Spatial and Non-linear Dynamics of Environmental Tax, Technology, and Economic Growth on Carbon Dioxide Emissions in OECD Countries

Assaf MALAK; Hanady TAHER

doi:10.14505/jemt.v15.2(74).05

Assaf MALAK Faculty of Business Administration, Beirut Arab University, Lebanon
Hanady TAHER Faculty of Business Administration, Beirut Arab University, Lebanon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14505/jemt.v15.2(74).05

Abstract

The current study sought to investigate spatial and non-linear dynamics of environmental tax, technology, and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in OECD Countries. Guided by STIRPAT as the theoretical framework and using OECD data between 2000 and 2021, the study also used the SAR model to investigate spatial dependence. The STIRPAT model is widely applied in environmental impact assessment to help scholars understand the forces that drive environmental issues. The analysis revealed that only economic growth significantly predicts CO2 emissions among OECD countries. Both ABAT and E.T. did not significantly affect CO2 emissions in the OECD countries. The SAR model revealed the presence of spatial dependence. This means other countries with higher emissions are also likely to have neighbours with higher emissions, and vice versa. This means there are spillover effects, where technology advancements and environmental policies in one country or region could influence emissions in other countries, especially neighbouring countries.

References

[1] Adebayo, T.S., Oladipupo S.D., Adeshola, I., and Rjoub, H. 2022. Wavelet analysis of impact of renewable energy consumption and technological innovation on CO2 emissions: evidence from Portugal. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(16): 23887-904.
[2] Ahmed, S.F., et al. 2022. Green approaches in synthesising nanomaterials for environmental nanobioremediation: Technological advancements, applications, benefits, and challenges. Environmental Research, 1(204): 111967.
[3] Al Shammre, A.S., Benhamed, A., Ben-Salha, O., and Jaidi, Z. 2023. Do environmental taxes affect carbon dioxide emissions in OECD countries? Evidence from the dynamic panel threshold model. Systems, 11(6).
[4] Alvarez-Herranz, A., Balsalobre-Lorente, D., Shahbaz, M., and Cantos, J.M. 2017. Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels. Energy policy, 105: 386-97.
[5] Bai, L., et al. 2023. Effects of digital economy on carbon emission intensity in Chinese cities: A life-cycle theory and the application of non-linear spatial panel smooth transition threshold model. Energy Policy, 183.
[6] Chen, J., and Hu, L. 2022. Does environmental regulation drive economic growth through technological innovation: Application of nonlinear and spatial spillover effect. Sustainability, 14(24): 16455.
[7] Costantini, V., Crespi, F., and Palma, A. 2017. Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies. Research policy, 46(4): 799-819.
[8] Cutcu, I., Ozkok, Y., and Golpek, F. 2023. Environment, education, and economy nexus: evidence from selected EU countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(3): 7474-97.
[9] Deng, Y., You, D., Wang, J. 2022. Research on the nonlinear mechanism underlying the effect of tax competition on green technology innovation-An analysis based on the dynamic spatial Durbin model and the threshold panel model. Resources Policy, 76: 102545.
[10] Erdogan, S., Okumus, I., Guzel, A.E. 2020. Revisiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in OECD countries: the role of renewable, non-renewable energy, and oil prices. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27: 23655-63.
[11] Espoir, D.K., Sunge, R. 2021. Co2 emissions and economic development in Africa: Evidence from a dynamic spatial panel model. Journal of environmental management, 300: 113617.
[12] Famielec, J., Kijanka, A., and Żaba-Nieroda R. 2019. Economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions. Wiadomości Statystyczne. The Polish Statistician, 64(4): 5-21.
[13] Ghazouani, A., Xia, W., Ben Jebli, M., and Shahzad, U. 2020. Exploring the role of carbon taxation policies on CO2 emissions: contextual evidence from tax implementation and non-implementation European Countries. Sustainability, 12(20): 8680.
[14] Hussain, Z., Khan, M.K., and Shaheen, W.A. 2022. Effect of economic development, income inequality, transportation, and environmental expenditures on transport emissions: evidence from OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(37): 56642-57.
[15] Ivanovski, K., and Hailemariam, A. 2022. Is globalisation linked to CO2 emission? Evidence from OECD nations. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 29(2): 241-70.
[16] Jardón, A., Kuik, O., and Tol, R.S. 2017. Economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions: An analysis of Latin America and the Caribbean. Atmósfera, 30(2): 87-100.
[17] Jiang, Q., Ma, X. 2021. Spillovers of environmental regulation on carbon emissions network. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 169: 120825.
[18] Khaerul Azis, M., and Widodo, T. 2019. The Impact of Carbon Tax on GDP and Environment. Available at: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/91314/1/MPRA_paper_91314.pdf
[19] Leitão, J., Ferreira, J., and Santibanez-González, E. 2022. New insights into decoupling economic growth, technological progress and carbon dioxide emissions: Evidence from 40 countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174: 121250.
[20] Ma, Q., Tariq, M., Mahmood, H., and Khan, Z. 2022. The nexus between digital economy and carbon dioxide emissions in China: The moderating role of investments in research and development. Technology in Society, 68: 101910.
[21] Maneejuk, N., Ratchakom, S., Maneejuk, P., and Yamaka W. 2020. Does the environmental Kuznets curve exist? An international study. Sustainability, 12(21): 9117.
[22] Nan, S., Huang, J., Wu, J., and Li, C. 2022. Does globalization change the renewable energy consumption and CO2 emissions nexus for OECD countries? New evidence based on the nonlinear PSTR model. Energy Strategy Reviews, 44: 100995.
[23] Naz, A., and Aslam, M. 2023. Green innovation, globalization, financial development, and CO2 emissions: the role of governance as a moderator in South Asian countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(20).
[24] Nerudová, D., Dobranschi, M., Solilová, V., and Schratzenstaller, M. 2018. Sustainability-oriented future EU funding: a fuel tax surcharge. www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1270205&dswid=-3122
[25] Osobajo, O.A., Otitoju, A. Otitoju, M.A., and Oke, A. 2020. The impact of energy consumption and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions. Sustainability, 12(19): 7965.
[26] Polat, O. 2019. Environmental Taxes and Carbon Dioxide Emission in Eu Countries: A Panel Var Approach. Economics Business and Organization Research, 1(1): 20-33.
[27] Safi, N., et al. 2023. Understanding the role of energy productivity, eco-innovation and international trade in shaping consumption-based carbon emissions: a study of BRICS nations. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(43): 98338-50.
[28] Shobande, O., and Asongu, S. 2023. The dilemmas of relevance: exploring the role of natural resources and energy consumption in managing climate crisis in Africa. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 34(5): 1375-90.
[29] Shobande, O.A., and Ogbeifun, L. 2024. Exploring the Criticality of Natural Resources Management and Technological Innovations for Ecological Footprint in the OECD Countries. The Journal of Developing Areas, 58(1): 157-70.
[30] Shpak N, et al. 2022. CO2 emissions and macroeconomic indicators: Analysis of the most polluted regions in the world. Energies, 15(8): 2928.
[31] Su CW, et al. 2021. Towards achieving sustainable development: role of technology innovation, technology adoption and CO2 emission for BRICS. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(1): 277.
[32] Sun, Y., and Razzaq, A. 2022. Composite fiscal decentralisation and green innovation: Imperative strategy for institutional reforms and sustainable development in OECD countries. Sustainable Development, 30(5):944-57.
[33] Ulucak, R., and Danish, Kassouri Y. 2020. An assessment of the environmental sustainability corridor: Investigating the nonlinear effects of environmental taxation on CO2 emissions. Sustainable Development, 28(4): 1010-8.
[34] Wang Q, et al. 2024. Digital economy and carbon dioxide emissions: examining the role of threshold variables. Geoscience Frontiers, 15(3): 101644.
[35] Wen, L., Chatalova, L., Gao, X., and Zhang, A. 2021. Reduction of carbon emissions through resource-saving and environment-friendly regional economic integration: Evidence from Wuhan metropolitan area, China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 166: 120590.
[36] Wisdom, O., Apollos, N., and Samuel, O. 2022. Carbon accounting and economic development in sub-Saharan Africa. Asian J Econ, Bus Account, 22(18): 81-9.
[37] Yıldırım, D.Ç., Esen, Ö. and Yıldırım, S. 2022. The nonlinear effects of environmental innovation on energy sector-based carbon dioxide emissions in OECD countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 182: 121800.
[38] York, R., Rosa, E.A., and Dietz, T. 2003. STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts. Ecological economics, 46(3): 351-65.
[39] Zafar, M.W., et al. 2020. How does renewable energy consumption contribute to environmental quality? The role of education in OECD countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 268: 122149.
[40] Zafar, S.Z., et al. 2021. Spatial spillover effects of technological innovation on total factor energy efficiency: taking government environment regulations into account for three continents. Business Process Management Journal, 27(6): 1874-91.
[41] Zhang, M., Zhang, D., and Xie, T. 2023. Technology innovations and carbon neutrality in technologically advanced economies: Imperative agenda for COP26. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 36(2).
[42] Zoundi Z. 2017. CO2 emissions, renewable energy and the Environmental Kuznets Curve, a panel cointegration approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72: 1067-75.