This two-dimensional study makes significant incursions into the healthenvironment literature by interrogating whether non-renewable energy moderates the impact of environmental degradation on mortality rates. It further aligns with the 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and 11, which aim to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages and make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. It contributes to the health-environment literature by investigating the intrinsic relationships among mortality rates, carbon emissions (environmental degradation), and non-renewable energy consumption. The study uses an unbalanced sample of 42 Asia and Pacific countries to determine (1) whether carbon emissions exaggerate the incidence of mortality rates and (2) if the interaction of non-renewable energy with carbon emissions CAS Article Google Scholar

The 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13 agenda hinges on attaining a sustainable environment with the need to “take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts”. Hence, this study empirically revisits the debate on the effect of nonrenewable energy and globalization on carbon emissions within the framework of the Kuznets hypothesis using an unbalanced panel data from seven South Asian countries (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka) covering 1980–2019. The variables of interest are carbon emissions measured in metric tons per capita, energy use measured as kg of oil equivalent per capita, and globalization index. To address five main objectives, we deploy four techniques: panel-corrected standard errors (PCSE), feasible generalized least squares (FGLS), quantile regression (QR), and fully modified ordinary least squares (FMOLS). For the most part, the findings reveal that the (1) inverted U-shaped energy-Kuznets curve holds; (2) U-shaped globalization-Kuznets curve is evident; (3) inverted U-shaped turning points for nonrenewable energy are 496.03 and 640.84, while for globalization are 38.83 and 39.04, respectively; (4) globalization-emission relationship indicates a U-shaped relationship at the median and 75th quantile; and (5) inverted U-shaped energy-Kuznets holds in Pakistan but a U-shaped nexus prevails in Nepal and Sri Lanka; inverted U-shaped globalization-Kuznets holds in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, but U-shaped nexus is evident in Bhutan, Maldives, and Nepal. Deductively, our results show that South Asia countries (at early stage of development) are faced with the hazardous substance that deteriorates human health. Moreover, the non-linear square term of the nonrenewable energy-emissions relationship is negative, which validates the inverted U-shaped EKC theory. Overall, the effect of energy and globalization on carbon emissions is opposite while the consistency at the 75th quantile result indicates that countries with intense globalization are prone to environmental degradation.

No abstract

No abstract

This study investigates and provides evidence on the impact of economic growth and non-renewable energy on environmental degradation. Using unbalanced panel data from 1990 to 2018 on five South Asian countries and engaging the dynamic common correlated effects-mean group (DCCE-MG) technique of Ditzen (2016, 2018), findings support the energy-led degradation hypothesis while the growth-led degradation hypothesis does not hold but both are supported from FMOLS and DOLS robustness checks. In order words, non-renewable energy and economic growth significantly drive environmental degradation. Country-level results are mixed with Nepal evidencing energy-led degradation, Pakistan shows growth-led degradation while India indicates growth-led sustainability. Supportively, the Dumitrescu-Hurlin (2012) non-Granger causality test establishes: (1) energy-led and growth-led degradation, (2) feedback causal relation between environmental degradation and non-renewable energy, and (3) unidirectional causality from growth to non-renewable energy i.e. “conservation” hypothesis. Policy implications are discussed.