Does agricultural development induce environmental pollution in E7? A myth or reality

Abstract

Environmental degradation caused by various human activities has been a subject of attention over the globe. There is a concern on how to maintain a clean environment and at the same time achieve optimum production of food and non-food products amidst global energy demand. To this end, this study examines the impact of agricultural development, energy use and economic growth on CO2 emissions in the emerging seven countries that comprises China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Russia, Indonesia and Turkey for the annual time frequency from 1990 to 2016. The study uses a battery of econometrics techniques for soundness of analysis the consist of Pooled MeanGroup-Autoregressive Distributed Lag methodology, Dynamic Ordinary Least Squares and Fully Modified Ordinary Least Squares as estimation techniques alongside Dumitrescu and Hurlin Causality Test for the direction of causality analysis. Empirical results revealed that Agricultural value-added and economic growth are drivers of CO2 emission in the E7 countries while the rise in renewable energy causes a reduction in CO2 emissions. While in the short-run, economic growth has a positive impact on emissions in the focus countries. While causality analysis shows that there is a feedback causality between economic growth and emissions, agriculture value-added and energy usage, emission and agriculture value-added as well as economic growth and agricultural development. Furthermore, energy use does not cause emissions directly, it causes economic growth and agriculture value-added which causes emissions. This position aligns with the advocacy of the United Nations Sustainable development goals (UN-SDGs) targets 7 and 13 of clean energy access and mitigation of climate changes issues.

Unlocking the investment impact of biomass energy utilization on environmental degradation for an isolated island

“…Moreover, the estimations prove that the effect of real GDP is positively significant in all the three models at a 1% level. This result is inconsistent with Ulucak ( 2020), but affirms the findings of Gyamfi et al (2021bGyamfi et al ( , 2020aGyamfi et al ( , 2021c and Adedoyin et al (2021). From the Chines energy/economy, Ulucak (2020) found a negative long-run significant association regarding real GDP and pollution.…”

Does agricultural ecology cause environmental degradation? Empirical evidence from Bangladesh

“…This is because the more agricultural production there is, the more is the demand for use of combustible energy resources which consequently leads to release of emissions into the environment. This finding is similar to that of the studies conducted prior [ 86 ] and [ 87 ] in four ASEAN countries and in another study conducted [ 88 ] for E7 countries. CO 2 emissions are pushed up a lot by the CO 2 equivalent of nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions from synthetic fertilizers and other farming equipment [ 89 ].…”

“…A study by Adedoyin et al. [ 88 ] found that energy use in the form of renewable energy had a negative and significant coefficient at various levels of significance. In the E7 countries, a 1% increase in energy use resulted in a 0.32 to 0.66 percent reduction in CO 2 emissions [ 88 ].…”

To what extent are pollutant emission intensified by international tourist arrivals? Starling evidence from G7 Countries

“…To ascertain whether to apply the first-generation or the second-generation panel data econometric technique, the cross-sectional dependency (CD) test was carried out. The estimators are incomplete, contradictory and useless if the CD is not considered (Adedoyin et al, 2021). The study used the CD test for the robustness purpose.…”