The effect of tourism development on the ecological footprint in Singapore: evidence from asymmetric ARDL method

Khôi, Nguyễn Văn; Le, Nguyen H.; Ngọc, Bùi Hoàng

doi:10.1080/13683500.2021.1971165

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The tourism industry is usually expected to reduce the negative impact on the environment, and even several tourism behaviors contribute to improving environmental degradation. This expectation is confirmed by many scholars (Croes et al, 2021; Khoi et al, 2021; Muhammad et al, 2020). More specifically, Kongbuamai et al (2020) employed the Driscoll-Kraay panel regression to explore the link between TO, GDP, energy consumption, natural resources, and EF in the context of ASEAN countries.…”

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 58%

“…Their results indicated that GLOB has an asymmetric effect on EF. Another study by Khoi et al (2021) recently also indicated that only positive changes in TO significantly and negatively influence EF in Singapore. These findings possibly imply that the linear models may not be appropriate to explain EF determinants and may provide ambiguous results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Tourism development (TO) has brought many benefits to a country and its resident, such as promoting infrastructure, attracting foreign direct investment, generating new jobs, and stimulating cultural change, thereby boosting economic growth. However, many tourism activities depend on the natural eco-system exploitation, so tourism promotion leads to increased transportation, hunting, and energy consumption, and thus the link between tourism activities and environmental degradation is generated (Adebayo et al, 2022; Akadiri et al, 2018; Khoi et al, 2021; Wang et al, 2021). One urgent challenge that every country or region has been facing is maintaining the balance between TO and its impact on environmental quality (Akadiri et al, 2019; Debbage & Debbage, 2019; Dolnicar, 2020; Sun et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, the impacts of TO, GDP, and GLOB on EF are still debated. For example, Mikayilov et al (2019), and Godil et al (2020) found that TO positively drives environmental degradation in Azerbaijan and Turkey, respectively, while Kongbuamai et al (2020), and Khoi et al (2021) presented an increase in TO leads to an increase in environmental quality in Thailand and Singapore. In addition, Akadiri, Uzuner, et al (2020) confirmed that international tourism and squared term of GDP have a significant inverse effect, while GLOB and GDP without squared term positively drive carbon emissions in 16 selected tourism island states.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Do Tourism Development and Globalization Reinforce Ecological Footprint? Evidence From RCEP Countries

Ngọc

2022

SAGE Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental degradation is one of the most urgent challenges facing governments and communities. Thus, the study aims to explore the influence of tourism development (TO), economic growth (GDP), and globalization (GLOB) on the environment (measured by the ecological footprint index, EF) in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) countries. By adopting a panel non-linear autoregressive distributed lag (panel NARDL) approach, the outcomes reveal that the impact of TO is an asymmetry in the long run but symmetry in the short run. More precisely, this study finds that positive changes in TO have a negative impact, while negative changes positively drive EF in the long run. In addition, the result also indicates that GDP positively influences EF, while GLOB has a significant negative impact on EF. Based on these findings, the work suggests practical policies for RCEP’s administrators to promote tourism and reduce ecological deficit.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 58%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Do Tourism Development and Globalization Reinforce Ecological Footprint? Evidence From RCEP Countries

Ngọc

2022

SAGE Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This linkage is understandable since the impact of economic growth on EF depends on the macroeconomic policies of each country or area. The literature review reveals that most studies empirically validate the positive impact of economic growth on EF (Khoi et al, 2021). A few works demonstrate a negative link between the two variables (Hassan et al, 2019;Usman, Kousar, Yaseen, et al, 2020) or even insignificant (Baz et al, 2020).…”

Section: The Links Between Economic Growth -Ecological Footprint Nexusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time-Frequency Nexus between Tourism Development, Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, and Ecological Footprint in Singapore

Ngọc

Hai²

2022

J. Rev. Global Econ.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Singapore has been listed as one of the top-visited countries and has the highest ecological deficit. Despite the abundance of previous studies, the distinction between short, medium, and long term by decomposing tourism development, economic growth, energy consumption, and ecological footprint has been largely ignored. This study aims to investigate the lead-lag nexus structures between ecological footprint and Singapore's economic activities from 1978 to 2016. By adopting the wavelet analysis and scale-by-scale Granger causality test, the outcomes show that energy consumption positively impacts ecological footprint at high frequencies, while tourism and economic growth positively drive ecological footprint at high and medium frequencies. We also find that the positive impact of macroeconomic variables on ecological footprint has not been evident since 2003. Additionally, the wavelet-based Granger test confirms a bi-directional causal between economic growth and ecological footprint at all frequencies, whilst there is a bi-directional relationship between tourism, energy consumption, and ecological footprint at high frequency. Based on these findings, the research may further strengthen the belief of Singapore’s policy-makers on the promotion of tourism and suggests some helpful lessons for emerging countries.

show abstract

Heterogeneous Impact of Tourism Development, and Economic Growth on Ecological Footprint in Singapore

Ngoc,

Tram,

Hoang

et al. 2024

Studies in Systems, Decision and Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of tourism development on the ecological footprint in Singapore: evidence from asymmetric ARDL method

Cited by 22 publications

References 69 publications

Do Tourism Development and Globalization Reinforce Ecological Footprint? Evidence From RCEP Countries

Do Tourism Development and Globalization Reinforce Ecological Footprint? Evidence From RCEP Countries

Time-Frequency Nexus between Tourism Development, Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, and Ecological Footprint in Singapore

Heterogeneous Impact of Tourism Development, and Economic Growth on Ecological Footprint in Singapore

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About