2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121699
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Testing the EKC hypothesis for the top six hydropower energy-consuming countries: Evidence from Fourier Bootstrap ARDL procedure

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

10
62
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 207 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
10
62
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The outcome complies with the findings of Zambrano-Monserrate et al [19], Ozatac et al [20], Pata [18], and Bekun et al [21]. However, the EKC hypothesis was refuted in the studies of Dogan and Inglesi-Lotz [28], Pata and Aydin [29], Koc and Bulus [31], and Dogan and Inglesi-Lotz [28]. Furthermore, Fig.…”
Section: Long-run and Short-run Estimations Findingssupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The outcome complies with the findings of Zambrano-Monserrate et al [19], Ozatac et al [20], Pata [18], and Bekun et al [21]. However, the EKC hypothesis was refuted in the studies of Dogan and Inglesi-Lotz [28], Pata and Aydin [29], Koc and Bulus [31], and Dogan and Inglesi-Lotz [28]. Furthermore, Fig.…”
Section: Long-run and Short-run Estimations Findingssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The results obtained disagree with the EKC hypothesis in these European countries. Pata and Aydin [29] explored the EKC hypothesis in Brazil, China, Canada, India, Norway, and the USA by employing yearly data between 1965 and 2016. The outcome showed that the EKC hypothesis is not valid.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They concluded that economic growth can solve environmental problems [ 4 ]. Ugur and Mucahit studied the relationship between the ecological footprint and economic growth of the six largest hydroelectric power generating countries, i.e., Brazil, China, Canada, India, Norway, and the United States [ 5 ]. The conclusion is that the ecological footprint has no effect.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The literature has recently revealed wide attention in the association linking dis(aggregate) energy use, economic growth (hereafter EG), and pollution. The existing literature can be separated into three areas of study (see Section 2): the first strand includes the existing energy literature, which handles a large range of studies of varied findings lying on the connection among the use of green energy and EG (e.g., [21][22][23][24][25][26], among others); the second strand combines a branch of research that treats the renewable energy consumption-environment nexus (e.g., [15,16,[27][28][29][30], among others); the third strand includes the existing literature, which presents practical proof on the association linking CO 2 emissions and EG, indicating the famous theory of Environmental Curve of Kuznets, e.g., [31][32][33][34][35][36]. As the connection between the environment and income continues to be indecisive within the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC), further research may offer the debate valuable information in previously uninvestigated regions and countries.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%