IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v15y2013i1p81-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

ICT applications in the research into environmental sustainability: a user preferences approach

Author

Listed:
  • Aline Chiabai
  • Dirk Rübbelke
  • Lisa Maurer

Abstract

Whether information and communication technology (ICT) constitutes a threat or a cure to environment’s deterioration is controversially discussed. Empirical evidence on the impacts of ICT is rare, so that generalizable lessons can hardly be drawn. This study provides empirical results on the role of ICT in research for environmental sustainability, but instead of ascertaining the impact of ICT on environmental protection, we conduct an analysis of the use of ICT in sustainability research. We assess the preferences of experts in different thematic sustainability fields for applying ICT tools, and we investigate ways to improve the application of these tools in order to augment their returns with respect to environmental protection research. This analysis is based on a set of surveys that were administered to international experts to evaluate the importance of ICT in environmental sustainability research and the research demands in key environmental sectors, such as climate change, natural resources, energy and biodiversity. The methodological framework is built on the analysis of users’ preferences for future developments in ICT tools using stated preferences techniques. Overall results suggest that ICT tools need to be developed in specific contexts, taking into account users’ needs and expectations. Our analysis shows that the use of ICT in environmental research is of great importance in the scientific community, but it can also play a crucial role in the policy context. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Aline Chiabai & Dirk Rübbelke & Lisa Maurer, 2013. "ICT applications in the research into environmental sustainability: a user preferences approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 81-100, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:15:y:2013:i:1:p:81-100
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-012-9376-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10668-012-9376-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-012-9376-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Kerry M. Martin & Jennifer L. Wright, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 80-99.
    2. Thomas Hempell, 2005. "Does experience matter? innovations and the productivity of information and communication technologies in German services," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 277-303.
    3. Aline Chiabai & Chiara Travisi & Anil Markandya & Helen Ding & Paulo Nunes, 2011. "Economic Assessment of Forest Ecosystem Services Losses: Cost of Policy Inaction," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(3), pages 405-445, November.
    4. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    5. Ben D. MacArthur & Richard O. C. Oreffo, 2005. "Bridging the gap," Nature, Nature, vol. 433(7021), pages 19-19, January.
    6. Choi, Hun & Kim, Youngchan & Kim, Jinwoo, 2011. "Driving factors of post adoption behavior in mobile data services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(11), pages 1212-1217.
    7. Christian Fuchs, 2008. "The implications of new information and communication technologies for sustainability," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 291-309, June.
    8. Alberini, Anna & Chiabai, Aline & Muehlenbachs, Lucija, 2005. "Using Expert Judgment to Assess Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change: Evidence From a Conjoint Choice Survey," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12216, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    9. Smith, V Kerry & Huang, Ju-Chin, 1995. "Can Markets Value Air Quality? A Meta-analysis of Hedonic Property Value Models," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(1), pages 209-227, February.
    10. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shunbin Zhong & Huafu Shen & Ziheng Niu & Yang Yu & Lin Pan & Yaojun Fan & Atif Jahanger, 2022. "Moving towards Environmental Sustainability: Can Digital Economy Reduce Environmental Degradation in China?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-23, November.
    2. Zhaojun Yang & Jun Sun & Yali Zhang & Ying Wang, 2020. "Synergy between green supply chain management and green information systems on corporate sustainability: an informal alignment perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 1165-1186, February.
    3. Jiaping Zhang & Xiaomei Gong & Zhongkun Zhu & Zhenyu Zhang, 2023. "Trust cost of environmental risk to government: the impact of Internet use," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 5363-5392, June.
    4. Mingxiao Dai, 2024. "How to Enhance Public Participation in Environmental Governance? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Yadav, Sanjeev & Samadhiya, Ashutosh & Kumar, Anil & Luthra, Sunil & Kumar, Vikas & Garza-Reyes, Jose Arturo & Upadhyay, Arvind, 2024. "The interplay effects of digital technologies, green integration, and green innovation on food supply chain sustainable performance: An organizational information processing theory perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Emilia Madudova & Tatiana Čorejova & Marek Valica, 2018. "Economic Sustainability in a Wider Context: Case Study of Considerable ICT Sector Sub-Divisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Manoj Kumar Dash & Chetanya Singh & Gayatri Panda & Diksha Sharma, 2023. "ICT for sustainability and socio-economic development in fishery: a bibliometric analysis and future research agenda," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2201-2233, March.
    8. Lin, Chen, 2024. "Asymmetric effects of digitalization, natural resources, capital formation, and green innovations on environmental sustainability in ASEAN countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).

    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. Kanya, Lucy & Sanghera, Sabina & Lewin, Alex & Fox-Rushby, Julia, 2019. "The criterion validity of willingness to pay methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 238-261.
    2. John Loomis & Bryon Allen, 2008. "Using Non Market Valuation to Inform the Choice Between Permits and Fees in Environmental Regulation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 329-337, July.
    3. Moeltner, Klaus & Boyle, Kevin J. & Paterson, Robert W., 2007. "Meta-analysis and benefit transfer for resource valuation-addressing classical challenges with Bayesian modeling," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 250-269, March.
    4. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    5. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    6. Chris Dumas & Pete Schuhmann & John C. Whitehead, 2004. "Measuring the Economic Benefits of Water Quality Improvement with the Benefit Transfer Method: An Introduction for Non-Economists," Working Papers 04-12, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    7. Gelsomina CATALANO & Massimo FLORIO & Francesco GIFFONI, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Basic Research: A Contingent Valuation Experiment on the Large Hadron Collider," Departmental Working Papers 2016-03, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    8. Henrik Lindhjem & Tran Tuan, 2012. "Valuation of species and nature conservation in Asia and Oceania: a meta-analysis," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(1), pages 1-22, January.
    9. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    10. Spash, Clive L., 2008. "The Contingent Valuation Method: Retrospect and Prospect," MPRA Paper 101234, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Bruno S. Frey & Simon Luechinger, 2005. "Measuring terrorism," Chapters, in: Alain Marciano & Jean-Michel Josselin (ed.), Law and the State, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Bénédicte Rulleau & Hélène Rey-Valette & Valérie Clément, 2017. "Impact of justice and solidarity variables on the acceptability of managed realignment," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 361-377, April.
    13. Sujitra Vassanadumrongdee & Shunji Matsuoka & Hiroaki Shirakawa, 2004. "Meta-analysis of contingent valuation studies on air pollution-related morbidity risks," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 6(1), pages 11-47, March.
    14. De Salvo, Maria & Signorello, Giovanni, 2015. "Non-market valuation of recreational services in Italy: A meta-analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 47-62.
    15. Bartczak, Anna & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle & Zandersen, Marianne & Zylicz, Tomasz, 2008. "Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: The case of Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(7-8), pages 467-472, October.
    16. Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh & Kenneth J. Button, 1997. "Meta-analysis of Environmental Issues in Regional, Urban and Transport Economics," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 34(5-6), pages 927-944, May.
    17. Tzipi Eshet & Mira Baron & Mordechai Shechter, 2007. "Exploring Benefit Transfer: Disamenities of Waste Transfer Stations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(3), pages 521-547, July.
    18. V. Smith & Subhrendu Pattanayak, 2002. "Is Meta-Analysis a Noah's Ark for Non-Market Valuation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 271-296, June.
    19. Kadjo, Didier & Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Alexander, Corinne, 2015. "Does quality affect maize prices in sub-Saharan Africa? Evidence from Benin," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205503, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.

    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:spr:endesu:v:15:y:2013:i:1:p:81-100. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.