Navigating Emission Metrics: Examining the Role of Eco-Innovation, Energy Efficiency, and Institutional Quality in OECD Countries
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10473754Keywords:
Eco-Innovation, Energy Efficiency, Consumption Based Carbon Emission, Institutional Quality, Environmental PerformanceAbstract
Purpose: Main purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the factors affecting consumption-based emissions (CCO2) and production-based emissions (PCO2) accounting approaches by considering role of eco innovation, energy efficiency, imports, exports and institutional quality under Environment Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis for OECD countries.
Design/Methodology/Approach: This study investigated research models based on EKC hypothesis and Porter’s hypothesis (PH) by utilizing the data set of 1996 to 2020. This study utilized second generation econometric techniques (Cross sectional dependence and slope heterogeneity tests). Set of regressions and models were estimated by using sys-GMM technique to get robust results after applying the panel unit root test by using E-views.
Findings: Result of sys-GMM, supporting the presence of EKC for production-based emissions but EKC doesn't exist for consumption-based emissions. Secondly, the impact of imports and exports is divergent across emission calculation approaches. Imports are significant for CCO2 but have no effect on PCO2. Impact of exports is significant and negative on both emission approaches. Coefficients of eco-innovation (EI) and Energy efficiency (EE) are significant and negative, yet quality of institutions (INQ) have moderating role for enhancing eco-innovation performance in OECD countries.
Implications/Originality/Value: Empirical findings of study provided useful insight for policy makers and researchers that both emission calculation approaches (PCO2 and CCO2) have their respective importance depending on the nature of the analysis. In the case of OECD countries, CCO2is more relevant because in OECD countries emission is more related to consumption patterns than production activities. Further, these countries must emphasize synergistic relationship between EI and INQ for enhancing, energy efficiency and eco-innovation performance.
References
Adom, P. K., Bekoe, W., Amuakwa-Mensah, F., Mensah, J. T., & Botchway, E. (2012). Carbon dioxide emissions, economic growth, industrial structure, and technical efficiency: Empirical evidence from Ghana, Senegal, and Morocco on the causal dynamics. Energy, 47(1), 314-325.
Ahmad, N., & Wyckoff, A. (2003). Carbon dioxide emissions embodied in international trade of goods.
Alvarez-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 105:386–397.
Ali, S., Dogan, E., Chen, F., & Khan, Z. (2021). International trade and environmental performance in top ten emitters countries: the role of eco-innovation and renewable energy consumption. Sustainable Development, 29(2), 378-387.
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.
Acemoglu, D., Aghion, P., Bursztyn, L., & Hemous, D. (2012). The environment and directed technical change. American economic review, 102(1), 131-166.
Antweiler, W., Copeland, B. R., & Taylor, M. S. (2001). Is free trade good for the environment?. American economic review, 91(4), 877-908.
Cai, W., & Li, G. (2018). The drivers of eco-innovation and its impact on performance: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 176, 110-118.
Costantini, V., Crespi, F., & Palma, A. (2017). Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies. Research policy, 46(4), 799-819.
Dean, J. M., & Lovely, M. E. (2010). Trade growth, production fragmentation, and China's environment. In China's growing role in world trade (pp. 429-469). University of Chicago Press.
Dong, K.; Sun, R.; Dong, X. ((2018). CO2 emissions, natural gas and renewable, economic growth: Assessing the evidence from China. Sci. Total Environs, 640, 293–302.
Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. The quarterly journal of economics, 110(2), 353-377.
Halkos, G. E., & Tzeremes, N. G. (2009). Exploring the existence of Kuznets curve in countries' environmental efficiency using DEA window analysis. Ecological Economics, 68(7), 2168-2176.
Hasanov, F.J., Liddle, B., Mikayilov, J.I., 2018. The impact of international trade on CO2 emissions in oil exporting countries: territory vs consumption emissions accounting.EnergyEcon.74, 343–350.
Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit root in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53–74.
IPCC (2018), Special Report : Global Warming of 1.5°C, Chapter 2, https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/
Ibrahim, M. H., & Law, S. H. (2014). Social capital and CO2 emission—output relations: a panel analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 29, 528-534.
Ikram M, Zhou P, Shah SAA, Liu GQ (2019) Do environmental management systems help improves corporate sustainable development? Evidence from manufacturing companies in Pakistan. J Clean Prod 226:628–641
Khan, S. A. R., Yu, Z., Belhadi, A., & Mardani, A. (2020). Investigating the effects of renewable energy on international trade and environmental quality. Journal of Environmental management, 272, 111089.
Liddle, B., & Sadorsky, P. (2018). How much does increasing non-fossil fuels in electricity generation reduce carbon dioxide emissions?. Applied energy, 197, 212-221.
Mózner, Z. V. (2013). A consumption-based approach to carbon emission accounting–sectoral differences and environmental benefits. Journal of Cleaner Production, 42, 83-95.
Mensah, C. N., Long, X., Boamah, K. B., Bediako, I. A., Dauda, L., & Salman, M. (2018). The effect of innovation on CO 2 emissions of OCED countries from 1990 to 2014. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(29), 29678-29698.
Navarro, A., Puig, R., K?l?ç, E., Penavayre, S., & Fullana-i-Palmer, P. (2017). Eco-innovation and benchmarking of carbon footprint data for vineyards and wineries in Spain and France. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 1661-1671.
Ozturk, Ilhan, A. (2013). The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy economics, 36, 262-267.
OCED (2009) Sustainable Manufacturing and Eco-Innovation Synthesis Report Framework, Practices and Measurement Eco-innovation.
Peters, G. P., Minx, J. C., Weber, C. L., & Edenhofer, O. (2011). Growth in emission transfers via international trade from 1990 to 2008. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 108(21), 8903-8908.
Pesaran, H. M. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. University of Cambridge, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, 435.
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.
Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of econometrics, 142(1), 50-93.
Porter, M., & Van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. The Dynamics of the eco-efficient economy: environmental regulation and competitive advantage, 33, 120-134.
Safi, A., Chen, Y., Wahab, S., Ali, S., Yi, X., & Imran, M. (2021). Financial instability and consumption-based carbon emission in E-7 countries: The role of trade and economic growth. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 383-391.
Shahbaz, M., Nasreen, S., Ahmed, K., & Hammoudeh, S. (2017). Trade openness–carbon emissions nexus: the importance of turning points of trade openness for country panels. Energy Economics, 61, 221-232.
Solomon, S. C. (2017). Global modeling of atmospheric air in the far ultraviolet. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 122(7), 7834-7848.
Torras, M., & Boyce, J. K. (1998). Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecological economics, 25(2), 147-160.
Wang, L., Chang, H. L., Rizvi, S. K. A., & Sari, A. (2017). Is eco-innovation and export diversification mutually exclusive to control carbon emissions in G-7 countries? Journal of Environmental Management, 270, 110829.
Yang, Z., Li, W., Pei, Y., Qiao, W., & Wu, Y. (2018). Classification of the type of eco-geological environment of a coal mine district: A case study of an ecologically fragile region in Western China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 1513-1526.
Yao, X., Shah, W. U. H., Yasmeen, R., Zhang, Y., Kamal, M. A., & Khan, A. (2021). The impact of trade on energy efficiency in the global value chain: A simultaneous equation approach. Science of the Total Environment, 765, 142759.
Yurdakul, M., & Kazan, H. (2020). Effects of eco-innovation on economic and environmental performance: Evidence from Turkey’s manufacturing companies. Sustainability, 12(8), 3167.
Zhang, X.L., Yin, H.T., Zhao, Y., (2015). Impact of environmental regulations on the efficiency and CO2 emissions of power plants in China. Appl. Energy 149, 238–247
Zhang, Y. J., Peng, Y. L., Ma, C. Q., & Shen, B. (2017). Can environmental innovation facilitate carbon emissions reduction? Evidence from China. Energy Policy, 100, 18-28.
