IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/sustdv/v32y2024i3p2454-2473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The dynamic impact assessment of clean energy and green innovation in realizing environmental sustainability of G‐20

Author

Listed:
  • Ranjan Aneja
  • Manisha Yadav
  • Sanjeev Gupta

Abstract

In the context of the growth and development process, stability in environmental quality has remained a challenging issue to sustainable development, as several environmental problems, such as climate conditions, anthropogenic global warming, deforestation, and escalating degradation of water and air quality, depict a rising trend. In the contemporary materialistic paradigm, attaining a high economic growth rate while ensuring sustainable consumption of natural resources is impossible. The world needs to attain an economic growth rate that confirms sustainability in natural resource consumption and exploitation of resources introduced severe alert about the sustainability of such trajectory progress as an increase in economic growth upsurges natural reserve usage and energy demand, which leads to environmental deprivation. Both theoretical and empirical literature support that green or clean energy sources could significantly sustain environmental quality and foster economic growth. The recent literature assessed the role of green technology in promoting environmental sustainability. It emphasizes that green innovations are the most competent method to carry the competent use of resources, thereby reducing environmental degradation. Therefore, the main aim of this study is to analyze the impact of economic growth, clean energy, technological innovations, natural resources depletion, and green and sustainable technology on the environmental degradation of G‐20 nations in the frame spanning from 1992 to 2018. The results of cross‐sectional‐autoregressive‐distributed lag (CS‐ARDL) model estimation indicate the presence of a long‐run association between economic growth, number of filled applications for patents, development of environment‐related technologies as a percentage of all technologies, natural resources rents (NRR) as a percentage of GDP, renewable energy consumption, trade openness and environment degradation of G‐20 nations. This study re‐confirmed the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis for selected nations. Further, the study's findings revealed that cleaner energy and technological innovations, mainly green technology, play a significant role in sustaining the environmental conditions of these selected countries. Moreover, the degree of natural resource depletion directly impacts environmental degradation (CO₂ emission, total greenhouse gases emission and ecological footprints) in selected nations. The study underscores the importance of promoting clean energy, green technology, and sustainable practices to balance economic growth and environmental preservation and provides policymakers in G‐20 nations with valuable policy recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ranjan Aneja & Manisha Yadav & Sanjeev Gupta, 2024. "The dynamic impact assessment of clean energy and green innovation in realizing environmental sustainability of G‐20," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 2454-2473, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:sustdv:v:32:y:2024:i:3:p:2454-2473
    DOI: 10.1002/sd.2797
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2797
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sd.2797?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. Joakim Westerlund, 2008. "Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 193-233.
    2. Pedroni, Peter, 2004. "Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic And Finite Sample Properties Of Pooled Time Series Tests With An Application To The Ppp Hypothesis," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 597-625, June.
    3. Muhammad Umar & Xiangfeng Ji & Dervis Kirikkaleli & Muhammad Shahbaz & Xuemei Zhou, 2020. "Environmental cost of natural resources utilization and economic growth: Can China shift some burden through globalization for sustainable development?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1678-1688, November.
    4. 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.
    5. Azam, Anam & Rafiq, Muhammad & Shafique, Muhammad & Zhang, Haonan & Yuan, Jiahai, 2021. "Analyzing the effect of natural gas, nuclear energy and renewable energy on GDP and carbon emissions: A multi-variate panel data analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    6. Zahoor Ahmed & Muhammad Mansoor Asghar & Muhammad Nasir Malik & Kishwar Nawaz, 2020. "Moving towards a sustainable environment: The dynamic linkage between natural resources, human capital, urbanization, economic growth, and ecological footprint in China," Post-Print hal-03557938, HAL.
    7. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2021. "General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 13-50, January.
    8. Gene M. Grossman & Alan B. Krueger, 1995. "Economic Growth and the Environment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(2), pages 353-377.
    9. Hashem Pesaran, M. & Yamagata, Takashi, 2008. "Testing slope homogeneity in large panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 50-93, January.
    10. Yongming Wang & Irfan Uddin & Yingmei Gong, 2021. "Nexus between Natural Resources and Environmental Degradation: Analysing the Role of Income Inequality and Renewable Energy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, July.
    11. Joakim Westerlund, 2007. "Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 69(6), pages 709-748, December.
    12. Tomiwa Sunday Adebayo & Dervis Kirikkaleli, 2021. "Impact of renewable energy consumption, globalization, and technological innovation on environmental degradation in Japan: application of wavelet tools," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16057-16082, November.
    13. Liu, Ximei & Latif, Zahid & Danish, & Latif, Shahid & Mahmood, Nasir, 2021. "The corruption-emissions nexus: Do information and communication technologies make a difference?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    14. Ang, James B., 2009. "CO2 emissions, research and technology transfer in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2658-2665, August.
    15. Popp, David C., 2001. "The effect of new technology on energy consumption," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 215-239, July.
    16. Raskin, Paul D., 1995. "Methods for estimating the population contribution to environmental change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 225-233, December.
    17. Hunjra, Ahmed Imran & Azam, Muhammad & Bruna, Maria Giuseppina & Taskin, Dilvin, 2022. "Role of financial development for sustainable economic development in low middle income countries," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(PB).
    18. He, Jie & Richard, Patrick, 2010. "Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 in Canada," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1083-1093, March.
    19. Muhammad Haseeb & Sallahuddin Hassan & Muhammad Azam & Tulus Suryanto, 2018. "The dynamics of governance, tourism and environmental degradation: the world evidence," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 17(4), pages 340-363.
    20. Alvarez-Herranz, Agustin & Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Cantos, José María, 2017. "Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 386-397.
    21. Ahmad, Mahmood & Jiang, Ping & Majeed, Abdul & Umar, Muhammad & Khan, Zeeshan & Muhammad, Sulaman, 2020. "The dynamic impact of natural resources, technological innovations and economic growth on ecological footprint: An advanced panel data estimation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    22. Tang, Chor Foon & Tan, Eu Chye, 2013. "Exploring the nexus of electricity consumption, economic growth, energy prices and technology innovation in Malaysia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 297-305.
    23. 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.
    24. Lukas Figge & Kay Oebels & Astrid Offermans, 2017. "The effects of globalization on Ecological Footprints: an empirical analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 863-876, June.
    25. Sohag, Kazi & Begum, Rawshan Ara & Abdullah, Sharifah Mastura Syed & Jaafar, Mokhtar, 2015. "Dynamics of energy use, technological innovation, economic growth and trade openness in Malaysia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 90(P2), pages 1497-1507.
    26. Ahmed, Zahoor & Asghar, Muhammad Mansoor & Malik, Muhammad Nasir & Nawaz, Kishwar, 2020. "Moving towards a sustainable environment: The dynamic linkage between natural resources, human capital, urbanization, economic growth, and ecological footprint in China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    27. Shahid Ali & Eyup Dogan & Fuzhong Chen & Zeeshan Khan, 2021. "International trade and environmental performance in top ten‐emitters countries: The role of eco‐innovation and renewable energy consumption," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 378-387, March.
    28. Ling Lin & Hsu-Ling Chang & Imran Shahzad & Nazneen Waseem, 2022. "A nexus between the rule of law, green innovation, growth and sustainable environment in top Asian countries: fresh insights from heterogeneous panel estimation," Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 5434-5452, December.
    29. Serdar Cop & Uju Violet Alola & Andrew Adewale Alola, 2020. "Perceived behavioral control as a mediator of hotels' green training, environmental commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior: A sustainable environmental practice," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3495-3508, December.
    30. 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).
    31. A. Kahuthu, 2006. "Economic Growth and Environmental Degradation in a Global Context," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 55-68, February.
    32. Langnel, Zechariah & Amegavi, George Babington & Donkor, Prince & Mensah, James Kwame, 2021. "Income inequality, human capital, natural resource abundance, and ecological footprint in ECOWAS member countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    33. Zhang, Yue-Jun & Peng, Yu-Lu & Ma, Chao-Qun & Shen, Bo, 2017. "Can environmental innovation facilitate carbon emissions reduction? Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 18-28.
    34. Tamazian, Artur & Chousa, Juan Piñeiro & Vadlamannati, Krishna Chaitanya, 2009. "Does higher economic and financial development lead to environmental degradation: Evidence from BRIC countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 246-253, January.
    35. Nathaniel, Solomon Prince & Yalçiner, Kürşat & Bekun, Festus Victor, 2021. "Assessing the environmental sustainability corridor: Linking natural resources, renewable energy, human capital, and ecological footprint in BRICS," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    36. Richard York & Eugene A. Rosa & Thomas Dietz, 2002. "Bridging Environmental Science with Environmental Policy: Plasticity of Population, Affluence, and Technology," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(1), pages 18-34, March.
    37. Zafar, Muhammad Wasif & Zaidi, Syed Anees Haider & Khan, Naveed R. & Mirza, Faisal Mehmood & Hou, Fujun & Kirmani, Syed Ali Ashiq, 2019. "The impact of natural resources, human capital, and foreign direct investment on the ecological footprint: The case of the United States," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    38. Destek, Mehmet Akif & Ulucak, Recep & Dogan, Eyüp, 2018. "Analyzing the Environmental Kuznets Curve for the EU countries: The role of ecological footprint," MPRA Paper 106882, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Manel Ouni & Khaled Ben Abdallah, 2024. "Environmental sustainability and green logistics: Evidence from BRICS and Gulf countries by cross‐sectionally augmented autoregressive distributed lag (CS‐ARDL) approach," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(4), pages 3753-3770, August.
    2. Nausheen Atta & Ayyoob Sharifi, 2024. "A systematic literature review of the relationship between the rule of law and environmental sustainability," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(6), pages 7051-7068, December.
    3. Nikunj Patel & Pradeep Kautish & Muhammad Shahbaz, 2024. "Unveiling the complexities of sustainable development: An investigation of economic growth, globalization and human development on carbon emissions in 64 countries," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(4), pages 3612-3639, August.

    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. Ahmad, Mahmood & Jiang, Ping & Majeed, Abdul & Umar, Muhammad & Khan, Zeeshan & Muhammad, Sulaman, 2020. "The dynamic impact of natural resources, technological innovations and economic growth on ecological footprint: An advanced panel data estimation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    2. Malayaranjan Sahoo & Narayan Sethi, 2022. "The dynamic impact of urbanization, structural transformation, and technological innovation on ecological footprint and PM2.5: evidence from newly industrialized countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 4244-4277, March.
    3. Siming Zuo & Mingxia Zhu & Zhexiao Xu & Judit Oláh & Zoltan Lakner, 2021. "The Dynamic Impact of Natural Resource Rents, Financial Development, and Technological Innovations on Environmental Quality: Empirical Evidence from BRI Economies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Khan, Yasir & Hassan, Taimoor & Guiqin, Huang & Nabi, Ghulam, 2023. "Analyzing the impact of natural resources and rule of law on sustainable environment: A proposed policy framework for BRICS economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PA).
    5. Hossain, Md. Emran & Islam, Md. Sayemul & Bandyopadhyay, Arunava & Awan, Ashar & Hossain, Mohammad Razib & Rej, Soumen, 2022. "Mexico at the crossroads of natural resource dependence and COP26 pledge: Does technological innovation help?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Ahmad, Mahmood & Ahmed, Zahoor & Khan, Sana Akbar & Alvarado, Rafael, 2023. "Towards environmental sustainability in E−7 countries: Assessing the roles of natural resources, economic growth, country risk, and energy transition," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    7. Pata, Ugur Korkut & Aydin, Mucahit & Haouas, Ilham, 2021. "Are natural resources abundance and human development a solution for environmental pressure? Evidence from top ten countries with the largest ecological footprint," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Han, Guixin & Cai, Xuesen, 2024. "The linkages among natural resources, sustainable energy technologies and human capital: An evidence from N-11 countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    9. Jahanger, Atif & Usman, Muhammad & Murshed, Muntasir & Mahmood, Haider & Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel, 2022. "The linkages between natural resources, human capital, globalization, economic growth, financial development, and ecological footprint: The moderating role of technological innovations," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    10. Bilgehan Tekin, 2024. "The catalyzing role of financial inclusion in decoding environmental challenges and fostering a sustainable future in BRICS‐T," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 1572-1603, November.
    11. Murat Cetin & Ilhan Ozturk & Sevgi Sumerli Sarigul & Muntasir Murshed & Emine Kilavuz, 2025. "Nexus between technological innovation and environmental pollution in selected OECD countries," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 49(1), pages 841-862, February.
    12. Taimoor Arif Kiani & Samina Sabir & Unbreen Qayyum & Sohail Anjum, 2023. "Estimating the effect of technological innovations on environmental degradation: empirical evidence from selected ASEAN and SAARC countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6529-6550, July.
    13. Appiah, Michael & Li, Mingxing & Sehrish, Saba & Abaji, Emad Eddin, 2023. "Investigating the connections between innovation, natural resource extraction, and environmental pollution in OECD nations; examining the role of capital formation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Xie, Bofeng & Rehman, Mubeen Abdur & Zhang, Junyan & Yang, Runze, 2022. "Does the financialization of natural resources lead toward sustainability? An application of advance panel Granger non-causality," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    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. Ali, Kishwar & Jianguo, Du & Kirikkaleli, Dervis, 2022. "Modeling the natural resources and financial inclusion on ecological footprint: The role of economic governance institutions. Evidence from ECOWAS economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    18. Aytun, Cengiz & Erdogan, Sinan & Pata, Ugur Korkut & Cengiz, Orhan, 2024. "Associating environmental quality, human capital, financial development and technological innovation in 19 middle-income countries: A disaggregated ecological footprint approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    19. Majeed, Abdul & Wang, Lijun & Zhang, Xiaohui & Muniba, & Kirikkaleli, Dervis, 2021. "Modeling the dynamic links among natural resources, economic globalization, disaggregated energy consumption, and environmental quality: Fresh evidence from GCC economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    20. Zhao, Yunying & Wang, Wenju & Liang, Zhentang & Luo, Peng, 2024. "Racing towards zero carbon: Unraveling the interplay between natural resource rents, green innovation, geopolitical risk and environmental pollution in BRICS countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).

    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:sustdv:v:32:y:2024:i:3:p:2454-2473. 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: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1719 .

    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.