2014
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2489904
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fuel Subsidy Reform and Environmental Quality in Nigeria

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We employed the non-linear autoregressive distributed lag estimation procedure and found fuel subsidy removal halt growth of carbon emission in the long-run. The long-run results were similar to Akinyemi et al (2015) findings in Ghana. Short-run estimates also revealed that fuel subsidy removal inversely relates to carbon emission in Nigeria.…”
Section: Conclusion Policy and Suggestion For Further Researchsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…We employed the non-linear autoregressive distributed lag estimation procedure and found fuel subsidy removal halt growth of carbon emission in the long-run. The long-run results were similar to Akinyemi et al (2015) findings in Ghana. Short-run estimates also revealed that fuel subsidy removal inversely relates to carbon emission in Nigeria.…”
Section: Conclusion Policy and Suggestion For Further Researchsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Across borders, there is a growing list of studies on the subject matter. However, few studies toe the line of discourse in Nigeria; some of which are Akinyemi et al(2015)Osunmuyiwa and Kalfagianni (2017); Dioha and Kumar (2020). In Akinyemi et al(2015), empirical credence was leaned to the established relationship of fuel subsidy and environmental reforms in Nigeria.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Essentially, fuel subsidy not only accounts for 30% of government expenditure in Nigeria, it gulps about 2.2-4% of the GDP. Notwithstanding the mixed outcomes, in 2012 the country spent $8-10 billion dollars on fuel subsidy which surpassed the $2 billion earmarked for education [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. For such policy ambiguities, public concerns over the high propensity to tragic endings in kerosene use in the country has now grown far bigger than ever [17,18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%