Comparative analysis of environmental sustainability indicators: Insights from Japan, Bangladesh, and Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyses environmental sustainability indicators (ESIs) and explores their governance challenges in developing countries (Bangladesh and Thailand) and advances possible remedies in light of the practices of a developed country (Japan). A comparative analysis of countries' performance based on the ESIs could help identify useful practices from countries with high ESI to improve the poor ESI countries. While it is broadly understood that renewable energy and effective governance support environmental sustainability, our findings extend this knowledge by detailing how these factors interact specifically within the contexts of developed and developing nations. The analysis delineates the complex relationship between GDP growth, fossil fuel reliance, and sustainability efforts, offering a detailed examination of the variance in ESI performance across these countries. Beyond established notions, this study empirically validates the relationships between environmental sustainability (ES) and its influencing factors, providing a country-specific analysis that emphasizes the differential impact of renewable energy adoption, governance quality, and economic policies on environmental sustainability in Japan, Bangladesh, and Thailand. The results also revealed that Bangladesh's performance in terms of majority ESIs ranges from bad to worse, while Japan exhibits good performance in all its ESI indicators except for emissions. Thailand's ESI performance indicates its vulnerability to climate disasters and slow growth of renewable energy. The ESI measures of Thailand have shown its susceptibility to climate-related calamities and a slowdown in the rate of renewable energy implementation. A noticeable discrepancy in the execution of regulatory frameworks was noted between developing countries, such as Bangladesh, and industrialized ones, such as Japan. The outstanding results of Japan's ESI may be credited to the successful practices of its citizens and their strong devotion to the rule of law.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".