| Literature DB >> 31694282 |
Irfan Ullah1, Sher Ali2, Muhammad Haroon Shah3, Farrah Yasim4, Alam Rehman5, Basheer M Al-Ghazali6.
Abstract
China has remained top among the carbon dioxide (CO2) emitting countries in the world, while it has a significant contribution to world trade after World Trade Organization (WTO) reforms in China. The dramatic increase in CO2 emissions has been witnessed. This study examines the linkages between trade openness, CO2 emissions, and healthcare expenditures in China using time series data for the period 1990-2017. The study extended a theoretical model by adding healthcare expenditures, CO2 emissions, and trade openness with some constraints. We used simultaneous equation method for the analysis, and the outcomes suggest that trade is significantly affecting the CO2 emissions in the country, resulting in an increase of healthcare expenditures. The government needs reforms and trade policy embodied green energy consumption in the industrial sector, especially in export sector industries. In addition, carbon tax may be an important tool to reduce CO2 emissions and it may compensate the healthcare spending in the country.Entities:
Keywords: CO2 emissions; China; healthcare spending; trade openness
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31694282 PMCID: PMC6862156 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16214298
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Source: World Bank Development Indictors [29].
Figure 2Source: OECD (2019), CO2 emissions embodied in international trade, http://oe.cd/io-CO2.
Figure 3Source: World Bank Development Indicators [29].
Figure 4Model.
2SLS Results for Health Expenditures Model.
| Variable | Coefficient | Standard Error | T-Ratio [Prob] |
|---|---|---|---|
| CO2 | 0.331 | 0.166 | 1.996 [0.046] * |
| TL | 0.048 | 0.036 | 1.334 [0.193] |
| PG | 0.3543 | 9.5314 | 6.677 [0.000] *** |
| IP | 0.0018 | 0.0038 | 0.475 [0.642] |
| R-Squared | 0.97638 | R-Bar-Squared | 0.97323 |
| F-Stat. [Prob. F Stat] | 310.05 [0.000] | ||
| DW-statistic | 1.88365 | System Log-likelihood | 38.3117 |
* significant at p < 0.05 level. ** significant at p < 0.01 level. *** significant at p < 0.001 level.
2SLS results for CO2 emissions model.
| Variable Coefficient | Standard Error | T-Ratio [Prob] | |
|---|---|---|---|
| TL | 0.047 | 0.0231 | 2.043 [0.043] * |
| HE | 0.142 | 0.219 | 0.645 [0.482] |
| PG | 0.786 | 0.258 | 3.047 [0.009] ** |
| IP | 0.841 | 0.126 | 6.674 [0.000] *** |
| R-Squared | 0.973 | R-Bar-Squared | 0.96743 |
| S.E. of Regression | 0.072 | F-Stat. F (3,14) | 169.3 [0.000] |
| DW-statistic | 1.676 | System Log-likelihood | 38.311 |
* significant at p < 0.05 level. ** significant at p < 0.01 level. *** significant at p < 0.001 level.
3SLS outcomes for health expenditures model.
| Variable | Coefficient | Standard Error | T-Ratio [Prob] |
|---|---|---|---|
| CO2 | 0.298 | 0.163 | 1.978 [0.048] * |
| TL | 0.018 | 0.038 | 0.474 [0.632] |
| PG | 0.3648 | 0.0524 | 6.961 [0.000] *** |
| IP | 0.0028 | 0.0046 | 0.608 [0.482] |
| R-Squared | 0.97608 | R-Bar-Squared | 0.97282 |
| F-Stat. [Prob. F Stat] | 305.235 [0.000] | ||
| DW-statistic | 1.872 | System Log-likelihood | 39.275 |
* significant at p < 0.05 level. ** significant at p < 0.01 level. *** significant at p < 0.001 level.
2SLS Results for CO2 Emissions Model.
| Variable | Coefficient | Standard Error | T-Ratio [Prob] |
|---|---|---|---|
| TL | 0.054 | 0.025 | 2.195 [0.041] * |
| HE | 0.250 | 0.207 | 1.208 [0.281] |
| PG | 0.758 | 0.245 | 3.097 [0.008] ** |
| IP | 0.793 | 0.136 | 5.831 [0.000] *** |
| R-Squared | 0.9728 | R-Bar-Squared | 0.96707 |
| F-Stat. F (3,14) | 167.3 [0.000] | ||
| DW-statistic | 1.796 | System Log-likelihood | 37.275 |
* significant at p < 0.05 level. ** significant at p < 0.01 level. *** significant at p < 0.001 level.
Pairwise Granger Causality Tests.
| Null Hypothesis: | F-Statistic | Prob. |
|---|---|---|
| CO2 does not Granger Cause TL | 2.34514 | 0.1418 |
| TL does not Granger Cause CO2 | 5.29775 | 0.0213 * |
| HE does not Granger Cause TL | 2.85156 | 0.1180 |
| TL does not Granger Cause HE | 1.00979 | 0.3933 |
| IP does not Granger Cause TL | 4.47741 | 0.0353 * |
| TL does not Granger Cause IP | 2.53736 | 0.1205 |
| HE does not Granger Cause PG | 1.80703 | 0.2096 |
| PG does not Granger Cause HE | 9.07768 | 0.0047 ** |
| CO2 does not Granger Cause PG | 2.64209 | 0.1120 |
| PG does not Granger Cause CO2 | 5.07730 | 0.0253 * |
| HE does not Granger Cause CO2 | 0.30366 | 0.7441 |
| CO2 does not Granger Cause HE | 4.17093 | 0.0449 * |
| CO2 does not Granger Cause IP | 1.09409 | 0.3550 |
| IP does not Granger Cause CO2 | 10.2660 | 0.0009 *** |
| HE does not Granger Cause IP | 1.99829 | 0.1782 |
| IP does not Granger Cause HE | 0.40864 | 0.6735 |
* significant at p < 0.05 level. ** significant at p < 0.01 level. *** significant at p < 0.001 level.
Figure 5Path diagram of the empirical analysis.