Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 31, pp 32460–32475 | Cite as

Environmental implication of offshore economic activities in Indonesia: a dual analyses of cointegration and causality

  • Edmund Ntom UdembaEmail author
  • Hasan Güngör
  • Festus Victor Bekun
Research Article
  • 90 Downloads

Abstract

Global warming issues have become a pertinent theme for many economies and policy initiatives. The Indonesian economy is no exception as government officials and stakeholder are working seriously to decouple carbon emission from economic growth. It is on this premise that the present study attempts to investigate the nexus between the environmental implication of offshore economic activities, economic growth, energy use, and environment (CO2) with the integration of foreign direct investment (FDI) and trade openness over recent time series data from 1980 to 2017. A series of analysis were conducted with Pesaran’s autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) methodology and the Granger causality test as estimation techniques over the outlined variables. Empirical findings from ARDL long-run (elasticity) shows that economic growth is significantly positively associated with carbon emissions at the initial stage but a negative association is established at lags 1 and 2. A significant positive relationship is witnessed between economic growth and FDI. Also, statistical positive relationship is observed between economic growth and energy use, while an inverse relationship is observed between openness and economic growth. For causality analysis, we observe that a uni-directional causality is running from economic growth to foreign direct investment at 5% significant level. This outcome is in support of the growth-induced FDI hypothesis in Indonesia. Furthermore, a one-way causality is seen from energy to openness, CO2 emissions, and from FDI to CO2 emissions while there is a feedback causality between openness and CO2 emissions. The findings of this study have implications to the environmental quality of Indonesia via economic growth; hence, the higher and better the economic growth of the country, the lesser the carbon emissions and the better the environmental quality. This proposition aligns with the pollution halo hypothesis (PHH), where FDI inflow enhances economic growth as well as impacts energy consumption and reduces carbon emissions in the host country.

Keywords

Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions Offshore production Energy use Openness Economic growth FDI Indonesia 

JEL classification

C32 C33 Q43 Q50 Q58 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Authors’ gratitude is extended to the prospective editor(s) and reviewers that will/have spared time to guide towards a successful publication.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Acharya J, Sahu JN, Sahoo BK, Mohanty CR, Meikap BC (2009) Removal of chromium (VI) from wastewater by activated carbon developed from tamarind wood activated with zinc chloride. Chem Eng J 150(1):25–39Google Scholar
  2. Ajide KB, Adeniyi O (2010) FDI and the environment in developing economies: evidence from Nigeria. Environ Res J 4(4):291–297Google Scholar
  3. Akadiri SS, Lasisi TT, Uzuner G, Akadiri AC (2018) Examining the causal impacts of tourism, globalization, economic growth and carbon emissions in tourism island territories: bootstrap panel Granger causality analysis. Curr Issue Tour:1–15Google Scholar
  4. Akadiri AC, Saint Akadiri S, Gungor H (2019a) The role of natural gas consumption in Saudi Arabia’s output and its implication for trade and environmental quality. Energy Policy 129:230–238Google Scholar
  5. Akadiri SS, Bekun FV, Taheri E, Akadiri AC (2019b) Carbon emissions, energy consumption and economic growth: a causality evidence. Int J Energy Technol Policy 15(2–3):320–336Google Scholar
  6. Akadiri SS, Akadiri AC (2019) The role of natural gas consumption in economic growth. Strateg. Plan. Energy EnvironGoogle Scholar
  7. Alfaro L, Chanda A, Kalemli-Ozcan S, Sayek S (2010) Does foreign direct investment promote growth? Exploring the role of financial markets on linkages. J Dev Econ 91(2):242–256Google Scholar
  8. Alola AA, Alola UV (2018) Agricultural land usage and tourism impact on renewable energy consumption among Coastline Mediterranean Countries. Energy & Environment 29(8):1438–1454Google Scholar
  9. Alola AA, Alola UV, Saint Akadiri S (2019a) Renewable energy consumption in coastline Mediterranean countries: impact of environmental degradation and housing policy. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–13Google Scholar
  10. Alola AA, Yalçiner K, Alola UV, Saint Akadiri S (2019b) The role of renewable energy, immigration and real income in environmental sustainability target. Evidence from Europe largest states. Sci Total Environ 674:307–315Google Scholar
  11. Álvarez-Herranz A, Balsalobre-Lorente D, Shahbaz M, Cantos JM (2017) Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels. Energy Policy 105:386–397Google Scholar
  12. Andersen HS (2019) Urban sores: On the interaction between segregation, urban decay and deprived neighbourhoods. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Anyanwu JC (2012) Why does foreign direct investment go where it goes?: new evidence from African countries. Ann Econ Financ 13(2)Google Scholar
  14. Asghari M (2013) Does FDI promote MENA region’s environment quality? Pollution halo or pollution haven hypothesis. Int J Sci Res Environ Sci 1(6):92–100Google Scholar
  15. Azmy K (2019) Carbon-isotope stratigraphy of the uppermost Cambrian in eastern Laurentia: implications for global correlation. Geol Mag 156(5):759–771Google Scholar
  16. Balcilar M, Bekun FV, Uzuner G (2019) Revisiting the economic growth and electricity consumption nexus in Pakistan. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(12):12158–12170Google Scholar
  17. Bakhsh K, Rose S, Ali MF, Ahmad N, Shahbaz M (2017) Economic growth, CO2 emissions, renewable waste and FDI relation in Pakistan: new evidences from 3SLS. J Environ Manag 196:627–632Google Scholar
  18. Balsalobre D, Álvarez-Herranz A (2016) Economic growth and energy regulation in the environmental Kuznets curve. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–17Google Scholar
  19. Balsalobre-Lorente D, Shahbaz M (2016) Energy consumption and trade openness in the correction of GHG levels in Spain. Bull Energy Econ 4(4):310–322Google Scholar
  20. Balsalobre-Lorente D, Shahbaz M, Roubaud D, Farhani S (2018) How economic growth, renewable electricity and natural resources contribute to CO2 emissions? Energy Policy 113:356–367Google Scholar
  21. Balsalobre-Lorente D, Driha OM, Bekun FV, Osundina OA (2019) Do agricultural activities induce carbon emissions? The BRICS experience. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–17Google Scholar
  22. Banerjee A, Dolado J, Mestre R (1998) Error-correction mechanism tests for cointegration in a single-equation framework. J Time Ser Anal 19(3):267–283Google Scholar
  23. Barnard M (2017) Tesla & Google disagree about LIDAR—which is right. Clean Technica. web.Google Scholar
  24. Barua A, Sawhney A (2015) Development policy implications for growth and regional inequality in a small open economy: the Indian case. Rev Dev Econ 19(3):695–709Google Scholar
  25. Behera SR, Dash DP (2017) The effect of urbanization, energy consumption, and foreign direct investment on the carbon dioxide emission in the SSEA (South and Southeast Asian) region. Renew Sust Energ Rev 70:96–106Google Scholar
  26. Bekun FV, Alola AA, Sarkodie SA (2019a) Toward a sustainable environment: nexus between CO2 emissions, resource rent, renewable and nonrenewable energy in 16-EU countries. Sci Total Environ 657:1023–1029Google Scholar
  27. Bekun FV, Emir F, Sarkodie SA (2019b) Another look at the relationship between energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions, and economic growth in South Africa. Sci Total Environ 655:759–765Google Scholar
  28. Ben Kheder S, & Zugravu-Soilita N (2008) The pollution haven hypothesis: a geographic economy model in a comparative studyGoogle Scholar
  29. Boopen S, & Vinesh S (2011) On the relationship between CO2 emissions and economic growth: the Mauritian experience. In University of Mauritius, Mauritius Environment Outlook Report, http://www.csae.ox.ac.uk/conferences/2011-EDiA/papers/776-Seetanah.pdf Vol. 14, p. 2015
  30. Brown RL, Durbin J, Evans JM (1975) Techniques for testing the constancy of regression relationships over time. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol 37(2):149–163Google Scholar
  31. Bustos P (2007) Multilateral trade liberalization, exports and technology upgrading: Evidence on the impact of MERCOSUR on Argentinean firms. mimeo Universitat Pompeu FabraGoogle Scholar
  32. Chakraborty C, Basu P (2002) Foreign direct investment and growth in India: a cointegration approach. Appl Econ 34(9):1061–1073Google Scholar
  33. Cheung YW, Lai KS (1997) Bandwidth selection, prewhitening, and the power of the Phillips-Perron test. Econometric Theory 13(5):679–691Google Scholar
  34. Cole MA, Elliott RJ (2003) Do environmental regulations influence trade patterns? Testing old and new trade theories. World Econ 26(8):1163–1186Google Scholar
  35. Cole MA, Elliott RJ, Fredriksson PG (2006) Endogenous pollution havens: does FDI influence environmental regulations? Scand J Econ 108(1):157–178Google Scholar
  36. Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1981) Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica: J Econometric Society 49:1057–1072Google Scholar
  37. Emir F, Bekun FV (2019) Energy intensity, carbon emissions, renewable energy, and economic growth nexus: new insights from Romania. Energy Environ 30(3):427–443Google Scholar
  38. Frimpong JM, & Oteng-Abayie EF (2007) Market returns and weak-form efficiency: the case of the Ghana stock exchangeGoogle Scholar
  39. Fullerton TM, Fullerton SL, Nazarian AD, & Solís O (2019) Borderplex economic outlook to 2020. UTEP Border Region Modeling ProjectGoogle Scholar
  40. Garcia-Santana M, Moral-Benito E, Pijoan-Mas J, & Ramos R (2016) Growing like Spain: 1995–2007Google Scholar
  41. Gregory AW, Hansen BE (1996) Practitioners corner: tests for cointegration in models with regime and trend shifts. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 58(3):555–560Google Scholar
  42. Hossain MS (2011) Panel estimation for CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and urbanization of newly industrialized countries. Energy Policy 39(11):6991–6999Google Scholar
  43. Huguet C, Martrat B, Grimalt JO, Sinninghe Damsté JS, Schouten S (2011) Coherent millennial-scale patterns in U37k′ and TEX86H temperature records during the penultimate interglacial-to-glacial cycle in the western Mediterranean. Paleoceanogr Paleoclimatol 26(2)Google Scholar
  44. Hye QMA (2012) Long term effect of trade openness on economic growth in case of Pakistan. Qual Quant 46(4):1137–1149Google Scholar
  45. Irandoust JEM (2001) On the causality between foreign direct investment and output: a comparative study. Int Trade J 15(1):1–26Google Scholar
  46. Kadarusman YB, Pramudya EP (2019) The effects of India and China on the sustainability of palm oil production in Indonesia: towards a better understanding of the dynamics of regional sustainability governance. Sustain DevGoogle Scholar
  47. Karimi MS, & Yusop Z (2009) FDI and economic growth in MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  48. Keho Y (2017) The impact of trade openness on economic growth: the case of Cote d’Ivoire. Cogent Econ Finance 5(1):1332820Google Scholar
  49. Lamb WF, Steinberger JK, Bows-Larkin, A, Peters GP, Roberts JT, Wood FR (2014) Transitions in pathways of human development and carbon emissions. Environmental Research Letters 9(1):014011Google Scholar
  50. Lee JW (2013) The contribution of foreign direct investment to clean energy use, carbon emissions and economic growth. Energy Policy 55:483–489Google Scholar
  51. Kwame Asiedu M (2013) Trade liberalization and growth: the Ghanaian experienceGoogle Scholar
  52. Lim KP, Kim JH (2011) Trade openness and the informational efficiency of emerging stock markets. Econ Model 28(5):2228–2238Google Scholar
  53. Mabey N, McNally R (1999) Foreign direct investment and the environment. WWF-UK, Godalming, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  54. Muhammad J, & Ghulam Fatima S (2013) Energy consumption, financial development and CO2 emissions in PakistanGoogle Scholar
  55. Narayan PK and Sharma SS (2015) Is carbon emissions trading profitable?. Economic Modelling 47:84–92Google Scholar
  56. Ndikumana L, Verick S (2008) The linkages between FDI and domestic investment: unravelling the developmental impact of foreign investment in Sub-Saharan Africa. Dev Policy Rev 26(6):713–726Google Scholar
  57. Nduka EK, Chukwu JO, Ugbor KI, & Nwakaire ON (2013) Trade openness and economic growth: a comparative analysis of the pre and post structural adjustment programme (SAP) periods in Nigeria. Asian J Bus Econ 3(3.4)Google Scholar
  58. Nguyen TH, Ross A (2017) Barriers and opportunities for the involvement of indigenous knowledge in water resources Management in the gam River Basin in north-East Vietnam. Water Alternatives 10:1Google Scholar
  59. Nguyen TN, Wongsurawat W (2017) Multivariate cointegration and causality between electricity consumption, economic growth, foreign direct investment and exports: recent evidence from Vietnam. Int J Energy Econ Policy 7(3):287–293Google Scholar
  60. MacKinnon JG (1996) Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. J Appl Econ 11(6):601–618Google Scholar
  61. Marelli E and Signorelli M (2011) China and India: Openness, trade and effects on economic growth. The European Journal of Comparative Economics 8(1):129Google Scholar
  62. MOTOR O (2015) Sustainability ReportGoogle Scholar
  63. Omri A (2013) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth nexus in MENA countries: evidence from simultaneous equations models. Energy Econ 40:657–664Google Scholar
  64. 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 36:262–267Google Scholar
  65. Paramati SR, Apergis N, Ummalla M (2017) Financing clean energy projects through domestic and foreign capital: the role of political cooperation among the EU, the G20 and OECD countries. Energy Econ 61:62–71Google Scholar
  66. Pazienza P (2015) The environmental impact of the FDI inflow in the transport sector of OECD countries and policy implications. Int Adv Econ Res 21(1):105–116Google Scholar
  67. Peiris JM, Cowling BJ, Wu JT, Feng L, Guan Y, Yu H, Leung GM (2016) Interventions to reduce zoonotic and pandemic risks from avian influenza in Asia. Lancet Infect Dis 16(2):252–258Google Scholar
  68. Perron P (1990) Testing for a unit root in a time series with a changing mean. J Bus Econ Stat 8(2):153–162Google Scholar
  69. Pesaran MH, Shin Y (1998) An autoregressive distributed-lag modelling approach to cointegration analysis. Econom Soc Monogr 31:371–413Google Scholar
  70. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16(3):289–326Google Scholar
  71. Sarkodie SA, Strezov V (2019) Effect of foreign direct investments, economic development and energy consumption on greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries. Sci Total Environ 646:862–871Google Scholar
  72. Shahbaz M, Tang CF, Shabbir MS (2011) Electricity consumption and economic growth nexus in Portugal using cointegration and causality approaches. Energy Policy 39(6):3529–3536Google Scholar
  73. Shahbaz M, Solarin SA, Mahmood H, Arouri M (2013) Does financial development reduce CO2 emissions in Malaysian economy? A time series analysis. Econ Model 35:145–152Google Scholar
  74. Shahbaz M, Loganathan N, Zeshan M, Zaman K (2015a) Does renewable energy consumption add in economic growth? An application of auto-regressive distributed lag model in Pakistan. Renew Sust Energ Rev 44:576–585Google Scholar
  75. Shahbaz M, Nasreen S, Abbas F, Anis O (2015b) Does foreign direct investment impede environmental quality in high-, middle-, and low-income countries? Energy Econ 51:275–287Google Scholar
  76. Shahbaz M, Balsalobre D, Shahzad SJH (2019) The influencing factors of CO 2 emissions and the role of biomass energy consumption: statistical experience from G-7 countries. Environ Model Assess 24(2):143–161Google Scholar
  77. Shahi U (2012) Risk and Return Analysis on Common Stock Investment between Kumari Bank Ltd And Everest Bank Ltd (Doctoral dissertation, Office of the Dean Faculty of Management Tribhuvan University)Google Scholar
  78. Shi K, Chen Y, Yu B, Xu T, Chen Z, Liu R, ... and Wu J (2016) Modeling spatiotemporal CO2 (carbon dioxide) emission dynamics in China from DMSP-OLS nighttime stable light data using panel data analysis. Applied Energy 168:523–533Google Scholar
  79. Shin Y, Schmidt P (1992) The KPSS stationarity test as a unit root test. Econ Lett 38(4):387–392Google Scholar
  80. Sinha A, Shahbaz M, Balsalobre D (2017) Exploring the relationship between energy usage segregation and environmental degradation in N-11 countries. J Clean Prod 168:1217–1229Google Scholar
  81. Talukdar D, Meisner CM (2001) Does the private sector help or hurt the environment? Evidence from carbon dioxide pollution in developing countries. World Dev 29(5):827–840Google Scholar
  82. Toone JE (2012) Mirage in the Gulf: examining the upsurge in FDI in the GCC and its legal and economic implications for the MENA region. Emory Int’l L Rev 26:677Google Scholar
  83. Twerefou DK, Tutu KA, Botchway E, Darkwah S (2015) Willingness-to-pay for potable water in the Accra-Tema Metropolitan area of Ghana. Mod Econ 6(12):1285–1296Google Scholar
  84. Twerefou DK, Adusah-Poku F, Bekoe W (2016) An empirical examination of the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for carbon dioxide emissions in Ghana: an ARDL approach. Environ Socio Econ Stud 4(4):1–12Google Scholar
  85. Udemba EN (2019) Triangular nexus between foreign direct investment, international tourism, and energy consumption in the Chinese economy: accounting for environmental quality. Environ Sci Pollut Res 1-12Google Scholar
  86. Villaverde J, Maza A (2012) Foreign direct investment in Spain: regional distribution and determinants. Int Bus Rev 21(4):722–733Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Economics Administrative and Social ScienceIstanbul Gelisim UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsEastern Mediterranean UniversityFamagustaTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Accounting , Analysis and Audit, School of Economics and ManagmentSouth Ural State UniversityChelyabinskRussia

Personalised recommendations