آزادی و عملکرد زیست محیطی: شواهد از کشورهای MENAT

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی به زبان انگلیسی

نویسندگان

1 گروه اقتصاد، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، سبزوار، ایران

2 گروه اقتصاد، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، سبزوار، ایران

چکیده

کیفیت محیط‌زیست و عوامل تعیین کننده آن یکی از چالش‌های اصلی حال و آینده بشریت است و توسعه پایدار در راستای حفظ و بهبود محیط‌زیست تفسیر می‌شود. در سال‌های اخیر مطالعات زیادی در مورد عوامل موثر بر کیفیت محیطی انجام شده است. یکی از موضوعات اصلی که در مطالعات مرتبط کمتر مورد توجه قرار گرفته است، تأثیر حاکمیت بر کیفیت محیط‌زیست است. در این مطالعه تأثیر مؤلفه‌های حکمرانی خوب شامل آزادی اقتصادی، آزادی تجاری و آزادی سیاسی بر شاخص عملکرد زیست‌محیطی (EPI) و زیرشاخص‌های آن شامل سلامت محیط، سرزندگی اکوسیستم و تغییرات آب و هوایی بررسی می‌شود. داده‌های مورد نیاز برای تجزیه و تحلیل آماری مربوط به کشورهای منطقه خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا و ترکیه (MENAT) طی سال‌های 2000-2021 می‌باشد. برای برآورد مدل و بررسی رابطه بین متغیرها از روش داده‌های پانل استفاده شده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که بین آزادی اقتصادی و آزادی سیاسی با شاخص عملکرد محیطی (EPI) رابطه مثبت و معناداری وجود دارد و بین آزادی تجاری و EPI رابطه معناداری وجود ندارد. همچنین مشخص شد که آزادی اقتصادی تأثیر منفی بر سرزندگی اکوسیستم و تغییرات آب و هوایی دارد، اما تأثیر مثبتی بر سلامت محیط‌زیست داشته است. همچنین آزادی سیاسی بر سرزندگی اکوسیستم و تغییرات اقلیمی تأثیر مثبت دارد، اما تأثیر قابل توجهی بر سلامت محیط‌زیست ندارد. نتایج این تحقیق نشان داد که آزادی اقتصادی منجر به سرمایه‌گذاری بیشتر در بخش نفت و گاز کشورهای مذکور شده است و بنابراین انتشار فاضلاب و گاز تاثیر منفی بر حیات محیط‌زیست و تغییرات آب و هوایی داشته است، اما با افزایش تولید و فروش نفت و گاز، درآمد سرانه کشورها افزایش یافته و بهداشت محیط بهبود یافته است. همچنین با توجه به اینکه آزادی سیاسی در میان منطقه خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا از تنوع زیادی برخوردار است، نتایج نشان داد که کشورهای دارای آزادی سیاسی بیشتر، از طریق آگاهی بیشتر جامعه و پاسخگویی بیشتر دولت‌ها و وضع قوانین حفاظت از محیط زیست، از وضعیت محیط زیست بهتری برخوردار بوده‌اند. البته شاخص بهداشت محیط بیشتر تحت تأثیر وضعیت اقتصادی و تولید سرانه کشورهاست و آزادی سیاسی تأثیر چندانی بر آن ندارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Freedom and Environmental Performance: Evidence from MENAT Countries

نویسندگان [English]

  • S.E. Alavi 1
  • M. Mohammadi 2
1 Department of Economics, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran
2 Department of Economics, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran
چکیده [English]

Environment quality and its determinants are one of the main challenges of the present and future of humanity and sustainable development is interpreted in the direction of preserving and improving the environment. In recent years, many studies have been conducted on the factors affecting environmental quality. One of the main topics that have been less considered in the related studies is the impact of governance on the quality of the environment. In this study, the impact of good governance components, including economic freedom, trade freedom, and political freedom, on the Environmental Performance Index (EPI) and its sub-indices including environmental health, ecosystem vitality, and climate change is investigated. The data required for statistical analysis are related to Middle East and North Africa region countries and Turkiye (MENAT) during 2000-2021. The panel data method was used to estimate the model and examine the relationship between the variables. The findings show that there is a positive and significant relationship between economic freedom and political freedom with the environmental performance index (EPI), and there is no significant relationship between trade freedom and EPI. In addition, the study found that economic freedom had a detrimental effect on ecosystem vitality and climate change, leading to negative impacts in these areas. However, it had a positive impact on environmental health, indicating that it contributed positively to this aspect. On the other hand, political freedom was observed to have a positive effect on the vitality of the ecosystem and climate change. However, it did not have a significant impact on the overall health of the environment, suggesting that its influence was more prominent in specific areas related to ecosystem vitality and climate change. The result of this research showed that economic freedom has led to more investment in the oil and gas sector of MENA countries, and therefore wastewater and gas emissions have had a negative impact on the vitality of the environment and climate change, but with the increase in production and sales of oil and Gas, per capita income of countries has increased, and environmental health has improved. Also, considering that political freedom among the MENA region has a lot of diversity, the results showed that the countries with more political freedom, through greater awareness of the society and more accountability of the governments and the establishment of environmental protection laws, had a positive impact on the environment. Of course, the environmental health index is more influenced by the economic situation and per capita production of countries and political freedom has little effect on it.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Environmental performance
  • Economic freedom
  • Political freedom

مراجع

  1. Adesina, K.S., & Mwamba, J.W.M. (2019). Does economic freedom matter for CO2emissions? Lessons from Africa. The Journal of Developing Areas, 53(3). https://doi.org/1353/jda.2019.0044
  2. Adkins, L.G., & Garbaccio, R.F. (2007). Coordinating global trade and environmental policy: The role of pre-existing distortions. National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C., United States.
  3. Antweiler, W., Copeland, B.R., & Taylor, M.S. (2001). Is free trade good for the environment? The American Economic Review, 91(4), 877-908.
  4. Asteriou, D., & Hall Stephen, G. (2021). Applied Econometrics, Bloomsbury Publishing, Edition 4.
  5. Babaki, R., & Elyaspour, B. (2021). The effect of economic freedom on environmental quality in OPEC countries (by using Panel-ARDL Approach). Journal of Economics and Regional Development, 27(20): 74-100. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/ 10.22067/erd.2021.18828.0
  6. Berggren, N., & Bjørnskov, Ch. (2021). Academic Freedom, Institutions and Productivity.  Working Paper Series1405, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
  7. Bernauer, Th., & Vally, K. (2013). Are bigger governments better providers of public goods? Evidence from Air Pollution. Public Choice, 156(3/4), 593–609. (Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/42003175).
  8. Bjørnskov, Ch. (2020). Economic freedom and the CO2 Kuznets curve, IFN working paper, o.1331, Research Institute of Industrial Economics (IFN), Stockholm.
  9. Callejas, D.G. (2010). Democracy and environmental quality in Latin America: A panel system of equations Approach, 1995-2008, Borradores Departamento de Economía. No. 36.
  10. Carlsson, F., & Lundström, S. (2002). Economic freedom and growth: decomposing the effects. Public Choice.  112, 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019968525415
  11. Carlsson, F., & Lundström, S. (2003). The effects of economic and political freedom on CO2 Emissions. Working Papers in Economics no 29. (Available at https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/2807/1/gunwpe0029v3.pdf)
  12. Chang, Sh., & Wang, H. (2012). Effects of economic freedom and income on CO2. 2nd International Conference on Management, Economics and Social Sciences, (ICMESS'2012), Bali.
  13. Congleton, R.D. (1992). Political institutions and pollution control. Review of Economics and Statistics, 74, 412–421.
  14. Copeland, B.R., & Taylor, M.S. (1995). Trade and environment: a partial synthesis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77, 765–771.
  15. Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey. Ecological Economics, 49(4), 431-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.011
  16. Dinda, S. (2009). Environmental externality, knowledge accumulation based technology lead economic growth. Working Paper April 15.
  17. Farzanegan, M.R., & Markwardt, G. (2018). Development and pollution in the Middle East and North Africa: Democracy matters. Journal of Policy Modeling, 40(2), 350-374. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2018.01.01
  18. Filimonova, I.V., Provornaya, A.V., Komarova, E.A., Zemnukhova, M.V., & Mishenin. (2020). Influence of economic factors on the environment in countries with different levels of development, Energy Reports, 6(1), 27-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2019.08.013
  19. Gleditsch, N.P., & Bjorn, O.S. (2003). Democracy and the environment. In Human Security and the Environment: International Comparisons. Edited by Edward Paper and Michael Redclift. London: Elgar.
  20. Global Carbon Atlas, CO2 (2020). (www.globalcarbonatlas.org. Retrieved 2020-04-10)
  21. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons, Science, 162, 1243–1248.
  22. Harrison, A. (1996). Openness and growth: a time-series, cross country analysis for developing countries. Journal of Development Economics, 48, 419–447.
  23. Hsu, A., & Zomer, A. (2016). Environmental performance index. In Wiley Stats Ref: Statistics Reference Online (eds N. Balakrishnan, T. Colton, B. Everitt, W. Piegorsch, F. Ruggeri and J.L. Teugels). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118445112.stat03789.pub2
  24. Jafariparvizkhanlou, K. (2020). The impact of political and economic freedom on CO2 emission and EKC in Neighbor Countries of IRAN. Journal of Environmental Science Studies, 5(2), 2504-2512. (In Persian with English abstract)
  25. Joshi, P., & Beck, K. (2018). Democracy and carbon dioxide emissions: assessing the interactions of political and economic freedom and the environmental Kuznets curve. Energy Research & Social Science, 39, 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.020
  26. Lee, H., & Roland-Holst, D. (1997). The environment and Welfare implication of trade and tax policy. Journal of Development Economics, 52(1), 65-82.
  27. Li, Q., & Reuveny, R. (2006). Democracy and environmental degradation. International Studies Quarterly, 50(4), 935–956.
  28. Lotfalipour, M.R., Falahi, M.A., & Ashena, M. (2010). Economic growth, CO2 emissions, and fossil fuels consumption in Iran. Energy, 35, 5115-5120. (In Persian with English abstract). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.08.004
  29. Magnani, E. (2000). The environmental Kuznets curve, environmental protection policy and income distribution. Ecological Economics, 32(3), 431-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00115-9
  30. Mani, M., & Wheeler, D. (1998). In search of pollution havens? Dirty industry in the world economy: 1960– 1995. Journal of Environment and Development, 7(3), 215–247.
  31. Miller, T., Kim, A., Roberts, B., & James, M. (2022). Index of Economic Freedom, the heritage foundation. (Available at https://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2022/book/2022_IndexOfEconomicFreedom_FINAL.pdf)
  32. Norton, W. (1998). Property rights, the environment, and economic well-being. In Who Owns the Environment?  Peter J. Hill and Roger E. Meiners. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 37–54.
  33. Olasky, S., Kling, C., Levin, S., Carpenter, S., Daily, G., Ehrlich, P., Heal, G., & Lubchenco, J. (2019). Role of economics in analyzing the environment and sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 5233-5238. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1901616116
  34. Payne, R. (1995). Freedom and the Environment. Journal of Democracy, 6, 41–55.
  35. Pourali, A., Falahi, M.A., & Naji Meydani, A.A. (2019). The study of human development dimensions (education, health, and welfare) effects on environmental performance index. Environmental Education and Sustainable Development, 8(1), 9-22. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.30473/ee.2019.6322
  36. Pourali, A., Falahi, M.A., & Naji Meidani, A.A. (2019). The effects of good governance and political-civil liberties indices on environmental performance index (EPI): An analysis of 101 countries worldwide. Journal of Economics and Regional Development, 26(17): 63-94. https://doi.org/10.22067/erd. v26i17.69596. (In Persian with English abstract)
  37. Alaa Abbass, R., Kumar, P., & El-Gendy, A. (2017). An overview of monitoring and reduction strategies for health and climate change related emissions in the Middle East and North Africa Region. Atmospheric Environment, 175, 33-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.11.061
  38. Rapsikevicius, J., Bruneckiene, J., Lukauskas, M., & Mikalonis, S. (2021). The impact of economic freedom on economic and environmental performance: evidence from European countries. Sustainability, 13, 2380. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042380
  39. Reppelin-Hill, V. (1999). Trade and environment: an empirical analysis of the technology effect in the steel industry. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 38, 283–301.
  40. Sart, G., Bayar, Y., Danilina, M., & Sezgin, FH. (2022). Economic freedom, education and CO2emissions: A causality Analysis for EU Member States. International Journal Environ Res Public Health, 19(13): 8061. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19138061
  41. Schultz, C.B., & Crockett, T.R. (1990). Economic development, democratization, and environmental protection in Eastern Europe. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, 18, 53–84.
  42. Shahabadi, A., Samari, H., & Nemati, M. (2017). The factors affecting environmental performance index (EPI) in selected OPEC countries. Iranian Economic Review, 21(3): 457-467. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/ier.2017.62925
  43. Stern, D.I. (2018). The environmental Kuznets curve, Reference Module in Earth systems and environmental sciences, Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.09278-2
  44. Weiss, E.B., & Jacobsen, H.K. (1999). Getting countries to comply with international agreements. Environment, 41, 16–23.
  45. Wolf, M.J., Emerson, J.W., Esty, D.C., de Sherbinin, A., & Wendling, Z.A. (2022). Environmental performance index. New Haven, CT: Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy. epi.yale.edu.
  46. Wood, J., & Herzog, I. (2014). Economic freedom and air quality. Fraser Institute, Vancouver, Canada, April. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2539809
  47. Zhang, Y., & Wu, Z. (2022). Environmental performance and human development for sustainability: Towards to a new Environmental Human Index. Science of the Total Environment, 838(4), 156491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156491

 

 

ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
CAPTCHA Image

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 15 فروردین 1402
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 24 تیر 1402
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 26 تیر 1402

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار