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

net/publication/375665470

The determinants of ecological footprint in the UK: The role of transportation

activities, renewable energy, trade openness, and globalization

Article in Environmental Science and Pollution Research · November 2023

DOI: 10.1007/s11356-023-30759-3

CITATIONS READS

2 122

3 authors:

Babatunde Sunday Eweade Hasan Güngör

Eastern Mediterranean University Eastern Mediterranean University
10 PUBLICATIONS 19 CITATIONS 33 PUBLICATIONS 1,000 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Selin Karlılar
Eastern Mediterranean University
20 PUBLICATIONS 126 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Babatunde Sunday Eweade on 16 November 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Environmental Science and Pollution Research
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-30759-3

RESEARCH ARTICLE

The determinants of ecological footprint in the UK: The role

of transportation activities, renewable energy, trade openness,
and globalization
Babatunde S. Eweade1 · Hasan Güngör1 · Selin Karlilar1,2

Received: 10 July 2023 / Accepted: 25 October 2023

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023

Abstract
The objective of this study is to explore the interaction between transportation energy consumption, GDP, renewable energy,
trade, globalization and ecological footprint in the United Kingdom over the period 1990–2020. To achieve this aim, the study
uses the autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) approach and Fourier Toda-Yamamoto causality test. The research findings
demonstrate that an increase in transportation energy consumption, renewable energy, and globalization is associated with a
reduction in environmental pollution. On the contrary, GDP and trade contribute to worsening the environment. Moreover,
there exists a unidirectional causal relationship from transportation energy consumption, GDP, renewable energy, trade, and
globalization towards the ecological footprint. The findings of the study recommend that the policymakers should implement
strategies and provide incentives to increase the deployment of renewables in the transportation sector, specifically focusing
on electric vehicles (EVs) and the necessary charging infrastructure. Overall, the UK government should prioritize sustain-
able environmental development when planning its economic development strategies.

Keywords Transportation energy consumption · Renewable energy · Globalization · Trade openness · Economic growth ·
Ecological footprint · United Kingdom

Introduction
Global warming poses a critical and pressing challenge that
confronts humanity. According to the scientific consensus,
the escalation of greenhouse gas (GhGs) emissions, predom-
inantly carbon dioxide ­(CO2) emissions and nitrous oxide
­(N2O), is responsible for the elevation of Earth’s tempera-
ture. This phenomenon is anticipated to have adverse effects
Responsible Editor: Ilhan Ozturk
* Babatunde S. Eweade
eweade.babatunde@gmail.com
Hasan Güngör
hasan.gungor@emu.edu.tr
Selin Karlilar
selin.karlilar@emu.edu.tr
1 and societal implications if the current emission levels endure
Department of Economics, Faculty of Business
and Economics, Eastern Mediterranean University, Via
Mersin 10, Famagusta, Northern Cyprus, Turkey
2
Clinic of Economics, Azerbaijan State University
of Economics (UNEC), Baku, Azerbaijan
on the planet, including but not limited to elevated sea lev-
els and severe weather occurrences (Edenhofer 2015; Peng
et al. 2018). Considering the severity of these consequences,
nations across the globe have been implementing measures
to tackle this matter. Several initiatives are being imple-
mented, such as allocating resources towards renewables,
promoting energy-efficient technologies, and implementing
carbon pricing mechanisms (Emir and Karlilar 2023; Yu and
Xu 2023; Adebayo and Alola 2023). ­CO2 emissions consti-
tute over 60% of GhGs emissions, and the transportation
sector plays a pivotal role in contributing to these emissions,
representing more than 25% of the overall global ­CO2 output
(Adams et al. 2020). This indicates the notable impact of
human-generated GhGs emissions within the transportation
industry, emphasizing the immediate requirement to tackle
this problem to mitigate climate change.
A paramount issue is the possible catastrophic ecological
and foster continuous planetary warming. Implementing
adequate measures to mitigate emissions is essential to alle-
viate the repercussions of climate change. Krambeck (2010)
reported that failing to take action promptly to reduce C ­ O2

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

emissions would be expensive and unaffordable, particularly
for developing nations. Consequently, it is imperative to imple-
ment immediate and specific measures to prevent catastrophe
(Jahanger et al. 2023; Liu and Zhang 2023; Alola and Adebayo
2023). The C ­ O2 emissions from the transportation sector in
the UK have exhibited variability over time, albeit displaying
a general downward trend in recent times. According to the
UK Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy
(BEIS 2022), the transportation sector accounted for 28% and
24% of the UK’s total GhGs in 2019 and 2020, respectively. In
the UK, this industry is acknowledged as the primary source
of GhGs emissions (BEIS 2022; see Fig. 1). From 1990 to
2019, there was an approximate 4% rise in emissions from road
transportation in the UK.
Nevertheless, the emissions stemming from alterna-
tive forms of transportation, such as domestic aviation and
rail, declined during the identical timeframe. Furthermore,
between 2010 and 2019, there was a reduction of around
6% in emissions stemming from road transportation. This is
attributed to the augmented adoption of electric and hybrid
vehicles and advancements in vehicle efficiency. The trans-
port sector’s decrease in GhGs contributed to 55% of the
total reduction in domestic ­CO2 emissions from 2019 to
2020, representing the most substantial decline on record.
The decline is attributed to COVID-19 restrictions (Rojas
et al. 2022; Bamidele et al. 2022). Previously, emissions
from transportation remained relatively unchanged, as a rise
in their usage offset the enhanced fuel efficiency of most
vehicles. A robust correlation exists between ­CO2, energy
utilization in transportation, and the patterns of economic
growth rate over time (Adams et al. 2020). Despite this
progress, additional measures are required to reduce ­CO2
emissions from transportation to achieve the climate change
objectives of the UK.
Fig. 1  GhGs emissions by sector (BEIS 2022)
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Renewable energy–powered electric vehicles (EVs)
have the potential to reduce UK transport sector emis-
sions by 90% by 2050 (IEA 2018). The adoption of clean
energy is critical for the UK’s strategy to shift towards an
economy with reduced carbon emissions. Reducing car-
bon emissions in energy generation, ensuring reliable and
steady energy provision, achieving equitable cost distribu-
tion, and capitalizing on the substantial economic pros-
pects linked to transitioning to sustainable transportation
systems fueled by renewable energy sources are of utmost
importance (BMRB Social Research 2009). The use of
renewables such as wind, solar power, and hydropower
are increasingly used to power transportation in the UK.
For instance, clean energy has the perspective to serve as
a means of charging electric vehicles, while clean energy
can be harnessed to power public transportation systems.
The transportation industry is experiencing a rise in using
biofuels derived from renewable sources, such as crops
and waste, which are environmentally friendly. Through
a reduction in reliance on fossil fuels and a rise in the use
of sustainable energy sources within the transportation
sector, the UK has the potential to decrease its carbon
footprint and mitigate its environmental impact, ultimately
leading to an enhancement in overall environmental condi-
tions (Eweade et al. 2022; Özkan et al. 2023). Neverthe-
less, the shift towards a sustainable transportation system
necessitates substantial investments in infrastructure and
technology, as well as modifications in consumer behavior
and public policy.
The rationale behind selecting the UK as the study subject
is predicated on the ensuing dynamics: (i) transportation
sector is responsible for the highest amount of GhGs in the
UK, accounting for 24% of the total emissions (BEIS 2022),
(ii) the nation has pledged to attain net zero GhGs by 2050 and
has instituted policies to promote the adoption of clean energy
alternatives and eco-friendly transportation methods (Milner
et al. 2023; Raihan and Tuspekova 2023; Agu et al. 2023), and
(iii) the country under investigation is currently undergoing
an energy transition, shifting from fossil fuels to clean energy
technologies. The shift towards cleaner alternatives presents
both opportunities and challenges in achieving environmental
quality, making it a significant case study for examining the
impact of sustainable energy in this regard.
This study represents a pioneering effort in this research
domain. First, this study aims to augment the extant body
of literature by exploring the effect of transportation energy
usage on environmental conditions. There is a scarcity of
research in the existing literature that has examined the role
of transportation energy consumption on environmental
conditions. Second, this is the first attempt to determine the
factors of ecological footprint (EFP) of the UK. Third, many
studies are limited in scope as they only consider atmos-
pheric pollution resulting from ­CO2 emissions (Wang et al.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
2023a; Sharif et al. 2023). To address this issue, EFP is
used as a more advanced environmental measurement than
­CO2 emissions. Fourth, this research employs the ARDL
bounds test, along with the Fourier Toda-Yamamoto causal-
ity approach to identify both long-term causal relationships
and the direction and strength of causality between variables
to generate a more decisive outcome with significant policy
implications.
Subsequent parts of this paper encompass the “Litera-
ture review” section, which offers a comprehensive literature
review. The “Data sources and methodology” section covers
the details for dataset, model, and theoretical foundation,
and the empirical model is discussed in the “Empirical find-
ings and discussions” section. Finally, the “Conclusion and
policy recommendations” section offers conclusions, sug-
gestions, and study limitations.
Literature review
This section provides a comprehensive review of previous
research on the relationships between transportation energy
consumption (TEC), renewable energy use (RENC), trade
(TO), globalization (GLO), and EFP.
Transportation energy consumption
and environment
The ongoing rise in emissions stemming from transportation
activities has emerged as a matter of concern on a global
scale. However, there is limited research in the current lit-
erature that examines the impact of TEC on environmental
pollution.
Neves et al. (2017) note that the allocation of resources
towards rail infrastructure has the potential to reduce the
reliance of fossil fuels and mitigate environmental pollu-
tion. According to Das and Roy (2019), even though there
are measures being proposed to improve vehicle fuel effi-
ciency, it is expected that a rise in travel volume will lead to
an increase in EFP within the transportation industry. Adams
et al. (2020) show that the transportation sector causes sig-
nificant negative environmental consequences in sub-Saharan
African countries. In the case of ASEAN countries, Shabir
et al. (2022) and Chen et al. (2022) document that TEC is
effective in improving the environment. Satrovic et al. (2023)
find that TEC degrades the environment in the seven most
innovative countries. Wenlong et al. (2023) indicate that
transportation worsens the environment in the USA. Pata
et al. (2023a) prove that the utilization of fossil fuels in vari-
ous transportation modes leads to a substantial escalation in
­CO2 emissions.
Renewable energy consumption and environment
Energy diversification has become increasingly important
in recent times, as it aligns with the sustainable devel-
opment goals (SDGs). This strategy involves integrating
renewable energy technologies into the energy infrastruc-
ture, aiming to decrease the reliance on fossil fuels. Destek
and Sinha (2020) explore that the adoption of clean energy
results in a reduction in the EFP in OECD countries.
Bekun et al. (2021) find that renewable energy sources
are a feasible solution to mitigate the negative impacts of
emissions in E7 economies. Rehman et al. (2021) showed
the importance of clean energy in reducing GhGs emis-
sions in 32 Asian countries. Adebayo et al. (2023a) dem-
onstrate that clean energy positively affects the quality
of environment in four developing countries. Focusing
on Indian economy, Bekun (2022) and Roy (2023) find
a mitigating impact of renewables on ecological degra-
dation. Dogan and Pata (2022) revealed the eco-friendly
role of renewables in G7 countries. Adebayo et al. (2023b)
and Wei et al. (2023) discover that using clean energy
sources alleviates environmental degradation. Karlilar
and Emir (2023) show that renewable energy technolo-
gies contribute the environmental situation in India. In the
case of OECD countries, Karlilar et al. (2023) and Pata
and Samour (2023) point out that RENC use alleviates
environmental pollution. Quito et al. (2023) explore that
the utilization of renewables promotes enhanced energy
efficiency in 43 European countries. Focusing on the USA,
Pata et al. (2023b) indicate enhance energy technologies
enhances environmental conditions in the short-term.
Trade openness and environment
The environmental costs of economic activities have risen
to prominence in recent decades. The interplay between
trade and the environment is multifaceted, comprising
various effects. By combining the assessments of scale,
composition, and technique effects, a remarkable conclu-
sion is observed: trade has positive implications for the
environment. For example, Al-Mulali et al. (2015) find
a positive correlation between trade and the environment
in 93 countries. Alola et al. (2019) emphasize that trade
openness reduces environmental pollution in 16 Euro-
pean member countries. Alvarado et al. (2021) highlight
that Latin American countries with higher trade volumes
exhibit a reduction in environmental degradation. Ma and
Wang (2021) reveal that foreign trade has a positive impact
on enhancing production efficiency in 179 major countries.
On the contrary, Le et al. (2016) prove the positive link
between trade and ecological pollution across a sample
of 98 nations. In the context of China, Li and Haneklaus
13

(2022) show that the increased level of trade intensity is
a contributing factor to the escalation of ­CO2 emissions.
Akhayere et al. (2023) and Wang et al. (2023b) find that
the openness of trade is detrimental to the environment in
Turkey and OECD countries, respectively.
Globalization and environment
The pursuit of enhancing globalization involves the imple-
mentation of a continuous and multifaceted integration
mechanism aimed at strengthening social, political, and
economic connections on a global scale. However, this
mechanism might have an impact on the natural environ-
ment. In this context, there are several studies that focus on
the ecological role of globalization in literature.
For instance, Baloch et al. (2021) prove that GLO has
the potential to decrease GhGs emissions in the 27 OECD
nations. Using the framework of the EKC, Kirikkaleli et al.
(2021) highlight that globalization has a beneficial impact
on the environment in Turkey. In the context of top energy
transition economies, Awosusi et al. (2023) disaggregate
globalization into two distinct components, namely financial
and trade globalization. They observe that both financial and
trade globalization alleviate ­CO2 emissions. On the contrary,
Yurtkuran (2021) observes that globalization increases the
degrading impact of ­CO2 emissions on the environment in
Turkey. Gyamfi et al. (2023) find that economic globaliza-
tion upsurges ecological challenges in selected Mediterra-
nean countries. Kartal and Pata (2023) use three different
environmental indicators and prove that GLO has a harm-
ful impact on the environment in China. Pata et al. (2023c)
examine 11 countries and report a degrading impact of glo-
balization on the ecological quality.
Research gap
In summary, numerous studies have examined the dynamic
role of renewable energy, trade, and globalization on the
natural environment, using various country groups. Nev-
ertheless, there is a scarcity of research in the current lit-
erature that has examined the role of transportation energy
Table 1  Data and measurement Variable
Ecological footprint
Transportation energy consumption
Gross domestic product
Renewable energy consumption
Trade openness
Globalization
GFN Global Footprint Network, WDI World Bank Indicator, BP British Petroleum
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
consumption on EFP. To date, no research has focused on
the impact of transportation energy consumption, renewable
energy, trade, and globalization on EFP for the UK. More
importantly, the existing literature lacks research specifically
focused on the UK. Given the lack of prior research on this
subject matter, this is the first study to assess the impact
of transportation energy use, renewable energy, trade, and
globalization on the EFP in the UK.
Data sources and methodology
Theoretical foundation and model specification
The aim of this study is to investigate the determinants of
EFP for the UK. The study utilizes a time series dataset
spanning the years 1990–2020. Following Adams et al.
(2020) and Satrovic et al. (2023), the empirical model can
be represented using Eq. (1) and Eq. (2), respectively.
EFPt = f (TECt , GDPt , RENCt , TRADEt , GLOt ) (1)
LnEFPit =𝛽0 +𝛽1 LnTECit +𝛽2 LnGDPit
+𝛽3 LnRENCit +𝛽4 LnTRADEit +𝛽5 LnGLOit + 𝜖 t
(2)
In Eq. (1) and Eq. (2), TEC is the transportation energy
consumption, GDP is the economic growth, RENC is the
renewable energy consumption, TRADE is the trade open-
ness, GLO is the globalization index, and 𝜖t is for the error
term. Additionally, Ln indicates the transformation of natu-
ral logarithms. The measurements and the sources of the
variables under investigation are displayed in Table 1.
Following Apergis and Ozturk (2015), GDP is incorpo-
rated in the empirical study model. It is commonly acknowl-
edged that GDP is positively related to EFP. The growth
in economic activities results in higher demand for fossil
fuels, consequently harming environmental sustainability.
Therefore, the coefficient on GDP 𝛽1 is expected to be posi-
tive. Previous research indicates that transportation has the
potential to enhance environmental quality. However, the
negative consequences of transportation are often proved by
Symbol Unit of measurement Source
EFP gha (global hectares) GFN
TEC % of total fuel combustion WDI
GDP Constant 2015 US$ WDI
RENC Exajoule BP
TRADE % of GDP WDI
GLO Index KOF Swiss Eco-
nomic Institute
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

several research in literature (Demirel et al. 2008; Tánczos Nevertheless, in the presence of a structural break,
and Török, 2008; Hussain et al. 2023). Hence, the coefficient the ADF and PP tests tend to display tendency to accept
𝛽2 can be positive or negative. the null hypothesis that the data has a unit root. Hence,
Aligned with the SDGs and the environmental objec- to overcome this issue, the study adopts the Zivot and
tives set by nations, renewable energy technologies emerge Andrews (2002) (ZA) unit-root test to detect a singular
as the primary policy instrument for facilitating the tran- structural change within the time series. The formula for
sition towards sustainable energy systems. Numerous the ZA test is presented below:
empirical studies show that clean energy technologies k
mitigate ecological pollution (Mukhtarov et al. 2023; Lee ∑
ΔXt − 𝜑 + 𝜑Xt−1 + 𝜋t + 𝛿DUt + djΔXt−j + μt , (5)
et al. 2023). Considering this, the coefficient on RENC 𝛽3 j−1
is expected to be negative. The dynamic role between trade
and the environment is multifaceted, comprising various k
effects. According to these effects, the ecological conse-
∑
ΔXt − 𝜑 + 𝜑Xt−1 + 𝜋t + 𝛾DTt + djΔXt−j + μt , (6)
quences of trade may vary depending on the characteristics j−1
of the country. Therefore, the coefficient 𝛽4 can be posi-
tive or negative. Following prior studies (Kirikkaleli et al. k
2021; Khan et al. 2020), globalization is included into
∑
ΔXt − 𝛽 + 𝛽Xt−1 + 𝛽t + 𝜃DTt + djΔXt−j + μt (7)
the model. The coefficient of GLO 𝛽5 is expected to be j−1
positive due to globalization boost trade and competition,
which poses a potential threat to the environment. Figure 2 The dummy variable DUt represents the mean shift occur-
presents the empirical flowchart of the study. ring at each potential break date, while DTt corresponds to
the associated trend shift variable. Empirically, this can be
expressed as follows.
Stationarity tests {
1 … .if t > TB
{
t … .TB t > TB
0 … .if t < TB (8)
DUt − and DUt −
0 … .if t < TB
The investigation of the stationary characteristics of the
series was deemed essential prior to conducting further
analysis in this study. Therefore, this study utilizes the Co‑integration: ARDL bounds test
unit root tests such as the augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF)
developed by Dickey and Fuller (1981) and Phillips and To account for cointegration within the series, the ARDL
Perron (1988) (PP) tests. The empirical equations for these bounds test formulated by Pesaran et al. (2001) is conducted.
tests are shown below in Eq. (3) for ADF and Eq. (4) for Compared to other cointegration methods, this test for eval-
PP. uating cointegration offers several advantages. First, the
�
∑p ARDL bounds test is a useful tool because it does not rely
ΔY 𝐭 = 𝜷 Dt + 𝝅Y 𝐭−1 +
j−i
𝝈jΔY 𝐭−𝐣 + 𝜺𝐭 (3) on any assumptions and requires all variables to be included
in the analysis in the same order. This makes it applicable
The vector represents the deterministic term ( Dt ) in the even when the series has a mixed order of integration. Sec-
equation, while the disturbance variable is denoted with 𝜀t. ond, it exhibits greater reliability, particularly in cases with
� limited sample sizes. Last, it offers robust estimation. The
ΔY 𝐭 = 𝜷 Dt + 𝝅Y 𝐭−1 + 𝛍𝐭 (4)
ARDL bounds test is expressed by Eq. (9):

Fig. 2  Empirical flowchart of

the study

Data selection ADF, PP and FMOLS, Fourier Toda-

ARDL bounds
and summary ZA unit root
test
DOLS and Yamamoto
statistics test CCR causality

13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

ΔEFPt = 𝜏0 + 𝜏 1 EFPt−1 + 𝜏2 TECt−1 + 𝜏3 GDPt−1 + 𝜏4 RENCt−1 + 𝜏5 TRADEt−1 + GLOt−1 n n

2πkt 2πkt
∑ ( ) ∑ ( )
(11)
q q q q
∑ ∑ ∑
+ 𝛾1 ΔEFPt−1 + 𝛾2 ΔTECt−1 + 𝛾3 ΔGDPt−1 + 𝛾4 ΔRENCt−1
∑ σ(t) = σ0 + γ1k sin + γ2k cos
i=1
q
i=1 i=1
q
i=1
k=1
T k=1
T
∑ ∑
+ 𝛾5 ΔTRADEt−1 + 𝛾6 ΔGLOt−1 +𝜀t
The Fourier TY causality method with cumulative fre-
i=1 i=1

(9)
quencies (CF) is characterized by 𝛾1k and 𝛾2k , which repre-
where the symbol q denotes the optimal lag length. Pesa-
sent displacement and frequency amplitude, respectively. By
ran and Timmermann (2005) offer critical values for the
incorporating Eq. (11) into Eq. (10), the TY causality based
F-distribution that are used in the ARDL bounds test. The
on the Fourier approximation is defined as Eq. (12).
analysis commences with Eq. (6), which employs ordinary
least squares (OLS) to conduct an F-test. This test is used to n
∑ (
2πkt
) n
∑ (
2πkt
)
yt = σ0 + γ1k sin + γ2k cos
evaluate the overall significance of the coefficients associ- k=1
T k=1
T
(12)
ated with lagged variables, with the objective of identifying + 𝛽1 yt−1 + ⋯ + 𝛽p+dmax yt−(p+dmax) + 𝜖t
enduring correlations among the variables.
The approximation frequency in Eq. (13) is denoted by
Long‑run coefficient estimation “k” in the context of Fourier TY causality.
2πkt 2πkt
( ) ( )
After determining the cointegration relationship, the long- σ(t) = σ0 + γ1 sin + γ2 + cos (13)
T T
term elasticities regarding the impact of TEC, GDP, RENC,
TRADE, and GLO on EFP are obtained to employ full modi- The definition of Fourier TY causality with single fre-
fied ordinary least squares (FM-OLS) of Phillips and Hansen quencies (SF) is as follows:
(1990), dynamic OLS (DOLS) of Stock and Watson (1993),
2πkt 2πkt
)( ( )
and canonical cointegrating regression (CCR) of Park (1992) σ(t) = σ0 + γ1 sin + γ2 + cos
methods.
T T (14)
+ 𝛽1 yt−1 + ⋯ + 𝛽p+d yt−(p+d) + 𝜖t

Fourier TY causality

Toda and Yamamoto (1995) (TY), as well as the Fourier
estimation used by Nazlioglu et al. (2016) are used to iden-
tify structural changes across the covered period (Kirikkaleli
and Gokmenoglu 2020). This approach assists in addressing
the VAR model’s shortcomings, including inconsistencies.
Applying the modified VAR model is shown in the follow-
ing equation:
yt = σ(t) + 𝛽1 yt−1 + ⋯ + 𝛽p+dmax yt−(p+dmax) + 𝜖t
where yt signifies variables employed, σ is intercept, β stands
for coefficient matrices, 𝜖t indicates the disturbance error,
and t signifies the time function. Equation (11) describes the
Fourier approximation method used to capture and represent
the structural shifts.
Empirical findings and discussions
Table 2 presents the summary statistics. EFP, GLO, and
GDP are skewed negatively, while the remaining are posi-
tively. In the case of kurtosis, the values of the variables
range from 1 to 3. The variable TRADE exhibits the high-
est level of volatility based on its standard deviation, which
is 5.63%, followed by GLO which is 3.66%. Based on the
(10)
Jarque–Bera statistics, it can be concluded that all variables
are normally distributed.
The results of the ADF and PP tests are displayed in
Table 3, demonstrating that the presence of stationarity is
evident for all variables when the first difference is taken.

Table 2  Summary statistics LnEFP LnGLO LnGDP LnRENC LnTEC LnTRADE

Mean 0.887 85.795 28.526 0.329 24.660 54.844

Median 0.910 87.017 28.585 0.138 24.153 52.807
Maximum 1.068 89.563 28.770 1.354 28.452 64.000
Minimum 0.693 77.228 28.213 0.007 20.417 45.336
Std. dev 0.143 3.663 0.181 0.407 2.454 5.633
Skewness − 0.065 − 0.790 − 0.396 1.257 0.367 0.308
Kurtosis 1.292 2.350 1.915 3.246 2.128 1.875
Jarque–Bera 3.789 3.773 2.332 8.242 1.677 2.127
Probability 0.150 0.152 0.312 0.116 0.432 0.345

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Table 3  Unit root test results Variables ADF PP Remark

Level △ Level △

LnEFP − 1.2785 − 3.9005** − 1.5551 − 3.917** I(1)

LnTEC − 3.4729 − 4.5008*** − 3.4438 − 6.2682*** I(1)
LnGDP − 2.0469 − 3.9991** − 1.8489 − 3.9991** I(1)
LnRENC 1.7244 − 5.6819*** 2.173 − 5.6846*** I(1)
LnTRADE − 3.1501 − 4.9296*** − 2.9017 − 11.3498*** I(1)
LnGLO − 1.1570 − 4.8829*** − 0.8175 − 18.1385*** I(1)

*Levels of significance at 10%

**Levels of significance at 5%
***Levels of significance at 1%

Table 4  Zivot-Andrew’s unit root test Moreover, Table 4 includes the ZA unit root test to
Variables Level 1st diff Order Break year
provide additional support for the identified unit root test
results. Based on the findings of the ZA test, this study has
LnEFP − 3.157 − 7.215*** I(1) 2015 successfully determined the precise years in which structural
LnTEC − 1.321 − 6.315*** I(1) 1993 changes took place for each indicator. Specifically, the years
LnGDP − 8.174 − 5.106** I(1) 2005 of significance are as follows: EFP in 2015, TEC in 1993,
LnRENC − 4.395 − 4.315** I(1) 1990 GDP in 2005, RENC in 1990, TRADE in 2008, and GLO
LnTRADE − 3.119 − 5.327*** I(I) 2008 in 2000. These years correspond to significant occurrences
LnGLO − 4.751 − 6.18*** I(1) 2000 within the economic structure of the UK. Since all the vari-
See the notes for Table 3
ables demonstrate first-order integration, it is appropriate to
explore co-integration relationships.
Table 5 presents the ARDL bounds test finding, which
Table 5  ARDL bounds test results examines the long-run equilibrium relationship among the
Test statistic Value Signif I(0) I(1)
variables analyzed. The F-test result exceeds the upper
critical value of 4.15 at a significance level of 1%, prov-
F-statistic 6.118 10% 2.08 3.00 ing evidence to reject the null hypothesis that there is no
k 5 5% 2.39 3.38 cointegration. To ascertain the validity of the obtained find-
2.5% 2.7 3.73 ings, several tests are conducted, including serial correlation,
1% 3.06 4.15 Glejser, Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey, and Harvey tests for model
Diagnostic test results F. stat Prob specification, as indicated in Table 5.
Serial correlation LM 0.570 0.575 In addition, Fig. 3 shows the outcomes of the residual
Glejser 0.231 0.973 diagnostic test for CUSUM and CUSUM-SQ. The plot dem-
Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey 0.403 0.890 onstrates that the fitted model remains stable within the con-
Harvey 0.687 0.682 fidence interval of the 5% threshold.

CUSUM 5% Significance
CUSUM of Squares 5% Significance
10.0
1.6
7.5
5.0 1.2

2.5
0.8
0.0
-2.5 0.4

-5.0
0.0
-7.5
-10.0 -0.4
04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14

Fig. 3  CUSUM and CUSUM-SQ plots

13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Table 6  Long-run coefficients Table 7  Fourier TY causality test results

Variable FMOLS DOLS CCR​ Causality Wald-stat # of Fourier p-value

LnTEC − 0.018* (0.097) − 0.016** − 0.021** (0.020) EFP → GDP 2.475 2 0.1341
(0.023) GDP → EFP 12.104** 2 0.0221
LnGDP 0.614** (0.028) 1.229* (0.068) 0.557* (0.058) EFP → TEC 3.763 2 0.5251
LnRENC − 0.249** − 0.763* (0.096) − 0.183 (0.239) TEC → EFP 15.743** 2 0.0429
(0.022)
EFP → RENC 4.15 2 0.685
LnTRADE 0.007* (0.073) − 0.011 (0.378) 0.008* (0.080)
RENC → EFP 10.283** 2 0.0493
LnGLO − 0.003 (0.889) − 0.047* (0.075) 0.001 (0.934)
EFP → TRADE 3.721 3 0.7793
C − 16.398* − 29.295* − 15.122**
TRADE → EFP 17.135* 3 0.0793
(0.091) (0.077) (0.040)
EFP → GLO 1.451 3 0.1341
R-squared 0.933 0.999 0.927
GLO → EFP 16.345** 3 0.0221
Values in parentheses “(n)” shows the p-values
See the notes for Table 6
** and * show significance at 5% and %10 levels

Table 6 presents the empirical results of estimation meth-
ods. Specifically, a rise in GDP leads to a corresponding
increase in the EFP of the UK. These results indicate that the
increase in GDP is linked to higher levels of resource con-
sumption, industrial activity, urbanization, and consumption
patterns. All these factors contribute to a larger EFP. This
aligns with the finding of Al-Mulali et al. (2015).
Regarding the role of renewable energy, there exists a
negative correlation with EFP, indicating that the adoption
of renewable technology contributes to the improvement of
ecological conditions. This finding is consistent with the
previous research conducted by Wang and Dong (2022) for
selected OECD countries and Kartal et al. (2023) for the
UK. The authors assert that the utilization of clean energy
technology leads to an improvement in the environmental
situation. The use of energy is an imperative prerequisite
for the sustained expansion and advancement of societies.
However, it is of utmost importance to prioritize the utiliza-
tion of sustainable power technologies to ensure long-term
environmental sustainability. The utilization of these forms
of energy has the potential to foster ecological sustainabil-
ity while simultaneously facilitating economic progress,
so assisting nations in attaining sustainable development.
Hence, the UK government should promote the deployment
of renewables to sustain their clean environmental targets.
With respect to transportation activities, there is a negative
correlation with the EFP of the UK. The result implies that
transportation energy consumption is a significant factor
that is supporting efforts to reduce the EFP in the UK. This
can be primarily attributed to the adoption of sustainable
transportation alternatives, enhanced energy efficiency, and
reduced resource depletion in the UK. This conclusion is in
contrast with the findings revealed by Satrovic et al. (2023)
and Wenlong et al. (2023).
In terms of the impact of trade, there is a positive rela-
tionship with EFP. In other words, trade plays a key role in
contributing to environmental pollution in the UK. It can
be argued that the UK has not actively pursued sustainable
trade practices, instead engaging in trading activities that
have contributed to the exacerbation of environmental foot-
print estimates. This finding aligns with the conclusions of
Li and Haneklaus (2022) and Wang et al. (2023b). Lastly,
the impact of globalization on the environment is negative
and significant. Namely, globalization enhances the envi-
ronmental condition in the UK. This may be attributed to
globalization results in a reduction in the environmentally
harmful items, the emergence of novel manufacturing meth-
ods, the diffusion of technological advancements, and an
enhancement of managerial capabilities. Globalization can
be regarded as a key tool to enhance the environmental con-
ditions in the UK. These results are consistent with prior
research by Kirikkaleli et al. (2021) for Turkey.
The causality findings in Table 7 indicate that GDP plays
a significant role in shaping the EFP of the UK. This sup-
ports the outcomes of Ahmed et al. (2019) for Malaysia and
Ulucak and Khan (2020) for BRICS countries. Furthermore,
the study shows that transportation energy consumption,
renewable energy, trade openness, and globalization have
a granger-causal relationship with the EFP. There is an uni-
directional causality from GDP, TEC, RENC, TRADE, and
GLO to EFP. These findings are in the line with the out-
comes of Alola et al. (2022).
Conclusion and policy recommendations
The UK government has made a commitment to achieve a
“net zero target” with the aim of mitigating GhG by 100%
from 1990 levels by 2050. Achieving this target can result in
the UK’s emissions being balanced or lower than the number
of emissions removed from the environment (BEIS 2022).
In this line, this study considers the various elements that
contribute to a country’s ability to attain its environmental
objectives. Hence, the study aims to examine the role of

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
transportation energy consumption, GDP, renewable energy,
trade, and globalization on ecological footprint over the
period 1990-2020. To this end, this study employs a com-
prehensive set of robust econometric methodologies, such
as ARDL bounds testing and Fourier TY causality analysis.
The ARDL tests results prove that there exists a coin-
tegration among the TEC, GDP, RENC, TRADE, GLO,
and EFP. The long-run estimation results obtained by FM-
OLS, DOLS, and CCR methods support the validity of
the ecological-induced hypothesis. This provides valuable
insights for governmental body in the UK, as all the vari-
ables examined demonstrate a substantial influence on the
EFP. The results show that the transportation energy con-
sumption and the utilization of renewables reduce the deg-
radation of the environment. By increasing the proportion
of renewable energy sources in the energy mix and using
transport-related renewable energy, the UK can improve
environmental condition. Furthermore, GDP and TRADE
degrade the environment. This result suggests that when the
economy expands, there is a propensity for resource con-
sumption levels, energy utilization, and waste production,
hence resulting in a more substantial EFP. Additionally, the
environmental impact of heightened trade flow, character-
ized by the cross-border flow of products and services, is
predominantly negative. The increased economic activities
associated with trade can result in higher resource consump-
tion, energy usage, and emissions, leading to a larger EFP.
Moreover, the causality analysis confirms an unidirectional
causality from GDP, TEC, RENC, TRADE, GLO to EFP.
This shows that GDP is a reliable predictor of the EFP in
the UK. However, the degrading impact of TEC reveals a
statistically negative nexus in the country. This suggests that
efforts to lower energy utilization in transportation, such as
promoting energy-efficient vehicles, alternative fuels, or
improved transportation systems, can lead to detrimental
environmental impacts, such as GhGs and air pollution, and
associated with transportation activities in the UK.
Based on the empirical outcome, this research offers
policy-oriented directions. The policy recommendations
encompass the following: policymakers should implement
strategies and inducements to boost the adoption of clean
technologies in transportation activities, such as electric
vehicles (EVs) and the necessary charging infrastructure.
This can be achieved through subsidies, tax incentives, and
renewable energy technology investments. The UK govern-
ment should support developing and expanding renewable
energy infrastructure, including charging stations for elec-
tric vehicles, hydrogen refueling stations, and clean energy
power generation facilities. This can be done through pub-
lic–private partnerships, grants, and streamlined regulatory
processes. The government should fund research and devel-
opment (R&D) to improve clean energy technologies for
transportation, including battery technologies, hydrogen fuel
cells, and sustainable biofuels. The necessary actions should
be taken for collaboration with automotive manufacturers
and energy companies to accelerate the development and
deployment of sustainable transportation solutions. Foster
partnerships to achieve shared environmental objectives.
This study has some limitations. First, in the UK context,
future studies may consider additional factors that drive EFP.
For example, R&D expenditures, environmental regulations,
institutional quality, or urbanization can play a significant
role on the environment. Second, the scope of the study is
confined to a single country, creating additional research
opportunities. This study focuses exclusively on the United
Kingdom. Future research may analyze other single develop-
ing or developed nation. Third, future studies could use other
recent econometric methods such as Fourier ADL, NARDL
or the Fourier-Granger quantile causality test.
Author contribution B.S.E.: Data curation, Software, Conceptualiza-
tion, Writing – original draft. H.G.: Writing – original draft. S.K.:
Investigation, Writing – review & editing.
Funding No funding has been received.
Data availability The datasets used in this study are available on rea-
sonable request.
Declarations
Ethics approval This original work is only submitted in ESPR.
Consent to participate All authors have a mutual contribution to the
submitted paper.
Consent for publication All authors have a mutual consent to the sub-
mitted paper.
Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.
References
Adams S, Boateng E, Acheampong AO (2020) Transport energy con-
sumption and environmental quality: does urbanization matter?
Sci Total Environ 744:140617. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.s​ citot​ env.​
2020.​140617
Adebayo TS, Alola AA (2023) Drivers of natural gas and renewable
energy utilization in the USA: how about household energy effi-
ciency-energy expenditure and retail electricity prices? Energy
283:129022. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​energy.​2023.​129022
Adebayo TS, Kartal MT, Ağa M, Al-Faryan MAS (2023a) Role of
country risks and renewable energy consumption on environ-
mental quality: evidence from MINT countries. J Environ Manag
327:116884. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jenvm​an.​2022.​116884
Adebayo TS, Ullah S, Kartal MT, Ali K, Pata UK, Ağa M (2023b)
Endorsing sustainable development in BRICS: the role of tech-
nological innovation, renewable energy consumption, and natu-
ral resources in limiting carbon emission. Sci Total Environ
859:160181. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​scito​tenv.​2022.​160181
13

Agu OS, Tabil LG, Mupondwa E (2023) Actualization and adoption
of renewable energy usage in remote communities in Canada by
2050: a review. Energies 16(8):3601. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​
en160​83601
Ahmed Z, Wang Z, Mahmood F, Hafeez M, Ali N (2019) Does glo-
balization increase the ecological footprint? Empirical evidence
from Malaysia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:18565–18582. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11356-​019-​05224-9
Akhayere E, Kartal MT, Adebayo TS, Kavaz D (2023) Role of energy
consumption and trade openness towards environmental sustain-
ability in Turkey. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30(8):21156–21168.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11356-​022-​23639-9
Al-Mulali U, Ozturk I, Lean HH (2015) The influence of economic
growth, urbanization, trade openness, financial development, and
renewable energy on pollution in Europe. Nat Hazards 79:621–
644. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11069-​015-​1865-9
Alola AA, Adebayo TS (2023) Analyzing the waste management, indus-
trial and agriculture greenhouse gas emissions of biomass, fossil fuel,
and metallic ores utilization in Iceland. Sci Total Environ 887:164115
Alola AA, Bekun FV, Sarkodie SA (2019) Dynamic impact of trade
policy, economic growth, fertility rate, renewable and non-renew-
able energy consumption on ecological footprint in Europe. Sci
Total Environ 685:702–709. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​scito​tenv.​
2019.​05.​139
Alola AA, Adebayo TS, Onifade ST (2022) Examining the dynamics of
ecological footprint in China with spectral Granger causality and
quantile-on-quantile approaches. Int J Sust Dev World 29(3):263–
276. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​13504​509.​2021.​19901​58
Alvarado R, Tillaguango B, Dagar V, Ahmad M, Işık C, Méndez P, Toledo
E (2021) Ecological footprint, economic complexity and natural
resources rents in Latin America: empirical evidence using quantile
regressions. J Clean Prod 318:128585. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​
ro.​2021.​128585
Apergis N, Ozturk I (2015) Testing environmental Kuznets curve
hypothesis in Asian countries. Ecol Ind 52:16–22. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​ecoli​nd.​2014.​11.​026
Awosusi AA, Ozdeser H, Seraj M, Abbas S (2023) Can green resource
productivity, renewable energy, and economic globalization drive
the pursuit of carbon neutrality in the top energy transition econo-
mies?. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 1–15. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 080/​
13504​509.​2023.​21920​07
Baloch MA, Ozturk I, Bekun FV, Khan D (2021) Modeling the
dynamic linkage between financial development, energy innova-
tion, and environmental quality: does globalization matter? Bus
Strateg Environ 30(1):176–184. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​bse.​2615
Bamidele R, Ozturk I, Gyamfi BA, Bekun FV (2022) Tourism-induced
pollution emission amidst energy mix: evidence from Nigeria.
Environ Sci Pollut Res 29:19752–19761. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11356-​021-​17233-8
BEIS (2022) https://​www.​gov.​uk/​gover​nment/​stati​stics/​trans​port-​and-​
enviro​ nment-s​ tatis​ tics-2​ 022/t​ ransp​ ort-a​ nd-e​ nviro​ nment-s​ tatis​ tics-​
2022. Accessed 5 July 2023
Bekun FV (2022) Mitigating emissions in India: accounting for the role
of real income, renewable energy consumption and investment in
energy. Int J Energy Econ Policy 12(1):188–192. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​32479/​ijeep.​12652
Bekun FV, Gyamfi BA, Onifade ST, Agboola MO (2021) Beyond the
environmental Kuznets curve in E7 economies: accounting for
the combined impacts of institutional quality and renewables. J
Clean Prod 314:127924. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2021.​
127924
BMRB Social Research (2009) UK renewable energy strategy: analysis
of consultation responses, prepared for DECC by BMRB Social
Research. http://​decc.​gov.​uk/​en/​conte​nt/​cms/​consu​ltati​ons/​cons_​
res/​cons_​res.​aspx. Accessed 1 July 2023
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Chen J, Huang S, Ajaz T (2022) Natural resources management and
technological innovation under EKC framework: a glimmer of
hope for sustainable environment in newly industrialized coun-
tries. Resour Policy 79:103016. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​resou​
rpol.​2022.​103016
Das SK, Roy SK (2019) Effect of variable carbon emission in a multi-
objective transportation-p-facility location problem under neutro-
sophic environment. Comput Ind Eng 132:311–324. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​cie.​2019.​04.​037
Demirel H, Sertel E, Kaya S, Seker DZ (2008) Exploring impacts
of road transportation on the environment: a spatial approach.
Desalination 226(1–3):279–288. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​desal.​
2007.​02.​111
Destek MA, Sinha A (2020) Renewable, non-renewable energy con-
sumption, economic growth, trade openness, and ecological foot-
print: evidence from the organisation for economic Cooperation
and development countries. J Clean Prod 242:118537. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2019.​118537
Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1981) Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregres-
sive time series with a unit root. Econometrica: J Econom Soc
49(4):1057–1072. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​19125​17
Dogan A, Pata UK (2022) The role of ICT, R&D spending and renew-
able energy consumption on environmental quality: testing the
LCC hypothesis for G7 countries. J Clean Prod 380:135038.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2022.​135038
Edenhofer O. (Ed.) (2015) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate
change vol. 3. Cambridge University Press
Emir F, Karlilar S (2023) Application of RALS cointegration test
assessing the role of natural resources and hydropower energy
on ecological footprint in emerging economy. Energy Environ
34(4):764–779. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​09583​05X21​10738​07
Eweade BS, Uzuner G, Akadiri AC, Lasisi TT (2022) Japan energy mix
and economic growth nexus: focus on natural gas consumption.
Energy Environ 0958305X221130460. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​
09583​05X22​11304​60
Gyamfi BA, Adebayo TS, Bekun FV, Agboola MO (2023) Sterling
insights into natural resources intensification, ageing population
and globalization on environmental status in Mediterranean coun-
tries. Energy Environ 34(5):1471–1491. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​
09583​05X22​10832​40
Hussain MM, Pal S, Villanthenkodath MA (2023) Towards sustainable
development: the impact of transport infrastructure expenditure on
the ecological footprint in India. Innov Green Dev 2(2):100037.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​igd.​2023.​100037
IEA (2018) IEA, Paris. https://w ​ ww.i​ ea.o​ rg/r​ eport​ s/w
​ orld-e​ nergy-o​ utlo​
ok-​2022. Accessed 8 July 2023
Jahanger A, Ali M, Balsalobre-Lorente D, Samour A, Joof F, Tursoy
T (2023) Testing the impact of renewable energy and oil price
on carbon emission intensity in China’s transportation sector.
Environ Sci Pollut Res 30:82372–82386. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11356-​023-​28053-3
Karlilar S, Emir F (2023) Exploring the role of coal consumption,
solar, and wind power generation on ecological footprint: evi-
dence from India using Fourier ADL cointegration test. Envi-
ron Sci Pollut Res 30(9):24077–24087. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11356-​022-​23910-z
Karlilar S, Balcilar M, Emir F (2023) Environmental sustainability in
the OECD: the power of digitalization, green innovation, renew-
able energy and financial development. Telecommun Policy
47(6):102568. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​telpol.​2023.​102568
Kartal MT, Pata UK (2023) Impacts of renewable energy, trade globali-
zation, and technological innovation on environmental develop-
ment in China: evidence from various environmental indicators
and novel quantile methods. Environ Dev 100923. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​envdev.​2023.​100923
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Kartal MT, Kılıç Depren S, Kirikkaleli D (2023) Asymmetric effect of
political stability on production-based CO2 emissions in the UK:
long-run evidence from nonlinear ARDL and frequency domain
causality. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30(12):33886–33897. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11356-​022-​24550-z
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.​scito​tenv.​
2020.​138945
Kirikkaleli D, Gokmenoglu KK (2020) Sovereign credit risk and eco-
nomic risk in Turkey: empirical evidence from a wavelet coher-
ence approach. Borsa Istanbul Rev 20(2):144–152. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/​
10.​1016/j.​bir.​2019.​06.​003
Kirikkaleli D, Adebayo TS, Khan Z, Ali S (2021) Does globaliza-
tion matter for the ecological footprint in Turkey? Evidence from
dual adjustment approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(11):14009–
14017. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11356-​020-​11654-7
Krambeck H (2010) Transport energy consumption trends-three
trajectories. Available online: https://​b logs.​world​b ank.​o rg/​
trans​port/​global-​impli​catio​nsof-​trans​port-​sector-​energy-​consu​
mption-​in-​thede​velop​ing-​world-0 (accessed on 15 September,
2023)
Le TH, Chang Y, Park D (2016) Trade openness and environmental
quality: international evidence. Energy Policy 92:45–55. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​enpol.​2016.​01.​030
Lee CC, Zhang J, Hou S (2023) The impact of regional renewable
energy development on environmental sustainability in China.
Resour Policy 80:103245. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​resou​r pol.​
2022.​103245
Li B, Haneklaus N (2022) The role of clean energy, fossil fuel con-
sumption and trade openness for carbon neutrality in China.
Energy Rep 8:1090–1098. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​egyr.​2022.​
02.​092
Liu X, Zhang Y (2023) What drives the decoupling progress of China’s
civil aviation transportation growth from carbon emissions? A
new decomposition analysis. Plos One 18(3):e0282025. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​02820​25
Ma T, Wang Y (2021) Globalization and environment: effects of
international trade on emission intensity reduction of pollutants
causing global and local concerns. J Environ Manag 297:113249.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jenvm​an.​2021.​113249
Milner J, Turner G, Ibbetson A, Colombo PE, Green R, Dangour AD,
... Wilkinson P (2023) Impact on mortality of pathways to net zero
greenhouse gas emissions in England and Wales: a multisectoral
modelling study. Lancet Planet Health 7(2):e128-e136. https://d​ oi.​
org/​10.​1016/​S2542-​5196(22)​00310-2
Mukhtarov S, Aliyev F, Aliyev J, Ajayi R (2023) Renewable energy
consumption and carbon emissions: evidence from an oil-rich
economy. Sustainability 15(1):134. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su150​
10134
Nazlioglu S, Gormus NA, Soytas U (2016) Oil prices and real estate
investment trusts (REITs): gradual-shift causality and volatility
transmission analysis. Energy Econ 60:168–175. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​eneco.​2016.​09.​009
Neves SA, Marques AC, Fuinhas JA (2017) Is energy consumption
in the transport sector hampering both economic growth and the
reduction of CO2 emissions? A disaggregated energy consump-
tion analysis. Transp Policy 59(C):64–70. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​tranp​ol.​2017.​07.​004
Özkan O, Alola AA, Adebayo TS (2023) Environmental benefits of
nonrenewable energy efficiency and renewable energy intensity
in the USA and EU: examining the role of clean technologies.
Sustain Energy Technol Assess 58:103315
Park JY (1992) Canonical cointegrating regressions. Econometrica: J
Econom Soc 119–143. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​29516​79
Pata UK, Samour A (2023) Assessing the role of the insurance market
and renewable energy in the load capacity factor of OECD coun-
tries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30(16):48604–48616. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/​
10.​1007/​s11356-​023-​25747-6
Pata UK, Ahmed Z, Eryilmaz S, Zeren F, Gencer YG (2023a) Analyz-
ing the environmental Kuznets curve for transportation modes
in European countries. Transp Res Part d: Transp Environ
122:103893. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​2023.​103893
Pata UK, Caglar AE, Kartal MT, Depren SK (2023b) Evaluation of the
role of clean energy technologies, human capital, urbanization, and
income on the environmental quality in the United States. J Clean
Prod 402:136802. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2023.​136802
Pata UK, Kartal MT, Dam MM, Kaya F (2023c) Navigating the
impact of renewable energy, trade openness, income, and glo-
balization on load capacity factor: the case of Latin American
and Caribbean (LAC) countries. Int J Energy Res 6828781.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1155/​2023/​68287​81
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.​apene​rgy.​2018.​03.​139
Pesaran MH, Timmermann A (2005) Small sample properties of
forecasts from autoregressive models under structural breaks. J
Econom 129(1–2):183–217. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jecon​om.​
2004.​09.​007
Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to
the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Economet 16(3):289–
326. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​jae.​616
Phillips PC, Hansen BE (1990) Statistical inference in instrumen-
tal variables regression with I (1) processes. Rev Econ Stud
57(1):99–125
Phillips PC, Perron P (1988) Testing for a unit root in time series
regression. Biometrika 75(2):335–346. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1093/​
biomet/​75.2.​335
Quito B, del Río MDLC, Álvarez-García J, Bekun FV (2023) Spati-
otemporal influencing factors of energy efficiency in 43 Euro-
pean countries: a spatial econometric analysis. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 182:113340. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​rser.​2023.​
113340
Raihan A, Tuspekova A (2023) Towards net zero emissions by 2050:
the role of renewable energy, technological innovations, and
forests in New Zealand. J Environ Sci Econ 2(1):1–16
Rehman MA, Fareed Z, Salem S, Kanwal A, Pata UK (2021) Do
diversified export, agriculture, and cleaner energy consumption
induce atmospheric pollution in Asia? Application of method
of moments quantile regression. Front Environ Sci 9:781097.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fenvs.​2021.​781097
Rojas C, Muñiz I, Quintana M, Simon F, Castillo B, de la Fuente H,
... Widener M (2022) Short run “rebound effect” of COVID on
the transport carbon footprint. Cities 131:104039. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​cities.​2022.​104039
Roy A (2023) The impact of foreign direct investment, renewable
and non-renewable energy consumption, and natural resources
on ecological footprint: an Indian perspective. Int J Energy Sect
Manag. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​IJESM-​09-​2022-​0004
Satrovic E, Cetindas A, Akben I, Damrah S (2023) Do natural
resource dependence, economic growth and transport energy
consumption accelerate ecological footprint in the most innova-
tive countries? The moderating role of technological innovation.
Gondwana Res. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​gr.​2023.​04.​008
Shabir M, Gill AR, Ali M (2022) The impact of transport energy
consumption and foreign direct investment on CO2 emissions
in ASEAN countries. Front Energy Res 10. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3389/​fenrg.​2022.​994062
Sharif A, Kartal MT, Bekun FV, Pata UK, Foon CL, Depren SK (2023)
Role of green technology, environmental taxes, and green energy
13

towards sustainable environment: insights from sovereign Nordic
countries by CS-ARDL approach. Gondwana Res 117:194–206.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​gr.​2023.​01.​009
Stock JH, Watson MW (1993) A simple estimator of cointegrating vec-
tors in higher order integrated systems. Econometrica: J Econom
Soc 783–820. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​29517​63
Tánczos K, Török Á (2008) Impact of transportation on environment.
Period Polytech Transp Eng 36(1–2):105–110
Toda HY, Yamamoto T (1995) Statistical inference in vector autore-
gressions with possibly integrated processes. J Econom 66(1–
2):225–250. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​0304-​4076(94)​01616-8
Ulucak R, Khan SUD (2020) Determinants of the ecological footprint: role
of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanization. Sustain Cit-
ies Soc 54:101996. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​scs.​2019.​101996
Wang Q, Dong Z (2022) Technological innovation and renewable
energy consumption: a middle path for trading off financial risk
and carbon emissions. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(22):33046–
33062. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11356-​021-​17915-3
Wang Q, Sun J, Pata UK, Li R, Kartal MT (2023a) Digital economy
and carbon dioxide emissions: examining the role of threshold
variables. Geosci Front 101644. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​gsf.​
2023.​101644
Wang Q, Zhang F, Li R (2023b) Free trade and carbon emissions revis-
ited: the asymmetric impacts of trade diversification and trade
openness. Sustain Dev. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​sd.​2703
Wei S, Wei W, Umut A (2023) Do renewable energy consumption,
technological innovation, and international integration enhance
13
View publication stats
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
environmental sustainability in Brazil? Renew Energy 202:172–
183. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​renene.​2022.​11.​074
Wenlong Z, Nawaz MA, Sibghatullah A, Ullah SE, Chupradit S, Minh Hieu
V (2023) Impact of coal rents, transportation, electricity consump-
tion, and economic globalization on ecological footprint in the USA.
Environ Sci Pollut Res 30(15):43040–44305. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s11356-​022-​20431-7
Yu Y, Xu Y (2023) The roles of carbon trading system and sustain-
able energy strategies in reducing carbon emissions—an empirical
study in China with panel data. Int J Environ Res Public Health
20(8):5549. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ijerp​h2008​5549
Yurtkuran S (2021) The effect of agriculture, renewable energy produc-
tion, and globalization on CO2 emissions in Turkey: a bootstrap
ARDL approach. Renew Energy 171:1236–1245. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​renene.​2021.​03.​009
Zivot E, Andrews DWK (2002) Further evidence on the great crash,
the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat
20(1):25–44. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2139/​ssrn.​963958
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.