, Julia MART´
Nikolay MINKOV, Sabrina NEUGE BAUER,
Kirana WOLF (2014). “Challenges in Life Cycle
Assessment: An Overview of Current Gaps and
Research Needs”. In: Background and Future
Prospects in Life Cycle Assessment. Ed. by
Walter KL¨
OP FFE R. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands,
pp. 207–258. IS BN: 978-94-017-8696-6 978-94-017-
FORSCHUNG, Bundesministerium f¨
ur Bildung und
(2014). Die neue High-Tech Strategie der Bun-
desregierung: Innovationen f¨
ur Deutschland. Tech.
rep. Berlin.
GESI and ACCENTURE (2015). Smarter 2030. ICT Solu-
tions for 21st Century Challenges. Tech. rep. Br¨
edric (2014). “Rebound effects and ict:
A review of the literature”. In: ICT Innovations for
Sustainability. Ed. by Lorenz M. HILT Y and Bernard
AEBISCHER. Berlin: Springer International Publish-
GRUN EWALD, Nicole, Stephan KLA SE N, Inmaculada
IN EZ -ZAR ZOSO, and Chris MUR IS (2017).
“The Trade-off Between Income Inequality and Car-
bon Dioxide Emissions”. In: Ecological Economics
142, pp. 249–256. IS SN: 09218009.
HAKANSSON, Cecilia and G¨
oran FINNVEDEN (2015).
“Indirect Rebound and Reverse Rebound Effects in
the ICT-sector and Emissions of CO2”. In: Joint
Conference on 29th International Conference on Infor-
matics for Environmental Protection/3rd International
Conference on ICT for Sustainability (EnviroInfo and
ICT4S), SEP 07-09, 2015, Univ Copenhagen, Copen-
hagen, DENMARK, pp. 66–73.
HEI JU NG S, Reinout, Gjalt H UPPES, and Jeroen GUIN´
(2009). “A scientific framework for LCA”. In: Deliv-
erable (D15) of work package 2.
HILTY , Lorenz M (2015). “The role of ICT in labor
productivity and resource productivity–are we using
technological innovation the wrong way?” In: Novat-
ica 234/ 2015.Special Issue for the 40th anniversary
of the Journal, pp. 32–39.
HILTY , Lorenz M. and Bernard AEBISCHER (2015).
“ICT for Sustainability: An Emerging Research Field”.
In: ICT Innovations for Sustainability. Ed. by Lorenz
M. HI LTY and Bernard AEBISCHER. Vol. 310. Cham:
Springer International Publishing, pp. 3–36. ISBN:
978-3-319-09227-0 978-3-319-09228-7.
HILTY , Lorenz M and Jan BIESE R (2017). Opportunities
and Risks of Digitalization for Climate Protection in
Switzerland. Tech. rep. Z¨
HILTY , Lorenz M, Bernard AEBISCHER, and Andrea E
RIZ ZO LI (2014). “Modeling and evaluating the sus-
tainability of smart solutions”. en. In: Environmental
Modelling & Software 56, pp. 1–5. ISSN: 13648152.
HORNER, Nathaniel C., Arman SH EH AB I, and Inˆ
es L.
AZE VE DO (2016a). “Known unknowns: indirect en-
ergy effects of information and communication tech-
nology”. en. In: Environmental Research Letters 11.10,
p. 103001. IS SN: 1748-9326.
HORNER, Nathaniel C, Arman SH EH AB I, and Inˆ
es L
AZE VE DO (2016b). “Known unknowns: indirect en-
ergy effects of information and communication tech-
nology”. en. In: Environmental Research Letters 11.10,
p. 103001. IS SN: 1748-9326.
KOOMEY, Jonathan, Stephen BERARD, Marla
SAN CH EZ, and Henry WONG (2011). “Implications
of historical trends in the electrical efficiency of
computing”. In: IEEE IEEE Annals of the History of
Computing 33.3, pp. 46–54.
KOP P, Thomas and Franziska DORN (2018). “Social
equity and ecological sustainability - can the two be
achieved together?” In: cege Discussion Papers 357,
pp. 1–32.
LEN NARTSON, B and K BE NGTSSON (2016). “Smooth
robot movements reduce energy consumption by up to
30 percent”. In: European Energy Innovation Spring,
p. 38.
Michael BO RUC KE, Lea COH EN, Alessandro GA LL I,
Elias LA ZA RUS, Golnar ZOKAI, Katsunori IH A, Derek
EATON, and Mathis WACKER NAG EL (2016). Working
Guidebook to the National Footprint Accounts: 2016
Edition. Tech. rep.
LOON, Patricia van, Lieven DEKETELE, Joost DE-
WAEL E, Alan MCKINNON, and Christine RUTHER-
FO RD (2015). “A comparative analysis of carbon emis-
sions from online retailing of fast moving consumer
goods”. en. In: Journal of Cleaner Production 106,
pp. 478–486. IS SN: 09596526.
MALMODIN, Jens, Pernilla BERGMARK, and Sepideh
MATINFAR (2018). “A high-level estimate of the ma-
terial footprints of the ICT and the E&M sector”. In:
pp. 148–168.
OTT I, and Angela T UMINO (2015). “A review of
the environmental implications of B2C e-commerce:
a logistics perspective”. In: International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 45.6,
pp. 565–591. IS SN: 0960-0035.
MIL LE R, Shelie A. and Gregory A. KEOLEIAN (2015).
“Framework for Analyzing Transformative Technolo-
gies in Life Cycle Assessment”. en. In: Environmental
Science & Technology 49.5, pp. 3067–3075. I SSN:
0013-936X, 1520-5851.
and Sara TY SKENG (2010). “Environmental impacts
of electronic invoicing”. In: Progress in Industrial
Ecology, an International Journal 7.2, pp. 93–113.
MOKHTARIAN, Patricia (2009). “If telecommunication is
such a good substitute for travel, why does congestion
continue to get worse?” In: Transportation Letters 1.1,
pp. 1–17. IS SN: 1942-7867.
OECD (2017). ICT investment Dataset.
POH L, Johanna, Lorenz M. HILTY, and Matthias
FINKBEINER (2019). “How LCA contributes to the
environmental assessment of higher order effects of
ICT application: A review of different approaches”. en.
In: Journal of Cleaner Production.ISSN: 09596526.
RES SO UR CE NEFFIZIEN Z, Zentrum (2017).
Ressourceneffizienz durch Industrie 4.0. Tech. rep.
RØP KE, Inge (2012). “The unsustainable directionality
of innovation – The example of the broadband tran-
sition”. en. In: Research Policy 41.9, pp. 1631–1642.
IS SN: 00487333.
SCH ULTE, Patrick, Heinz WE LSCH, and Sascha
AU SE R (2016). “ICT and the Demand for
Energy: Evidence from OECD Countries”. en.
In: Environmental and Resource Economics 63.1,
pp. 119–146. IS SN: 0924-6460, 1573-1502.
SHE HA BI, Arman, Ben WALK ER, and Eric MASANET
(2014). “The energy and greenhouse-gas implications
of internet video streaming in the United States”.
en. In: Environmental Research Letters 9.5, p. 54007.
IS SN: 1748-9326.
NO O, Didier COL LE, Mario PICKAVET, and Piet DE-
MEESTER (2014). “Trends in worldwide ICT electric-
VI Appendix
ity consumption from 2007 to 2012”. en. In: Computer
Communications 50, pp. 64–76. IS SN: 01403664.
WILLIAMS, Eric (2011). “Environmental effects of infor-
mation and communications technologies”. In: Nature
479.7373, pp. 354–358. ISSN: 0028-0836, 1476-4687.
WISSENSCHAFT, Promotorengruppe Kommunikation
der Forschungsunion Wirtschaft – (2013). “Umset-
zungsempfehlungen f¨
ur das Zukunftsprojekt Industrie
4.0”. In: Abschlussbericht des Arbeitskreises Industrie
TABLE IV: Observations per group.
N production N consumption
1 52 41
2 73 152
3 46 35
4 117 77
5 75 52
VI Appendix
TABLE V: Mean values of key variables.
ICTinvest assignment prod. EF OnlineShopping assignment cons. GDP
Australia 1367 18.54 4 1838 1.3e+10
Austria 289 11.32 2 391 0.36 2 5.5e+09
Belgium 399 544 0.30 2 7.1e+09
Bulgaria 197 267 0.10 5 9.0e+08
Canada 2318 16.75 2 3126 2.5e+10
Croatia 91 120 0.13 4 1.0e+09
Czechrepublic 526 728 0.17 3 3.8e+09
Denmark 232 20.51 5 306 0.57 4 4.5e+09
Estonia 82 106 0.17 1 3.6e+08
Finland 282 11.09 4 268 0.41 1 3.6e+09
France 1513 15.49 5 1963 0.39 2 3.4e+10
Greece 312 423 0.13 4 4.0e+09
Hungary 210 273 0.20 3 2.6e+09
Ireland 187 10.15 3 247 0.34 4 3.3e+09
Italy 1829 12.48 2 2359 0.11 2 3.2e+10
Japan 4973 13.27 5 6403 8.1e+10
Latvia 31 42 0.14 5 4.0e+08
Lithuania 62 79 0.11 5 6.8e+08
Luxembourg 37 49 0.51 2 7.0e+08
Malta 10 13 0.32 5 1.3e+08
Montenegro 10 13 0.04 6.8e+07
Netherlands 694 880 0.52 2 1.2e+10
Newzealand 130 20.56 4 160 1.7e+09
Norway 279 292 0.55 1 8.4e+09
Poland 1478 1948 0.20 2 8.8e+09
Portugal 201 276 0.12 3 3.5e+09
Romania 461 626 0.04 4 3.6e+09
Serbia 243 324 0.03 7.6e+08
Slovakia 168 237 0.23 2 1.7e+09
Slovenia 71 101 0.19 2 8.4e+08
Southkorea 1996 11.17 3 2641 1.2e+10
Spain 1282 13.78 4 1680 0.20 3 2.0e+10
Sweden 241 22.65 1 322 0.52 5 6.6e+09
Switzerland 163 16.66 1 229 0.62 7.2e+09
Turkey 1554 2061 0.05 4 1.6e+10
Unitedkingdom 2076 23.58 4 2669 0.63 2 3.1e+10
Unitedstates 20518 29.54 2 26680 1.8e+11
Blank spots in the table refer to non-observed values in the respective dataset.
... Furthermore, Stock et al. (2016) claimed that the allocation of materials, energy, and water can be efficiently done based on the intelligent cross-linked value creation modules [51]. Statistically, as stated by the Association of German Engineers, digitalization may result in a 25% increase of resource efficiency [16]; it also affirms that digitalization has the potential to reduce carbon emissions by 20% [16]. CPS and IoT enable transparency in manufacturing through real-time process monitoring of resource consumption, thus providing production management a solid basis for improved responsiveness [6,12]. ...
... Furthermore, Stock et al. (2016) claimed that the allocation of materials, energy, and water can be efficiently done based on the intelligent cross-linked value creation modules [51]. Statistically, as stated by the Association of German Engineers, digitalization may result in a 25% increase of resource efficiency [16]; it also affirms that digitalization has the potential to reduce carbon emissions by 20% [16]. CPS and IoT enable transparency in manufacturing through real-time process monitoring of resource consumption, thus providing production management a solid basis for improved responsiveness [6,12]. ...
... This is because most of the research only considers the environmental impact from the product lifecycle perspective. As stated in a few studies, the manufacturing and use of digital equipment and devices requires abundant resources and generates enormous wastes [4,15,16]. Therefore, the impact from the technology lifecycle should be included, when we stand from the ecological perspective. The next section will present the environmental impact from the technology hardware's lifecycle. ...
Full-text available
The rapid development and implementation of digitalization in manufacturing has enormous impact on the environment. It is still unclear whether digitalization has positive or negative environmental impact from applications in manufacturing. Therefore, this study aims to discuss the overall implications of digitalization on environmental sustainability through a literature study, within the scope of manufacturing (product design, production, transportation, and customer service). The analysis and categorization of selected articles resulted in two main findings: (1) Digitalization in manufacturing contributes positively to environmental sustainability by increasing resource and information efficiency as a result of applying Industry 4.0 technologies throughout the product lifecycle; (2) the negative environmental burden of digitalization is primarily due to increased resource and energy use, as well as waste and emissions from manufacturing, use, and disposal of the hardware (the technology lifecycle). Based on these findings, a lifecycle perspective is proposed, considering the environmental impacts from both the product and technology lifecycles. This study identified key implications of digitalization on environmental sustainability in manufacturing to increase awareness of both the positive and negative impacts of digitalization and thereby support decision making to invest in new digital technologies.
... Furthermore, there are also studies showing a negative impact of Industry 4.0 on the environment. The widely used and fast updated electrical and electronic equipment and devices from CPS and IoT produce a high amount of e-waste [15,16]. The production and use of ICT consume a growing amount of materials, which speeds up the depletion of natural resources [4]. ...
... Furthermore, Stock et al. (2016) claimed that the allocation of materials, energy, and water can be efficiently done based on the intelligent cross-linked value creation modules [51]. Statistically, as stated by the Association of German Engineers, digitalization may result in a 25% increase of resource efficiency [16]; it also affirms that digitalization has the potential to reduce carbon emissions by 20% [16]. CPS and IoT enable transparency in manufacturing through real-time process monitoring of resource consumption, thus providing production management a solid basis for improved responsiveness [6,12]. ...
... Furthermore, Stock et al. (2016) claimed that the allocation of materials, energy, and water can be efficiently done based on the intelligent cross-linked value creation modules [51]. Statistically, as stated by the Association of German Engineers, digitalization may result in a 25% increase of resource efficiency [16]; it also affirms that digitalization has the potential to reduce carbon emissions by 20% [16]. CPS and IoT enable transparency in manufacturing through real-time process monitoring of resource consumption, thus providing production management a solid basis for improved responsiveness [6,12]. ...
Full-text available
The potential of digital technologies is widely discussed and recognized, mainly focusing on process automation, efficiency improvements and quality control. The implications on environmental sustainability is mostly considered from a theoretical perspective rather than operational. This study aims to reveal the potential of digital technologies to reduce the environmental impact in industrial practice. A case study was carried out at two manufacturing sites of an international manufacturing company producing mechanical components for the global markets. Data and insights were collected through interviews and observations. This paper presents the findings in terms of real life implementations and potentials to reduce the environmental impact using digital technologies along the manufacturing value chain, which can serve as input and guideline for the manufacturing industry.
... The amount of publications on Artificial Intelligence (AI) has increased more than fivefold over the last decade [2]. Early studies already warned of the dangers of using digitalisation without rebound considerations regarding the environment [3] and identified the need for a more fine-grained analysis of digital processes with respect to their ecological footprint [4]. Nowadays, several international initiatives, such as the EU Green Deal, aim to reduce carbon emissions. ...
... We thank the Dutch Research Project "Data Logistics for Logistics Data" (DL4LD), supported by the Dutch Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), the Dutch Institute for Advanced Logistics 3 and the Dutch Commit-to-Data initiative 4 . This work is also partially funded through the AMdEX Fieldlab project supported by Kansen Voor West EFRO (KVW00309) and the province of Noord-Holland. ...
Full-text available
To address increasing societal concerns regarding privacy and climate, the EU adopted the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and committed to the Green Deal. Considerable research studied the energy efficiency of software and the accuracy of machine learning models trained on anonymised data sets. Recent work began exploring the impact of privacy-enhancing techniques (PET) on both the energy consumption and accuracy of the machine learning models, focusing on k-anonymity. As synthetic data is becoming an increasingly popular PET, this paper analyses the energy consumption and accuracy of two phases: a) applying privacy-enhancing techniques to the concerned data set, b) training the models on the concerned privacy-enhanced data set. We use two privacy-enhancing techniques: k-anonymisation (using generalisation and suppression) and synthetic data, and three machine-learning models. Each model is trained on each privacy-enhanced data set. Our results show that models trained on k-anonymised data consume less energy than models trained on the original data, with a similar performance regarding accuracy. Models trained on synthetic data have a similar energy consumption and a similar to lower accuracy compared to models trained on the original data.
... Interdisciplinary collaboration with social scientists and macro-economists with regard to the multiple environmental effects of ICT-based services at the micro and macro level (e.g. Frick and Matthies, 2020;Kopp and Lange, 2019;Santarius and Soland, 2018) informed research question RQ1. Interdisciplinary collaboration with social scientists (Frick and Nguyen, 2021;Rohde and Santarius, n.d.) as well as transdisciplinary cooperation with societal actors supported research questions RQ2 + RQ3. ...
Full-text available
The application of information and communication technology (ICT) is attributed a decisive role in the necessary reduction of energy and resource demand and associated environmental emissions. However, a closer look at the environmental impact of ICT reveals a contradictory picture: On the one hand, the application of ICT has the potential to reduce environmental impacts and counter climate change. On the other hand, ICT's direct energy and resource demands and their associated environmental impact are substantial. So far, it has not been possible to determine the actual environmental impact of various ICT applications. This is due to the lack of suitable approaches to include higher-order effects such as induction and rebound effects in the life cycle assessment (LCA) of ICT. This thesis aims at addressing this gap. With a focus on the application of ICT, this thesis therefore investigates how higher-order effects can be integrated into LCA of ICT. Higher-order effects of ICT are those that stem from the application of ICT, for example optimisation, induction or rebound effects. Three research questions were formulated for this purpose. The first was based on a literature review and identified the various challenges of including higher-order environmental effects of ICT into LCA. These challenges included methodological issues with regard to the definition of goal and scope in LCA of ICT, and the lack of empirical data on use-related higher-order effects. ased on these challenges, the second research question considered how higher-order effects can be properly addressed in the goal and scope definition in LCA. To this end, a conceptual framework \emph{The user perspective in LCA} was developed that firstly outlines various user-driven parameters, such as number and choice of products or intensification of use, and secondly relates these parameters to corresponding LCA modelling characteristics, such as definition of functional unit or system boundaries. Finally, the third research question focused on the operationalisation of the conceptual framework and its application in two case studies. The case of smart homes with smart heating in Germany was used to demonstrate the feasibility of the framework and to gain insights into the environmental assessment of smart home systems (SHS) when higher-order effects are also captured. The study design included the operationalisation of the user-driven parameters, the collection of primary data using an online survey, and the environmental assessment with LCA both of the average SHS in Germany (first case study), and of 375 different SHS in Germany (second case study). For one, findings show that direct environmental effects of the SHS are substantial. For example, heating optimisation in the average SHS must be at least 6\% of the annual heating energy demand over three years in order to balance out the effects of the production and operation of the SHS for the impact categories Climate Change and Primary Energy Demand. Secondly, it was found that user behaviour in the smart home varies greatly and that both the choice of device (induction effect) and the actual heating behaviour (rebound effect) have a decisive influence on the overall environmental performance of the SHS. It follows that the inclusion of user behaviour in LCA of ICT can increase the uncertainty of the results if the data on user behaviour are not appropriately validated. With regard to LCA modelling, it was found that a proper definition of the functional unit is particularly relevant for the integration of higher-order effects into the goal and scope definition. Another challenge can be the handling of multifunctionality when it comes to the inclusion of induction effects. With the development of the conceptual framework \emph{The user perspective in LCA} and its operationalisation and application to the case of smart homes, this research presented a novel approach to integrating higher-order effects into LCA of ICT. This is particularly relevant when investigating the environmental net saving potential of the application of ICT. Future research can tie in with this, for example in the investigation of higher-order ICT effects in other sectors, in the development of further interdisciplinary approaches for investigating product use behaviour, or in the development of databases with representative behavioural data for product assessment.
... According to Yusoff et al. (2020), businesses in the hotel industry's interest in the environmental performance program are rising as they benefit in various ways due to digitalization of HR, such as improved competitiveness, more well-organized practices, saving in operational costs, and improved brand image. Moreover, Kopp and Lange (2019), highlighted on a paper that the digitalization of HR could lead to a 25% increase in resource utilization. It also argues that digitalization HR has the potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 20%. ...
Digital technologies are new trends in recent times that have revolutionarily changed. business models, work, conduct business, and corporate strategies. As a result, the human resources (HR) function has evolved to incorporate digital world in its design thinking, strategizing and implementing. The hotel industry is one of the sectors that move at an unbelievably fast-pace in developing countries due to an increase in the tourism industry. Yet, on the contrary, the hotel industry is heavily increasing the burden on the environment. Thus, because of the huge number of environmental issues that hotel industry has faced over time, there is an increasing force to pay a correct reaction to environmental issues and implementing sustainable business practices. These practices incorporate the adoption of digital human resource management (HRM) practices, offering a win–win situation for the hotel and its stakeholders. This paper examining the relationship between digital HRM practices (digital recruitment and selection, digital training and development, digital performance appraisal, and digital compensation) and environmental performance in the hotel industry. Based on our analysis, the study revealed that digital HRM has a remarkable impact on environmental performance within hotel industry.
... Generally speaking, the digital dimension plays an important role when it comes to "contributing towards the goals of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, where economic and environmental issues are at the heart of solving the challenges of the future" (Bican and Brem 2020, p. 11). In fact, digital solutions are supposed to facilitate sustainability and to have a positive impact on the planet despite their well-known, controversial rebound effects (Kopp and Lange 2019). For instance, digitalization may contribute to protecting biodiversity thanks to innovations coming from the fields of artificial intelligence or the internet of things that surely foster smart and data-based policy implementations (Hedberg and Sipka 2020). ...
Full-text available
This paper focuses on Design Thinking as a tool for initiating transformation processes both for the enhancement of company resilience, involving challenges connected to current trends such as digitalization and democratic leadership, as well as for the restructuring of a sustainable socio-ecological company organization. Primary findings of this explorative study show that Design Thinking is a suitable method to promote digital, democratic, and innovative business and leadership transformation, but that it is not primarily operationalized in the context of a further-reaching socio-ecological transformation towards more sustainability.
... Other than economical implication, ICT is revealed to have salient effect on environment. Kopp and Lange (2019) [12]who studied the climate effect of digitalization in production and consumption in OECD countries discovered that apart from economical impact, beneficial environmental effects of digitalization on reducing climate gas emissions slightly outweigh the undesired environmental effects, both in production and consumption. ...
Conference Paper
In an innovative economy, technology change is the heart of economic growth. Trade is central to economic growth that creates a global trading system that is more open and reliable for all. The diffusion of information and communication technologies (ICT) has made the process of trading become faster and cheaper. ICT has intensely influenced the global economy and its usage has been connected to marketplace transformation and more robust international trade.The rise of technology intensity around the globe has increased competition for trade in the ASEAN-5 economies. Do ICT facilitate the exchange of products and services between individuals, businesses and groups to enhance the trade in ASEAN-5? The objective of this study is to examine the impacts of broadband, internet, telephone and mobile use on trade flows in ASEAN-5 using panel regression models for year 2000-2018. The findings suggest that broadband, telephone and mobile use serve as complementary roles to the internet usage to enhance trade activities.The study also shows that the dominant technology driver isinternet. This study demonstrates that Neo-Schumpeterian Economics is important to explain technology as an important element determining the characteristics of international trade flows and growth in ASEAN-5. To improve the trade activities in ASEAN-5, encouragement on ICT use across individuals, firms and public administrations should be supported to stimulate international trade.
Humanity is running out of time to curb climate change, and its effects are becoming ever more intense and harmful to humankind. A change in habits and production methods is required in order to slow the advance of this scourge. This research seeks to provide quantitative information on the nexus between digitalization and sustainable production (SP). The analysis focuses exclusively on the 27 EU member states (2015–2019), all of which are characterized by a proactive stance towards environmental degradation. First, a synthetic index is constructed using cross-efficiency, in order to assess Europe's position in terms of SP. This index is then taken as the dependent variable in an estimation of the effects of the different aspects of digitalization measured in the Digital Economy and Society Index, as well as the environmental and innovation policies adopted in the EU. The generalized method of moments is used to examine the effect of the trend in SP. Results reveal that the level of income per capita does not determine SP and that it is more a matter of society's commitment to implementing practices that foster SP. Furthermore, the evidence found indicates that Europe has not yet been able to break the negative link between GDP and sustainability, despite the positive impact of all facets of digitalization, innovation and environmental policies.
Full-text available
Information and communication technology (ICT) is often considered a technology for reducing environmental emissions by increasing energy and resource efficiencies of processes. However, due to other effects of ICT, such as rebound and induction effects, the net benefits of ICT in terms of environmental impact are by no means assured. Even though the relevance of indirect or higher order effects has become a well-known issue in recent years, their environmental assessment remains controversial. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is one of the most established environmental assessment methods for modelling the environmental effects of goods and services throughout their life cycle. Although LCA is traditionally rather product-focused, there exist also LCA-based approaches to assess higher order effects of technology replacement and optimization. This paper examines whether and how LCA case studies on environmental effects of ICT already take into account related higher order effects. A systematic review of scientific literature published since 2005 has been conducted and 25 case studies were analyzed in detail. The following research questions were addressed: i) Which products are assessed? ii) Which higher order effects of ICT are considered; and iii) how is the integration of higher order effects methodically realized? The results show that few case studies were concerned with the environmental effects of the introduction of ICT services in commerce, telework and monitoring and control. Most studies investigated the substitution of certain media with electronic devices or digital services. It was found that technology-based higher order effects, such as optimization and substitution, are usually included in the assessment by choosing comparative study designs, while user-related higher order effects, such as rebound effects and induction effects, are less often considered. For the latter effects, methodological integration was mainly provided by scenario modelling and sensitivity analysis. Overall, most studies chose an attributional LCA approach. It can be concluded from the results that, in particular, user-related effects such as rebound effects have not yet been frequently included in the environmental assessment of ICT. The identified research gaps include in particular interdisciplinary approaches on how changing use patterns can be more strongly observed in LCA.
Full-text available
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is an important enabler for a low-carbon economy in Switzerland. ICT has the potential to avoid up to 3.37 times more greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than the amount of emissions caused by the production, operation and disposal of ICT devices and infrastructures used in Switzerland in 2025. In absolute terms, ICT will enable the Swiss economy to save up to 6.99 Mt CO2-equivalents (CO2e) per year, with an own carbon footprint of 2.08 Mt CO2e per year. This opportunity for the ICT sector to contribute to climate protection, however, can only be realized under optimistic assumptions. In particular, it is necessary that the existing technological and economic potentials are systematically exploited by taking ambitious and targeted actions. Such actions can be especially effective in the transportation, building and energy sectors, which have the highest potential for ICT-enabled (“smart”) solutions to reduce GHG emissions. At the same time, the carbon footprint of the ICT sector itself must be reduced by 17%, which is technologically and economically feasible due to efficiency gains.
Full-text available
We investigate the theoretically ambiguous link between income inequality and per capita carbon dioxide emissions using a panel data set that is substantially larger (in both regional and temporal coverage) than those used in the existing literature. Using an arguably superior group fixed effects estimator, we find that the relationship between income inequality and per capita emissions depends on the level of income. We show that for low and middle-income economies, higher income inequality is associated with lower carbon emissions while in upper middle-income and high-income economies, higher income inequality increases per capita emissions. The result is robust to the inclusion of plausible transmission variables.
Full-text available
This paper presents a critical review of the literature on the rebound effects generated by information and communication technologies (ICT). Following a discussion of the types of general rebound, including direct, indirect, and economy-wide, the literature on ICT-related rebound effects is critically assessed. The chapter suggests ways of overcoming rebound and lays out promising avenues of research to better understand and tackle rebound effects in ICT.
Full-text available
Background. There has been sustained and growing interest in characterizing the net energy impact of information and communication technology (ICT), which results from indirect effects offsetting (or amplifying) the energy directly consumed by ICT equipment. These indirect effects may be either positive or negative, and there is considerable disagreement as to the direction of this sign as well as the effect magnitude. Literature in this area ranges from studies focused on a single service (such as e-commerce versus traditional retail) to macroeconomic studies attempting to characterize the overall impact of ICT. Methods. We review the literature on the indirect energy effect of ICT found via Google Scholar, our own research, and input from other researchers in the field. The various studies are linked to an effect taxonomy, which is synthesized from several different hierarchies present in the literature. References are further grouped according to ICT service (e.g., e-commerce, telework) and summarized by scope, method, and quantitative and qualitative findings. Review results. Uncertainty persists in understanding the net energy effects of ICT. Results of indirect energy effect studies are highly sensitive to scoping decisions and assumptions made by the analyst. Uncertainty increases as the impact scope broadens, due to complex and interconnected effects. However, there is general agreement that ICT has large energy savings potential, but that the realization of this potential is highly dependent on deployment details and user behavior. Discussion. While the overall net effect of ICT is likely to remain unknown, this review suggests several guidelines for improving research quality in this area, including increased data collection, enhancing traditional modeling studies with sensitivity analysis, greater care in scoping, less confidence in characterizing aggregate impacts, more effort on understanding user behavior, and more contextual integration across the different levels of the effect taxonomy.
Conference Paper
This paper attempts to make a high-level estimate of the material footprints of the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Entertainment and Media (E&M) sectors for one year from four different perspectives while including the full life cycle of products and applying a top-down perspective. The four perspectives explored are: i) amount of materials used; ii) carbon footprint of the materials focusing on Raw Materials Acquisition (RMA) and End of Life Treatment (EoLT) stages; iii) material resource depletion; and iv) toxicity of materials. For the given assumptions, it is estimated that the sectors represent about 0,5% of the global annual usage of the selected materials, and for several materials (indium, gallium and germanium), ICT and E&M usage represents as much as 80-90% of the overall usage. Their use of materials represents about 0.9% of the carbon footprint for the selected materials, and about 0.1% of the total global carbon footprint, while the sectors material resource depletion potential is estimated to be between 13% and 48% of overall global depletion for the selected materials, depending on impact assessment method. Finally, the for toxicity of the selected materials, plus cement production, ICT and E&M are estimated to represent about 3.3%, based on ReCiPe. Toxicity and resource depletion results and the mass result for specific materials all indicate that the ICT and E&M sectors play a larger role than their average share of the total annual materials usage indicates, and gold and copper are identified as the most impacting materials. The applied top-down method provide only coarse estimates and further research is needed based on bottom-up methods.
Purpose – Given the importance of logistics operations in business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce and growing interest in the related environmental effects, the purpose of this paper is to offer an up-to-date literature review on the topic of B2C e-commerce environmental sustainability, specifically from a logistics perspective. Design/methodology/approach – The analysis focussed on a set of 56 papers published from 2001 to 2014 in 38 peer-reviewed international journals. The papers were analyzed and categorized according to the main features of the paper, the research method(s) adopted and the themes tackled. Findings – There is a growing interest in sustainability issues. In the last 14 years, the focus has progressively shifted from the mere identification of the wide-ranging environmental effects of e-commerce to the need for a quantitative evaluation of their impact, although much remains to be done in this regard. Some industries, such as books and grocery, have largely been addressed, however, promising sectors in the e-commerce field, such as clothing and consumer electronics, have only been considered to a certain degree. Moreover, despite the emerging role of multichannel strategies, the environmental implications of the related logistics activities have not yet been studied in detail. Originality/value – B2C e-commerce has grown in popularity, and its environmental implications are currently of key interest. This paper contributes to the understanding of the existing body of knowledge on this topic, presenting an up-to-date classification of articles and highlighting themes for further research activities. From a managerial perspective, this paper helps supply chain managers develop a clear understanding of both the logistics areas with the most impact on environmental sustainability and the KPIs used to quantify the environmental implications of e-commerce logistics operations comprehensively and effectively.
Online retailing can lower the environmental impact of shopping under specific circumstances. As a result of the numerous variables involved, most of the studies that have compared the carbon footprints of online and conventional retailing only take a partial view. To make a more holistic assessment, this study develops a framework that accounts for all the relevant environmental factors relating to retail/e-commerce activities. Variables related to consumer shopping behaviour such as basket size, transport mode, trip length and trip frequency are included in the analysis. This framework is used to build a Life Cycle Analysis model. The model is applied to different online retail methods for fast-moving consumer goods in the United Kingdom. We find that, within the “last mile” link to the home, the nature of the consumer's behaviour in terms of travel, choice of e-fulfilment method and basket size are critical factors in determining the environmental sustainability of e-commerce. The nature and routing of van deliveries, the amount and type of packaging used, and the energy efficiency of shop and e-fulfilment centre operations are also identified as significant contributors to climate change potential. The results of this study indicate ways in which e-commerce can be made more environmentally sustainable, encouraging consumers to reduce complementary shopping trips and maximise the number of items per delivery. This study identifies the strengths and weaknesses of a range of e-retail channels and provides a basis for future research on the environmental sustainability of online retailing of fast-moving consumer goods.