| Literature DB >> 33840025 |
Zaid Ashiq Khan1, Mansoor Ahmed Koondhar1, Imran Khan2, Uzair Ali1, Liu Tianjun3.
Abstract
This study aims to contribute to the literature and examine the causal relationship between Pakistan's agricultural products export, industrialization, urbanization, transportation, energy consumption, and carbon emissions. For the last four decades, time-series data were used to employ short-run and long-run nexus between the selected variables by analyzing the autoregressive distributed lag model (ARDL). The Granger causality test was analyzed to estimate the causality directions. The unit root test results indicate that all the selected variables are stationary at the level and first difference. The bound test confirmed that all variables are cointegrated at a 1% significance level. Long-run estimates suggest that an increase in energy consumption will increase the export of agricultural products. An increase in urbanization, transportation, and carbon emission resulted in a decrease in agricultural products export in Pakistan. In the short run, an increase in industrialization, transportation, and energy consumption leads to an increase in agricultural products export. Increasing urbanization and carbon emission decrease the agricultural products export of Pakistan. Based on our findings, we recommend sustainable agricultural production, renewable energy consumption, low carbon emission technologies, and a green portfolio for sustainable agricultural products export.Entities:
Keywords: Agricultural products exports; Carbon emissions; Industrialization; Pakistan; Urbanization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33840025 PMCID: PMC8036015 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-13738-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 4.223
Fig. 1Theoretical framework of the study
Description and source of variables used
| Variable | Abbreviation | Unit | Data source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agricultural products export | APE | 1000 US$ | FAO 2018 |
| Industrialization | IND | Value added (% of GDP) | WDI 2018 |
| Urbanization | UP | Actual figure of urban population | FAO 2018 |
| Transportation | TP | % of commercial service exports | WDI 2018 |
| Energy Consumption | EC | kg of oil equivalent per capita | WDI 2018/International Energy Agency |
| Carbon emission | CO2 | Kiloton (kt) | WDI 2018/EDGAR 2020 |
Authors collected from World Bank (https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators), Food and Agriculture Organization (http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC), International Energy Agency (https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics?country=PAKISTAN&fuel=Energy%20consumption&indicator=Total%20final%20consumption%20(TFC)%20by%20source), and Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval EDGAR (https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=booklet2018)
Fig. 2Time trends of study variables
Fig. 3Schematic diagram of the study
Descriptive statistics of desired variables
| Tests | LnAPE | LnIND | LnUP | LnTP | LnEC | Ln CO2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 5.977 | 1.326 | 7.602 | 1.699 | 2.618 | 4.914 |
| Median | 5.899 | 1.331 | 7.619 | 1.706 | 2.638 | 4.976 |
| Maximum | 6.492 | 1.407 | 7.879 | 1.829 | 2.719 | 5.295 |
| Minimum | 5.580 | 1.254 | 7.264 | 1.379 | 2.476 | 4.359 |
| Std. dev | 0.270 | 0.031 | 0.183 | 0.089 | 0.073 | 0.277 |
| Skewness | 0.297 | 0.123 | −0.225 | −1.577 | −0.559 | −0.478 |
| Kurtosis | 1.856 | 3.817 | 1.847 | 6.259 | 2.053 | 2.030 |
| Jarque-Bera | 2.907 | 1.276 | 2.679 | 36.007 | 3.754 | 3.243 |
| Probability | 0.234 | 0.528 | 0.262 | 0.000 | 0.153 | 0.197 |
| No. of observations | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 |
Authors analyzed by Eviews 9
Results of the unit root test
| Variables | Level | 1st difference | Outcome | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | Trend and intercept | Intercept | Trend and intercept | ||
| Augmented Dickey fuller | |||||
| LnIND | −2.558 | −2.701 | −7.574*** | −7.767*** | |
| LnUP | −3.583** | −2.093 | −1.333 | −2.976 | |
| LnTP | 0.991 | 0.271 | −6.153*** | −6.947*** | |
| LnEC | −2.390 | 0.478 | −5.769*** | −7.082*** | |
| Ln CO2 | −3.625*** | −1.414 | −5.584*** | −7.244*** | |
| LnAPE | −0.830 | −3.869** | −7.437*** | −7.329*** | |
| Phillip-Perron | |||||
| LnIND | −2.434 | −2.571 | −7.690*** | −9.149*** | |
| LnUP | −22.816*** | −1.565 | −0.530 | −2.281 | |
| LnTP | 1.420 | 0.271 | −6.190*** | −6.947*** | |
| LnEC | −2.366 | 1.244 | −5.852*** | −7.095*** | |
| Ln CO2 | −4.000** | −1.414 | −5.882*** | −7.239*** | |
| LnAPE | −1.258 | −3.912** | −9.910*** | −9.731*** | |
Automatic lag length selection based on SIC
***Acquired null hypothesis rejected at 1% level, **reject the null hypothesis at 5% significant level, results in author calculation by using Eviews 9
Results of ARDL bounding test for cointegration
| Test statistic | Value | |
|---|---|---|
| F-statistic | 5.558134 | 5 |
| Critical value bounds | ||
| Significance | ||
| 10% | 2.08 | 3 |
| 5% | 2.39 | 3.38 |
| 2.5% | 2.7 | 3.73 |
| 1% | 3.06 | 4.15 |
Authors analyzed by using Eviews 9
Long- and short-run estimates analyzed by ARDL
| Variables | Coefficient | Std. Error | T-test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-run association | ||||
| C | −38.691 | 12.347 | −3.134 | 0.009* |
| LnIND | −1.673 | 2.134 | −0.784 | 0.449 |
| LnUP | −11.760 | 2.446 | 4.808 | 0.000*** |
| LnTP | −6.263 | 1.460 | −4.289 | 0.001*** |
| LnEC | 19.889 | 3.882 | 5.123 | 0.000*** |
| Ln CO2 | −13.023 | 2.154 | −6.046 | 0.000*** |
| Short-run association | ||||
| D(LnAPE(−1)) | 2.318 | 0.380 | 6.100 | 0.000*** |
| D(LnAPE(−2)) | 1.714 | 0.286 | 6.001 | 0.000*** |
| D(LnAPE(−3)) | 0.322 | 0.127 | 2.544 | 0.027 |
| D(LnIND) | 0.145 | 0.520 | 0.278 | 0.785 |
| D(LnIND(−1)) | 2.056 | 0.478 | 4.301 | 0.001*** |
| D(LnIND(−2)) | 1.569 | 0.561 | 2.795 | 0.017 |
| D(LnIND(−3)) | 2.765 | 0.528 | 5.239 | 0.000*** |
| D(LnUP) | −124.897 | 64.582 | −1.934 | 0.079 |
| D(LnUP(−1)) | −110.585 | 98.075 | −1.128 | 0.283 |
| D(LnUP(−2)) | −302.866 | 96.465 | −3.140 | 0.009** |
| D(LnTP) | −1.681 | 0.364 | −4.619 | 0.000*** |
| D(LnTP(−1)) | 3.187 | 0.458 | 6.955 | 0.000*** |
| D(LnTP(−2)) | 1.326 | 0.310 | 4.276 | 0.001*** |
| D(LnEC) | 6.335 | 1.308 | 4.842 | 0.000*** |
| D(LnEC(−1)) | −13.270 | 1.999 | −6.638 | 0.000*** |
| D(LnEC(−2)) | −6.651 | 1.434 | −4.639 | 0.000*** |
| D(Ln CO2) | −9.027 | 1.044 | −8.651 | 0.000*** |
| D(Ln CO2 (−1)) | 4.982 | 1.305 | 3.817 | 0.002** |
| D(Ln CO2 (−2)) | 7.838 | 1.447 | 5.416 | 0.000*** |
| ECT(−1) | −3.681 | 0.474 | −7.754 | 000*** |
| 0.907 | Akaike information criteria | −2.865 | ||
| Adjust | 0.799 | Schwarz criterion | −1.960 | |
| Log-likelihood | 75.428 | Hannan-Quinn criteria | −2.543 | |
| Prob | 0.000 | D.W | 2.029 | |
| Normality | 11.869 | LM test | 0.745 | |
| Heteroskedasticity | 0.443 | |||
***Acquired null hypothesis rejected at 1% level, **reject the null hypothesis as 5% significant level, results in author calculation by using Eviews 9
Granger causality tests
| Dependent variables | Independent variables | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LnAPE | LnIND | LnUP | LnTP | LnEC | LnCO2 | |
| LnAPE | – | 0.66105 | 0.44781 | 1.34479 | 3.02413** | 2.06719 |
| LnIND | 0.33620 | – | 0.74110 | 0.17917 | 2.64850** | 1.17982 |
| LnUP | 0.92546 | 0.84031 | – | 1.38575 | 1.09466 | 1.59651 |
| LnTP | 0.85199 | 5.40460*** | 0.90920 | – | 2.52408* | 0.60877 |
| LnEC | 1.47862 | 0.62214 | 0.20885 | 1.59218 | – | 1.53519 |
| Ln CO2 | 0.72789 | 0.80836 | 0.33670 | 0.58960 | 1.11925 | – |
***Acquired null hypothesis rejected at 1% level, **reject the null hypothesis as 5% significant level, results in author calculation by using Eviews 9
Fig. 4Robustness test results analyzed by Eviews 9