Advertisement

Effect of trade on ecological quality: a case of D-8 countries

  • Khalid AhmedEmail author
  • Ilhan Ozturk
  • Ikhtiar Ali Ghumro
  • Pirih Mukesh
Research Article
  • 55 Downloads

Abstract

Sustainable development inculcates the process of preserving the environment for future generations while maintaining existing human needs. This study attempts to empirically investigate the relationship between CO2 emissions, GDP, energy consumption, and imports and exports using yearly data between 1980 and 2014 for the panel of eight developing countries (i.e., Bangladesh, Egypt, Iran, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Turkey). All the tests for cointegration establish the long-run association among the variables and confirm the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis for the panel of eight countries. GDP and energy consumption remained significant factors for emission intensity both in the long and short run. However, exports found to be positive factor for emissions in the long run only and imports spur emissions in the short run. The country-specific results validate EKC hypothesis for Bangladesh, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Turkey. The findings are policy oriented and suggest that the countries’ economic growth along with energy consumption and exports are highly emission intensive which require necessary adjustments at sustainable development policy front.

Keywords

CO2 emission Imports Exports Developing countries 

Notes

References

  1. Ahmad N, Wyckoff A (2003) Carbon dioxide emissions embodied in international trade of goods, STI Working Paper Series DSTI/DOC (2003)15 (Paris, OECD). Available at http://www.oecd.org/sti/working-papers
  2. Ahmed K (2014) Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emission in Mongolia: an empirical analysis. Manag Environ Qual 25(4):505–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahmed K (2016) The sheer scale of China’s urban renewal and CO 2 emissions: multiple structural breaks, long-run relationship, and short-run dynamics. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(16):16115–16126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ahmed K, Ahmed S (2018) A predictive analysis of CO 2 emissions, environmental policy stringency, and economic growth in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(16):16091–16100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ahmed K, Ozturk I (2018) What new technology means for the energy demand in China? A sustainable development perspective. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(29):29766–29771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ahmed K, Ahmed N, Shahbaz M, Ozturk I, Long W (2016b) Modelling trade and climate change policy: a strategic framework for global environmental negotiators. J Water Clim Chang 7(4):731–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ahmed K, Shahbaz M, Kyophilavong P (2016c) Revisiting the emissions-energy-trade nexus: evidence from the newly industrializing countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(8):7676–7691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ahmed K, Bhattacharya M, Shaikh Z, Ramzan M, Ozturk I (2017) Emission intensive growth and trade in the era of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) integration: an empirical investigation from ASEAN-8. J Clean Prod 154:530–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown LR (2003) Shifting taxes, plan B: rescuing a planet under stress and a civilization in trouble. W.W. Norton & Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis SJ, Caldeira K (2010) Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(12):5687–5692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Denton RV (1975) The energy cost of goods and services in the Federal Republic of Germany. Energy Policy 3(4):279–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dimaranan BV (2006) Global trade, assistance, and production: the GTAP 6 database, Center for Global Trade Analysis. Purdue University, West LafayetteGoogle Scholar
  13. Fang J, Gozgor G, Lu Z, Wu W (2019) Effects of the export product quality on carbon dioxide emissions: evidence from developing economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(129):12181–121931-13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Farhani S, Ozturk I (2015) Causal relationship between CO 2 emissions, real GDP, energy consumption, financial development, trade openness, and urbanization in Tunisia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(20):15663–15676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research IncGoogle Scholar
  16. Halicioglu F, Ketenci N (2016) The impact of international trade on environmental quality: the case of transition countries. Energy 109:1130–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoerner JA, Bosquet B (2001) Environmental tax reform: the European experience. Center for a Sustainable Economy, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Kao C (1999) Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. J Econ 90(1):1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kondo Y, Moriguchi Y, Shimizu H (1998) CO2 emissions in Japan: influences of imports and exports. Appl Energy 59(2–3):163–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lenzen M, Pade L, Munksgaard J (2004) CO2 multipliers in multi-region input-output models. Econ Syst Res 16(4):391–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ling CH, Ahmed K, Muhamad R, Shahbaz M, Loganathan N (2017) Testing the social cost of rapid economic development in Malaysia: the effect of trade on life expectancy. Soc Indic Res 130(3):1005–1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ozturk I, Al-Mulali U, Saboori B (2016) Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: the role of tourism and ecological footprint. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(2):1916–1928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pedroni P (1999) Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 61(S1):653–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16(3):289–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peters GP, Hertwich EG (2008a) Post-Kyoto greenhouse gas inventories: production versus consumption. Climate Change 86(1–2):51–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Peters GP, Hertwich EG (2008b) CO2 embodied in international trade with implications for global climate policy. Environ Sci Technol 42(5):1401–1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Peters GP, Weber CL, Guan D, Hubacek K (2007) China’s growing CO2 emissions—a race between increasing consumption and efficiency gains. Environ Sci Technol 41(17):5939–5944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Proops JL, Faber M, Wagenhals G (1993) Policy conclusions for reducing CO2 emissions. In: Reducing CO2 emissions. Springer, Berlin, pp 271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rhee HC, Chung HS (2006) Change in CO2 emission and its transmissions between Korea and Japan using international input–output analysis. Ecological Economics, 58(4):788–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shahbaz M, Bhattacharya M, Ahmed K (2016) CO2 emissions in Australia: economic and non-economic drivers in the long-run. Appl Econ 49(13):1273–1286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shahbaz M, Bhattacharya M, Ahmed K (2017a) CO2 emissions in Australia: economic and non-economic drivers in the long-run. Appl Econ 49(13):1273–1286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shahbaz M, Nasreen S, Ahmed K, Hammoudeh S (2017b) Trade openness–carbon emissions nexus: the importance of turning points of trade openness for country panels. Energy Econ 61:221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wyckoff AW, Roop JM (1994) The embodiment of carbon in imports of manufactured products: implications for international agreements on green-house gas emissions. Energy Policy 22(3):187–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sukkur IBA UniversitySukkurPakistan
  2. 2.Cag UniversityMersinTurkey
  3. 3.Shah Abdul Latif UniversityKhairpurPakistan

Personalised recommendations