4.6 Article

Investigating the role of export product diversification for renewable, and non-renewable energy consumption in GCC (gulf cooperation council) countries: does the Kuznets hypothesis exist?

期刊

ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
卷 24, 期 6, 页码 8397-8417

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10668-021-01789-z

关键词

Export product diversification; Renewable energy; Kuznets hypothesis; GCC countries; Panel cointegration analysis; JEL Classifications; C32; F1; F12; Q56

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found a negative correlation between renewable energy and export product diversification, and a positive correlation between the square of export product diversification. The results support the Kuznets hypothesis and suggest that promoting export diversification can reduce GCC countries' reliance on oil.
This study explores the effects of renewable and nonrenewable energy demand on export product diversification, economic growth, natural resources, human capital, and trade in GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) countries using data of six countries from 1990 to 2019. The empirical analysis integrates the panel unit root tests (IPS and CIPS), panel quantile regression, and fully modified OLS models. The empirical results confirm that there exists a significant negative relationship between renewable energy and export diversification; signifying that diversification of products will reduce renewable energy. Similarly, when compared to the square of export product diversification, it shows a positive and significant correlation. The empirical findings highlighted the presence of Kuznets's hypothesis between export product diversification, renewable, and non-renewable energy consumption. Furthermore, the findings suggest that natural resources and economic growth may increase overall energy consumption in GCC countries. It implies an important policy suggestion that encouraging export diversification will reduce GCC countries' reliance on oil to meet energy demand.

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

4.6
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