Several nations, including Mexico, are encountering problems with accomplishing the targets of sustainable development goals (SDGs). This study addresses how to develop SDG agenda for Mexico, which may also be applied to other emerging markets with comparable profiles. Therefore, this study utilizes a newly developed load capacity factor (LCF, a detailed environmental evaluation tool) that combines biocapacity (supply side) and ecological foot (demand side) to examine the effect of renewable energy consumption and trade openness on LCF while controlling for nonrenewable energy consumption and economic growth in the case of Mexico during 1970–2017. Using the dual adjustment approach, we find evidence of long-run cointegration nexus among the series. In addition, trade openness affects LCF positively, whereas renewable energy consumption, economic growth, and nonrenewable energy consumption impact LCF negatively. Furthermore, results of the frequency domain causality show that all the variables can predict LCF in the long-term. Based on these results, Mexico should focus on promoting public understanding of green energy and environmental preservation measures and participate in the production of nonenergy-consuming and ecologically friendly products while compelling polluting enterprises to migrate to countries with less stringent environmental restrictions.
World Bank. Trade (% of GDP) Data. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS. (2021, accessed 12th April 2022).
2.
AlolaAABekunFVSarkodieSA. Dynamic impact of trade policy, economic growth, fertility rate, renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption on ecological footprint in Europe. Sci Total Environ2019; 685: 702–709.
3.
AntweilerWCopelandBTaylorS. Is free trade good for the environment?Am Econ Rev2001; 91: 877–908.
4.
DestekMASinhaA. Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: evidence from organisation for economic co-operation and development countries. J Clean Prod2020; 242: 1.
5.
KirikkaleliDAdebayoTSKhanZ,et al.Does globalization matter for ecological footprint in Turkey? Evidence from dual adjustment approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2021; 28: 14009–14017.
6.
AydinMTuranYE. The influence of financial openness, trade openness, and energy intensity on ecological footprint: revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for BRICS countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2020; 27: 43233–43245.
7.
TayebiSKYounespourS. The effect of trade openness on environmental quality: evidence from Iran’s trade relations with the selected countries of the different blocks. Iran Econ Rev2012; 16: 19–40.
8.
ZafarMWMirzaFMZaidiSAH,et al.The nexus of renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption, trade openness, and CO2 emissions in the framework of EKC: evidence from emerging economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2019; 26: 15162–15173.
9.
GulistanATariqYBBashirMF. Dynamic relationship among economic growth, energy, trade openness, tourism, and environmental degradation: fresh global evidence. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2020; 27: 13477–13487.
10.
LeT-HChangYParkD. Trade openness and environmental quality: international evidence. Energy Policy2016; 92: 45–55.
11.
MehraraMKarsalariARMusaiM. The relationship among income, openness and environmental quality: an ARDL approach for the case of Iran. Int J Acad Res Bus Soc Sci2014; 4: 32–40.
12.
BeghinJRoland-HolstDMensbruggheD. A survey of the trade and environment nexus: global dimensions. OECD J Econ Stud1994; 23: 167–192.
13.
NathanielSAnyanwuOShahM. Renewable energy, urbanization, and ecological footprint in the Middle East and North Africa region. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2020; 27: 1–13.
14.
PataUK. Renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption, economic complexity, CO2 emissions, and ecological footprint in the USA: testing the EKC hypothesis with a structural break. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2021; 28: 846–861.
15.
RahmaneABenelbarMTraichM. The Nexus between sustainable energy and ecological footprint: evidence from Algeria. Sustain Sci Pract Policy2021; 17: 323–333.
16.
SharmaRSinhaAKautishP. Does renewable energy consumption reduce ecological footprint? Evidence from eight developing countries of Asia. J Clean Prod2020; 285: 124867.
17.
XueLHaseebMMahmoodH,et al.Renewable energy use and ecological footprints mitigation: evidence from selected South Asian economies. Sustainability2021; 13: 1613.
18.
NathanielSKhanSAR. The nexus between urbanization, renewable energy, trade, and ecological footprint in ASEAN countries. J Clean Prod2020; 272: 122709.
19.
FareedZSalemSAdebayoTS,et al.Role of export diversification and renewable energy on the load capacity factor in Indonesia: a Fourier quantile causality approach. Front Environ Sci2021; 9: 770152.
20.
IsmihanM. The dual adjustment approach with an application to the consumption function. Central Bank Rev2019; 19: 1–8.
21.
PataUK. Do renewable energy and health expenditures improve load capacity factor in the USA and Japan? A new approach to environmental issues. Eur J Health Econ2021; 22: 1427–1439.
22.
LiRWangXWangQ. Does renewable energy reduce ecological footprint at the expense of economic growth? An empirical analysis of 120 countries. J Clean Prod2022; 346: 131207.
23.
UsmanOAlolaAASaint AkadiriS. Effects of domestic material consumption, renewable energy, and financial development on environmental sustainability in the EU-28: evidence from a GMM panel-VAR. Renew Energy2022; 184: 239–251.
24.
UsmanOAkadiriSSAdesholaI. Role of renewable energy and globalization on ecological footprint in the USA: implications for environmental sustainability. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2020; 27: 30681–30693.
25.
AlolaAAAdebayoTSOnifadeSTExamining the dynamics of ecological footprint in China with spectral Granger causality and quantile-on-quantile approaches. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol2022; 29: 263–276.
26.
AkadiriSSAdebayoTS. Asymmetric nexus among financial globalization, non-renewable energy, renewable energy use, economic growth, and carbon emissions: impact on environmental sustainability targets in India. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2022; 29: 16311–16323.
27.
AlolaAAYalçinerKAlolaUV,et al.The role of renewable energy, immigration and real income in environmental sustainability target. Evidence from Europe largest states. Sci Total Environ2019; 674: 307–315.
28.
AlolaAAAlolaUVAkadiriSS. Renewable energy consumption in coastline Mediterranean countries: impact of environmental degradation and housing policy. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2019; 26: 25789–25801.
29.
Saint AkadiriSAlolaAAAkadiriAC,et al.Renewable energy consumption in EU-28 countries: policy toward pollution mitigation and economic sustainability. Energy Policy2019; 132: 803–810.
30.
Saint AkadiriSAlkawfiMMUğuralS,et al.Towards achieving environmental sustainability target in Italy. The role of energy, real income and globalization. Sci Total Environ2019; 671: 1293–1301.
31.
AmalFUllahSLuoR, et al. Dynamics between environmental taxes and ecological sustainability: Evidence from top-seven green economies by novel quantile approaches. Sustainable Development2021; 4: 59–72.
32.
KirikkaleliDShanSAhmadM, et al. The role of energy prices and non-linear fiscal decentralization in limiting carbon emissions: Tracking environmental sustainability. Energy2020; 234: 121243.
33.
LiRWangQWangX,et al.Germany’s contribution to global carbon reduction might be underestimated—a new assessment based on scenario analysis with and without trade. Technol Forecast Soc Change2022; 176: 121465.
34.
WangQWangXLiR. Does urbanization redefine the environmental Kuznets curve? An empirical analysis of 134 countries. Sustain Cities Soc2022; 76: 103382.
35.
WangQSuMLiR,et al.The effects of energy prices, urbanization and economic growth on energy consumption per capita in 186 countries. J Clean Prod2019; 225: 1017–1032.
36.
WangQZhangF. The effects of trade openness on decoupling carbon emissions from economic growth–evidence from 182 countries. J Clean Prod2021; 279: 123838.
37.
KhanZAliSUmarM,et al.Consumption-based carbon emissions and international trade in G7 countries: the role of environmental innovation and renewable energy. Sci Total Environ2020; 730: 138945.
WDI. World Bank Indicators. Mexico | Data. https://data.worldbank.org/country/mexico. (2021, accessed 4th June 2022).
40.
BP. Statistical Review of World Energy | Energy economics | Home. https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energyeconomics/ statistical-review-of-world-energy.html. (2021, accessed 2 April 2022).
41.
ZivotEAndrewsDWK. Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat2002; 20: 25–44.
42.
RavnMOUhligH. On adjusting the Hodrick-Prescott filter for the frequency of observations. Review of Economics and Statistics2002; 84: 371–376.
43.
BayerCHanckC. Combining non-cointegration tests. J Time Ser Anal2013; 34: 83–95.
44.
UdiJBekunFVAdedoyinFF. Modeling the nexus between coal consumption, FDI inflow and economic expansion: does industrialization matter in South Africa?Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2020; 27: 1–12.
45.
GokmenogluKKirikkaleliDErenBM. Time and frequency domain causality testing: the causal linkage between FDI and economic risk for the case of Turkey. J Int Trade Econ Dev2019; 28: 649–667.
46.
GewekeJ. Measurement of linear dependence and feedback between multiple time series. J Am Stat Assoc1982; 77: 304–313.
47.
HosoyaY. The decomposition and measurement of the interdependency between second-order stationary processes. Probab Theory Relat Fields1991; 88: 429–444.
48.
BreitungJCandelonB. Testing for short-and long-run causality: a frequency-domain approach. J Econom2006; 132: 363–378.
49.
PataUKIsikC. Determinants of the load capacity factor in China: a novel dynamic ARDL approach for ecological footprint accounting. Resour Policy2021; 74: 102313.
50.
XuDSalemSAwosusiAA,et al.Load capacity factor and financial globalization in Brazil: the role of renewable energy and urbanization. Front Environ Sci2022; 9: 689.
51.
AwosusiAAAdebayoTSAltuntaşM,et al.The dynamic impact of biomass and natural resources on ecological footprint in BRICS economies: a quantile regression evidence. Energy Rep2022; 8: 1979–1994.
52.
HeXAdebayoTSKirikkaleliD,et al.Consumption-based carbon emissions in Mexico: an analysis using the dual adjustment approach. Sustain Prod Consumpt2021; 27: 947–957.
53.
HeKRamzanMAwosusiAA,et al.Does globalization moderate the effect of economic complexity on CO2 emissions? Evidence from the top 10 energy transition economies. Front Environ Sci2021; 9: 778088.
54.
MiaoYRazzaqAAdebayoTS,et al.Do renewable energy consumption and financial globalisation contribute to ecological sustainability in newly industrialized countries?Renew Energy2022; 187: 688–697.
55.
Beton KalmazDAwosusiAA. Investigation of the driving factors of ecological footprint in Malaysia. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2022; 29: 56814–56827.
56.
AkadiriSSAdebayoTSAsuzuOC,et al.Testing the role of economic complexity on the ecological footprint in China: a nonparametric causality-in-quantiles approach. Energy Environ2022: 12: 109–125.
57.
AwosusiAAKutlayKAltuntaşM,et al.A roadmap toward achieving sustainable environment: evaluating the impact of technological innovation and globalization on load capacity factor. Int J Environ Res Public Health2022; 19: 3288.
58.
AkinsolaGDAwosusiAAKirikkaleliD,et al.Ecological footprint, public–private partnership investment in energy, and financial development in Brazil: a gradual shift causality approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2022; 29: 10077–10090.
59.
Alemán-NavaGSCasiano-FloresVHCárdenas-ChávezDL,et al.Renewable energy research progress in Mexico: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2014; 32: 140–153.
60.
OladipupoSDAdebayoTSRjoubH,et al.The asymmetric effects of renewable energy consumption and trade openness on carbon emissions in Sweden: new evidence from quantile-on-quantile regression approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2022; 29: 1875–1886.
61.
YupingLRamzanMXinchengL,et al.Determinants of carbon emissions in Argentina: the roles of renewable energy consumption and globalization. Energy Rep2021; 7: 4747–4760.
62.
AdekoyaOBOliyideJAFasanyaIO. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption–ecological footprint nexus in net-oil exporting and net-oil importing countries: policy implications for a sustainable environment. Renew Energy2022; 189: 524–534.
63.
AkadiriSSAdebayoTSRitiJS,et al.The effect of financial globalization and natural resource rent on load capacity factor in India: an analysis using the dual adjustment approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int2022; 3: 3(5): 1–18.
64.
KirikkaleliDAwosusiAAAdebayoTS,et al.Role of technological innovation and globalization in BRICS economies: policy towards environmental sustainability. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol2022; 8: 1–18.
65.
FareedZRehmanMAAdebayoTS,et al.Financial inclusion and the environmental deterioration in eurozone: the moderating role of innovation activity. Technol Soc2022; 69: 101961.
66.
LiuYSadiqFAliW,et al.Does tourism development, energy consumption, trade openness and economic growth matters for ecological footprint: testing the environmental Kuznets curve and pollution haven hypothesis for Pakistan. Energy2022; 245: 123208.
