Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Determinants of ecological footprint in BRICS countries: a panel data analysis

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the variables that might affect the ecological footprint by using 1992–2015 data of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). The common correlated effects’ mean group test was employed under the assumption of cross-sectional dependence and heterogeneity. In Brazil, an increase in energy consumption, technological development, and globalization decreased the ecological footprint by 0.043, 0.031, and 0.050 units, respectively, while an increase in urbanization increased the ecological footprint by 0.716 units. In Russia, on the other hand, no interpretation could be made because the coefficients were meaningless. In India, it had been observed that an increase of one unit in urbanization reduced the ecological footprint by 0.269 units. In China, it had been determined that a 1-unit increase in energy consumption reduced the ecological footprint by 0.043 units. In South Africa, the results could not be interpreted because the coefficients were insignificant. The results obtained vary according to the countries that revealed that local policies can also be effective on these variables. Therefore, countries have to act by examining the structures on their own to implement the policies they needed.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data are accessible from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  • Ahmad, M., Jiang, P., Murshed, M., Shehzad, K., Akram, R., Cui, L., & Khan, Z. (2021). Modeling the dynamic linkages between eco-innovation, urbanization, economic growth, and ecological footprints for G7 countries: Does financial globalization matter? Sustainable Cities and Society, 70, 102881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ando, T., & Bai, J. (2015). A simple new test for slope homogeneity in panel data models with interactive effects. Economics Letters, 136, 112–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breusch, T., & Pagan, A. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its application to model specifications in econometrics. Reviews of Economics Studies, 47, 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Büberkökü, Ö. (2016). Uluslararası Sermaye Hareketliliğinin İncelenmesi: Yükselen Piyasa Ekonomileri Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Finansal Araştırmalar Ve Çalışmalar Dergisi, 8(15), 281–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R. (2000). The dynamics of the ecological footprint concept. Ecological Economics, 32(3), 341–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • GFN (2021). Global Footprint Network. https://www.footprintnetwork.org/our-work/ecological-footprint/

  • Holly, S., Pesaran, M. H. and Yamagata, T. (2006). A Spatio-temporal model of house prices in the US, CESifo Working Paper, No. 1826, Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute (CESifo)

  • Hurlin, C., Mignon, V. (2007). Second generation panel unit root tests, HAL working papers, HAL ID halshs-00159842.

  • Inglesi-Lotz, R., Chang, T., & Gupta, R. (2015). Causality between research output and economic growth in BRICS. Quality & Quantity, 49(1), 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kar, M., Nazlıoğlu, Ş, & Ağır, H. (2011). Financial development and economic growth nexus in the MENA countries: Bootstrap panel granger causality analysis. Economic Modelling, 28(1–2), 685–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassouri, Y., & Altıntaş, H. (2020). Human well-being versus ecological footprint in MENA countries: A trade-off? Journal of Environmental Management, 263, 110405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirikkaleli, D., Adebayo, T. S., Khan, Z., & Ali, S. (2021). Does globalization matter for the ecological footprint in Turkey? Evidence from dual adjustment approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(11), 14009–14017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitzes, J., Peller, A., Goldfinger, S., & Wackernagel, M. (2007). Current methods for calculating national ecological footprint accounts. Science for Environment & Sustainable Society, 4(1), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kongbuamai, N., Bui, Q., Yousaf, H. M. A. U., & Liu, Y. (2020a). The impact of tourism and natural resources on the ecological footprint: A case study of ASEAN countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(16), 19251–19264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kongbuamai, N., Zafar, M. W., Zaidi, S. A. H., & Liu, Y. (2020b). Determinants of the ecological footprint in Thailand: The influences of tourism, trade openness, and population density. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(32), 40171–40186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kongkuah, M., Yao, H., Fongjong, B. B., & Agyemang, A. O. (2021). The role of CO2 emissions and economic growth in energy consumption: Empirical evidence from Belt and Road and OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(18), 22488–22509.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kongkuah, M., Yao, H., & Yilanci, V. (2022). The relationship between energy consumption, economic growth, and CO2 emissions in China: The role of urbanization and international trade. Environment, Development, and Sustainability, 24(4), 4684–4708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menyah, K., Nazlioglu, S., & Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2014). Financial development, trade openness and economic growth in African countries: New insights from a panel causality approach. Economic Modelling, 37, 386–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nathaniel, S., Nwodo, O., Adediran, A., Sharma, G., Shah, M., & Adeleye, N. (2019). Ecological footprint, urbanization, and energy consumption in South Africa: Including the excluded. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(26), 27168–27179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran, M.H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. IZA Discussion Paper Series, IZA Discussion Paper No: 1240.

  • Pesaran, M.H. and Tosetti, E. (2007). Large panel with common factors and spatial correlations. CESIFP Working Paper, No. 2103, Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute (CESifo)

  • Tosunoğlu, B. (2014). Sürdürülebilir küresel refah göstergesi olarak ekolojik ayak izi. Hak İş Uluslararası Emek Ve Toplum Dergisi, 3(5), 132–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uddin, G. A., Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Gow, J. (2017). Ecological footprint and real income: Panel data evidence from the 27 highest emitting countries. Ecological Indicators, 77, 166–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullah, A., Ahmed, M., Raza, S. A., & Ali, S. (2021). A threshold approach to sustainable development: Nonlinear relationship between renewable energy consumption, natural resource rent, and ecological footprint. Journal of Environmental Management, 295, 113073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulucak, R., & Khan, S. U. D. (2020). Determinants of the ecological footprint: Role of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanization. Sustainable Cities and Society, 54, 101996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usman, M., Kousar, R., Yaseen, M. R., & Makhdum, M. S. A. (2020). An empirical nexus between economic growth, energy utilization, trade policy, and ecological footprint: A continent-wise comparison in upper-middle-income countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(31), 38995–39018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usman, M., Makhdum, M. S. A., & Kousar, R. (2021). Does financial inclusion, and renewable and non-renewable energy utilization accelerate ecological footprints and economic growth? Fresh evidence from the 15 highest emitting countries. Sustainable Cities and Society, 65, 102590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bergh, J. C., & Verbruggen, H. (1999). Spatial sustainability, trade, and indicators: An evaluation of the ‘ecological footprint.’ Ecological Economics, 29(1), 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wackernagel, M., Onisto, L., Bello, P., Linares, A. C., Falfán, I. S. L., Garcı́a, J. M., Guerrero, A. I. S., & Guerrero, M. G. S. (1999). National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept. Ecological Economics, 29(3), 375–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zambrano-Monserrate, M. A., Ruano, M. A., Ormeño-Candelario, V., & Sanchez-Loor, D. A. (2020). Global ecological footprint and spatial dependence between countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 272, 111069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No external funding was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Nigde Omer Halisdemir University, Nigde, Turkey

    Okyay Ucan & Ecem Turgut

  2. College of Business Administration, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE

    Ilhan Ozturk

  3. Faculty of Economics, Administrative and Social Sciences, Nisantasi University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ilhan Ozturk

  4. Department of Medical Research, China Medical University Hospital, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan

    Ilhan Ozturk

Authors
  1. Okyay Ucan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ilhan Ozturk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ecem Turgut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ilhan Ozturk.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no competing interests.

Consent to publish

The authors have provided consent to publish this work is accepted.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

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

Ucan, O., Ozturk, I. & Turgut, E. Determinants of ecological footprint in BRICS countries: a panel data analysis. Environ Dev Sustain (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03755-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03755-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation