4.8 Article

Environmental sustainability and economic development in sub-Saharan Africa: A modified EKC hypothesis

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110897

关键词

Environmental sustainability; Economic development; Modified EKC hypothesis; Panel ARDL; SSA countries

资金

  1. Dire Dawa University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study in sub-Saharan African countries unveils a modified Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis, where the environment-development linkage depends on the abundance of natural resources. Energy consumption and trade openness are found to have a long term detrimental effect on the environment, suggesting the need for appropriate policies to ensure environmental sustainability alongside economic development efforts.
Despite numerous studies of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC), the evidence is still inconclusive and little has been done to capture the issue of environmental sustainability and welfare aspects of growth in the EKC relationship. Accordingly, this paper aims to investigate the environment-development linkage under a sustainability-oriented EKC framework in 20 sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries for the period from 1990 to 2015. The Common Correlated Effects version of Pooled Mean Group Estimator (CCE-PMG) in the context of error-correction based panel Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model augmented with cross-sectional averages was employed as a preferred estimation technique. The study also used an appropriate U test to check the presence of genuine inverted U-shaped EKC relationship. The results confirm the existence of a modified EKC hypothesis in SSA, but the linkage depends on the extent of endowment of natural resources. Among the growth-related factors, energy consumption and trade openness are found to have a long run detrimental effect on the environment. The study suggests that country's effort for economic development needs to be accompanied by appropriate policy options to ensure environmental sustainability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据