Time-varying relatedness and structural changes among green growth, clean energy innovation, and carbon market amid exogenous shocks: A quantile VAR approach

IF 12.9 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Technological Forecasting and Social Change Pub Date : 2024-08-27 DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123705
{"title":"Time-varying relatedness and structural changes among green growth, clean energy innovation, and carbon market amid exogenous shocks: A quantile VAR approach","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123705","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Green growth has become a critical driver in sustainability science. However, attaining a steady state of green growth can be challenging in the face of exogenous economic shocks. As such, this study assesses the time-varying relatedness among the USA's green economy (OMXGE), carbon markets (CCAI), green energy (ECO), natural resource markets (SPNGR), and sustainability index (DJS) considering multiple economic traumatism (i.e., the Brexit, COVID-19, Russia-Ukraine conflict). By deploying the quantile VAR (QVAR) and “Wavelet Local Multiple Correlations (WLMC)” approaches, we find: 1) Without the quantile effect, we note strong total interconnectedness among the designated series, which is close to 93 %. 2) From the QVAR findings, we note a high shock-receiving tendency in ECO and CCAI during the Brexit referendum, the first wave of COVID-19, and the Ukraine-Russia conflict, making these markets attractive for further investment during turbulent times. 3) DJS and OMXGE are temporary shock receivers and predominant shock transmitters, indicating that the green economy and sustainability indicators are not robust enough to absorb shocks during economic shocks. 4) Wavelet coherence findings further validate that the green economy is not a safe haven asset, whereas the carbon market has a strong shock absorption capacity and can provide strong hedging support. The underlying findings reveal that Washington's policy toward a renewable-based equity market should be more liberal to ramp up investment in renewables.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48454,"journal":{"name":"Technological Forecasting and Social Change","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":12.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technological Forecasting and Social Change","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162524005031","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Green growth has become a critical driver in sustainability science. However, attaining a steady state of green growth can be challenging in the face of exogenous economic shocks. As such, this study assesses the time-varying relatedness among the USA's green economy (OMXGE), carbon markets (CCAI), green energy (ECO), natural resource markets (SPNGR), and sustainability index (DJS) considering multiple economic traumatism (i.e., the Brexit, COVID-19, Russia-Ukraine conflict). By deploying the quantile VAR (QVAR) and “Wavelet Local Multiple Correlations (WLMC)” approaches, we find: 1) Without the quantile effect, we note strong total interconnectedness among the designated series, which is close to 93 %. 2) From the QVAR findings, we note a high shock-receiving tendency in ECO and CCAI during the Brexit referendum, the first wave of COVID-19, and the Ukraine-Russia conflict, making these markets attractive for further investment during turbulent times. 3) DJS and OMXGE are temporary shock receivers and predominant shock transmitters, indicating that the green economy and sustainability indicators are not robust enough to absorb shocks during economic shocks. 4) Wavelet coherence findings further validate that the green economy is not a safe haven asset, whereas the carbon market has a strong shock absorption capacity and can provide strong hedging support. The underlying findings reveal that Washington's policy toward a renewable-based equity market should be more liberal to ramp up investment in renewables.

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
外生冲击下绿色增长、清洁能源创新和碳市场之间的时变关联性和结构变化:量化 VAR 方法
绿色增长已成为可持续发展科学的重要驱动力。然而,面对外生经济冲击,实现绿色增长的稳定状态可能具有挑战性。因此,本研究评估了美国绿色经济(OMXGE)、碳市场(CCAI)、绿色能源(ECO)、自然资源市场(SPNGR)和可持续发展指数(DJS)之间的时变相关性,并考虑了多重经济冲击(即英国脱欧、COVID-19、俄乌冲突)。通过采用量化 VAR(QVAR)和 "小波局部多重相关性(WLMC)"方法,我们发现1) 在没有量值效应的情况下,我们注意到指定序列之间的总关联度很高,接近 93%。2)从量化相关性分析结果来看,我们注意到在英国脱欧公投、COVID-19 第一波和乌克兰-俄罗斯冲突期间,ECO 和 CCAI 具有较高的冲击接收倾向,这使得这些市场在动荡时期具有进一步投资的吸引力。3) DJS 和 OMXGE 是暂时的冲击接收器和主要的冲击发射器,这表明绿色经济和可持续发展指标在经济冲击期间不够稳健,无法吸收冲击。4)小波相干性研究结果进一步验证了绿色经济不是避险资产,而碳市场具有很强的冲击吸收能力,可以提供强有力的对冲支持。基本研究结果表明,华盛顿的可再生能源股权市场政策应更加宽松,以增加对可再生能源的投资。
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
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
10.80%
发文量
813
期刊介绍: Technological Forecasting and Social Change is a prominent platform for individuals engaged in the methodology and application of technological forecasting and future studies as planning tools, exploring the interconnectedness of social, environmental, and technological factors. In addition to serving as a key forum for these discussions, we offer numerous benefits for authors, including complimentary PDFs, a generous copyright policy, exclusive discounts on Elsevier publications, and more.
期刊最新文献
Structural imbalance and integrated economic development of RCEP countries on perspective of industrial network Social media data-based spatio-temporal assessment of public attitudes towards digital contact tracing applications: A case of health code application in mainland China Climate risks, financial performance and lending growth: Evidence from the banking industry Geopolitics and the changing landscape of global value chains and competition in the global semiconductor industry: Rivalry and catch-up in chip manufacturing in East Asia Digital inequalities among internet users before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparison from two cross-sectional surveys in Slovenia
×
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