This research attempts to explore the scale (trade openness), composition (export concentration) and technique effect (economic complexity) of international trade on energy use in the sample of G7 nations over the period 1970 and 2020 separately. To do that, we build up three empirical models based on the regression on population, affluence and technology approach. The analysis outcomes indicated a positive long-run link between per capita income, urbanization, trade openness, export concentration, economic complexity and energy use across the three models. The outcomes obtained from long-run estimations provide evidence that economic complexity and export concentration decreases energy consumption. Besides, empirical findings show that trade openness boosts energy use. Based on the detailed empirical research, the direction for the policy is that they should harness more strength on energy conservation by increasing the composition and technical effects of international trade. They should also focus on improving the countries’ economic freedom (trade openness) while maintaining energy consumption at a lower rate.
DoganE. (2015). The relationship between economic growth and electricity consumption from renewable and non-renewable sources: a study of Turkey. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 52, 534–546.
2.
ShahbazM.KhanS.TahirM. I. (2013). The dynamic links between energy consumption, economic growth, financial development and trade in China: fresh evidence from multivariate framework analysis. Energy Econ, 40, 8–21.
3.
SebriM.Ben SalhaO. (2014). On the causal dynamics between economic growth, renewable energy consumption, CO2 emissions and trade openness: fresh evidence from BRICS countries. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 39, 14–23.
4.
CanB.AhmedZ.AhmadM., et al. (2022). Do renewable energy consumption and green trade openness matter for human well-being? Empirical evidence from European Union countries. Soc Indic Res164: 1043–1059.
5.
BerdellJ. (2002). International trade and economic growth in open economies, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
6.
BuysseJ.CanM.GozgorG. (2018). Globalization outcomes and the real output in the sub-Saharan Africa LICs: a cointegration analysis. Econ Res, 31, 338–351.
7.
ColeM. A.RaynerA. J. (2000). The Uruguay round and air pollution: estimating the composition, scale and technique effects of trade liberalization. J Int Trade Econ Dev: Int Comp Rev, 9, 339–354.
8.
TsurumiT.ManagiS. (2010). Decomposition of the environmental Kuznets curve: scale, technique, and composition effects. Environ Econ Policy Stud, 11, 19–36.
9.
ShahbazM.NasreenS.LingC. H.,et al. (2014). Causality between trade openness and energy consumption: what causes what in high, middle and low income countries. Energy Policy, 70, 126–143.
10.
NasreenS.AnwarS. (2014). Causal relationship between trade openness, economic growth and energy consumption: a panel data analysis of Asian countries. Energy Policy, 69, 82–91.
11.
SadorskyP. (2011). Trade and energy consumption in the Middle East. Energy Econ, 33, 739–749.
12.
JaimovichE. (2012). Import diversification along the growth path, Econ Lett, 117 , 306–310.
HerzerD.Nowak-LehmannF. D. (2006). What does export diversification do for growth? An econometric analysis. Appl Econ, 38, 1825–1838.
15.
GozgorG.CanM. (2016b). Export product diversification and the environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from Turkey. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 23, 21594–21603.
16.
HuG.CanM.ParamatiS. R., et al. (2020). The effect of import product diversification on carbon emissions: new evidence for sustainable economic policies. Econ Anal Policy, 65, 198–210.
ImbsJ.WacziargR. (2003). Stages of diversification. Am Econ Rev, 93, 63–86.
19.
ManiaE. (2020). Export diversification and CO2 emissions: an augmented environmental Kuznets curve. J Int Dev, 32, 168–185.
20.
CanM.GozgorG. (2018). Effect of export product diversification on quality upgrading: an empirical study. J Int Trade Econ Dev: Int Comp Rev, 27, 293–313.
21.
AdityaA.AcharyyaR. (2013). Export diversification, composition, and economic growth: evidence from a cross-country analysis. J Int Trade Econ Dev: Int Comp Rev, 22, 959–992.
22.
GozgorG.CanM. (2016a). Effects of the product diversification of exports on income at different stages of economic development. Eurasian Bus Rev, 6, 215–235.
23.
GozgorG.CanM. (2017). Causal linkages among the product diversification of exports, economic globalization and economic growth. Rev Dev Econ, 21, 888–908.
24.
MarkakkaranS.SridharanP. (2022). Impact of export diversification on economic growth: a system GMM approach. Int J Dev Issues, 21, 309–320.
25.
MunirK.JavedZ. (2018). Export composition and economic growth: evidence from South Asian countries. South Asian J Bus Stud, 7, 225–240.
26.
CanM.DoganB.SabooriB. (2020). Does trade matter for environmental degradation in developing countries? New evidence in the context of export product diversification. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 27, 14702–14710.
27.
WuR.WangJ.WangS., et al. (2021). The drivers of declining CO2 emissions trends in developed nations using an extended STIRPAT model: a historical and prospective analysis. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 149, 111328.
28.
XueL.LiH.XuC.,et al. (2022). Impacts of industrial structure adjustment, upgrade and coordination on energy efficiency: empirical research based on the extended STIRPAT model. Energy Strategy Rev, 43, 100911.
29.
FerrantiD. D.GuillermoE. P.FranciscoH. G. F., et al. (2004). Inequality in Latin America: breaking with history? In World Bank Latin American and Caribbean Studies, Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/15009.
30.
DoganE.AltinozB.MadalenoM., et al. (2020). The impact of renewable energy consumption to economic growth: a replication and extension of. Energy Econ, 90, 104866.
31.
CanM.DoğanB. (2017). The effects of economic structural transformation on employment: an evaluation in the context of economic complexity and product space theory. In: YenilmezFKilicE (eds), Handbook of research on unemployment and labour market sustainability in the era of globalization. IGI Global Publishing, Hershey, 275–306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2008-5.ch016.
32.
HausmannR.HidalgoC. A.BustosS.,et al. (2014). The atlas of economic complexity: mapping paths to prosperity, Cambridge: MIT Press.
33.
ZhuS.LiR. (2017). Economic complexity, human capital and economic growth: empirical research based on cross-country panel data. Appl Econ, 49, 3815–3828.
34.
CanM.DoğanB. (2020). The effect of knowledge and skill-based production on agricultural employment: an empirical analysis in the sample of South Korea. In: SikdarS.DasR.C.BhattacharyyaR. (eds), Role of IT-ITES in economic development of Asia. Springer, Singapore.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4206-0_17.
35.
ApergisN.CanM.GozgorG.,et al. (2018). Effect of export concentration on CO2 emissions in developed countries: an empirical analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 25, 14106–14116.
36.
CanM.GozgorG. (2017). The impact of economic complexity on carbon emissions: evidence from France. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 24, 16364–16370.
37.
DoğanB.SabooriB.CanM. (2019). Does economic complexity matter for environmental degradation? An empirical analysis for different stages of development. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 26, 31900–31912.
38.
World Economic Situation and Prospects, (2018). https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/wpcontent/uploads/sites/45/publication/WESP2018_Full_Web-1.pdf (Accessed 13.02.2020).
39.
AlamM. M.MuradM. W. (2020). The impacts of economic growth, trade openness and technological progress on renewable energy use in organizations for economic cooperation and development countries. Renewable Energy, 145, 382–390.
40.
PanX.UddinM. K.SaimaU.,et al. (2019). How does industrialization and trade openness influence energy intensity? Evidence from a path model in case of Bangladesh, Energy Policy, 133, 110916.
41.
AmriF. (2019). Renewable and non-renewable categories of energy consumption and trade: do the development degree and the industrialization degree matter?Energy, 173, 374–383.
42.
RafiqS.SalimR.NielsenI., (2016). Urbanization, openness, emissions, and energy intensity: a study of increasingly urbanized emerging economies. Energy Econ, 56, 20–28.
43.
RafindadiA. A.OzturkI. (2016). Effects of financial development, economic growth and trade on electricity consumption: evidence from post-Fukushima Japan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 54, 1073–1084.
44.
AdomP.K. (2015). Business cycle and economic-wide energy intensity: the implications for energy conservation policy in Algeria, Energy, 88, 334–350.
45.
KyophilavongP.ShahbazM.AnwarS.,et al. (2015). The energy-growth nexus in Thailand: does trade openness boost energy consumption?Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 46, 265–274.
46.
DedeogluD.KayaH. (2013). Energy use, exports, imports and GDP: new evidence from the OECD countries. Energy Policy, 57, 469–476.
47.
ShahbazM.GozgorG.HammoudehS. (2019). Human capital and export diversification as new determinants of energy demand in the United States. Energy Econ, 78, 335–349.
48.
BashirM. A.ShengB.DoğanB.,et al. (2020). Export product diversification and energy efficiency: empirical evidence from OECD countries. Struct Change Econ Dyn, 55, 232–243.
49.
ShahzadU.DoğanB.SinhaA.,et al. (2020). Does export product diversification help to reduce energy demand: exploring the contextual evidences from the newly industrialized countries. Energy, 118881.
50.
Olasehinde-WilliamsGLeeCCFolorunshoA. What does export diversification do for energy demand? Evidence from the Global North. Environmental Science and Pollution Research2023; 30: 547–556.
51.
FatimaT.MentelG.DoğanB.,et al. (2022). Investigating the role of export product diversification for renewable, and non-renewable energy consumption in GCC (gulf cooperation council) countries: does the Kuznets hypothesis exist?Environ Dev Sustainability, 24, 8397–8417.
52.
NawazK.LahianiA.RoubaudD. (2020). Do natural resources determine energy consumption in Pakistan? The importance of quantile asymmetries. Q Rev Econ Finance, 87, 200–211.
53.
FangJ.GozgorG.MahalikM. K.,et al. (2021). The impact of economic complexity on energy demand in OECD countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 28, 33771–33780.
54.
CanMBrusselaersJMercanM. The effect of export composition on energy demand: A fresh evidence in the context of economic complexity. Review of Development Economics2022; 26(2): 687–703.
55.
CanM. Towards sustainable development in the European Union countries: Does economic complexity affect renewable and non-renewable energy consumption. Sustainable Development2023; 31: 439–451.
56.
CanM.AhmadM.KhanZ. (2021). The impact of export composition on environment and energy demand: evidence from newly industrialized countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 28, 33599–33612.
57.
CanM.BrusselaersJ.MercanM. (2022a). The effect of export composition on energy demand: a fresh evidence in the context of economic complexity. Rev Dev Econ, 26, 687–703.
58.
MagazzinoC.MeleM.SchneiderN., et al. (2022). Does export product diversification spur energy demand in the APEC region? Application of a new neural networks experiment and a decision tree model. Energy Build, 258, 111820.
59.
Olasehinde-WilliamsG.LeeCC.FolorunshoA. (2022). What does export diversification do for energy demand? Evidence from the global north. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 30, 547–556.
60.
DingruL.OnifadeS. T.RamzanM., et al. (2023). Environmental perspectives on the impacts of trade and natural resources on renewable energy utilization in sub-Sahara Africa: accounting for FDI, income, and urbanization trends. Resour Policy, 80, 103204.
61.
BergerA.BusseM.NunnenkampP.,et al. (2010). More stringent BITs, less ambiguous effects on FDI? Not a bit! WTO Staff Working Paper.
62.
BusseM.KönigerJ.NunnenkampP. (2010). FDI promotion through bilateral investment treaties: more than a bit?Rev World Econ, 146 , 147–141.
63.
TekinR. B. (2012). Economic growth, exports and foreign direct investment in least developed countries: a panel Granger causality analysis. Econ Model, 29, 868–878.
64.
DietzT.RosaE.A. (1994). Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Human Ecol Rev, 1, 277–300.
65.
EhrlichP.HoldrenJ. (1972). Impact of population growth. Popul Resour Environ, 3, 365–377.
WeiT. (2011). What STIRPAT tells about effects of population and affluence on the environment?Ecol Econ, 72, 70–74.
68.
WangQ.LiR. (2016). Drivers for energy consumption: a comparative analysis of China and India. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 62, 954–962.
69.
ShahbazM.LoganathanN.SbiaR.,et al. (2015). The effect of urbanization, affluence and trade openness on energy consumption: a time series analysis in Malaysia. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 47, 683–693.
70.
BreuschT. S.PaganA. R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev Econ Stud, 47, 239–253.
71.
PesaranM. H. (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependencec in Panels. University of Cambridge, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, 435.
72.
PeseranM. H.UllahA.YamagataT. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. Econom J, 11, 105–127.
73.
KatirciogluS. T.SertogluK.CandemirM., et al. (2015). Oil price movements and macroeconomic performance: evidence from twenty-six OECD countries. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev, 44, 257–270.
74.
CarrioniS. J. L.Barrio-CastroT. D.Lopez-BazoE. (2005). Breaking the panels: an application to the GDP per capita. Econom J, 8, 159–175.
75.
PesaranM. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ, 22, 265–312.
76.
WesterlundJ.EdgertonD. L. (2008). A simple test for cointegration in dependent panels with structural breaks. Oxf Bull Econ Stat, 70, 665–704.
77.
WesterlundJ. Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of applied econometrics2008; 23(2): 193–233.
78.
EberhardtM.BondS. (2009). Cross-section dependence in non-stationary panel models: a novel estimator. MPRA Paper 17692, University Library of Munich. http://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/17692.pdf.
