2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125607
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Drivers of household consumption expenditure and carbon footprints in Finland

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
1
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
1
26
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We also chose the target levels to comply with our footprints' scope. The scope differences are the main reason why average per capita footprints in our sample are lower than those reported in previous studies in the Nordics: 12.2 to 15.2 t CO 2 e in Denmark (Hertwich, Peters 2009, Ivanova et al 2016, 8.88 to 18 t CO 2 e in Finland (Hertwich, Peters 2009, Ala-Mantila et al 2016, Ivanova et al 2016, Salo and Nissinen 2017, Koide et al 2021a, 10.4 t CO 2 e in Iceland (Clarke et al 2017), 10.3 to 14.9 t CO 2 e in Norway and 8.7 to 10.5 t CO 2 e for Sweden (Hertwich, Peters 2009, Ivanova et al 2016. Other reasons include the changes in carbon intensities and consumption patterns since the other studies were conducted, as well as potentially higher adoption rates of the demand-side actions in our sample than in whole societies.…”
Section: Limitations and Uncertaintiescontrasting
confidence: 74%
“…We also chose the target levels to comply with our footprints' scope. The scope differences are the main reason why average per capita footprints in our sample are lower than those reported in previous studies in the Nordics: 12.2 to 15.2 t CO 2 e in Denmark (Hertwich, Peters 2009, Ivanova et al 2016, 8.88 to 18 t CO 2 e in Finland (Hertwich, Peters 2009, Ala-Mantila et al 2016, Ivanova et al 2016, Salo and Nissinen 2017, Koide et al 2021a, 10.4 t CO 2 e in Iceland (Clarke et al 2017), 10.3 to 14.9 t CO 2 e in Norway and 8.7 to 10.5 t CO 2 e for Sweden (Hertwich, Peters 2009, Ivanova et al 2016. Other reasons include the changes in carbon intensities and consumption patterns since the other studies were conducted, as well as potentially higher adoption rates of the demand-side actions in our sample than in whole societies.…”
Section: Limitations and Uncertaintiescontrasting
confidence: 74%
“…is series of data reflects the current development status of China's communication industry: compared with residents' income and other consumption, communication consumption has a relatively downward trend [6]. Furthermore, from the perspective of each region, with the increase of income and consumption, although residents' communication consumption is also increasing, the communication consumption coefficient and the proportion of communication consumption in per capita income also show a downward trend [7].…”
Section: Evaluation Model Of Regional Household Consumptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They also suggested that Thailand should consider using more sustainable energy sources. Salo et al 4 investigated how differences in consumption patterns affect the CF and provided implications for policymaking. Chen et al 5 explored household energy use and carbon emissions in Beijing between 1996 and 2011 and investigated the most energy/carbon-intensive consumption behaviors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%