Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 30, pp 30508–30516 | Cite as

Does financial openness increase environmental degradation? Fresh evidence from MERCOSUR countries

  • Matheus Koengkan
  • José Alberto FuinhasEmail author
  • António Cardoso Marques
Research Article


This article researches the impact of financial openness on environmental degradation in the MERCOSUR countries over the time spanning from 1980 to 2014. The Panel Autoregressive Distributed Lag (PARDL), in the form of Unrestricted Error Correction Model (UECM), was computed with the purpose of decomposing the total effects of variables in their short- and long-run ones. The results of short-run impacts and elasticities of PARDL model showed that the financial openness increases the CO2 emissions both in the short- and in the long-run. Moreover, the results also support that economic growth, consumption of primary energy, and agricultural production are responsible for an increase of emissions in the MERCOSUR countries. Therefore, these empirical findings will help expand the literature that assesses the impact of financial development on the environment. The results also point out to the need of policymakers to change the way the energy mix is financed.


Agricultural production Environmental degradation Energy economics Economic growth Financial openness 



We are deeply grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their careful review and valuable suggestions.


Research is supported by NECE, R&D unit funded by the FCT – Portuguese Foundation for the Development of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science, Technology and Higher Education, project UID/GES/04630/2013.


  1. Abbasi F, Riaz K (2016) CO2 emissions and financial development in an emerging economy: an augmented VAR approach. Energy Policy 90:102–114. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balza LH, Espinasa R, Serebrisky T (2016) Lights on?: energy needs in Latin America and the Caribbean to 2040. Inter-American Development Bank, pp 1–39Google Scholar
  3. Bekhet HA, Matar A, Yasmin T (2017) CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, and financial development in GCC countries: dynamic simultaneous equation models. Renew Sust Energ Rev 70:117–132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boden TA, Marland G, Andres RJ (2011) Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boutabba MA (2014) The impact of financial development, income, energy and trade on carbon emissions: evidence from the Indian economy. Econ Model 40:33–41. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breusch TS, Pagan AR (1980) The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev Econ Stud 47(1):239–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chang SC (2015) Effects of financial developments and income on energy consumption. Int Rev Econ Financ 35:28–44. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charfeddine L (2017) The impact of energy consumption and economic development on ecological footprint and CO2 emissions: evidence from a Markov switching equilibrium correction model. Energy Econ 65:355–374. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chinn MD, Ito H (2008) A new measure of financial openness. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 10(3):309–322. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dogan E, Seker F (2016) The influence of real output, renewable and non-renewable energy, trade and financial development on carbon emissions in the top renewable energy countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 60:1074–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dogan E, Turkekul B (2016) CO2 emissions, real output, energy consumption, trade, urbanization and financial development: testing the EKC hypothesis for the USA. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(2):1203–1213. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Engle R, Granger G (1987) Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55:251–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Friedman M (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc 32:675–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fuinhas JA, Marques AC, Koengkan M (2017) Are renewable energy policies upsetting carbon dioxide emissions? The case of Latin America countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(17):15044–15054. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Granger CWJ (1981) Some properties of time series data and their use in econometric model specification. J Econ 28:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1993) Environmental impacts of a north American free trade agreement. In: Garber P (ed) The U.S.-Mexico free trade agreement. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. International Energy Administration (IEA) (2018) Available in:
  18. Islam F, Shahbaz M, Ahmed AU, Alam M (2013) Financial development and energy consumption nexus in Malaysia: a multivariate time series analysis. Econ Model 30:435–441. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jalil A, Feridun M (2011) The impact of growth, energy and financial development on the environment in China: a cointegration analysis. Energy Econ 33(2):284–291. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johansen J, Juselius K (1990) Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration-with applications to the demand for money. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 52(2):169–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koçak E, Şarkgüneşi A (2018) The impact of foreign direct investment on CO2 emissions in Turkey: new evidence from cointegration and bootstrap causality analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(1):790–804. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koengkan M (2017) Is the globalization influencing the primary energy consumption? The case of Latin America and Caribbean countries. Cadernos UniFOA, Volta Redonda 12(33):59–69 ISSN: 1809-9475Google Scholar
  23. Koengkan M (2018a) The decline of environmental degradation by renewable energy consumption in the MERCOSUR countries: an approach with ARDL modeling. Environment Systems and Decisions:1–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Koengkan M (2018b) The positive impact of trade openness on consumption of energy:fresh evidence from Andean community countries. Energy 158:936–943. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kuznets S (1955) Economic growth and income inequality. Am Econ Rev 45(1):1–28Google Scholar
  26. Lau LS, Choong CH, Eng YK (2014) Investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve for carbon emissions in Malaysia: do foreign direct investment and trade matter? Energy Policy 68:490–497. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Menegaki AN, Marques AC, Fuinhas JA (2017) Redefining the energy-growth nexus with an index for sustainable economic welfare in Europe. Energy 141:1254–1268. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. MERCOSUR (2018) Saiba mais sobre o MERCOSUL. Available in:
  29. Omri A, Nguyen DK, Rault C (2014) Causal interactions between CO2 emissions, FDI, and economic growth: evidence from dynamic simultaneous-equation models. Econ Model 42:382–389. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ozturk I, Acaravci A (2013) The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy Econ 36:262–267. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pablo-Romero MD, Jésus JD (2016) Economic growth, and energy consumption: the energy-environmental Kuznets curve for Latin America and the Caribbean. Renew Sust Energ Rev 60:1343–1350. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paramati SR, Alam S, Chen CF (2017) The effects of tourism on economic growth and CO2 emissions: a comparison between developed and developing economies. J Travel Res 56(6):712–724. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pesaran MH (2004) General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. The University of Cambridge, Faculty of Economics. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, n. 0435Google Scholar
  34. Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ 22(2):256–312. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RP (1999) Pooled mean group estimation of dynamic heterogeneous panels. J Am Stat Assoc 94(446):621–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16(3):289–326. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pryor SW, Smithers J, Lyne P, Antwerpen RV (2017) Impact of agricultural practices on energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for South African sugarcane production. J Clean Prod 141(10):137–145. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Quispe-Agnoli M, McQuerry E (2011) Measuring financial liberalization in Latin America: an index of banking activity. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, pp 1–39Google Scholar
  39. Sadorsky P (2010) The impact of financial development on energy consumption in emerging economies. Energy Policy 38:2528–2535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Saidi K, Hammami S (2015) The impact of CO2 emissions and economic growth in energy consumption in 58 countries. Energy Reports 1:62–70. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saidi K, Mbarek MB (2017) The impact of income, trade, urbanization, and financial development on CO2 emissions in 19 emerging economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(14):12748–12757. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Salahuddin M, Gow J, Ozturk I (2015) Is the long-run relationship between economic growth, electricity consumption, carbon dioxide emissions and financial development in gulf cooperation council countries robust? Renew Sust Energ Rev 51:317–326. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shahbaz M (2013) Does financial instability increase environmental degradation? Fresh evidence from Pakistan. Econ Model 33:537–544. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shahbaz M, Khan S, Tahir MI (2013a) The dynamic links between energy consumption, economic growth, financial development and trade in China: fresh evidence from multivariate framework analysis. Energy Econ 40:8–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shahbaz M, Hye QMA, Tiwari AK, Leitão NC (2013b) Economic growth, energy consumption, financial development, international trade and CO2 emissions in Indonesia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 25:109–121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shahbaz M, Tiwari AK, Nasir M (2013c) The effects of financial development, economic growth, coal consumption, and trade openness on CO2 emissions in South Africa. Energy Policy 61:1452–1459. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shahbaz M, Solarin SA, Mahmood H, Auri M (2013d) Does financial development reduce CO2 emissions in Malaysian economy? A time series analysis. Econ Model 35:145–152. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shahbaz M, Mutascu M, Azim P (2013e) Environmental Kuznets curve in Romania and the role of energy consumption. Renew Sust Energ Rev 18:165–173. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shahbaz M, Shahzad SJH, Ahmad N, Alam S (2016) Financial development and environmental quality: the way forward. Energy Policy 98:353–364. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tamazian A, Rao BB (2010) Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies. Energy Econ 32(1):137–145. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tamazian A, Chousa JP, Vadlamannati KC (2009) Does higher economic and financial development lead to environmental degradation: Evidence from BRIC countries. Energy Policy 37(1):246–253. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vlontzos G, Pardalos PM (2017) Assess and prognosticate greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural production of EU countries, by implementing, DEA window analysis and artificial neural networks. Renew Sust Energ Rev 76:155–162. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Westerlund J (2007) Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 69(6):709–748. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. The MIT Press Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  55. World Bank Data (2018) Available in:
  56. You WH, Zhu HM, Yu K, Peng C (2015) Democracy, financial openness, and global carbon dioxide emissions: heterogeneity across existing emission levels. World Dev 66:189–207. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsFederal Fluminense UniversityNiteróiBrazil
  2. 2.NECE-UBI and Faculty of EconomicsUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  3. 3.NECE-UBI and University of Beira InteriorCovilhãPortugal

Personalised recommendations