Life Expectancy at Birth in Europe: An Econometric Approach Based on Random Forests Methodology

Abstract

The objective of this work is to identify and classify the relative importance of several socioeconomic factors which explain life expectancy at birth in the European Union (EU) countries in the period 2008–2017, paying special attention to greenhouse gas emissions and public environmental expenditures. Methods: The Random Forests methodology was employed, which allows classification of the socioeconomic variables considered in the analysis according to their relative importance to explain health outcomes. Results: Per capita income, the educational level of the population, and the variable AREA (which reflects the subdivision of Europe into four relatively homogeneous areas), followed by the public expenditures on environmental and social protection, are the variables with the highest relevance in explaining life expectancy at birth in Europe over the perip.1 he peusto el correo e inciod 2008–2017. Conclusions: We have identified seven sectors as the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions: Electricity, gas, steam, and air conditioning supply; manufacturing; transportation and storage; agriculture, forestry, and fishing; construction; wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles; and mining and quarrying. Therefore, any public intervention related to environmental policy should be aimed at these economic sectors. Furthermore, it will be more effective to focus on public programs with higher relevance to the health status of the population, such as environmental and social protection expenditures.

The Relative Importance of Globalization and Public Expenditure on Life Expectancy in Europe: An Approach Based on MARS Methodology

“…For this reason, this work has included this factor in this type of research by using macro data. Our findings show that environmental expenditures are one of the least important socioeconomic factors related to life expectancy at birth [ 47 ]; this does not mean that this type of public expenditure has no effect on health status, but this item has less relevance than other factors such social and healthcare expenditures.…”

“…The available evidence on the impact of public environmental protection expenditures on life expectancy from a macro approach is more scarce [ 47 ]. For this reason, this work has included this factor in this type of research by using macro data.…”

“…Social protection expenditure by government has also been employed, but, unlike the above public function, most of the thematic literature detects a positive influence of public social expenditure on health status of population [ 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. The growing importance of environmental issues and the role of the public sector in this area justify the inclusion of public expenditure on environmental protection in our analysis, thus continuing to contribute to the scarce literature in this field [ 47 ].…”

“…In the field of public policy, environmental factors, including greenhouse emissions [ 9 , 45 , 46 ], have been widely studied as determinants of health outcome. However, the government expenditure aimed at environmental protection has received minimal attention in this type of research, with the exception of the work in [ 47 ].…”

Trends in Life Expectancy in Romania between 1990 and 2018. A Territorial Analysis of Its Determinants

“…A more or less significant increase in their value has an important effect, especially in developing countries, when health is granted consistent funds [22][23][24]. However, the inequalities that appear in the health state of the population in developed states are much more complex, exceeding the simple connection with the income indicators [25][26][27]. An important role can also be played by factors related to local particularities, such as: types and extent of disease risks, economic conditions, demographic characteristics, quality of the environment, accessibility of the offer and the quality of health services etc.…”