See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/361677071

Impact of governance and globalization on natural resources volatility: The

role of financial development in the Middle East North Africa countries

Article  in  Resources Policy · July 2022

DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102881

CITATIONS READS

11 377

5 authors, including:

Mansoor Saleem Mamdouh Abdulaziz Saleh Al-Faryan

Clark University University of Portsmouth
6 PUBLICATIONS   76 CITATIONS    58 PUBLICATIONS   114 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Irfan Khan Muhammad Wasif Zafar

Beijing Institute of Technology Shenzhen University
42 PUBLICATIONS   1,212 CITATIONS    43 PUBLICATIONS   2,792 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Environmental Sustainability View project

Monetary Policy Frameworks in the SAARC Region View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Irfan Khan on 01 July 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Resources Policy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resourpol

Impact of governance and globalization on natural resources volatility: The

role of financial development in the Middle East North Africa countries
Haiying Liu a, Muhammad Mansoor Saleem b, Mamdouh Abdulaziz Saleh Al-Faryan c, d,
Irfan Khan e, Muhammad Wasif Zafar f, *
a
Center for Quantitative Economics, Jilin University, Changchun, 130012, China
b
Clark University, Massachusetts, 01610, USA
c
Faculty of Business and Law, University of Portsmouth, UK
d
Economics and Finance. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
e
School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, 100081, China
f
Riphah School of Business and Management, Riphah International University, Lahore, Pakistan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Developing countries have experienced persistent increases in population growth and surging supply-demand
Governance gaps in natural resources. The growing resource gap has exposed fragile economies to a volatile environment
Globalization when prices move rapidly upward. This study attempts to assess the role of macroeconomic policy indicators in
Natural resources volatility
determining the frequent and rapid price changes of natural resources by using data from 1996 to 2020. Neo-
Income
Financial development
Classic growth theories have considered prices of natural resources as an exogenous factor affecting various
macroeconomic variables; however, this study attempts to explore the long-run impact of governance and
globalization on natural resource prices and acknowledge it as an endogenous factor. Second-generation methods
have been used to assess heterogeneity and unit root in this study. Westerlund and Edgerton co-integration test
results show the presence of co-integration among the study variables. This study has empirically estimated long-
run elasticities and maintained the positive impact of globalization and governance on the volatility of natural
resource prices for the Middle East North Africa countries. However, financial development and income reduce
natural resource price volatility in these countries. This study also suggests policy implications based on
empirical analysis.

1. Introduction hamper growth (see Figs. 1–5).

Since industrialization, countries with abundant capital stock have
grown faster than countries with abundant natural resources. This study
has focused on Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries; this
region claims its significance as it has one of the highest reserves of
natural resources. However, the resource curse theory seems proven for
this region. This region has more than half of the world’s oil and gas
reserves but has also seen growing poverty. Since 2010, the poverty rate
in the MENA region has almost doubled compared to other regions.
Despite holding precious natural resources, the region’s fortunes could
not be reversed for several reasons. For instance, market demand and
supply have controlled by external regulators than the one with re­
sources. Moreover, the price of natural resources varies, and fluctuations
Global energy supply depends on both renewable and non-renewable
resources. However, natural resources have become increasingly critical
(Erdoğan et al., 2020a, 2020b). Researchers have maintained that nat­
ural resources improve the economic outcomes of the region as they
attract investment, promote trade and reduce unemployment (Guan
et al., 2021a; Shahbaz et al., 2019b). An unsettling debate on natural
resources claims these resources are a curse or a blessing and depend on
optimal utilization of resources (Atil et al., 2020; Badeeb et al., 2020;
Cheng et al., 2020). highlighting the significance of natural resources,
the international energy agency (IEA) expects oil demand to grow by
more than 50 percent between 2002 and 2030, while gas demand will
double during this same period (IEA, 2021). However, allocation of re­
sources and supply decisions within and across economies cannot be

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: 593736059@qq.com (H. Liu), msaleem@clarku.edu (M.M. Saleem), Al-Faryan@hotmail.com (M.A.S. Al-Faryan), Irfan.Khan@bit.edu.cn, Khan.
Irfan4032@yahoo.com (I. Khan), wasif.zafar6@yahoo.com (M.W. Zafar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102881
Received 12 January 2022; Received in revised form 8 May 2022; Accepted 27 June 2022
0301-4207/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Liu et al.
seen as separated from regulators’ economic and political interests. It is
especially important during scarcity, shortages, and overconsumption of
resources (United States Institute of Peace/Washington, 2007). Human
rights abuses and environmental damage are also common during
resource extraction. Global development agendas such as the Sustain­
able Development Goals (SDGs) typically promote more sustainable
resource extraction. Researchers and scholars have focused on economic
models, such as natural resource volatility and circular economies,
emphasizing recycling, reusing, and using renewable resources to
manage resources sustainably.
Oil has become the primary energy resource in developed and
emerging economies since World War II, especially in transport and
manufacturing (Hugon, 2010). Around 40% of the world’s energy con­
sumption comes from crude oil, which dominates the commodity market
(Schiffer, 2016). Many countries rely on oil as their primary energy
carrier, so oil price fluctuations can cause volatility in other energy
carriers’ prices and impact the economy’s performance. Several studies
support this notion (Cui et al., 2021; Guan et al., 2021b; Hansen and
Gross, 2018; Naeem et al., 2019; Resources and Volatility, 2022; Sun and
Wang, 2021; Wen et al., 2022). Oil price volatility and uncertainty affect
economic growth, especially in oil-dependent economies. Consequently,
natural resource commodity price volatility raises production costs and
reduces output, posing a risk to economic growth (UNCTAD, 2012).
Conversely, fossil fuel prices have decreased their affordability, posing a
threat to energy security, especially in less developed nations (Vakul­
chuk et al., 2020). These factors may inhibit future sustainable economic
growth. In times of oil crisis, including the Arab oil embargo (1970), the
Iran-Iraq war (1980), the Gulf War (1990), the global recession (2008),
and the current pandemic Covid-19 (2020), oil prices become volatile
(Guan et al., 2021b). They have a significant impact on countries’ eco­
nomic growth.
Theoretically, globalization increases economies of scale and reduces
price fluctuations by improving access to different affordable markets.
However, natural resources and globalization have entirely different
dynamics. This study has specifically focused on natural resources such
as oil and gas, which are essential inputs for the physical capital and
services sector. The role and significance of these resources determine
the quantum of global trade and define the economic and geopolitical
relationship between natural resource-abundant suppliers and recipient
countries. Stable oil and natural resource prices help the economy reach
a sustainable growth path. Globalization eliminates the market barriers,
facilitates competitive trade and normalizes market prices.
Globalization and oil price volatility can be better understood by
understanding the differences between wet and paper barrels. Usually,
we consider the wet barrel market a place for trading crude oil and the
paper barrel market is based on an exchange agreement (written on
paper). Global markets and trading units often face exchange rate
management issues that widen the gap between paper and wet barrel
market price agreements and exacerbate the volatility of oil prices.
Furthermore, temporary shortage due to agreement revision changes the
global market perception and considers the demand-supply gap a reason
for price fluctuations. Knowing that MENA countries have a monopoly
in the region, trade agreements, regional tension and geopolitical issues
significantly affect physical supply in the wet barrel market. Here, the
role of governance turns in and helps regulate exchange and trade
market perceptions.
This current study examined the impact of governance and global­
ization on natural resource volatility. The primary objective is to assess
whether the government could manage natural resource volatility in the
region as theory suggests that elected governing teams and a politically
stable environment reduce volatility. Natural resource management is
affected by general trends in governance. Decentralization and the
strengthening of local democracy have changed the relative influence of
actors at different levels on the exploitation of natural resources. In
natural resource governance, norms, institutions, and processes deter­
mine how power and responsibility for resources are exercised, how
2
Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881
decisions are made, and how citizens - men, women, indigenous peoples,
and local communities - participate in and benefit from natural resource
management (Chêne, 2017). An increasingly critical aspect of natural
resource management is balancing competing objectives. Growing the
economy and empowering poor people are often viewed as competing
goals. It is often possible to reconcile these seemingly opposing objec­
tives through various policy options.
This study also examines how much globalization affects the vola­
tility of natural resources in MENA countries. The relationship between
trade openness and efficient technology transfer is why economic
globalization affects natural resource extraction practices (Zaidi et al.,
2019). In addition to natural resources exported from the region, the
technical capability required to explore natural resources is also
dependent on economic globalization. Environmental pressure increases
as a result of globalization. The world faces one of the most pressing
challenges today due to the degradation of the environment. Excessive
use of resources may negatively affect the environment. Climate change
is considered one of the greatest challenges facing the modern human
race due to diminishing resources (Abbasi et al., 2021; Stobierski, 2001).
The study also looked at the effects of financial development and
economic growth on the volatility of natural resources in the MENA
region. Since their use increases output and their depletion rate, natural
resources have a double-edged effect on economic growth. Natural re­
sources stimulate economic growth and directly impact growth (Ibra­
him, 2017). By finding more natural resources, such as oil or mineral
deposits, a country increases its production capacity, derives its wealth
from natural resources, both renewable and non-renewable, and
ecosystem services, and provides a base for other types of capital.
Increased revenue, income, and reduced poverty result from their con­
tributions. A link between the natural and economic systems is found in
the flow of resources from the environment (including ecosystems) into
the human economy and the flow of wastes (sometimes referred to as
wastes) from the human economy to the natural environment
(Freedman, 2018). Economic growth has also been stunted in many
countries due to the depletion of natural resources and mineral deposits
(Nawaz et al., 2019). Countries with abundant non-renewable resources
tend to experience stagnant or even negative economic growth. Oil and
mining are examples of industries plagued by the resource curse when
focusing on a single sector.
Natural resource prices are volatile in the MENA region, hence the
focus of this study. There are several reasons for selecting MENA
countries. For example, the available estimates show that the Gulf re­
gion possesses around 60 percent of the world’s oil reserves and around
half of the world’s gas reserves. With a share of around 6 percent of the
world’s population, the MENA region also holds around 45 percent of
the world’s natural gas reserves. With such a high level of resource
endowments, MENA is an important source of energy resources for the
rest of the world and global economic growth. It is not surprising that the
receipts from oil export account for more than 85 percent of the region’s
exports. At the same time, such dependence on a single commodity
renders the country’s balance of payment position vulnerable to vola­
tility in international prices of energy resources.
The existence of natural resources in a country is also linked with a
higher prevalence of intrastate conflicts. The MENA countries have also
experienced several major local conflicts and foreign interference
because of the strategic importance of their energy reserves. For
instance, the Arab Spring protests in 2011, which engulfed several
countries resulted in political unrest, chaos, and civil wars and eventu­
ally led to the biggest refugee crisis since World War II. It is well
established in the literature that dependence on a few or single export
products creates economic dependence and reduces the chance for
economic diversification, hampers growth prospects and job creation
(Ndiamé Diop et al., 2012). Considering this background, we chose this
region to exploit natural resource volatility, dynamics concerning
globalization trends, and impacts on governance quality.
The underlying motivation behind this study is to evaluate the
H. Liu et al.
impact of governance, globalization, income, and financial development
on natural resources volatility in a sample of 14 MENA countries. As
dependency on natural resources is associated with volatility, it is
broadly agreed that a volatile price environment for commodities
derived from natural resources is a risk for the country’s sustainable
economic growth objective. For example, an increase in the prices of
fossil fuels will also reduce the purchasing power of underdeveloped
countries, which could pose a threat to their energy security levels.
Ample literature has thus ensued and studied the multidimensional
impacts of the price volatility of natural resources on different economic
variables. The existing literature, however, has considered the volatility
as an exogenous variation and used the volatility in prices of natural
resources for impact evaluation on economic growth, environment, and
other variables of interest (Guan et al., 2021b; Hansen and Gross, 2018;
Hayat and Tahir, 2021; Wen et al., 2022). An analysis by Wen et al.
(2022) examined the relationship between the volatility of natural
resource prices and the economic performance of the BRICS countries.
As a result, they believe that there would be a detrimental impact on the
economic performance of a country or region if natural resources fluc­
tuate excessively. Liu and Chen (2022) have examined the relationship
between the volatility of natural resources commodity prices and the
economy’s performance. The authors found that an irreversible invest­
ment theory of price volatility in natural resource commodities can
explain the negative effect of price volatility on economic performance.
Using a set of G-7 countries, Liu et al. (2022) looked at the volatility of
natural resource commodity prices, economic performance, and the
environment. The study showed that increasing economic growth and
the price of natural resources for commodities is detrimental to envi­
ronmental quality by increasing levels of carbon emissions. Ma et al.
(2021) examined the economic performance of China pre and post
COVID-19 perspectives from the perspective of commodity prices and
natural resources commodities. Based on their empirical analysis, the
researchers found that natural resource commodity prices were more
vulnerable than the economic performance during the Covid-19 peak
period, especially in China. To the best of the author’s information, this
is the first attempt at a direct impact analysis using natural resource
volatility as an endogenous variable in the model stemming from factors
pertinent to host economies. Therefore, the study aims to analyze and
incorporate the domestic factors that contribute to the price volatility of
natural resources by highlighting the crucial role of governance in this
context. Specifically, this study examines the impact of governance on
the volatility of natural resources in natural resource-rich economies by
acknowledging their role as price setters in the international market.
The study incorporates globalization, economic growth, and financial
development into a natural resource volatility model. The study has
employed Continuously Updated Fully Modified Ordinary Least Square
(Cup-FM) to assess the role of governance, globalization, income, and
financial development on natural resources volatility.
The next section reviews the existing literature on volatility in the
price of natural resources, the role of domestic and international factors
in driving price volatility and impact evaluations. The third section
discusses utilized data and the underlying theoretical model. Section 4
explains econometric methods, while the results of the empirical anal­
ysis are presented in Section 5, followed by the conclusions and policy
recommendations in Section 6.
2. Literature review
Irrespective of their position on the development ladder, both
developed and under-developed nations are increasingly concerned by
the depletion of natural resources and their price volatility in the current
environmental-economic scenario. The literature concerning the nature
of the nexus between natural resources’ price volatility and economic
performance has garnered significant attention from researchers and
policymakers. While the earlier literature considered the price volatility
of different commodities, relatively recent literature had concentrated
3
Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881
mostly on the oil price volatility and economic growth. Evidence from
literature indicates that natural resource price volatility impacts eco­
nomic performance. Scholars and policymakers have extensively con­
ducted studies on natural resources (Ali et al., 2021; Atil et al., 2020;
Haseeb et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2020). Different countries and regions
have also investigated the use of natural gas and green innovations. Most
of these studies are on natural resources’ economic growth and envi­
ronmental aspects. There are, however, some crucial indicators, such as
governance quality and globalization, which are still understudied. In
this section of the paper, relevant literature is reviewed in detail.
Using data from 1969 to 2014, Aloui et al. (2018) analyzed the
relationship between economic growth, oil prices, exchange rates, and
inflation in Saudi Arabia. The study employed Morlet wavelet method,
including cross-wavelet power spectra, continuous wavelet power
spectra, wavelet coherence, multiple wavelet coherence, and partial
wavelet coherence. The study notes that the associations or dynamics
among variables have evolved with time and frequency. The results
show a significant and heterogeneous association between these vari­
ables in the time domain. However, a strong lead and lag and significant
wavelet coherence were detected in the frequency domain. The study
concludes that the economy is exposed to a diverse range of global risks,
including the volatility in the oil market, which is unfavorable to the
growth prospects.
To examine the asymmetric and time-varying effects, K. P. K.P.
Prabheesh and Laila (2020) applied the linear and non-linear autore­
gressive distributed lag (NARDL) methodologies to examine the effects
of crude and palm oil on economic growth in Indonesia for the period
2000–2019. The results suggest that oil prices have a non-linear effect
on economic growth. Regarding relative comparisons, the effect of palm
oil price volatility on economic growth was more significant than the
effect of petroleum prices by Alamgir and Amin (2021). Baek and Young
(2021) analyzed that the short-run impact suggests that the oil price has
a significant impact on economic growth in the short run in China. The
estimation results obtained through NARDL show that crude oil has a
significant influence in 31 provinces of China, both in the short term and
the long term.
The role of oil prices in another resource-rich economy of Azerbaijan
was analyzed by Mukhtarov et al. (2020) by using data for the period
1992–2015. Based on structural time series models, the study main­
tained that the transition to renewable energy consumption is positively
affected by economic growth, while higher oil prices negatively impact
it. The results indicate that higher oil prices make the transition to
renewable energy more expensive. Katırcıoglu et al. (2020) examined
the Turkish commercial banks’ inflation, oil prices, and profitability
increases. The study constructed two models to identify indirect and
direct effects of oil price volatility on banks’ profitability. The results
show that oil price volatility affects bank profitability indirectly through
inflation. As argued, higher oil prices directly and negatively affect the
banking sector’s profitability by decreasing oil-related business lending.
Similarly, Cevik et al. (2021) examined oil prices, stock market returns,
and the effects of volatility spillovers from 1990 to 2017 for Turkey and
concluded that crude oil prices significantly impact stock market
returns. However, the study did not find a significant spillover effect on
oil prices.
Albeit limited, the volatility spillover effects between Islamic stock
markets and the exchange rate of three emerging countries were re­
ported by Erdoğan et al. (2020a, 2020b). Based on the timing of the
results of the time-varying tests, there is at least one direction in which
spillovers related to volatility occur between the exchange rate and the
Islamic stock market at a certain period. A recent study by Shahbaz et al.
(2019a, 2019b) examined the resource curse hypothesis and the role of
oil prices on the economy of the United States. The study confirms an
inverted U-shaped relationship between the abundance of natural re­
sources and economic growth, which supports the assertion that
resource abundance negatively relates to economic growth. The results
suggest that oil prices positively impact the economy, and economic
H. Liu et al.
growth benefits from market capitalization. Similarly, Rahim et al.
(2021) found that natural resource rents significantly hindered eco­
nomic growth between 1990 and 2019 while studying 11 resource-rich
economies. The study maintained that human capital development is
necessary for developing natural resources to benefit economic growth.
Shahbaz et al. (2018) also investigated whether natural resource
abundance affects financial development in the United States. Their
preliminary findings confirmed that natural resource abundance con­
tributes to financial development through different channels. Hayat and
Tahir (2021) examined three resource-rich economies from 1960 to
2016. Based on the ARDL approach, the study concluded that while
natural resources play a significant role in economic growth, the vola­
tility in natural resource prices adversely affects economic growth in the
UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Oman. Guan et al. (2021a, 2021b) drew a
similar conclusion while examining natural resource-dependent coun­
tries between 2000 and 2020 to identify how price volatility affects
economic growth. The study employed Autoregressive Distributed Lags
(ARDL) and the Pooled Mean Group (PMG) model and concluded that
global events greatly affect natural resources. For instance, the global
financial crisis and the Covid-19 had a greater impact on crude oil than
on gold. Similarly, among African economies dependent on mineral
resources between 2007 and 2016, Pérez and Claveria (2020) argue that
corruption and other factors hindered natural resource rents from
contributing to economic growth.
While the abundance of natural resources is generally considered
crucial for economic growth, the role of the natural resource curse and
Asian economic growth phenomena has been explored in the literature
(Haseeb et al., 2021). In the context of Asian economies, top Asian
economies, except for India, have natural resources that are also asso­
ciated with stimulating economic growth. Similarly, Atil et al. (2020)
concluded that natural resource richness positively correlated with
Pakistan’s financial development between 1972 and 2016. Zallé (2018)
shows that natural resource abundance is associated with economic
growth in Africa. The literature also highlights the importance of man­
aging the utilization of natural resources, which can cause environ­
mental damage, such as contaminated air, and water, damage to
ecosystems, global warming, and desertification (GUTTI et al., 2012).
With an increased focus on natural resources and environmental
degradation, excessive use of natural resources can lead to ecological
overshoot (Gao and Tian, 2016). In this regard, Erdoğan et al. (2020a,
2020b) examined the abundance of natural resources, financial devel­
opment, and economic growth for the Next-11 nations. The study results
show that oil exports do not affect economic growth in the first regime,
in which the rate of financial deepening is less than 45 percent. The
second regime, characterized by a financial deepening of above 45
percent, results in a 7 percent increase in economic growth for every unit
increase in oil exports. However, the impact of natural resources on
economic structures differs across economies, as argued by Vasilyeva
and Libman (2020). In turn, economic growth can curb the pressure on
natural resources, as argued by González-Val and Pueyo (2019).
Additionally, Baek and Young (2021) examined the nexus of crude
oil prices and economic growth by using quarterly data from 1998Q1 to
2017Q2. Using the NARDL approach, the study draws similar conclu­
sions to those of (K. K. Prabheesh and Laila, 2020), namely, that oil price
volatility impacts the economic growth of oil-exporting economies in
both the short- and long-run (Mukhtarov et al., 2020). examined Azer­
baijan’s time-series data between 1992 and 2015 to examine the role of
oil prices in the transition to renewable energy consumption. In com­
parison to oil prices, economic growth affects renewable energy con­
sumption positively and significantly, according to estimates from
structural time series models. They concluded that increasing oil prices
impeded the transition from fossil fuel to renewable energy (Ozturk,
2010).
The relationship between oil prices and economic growth was
examined in seven low-income countries with oil-importing sub-
Saharan Africa (SSA) (Akinsola and Odhiambo, 2020). This study, using
4
Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881
non-linear ARDL and PMG approaches, shows oil price volatility is not a
significant factor in short-run economic growth, but it is when looking at
the long run. The study also shows that lower oil prices promote eco­
nomic growth, adversely affecting higher oil prices. Baba (2017)
examined the connection between the oil price volatility and the
Nigerian economy’s growth from 1997 to 2017. Using vector autore­
gressive methods, the study results indicate that oil price volatility re­
duces economic growth, household welfare, and the poverty ratio in the
region. According to Kalymbetova et al. (2021), there is a robust cor­
relation between the oil price shock and economic growth. (Mohamued
et al., 2021), taking into account the environmental impact of oil price
volatility, found asymmetrical effects on oil-importing and oil-exporting
economies.
As well as crude oil and other minerals, natural gas is also a natural
resource. This resource has a profound effect on both economic growth
and the environment. This concern was studied by (Etokakpan et al.,
2020) for Malaysia between 1980 and 2014. Both benefits and disad­
vantages are found in natural gas. On the one hand, it promotes eco­
nomic growth, but on the other, it damages the environment. In the
1980–2018 period, Topcu et al. (2020) also found similar results. Ac­
cording to the authors, higher natural resource utilization and energy
consumption contributed to higher economic growth in these countries.
Galadima and Aminu (2020) did a follow-up study to demonstrate the
positive influence of natural gas consumption on economic growth in a
region. They found it to be non-linear. A study by (Magazzino et al.,
2021) also confirmed that natural gas and economic growth had a
bidirectional relationship from 1970 to 2018 in Japan and Germany.
Natural gas consumption influences Malaysia’s economic performance
indirectly, and natural gas consumption is not affected by Malaysia’s
economic growth (Rafindadi and Ozturk, 2015).
Broader debates in international and comparative political econo­
mies about the globalization and natural resources nexus literature. It
investigates the role of domestic institutions in shaping globalization
and the influence of economic factors on the survival of individuals and
regimes. Worldwide, globalization is driving economies into vibrant
growth. Hassan et al. (2019) discussed economic growth in Pakistan
from 1970 to 2014 from the perspective of globalization and natural
resources. In Pakistan, globalization results in economic growth, as
inferred by an auto-regressive distributive lag (ARDL) model. Global­
ization and natural resources are bi-directionally causal, according to
the causality results. Tsani (2013) examined the relationship between
natural resource funds, governance, and institutional quality in
resource-rich countries. An inconclusive debate has recently raged about
resource funds and their role in addressing the resource curse, which
motivated the study. According to the estimate, using resource funds
could improve governance and institutional quality. Analysis of the
natural resource curse and factors affecting institutional quality and
governance complements the debate on remedies.
Literature on natural resource curse, environmental impacts, and
economic growth perspectives generally discusses causes and solutions.
A very limited amount of information about commodity price volatility
in natural resources: due to globalization and governance quality, this
study may reduce the imposing risk for economic growth in the MENA
region. We are motivated to fill this gap since there has been no
empirical examination of such factors in crucial economies such as
MENA. Considering these factors, this study examines how governance
and globalization impact natural resources volatility in MENA countries
by considering their financial development.
3. Model and data
This study explores the impact of governance and economic global­
ization on the volatility of natural resources in the presence of financial
development and economic growth for MENA countries from 1996 to
2020. As highlighted in the literature, the extraction and mining of
natural resources have caused many environmental damages. Therefore,
H. Liu et al.
the governance quality for the utilization and management of natural
resources is considered a key factor that determines whether the cost of
such extraction or utilization will outweigh the benefits. The role of
governance quality has been highlighted in numerous international
initiatives and empirical studies. For instance, according to Tsani
(2013), natural resources and governance possess a long-run equilib­
rium relationship. Institutional factors, such as political stability,
absence of violence, corruption control, regulatory quality, etc., are
combined to represent governance. Such institutional factors affect the
growth of countries (Mahmood Ahmad et al., 2021) and impact the
policies regarding natural resource extraction and consumption as well
as their prices. Formulating a comprehensive and systematic national
policy and promoting global norms and international best practices are
the goals of these efforts (Addison and Roe, 2018).
Natural resources are linked to the economic growth of different
economies (Guan et al., 2021a). However, some empirical investigations
regarded the presence of natural resources as either a blessing or a curse
depending upon different factors (Badeeb et al., 2020). Akinsola and
Odhiambo (2020) point toward the long-term relationship between oil
price volatility and economic growth. Two essential variables determine
the economic significance of natural resources: current income flows
and future income potential. Further, production costs and market de­
mand are cited as critical drivers for utilizing natural resources (Zakari
and Khan, 2021). Ecosystem services and natural resources comprise a
nation’s real wealth, and these raw materials produce other forms of
capital required for production. Moreover, the abundance of natural
resource help governments generates revenues and incomes, which in
turn help to reduce poverty (Khan et al., 2022b, 2022c; Zhang et al.,
2022). Therefore, economic progress is affected by the volatility in oil
prices (Baek and Young, 2021). Economic progress can improve tech­
nological capacity, which can boost the extraction and consumption of
natural resources (Ahmed et al., 2020a). The intensity of natural
resource utilization and their depletion rate are important factors in
economic growth.
According to Zaidi et al. (2019), economic globalization can impact
natural resource extraction practices. According to (Xiaoman et al.,
2021), economic globalization influences the demand for natural re­
sources by boosting their export and the level of technical expertise
required for the exploration of natural resources. Natural resources have
been linked with an increase in globalization, foreign trade, foreign
investment, and foreign exchange reserves. Climate change, deforesta­
tion (and other forms of habitat destruction), greenhouse gas emissions,
and invasive species are reducing biodiversity worldwide (Hassan et al.,
2022; Khan et al., 2022a; Zakari et al., 2022). According to Hassan et al.
(2019), economic growth and globalization have bidirectional causality,
which implies that both these factors Granger cause each other. Finan­
cial institutions also provide resources and funding to support natural
resource extraction practices. Traditionally, countries with higher rev­
enue from natural resources have more developed financial sectors with
more capital flows into resource-rich countries due to the export of these
resources and the inflow of foreign capital (Taghizadeh-Hesary et al.,
2022). Financial institutions support the expansion of businesses by
lending money, which increases the demand for natural resources
(Ahmed et al., 2020b). This increase in demand can affect natural
resource prices. Based on this discussion, the following model is
developed.
NRV = f (GQ, GE, FD, GDP) (1)
NRVit = φ0 + φ1 LGQit + φ2 LGEit + φ3 LFDit + φ4 LGDPit + εit (2)
where NRV indicates natural resources volatility, GQ denotes gover­
nance, GE shows economic globalization, FD represents financial
development, and GDP shows economic growth.
5
Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881
3.1. Data
This study examines the impact of governance, globalization, in­
come, and financial development on the natural resources volatility of
the MENA countries from 1996 to 2020. The MENA region consists of 18
countries, and this study includes 14 countries: Algeria, Egypt, Iran,
Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia,
Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. This study excludes other
MENA countries due to the unavailability of the data. NRV is measured
by yearly changes in natural resources rents (% of GDP). Economic
growth is measured per capita GDP constant 2010 US dollars, financial
development is measured in domestic credit to private sector % of GDP,
and the dataset of both these variables is amassed from (WDI, 2020).
Governance (GQ) is measured by the Governance Quality Index,
composed of six indicators: political stability, government effectiveness,
corruption control, regulatory quality, voice and accountability, and the
rule of law. The data on GQ is obtained from World governance in­
dicators (2020). Economic globalization (GE) is measured by the KOF
index of economic globalization introduced (Dreher, 2006).
4. Econometric methodology
4.1. Cross-sectional dependence test
In the empirical strategy of this paper, we tested for cross-sectional
dependence (CRSD) and heterogeneity (HET) before proceeding to the
main analysis. Scholars have advised to investigate the CRSD in panel
datasets in the past literature because economies are often closely con­
nected in recent times due to international trade and globalization
(Goryakin et al., 2015). In such a situation, some exogenous events
affecting one economy can influence other economies through different
macroeconomic channels and cause a spillover effect. Therefore, it is
pertinent to assess the independence among the selected panel dataset
for efficient, unbiased, and consistent results (Phillips and Sul, 2003).
Pesaran (2004) introduced a CD test known for tracing the CRSD
problems for a large panel irrespective of the stationary level of vari­
ables. Thus, in this paper, Pesaran’s (2004) method is applied to disclose
the CRSD in our data. The test equation of this famous test is given
below.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅( )
2t S− 1 ∑
∑ S
CD test = δij (3)
S(S − 1) i=1 j=i+1
where t specifies the period, S denotes sample size, and δij shows the
correlation of errors for nations j and i. Apart from this, it is also relevant
to assess the heterogeneity concerns in panel datasets. The inspection of
HET is a vital step because, in the literature, many widely used co-
integration and unit root estimators follow the rigid assumption of
slope homogeneity, which is often not true in panel data. Thus, Pesaran
and Yamagata’s (2008) test is adopted to unveil HET in our dataset. This
approach is composed of two test statistics, i.e., adjusted delta and delta,
based on the null hypothesis of slope homogeneity. For the delta test, the
model can be written as follows.
( )
̃ HS = (N)12 (2p)− 12 1 ̃
Δ S− p (4)
N
Equation (4) Δ̃HS represents the delta tilde, while N, ̃
S indicates the
cross-sectional dimension and Swamy’s test. The symbol p denotes the
fixed across replications. The model for adjusted delta is as follows.
( )− 12 ( )
̃ HAS = (N)12 2P(T − P − 1 1̃
Δ S− P (5)
T +1 N
In the above equation, Δ
̃ HAS depicts the delta tilde Adjusted. N, and T
represent the cross-sectional and time dimension, while ̃
S, and P denote
the Swamy’s test and fixed across replications.
H. Liu et al. Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881

4.2. Unit root testing 4.5. Causality test

As anticipated, the results of the CD test and Pesaran and Yamagata
(2008) test show that CRSD and HET exist in the panel data of MENA
countries. Hence, consistent with the literature, the well-known Pesaran
(2007) cross-sectional augmented IPS and ADF (CIPS and CADF) tech­
niques are employed (Zafar et al., 2019). This is because the conven­
tional unit root approaches follow the assumption of independence and
homogeneity of slope coefficients in panel datasets (Smeekes and Wijler,
2005). Pesaran’s (2007) approaches tackle CRSD and HET problems
while investigating integration levels. The equation of CADF tests is
given below.
∑
n
Δxit = φit + γ i Vi,t− 1 + ρi T + θij ΔVi,t− j + εit
j=1
The tests discussed above (Cup-FM and Cup-BC) only reveal the long-
run coefficients; however, it is difficult to suggest policies unless
knowing the causal directions among selected variables. Hence, in this
paper, the test proposed by Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) is utilized to
trace causal associations. This test reveals causal directions accounting
for CRSD and heterogeneity. Dumitrescu and Hurlin’s (2012) causality
test is based on the null hypothesis of no causality in any N (cross-­
section), and for the rejection of this hypothesis, at least one causal as­
sociation is required. The estimation procedure for this test is not based
on any particular requirement for T > N or vice versa. Hence, this
method is considered a flexible and reliable method to assess causal
(6) associations in the panel data.

5. Results and discussion

In equation (5), φ shows the intercept, V (i,t) depicts estimated
variable, Ɛ is the error term, and time trend is indicated by T. In these
The descriptive statistics are given in the Table 1. The mean values of
tests, the assumption of stationarity of one individual (at least) in the
the natural resources volatility, governance, economic globalization,
panel constitutes the alternative hypothesis which is compared against
financial development, and economic growth are 0.077, 1.991, 1.768,
the null hypothesis of non-stationarity.
1.622, and 3.927, respectively. The standard deviation of natural re­
sources volatility, governance, economic globalization, financial devel­
4.3. Cointegration test
opment, and economic growth is 1.838, 0.269, 140, 0.330, and 0.596
(see Table 1).
After tracing the CRSD and HET concerns, it is necessary to utilize a
Literature suggests that having unbiased and efficient estimators are
co-integration approach that does not assume homogeneity and inde­
subject to data properties. Empirical estimates are significant when
pendence (McHugh, 2012). Hence, this paper applied the widely used
assessed for underlying data properties before using them for long-run
Westerlund (2007) method, which derives group mean and pooled panel
relationship assessments. It is important to assess the panel data for
test statistics from the following model.
unit root properties and the state of dependence in cross-sectional ob­
( ) ∑ki ∑
ki servations. As we know, factors like financial development and trade
(7)
′ ′
Δeit = σi ct + δi eit− 1 − βi fit− 1 + δij Δeit− j + γ ij Δfit− j + μit openness are leading determinants of globalization. These factors
j=1 j=− li
directly or indirectly affect economic growth and international prices.
where ct shows the deterministic component and li and ki indicate leads Aiming to explore the tendency of these variables to affect macroeco­
and lags. The cross-sections and observation are indicated by N (i = 1 …. nomic indicators and prices, this study has assessed the cross sectional
N) and T (t = 1.. ….T). The test statistics derived from equation (6) are dependence level. Results in Table 2 imply that all included variables are
based on the heterogeneous specification for both long and short-run highly significant dependence levels. It can be said that natural resource
parameters of the error correction model. According to Westerlund prices, globalization, governance quality, economic growth and finan­
(2007), in this test, the p-values are produced through bootstrapping. cial development have a spillover effect between North African coun­
These p-values are known to be robust against CRSD. tries included in this study. It is important to assess the cross-sectional
dependence level before assessing long-run co-integration. This study
4.4. Cup-FM and Cup-BC tests also tests the slope heterogeneity in the data, and the results are given in
table- 3. The result indicates the presence of slope heterogeneity in the
The variables of the study NRV, LCQ, LGE, GDP, and FD are coin­ data.
tegrated; therefore, it is possible to ascertain the long-run effects of LCQ, Before adding to the model for long-run association assessment, this
LGE, GDP, and FD on NRV. In the previous studies, scholars have study has applied the unit root test. As none of these variables are sig­
adopted various long-run estimation methodologies, including nificant at level, this study has used them at their first difference because
Augmented Mean Group, Fully Modified Ordinary Least Squares, Panel estimated results presented in Table 4 revealed that these variables are
Mean Group, and Dynamic Ordinary Least Squares (Muni Munir Ahmad statistically significant at 1% first difference levels (see Table 5).
et al., 2021; Zaidi et al., 2019). However, the study of Bai et al. (2009) Using co-intergration tests proposed by Westerlund (2007), this
introduced two reliable methods that solve many important problems of study has assessed the existence of co-integration among variables in the
the panel data, such as endogeneity, overlooked non-linearity, CRSD, presence of heterogeneity and cross-sectional dependence in the panel
and serial interdependence (Ahmed et al., 2021). Therefore, this study data. This test relies on the assumption of LM bootstrap test that esti­
applies the reliable, continuously updated fully modified and bias cor­ mated the long-run co-integration among variables. Results presented in
rected (Cup-FM and CuP-BC) tests of Bai et al. (2009). The equation for Table 5 can be understood using the null hypothesis stating no-long run
these methods is given below.
( ) ∑
n Table-1
̂ Cup = argmin 1 (8) Cross-sectional dependence.
′
̂
β Cup , F (Yi − xi ϑ) MF (Yi − xi ϑ)
2
nT i=1
NRV LGQ LGE LFD LGDP
In equation (7), MF = IT − T − 2 FF , I and F depict the identity matrix
′
Mean 0.077361 1.990177 1.768804 1.622249 3.92752
of time T, and the error term presumes the common latent factors. The Median − 0.01699 2.068735 1.798621 1.729391 3.822594
initial estimations are allocated to F, and these are repeated until the Maximum 19.50003 2.260052 2.037184 2.103059 4.861361
level of convergence is reached. Minimum − 23.1259 0.230569 1.178748 0.47922 0.464591
Std. Dev. 1.838352 0.269431 0.140914 0.330549 0.596875
Skewness − 1.28444 − 2.47492 − 1.1358 − 1.41659 − 0.66507
Kurtosis 115.7734 12.90969 4.560165 4.463993 5.421947
Observations 350 350 350 350 350

6
H. Liu et al. Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881

Table-2 Table-5
Cross-sectional dependence. Westerlund and Edgerton cointegration test results.
Variable CD-test p-value Corr abs(corr) Statistic Value Z-value P-value Robust P-value

NRV 19.33*** 0.000 0.405 0.461 Gt − 4.816 − 10.321 0.000 0.000

LGQ 3.87*** 0.000 0.081 0.515 Ga − 12.770 − 1.521 0.064 0.003
LGE 25.34*** 0.000 0.531 0.747 Pt − 11.108 − 3.993 0.000 0.037
LFD 17.77*** 0.000 0.373 0.651 Pa − 12.193 − 3.111 0.001 0.015
LGDP 10.68*** 0.000 0.224 0.602
Note: *, ** and *** show significant at 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively.
Note: *, ** and *** show significant at 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively.
impact on natural resource price volatility. Knowing that literature has
suggested six factors that measure good governance. Shedding light on
Table-3
these factors, significant determinants are the level of participation and
Testing for slope heterogeneity test result.
the rule of law. These factors attract foreign inflows and cause local
Delta p-value
trade expansion. Countries with the rule of law and inclusiveness also
− 17.484*** 0.000 suffer with low capital output ratios and low private capital formation.
adj. − 14.702*** The results show that quality of governance increases price volatility.
Note: *, ** and *** show significant at 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively. However, the sign of the price movement implies that prices are volatile
and change rapidly when the country has significant participation,
transparency and presence of the rule of law along with equity and
Table-4 inclusiveness. However, it contrasts the theoretical relationship between
Unit root tests result. volatility and good governance. Literature has associated shocks with
Level 1st Difference Level 1st Difference several factors that change equilibrium prices. This study has high­
NRV − 2.291 − 5.770*** − 2.433 − 4.664*** lighted the significance of investment and capital-output ratio-driven
LGQ − 2.180 − 3.959*** − 2.119 − 4.054*** shocks by adding financial development to the model. Results confirmed
LGE − 1.826 − 4.575*** − 1.927 − 4.449*** that an increase in financial development significantly reduces price
LFD − 2.352 − 4.187*** − 2.544 − 3.322*** volatility by almost 0.7%. This implies that increased access to funds for
LGDP 2.580 3.714*** 2.355 3.762***
investment, increased saving rate, and low business costs contract the
− − − −

Note, critical values of CIPS test for 1, 5, 10, % significance level is (t ≥ 2.89), (t
≥ − 2.7 & t < -2.89), and (t ≥ − 2.6 & t < -2.7). Critical values of CADF test for 1,
5, 10, % significance level is (t ≥ 2.960), (t ≥ − 2.760 & t < 2.960), and (t ≥
− 2.660 & t < 2.760).
co-integration and vice versa for the alternative hypothesis. Insignificant
statistics of LM test indicate the presence of long-run relationship among
the cross-sectional variables.
Before proceeding further, it is important to estimate the long-run
elasticities to establish a relationship between variables. Although the
literature has suggested several different econometric methods, this
study has used Cup-FM, and Cup-BC methods based on their relative
advantage, as Bai et al. (2009) proposed. These methods provide effi­
cient and unbiased estimates for panel estimations due to better control
for cross-sectional dependence and unobserved non-linearity. Cup-BC is
important to explore and address serial correlation problems due to the
existence of potential endogeneity in macroeconomic variables. Addi­
tionally, Cup-FM is significant for framing the parametric and
non-parametric distribution for efficient estimates. Hence, using
continuously updated (Cup) with the help of iterations, parameters get
efficient and unbiased when they reach the convergence point.
Existing literature has an inconclusive debate over the impact of
different indicators of globalization on long-term growth, prices and
trade outcomes. Results presented in Table 6 suggest that growing
globalization significantly exacerbates natural resource prices. A plau­
sible explanation for this could be that access to different markets and
price information plays an important role in deciding the final trade
deal. Since natural resources are traded on large scales and among
governments, local exchange markets and distribution sections cause
more volatility and change prices to small shocks. These shocks transmit
to other exchange markets. However, terms of trade for natural resource
exchange mostly have pre-settlements among governments and tend to
be less volatile in prices. It is important to mention that in financial and
trade liberalization, counter deals are also common where supply
shortages cause a sudden rise in prices of abundant supply providers. It
is quite uncommon at the macro level, but at local and micro market
stages, it is quite frequent to observe.
Table 6 shows that quality of governance has a significant positive
negative shock effects, and prices remain stable. In light of this finding,
this study suggests that policymakers may pay attention to all pillars of
financial development. Similarly, economic growth and increased per
capita income are volatility controlling factors. Higher aggregate de­
mand creates a conducive environment for employment and investment,
these factors increase per capita income, and prices remain stable due to
demand-supply trends. It is suggested that countries with higher un­
employment levels may need to invest in services and trade sectors to
reduce unemployment, knowing that the industrial and agricultural
sectors may not have much employment generation (see Table 7).
As highlighted by ample literature, financial development reduces
the natural resource’s price volatility, and our results are in line. The
long-run elasticities presented in Table 6 show that greater access to
financial resources, money supply to GDP ratio and ease of doing busi­
ness reduce the price volatility (Cevik and Bugan, 2018). Considering
the domestic markets, the feasibility of exchange enhances the trade
opportunities. Similarly, balanced money and foreign exchange markets
create a reliable environment among countries that do not amplify the
market prices for different trading services.
DH results presented in Table 7 show that natural resources volatility
causes financial development and income, and in return, these variables
do not cause natural resources volatility. Similarly, a one-way causality
is found from globalization to governance and financial development
(Cevik et al., 2013) at a 1 and 5 percent significance level. However,
bidirectional causality exists between governance and income. Global­
ization causes financial development, but in response, financial devel­
opment does not cause globalization. The relationship between financial
development and income is bidirectional.
6. Conclusion and policy suggestions
Recently, there have been significant variations in the demand and
supply of natural resources, and natural resource volatility has been the
subject of scholarly study. The volatility of natural resources is not only
determined by demand and supply; other factors influence it as well.
There has been a persistent increase in population growth in developing
countries in conjunction with the gap between the supply and demand of
natural resources. As the resource gap continues to grow, fragile

7
H. Liu et al. Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881

Table-6
Long-run elasticities tests result.
Cup-FM Cup-BC

Variables Coefficient t-statistics p-value Coefficient t-statistics p-value

LGQ 0.9336*** 8.0096 0.000 0.6585*** 5.8859 0.000
LGE 0.6695*** 6.8962 0.000 0.6092*** 4.1793 0.000
LFD − 0.7881*** − 6.2335 0.000 − 0.6879*** − 5.2886 0.000
LGDP − 0.4749*** − 4.8073 0.000 − 0.4686*** − 4.3221 0.000

Note: *, ** and *** show significant at 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively.

The long-run results of this study suggest that economic growth

Table 7 could be an important means of reducing the volatility of natural re­
Pairwise Dumitrescu Hurlin Panel Causality Test results.
sources as a direct result of the empirical findings of this study. An in­
NRV LGQ LGE LFD LGDP crease in economic growth will increase per capita income, investments,
NRV ==== 0.6989 0.7496 − 0.0549 0.8073 and support to the industrial sector, leading to a lower dependency on
(0.4846) (0.4535) (0.9562) (0.4195) natural resources and perhaps the adoption of alternative energy sour­
LGQ 0.9646 ==== 2.9350*** 1.0672 5.6672*** ces. Consequently, this could result in a trickle-down effect on the price
(0.3347) (0.0033) (0.2859) (0.000)
LGE − 1.0862 0.8035 ===== 0.8423 1.4184
of natural resources. In addition, the research and development of
(0.2774) (0.4217) (0.3996) (0.1560) renewable energy should be enhanced to reduce dependency on natural
LFD 3.0562*** 2.5165** 4.4672*** ==== 2.6589*** resources and traditional fossil fuel energy sources. Nevertheless, pol­
(0.0022) (0.0119) (0.000) (0.0078) icies concerning your research and development of renewable energy
LGDP 4.9660*** 7.7256*** 1.4020 4.2364*** ====
must be reviewed to consider the increase in volatility in natural re­
(0.000) (0.000) (0.1609) (0.000)
sources. Furthermore, to reduce political risk, it is necessary to have
Note: *, ** and *** show significant at 1%, 5% and 10% levels respectively. The policies aimed at eliminating multiple risks, such as financial, economic,
p-values are in the parenthesis. trade, and investment risks(Khan et al., 2021a,b). This is why an in­
crease in the risk would result in a more uncertain situation for investors
economies are exposed to extremely volatile environments, where the and industrialists. To achieve the goals of a balanced economy, nations
price of commodities is rapidly going up. It is an attempt this study to must improve the financial system, revise their trade policies, and
compare macroeconomic policy indicators and price changes of natural regulate the legislation which regulates the balance between supply and
resources using data from 1996 to 2020 to evaluate if macroeconomic demand. As long as the financial markets are functional, long-term in­
policy indicators contribute to price changes. It has long been assumed vestments are counter-cyclical and will mitigate the risk associated with
that the prices of natural resources play a decisive role in economic volatility. On the other hand, if firms face tight credit constraints, in­
growth through exogenous factors affecting various macroeconomic vestment can be pro-cyclical and cause increased volatility in the
variables. This study recognizes that governance and globalization play economy. In addition to volatility, other factors can contribute to eco­
a critical role in natural resource prices as endogenous factors. This nomic growth deceleration.
study aims to assess the heterogeneity and unit root in the underlying Fortunately, volatility can be reduced depending on whether or not
data properties using second-generation methods. Westerlund and the country has a sound financial system that can deal with large
Edgerton’s co-integration tests indicate highly cointegrated study vari­ undisrupted changes in the revenues from the extraction of resources.
ables. Globalization and governance positively affect natural resource Furthermore, fewer restrictions on capital account balances, openness,
price volatility for countries in the Middle East and North Africa. and physical access to international trade also reduce volatility. After
However, the financial sector’s development and the income increase in controlling for volatility, this study finds that countries can even turn the
these countries have reduced natural resource price volatility. curse of natural resource dependence into a blessing. This study finds
It has been observed that governance and the growing globalization that natural resource dependence has a positive direct effect on growth.
significantly exacerbate natural resource prices over time. A natural In many resource-rich countries, the key to turning their fortunes around
resource bonanza reduces the ability of the government to be critical and is financial development, ensuring openness, and mitigating the nega­
induces a false sense of security in their voters. In the case of resource tive impact of being landlocked on growth, as resource dependence has a
depletion, this would likely lead to investments in ‘white elephant’ more indirect negative impact on growth via volatility than any direct
projects, bad policies regarding import substitution or unsustainable positive impact. However, it should still be possible to deal with vola­
budgetary policies, and favors given to political clientele, which will not tility more effectively by lowering the price volatility of the resources
be able to be funded once the resources run out. In the modern era, themselves, even if it may be difficult to lower the price volatility of
governments lose sight of policies that will promote growth, free trade, resources directly. Increasingly, public policymakers realize that many
and value for money management. Countries often engage in exuberant external shocks, volatile macroeconomic policies, microeconomic ri­
public expenditures during a commodity boom, assuming that these gidities, and weak institutions substantially affect income volatility in
revenues would never disappear. A consequence of this could be that many developing countries. This, in turn, reduces the welfare of risk-
unsustainable spending programs are enacted, which need to be averse individuals. Therefore, future research should focus on coping
reversed when the global commodity prices drop and revenues dry up. with such volatility and managing the risks involved as a result.
As a result of the secular decline of world prices of primary exports, Research may be undertaken to examine ways of overcoming the po­
which aligns with the Prebisch hypothesis, some developing countries litical temptations of short-run resource wealth to establish the financial
have opted to promote state-led industrialization for many years to and political institutions that will reduce volatility, mitigate the nega­
avoid resource dependency. These policies may also have been a reac­ tive effects of volatility on growth, and prevent poverty.
tion to the appreciation of the real exchange rate and the decline of the
traded manufacturing sectors caused by natural resource dependence. Author contribution
Once natural resource income has ceased, policies often have to be
reversed. This, in turn, would cause a rise in volatility that would harm Haiying Liu: designing the article, supervision, reviewing and cor­
growth and welfare. recting mistakes. Muhammad Mansoor Saleem and Muhammad Wasif

8
H. Liu et al. Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881

Zafar: writing original manuscript, conceptualization, writing review Acknowledgement

and editing. Mamdouh Abdulaziz Saleh Al-Faryan and Irfan Khan:
formal analysis, methodology, writing original manuscript, writing re­ This research was funded by the National Social Science Foundation
view and editing. of China (grant no. 20BGY102).

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Appendix-1

IEA International energy agency NRV Natural Resources volatility

SDG’s Sustainable Development Goals GDP Gross Domestic Product

MENA Middle East North Africa FD financial development
Cup-FM Continuously Updated Fully Modified Ordinary Least Square GE Economic Globalization
Cup-BC Continuously Updated Bias-Corrected GQ Governance
ARDL Autoregressive Distributed Lags CRSD cross-sectional dependence
PMG Pooled Mean Group HET heterogeneity
NARDL Non-linear Autoregressive Distributed Lags DH Dumitrescu and Hurlin’s
SSA sub-Saharan African CD Cross-sectional Dependence

Appendix-2

Figure-1.

Figure-2.

9
H. Liu et al. Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881

Figure-3.

Figure-4.

Figure-5.

References way forward towards sustainable development. Resour. Pol. 74, 102341 https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102341.
Addison, T., Roe, A., 2018. Extractive industries : the management of resources as a
Abbasi, K.R., Hussain, K., Redulescu, M., Ozturk, I., 2021. Does natural resources
driver of sustainable development protecting the environment during and after
depletion and economic growth achieve the carbon neutrality target of the UK? A

10
H. Liu et al.
resource extraction. Oapen.Org 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/
9780198817369.001.0001.
Ahmad, Mahmood, Ahmed, Z., Majeed, A., Huang, B., 2021. An environmental impact
assessment of economic complexity and energy consumption: does institutional
quality make a difference. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 89, 106603 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.eiar.2021.106603.
Ahmad, Munir, Muslija, A., Satrovic, E., 2021. Does economic prosperity lead to
environmental sustainability in developing economies? Environmental Kuznets
curve theory. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28, 22588–22601. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11356-020-12276-9.
Ahmed, Z., Ahmad, M., Rjoub, H., Kalugina, O.A., Hussain, N., 2021. Economic growth,
renewable energy consumption, and ecological footprint: exploring the role of
environmental regulations and democracy in sustainable development. Sustain. Dev.
1–11 https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2251.
Ahmed, Z., Asghar, M.M., Malik, M.N., Nawaz, K., 2020a. Moving towards a sustainable
environment: the dynamic linkage between natural resources, human capital,
urbanization, economic growth, and ecological footprint in China. Resour. Pol. 67,
101677 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101677.
Ahmed, Z., Zhang, B., Cary, M., 2020b. Linking economic globalization, economic
growth, financial development, and ecological footprint: evidence from symmetric
and asymmetric ARDL. Ecol. Indicat. 121, 107060.
Akinsola, M.O., Odhiambo, N.M., 2020. Oil price and economic growth of oil-importing
countries: a review of international literature. Appl. Econom. Int. Dev. 20, 129–151.
Alamgir, F., Amin, S. Bin, 2021. The nexus between oil price and stock market: evidence
from South Asia. Energy Rep. 7, 693–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
egyr.2021.01.027.
Ali, A., Audi, M., Roussel, Y., 2021. Natural resources depletion, renewable energy
consumption and environmental degradation: a comparative analysis of developed
and developing world. Int. J. Energy Econ. Pol. 11, 251–260. https://doi.org/
10.32479/ijeep.11008.
Aloui, C., Hkiri, B., Hammoudeh, S., Shahbaz, M., 2018. A multiple and partial wavelet
analysis of the oil price, inflation, exchange rate, and economic growth nexus in
Saudi Arabia. Emerg. Mark. Finance Trade 54, 935–956. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1540496X.2017.1423469.
Atil, A., Nawaz, K., Lahiani, A., Roubaud, D., 2020. Are natural resources a blessing or a
curse for financial development in Pakistan? The importance of oil prices, economic
growth and economic globalization. Resour. Pol. 67, 101683 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101683.
Baba, S., 2017. A vector autoregressive analysis of oil price volatility and economic
growth in Nigeria (1997-2017). J. Int. Business, Innov. Strateg. Manag. 4, 1–2.
Badeeb, R.A., Lean, H.H., Shahbaz, M., 2020. Are too many natural resources to blame
for the shape of the Environmental Kuznets Curve in resource-based economies?
Resour. Pol. 68, 101694 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101694.
Baek, J., Young, T.B., 2021. A new look at the crude oil prices and economic growth
nexus: asymmetric evidence from Alaska. Miner. Econ. 34, 339–344. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s13563-020-00225-4.
Bai, J., Kao, C., Ng, S., 2009. Panel cointegration with global stochastic trends.
J. Econom. 149, 82–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2008.10.012.
Cevik, E.I., Bugan, M.F., 2018. Regime-dependent relation between Islamic and
conventional financial markets. Borsa Istanbul Rev. 18, 114–121. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.bir.2017.11.001.
Cevik, E.I., Dibooglu, S., Awad Abdallah, A., Al-Eisa, E.A., 2021. Oil prices, stock market
returns, and volatility spillovers: evidence from Saudi Arabia. Int. Econ. Econ. Pol.
18, 157–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-020-00484-0.
Cevik, E.I., Dibooglu, S., Kenc, T., 2013. Measuring financial stress in Turkey. J. Pol.
Model. 35, 370–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2012.06.003.
Chêne, M., 2017. Natural Resource Management Transparency and Governance: A
Literature Review Focusing on Extractive Industries, 1–28. CHR Michelsen Inst.
Cheng, Z., Li, L., Liu, J., 2020. Natural resource abundance, resource industry
dependence and economic green growth in China. Resour. Pol. 68, 101734 https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101734.
Cui, L., Weng, S., Kirikkaleli, D., Bashir, M.A., Rjoub, H., Zhou, Y., 2021. Exploring the
role of natural resources, natural gas and oil production for economic growth of
China. Resour. Pol. 74, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102429.
Dreher, A., 2006. Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of
globalization. Appl. Econ. 38, 1091–1110. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00036840500392078.
Dumitrescu, E.I., Hurlin, C., 2012. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous
panels. Econ. Modell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014.
Erdoğan, S., Gedikli, A., Çevik, E.İ., 2020a. Volatility spillover effects between Islamic
stock markets and exchange rates: evidence from three emerging countries. Borsa
Istanbul Rev. 20, 322–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2020.04.003.
Erdoğan, S., Yıldırım, D.Ç., Gedikli, A., 2020b. Natural resource abundance, financial
development and economic growth: an investigation on Next-11 countries. Resour.
Pol. 65, 101559 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101559.
Etokakpan, M.U., Solarin, S.A., Yorucu, V., Bekun, F.V., Sarkodie, S.A., 2020. Modeling
natural gas consumption, capital formation, globalization, CO2 emissions and
economic growth nexus in Malaysia: fresh evidence from combined cointegration
and causality analysis. Energy Strategy Rev. 31, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
esr.2020.100526.
Freedman, B., 2018. Chapter 12: resources and sustainable development. Environ. Sci. a
Can. Perspect. 1–37.
Galadima, M.D., Aminu, A.W., 2020. Nonlinear unit root and nonlinear causality in
natural gas - economic growth nexus: evidence from Nigeria. Energy 190, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116415.
11
Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881
Gao, J., Tian, M., 2016. Analysis of over-consumption of natural resources and the
ecological trade deficit in China based on ecological footprints. Ecol. Indicat. 61,
899–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.10.044.
González-Val, R., Pueyo, F., 2019. Natural resources, economic growth and geography.
Econ. Modell. 83, 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2019.02.007.
Goryakin, Y., Lobstein, T., James, W.P.T., Suhrcke, M., 2015. The impact of economic,
political and social globalization on overweight and obesity in the 56 low and middle
income countries. Soc. Sci. Med. 133, 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
socscimed.2015.03.030.
Guan, L., Zhang, W.W., Ahmad, F., Naqvi, B., 2021a. The volatility of natural resource
prices and its impact on the economic growth for natural resource-dependent
economies: a comparison of oil and gold dependent economies. Resour. Pol. 72,
102125 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102125.
Guan, L., Zhang, W.W., Ahmad, F., Naqvi, B., 2021b. The volatility of natural resource
prices and its impact on the economic growth for natural resource-dependent
economies: a comparison of oil and gold dependent economies. Resour. Pol. 72,
1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102125.
Gutti, B., Aji, M.M., Magaji, G., 2012. Environmental impact of natural resources
exploitation in Nigeria and the way forward. J. Appl. Technol. Environ. Sanit. 2,
95–102.
Hansen, J., Gross, I., 2018. Commodity price volatility with endogenous natural
resources. Eur. Econ. Rev. 101, 157–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
euroecorev.2017.10.006.
Haseeb, M., Kot, S., Iqbal Hussain, H., Kamarudin, F., 2021. The natural resources curse-
economic growth hypotheses: quantile–on–Quantile evidence from top Asian
economies. J. Clean. Prod. 279, 123596 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2020.123596.
Hassan, S.T., Batool, B., Zhu, B., Khan, I., 2022. Environmental complexity of
globalization, education, and income inequalities: new insights of energy poverty.
J. Clean. Prod. 340, 130735 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130735.
Hassan, S.T., Xia, E., Huang, J., Khan, N.H., Iqbal, K., 2019. Natural resources,
globalization, and economic growth: evidence from Pakistan. Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04890-z.
Hayat, A., Tahir, M., 2021. Natural resources volatility and economic growth: evidence
from the resource-rich region. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 14, 84. https://doi.org/
10.3390/jrfm14020084.
Huang, Y., Raza, S.M.F., Hanif, I., Alharthi, M., Abbas, Q., Zain-ul-Abidin, S., 2020. The
role of forest resources, mineral resources, and oil extraction in economic progress of
developing Asian economies. Resour. Pol. 69, 19–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2020.101878.
Hugon, P., 2010. International Development Policy | Revue internationale de politique
de développement States as Actors in International. Open Educ. J. 11, 95–113.
Ibrahim, M.J., 2017. Introductory chapter: economics, natural resources and sustainable
development. Emerg. Issues Econ. Dev. 1–11 https://doi.org/10.5772/
intechopen.70399.
IEA, 2021. World Energy Outlook 2021 - Revised Version October 2021. Internatioanl
Energy Agency.
Kalymbetova, A., Zhetibayev, Z., Kambar, R., Ranov, Z., Izatullayeva, B., 2021. The effect
of oil prices on industrial production in oil-importing countries : panel cointegration
test. Int. J. Energy Econ. Pol. 11, 186–192.
Katırcıoglu, S., Ozatac, N., Taspınar, N., 2020. The role of oil prices, growth and inflation
in bank profitability. Serv. Ind. J. 40, 565–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02642069.2018.1460359.
Khan, I., Hou, F., Le, H.P., 2021a. The impact of natural resources, energy consumption,
and population growth on environmental quality: fresh evidence from the United
States of America. Sci. Total Environ. 754, 142222 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.142222.
Khan, I., Hou, F., Phong, H., Ahtsham, S., 2021b. Do natural resources , urbanization ,
and value-adding manufacturing affect environmental quality ? Evidence from the
top ten manufacturing countries. Resour. Pol. 72, 102109 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2021.102109.
Khan, I., Tan, D., Tauseef, S., Bilal, H., 2022a. Role of alternative and nuclear energy in
stimulating environmental sustainability : impact of government expenditures.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-18306-4.
Khan, I., Zakari, A., Dagar, V., Singh, S., 2022b. World energy trilemma and
transformative energy developments as determinants of economic growth amid
environmental sustainability. Energy Econ. 108, 105884 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
eneco.2022.105884.
Khan, I., Zakari, A., Zhang, J., Dagar, V., Singh, S., 2022c. A study of trilemma energy
balance, clean energy transitions, and economic expansion in the midst of
environmental sustainability: new insights from three trilemma leadership. Energy
248, 123619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.123619.
Liu, Q., Zhao, Z., Liu, Y., He, Y., 2022. Natural resources commodity prices volatility,
economic performance and environment: evaluating the role of oil rents. Resour.
Pol. 76, 102548 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102548.
Liu, W., Chen, X., 2022. Natural resources commodity prices volatility and economic
uncertainty: evaluating the role of oil and gas rents in COVID-19. Resour. Policy 76,
1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102581.
Ma, Q., Zhang, M., Ali, S., Kirikkaleli, D., Khan, Z., 2021. Natural resources commodity
prices volatility and economic performance: evidence from China pre and post
COVID-19. Resour. Pol. 74, 102338 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2021.102338.
Magazzino, C., Mele, M., Schneider, N., 2021. A D2C algorithm on the natural gas
consumption and economic growth: challenges faced by Germany and Japan. Energy
219, 11–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119586.
H. Liu et al.
McHugh, M.L., 2012. The Chi-square test of independence. Biochem. Med. 23, 143–149.
https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2013.018.
Mohamued, E.A., Ahmed, M., Pypłacz, P., Liczmańska-Kopcewicz, K., Khan, M.A., 2021.
Global oil price and innovation for sustainability: the impact of r&d spending, oil
price and oil price volatility on ghg emissions. Energies 14. https://doi.org/
10.3390/en14061757.
Mukhtarov, S., Mikayilov, J.I., Humbatova, S., Muradov, V., 2020. Do high oil prices
obstruct the transition to renewable energy consumption? Sustain. Times 12, 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114689.
Naeem, M., Tiwari, A.K., Mubashra, S., Shahbaz, M., 2019. Modeling volatility of
precious metals markets by using regime-switching GARCH models. Resour. Pol. 64,
101497 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101497.
Nawaz, M.A., Azam, M.A., Bhatti, M.A., 2019. Natural resources depletion and economic
growth: evidence from ASEAN countries. Pakistan J. Econ. Stud. 2, 58–77.
Ndiamé Diop, Marotta, D., Melo, J. de, 2012. Natural resource abundance, growth, and
diversification in the Middle East and North Africa: the effects of natural resources
and the role of policies. Nat. Resour. Abundance, Growth, Diversif. Middle East
North Africa 228.
Ozturk, I., 2010. A literature survey on energy. Energy Pol. 38, 340–349.
Pérez, C., Claveria, O., 2020. Natural resources and human development: evidence from
mineral-dependent African countries using exploratory graphical analysis. Resour.
Pol. 65, 11–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101535.
Pesaran, H., Yamagata, T., 2008. Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. J. Econom.
142, 50–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010.
Pesaran, M.H., 2007. A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section
dependence. J. Appl. Econom. 22, 265–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951.
Pesaran, M.H., 2004. General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels
General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels. Univ, Cambridge.
Phillips, P.C.B., Sul, D., 2003. Dynamic panel estimation and homogeneity testing under
cross section dependence. Econom. J. 6, 217–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-
423x.00108.
Prabheesh, K., Laila, N., 2020. Asymmetric effect of crude oil and palm oil prices on
economic growth: evidence from Indonesia. Bul. Ekon. Monet. dan Perbank. 23,
253–268. https://doi.org/10.21098/bemp.v23i1.1304.
Prabheesh, K.P., Laila, N., 2020. Asymmetric effect of crude oil and palm oil prices on
Indonesia’s output. Bul. Ekon. Monet. dan Perbank. 23, 253–268. https://doi.org/
10.21098/bemp.v23i1.1304.
Rafindadi, A.A., Ozturk, I., 2015. Natural gas consumption and economic growth nexus:
is the 10th Malaysian plan attainable within the limits of its resource? Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 49, 1221–1232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.007.
Rahim, S., Murshed, M., Umarbeyli, S., Kirikkaleli, D., Ahmad, M., Tufail, M., Wahab, S.,
2021. Do natural resources abundance and human capital development promote
economic growth? A study on the resource curse hypothesis in Next Eleven
countries. Resour. Environ. Sustain. 4, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resenv.2021.100018.
Resources, N., Volatility, T., 2022. Natural resources tax volatility and economic
performance : evaluating the role of digital economy. Resour. Pol. 75, 102510.
Schiffer, H.-W., 2016. World Energy Resources 2016. World Energy Counc, pp. 6–46,
2016.
Shahbaz, M., Ahmed, K., Tiwari, A.K., Jiao, Z., 2019a. Resource curse hypothesis and
role of oil prices in USA. Resour. Pol. 64, 2–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2019.101514.
Shahbaz, M., Destek, M.A., Okumus, I., Sinha, A., 2019b. An empirical note on
comparison between resource abundance and resource dependence in resource
abundant countries. Resour. Pol. 60, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2018.12.002.
Shahbaz, M., Naeem, M., Ahad, M., Tahir, I., 2018. Is natural resource abundance a
stimulus for financial development in the USA? Resour. Pol. 55, 223–232.
Smeekes, S., Wijler, E., 2005. Unit roots and cointegration. Adv. Stud. Theor. Appl.
Econom. 52, 541–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31150-6_17.
12
View publication stats
Resources Policy 78 (2022) 102881
Stobierski, T., 2001. Business insights. Chem. Eng. News 79, 45. https://doi.org/
10.1021/cen-v078n032.p049. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/globalization-effe
cts-on-environment.
Sun, L., Wang, Y., 2021. Global economic performance and natural resources commodity
prices volatility: evidence from pre and post COVID-19 era. Resour. Pol. 74, 1–21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102393.
Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., Zakari, A., Yoshino, N., Khan, I., 2022. Leavering on energy
security to alleviate poverty in asian economics. Singapore Econ. Rev. 1–28 https://
doi.org/10.1142/s0217590822440015.
Topcu, E., Altinoz, B., Aslan, A., 2020. Global evidence from the link between economic
growth, natural resources, energy consumption, and gross capital formation. Resour.
Pol. 66, 101622 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101622.
Tsani, S., 2013. Natural resources, governance and institutional quality: the role of
resource funds. Resour. Pol. 38, 181–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2012.11.001.
UNCTAD, 2012. Excessive Commodity Price Volatility: Macroeconomic Effects on
Growth and Policy Options, 51. United Nations Conf. Trade Dev.
United States Institute of Peace/Washington, 2007. A Study Guide Series on Peace and
Conflict for Independent Learners and Classroom Instructors Natural, Natural
Resources , Conflict , and Conflict Resolution. United States Inst. Peace, Washington,
DC.
Vakulchuk, R., Overland, I., Scholten, D., 2020. Renewable energy and geopolitics: a
review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 122, 109547 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2019.109547.
Vasilyeva, O., Libman, A., 2020. Varieties of authoritarianism matter: elite
fragmentation, natural resources and economic growth. Eur. J. Polit. Econ. 63,
101869 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2020.101869.
WDI, 2020. World development indicators (WDI). Available at. https://datatopics.worl
dbank.org/world-development-indicators/.
Wen, J., Mughal, N., Kashif, M., Jain, V., Ramos Meza, C.S., Cong, P.T., 2022. Volatility
in natural resources prices and economic performance: evidence from BRICS
economies. Resour. Pol. 75, 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102472.
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.
Xiaoman, W., Majeed, A., Vasbieva, D.G., Yameogo, C.E.W., Hussain, N., 2021. Natural
resources abundance, economic globalization, and carbon emissions: advancing
sustainable development agenda. Sustain. Dev. 29, 1037–1048. https://doi.org/
10.1002/sd.2192.
Zafar, M.W., 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-Paci fi c Economic Cooperation countries. J. Clean. Prod. 212,
1166–1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.081.
Zaidi, S.A.H., Wei, Z., Gedikli, A., Zafar, M.W., Hou, F., Iftikhar, Y., 2019. The impact of
globalization, natural resources abundance, and human capital on financial
development: evidence from thirty-one OECD countries. Resour. Pol. 64, 101476
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101476.
Zakari, A., Khan, I., 2021. Boosting economic growth through energy in Africa : the role
of Chinese investment and institutional quality. J. Chin. Econ. Bus. Stud. 1–21.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14765284.2021.1968709, 00.
Zakari, A., Li, G., Khan, I., Jindal, A., Tawiah, V., 2022. Are abundant energy resources
and Chinese business a solution to environmental prosperity in Africa. Energy Pol.
163, 112829 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112829.
Zallé, O., 2018. Natural resources and economic growth in Africa: the role of institutional
quality and human capital. Resour. Pol. 62, 616–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resourpol.2018.11.009.
Zhang, C., Khan, I., Dagar, V., Saeed, A., Zafar, M.W., 2022. Technological Forecasting &
Social Change Environmental impact of information and communication technology
: unveiling the role of education in developing countries. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Change 178, 121570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121570.