| Literature DB >> 34421336 |
Gao Ling1, Asif Razzaq2,3, Yaqiong Guo4, Tehreem Fatima5,6, Farrukh Shahzad6.
Abstract
In the real world, economic covariates follow asymmetric and time-varying patterns. Therefore, it is imperative to integrate these effects while estimating environmental and economic relationships. Although prevailing literature reveals various emissions-deriving and eliminating factors, however, there is a dearth of empirical evidence that estimates the asymmetric and time-varying effect of globalization, natural resources, and financial development from a multidimensional perspective in China. In doing so, we employ the nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) and cross-wavelet modeling framework to explore the long- and short-run nonlinear and time-variant association between globalization, natural resources, financial development, and carbon emissions from 1980 to 2017. The NARDL method has the benefit of discriminating the long-term and short-term asymmetric carbon emission responses due to a positive and negative shock in our primary variables of interest. Mainly, the findings of NARDL estimations confirm that positive shocks in globalization and financial developments have a significant positive impact on carbon emissions, whereas negative shock in natural resources has a significant positive impact on carbon emissions. Similarly, the outcomes of continuous wavelet transformation and wavelet transformation coherence confirm the causal linkages between covariates; however, this effect varies across different time and frequency domains. These results imply that environmental researchers should consider asymmetric transmission channels and time-frequency associations among variables to devise long-term sustainable policies.Entities:
Keywords: Carbon emissions; Financial development; Globalization; Natural resources; Nonlinear ARDL; Wavelet approach
Year: 2021 PMID: 34421336 PMCID: PMC8369448 DOI: 10.1007/s10668-021-01724-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Dev Sustain ISSN: 1387-585X Impact factor: 4.080
Summery of literature reviw
| Authors | Year | Outcome variable | Explanatory variable | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chang ( | 1981–2006 | CO2 | Energy consumption, gross domestic product | JCT, ECM |
| Cole et al. ( | 2001–2004 | CO2 | FDI and GDP | FEM |
| Govindaraju and Tang ( | 1965–2009 | CO2 | GDP and coal consumption | VECM cand causality test |
| Guo ( | 1978–2010 | CO2 | Gross domestic product | VECM cand causality test |
| Jalil and Feridun ( | 1953–2006 | CO2 | Financial development (FD), energy consumption, and GDP | ARDL bounds test |
| Jalil and Mahmud ( | 1975–2005 | CO2 | GDP, trade, and energy consumption | ARDL bounds test, ECM |
| Jayanthakumaran et al. ( | 1972–2007 | CO2 | GDP, trade openness, and energy consumption | ARDL bounds test |
| Kang et al. ( | 1997–2012 | CO2 | GDP, energy structure, population density, urbanization, and trade openness | Spatial PDA |
| Li et al. ( | 1996–2012 | CO2 | GDP, trade openness, urbanization, energy consumption | GMM, ARDL bounds test |
| Li et al. ( | 1998–2014 | CO2 | Population, carbon intensity, GDP, urbanization, economic structure, energy consumption | STIRPAT model |
| Li et al. (2018) | 1953–2016 | CO2 | GDP, energy consumption, energy intensity, urbanization | JCT, unit root test |
| Ren et al. ( | 2001–2010 | CO2 | FDI, industrial income, trade openness, import | FEM, REM |
| Shahbaz et al. ( | 1971–2011 | CO2 | GDP, coal consumption | ARDL and VECM Granger causality test |
| Shahbaz et al. ( | 1970–2012 | CO2 | Coal consumption, globalization, gross domestic product | Unit root test, VECM Granger causality test |
| Wang et al. ( | 1995–2007 | CO2 | Energy consumption, GDP | Panel VECM and cointegration |
| Wang et al. ( | 1995–2011 | CO2 | Energy consumption, urbanization | PDA |
| Zhang ( | 1980–2009 | CO2 | Financial development, gross domestic product | Granger causality and variance decomposition |
Fixed effect model (FEM), random effect model (REM), generalized method of moments” “(GMM), panel data analysis (PDA), autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL), error correction method” “((ECM), vector error correction method (VECM), Johansen cointegration test (JCT), stochastic impacts” by regression on population, affluence, and technology (STIRPAT)
Fig. 1Theoretical framework
Descriptive statistic
| CO2 | GLOB | NR | FD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 3.496 | 47.88 | 6.179 | 69.30 |
| Standard error | 0.330 | 2.251 | 0.782 | 3.588 |
| Median | 2.696 | 48.19 | 5.215 | 64.55 |
| Maximum | 7.557 | 64.79 | 19.23 | 108.5 |
| Minimum | 1.460 | 26.88 | 1.387 | 41.05 |
| Std. Dev | 1.956 | 13.32 | 4.628 | 21.23 |
| Skewness | 1.039 | − 0.146 | 1.618 | 0.454 |
| Kurtosis | − 0.2918 | − 1.543 | 2.336 | − 1.041 |
Source: Author’s estimations
Unit root test Results
| Variable | CO2 | NR | GLO | FD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ADF (Level) | − 2.027 | − 2.588 | − 0.313 | − 1.327 |
| ADF (Δ) | − 5.054*** | − 6.560*** | − 5.126** | − 5.458*** |
| ZA (Level) | − 0.807 | − 2.629 | − 0.700 | − 1.327 |
| Break Year | 2016 | 2015 | 2007 | 2009 |
| ZA (Δ) | − 5.038*** | − 6.536*** | − 5.167** | − 5.453*** |
| Break Year | 2014 | 2016 | 2002 | 2011 |
Short-run result of nonlinear ARDL
| Panel A | Coefficient | Std. Error | t-Statistic |
|---|---|---|---|
| C | 0.6776** | 0.2391 | 2.8338 |
| ECM (-1) | 0.2652** | 0.1336 | − 1.9853 |
| GLOB_POS(-1) | 0.0165** | 0.0068 | 2.3938 |
| GLOB_NEG(-1) | − 0.2300 | 0.2165 | − 1.0623 |
| NR_POS(-1) | 0.0785 | 0.0633 | 1.2402 |
| NR_NEG(-1) | 0.0560** | 0.0309 | 1.8144 |
| FD_POS(-1) | 0.0059* | 0.0033 | 1.7435 |
| FD_NEG(-1) | − 0.0018 | 0.0065 | − 0.2852 |
| ΔCO (-1) | 0.8290*** | 0.1790 | 4.6293 |
| ΔNR_NEG | 0.1166*** | 0.0333 | 3.4927 |
| ΔFD_NEG(-1) | − 0.0206** | 0.0076 | − 2.6942 |
| ΔNR_POS(-1) | − 0.0652** | 0.0317 | − 2.0504 |
| ΔGLOB_NEG(-1) | − 0.2375 | 0.1982 | − 1.1984 |
| ΔGLOB_POS(-1) | 0.0428** | 0.0218 | 1.9633 |
_POS and _NEG represent positive and negative shocks. ΔCO2 change in CO2 emission, ΔFD change in financial development, ΔGLOB change in globalization, ΔNR change in natural resources. Wald LR signifies the Wald test for long-term asymmetry, LB and UB denote lower bound and upper bound values, [] indicate the probability values, C is constant
Long-run results of nonlinear ARDL
| Variable | Coefficient | Std. Error | t-Statistic |
|---|---|---|---|
| GLOB_POS(-1) | 0.0622* | 0.0347 | 1.7925 |
| GLOBN_NEG(-1) | − 0.8674 | 1.137 | − 0.7626 |
| NR_POS(-1) | 0.2960 | 0.1166 | 2.5382 |
| NR_NEG(-1) | 0.2114** | 0.0950 | 2.2252 |
| FD_POS(-1) | 0.0515** | 0.0243 | 2.1193 |
| FD_NEG(-1) | − 0.0069 | 0.0263 | − 0.2648 |
The coefficients in long run (_POS and _NEG) are calculated as
Diagnostic inspection
| Diagnostic Test | χ2 ( | Decision |
|---|---|---|
| R2/Adjusted R2 | 0.94 and 0.805 | Model is good fit |
| F-bound test | 14.7 (0.0034) | Model is good fit |
| Wald LR test | 2.43 (0.067) | Long-term asymmetry is normal |
| Jarque Bera test (χ2) | 1.289 (0.524) | ARDL model has normality |
| LM test (χ2) | 1.98 (0.177) | No serial correlation exists |
| BPG test (χ2) | 0.54 (0.89) | No heteroscedasticity exists |
| Ramsey reset test (χ2) | 0.142 (0.839) | The model is correctly specified |
Values in parentheses denote p values and significance level at 1% and 5% are presented by * (**). In both cases, the value of the F test is higher than lower and upper bound values at 1%. Heteroscedasticity and homoscedasticity tests are normal, as the p-value of each is greater than 5%
Fig. 2CUSUM and CUSUMQ
Fig. 3Decomposition series of CO2 on J = 6 wavelet levels. Note: D1& D2 indicate short-run, D3& D4 medium-run and D5 &D6 represent long-run and S6 shows very long-run.
Fig. 4Decomposition series of GLOB on J = 6 wavelet levels
Fig. 5Decomposition series of FD on J = 6 wavelet levels
Fig. 6Decomposition series of NR on J = 6 wavelet levels
Fig. 7Continuous wavelet power spectra of the CO2
Fig. 8Continuous wavelet power spectra of the GLOB
Fig. 9Continuous wavelet power spectra of the FD
Fig. 10Continuous wavelet power spectra of the NR
Fig. 11Wavelet coherence between CO2 and GLOB
Fig. 12Wavelet coherence between CO2 and FD
Fig. 13Wavelet coherence between CO2 and NR