IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i23p4481-d986103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Sub-Sector of Economic Activity and Financial Development on Environmental Degradation: New Evidence Using Dynamic Heterogeneous Panel

Author

Listed:
  • Nada Amer Abdulhafedh Al-Kubati

    (Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Zulkefly Abdul Karim

    (Center for Sustainable and Inclusive Development Studies (SID), Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • Norlin Khalid

    (Center for Sustainable and Inclusive Development Studies (SID), Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia)

  • M. Kabir Hassan

    (Department of Economics and Finance, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, LA 70148, USA)

Abstract

While many recent studies have used the ecological footprint as a comprehensive indicator of environmental degradation instead of CO 2 emission, these were mainly focused on consumer responsibility. This study, however, aims to cover both aspects of consumption and production to elicit a more comprehensive understanding. Furthermore, this study addresses another information gap by analyzing the effect of aggregated and disaggregated economic activities on the environment. Panel data were used and sourced from 92 countries classified by income group spanning 1992 to 2015. Comprehensive financial development indicators, energy structure, energy intensity, trade openness, and urbanization were considered in examining their impacts on environmental degradation. The pooled mean group estimation was adopted in examining the long-run and short-run relationship between variables. The main findings suggest that financial development promotes green investment in high-income and upper-middle-income countries but increases degradation in lower-middle and lower-income countries. Renewable energy improves the environment in general, and energy intensity is a crucial factor in environmental modeling across all groups. Most importantly, a U-shape relationship is found on both the consumption and the production side for all income groups except for lower-income countries (inverse U-shape) on the production side. Interestingly, a U-shape relationship was found in high-income and upper-middle-income countries in the industrial sector, but a monotonic relationship in the service sector. A U-shape relationship was found for the industrial and service sectors in lower-middle-income and lower-income countries, but an inverse U-shape for agriculture outputs in lower-middle-income countries. This finding suggests the need to shift from fast-growth strategies to strategic growth planning that considers the nature of the relationship between economic sectors and the environment while diversifying the economic structure to allow for the recovery of natural capital.

Suggested Citation

  • Nada Amer Abdulhafedh Al-Kubati & Zulkefly Abdul Karim & Norlin Khalid & M. Kabir Hassan, 2022. "The Impact of Sub-Sector of Economic Activity and Financial Development on Environmental Degradation: New Evidence Using Dynamic Heterogeneous Panel," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(23), pages 1-23, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:23:p:4481-:d:986103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/23/4481/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/23/4481/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, G.M & Krueger, A.B., 1991. "Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement," Papers 158, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Public and International Affairs.
    2. Destek, Mehmet & Sinha, Avik, 2020. "Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries," MPRA Paper 104246, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2020.
    3. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    4. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2021. "General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 13-50, January.
    5. Eyup Dogan & Nigar Taspinar & Korhan K Gokmenoglu, 2019. "Determinants of ecological footprint in MINT countries," Energy & Environment, , vol. 30(6), pages 1065-1086, September.
    6. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    7. Huang, Yongming & Haseeb, Mohammad & Usman, Muhammad & Ozturk, Ilhan, 2022. "Dynamic association between ICT, renewable energy, economic complexity and ecological footprint: Is there any difference between E-7 (developing) and G-7 (developed) countries?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. Caviglia-Harris, Jill L. & Chambers, Dustin & Kahn, James R., 2009. "Taking the "U" out of Kuznets: A comprehensive analysis of the EKC and environmental degradation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1149-1159, February.
    9. Charfeddine, Lanouar & Mrabet, Zouhair, 2017. "The impact of economic development and social-political factors on ecological footprint: A panel data analysis for 15 MENA countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 138-154.
    10. Muhammad Hasnain Khalid & Ihtisham ul Haq & Dilawar Khan & Khurram Abbas, 2022. "Exploring the Impact of Economic Structure on Carbon Emissions: A Case Study of Pakistan," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 12(3), pages 425-431, May.
    11. Veli Yılancı & İbrahim Çütcü & Serkan Araci, 2022. "The Causality Relationship between Trade and Environment in G7 Countries: Evidence from Dynamic Symmetric and Asymmetric Bootstrap Panel Causality Tests," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(15), pages 1-29, July.
    12. Victor Moutinho & Celeste Varum & Jorge Mota, 2018. "The environment–growth dilemma: new evidence using a panel cointegration approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 166-183, April.
    13. Rui Cai & Jianluan Guo, 2021. "Finance for the Environment: A Scientometrics Analysis of Green Finance," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(13), pages 1-15, July.
    14. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Smith, Ron, 1995. "Estimating long-run relationships from dynamic heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 79-113, July.
    15. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2007. "A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 265-312.
    16. Ulucak, Zübeyde Şentürk & İlkay, Salih Çağrı & Özcan, Burcu & Gedikli, Ayfer, 2020. "Financial globalization and environmental degradation nexus: Evidence from emerging economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    17. Shafik, Nemat, 1994. "Economic Development and Environmental Quality: An Econometric Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 757-773, Supplemen.
    18. Shafik, Nemat & Bandyopadhyay, Sushenjit, 1992. "Economic growth and environmental quality : time series and cross-country evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 904, The World Bank.
    19. Zakari, Abdulrasheed & Khan, Irfan & Tawiah, Vincent & Alvarado, Rafael & Li, Guo, 2022. "The production and consumption of oil in Africa: The environmental implications," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    20. Adel Ben Youssef & Sabri Boubaker & Anis Omri, 2020. "Financial development and macroeconomic sustainability: modeling based on a modified environmental Kuznets curve," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 767-785, November.
    21. Charfeddine, Lanouar, 2017. "The impact of energy consumption and economic development on Ecological Footprint and CO2 emissions: Evidence from a Markov Switching Equilibrium Correction Model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 355-374.
    22. Kolcava, Dennis & Nguyen, Quynh & Bernauer, Thomas, 2019. "Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 98-112.
    23. David Lin & Laurel Hanscom & Adeline Murthy & Alessandro Galli & Mikel Evans & Evan Neill & Maria Serena Mancini & Jon Martindill & Fatime-Zahra Medouar & Shiyu Huang & Mathis Wackernagel, 2018. "Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-22, September.
    24. Daly, Herman E., 1990. "Toward some operational principles of sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-6, April.
    25. Al Mamun, Md. & Sohag, Kazi & Hannan Mia, Md. Abdul & Salah Uddin, Gazi & Ozturk, Ilhan, 2014. "Regional differences in the dynamic linkage between CO2 emissions, sectoral output and economic growth," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-11.
    26. Liu, Haiying & Khan, Irfan & Zakari, Abdulrasheed & Alharthi, Majed, 2022. "Roles of trilemma in the world energy sector and transition towards sustainable energy: A study of economic growth and the environment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    27. Katsiaryna Svirydzenka, 2016. "Introducing a New Broad-based Index of Financial Development," IMF Working Papers 2016/005, International Monetary Fund.
    28. Abdul Rehman & Hengyun Ma & Magdalena Radulescu & Crenguta Ileana Sinisi & Zahid Yousaf, 2021. "Energy Crisis in Pakistan and Economic Progress: Decoupling the Impact of Coal Energy Consumption in Power and Brick Kilns," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(17), pages 1-15, August.
    29. Elahi, Ehsan & Khalid, Zainab, 2022. "Estimating smart energy inputs packages using hybrid optimisation technique to mitigate environmental emissions of commercial fish farms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    30. Thi Anh Dam & Markus Pasche & Niclas Werlich, 2017. "Trade Patterns and the Ecological Footprint - a theory-based Empirical Approach," Jena Economics Research Papers 2017-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    31. Abdelaziz Boukhelkhal, 2022. "Energy use, economic growth and CO2 emissions in Africa: does the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis exist? New evidence from heterogeneous panel under cross-sectional dependence," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(11), pages 13083-13110, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Iftikhar Yasin & Nawaz Ahmad & M. Aslam Chaudhary, 2020. "Catechizing the Environmental-Impression of Urbanization, Financial Development, and Political Institutions: A Circumstance of Ecological Footprints in 110 Developed and Less-Developed Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 147(2), pages 621-649, January.
    2. Okelele, Daniel Ochudi & Lokina, Razack & Ruhinduka, Remidius Denis, 2021. "Effect of Trade Openness on Ecological Footprint in Sub-Saharan Africa," African Journal of Economic Review, African Journal of Economic Review, vol. 10(1), December.
    3. Jian Xue & Zeeshan Rasool & Raima Nazar & Ahmad Imran Khan & Shaukat Hussain Bhatti & Sajid Ali, 2021. "Revisiting Natural Resources—Globalization-Environmental Quality Nexus: Fresh Insights from South Asian Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Al Mamun, Md. & Sohag, Kazi & Hannan Mia, Md. Abdul & Salah Uddin, Gazi & Ozturk, Ilhan, 2014. "Regional differences in the dynamic linkage between CO2 emissions, sectoral output and economic growth," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-11.
    5. Caravaggio, Nicola, 2020. "A global empirical re-assessment of the Environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    6. Lian Xue & Mohammad Haseeb & Haider Mahmood & Tarek Tawfik Yousef Alkhateeb & Muntasir Murshed, 2021. "Renewable Energy Use and Ecological Footprints Mitigation: Evidence from Selected South Asian Economies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    7. Ulucak, Zübeyde Şentürk & İlkay, Salih Çağrı & Özcan, Burcu & Gedikli, Ayfer, 2020. "Financial globalization and environmental degradation nexus: Evidence from emerging economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    8. Hatem M'henni & Mohamed El Hedi Arouri & Adel Ben Youssef & Christophe Rault, 2011. "Income Level and Environmental Quality in The MENA Countries: Discussing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis," Working Papers 587, Economic Research Forum, revised 05 Jan 2011.
    9. Iftikhar Yasin & Nawaz Ahmad & Muhammad Aslam Chaudhary, 2021. "The impact of financial development, political institutions, and urbanization on environmental degradation: evidence from 59 less-developed economies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 6698-6721, May.
    10. Ansari, Mohd Arshad, 2022. "Re-visiting the Environmental Kuznets curve for ASEAN: A comparison between ecological footprint and carbon dioxide emissions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    11. Bartosz Jóźwik & Antonina-Victoria Gavryshkiv & Kinga Galewska, 2022. "Do Urbanization and Energy Consumption Change the Role in Environmental Degradation in the European Union Countries?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-14, September.
    12. Abdelaziz Boukhelkhal, 2022. "Energy use, economic growth and CO2 emissions in Africa: does the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis exist? New evidence from heterogeneous panel under cross-sectional dependence," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(11), pages 13083-13110, November.
    13. Olimpia Neagu, 2020. "Economic Complexity and Ecological Footprint: Evidence from the Most Complex Economies in the World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, October.
    14. Huaping Sun & Love Enna & Augustine Monney & Dang Khoa Tran & Ehsan Rasoulinezhad & Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary, 2020. "The Long-Run Effects of Trade Openness on Carbon Emissions in Sub-Saharan African Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    15. Muhammad Zahid Rafique & Abdul Majeed Nadeem & Wanjun Xia & Majid Ikram & Hafiz Muhammad Shoaib & Umer Shahzad, 2022. "Does economic complexity matter for environmental sustainability? Using ecological footprint as an indicator," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 4623-4640, April.
    16. Ulucak, Recep & Danish, & Ozcan, Burcu, 2020. "Relationship between energy consumption and environmental sustainability in OECD countries: The role of natural resources rents," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    17. Halkos, George, 2011. "Economy - environment relationship: The case of sulphur emissions," MPRA Paper 45480, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel & Sinha, Avik, 2019. "Foreign Direct Investment–CO2 Emissions Nexus in Middle East and North African countries: Importance of Biomass Energy Consumption," MPRA Paper 91729, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 19 Jan 2019.
    19. Destek, Mehmet & Sinha, Avik, 2020. "Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries," MPRA Paper 104246, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2020.
    20. Zhou, Anhua & Li, Jun, 2022. "How do trade liberalization and human capital affect renewable energy consumption? Evidence from the panel threshold model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 332-342.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:23:p:4481-:d:986103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.