*3.1. Statistical Database*

According to the adopted assumptions, the analyses covered two groups of data. The first includes the European Commission's indicators to monitor progress in the implementation of Goal 7 of the 2030 Agenda. The second group comprised the indicators describing developments in one of the areas of green growth, i.e., the environmental and resource productivity of the economy, from the OECD database. In the paper, all of the indicators applied by the European Commission (2030 Agenda) and OECD (green growth) were used. The authors decided not to select indicators from these databases with use, e.g., statistical methods. It means that all of the indicators created for this purpose by these international organizations were adopted for the study. This approach will allow for a real comparison of these areas as they were originally designed.

In both cases, because of the comparative nature of the studies conducted, the 2018 data were analyzed. In individual cases, due to the adopted, for example, 5-year period of change monitoring, data from 2015 were included in the analyses, mainly in the case of indicators on the green economy. The study covered the 27 current European Union members and the United Kingdom, which only formally left the European Union in 2020. A comparison of both groups of indicators is presented in Table 2. The symbol *S* next to the indicator (e.g., *X*15*S*) means that it is a stimulant—with the increase in the value of this indicator, an improvement is observed in the analyzed area, while the symbol *D* means a destimulant, in this case, the deterioration is observed with the increase of the indicator.


**Table 2.** Descriptive characteristics of indicators analyzed in the paper, EU countries and the United Kingdom, 2018 1.

> All the indicators studied have a significant variation level, with coefficients of variation ( *VS*) for indicators describing changes in Goal 7 of sustainable development strategies are significantly higher than in the case of green growth for the area selected for the study: the economy's environmental and resource productivity. The highest level of coefficient of variation concerns two indicators: *X*13*D*—final energy consumption in households (kg of oil equivalent per capita) is 304.99% and *X*1.4*S*—energy productivity (purchasing power standard, PPS per kg of oil equivalent) is 318.45%. Such a large diversity is influenced, among others, by significant differences between maximum and minimum values. For *X*1.3*D*, the highest final energy consumption in households per capita, at 1032 kg, was recorded for Finland, and the lowest was recorded at 193 kg for Malta. With respect to the latter, the maximum concerned was Ireland (18.66 PPS per kg of oil equivalent), and the minimum value (4.73) was also Malta. It is also worth noting that most of the indicators adopted for the study were characterized by high (Goal 7 indicators) or moderate (green growth indicators) right-hand asymmetry, which means that for most EU countries, their values were below average. In the case of indicators classified as destimulants, this is a favorable situation for most analyzed countries. Their values are below average.

> To describe the second study area of green growth, 14 indicators were selected, 8 of which are stimulants. The coefficients of variation, lower than for Goal 7, range from 20.1% (*X*2.3*S*) to 58.35% ( *X*2.9*S*). The relatively high variation of the indicator describing renewable energy supply ( *X*2.9*S*, % of total energy supply) is influenced by a significant difference between the maximum value, 40.44% for Latvia, and the minimum value of 5.17% for Malta. It is also worth noting that, compared to the results of the OECD Report [42], there is still an increase in the use of energy in transport in most of the countries under study, the largest for the dynamically developing countries of Eastern Europe: Poland (up 4.60 PPS), Slovak Republic (2.82 PPS), and Hungary (1.45 PPS). There is also a decrease in the use of

energy in transport, mainly in the Nordic countries: Norway (down 1.96 PPS), Finland (0.47 PPS), and Sweden (0.55 PPS), but also, e.g., Italy (0.72 PPS) and Latvia (0.50 PPS).

In most countries, the X2.6*S* energy productivity indicator is also increasing, with the most notable increase observed in Ireland (17.02%), Malta (14.73%), Romania (11.33%), Bulgaria (10.76%), Germany (8.60%), Portugal (8.39%), and Croatia (8.20%). The indicator decreased in the case of Sweden ( −4.78%) and Estonia ( −0.90%). In many EU countries, there is also an increase in the use of renewable energy (X2.9*S*), even by more than 30%, but at the same time relatively minor role of this energy in energy mixes in the case of, e.g., Malta (up 61.21 PPS, with a share of 5.02%), or Ireland (33.23 p.p. and 8.42%, respectively).

The information provided confirms significant development differences between EU countries, which is important because one of the main objectives of the functioning of such economic organizations is to strive for equal development of all member states. However, it appears that these differences are still significant, and efforts to eliminate them are still needed. The differences between the level of development of EU countries observed at the level of the individual indicators will also be seen in more advanced multidimensional analyses. Therefore, it is essential to check whether the improvement of the analyzed area of green growth: the environmental and resource productivity of the economy is reflected in the implementation of Goal 7, the 2030 Agenda.
