ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2021
Do inward foreign direct investment and economic development improve local environmental quality: aggregation bias puzzle.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- From foreign direct investment to environmental regulations: Does a feedback effect ever exist?Heliyon · 2024Article
- The effect of mandatory environmental regulation on green development efficiency: evidence from China.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2023Article
- Exploring the moderating effect of globalization, financial development and environmental degradation nexus: a roadmap to sustainable development.Environment, development and sustainability · 2022Article
- Assessment of Foreign Direct Investment-Led Growth Argument in South Africa Amidst Urbanization and Industrialization: Evidence from Innovation Accounting Tests.Journal of the knowledge economy · 2022Article
- Combined role of industrialization and urbanization in determining carbon neutrality: empirical story of Pakistan.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Reinvestigating the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis by a composite model constructed on the Armey curve hypothesis with government spending for the US States.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Asymmetric impact of temperature on COVID-19 spread in India: Evidence from quantile-on-quantile regression approach.Journal of thermal biology · 2022Article
- A study of energy investment and environmental sustainability nexus in China: a bootstrap replications analysis.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Dynamics among economic growth, urbanization, and environmental sustainability in IEA countries: the role of industry value-added.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Exploring the asymmetric effects of renewable energy production, natural resources, and economic progress on COEnvironmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Do economic openness and electricity consumption matter for environmental deterioration: silver bullet or a stake?Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since preceding several decades, the carbon emissions based standard Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) has been tested and supported by a plethora of studies in countries around the globe. The current study estimated the inward foreign direct investment (IFDI)-augmented EKCs for China's 27 provincial divisions employing the advanced econometric methodologies involving cross-sectional dependence, slope heterogeneity, and second generation-based estimation procedures. The study has further contributed through a modification to "Stochastic Influence by Regression on Population, Affluence, and Technology" (STIRPAT) in terms of including IFDI to the standard model. Accordingly, this work estimated the standard EKC (involving economic development-carbon emissions linkage) as well as IFDI-carbon emissions linkage within the STIRPAT framework, by employing a panel vector error-correction-based estimation procedure. The findings revealed that (1) the conventional EKC estimates for national and regional samples (i.e., aggregate samples) presented linkages differing from the EKC links for the provincial divisions. It suggested that the EKC at the aggregated levels is likely the consequence of aggregation bias problem. (2) The links between IFDI (in power and non-power sector) and carbon emissions provided inverse U shape for the aggregate samples, while the provincial divisions presented heterogeneous results. This is perhaps because of the aggregation bias. Hence, the aggregation bias puzzle is unriddled. (3) Also, heterogeneous patterns are found in terms of turning points, degree of impact, and nature of the association of income and IFDI with carbon emissions. The meaningful policies can be extracted for the large countries encompassing varied economic development levels, such as China, if the EKC is evaluated at the disaggregate scales.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.