Volume 26, Issue 2 (Summer 2021)                   JPBUD 2021, 26(2): 153-179 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Moridian A, Yarmohammadian N, Motalebi M, Shadmehr A. (2021). The Role of Economic Complexity in the Ecological Footprint: A Review of the EKC Hypothesis for Iran. JPBUD. 26(2), 153-179. doi:10.52547/jpbud.26.2.153
URL: http://jpbud.ir/article-1-2006-en.html
The Role of Economic Complexity in the Ecological Footprint: A Review of the EKC Hypothesis for Iran
Ali Moridian 1, Nasser Yarmohammadian2 , Masoumeh Motalebi3 , Afsaneh Shadmehr4
1- Isfahan University of Arts, Isfahan, Iran , alimoridian@ymail.com
2- Department of Urban Economics, Isfahan University of Arts, Isfahan, Iran
3- Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran.
4- Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:   (2931 Views)
The aim of this study is to test the validity of the Kuznets Environmental Curve (EKC) hypothesis for Iran. For this purpose, this study used the FourierARDL method and causality test with time change to analyze the short-term and long-term relationships between economic growth, economic complexity index, energy consumption, and ecological footprint. Findings from the Fourier ARDL approach confirm the existence of coherence between variables. In addition, the results of this study show that energy consumption and economic growth increase the ecological footprint in the short and long term. However, the short-term elasticity of economic growth is smaller than the long-term elasticity, meaning that the EKC hypothesis is not valid for Iran. This finding is confirmed by the causality test with time change. The overall results show that economic complexity has a diminishing effect on the ecological footprint and economic growth is not effective in solving environmental problems in Iran. Therefore, the Iranian government should encourage an environmentally friendly production process and cleaner technologies in exports to reduce environmental pollution.
Keywords: Economic Complexity, Fourier ARDL, Casualty Test with Time Change, Ecological Footprint, Environment.
Full-Text [PDF 1103 kb]   (958 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Energy Economics, Environment and Natural Resources
Received: Apr 27 2021 | Accepted: Jul 10 2021 | ePublished: Dec 05 2021
References
1. Atlas of Economic Complexity (2020). Available online: [https://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/countries (Accessed on 20 July).]
2. Azizi, Z., Daraei, F., & Boroujeni, A. N. (2019). The Impact of Economic Complexity on Environmental Pollution. Economic Development Policy, 7(2), 201-219. [DOI:https://dx.doi.org/10.22051/edp.2020.29451.1225]
3. Bagliani, M., Bravo, G., & Dalmazzone, S. (2008). A Consumption-Based Approach to Environmental Kuznets Curves Using the Ecological Footprint Indicator. Ecological Economics, 65(3), 650-661. [DOI:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.01.010]
4. Bilgili, F., Ulucak, R., Koçak, E., & İlkay, S. Ç. (2020). Does Globalization Matter for Environmental Sustainability? Empirical Investigation for Turkey by Markov Regime Switching Models. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(1), 1087-1100. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-019-06996-w]
5. Boleti, E., Garas, A., Kyriakou, A., & Lapatinas, A. (2021). Economic Complexity and Environmental Performance: Evidence from a World Sample. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 26(3), 251-270. [DOI:10.1007/s10666-021-09750-0]
6. Bölük, G., & Mert, M. (2014). Fossil & Renewable Energy Consumption, GHGs (Greenhouse Gases) and Economic Growth: Evidence from a Panel of EU (European :union:) Countries. Energy, 74(1), 439-446. [DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2014.07.008]
7. BP Statistical Review of World Energy (2019). Available at: [https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/news-and-insights/press-releases/bp-statistical-review-of-wor]
8. Brown, S. P., & McDonough, I. K. (2016). Using the Environmental Kuznets Curve to Evaluate Energy Policy: Some Practical Considerations. Energy Policy, 98(1), 453-458. [DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.09.020]
9. Can, M., & Gozgor, G. (2017). The Impact of Economic Complexity on Carbon Emissions: Evidence from France. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(19), 16364-16370. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-017-9219-7]
10. Charfeddine, L. (2017). The Impact of Energy Consumption and Economic Development on Ecological Footprint and CO2 Emissions: Evidence from a Markov Switching Equilibrium Correction Model. Energy Economics, 65(1), 355-374. [DOI:10.1016/j.eneco.2017.05.009]
11. Chen, Y., Wang, Z., & Zhong, Z. (2019). CO2 Emissions, Economic Growth, Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Production and Foreign Trade in China. Renewable Energy, 131(1), 208-216. [DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2018.07.047]
12. Christopoulos, D. K., & Leon-Ledesma, M. A. (2011). International Output Convergence, Breaks, and Asymmetric Adjustment. Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, 15(3), 1-35. [DOI:10.2202/1558-3708.1823]
13. Danish, Zhang, B., Wang, B., & Wang, Z. (2017). Role of Renewable Energy and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption on EKC: Evidence from Pakistan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 156(1), 855-864. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.203]
14. Destek, M. A., Ulucak, R., & Dogan, E. (2018). Analyzing the Environmental Kuznets Curve for the EU Countries: The Role of Ecological Footprint. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(29), 29387-29396. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-018-2911-4]
15. Doğan, B., Saboori, B., & Can, M. (2019). Does Economic Complexity Matter for Environmental Degradation? An Empirical Analysis for Different Stages of Development. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(31), 31900-31912. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-019-06333-1]
16. Dong, K., Sun, R., & Dong, X. (2018). CO2 Emissions, Natural Gas and Renewables, Economic Growth: Assessing the Evidence from China. Science of the Total Environment, 640(1), 293-302. [DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.322]
17. Environmental Performance Index (2020). Available Online: [https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2020/country/irn]
18. Global Footprint Network (2010). Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010. Retrieved May, 25, 2014. [https://www.footprintnetwork.org/]
19. Global Footprint Network (2020). Available Online: [http://data.footprintnetwork.org (Accessed on 4 July).]
20. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1991). Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth. The Review of Economic Studies, 58(1), 43-61. [DOI:10.2307/2298044]
21. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. In: National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working Papers Series, No. 3914. [DOI:10.3386/w3914]
22. Hacker, R. S., & Hatemi-J, A. (2006). Tests for Causality between Integrated Variables Using Asymptotic and Bootstrap Distributions: Theory and Application. Applied Economics, 38(13), 1489-1500. [DOI:10.1080/00036840500405763]
23. Hausmann, R., Hidalgo, C. A., Bustos, S., Coscia, M., & Simoes, A. (2014). The Atlas of Economic Complexity: Mapping Paths to Prosperity: Mit Press. [DOI:10.7551/mitpress/9647.001.0001]
24. Hidalgo, C. A., & Hausmann, R. (2009). The Building Blocks of Economic Complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(26), 10570-10575. [DOI:10.1073/pnas.0900943106]
25. Horee, H. R., Galali, S. A., & Gafare, S. (2013). Examining the Impact of Financial Development and Energy Consumption on the Environmental Degradation in Iran in the Framework of the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis (EKC). Iranian Energy Economics, 2(6), 27-48. [http://jiee.atu.ac.ir/article_759.html]
26. Hubacek, K., Guan, D., Barrett, J., & Wiedmann, T. (2009). Environmental Implications of Urbanization and Lifestyle Change in China: Ecological and Water Footprints. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(14), 1241-1248. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.03.011]
27. Lee, K.-K., & Vu, T. V. (2020). Economic Complexity, Human Capital and Income Inequality: A Cross-Country Analysis. The Japanese Economic Review, 71(4), 695-718. [DOI:10.1007/s42973-019-00026-7]
28. Li, K., & Lin, B. (2015). Impacts of Urbanization and Industrialization on Energy Consumption/CO2 Emissions: Does the Level of Development Matter? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52(1), 1107-1122. [DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.185]
29. Liu, H., Kim, H., Liang, S., & Kwon, O.-S. (2018). Export Diversification and Ecological Footprint: A Comparative Study on EKC Theory among Korea, Japan, and China. Sustainability, 10(10), 3657-3669. [DOI:10.3390/su10103657]
30. Maddison, A. (2001). The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective: The Development Center of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. [DOI:10.1787/9789264189980-en]
31. Madlener, R., & Sunak, Y. (2011). Impacts of Urbanization on Urban Structures and Energy Demand: What Can We Learn for Urban Energy Planning and Urbanization Management? Sustainable Cities and Society, 1(1), 45-53. [DOI:10.1016/j.scs.2010.08.006]
32. McNown, R., Sam, C. Y., & Goh, S. K. (2018). Bootstrapping the Autoregressive Distributed Lag Test for Cointegration. Applied Economics, 50(13), 1509-1521. [DOI:10.1080/00036846.2017.1366643]
33. Mobarak, A., & Mohammadlou, N. (2010). The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Greenhouse Gases Emissions: an Empirical Test of Pollution Haven Hypotheses and Environmental Kuznets Curve. The Journal of Planning and Budgeting, 14(1), 31-58. [http://jpbud.ir/article-1-175-fa.html]
34. Molaei, M., & Basharat, E. (2015). Investigating Relationship between Gross Domestic Product and Ecological Footprint as an Environmental Degradation Index. Journal of Economic Research (Tahghighat-E-Eghtesadi), 50(4), 1017-1033. [DOI:https://dx.doi.org/10.22059/jte.2015.56156]
35. Munir, Q., Lean, H. H., & Smyth, R. (2020). CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in the ASEAN-5 Countries: A Cross-sectional Dependence Approach. Energy Economics, 85(1), 104571. [DOI:10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104571]
36. Nahidi Amirkhiz, M., Rahimzadeh, F., & Shokouhifard, S. (2020). Study of the Relation among Economic Growth, Energy Using and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Case study: Selected Countries of the OIC). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 22(3), 13-26. [http://jest.srbiau.ac.ir/article_12735.html]
37. Narayan, P. K., & Narayan, S. (2010). Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth: Panel Data Evidence from Developing Countries. Energy Policy, 38(1), 661-666. [DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.09.005]
38. Neagu, O. (2019). The Link between Economic Complexity and Carbon Emissions in the European :union: Countries: A Model Based on the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Approach. Sustainability, 11(17), 4753-4780. [DOI:10.3390/su11174753]
39. Neagu, O., & Teodoru, M. C. (2019). The Relationship between Economic Complexity, Energy Consumption Structure and Greenhouse Gas Emission: Heterogeneous Panel Evidence from the EU Countries. Sustainability, 11(2), 497-526. [DOI:10.3390/su11020497]
40. OEC (2020). Economic Complexity Rankings. Available at: [https://oec.world]
41. Panayotou, T. (1993). Empirical Tests and Policy Analysis of Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development. International Labour Office (ILO), Working Paper, WP238.
42. Pata, U. K. (2021). Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption, Economic Complexity, CO2 Emissions, and Ecological Footprint in the USA: Testing the EKC Hypothesis with a Structural Break. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(1), 846-861. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-020-10446-3]
43. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds Testing Approaches to the Analysis of Level Relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289-326. [DOI:10.1002/jae.616]
44. Pritchett, L. (1997). Divergence, Big Time. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(3), 3-17. [DOI:10.1257/jep.11.3.3]
45. Ranis, G., & Fei, J. C. (1961). A Theory of Economic Development. The American Economic Review, 51(4), 533-565.
46. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Part 2), 71-102. [DOI:10.1086/261725]
47. Saboori, B., & Sulaiman, J. (2013). CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Countries: A Cointegration Approach. Energy, 55(1), 813-822. [DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2013.04.038]
48. Salmanpour, A., Mousavi, S. K., & Shokouhifard, S. (2016). The Effect of Foreign Direct Investment on Gross Domestic Saving in Iran. Economic Development Policy, 4(4), 9-33. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22051/edp.2018.17529.1121]
49. Savci, S. (2012). An Agricultural Pollutant: Chemical Fertilizer. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 3(1), 77-80. [DOI:10.7763/IJESD.2012.V3.191]
50. Shahzad, U., Fareed, Z., Shahzad, F., & Shahzad, K. (2021). Investigating the Nexus between Economic Complexity, Energy Consumption and Ecological Footprint for the United States: New Insights from Quantile Methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279(1), 123806. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123806]
51. Sinclair-Desgagné, B. (2008). The Environmental Goods and Services Industry. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 2(1), 69-99. [DOI:10.1561/101.00000012]
52. Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations: Princeton Review.
53. Stern, D. I. (2017). The Environmental Kuznets Curve after 25 Years. Journal of Bioeconomics, 19(1), 7-28. [DOI:10.1007/s10818-017-9243-1]
54. Swart, J., & Brinkmann, L. (2020). Economic Complexity and the Environment: Evidence from Brazil. Paper Presented at the Universities and Sustainable Communities: Meeting the Goals of the Agenda 2030. World Sustainability Series. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-30306-8_1]
55. Tarazkar, M. H., Ghorbanian, E., & Bakhshoodeh, M. (2017). The Effect of Economic Growth on Environmental Sustainability in Iran: Application of Ecological Footprint. Journal of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, 2(3), 51-70. [DOI:https://dx.doi.org/10.22054/eenr.2017.9067]
56. Teimouri, I., Salarvandian, F., & Ziarii, K. (2014). The Ecological Foot Print of Carbon Dioxide for Fossil Fuels in the Shiraz. Geographical Research, 29(1), 193-204. [https://jgr.ui.ac.ir/article_18035.html]
57. Torabi, T., Khajooeipour, A., Tarighi, S., & Pakravan, M. (2015). The Effect of Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and International Business on Greenhouse Gas Emission in Iran. Economic Modeling, 9(29), 63-84. [http://eco.iaufb.ac.ir/article_556765.html]
58. Usman, O., Iorember, P. T., & Olanipekun, I. O. (2019). Revisiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Hypothesis in India: The Effects of Energy Consumption and Democracy. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(13), 13390-13400. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-019-04696-z]
59. Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1998). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth (Vol. 9): New society publishers.
60. Waheed, R., Sarwar, S., & Wei, C. (2019). The Survey of Economic Growth, Energy Consumption and Carbon Emission. Energy Reports, 5(1), 1103-1115. [DOI:10.1016/j.egyr.2019.07.006]
61. Wang, Z., Yang, L., Yin, J., & Zhang, B. (2018). Assessment and Prediction of Environmental Sustainability in China Based on a Modified Ecological Footprint Model. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 132(1), 301-313. [DOI:10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.05.003]
62. Yilanci, V., & Ozgur, O. (2019). Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve for G7 Countries: Evidence from a Bootstrap Panel Causality Test in Rolling Windows. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(24), 24795-24805. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-019-05745-3]
63. Yilanci, V., & Pata, U. K. (2020a). Convergence of Per Capita Ecological Footprint among the ASEAN-5 Countries: Evidence from a Non-Linear Panel Unit Root Test. Ecological Indicators, 113(1), 106178. [DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106178]
64. Yilanci, V., & Pata, U. K. (2020b). Investigating the EKC Hypothesis for China: The Role of Economic Complexity on Ecological Footprint. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(1), 32683-32694. [DOI:10.1007/s11356-020-09434-4]
65. Yilanci, V., Bozoklu, S., & Gorus, M. S. (2020). Are BRICS Countries Pollution Havens? Evidence from a Bootstrap ARDL Bounds Testing Approach with a Fourier Function. Sustainable Cities and Society, 55(1), 102035. [DOI:10.1016/j.scs.2020.102035]
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Planning and Budgeting

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb