Trade policy and environmental sustainability in Africa: An empirical analysis

IF 3.5 4区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Natural Resources Forum Pub Date : 2024-04-30 DOI:10.1111/1477-8947.12488
James Temitope Dada, Folorunsho Monsur Ajide, Mamdouh Abdulaziz Saleh Al‐Faryan, Mosab I. Tabash
{"title":"Trade policy and environmental sustainability in Africa: An empirical analysis","authors":"James Temitope Dada, Folorunsho Monsur Ajide, Mamdouh Abdulaziz Saleh Al‐Faryan, Mosab I. Tabash","doi":"10.1111/1477-8947.12488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates whether trade policy instruments—tariffs—strengthen or worsen African environmental sustainability. To drive out the objectives of the study, fully modified ordinary least square (FMOLS), dynamic OLS (DOLS), augmented mean group (AMG), method of moment quantile regression (MMQR) and Dumitrescu–Hurlin panel causality approaches are used to analyse the effect of tariff in addition to other control variables on carbon and ecological footprints as measured of environmental sustainability from 2001 to 2020. The results from the MMQR reveal that tariffs have a significant positive effect on carbon footprints in the 0.15 quantile, while the effect becomes insignificant between 0.25 and 0.5 quantiles. However, at the upper quantiles level (0.75–0.95), the impact of the tariff on carbon footprint is negative and significant, with increasing coefficients. Furthermore, tariffs significantly positively affect lower and middle quantiles' ecological footprints (0.15–0.5). However, the effect turns negative at the upper quantiles (0.9 and 0.95), suggesting that tariff reduces ecological footprint at these levels. In addition, the long‐run estimates (FMOLS, DOLS and AMG) also support the upper quantile estimates of MMQR. A one‐way causality between tariffs, carbon and ecological footprint was found. These findings reveal that tariffs do not create market inefficiency in Africa. This study recommends that tariffs as a trade policy instrument could be used to strengthen Africa's environmental quality. The government can use the tariff revenue to subsidize cleaner production and consumption and move the economy from a traditional energy source to renewable energy.","PeriodicalId":49777,"journal":{"name":"Natural Resources Forum","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Natural Resources Forum","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12488","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates whether trade policy instruments—tariffs—strengthen or worsen African environmental sustainability. To drive out the objectives of the study, fully modified ordinary least square (FMOLS), dynamic OLS (DOLS), augmented mean group (AMG), method of moment quantile regression (MMQR) and Dumitrescu–Hurlin panel causality approaches are used to analyse the effect of tariff in addition to other control variables on carbon and ecological footprints as measured of environmental sustainability from 2001 to 2020. The results from the MMQR reveal that tariffs have a significant positive effect on carbon footprints in the 0.15 quantile, while the effect becomes insignificant between 0.25 and 0.5 quantiles. However, at the upper quantiles level (0.75–0.95), the impact of the tariff on carbon footprint is negative and significant, with increasing coefficients. Furthermore, tariffs significantly positively affect lower and middle quantiles' ecological footprints (0.15–0.5). However, the effect turns negative at the upper quantiles (0.9 and 0.95), suggesting that tariff reduces ecological footprint at these levels. In addition, the long‐run estimates (FMOLS, DOLS and AMG) also support the upper quantile estimates of MMQR. A one‐way causality between tariffs, carbon and ecological footprint was found. These findings reveal that tariffs do not create market inefficiency in Africa. This study recommends that tariffs as a trade policy instrument could be used to strengthen Africa's environmental quality. The government can use the tariff revenue to subsidize cleaner production and consumption and move the economy from a traditional energy source to renewable energy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非洲的贸易政策和环境可持续性:实证分析
本研究探讨了贸易政策工具--关税--是加强还是恶化了非洲的环境可持续性。为实现研究目标,本研究采用了完全修正普通最小二乘法(FMOLS)、动态 OLS(DOLS)、均值组增强法(AMG)、矩量子回归法(MMQR)和杜米特雷斯库-胡林面板因果关系法,分析了关税以及其他控制变量对衡量 2001 至 2020 年环境可持续性的碳足迹和生态足迹的影响。MMQR 的结果显示,在 0.15 量级,关税对碳足迹有显著的正向影响,而在 0.25 和 0.5 量级之间,影响变得不显著。然而,在高量纲水平(0.75-0.95),关税对碳足迹的影响为负且显著,系数不断增大。此外,关税对中低量化水平(0.15-0.5)的生态足迹有明显的正向影响。然而,在高分量组(0.9 和 0.95),影响转为负值,表明关税减少了这些分量组的生态足迹。此外,长期估计值(FMOLS、DOLS 和 AMG)也支持 MMQR 的上量化估计值。研究发现,关税、碳足迹和生态足迹之间存在单向因果关系。这些研究结果表明,关税并未造成非洲市场效率低下。本研究建议,关税作为一种贸易政策工具,可用于加强非洲的环境质量。政府可以利用关税收入补贴清洁生产和消费,并将经济从传统能源转向可再生能源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Natural Resources Forum
Natural Resources Forum 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Natural Resources Forum, a United Nations Sustainable Development Journal, focuses on international, multidisciplinary issues related to sustainable development, with an emphasis on developing countries. The journal seeks to address gaps in current knowledge and stimulate policy discussions on the most critical issues associated with the sustainable development agenda, by promoting research that integrates the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. Contributions that inform the global policy debate through pragmatic lessons learned from experience at the local, national, and global levels are encouraged. The Journal considers articles written on all topics relevant to sustainable development. In addition, it dedicates series, issues and special sections to specific themes that are relevant to the current discussions of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). Articles must be based on original research and must be relevant to policy-making. Criteria for selection of submitted articles include: 1) Relevance and importance of the topic discussed to sustainable development in general, both in terms of policy impacts and gaps in current knowledge being addressed by the article; 2) Treatment of the topic that incorporates social, economic and environmental aspects of sustainable development, rather than focusing purely on sectoral and/or technical aspects; 3) Articles must contain original applied material drawn from concrete projects, policy implementation, or literature reviews; purely theoretical papers are not entertained.
期刊最新文献
Trade dependence and cultural distance: An analysis of economic interactions and humanistic exchanges between China and ASEAN countries Can energy intensity, clean energy utilization, economic expansion, and financial development contribute to ecological progress in Iceland? A quantile‐on‐quantile KRLS analysis The nexus of foreign aid, institutional quality, and climate‐related financial policies: Evidence from the global database Impact of foreign direct investment on methane emissions in agriculture: An empirical evidence based on Sub‐Saharan Africa Sustainable development goals, sustainable finance, and financial inclusion: An awareness perspective of business graduates
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1