Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Natural Resource Rents and Trade Openness in Countries with the Highest Carbon Emissions

Öz

The factor that contributes the most to environmental pollution is greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 emission, one of the main indicators of environmental degradation, has the highest volume among greenhouse gases. Therefore, the greenhouse gas that causes the most pollution to the environment among the total greenhouse gas emissions is carbon dioxide. The emission of carbon dioxide and other harmful gases threatens living life by causing problems such as global warming. For this reason, it is necessary to protect the environment, and in order to protect the environment, policies to reduce carbon dioxide emissions should be determined and implemented. There are many factors affecting carbon dioxide emissions. The primary factors are various activities carried out for economic purposes. In this study, the factors affecting environmental pollution were examined using the indicators of energy, foreign trade and income. For this purpose, the relationships of the total energy resource rents, trade openness and GDP variables with carbon dioxide emissions were investigated. In the study, panel data analysis was used with 1990-2020 data from the 14 countries with the highest carbon dioxide emissions. In the analyses, the CIPS panel unit root test, one of the second-generation unit root tests, was applied. Then, the second-generation co-integration test was applied, and as a result of this test, it was determined that there was a long-run relationship between the variables. The PDOLSMG test was applied to estimate the long-run coefficients. The results showed that natural resource rents and economic growth had a positive impact on carbon emissions. Finally, the Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel causality test was applied to investigate whether there were causality relationships between the variables. As a result of the causality test, it was determined that there were bidirectional causal relationships between natural resource rents and carbon dioxide emissions, unidirectional causal relationships from GDP to carbon dioxide emissions and from trade openness to GDP. JEL Classification : O13 , F18 , F43 , C23

Anahtar Kelimeler

• CO2
• Trade Openness
• Total Resource Rents
• GDP
• Co-integration and Causality Analysis

Kaynakça

1. Agboola, M. O., Bekun, F. V. and Joshua, U. (2021). Pathway to environmental sustainability: Nexus between economic growth, energy consumption, CO2 emission, oil rent and total natural resources rent in Saudi Arabia. Resour Policy, 74, 102380. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102380 google scholar
2. Alvi, A. A. and Mudassar, M. (2025). Assessing the ımpact of green energy strategies on natural resource rents in Pakistan. Journal of Energy and Environmental Policy Options, 8(1), 37-50. http://resdojournals.com/index.php/JEEPO/article/view/405 google scholar
3. Amin, S. B. and Murshed, M. (2017). An empirical analysis of multivariate causality between electricity consumption, economic growth and foreign aid: Evidence from Bangladesh. The Journal of Developing Areas, 51(2), 369-380. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26415745 google scholar
4. Aye, G. C. and Edoja, PE. (2017). Effect of economic growth on CO2 emissions in developing countries: Evidence from a dynamic panel threshold model Powerful Econ Finance, 5:1379239. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2017.1379239 google scholar
5. Balounejad Nouri, R. (2023). Investigating the causality between natural resource rents, openness, and economic growth: A quantile approach. In Natural Resources Forum. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12338 google scholar
6. Bernard, J., and Mandal, S. K. (2016). The impact of trade openness on environmental quality: An empirical analysis of emerging and developing economies WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 203, 195–208. https://www.witpress.com/Secure/ elibrary/papers/EID16/EID16018FU1.pdf google scholar
7. Brautigam, D., Lintner, P. (2013). Land grabbing in Africa: a review of the impacts and the possible policy responses. J. Dev. Stud. 49 (6), 857–873. google scholar
8. Cai, X., Li, K., Wang, W., Lu, Y. and Wang, R. (2023). The role of resource rent in shaping CO2 emissions in BRICS countries: A panel data approach. Resour Policy, 85, 103857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103857 google scholar

9. Chen, L., Gözgör, G., Mahalik, M. K., Pal, S., and Rather, K. N. (2023). How does geopolitical risk affect CO2 emissions? The role of natural resource rents. Resources Policy, 87, 104321. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104321 google scholar
10. Chhabra, M., Giri, A.K. and Kumar, A. (2023). Do trade openness and institutional quality contribute to carbon emission reduction? Evidence from BRICS countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30, 50986–51002 . doi:10.1007/s11356-023-25789-w google scholar
11. Chien, F., Chau, K.Y., Sadiq, M. (2023). Impact of climate mitigation technology and natural resource management on climate change in China. Resour. Pol. 81, 103367. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103367 google scholar
12. Cole, M. A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages. Ecol Econ, 48(1):71–81. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.09.007 google scholar
13. Conserve (2024). Green House Gas Reporting, Access Date: 21.02.2024, https://www.conservesolution.com/sustainability/ghg-reporting/ google scholar
14. Coşkuner, Ç., Paskeh, M.K., Olasehinde-Williams, G. and Akadiri, S.S. (2020). Economic and social determinants of carbon emissions: evidence from organisation of petroleum exporting countries. J. Publ. Aff. 20 (3), e2092. doi:10.1002/pa.2092 google scholar
15. Deka, A. (2024). The role of natural resources rent, trade openness and technological innovations on environmental sustainability– Evidence from resource-rich african nations. Resour Policy, 98, 105364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.105364 google scholar
16. Dogan, E. and Turkekul, B. (2016). CO2 emissions, real output, energy consumption, trade, urbanisation and financial development: testing the EKC hypothesis for the USA. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 23, 1203-1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5323-8 google scholar
17. Dorfleitner, G. and Grebler, J. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and systematic risk: international evidence. Risk Finance, 23, 85– 120. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRF- 07-2020-0162. google scholar
18. Dumitrescu, E.-I., and Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels Economic Modelling, 29, 1450–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/ google scholar
19. Dutta, A., Bouri, E. and Noor, M.H. (2021). Climate bond, stock, gold, and oil markets: dynamic correlations and hedging analyses during the COVID-19 outbreak. Resour. Pol. 74, 102265. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102265 google scholar
20. Ehigiamusoe, K. U., Dogan, E., Ramakrishnan, S. and Binsaeed, R. H. (2024). How does technological innovation moderate the environ- mental impacts of economic growth, natural resource rents and trade openness?. Journal of Environmental Management, 371, 123229. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123229 google scholar
21. Fakhrullah, Xiao, D., Jan, N., Khan, S. and Suplata, M. (2025). Environmental stewardship and economic prosperity: A comprehensive assessment of CO2 emissions and sustainable development goals in European countries. J Knowl Econ, 16, 5572–5593. doi:10.1007/ s13132-024-02169-4 google scholar
22. Ghoshray, A. and Lorusso, M. (2025). Energy consumption, CO2 emissions and economic growth in selected ASEAN countries. Lett. Spat. Resour. Sci., 18 , 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12076-025-00398-y google scholar
23. Grossman, G. M. and Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. Q J Econ, 110(2):353–377. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 21184 43 google scholar
24. Guan, X., Wang, Q., Mansoor, H. and Nadeem, M. (2025, February). Impact of natural resource rent, global value chain participation, and financial development on environmental footprints: A global analysis with fresh evidence In Natural Resources Forum (Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 748-775). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12413 google scholar
25. Huang, Y., Chen, X., Zhu, H., Huang, C. and Tian, Z. (2019). Heterogeneous effects of FDI and foreign trade on CO2 emissions: evidence from China Maths Probl Eng 2019:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/ 9612492. 10.1155/2019/9612492 google scholar
26. Hussain, M., Lu, T., Chengang, Y. and Wang, Y. (2023). Role of economic policies, renewable energy consumption, and natural resources to limit carbon emissions in top five polluted economies. Resour Policy, 83, 103605. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103605 google scholar
27. Islam, M.S. (2021). Influence of economic growth on environmental pollution in South Asia: a panel co-integration analysis. Asia-Pac J Reg Sci. 5, 951–973. DOI: 10.1007/s41685-021-00208-5 google scholar
28. İcen, H. (2020). Environmental kuznets curve in the D8 countries: Evidence from panel co-integration. EKOIST Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, 32, 85-96. doi:10.26650/ekoist.2020.32.0011 google scholar
29. Kaftan, V., Kandalov, W., Molodtsov, I., Sherstobitova, A. and Strielkowski, W. (2023). Socioeconomic stability and sustainable develop- ment in the post-COVID era: lessons for business and economic leaders. Sustainability, 15 (4), 2876. doi:10.3390/su15042876 google scholar
30. Kuik, O. and Gerlagh, R. (2003.) Trade liberalisation and carbon leakage The Energy J 24(3):97–120. https://doi.org/10.5547/ISSN0 195-6574- EJ-Vol24-No3-4 google scholar
31. Li, R., Wang, Q., Li, L. and Hu, S. (2023). Do natural resource rent and corruption governance reshape the environmental Kuznets curve for the ecological footprint? Evidence from 158 countries. Resources Policy, 85, 103890. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103890 google scholar
32. Ling, C. H., Ahmed, K., Muhamad, R. B., and Shahbaz, M. (2015). Decomposing the trade environment nexus for Malaysia: What do the technique, scale, composition, and comparative advantage effect indicate? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22(24), 20131–20142. doi:10.1007/s11356-015-5217-9 google scholar
33. Lopez, L. and Weber, S. (2017). Testing for Granger Causality in Panel Data. The Stata Journal, 17(4), 972-984. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1536867X1801700412 google scholar
34. Luo, J., Ali, S. A., Aziz, B., Aljarba, A., Akeel, H. and Hanif, I. (2023). Impact of natural resource rents and economic growth on environmental degradation in the context of COP-26: Evidence from low-income, middle-income, and high-income Asian countries. Resour Policy, 80, 103269. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103269 google scholar
35. Lv, Z., and Xu, T. (2018). Trade openness, urbanisation and CO2 emissions: Dynamic panel data analysis of middle-income countries The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 28(3), 317–330. doi:10.1080/09638199.2018.1534878 google scholar
36. Mahmood H. (2023). Spatial effects of trade, foreign direct investment (FDI), and natural resource rents on carbon productivity in the GCC region. PeerJ, 11:e16281, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.16281 google scholar
37. Mahmood, H., Maalel, N. and Zarrad, O. (2019). Trade openness and CO2 emissions: Evidence from Tunisia. Sustainability, 11(12), 3295. doi:10.3390/su11123295 google scholar Meng, B., Xue, K., and Han, M. (2022). Digitalisation, natural resources rents, and financial market risk: Evidence from G7 countries. Resources Policy, 79, 103074. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103074 google scholar
38. Mughal, N., Wen, J., Zhang, Q., Pekergin, Z. B., Ramos-Meza, C. S., and Pelaez-Diaz, G. (2024). Economic, social, and political determinants of environmental sustainability: Panel data evidence from NEXT eleven economies. Energy & Environment, 35(1), 64-87. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0958305X22112 google scholar
39. Mutascu, M. (2018). A time-frequency analysis of trade openness and CO2 emissions in France. Energy policy, 115, 443-455. doi:10.1016/ j.enpol.2018.01.034 google scholar
40. Naseer, A., Su, C.-W., Mirza, N., Li, J.-P., 2020. The double jeopardy of resources and the investment curse in South Asia: is technology the only way out? Resour. Policy 68, 101702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101702. google scholar
41. Nathaniel, S. P., Yalçiner, K., & Bekun, F. V. (2021). Assessing the environmental sustainability corridor: Linking natural resources, renew- able energy, human capital, and ecological footprint in BRICS. Resources Policy, 70, 101924. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101924 google scholar
42. Olaniyi, C. O. and Odhiambo, N. M. (2025, May). Do natural resource rents aid the renewable energy transition in resource‐rich African countries? The roles of institutional quality and its threshold. In Natural resources forum, 49(2), 1330-1375. https://doi.org/10.1111/ 1477-8947.12430 google scholar
43. Ozturk, I., Acaravci, A. (2013). The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy Econ ,36:262–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.025 google scholar
44. Panayotou, T. (1992). Environmental Kuznets Curves: Empirical Tests and Policy Implications, Cambridge: Harvard Institute for Interna-tional Development, Harvard University. google scholar
45. Panayotou, T. (1993). Empirical Tests and Policy Analysis of Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development. IDEAS Working Paper Series from RePEc. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Empirical%20tests google scholar
46. Panayotou, T. (1995). Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development, Beyond Rio (The Environmental Crisis and Sustainable Livelihoods in the Third World. google scholar
47. Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical values for co-integration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(1), 653-670. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1653 google scholar
48. Pedroni, P. (2001). Purchasing power parity tests in co-integrated panels. The Review of Economics And Statistics, 83(4), 727-731. https:// doi.org/10.1162/003465301753237803 google scholar
49. Pedroni, P. (2004). Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of the pooled time series tests with application to the ppp hypothesis. Econometric Theory, 20(3), 597 625. doi:10.1017/S0266466604203073 google scholar
50. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross-section dependence in the panels. Cambridge Working Papers. Economics, 1240(1), 1. doi:10.1007/s00181-020-01875-7 google scholar
51. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence, J. Appl. Econom. 22 (2), 265e312. DOI: 10.1002/jae.951 google scholar
52. Pesaran, M. H. and T. Yamagata (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels, J. Econom. 142 (1), 50e93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jeconom.2007.05.010 google scholar
53. Polat, B., Çil, N. (2024). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve modified with HDI: Evidence from a panel of eco-innovative countries. Environ Dev Sustain, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04583-9 google scholar
54. Rahim, S., Murshed, M., Umarbeyli, S., Kirikkaleli, D., Ahmad, M., Tufail, M. and Wahab, S. (2021). Do natural resource abundance and human capital development promote economic growth? A study on the resource curse hypothesis in Next Eleven countries. Resources, Environment and Sustainability, 4, 100018. doi:10.1016/j.resenv.2021.100018 google scholar
55. Rahman, M. M., Saidi, K., and Mbarek, M. B. (2020). Economic growth in South Asia: the role of CO2 emissions, population density and trade openness. Heliyon, 6(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03903 google scholar
56. Sebri, M., and Ben-Salha, O. (2014). On the causal dynamics between economic growth, renewable energy consumption, CO2 emissions and trade openness: Fresh evidence from BRICS countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 14-23. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.033 google scholar
57. Shah, I. H., Manzoor, M. A., Jinhui, W., Li, X., Hameed, M. K., Rehaman, A., … & Chang, L. (2024). Comprehensive review: Effects of climate change and greenhouse gases emission relevance to environmental stress on horticultural crops and management. J Environ Manage 351, 119978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119978 google scholar
58. Shahbaz, M., Destek, M.A., Okumus, I., Sinha, A. (2019). An empirical note on comparison between resource abundance and resource dependence in resource abundant countries. Resour. Policy, 60, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.12.002 google scholar
59. Shang, F., Akhtar, R., Masud, M. M. and Salahuddin, S. (2025). The role of natural resource rent, economic sustainability, and renewable energy consumption on greenhouse gas emissions: an asymmetric analysis. Environ Res Commun, 7(1), 015013. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/2515-7620/ad9e8b google scholar
60. Shuayb, A. S. S., Dube, S., Khalifa, W., Deka, A., Kareem, P. H., & Cavusoglu, B. (2024). The impact of natural resource rent, renewable energy, and governance on environmental sustainability—Evidence from resource‐rich countries. In Natural Resources Forum. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12459 google scholar
61. Sun, H., Tariq, G., Haris, M., Mohsin, M., 2019. Evaluating the environmental effects of economic openness: evidence from SAARC countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 26:24542–24551. doi:10.1007/s11356-019-05750-6 google scholar
62. Sun, X., Xiao, S., Ren, X. and Xu, B., (2023). Time-varying impact of information and communication technology on carbon emissions. Energy Econ. 118, 106492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106492 google scholar
63. Tabash, M. I., Mesagan, E. P., and Farooq, U. (2022). Dynamic linkage between natural resources, economic complexity, and economic growth: Empirical evidence from Africa. Resour Policy, 78, 102865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102865 google scholar
64. Tian, K., Zhang, Y., Li, Y., Ming, X., Jiang, S., Duan, H., … & Wang, S. (2022). Regional trade agreement burdens global carbon emissions mitigation. Nature Communications, 13(1), 408. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-28004-5 google scholar
65. Ulucak, R., Khan, S.U.D. (2020). Determinants of the ecological footprint: Role of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanisation. Sustain. Cities Soc. 54, 101996. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2019.101996 google scholar
66. Wang, Q., Wang, L., Li, R. (2024). Trade openness helps move towards carbon neutrality—Insight from 114 countries. Sustainable Development, 32(1), 1081-1095. doi:10.1002/sd.2720 google scholar
67. Wang, W., Rehman, M.A., Fahad, S. (2022). The dynamic influence of renewable energy, trade openness, and industrialisation on the sustainable environment in G-7 economies. Renewable Energy, 198, 484–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.08.067 google scholar
68. World Bank (2024) WDI, Access Date: 16.03.2024. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators google scholar
69. Xiaoman, W., Majeed, A., Vasbieva, D.G., Yameogo, C.E.W., Hussain, N., 2021. Natural resources abundance, economic globalisation, and carbon emissions: advancing sustainable development agenda. Sustain Dev, 29(5):1037–1048. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2192 google scholar
70. Yasmeen, R., Hafeez, M., and Padda, I. (2018). Trade balance and terms of trade relationship: Evidence from Pakistan, Pakistan Journal of Applied Economics, 28 (2), 173–188. google scholar
71. Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. (2017). Panel Zaman Serileri Analizi Stata Uygulamalı (3. Edit. 2020). google scholar
72. Yu, Z. (2024). Do natural resources promote carbon neutrality: The role of green finance. Resour Policy, 88, 104424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104424 google scholar