Latent dimensions between water use and socio-economic development: A global exploratory statistical analysis

doi:10.1016/j.regsus.2022.09.004

Abstract

Abstract:

Water use and socio-economic development are interconnected in complex ways. Causalities are not easy to identify but it is evident that a nexus between water use and socio-economic development does exist. Considering the diversity of national situations relating to these interrelated phenomena, its study should be considered from a global perspective. This article critically reviews the literature and information from official sources on the relevance of water use and circular economy in order to create a global picture, linking water with socio-economic development. Data from 195 countries was analyzed statistically. A factor analysis defined five essential latent dimensions on the nexus between water use and socio-economic development: development and basic services, population and resource, economic volume, health and well-being, and population density. Based on the identified factors, countries were classified into six groups: Global South in difficulty, global semi-periphery, advanced economy, Middle East and other Global South developing economy, global weight, and small highly developed economy. The clustering results clarify connections between water use conditions and socio-economic development. Understanding the variety of national profiles is helpful to reveal the magnitude and urgency of dealing with the nexus between water use and socio-economic development for many countries.

Key words: Water reuse, Circular economy, Water management, Urban water cycle, Socio-economic sustainable development, Country clusters, Factor analysis

Edson Elídio BALATA, Hugo PINTO, Manuela Moreira da SILVA. Latent dimensions between water use and socio-economic development: A global exploratory statistical analysis[J]. Regional Sustainability, 2022, 3(3): 269-280.

Figures/Tables 4

Table 1

Fig. 1.

Table S1

Factor score of each cluster."

Factor	Cluster	Number of countries (n)	Mean	SD	Confidence interval (95%)		Minimum	Maximum
Factor	Cluster	Number of countries (n)	Mean	SD	Inferior Bound	Superior Bound	Minimum	Maximum
Development and basic services	1	56	-1.3690	0.6745	-1.5497	-1.1884	-2.3871	-0.0971
	2	90	0.4917	0.3721	0.4138	0.5697	-0.7430	0.9918
	3	29	0.5981	0.3006	0.4837	0.7124	0.0145	0.9463
	4	16	0.9299	0.5028	0.6620	1.1978	-0.4953	1.5307
	5	3	0.0526	0.4337	-1.0248	1.1300	-0.4359	0.3924
	6	1	0.0141	0.1473	-1.3091	1.3373	-0.0900	0.1182
	Total	195	0.0000	1.0000	-0.1409	0.1409	-2.3871	1.5307
Population and resource	1	56	-0.0678	0.7278	-0.2627	0.1271	-2.1855	1.1469
	2	90	0.3804	0.5068	0.2742	0.4866	-1.1237	1.3032
	3	29	0.2162	0.3769	0.0728	0.3595	-0.7175	0.7356
	4	16	-2.3766	1.4668	-3.1582	-1.5951	-5.6461	-0.7548
	5	3	0.2302	0.7674	-1.6762	2.1366	-0.6176	0.8775
	6	1	0.3135	0.4617	-3.8348	4.4618	-0.0130	0.6400
	Total	195	0.0000	1.0000	-0.1409	0.1409	-5.6461	1.3032
Economic volume	1	56	-0.1157	0.1790	-0.1636	-0.0678	-0.3758	0.7555
	2	90	-0.1722	0.2813	-0.2311	-0.1133	-0.4434	1.1282
	3	29	0.0568	0.5479	-0.1516	0.2652	-0.4919	1.6370
	4	16	-0.1167	0.1093	-0.1750	-0.0584	-0.2741	0.0916
	5	3	7.4910	1.6585	3.3709	11.6110	6.0546	9.3062
	6	1	-0.1389	0.0063	-0.1959	-0.0818	-0.1434	-0.1344
	Total	195	0.0000	1.0000	-0.1409	0.1409	-0.4919	9.3062
Health and well-being	1	56	-0.0155	0.7266	-0.2101	0.1791	-1.3641	2.9072
	2	90	-0.3769	0.5491	-0.4919	-0.2619	-1.6416	0.9313
	3	29	1.4917	0.8636	1.1632	1.8202	-0.3586	3.8872
	4	16	-0.4025	0.4026	-0.6171	-0.1880	-1.1858	0.3741
	5	3	0.1917	3.8693	-9.4202	9.8037	-2.6880	4.5900
	6	1	-1.3049	1.5636	-15.3531	12.7434	-2.4105	-0.1993
	Total	195	0.0000	1.0000	-0.1409	0.1409	-2.6880	4.5900
Population density	1	56	-0.0729	0.3340	-0.1623	0.0166	-1.2564	0.5548
	2	90	-0.2403	0.2888	-0.3008	-0.1798	-0.9305	0.5201
	3	29	0.4341	1.2131	-0.0273	0.8956	-1.9487	3.6286
	4	16	-0.1511	0.5575	-0.4482	0.1460	-0.7162	1.1794
	5	3	-0.0551	0.3643	-0.9600	0.8497	-0.4350	0.2911
	6	1	7.8497	0.8632	0.0944	15.6049	7.2393	8.4600
	Total	195	0.0000	1.0000	-0.1409	0.1409	-1.9487	8.4600

Table S1

Fig. 2.

References 86

[1]	Alcamo, J., Henrish, T., Rösch, T., 2000. World Water in 2025—Global modeling and scenario analysis for the World Commission on Water for the 21^st Century. Report A0002. Center for Environment Systems Research, University of Kassel. Kassel, Germany.
[2]	Anand, S., Sen, A., 2000. Human development and economic sustainability. World Dev. 28(12), 2029-2049. doi: 10.1016/S0305-750X(00)00071-1
[3]	BCSD Business Council for Sustainable Development Portugal, 2017. Financiar a Sustentabilidade. [2022-02-05]. https://bcsdportugal.org/financiar-a-sustentabilidade-2/ (in Portuguese).
[4]	Bhat, R.A., Singh, D.V., Qadri, H., et al., 2022. Vulnerability of municipal solid waste: An emerging threat to aquatic ecosystems. Chemosphere. 287(Part 3), 132223, doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132223. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132223
[5]	BIO by Deloitte, 2015. Optimising water reuse in the EU—Public consultation analysis report prepared for the European Commission (DG ENV). [2022-01-30]. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/blueprint/pdf/BIO_Water%20Reuse%20Public%20Consultation%20Report_Final.pdf.
[6]	Brown, J.H., Burguer, J.R., Burnside, W.R., et al., 2014. Macroecology meets macroeconomics: Resource scarcity and global sustainability. Ecol. Eng. 65, 24-32. pmid: 24882946
[7]	CRED (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters), 2020. Natural disasters 2019—Now is the time to not give up. [2022-01-15]. https://emdat.be/natural-disasters-2019-now-time-not-give.
[8]	Damania, R., 2020. The economics of water scarcity and variability. Oxford Rev Ec Pol. 36(1), 24-44.
[9]	DiStefano, C., Zhu, M., Mîndrilã, D., 2009. Understanding and using factor scores: considerations for the applied researcher. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. 14(1), article 20, doi: 10.7275/da8t-4g52. doi: 10.7275/da8t-4g52
[10]	EEA (European Environment Agency), 2022. Drought impact on ecosystems in Europe. [2022-01-18]. https://www.eea.europa.eu/ims/drought-impact-on-ecosystems-in-europe.
[11]	El-Gafy, I.K.E.-D., 2018. The water poverty index as an assistant tool for drawing strategies of the Egyptian water sector. Ain Shams Eng. J. 9(2), 173-186. doi: 10.1016/j.asej.2015.09.008
[12]	European Commission, 2015. Circular Economy Package: Questions & Answers. [2022-01-08]. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_15_6204.
[13]	European Commission, 2019. Water Scarcity & Droughts in the European Union. [2022-01-23]. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/scarcity_en.htm#:-:text=Water%20Scarcity%20%26%20Droughts%20in%20the%20European%20Union,exceeding%20available%20water%20resources%20is%20no%20longer%20uncommon.
[14]	European Commission, 2020 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—A New Circular Economy Action Plan for a Cleaner and More Competitive Europe COM (2020) 98 Final. European Commission. Brussels, Belgium.
[15]	Fagbemi, F., Nzeribe, G.E., Osinubi, T.T., et al., 2021. Interconnections between governance and socioeconomic conditions: Understanding the challenges in sub-Saharan Africa. Regional Sustainability. 2(4), 337-348. doi: 10.1016/j.regsus.2022.01.004
[16]	FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2019. Definitions and Standards Used in FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). [2021-11-18]. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#search/Food%20and%20Agriculture%20Organization%20of%20the%20United%20Nations%20FAO.
[17]	Fernández-Esquinas, M., Pinto, H., Yruela, M.P., et al., 2016. Tracing the flows of knowledge transfer: Latent dimensions and determinants of university-industry interactions in peripheral innovation systems. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 113(Part B), 266-279. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.07.013
[18]	Garcia, X, Pargament, D., 2015. Reusing wastewater to cope with water scarcity: Economic, social and environmental considerations for decision-making. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 101, 154-166. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.015
[19]	Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N.M.P., et al., 2017. The circular economy—A new sustainability paradigm? J. Clean Prod. 143, 757-768. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
[20]	Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., Ulgiati. S., 2016. A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J. Clean Prod. 114, 11-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007
[21]	Gondo, R., Kolawole, O.D., 2022. Household water access and COVID-19 in Karoi Town, Zimbabwe. Sci. Afr. 16, e01145, doi: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01145. doi: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01145
[22]	Gosling, S.N., Arnell, N.W., Lowe, J.A., 2011. The implications of climate policy for avoided impacts on water scarcity. Procedia Environmental Sciences. 6, 112-121. doi: 10.1016/j.proenv.2011.05.012
[23]	Heidecke, C., 2006. Development and evaluation of a regional water poverty index for Benin. [2021-12-28]. https://ebrary.ifpri.org/utils/getfile/collection/p15738coll2/id/35556/filename/35557.pdf.
[24]	Hou, J., Walsh, P.P., Zhang, J., 2015. The dynamics of human development index. Soc. Sci. J. 52(3), 331-347.
[25]	Hutton, G., 2015. Benefits and Costs of the Water Sanitation and Hygiene Targets for the Post-2015 Development Agenda—Post-2015 Consensus. [2021-12-20]. https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/sites/default/files/water_sanitation_assessment_-_hutton.pdf.
[26]	Jia, X.X., Shahzad, K., Klemeš, J.J., et al., 2022. Changes in water use and wastewater generation influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study of China. J. Environ. Manage. 314, 115024, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115024. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115024
[27]	Kahil, M.T., Dinar, A., Albiac, J., 2015. Modeling water scarcity and droughts for policy adaptation to climate change in arid and semiarid regions. J. Hydrol. 522, 95-109. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.12.042
[28]	Kaiser, H.F., 1974. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 39(1), 31-36. doi: 10.1007/BF02291575
[29]	Kakwani, N.S., Kalbar, P.P., 2022. Measuring urban water circularity: Development and implementation of a water circularity indicator. Sustain. Prod. Consump. 31, 723-735.
[30]	Kalmykova, Y., Sadagopan, M., Rosado, L., 2018. Circular economy—From review of theories and practices to development of implementation tools. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 135, 190-201. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.10.034
[31]	Ladi, T., Mahmoudpour, A., Sharifi, A., 2021. Assessing impacts of the water poverty index components on the human development index in Iran. Habitat Int. 113, 102375, doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102375. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102375
[32]	Lawrence, P., Meigh, J., Sullivan, C., 2002. The water poverty index:an international comparison. In: Keele Economics Research Papers KERP 2002/19. Centre for Economic Research, Keele University. Keele, UK.
[33]	Liu, L., Jensen, M.B., 2018. Green infrastructure for sustainable urban water management: Practices of five forerunner cities. Cities. 74, 126-133. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2017.11.013
[34]	Liu, J.G., Liu, Q.Y., Yang, H., 2016. Assessing water scarcity by simultaneously considering environmental flow requirements, water quantity, and water quality. Ecol. Indic. 60, 434-441. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.07.019
[35]	Lu, Y.L., Liu, M.Y., Zeng, S.Y., et al., 2021. Screening and mitigating major threats of regional development to water ecosystems using ecosystem services as endpoints. J. Environ. Manage. 293, 112787, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112787. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112787
[36]	Máñez, K.S., Husain, S., Ferse, S.C.A., et al., 2012. Water scarcity in the Spermonde Archipelago, Sulawesi, Indonesia: Past, present and future. Environ. Sci. Policy. 23, 74-84. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2012.07.004
[37]	Masi, F., Rizzo, A., Regelsberger, M., 2018. The role of constructed wetlands in a new circular economy, resource oriented, and ecosystem services paradigm. J. Environ. Manage. 216, 275-284. doi: S0301-4797(17)31161-1 pmid: 29224716
[38]	Maurya, S.P., Singh, P.K., Ohri, A., et al., 2020. Identification of indicators for sustainable urban water development planning. Ecol. Indic. 108, 105691, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105691. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105691
[39]	McGrane, S.J., 2016. Impacts of urbanisation on hydrological and water quality dynamics, and urban water management: a review. Hydrol. Sci. J. 61(13), 2295-2311. doi: 10.1080/02626667.2015.1128084
[40]	Nazemi, A., Madani, K., 2018. Urban water security: Emerging discussion and remaining challenges. Sust. Cities Soc. 41, 925-928.
[41]	OECD (the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), 2011. Benefits of Investing in Water and Sanitation:An OECD Perspective, Paris: OECD Publishing, 21-117.
[42]	Pereira, A., 2003. Guia Prático de Utilização do SPSS: Análise de Dados Para Ciências Sociais e Psicologia (3^rd edition). Lisbon: Almedina, 116-194 (in Portuguese).
[43]	Pestana, M.H., Gageiro, J.M.N., 2014. Análise de Dados Para Ciências Sociais, A Complementaridade Do SPSS (6^th edition). Lisbon: Sílabo, 516-579 (in Portuguese).
[44]	Pinto, H., 2009. The diversity of innovation in the European Union: mapping latent dimensions and regional profiles. Eur. Plan Stud. 17(2), 303-326. doi: 10.1080/09654310802553571
[45]	Pomponi, F., Moncaster, A., 2017. Circular economy for the built environment: A research framework. J. Clean Prod. 143, 710-718. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.055
[46]	Portugal Council of Ministers, 2017. Resolução do Conselho de Ministros number 190-A/2017. Diário da República. 54, 54-73 (in Portuguese).
[47]	Ramos, P.N., 2013. Torturem os Números que Eles Confessam: Sobre o mau uso e abuso das Estatísticas em Portugal, e não só. Lisbon: Almedina, 1-174 (in Portuguese).
[48]	Sagar, A.D., Najam, A., 1998. The human development index: a critical review. Ecol. Econ. 25(3), 249-264. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00168-7
[49]	Shiklomanov, I.A., 1998. World Water Resources—A New Appraisal and Assessment for the 21^st Century. Paris: UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), 16-26.
[50]	Shrestha, N., 2021. Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics. 9(1), 4-11. doi: 10.12691/ajams-9-1-2
[51]	Stoler, J., Miller, J.D., Brewis, A., et al., 2021. Household water insecurity will complicate the ongoing COVID-19 response: Evidence from 29 sites in 23 low- and middle-income countries. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health. 234, 113715, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2021.113715. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2021.113715
[52]	Sullivan, C., 2002. Calculating a water poverty index. World Dev. 30(7), 1195-1210. doi: 10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00035-9
[53]	Sullivan, C.A., Meigh, J.R., Giacomello. A.M., 2003. The water poverty index: Development and application at the community scale. Natural Resources Forum. 27(3), 189-199. doi: 10.1111/1477-8947.00054
[54]	Todaro, M.P., Smith, S.C., 2021. Economic Development (12^th edition). Upper Saddle River: Pearson, 1-114.
[55]	UNESCO, UN (United Nations)-Water, 2020. World Water Development Report 2020—Water and Climate Change. Paris: UNESCO, 1-37.
[56]	United Nations, 2015. Framework Convention on Climate Change, Adoption of the Paris Agreement. In:The Conference of the Parties. Paris, France.
[57]	United Nations, 2017. Clean Water and Sanitation: Why it Matters. [2021-12-28]. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/6_Why-it-Matters_Sanitation_2p.pdf.
[58]	United Nations, 2021. The United Nations World Water Development Report 2021:Valuing Water. Paris: UNESCO, 11-16.
[59]	United Nations General Assembly, 2010. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 28 July 2010. [2022-01-05]. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/479/35/PDF/N0947935.pdf?OpenElement.
[60]	United Nations General Assembly, 2015. Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. [2022-07-19]. https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.
[61]	UN-Water, 2019. UN-Water Policy Brief—Climate Change and Water. [2021-12-18]. https://www.unwater.org/app/uploads/2019/07/UN-Water_Water-and-Climate-Policy-Brief_unedited.pdf.
[62]	UN-Water, 2021. Summary Progress Update 2021: SDG 6—Water and Sanitation for All. Version: July 2021. Geneva: UN-Water, 8-16.
[63]	U.S. Department of Commerce, 2019. Population Statistics. [2021-12-30]. https://www.commerce.gov/data-and-reports/population-statistics.
[64]	van Dorn, A., Cooney, R.E., Sabin, M.L., 2020. COVID-19 exacerbating inequalities in the US. Lancet. 395(10232), 1243-1244.
[65]	Vaz, A.S., Costa, S., Pinheiro, L., et al., 2017. Liderar a Transição—Plano de Ação para a Economia Circular em Portugal: 2017-2020. [2022-01-13]. https://eco.nomia.pt/contents/ficheiros/paec-pt.pdf (in Portuguese).
[66]	Verma, J.P., 2013. Data Analysis in Management with SPSS Software. New Delhi: Springer, 317-389.
[67]	Vörösmarty, C.J., McIntyre, P.B., Gessner, M.O., et al., 2010. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature. 467, 555-561. doi: 10.1038/nature09440
[68]	Wakeel, M., Chen, B., 2016. Energy consumption in urban water cycle. Energy Procedia. 104, 123-128. doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2016.12.022
[69]	WaterAid, 2021. Mission-critical: Invest in water, sanitation and hygiene for a healthy and green economic recovery. [2022-01-12]. https://www.wateraid.org/us/sites/g/files/jkxoof291/files/mission-critical-invest-in-wash-for-a-healthy-green-recovery---en-digital.pdf.
[70]	Water Resources Group, 2012. The water resources group: background, impact and the way forward. In: the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting Report. Davos-Klosters, Switzerland.
[71]	Watkins, K., Carvajal, L., Coppard, D., et al., 2006. Human Development Report 2006—Beyond Scarcity:Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis. New York:UNDP (United Nations Development Program), 131-170.
[72]	Weiss, D.J., 1971. Further considerations in applications of factor analysis. J. Couns. Psychol. 18(1), 85-92. doi: 10.1037/h0020032
[73]	WHO (World Health Organization), UNICEF (United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund), 2016. Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean. [2022-01-12]. https://washdata.org/sites/default/files/documents/reports/2017-07/LAC-snapshot-wash-2016-EN.pdf.
[74]	WHO, UNICEF, 2017a. Progress on drinking water, sanitation and hygiene—2017 update and SDG Baselines. [2022-01-08]. https://www.unicef.org/media/49061/file/Progress_on_Drinking_Water_Sanitation_and_Hygiene_2017-ENG.pdf.
[75]	WHO, UNICEF, 2017b. Safely managed drinking water:thematic report on drinking water 2017. WHO. Geneva, Switzerland.
[76]	WHO, 2019. “Global Health Observatory Indicator Views.” World Health Organization. Retrieved August 1, 2019. [2022-01-14]. http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.imr.
[77]	Winans, K., Kendall, A., Deng, H., 2017. The history and current applications of the circular economy concept. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 68(Part 1), 825-833. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.123
[78]	World Bank, 2019. Indicators, The World Bank Group 1. Retrieved August 1, 2019. [2021-12-30]. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator.
[79]	WWAP (UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme), UN-Water, 2012. United Nations World Water Development Report 4:Managing Water under Uncertainty and Risk. Paris: UNESCO, 44-76.
[80]	WWAP, 2019. The United Nations World Water Development Report 2019:Leaving No One Behind. Paris: UNESCO, 11-33.
[81]	Xu, S.J., Zheng, S.Y., Huang, Z.Q., et al., 2022. Assessing progress towards sustainable development in Shenzhen 2005-2019. J. Clean Prod. 349, 131496, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131496. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131496
[82]	Yang, S.H., Yang, T., 2021. Exploration of the dynamic water resource carrying capacity of the Keriya River Basin on the southern margin of the Taklimakan Desert, China. Regional Sustainability. 2(1), 73-82. doi: 10.1016/j.regsus.2021.01.005
[83]	Zhang, R.J., Duan, Z.H., Tan, M.L., et al., 2012. The assessment of water stress with the water poverty index in the Shiyang River Basin in China. Environ. Earth Sci. 67, 2155-2160. doi: 10.1007/s12665-012-1655-6
[84]	Zhang, S., Zhu, D.J., Shi, Q.H., et al., 2018. Which countries are more ecologically efficient in improving human well-being? An application of the index of ecological well-being performance. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 112-119.
[85]	Zhang, S.H., Fan, W.W., Yi, Y.J., et al., 2017. Evaluation method for regional water cycle health based on nature-society water cycle theory. J. Hydrol. 551, 352-364. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.06.013
[86]	Zhou, Q., Deng, X.Z., Wu, F., 2017. Impacts of water scarcity on socio-economic development: A case study of Gaotai County, China. Phys. Chem. Earth. 101, 204-213. doi: 10.1016/j.pce.2017.03.009

Variable	Factor loading
Variable	Factor 1	Factor 2	Factor 3	Factor 4	Factor 5
Percentage of the population with access to electricity	0.919	0.184	0.046	0.021	0.069
Percentage of the population with access to basic sanitation services	0.910	0.177	-0.032	0.170	0.073
Percentage of the population with access to clean fuels and technologies for cooking	0.898	0.102	-0.011	0.157	0.066
Percentage of renewable energy consumption over total energy	-0.888	0.122	-0.066	0.128	0.102
Percentage of the population with access to basic drinking water services	0.863	0.260	0.028	0.113	0.105
Human development index (HDI)	0.847	0.125	0.045	0.355	0.146
Average life expectancy	0.807	0.215	0.040	0.307	0.234
Annual population growth	-0.450	-0.634	-0.028	-0.136	0.086
Natural resources availability as a percentage of gross national income (GNI)	0.444	0.707	0.087	-0.064	0.044
Availability of energy as a percentage of GNI	-0.187	0.869	0.015	0.162	0.058
Population	-0.021	0.075	0.897	-0.184	0.000
National GDP	0.114	0.009	0.855	0.293	-0.009
Percentage of GDP for health	0.048	0.208	0.040	0.787	-0.245
GDP per capita	0.387	-0.062	0.044	0.606	0.502
Population density	0.047	0.039	-0.016	-0.131	0.874