4.1 Review

A literature review of the Environmental Kuznets Curve in GCC for 2010-2020

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.indic.2022.100181

Keywords

Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC); GCC; Literature review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article presents a systematic review of empirical literature on the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) of six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries between 2010 and 2020. The findings reveal a mixed nature of the EKC hypothesis in the GCC area. Logistic regression analysis identifies two significant factors predicting the existence of the EKC.
The early stages of economic development and national growth witness air, water, and soil pollution, which further lead to environmental deterioration. As the economy grows, clean technologies are used to offset this deterioration. This relationship between economic growth and environmental deterioration is defined by the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis. We provide a systematic review of the empirical literature on the EKC of six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries for the period between 2010 and 2020. The survey included 38 articles retrieved from the Web of Science database that were analyzed based on the length of the study, explanatory variables included, econometric methodology used, shape of the EKC, and whether the EKC hy-pothesis was supported. The findings observed the mixed nature of the EKC hypothesis in the GCC area. Logistic regression was used to identify the factors responsible for the mixed results. The two significant factors pre-dicting the existence of the EKC were adding other control variables to GDP as explanatory variables and analyzing the data on a panel of countries level instead of individual country level. The four insignificant factors were the publication year, the length of the study, structural breaks in data and econometric methodologies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available