Assessing the asymmetric impact of physical infrastructure and trade openness on ecological footprint: An empirical evidence from Pakistan

被引:17
作者
Zahra, Samia [1 ]
Khan, Dilawar [2 ]
Gupta, Rakesh [3 ]
Popp, Jozsef [4 ]
Olah, Judit [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Higher Educ Arch & Lib Dept, Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunk, Pakistan
[2] Kohat Univ Sci & Technol, Kohat, Pakistan
[3] Griffith Univ Brisbane, Dept Accounting Finance & Econ, Brisbane, Australia
[4] WSB Univ, Fac Appl Sci, Dept Management, Dabrowa Gornicza, Poland
[5] Univ Debrecen, Fac Econ & Business, Debrecen, Hungary
[6] Univ Johannesburg, Coll Business & Econ, Johannesburg, South Africa
关键词
CO2; EMISSIONS; ECONOMIC-GROWTH; TRANSPORT SECTOR; ROAD TRANSPORT; ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION; ENERGY-CONSUMPTION; RENEWABLE ENERGY; URBAN METABOLISM; PUBLIC TRANSPORT; CARBON FOOTPRINT;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0262782
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
This study analyzed the asymmetric impact of the physical infrastructure and trade openness on Pakistan's ecological footprint over the period 1970-2019 using the non-linear autoregressive distributed lag model. The study results posit that positive and negative shocks to physical infrastructure increase and decrease the ecological footprint asymmetrically in the short-run and symmetrically in the long-run. Likewise, the positive and negative shocks to trade openness increase and decrease the ecological footprint asymmetrically, both in the short and in the long run. Furthermore, urbanization also positively and significantly increases Pakistan's ecological footprint in the short and long run. Moreover, a 1% increase in physical infrastructure increases the ecological footprint by 0.32%, while a 1% decrease in physical infrastructure decreases the ecological footprint by 0.33% in the long run. Similarly, a 1% increase in trade openness causes a 0.09% increase in the ecological footprint in the long term, while a 1% reduction in trade openness causes a 0.61% reduction in the ecological footprint. The results also conclude that urbanization is a major determinant of Pakistan's long-term ecological footprint. Thus, a 1% increase in urbanization causes a 1.31% increase in the ecological footprint in the long run. Finally, this study recommends that policies regarding physical infrastructure be formulated keeping in view its environmental impact. In addition, strict environmental policies should be implemented to reduce the environmental degradation effect of trade openness.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 109 条
[1]   Moving towards a sustainable environment: The dynamic linkage between natural resources, human capital, urbanization, economic growth, and ecological footprint in China [J].
Ahmed, Zahoor ;
Asghar, Muhammad Mansoor ;
Malik, Muhammad Nasir ;
Nawaz, Kishwar .
RESOURCES POLICY, 2020, 67
[2]   Linking urbanization, human capital, and the ecological footprint in G7 countries: An empirical analysis [J].
Ahmed, Zahoor ;
Zafar, Muhammad Wasif ;
Ali, Sajid ;
Danish .
SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY, 2020, 55
[3]   Investigating the impact of human capital on the ecological footprint in India: An empirical analysis [J].
Ahmed, Zahoor ;
Wang, Zhaohua .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2019, 26 (26) :26782-26796
[5]   Dynamic impact of trade policy, economic growth, fertility rate, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on ecological footprint in Europe [J].
Alola, Andrew Adewale ;
Bekun, Festus Victor ;
Sarkodie, Samuel Asumadu .
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2019, 685 :702-709
[6]   Agricultural land usage and tourism impact on renewable energy consumption among Coastline Mediterranean Countries [J].
Alola, Andrew Adewale ;
Alola, Uju Violet .
ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT, 2018, 29 (08) :1438-1454
[7]   Driving factors of GHG emissions in the EU transport activity [J].
Andres, Lidia ;
Padilla, Emilio .
TRANSPORT POLICY, 2018, 61 :60-74
[8]  
Angel S., 2005, DYNAMICS GLOBAL URBA
[9]  
[Anonymous], 1998, OUR ECOLOGICAL FOOTP
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2019, Ecological Footprint term glossary