Research background: Income inequality and poverty attract a lot of attention among politicians, activists as well as scientists, who are trying to find a solution to these socio-economic problems. State intervention is commonly expected in this field, however, there is no agreement about the most efficient methods and instruments, as well as about the scale of public expenditure for the purpose of limiting poverty and inequality. Purpose of the article: The aim of the paper is to specify efficiency of government social spending in reducing problems of poverty and income inequality in the EU countries. Moreover, the attention is paid to changes in the efficiency in a period of the 2007 crisis occurrence and its overcoming and to sources of the changes. Methods: To fulfill the main goal of the paper, the DEA method is used, which enables to compare the social efficiency of the EU countries. The Malmquist index is also calculated and decomposed to identify changes in the efficiency and their sources in the crisis period. Data used in the analyses were obtained from Eurostat and OECD databases and cover the period from 2007 to 2016 year. Findings & Value added: The main findings of the paper shed some light on the differences in social efficiency of government spending in the EU countries. Generally, the countries with a higher level of social spending are also those with lower efficiency in inequality reduction, however, the relationship doesn?t appear for poverty alleviation. Thus, the research suggests some substitution between the scale and the efficiency of social spending, at least for the inequality dimension. Moreover, some differences in a social model can be found between the countries of the South and of the North: the countries of the South focus their social policy mainly on inequality reduction, while the Scandinavian countries as well as some other affluent societies direct their public support mainly on poverty alleviation. The research also shows that in the crisis period decreases in efficiency concerned mainly the poverty dimension. It reflects the fact that the poor were the losers of the crisis in favor of the middle classes. The efficiency losses were induced by negative changes in the current usage of public sources, while institutional reforms positively influenced the efficiency.

Measuring sustainable development requires multidimensional attitude as the process is characterised by compound relationships between social, economic and environmental spheres. The paper aims at assessing selected effects of sectoral employment for the three dimensions of developmental processes. We examine employment efficiency in 25 EU countries concerning four sectors: agriculture, industry, market services, and non-market services. We use a non-radial DEA input-oriented model, which allows the assessment of the general efficiency of labour resources, as well as the evaluation of in-depth efficiency in the three dimensions of the economies under study. The novelty of the research lays in both multidimensional attitudes to the effects of labour engagement as well as intersectoral comparisons of the employment results. We categorise the EU countries according to efficiency in gaining the sustainable development and its three dimensions. Generally, the “old” EU members are of higher efficiency than the “new” states. Our research shows desirable movements of labour force that are necessary to improve efficiency and thus offers some advice for a rational development policy. It appears that it is necessary to limit agricultural employment in favour of non-market and market services and, to a lower extent, of industry. We conclude that the structural changes in employment specified by patterns observed in the highly developed EU countries are favourable for realising the aims of sustainable development.

This study focuses on the empirical verification of the influence of rural specificity on energy poverty across European Union countries, in the period 2010–2020. The research aimed at specifying the role of the agricultural character of a country, as well as economic disparities between rural and urban areas, in inducing problems of energy affordability. Based on the literature consensus about the most important determinants of energy poverty, namely income, energy prices, energy productivity, quality of dwellings, and climate conditions, a standard model was constructed concerning the role of the rural character of an economy, with its traditional features such as agricultural employment, and indices of rural–urban divide, in terms of median income and material poverty. Models for panel data with fixed effects were estimated. The results indicate agricultural employment as a factor increasing the subjective energy poverty of households. However, the scale of rural settlement cannot be specified as a factor determining energy poverty, neither concerning energy consumption nor self-reported difficulties. This suggests that only the traditional agricultural character of rural areas negatively influences energy poverty. The processes of gentrification of rural areas observable in many EU countries changes the typical pattern of the identification of villagers with the most excluded group.

With growing attention being paid to the problems of sustainable development and just transition, energy poverty emerges as a focal issue to be addressed by the Common Policy. However, the dynamics of this phenomenon across the EU still appear to be insufficiently recognised. Therefore, this study deals with the problem of energy poverty convergence and aims to test it for the 27 EU countries over the period 2010–2022. Contrary to limited studies of energy poverty convergence that use a simple indicator, it uses aggregate measures based on consensual consequential indicators of energy poverty to verify the hypothesis of convergence. Absolute and conditional beta convergence are considered. Potential determinants of energy poverty are incorporated into a model of conditional convergence. The analysis confirms the existence of beta convergence of energy poverty in the EU, indicating the progressing socio-economic cohesion of the member states. The results, thus, deliver some arguments supporting an integrative approach to the energy policy of the EU. The research reveals that, among the factors influencing EP dynamics, an important role may be attributed to technological catch-up and income distribution across a society. Sustainable development should thus be supported with energy modernisation efforts of an inclusive character.

Energy sustainability constitutes an important goal for development, as declared at the global and the European levels. Some conditions decisive for energy performance, as suggested by the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis, may be specified by the sectoral structure of production, as industries vary in the intensity of energy consumption. Nevertheless, sustainability is not automatically induced along with economic development and it is important to identify its determinants. The aim of the study is to empirically verify whether the sectoral structure of an economy differentiates energy sustainability within 28 European Union member states (the EU-28). To fulfil the task, a static approach was adopted and such taxonomic methods as the Ward agglomeration method and linear ordering based on the Hellwig synthetic measure were used. The hypothesis concerning the essential role of structural features in energy achievements was verified by a one-way analysis of variance. Our results do not confirm the decisive role of economic structure in energy performance for the EU-28 states; however, they suggest some complex relationships. The interference between energy performance and sectoral structure mostly concerned primary and final energy consumptions and energy poverty, as well as the shares of agriculture, industry, traditional services and finance in total production. The findings reveal a need for further research into the potential interlinkages between different dimensions of sustainable development (SD).

Research background: Regions that are able to use their resources in the most efficient way could be perceived as valuable benchmarks when shaping socio-economic policy. The concept of efficiency, however, may be related not only to pure economic categories but to social goals as well. The economic and social spheres overlap and often have some common origins, among which, the sectoral structure of employment seems to be an important one. Purpose of the article: The aim of the study was to compare the social efficiency of employment in three sectors in Polish voivodeships. Not only were we evaluating the relative performance of each region, but we were also paying attention to the efficiency of engagement of human resources in the agricultural, industrial and service sectors. Methods: We adopted the DEA method to assess the social efficiency of Polish regions. We have evaluated social cohesion concerning its two output dimensions: positive, which may be described by social activity, and negative, which may be reflected in the form of social exclusion stemming from material sources. We took into account the level of employment in agricultural, industrial and service sectors as inputs in the model and thus focused our attention on the three sectoral structure of the regional economies. Our model assumed non-radial developmental paths and was input oriented (NR-CCR). The data described the 16 Polish voivodeships in the year 2015, and were extracted from the Central Statistical Office of Poland’s databases. Findings & value added: The research conducted indicates that Polish regions which were the most efficient in terms of social integration were simultaneously those with the best economic results in terms of GDP per capita. The highest social efficiency level was characteristic for employment in the service sector, while agriculture was placed at the lowest level. The same pattern was revealed when social activity and the danger of poverty were considered separately. Thus, structural development appears to be favourable for regional economies also in terms of social cohesion, which is a factor often neglected in the literature.