Nexus between financial development, energy consumption, income level, and ecological footprint in CEE countries: do human capital and biocapacity matter?
- 32 Downloads
In recent decades, climate change and environmental pollution have been at the center of global environmental debates. Nowadays, researchers have turned their attention to the linkage between real output and environmental quality and test the environmental Kuznets curve. Majority of the studies focus on a single pollutant aspect and measure the deterioration of the environment through carbon emission (CO2) only. In contrary, the current study uses a comprehensive proxy, ecological footprint, to measure the environmental quality of the sixteen Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs). The aim of this paper is to discover the impact of financial development, economic growth, and energy consumption (renewable and non-renewable) on the environment. In addition, for the first time, the current study includes biocapacity and human capital in the growth–energy–environment nexus in the case of CEECs. In doing so, we used annual data of sixteen CEE countries in perspective of the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative and cover the period of 1991–2014. For reliable findings, this study focuses on second-generation econometric approaches to check stationarity, cross-sectional dependency, and co-integration among the model parameters. The long-run estimations of the “Dynamic Seemingly Unrelated-co-integration Regression” (DSUR) signify that the effect of economic growth on ecological footprint is not stable and validate N-shaped relationship for cubic functional form between per capita income and ecological footprint (environmental quality). Empirical evidence divulges that financial development and energy use significantly contribute to environmental degradation while renewable energy improves environmental quality by declining ecological footprint significantly. Moreover, the significant effects of biocapacity and human capital are positive and negative on the ecological footprint, respectively. In robustness check through the “Feasible Generalized Least Square” (FGLS) and “Generalized Method of Moment” (GMM) models, we found consistent result. Lastly, the “Dumitrescu-Hurlin (D-H) Panel Causality Test” demonstrates that two-way causal relationship exists between EF and GDP, EF and FD, EF and EU, EF and BC, and EF and HC, while one-way causality is running from RE to EF. This study puts the present scenario of CEE economies in front of the policymakers and suggests that they should consider the vital role of renewable energy and human capital to get sustainability.
KeywordsN-shaped curve Ecological footprint Financial development Energy use Renewable energy Biocapacity Human capital CEECs OBOR
This empirical work was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under the project number NSFC-71672009.71372016.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Ahmed Z, Wang Z, Mahmood F, Hafeez M, Ali N (2019) Does globalization increase the ecological footprint? Empirical evidence from Malaysia. Environ Sci Pollut Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05224-9
- Borucke M, Moore D, Cranston G, Gracey K, Iha K, Larson J, Lazarus E, Morales JC, Wackernagel M, Galli A (2013) Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: the National Footprint Accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecol Indic 24:518–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Breitung J (2001) The local power of some unit root tests for panel data, in Badi H. Baltagi, Thomas B. Fomby, R. Carter Hill (ed.) Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, and dynamic panels (advances in econometrics, volume 15). In: Advances in econometrics. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 161–177Google Scholar
- Destek MA (2019) Investigation on the role of economic, social, and political globalization on environment: evidence from CEECs. Environ Sci Pollut Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04698-x
- Destek MA, Balli E, Manga M (2016) The relationship between CO2 emission, energy consumption, urbanization and trade openness for selected CEECs. Res World Econ 7. https://doi.org/10.5430/rwe.v7n1p52
- Dogan E, Taspinar N, Gokmenoglu KK (2019) Determinants of ecological footprint in MINT countries. Energy Environ 0958305X1983427. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X19834279
- GFN (2018) Global footprint network—advancing the science of sustainability. http://data.footprintnetwork.org/#/exploreData. Accessed 11 May 2019
- Guo M, Hu Y, Yu J (2019) The role of financial development in the process of climate change: evidence from different panel models in China. Atmos Pollut Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2019.03.006
- IEA (2018) International Energy Agency—data services. http://wds.iea.org/wds/ReportFolders/ReportFolders.aspx. Accessed 11 May 2019
- IMF (2018) Financial development - index - international monetary fund data. http://data.imf.org/?sk=F8032E80-B36C-43B1-AC26-493C5B1CD33B. Accessed 11 May 2019
- Inglesi-Lotz R, Corral Morales LD del (2017) The effect of education on a country’s energy consumption: evidence from developed and developing countries. ERSA work pap 678Google Scholar
- IPCC (2013) IPCC—Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/. Accessed 11 May 2019
- Jorgenson AK (2011) Carbon dioxide emissions in Central and Eastern European nations, 1992–2005: a test of ecologically unequal exchange theory. Hum Ecol Rev 18:105–114Google Scholar
- Kwon DB (2009) Human capital and its measurement. 3rd OECD world forum “Statistics, knowl policy” charting progress, build visions, improv life. pp 27–30Google Scholar
- Marquart-Pyatt ST (2012) Environmental concerns in cross-national context: how do mass publics in Central and Eastern Europe compare with other regions of the world? Sociologický Časopis/Czech Sociological Review , Vol . 48 , N. Czech Sociol Rev 48:441–466Google Scholar
- Mesagan EP, Isola WA, Ajide KB (2018) The capital investment channel of environmental improvement: evidence from BRICS. Environ Dev Sustain:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0110-6
- Pesaran MH (2004) General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Univ Cambridge, Fac Econ Cambridge Work Pap Econ No 0435 41Google Scholar
- PWT 9.1 (2019) The database | Penn World Table | Productivity | University of Groningen. https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/productivity/pwt/. Accessed 11 May 2019
- Saud S, Chen S, Haseeb A, Khan K, Imran M (2019b) The nexus between financial development, income level, and environment in Central and Eastern European countries: a perspective on belt and road initiative. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:16053–16075. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05004-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Seetanah B, Sannassee RV, Fauzel S, Soobaruth Y, Giudici G, Nguyen APH (2019) Impact of economic and financial development on environmental degradation: evidence from small island developing states (SIDS). Emerg Mark Financ Trade 55:308–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2018.1519696 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Shujah-ur-Rahman CS, Saleem N, Bari MW (2019) Financial development and its moderating role in environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from Pakistan. Environ Sci Pollut Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05290-z
- World Bank (2018) World development indicators (WDI) database archives (beta) | DataBank. https://databank.banquemondiale.org/data/reports.aspx?source=WDI Database Archives (beta). Accessed 11 May 2019
- Zafar MW, Mirza FM, Zaidi SAH, Hou F (2019a) The nexus of renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption, trade openness, and CO2 emissions in the framework of EKC: evidence from emerging economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:15162–15173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04912-w CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Zafar MW, Saud S, Hou F (2019b) The impact of globalization and financial development on environmental quality: evidence from selected countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:13246–13262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04761-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar