scholarly journals Causality relationship between economic growth and environmental degradation. Case G-8

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (111) ◽  
pp. 165-173
Author(s):  
Victor Quinde Rosales ◽  
Rina Bucaram Leverone ◽  
Martha Bueno Quinonez ◽  
Michelle Saldana Vargas
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
New York ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Carbon Emissions ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Quarterly Journal ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Environment And Development

This article is an inductive argumentation and an empirical-analytical paradigm that evaluates the actual relationship between Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita and the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in country groups of the G8 considered as developed in a period of time from 1960 to 2011. It was developed an Augmented Dickey-Fuller unit root (ADF), a Granger Causality Test and a Johansen Cointegration test. The results evidence the non-stationary of constrains in both countries. It was obtained a VAR model with two variables with a number of lags of four - VAR2 (4) to which were tested for causality by demonstrating a unidirectionality of GDP per capita to CO2. Keywords: economic growth, economic development, income distribution, environmental economics. References [1]G. Brundtland, «Our Common Future,» de Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development , 1987. [2]R. Bermejo, Del desarrollo sostenible según Brundtland a la sostenibilidad como biomimesis, Bilbao: Hegoa, 2014. [3]R. B. and. P. C. Fander Falconí, «Flacso,» 16 03 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.flacsoandes.edu.ec/agora/62767-la-discutible-curva-de-kuznets. [Last access: 15 01 2021]. [4]E. Urteaga, «Las teorías económicas del desarrollo sostenible,» Cuadernos de Economía, vol. 32, nº 89, pp. 113-162, 2009. [5]V. K. Smith, Scarcity and Growth Reconsidered, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1979. [6]J. y. A. Medina, «Ingreso y desigualdad: la Hipótesis de Kuznets en el caso boliviano,» Espacios, vol. 38, nº31, p. 23, 2017. [7]M. Ahluwalia, «Inequality, poverty and development, » Journal of Development Economics, nº 3, pp. 307-342, 1976. [8]A. and R. D. Alesina, «Distributive politics and economic growth,» Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 109, nº 2, pp. 465-490, 1994. [9]R. Barro, «Inequality and growth in a panel of countries, » Journal of Economic Growth, vol. 5, nº 1, pp. 5-32, 2000. [10]M. A. Galindo, «Distribución de la renta y crecimiento económico,» de Anuario jurídico y económico escurialense, 2002, pp. 473-502. [11]A. Álvarez, «Distribución de la renta y crecimiento económico, Información Comercial Española, ICE,» Revista de economía, nº 835, pp. 95-100, 2007. [12]J. C. Núñez, «Crecimiento económico y distribución del ingreso: una perspectiva del Paraguay,» Población y Desarrollo, nº 43, pp. 54-61, 2016. [13]S. Kuznets, «Economic Growth and Income Inequality, » American Economic Review, nº 45, pp. 1-28, 1955. [14]J. A. and. C. J. Araujo, «Relación entre la desigualdad de la renta y el crecimiento económico en Brasil: 1995-2012.,» Problemas del desarrollo, vol. 46, nº 180, pp.129-150, 2015. [15]F. V. A. and P. C. Correa, «La Curva Medioambiental de Kuznets: Evidencia Empírica para Colombia Grupo de Economía Ambiental (GEA),» Semestre Económico, vol. 8, nº 15, pp. 13-30, 2005. [16]W. Malenbaum, World Demand for Raw Materials in 1985 and 2000, McGraw-Hill: New York, 1978. [17]W. Beckerman, «Economists, scientists, and environmental catastrophe,» Oxford Economic Papers, vol. 24, nº 3, 1972. [18]G. y. K. A. Grossman, «Economic Growth and the Environment,» The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 110, nº 2, pp. 353-377, 1995. [19]N. Stokey, «Are there Limits to Growth?,» International Economic Review, vol. 39, nº 1, 1998. [20]W. and. C. W. Jaeger, «A Theoretical Basis for the Environmental Inverted-U Curve and Implications for International Trade,» de Discussant: Clive Chapple, New York, 1998. [21]T. B. K. B. R. and. G. K. Cavlovic, «A Mets-Analysis of Environmental Kuznets Curve Studies,» Agricultural and Resource Economics, nº 29, pp. 32-42, 2000. [22]M. and. S. T. Heil, «Carbon emissions and economic development: future trajectories based on historical experience, » Environment and Development Economics, vol. 6, nº 1, pp. 63-83, 2001. [23]U. S. R. and E. B. Soytas, «Energy consumption, income, and carbon emissions in the United States,» Ecological Economics, vol. 62, nº 3, pp. 482-489, 2007.[24]C. W. J. Granger, «Investigating causal relations by econometrics models and cross spectral methods,» Econometrica, nº 37, pp. 424-438, 1969. [25]M. and U. R. Nasir, «Environmental Kuznets Curve for carbon emissions in Pakistan: An empirical investigation,» Energy Policy, vol. 39, nº 3, pp. 1857-1864,2011. [26]S. Johansen, «Statistical Analysis of Cointegration Vectors,» Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 12, nº 2, pp. 231-254, 1988. [27]B. Goldman, «Meta-Analysis of Environmental Kuznets Curve Studies: Determining the Cause of the Curve’s Presence,» de Honors Projects, 2012. [28] M. B.  and T. T. Fosten, «Dynamic misspecification in the environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from CO2 and SO2 emissions in the United Kingdom,» Ecological Economics, vol. 76, pp. 25-33, 2012.  

The Environmental Kuznets Curve

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
David I. Stern
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Human Impacts ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
The Impact

The environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) is a hypothesized relationship between environmental degradation and GDP per capita. In the early stages of economic growth, pollution emissions and other human impacts on the environment increase, but beyond some level of GDP per capita (which varies for different indicators), the trend reverses, so that at high income levels, economic growth leads to environmental improvement. This implies that environmental impacts or emissions per capita are an inverted U-shaped function of GDP per capita. The EKC has been the dominant approach among economists to modeling ambient pollution concentrations and aggregate emissions since Grossman and Krueger introduced it in 1991 and is even found in introductory economics textbooks. Despite this, the EKC was criticized almost from the start on statistical and policy grounds, and debate continues. While concentrations and also emissions of some local pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide, have clearly declined in developed countries in recent decades, evidence for other pollutants, such as carbon dioxide, is much weaker. Initially, many understood the EKC to imply that environmental problems might be due to a lack of sufficient economic development, rather than the reverse, as was conventionally thought. This alarmed others because a simplistic policy prescription based on this idea, while perhaps addressing some issues like deforestation or local air pollution, could exacerbate environmental problems like climate change. Additionally, many of the econometric studies that supported the EKC were found to be statistically fragile. Some more recent research integrates the EKC with alternative approaches and finds that the relation between environmental impacts and development is subtler than the simple picture painted by the EKC. This research shows that usually, growth in the scale of the economy increases environmental impacts, all else held constant. However, the impact of growth might decline as countries get richer, and richer countries are likely to make more rapid progress in reducing environmental impacts. Finally, there is often convergence among countries, so that countries that have relatively high levels of impacts reduce them more quickly or increase them more slowly, all else held constant.

scholarly journals Do Carbon Emissions and Economic Growth Decouple in China? An Empirical Analysis Based on Provincial Panel Data

Energies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 2411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Hao ◽  
Zirui Huang ◽  
Haitao Wu
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Panel Data ◽  
Carbon Emissions ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Ekc Hypothesis ◽  
Capita Gross Domestic Product ◽  
Level Of Economic Development ◽  
The Relationship

Global warming has emerged as a serious threat to humans and sustainable development. China is under increasing pressure to curb its carbon emissions as the world’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide. By combining the Tapio decoupling model and the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) framework, this paper explores the relationship between China’s carbon emissions and economic growth. Based on panel data of 29 provinces from 2007 to 2016, this paper quantitatively estimates the nexus of carbon emissions and economic development for the whole nation and the decoupling status of individual provinces. There is empirical evidence for the conventional EKC hypothesis, showing that the relationship between carbon emissions and per capita gross domestic product (GDP) is an inverted U shape and that the inflection point will not be attained soon. Moreover, following the estimation results of the Tapio decoupling model, there were significant differences between individual provinces in decoupling status. As a result, differentiated and targeted environmental regulations and policies regarding energy consumption and carbon emissions should be reasonably formulated for different provinces and regions based on the corresponding level of economic development and decoupling status.

scholarly journals PERTUMBUHAN PENDUDUK, INFLASI DAN KORUPSI: ANALISIS EMPIRIS ENVIRONMENTAL KUZNETS CURVE (EKC) DI KAWASAN ASEAN PERIODE 2002-2016

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Muhammad Fajri Setia Trianto ◽  
Evi Yulia Purwanti
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Population Growth ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
The Impact

The economy that continues to grow has the impact of environmental damage. This study aims to prove empirically the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis by analyzing the relationship of economic growth with environmental damage as measured by GDP per capita, and CO2 emissions. The data used are secondary data in the form of data on GDP per capita, CO2 emissions, population growth, inflation, and control of corruption in 10 countries in the ASEAN region in 2002-2016. Data analysis using the Fixed Effect model. The results show that there is a relationship between economic growth and environmental damage that forms an inverted U curve. Economic growth will initially have a positive effect on environmental damage so that at a point of economic growth negatively affects environmental damage. By adding control variables: population growth, inflation and corruption, inflation and corruption positively impact environmental damage, while population negatively affect environmental damage.

scholarly journals Economic Growth and Environmental Quality in the European Union Countries – Is there Evidence for the Environmental Kuznets Curve?

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Mazur ◽  
Zaur Phutkaradze ◽  
Jaba Phutkaradze
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
European Union ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Carbon Dioxide Emission ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Countries ◽  
Per Capita

Abstract This research empirically explores the relation between carbon dioxide emission and economic growth during the period 1992-2010, using panel data on the European Union countries. Both fixed and random effect models are employed to test the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) relationship between CO2 emissions and GDP per capita. While no U-shaped EKC was confirmed empirically for all 28 current EU member states, the graphical analysis demonstrates a justified turning point for CO2 emissions as GDP per capita reaches the level of 23,000 USD. Furthermore, there is a firm empirical ground for the EKC hypothesis based on data from 16 older, relatively high-income EU states. Thus, though not empirically confirmed, there is ample data verifying the existence of the EKC in EU economies.

scholarly journals Empirical evidence of sustainable development: Causality relationship between economic growth and environmental degradation in Ecuador and Latin America and The Caribbean

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (111) ◽  
pp. 67-77
Author(s):  
Victor Quinde Rosales ◽  
Rina Bucaram Leverone ◽  
Martha Bucaram Leverone ◽  
Francisco Quinde Rosales
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Development Economics ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Ecological Economics ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Environment And Development ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curves

This article is an inductive argumentation and an empirical-analytical paradigm that evaluates the actual relationship between Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita and the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in the case of Ecuador and to compare it with Latin America and the Caribbean within a period of analysis from 1960 to 2011. It was developed an Augmented Dickey-Fuller unit root (ADF), a Granger Causality Test and a Johansen Cointegration test. It was obtained a VAR model with two variables with a number of 14 lags – VAR2(14) which were tested for which were tested for causality by demonstrating a bidirectionality for Latin America and the Caribbean and a unidirectionality of GDP per capita to CO2 for the Ecuador. Keywords: economic growth, sustainable development, environmental economics. References [1]E. Urteaga, «Las teorías económicas del desarrollo sostenible,» Cuadernos de Economía, vol. 32, nº 89, pp.113-162, 2009. [2]G. Brundtland, «Our Common Future,» de Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. [3]R. Bermejo, Del desarrollo sostenible según Brundtland a la sostenibilidad como biomimesis, Bilbao: Hegoa, 2014. [4]W. Beckerman, «Economists, scientists, and environmental catastrophe,» Oxford Economic Papers, vol. 24, nº 3, 1972. [5]G. Grossman and A. Krueger, «Economic Growth and the Environment,» The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 110, nº 2, pp. 353-377, 1995. [6]J. y. A. Medina, «Ingreso y desigualdad: la Hipótesis de Kuznets en el caso boliviano,» Espacios, vol. 38, nº31, p. 23, 2017. [7]M. Ahluwalia, «Inequality, poverty and development, » Journal of Development Economics, nº 3, pp. 307-342, 1976. [8]A. y. R. D. Alesina, «Distributive politics and economic growth,» Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 109, nº 2, pp. 465-490, 1994. [9]R. Barro, «Inequality and growth in a panel of countries, » Journal of Economic Growth, vol. 5, nº 1, pp. 5-32, 2000. [10]M. A. Galindo, «Distribución de la renta y crecimiento económico,» de Anuario jurídico y económico escurialense, 2002, pp. 473-502. [11]A. Álvarez, «Distribución de la renta y crecimiento económico, Información Comercial Española, ICE,» Revista de economía, nº 835, pp. 95-100, 2007. [12]J. C. Núñez, «Crecimiento económico y distribución del ingreso: una perspectiva del Paraguay,» Población y Desarrollo, nº 43, pp. 54-61, 2016. [13]S. Kuznets, «Economic Growth and Income Inequality, » American Economic Review, nº 45, pp. 1-28, 1955. [14]J. A. y. C. J. Araujo, «Relación entre la desigualdad de la renta y el crecimiento económico en Brasil: 1995-2012.,» Problemas del desarrollo, vol. 46, nº 180, pp.129-150, 2015. [15]F. Correa, A. Vasco and C. Pérez, «La Curva Medioambiental de Kuznets: Evidencia Empírica para Colombia Grupo de Economía Ambiental (GEA),» Semestre Económico, vol. 8, nº 15, pp. 13-30, 2005. [16]M. Heil and T. Selden, «Carbon emissions and economic development: future trajectories based on historical experience,» Environment and Development Economics, vol. 6, nº 1, pp. 63-83, 2001. [17]D. Holtz-Eakin and T. Selden, «Stoking the fires? CO2 emissions and economic growth,» Journal of Public Economics, pp. 85-101, 1995. [18]D. STERN, «Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve?,» Environment and Development Economics, vol. 3, nº 2, pp. 173-196, 1998. [19]P. Ekins, «The Kuznets curve for the environment and economic growth: examining the evidence,» Environment and Planning, vol. 29, pp. 805-830, 1997. [20]W. Moomaw and G. Unruh, «Are Environmental Kuznets Curves Misleading us?,» de Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy, 1997. [21]S. M. Bruyn, J. Van- Den- Bergh and J. Opschoor, «Economic growth and emissions: reconsidering the empirical basis of environmental Kuznets curves,» Ecological Economics, pp. 161-175, 1998. [22]B. Friedl and M. Getzner, «Determinants of CO2 Emissions in a small open Economy,» Ecological Economics, vol. 45, nº 1, pp. 133-148, 2003. [23]T. Sheldon, «Carbon emissions and economic growth: A replication and extension,» Energy Economics, vol. 82, pp. 85-88, 2007. [24]B. Huang, M. Hwang and C. Yang, «Causal relationship between energy consumption and GDP growth revisited: A dynamic panel data approach,» Ecological Economics, vol. 67, nº 1, pp. 41-54, 2008. [25]J. He and P. Richard, «Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 in Canada,» Ecological Economics, vol. 69, nº5, pp. 1083-1093, 2010. [26]S. Dinda, «Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey,» Ecological Economics, vol. 49, nº 4, pp. 431-455, 2004. [27]J. M. B. and  T. T. Fosten, «Dynamic misspecification in the environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from CO2 and SO2 emissions in the United Kingdom,» Ecological Economics, vol. 76, pp. 25-33, 2012. [28]K. Ahmed, M. Shahbaz, A. Qasing and W. Long, «The linkages between deforestation, energy and growth for environmental degradation in Pakistan,» Ecological Indicators, vol. 49, pp. 95-103, 2014. [29]J. Wooldridge, Introducción a la Econometría Un Enfoque Moderno. 4ª ed., Mexico D.F.: Cengage Learning, 2010.    

scholarly journals To examine environmental pollution by economic growth and their impact in an environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) among developed and developing countries.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
YuSheng Kong ◽  
Rabnawaz Khan
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Manufacturing Industries ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Vector Error Correction ◽  
Vector Error ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Service Export

This study analyzes the core energy consumption among countries specific variables by Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis (EKC), for a panel data of 29 (14 developed and 15 developing) countries during the period of 1977-2014. By assessing Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) regressions with first generation test such as common root, individual Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF), and individual root-Fisher-PP have been computed individually, the results confirm the EKC hypothesis in the case of emissions of solid, liquid, gases, manufacturing industries and also construction. Hence, we computed the cointegration test by Pedroni Kao from Engle-Granger based and Fisher. Onward, since the variable are co-integrated, a panel vector error correction model is estimated in GDP per capita, emission from manufacturing industries, arms import, commercial service export and coal rent, order to perform Pairwise Granger Causality test and indicate Vector Error Correction (VEC), with co-integration restrictions. Moreover, the statistical finding from VEC short-run unidirectional causality from GDP per capita growth to manufacturing industries and coat rent, as well as the causal link with manufacturing industries and commercial service export. Additionally, since there occurred no causal link among economic growth, arm import and coal rent.

scholarly journals Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis for Turkey: The Role of Clean Energy Consumption and Ecological Footprint

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suleyman Yurtkuran
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Capita Income ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Ecological Footprint ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis

Abstract This study aims to investigate the dynamic relationship between income, clean energy consumption, exports, imports, urbanization and ecological footprint for Turkey from 1973 to 2015 using the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. The long-term coefficients derived from the ARDL approach demonstrate that import increase the ecological footprint, whereas urbanization and clean energy consumption do not have an impact on environmental pollution in the long-term. In addition, the 2001 dummy variable is negative and statistically significant. The crisis in 2001 slowed down the economic growth rate. This situation also caused reduction of environmental pollution. Moreover, the long run estimates indicate that the EKC hypothesis is valid in Turkey. However, the turning point of per capita income was calculated as $16,045 that outside of the analyzed period. As economic activities increase, human pressure on nature continues to increase. Consequently, the only factor that reduces the ecological footprint has been determined as exports. In contrast, economic growth and clean energy consumption cannot be used as a tool to reduce the ecological footprint. Turkey needs a higher level of per capita income than the threshold level to improve environmental quality.

scholarly journals Study on the relationship between industrialization level, economic development and environmental pollution in China

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 01-06
Author(s):  
Junran Ma
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Environmental Pollution ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Response Analysis ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Per Capita Gdp ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Pollution Emissions ◽  
The Relationship

With the development of economy, environmental problems gradually outstanding in China. This article adopts the method of empirical study, have collected the data of China's industrial added value, per capita GDP and emissions of the three major pollutants from 2004 to 2015. The VAR model was established on the basis of the logarithm values of the three factors mentioned above, so as to conduct impulse- response analysis to discuss the relationship between industrialization level, economic development and environmental pollution. The conclusion is as follows: (1) At present, the increase of China's industrial added value can promote the decline of China's environmental pollution emissions to a certain extent; (2) China is now at the left of the turning point of the Environmental Kuznets Curve, and the increase of per capita GDP will aggravate environmental pollution.

An Empirical Analysis on the Relationship between Industrial Economic Growth and Environmental Pollution - Taking the Chongqing of China as an Example

2013 ◽  
Vol 807-809 ◽  
pp. 732-735
Author(s):  
Shu Qing Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Waste Water ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Environmental Pollution ◽  
Environmental Kuznets Curve ◽  
Solid Wastes ◽  
Kuznets Curve ◽  
Chongqing Municipality ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Industrial Economic

Basing on the theories of Environmental Kuznets Curve,this paper analyzes the relationship between industrial economic growth and waste gas,waste water and solid wastes with the economic and environmental statistics of Chongqing Municipality from 1995 to 2009. The study shows that there is a inverted N-type of environmental Kuznets curve of the industrial waste water with the rising of industrial per capita value, but it lies in the left side of the EKC. There exists a extremely notable relationship between the industrial per capita value and produced volume of industrial solid wastes,but the curve has not come up to the turning point. In order to achieve the harmonious development between industrial economic growth and environmental pollution in Chongqing,we should establish the long-effect mechanism for environmental protection.

scholarly journals Dynamic linkages between renewable energy, carbon emissions and economic growth through nonlinear ARDL approach: Evidence from Iran

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0253464
Author(s):  
M. S. Karimi ◽  
S. Ahmad ◽  
H. Karamelikli ◽  
D. T. Dinç ◽  
Y. A. Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Carbon Emissions ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Bounds Testing ◽  
Renewable Energy Consumption ◽  
Economic Implications ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Per Capita

This study examines the relationship between economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and carbon emissions in Iran between 1975–2017, and the bounds testing approach to cointegration and the asymmetric method was used in this study. The results reveal that in the long run increase in renewable energy consumption and CO2 emissions causes an increase in real GDP per capita. Meanwhile, the decrease in renewable energy has the same effect, but GDP per capita reacts more strongly to the rise in renewable energy than the decline. Besides, in the long run, a reduction of CO2 emissions has an insignificant impact on GDP per capita. Furthermore, the results from asymmetric tests suggest that reducing CO2 emissions and renewable energy consumption do not have an essential role in decreasing growth in the short run. In contrast, an increase in renewable energy consumption and CO2 emissions do contribute to boosting the growth. These results may be attributable to the less renewable energy in the energy portfolio of Iran. Additionally, the coefficients on capital and labor are statistically significant, and we discuss the economic implications of the results and propose specific policy recommendations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document