Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Economic growth and environmental technology simultaneously important for reducing energy poverty and ecological footprint in E7 economies: do political institutions play a role?

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Energy poverty and climate change are major concerns for the emerging seven countries. Therefore, this study explores the economic growth impact on reducing energy poverty and ecological footprint in the emerging seven economies from 2000 to 2019. Energy poverty is measured using three disciplines: availability poverty, accessibility poverty, and affordability poverty. We applied a new dynamic method, “bias-corrected method of moments estimators (2021),” for long-run outcomes. This study used the environmental Kuznets curve—approach to measure economic growth’s scale effect and technique effect to reduce energy poverty and ecological footprint. Importantly, the study explores the mediating role of politically stable institutions in mitigating environmental and energy poverty. Our findings validate that energy poverty and ecological footprint could not reduce at the initial stage of economic growth. However, the later development stage shows a positive effect on reducing energy poverty and ecological footprint. These results validated an inverted U-shaped Kuznets curve hypothesis for emerging seven. Further, the result found that strong political systems are more quick-witted and have the legislative power to swiftly implement beneficial policies to pull out of the vicious circle of energy poverty. Further, environmental technology significantly reduced energy poverty and ecological footprint. The causality analysis entails that a bidirectional exists between energy poverty, income, and ecological footprint.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data available at World Development Indicators, BP-statistical review, World Governess Indicators, OECD-stat, EIA-data, Global Footprint Network.

References

  • Acharya RH, Sadath AC (2019) Energy poverty and economic development: household-level evidence from India. Energy Build 183:785–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adebayo TS (2022) Renewable energy consumption and environmental sustainability in Canada: does political stability make a difference? Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(40):61307–61322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20008-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aftab S, Ahmed A, Chandio AA, Korankye BA, Ali A, Fang W (2021) Modeling the nexus between carbon emissions, energy consumption, and economic progress in Pakistan: evidence from co-integration and causality analysis. Energy Rep 7:4642–4658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad M, Zheng J (2021) Do innovation in environmental-related technologies cyclically and asymmetrically affect environmental sustainability in BRICS nations? Technol Soc 67:101746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Perotti R (1996) Income distribution, political instability, and investment. Eur Econ Rev 40(6):1203–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, Ozler S, Roubini N, Swagel P (1996) Political instability and economic growth. J Econ Growth 1:279–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Mulali U, Ozturk I (2015) The effect of energy consumption, urbanisation, trade openness, industrial output, and the political stability on the environmental degradation in the MENA (Middle East and North African) region. Energy 84:382–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Tal R, Al-Tarawneh A (2021) The impact of government effectiveness and political stability on energy consumption in the selected MENA economies. Int J Energy Econ Policy 11(2):1–6. https://econjournals.com/index.php/ijeep/article/view/10786

  • Alvarez-Herranz A, Balsalobre-Lorente D (2015) Energy regulation in the EKC model with a dampening effect. J Environ Anall Chem 2(3):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Amin A, Liu Y, Yu J, Chandio AA, Rasool SF, Luo J, Zaman S (2020) How does energy poverty affect economic development? A panel data analysis of South Asian countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27(25):31623–31635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andlib Z, Khan A (2021) The role of information and communication technologies (ICT) in environmental quality: an empirical analysis for South Asian economies. Int J Econ Environ Geol 12(2):80–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Ankrah I, Dogah K, Twumasi-Ankrah S, Sackey FG, Asravor R, Donkor DO, Lamptey C, Arthur L (2023) Is energy transition possible for oil-producing nations? Probing the case of a developing economy. Clean Prod Lett 4:100031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clpl.2023.100031

  • Anser MK, Ahmad M, Khan MA et al (2021) The role of information and communication technologies in mitigating carbon emissions: evidence from panel quantile regression. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:21065–21084. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-12114-y

  • Anser MK, Yusop Z, Abbas S, Ali S, Ahmad M (2022) Nexus between economic development and energy poverty to Ghain energy efficiency: empirical evidence from China. Front Energy Res 191. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2022.843765

  • Apergis N, Garćıa C (2019) Environmentalism in the EU-28 context: the impact of governance quality on environmental energy efficiency. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(36):37012–37025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asongu SA, Odhiambo NM (2020) Governance, CO2 emissions and inclusive human development in sub-Saharan Africa. Energy Explor Exploit 38(1):18–36

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes DF, Khandker SR, Samad HA (2011) Energy poverty in rural Bangladesh. Energy Policy 39(2):894–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett MS (1950) Tests of significance in factor analysis. Brit J Stat Psychol 3(2):77–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercu AM, Paraschiv G, Lupu D (2019) Investigating the energy–economic growth–governance nexus: Evidence from central and eastern european countries. Sustainability 11(12):3355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biermann P (2016) How fuel poverty affects subjective well-being: panel evidence from Germany, vol 395, no 16. Oldenburg Discussion Papers in Economics. https://uol.de/f/2/dept/wire/fachgebiete/vwl/V-395-16.pdf

  • Boardman B (1991) Fuel poverty – from cold homes to affordable warmth. Belhaven Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollino CA, Botti F (2017) Energy poverty in Europe: a multidimensional approach (January 11, 2018). PSL Quart Rev 70(283):473–507. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3100120

  • Bonatz N, Guo R, Wu W, Liu L (2019) A comparative study of the interlinkages between energy poverty and low carbon development in China and Germany by developing an energy poverty index. Energy Build 183:817–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breitung J, Kripfganz S, Hayakawa K (2021) Bias-corrected method of moments estimators for dynamic panel data models. Econom Stat. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosta.2021.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breusch TS, Pagan AR (1980) The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev Econ Stud 47(1):239–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burlinson A, Giulietti M, Law C, Liu HH (2021) Fuel poverty and financial distress. Energy Econ 102:105464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao W, Chen S, Huang Z (2020) Does foreign direct investment impact energy intensity? Evidence from developing countries. Math Probl Eng 2020:5695684. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/5695684

  • Chang CP, Lee CC, Berdiev AN (2015) The impact of government ideology on energy efficiency: evidence from panel data. Energ Effi 8(6):1181–1199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chudik A, Pesaran MH, Tosetti E (2011) Weak and strong cross-section dependence and estimation of large panels. Econ J 14(1):C45–C90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368-423X.2010.00330.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill SA, Smyth R, Farrell L (2020) Fuel poverty and subjective well-being. Energy Econ 86:104650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danish (2020) Moving toward sustainable development: the relationship between water productivity, natural resource rent, international trade, and carbon dioxide emissions. Sustain Dev 28(4):540–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day R, Walker G, Simcock N (2016) Conceptualising energy use and energy poverty using a capabilities framework. Energy Policy 93:255–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DECC (Department of Energy & Climate Change) (2013) Annual Report on Fuel Poverty Statistics 2013. DECC, London. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/199833/Fuel_Poverty_Report_2013_FINALv2.pdf

  • Dinda S (2004) Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: a survey. Ecol Econ 49(4):431–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher-Vanden K, Jefferson GH, Liu H, Tao Q (2004) What is driving China’s decline in energy intensity? Resour Energy Econ 26(1):77–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao D, Zhou D (2010) An empirical study of international trade and China’s total factor energy efficiency. Stat Decis 8:110–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar K, Cherif M (2015) Institutions and the finance–growth nexus: empirical evidence from MENA countries. Borsa Istanbul Rev 15(3):137–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghodsi M, Huang X (2015) Causality between energy poverty and economic growth in Africa: Evidences from time and frequency domain causality test. Int J Energy Stat 3(04):1550020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Eguino M (2015) Energy poverty: an overview. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 47:377–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gozgor G (2017) Does trade matter for carbon emissions in OECD countries? Evidence from a new trade openness measure. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(36):27813–27821

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches Z (1998) Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. In: R&D and productivity: the econometric evidence. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 287–343. http://www.nber.org/books/gril98-1

  • Groh S (2014) The role of energy in development processes—the energy poverty penalty: Case study of Arequipa (Peru). Energy Sustain Dev 18:83–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guangul FM, Chala GT (2019) Solar energy as renewable energy source: SWOT analysis. In: 2019 4th MEC International Conference on Big Data and Smart City. ICBDSC, Muscat, Oman, pp 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBDSC.2019.8645580

  • Guo-qing Z, Zhong-yuan Z (2008) FDI spillover effect, innovation activities and technological progress—the empirical study of Chinese high-tech industries. Econ Theor Bus Manag 11:25

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancher L, Larouche P, Lavrijssen SACM (2004) Principles of good market governance. Tijdschrift Voor Economie En Manag 49(2):339–374

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassan ST, Batool B, Zhu B, Khan I (2022) Environmental complexity of globalisation, education, and income inequalities: New insights of energy poverty. J Clean Prod 340:130735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hills J (2011) Fuel Poverty: The problem and its measurement. Interim Report of the Fuel Poverty Review. CASE Reports, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE. https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/sticar/casereport69.html

  • Hussain M, Dogan E (2021) The role of institutional quality and environment-related technologies in environmental degradation for BRICS. J Clean Prod 304:127059

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • IEA (International Energy Agency) (2002) Energy and Poverty. In: World Energy Outlook2002. IEA, Paris. www.iea.org

  • IEA (International Energy Agency) (2017) Energy access outlook 2017: from poverty to prosperity. World energy outlook special report. www.iea.org. Accessed Oct 2022

  • Irandoust M (2016) The renewable energy-growth nexus with carbon emissions and technological innovation: Evidence from the Nordic countries. Ecol Ind 69:118–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson TB, Patwardhan AP, Nakićenović N, Gomez-Echeverri L (eds) (2012) Global energy assessment: toward a sustainable future. Cambridge University Press. https://previous.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/research/Flagship-Projects/Global-Energy-Assessment/GEA-Summary-web.pdf. Accessed Nov 2022

  • Kaiser HF (1970) A second generation little jiffy. Psychometrika; 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291817

  • Karpinska L, Śmiech S (2020) Conceptualising housing costs: the hidden face of energy poverty in Poland. Energy Policy 147:111819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann D, Kraay A, Mastruzzi M (2011) The worldwide governance indicators: methodology and analytical issues1. Hague J Rule Law 3(2):220–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan A, Chenggang Y, Hussain J, Kui Z (2021) Impact of technological innovation, financial development and foreign direct investment on renewable energy, non-renewable energy and the environment in belt & Road Initiative countries. Renew Energy 171:479–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan MK, Babar SF, Oryani B, Dagar V, Rehman A, Zakari A, Khan MO (2022) Role of financial development, environmental-related technologies, research and development, energy intensity, natural resource depletion, and temperature in sustainable environment in Canada. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(1):622–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkulak B, Qiu B, Yin W (2011) The impact of FDI on air quality: evidence from China. J Chinese Econ Foreign Trade Stud 4(2):81–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kızılgöl Ö, Öndes H (2022) Factors affecting the ecological footprint: a study on the OECD countries. Sci Total Environ 849:157757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.157757

  • Klein MU, Aaron C, Hadjimichael B (2001) Foreign direct investment and poverty reduction. Policy Research Working Paper, World Bank Publications. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-2613

  • Knotek ES II (2007) How useful is Okun’s law? Econ Rev-Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City 92(4):73

    Google Scholar 

  • Latief R, Kong Y, Peng Y, Javeed SA (2020) Conceptualising pathways of sustainable development in the union for the Mediterranean countries with an empirical intersection of energy consumption and economic growth. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(15):5614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin B, Liu H (2015) Do energy and environment efficiency benefit from foreign trade?—The case of China’s industrial sectors. Econ Res J 9:127–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Z, Wu D, He BJ, Liu Y, Zhang X, Yu H, Jin G (2018) Using solar house to alleviate energy poverty of rural Qinghai-Tibet region, China: a case study of a novel hybrid heating system. Energy Build 178:294–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo J, Cheng K (2013) The influence of FDI on energy efficiency of China: an empirical analysis based on DEA method. Appl Mech Mater 291–294:1217–1220. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.291-294.1217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maji IK (2019) Impact of clean energy and inclusive development on CO2 emissions in sub-Saharan Africa. J Clean Prod 240:118186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Modi V, McDade S, Lallement D, Saghir J (2006) Energy Services for the Millennium Development Goals. (2006). Available online: http://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publications/environment-energy/www-ee-library/sustainable-energy/energy-services-for-the-millennium-development-goals/MP_Energy2006.pdf. Accessed Nov 2022

  • Murtaza G, Faridi MZ (2015) Causality linkages among energy poverty, income inequality, income poverty and growth: a system dynamic modelling approach. Pak Dev Rev 54(4):407–425. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43831328

  • Nussbaumer P, Fuso Nerini F, Onyeji I, Howells M (2013) Global insights based on the multi-dimensional energy poverty index (MEPI). Sustainability 5(5):2060–2076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oryani B, Moridian A, Han CS, Rezania S, Kasyoka KK, Darajeh N, ... Shahzad U (2022) Modeling the environmental impact of energy poverty in South Korea: Do environment-related technologies matter? Fuel 329:125394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125394

  • Pesaran MH (2004) General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. IZA Discussion Paper No. 1240, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). https://docs.iza.org/dp1240.pdf

  • Polat B (2018) The influence of FDI on energy consumption in developing and developed countries: a dynamic panel data approach. J Yasar Univ 13(49):33–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Qin L, Chen W, Sun L (2022) Impact of energy poverty on household quality of life–based on Chinese household survey panel data. J Clean Prod 366:132943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghutla C, Chittedi KR (2022) Energy poverty and economic development: evidence from BRICS economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(7):9707–9721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reyes R, Schueftan A, Ruiz C, González AD (2019) Controlling air pollution in a context of high energy poverty levels in southern Chile: clean air but colder houses? Energy Policy 124:301–311

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sadiq M, Wen F (2022) Environmental footprint impacts of nuclear energy consumption: the role of environmental technology and globalization in ten largest ecological footprint countries. Nucl Eng Technol 54(10):3672–3681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2022.05.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah WUH, Yasmeen R, Padda IUH (2019) An analysis between financial development, institutions, and the environment: a global view. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(21):21437–21449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah WUH, Hao G, Yasmeen R, Kamal MA, Khan A, Padda IUH (2022) Unraveling the role of China’s OFDI, institutional difference and B&R policy on energy efficiency: a meta-frontier super-SBM approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(37):56454–56472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-19729-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz M (2015) Measuring economic cost of electricity shortage: current challenges and future prospects in Pakistan. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA) Paper 67164; 2015. Available online: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/67164/1/MPRA_paper_67164.pdf. Accessed Nov 2022

  • Sohag K, Begum RA, Abdullah SMS, Jaafar M (2015) Dynamics of energy use, technological innovation, economic growth and trade openness in Malaysia. Energy 90:1497–1507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sohail MT, Majeed MT, Shaikh PA et al (2022) Environmental costs of political instability in Pakistan: policy options for clean energy consumption and environment. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29:25184–25193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17646-5

  • Sovacool BK (2013) Confronting energy poverty behind the bamboo curtain: a review of challenges and solutions for Myanmar (Burma). Energy Sustain Dev 17(4):305–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullah S, Khan M, Yoon SM (2021) Measuring energy poverty and its impact on economic growth in Pakistan. Sustainability 13(19):10969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulucak R (2020) How do environmental technologies affect green growth? Evidence from BRICS economies. Sci Total Environ 712:136504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang K, Wang YX, Li K, Wei YM (2015) Energy poverty in China: an index based comprehensive evaluation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 47:308–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westerlund J (2005) New simple tests for panel co-integration. Economet Rev 24(3):297–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xing L (2016) The BRICS and beyond: the international political economy of the emergence of a new world order. Routledge, London. https://www.routledge.com/The-BRICS-and-Beyond-The-International-Political-Economy-of-the-Emergence/Xing/p/book/9781138359345#

  • Yang B, Jahanger A, Ali M (2021) Remittance inflows affect the ecological footprint in BICS countries: do technological innovation and financial development matter? Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(18):23482–23500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Yasmeen R, Li Y, Hafeez M, Padda IUH (2019) Free trade agreements and environment for sustainable development: a gravity model analysis. Sustainability 11(3):597

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Yasmeen R, Padda IUH, Shah WUH, Kamal MA (2020) Inequalities by energy sources: An assessment of environmental quality. PLoS One 15(3):e0230503

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Yasmeen R, Hussain J, Shah WUH (2021a) The repercussions of financial development and corruption on energy efficiency and ecological footprint: evidence from BRICS and next 11 countries. Energy 223:120063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Shah WUH, Yasmeen R, Zhang Y, Kamal MA, Khan A (2021b) The impact of trade on energy efficiency in the global value chain: a simultaneous equation approach. Sci Total Environ 765:142759

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yasmeen R, Li Y, Hafeez M, Ahmad H (2018) The trade-environment nexus in light of governance: a global potential. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(34):34360–34379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yasmeen R, Li Y, Hafeez M (2019) Tracing the trade–pollution nexus in global value chains: evidence from air pollution indicators. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(5):5221–5233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yasmeen R, Yao X, Padda IUH, Shah WUH, Jie W (2022) Exploring the role of solar energy and foreign direct investment for clean environment: evidence from top 10 solar energy consuming countries. Renew Energy 185:147–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yılancı V, Çütcü İ, Araci S (2022) The causality relationship between trade and environment in G7 countries: evidence from dynamic symmetric and asymmetric bootstrap panel causality tests. Mathematics 10(15):2553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaman Q, Zaman S, Hussain M, Amin A, Faiz Rasool S (2019) Situational analysis of public sector schools in rural areas of Southern Punjab, Pakistan. Eur Online J Nat Soc Sci: Proceedings 8(3):42

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao X, Ramzan M, Sengupta T, Sharma GD, Shahzad U, Cui L (2022) Impacts of bilateral trade on energy affordability and accessibility across Europe: does economic globalisation reduce energy poverty? Energy Build 262:112023

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Economics and Management, Panzhihua University, Panzhihua, 617000, Sichuan, China

    Rizwana Yasmeen & Rui Tao

  2. School of Management, Zhejiang Shuren University, Hangzhou, 310000, China

    Wasi Ul Hassan Shah

Authors
  1. Rizwana Yasmeen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rui Tao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wasi Ul Hassan Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Rizwana Yasmeen: conceptualization, formal analysis, writing—original draft: Wasi Ul Hassan Shah; Tao Rui: data, methodology, writing—review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wasi Ul Hassan Shah.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Ilhan Ozturk

Publisher's note

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

Appendix

Appendix

Table 8 Data description
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yasmeen, R., Tao, R. & Shah, W.U.H. Economic growth and environmental technology simultaneously important for reducing energy poverty and ecological footprint in E7 economies: do political institutions play a role?. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30, 65102–65118 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26923-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26923-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation