Abstract
This study determines the dynamic linkages between road transport intensity, road transport passenger and road transport freight, and road carbon emissions in G20 countries in the presence of economic growth, urbanization, crude oil price, and trade openness for the period of 1990 to 2016, under the multivariate framework. This study employs the residual-based Kao and Westerlund cointegration technique to find long-run cointegration, and continuously updated bias-corrected (CUP-BC) and continuously updated fully modified (CUP-FM) methods to check the long-run elasticities between the variables. The long-run estimators’ findings suggest a positive and significant impact of road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport on road transport CO2 emissions. Economic growth and urbanization are significant contributing factors in road transport CO2 emissions, while trade openness and crude oil price significantly reduce road transport CO2 emissions. The Dumitrescu and Hurlin causality test results disclose unidirectional causality from road transport intensity and road transport freight to the road transport CO2 emissions. However, the causality between road passenger transport and road transport CO2 emissions is bidirectional. Finally, comprehensive policy options like subsidizing environmental-friendly technologies, developing green transport infrastructure, and enacting decarbonizing regulations are suggested to address the G20 countries’ environmental challenges.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Carbon dioxide is thought to be the most prevalent greenhouse gas (GHG), which is more responsible for global warming (Xu and Lin 2017; Paramati et al. 2017; Peng et al. 2018). Carbon is estimated to account for over 74% of all GHGs (IEA 2020a). A substantial portion of energy-related CO2 emissions comes from the transport sector, contributing about 24% (8 billion tonnes) of global anthropogenic GHG emissions (IEA 2019a). On a global average, road transport contributes to about 75% (three-quarters) of overall transportation emissions in 2018. Within road transport, light-duty vehicles (passenger vehicles) contribute 45.1%, and the other 29.4% of transport CO2 emissions come from heavy-duty vehicles (trucks carrying freight) (IEA 2019b; CIAT 2020). A major contributing factor to CO2 emissions in all regions is transportation infrastructure and fossil fuel consumption.
The transport industry uses a significant amount of energy, which fuels economic development and stimulates urbanization, resulting in more private vehicles (Lu et al. 2007; Achour and Belloumi 2016a). This trend suggests that almost half of all potential travel growth will be caused by increased passenger vehicles and trucks (Dulac 2013; IEA 2020b). As a result, the transport sector is a substantial and growing source for CO2 emissions, economic growth, and country development (Andrés and Padilla 2018; Sajid et al. 2019; Dong et al. 2020). While fossil fuels constitute 81% of global energy consumption in 2018 (IEA 2020c), the mounting CO2 emissions generated by road freight transport are not expected to slow or cut down. No single solution will be adequate to challenge mitigating these emissions (OECD 2019). The number of passengers (roughly 2.4 billion Millennial passengers) projected to travel globally by 2050 is predicted to be approximately two times greater than it was in 2010. Although transport sector emissions have risen dramatically over the last 25 years, contributing to rising regional emissions, the transport sector’s share of the total has remained persistent, with approximately 10% of emissions across countries (Aggarwal and Jain 2016; Amin et al. 2020).
Transport infrastructure is a significant economic segment that fosters economic and social growth and enables effectual resource allocation and materials and mobility (Kuştepeli et al. 2012; Maparu and Mazumder 2017). Transportation facilities can, directly (efficiency and productivity channels) and indirectly (effects on trade, urbanization, fuel-energy consumption, and CO2 emissions), significantly contribute to economic development (Beyzatlar et al. 2014). The demand for transport increased with high economic growth, swift pace in urban growth, growing disposable income, assortment in leisure pursuits, the imbalanced distribution of energy and material resources, and rapid growth in private cars’ numbers. However, the environmental effects of transport activities raise significant challenges. The transport sector contributes substantially and steadily to GHG emissions, and its share in environmental degradation is rising in all world regions. The transport sector’s share of CO2 emissions and its continuing growth have drawn policymakers’ attention to economic growth, transport activities, and environmental stress.
The EKC hypothesis is an effective conceptual framework for addressing environmental problems associated with greenhouse gas emissions because it emphasizes the structural changes in the transportation sector, energy efficiencies, and scale effects in the economy (Al-Mulali and Ozturk 2016; Sarkodie and Strezov 2019a, 2019b). In the revised environmental Kuznets curve theory, the concept of scale-effect suggested by Grossman and Krüger could initially stimulate the demand for transportation and travel activities, leading to a remarkable increase in energy consumption for transportation and other sectors (Grossman and Krueger 1991; Sarkodie 2018). As a result, increased road transportation could exacerbate air pollution through the economy’s scale effect. Therefore, increasing environmental impacts should be considered in conjunction with increased road transport activities, operations, and energy usage. Energy consumption may increase carbon dioxide emissions as the transportation system enormously contributes to the energy-emission nexus (Franco and Mandla 2014; Erdogan et al. 2020). This means that the transport sector contributes more to greenhouse gas emissions than other sectors of the economy because emissions from the transport sector directly impact the environment (IEA 2009; Alshehry and Belloumi 2017; Andrés and Padilla 2018; Solaymani 2019). Therefore, more stringent environmental regulations and policies are needed to decouple the strong relationship between transportation intensity and carbon dioxide emissions (Ben Abdallah et al. 2013; Ouyang et al. 2019).
Given the above discussion, a clear and strong linkage exists between transport infrastructure and activity, economic development, and transport-related CO2 emissions. The first empirical studies branch is primarily concerned with economic growth and energy consumption relationship. After the seminal work of Kraft and Kraft (1978), with the different econometric techniques, energy consumption, and economic growth causal relationship has been investigated in prior studies (Akarca and Long 1980; Yu and Hwang 1984; Belloumi 2009; Apergis and Payne 2010; Zhang and Ren 2011; Dagher and Yacoubian 2012; Kandemir Kocaaslan 2013; Mutascu 2016). The second group of literature looks at the relationship between economic growth and CO2 emissions. This strand underlines the linkage between economic growth and environmental impacts, which has been explored in past empirical work (Shafik 1994; Cole et al. 1997; Cole 2004; Fodha and Zaghdoud 2010; Lotfalipour et al. 2010; Andreoni and Galmarini 2012; Kofi Adom et al. 2012; Abid 2015; Al-Mulali et al. 2016; Alam et al. 2016; Anastacio 2017; Awad and Abugamos 2017; Ahmad et al. 2017). The third group is primarily concerned with the connection between transportation infrastructure and activity and economic development. The basic conception is that enhancements in transport infrastructure and increased transport activity trigger economic growth, but economic growth can also enhance transport activity. Numerous studies have investigated and proven this relationship, including (Canning and Bennathan 2000; Kuştepeli et al. 2012; Pradhan and Bagchi 2013; Pradhan et al. 2013; Beyzatlar et al. 2014; Achour and Belloumi 2016b; Maparu and Mazumder 2017; Saidi et al. 2018).
The fourth strand appeared in recent literature, combining the previous three classes to examine the multifaceted link between the transport sector, environmental pollution and degradation, transport-energy use, and economic growth. Several empirical reviews exist in the literature. The most relevant studies that considered transport-energy consumption and gasoline demand are (Bentzen 1994) for Denmark; (Eltony and Al-Mutairi 1995) for Kuwait;(Ramanathan and Parikh 1999) for India. Also, Liddle (2009), Ramanathan (2001), Samimi (1995), and Xu and Lin (2015) identified the cointegrating relationship between transport demand and performance and macro-economic variables for the USA, India, Australia, and China, respectively. Equally, Azlina et al. (2014), Botzoris et al. (2015), Liddle and Lung (2013), and Saboori et al. (2014) scrutinized the dynamic long-run causal relationship between transport-related energy usage, economic growth, and environmental degradation. Consequently, there is a strong relationship between transport sector-related activities and transport CO2 emissions with other macro-economic factors. However, recent studies neglect specific prestigious panels of countries such as G20 countries and road transport-related variables that affect pollution. Therefore, this study’s strong emphasis is to consider the impact of road transport intensity, road passenger transport, and road freight transport with additional macro-economic variables on road transport CO2 emissions in the G20 countries.
For several reasons, the selection of G20 (group of twenty) countries in this study is justified. First, the G20 countries have a significant impact on global economic development, growth, and global emissions. Precisely, the G20 countries seized approximately 85% of the global GDP and also responsible for approximately 80% of GHG emissions, with 70% of the climate impacts. Because of compelling economic growth and higher energy demand and consumption, transport-related CO2 emissions of G20 countries increased by 1.2% in 2018. Figure 1 shows the yearly uptrend for road transport CO2 emissions for G20 countries in 1990–2016. Second, most of the G20 countries’ energy supply is from coal and oil has increased, and 82% of the energy mix is still based on fossil fuels. Furthermore, most G20 countries have similar transport-energy consumption trends, share of transport CO2 emissions, and economic growth. Despite the critical role of the G20 countries in the world economy, the factors contributing to transport CO2 emissions are worth investigating.
This current research extends in several respects beyond the established literature. First, there is no established literature that focuses on the relationship between road transport intensity, road transport CO2 emissions, and other macro-economic factors, to the best of our knowledge. Environmentally sustainable, effective, and economically productive, and efficient policies addressing the transportation sector are needed due to their potential impact on the environment. Second, this study uses a large sample of 19 G-20 countries and utilizes a long period (1990–2016), containing recent data. Third, our research model also develops an overall measure of road transport intensity comprised of road freight transport and road passenger transport because ecological issues are anthropogenic and a key role of the transport sector in the world’s economy. Fourth, as per methodological perspective, CADF and CIPS second-generation unit root tests, Kao and Westerlund panel cointegration tests, advanced panel long-run cointegrating regression Continuously Updated Fully Modified (CUP-FM) and Continuously Updated Bias-Corrected (CUP-BC) estimators, and panel granger Dumitrescu-Hurlin (D-H) causality test are employed to exhibits more reliable, accurate and robust results considering the problem of cross-sectional dependence, residual autocorrelation, heteroscedasticity, endogeneity, and slope heterogeneity.
The rest of the paper is organized in the following way: the “Data, model construction, and methodology” section provides data source information, model construction, and econometric methodology; the “Empirical results and discussion” section presents the empirical findings with discussion, and it concludes the study with some policy implications in the “Conclusion and policy implications” section.
Data, model construction, and methodology
Data
This research is intended to build a linkage between road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, and CO2 emissions from road transport, considering economic growth, urbanization, crude oil price, and trade openness as additional determinants of road transport carbon emissions. The road transport intensity is classified as road passenger transport and road freight transport or a combination of both measures using the concepts of the net and gross mass movement (Peake 1994; Scholl et al. 1996; Michaelis and Davidson 1996; SACTRA 1999; Arvin et al. 2015). In this study, we also disaggregate the combined measures of road transport intensity into road passenger transport and road freight transport for investigating the impact of both modules simultaneously because the environmental effect of road passenger and freight transport might be different.
The unique data on road transport CO2 emissions (kt) is subscribed and compiled from the International Energy Agency online data services (IEA 2021). We have used the OECD (OECD 2020) database to gather data on road passenger transport (RDPT) and road freight transport (RDFT). The data for urbanization (%), economic growth (GDP), and trade openness (%) are amassed from the World Bank Indicators platform (WDI 2021), while the crude oil price data is taken from DataStream. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) is an index to measure crude oil price in US dollar per barrel (Sadorsky 2014; Khalfaoui et al. 2015; Basher and Sadorsky 2016; Sarwar et al. 2019; Nguyen et al. 2020; Habib et al. 2020), which aptly reflects the global oil demand and supply (Kao and Wan 2012; Cross and Nguyen 2017); many prior studies have used it as a significant determinant of carbon emissions (Zeng et al. 2017; Zou 2018; Mensah et al. 2019; Malik et al. 2020). The crude oil prices may have a diverse effect on the energy demand curve of each country (Kilian 2009; Mensah et al. 2019; Ahmed et al. 2020a). Therefore, it may influence the environment quality differently based on the structure of the economy and oil demand. For example, according to Boufateh (2019), the positive change in crude oil price harms environmental quality. In other words, positive shocks in crude oil prices cause an increase in the use of polluting energy.
This study uses annual data that covered the period of 1990–2016 for G20 (Group of Twenty) countries. The list of G20Footnote 1 countries covers Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, People’s Republic of China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the UK, and the US. Yearly trends for road passenger transport and road freight transport are presented in Appendix. A comprehensive description, sources, and measurement of variables are tabulated in Table 1.
Principal component analysis
Two variables, road passenger transport (RDPT) and road freight transport (RDFT), were utilized together by employing principal component analysis (PCA) to construct an air transport intensity index. Being a distinct form of factor analysis, to form an index, the PCA reduces variable’s variance (dimensionality) by melding the variables into a smaller and more compact linear combination based on their inherent variance (Gries et al. 2009; Menyah et al. 2014; Jollife and Cadima 2016; Latif et al. 2018). However, this study aims to formulate an index of road transport intensity (RDTI) for an in-depth and extensive analysis. This analysis uses the road transport intensity index, a weighted index of all road transport intensity indicators. This index also offers a single weighted relative measure, integrating most of the information on specific intensity parameters to comprehend the proper connection between road transport intensity and CO2 emissions from road transport. It also contributes to our study because it is the first time for the RDTI index to be measured by PCA. The PCA process involves matrix construction for the dataset, standardized variables formation, computation of the correlation matrix, sorting of the eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors, and the panel component’s selection and reorienting (Jolliffe 2011; Hassan et al. 2011; Mirshojaeian Hosseini and Kaneko 2011). Table 2 demonstrates the PCA analysis for the RDTI index.
Table 2 showed that the first factor’s highest eigenvalue is 1.851, while the second factor has the lowest eigen value, i.e., 0.149. Ensuing, the variance range of the first factor (0.925) and second factor (0.075) are given. The table also includes the eigenvectors that display the two main component factors’ loadings. RDTI index was developed with PC 1 as it has no negative value and contains most of the variable information relative to another component.
Economic modeling
Consistent with the prior studies (Stead 2001; Åhman 2004; Alises et al. 2014; Arvin et al. 2015; Adams et al. 2020), the current study adopted an empirical model; in our scenario, road transport CO2 emissions is a dependent variable dictated by other independent variables like road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, GDP per capita, urbanization, crude oil price, and trade openness are expressed as:
In Eq. (1), RDCO2 refers to road transport CO2 emissions, RDTI denotes road transport intensity, RDPT indicates road passenger transport, RDFT is road freight transport, GDP is economic growth, URB shows urbanization, COP is the crude oil price, while TROP is trade openness. In this study, the log-linear enhanced function is used to transform the data into natural logarithmic form to remove data dispersion, reduce nonnormality and generate more reliable and consistent results than a standard linear augmented function (Vogelvang 2004; Charfeddine and Ben Khediri 2016; Kahia et al. 2017; Charfeddine and Kahia 2019). The specifications of the log-linear function for our empirical model can be seen in Eq (2).
where i denotes the number of the countries (i = 1,2,3….. 19), t indicates the time dimension (from 1990 to 2016), φοis an intercept, and ωitis the stochastic term, The coefficients of road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, economic growth, urbanization, crude oil price, and trade openness are signified by ξ1, ξ2, ξ3, ξ4, ξ5, ξ6, and ξ7respectively. Road Transport intensity is the degree to which road transport facilities are used, which can also be expressed as road freight transport and road passenger transport or a combination of both measures (Stead 2001). These intensity measures and economic growth have been originated from contributing to environmental degradation (Arvin et al. 2015; Wang et al. 2020a). By taking into account the impact of road transport intensity on road transport CO2 emissions, Model 1 can be derived as follows:
We replaced road transport intensity with road passenger transport (million passenger-kilometers) in model 2.
We replaced road passenger transport component with road freight transport (million tonne-kilometers-goods) in model 3.
The linkage between road transport CO2 emissions and urbanization can explain the environmental impact of the urban population. Previous research identified urbanization as a significant environmental degradation determinant with positive and negative outcomes (Poumanyvong and Kaneko 2010; Ozturk et al. 2016; Wang et al. 2016; Charfeddine et al. 2018). The rigorous empirical works on the environmental effect of international trade are at best mixed. The following studies endorsing the pro-environmental repercussions of trade openness (Birdsall and Wheeler 1993; Frankel and Rose 2005; Ozturk and Acaravci 2013; Al-Mulali and Ozturk 2015), while (Dauda et al. 2021; Pata and Caglar 2021) exemplify a negative elasticity of CO2 emissions in terms of trade openness. We have also included crude oil price as an explanatory variable because variations in fuel price control CO2 emissions, boost energy efficiency, and promote vehicle fuel economy (He et al. 2005; Maghelal 2011; Shahbaz et al. 2015; Talbi 2017).
Econometric methodology
This study analyzes road transport intensity, road passenger transport, and road freight transport on road transport CO2 emissions in G20 countries. This study follows econometric panel techniques suited to large T and N panels. We carry out CD tests, perform panel unit root and panel cointegration tests, and then move into long-run panel estimations and perform causality tests. Figure 2 shows the flowchart of econometric analysis used in this study.
Testing cross-sectional dependence
Our research instigates by examining the dependence in the empirical model between cross-sectional (units) countries. In the case where the cross-sectional units are dependent on one another, the cross-sectional dependence (CSD) problem arises (Nathaniel et al. 2021; Liu et al. 2021). Due to the high degree of globalization, international trade, economic and financial integration, and financial crisis spillover, one country is more sensitive to the economic shocks that can be widely shared with other countries (Munir et al. 2020). This interaction of nations has the potential to create an inappropriate dependency in panel data between cross-section countries. The presumption of cross-sectional independence is one of the drawbacks of traditional econometrics and analytical approaches (Andrews 2005). If cross-sectional dependence in a panel is ignored, the results obtained from such methods can be biased and misleading (Aydin 2019). Overlooking CSD precedes spurious and skewed elasticity estimations (Behera and Mishra 2020).
To that extent, Breusch and Pagan (1980) posited the Lagrange Multiplier (LM) simple test is used to investigate and counter cross-sectional dependency. By using the following panel data model, the LM statistic can be determined:
where T is the time dimension, N designates the number of cross-sectional countries (units), and \( {\hat{\rho}}_{ij} \) signifies an estimation of the pair-wise correlation between residuals derived from estimates of Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) for each sequence.
The LM test is only valuable and effective for such cases where the T is amply large and the N is comparatively short (Chou 2013). Pesaran (2020) has suggested the following CD test based on the LM statistic as a solution to this problem:
Under both tests’ null hypothesis, cross-section units’ independence is presumed and spread as a standard two-tailed normal distribution. In contrast, the alternative hypothesis postulates the dependency between countries (cross-section units).
Slope of homogeneity
Based on Hashem Pesaran and Yamagata (2008) slope homogeneity tests, we examined the slope coefficients’ homogeneity after checking the cross-sectional dependence. Earlier empirical approaches with an assumption of slope homogeneity ignored the country-specific characteristics (Breitung 2005; Bedir and Yilmaz 2016). Assuming homogeneity, in the case of large (N) and small (T), could yield misleading results. The problem of heterogeneity is critical to address because, due to differences in demographic, social, and economic structures of G20 countries, there is a possibility of heterogeneity in slope parameters, which could affect the consistency and accuracy of panel estimators. For this purpose, this study applied the robust slope homogeneity method proposed by Blomquist and Westerlund (2013). Blomquist and Westerlund (2013) suggested, based on Swamy’s model (Swamy 1970) and a robust version of the Hashem Pesaran and Yamagata (2008) test (denoted Δ), a generalized test to deal with both heteroskedasticity and serially correlated errors. This approach is very effective against more generalized cross-correlation constructs and considers the trivial size distortions in all assessments. To extend Δ, the data-generating process is provided as:
where i = 1…N χi, tis a vector of regressors, with ξi the slope coefficients for the associated vector. The HAC version of Δ proposed by Blomquist and Westerlund (2013) is derived as :
where \( {\overset{\frown }{\varGamma}}_{2 HAC} \) is a robust HAC estimator, and \( {\overset{\frown }{X}}_{i,{T}_i} \)is a trajectory matrix that partially eliminates the heterogeneous variables. \( {\overset{\frown }{V}}_{i,T} \) implies variance estimator with kernel function k and bandwidth parameter Bi, T.
Panel unit root test
After checking the CSD and slope homogeneity, the next step in the analysis is to test the order of the cointegration of the various variables considered in this study. If the CSD is existent across cross-sections, then the first-generation panel unit root tests may offer misleading and worthless results (Dogan and Seker 2016a). Indeed, to address this issue, Khan et al. (2020) and Rauf et al. (2018) suggested non-parametric and parametric tests to avoid bias in findings. Except for Dickey and Fuller (1979) ADF test, Im et al. (2003) IPS test, Levin et al. (2002) LLC test, and Phillips and Perron (1988) PP test, the cross-sectional dependency and slope heterogeneity problems can also be countered by the both CADF (Cross-sectional augmented Dickey-Fuller) and CIPS (Cross-sectional Im, Pesaran and Shin) tests. The findings from both methods are also more robust and accurate. Pesaran (2007) has suggested both of these tests. CADF test statistic is stated as follows:
where Δ displays change operator, Y denotes studied variable, and ςitis a residual term. Based on the Eq.(11), CIPS equation is specified as:
where \( \overline{Y} \) is the average for cross-sectional units and is illustrated as:
CIPS test statistics are labeled as:
Panel cointegration tests
The current study is aimed at building a linkage between CO2 emissions from road transport and road transport intensity, road passenger transport, and road freight transport, considering urbanization, economic growth, trade openness, and crude oil price as additional determinants for the G20 countries. It deploys two cointegration tests, i.e., Kao (1999) and CSD-robust Westerlund (2007) panel cointegration tests. To check the long-run non-heterogeneous connection, the residual-based Kao test is used. This test also uses the specific DF and ADF statistics to verify the null hypothesis of having no cointegration over the alternative hypothesis, namely, cointegration.
For estimation of residuals, we used the following regression:
For instance, Basile et al. (2011) determined ADF statistics as:
where \( {\sigma}_v^2={\sum}_{ae}-{\sum}_{ae}{\sum}_e^{-1},{\sigma}_{0v}^2={\mathrm{\Re}}_a-{\mathrm{\Re}}_{ae}{\mathrm{\Re}}_e^{-1},\mathrm{\Re} \)exhibits the long-run covariance matrix. Next, we also utilize Westerlund (2007) cointegration technique. It provides robust and accurate results and helps to handle cross-sectional error term dependence (Kapetanios et al. 2011). Besides, the test has no limitation for the common factor (Khan et al. 2020). The null hypothesis, in this case, implies that cointegration between cross-section units does not exist. Besides that, the alternative hypothesis indicates the presence of cointegration between considered variables.
Hence, the baseline equation for Westerlund (2007) test can be simplified as:
where γi holds the cointegration vector between studied variables x and y. γi signifies the coefficient for the rectification of errors. The four group and panel test statistics can be specified as:
Gτ and Gα characterize the group means statistics, while Pτand Pα denote the panel statistics. The pre-requisite for conducting the regression analysis is fulfilled by statistical evidence of cointegrating links between the variables.
Long run estimations
Prior studies have used various first-generation econometric methods to estimate long-run effects but neglect the issue of cross-sectional dependency (Ulucak and Bilgili 2018; Zafar et al. 2019; Ahmed et al. 2020b). In order to overcome this problem, we calculate the long-run parameters with the CUP-BC and CUP-FM estimators, developed by Bai et al. (2009) and Bai and Kao (2006), following the recent studies (Fang and Chen 2017; Koçak et al. 2020; Wang et al. 2020b; Ahmed et al. 2020b; Ahmed and Le 2021). Both methods have certain benefits: i) the issue of cross-sectional dependency and unobserved non-linearity is being considered; (ii) these approaches are preferable over other estimators because they are capable of generating accurate and robust results even within sight of residual autocorrelation, endogeneity, and heteroscedasticity (Bai et al. 2009; Camarero et al. 2014; Ahmed et al. 2021); iii) consistent results are also achieved even with factors and regressors having a mixed integration order, i.e., (I(1) and I (0)) (Bai et al. 2009; Tamarit et al. 2011). Owing to these advantages, these estimators for our sample have the appropriate size and power estimates. The CUP-FM is the most suitable tool for this analysis because it is ideal for a small data sample. Additionally, these estimators are extensively used to estimate the long-run parameters (Fang and Chang 2016; Fang and Chen 2017; Ulucak and Bilgili 2018; Koçak et al. 2020).
For CUP-FM and CUP-BC estimators, the following equation is employed:
where MF = XT − T−2VV′, the identity matrix for dimension T is XT. V assumes a vector of common latent factors.
Moreover, heterogeneous FMOLS, DOLS, and DSUR were used to validate CUP-BC and CUP-FM estimators’ findings.
Heterogeneous panel causality test
We analyze the directional flow and causal relationships between interest variables by utilizing the heterogeneous Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) (D-H) panel granger causality test to provide additional details to the policymakers. This approach addresses the question of heterogeneity and CSD and also has no constraint T >N (Dogan and Seker 2016b; Koçak and Şarkgüneşi 2017). In this case, the null hypothesis of the D-H causality is presumed to reflect that no causal direction was found between variables contrary to the alternative hypothesis, which directs the causal associations among considered variables. The model can be formulated as:
k signifies the lag length, whereas ξi(j)represents the autoregressive parameters.
The Wald statistics of all panel are computed to test the null hypothesis by averaging the values for each cross-section of the individual Wald statistics:
Empirical results and discussion
This study examines the nexus between road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, and CO2 emissions from road transport for a panel of G20 countries. In Table 3, descriptive statistics disclose the average road transport CO2 emissions of 178095.418 kt of CO2 with the maximum value of 1544553 kt of CO2.
The average urban population level is 70.838%, with the maximum value approaching 91%. The average GDP (million 2010 US dollars) is 22121.566 US$, which directs the high economic growth in G20 countries. The Pearson correlation results in Table 4 validate that CO2 emissions from road transport are positively correlated with road transport intensity. As with this point, all the other independent variables RDFT, RDPT, URB, GDP, and COP, have a strong positive association with CO2 emissions except trade openness, which negatively correlates. Road passenger transport and road freight transport are positively and substantially linked to each other. The correlation of RDTI, RDFT, and RDPT with urbanization and TROP are negative, while positive relationship with GDP and crude oil price is observed.
The estimation of cross-sectional dependency (CSD) has become the main focal point in recent literature. The failure to contain CSD may lead to biased results and efficacy loss. Thus, the Breusch-Pagan LM and Pesaran Scaled LM tests were used to assess the existence of CSD.
Table 5 documents the results of cross-sectional dependency. Based on respective p-values of LM and CD statistics, we reject the null hypothesis of no cross-sectional independence at the 1% statistical significance level for road transport CO2 emissions, road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, urbanization, economic growth, crude oil price, and trade openness. These findings indicate the prevalence of an unobserved common factor as shocks in road transport intensity occurring in one country may cause variations in other countries’ related factors. In other words, all variables in this analysis have a cross-sectional dependency.
Concerning the CSD, the issue of slope heterogeneity is disclosed in Table 6 by both tests of the slope’s homogeneity. Both tests (\( \tilde{\Delta} \) and \( {\tilde{\Delta}}_{adj} \)) have p-values less than 1%, so the alternative hypothesis of slope heterogeneity is accepted for G-20 countries and affirming the existence of heterogeneity. Table 6 shows that the problem of slope heterogeneity persists in the panel based on the significance values of the given tests.
Table 7 tabulates the outcomes of CIPS and CADF panel unit root tests. The empirical findings of both CIPS and CADF tests propose that all variables have unit root and showing stationary behavior when their first differences are made. Put differently, these results suggested that all variables are integrated at 1(1), and also, there must be an indication of a long-run cointegration nexus between the analyzed variables.
Next, we deploy the panel cointegration tests of Kao (1999) and Westerlund (2007). The results of Kao (1999) are shown in Table 8, which endorses the cointegration relationship among selected variables. The ADF statistic displays a cointegration relationship and rejects the null hypothesis at a 1% or 5% significance level. Furthermore, the Kao test traces the long-term equilibrium relationship between road transport CO2 emissions, road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, economic growth, urbanization, crude oil price, and trade openness.
Likewise, the Westerlund (2007) test approximations in Table 9 validate that road transport CO2 emissions, road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, urbanization, economic growth, crude oil price, and trade openness have a long-run equilibrium relationship. Using group (Gτ) and panel (Pτ) statistics, the null hypothesis, depending on corresponding p-values, has been refuted at 5% and 10% significance levels for all models. The results of both tests imply the cointegration existence among analyzed variables in the selected panel.
After establishing cointegrating nexus among considered variables, we determine the long-run effects of variables. For this purpose, we employ the CUP-BC and CUP-FM approaches. Figure 3 shows the graphical summary of long-run relationships. Table 10 offers key estimates of this analysis.
Our study’s primary purpose is to explore the effect of road transport intensity on road transport emissions. Empirical evidence shows that road transport intensity positively and significantly affects road transport CO2 emissions at a 1% critical level in model 1. Assuming other factors unchanged, a 1% increase in road transport intensity will increase road transport CO2 emissions by 0.015% (according to CUP-FM) and 0.008 % (according to CUP-BC). This result implies that road transport intensity increases the road transport CO2 emissions in G20 countries and suggests that more economic activity leads to higher energy demand and deter the environment. Immense energy demand inevitably leads to fossil fuels such as diesel and gasoline consumption, thereby emitting large amounts of CO2 emissions. This finding is aligned with the prior studies (Wang et al. 2018; Song et al. 2019).
In model 2, the coefficient of road passenger transport has a positive and significant effect on road transport CO2 emissions under CUP-FM and CUP-BC. The results indicate that a 1% increase in road passenger transport raises road transport CO2 emissions by 0.021 and 0.017% based on CUP-BC and CUP-FM long-run estimation methods. The estimated coefficient for road passenger transport is positive and statistically significant. These findings confirm the argument that road passenger transport escalates transportation demands, fuel consumption, and associated environmental degradation. The main reason for the increase in road transport CO2 emissions is passenger transport, roughly half of all transport emissions. Passenger transport produces more emissions than other transportation modes because of the comparatively high demand for road transportation. In effect, road passenger transport burns more gasoline, resulting in higher emissions. This result is synchronized with the previous findings of (Ribeiro and Balassiano 1997; Li and Yu 2019) that road passenger transport increases road transport CO2 emissions.
Regarding road freight transport and road transport CO2 emissions, we again verify the positive relationship in model 3. It shows that a 1% increase in RDFT raises RDCO2 by 0.010% (CUP-FM) and 0.012% (CUP-BC). These outcomes are plausible because road freight transport establishes a significant share in road transport CO2 emissions. Additionally, the prior literature documents that road freight transport degrades the environment. Besides, future environmental transport issues cannot be ignored because the rise in vehicle numbers upsurges road expansion, so the rising demand for energy and the growing usage of low-quality fuels has increased environmental pollution. The major sources of energy use for most public transports are electricity and coal.
In contrast, fossil fuels like oil and natural gas are used as the key source of energy for private vehicles (Saboori et al. 2014). The findings are congruent with (McKinnon and Piecyk 2009; Xu and Lin 2018; Anwar et al. 2020) and differ with findings of (Danish et al. 2020). All the three measures of road transport intensity, based on passenger and freight transport, in our empirical results reveal the pollution-enhancing role of road transport activities. These findings imply that the higher level of road transport intensity stimulates environmental degradation via related CO2 emissions. Road transportation operates through the scale effect because G20 countries have tremendous growth patterns and account for approximately 85% of global GDP and around 75% of international trade (OECD 2021). Therefore, these countries are faced with the challenges of balancing economic growth and environmental quality to achieve sustainable development. Though G20 countries have comparatively more advanced and efficient transportation system than other countries, yet the road transport activities are intensifying the road emissions in these countries. Figure 1 also supports these arguments, which exhibits an overall rising trend of road-related carbon emissions in G20 panel over the time. The scale effect of road transportation mainly stimulates the energy demand especially for fossil fuel resources in these countries. Moreover, the recent figures show that transport-related CO2 emissions surge by approximately 1.2% because international trade and economic growth have significantly enhanced freight and passenger transport (Climate Transparency 2021). These rising trends of road-related environmental degradation require the urgent attention to further improve the energy efficiencies in the road transport sector and implement the renwable energy options.
Urbanization also has a positive effect on road transport CO2 emissions in G20 countries. A 1% rise in urbanization may increase RDCO2 by 0.0323% (CUP-FM), and 0.027% (CUP-BC) in model 1, 0.0549% (CUP-FM) and 0.0555% (CUP-BC) in model 2, and 0.015% (CUP-FM) and 0.015% (CUP-BC) in model 3. From the results, urbanization significantly influences road transport CO2 emissions, the urban population in G20 countries deteriorates environmental quality by rising energy demand and expansion of the road transport infrastructure. Urbanization is the population migration from rural to urban areas, which has shown remarkable growth for the private transport industry as urban private transport networks expand in urban areas for long-distance travel. As cities expand, public infrastructure projects, including highways and roads, are being pursued. The empirical outcomes are aligned with the Poumanyvong and Kaneko (2010); Martínez-Zarzoso and Maruotti (2011); Wang et al. (2017); Song et al. (2018); Fan et al. (2020); and Hashmi et al. (2021) and contradict the result of Adams et al. (2020). These findings reveal that the urban population in G20 countries has caused a substantial increase in road-related carbon emissions by stimulating travel and energy demand. Therefore, the national and municipal authorities should mitigate the steady decline in environmental quality due to the tremendous growth of urbanization in these economies by designing and launching environmental-friendly and energy-efficient road transport vehicles and green transportation systems.
The economic development coefficient (GDP) has a positive and significant effect (under both CUP-FM and CUP-BC) at a 1% level in all three models. When economic growth increases by 1%, RDCO2 also accelerates by 0.041% and 0.036% in the case of CUP-FM and CUP-BC, respectively. This acceleration may be due to the scale effect, which is dominant in G-20 countries as compared to technique and composition effects. As income level rises, people purchase and consume more goods, move to cities for better health care facilities and educational services, enhance transport demand, and expand the road network. This empirical outcome is aligned with the findings of Danish et al. (2020); and Godil et al. (2021). As stated above, G20 countries hold more than 80% of global GDP, which has intensified the environmental degradation by aggregating the demand for both passengers and freight transport to meet the pace of economic development. Therefore, economic growth has a scale effect on road transport activities, which are mainly dependent on fossil fuel and other energy resources for transport vehicles leading to more air pollution in G20 countries.
Considering crude oil price and road transport CO2 emissions, we again found evidence of a strong negative linkage between them. It shows that a 1% increase in COP reduces RDCO2 by 0.025% and 0.020% under CUP-FM and CUP-BC, respectively. As crude oil prices rise, the road transport CO2 emissions decrease because the people reduce their cars’ use. This result is consistent with the previous research findings (Maghelal 2011; Rasool et al. 2019; Abumunshar et al. 2020). Thus, the overall findings in all three models unveil that oil price improves the environmental quality in G20 countries by reducing the demand for oil resources. As road vehicles mainly consume fossil fuel energy resources, the rising oil prices significantly reduce the demand for non-renewable energy resources, causing the decline in road-related emissions in the long run.
Finally, the relationship between TROP and RDCO2 is negative, implying that TROP increases environmental quality. A 1% increase in TROP lessens RDCO2 by 0.008 (CUP-FM) and 0.015 (CUP-BC) in G-20 countries. This suggests that with increasing economic level, the impact of trade openness on carbon emissions also changes and notably enhances the environment of affluent and rich G20 countries. The recent trend of augmented trade would stimulate the transfer of high emission-intensive industrial units from developed to developing countries, causing developed countries to accomplish emission reduction at the expense of developing countries. This is consistent with the acknowledged carbon transfer phenomenon in the international trade process (Essandoh et al. 2020). This result confirms the outcomes of Acheampong (2018), which indicate that trade openness in sub-Saharan African countries cuts carbon emissions and opposes the findings of Ahmed et al. (2017); and Chen et al. (2021). The empirical findings confirm the positive role of trade openness in effect with CO2 emissions in G20 countries because the higher level of exports and imports creates healthy competition among the countries to improve the environmental quality. Moreover, these countries are highly developed and have introduced comparatively stringent environmental regulations about foreign trade, state of the art transportation system, and environmental-friendly trade policies.
In addition, all three models are estimated using heterogeneous and robust FMOLS, DOLS and DSUR, and the results are presented in Table 11. The results of FMOLS, DOLS, and DSUR are aligned with the CUP-FM and CUP-BC estimates. These robust results show that this study’s findings are accurate and can be extended for policy consequences.
We utilize the method of Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) (DH) to examine and find the causal paths of relationships in the short run between variables after assessing the long-term coefficients and the existence of CSD. Table 12 shows the findings of the heterogeneous DH panel causality test. The most exciting outcome from this causality analysis documents the bidirectional causality and feedback relation between road transport passenger and road transport CO2 emissions. That means the road transport passenger changes lead to variations in road transport CO2 emissions, and vice versa. However, our results designate a unidirectional relationship from road transport freight to road transport CO2 emissions, signifying that road transport freight Granger-causes road transport CO2 emissions, but not the other way around. Referring to the above finding, unidirectional causality extending from road transport intensity to road transport CO2 emissions has been found. Besides, our results also confirm feedback (bidirectional) causal link between the GDP and road transport CO2 emissions, between urban population and road transport CO2 emissions. A strong interdependence between economic growth and road transport CO2 emissions is demonstrated. This outcome is consistent with the findings of Aslan et al. (2021) for Mediterranean countries but is not aligned with (Zhang et al. 2014; Arvin et al. 2015).
Similarly, the bidirectional relationship between urbanization and road transport CO2 emissions implies that urbanization leads to road transport CO2 emissions, while high road transportation emissions motivate policymakers and legislators to formulate and implement current urban policies obstructing rural to urban migration and relocation. The finding of this feedback relationship is also supported by (Al-Mulali et al. 2013). Moreover, empirical findings also posit that there is a two-way causality between crude oil price and road transport CO2 emissions. Finally, both trade openness and road transport CO2 emissions affect each other in the Granger causality sense and found a bidirectional link.
Conclusion and policy implications
This study scrutinized the influence of road transport intensity, road passenger transport, and road freight transport on road transport CO2 emissions in G20 countries in a multivariate framework for the period of 1990–2016 while incorporating economic growth, urbanization, trade openness, and crude oil price. Numerous econometric approaches were employed to achieve the objectives of this analysis. For instance, CSD, robust unit root tests such as CADF and CIPS are used to verify unit root properties, and the residual-based Kao’s (1999) and Westerlund’s (2007) panel cointegration tests are used to check the existence of cointegration among the studied variables. The long-run CUP-FM and CUP-BC estimators are used to measure long-term elasticities. Finally, panel causality is checked through Dumitrescu-Hurlin (DH) heterogeneous panel causality test. These latest econometrics techniques help to address the problems of slope homogeneity and cross-sectional dependency in panel data.
The results of the cointegration tests suggest the long-term equilibrium between variables. The long-run estimation unfolds a positive association between road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport, and road transport CO2 emissions. Simply speaking, road transport intensity, road passenger transport, road freight transport contribute to enhancing road transport CO2 emissions. Economic growth and urbanization are significant factors in promoting road transport CO2 emissions, while trade openness and crude oil price significantly reduce road transport CO2 emissions. The causality test estimates indicate that a unidirectional relationship extends from road freight transport and road transport intensity to road transport CO2 emissions, signifying that road transport freight and road transport intensity Granger-cause road transport CO2 emissions. We also found that bidirectional causality and feedback relation exists between road passenger transport and road transport CO2 emissions.
Based on the empirical results, several relevant policy implications for G20 countries are proposed. Road transport intensity degrades the environment as a whole, increases transport-related CO2 emissions, and enhances economic activity. However, G20 countries should take two major steps to remove barriers to the transport sector’s decarbonization. Incomplete commitments of international agreements (Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement) and the high cost for transport-related clean technologies have precluded significant reductions in overall GHG emissions and the transport sector in particular. All Parties of The Paris Agreement, especially the G20 countries as the largest emitters of carbon emissions, uphold their pledges towards emission reduction targets and intensify these efforts in the future. To deliver nationally determined contributions (NDCs), the governments should use taxes and subsidies as a tool to change the clean energy’s relative costs in the transport sector. They should provide subsidies to promote environmental-friendly technologies. They should also provide incentives to foster the research and development (R&D) of public and private clean and renewable technologies, capitalize and develop green infrastructure like urban road transport systems, and enact regulations, which will gradually decarbonize all economic sectors, including the transport sector. Movings towards sustainable transportation require strategies at individual levels like awareness regarding sustainable transport benefits, an adaptation of sustainable lifestyle, and car-sharing.
This research has some limitations because it focuses on G20 countries and country-specific analysis is not included. Based on this limitation, a time-series estimation at the individual and country-level would help to understand the link between road transport intensity and the environment. Also, this relationship with other transport modes like air transport and railways would be more vital for understanding this relationship.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Notes
This study consider only 19 member countries of Group of twenty(G20) and excludes European Union (EU).
References
Abid M (2015) The close relationship between informal economic growth and carbon emissions in Tunisia since 1980: The (ir)relevance of structural breaks. Sustain Cities Soc 15:11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.11.001
Abumunshar M, Aga M, Samour A (2020) Oil price, energy consumption, and CO2emissions in Turkey. New evidence from a bootstrap. ARDL test. Energies 13:5588. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13215588
Acheampong AO (2018) Economic growth, CO2 emissions and energy consumption: What causes what and where? Energy Econ 74:677–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.07.022
Achour H, Belloumi M (2016a) Decomposing the influencing factors of energy consumption in Tunisian transportation sector using the LMDI method. Transp Policy 52:64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.07.008
Achour H, Belloumi M (2016b) Investigating the causal relationship between transport infrastructure, transport energy consumption and economic growth in Tunisia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 56:988–998
Adams S, Boateng E, Acheampong AO (2020) Transport energy consumption and environmental quality: Does urbanization matter? Sci Total Environ 744:140617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140617
Aggarwal P, Jain S (2016) Energy demand and CO2 emissions from urban on-road transport in Delhi: current and future projections under various policy measures. J Clean Prod 128:48–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.012
Ahmad N, Du L, Lu J et al (2017) Modelling the CO2 emissions and economic growth in Croatia: Is there any environmental Kuznets curve? Energy 123:164–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.12.106
Åhman M (2004) A Closer Look at Road Freight Transport and Economic Growth in Sweden Are There Any Opportunities for Decoupling?
Ahmed Z, Le HP (2021) Linking Information Communication Technology, trade globalization index, and CO2 emissions: evidence from advanced panel techniques. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:8770–8781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11205-0
Ahmed K, Bhattacharya M, Shaikh Z, Ramzan M, Ozturk I (2017) Emission intensive growth and trade in the era of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) integration: An empirical investigation from ASEAN-8. J Clean Prod 154:530–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.008
Ahmed Z, Ali S, Saud S, Shahzad SJH (2020a) Transport CO2 emissions, drivers, and mitigation: an empirical investigation in India. Air Qual Atmos Health 13:1367–1374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00891-x
Ahmed Z, Zafar MW, Ali S, Danish (2020b) Linking urbanization, human capital, and the ecological footprint in G7 countries: An empirical analysis. Sustain Cities Soc 55:102064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102064
Ahmed Z, Nathaniel SP, Shahbaz M (2021) The criticality of information and communication technology and human capital in environmental sustainability: Evidence from Latin American and Caribbean countries. J Clean Prod 286:125529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125529
Akarca AT, Long TV (1980) On the relationship between energy and GNP: a reexamination. J Energy Dev 326–331
Alam MM, Murad MW, Noman AHM, Ozturk I (2016) Relationships among carbon emissions, economic growth, energy consumption and population growth: Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis for Brazil, China, India and Indonesia. Ecol Indic 70:466–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.06.043
Alises A, Vassallo JM, Guzmán AF (2014) Road freight transport decoupling: A comparative analysis between the United Kingdom and Spain. Transp Policy 32:186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.01.013
Al-Mulali U, Ozturk I (2015) The effect of energy consumption, urbanization, trade openness, industrial output, and the political stability on the environmental degradation in the MENA (Middle East and North African) region. Energy 84:382–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.03.004
Al-Mulali U, Ozturk I (2016) The investigation of environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in the advanced economies: The role of energy prices. Renew Sust Energ Rev 54:1622–1631
Al-Mulali U, Fereidouni HG, Lee JYM, Sab CNBC (2013) Exploring the relationship between urbanization, energy consumption, and CO2 emission in MENA countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 23:107–112
Al-Mulali U, Ozturk I, Solarin SA (2016) Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in seven regions: The role of renewable energy. Ecol Indic 67:267–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.02.059
Alshehry AS, Belloumi M (2017) Study of the environmental Kuznets curve for transport carbon dioxide emissions in Saudi Arabia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 75:1339–1347
Amin A, Altinoz B, Dogan E (2020) Analyzing the determinants of carbon emissions from transportation in European countries: the role of renewable energy and urbanization. Clean Techn Environ Policy 22:1725–1734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01910-2
Anastacio JAR (2017) Economic growth, CO2 emissions and electric consumption: Is there an environmental Kuznets curve? An empirical study for North America countries. Int J Energy Econ Policy 7:65–71
Andreoni V, Galmarini S (2012) Decoupling economic growth from carbon dioxide emissions: A decomposition analysis of Italian energy consumption. Energy 44:682–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.05.024
Andrés L, Padilla E (2018) Driving factors of GHG emissions in the EU transport activity. Transp Policy 61:60–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.10.008
Andrews DWK (2005) Cross-Section Regression with Common Shocks. Econometrica 73:1551–1585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00629.x
Anwar A, Ahmad N, Madni GR (2020) Industrialization, Freight Transport and Environmental Quality: Evidence from Belt and Road Initiative Economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:7053–7070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07255-8
Apergis N, Payne JE (2010) Energy consumption and growth in South America: Evidence from a panel error correction model. Energy Econ 32:1421–1426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2010.04.006
Arvin MB, Pradhan RP, Norman NR (2015) Transportation intensity, urbanization, economic growth, and CO<inf>2</inf> emissions in the G-20 countries. Util Policy 35:50–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2015.07.003
Aslan A, Altinoz B, Özsolak B (2021) The nexus between economic growth, tourism development, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions in Mediterranean countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:3243–3252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10667-6
Awad A, Abugamos H (2017) Income-carbon emissions nexus for middle East and North Africa countries: A semi-parametric approach. Int J Energy Econ Policy 7:152–159
Aydin M (2019) The effect of biomass energy consumption on economic growth in BRICS countries: A country-specific panel data analysis. Renew Energy 138:620–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.02.001
Azlina AA, Law SH, Nik Mustapha NH (2014) Dynamic linkages among transport energy consumption, income and CO2 emission in Malaysia. Energy Policy 73:598–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.05.046
Bai J, Kao C (2006) Chapter 1 On the Estimation and Inference of a Panel Cointegration Model with Cross-Sectional Dependence. Elsevier, pp 3–30
Bai J, Kao C, Ng S (2009) Panel cointegration with global stochastic trends. J Econ 149:82–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2008.10.012
Basher SA, Sadorsky P (2016) Hedging emerging market stock prices with oil, gold, VIX, and bonds: A comparison between DCC, ADCC and GO-GARCH. Energy Econ 54:235–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.11.022
Basile R, Costantini M, Destefanis S (2011) Unit Root and Cointegration Tests for Cross-sectionally Correlated Panels. Estimating Regional Production Functions. SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.936324
Bedir S, Yilmaz VM (2016) CO2 emissions and human development in OECD countries: granger causality analysis with a panel data approach. Eur Econ Rev 6:97–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40822-015-0037-2
Behera J, Mishra AK (2020) Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth in G7 countries: evidence from panel autoregressive distributed lag (P-ARDL) model. Int Econ Econ Policy 17:241–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-019-00446-1
Belloumi M (2009) Energy consumption and GDP in Tunisia: Cointegration and causality analysis. Energy Policy 37:2745–2753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.03.027
Ben Abdallah K, Belloumi M, De Wolf D (2013) Indicators for sustainable energy development: A multivariate cointegration and causality analysis from Tunisian road transport sector. Renew Sust Energ Rev 25:34–43
Bentzen J (1994) An empirical analysis of gasoline demand in Denmark using cointegration techniques. Energy Econ 16:139–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-9883(94)90008-6
Beyzatlar MA, Karacal M, Yetkiner H (2014) Granger-causality between transportation and GDP: A panel data approach. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 63:43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.03.001
Birdsall N, Wheeler D (1993) Trade Policy and Industrial Pollution in Latin America: Where Are the Pollution Havens? J Environ Dev 2:137–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/107049659300200107
Blomquist J, Westerlund J (2013) Testing slope homogeneity in large panels with serial correlation. Econ Lett 121:374–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.09.012
Botzoris GN, Galanis AT, Profillidis VA, Eliou NE (2015) Coupling and decoupling relationships between energy consumption and air pollution from the transport sector and the economic activity. Int J Energy Econ Policy 5:949–954
Boufateh T (2019) The environmental Kuznets curve by considering asymmetric oil price shocks: evidence from the top two. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:706–720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3641-3
Breitung J (2005) A parametric approach to the estimation of cointegration vectors in panel data. Aust Econ Rev 24:151–173. https://doi.org/10.1081/ETC-200067895
Breusch TS, Pagan AR (1980) The Lagrange Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics. Rev Econ Stud 47:239. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111
Camarero M, Gómez E, Tamarit C (2014) Is the “euro effect” on trade so small after all? New evidence using gravity equations with panel cointegration techniques. Econ Lett 124:140–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2014.04.033
Canning D, Bennathan E (2000) The social rate of return on infrastructure investments. World Bank Policy Res Work Pap
Charfeddine L, Ben Khediri K (2016) Financial development and environmental quality in UAE: Cointegration with structural breaks. Renew Sust Energ Rev 55:1322–1335
Charfeddine L, Kahia M (2019) Impact of renewable energy consumption and financial development on CO2 emissions and economic growth in the MENA region: A panel vector autoregressive (PVAR) analysis. Renew Energy 139:198–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.01.010
Charfeddine L, Yousef Al-Malk A, Al Korbi K (2018) Is it possible to improve environmental quality without reducing economic growth: Evidence from the Qatar economy. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82:25–39
Chen F, Jiang G, Kitila GM (2021) Trade Openness and CO2 Emissions: The Heterogeneous and Mediating Effects for the Belt and Road Countries. Sustainability 13:1958. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041958
Chou MC (2013) Does tourism development promote economic growth in transition countries? A panel data analysis. Econ Model 33:226–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.04.024
CIAT (2020) World, Transportation, Total | Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions | Climate Watch Data. https://www.climatewatchdata.org/ghg-emissions?end_year=2017§ors=transportation&start_year=1990. Accessed 1 Mar 2021
Climate Transparency (2021) Transport | Climate Transparency. https://www.climate-transparency.org/transport. Accessed 27 May 2021
Cole MA (2004) Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: Examining the linkages. Ecol Econ 48:71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.09.007
Cole MA, Rayner AJ, Bates JM (1997) The environmental Kuznets curve: An empirical analysis. Environ Dev Econ 2:401–416. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X97000211
Cross J, Nguyen BH (2017) The relationship between global oil price shocks and China’s output: A time-varying analysis. Energy Econ 62:79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2016.12.014
Dagher L, Yacoubian T (2012) The causal relationship between energy consumption and economic growth in Lebanon. Energy Policy 50:795–801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.034
Danish ZJ, Hassan ST, Iqbal K (2020) Toward achieving environmental sustainability target in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries: The role of real income, research and development, and transport infrastructure. Sustain Dev 28:83–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1973
Dauda L, Long X, Mensah CN, Salman M, Boamah KB, Ampon-Wireko S, Kofi Dogbe CS (2021) Innovation, trade openness and CO2 emissions in selected countries in Africa. J Clean Prod 281:125143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125143
Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1979) Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series With a Unit Root. J Am Stat Assoc 74:427. https://doi.org/10.2307/2286348
Dogan E, Seker F (2016a) The influence of real output, renewable and non-renewable energy, trade and financial development on carbon emissions in the top renewable energy countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 60:1074–1085
Dogan E, Seker F (2016b) Determinants of CO2 emissions in the European Union: The role of renewable and non-renewable energy. Renew Energy 94:429–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.03.078
Dong E, Du H, Gardner L (2020) An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. Lancet Infect Dis 20:533–534
Dulac J (2013) Global land transport infrastructure requirements. Paris Int Energy Agency 20:2014
Dumitrescu EI, Hurlin C (2012) Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Econ Model 29:1450–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
Eltony MN, Al-Mutairi NH (1995) Demand for gasoline in Kuwait. An empirical analysis using cointegration techniques. Energy Econ 17:249–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-9883(95)00006-G
Erdogan S, Fatai Adedoyin F, Victor Bekun F, Asumadu Sarkodie S (2020) Testing the transport-induced environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: The role of air and railway transport. J Air Transp Manag 89:101935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101935
Essandoh OK, Islam M, Kakinaka M (2020) Linking international trade and foreign direct investment to CO2 emissions: Any differences between developed and developing countries? Sci Total Environ 712:136437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136437
Fan H, Hashmi SH, Habib Y, Ali M (2020) How Do Urbanization and Urban Agglomeration Affect CO2Emissions in South Asia? Testing Non-Linearity Puzzle with Dynamic STIRPAT Model. Chin J Urban Environ Stud 8:2050003. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2345748120500037
Fang Z, Chang Y (2016) Energy, human capital and economic growth in Asia Pacific countries - Evidence from a panel cointegration and causality analysis. Energy Econ 56:177–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2016.03.020
Fang Z, Chen Y (2017) Human capital and energy in economic growth – Evidence from Chinese provincial data. Energy Econ 68:340–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.10.007
Fodha M, Zaghdoud O (2010) Economic growth and pollutant emissions in Tunisia: An empirical analysis of the environmental Kuznets curve. Energy Policy 38:1150–1156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.002
Franco S, Mandla VR (2014) Analysis of road transport energy consumption and emissions: A case study. Int J Energy Sect Manag 8:341–355. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJESM-03-2013-0004
Frankel JA, Rose AK (2005) Is trade good or bad for the environment? sorting out the causality. Rev Econ Stat 87:85–91. https://doi.org/10.1162/0034653053327577
Godil DI, Yu Z, Sharif A, Usman R, Khan SAR (2021) Investigate the role of technology innovation and renewable energy in reducing transport sector <scp> CO 2 </scp> emission in China: A path toward sustainable development. Sustain Dev sd.2167. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2167
Gries T, Kraft M, Meierrieks D (2009) Linkages Between Financial Deepening, Trade Openness, and Economic Development: Causality Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. World Dev 37:1849–1860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.05.008
Grossman G, Krueger A (1991) Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. Natl Bur Econ Res. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914
Habib Y, Xia E, Fareed Z, Hashmi SH (2020) Time–frequency co-movement between COVID-19, crude oil prices, and atmospheric CO2 emissions: Fresh global insights from partial and multiple coherence approach. Environ Dev Sustain 23:9397–9417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01031-2
Hashem Pesaran M, Yamagata T (2008) Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. J Econ 142:50–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010
Hashmi SH, Fan H, Habib Y, Riaz A (2021) Non-linear relationship between urbanization paths and CO2 emissions: A case of South, South-East and East Asian economies. Urban Clim 37:100814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2021.100814
Hassan MK, Sanchez B, Yu JS (2011) Financial development and economic growth: New evidence from panel data. Q Rev Econ Financ 51:88–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2010.09.001
He K, Huo H, Zhang Q, He D, An F, Wang M, Walsh MP (2005) Oil consumption and CO2 emissions in China’s road transport: Current status, future trends, and policy implications. Energy Policy 33:1499–1507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.01.007
IEA (2009) Transport, Energy and CO2 – Analysis - IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/transport-energy-and-co2. Accessed 26 May 2021
IEA (2019a) Transport sector CO2 emissions by mode in the Sustainable Development Scenario, 2000-2030 – Charts – Data & Statistics - IEA. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/transport-sector-co2-emissions-by-mode-in-the-sustainable-development-scenario-2000-2030. Accessed 1 Mar 2021
IEA (2019b) Data – World Energy Outlook 2019 – Analysis - IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2019/data#abstract. Accessed 1 Mar 2021
IEA (2020a) IEA webstore. CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion Overview (2020 edition). https://webstore.iea.org/co2-emissions-from-fuel-combustion-overview-2020-edition. Accessed 1 Mar 2021
IEA (2020b) Trucks and buses – Tracking Transport 2020 – Analysis - IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/tracking-transport-2020/trucks-and-buses#abstract. Accessed 9 Mar 2021
IEA (2020c) World Energy Balances – Analysis - IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-balances-overview. Accessed 9 Mar 2021
IEA (2021) International Energy Agency (IEA) Data Services Subscriptions. http://data.iea.org/. Accessed 9 Feb 2021
Im KS, Pesaran MH, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J Econ 115:53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
Jollife IT, Cadima J (2016) Principal component analysis: A review and recent developments. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci. 374
Jolliffe I (2011) Principal Component Analysis. In: International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 1094–1096
Kahia M, Ben AMS, Lanouar C (2017) Renewable and non-renewable energy use - economic growth nexus: The case of MENA Net Oil Importing Countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 71:127–140
Kandemir Kocaaslan O (2013) The causal link between energy and output growth: Evidence from Markov switching Granger causality. Energy Policy 63:1196–1206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.086
Kao C (1999) Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. J Econ 90:1–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00023-2
Kao CW, Wan JY (2012) Price discount, inventories and the distortion of WTI benchmark. Energy Econ 34:117–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2011.03.004
Kapetanios G, Pesaran MH, Yamagata T (2011) Panels with non-stationary multifactor error structures. J Econ 160:326–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2010.10.001
Kraft J, Kraft A (1978) On the relationship between energy and GNP. J Energy Dev 401–403
Khalfaoui R, Boutahar M, Boubaker H (2015) Analyzing volatility spillovers and hedging between oil and stock markets: Evidence from wavelet analysis. Energy Econ 49:540–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.03.023
Khan Z, Ali S, Umar M, Kirikkaleli D, Jiao Z (2020) Consumption-based carbon emissions and International trade in G7 countries: The role of Environmental innovation and Renewable energy. Sci Total Environ 730:138945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138945
Kilian L (2009) Not all oil price shocks are alike: Disentangling demand and supply shocks in the crude oil market. Am Econ Rev 99:1053–1069. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.3.1053
Koçak E, Şarkgüneşi A (2017) The renewable energy and economic growth nexus in black sea and Balkan Countries. Energy Policy 100:51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.10.007
Koçak E, Ulucak R, Ulucak ZŞ (2020) The impact of tourism developments on CO2 emissions: An advanced panel data estimation. Tour Manag Perspect 33:100611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100611
Kofi Adom P, Bekoe W, Amuakwa-Mensah F, Mensah JT, Botchway E (2012) Carbon dioxide emissions, economic growth, industrial structure, and technical efficiency: Empirical evidence from Ghana, Senegal, and Morocco on the causal dynamics. Energy 47:314–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.09.025
Kuştepeli Y, Gülcan Y, Akgüngör S (2012) Transportation infrastructure investment, growth and international trade in Turkey. Appl Econ 44:2619–2629. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2011.566189
Latif Z, Mengke Y, Danish et al (2018) The dynamics of ICT, foreign direct investment, globalization and economic growth: Panel estimation robust to heterogeneity and cross-sectional dependence. Telemat Inform 35:318–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.12.006
Levin A, Lin CF, Chu CSJ (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J Econ 108:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
Li X, Yu B (2019) Peaking CO2 emissions for China’s urban passenger transport sector. Energy Policy 133:110913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110913
Liddle B (2009) Long-run relationship among transport demand, income, and gasoline price for the US. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 14:73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2008.10.006
Liddle B, Lung S (2013) The long-run causal relationship between transport energy consumption and GDP: Evidence from heterogeneous panel methods robust to cross-sectional dependence. Econ Lett 121:524–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.10.011
Liu J, Murshed M, Chen F, Shahbaz M, Kirikkaleli D, Khan Z (2021) An empirical analysis of the household consumption-induced carbon emissions in China. Sustain Prod Consum 26:943–957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.01.006
Lotfalipour MR, Falahi MA, Ashena M (2010) Economic growth, CO2 emissions, and fossil fuels consumption in Iran. Energy 35:5115–5120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.08.004
Lu IJ, Lin SJ, Lewis C (2007) Decomposition and decoupling effects of carbon dioxide emission from highway transportation in Taiwan, Germany, Japan and South Korea. Energy Policy 35:3226–3235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.11.003
Maghelal P (2011) Investigating the relationships among rising fuel prices, increased transit ridership, and CO2 emissions. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 16:232–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.12.002
Malik MY, Latif K, Khan Z, Butt HD, Hussain M, Nadeem MA (2020) Symmetric and asymmetric impact of oil price, FDI and economic growth on carbon emission in Pakistan: Evidence from ARDL and non-linear ARDL approach. Sci Total Environ 726:138421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138421
Maparu TS, Mazumder TN (2017) Transport infrastructure, economic development and urbanization in India (1990–2011): Is there any causal relationship? Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 100:319–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.033
Martínez-Zarzoso I, Maruotti A (2011) The impact of urbanization on CO2 emissions: Evidence from developing countries. Ecol Econ 70:1344–1353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.02.009
McKinnon AC, Piecyk MI (2009) Measurement of CO2 emissions from road freight transport: A review of UK experience. Energy Policy 37:3733–3742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.007
Mensah IA, Sun M, Gao C, Omari-Sasu AY, Zhu D, Ampimah BC, Quarcoo A (2019) Analysis on the nexus of economic growth, fossil fuel energy consumption, CO2 emissions and oil price in Africa based on a PMG panel ARDL approach. J Clean Prod 228:161–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.281
Menyah K, Nazlioglu S, Wolde-Rufael Y (2014) Financial development, trade openness and economic growth in African countries: New insights from a panel causality approach. Econ Model 37:386–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.11.044
Michaelis L, Davidson O (1996) GHG mitigation in the transport sector. Energy Policy 24:969–984
Mirshojaeian Hosseini H, Kaneko S (2011) Dynamic sustainability assessment of countries at the macro level: A principal component analysis. Ecol Indic 11:811–823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.10.007
Munir Q, Lean HH, Smyth R (2020) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in the ASEAN-5 countries: A cross-sectional dependence approach. Energy Econ 85:104571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104571
Mutascu M (2016) A bootstrap panel Granger causality analysis of energy consumption and economic growth in the G7 countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 63:166–171
Nathaniel SP, Murshed M, Bassim M (2021) The nexus between economic growth, energy use, international trade and ecological footprints: the role of environmental regulations in N11 countries. Energy, Ecol Environ 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-020-00205-y
Nguyen TT, Pham TAT, Tram HTX (2020) Role of information and communication technologies and innovation in driving carbon emissions and economic growth in selected G-20 countries☆. J Environ Manag 261:110162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110162
OECD (2019) Sectoral shares of transport CO2 emissions by scenario
OECD (2020) OECD Data. https://data.oecd.org/. Accessed 9 Feb 2021
OECD (2021) About - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/g20/about/. Accessed 27 May 2021
Ouyang X, Shao Q, Zhu X, He Q, Xiang C, Wei G (2019) Environmental regulation, economic growth and air pollution: Panel threshold analysis for OECD countries. Sci Total Environ 657:234–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.056
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
Ozturk I, Al-Mulali U, Saboori B (2016) Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: the role of tourism and ecological footprint. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:1916–1928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5447-x
Paramati SR, Mo D, Gupta R (2017) The effects of stock market growth and renewable energy use on CO2 emissions: Evidence from G20 countries. Energy Econ 66:360–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.06.025
Pata UK, Caglar AE (2021) Investigating the EKC hypothesis with renewable energy consumption, human capital, globalization and trade openness for China: Evidence from augmented ARDL approach with a structural break. Energy 216:119220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119220
Peake S (1994) Transport in transition: Lessons from the history of energy. Earthscan
Peng T, Ou X, Yuan Z, Yan X, Zhang X (2018) Development and application of China provincial road transport energy demand and GHG emissions analysis model. Appl Energy 222:313–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.139
Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ 22:265–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
Pesaran MH (2020) General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. Empir Econ 60:13–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01875-7
Phillips PCB, Perron P (1988) Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika 75:335–346. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/75.2.335
Poumanyvong P, Kaneko S (2010) Does urbanization lead to less energy use and lower CO2 emissions? A cross-country analysis. Ecol Econ 70:434–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.09.029
Pradhan RP, Bagchi TP (2013) Effect of transportation infrastructure on economic growth in India: The VECM approach. Res Transp Econ 38:139–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2012.05.008
Pradhan RP, Norman NR, Badir Y, Samadhan B (2013) Transport Infrastructure, Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth Interactions in India: The ARDL Bounds Testing Approach. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 104:914–921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.186
Ramanathan R (2001) The long-run behavior of transport performance in India: A cointegration approach. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 35:309–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(99)00060-9
Ramanathan R, Parikh JK (1999) Transport sector in India: An analysis in the context of sustainable development. Transp Policy 6:35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(98)00030-4
Rasool Y, Zaidi SAH, Zafar MW (2019) Determinants of carbon emissions in Pakistan’s transport sector. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:22907–22921. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05504-4
Rauf A, Liu X, Amin W et al (2018) Testing EKC hypothesis with energy and sustainable development challenges: a fresh evidence from belt and road initiative economies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:32066–32080. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3052-5
Ribeiro SK, Balassiano R (1997) CO2 emissions from passenger transport in Rio de Janeiro. Transp Policy 4:135–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(97)00003-6
Saboori B, Sapri M, Bin Baba M (2014) Economic growth, energy consumption and CO2 emissions in OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development)’s transport sector: A fully modified bi-directional relationship approach. Energy 66:150–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.12.048
SACTRA (1999) Transport and the Economy
Sadorsky P (2014) Modeling volatility and correlations between emerging market stock prices and the prices of copper, oil and wheat. Energy Econ 43:72–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.02.014
Saidi S, Shahbaz M, Akhtar P (2018) The long-run relationships between transport energy consumption, transport infrastructure, and economic growth in MENA countries. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 111:78–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.03.013
Sajid MJ, Cao Q, Kang W (2019) Transport sector carbon linkages of EU’s top seven emitters. Transp Policy 80:24–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.05.002
Samimi R (1995) Road transport energy demand in Australia A cointegration approach. Energy Econ 17:329–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-9883(95)00035-S
Sarkodie SA (2018) The invisible hand and EKC hypothesis: what are the drivers of environmental degradation and pollution in Africa? Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:21993–22022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2347-x
Sarkodie SA, Strezov V (2019a) Effect of foreign direct investments, economic development and energy consumption on greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries. Sci Total Environ 646:862–871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.365
Sarkodie SA, Strezov V (2019b) A review on Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis using bibliometric and meta-analysis. Sci Total Environ 649:128–145
Sarwar S, Khalfaoui R, Waheed R, Dastgerdi HG (2019) Volatility spillovers and hedging: Evidence from Asian oil-importing countries. Res Policy 61:479–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.04.010
Scholl L, Schipper L, Kiang N (1996) CO2 emissions from passenger transport: A comparison of international trends from 1973 to 1992. Energy Policy 24:17–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-4215(95)00148-4
Shafik N (1994) Economic development and environmental quality: An econometric analysis. Oxf Econ Pap 46:757–773. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/46.Supplement_1.757
Shahbaz M, Khraief N, Ben JMM (2015) On the causal nexus of road transport CO2 emissions and macroeconomic variables in Tunisia: Evidence from combined cointegration tests. Renew Sust Energ Rev 51:89–100
Solaymani S (2019) CO2 emissions patterns in 7 top carbon emitter economies: The case of transport sector. Energy 168:989–1001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.11.145
Song C, Liu Q, Gu S, Wang Q (2018) The impact of China’s urbanization on economic growth and pollutant emissions: An empirical study based on input-output analysis. J Clean Prod 198:1289–1301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.058
Song Y, Zhang M, Shan C (2019) Research on the decoupling trend and mitigation potential of CO2 emissions from China’s transport sector. Energy 183:837–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.07.011
Stead D (2001) Transport intensity in Europe - Indicators and trends. Transp Policy 8:29–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00034-2
Swamy PAVB (1970) Efficient Inference in a Random Coefficient Regression Model. Econometrica 38:311. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913012
Talbi B (2017) CO2 emissions reduction in road transport sector in Tunisia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 69:232–238
Tamarit C, Gómez-Herrera E, Tamarit C, Gómez-Herrera E (2011) The euro effect on trade: evidence in gravity equations using panel cointegration techniques
Ulucak R, Bilgili F (2018) A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries. J Clean Prod 188:144–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.191
Vogelvang B (2004) Econometrics: Theory and Applications with EViews | 1st edition | Pearson. https://www.pearson.com/store/p/econometrics-theory-and-applications-with-eviews/P100000231117. Accessed 27 Feb 2021
Wang Q, Wu SD, Zeng YE, Wu BW (2016) Exploring the relationship between urbanization, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions in different provinces of China. Renew Sust Energ Rev 54:1563–1579
Wang H, Ou X, Zhang X (2017) Mode, technology, energy consumption, and resulting CO2 emissions in China’s transport sector up to 2050. Energy Policy 109:719–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.07.010
Wang B, Sun Y, Chen Q, Wang Z (2018) Determinants analysis of carbon dioxide emissions in passenger and freight transportation sectors in China. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 47:127–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2018.08.003
Wang H, Han J, Su M, Wan S, Zhang Z (2020a) The relationship between freight transport and economic development: A case study of China. Res Transp Econ 100885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2020.100885
Wang Z, Bui Q, Zhang B (2020b) The relationship between biomass energy consumption and human development: Empirical evidence from BRICS countries. Energy 194:116906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.116906
WDI (2021) World Development Indicators | DataBank. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators. Accessed 9 Feb 2021
Westerlund J (2007) Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 69:709–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x
Xu B, Lin B (2015) Factors affecting carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in China’s transport sector: A dynamic nonparametric additive regression model. J Clean Prod 101:311–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.03.088
Xu B, Lin B (2017) What cause a surge in China’s CO2 emissions? A dynamic vector autoregression analysis. J Clean Prod 143:17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.159
Xu B, Lin B (2018) Investigating the differences in CO2 emissions in the transport sector across Chinese provinces: Evidence from a quantile regression model. J Clean Prod 175:109–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.022
Yu ESH, Hwang BK (1984) The relationship between energy and GNP. Further results. Energy Econ 6:186–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-9883(84)90015-X
Zafar MW, Shahbaz M, Hou F, Sinha A (2019) From nonrenewable to renewable energy and its impact on economic growth: The role of research & development expenditures in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation countries. J Clean Prod 212:1166–1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.081
Zeng S, Nan X, Liu C, Chen J (2017) The response of the Beijing carbon emissions allowance price (BJC) to macroeconomic and energy price indices. Energy Policy 106:111–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.03.046
Zhang Z, Ren X (2011) Causal relationships between energy consumption and economic growth. In: Energy Procedia. Elsevier Ltd, pp 2065–2071
Zhang YJ, Liu Z, Zhang H, De Tan T (2014) The impact of economic growth, industrial structure and urbanization on carbon emission intensity in China. Nat Hazards 73:579–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1091-x
Zou X (2018) VECM Model Analysis of Carbon Emissions, GDP, and International Crude Oil Prices. Discret Dyn Nat Soc 2018:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5350308
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The paper has been written with the following four authors’ joint efforts, each contributing significantly to the final manuscript’s development. It is also stated here that all author contributions have been stated and included in the manuscript, and there is no conflict of interest.
Yasir Habib drafted and written the overall manuscript and worked on methodological and analytical work.
Prof. Enjun Xia supervised the overall research and conceptualization of the main idea, and without his due support and insightful guidance, this work was not possible.
Shujahat Haider Hashmi made the data collection and helped in data analysis. He also reviewed the manuscript for its refinement and final shape.
Zahoor Ahmed helped in data analysis, software management, and technical editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable
Consent for publication
Not applicable
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Nicholas Apergis
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
ESM 1
(DOCX 20 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Habib, Y., Xia, E., Hashmi, S.H. et al. The nexus between road transport intensity and road-related CO2 emissions in G20 countries: an advanced panel estimation. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 58405–58425 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14731-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14731-7