4.8 Review

The relationship between energy-resource depletion, climate change, health resources and the environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from the panel of selected developed countries

期刊

RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS
卷 62, 期 -, 页码 468-477

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.061

关键词

Energy depletion; Resource depletion; Climate change; Health resources; Environmental Kuznets curve; Panel GMM technique

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of the study is to examine the relationship between energy-resource depletion, climate change, health resources and the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) under the financial constraint environment in the panel of selected developed countries, over the period of 2000-2013. The study employed panel Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) estimate for robust inferences. The results confirmed the existence of EKC hypothesis in the energy-resource depletion model i.e., inverted U-shaped relationship between energy-resource depletion and GDP per capita in the selected developed countries. The results of climate change model confirmed the U-shaped relationship of Perfluorocarbons (PFC) gas emission and Particulate Matter-2.5 micrometers (PM2.5) emissions with the per capita income. The health resource model confirmed the existence of inverted U-shaped relationship of infant deaths and health expenditures per capita with the per capita income, while there is a U-shaped relationship between incidence of Tuberculosis (TB) and GDP per capita. The other results indicate that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions increase Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) emissions and health expenditures; fossil fuel energy consumption increases PFC gas emissions and PM2.5 emissions; energy demand increases PM2.5 emissions and health expenditures; and financial dummy (D-2008) affected energy-resource depletion, PM2.5 emissions, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions index, infant deaths, and health expenditures per capita. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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