Modelling the green logistics and financial innovation on carbon neutrality goal, a fresh insight for BRICS‐T

Abstract

This article explores the concepts and objectives of green logistics and financial innovation in the context of the BRICS‐T economies (Brazil, the Russian Federation, India, China, South Africa and Turkey) with the aim of achieving carbon neutrality or net‐zero emissions. It outlines a new scientific direction that incorporates the use of knowledge and other areas to apply green innovation, green energy and economic growth to reducing transport‐based CO2 emissions. To examine the identified research gap, the study adopted a novel econometric approach for 2000–2018 and confirmed the ‘carbon neutrality’ hypothesis. The findings revealed that green logistics, green innovation and renewable resources—which become a strong driving force for executing neutrality—result in net zero emissions and improve environmental sustainability in the BRICS‐T countries. In contrast, financial innovation and economic growth boost transportation emissions and increase environmental degradation. According to the findings of the study, policymakers should prioritize sustainable development strategies in order to achieve ‘Carbon Neutrality’. This includes implementing green logistics and promoting green financial innovation. Furthermore, it is suggested that greater support be given to the renewable energy sector, green technologies and sustainable growth to drive sustainable development in the BRICS‐T economies.

Can financial innovation and environmental policy curb transport‐based CO2 emissions? An advanced panel analysis

“…It is crucial to prioritize sustainable development and take measures to overcome CO 2 E in the transport sector to mitigate the adverse effects of FIN. Our outcomes are in line with Huo et al (2023), Jianguo et al (2023) and Kirikkaleli et al (2022).…”

“…As economies grow, there is a greater demand for energy for businesses, industries and power homes. This energy is often produced by burning fossil fuels, which leads to increasing GHGs, such as CO 2 E. Expanding transport networks, buildings and other infrastructure associated with economic growth also increases CO 2 E. Our consequences are in line with many previous studies (Ahmad, Ahmed, et al, 2023; Jianguo et al, 2023; Rasool et al, 2019; Wang et al, 2019, 2020).…”

“…The first view suggests that FIN could be vital in financing sustainable projects, preventing global heating and disrupting CO 2 E (Chishti & Sinha, 2022; Naseem et al, 2023). In contrast, other researchers reported that FIN could threaten ecological sustainability (Huo et al, 2023; Jianguo et al, 2023; Kirikkaleli & Adebayo, 2022; Zhang et al, 2022). The researchers from both sides have yet to arrive at a decisive conclusion on the relationship between FIN and environmental sustainability; therefore, it is essential to consider the effect of FIN on environmental sustainability.…”

“…We utilized TCO 2 E (Mt per capita) as a proxy indicator for achieving the carbon neutrality goal. Moreover, FIN is the index of (M1 and M3) utilized in the study of Huo et al (2023) and Jianguo et al (2023). M1 is narrow money, and M3 is broad money, where M1 and M3 are measured as a seasonally adjusted index based on 2015 = 100.…”

“…After the CSD technique and SLH determination, the CS‐ARDL is the most valuable method for examining the LR outcomes. Moreover, this approach calculates dynamic mutual connection influence for the time dynamics (Jianguo et al, 2023; Zhen et al, 2023), cross‐sectional dependence, SLH and residual cross‐region dependence and examines long and short outcomes. The CS‐ARDL mutual elasticity coefficients add to a shared policy outline for climate strengths.…”