Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Green investment, institutional quality, and environmental performance: evidence from G-7 countries using panel NARDL approach

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The foremost purpose of the study is to establish a point that an economy of G-7 countries has an abundance of resources to tackle the environmental changes that occur in the world, but these countries are still behind the line because in this modern era, environmental performance changes their shape, dimension, and nature very frequently and create a huge impact on globalization of world economy. To fill this gap, we use green investment, institutional quality, and economic growth on environmental performance for this, we use four proxies for green investment and three proxies for greenhouse gas, and we also use six proxies of institutional quality to do this using period of 1997 to 2021. Moreover, we have used the panel nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag method to evaluate the long-run and short-run asymmetric effects of green investment, institutional quality, and economic growth on greenhouse gas emissions. The findings of the study affirm that the positive change of green investment has a positive and significant relationship with environmental performance, while the negative change of green investment has a significant and positive influence with environmental performance in the long run. Furthermore, the outcomes demonstrate that the positive shock of institutional quality has a positive and significant relationship with environmental performance, while the negative shock of intuitional quality has a significant and positive association with environmental performance in the long run, whereas positive change in economic growth has a positive and significant with the environmental performance, while the negative change of economic growth has a positive effect with environmental performance in the long run. This study finds future precautions that institutional quality has to perform exceptionally and shows results very rapidly, while green investment with economic growth has also made a deadly combination to control greenhouse gas emission, so the role of G-7 countries is pretty clear and straight. Furthermore, it is suggested that governments and policymakers take a proactive stance to promote resource acquisition and investment across all industries. To reduce gas emissions, public interest might also be complementary to private ones. So, economic policymakers, specifically in G-7 countries, should consider strategies that support sustainable economic growth.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  • Ahmad M, Ahmed Z, Majeed A, Huang B (2021) An environmental impact assessment of economic complexity and energy consumption: does institutional quality make a difference? Environ Impact Assess Rev 89:106603

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali S, Yusop Z, Kaliappan SR, Chin L (2020) Dynamic common correlated effects of trade openness, FDI, and institutional performance on environmental quality: evidence from OIC countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27(11):11671–11682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-07768-7

  • Ali S, Yusop Z, Kaliappan SR et al (2021) Trade-environment nexus in OIC countries: fresh insights from environmental Kuznets curve using GHG emissions and ecological footprint. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:4531–4548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10845-6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Amin A, Aziz B, Liu X-H (2020) RETRACTED ARTICLE: the relationship between urbanization, technology innovation, trade openness, and CO2 emissions: evidence from a panel of Asian countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27(28):35349–35363

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Antweiler W, Copeland RB, Taylor MS (2001) Is free trade good for the emissions: 1950–2050. Rev Econ Stat 80:15–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Anwar A, Sinha A, Sharif A, Siddique M, Irshad S, Anwar W, Malik S (2022) The nexus between urbanization, renewable energy consumption, financial development, and CO 2 emissions: Evidence from selected Asian countries. Environ Dev Sustain:1–21. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-021-01716-2

  • Aswani R, Sajith S, Bhat MY (2021) Is geopolitics a threat for offshore wind energy? A case of Indian Ocean Region. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(25):32683–32694

    Google Scholar 

  • Aye GC, Edoja PE (2017) Effect of economic growth on CO2 emission in developing countries: Evidence from a dynamic panel threshold model. Cogent Econ Finance 5(1):1–22. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/23322039.2017.1379239

  • Baloch MA, Khan SU-D, Ulucak ZŞ (2020) Poverty and vulnerability of environmental degradation in sub-Saharan African countries: what causes what? Struct Chang Econ Dyn 54:143–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltagi BH, Feng Q, Kao C (2012) A Lagrange Multiplier test for cross-sectional dependence in a fixed effects panel data model. J Econometr 170(1):164–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernauer T, Koubi V (2009) Effects of political institutions on air quality. Ecol Econ 68(5):1355–1365

  • Bhat MY, Sofi AA, Sajith S (2022) Domino-effect of energy consumption and economic growth on environmental quality: role of green energy in G20 countries. Manag Environ Qual Int J 33(3):756–775. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MEQ-08-2021-0194/full/html

  • Breusch TS, Pagan AR (1980) The Lagrange Multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev Econ Stud 47(1):239–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown RL, Durbin J, Evans JM (1975) Techniques for testing the constancy of regression relationships over time. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 37(2):149–163. https://academic.oup.com/jrsssb/article-abstract/37/2/149/7027284

  • Can M, Gozgor G (2017) The impact of economic complexity on carbon emissions: evidence from France. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(19):16364–16370

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Yu C, Yuan Y, Lu F, Shen W (2021) The influence of trust on creativity: A review. Front Psychol 12:1–10

  • Chien F, Anwar A, Hsu CC, Sharif A, Razzaq A, Sinha A (2021) The role of information and communication technology in encountering environmental degradation: proposing an SDG framework for the BRICS countries. Technol Soc 65:101587

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi I (2006) Nonstationary panels. In: Patterson K, Mills TC (eds) Palgrave handbooks of econometrics 1. Palgrave Macmillan, NewYork, pp 11–539

  • Chu LK (2021) Economic structure and environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: new evidence from economic complexity. Appl Econ Lett 28(7):612–616

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta S, De Cian E, Verdolini E (2016) The political economy of energy innovation. Polit Econ Clean Energy Trans:123–143

  • Dauda L, Long X, Mensah CN, Salman M (2019) The effects of economic growth and innovation on CO2 emissions in different regions. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(15):15028–15038

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Destek MA, Sarkodie SA (2019) Investigation of environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint: the role of energy and financial development. Sci Total Environ 650:2483–2489

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Doğan B, Balsalobre-Lorente D, Nasir MA (2020) European commitment to COP21 and the role of energy consumption, FDI, trade and economic complexity in sustaining economic growth. J Environ Manag 273:111146

    Google Scholar 

  • Energy G (2019) CO2 status report. IEA (International Energy Agency), Paris, pp 1030–1031

  • Fethi S, Rahuma A (2019) The role of eco-innovation on CO2 emission reduction in an extended version of the environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from the top 20 refined oil exporting countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(29):30145–30153

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gill AR, Viswanathan KK, Hassan S (2018) The environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) and the environmental problem of the day. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 81:1636–1642

    Google Scholar 

  • Glicksman RL, Buzbee WW, Mandelker DR, Hammond E, Camacho A (2023) Environmental protection: law and policy. Aspen Publishing

  • Greening LA, Greene DL, Difiglio C (2000) Energy efficiency and consumption—the rebound effect—a survey. Energy Policy 28(6–7):389–401

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER, Working Paper Series No.3914, pp 1–57

  • Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1995) Economic growth and the environment. Q J Econ 110(2):353–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammed YS, Arawomo O (2022) FDI, Economic growth and environmental quality in the Nigerian economy: new evidences from system GMM. J Econ Behav Stud 14(1 (J)):50–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Huo T, Li X, Cai W, Zuo J, Jia F, Wei H (2020) Exploring the impact of urbanization on urban building carbon emissions in China: evidence from a provincial panel data model. Sustain Cities Soc 56:102068

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim MH, Law SH (2016) Institutional quality and CO2 emission–trade relations: evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. S Afr J Econ 84(2):323–340

  • Im KS, Pesaran MH, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J Econometr 115(1):53–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabeen G, Ahmad M, Zhang Q (2021) Perceived critical factors affecting consumers’ intention to purchase renewable generation technologies: rural-urban heterogeneity. Energy 218:119494

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang D, Li H, Wang S, Cheng X, Bartocci P, Fantozzi F (2023) Insight the CO2 adsorption onto biomasspyrolysis derived char via experimental analysis coupled with DFT calculation. Fuel 332:125948

  • Kang Y, He X (2018) Institutional forces and environmental management strategy: moderating effects of environmental orientation and innovation capability. Manag Organ Rev 14(3):577–605

    Google Scholar 

  • Kao C (1999) Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. J Econometr 90(1):1–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Karsch NM (2019) Examining the validity of the environmental Kuznets curve. Consilience: J Sustain Dev 21(1):32–50. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26775082

  • Khan SAR (2019) The nexus between carbon emissions, poverty, economic growth, and logistics operations-empirical evidence from southeast Asian countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(13):13210–13220

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan MTI, Yaseen MR, Ali Q (2017) Dynamic relationship between financial development, energy consumption, trade and greenhouse gas: comparison of upper middle income countries from Asia, Europe, Africa and America. J Clean Prod 161:567–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan MA, Khan MA, Abdulahi ME, Liaqat I, Shah SSH (2019a) Institutional quality and financial development: the United States perspective. J Multinatl Financ Manag 49:67–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan SAR, Jian C, Zhang Y, Golpîra H, Kumar A, Sharif A (2019b) Environmental, social and economic growth indicators spur logistics performance: from the perspective of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation countries. J Clean Prod 214:1011–1023

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan Z, Ali S, Dong K, Li RYM (2021) How does fiscal decentralization affect CO2 emissions? The roles of institutions and human capital. Energy Econ 94:105060

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan S, Yahong W, Chandio AA (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. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(31):47647–47660

  • Law SH, Tan HB, Azman-Saini WNW (2014) Financial development and income inequality at different levels of institutional quality. Emerg Mark Finance Trade 50(sup1):21–33. https://doi.org/10.2753/REE1540-496X5001S102

  • Levin A, Lin CF, Chu CSJ (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J Econometr 108(1):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Li D, Bai Y, Yu P, Meo MS, Anees A, Rahman SU (2022) Does institutional quality matter for environmental sustainability? Front Environ Sci 10:966762. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2022.966762/full

  • Liao X, Dogan E, Baek J (2017) Does corruption matter for the environment? Panel evidence from China. Economics 11(1):20170027. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2017-27/html

  • Liobikienė G, Butkus M (2019) Scale, composition, and technique effects through which the economic growth, foreign direct investment, urbanization, and trade affect greenhouse gas emissions. Renew Energ 132:1310–1322

  • Maddala GS, Wu S (1999) A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bull Econ Stat 61(S1):631–652

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahalik MK, Mallick H, Padhan H, Sahoo B (2018) Is skewed income distribution good for environmental quality?A comparative analysis among selected BRICS countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(23):23170–23194

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Malik MY, Latif K, Khan Z, Butt HD, Hussain M, Nadeem MA (2020) Symmetric and asymmetric impact of oil price, FDI and economic growth on carbon emission in Pakistan: Evidence from ARDL and non-linear ARDL approach. Sci Total Environ 726:138421

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mehmood U, Tariq S, Ul-Haq Z, Meo MS (2021) Does the modifying role of institutional quality remains homogeneous in GDP-CO 2 emission nexus? New evidence from ARDL approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:10167–10174

  • Mensah CN, Long X, Dauda L, Boamah KB, Salman M (2019) Innovation and CO2 emissions: the complimentary role of eco-patent and trademark in the OECD economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(22):22878–22891

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohsin M, Kamran HW, Nawaz MA, Hussain MS, Dahri AS (2021) Assessing the impact of transition from nonrenewable to renewable energy consumption on economic growth-environmental nexus from developing Asian economies. J Environ Manag 284:111999

    Google Scholar 

  • Mrabet Z, Alsamara M (2017) Testing the Kuznets curve hypothesis for Qatar: a comparison between carbon dioxide and ecological footprint. Renew Sust Energ Rev 70:1366–1375

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nathaniel S, Khan SAR (2020) The nexus between urbanization, renewable energy, trade, and ecological footprint in ASEAN countries. J Clean Prod 272:122709

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson M Jr (1996) Distinguished lecture on economics in government: big bills left on the sidewalk: why some nations are rich, and others poor. J Econ Perspect 10(2):3–24. https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdf/10.1257%2Fjep.10.2.3

  • Park KS, Ni Z, Côté AP, Choi JY, Huang R, Uribe-Romo FJ... Yaghi OM (2006) Exceptional chemical and thermal stability of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103(27):10186–10191

  • Pedroni P (1999) Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bull Econ Stat 61(S1):653–670

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran MH (2004) General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Paper in Economics 0435. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=572504

  • Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econometr 22(2):265–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahman UR, Chaudhry IS, Meo MS, Sheikh SM, Idrees S (2021) Asymmetric effect of FDI and public expenditure on population health: new evidence from Pakistan based on non-linear ARDL. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(16):23871–23886

    Google Scholar 

  • Raymond L (2004) Economic growth as environmental policy? Reconsidering the environmental Kuznets curve. J Publ Policy 24(3):327–348

    Google Scholar 

  • Rehman Khan SA, Yu Z (2021) Assessing the eco-environmental performance: an PLS-SEM approach with practice-based view. Int J Log Res Appl 24(3):303–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Saarinen J, Moswete N, Atlhopheng JR, Hambira WL (2020) Changing socio-ecologies of Kalahari: Local perceptions towards environmental change and tourism in Kgalagadi, Botswana. Dev S Afr 37(5):855–870

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkodie SA (2018) The invisible hand and EKC hypothesis: what are the drivers of environmental degradation and pollution in Africa? Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(22):21993–22022

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkodie SA, Strezov V (2019) A review on environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis using bibliometric and meta-analysis. Sci Total Environ 649:128–145

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shen Y, Su Z-W, Malik MY, Umar M, Khan Z, Khan M (2021) Does green investment, financial development and natural resources rent limit carbon emissions? A provincial panel analysis of China. Sci Total Environ 755:142538

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shin Y, Yu B, Greenwood-Nimmo M (2014) Modelling asymmetric cointegration and dynamic multipliers in a nonlinear ARDL framework. Festschrift in honor of Peter Schmidt: Econometric methods and applications:281–314. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4899-8008-3_9

  • Su C-W, Umar M, Gao R (2022) Save the environment, get financing! How China is protecting the environment with green credit policies? J Environ Manag 323:116178

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Swart J, Brinkmann L (2020) Economic complexity and the environment: evidence from Brazil. In: Universities and sustainable communities: meeting the goals of the agenda 2030. Springer International Publishing, pp 3–45. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-30306-8_1

  • Uddin GA, Salahuddin M, Alam K, Gow J (2017) Ecological footprint and real income: panel data evidence from the 27 highest emitting countries. Ecol Indic 77:166–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Udeagha MC, Ngepah N (2019) Revisiting trade and environment nexus in South Africa: fresh evidence from new measure. Environ SciPollut Res 26(28):29283–29306

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ulucak R, Khan SU-D (2020) Determinants of the ecological footprint: role of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanization. Sustain Cities Soc 54:101996

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) and World Bank (2018) The Unseen Impact of Non-tariff Measures: Insights from a New Database. Report UNCTAD DC:/DITC/TAB/2018/2

  • Webber DJ, Allen DO (2004) Environmental Kuznets curves: mess or meaning? School of Economics Discussion Papers,(0406). University of the West of England

  • Yii K-J, Geetha C (2017) The nexus between technology innovation and CO2 emissions in Malaysia: evidence from granger causality test. Energy Procedia 105:3118–3124

    Google Scholar 

  • Yilanci V, Pata UK (2020) Investigating the EKC hypothesis for China: the role of economic complexity on ecological footprint. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27(26):32683–32694

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu L, Fang W, Rahman SU, Khan AI (2023) How solar-based renewable energy contributes to CO2 emissions abatement? Sustainable environment policy implications for solar industry. Energy Environ 34(2):359–378. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0958305X211061886

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Xinxiang Vocational and Technical College, Xinxiang, 453000, China

    Jiguo Zhao

  2. Faculty of Economics & Commerce, Superior University, Lahore, Pakistan

    Saif ur Rahman

  3. Sunway Business School, Sunway University Malaysia, Subang Jaya, Malaysia

    Sahar Afshan

  4. Adnan Kassar School of Business, Lebanese American University, Beirut, Lebanon

    Sahar Afshan

  5. School of Business, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China

    Muhammad Sibt E. Ali

  6. Superior University, Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan

    Hammad Ashfaq

  7. University Utara Malaysia, 06010, Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia

    Sadia Idrees

Authors
  1. Jiguo Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saif ur Rahman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sahar Afshan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Muhammad Sibt E. Ali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hammad Ashfaq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sadia Idrees
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Jiguo Zhao: introduction section and writing—original draft and supervision; Saif ur Rahman: interpretation of findings and writing—original draft and supervision; Sahar Afshan: writing—literature review and methodology and data curation; Muhammad Sibt E Ali: conceptualization framework, writing original draft, and data analysis; Hammad Ashfaq: initial draft preparation, original draft, and writing—methodology; Sadia Idrees: analysis and explanation results, proofreading, and writing—original draft.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saif ur Rahman.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This original work has not been submitted anywhere else for publication.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

The paper submitted with the mutual consent of authors for publication in Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Arshian Sharif

Publisher's note

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

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

Zhao, J., Rahman, S.u., Afshan, S. et al. Green investment, institutional quality, and environmental performance: evidence from G-7 countries using panel NARDL approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30, 100845–100860 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-29332-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-29332-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation