Abstract
Through this paper we wanted to evaluate to what extent the efforts that society makes to improve environmental conditions are reflected in the well-being of the population. We put two indicators into the equation:
”National expenditure on environmental protection” and ”At-risk-of-poverty rate”.
“National expenditure on environmental protection” is the resources allocated to limit or remove the negative effects of economic activities. Expenditure on environmental protection includes the amounts of money allocated by various entities (government, companies or households) to reduce pollution (of any nature: air, water, soil), waste and wastewater management, protection of biodiversity, etc.
The “at-risk-of-poverty rate” is an important indicator for assessing the well-being of a country’s population.
This article analyses the correlation between these indicators in the European Union, Romania and Bulgaria, in the period 2015-2024. In principle, financial efforts to protect the environment should have beneficial effects, i.e. contribute to poverty reduction.
The calculations showed that there is an inverse relationship between the two indicators, that is, as environmental protection spending increases, there is a reduction in the risk of poverty, and vice versa (when environmental protection spending decreases, there is an increase in the risk of poverty), but this influence is quite small.
There are, however, differences between the territorial units studied, in the sense that at the EU27 level the link is very weak, in Bulgaria it is weak, and in Romania it is of medium intensity.
”National expenditure on environmental protection” and ”At-risk-of-poverty rate”.
“National expenditure on environmental protection” is the resources allocated to limit or remove the negative effects of economic activities. Expenditure on environmental protection includes the amounts of money allocated by various entities (government, companies or households) to reduce pollution (of any nature: air, water, soil), waste and wastewater management, protection of biodiversity, etc.
The “at-risk-of-poverty rate” is an important indicator for assessing the well-being of a country’s population.
This article analyses the correlation between these indicators in the European Union, Romania and Bulgaria, in the period 2015-2024. In principle, financial efforts to protect the environment should have beneficial effects, i.e. contribute to poverty reduction.
The calculations showed that there is an inverse relationship between the two indicators, that is, as environmental protection spending increases, there is a reduction in the risk of poverty, and vice versa (when environmental protection spending decreases, there is an increase in the risk of poverty), but this influence is quite small.
There are, however, differences between the territorial units studied, in the sense that at the EU27 level the link is very weak, in Bulgaria it is weak, and in Romania it is of medium intensity.
Cuvinte cheie
National expenditure on environmental protection
risk of poverty
statistics
correlation
Istoric articol
Publicat
26.06.2026
Informații autori
Citare recomandată
ILIE MURARITA (2026). STATISTICAL STUDY ON THE CORRELATION BETWEEN ”ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EXPENDITURE” AND ”AT RISK OF POVERTY RATE” IN THE EUROPEAN UNION, ROMANIA AND BULGARIA, 2015-2024. Constantin Brâncuși University of Târgu Jiu Economics Series, 1(3), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.65631/jes.3.2026.8
Referințe bibliografice
[1] Bouzarovski, S., & Tirado Herrero, S. (2017). The energy divide: Integrating energy
transitions, regional inequalities and poverty trends in the European Union. European Urban and Regional Studies, 24(1), 69-86 (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0969776415596449)
[2] Cassin, L., Melindi-Ghidi, P., Prieur, F., The impact of income inequality on public
environmental expenditure with green consumers, European Journal of Political Economy, Volume 90, Part B, 2025, 102746, ISSN 0176-2680, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2025.102746 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268025001065)
[3] Ciurlău, C., Enea-Smarandache, I., Murăriţa, I., Ciurlău, C.F., Ciobanu, A.M.,
ECONOMIC FORECAST. Theory. Grid tests. Applications, Universitaria Publishing House, Craiova, 2008
[4] Ciurlău, C., Enea-Smarandache, I., Murăriţa, I., Ciurlău, C.F., Ciobanu, A.M.,
MICROECONOMIC FORECASTING, University Publishing House, Craiova, 2011
[5] Dimian, G.C., Dragan, I.M., The basics of econometrics. Theory. Applications. Case
studies, ASE Publishing House, 2018
[6] Dinga, G.D., The ecological poverty trap: Addressing the role of structural change,
economic growth, trade, capital formation and democracy, Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, Volume 18, 2023, 100245, ISSN 2665-9727,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2023.100245 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972723000223)
[7] Enea-Smarandache, I., Ciurlău, C., Murăriţa, I., Ciurlău, C.F., Ciobanu, A.M.,
ECONOMIC FORECAST. Methods and Techniques, Universitaria Publishing House, Craiova, 2009
[8] Galiński, P. (2023) “Determinants of the expenditure side of environmental federalism – panel data research on countries in Europe”, Economics and Environment, 86(3), pp. 63–88. doi:10.34659/eis.2023.86.3.601 (https://ekonomiaisrodowisko.pl/journal/article/view/601)
[9] Georgescu, V., Econometrics Course, Sitech Publishing House, Craiova, 2014
[10] Jarczok-Guzy, M., Kaczmarzyk, J., & Sygut, E. (2024). Efficiency of environmental
protection expenditure of the general governments in European Union Member States in the context of sustainable development in waste management. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia, 23(2), 17–27. https://doi.org/10.22630/ASPE.2024.23.2.6
[11] Murăriţa, I., Statistical Software Packages, PIM Publishing House, Iasi, 2018
[12] Murăriţa, I., Radu, C., Ionaşcu, C.M., STATISTICS. Theory and Solved Applications
in Excel, PIM Publishing House, Iasi, 2014
[13] Panait, M., & Iacob, Ș. & Neacsa, A. & Voica, M. (2026). Bridging the energy divide
in a sustainable approach: Analyzing poverty, disparities and green transition in the European Union. Energy Exploration & Exploitation. 44. 1483-1512. 10.1177/01445987251413722
[14] Radu, C., Ionaşcu, C.M., Murăriţa, I., THEORETICAL STATISTICS, Second
Edition, Universitaria Publishing House, Craiova, 2009
[15] *** https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/