4.7 Article

Does the quality of institutions and education strengthen the quality of the environment? Evidence from a global perspective

Journal

ENERGY
Volume 218, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.119303

Keywords

Environmental degradation; GDP; Human capital; Institutions; Renewable energy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the determinants of global environmental degradation, finding that institutional quality and human capital play important roles in protecting the environment.
This paper explores the determinants of global environmental degradation by utilising a newly formulated conceptual framework to examine whether the quality of institutions in a country plays a moderating role on environmental degradation. This issue has become a widespread concern in academia but few studies have accounted for these moderating roles. This is the scientific novelty of this study in comparison to previously published works. The study utilises unbalanced panel data from 114 countries. The dynamic panel GMM estimator is deployed to estimate a newly constructed global environmental degradation model. Generally, our findings support the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis where we find the EKC has an inverted-U shape. More importantly, we find that institutional quality and human capital facilitate the impacts of both foreign direct investment (FDI) and renewable energy in reducing environmental degradation. These findings not only advanced the prior environmental literature but it also provides a clearer picture for policymakers on the channel of institutional quality and human capital in protecting the environment. Therefore, corresponding policy measures should focus on improving the quality of institutions and human capital to effectively reduce environmental degradation for sustainable development. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available