Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Influence of Multifactor Productivity, Research and Development Expenditure, Renewable Energy Consumption on Ecological Footprint in G7 Countries: Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis

  • Published:
Environmental Modeling & Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, the relationship between renewable energy consumption, multifactor productivity, research and development (R&D) expenditure, and the ecological footprint was investigated under the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis between 1990 and 2018, using Lagrange multiplier (LM) bootstrap panel cointegration, augmented mean group (AMG) estimators. and Emirmahmutoglu and Kose (EK) panel causality test for G7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the USA). The findings from the study are as follows: (i) The LM bootstrap panel cointegration test results demonstrate that series in the EKC model are related in the long run. (ii) The AMG long-run coefficient estimates show that while the EKC hypothesis is valid for Canada, France, the USA, and the whole panel, it is not valid for Germany, Italy, Japan, and the UK. (iii) The renewable energy and R&D expenditure reduce environmental pollution in the panel created for the G7 countries. (iv) The EK (2011) panel causality test indicates that the environmental pollution variable has a unidirectional causality relationship with the R&D expenditure, economic growth, and multifactor productivity variables, and a bidirectional causality relationship with the renewable energy variables. An overall evaluation of the results reveals that adopting policies that aim to increase renewable energy and R&D expenditure in G7 countries will have a positive effect on the environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

These data were derived from the following resources available in the public domain: Ecological Footprint – https://data.footprintnetwork.org/?_ga=2.30860345.742645417.1654760029-181970154.1642670815#/; Economic Growth –https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD; Renewable Energy – https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-browser/?country=WORLD&fuel=Renewables%20and%20waste&indicator=WasteGenBySource; Multifactor Productivity: https://stats.oecd.org/; Research and Development Expenditure: https://stats.oecd.org/.

References

  1. British Petroleum. (2016). BP energy outlook 2016 edition. Outlook to 2035. London: BP.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shell, R. D. (2017). Shell World Energy Model–A view to 2100. Retrieved June 23, 2020, from https://www.worldenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/World-Energy-Resources_Report_2016.pdf

  3. Gormus, S., & Aydin, M. (2020). Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis using innovation: New evidence from the top 10 innovative economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(22), 27904–27913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rees, W. E. (1992). Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban economics leaves out. Environment and Urbanization, 4(2), 121–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy (1976th ed.). Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rivera-Batiz, L. A., & Romer, P. M. (1991). International trade with endogenous technological change. European Economic Review, 35(4), 971–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Romer, P. M. (1994). The origins of endogenous growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5), 1002–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lucas, R. E. (1989). On the mechanics of economic development. NBER. Working Paper (R1176).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1989). Product development and international trade. Journal of political economy, 97(6), 1261–1283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323–351. JSTOR.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jones, C. I. (1995). R & D-based models of economic growth. Journal of Political Economy, 103(4), 759–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Aydin, N., Alrajhi, A. N., & Jouini, J. H. (2018). Estimating the impact of R&D spending on total factor productivity for OECD countries: Pooled mean group approach. The Journal of Developing Areas, 52(2), 159–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 39(3), 312–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Taymaz, E., Voyvoda, E., & Yılmaz, K. (2008). Türkiye imalat sanayiinde yapısal dönüşüm, üretkenlik ve teknolojik değişme dinamikleri. Economic Research Center Working Papers in Economics, 8(04).

  16. OECD Data. (2020). Retrieved June 23, 2020, from https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/multifactor-productivity.htm

  17. Aydin, M. (2019). The effect of biomass energy consumption on economic growth in BRICS countries: A country-specific panel data analysis. Renewable Energy, 138, 620–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Begum, R. A., Sohag, K., Abdullah, S. M. S., & Jaafar, M. (2015). CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic and population growth in Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 594–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rahman, M. M., & Velayutham, E. (2020). Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption-economic growth nexus: New evidence from South Asia. Renewable Energy, 147, 399–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research. No. w3914.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Badulescu, D., Badulescu, A., Rangone, A., & Sipos-Gug, S. (2016). Different or alike? Investigating the impact of GDP on environmental protection expenditure in selected European States. Global & Local Economic Review, 20(1), 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pata, U. K., & Aydin, M. (2020). Testing the EKC hypothesis for the top six hydropower energy-consuming countries: Evidence from Fourier Bootstrap ARDL procedure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 264, 121699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Al-Mulali, U., Weng-Wai, C., Sheau-Ting, L., & Mohammed, A. H. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis by utilizing the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation. Ecological Indicators, 48, 315–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Destek, M. A., Ulucak, R., & Dogan, E. (2018). Analyzing the environmental Kuznets curve for the EU countries: The role of ecological footprint. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(29), 29387–29396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Destek, M. A., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Investigation of environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint: The role of energy and financial development. Science of the Total Environment, 650, 2483–2489.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hassan, S. T., Xia, E., Khan, N. H., & Shah, S. M. A. (2019). Economic growth, natural resources, and ecological footprints: Evidence from Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(3), 2929–2938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Destek, M. A., & Sinha, A. (2020). Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Pata, U. K. (2021). Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption, economic complexity, CO2 emissions, and ecological footprint in the USA: Testing the EKC hypothesis with a structural break. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(1), 846–861.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Destek, M. A. (2021). Deindustrialization, reindustrialization and environmental degradation: Evidence from ecological footprint of Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 296, 126612.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Khan, S., Yahong, W., & Chandio, A. A. (2022). How does economic complexity affect ecological footprint in G-7 economies: The role of renewable and non-renewable energy consumptions and testing EKC hypothesis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(31), 47647–47660.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cole, M. A., Elliott, R. J. R., & Wu, S. (2008). Industrial activity and the environment in China: An industry-level analysis. China Economic Review, 19, 393–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ang, J. B. (2009). CO2 emissions research and technology transfer in China. Ecological Economics, 68(10), 2658–2665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.05.002

  34. Garrone, P., & Grilli, L. (2010). Is there a relationship between public expenditures in energy R&D and carbon emissions per GDP? An empirical investigation. Energy Policy, 38(10), 5600–5613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang, M., & Feng, C. (2018). Using an extended logarithmic mean Divisia index approach to assess the roles of economic factors on industrial CO2 emissions of China. Energy Economics, 76, 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Fernández, Y. F., López, M. F., & Blanco, B. O. (2018). Innovation for sustainability: The impact of R&D spending on CO2 emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 3459–3467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kahouli, B. (2018). The causality link between energy electricity consumption, CO2 emissions, R&D stocks and economic growth in Mediterranean countries (MCs). Energy, 145, 388–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Adedoyin, F. F., Alola, A. A., & Bekun, F. V. (2020). An assessment of environmental sustainability corridor: The role of economic expansion and research and development in EU countries. Science of The Total Environment, 713, 136726.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Kocak, E., & Alnour, M. (2022). Energy R&D expenditure, bioethanol consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions in the United States: Non-linear analysis and political implications. Journal of Cleaner Production, 374, 133887.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Danish, & Ulucak R. (2022). Analyzing energy innovation-emissions nexus in China: A novel dynamic simulation method. Energy, 244, 123010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. López-Menéndez, A. J., Pérez, R., & Moreno, B. (2014). Environmental costs and renewable energy: Re-visiting the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Environmental Management, 145, 368–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mert, M., & Bölük, G. (2016). Do foreign direct investment and renewable energy consumption affect the CO2 emissions? New evidence from a panel ARDL approach to Kyoto Annex countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(21), 21669–21681.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Dong, K., Sun, R., & Hochman, G. (2017). Do natural gas and renewable energy consumption lead to less CO2 emission? Empirical evidence from a panel of BRICS countries. Energy, 141, 1466–1478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Liu, X., Zhang, S., & Bae, J. (2017). The impact of renewable energy and agriculture on carbon dioxide emissions: Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve in four selected ASEAN countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 164, 1239–1247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Dogan, E., & Ozturk, I. (2017). The influence of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and real income on CO2 emissions in the USA: Evidence from structural break tests. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(11), 10846–10854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Gill, A. R., Viswanathan, K. K., & Hassan, S. (2018). A test of environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) for carbon emission and potential of renewable energy to reduce green house gases (GHG) in Malaysia. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 20(3), 1103–1114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Dong, K., Sun, R., Jiang, H., & Zeng, X. (2018). CO2 emissions, economic growth, and the environmental Kuznets curve in China: What roles can nuclear energy and renewable energy play? Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 51–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zafar, M. W., Mirza, F. M., Zaidi, S. A. H., & Hou, F. (2019). The nexus of renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption, trade openness, and CO2 emissions in the framework of EKC: Evidence from emerging economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(15), 15162–15173.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Destek, M. A., Sarkodie, S. A., & Asamoah, E. F. (2021). Does biomass energy drive environmental sustainability? An SDG perspective for top five biomass consuming countries. Biomass and Bioenergy, 149, 106076.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Liu, H., Sinha, A., Destek, M. A., Alharthi, M., & Zafar, M. W. (2022). Moving toward sustainable development of sub-Saharan African countries: Investigating the effect of financial inclusion on environmental quality. Sustainable Development, 30(6), 2015–2024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Haider, S., & Ganaie, A. A. (2017). Does energy efficiency enhance total factor productivity in case of India? OPEC Energy Review, 41(2), 153–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Rodríguez, M. C., Haščič, I., & Souchier, M. (2018). Environmentally adjusted multifactor productivity: Methodology and empirical results for OECD and G20 countries. Ecological Economics, 153, 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Amri, F., Zaied, Y. B., & Lahouel, B. B. (2019). ICT, total factor productivity, and carbon dioxide emissions in Tunisia. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 212–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Chen, X., Ma, W., & Valdmanis, V. (2021). Can labor productivity growth reduce carbon emission? Evidence from OECD countries and China. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 33(3), 644–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Destek, M. A., Sohag, K., Aydın, S., & Destek, G. (2022). Foreign direct investment, stock market capitalization, and sustainable development: Relative impacts of domestic and foreign capital. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1–13.

  56. Liu, M., Chen, Z., Sowah, J. K., Jr., Ahmed, Z., & Kirikkaleli, D. (2022). The dynamic impact of energy productivity and economic growth on environmental sustainability in South European countries. Gondwana Research, 115, 116–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Pesaran, M. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). IZA Discussion Paper No. 1240.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  59. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Swamy, P. A. V. B. (1970). Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model. Econometrica, 38(2), 311–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Westerlund, J., & Edgerton, D. L. (2007). A panel bootstrap cointegration test. Economics Letters, 97(3), 185–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Eberhardt, M., & Bond, S. (2009). Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: A novel estimator. University Library of Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Emirmahmutoglu, F., & Kose, N. (2011). Testing for Granger causality in heterogeneous mixed panels. Economic Modelling, 28(3), 870–876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Toda, H. Y., & Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics, 66(1–2), 225–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8

  66. Nabaee, M., Shakouri, G. H., & Tavakoli, O. (2015). Comparison of the relationship between CO2, energy USE, and GDP in G7 and developing countries: Is there environmental Kuznets curve for those? Energy Systems and Management (pp. 229–239). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  67. Raza, S. A., & Shah, N. (2018). Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in G7 countries: The role of renewable energy consumption and trade. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(27), 26965–26977.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Shahbaz, M., Balsalobre, D., & Shahzad, S. J. H. (2019). The influencing factors of CO2 emissions and the role of biomass energy consumption: Statistical experience from G-7 countries. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 24(2), 143–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Anser, M. K., Yousaf, Z., Nassani, A. A., Abro, M. M. Q., & Zaman, K. (2020). International tourism, social distribution, and environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from a panel of G-7 countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(3), 2707–2720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Ike, G. N., Usman, O., Alola, A. A., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2020). Environmental quality effects of income, energy prices and trade: The role of renewable energy consumption in G-7 countries. Science of The Total Environment, 721, 137813.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Wang, Z., Bui, Q., Zhang, B., & Pham, T. L. H. (2020). Biomass energy production and its impacts on the ecological footprint: An investigation of the G7 countries. Science of the Total Environment, 743, 140741.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. IEEFA. (2019). Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Political Sciences, Department of Econometrics, Sakarya University, Esentepe Campus, Serdivan, Sakarya, Turkey

    Mehmet Aydin

  2. Faculty of Political Sciences, Department of Finance, Sakarya University, Esentepe Campus, Serdivan, Sakarya, Turkey

    Tunahan Degirmenci & Hakan Yavuz

Authors
  1. Mehmet Aydin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tunahan Degirmenci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hakan Yavuz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. M. Aydin: econometric modelling. T. Degirmenci: literature research. H.Yavuz: data collection. The first draft of the manuscript was written by T. Değirmenci. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tunahan Degirmenci.

Ethics declarations

Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

figure a

Fig. 2 GDP per capita for G7 countries (1990–2018) (average)

figure b

Fig. 3 Multifactor productivity (index 2010 = 100) (1990–2018) (average)

figure c

Fig. 4 R&D expenditure (RD % of GDP) (1990–2018) (average)

figure d

Fig. 5 The environmental Kuznets curve in Canada

figure e

Fig. 6 The environmental Kuznets curve in France

figure f

Fig. 7 The environmental Kuznets curve in the USA

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aydin, M., Degirmenci, T. & Yavuz, H. The Influence of Multifactor Productivity, Research and Development Expenditure, Renewable Energy Consumption on Ecological Footprint in G7 Countries: Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis. Environ Model Assess 28, 693–708 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-023-09879-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-023-09879-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation