Exploring the asymmetric impact of economic complexity, FDI, and green technology on carbon emissions: Policy stringency for clean-energy investing countries

Abstract

All economies are concerned about rising carbon emissions, which contribute to environmental degradation. The current paper formulates a novel framework to scrutinize the impacts of shocks in economic complexity, FDI, environmental technology, and renewable energy on carbon emission in the leading clean energy investment countries, spanning the period from 1995 to 2020. In spite of the constraint for better environmental defence and the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), this paper introduces an empirical approach utilizing the Panel NARDL methodology to investigate the asymmetrical connections between carbon emissions and relevant exogenous factors. Furthermore, we utilize additional techniques, namely AMG and CCEMG, to enhance the robustness of our findings. Our empirical findings reveal that positive shocks in economic complexity, FDI, environmental technology, and renewable energy reduce carbon emissions while negative shocks may result to elevated pollution levels in the long-run. However, adverse shocks in economic complexity and FDI cause increased pollution in the long run. Likewise, the short-run coefficient signs are also similar to the long-run coefficient signs but different in significance level and magnitude. This has paved the way for a well-designed policy for leading clean-energy investment countries should focus on structural change, FDI, technology and renewable energy consumption.

Keywords

Renewable energy / Economic complexity / NARDL / Environmental technology / SDGs / Carbon emission / FDI

CRediT Author Contribution Statement

Najia Saqib: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal Analysis, Data curation, Writing- Original draft. Gheorghița Dinca: Review literature, Validation, Writing - review & editing

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgment

The first author would like to thank Prince Sultan University for their support.

References

[1] S. Adams, A.O. Acheampong. Reducing carbon emissions: The role of renewable energy and democracy. J. Clean. Prod., 240 (2019), Article 118245,

[2] M. Al Mamun, K. Sohag, M. Shahbaz, S. Hammoudeh. Financial markets, innovations and cleaner energy production in OECD countries. Energy Econ., 72 (2018), pp. 236-254,

[3] D. Balsalobre-Lorente, M. Shahbaz, D. Roubaud, S. Farhani. How economic growth, renewable electricity and natural resources contribute to CO2 emissions?. Energy Policy, 113 (2018), pp. 356-367,

[4] A. Banerjee, J.L. Carrion-i-Silvestre. Testing for panel cointegration using common correlated effects estimators. J. Time Ser. Anal., 38 (2017), pp. 610-636,

[5] A.K. Bello, O.M. Abimbola. Does the level of economic growth influence environmental quality in Nigeria: a test of environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis. Pak. J. Soc. Sci., 7 (2010), pp. 325-329

[6] M. Ben Jebli, S. Ben Youssef, N. Apergis. The dynamic linkage between renewable energy, tourism, CO2 emissions, economic growth, foreign direct investment, and trade. Latin Am. Econ. Rev., 28 (2019), pp. 1-19,

[7] M. Bhattacharya, S. Awaworyi Churchill, S.R. Paramati. The dynamic impact of renewable energy and institutions on economic output and CO2 emissions across regions. Renew. Energy, 111 (2017), pp. 157-167,

[8] Bloomberg NEF, 2023. Energy Transition Investment Trends, UNEP, Frankfurt-School-UNEP Centre.

[9] E. Boleti, A. Garas, A. Kyriakou, A. Lapatinas. Economic complexity and environmental performance: evidence from a world sample. Environ. Model. Assess., 26 (2021), pp. 251-270,

[10] J. Breitung. The local power of some unit root tests for panel data. Adv. Econom., 15 (2000), pp. 161-177,

[11] T.S. Breusch, A.R. Pagan. The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev. Econ. Stud., 47 (1980), pp. 239-253,

[12] M. Campello, A.F. Galvao, T. Juhl. Testing for slope heterogeneity bias in panel data models. J. Bus. Econ. Stat., 37 (2019), pp. 749-760,

[13] M. Can, G. Gozgor. The impact of economic complexity on carbon emissions: Evidence from France. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 24 (2017), pp. 16364-16370,

[14] W. Carlin, A. Glyn, J. Van Reenen. Export market performance of OECD countries: an empirical examination of the role of cost competitiveness. The Econ. J., 111 (2001), pp. 128-162,

[15] H.B. Chenery, L. Taylor. Development patterns: Among countries and over time. Rev. Econ. Stat., 50 (1968), p. 391,

[16] B. Danish, M.A., Mahmood, N., Zhang, J.W.. Effect of natural resources, renewable energy and economic development on CO2 emissions in BRICS countries. Sci. Total Environ., 678 (2019), pp. 632-638,

[17] E. Dogan, F. Seker. The influence of real output, renewable and non-renewable energy, trade and financial development on carbon emissions in the top renewable energy countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 60 (2016), pp. 1074-1085,

[18] K. Du, P. Li, Z. Yan. Do green technology innovations contribute to carbon dioxide emission reduction? Empirical evidence from patent data. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 146 (2019), pp. 297-303,

[19] E.I. Dumitrescu, C. Hurlin. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Econ. Model., 29 (2012), pp. 1450-1460,

[20] I.A. Duran, N. Saqib, H. Mahmood. Assessing the connection between nuclear and renewable energy on ecological footprint within the EKC framework: Implications for sustainable policy in leading nuclear energy-producing countries. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy, 13 (2) (2023), p. 256, 10.32479/ijeep.14183

[21] M. Eberhardt. Estimating panel time-series models with heterogeneous slopes. Stata J., 12 (2012), pp. 61-71,

[22] Eberhardt, M., Bond, S., 2009. Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: a novel estimator. MPRA Paper 17870.

[23] S. Erdoğan, S. Yıldırım, D.Ç. Yıldırım, A. Gedikli. The effects of innovation on sectoral carbon emissions: Evidence from G20 countries. J. Environ. Manag., 267 (2020), Article 110637,

[24] B. Erkan, E. Yildirimci. Economic complexity and export competitiveness: The case of Turkey. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci., 195 (2015), pp. 524-533,

[25] O.K. Essandoh, M. Islam, M. Kakinaka. Linking international trade and foreign direct investment to CO2 emissions: any differences between developed and developing countries?. Sci. Total Environ., 712 (2020), Article 136437,

[26] S. Farhani, M. Shahbaz. What role of renewable and non-renewable electricity consumption and output is needed to initially mitigate CO2 emissions in MENA region?. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 40 (2014), pp. 80-90,

[27] F. Ganda. The impact of innovation and technology investments on carbon emissions in selected organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries. J. Clean. Prod., 217 (2019), pp. 469-483,

[28] C.W.J. Granger. Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37 (1969), p. 424,

[29] R. Hashmi, K. Alam. Dynamic relationship among environmental regulation, innovation, CO2 emissions, population, and economic growth in OECD countries: A panel investigation. J. Clean. Prod., 231 (2019), pp. 1100-1109,

[30] R. Hausmann, C.A. Hidalgo, S. Bustos, M. Coscia, A. Simoes, M.A. Yildirim. The atlas of economic complexity: Mapping paths to prosperity. Mit Press (2014),

[31] C.A. Hidalgo, R. Hausmann. The building blocks of economic complexity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 106 (2009), pp. 10570-10575,

[32] C.A. Hidalgo, B. Winger, A.L. Barabási, R. Hausmann. The product space conditions the development of nations. Science, 1979 (317) (2007), pp. 482-487,

[33] P.H. Hsu, X. Tian, Y. Xu. Financial development and innovation: Cross-country evidence. J. Financ. Econ., 112 (2014), pp. 116-135,

[34] M. Huchet-Bourdon, C. Le Mouël, M. Vijil. The relationship between trade openness and economic growth: Some new insights on the openness measurement issue. The World Econ., 41 (2018), pp. 59-76,

[35] C. Hurlin, E. Dumitrescu. Testing for Granger non causality in heterogeneous panels. Dep. Econ. Univ. Orleans Work. Pap. (2008), pp. 1-32

[36] Iea. Global Energy Review 2020. IEA Int, Energy Agency Paris Fr (2020)

[37] K.S. Im, M.H. Pesaran, Y. Shin. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J. Econom., 115 (2003), pp. 53-74,

[38] A. Jahanger, U. Zaman, M.R. Hossain, A. Awan. Articulating CO2 emissions limiting roles of nuclear energy and ICT under the EKC hypothesis: An application of non-parametric MMQR approach. Geosci. Front., 14 (5) (2023), Article 101589,

[39] E. Kazemzadeh, J.A. Fuinhas, M. Koengkan. The impact of income inequality and economic complexity on ecological footprint: an analysis covering a long-time span. J. Environ. Econ. Policy, 11 (2021), pp. 133-153,

[40] D. Kirikkaleli, E. Sofuoğlu, O. Ojekemi. Does patents on environmental technologies matter for the ecological footprint in the USA? Evidence from the novel Fourier ARDL approach. Geosci. Front., 14 (2023), Article 101564,

[41] A. Lapatinas, A. Garas, E. Boleti, A. Kyriakou. Economic complexity and environmental performance: Evidence from a world sample. MDPI Open Access J., 12 (2019), pp. 1-18

[42] R. Larsson, J. Lyhagen, M. Löthgren. Likelihood-based cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels. Econom. J., 4 (2001), pp. 109-142,

[43] L.S. Lau, C.K. Choong, Y.K. Eng. Investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve for carbon emissions in Malaysia: Do foreign direct investment and trade matter?. Energy Policy, 68 (2014), pp. 490-497,

[44] A. Levin, C.F. Lin, C.S.J. Chu. Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J. Econom., 108 (2002), pp. 1-24,

[45] Lewis, W.A., 2003. Theory of Economic Growth. 1st Ed. Routledge, 1–454.

[46] K. Li, B. Lin. Impacts of urbanization and industrialization on energy consumption/CO2 emissions: Does the level of development matter?. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 52 (2015), pp. 1107-1122,

[47] C. Liu, C. Tang, Y. Liu. Does the transformation of energy structure promote green technological innovation? A quasi–natural experiment based on new energy demonstration city construction. Geosci. Front., 101615 (2023),

[48] O. Neagu, M.C. Teodoru. The relationship between economic complexity, energy consumption structure and greenhouse gas emission: Heterogeneous panel evidence from the EU countries. Sustainability, 11 (2) (2019), p. 497,

[49] OEC, 2021. Economic Complexity Legacy Rankings. https://oec.world/en/rankings/eci.

[50] I. Ozturk, S. Farooq, M.T. Majeed, M. Skare. An empirical investigation of financial development and ecological footprint in South Asia: Bridging the EKC and pollution haven hypotheses. Geosci. Front., 101588 (2023),

[51] H.T. Pao, C.M. Tsai. Multivariate Granger causality between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, FDI (foreign direct investment) and GDP (gross domestic product): Evidence from a panel of BRIC (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, and China) countries. Energy, 36 (2011), pp. 685-693,

[52] S.R. Paramati, M. Ummalla, N. Apergis. The effect of foreign direct investment and stock market growth on clean energy use across a panel of emerging market economies. Energy Econ., 56 (2016), pp. 29-41,

[53] S.R. Paramati, N. Apergis, M. Ummalla. 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 (2017), pp. 62-71,

[54] P. Pedroni. Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Econom. Theory, 20 (2004), pp. 597-625,

[55] M.H. Pesaran. Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74 (2006), pp. 967-1012,

[56] M.H. Pesaran. A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J. Appl. Econom., 22 (2007), pp. 265-312,

[57] M.H. Pesaran, Y. Shin, R.J. Smith. Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J. Appl. Econom., 16 (2001), pp. 289-326,

[58] Pesaran, M.H., 2004. General diagonist tests for cross section dependence in panels. June 2004. Mimeo, University of Cambridge.

[59] M.H. Pesaran, T. Yamagata. Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. J. Econom., 142 (2008), pp. 50-93,

[60] T. Qi, X. Zhang, V.J. Karplus. The energy and CO2 emissions impact of renewable energy development in China. Energy Policy, 68 (2014), pp. 60-69,

[61] J.P. Romero, C. Gramkow. Economic complexity and greenhouse gas emissions. World Dev., 139 (2021), Article 105317,

[62] K. Saidi, A. Omri. The impact of renewable energy on carbon emissions and economic growth in 15 major renewable energy-consuming countries. Environ. Res., 186 (2020), Article 109567,

[63] N. Saqib, I. Ozturk, M. Usman, A. Sharif, A. Razzaq. Pollution Haven or Halo? How European countries leverage FDI, energy, and human capital to alleviate their ecological footprint. Gondwana Res., 116 (2023), pp. 136-148,

[64] G. Semieniuk, E. Campiglio, J.F. Mercure, U. Volz, N.R. Edwards. Low-carbon transition risks for finance. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change, 12 (1) (2021), p. e678

[65] M. Shahbaz, S. Nasreen, F. Abbas, O. Anis. Does foreign direct investment impede environmental quality in high-, middle-, and low-income countries?. Energy Econ., 51 (2015), pp. 275-287,

[66] M. Shahbaz, C. Raghutla, M. Song, H. Zameer, Z. Jiao. Public-private partnerships investment in energy as new determinant of CO2 emissions: The role of technological innovations in China. Energy Econ., 86 (2020), Article 104664,

[67] U. Shahzad, Z. Fareed, F. Shahzad, K. Shahzad. Investigating the nexus between economic complexity, energy consumption and ecological footprint for the United States: New insights from quantile methods. J. Clean. Prod., 279 (2021), Article 123806,

[68] A. Sharif, N. Saqib, K. Dong, S.A.R. Khan. Nexus between green technology innovation, green financing, and CO2 emissions in the G7 countries: The moderating role of social globalisation. Sustain. Dev., 30 (2022), pp. 1934-1946,

[69] A. Sharif, M.T. Kartal, F.V. Bekun, U.K. Pata, C.L. Foon, S.K. Depren. Role of green technology, environmental taxes, and green energy towards sustainable environment: insights from sovereign Nordic countries by CS-ARDL approach. Gondwana Res., 117 (2023), pp. 194-206,

[70] Y. Shin, B. Yu, M. Greenwood-Nimmo. Modelling Asymmetric Cointegration and Dynamic Multipliers in a Nonlinear ARDL Framework. Festschrift in Honor of Peter Schmidt, Springer, New York, NY, 281–314 (2014),

[71] Y. Sun, L. Chen, H. Sun, F. Taghizadeh-Hesary. Low-carbon financial risk factor correlation in the belt and road PPP project. Finance Res. Lett., 35 (2020), Article 101491,

[72] F. Taghizadeh-Hesary, N. Yoshino. The way to induce private participation in green finance and investment. Finance Res. Lett., 31 (2019), pp. 98-103,

[73] A. Tamazian, B. Bhaskara Rao. Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation?. Evidence from transitional economies. Energy Econ., 32 (2010), pp. 137-145,

[74] I. Uddin, A. Ullah, N. Saqib, R. Kousar, M. Usman. Heterogeneous role of energy utilization, financial development, and economic development in ecological footprint: How far away are developing economies from developed ones. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 30 (2023), pp. 58378-58398,

[75] J. Westerlund. Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat., 69 (6) (2007), pp. 709-748,

[76] J. Westerlund, D.L. Edgerton. A simple test for cointegration in dependent panels with structural breaks. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat., 70 (2008), pp. 665-704,

[77] Q. Yang, J. Huo, N. Saqib, H. Mahmood. Modelling the effect of renewable energy and public-private partnership in testing EKC hypothesis: Evidence from methods moment of quantile regression. Renew. Energy, 192 (2022), pp. 485-494,