4.7 Article

The Environmental Kuznets Curve in a long-term perspective: Parametric vs semi-parametric models

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW
Volume 98, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106973

Keywords

Environmental Kuznets Curve; Panel data; Mean group estimators; Generalized additive model

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Empirical studies of the EKC hypothesis may be sensitive to datasets, specifications, and functional forms. This paper investigates the long-run relationship among CO2 emissions, real GDP, and energy consumption using a panel of 9 advanced economies from 1870 to 2008. The results suggest that while the EKC exists at the panel level post-1950s, the inverted U-shaped relationship between CO2 and real GDP is only validated for a subset of countries at the individual country level. However, a clear inverse U-shaped pattern emerges for all countries, except Canada, when a semi-parametric regression framework is applied.
Empirical studies of the EKC hypothesis may be very sensitive to datasets, specifications, and functional forms. The aim of this paper is to investigate the long-run relationship among CO2 emissions, real GDP, and energy consumption using a panel of 9 advanced economies from 1870 to 2008 using both parametric and semi -parametric additive models. While at the panel level the results provide support to the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) only in the post-1950s period, at the individual country level the inverted U-shaped relationship between CO2 and real GDP is validated for a subset of countries only. However, when a semi-parametric regression framework is applied an inverse U-shaped pattern becomes clear for all countries of the sample, except Canada. Empirical findings indicate that relaxing the restrictions associated with parametric regression models may be critical for the question of investigating the existence of the EKC.

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