International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 8, Issue 4 (April 2021), Pages: 130-137

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: How does a democratic government with limited intervention affect environmental quality? Fresh evidence with international panel data

 Author(s): Rajput Sheraz 1, *, Hussain Akseer 1, Aziz Tariq 1, Noor Ahmed Khoso 1, Sayema Sultana 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Department of Business Administration, Sukkur IBA University, Sukkur, Pakistan
 2Department of Economics and Finance, Sunway University, Subang Jaya, Malaysia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0596-3266

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.04.015

 Abstract:

This paper examines the effect of democratic countries which encourage economic freedom on the environment, measured by Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emission. For the empirical analysis, an annual panel data sample consisting of 179 countries from 1990 to 2018 is collected. Applying the Ordinary Least Squares and Two-Step Generalized Method of Moments estimation techniques, we find that the environmental quality is enhanced with a higher degree of democracy and economic freedom. The results firmly hold for high and middle-income countries when the sample is decomposed across income levels. 

 © 2021 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: πΆπ‘‚2 emission, Democracy, Economic freedom, High/middle-income countries

 Article History: Received 13 October 2020, Received in revised form 6 January 2021, Accepted 6 January 2021

 Acknowledgment:

I would like to thank Mr. Akseer Hussain Solangi, Dr. Tariq, Mr. Noor Khoso, and Mr. A Basit Bhatti for their valuable insights and contribution to this paper. In addition, I am grateful to Sukkur IBA University for utmost support for providing a conducive environment for research.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

  Sheraz R, Akseer H, and Tariq A et al. (2021). How does a democratic government with limited intervention affect environmental quality? Fresh evidence with international panel data. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(4): 130-137

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4

----------------------------------------------

 References (28)

  1. Abdouli M, Kamoun O, and Hamdi B (2018). The impact of economic growth, population density, and FDI inflows on CO2 emissions in BRICTS countries: Does the Kuznets curve exist? Empirical Economics, 54(4): 1717-1742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-017-1263-0   [Google Scholar]
  2. Antweiler W, Copeland BR, and Taylor MS (2001). Is free trade good for the environment? American Economic Review, 91(4): 877-908. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.4.877   [Google Scholar]
  3. Berge E (1994). Democracy and human rights: Conditions for sustainable resource utilization. In: Johnston BR (Ed.), Who pays the price: 187-193. Island Press, Washington, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  4. Carlsson F and Lundström S (2001). Political and economic freedom and the environment: the case of CO2 emissions. Working Papers, Department of Economics, Goteborg University, Goteborg, Sweden.   [Google Scholar]
  5. Congleton RD (1992). Political institutions and pollution control. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 74: 412-421. https://doi.org/10.2307/2109485   [Google Scholar]
  6. Desai U (1998). Environment, economic growth and government in developing countries. In: Desai U (Ed.), Ecological policy and politics in developing countries: 1-46. State University of New York Press, Albany, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  7. Dryzek JS (1987). Rational ecology: The political economy of environmental choice. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  8. Galbraith JK and Kum H (2005). Estimating the inequality of household incomes: A statistical approach to the creation of a dense and consistent global data set. Review of Income and Wealth, 51(1): 115-143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2005.00147.x   [Google Scholar]
  9. Galdeano-Gómez E (2008). Does an endogenous relationship exist between environmental and economic performance? A resource-based view on the horticultural sector. Environmental and Resource Economics, 40(1): 73-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9141-4   [Google Scholar]
  10. Gallagher KP and Thacker SC (2008). Democracy, income, and environmental quality. Political Economy Research Institute Working Papers (PERI) No. 164, Amherst, ‎USA.   [Google Scholar]
  11. Hailemariam A, Dzhumashev R, and Shahbaz M (2020). Carbon emissions, income inequality and economic development. Empirical Economics, 59(3): 1139-1159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-019-01664-x   [Google Scholar]
  12. Heilbroner RL (1991). An inquiry into the human prospect: Looked at again for the 1990s. WW Norton and Company, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  13. Kotov V and Nikitina E (1995). Russia and international environmental cooperation. In: Bergesen HO, Parmann G, and Thommessen ØB (Eds.), Green globe yearbook of international cooperation on environment and development: 17-27. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  14. Le TH, Chang Y, and Park D (2019). Economic development and environmental sustainability: Evidence from Asia. Empirical Economics, 57(4): 1129-1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-018-1494-8   [Google Scholar]
  15. List JA and Co CY (2000). The effects of environmental regulations on foreign direct investment. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 40(1): 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1999.1095   [Google Scholar]
  16. Lombardini-Riipinen C (2005). Optimal tax policy under environmental quality competition. Environmental and Resource Economics, 32(3): 317-336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-005-4680-z   [Google Scholar]
  17. Midlarsky MI (1998). Democracy and the environment: An empirical assessment. Journal of Peace Research, 35(3): 341-361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343398035003005   [Google Scholar]
  18. Paehlke R (1996). Environmental challenges to democratic practice. In: Lafferty W and Meadowcroft J (Eds.), Democracy and the environment: Problems and prospects: 18-38. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  19. Panayotou T (1997). Demystifying the environmental Kuznets curve: Turning a black box into a policy tool. Environment and development economics, 2: 465-484. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X97000259   [Google Scholar]
  20. Payne RA (1995). Freedom and the environment. Journal of Democracy, 6(3): 41-55. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1995.0053   [Google Scholar]
  21. Romuald KS (2011). Democratic institutions and environmental quality: Effects and transmission channels. In the International Congress, European Association of Agricultural Economists, Zurich, Switzerland.   [Google Scholar]
  22. Schultz CB and Crockett TR (1990). Economic development, democratization, and environmental protection in Eastern Europe. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, 18: 53-84.   [Google Scholar]
  23. Selden TM and Song D (1994). Environmental quality and development: Is there a Kuznets curve for air pollution emissions? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 27(2): 147-162. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1994.1031   [Google Scholar]
  24. Sen A (1994). Liberty and poverty: Political rights and economics. New Republic, 210(10): 31-37.   [Google Scholar]
  25. Sherbinin AD, Carr D, Cassels S, and Jiang L (2007). Population and environment. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32: 345-373. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.32.041306.100243   [Google Scholar] PMid:20011237 PMCid:PMC2792934
  26. Tuncer G, Ertepinar H, Tekkaya C, and Sungur S (2005). Environmental attitudes of young people in Turkey: Effects of school type and gender. Environmental Education Research, 11(2): 215-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462042000338379   [Google Scholar]
  27. Weiss EB and Jacobson HK (1999). Getting countries to comply with internationl agreements. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 41(6): 16-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139159909604641   [Google Scholar]
  28. Wood J and Herzog I (2014). Economic freedom and air quality. Fraser Institute, Vancouver, Canada.   [Google Scholar]