IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/natres/v49y2025i4p3319-3353.html

Assessing the nonlinear impact of population aging on energy footprint: From the perspective of labor productivity and high‐quality economic development

Author

Listed:
  • Xiyue Yang
  • Shixiong Cheng
  • Mahmood Ahmad

Abstract

Amidst the ongoing low‐carbon transition, the phenomenon of population aging is receiving increasing attention. Nevertheless, the relationship between population aging and environmental quality has not been conclusively established, and existing studies have yet to delve into the mechanism of the effect of population aging on energy and environmental quality. This paper utilizes the panel data of 30 Chinese provinces and regions from 2000 to 2019 and constructs the benchmark model, the nonlinear mediating effect, and the nonlinear moderating effect models to explore the nonlinear association between population aging and energy footprint, respectively. Additionally, we develop a comprehensive aging index employing principal component analysis (PCA) and measure the energy footprint by carbon sink approach. The results show that population aging has a nonlinear effect on the energy footprint with an inverted “U” shape and there is an inflection point on the curve of value 0.453. We also verify that population aging indirectly affects the energy footprint through its nonlinear impact on labor productivity, with an instantaneous mediating effect of 3.0902. Furthermore, the high‐quality economic development has a nonlinear moderating impact on the inverted “U”‐shape between population aging and energy footprint. As the level of high‐quality economic development increases, the shape of the inverted “U” curve flattens out, and the inflection point shifts to the left. Among the five sub‐indicators of high‐quality economic development, green development has the most significant effect on the inverted “U” curve of population aging and energy footprint. These noteworthy findings offer valuable insights for formulating effective strategies to enhance the favorable effects of aging on environmental quality from multifaceted perspectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiyue Yang & Shixiong Cheng & Mahmood Ahmad, 2025. "Assessing the nonlinear impact of population aging on energy footprint: From the perspective of labor productivity and high‐quality economic development," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 49(4), pages 3319-3353, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:49:y:2025:i:4:p:3319-3353
    DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12531
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12531
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1477-8947.12531?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason Venetoulis & John Talberth, 2008. "Refining the ecological footprint," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 441-469, August.
    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. Wei Fan & Xiankun Yang & Shirong Cai & Haidong Ou & Tao Zhou & Dakang Wang, 2024. "Land-Use/Cover Change and Driving Forces in the Pan-Pearl River Basin during the Period 1985–2020," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-26, June.
    2. Nejla Ould Daoud Ellili, 2024. "Bibliometric analysis of sustainability papers: Evidence from Environment, Development and sustainability," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 8183-8209, April.
    3. Xiaowei Yao & Zhanqi Wang & Hongwei Zhang, 2016. "Dynamic Changes of the Ecological Footprint and Its Component Analysis Response to Land Use in Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, April.
    4. Xin Yang & Fan Zhang & Cheng Luo & Anlu Zhang, 2019. "Farmland Ecological Compensation Zoning and Horizontal Fiscal Payment Mechanism in Wuhan Agglomeration, China, From the Perspective of Ecological Footprint," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-15, April.
    5. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow, 2024. "The mathematics of the ecological footprint revisited: An axiomatic approach," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(4), pages 727-735, August.
    6. Smith, Nicola J & McDonald, Garry W & Patterson, Murray G, 2020. "Biogeochemical cycling in the anthropocene: Quantifying global environment-economy exchanges," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 418(C).
    7. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow & Anja Zenker, 2019. "An Axiomatic Characterization of a Generalized Ecological Footprint," Chemnitz Economic Papers 033, Department of Economics, Chemnitz University of Technology, revised Aug 2019.
    8. Shuhui Zhang & Fuquan Li & Yuke Zhou & Ziyuan Hu & Ruixin Zhang & Xiaoyu Xiang & Yali Zhang, 2022. "Using Net Primary Productivity to Characterize the Spatio-Temporal Dynamics of Ecological Footprint for a Resource-Based City, Panzhihua in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-14, March.
    9. Ruilin Xiao & Jing Ling & Jianbo Fei & Junxuan Huang & Jianzhong Wang, 2025. "A Study on Spatiotemporal Differentiation Characteristics of Ecological Security and Sustainable Utilization of Cultivated Land in Sichuan Province Based on Emergy–Ecological Footprint Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-27, October.
    10. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    11. Mindaugas Staniunas & Marija Burinskiene & Vida Maliene, 2012. "Ecology in Urban Planning: Mitigating the Environmental Damage of Municipal Solid Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-18, August.
    12. Decun Wu & Jinping Liu, 2016. "Multi-Regional Input-Output (MRIO) Study of the Provincial Ecological Footprints and Domestic Embodied Footprints Traded among China’s 30 Provinces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-31, December.
    13. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow & Anja Zenker, 2018. "An Axiomatic Foundation of the Ecological Footprint," Chemnitz Economic Papers 025, Department of Economics, Chemnitz University of Technology.
    14. Jincheng Li & Xinyue Zhang & Xuexiu Chang & Wei Gao, 2018. "Revising Yield and Equivalence Factors of Ecological Footprints Based on Land-Use Conversion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    15. Enkhjargal Volodya & Min Ju Yeo & Yong Pyo Kim, 2018. "Trends of Ecological Footprints and Policy Direction for Sustainable Development in Mongolia: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    16. Edward Simpson & David Bradley & John Palfreyman & Roger White, 2022. "Sustainable Society: Wellbeing and Technology—3 Case Studies in Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-30, October.
    17. Xueke Liu & Yong Wu & Ling Li & Chi Sun & Jianwei Liu & Wenzhen Wang, 2025. "Research on the Water–Energy–Carbon Coupling Changes and Their Influencing Factors in the Henan Section of the Sha Ying River Basin, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-21, May.
    18. Federica De Leo & Pier Paolo Miglietta & Slađana Pavlinović, 2014. "Marine Ecological Footprint of Italian Mediterranean Fisheries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-14, October.
    19. Xiaoman Liu & Jingying Fu & Dong Jiang & Jianwu Luo & Chenxi Sun & Huiming Liu & Ruihong Wen & Xuefeng Wang, 2018. "Improvement of Ecological Footprint Model in National Nature Reserve Based on Net Primary Production (NPP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Smith, Nicola J. & McDonald, Garry W. & Patterson, Murray G., 2014. "Is there overshoot of planetary limits? New indicators of human appropriation of the global biogeochemical cycles relative to their regenerative capacity based on ‘ecotime’ analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 80-92.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:natres:v:49:y:2025:i:4:p:3319-3353. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1477-8947 .

    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.