Energy use, CO2 emission and foreign direct investment: Is there any inconsistence between causal relations?

doi:10.1007/s11708-014-0326-6

Frontiers in Energy

2014, Vol. 8

Issue (3): 269-278 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-014-0326-6

本期目录

Energy use, CO₂ emission and foreign direct investment: Is there any inconsistence between causal relations?

Ertugrul YILDIRIM(

)

Department of Economics, Bulent Ecevit University, Zonguldak 67100, Turkey

全文: PDF(139 KB) HTML

Abstract：

In this study, the causal relations between inward foreign direct investment (FDI)-energy use per capita and inward FDI-CO₂ emission per capita were analyzed and the inconsistency between the causal relations was investigated via bootstrap-corrected panel causality test and cross-correlation analysis. In this direction, data from 76 countries including the period of 1980–2009 was processed. No supportive evidence was found for changing causal relations to country group which was classified into income level. The findings indicated that while the pollution haven hypothesis was supported for Mozambique, United Arab Emirates and Oman, the pollution halo hypothesis was supported in the case of India, Iceland, Panama and Zambia. For other countries, energy use and CO₂ emission were neutral to inward FDI flows in aggregated level. Furthermore, this study urged that increased (decreased) energy use due to the inward FDI flows did not necessarily mean an increase (decrease) in pollution level, and vice versa. For policy purpose, FDI attractive policy should be regulated by taking into account this possibility.

Key words： CO₂ emissions energy consumption liberalization

收稿日期: 2013-08-03 出版日期: 2014-09-09

Corresponding Author(s): Ertugrul YILDIRIM

引用本文:

. [J]. Frontiers in Energy, 2014, 8(3): 269-278.
Ertugrul YILDIRIM. Energy use, CO₂ emission and foreign direct investment: Is there any inconsistence between causal relations?. Front. Energy, 2014, 8(3): 269-278.

链接本文:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/CN/10.1007/s11708-014-0326-6
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/CN/Y2014/V8/I3/269

Study	Variable	Methodology	Period	Subject	Supported hypothesis
Blackman and Wu [3]	FDI-energy intensity	Survey	1997	14 US firms in China	Energy saving
Mielnik and Goldemberg [4]	FDI-energy intensity	Panel regression	1987–1998	20 developing countries	Energy saving
Eskeland and Harrison [5]	FDI-energy intensity	GMM	1984–19901983–19881976–1993	Mexico,Venezuela,Cote d’Ivoire	Energy saving
Fisher-Vanden et al. [6]	FDI-energy intensity	Panel Regression	1997–1999	2500 firms in Chinese industrial sector	Energy saving
Tang [7]	FDI-Electricity consumption	ARDL, Granger Causality	1970–2005	Malaysia	Not energy saving, FDI?EC
Hübler and Keller [8]	FDI-energy intensity	Johansen cointegration test	1975–2004	60 developing countries	Neutrality
Sadorsky [9]	FDI-Energy consumption	Panel GMM	1990–2006	22 emerging countries	Neutrality
Pao and Tsai [10]	FDI-Energy use- CO₂	Panel cointegration and panel Granger causality	1980–2007	Brazil, Russian Federation, India, China	FDI?CO₂FDI?Energy
Ting et al. [11]	FDI-energy intensity	Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index	1998–2008	Jiangsu province of China	Energy saving
Song and Zheng [12]	FDI-energy intensity	Panel fixed effects regression	1995–2009	28 Chinese provinces.	Neutrality
Herrerias et al. [13]	FDI-energy use	Regression with panel corrected standard errors	1985–2008	28 Chinese regions	Energy saving
Al-mulali and Tang [14]	FDI-energy consumption	Panel cointegration, FMOLS and panel Granger causality	1980–2009	Gulf Cooperation Council Countries	Neutrality
Eskeland and Harrison [5]	FDI-air pollution	GMM	1982–1993	Mexico, Venezuela, Cote d’Ivoire, Morocco	Mixed
Cole and Elliott [15]	FDI-pollution	Panel fixed effects and IV regressions	1989–1994	US, Brazil and Mexico	Pollution haven
Hoffman et al. [16]	FDI-CO₂	Panel Granger causality	Changing	37 low-income countries	FDI←CO₂
				50 middle-income countries	FDI→CO₂
				25 high income countries	FDI≠CO₂
He [17]	FDI-pollution	System of simultaneous equations	1994–2001	29 Chinese regions	Pollution haven
Merican et al. [18]	FDI-CO₂	ARDL	1970–2001	Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines	Pollution haven
				Indonesia	Pollution halo
				Singapore	Neutrality
Waldkirch and Gopinath [19]	FDI-pollution	Cross sectional regression	1994–2000	Mexican industries	Neutrality
Jorgenson [20]	FDI- water pollution	Panel random effects regression	1980–2000	Less developed countries	Pollution haven
Lee [21]	FDI-CO₂	ARDL	1970–2000	Malaysia	FDI→CO₂
Tamazian et al. [22]	FDI- CO₂	Panel random effects regression	1992–2004	BRIC Countries	Pollution halo
Chang [1]	FDI- SO₂	Granger causality	1981–2008	China	Neutrality
Kim and Adilov [23]	FDI-CO₂	Panel OLS	1961–2004	164 countries	Pollution haloor neutrality
Al-mulali and Tang [14]	FDI- CO2	Panel cointegration, FMOLS and panel Granger causality	1980–2009	Gulf Cooperation Council Countries	Pollution halo except for Bahrain
Blanco et al. [24]	FDI- CO₂	Panel Granger causality	1980–2007	18 Latin American Countries	Pollution haven
Chandran and Tang [25]	FDI- CO₂	Johansen Cointegration and Granger Causality	1971–2008	ASEAN-5 Countries (Transport sector)	FDI→CO₂

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

Tab.6

1	Chang N. The empirical relationship between openness and environmental pollution in China. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2012, 55(6): 783–796 doi: 10.1080/09640568.2011.628087
2	Zarsky L. Havens, halos and spaghetti: untangling the evidence about foreign direct investment and the environment. In: Meyer K E ed. Multinational Enterprises and Host Economies. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2008, 283–306
3	Blackman A, Wu X. Foreign direct investment in China’s power sector: trends, benefits and barriers. Energy Policy, 1999, 27(12): 695–711 doi: 10.1016/S0301-4215(99)00063-4
4	Mielnik O, Goldemberg J. Foreign direct investment and decoupling between energy and gross domestic product in developing countries. Energy Policy, 2002, 30(2): 87–89 doi: 10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00080-5
5	Eskeland G S, Harrison A E. Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis. Journal of Development Economics, 2003, 70(1): 1–23 doi: 10.1016/S0304-3878(02)00084-6
6	Fisher-Vanden K, Jefferson G H, Ma J, Xu J. Technology development and energy productivity in China. Energy Economics, 2004, 28(5, 6): 690–705
7	Tang C F. Electricity consumption, income, foreign direct investment, and population in Malaysia: new evidence from multivariate framework analysis. Journal of Economic Studies (Glasgow, Scotland), 2009, 36(4): 371–382 doi: 10.1108/01443580910973583
8	Hübler M, Keller A. Energy savings via FDI? Empirical evidence from developing countries. Environment and Development Economics, 2010, 15(1): 59–80 doi: 10.1017/S1355770X09990088
9	Sadorsky P. The impact of financial development on energy consumption in emerging economies. Energy Policy, 2010, 38(5): 2528–2535 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.048
10	Pao H T, Tsai C M. Multivariate Granger causality between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, FDI (foreign direct investment) and GDP (gross domestic product): evidence from a panel of BRIC (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, and China) countries. Energy, 2011, 36(1): 685–693 doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.09.041
11	Ting Y, Long R Y, Zhuang Y Y. Analysis of the FDI effect on energy consumption intensity in Jiangsu province. Energy Procedia, 2011, 5: 100–104 doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2011.03.019
12	Song F, Zheng X. What drives the change in China’s energy intensity: combining decomposition analysis and econometric analysis at the provincial level. Energy Policy, 2012, 51: 445–453 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.044
13	Herrerias M J, Cuadros A, Orts V. Energy intensity and investment ownership across Chinese provinces. Energy Economics, 2013, 36: 286–298 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.043
14	Al-mulali U, Tang C F. Investigating the validity of pollution haven hypothesis in the gulf cooperation council (GCC) countries. Energy Policy, 2013, 60: 813–819 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.055
15	Cole M A, Elliott R J R. FDI and the capital intensity of “dirty” sectors: a missing piece of the pollution haven puzzle. Review of Development Economics, 2005, 9(4): 530–548 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9361.2005.00292.x
16	Hoffmann R, Lee C G, Ramasamy B, Yeung M. FDI and pollution: a Granger causality test using panel data. Journal of International Development, 2005, 17(3): 311–317 doi: 10.1002/jid.1196
17	He J. Pollution haven hypothesis and environmental impacts of foreign direct investment: the case of industrial emission of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in Chinese provinces. Ecological Economics, 2006, 60(1): 228–245 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.12.008
18	Merican Y, Yusop Z, Noor Z M, Hook L S. Foreign direct investment and the pollution in five ASEAN nations. International Journal of Economics and Management, 2007, 1(2): 245–261
19	Waldkirch A, Gopinath M. Pollution control and foreign direct investment in Mexico: an industry-level analysis. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2008, 41(3): 289–313 doi: 10.1007/s10640-008-9192-1
20	Jorgenson A K. Foreign direct investment and the environment, the mitigating influence of institutional and civil society factors, and relationships between industrial pollution and human health: a panel study of less-developed countries. Organization & Environment, 2009, 22(2): 135–157 doi: 10.1177/1086026609338163
21	Lee C G. Foreign direct investment, pollution and economic growth: evidence from Malaysia. Applied Economics, 2009, 41(13): 1709–1716 doi: 10.1080/00036840701564376
22	Tamazian A, Chousa J P, Vadlamannati K C. Does higher economic and financial development lead to environmental degradation: evidence from BRIC countries. Energy Policy, 2009, 37(1): 246–253 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.08.025
23	Kim M H, Adilov N. The lesser of two evils: an empirical investigation of foreign direct investment-pollution tradeoff. Applied Economics, 2012, 44(20): 2597–2606 doi: 10.1080/00036846.2011.566187
24	Blanco L, Gonzalez F, Ruiz I. The impact of FDI on CO2 emissions in Latin America. Oxford Development Studies, 2013, 41(1): 104–121 doi: 10.1080/13600818.2012.732055
25	Chandran V G R, Tang C F. The impacts of transport energy consumption, foreign direct investment and income on CO2 emissions in ASEAN-5 economies. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013, 24: 445–453 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.054
26	Kónya L. Exports and growth: Granger causality analysis on OECD Countries with a panel data approach. Economic Modelling, 2006, 23(6): 978–992 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2006.04.008
27	Zellner A. An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1962, 57(298): 348–368 doi: 10.1080/01621459.1962.10480664
28	Pesaran M H. Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panel with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 2006, 74(4): 967–1012 doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x
29	Huang Y. Private investment and financial development in a globalized world. Empirical Economics, 2011, 41(1): 43–56 doi: 10.1007/s00181-010-0394-3
30	Selover D D. International interdependence and business cycle transmission in ASEAN. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 1999, 13(3): 230–253 doi: 10.1006/jjie.1999.0436
31	Sayek S, Selover D D. International interdependence and business cycle transmission between Turkey and the European Union. Southern Economic Journal, 2002, 69(2): 206–238 doi: 10.2307/1061670
32	Breusch T S, Pagan A R. The Lagrange multiplier test and its application to model specifications in econometrics. Review of Economic Studies, 1980, 47(1): 239–253 doi: 10.2307/2297111
33	Pesaran M H. General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. CESifo Working Paper, 2004, Paper No. 1229
34	Granger C W J. Some aspects of causal relationships. Journal of Econometrics, 2003, 112(1): 69–71 doi: 10.1016/S0304-4076(02)00148-3
35	Breitung J. A parametric approach to the estimation of cointegration vectors in panel data. Econometric Reviews, 2005, 24(2): 151–173 doi: 10.1081/ETC-200067895
36	Kar M, Nazlioglu S, Agir H. Financial development and economic growth nexus in the MENA countries: bootstrap panel granger causality analysis. Economic Modelling, 2011, 28(1-2): 685– 693 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2010.05.015
37	Pesaran M H, Shin Y, Smith R P. Pooled mean group estimation of dynamic heterogeneous panels. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1999, 94(446): 621–634 doi: 10.1080/01621459.1999.10474156
38	Dumitrescu E I, Hurlin C. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 2012, 29(4): 1450–1460 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
39	Phillips P C B. Fully modified least squares and vector autoregression. Economic Modelling, 2012, 29(4): 1450–1460

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed