The article investigates the long-run impact of global and regional linkages through trade, foreign investment and digitalization on reducing carbon emissions in five South Asian economies, namely Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Based on the data from 2006 to 2021, the study uses the fully-modified OLS technique for estimation after controlling for endogeneity, non-stationarity, cross-sectional dependence and cross-sectional heterogeneity in the panel data. The article finds that exports and FDI inflows reduce consumption-based emissions for South Asia, thereby strengthening the idea that trade in environment-friendly goods and services and the transfer of cleaner technologies could facilitate better adaptation to climate change in the region. The positive impact of imports on emissions indicates that the region imports products with high energy usage. Regional linkages are also found to mitigate carbon emissions, providing ground for such linkages to encourage policy frameworks for countering climate change-related risks. The output and energy consumption are found to impact consumption-based emissions positively. The policy recommendation that emerges from the article is to integrate trade, investment and climate change policies to foster sustainable growth in the South Asian region.
AbidM., & SekrafiH. (2021). Pollution haven or halo effect? A comparative analysis of developing and developed countries. Energy Reports, 7, 4862–4871.
2.
AbmanR. M., LundbergC. C., & RutaM. (2021). The effectiveness of environmental provisions in regional trade agreements (No. 9601). The World Bank.
3.
AgarwalR., BalasundharamV., BlagraveP., GudmundssonR., & MousaR. (2021). Climate change in South Asia: Further need for mitigation and adaptation (Vol. 2021, No. 217). International Monetary Fund.
4.
AhmedK., RehmanM. U., & OzturkI. (2017). What drives carbon dioxide emissions in the long run? Evidence from selected South Asian Countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 70, 1142–1153.
5.
Asian Development Bank report. (2023). https://dx.doi.org/10.22617/FLS240103
6.
BaghdadiL., Martinez-ZarzosoI., & ZitounaH. (2013). Are RTA agreements with environmental provisions reducing emissions? Journal of International Economics, 90(2), 378–390.
7.
BekkersE., FrancoisJ. F., & Rojas-RomagosaH. (2018). Melting ice caps and the economic impact of opening the Northern Sea Route. The Economic Journal, 128(610), 1095–1127.
8.
BrentonP., & ChemutaiV. (2021). The trade and climate change nexus: The urgency and opportunities for developing countries. World Bank Publications.
9.
CopelandB. R., & TaylorM. S. (1994). North–south trade and the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(3), 755–787.
10.
CopelandB. R., & TaylorM. S. (1995). Trade and transboundary pollution. American Economic Review, 85(4), 716–737.
11.
DerindagO. F., MaydyburaA., KalraA., WongW. K., & ChangB. H. (2023). Carbon emissions and the rising effect of trade openness and foreign direct investment: Evidence from a threshold regression model. Heliyon, 9(7), e17448.
12.
DouY., DongK., JiangQ., & DongX. (2020). How does trade openness affect carbon emissions? New international evidence. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 22(03–04), 2250005.
13.
DuaP., & VermaN. (2024). Drivers of foreign direct investment inflows to emerging Asian economies. Journal of Emerging Market Finance, 23(1), 83–107.
14.
DuaP., GoelD., KumarN., & VermaN. (2023). Reducing financial inclusion gaps: A policy roadmap for developing economies. G20 policy briefs.
15.
DumitrescuE. I., & HurlinC. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modeling, 29(4), 1450–1460.
16.
ESCAP, & UN. (2017). Unlocking the potential of regional economic and integration in South Asia: Potential, challenges and the way forward. United Nations.
17.
FrankelJ. A. (2008). Global environmental policy and global trade policy. For the Harvard Project on international climate agreements. Harvard Kennedy School.
18.
FrankelJ. A., & RoseA. K. (2005). Is trade good or bad for the environment? Sorting out the causality. Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(1), 85–91.
19.
GoslingS. N., ZaherpourJ., & IbarretaD. (2018). PESETA III: Climate change impacts on labour productivity (p. 6). Publications Office of the European Union.
20.
GozgorG. (2017). Does trade matter for carbon emissions in OECD countries? Evidence from a new trade openness measure. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(36), 27813–27821.
21.
GrossmanG. M., & KruegerA. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353–377.
22.
HancockP. A., RossJ. M., & SzalmaJ. L. (2007). A meta-analysis of performance response under thermal stressors. Human Factors, 49(5), 851–877.
23.
HaugA. A., & UcalM. (2019). The role of trade and FDI for CO2 emissions in Turkey: Non-linear relationships. Energy Economics, 81, 297–307.
24.
HuG., CanM., ParamatiS. R., DoğanB., & FangJ. (2020). The effect of import product diversification on carbon emissions: New evidence for sustainable economic policies. Economic Analysis and Policy, 65, 198–210.
25.
HuhH. S., & ParkC. Y. (2017). Asia-Pacific regional integration index: Construction, interpretation, and comparison [ADB Economics Working Paper Series, No. 511]. Asian Development Bank. https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/adbewp/0511.html
26.
JainR., & SinghJ. B. (2009). Trade pattern in SAARC countries: Emerging trends and issues. Reserve Bank of India Occasional Papers, 30(3), 73–117.
27.
JiX., LiuY., HanM., & MengJ. (2020). The mutual benefits from Sino-Africa trade: Evidence on emission transfer along the global supply chain. Journal of Environmental Management, 263, 110332.
28.
JijianZ., TwumA. K., AgyemangA. O., EdziahB. K., & AyambaE. C. (2021). Empirical study on the impact of international trade and foreign direct investment on carbon emission for Belt and Road countries. Energy Reports, 7, 7591–7600.
29.
KathuriaS. (Ed.). (2018). A glass half full: The promise of regional trade in South Asia. World Bank Publications.
30.
KaoC. (1999). Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 90(1), 1–44.
31.
Kozul-WrightR., & FortunatoP. (2012). International trade and carbon emissions. The European Journal of Development Research, 24, 509–529.
32.
KhanZ., AliM., JinyuL., ShahbazM., & SiqunY. (2020). Consumption-based carbon emissions and trade nexus: Evidence from nine oil exporting countries. Energy Economics, 89, 104806.
33.
KurniawanK., SupriatnaJ., SapoheluwakanJ., SoesiloT. E. B., MariatiS., & GunarsoG. (2022). The analysis of forest and land fire and carbon and greenhouse gas emissions on the climate change in Indonesia. AgBioForum, 24(2), 1–11.
34.
LevinA., LinC. F., & ChuC. S. J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1–24.
35.
LiuX., ChenY., & WangX. (2020, January). Research on China–Kazakhstan trade under ‘The Belt and Road Initiative’—Based on the perspective of factor endowment theory. In 2019 International conference on management science and industrial economy (MSIE, 2019) (pp. 270–274). Atlantis Press.
36.
MaddalaG. S., & WuS. (1999). A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 631–652.
37.
Martínez-MartínezA., Esteve-PérezS., Gil-ParejaS., & Llorca-ViveroR. (2023). The impact of climate change on international trade: A gravity model estimation. The World Economy, 46(9), 2624–2653.
38.
Martínez-ZarzosoI., & OueslatiW. (2018). Do deep and comprehensive regional trade agreements help reduce air pollution?International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 18(6), 743–777.
39.
MonteiroJ. A. (2016). Typology of environment-related provisions in regional trade agreements [Staff Working Paper No. ERSD-2016-13]. World Trade Organization.
40.
ParkC. Y., & ClaveriaR. (2018, October19). Does regional integration matter for inclusive growth? Evidence from the multidimensional regional integration index. [Asian Development Bank Economics Working Paper Series, No. 559].
41.
PataU. K., DamM. M., & KayaF. (2023). How effective are renewable energy, tourism, trade openness, and foreign direct investment on CO2 emissions? An EKC analysis for ASEAN countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(6), 14821–14837.
42.
PazW. T. (2023). Trade during low carbon transition: Opportunities and challenges in Asia. Background note. Asian Development Bank.
43.
PedroniP. (1999). Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 653–670.
44.
PedroniP. (2004). Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Econometric Theory, 20(3), 597–625.
45.
PesaranM. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265–312.
46.
PesaranM. H., & YamagataT. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50–93.
47.
RenS., YuanB., MaX., & ChenX. (2014). International trade, FDI (foreign direct investment) and embodied CO2 emissions: A case study of China’s industrial sectors. China Economic Review, 28, 123–134.
48.
RowanN. J., MurrayN., QiaoY., O’neillE., CliffordE., BarcelóD., & PowerD. M. (2022). Digital transformation of peatland eco-innovations (‘Paludiculture’): Enabling a paradigm shift towards the real-time sustainable production of ‘green-friendly’ products and services. Science of the Total Environment, 838, 156328.
49.
SeldenT. M., & SongD. (1994). Environmental quality and development: Is there a Kuznets curve for air pollution emissions?Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 27(2), 147–162.
50.
ShenY., YangZ., & ZhangX. (2023). Impact of digital technology on carbon emissions: Evidence from Chinese cities. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 11, 1166376.
51.
SilvaE. C., & ZhuX. (2009). Emissions trading of global and local pollutants, pollution havens and free riding. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 58(2), 169–182.
52.
SternD. I. (2004). The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419–1439.
53.
TangC. F., & TanB. W. (2015). The impact of energy consumption, income, and foreign direct investment on carbon dioxide emissions in Vietnam. Energy, 79, 447–454.
54.
TealF., & EberhardtM. (2010). Productivity analysis in global manufacturing production[Working Paper]. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:ea831625-9014-40ec-abc5-516ecfbd2118
WanP., HeF., & ChenS. (2024). The impact of digital trade on regional carbon emissions: Evidence from China. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/176702
57.
WangQ., & YangZ. (2016). Industrial water pollution, water environment treatment, and health risks in China. Environmental pollution, 218, 358–365.
58.
WangY., ZhangX., LinF., & PengM. (2023). The role of digital governance on carbon emission performance: Evidence from the cities in Yangtze River delta, China. Environmental Research Communications, 5(8), 085013.
59.
WesterlundJ. (2005). New simple tests for panel cointegration. Econometric Reviews, 24(3), 297–316.
60.
WiedmannT., & LenzenM. (2018). Environmental and social footprints of international trade. Nature Geoscience, 11(5), 314–321.
61.
World Bank. (April2024). World Bank’s South Asia development update.
62.
World Bank Group. (2021). World Bank Group climate change action plan 2021–2025: Supporting green, resilient, and inclusive development. World Bank.
63.
XiaoR., TanG., HuangB., LiJ., & LuoY. (2022). Pathways to sustainable development: Regional integration and carbon emissions in China. Energy Reports, 8, 5137–5145.
64.
YuY., & XuW. (2019). Impact of FDI and R&D on China’s industrial CO2 emissions reduction and trend prediction. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 10(5), 1627–1635.
65.
ZhengJ., XiangY., & TuX. (2023). Digital economy, spatial spillover, and carbon intensity: Concurrently on the threshold effect of human capital. Economic Research [Ekonomska istraživanja], 36(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2023.2178022
