Exploring aggregated and disaggregated environmental impacts of biofuels: Do affluence,green technological innovation and green finance matter for top biofuel-abundant economies?
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2025
Exploring aggregated and disaggregated environmental impacts of biofuels: Do affluence,green technological innovation and green finance matter for top biofuel-abundant economies?
The unceasing ravaging effects of global warming have made the world rethink the choice of energy consumption, with policymakers pushing for an unconditional transition to sustainable energy believed to be eco-friendly. Although studies have emerged with a view to unravel the path to global environmental sustainability, the paths of biofuels remain scantly investigated. Hence, this study presented the maiden empirical support for the aggregated and disaggregated impacts of biofuels on environmental sustainability in five top biofuel-abundant economies (Brazil, China, Germany, Indonesia, and the United States) from 1995 to 2019. The papers add to the existing knowledge by considering the roles of green technological innovation (proxied by environmental-related technologies), affluence, green finance, population and coal in a novel STIRPAT framework. The stated model is empirically verified based on recent techniques encompassing CS-ARDL, CCEMG, AMG, and MMQR. The empirical results uncover that both effects of biofuels substantially moderate carbon emissions, thus paving the way for environmental sustainability. Besides, environmental-related technologies and green finance significantly mitigate carbon emissions, whereas affluence, population, and coal positively drive carbon emissions. The empirical regularity of the main estimators is confirmed based on the feedback from MMQR which uphold the validity of biofuels in mitigating carbon emissions at different quantiles. The outcomes of the causality analysis uncover unidirectional, bidirectional and non-causal nexuses. Policy insights that promote sustainable exploration of biofuels for achieving a carbon-neutral environment are exposited following the findings.
Lanre IbrahimRBello AjideKUsmanM, et al.Heterogeneous effects of renewable energy and structural change on environmental pollution in Africa: do natural resources and environmental technologies reduce pressure on the environment?Renew Energy2022; 200: 244–256.
2.
LiRWangQLiuY, et al.Per-capita carbon emissions in 147 countries: the effect of economic, energy, social, and trade structural changes. Sustain Prod Consump2021; 27: 1149–1164.
3.
WangQWangXLiR. Does urbanization redefine the environmental Kuznets curve? An empirical analysis of 134 Countries. Sustain Cities Soc2022; 76: 103382.
4.
HuangYHaseebMUsmanM, et al.Dynamic association between ICT, renewable energy, economic complexity and ecological footprint: is there any difference between E-7 (developing) and G-7 (developed) countries?Technol Soc2022; 68: 101853.
5.
UsmanMJahangerAMakhdumMSA, et al.How do financial development, energy consumption, natural resources, and globalization affect Arctic countries’ economic growth and environmental quality? An advanced panel data simulation. Energy2022; 241: 122515.
IbrahimRL. Beyond COP26: can income level moderate fossil fuels, carbon emissions, and human capital for healthy life expectancy in Africa?Environ Sci Pollut Res2022. Epub ahead of print 11 July 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21872-w.
8.
OkeDMIbrahimRLBokanaKG. Can renewable energy deliver African quests for sustainable development?J Develop Areas2021; 55, Epub ahead of print 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2021.0022.
9.
OnifadeSTAlolaAA. Energy transition and environmental quality prospects in leading emerging economies: The role of environmental-related technological innovation. Sustain Develop2022; n/a. Epub ahead of print February 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2346.
10.
Hernández-DelgadoEA. The emerging threats of climate change on tropical coastal ecosystem services, public health, local economies and livelihood sustainability of small islands: cumulative impacts and synergies. Mar Pollut Bull2015; 101: 5–28.
11.
WadeK. The impact of climate change on the The impact of climate change on the.
12.
LawansonOIProverbsDIbrahimRL. The impact of flooding on poor communities in Lagos State, Nigeria: the case of the Makoko urban settlement. J Flood Risk Manage2022; n/a: e12838. :
13.
GalimovaTRamMBreyerC. Mitigation of air pollution and corresponding impacts during a global energy transition towards 100% renewable energy system by 2050. Energy Rep2022; 8: 14124–14143.
14.
SadiqaAGulagiABreyerC. Energy transition roadmap towards 100% renewable energy and role of storage technologies for Pakistan by 2050. Energy2018; 147: 518–533.
15.
WangQZhangFLiR. Revisiting the environmental kuznets curve hypothesis in 208 counties: the roles of trade openness, human capital, renewable energy and natural resource rent. Environ Res2023; 216: 114637.
16.
FiorentinoGZucaroAUlgiatiS. Towards an energy efficient chemistry. Switching from fossil to bio-based products in a life cycle perspective. Energy2019; 170: 720–729.
17.
MofijurMRasulMGHydeJ, et al.Role of biofuels on IC engines emission reduction. Energy Procedia2015; 75: 886–892.
18.
HuangHKhannaMÖnalH, et al.Stacking low carbon policies on the renewable fuels standard: economic and greenhouse gas implications. Energy Policy2013; 56: 5–15.
ChuLK. Determinants of ecological footprint in OCED countries: do environmental-related technologies reduce environmental degradation?Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 23779–23793.
22.
UsmanMJahangerARadulescuM, et al.Do nuclear energy, renewable energy, and environmental-related technologies asymmetrically reduce ecological footprint? Evidence from Pakistan. Energies2022; 15: 3448.
23.
IbrahimRLAjideKB. The dynamic heterogeneous impacts of nonrenewable energy, trade openness, total natural resource rents, financial development and regulatory quality on environmental quality: evidence from BRICS economies. Resour Policy2021; 74: 102251.
24.
ShenJIbrahimRLAjideKB, et al.Tracking environmental sustainability pathways in Africa: Do natural resource dependence, renewable energy, and technological innovations amplify or reduce the pollution noises?Energy Environ2022; 0958305X221124221.
25.
IbrahimRLAl-mulaliUOzturkI, et al.On the criticality of renewable energy to sustainable development: Do green financial development, technological innovation, and economic complexity matter for China?Renew Energy. 2022. Epub ahead of print 31 August 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.08.101.
26.
RazzaqAAjazTLiJC, et al.Investigating the asymmetric linkages between infrastructure development, green innovation, and consumption-based material footprint: novel empirical estimations from highly resource-consuming economies. Resour Policy2021; 74: 102302.
27.
ZhaoJTaghizadeh-HesaryFDongK, et al.How green growth affects carbon emissions in China: the role of green finance. Econ Res-Ekonomska Istraživanja2022; 0: 1–22.
28.
ZhangSWuZWangY, et al.Fostering green development with green finance: an empirical study on the environmental effect of green credit policy in China. J Environ Manag2021; 296: 113159.
CapazRSGuidaESeabraJEA, et al.Mitigating carbon emissions through sustainable aviation fuels: costs and potential. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin2021; 15: 502–524.
32.
QiuRXuJZengZ, et al.Carbon tax policy-induced air travel carbon emission reduction and biofuel usage in China. J Air Transp Manage2022; 103: 102241.
33.
SaravananASenthil KumarPJeevananthamS, et al.Recent advances and sustainable development of biofuels production from lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour Technol2022; 344: 126203.
34.
ThiyagarajanSSonthaliaAGeoVE, et al.Chapter 11 - effect of low carbon biofuel on carbon emissions in biodiesel fueled CI engine. In: AzadAKKhanMMK (eds) Bioenergy resources and technologies. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Academic Press, 2021, pp. 333–368.
35.
BibiAZhangXUmarM. The imperativeness of biomass energy consumption to the environmental sustainability of the United States revisited. Environ Ecol Stat2021; 28: 821–841.
36.
GuoJTanakaT. Energy security versus food security: an analysis of fuel ethanol- related markets using the spillover index and partial wavelet coherence approaches. Energy Econ2022; 112: 106142.
37.
MajeedMTLuniTTahirT. Growing green through biomass energy consumption: the role of natural resource and globalization in a world economy. Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 33657–33673.
38.
ChopraRMagazzinoCShahMI, et al.The role of renewable energy and natural resources for sustainable agriculture in ASEAN countries: do carbon emissions and deforestation affect agriculture productivity?Resour Policy2022; 76: 102578.
39.
DestekMASarkodieSAAsamoahEF. Does biomass energy drive environmental sustainability? An SDG perspective for top five biomass consuming countries. Biomass Bioenergy2021; 149: 106076.
40.
XuBZhongRQiaoH. The impact of biofuel consumption on CO2 emissions: a panel data analysis for seven selected G20 countries. Energy Environ2020; 31: 1498–1514.
41.
SaravananAPPugazhendhiAMathimaniT. A comprehensive assessment of biofuel policies in the BRICS nations: implementation, blending target and gaps. Fuel2020; 272: 117635.
42.
KumarSShresthaPAbdul SalamP. A review of biofuel policies in the major biofuel producing countries of ASEAN: production, targets, policy drivers and impacts. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2013; 26: 822–836.
43.
VillanthenkodathMAMahalikMK. Technological innovation and environmental quality nexus in India: does inward remittance matter?J Public Affairs2022; 22: e2291.
44.
AdebayoTSOladipupoSDAdesholaI, et al.Wavelet analysis of impact of renewable energy consumption and technological innovation on CO2 emissions: evidence from Portugal. Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 23887–23904.
45.
LingyanMZhaoZMalikHA, et al.Asymmetric impact of fiscal decentralization and environmental innovation on carbon emissions: evidence from highly decentralized countries. Energy Environ2022; 33: 752–782.
46.
ZhengYXiaoJHuangF, et al.How do resource dependence and technological progress affect carbon emissions reduction effect of industrial structure transformation? Empirical research based on the rebound effect in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2022. Epub ahead of print 16 May 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20193-2.
47.
ZhaoTZhouHJiangJ, et al.Impact of green finance and environmental regulations on the green innovation efficiency in China. Sustainability2022; 14: 3206.
48.
RonaldoRSuryantoT. Green finance and sustainability development goals in Indonesian Fund Village. Resour Policy2022; 78: 102839.
49.
IrfanMRazzaqASharifA, et al.Influence mechanism between green finance and green innovation: exploring regional policy intervention effects in China. Technol Forecast Soc Change2022; 182: 121882.
50.
YangQDuQRazzaqA, et al.How volatility in green financing, clean energy, and green economic practices derive sustainable performance through ESG indicators? A sectoral study of G7 countries. Resour Policy2022; 75: 102526.
51.
ShengJTangW. Spatiotemporal variation patterns of water pollution drivers: the case of China’s south-north water transfer project. Sci Total Environ2021; 761: 143190.
52.
ShahbazMLoganathanNMuzaffarAT, et al.How urbanization affects CO2 emissions in Malaysia? The application of STIRPAT model. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2016; 57: 83–93.
53.
PoumanyvongPKanekoS. Does urbanization lead to less energy use and lower CO2 emissions? A cross-country analysis. Ecol Econ2010; 70: 434–444.
54.
KhanSARIbrahimRLAl-AminAQ, et al.An ideology of sustainability under technological revolution: striving towards sustainable development. Sustainability2022; 14: 4415.
55.
Cabrera-JiménezRMateo-SanzJMGavaldàJ, et al.Comparing biofuels through the lens of sustainability: a data envelopment analysis approach. Appl Energy2022; 307: 118201.
56.
IbrahimRLOzturkIAl-FaryanMAS, et al.Exploring the nexuses of disintegrated energy consumption, structural change, and financial development on environmental sustainability in BRICS: modulating roles of green innovations and regulatory quality. Sustain Energy Technol Assess2022; 53: 102529.
57.
HouSChenXQiuR. Sustainable biofuel consumption in air passenger transport driven by carbon-tax policy. Sustain Prod Consump2022; 31: 478–491.
58.
SarkarBMridhaBPareekS. A sustainable smart multi-type biofuel manufacturing with the optimum energy utilization under flexible production. J Cleaner Prod2022; 332: 129869.
AjideKRidwanI. Energy consumption, environmental contaminants, and economic growth: the G8 experience. Прикладная эконометрика, Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), 2018; 51: 58–83.
61.
AjideKBIbrahimRL. Threshold effects of capital investments on carbon emissions in G20 economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res2021; 28: 39052–39070.
62.
AjideKBIbrahimRL. Environmental impacts of income inequality: evidence from G7 economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 1887–1908.
63.
JahangerAUsmanMMurshedM, et al.The linkages between natural resources, human capital, globalization, economic growth, financial development, and ecological footprint: the moderating role of technological innovations. Resources Policy2022; 76: 102569.
64.
ChenHTackieEAAhakwaI, et al.Does energy consumption, economic growth, urbanization, and population growth influence carbon emissions in the BRICS? Evidence from panel models robust to cross-sectional dependence and slope heterogeneity. Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 37598–37616.
65.
RehmanAMaHAhmadM, et al.Towards environmental Sustainability: devolving the influence of carbon dioxide emission to population growth, climate change, Forestry, livestock and crops production in Pakistan. Ecol Indic2021; 125: 107460.
66.
ZhangMAjideKBRidwanLI.Heterogeneous dynamic impacts of nonrenewable energy, resource rents, technology, human capital, and population on environmental quality in Sub-Saharan African countries. Environ Dev Sustain.2021. Epub ahead of print 26 November 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01927-7.
67.
IbrahimRLAjideKB. The role of income level and institutional quality in the non-renewable energy consumption and life expectancy nexus: evidence from selected oil-producing economies in Africa. OPEC Energy Review2021; 45: 341–364.
68.
KanwalSMehranMTHassanM, et al.An integrated future approach for the energy security of Pakistan: replacement of fossil fuels with syngas for better environment and socio-economic development. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2022; 156: 111978.
69.
PesaranMH. Testing weak cross-sectional dependence in large panels. Econom Rev2015; 34: 1089–1117.
70.
Pesaran. General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. University of Cambridge, Faculty of Economics, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics No. 0435.
71.
Hashem PesaranMYamagataT. Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. J Econom2008; 142: 50–93.
72.
PesaranMH. A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econom2007; 22: 265–312.
73.
WesterlundJ. Testing for error correction in panel data*. Oxf Bull Econ Stat2007; 69: 709–748.
74.
HussainMMirGMUsmanM, et al.Analysing the role of environment-related technologies and carbon emissions in emerging economies: a step towards sustainable development. Environ Technol2022; 43: 367–375.
75.
UsmanMBalsalobre-LorenteDJahangerA, et al.Pollution concern during globalization mode in financially resource-rich countries: do financial development, natural resources, and renewable energy consumption matter?Renew Energy2022; 183: 90–102.
76.
ChudikAPesaranMH. Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. J Econom2015; 188: 393–420.
77.
PesaranMH. Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica2006; 74: 967–1012.
NeweyWKWestKD. Hypothesis testing with efficient method of moments estimation. Int Econ Rev1987; 28: 777.
80.
EberhardtMBondS. Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: a novel estimator, https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/17692/ (2009, accessed 29 July 2022).
81.
DumitrescuE-IHurlinC. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Econ Model2012; 29: 1450–1460.
82.
StrohmB. Ethanol. In: WexlerP (eds) Encyclopedia of toxicology. Third Edition. Oxford: Academic Press, 2014, pp. 488–491.
83.
WesterlundJEdgertonDL. A panel bootstrap cointegration test. Econ Lett2007; 97: 185–190.
84.
KocakEAlnourM. Energy R&D expenditure, bioethanol consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions in the United States: non-linear analysis and political implications. J Cleaner Prod2022; 374: 133887.
85.
LiuZSaydalievHBLanJ, et al.Assessing the effectiveness of biomass energy in mitigating CO2 emissions: evidence from top-10 biomass energy consumer countries. Renew Energy2022; 191: 842–851.
86.
AhmadMWuY. Combined role of green productivity growth, economic globalization, and eco-innovation in achieving ecological sustainability for OECD economies. J Environ Manag2022; 302: 113980.
87.
IbrahimRL.Post-COP26: can energy consumption, resource dependence, and trade openness promote carbon neutrality? Homogeneous and heterogeneous analyses for G20 countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res.2022. Epub ahead of print 7 July 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21855-x.
88.
Al MamunMBoubakerSNguyenDK. Green finance and decarbonization: evidence from around the world. Finance Res Lett2022; 46: 102807.
89.
BaiJChenZYanX, et al.Research on the impact of green finance on carbon emissions: evidence from China. Econ Res-Ekonomska Istraživanja2022; 0: 1–20.
90.
DietzTRosaEA. Effects of population and affluence on CO 2 emissions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA1997; 94: 175–179.
91.
RehmanAMaHOzturkI, et al.Sustainable development and pollution: the effects of CO2 emission on population growth, food production, economic development, and energy consumption in Pakistan. Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 17319–17330.
92.
IbrahimRLAjideKB. Nonrenewable and renewable energy consumption, trade openness, and environmental quality in G-7 countries: the conditional role of technological progress. Environ Sci Pollut Res2021; 28: 45212–45229.
93.
JoshuaUAlolaAA. Accounting for environmental sustainability from coal-led growth in South Africa: the role of employment and FDI. Environ Sci Pollut Res2020; 27: 17706–17716.
94.
KoengkanMFuinhasJASilvaN. Exploring the capacity of renewable energy consumption to reduce outdoor air pollution death rate in Latin America and the Caribbean region. Environ Sci Pollut Res2021; 28: 1656–1674.
95.
HuangQZhangHChenJ, et al.Quantile regression models and their applications: a review. J Biom Biostat2017; 08, Epub ahead of print 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6180.1000354.
