Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of Landslide Susceptibility of Mangshan Mountain in Zhengzhou Based on GWO-1D CNN Model
Next Article in Special Issue
Renewable Wind Energy Implementation in South America: A Comprehensive Review and Sustainable Prospects
Previous Article in Journal
Research on the Prediction of Sustainable Safety Production in Building Construction Based on Text Data
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Adoption of Renewable Energy Technologies by Oil-Producing Countries: An Inevitable Outcome at a Time of Global Challenges and Demand for Sustainable Development
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Towards Sustainable Industry: A Comprehensive Review of Energy–Economy–Environment System Analysis and Future Trends

1
Key Laboratory of Environment Controlled Aquaculture (Dalian Ocean University) Ministry of Education, 52 Heishijiao Street, Dalian 116023, China
2
College of Marine Technology and Environment, Dalian Ocean University, 52 Heishijiao Street, Dalian 116023, China
3
Dandong No.1 Senior High School, Jinshan County, Dandong 118003, China
4
College of Fisheries and Life Science, Dalian Ocean University, 52 Heishijiao Street, Dalian 116023, China
5
College of Biosystems Engineering and Food Science, Zhejiang University, 866 Yuhangtang Road, Hangzhou 310058, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(12), 5085; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125085
Submission received: 23 April 2024 / Revised: 28 May 2024 / Accepted: 12 June 2024 / Published: 14 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Energy Economics and Energy Policy towards Sustainability)

Abstract

:
Industry, encompassing various sectors like agriculture, manufacturing, and services, is crucial for economic growth and societal progress. However, industrial growth often comes at the cost of environmental degradation and energy resource depletion, ignoring the need for sustainable development. This study analyzed 131 articles published from 2004 to 2023, using the energy–economy–environment (3E) method to explore industrial research trends. The primary focus of industrial 3E research is on environmental impact and sustainable development, particularly related to energy consumption. This field covers various topics like systems, efficiency, optimization, and others. LCA methods and system dynamics models are commonly used in research method innovation. This study summarizes the main viewpoints of industrial 3E research and highlights future research directions and priorities, including transitions to areas like agriculture, fisheries, and renewable energy and combining evaluation and prediction methods with 3E methods, conducting large-scale system research, and examining coupling relationships within and between industrial systems.

1. Introduction

Industry stands as a cornerstone for the economic advancement and social progress of nations and regions, driving economic value creation, growth, employment opportunities, and heightened living standards. Industrial development is intricately entwined with energy consumption, structural adjustments, and pollutant emissions. Amidst rapid economic growth, integrating environmental considerations into social, political, and economic spheres has emerged as a focal point of research [1]. With escalating concerns over environmental quality and the impacts of phenomena like the greenhouse effect and climate warming, environmental issues have garnered increasing attention, posing constraints on economic development [2]. The industry has persistently adhered to an unsustainable development model characterized by excessive energy consumption, high pollutant emissions, and unbalanced structures, resulting in an inefficient and unsustainable long-term development trajectory. In the face of global climate change and the surge in carbon emissions and non-renewable fossil fuel consumption, optimizing industrial structures, enhancing energy efficiency, and implementing rational pollutant emission strategies have become imperative for fostering a low-carbon economy and achieving sustainable regional development. Different industrial structures and adjustment pathways yield diverse impacts on economic growth, natural resource utilization, and ecological stability, emphasizing the importance of scientifically informed decisions regarding industrial structural optimization for sustainable development. The energy–economy–environment (3E) coupling system emerges as a pivotal tool for assessing industrial coordination levels and steering optimal industry development. This includes an examination of the computation techniques and models that govern the interaction among the three subsystems of energy, economy, and environment within the present social development system, alongside a comprehensive assessment of their balanced and synchronized progress [3]. Energy serves as the fundamental technical backbone for industrial growth within the economic subsystem while also constituting the underlying cause of carbon emissions emitted by the environmental subsystem. Conversely, the environment offers spatial accommodation for the economic subsystem and resources to sustain the energy subsystem [2]. The widely utilized 3E coupling evaluation system serves as a critical tool in industrial production and equipment assessment. It enables the precise evaluation of the environmental impact resulting from industrial operations or equipment usage while also providing a reliable basis for making informed decisions aimed at enhancing the environmental performance of both industries and equipment.
The examination of the intricate relationship between energy and the economy commenced during the inaugural oil crisis, as the profound economic ramifications of this event sparked researchers’ interest in the significant influence of energy consumption on macroeconomic performance [4]. Since its inception, numerous scholars have dedicated their efforts to elucidating the causal nexus between energy consumption and economic growth, employing diverse measurement techniques. Energy–environment research gained prominence in the 1970s amidst a surge in global energy demand, particularly in power demand, leading to widespread interest in the location of new energy production facilities [5]. Analogous to the examination of the energy–economic nexus, the investigation into the economy–environment link is extensive, yet its conclusions remain elusive. Some scholars attribute this complexity to the neglect of variables within dual-system research, thus emphasizing the need for a comprehensive analysis encompassing the three systems: energy, economy, and environment [6]. The three components of energy, economy, and environment together form a dynamic system known as the 3E system [7].
Numerous scholars have conducted extensive research and made significant contributions to the examination of internal connections, interactions, and logical relationships as well as the quantification and assessment of the coordination level within the 3E system [8]. Previous empirical studies on the nexus between energy, growth, and the environment can be categorized into three distinct perspectives [9]. Firstly, a significant focus has been on exploring the relationship between energy variables and economic growth [10]. Secondly, there has been a concentration on the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis, which posits the existence of an inverted U-shaped linkage between economic growth and environmental quality [11]. Lastly, attention has also been paid to the complex ternary coupling relationship among energy, consumption, and carbon dioxide emissions [12]. The main application areas can be divided into three parts: The first part is the research on urban areas. In the application of urban areas, empirical research is conducted to explore the relationship between energy, economy, and environment through panel Granger causality analysis [13], panel quantile regression [14], the autoregressive distributed lag model [15], and other methods. Regional characteristic indicators such as globalization [16], urbanization, industrialization [17], and financial development level [18] are often included in multivariable models. Some studies evaluate the coordination and coupling of the three systems of energy, economy, and environment in the study area by establishing a sustainable transformation evaluation index system [19]. Based on the analysis of the current urban situation, some studies combine multi-objective linear programming models based on input–output analysis [20,21,22], system dynamics models [23], Bayesian network analysis [24], and other methods to simulate and predict economic and social development under multiple constraints, providing quantitative suggestions for planning and policy making.
The second part is the research on the industrial field. In terms of the industrial field, the research is slightly different from that of the urban field, mostly aiming at screening out corresponding indicators for the corresponding industrial field. The indicators under the energy system can be divided into three aspects: energy production, energy consumption, and the combination of energy consumption and economic development. Indicators under the economic system can be divided into three aspects: economic level, economic structure, and development quality. The indicators under the environmental system can be divided into three aspects: environmental pollution, environmental management, and environmental quality. Table 1 presents the selected indicators from the relevant literature to facilitate readers’ understanding, with the aim of providing theoretical support for other researchers in selecting indicators (Table 1). Then, the indicators are normalized or the TOPSIS method and introduced into the system coupling model, and the weighted distance is used to replace the standardized data, making the results more distinguishable [25]. This can also be combined with the market allocation resource model, the general equilibrium model, the indicator evaluation method, the input–output model, etc., to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of related industries and provide corresponding guidance for industrial development.
The third part is the research on other fields, including a large number of empirical studies on whether the environmental Kuznets curve [68] exists through analysis of the spatial distribution deviation of the focus of energy, economy, and environmental subsystem development [69]. Based on this, it also introduces the ecosystem [70], technology system [71], public health system [72], social system [73], and other systems for multi-system evaluation and analysis.
The majority of studies concentrate primarily on distinct aspects and practices, with a minority focusing on the methodological facet of industry 3E. This study aims to delve into the literature spanning from 2004 to 2023, utilizing the 3E coupling evaluation method for industrial analysis and evaluation. Using the application of the 3E coupling evaluation system in industrial environmental impact assessments as a launching pad, a literature measurement analysis approach was employed to offer a comprehensive overview of the research landscape surrounding relevant industries’ 3E coupling evaluation. This analysis also aims to dissect the existing 3E research and cast a vision for future research directions within this domain. Furthermore, descriptive statistics are presented regarding popular journals, disciplinary fields, and a listing of countries contributing to the industry 3E literature, providing readers with a multifaceted understanding of the literature.
The precise structure is outlined as follows: In Section 2, the research methods are introduced. Section 3 presents a bibliometric analysis, focusing on identifying journals and countries with significant contributions. Section 4 delves into the research trend of industrial 3E, primarily from the lenses of research object, research purpose, and research method. Section 5 discusses the research direction and offers suggestions for future exploration. Finally, Section 6 provides a comprehensive summary of the entire paper.

2. Materials and Methods

A literature review typically involves the examination, summation, and integration of secondary sources, derived from a comprehensive collection of the scattered primary literature on a particular subject, spanning an extended timeframe [74]. Its aim is not to merely enumerate articles that exist but to analyze and appraise these materials based on their own content, following the identification of pertinent information [75].

2.1. Research Procedure

Drawing from the principles of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods, this study employed a rigorous approach to gather data from reliable sources through a systematic process. This involved four distinct steps: identifying relevant data, screening the initial dataset, determining eligibility criteria, and ultimately sorting and analyzing the data (Figure 1).

2.2. Data Analysis

Data were sourced from the core collection of the Web of Science database, encompassing articles published between 2004 and 2023. The study employed two keywords: “Energy–Economy–Environment” and “3E”. Initially, the search was confined to the titles and keywords of the articles, yielding 144 results. These preliminary findings encompassed conference papers, books and book chapters, along with other loosely related articles. Following a screening process, any articles that were not formal papers were excluded, resulting in a final selection of 131 papers for data analysis.

3. Industry 3E System Bibliometric Analysis

The first article on the research of industry 3E was published in 2004, and subsequently, the number of articles published exhibited a consistent upward trend, peaking at 29 articles in 2022. Notably, the fastest growth rate of publications occurred between 2021 and 2022, highlighting the rapid development and expanding interest in this field. Parallel to the increasing emphasis on environmental sustainability, economy, and social responsibility from governments and enterprises, there has been a concurrent surge in interest and focus on the theme of industry 3E. The Journal of Cleaner Production emerged as the leading publisher with the highest number of papers (14), closely followed by e, which secured the second position with 11 published papers. Given the interdisciplinary nature of industry 3E, encompassing environmental science, engineering technology, and management science, comprehensive journals like Energy Policy and Sustainability also contributed relevant research papers to the field (Figure 2). As Figure 3 illustrates, China has emerged as the leading publisher of literature related to industry 3E, with Iran following closely, representing 50.1% and 8.2% of the total papers, respectively. India and England rank next, contributing 7.6% and 4.4% to the overall count. Egypt, meanwhile, holds the 15th spot, accounting for 1.9% of the total papers. Asia, America, and Europe hold a prominent position in the literature related to industry 3E. Notably, China’s total paper count exceeds half of the global total, possibly attributed to the nation’s heightened awareness of sustainable environmental practices, particularly with the implementation of policies such as “carbon neutrality” and “carbon peaking”. The VOS viewer software (version 1.6.20) was employed to analyze the keyword co-occurrence within the 131 pieces of literature. The keywords exhibiting the highest frequency were “energy”, “life cycle assessment”, and “optimization”, among others, as depicted in Figure 4. Evidently, the prevalent research topics within industry 3E primarily center on environmental impact and sustainable development. Additionally, the research focuses primarily on energy consumption, evolving towards systems, efficiency, optimization, and other areas related to energy.

4. Industry 3E Research Trends

4.1. Main Research Object of Industry 3E

Through the literature analysis, 101 studies focused on energy, 28 on the economy, and 82 on the environment in the 131 selected relevant articles, as detailed in the following analysis. Energy serves as a crucial material foundation for societal progress and advancement [76]. The advancement of society is inherently intertwined with the consumption and provision of energy. As economic growth accelerates, humanity’s reliance on energy has steadily risen, leading to a consistent increase in energy demand [77]. Energy stands at the center of research in the realm of industry 3E. Based on the results of Figure 4, the significance of energy as the focal point for related research in industry 3E can be seen, radiating outwards from this core. Additionally, the advancement of the economy and society is inextricably linked to the provision of energy resources [78]. The environment serves as the medium for energy; yet, amidst the rapid economic growth, it faces challenges including the degradation of the ecological system, energy depletion, and resource scarcity [79]. In the development process of the industry, the relationship between energy and efficiency is close and complex. To achieve the substantial reduction in energy demand required for stable climate, new methods that far exceed traditional methods to improve energy efficiency and conserve energy are needed [80]. These methods include innovation in industrial equipment and usage methods, mainly focused on energy-saving transformation, efficiency improvement, and emission reduction [81]. The power industry serves as a crucial foundation for the advancement of a nation’s economy and society [82]. Its growth is intricately tied to the consumption of power energy. Enhancing the energy efficiency of coal-fired power plants is a pivotal strategy for achieving a low-carbon future for the industry [83]. The survival and progress of human society and economy rely on the material foundation of resources, environment, and economy. However, the exploitation of resources, while contributing to rapid prosperity, has also resulted in the degradation of local economic, social, and ecological environments [84].
Emerging energy sources such as nuclear power, hydropower, wind power, and photovoltaic power generation are being increasingly used in the industrial sector. Green policies [85] such as carbon taxes [86], emission reduction responsibility sharing [87], export tax rebates [88], resource tax reform [89], and carbon trading [90] have also been introduced successively for enterprises. Technology can promote growth, improve energy efficiency, and reduce unit output intensity [91] by substituting production factors. For example, optimizing the thermal insulation thickness of materials can make a significant contribution to building energy conservation and greenhouse gas reduction in the construction industry [92]. Although technological advancements provide convenience, they also pose certain challenges. For instance, most of the cumulative and newly installed capacity is now plagued by grid connection and power abandonment issues [93]. When developing and using energy, it is necessary to pay attention to protecting the environment, and emission reduction costs are a key factor in slowing climate change and technological change [94]. In the related research of industrial 3E, the thermodynamic device has been evaluated mainly through parameter research to investigate the change of system performance, and the variation of energy and exergy efficiency with operating conditions is judged [95]. The comprehensive evaluation method of energy–economy–environment was used to analyze the industrial power integration [96], which is closer to the actual operation cases [97]. The impact of sectoral efficiency on reducing carbon dioxide emissions can also be compared [98], which is better for the overall analysis of the industry. In addition to being closely related to efficiency, the improvement of energy efficiency in manufacturing, transportation, and other sectors affects the energy consumption structure, trend, and energy efficiency indicators of economic activity sectors [99]. In addition to analyzing the energy, economic, and environmental subsystems, the selection of materials [100] is also a major part of industrial 3E research. There is also a close relationship between research on industrial 3E and national policies. The dichotomy of attention between the environment can provide a judgment of the sustainability of governance [101]. The research object of industrial 3E is diverse, mainly analyzing industries from three perspectives, namely energy, economy, and environment, seeking the optimal development of industries and judging the efficiency of industrial or device [102] operations. Initially, previously, 3E only referred to three aspects: energy-economy-environment. Subsequently, there have been innovations in research objects such as energy-exergy-environment [103,104] and energy–economy–environment–society [105].

4.2. Main Research Purpose of Industrial 3E

Through the literature analysis, 21 studies aimed at coordinated development, 15 at industrial structure optimization, 5 at improving utilization efficiency, and 40 at pollution prevention and control within the 131 selected relevant articles, as detailed in the following analysis. Fully utilizing resources and reasonably promoting the transformation of energy structure are the focuses of policymaking and industrial planning [106]. The main research goal of industry 3E is to achieve coordinated development of energy, environment, and economy, promoting green and sustainable development [107]. The specific process has involved setting key indicators around benchmarks, trading, and enhanced scenarios and investigating the effects of combining industry energy policies [108]. Some authors also promoted energy conservation and emission reduction in the largest consuming sectors [109]. In terms of marine applications, exergy analysis and design optimization of integrated molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC) systems have been conducted, considering the use of waste heat recovery for additional power generation [110]. Energy, environmental, and economic analyses have been conducted to provide sustainability indicators for the final product resource extraction of MCFC systems [111]. One study stablished a model of the contribution rate of consumption factors to GDP growth to study the relationship between effective energy utilization and ecological growth protection [112]. In the tertiary industry, a simple method was proposed to estimate electricity fuel by applying a series of predetermined coefficients and monthly data from utility bills, reducing the burden on users to build dynamic simulations [113]. One study used simulation software to study apartment buildings [114] to provide users with living environment analysis. This was also used for existing large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) to help study some key issues, especially the conversion of waste-derived fuels [115]. The gray correlation method was used to explore the relationship between economic development and environmental protection industrial consumption, and the contribution rate was calculated based on indicators [116]. One article studied the relationship between energy, environment, and economic growth among industries and seeking high-speed economic growth with minimal environmental costs [117]. The research of industry 3E mainly focuses on optimizing energy structure, improving energy utilization efficiency, and innovating energy technology. In terms of the economic aspect, it encompasses the adjustment of industrial structure, regional coordinated development [118], and innovation-driven development, among others. In terms of the environmental aspect, it has encompassed the prevention and control of air pollution [119], the preservation of water resources, as well as ecological protection and restoration.

4.3. Main Research Methods of Industrial 3E

Through the literature analysis, 17 articles adopted LCA as the research method, 10 adopted system dynamics, and 40 adopted other models in the 131 selected relevant articles, as detailed in the following analysis. Establishing evaluation methods for related industries and using this method to comprehensively evaluate the coordinated development of energy, economic, and environmental subsystems [120] of the industry and analyzing the main factors affecting the development of coordination [121] have comprised the main approaches in the research of industry 3E. Recently, research on industry 3E has gradually increased, and research methods have also shown various differences. For instance, based on the principles of life cycle analysis [122] (LCA) and system optimization 3E, strategic planning for the industry was analyzed and proposed [123]. As resource efficiency is considered a key factor for sustainable development, life cycle thinking and evaluation [124] play a major role in addressing sustainability issues in resource use. Taking the construction industry as an example, a calculation model for office building emissions was established, considering emissions generated during production, transportation, materials, equipment, and processes [125]. From the perspective of the life cycle [126], construction consumption and environmental emissions should be considered when comparing different types of materials in the manufacturing, production, transportation, use, and recycling stages [127]. This can furnish a more comprehensive analysis of the construction industry, along with pertinent recommendations.
Certain authors have conducted analyses of the industry in terms of energy, economy, and environment and combined it with system dynamics models to build a 3E system simulation model under the CT mechanism based on system dynamics (SD) theory [2]. They decomposed large-scale cities into three parts for modeling and simulation [128] and predicted and analyzed the footprint of industrial operation and development in urban agglomerations. In addition to combining with system dynamics models, the industry’s 3E analysis has also been combined with models such as SDM models [129], VAR models [130], analytic hierarchy process (AHP) [131], entropy method [132], ESDA tools [133], and PLS path models [134] for dynamic analysis of the industry. The specific characteristics of different industries vary slightly, and technological innovation is an important factor influencing industrial development [135]. New technologies [136] have a significant impact and contribution to industrial development [137]. In addition to combining with existing methods, changing and innovating original research methods in certain aspects is also a major research hotspot, for example, applying the dynamic computable general equilibrium (CGE) model—CASIPM-GE—to explore different income recycling schemes for China’s economy [138]. One study established the MCDA model to distinguish the basic methods of structural price substitution effects and clarify the interdependencies between economic sectors [139], while another used a systematic approach to accurately identify the true source losses in various components, considering multiple constraints and optimizing their efficiency overall [140]. Based on comprehensive analysis of energy, environmental, and economic criteria, a new function was defined that simultaneously considers the energy, environmental, and economic costs of producing thermal insulation materials [141]. Drawing on and adopting the TIER model, one study employed economic, environmental, and energy strategies to analyze the expected efficiency of Taiwan’s actual GDP, trade conditions, import and export economy, related industry output, carbon dioxide emissions reduction, and the overall development of the fuel cell scooter industry [142]. Based on the triple coupling of the energy–economy–environment (3E-CGE) model, the climate-friendly technology has been endogenously integrated into the analytical framework of the model through logical curves, refining and revising the energy use and carbon emission modules of the CGE model [143] and other innovations.

5. Future Research Prospects of Industry 3E

5.1. The Areas in Future Industrial 3E Research

With the continuous development of the global economy, the relationship between industrial development and the environment is increasingly drawing people’s attention. This study has embarked on a preliminary exploration of the content pertaining to industrial 3E research, but numerous aspects remain unexamined in depth, such as the relationship between industrial 3E and regional development, industrial policies, and international cooperation as well as the specific applications of industrial 3E in different industries and fields. In terms of energy efficiency, the research of industry 3E needs to pay more attention to energy consumption issues. Future research has the potential to delve deeper into strategies that can effectively promote efficiency enhancement, refine industrial structure, and strengthen social cohesion via industrial development, for instance, studies pertaining to the transition and advancement of resource-intensive sectors, modification of industrial configurations, enhancement and upgrading of equipment, and numerous other factors. In terms of economic benefits, industry 3E emphasizes the unity of economic benefits, ecological environmental protection, and social benefits. It focuses on how to improve the economic efficiency of the industry through technological innovation and management innovation, such as intelligent production, circular economy, network economy, and other related areas. Research on collaborative development among different industries, the formulation and implementation of industrial policies, and international industrial cooperation will also provide new ideas for improving economic efficiency. In terms of ecological environment protection, with increasingly serious environmental problems, how to balance the relationship between economic development and environmental protection has become the focus of research. Future research can further explore the innovation and application of green technology, such as the development of renewable energy, the utilization of waste resources, and low-carbon production models. Furthermore, specific application areas of renewable energy should be considered, such as was carried out in the comparative analysis of energy governance for renewable energy in Ecuador conducted by Arroyo M and others [144], utilizing scenario analysis and examples of international renewable energy policies to achieve sustainable energy development in Ecuador. The development of green energy not only promotes the greening and decarbonization of industries but also provides a new impetus for the sustainable development of industries, such as driving the green transformation of industries, providing new economic growth points for industries, and enhancing industrial competitiveness. There is also broad research space for the relationship between industrial layout and ecological protection as well as the construction of industrial ecosystems. The primary focus of applied research on industrial 3E lies within industrial enterprises and affiliated sectors. However, its utilization in agricultural production systems including fisheries, breeding, and other industries remains unexplored. Future research efforts should broaden their scope to these sectors, aiming to enhance the theoretical underpinnings of industrial 3E’s practical applications and address the current void in its evaluation and implementation within agricultural production systems.

5.2. Industry 3E Methodology Innovation

With the increasing complexity of environmental, economic, and social issues, the research of industry 3E requires interdisciplinary research methods in order to solve problems across a broader field and on a deeper level. Future research can try to combine methods from environmental science, engineering technology, economics, and other disciplines to build a more comprehensive research framework, providing more comprehensive and precise guidance for industrial development. With the rapid development of digital technology, the combination between industrial 3E research and digital twin [145] and other digital transformations will become an important direction for future research. For example, by utilizing big data [146], artificial intelligence [147], and other technological means, energy, environmental, and economic data can be monitored and analyzed in real time [148], for example, by using the new open-source-integrated assessment model pymedeas [149] to address energy transition issues by considering biophysical constraints, raw material availability, and climate change impacts, providing policymakers with a more precise decision-making basis. The combination of the LCA research system [150] and 3E research system has important theoretical and practical significance. The LCA research system, which includes a comprehensive environmental–economic–social evaluation [151], has basically the same purpose and research content as the 3E research system. In terms of the environment, the LCA research system mainly focuses on the environmental impact during the life cycle process [152], including resource consumption, pollution generation, and ecological benefits. The 3E research system, however, conducts a comprehensive evaluation from the three dimensions of environment, economy, and society, emphasizing sustainable development. In terms of the economy, the LCA research system rarely involves the evaluation of economic benefits [153]. In contrast, the 3E research system includes economic benefits in its evaluation scope, focusing on the economic rationality of the industry. In terms of society, the LCA research system is closely related to social evaluation, but current research is still not perfect [154]. The 3E research system emphasizes social equity, well-being, and human development, complementing the LCA research system. Through the deep integration of the 3E framework and the LCA framework, a comprehensive analysis of the economic benefits of the industry can be conducted, providing strong support for industrial development. The deep integration of the 3E research framework and the LCA research framework can effectively evaluate the system coordination of the industry and also achieve a comprehensive evaluation of LCA based on 3E. This integration helps to evaluate the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the industry more comprehensively and deeply. In future research, the integration of these two research systems should be further deepened to further promote the green development of the industry.

5.3. Expansion of Industry 3E Research Scale

In the context of globalization, predictive regulation and control play an increasingly important role in industrial development. This is mainly reflected in resource integration, market forecasting, risk prevention, and other aspects. With frequent flows of resources among countries, the sustainability of industries mainly considers the economic and environmental impacts of industrial clusters, and there is usually a trade-off between increasing profits and reducing environmental impacts [155]. Predictive regulation and control can help industries better grasp the supply of resources, advance the allocation of resources, and ensure the smooth progress of production. As market information becomes increasingly transparent, it can correctly identify the nonlinear relationship between industrial economic growth, energy consumption, and pollutant emissions [156]; further analyze market development trends; help industries formulate reasonable production strategies; and improve market competitiveness. Development has brought more uncertainties and risks. Barnosell Irene pointed out that as the planetary boundaries framework suggests, it is necessary to shift to a greener industrial model, comparing its impacts with the ecological capacity of the earth to assess the absolute sustainability level of the chemical industry [157]. Predictive regulation and control can help industries identify and evaluate risks early [158], formulate response measures, and reduce risks. Future research can focus on the application of industrial 3E in the field of planetary boundaries, exploring how to promote the development of industrial 3E through predictive regulation and control. With the continuous popularization of the concept of sustainable development, the internationally proposed sustainable development goals indicate that the combination of industrial 3E research and sustainable development will become an important direction for future research. Researchers established a Meta-coupling framework and its relationship with sustainability, indicating that Meta-coupling and other factors affect the sustainability of each system and the globe; that is, the key themes of future research include the cascade effects of events in one place on other places nearby and far away (regional coupling) [159]. Future research should focus on exploring how to promote the development of green industries by establishing coupling frameworks.
The research on industry 3E has different development laws and characteristics at different spatial scales, which need to be paid attention and discussed in a targeted manner. At the urban scale, the research on industry 3E should focus on the economic development of various industries within the city, exploring the relationship between different industries and their impact on the overall economy of the city [160]. It is also necessary to consider the allocation efficiency and liquidity of various production factors within the city as well as the status and role of the city in the regional and even global industry chain [161]. At the provincial scale, the research on industry 3E needs to examine the industrial layout, industrial structure, and competitive advantages of the province from a macro perspective. It studies the pillar industries, emerging industries, and potential industries in the province and explores how to promote the transformation, upgrading, and high-quality development of industries through policy guidance and market mechanisms. At the national scale, the research on industry 3E involves a broader scope and higher complexity. It needs to analyze the overall industrial system, international competitiveness, and industrial cooperation relationships with other countries and regions in the world from a macro perspective. When conducting research on industry 3E at different scales, such as cities, provinces, and countries, it is necessary to fully consider their respective characteristics and needs, adopt multi-level and multi-angle research methods, and comprehensively and deeply explore the laws and trends of industrial development. See Figure 5.

6. Conclusions

The development of the industry must not solely focus on economic benefits but rather demands a comprehensive approach that takes into account environmental performance, energy conservation, emission reduction, and economic costs. By doing so, the industry can effectively respond to climate change and foster sustainable development from a broader perspective. Based on the Web of Science Core Collection database, this study screened out 144 papers with the keywords of “energy, environment, economy, and 3E”. Through further manual screening and objective analysis of the relevant research based on the industrial system, 131 papers were selected for further research and analysis. The bibliometric analysis results show that the number of published articles in 2022 is the largest, with 29 articles. The Journal of Cleaner Production is the journal with the largest number of publications, and China is the country with the most 3E research. The keyword co-occurrence results show that the industrial 3E research mainly focuses on energy consumption, environmental impact, and sustainable development. The industrial 3E research mainly focuses on the interaction mechanism and system coupling as well as system coordination among the three subsystems of energy, economy, and environment, aiming to evaluate the degree of industrial sustainable development or system coordination and propose targeted improvement decision-making suggestions.
Currently, most scholars use energy–economy–environment methods to evaluate and analyze industries, mostly targeting specific industries such as coal, materials, and construction. The research approach mainly involves selecting relevant indicators and using calculations to assess the industry’s coordination and coupling coordination. A small portion of research combines methods such as system dynamics, scenario analysis, and sensitivity exploration. Research is often conducted at the scale of cities, single industries, and relatively small regions, without forming a unified comparison that could provide readers with a better understanding of the current status of the 3E in the industry.
Due to limitations in the database search, a total of 144 relevant articles were found. This study conducted a preliminary exploration of research on the 3E in industries, but there are still many areas that have not been thoroughly covered. Future research directions ought to place greater emphasis on the industry’s 3E, encompassing research fields, methodologies, and scales. The research fields should shift from the existing research directions towards agriculture, fisheries, renewable energy, and other areas to evaluate the energy–economy–environmental coupling coordination of specific applications in certain crops, livestock industries, and renewable energy industries in a particular region. The research methodologies should combine existing evaluation and prediction methods with 3E methods such as life cycle assessment, system dynamics, and predictive model construction. At the same time, they should also be integrated with digital technologies, utilizing big data, artificial intelligence, and other technical means to provide policymakers with precise decision-making bases. The research scales should focus more on conducting large-scale systematic research on urban, regional, and national industrial systems while also paying attention to the coupling relationships within and between industrial systems. This is expected to provide technical support and data support for the sustainable development of industrial systems at the planetary boundary level.

Author Contributions

F.H., conceptualization, investigation, writing—original draft, and writing—review and editing; A.R., writing—review and editing; J.L., investigation and writing—review and editing; L.Y., writing—review and editing; F.J., writing—review and editing; H.H., writing—review and editing, funding acquisition, and conceptualization; Y.L., supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Open Foundation of Key Laboratory of Environment Controlled Aquaculture (Dalian Ocean University) Ministry of Education (202319) and the Science and Technology Joint Program (Doctoral Initiation Project) of Liaoning Province (2023-BSBA-010).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

This manuscript does not report on or involve the use of any animal or human data or tissues, and therefore, ethics problems are not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Donoghue, S.; Oordt, V.C.; Strydom, N. Consumers’ subjective and objective consumerism knowledge and subsequent complaint behaviour concerning consumer electronics: A South African perspective. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2016, 40, 385–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Li, Y.; Lim, K.M.; Hu, J.Y.; Tseng, L.M. Investigating the effect of carbon tax and carbon quota policy to achieve low carbon logistics operations. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 154, 104535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wianwiwat, S.; Asafu-Adjaye, J. Modelling the promotion of biomass use: A case study of Thailand. Energy 2010, 36, 1735–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Barsky, B.R.; Kilian, L. Oil and the Macroeconomy since the 1970s. J. Econ. Perspect. 2004, 18, 115–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Warr, B.; Ayres, R. Evidence of causality between the quantity and quality of energy consumption and economic growth. Energy 2009, 35, 1688–1693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Aranya, V.; Paulina, J.; Michael, W.G. Implications of near-term coal power plant retirement for SO2 and NOX and life cycle GHG emissions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 9838–9845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Freitas, C.L.; Kaneko, S. Decomposition of CO2 Emissions Change from Energy Consumption in Brazil: Challenges and Policy Implications. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 1495–1504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Liu, Y.Q.; Zhang, J.C.; Zhu, Z.S.; Zhao, G.H. Impacts of the 3E (economy, energy and environment) coordinated development on energy mix in China: The multi-objective optimisation perspective. Struct. Chang. Econ. Dyn. 2019, 50, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tiba, S.; Omri, A. Literature survey on the relationships between energy, environment and economic growth. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 69, 1129–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yonghun, J.; Hoon, S.L. Electrification and productivity growth in Korean manufacturing plants. Energy Econ. 2014, 45, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ang, B.J. CO2 emissions, energy consumption and output in France. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 4772–4778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Apergis, N.; Payne, E.J. Renewable energy, output, CO2 emissions, and fossil fuel prices in Central America: Evidence from a non linear panel smooth transition vector error correction model. Energy Econ. 2014, 42, 226–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kasman, A.; Duman, S.Y. CO2 emissions, economic growth, energy consumption, trade and urbanization in new EU member and candidate countries: A panel data analysis. Econ. Model. 2015, 44, 97–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chen, W.H.; Lei, Y.L. The impacts of renewable energy and technological innovation on environment-energy-growth nexus: New evidence from a panel quantile regression. Renew. Energy 2018, 123, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rajesh, S.; Muhammad, S.; Pradeep, K.; Vinh, X.V. Does energy consumption reinforce environmental pollution? Evidence from emerging Asian economies. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 297, 113272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Wen, J.; Nafeesa, M.; Zhao, J.; Shahzad, M.S.; Gniewko, N.; Vipin, J.; Ahsan, A. Does globalization matter for environmental degradation? Nexus among energy consumption, economic growth, and carbon dioxide emission. Energy Policy 2021, 153, 112230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Li, K.; Lin, B.Q. Impacts of urbanization and industrialization on energy consumption/CO2 emissions: Does the level of development matter? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 52, 1107–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhao, J.; Zhao, Z.R.; Zhang, H. The impact of growth, energy and financial development on environmental pollution in China: New evidence from a spatial econometric analysis. Energy Econ. 2021, 93, 104506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Paramati, R.S.; Mo, D.; Huang, H. The role of financial deepening and green technology on carbon emissions: Evidence from major OECD economies. Financ. Res. Lett. 2021, 41, 101794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. He, Y.X.; Xie, C. Internal adjustment and digital transformation of intermediate inputs: Economic performance and environmental effects. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 419, 138155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Oliveira, C.; Antunes, H.C. A multiple objective model to deal with economy–energy–environment interactions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2004, 153, 370–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhang, S.; Yu, Y.D.; Kharrazi, A.; Ren, H.B.; Ma, T.J. Quantifying the synergy and trade-offs among economy–energy–environment–social targets: A perspective of industrial restructuring. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 316, 115285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Wu, D.S.; Ning, S. Dynamic assessment of urban economy-environment-energy system using system dynamics model: A case study in Beijing. Environ. Res. 2018, 164, 70–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Shi, H.T.; Chai, J.; Lu, Q.Y.; Zheng, J.T.; Wang, S.Y. The impact of China’s low-carbon transition on economy, society and energy in 2030 based on CO2 emissions drivers. Energy 2022, 239, 122336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lu, Y.L.; Zhang, Y.Q.; Cao, X.H.; Wang, C.C.; Wang, Y.C.; Zhang, M.; Ferrier, R.C.; Jenkins, A.; Yuan, J.J.; Bailey, M.J.; et al. Forty years of reform and opening up: China’s progress toward a sustainable path. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, 9413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Shahbaz, M.; Khraief, N.; Uddin, S.G.; Ozturk, I. Environmental Kuznets curve in an open economy: A bounds testing and causality analysis for Tunisia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 34, 325–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Akalpler, E.; Hove, S. Carbon emissions, energy use, real GDP per capita and trade matrix in the Indian economy-an ARDL approach. Energy 2019, 168, 1081–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liu, J.G.; Kong, Y.D.; Li, S.J.; Wu, J.J. Sustainability assessment of port cities with a hybrid model-empirical evidence from China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 75, 103301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Oliveira, C.; Antunes, H.C. A multi-objective multi-sectoral economy-energy-environment model: Application to Portugal. Energy 2011, 36, 2856–2866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Mazur, A. Does increasing energy or electricity consumption improve quality of life in industrial nations? Energy Policy 2011, 39, 2568–2572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wing, S.I. The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down approaches to climate policy modeling: Electric power technologies and the cost of limiting US CO2 emissions. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 3847–3869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhang, M.; Liu, X.; Wang, W.W.; Zhou, M. Decomposition analysis of CO2 emissions from electricity generation in China. Energy Policy 2013, 52, 159–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Mehrara, M. Energy consumption and economic growth: The case of oil exporting countries. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 2939–2945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Guo, Q.R.; Abbas, S.; AbdulKareem, K.K.H.; Shuaibu, S.M.; Khudoykulov, K.; Sinha, A. Devising strategies for sustainable development in sub-Saharan Africa: The roles of renewable, non-renewable energy, and natural resources. Energy 2023, 284, 128713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Njindan, B.I. Climate change, energy security risk, and clean energy investment. Energy Econ. 2024, 129, 107225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Phillis, Y.A.; Kouikoglou, V.S.; Verdugo, C. Urban sustainability assessment and ranking of cities. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2017, 64, 254–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Akkemik, A.K.; Göksal, K.; Li, J. Energy consumption and income in Chinese provinces: Heterogeneous panel causality analysis. Appl. Energy 2012, 99, 445–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Vicente, E.; Cecilio, T. Threshold cointegration and nonlinear adjustment between CO and income: The Environmental Kuznets Curve in Spain, 1857–2007. Energy Econ. 2012, 34, 2148–2156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Liang, X.D.; Si, D.Y.; Zhang, X.L. Regional sustainable development analysis based on information entropy—Sichuan province as an example. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, Q.S.; Xu, Z.P.; Qian, Y.; Yuan, X.L.; Zuo, J.; Song, Y.Z.; Wang, M.S. Evaluation and countermeasures of sustainable development for urban energy-economy-environment system: A case study of Jinan in China. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 1663–1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kilkis, S. Sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems index for southeast European cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 130, 222–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Guan, D.J.; Gao, W.J.; SU, W.C.; Li, H.F.; Hokao, K. Modeling and dynamic assessment of urban economy-resource-environment system with a coupled system dynamics-geographic information system model. Ecol. Indic. 2011, 11, 1333–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zhu, B.Z.; Jiang, M.X.; Wang, K.F.; Chevallier, J.; Wang, P.; Wei, Y.M. On the road to China’s 2020 carbon intensity target from the perspective of “double control”. Energy Policy 2018, 119, 377–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Duan, H.B.; Zhou, S.; Jiang, K.J.; Christoph, B.; Mathijs, H.; Elmar, K.; van Vuuren, D.P.; Wang, S.Y.; Shinichiro, F.; Massimo, T.; et al. Assessing China’s efforts to pursue the 1.5 °C warming limit. Science 2021, 372, 378–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Jaganath, B.; Kumar, A.M. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth in G7 countries: Evidence from panel autoregressive distributed lag (P-ARDL) model. Int. Econ. Econ. Policy 2020, 17, 241–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xie, P.J.; Li, H.; Sun, F.H.; Tian, H.Z. Analysis of the dependence of economic growth on electric power input and its influencing factors in China. Energy Policy 2021, 158, 112528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Xu, M.Y.; Chen, C.T.; Deng, X.Y. Systematic analysis of the coordination degree of China’s economy-ecological environment system and its influencing factor. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2019, 26, 29722–29735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Shen, L.Y.; Huang, Y.L.; Huang, Z.H.; Lou, Y.L.; Ye, G.; Wong, S.W. Improved coupling analysis on the coordination between socio-economy and carbon emission. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 94, 357–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sun, Q.; Zhang, X.H.; Zhang, H.W.; Niu, H.P. Coordinated development of a coupled social economy and resource environment system: A case study in Henan province, China. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2018, 20, 1385–1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Dong, Q.; Zhong, K.Y.; Liao, Y.J.; Xiong, R.L.; Wang, F.B.; Pang, M. Coupling coordination degree of environment, energy, and economic growth in resource-based provinces of China. Resour. Policy 2023, 81, 103308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Li, W.W.; Yi, P.T.; Zhang, D.N.; Zhou, Y. Assessment of coordinated development between social economy and ecological environment: Case study of resource-based cities in Northeastern China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 59, 102208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hondroyiannis, G.; Lolos, S.; Papapetrou, E. Energy consumption and economic growth: Assessing the evidence from Greece. Energy Econ. 2002, 24, 319–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Xue, B.; Chen, X.P.; Geng, Y.; Guo, X.J.; Lu, C.P.; Zhang, Z.L.; Lu, C.Y. Survey of officials’ awareness on circular economy development in China: Based on municipal and county level. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54, 1296–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Lu, X.; Xue, M.G.; Hu, M.S. Dynamic simulation and assessment of the coupling coordination degree of the economy–resource–environment system: Case of Wuhan city in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 230, 474–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Jiang, B.; Ding, L.; Fang, X.J. Sustainable development of new urbanization from the perspective of coordination: A new complex system of Urbanization-Technology innovation and the atmospheric environment. Atmosphere 2019, 10, 652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. McCann, P. Sketching Out a Model of Innovation, Face-to-face Interaction and Economic Geography. Spat. Econ. Anal. 2007, 2, 117–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Fang, G.C.; Wang, Q.L.; Tian, L.X. Green development of Yangtze River Delta in China under Population-Resources-Environment-Development-Satisfaction perspective. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 727, 138710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Yang, Y.L.; Kong, J.; Yang, L.; Yang, Z.W. Sequential Big Data-Based Macroeconomic Forecast for Industrial Value Added. Commun. Math. Stat. 2019, 7, 445–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Liu, X.R.; Guo, W. Dynamic nonlinear effects of urbanization on wastewater discharge based on inertial characteristics of wastewater discharge. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 904, 166514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Liu, K.; Lin, B.Q. Research on influencing factors of environmental pollution in China: A spatial econometric analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 206, 356–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Guo, M.J.; Meng, J. Exploring the driving factors of carbon dioxide emission from transport sector in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 226, 692–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Nain, Z.M.; Ahmad, W.; Kamaiah, B. Economic growth, energy consumption and CO2 emissions in India: A disaggregated causal analysis. Int. J. Sustain. Energy 2017, 36, 807–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Miketa, A.; Mulder, P. Energy productivity across developed and developing countries in 10 manufacturing sectors: Patterns of growth and convergence. Energy Econ. 2005, 27, 429–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Chu, L.; Grafton, Q.R.; Keenan, R. Increasing Conservation Efficiency While Maintaining Distributive Goals With the Payment for Environmental Services. Ecol. Econ. 2019, 156, 202–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. He, C.Y.; Liu, Z.F.; Wu, J.G.; Pan, X.H.; Fang, Z.H.; Li, J.W.; Bryan, B.A. Future global urban water scarcity and potential solutions. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 4667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Bateman, J.I.; Mace, M.G. The natural capital framework for sustainably efficient and equitable decision making. Nat. Sustain. 2020, 3, 776–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Englert, N. Fine particles and human health—A review of epidemiological studies. Toxicol. Lett. 2004, 149, 235–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Calvert, K. From ‘energy geography’ to ‘energy geographies’. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2015, 40, 105–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Carvalho, D.L.A.; Antunes, H.C.; Freire, F.; Henriques, C. A hybrid input–output multi-objective model to assess economic–energy–environment trade-offs in Brazil. Energy 2015, 82, 769–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Nisar, A.; Aghdam, R.F.; Irfan, B.; Amjad, A. Citation-based systematic literature review of energy-growth nexus: An overview of the field and content analysis of the top 50 influential papers. Energy Econ. 2020, 86, 104642. [Google Scholar]
  71. Odhiambo, M.N. Energy Consumption And Economic Growth Nexus In Tanzania: An Ardl Bounds Testing Approach. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 617–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Matus, K.; Nam, K.M.; Selin, N.E.; Lamsal, L.N.; Reilly, J.M.; Paltsev, S. Health damages from air pollution in China. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2012, 22, 55–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Jeon, J.; Lee, J.H.; Seo, J.; Jeong, S.J.; Kim, S. Application of PCM thermal energy storage system to reduce building energy consumption. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2013, 111, 279–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Basty, R.; Celik, A.; Said, H. The Academic Discipline of Information Technology: A Systematic Literature Review. Issues Informing Sci. Inf. Technol. 2023, 20, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Kaufmann, K.R. The Mechanisms for Autonomous Energy Efficiency Increases: A Cointegration Analysis of the US Energy/GDP Ratio. Energy J. 2004, 25, 63–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Riep, R.J.; Akanbi, K.; Said, H. The Role of the Discipline of Information Technology: A Systematic Literature Review. Issues Informing Sci. Inf. Technol. 2023, 20, 23–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Chen, L.; Li, X.; Zhao, J.S.; Kang, X.Y.; Liu, L.; Wang, M.X.; Wu, C.F. Coupling and coordinated evolution characteristics of regional economy-energy-carbon emission multiple systems: A case study of main China’s Basin. J. Environ. Sci. 2023, 140, 204–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Huang, H.; David, R.H.; Wang, C.; Cai, W.J. China’s income gap and inequality under clean energy transformation: A CGE model assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 251, 119626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Wu, L.; Zhang, Z.G. Impact and threshold effect of Internet technology upgrade on forestry green total factor productivity: Evidence from China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 271, 122657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Dusyk, N.; Berkhout, T.; Burch, S.; Coleman, S.; Robinson, J. Transformative energy efficiency and conservation: A sustainable development path approach in British Columbia, Canada. Energy Effic. 2009, 2, 387–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kevork, S.I.; Pange, J.; Tzeremes, P. Estimating Malmquist productivity indexes using probabilistic directional distances: An application to the European banking sector. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 261, 1125–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Nadejda, V.; Christopher, N.; Charles, Z. The U.S. power sector decarbonization: Investigating technology options with MARKAL nine-region model. Energy Econ. 2018, 73, 410–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Ma, X.J.; Wang, Y.; Wang, C. Low-carbon development of China’s thermal power industry based on an international comparison: Review, analysis and forecast. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 80, 942–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Naughten, B. Economic assessment of combined cycle gas turbines in Australia. Energy Policy 2003, 31, 225–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Hamed, A.T.; Bressler, L. Energy security in Israel and Jordan: The role of renewable energy sources. Renew. Energy 2019, 135, 378–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Liang, Q.M.; Wei, Y.M. Distributional impacts of taxing carbon in China: Results from the CEEPA model. Appl. Energy 2012, 92, 545–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Liang, Q.M.; Wei, Y.M.; Fan, Y. The effect of energy end-use efficiency improvement on China’s energy use and CO2 emissions: A CGE model-based analysis. Energy Effic. 2009, 2, 243–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Xu, Z.W.; Wen, Q.; Zhang, T. Trade policy and air pollution: Evidence from the adjustment of the export tax rebate in China. Econ. Model. 2023, 128, 106497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Jiang, H.D.; Hao, W.T.; Xu, Q.Y.; Liang, Q.M. Socio-economic and environmental impacts of the iron ore resource tax reform in China: A CGE-based analysis. Resour. Policy 2020, 68, 101775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Jiang, H.D.; Liu, L.J.; Dong, K.Y.; Fu, Y.W. How will sectoral coverage in the carbon trading system affect the total oil consumption in China: A CGE-based analysis. Energy Econ. 2022, 110, 105996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Chappin, E.; Dijkema, G. On the impact of CO2 emission-trading on power generation emissions. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2009, 76, 358–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Cuce, E.; Cuce, M.P.; Wood, J.C.; Riffat, S.B. Optimizing insulation thickness and analysing environmental impacts of aerogel-based thermal superinsulation in buildings. Energy Build. 2014, 77, 28–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zeng, M.; Zhang, K.; Dong, J. Overall review of China’s wind power industry: Status quo, existing problems and perspective for future development. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 24, 379–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Wang, K.; Wang, C.; Chen, J.N. Analysis of the economic impact of different Chinese climate policy options based on a CGE model incorporating endogenous technological change. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 2930–2940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. El-Emam, S.R.; Dincer, I. Energy and exergy analyses of a combined molten carbonate fuel cell-Gas turbine system. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2011, 36, 8927–8935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Han, Q.; Zhou, Y. The Relation between Energy, Economy and Environment in China’s Industrial Sector: Based on Energy Saving. Int. J. Online Eng. Ijoe 2013, 9, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Rong, A.Y.; Lahdelma, R. Role of polygeneration in sustainable energy system development challenges and opportunities from optimization viewpoints. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 53, 363–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Vera, S.; Sauma, E. Does a carbon tax make sense in countries with still a high potential for energy efficiency? Comparison between the reducing-emissions effects of carbon tax and energy efficiency measures in the Chilean case. Energy 2015, 88, 478–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Malinauskaite, J.; Jouhara, H.; Egilegor, B.; Al-Mansour, F.; Ahmad, L.; Pusnik, M. Energy efficiency in the industrial sector in the EU, Slovenia, and Spain. Energy 2020, 208, 118398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Özel, M. Cost analysis for optimum thicknesses and environmental impacts of different insulation materials. Energy Build. 2012, 49, 552–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Scrieciu, S.; Rezai, A.; Mechler, R. On the economic foundations of green growth discourses: The case of climate change mitigation and macroeconomic dynamics in economic modeling. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Energy Environ. 2013, 2, 251–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Dai, Y.P.; Wang, J.F.; Gao, L. Parametric optimization and comparative study of organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for low grade waste heat recovery. Energy Convers. Manag. 2009, 50, 576–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Roy, J.P.; Misra, A. Parametric optimization and performance analysis of a regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle using R-123 for waste heat recovery. Energy 2012, 39, 227–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Saleh, B.; Koglbauer, G.; Wendland, M.; Fischer, J. Working fluids for low-temperature organic Rankine cycles. Energy 2007, 32, 1210–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Xie, Q.C.; Xu, X.; Liu, X.Q. Is there an EKC between economic growth and smog pollution in China? New evidence from semiparametric spatial autoregressive models. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 220, 873–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Yang, F.; Cheng, Y.Y.; Yao, X. Influencing factors of energy technical innovation in China: Evidence from fossil energy and renewable energy. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 232, 57–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Khalid, M.A.; Muhammad, U.; Iqbal, D.J.; Shahzad, M.S.; Arshian, S.; Iqbal, M.T.; Bares, L.L. Does globalization affect the green economy and environment? The relationship between energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions, and economic growth. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 51105–51118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Cong, J.H.; Pei, Y.J.; Xu, T.; Zhao, Y.B.; Ren, L.J.; Schwarz, P.; Zhang, M.; Song, J.W.; Zhang, W.Q.; Yang, J. How does the carbon market impact the economy-energy-environment system in resource-based regions of China? Empirical evidence from Shanxi Province. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 376, 134218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Luong, D.N. A critical review on Energy Efficiency and Conservation policies and programs in Vietnam. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 52, 623–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Giap, V.T.; Lee, D.Y.; Kim, S.Y.; Ahn, Y.K.; Kim, H.D.; Lee, I.J. System simulation and exergetic evaluation of hybrid propulsion system for crude oil tanker: A hybrid of solid-oxide fuel cell and gas engine. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 223, 113265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Mehmeti, A.; Pérez-Trujillo, P.J.; Elizalde-Blancas, F.; Angelis-Dimakis, A.; McPhail, S.J. Exergetic, environmental and economic sustainability assessment of stationary Molten Carbonate Fuel Cells. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 168, 276–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Wu, B.S. Low-carbon development mechanism of energy industry from the perspective of carbon neutralization. Energy Environ. 2022, 35, 628–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Fumo, N.; Mago, P.; Luck, R. Methodology to estimate building energy consumption using EnergyPlus Benchmark Models. Energy Build. 2010, 42, 2331–2337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Taleb, M.H.; Sharples, S. Developing sustainable residential buildings in Saudi Arabia: A case study. Appl. Energy 2010, 88, 383–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Czelej, K.; Cwieka, K.; Colmenares, C.J.; Krzysztof, J.K. Catalytic activity of NiO cathode in molten carbonate fuel cells. Appl. Catal. B-Environ. 2018, 222, 73–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Ajmi, A.N.; Inglesi-Lotz, R. Biomass energy consumption and economic growth nexus in OECD countries: A panel analysis. Renew. Energy 2020, 162, 1649–1654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Li, H.; Wu, Z.X.; Yuan, X.; Yang, Y.X.; He, X.Q. The research on modeling and application of dynamic grey forecasting model based on energy price-energy consumption-economic growth. Energy 2022, 257, 124801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. De, C.L.A.; Antunes, H.C.; Freire, F.; Henriques, C. A multi-objective interactive approach to assess economic-energy-environment trade-offs in Brazil. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 1429–1442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Zhou, X.Y.; Xu, Z.D.; Xi, Y.Q. Energy conservation and emission reduction (ECER): System construction and policy combination simulation. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 267, 121969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Wang, G.H.; Zhao, T.; Wang, Y.X. Analysis of interactions among the barriers to energy saving in China. Energy Policy 2008, 36, 1879–1889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Chen, Q.Y.; Zhu, M.T.; Zhang, C.J.; Zhou, Q. The driving effect of spatial-temporal difference of water resources carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 388, 135709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Hou, H.C.; Shao, S.; Zhang, Y.; Kang, H.; Qin, C.L.; Sun, X.Y.; Zhang, S.S. Life cycle assessment of sea cucumber production: A case study, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 213, 158–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. He, X.Y.; Lin, J.; Xu, J.; Huang, J.B.; Wu, N.Y.; Zhang, Y.N.; Liu, S.L.; Jing, R.; Xie, S.J.; Zhao, Y.R. Long-term planning of wind and solar power considering the technology readiness level under China’s decarbonization strategy. Appl. Energy 2023, 348, 121517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Klinglmair, M.; Sala, S.; Brandão, M. Assessing resource depletion in LCA: A review of methods and methodological issues. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2014, 19, 580–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Luo, Z.X.; Yang, L.; Liu, J.P. Embodied carbon emissions of office building: A case study of China’s 78 office buildings. Build. Environ. 2016, 95, 365–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Yogev, U.; Vogler, M.; Nir, O.; Londong, G.; Gross, A. Phosphorous recovery from a novel recirculating aquaculture system followed by its sustainable reuse as a fertilizer. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 722, 137949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Su, X.; Luo, Z.; Li, Y.H.; Huang, C.H. Life cycle inventory comparison of different building insulation materials and uncertainty analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 275–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Qin, Y.; Luo, Y.Y.; Lu, J.R.; Lu, Y.; Yu, X.R. Simulation analysis of resource-based city development based on system dynamics: A case study of Panzhihua. Appl. Math. Nonlinear Sci. 2018, 3, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Drukker, M.D.; Prucha, R.I.; Raciborski, R. Maximum Likelihood and Generalized Spatial Two-Stage Least-Squares Estimators for a Spatial-Autoregressive Model with Spatial-Autoregressive Disturbances. Stata J. 2013, 13, 221–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Apergis, N.; Payne, E.J. Energy consumption and economic growth: Evidence from the Commonwealth of Independent States. Energy Econ. 2009, 31, 641–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Yi, Q.; Feng, J.; Wu, Y.L. 3E (energy, environmental, and economy) evaluation and assessment to an innovative dual-gas polygeneration system. Energy 2014, 66, 285–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Li, Y.F.; Li, Y.; Zhu, X.D. Investigation of a coupling model of coordination between urbanization and the environment. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 98, 127–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Yu, Y.; Gong, X. Study on the coupling problem of coordinated development of economy–energy–environment–technology system in Northeast China. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 305–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Fu, Z.H.; Xie, Y.L.; Li, W.; Lu, W.T.; Guo, H.C. An inexact multi-objective programming model for an economy-energy-environment system under uncertainty: A case study of Urumqi, China. Energy 2017, 126, 165–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Haslam, E.J.; Jupesta, J.; Parayil, G. Assessing fuel cell vehicle innovation and the role of policy in Japan, Korea, and China. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2012, 37, 14612–14623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Kruitwagen, L.; Story, T.K.; Friedrich, J.; Byers, L.; Skillman, W.S.; Hepburn, C. A global inventory of photovoltaic solar energy generating units. Nature 2021, 598, 604–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Yu, Z.; Gibbs, D. Encircling cities from rural areas? Barriers to the diffusion of solar water heaters in China’s urban market. Energy Policy 2018, 115, 366–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Liu, Y.; Lu, Y. The Economic impact of different carbon tax revenue recycling schemes in China: A model-based scenario analysis. Appl. Energy 2015, 141, 96–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Shinichiro, O.; Makoto, T. What causes the change in energy demand in the economy? Energy Econ. 2009, 32, S41–S46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Dimopoulos, G.G.; Stefanatos, C.I.; Kakalis, M.N. Exergy analysis and optimisation of a marine molten carbonate fuel cell system in simple and combined cycle configuration. Energy Convers. Manag. 2016, 107, 10–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Rad, A.E.; Fallahi, E. Optimizing the insulation thickness of external wall by a novel 3E (energy, environmental, economic) method. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 205, 196–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Tso, C.; Shinchih, C. The Efficiency Evaluation of Promoting Fuel Cell Scooter in Taiwan. ECS Trans. 2019, 30, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Liang, S.; Lin, X.Y.; Liu, X.X.; Pan, H.R. The Pathway to China’s Carbon Neutrality Based on an Endogenous Technology CGE Model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 6251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Arroyo, F.M.R.; Miguel, L. The Role of Renewable Energies for the Sustainable Energy Governance and Environmental Policies for the Mitigation of Climate Change in Ecuador. Energies 2020, 13, 3883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Ferreira, J.G.; Bernard-Jannin, L.; Cubillo, A.; Lencart, E.S.J.; Diedericks, G.P.; Moore, H.; Service, M.; Nunes, J.P. From soil to sea: An ecological modelling framework for sustainable aquaculture. Aquaculture 2023, 577, 739920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Vahid, A.; Roquzbeh, A.; Nagi, A.; Fatemeh, S.; Vikram, G.; Mohsen, A.; Al-Amin, B.; Irene, P.; Hassan, K.; Scott, D.; et al. Reliability of multi-purpose offshore-facilities: Present status and future direction in Australia. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2021, 148, 437–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Piyali, C.; Goud, K.N.L.; Susana, L.; Kumar, J.S.; Ranjan, M.B. Climate change and coastal morphodynamics: Interactions on regional scales. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 899, 166432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Zhao, Y.P.; Lian, L.K.; Bi, C.W.; Xu, Z.J. Digital twin for rapid damage detection of a fixed net panel in the sea. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2022, 200, 107247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Solé, J.; Samsó, R.; García-Ladona, E.; García-Olivares, A.; Ballabrera-Poy, J.; Madurell, T.; Turiel, A.; Osychenko, O.; Alvarez, B.D.; Bardi, U.; et al. Modelling the renewable transition: Scenarios and pathways for a decarbonized future using pymedeas, a new open-source energy systems model. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 132, 110105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Hou, H.C.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, Z.; Wang, X.L.; Su, P.; Wang, H.H.; Liu, Y. Life cycle assessment of tiger puffer (Takifugu rubripes) farming: A case study in Dalian, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 823, 153522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Xu, A.X.; Yang, L.X.; Song, T.T.; Xu, M.J.; Chen, H.; Xiang, L.; Liu, Z.Q.; Yang, S. A cascade lithium bromide absorption refrigeration/dehumidification system for efficient energy recovery: Development, 3E optimization and life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 383, 135286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Hou, H.C.; Wang, H.H.; Ren, A.Q.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Y. Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of the Manufacturing of Conventional and Innovative Aerators: A Case Study in China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Hou, H.C.; Shao, S.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, D.L.; Yang, Q.Y.; Qin, C.L.; Sun, X.Y. Cleaner Production assessment for sea cucumber aquaculture: Methodology and case studies in Dalian, China. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2019, 21, 1751–1763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Hou, H.C.; Ren, A.Q.; Yu, L.X.B.; Ma, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Y. An Environmental Impact Assessment of Largemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides) Aquaculture in Hangzhou, China. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Ahmed, R.O.; Al-Mohannadi, D.M.; Patrick, L. Multi-objective resource integration for sustainable industrial clusters. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 316, 128237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Wang, Z.X.; Jv, Y.Q. A non-linear systematic grey model for forecasting the industrial economy-energy-environment system. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 167, 120707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Irene, B.; Carlos, P. The impacts of the European chemical industry on the planetary boundaries. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2024, 44, 188–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Saidur, R.; Hasanuzzaman, M.; Rahim, A.N. Energy, economic, and environmental analysis of the Malaysian industrial compressed-air systems. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2012, 14, 195–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Liu, J.G. Leveraging the metacoupling framework for sustainability science and global sustainable development. Natl. Sci. Rev. 2023, 10, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Dennis, A.; Wang, Z.; Hu, S.G.; Minua, K.G.A.; Akwasi, D.A. Exploring the dynamic nexus between urbanization and industrialization with carbon emissions in sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from panel PMG-ARDL estimation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2023, 30, 6373–6389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Zhou, Y.Y.; Lin, Z.H.; Zhang, Y.J.; Sun, W.X.; Lei, F.Y.; Gao, W.Z. Impact of changes in energy structure and industrial structure on green total factor productivity in the context of environmental protection-evidence from China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2024, 31, 17097–17114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Flowchart of the method used in this study.
Figure 1. Flowchart of the method used in this study.
Sustainability 16 05085 g001
Figure 2. The publication statistical results of industrial 3E research.
Figure 2. The publication statistical results of industrial 3E research.
Sustainability 16 05085 g002
Figure 3. The publishing countries results of industrial 3E research.
Figure 3. The publishing countries results of industrial 3E research.
Sustainability 16 05085 g003
Figure 4. Frequency of keyword co-occurrence.
Figure 4. Frequency of keyword co-occurrence.
Sustainability 16 05085 g004
Figure 5. Future research prospects of industry 3E.
Figure 5. Future research prospects of industry 3E.
Sustainability 16 05085 g005
Table 1. Industrial energy–environment–economy (3E) nexus system-related indicators.
Table 1. Industrial energy–environment–economy (3E) nexus system-related indicators.
ReferenceAttributeIndex
EnergyEnergy productionTotal energy production [26], Production of primary energy [27], Total electricity production [28], Total output of raw coal [29], Growth rate of energy production [30], Proportion of crude oil production [31], Proportion of electricity production [32], Proportion of natural gas production [33], Per capita energy production [34], Per capita electricity production [35]
Energy consumptionTotal energy consumption [36], Total electricity consumption [37], Growth rate of electricity consumption [38], Energy consumption per unit of gross product [39], Electricity consumption per unit of GDP [40], Energy consumption per unit of industrial value added [41], Proportion of coal consumption [42], Share of crude oil consumption [43], Natural gas consumption [44]
Integration energyElasticity coefficient of energy consumption [45], Elasticity coefficient of electricity consumption [46]
EconomicEconomic levelGDP [47], GDP growth rate [48], GDP per capita [49], Gross value of industrial output [50], Total retail sales of consumer goods [51]
Economic structurePercentage of primary sector of the economy [52], Percentage of secondary sector of the economy [53], Percentage of tertiary sector of the economy [54], R&D activities as a percentage of expenditure [55]
Develop qualityLabor productivity [56], Per capita disposable income [57], Registration of the unemployment rate [58]
EnvironmentalEnvironmental pollutionDischarge of industrial waste water [59], Industrial smoke and dust emissions [60], CO2 emissions [61], Per capita CO2 emissions [62]
Environmental protectionIndustrial wastewater discharge rate [63]
Environmental qualityForest coverage [64], Per capita water resources [65], Per capita area of arable land [66], Excellent rate of air quality [67]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Han, F.; Ren, A.; Liu, J.; Yu, L.; Jia, F.; Hou, H.; Liu, Y. Towards Sustainable Industry: A Comprehensive Review of Energy–Economy–Environment System Analysis and Future Trends. Sustainability 2024, 16, 5085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125085

AMA Style

Han F, Ren A, Liu J, Yu L, Jia F, Hou H, Liu Y. Towards Sustainable Industry: A Comprehensive Review of Energy–Economy–Environment System Analysis and Future Trends. Sustainability. 2024; 16(12):5085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125085

Chicago/Turabian Style

Han, Fengfan, Anqi Ren, Jinxin Liu, Lixingbo Yu, Fei Jia, Haochen Hou, and Ying Liu. 2024. "Towards Sustainable Industry: A Comprehensive Review of Energy–Economy–Environment System Analysis and Future Trends" Sustainability 16, no. 12: 5085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125085

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop