4.7 Article

The effect of institutions and urbanization on environmental quality: evidence from the Belt and Road Initiative countries using dynamic panel models

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-023-27031-z

关键词

Urbanization; Institutional quality; Energy consumption; Carbon dioxide emission; Nonlinear relationship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increased globalization in urban areas leads to higher energy consumption and carbon dioxide discharge, resulting in environmental degradation. However, a well-established institutional framework can mitigate these issues and minimize the negative impact on the environment.
Increased globalization in urban areas raise energy consumption that leads to high carbon dioxide discharge and degrade environmental quality. Other economic activities also produce emission; however, a well-established institutional framework can overcome the issues of environmental degradation and minimize the effect of harmful factors on the environment. In this regard, this study investigates the effect of urbanization, energy consumption, and industrialization on carbon dioxide emission by taking into consideration the role of institutional quality in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) countries for the period of 2002 to 2019. Employing dynamic panel techniques, the results are in line with theories which show that increased urbanization, energy consumption, industrialization, and economic growth raise carbon dioxide emission and lead to environmental degradation. The study also found that international trade and political stability reduce emission; however, institutional quality as a whole positively affects carbon dioxide emission. The study also found a U-shape relationship between urbanization and carbon dioxide emission. The interaction term between institutional quality and urbanization significantly mitigates carbon dioxide emission and raise environmental sustainability. The findings of this study have considerable policy suggestions for the sample countries.

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

4.7
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