Skip to main content

Decomposing the trade-environment nexus for Malaysia: what do the technique, scale, composition, and comparative advantage effect indicate?

Environmental Science and Pollution Research volume 22, pages 20131–20142 (2015)Cite this article

Abstract

This paper investigates the impact of trade openness on CO2 emissions using time series data over the period of 1970QI-2011QIV for Malaysia. We disintegrate the trade effect into scale, technique, composition, and comparative advantage effects to check the environmental consequence of trade at four different transition points. To achieve the purpose, we have employed augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Phillips-Perron (PP) unit root tests in order to examine the stationary properties of the variables. Later, the long-run association among the variables is examined by applying autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) bounds testing approach to cointegration. Our results confirm the presence of cointegration. Further, we find that scale effect has positive and technique effect has negative impact on CO2 emissions after threshold income level and form inverted U-shaped relationship—hence validates the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. Energy consumption adds in CO2 emissions. Trade openness and composite effect improve environmental quality by lowering CO2 emissions. The comparative advantage effect increases CO2 emissions and impairs environmental quality. The results provide the innovative approach to see the impact of trade openness in four sub-dimensions of trade liberalization. Hence, this study attributes more comprehensive policy tool for trade economists to better design environmentally sustainable trade rules and agreements.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. The pollution haven hypothesis argues that since developed countries have stringent environmental regulations, hence the disadvantaged firms relocate their pollution-intensive productions to developing countries where the regulations are soft.

  2. Later on, Khalid et al. (2014) confirmed the findings by Shahbaz et al. (2012b, c)

  3. Shahbaz et al. (2015c) examined the validity of EKC for African countries. Their analysis indicated the presence of EKC, and the feedback effect is noticed between economic growth and CO2 emissions.

  4. We have converted annual data into quarter frequency using quadratic match sum method (see, for more details, Shahbaz et al. 2014c).

  5. For more details, see (Pesaran et al. 1999, 2001)

  6. We have inserted dummy variable for each variable while considering it as dependent variable.

  7. We have not reported a stability test just to conserve space. The long-run and short-run models do not face the problem of non-normality, serial correlation, white heteroskedasticity, and functional form.

References

  • Agus F, Gunarso P, Sahardjo BH, Harris N, van Noordwijk M, Killeen TJ (2013) Historical CO2 emissions from land use and land use change from the oil palm industry in Indonesia, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea. Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, Kuala Lumpur

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed K, Long W (2013) An empirical analysis of CO2 emission in Pakistan using EKC hypothesis. J Int Trade Law Policy 12(2):188–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed K, Shahbaz M, Qasim A, Long W (2015) The linkages between deforestation, energy and growth for environmental degradation in Pakistan. Ecol Indic 49:95–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ang JB (2008) A survey of recent developments in the literature of finance and growth. J Econ Surv 22(3):536–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antweiler W, Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2001) Is free trade good for the environment? Am Econ Rev 91:877–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arouri M, Shahbaz M, Onchang R, Islam F, Teulon F (2014) Environmental Kuznets curve in Thailand: cointegration and causality analysis. J Energy Dev 39:149–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Baek J, Koo WW (2008) Identifying macroeconomic linkages to US agricultural trade balance. Can J of Agric Econ/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie 56(1):63–77

  • Baek J, Cho Y, Koo WW (2009) The environmental consequences of globalization: a country-specific time-series analysis. Ecol Econ 68:2255–2264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baylis J, Smith S (2005) The globalization of world politics. Oxford University Press, 2005

  • Begum RA, Sohag K, Abdullah SMS, Jaafar M (2015) CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic and population growth in Malaysia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 41:594–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekhet HA, Yasmin T (2013) Disclosing the relationship among CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth and bilateral trade between Singapore and Malaysia: an econometric analysis. Int J Soc Hum Sci Eng 7(9):50–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharyya R, Ghoshal T (2010) Economic growth and CO2 emissions. Environ Dev Sustain 12(2):159–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busse M (2004) Transnational corporations and repression of political rights and civil liberties: an empirical analysis. Kyklos 57(1):45–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang C (2010) A multivariate causality test of carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China. Appl Energy 87:3533–3537

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chebbi HE, Olarreaga M, Zitouna H (2010) Trade openness and CO2 emissions in Tunisia. Working Paper 518, Economic Research Forum

  • Cole G (2004) Personnel and human resource management. Pers Rev 33(3):373–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole MA (2006) Does trade liberalization increase national energy use? Econ Lett 92:108–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole MA, Elliott RJ (2003) Determining the trade–environment composition effect: the role of capital, labor and environmental regulations. J Environ Econ Manag 46(3):363–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copeland BR (2005) Policy endogeneity and the effects of trade on the environment. Agric Resour Econ Rev 34(1):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Copeland BR, Taylor MS (1994) North-South trade and the environment. Q J Econ 755–787

  • Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2004) Trade, growth and the environment (No. 9823). National Bureau of Economic Research

  • Dean JM (2002) Does trade liberalization harm the environment? A new test. Can J Econ 35(4):819–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietzenbacher E, Mukhopadhyay K (2007) An empirical examination of the pollution haven hypothesis for India: towards a green Leontief paradox? Environ Resour Econ 36(4):427–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinda S, Coondoo D (2006) Income and emission: a panel data-based cointegration analysis. Ecol Econ 57(2):167–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle RF, Granger CW (1987) Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 251–276

  • Farhani S, Ozturk I (2015) Causal relationship between CO2 emissions, real GDP, energy consumption, financial development, trade openness, and urbanization in Tunisia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 1–14

  • Forslid R, Okubo T, Ultveit-Moe KH (2011) Does international trade contribute to global CO2 emissions? Third Conference of GIST, International Trade, Firm Location and Services

  • Frankel JA, Rose AK (2005) Is trade good or bad for the environment? Sorting out the causality. Rev Econ Stat 87(1):85–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gale LR, Mendez JA (1998) The empirical relationship between trade, growth and the environment. Int Rev Econ Financ 7(1):53–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S (2010) Examining carbon emissions economic growth nexus for India: a multivariate cointegration approach. Energy Policy 38(6):3008–3014

  • Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement (No. w3914). National Bureau of Economic Research

  • Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1994) Economic growth and the environment (No. 4634). National Bureau of Economic Research

  • Gu Z, Gao Y, Li C (2013) An empirical research on trade liberalization and CO2 emissions in China. International Conference on Education Technology and Information System (ICETIS 2013), p 243–246

  • Halicioglu F (2009) An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energ Policy 37(3):1156–1164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris R, Sollis R (2003) Applied time series modeling and forecasting. Wiley, West Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoa TV (2012) Trade, growth and CO2 emissions in China: evidence from an economic integration model. Victoria Institute of Strategic Economic Studies, Victoria University, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim MH, Law SH (2015) Institutional quality and CO2 emission–trade relations: evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. S Afr J Econ. doi:10.1111/saje.12095

    Google Scholar 

  • Iwata H, Okada K, Samreth S (2012) Empirical study on the determinants of CO2 emissions: evidence from OECD countries. Appl Econ 44(27):3513–3519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalil A, Mahmud SF (2009) Environment Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: a cointegration analysis for China. Energ Policy 37(12):5167–5172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jena PR, Grote U (2008). Growth–trade–environment nexus in India. Econ Bull 17(11):1–11

  • Johansen S (1995) Identifying restrictions of linear equations with applications to simultaneous equations and cointegration. J Econ 69(1):111–132

  • Kearsley A, Riddel M (2010) A further inquiry into the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets Curve. Ecol Econ 69(4):905–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalid A, Shahbaz M, Long AQ (2014) The linkages between deforestation, energy and growth for environmental degradation in Pakistan. Ecol Indic 49:95–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Khalil, S. and Inam, Z. (2006). Is trade good for environment? A unit root cointegration analysis. Pak Dev Rev 1187–1196

  • Kohler M (2013) CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade: a South African perspective. Energ Policy 63:1042–1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kukla-Gryz A (2009) Economic growth, international trade and air pollution: a decomposition analysis. Ecol Econ 68(5):1329–1339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau L-S, Chee-Keong C, Eng Y-E (2014) Investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve for carbon emissions in Malaysia: do foreign direct investment and trade matter? Energ Policy 68:490–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee C, Chiu Y, Sun C (2009) Does one size fit all? A re-examination of the environmental Kuznets curve using the dynamic panel data approach. Rev Agric Econ 31:751–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson A, Taylor MS (2001) Trade and the environment: unmasking the pollution haven effect. Unpublished manuscript, US National Science Foundation

  • Levinson A, Taylor MS (2008) Unmasking the pollution haven effect. Int Econ Rev 49(1):223–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liddle HA (2001) Free trade and the environment-development system. Ecol Econ 39(1):21–26

  • Low P, Yeats A (1992) Do dirty industries migrate? World Bank Discussion Papers, 1992

  • Lucas RE, Wheeler D, Hettige H (1992) Economic development, environmental regulation, and the international migration of toxic industrial pollution, 1960–88 (vol. 1062). World Bank Publications

  • Managi S (2004) Trade liberalization and the environment: carbon dioxide for 1960–1999. Econ Bull 17(1):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Managi S, Hibiki A, Tsurumi T (2009) Does trade openness improve environmental quality? J Environ Econ Manag 58(3):346–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mani M, Wheeler D (1998) In search of pollution havens? Dirty industry in the world economy, 1960 to 1995. J Environ Dev 7(3):215–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArthur, J. W. and Sachs, J. D. (2001). Institutions and geography: comment on Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson (2000) (No. w8114). National Bureau of Economic Research

  • Menyah K, Wolde-Rufael Y (2010) Energy consumption, pollutant emissions and economic growth in South Africa. Energy Econ 32(6):1374–1382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naranpanawa A (2010) Does trade openness promote carbon emissions? Empirical evidence from Sri Lanka. Empir Econ Lett 10(10):973–986

    Google Scholar 

  • Narayan PK, Narayan S (2010) Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: panel data evidence from developing countries. Energ Policy 38:661–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nasir M, Rehman F-U (2011) Environmental Kuznets curve for carbon emissions in Pakistan: an empirical investigation. Energ Policy 39:1857–1864

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ozturk I (2010) A literature survey on energy-growth nexus. Energ Policy 38:340–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RP (1999) Pooled mean group estimation of dynamic heterogeneous panels. J Am Stat Assoc 94(446):621–634

  • Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16(3):289–326

  • Pesaran MH, Smith LV, Smith RP (2007) What if the UK or Sweden had joined the euro in 1999? An empirical evaluation using a Global VAR. International Journal of Finance & Economics 12(1):55–87

  • Porter ME, Van der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 97–118

  • Saboori B, Sulaiman J (2013) Environmental degradation, economic growth and energy consumption: evidence of the environmental Kuznets curve in Malaysia. Energ Policy 60:892–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saboori B, Sulaiman J, Mohd S (2012) Economic growth and CO2 emissions in Malaysia: a cointegration analysis of the environmental Kuznets curve. Energ Policy 51:184–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sbia R, Shahbaz M, Hamdi H (2014) A contribution of foreign direct investment, clean energy, trade openness, carbon emissions and economic growth to energy demand in UAE. Econ Model 36:191–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Lean HH (2012a) Does financial development increase energy consumption? The role of industrialization and urbanization in Tunisia. Energy Policy 40:473–479

  • Shahbaz M, Lean HH, Shabbier MM (2012b) Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in Pakistan: cointegration and Granger causality. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16:2947–2953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Zeshan M, Afza T (2012c) Is energy consumption effective to spur economic growth in Pakistan? New evidence from bounds test to level relationships and Granger causality tests. Econ Model 29(6):2310–2319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Khan S, Tahir MI (2013a) The dynamic links between energy consumption, economic growth, financial development and trade in China: fresh evidence from multivariate framework analysis. Energy Econ 40:8–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Solarin SA, Mahmood H, Arouri M (2013b) Does financial development reduce CO2 emissions in Malaysian economy? A time series analysis. Econ Model 35:145–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Tiwari AK, Nasir M (2013c) The effects of financial development, economic growth, coal consumption and trade openness on CO2 emissions in South Africa. Energ Policy 61:1452–1459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Khraief N, Uddin GS, Ozturk I (2014a) Environmental Kuznets curve in an open economy: a bounds testing and causality analysis for Tunisia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 34:325–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Sbia R, Hamdi H, Ozturk I (2014b) Economic growth, electricity consumption, urbanization and environmental degradation relationship in United Arab Emirates. Ecol Indic 45:622–631

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Uddin GS, Rehman I, Imran K (2014c) Industrialization, electricity consumption and CO2 emissions in Bangladesh. Renew Sust Energ Rev 31:575–586

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Mallick H, Mahalik MK, Loganathan N (2015a) Does globalization impede environmental quality in India? Ecol Indic 52:379–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Nasreen S, Abbas F, Anis O (2015b) Does foreign direct investment impede environmental quality in high-, middle-, and low-income countries? Energy Econ 51:275–287

  • Shahbaz M, Solarin SA, Sbia R, Bibi S (2015c) Does energy intensity contribute to CO2 emissions? A trivariate analysis in selected African countries. Ecol Indic 50:215–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solarin SA (2014) Tourist arrivals and macroeconomic determinants of CO2 emissions in Malaysia. Anatolia 25(2):228–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takeda F, Matsuura K (2006) Trade and the environment in East Asia: examining the linkages with Japan and the USA. J Korean Econ 7(1):33–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Temurshoev U (2006) Pollution haven hypothesis or factor endowment hypothesis: theory and empirical examination for the US and China. CERGE-EI

  • Tiwari AK, Shahbaz M, Hye QMA (2013) The environmental Kuznets curve and the role of coal consumption in India: cointegration and causality analysis in an open economy. Renew Sust Energ Rev 18:519–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todaro MP, Smith SC (2002) Economic development pearson education ltd. Edenburg Gate, Essex

  • Tsurumi T, Managi S (2010) Decomposition of the environmental Kuznets curve: scale, technique, and composition effects. Environ Econ Policy Stud 11(1–4):19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Beers C, Van Den Bergh JC (1997) An empirical multi‐country analysis of the impact of environmental regulations on foreign trade flows. Kyklos 50(1):29–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zivot E, Andrews D (1992) Further evidence of great crash, the oil price shock and unit root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat 10:251–270

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Postgraduate Studies, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Chong Hui Ling

  2. Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Pakistan

    Khalid Ahmed

  3. Faculty of Business and Accountancy, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Rusnah Binti Muhamad

  4. Department of Management Sciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Lahore, Pakistan

    Muhammad Shahbaz

Authors
  1. Chong Hui Ling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Khalid Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rusnah Binti Muhamad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Muhammad Shahbaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Khalid Ahmed.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ling, C.H., Ahmed, K., Binti Muhamad, R. et al. Decomposing the trade-environment nexus for Malaysia: what do the technique, scale, composition, and comparative advantage effect indicate?. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22, 20131–20142 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5217-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5217-9

Keywords

  • CO2 emissions
  • Trade openness
  • Economic growth
  • Environmental Kuznets curve
  • Scale effect
  • Technique effect
  • Composition effect