| Literature DB >> 36081425 |
Abstract
For the purpose of coping with or eliminating the influence of carbon dioxide emissions effectively, it is crucial to apply the green investment models to carry out a qualitative analysis of carbon dioxide emission evolution. The effect of financial risks on the implementation of the carbon dioxide emission limit is essential for the distribution of resources, and it is necessary to summarize the patterns and make innovations in the process of limiting the emissions of carbon dioxide effectively. In the case of fully complying with the principles of low-carbon economic development and related policy protection, the appropriate model for low-carbon economic development is identified. In this article, the multivariate primary nonlinear model is applied to the analysis of the nonlinear influence of financial risks on carbon dioxide emissions to cope with the problem of financial risks on carbon dioxide emissions at present. In this method, a multivariate primary nonlinear model is established based on the detailed analysis of the financial development features, and the parameters are optimized mainly from various aspects such as the structure of the model, the features of data, and the dynamic changes of the model so as to obtain the optimal values for the parameters of the constructed multivariate primary nonlinear model. The results of the practical case analysis indicate that the influence of financial risks on the limits of domestic carbon dioxide emissions is differentiated in accordance with the results and related categories. Only in this way can the regional division of carbon emission factors be properly classified. The relationship between economic growth and carbon emission increase and changes indicates that effective strategies for carbon emission reduction should be adopted. The established panel data model is used to carry out an in-depth analysis of the influence of carbon dioxide limitations in Asian countries.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36081425 PMCID: PMC9448573 DOI: 10.1155/2022/8458122
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Public Health ISSN: 1687-9805
Comparison of sampling effects of the experimental samples.
| Training set | Test data set | Validation data set | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy rate (%) | Recall rate (%) | F1 value (%) | Accuracy rate (%) | Recall rate (%) | F1 value (%) | |
| Without sampling | 35.82 | 41.01 | 38.20 | 31.01 | 35.24 | 33.09 |
| Comprehensive sampling | 52.58 | 67.47 | 59.11 | 36.86 | 39.77 | 38.26 |
Figure 1Comparison of the overdue rate without using the model and with using the model.
Figure 2Impact of financial risks on carbon dioxide emissions.
Results of nonlinear impact analysis of the relationship between financial risks and carbon dioxide emissions.
| Variables | Green economy | Analysis of the nonlinear effect of carbon dioxide emissions | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter 1 | Parameter 2 | Parameter 1 | Parameter 2 | Parameter 3 | Parameter 4 | |
| Scale of national economy | −0.018 | −0.03 | 0.094 | 0.09 | 0.104 | 0.098 |
| Type of national economy | −0.04 | 0.01 | −0.075 | −0.01 | −0.053 | −0.08 |
| Financial risks | 0.615 | 0.551 | 0.337 | |||
| Green economy | 0.553 | 0.347 | ||||
ADF check result.
| ADF |
| |
|---|---|---|
|
| −1.23 | 1 |
|
| 0.93 | 0 |
|
| 0.92 | 1 |
|
| 1.33 | 1 |
| d | 1.52 | 1 |
|
| −1.52 | 0 |
| Δ | −4.34 | 1 |
| Δ | −3.11 | 0 |
| Δ | −3.23 | 0 |
| Δ | −4.11 | 1 |
| Δd | −4.03 | 1 |
| Δ | −4.23 | 0 |
Granger causality test results.
| Null hypothesis |
| Prob. |
|---|---|---|
|
| 0.42 | 0.63 |
|
| 3.16 | 0.02 |
ADRL estimation results.
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cointegrating check | ||||
|
| 6.74 | 5.81 | 07.94 | 6.81 |
| ARDL estimation | ||||
| Intercept | −7.6 | −6.2 | −4.23 | −5.91 |
| e | 00.31 | 000.68 | NA | NA |
|
| 3.21 | 3.53 | 3.15 | 2.86 |
|
| NA | −0.53 | NA | −0.45 |
| d | −0.35 | −0.27 | −0.67 | −0.17 |
| tr | 0.56 | 0.23 | 0.19 | 0.89 |
Note. means significant at 1% level, means significant at 5% level, means significant at 10% level.