Skip to main content

The interplay among ecological footprint, real income, energy consumption, and trade openness in 13 Asian countries

Environmental Science and Pollution Research volume 27, pages 45148–45160 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

This article investigates the effects of real income, trade openness, and energy consumption on the ecological footprint using a panel data of 13 Asian countries over the 1973–2014 period. The empirical findings suggest that the panel variance-ratio test confirms the existence of a long-run equilibrium relationship among ecological footprint real income, trade openness, and energy consumption. Results from panel pooled mean group estimates confirm that the long-run elasticity of real income, trade openness, and energy consumption is 0.16, −0.07, and 0.51, respectively. The real income and energy consumption have a positive impact on the ecological footprint. There are three bidirectional causal relationships that were found between ecological footprint and real income; between energy consumption and ecological footprint; and between trade openness and ecological footprint. In addition, three unidirectional causalities can be found: a unidirectional causality running from real income to trade openness; from real income to energy consumption; and from trade openness to energy consumption. Those causal relationships show that economic indicators are highly related to ecological footprint. The findings recommend that various governments should fund more in renewable energy and efficiency upgrade and continue sustaining their growth without hurting the environment.

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
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. The data and description can be found at following address: https://www.footprintnetwork.org/our-work/ecological-footprint/

  2. \( {\overline{y}}_{i,t}=\frac{1}{N}\sum \limits_{i=1}^N{y}_{i,t} \) and \( {\overline{x}}_{i,t}=\frac{1}{N}\sum \limits_{i=1}^N{x}_{i,t} \)

References

  • Acar S, Aşici AA (2017) Nature and economic growth in Turkey: what does ecological footprint imply? Middle East Dev J 9(1):101–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Acaravci A, Ozturk I (2010) On the relationship between energy consumption, CO2 emissions and economic growth in Europe. Energy Policy 35(12):5412–5420

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed Z, Wang Z (2019) Investigating the impact of human capital on the ecological footprint in India: an empirical analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:26782–26796

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed Z, Wang Z, Mahmood F, Hafeez M, Ali N (2019) Does globalization increase the ecological footprint? Empirical evidence from Malaysia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(18):18565–18582

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-mulali U (2011) Oil consumption, CO2 emissions and economic growth in MENA countries. Energy 36(10):5412–5420

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-mulali U, Saboori B, Ozturk I (2015a) Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Vietnam. Energy Policy 76:123–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-mulali U, Choong WW, Low ST, Mohammed AH (2015b) Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis by utilizing the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation. Ecol Indic 48:315–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Ang JB (2007) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and output in France. Energy Policy 30(10):4772–4778

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansari MA, Haider S, Khan NA (2020) Environmental Kuznets curve revisited: an analysis using ecological and material footprint. Ecol Indic 115:106416

    Google Scholar 

  • Aşici AA, Acar S (2016) Does income growth relocate ecological footprint? Ecol Indic 61:707–714

    Google Scholar 

  • Baležentis T, Streimikiene D, Zhang T, Liobikiene G (2019) The role of bioenergy in greenhouse gas emission reduction in EU countries: an environmental Kuznets curve modelling. Resour Conserv Recycl 142:225–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Bello MO, Solarin SA, Yen YY (2018) The impact of electricity consumption on CO2 emission, carbon footprint, water footprint and ecological footprint: The role of hydropower in an emerging economy. J Environ Manag 219:218–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburne EF, Frank MW (2007) Estimation of nonstationary heterogeneous panels. Stata J 7(2):197–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Boutaud A, Natacha G, Christian B (2006) Local environmental quality versus (global ecological carrying capacity: what might alternative aggregated indicators bring to the debates about environmental kunzites curves and sustainable development). Int J Sustain Dev 9(3):297–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulut U (2017) The impacts of non-renewable and renewable energy on CO2 emissions in Turkey. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(18):15416–15426

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Caviglia-Harris JL, Chambers D, Kahn JR (2009) Taking the “U” out of Kuznets: a comprehensive analysis of the EKC and environmental degradation. Ecol Econ 68(4):1149–1159

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandia KE, Gul I, Aziz S, Sarwar B, Zulfiqar S (2018) An analysis of the association among carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption and economic performance: an econometric model. Carbon Manag 9(3):227–241

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chang CC (2009) A multivariate causality test of carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China. Appl Energy 87:3533–3537

    Google Scholar 

  • Charfeddine L, Mrabet Z (2017) The impact of economic development and social-political factors on ecological footprint: a panel data analysis for 15 MENA countries. Renew Sust Energy Rev 76:138–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Demetrescu M, Hanck C (2012) A simple nonstationary-volatility robust panel unit root test. Econ Lett 117:10–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumitrescu EI, Hurlin C (2012) Testing for granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Econ Model 29(4):1450–1460

    Google Scholar 

  • Halicioglu F (2012) An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy 37:1156–1164

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassan ST, Xia E, Khan NH, Ali Shah SM (2019) Economic growth, natural resources, and ecological footprints: evidence from Pakistan. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:2929–2938

    Google Scholar 

  • Herwartz H, Siedenburg F (2008) Homogeneous panel unit root tests under cross sectional dependence: finite sample modifications and the wild bootstrap. Comput Stat Data 53:137–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Im KS, Pesaran MH, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J Econ 115(1):53–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Jebli MB, Youssef SB, Ozturk I (2016) Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: the role of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and trade in OECD countries. Ecol Indic 60:824–831

    Google Scholar 

  • Lean HH, Smyth R (2010) CO2 emissions, electricity consumption and output in ASEAN. Appl Energy 87(6):1858–1864

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Levin A, Lin CF, Chu CSJ (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J Econ 108(1):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Hao Y (2018) The dynamic links between CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic development in the countries along “the Belt and Road”. Sci Total Environ 645:674–683

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu H, Kim H, Liang S, Kwon O (2018) Export diversification and ecological footprint: a comparative study on EKC theory among Korea, Japan, and China. Sustainability 10:3657

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu WC (2017) Greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption and economic growth: a panel cointegration analysis for 16 Asian countries. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14(11):1436–1451

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu WC (2018) The impact of information and communication technology, energy consumption, financial development, and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in 12 Asian countries. Mitig Adapt Strat GL 28(2):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Magazzino C (2014) The relationship between CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Italy. Int J Sust Energy 35:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Mrabet Z, Alsamara M (2017) Testing the Kuznets curve hypothesis for Qatar: a comparison between carbon dioxide and ecological footprint. Renew Sust Energ Rev 70(C):1366–1375

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ozcan B, Ulucak R, Dogan E (2019) Analysis long lasting effects of environmental policies: evidence from low, middle and high income economies. Sustain Cities Soc 44:130–143

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 23:1916–1928

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedroni P (2001) Purchasing power parity tests in cointegrated panels. Rev Econ Stat 83:727–31

  • Pedroni P (2004) Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis, Econometric Theory 20:597–625

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

  • Pesaran MH (2006) Estimation and influence in large heterogenous panels with multifactor error structure. Econometrica 74:967–1012

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ 22:265–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabir S, Gorus MS (2019) The impact of globalization on ecological footprint: empirical evidence from the south Asian countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:33387–33398

    Google Scholar 

  • Saboori B, Sulaiman J (2013) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries: a cointegration approach. Energy 55:813–822

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Saidi K, Hammami S (2015) The impact of CO2 emissions and economic growth on energy consumption in 58 countries. Energy Rep 1:62–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Shabbir MS, Shahbaz M, Zeshan M (2014) Renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption, real GDP and CO2 emissions nexus: a structural VAR approach in Pakistan. Bull Energy Econ 2:91–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M, Sinha A (2019) Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: a literature survey. J Econ Stud 46(1):106–168

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Solarin SA, Bello MO (2018) Persistence of policy shocks to an environmental degradation index: the case of ecological footprint in 128 developed and developing countries. Ecol Indic 89:35–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Soytas U, Sari R (2009) Energy consumption, economic growth and carbon emissions: challenges faced by a EU candidate member. Ecol Econ 68:1667–1675

    Google Scholar 

  • Soytas U, Sari R, Ewing BT (2007) Energy consumption, income and carbon emissions in the United States. Ecol Econ 62:482–489

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern DI (2014) The environmental Kuznets curve: a primer centre for climate economics and policy. Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU

  • Tsaurai K (2018) Greenhouse gas emissions and economic growth in Africa: does financial development play and moderating role? Int J Energy Econ Policy 8(6):267–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Uddin GA, Salahuddin M, Alam K, Gow J (2017) Ecological footprint and real income: panel data evidence from the 27 highest emitting countries. Ecol Indic 77:166–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulucak R, Bilgili F (2018) A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle, and low income countries. J Clean Prod 188:144–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulucak R, Lin D (2017) Persistence of policy shocks to ecological footprint of the USA. Ecol Indic 80:337–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerlund J (2005) New simple tests for panel cointegration. Econ Rev 24(3):297–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerlund J, Edgerton DL (2008) A simple test for cointegration in dependent panels with structural breaks. Oxford B of Econ Stat 70(5):665–704

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank World Development Indicators Online (WDI) (2013) database (Accessed January 2015)

  • Yilanci V, Pata UK (2020) Investigating the EKC hypothesis for China: the role of economic complexity on ecological footprint. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27(16):19251–19264

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu H, Duan L, Guo Y, Yu K (2016) The effects of FDI, economic growth and energy consumption on carbon emissions in ASEAN-5: evidence from panel quantile regression. Econ Model 58:237–248

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Finance, Ming Chuan University, 5 De Ming Rd., Gui Shan District, Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan, Republic of China

    Wen-Cheng Lu

Authors
  1. Wen-Cheng Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wen-Cheng Lu.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Responsible Editor: Nicholas Apergis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lu, WC. The interplay among ecological footprint, real income, energy consumption, and trade openness in 13 Asian countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27, 45148–45160 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10399-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10399-7

Keywords

  • Ecological footprint
  • Real income
  • Trade openness
  • Renewable energy
  • Energy consumption