Abstract
This paper attempts to analyze decoupling between CO2 emissions and income growth in the U.S. through the lens of Environmental Kuznets curve (EKC). Many states in the U.S. have achieved absolute decoupling in recent years, which means that CO2 emissions have decreased while the economy grows. This is partly due to the adoption of low-emission technologies, such as coal to gas switching, nuclear power, and economic restructuring towards a more sustainable economy. We argue that understanding decoupling is crucial to implement effective climate change policies. This study suggests that, after 2015, EKC has taken on the U-shaped form with many states currently located on the negatively sloped portion of the curve. It is not desirable as emissions may eventually begin to increase as the economy grows. To support this claim, we estimate panel fixed effects rolling-window EKCs using two-stage least square with two instrumental variables, unemployment rate and the trend variable. Empirical results show how the inverted U-shaped EKC has transformed into the U-shaped EKC in the U.S. This transformation is probably caused by the recent increases in emissions in transportation sector, strong electricity demand in recent years with cold winter seasons, reversals of eco-friendly energy policies, and manufacturers’ onshoring. Stakeholders should make efforts to transform the U-shaped EKC back to an inverted U-shaped EKC even in cases where absolute decoupling is observed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data used in this study are available from the public domains, for example, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Energy Information Administration, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Notes
The concept of decoupling emissions from income growth involves measuring the ratio of changes in emissions to changes in income, which is referred to as decoupling elasticity. Coupling is defined when 0.8 < ϵ < 1.2, decoupling when 0 < ϵ < 0.8, and strong decoupling when ϵ < 0, where ϵ is decoupling elasticity (Tapio 2005).
CO2 emissions are a major contributor to climate change, leading to rising global temperatures and a range of environmental and societal impacts. To address this issue, the Paris Agreement was established, aiming to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius (UNFCCC, 2015). Net zero emissions are critical to achieving these goals, meaning that any remaining emissions are offset by removing an equivalent amount of CO2 from the atmosphere. Mitigating climate change is essential to safeguarding our planet and future generations, and requires immediate action and commitment from individuals, governments, and businesses worldwide (IEA, 2021).
A process is called absolute decoupling when emissions decrease steadily with economic growth (Heger and Vashold 2021). A process is called relative decoupling when the economy grows faster than the growth rate of emissions (Heger and Vashold 2021). The U.S. has shown absolute decoupling. Note that the actual emissions from the U.S. are still relatively larger than other countries even if the U.S. has achieved absolute decoupling. The U.S. emitted 15.2 (metric tons/person) in 2018. In the same year, Qatar emitted 32.4, Australia 15.5, Korea, 12.2, Russia 11.1, Japan 8.7, Germany 8.6, China 7.4, United Kingdom 5.4, and India 1.8. Top five countries in terms of total emissions are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan (Word Bank CO2 emissions database).
To ensure that we do not have a spurious relationship between CO2 emissions and personal income, we conducted a panel unit root test, Im–Pesaran–Shin (IPS) (Im et al. 2003) with demean for the entire sample. IPS test allow for a heterogeneous coefficient of lagged CO2 emissions Baltagi (2005). We rejected the null hypothesis, all panels contain unit roots, indicating that some panels are stationary. The test statistics are not reported here but available upon request.
The Bai-Perron test (Bai and Perron 1998, 2003) detects unknown structural break points in a time series data. The unit root test proposed in Carrion-i-Silvestre et al. (2009), the GLS-based test, may identify multiple structural breaks using the method similar to the Bai-Perron test for a non-stationary time series data. The GLS-based test reveals that there were structural breaks in 1993 & 2001 assuming two breaks, or 1993, 2001 and 2015 with three breaks. Results of the GLS-based test are not reported here and available upon request.
Studentized residuals for these states are larger than + 2.5 (Alaska and Wyoming) or smaller than − 2.5, which may be considered as the outliers.
References
Aden N (2016) The Roads to Decoupling: 21 Countries Are Reducing Carbon Emissions While Growing GDP, World Resources Institute. Available at https://www.wri.org/insights/roads-decoupling-21-countries-are-reducing-carbon-emissions-while-growing-gdp. Accessed 24 Jan 2024
Aldy J (2005) An Environmental Kuznets Curve Analysis of U.S State-Level Carbon Dioxide Emissions. J Environ Dev 14:48–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496504273514
Alola A, Ozturk I (2021) Mirroring Risk to Investment within the EKC Hypothesis in the United States. J Environ Manage 293:112890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112890
Appiah M (2018) Investigating the Multivariate Granger Causality Between Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in Ghana. Energy Policy 112:198–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.017
Aslan A, Destek M, Okumus I (2018) Bootstrap Rolling Window Estimation Approachto Analysis of the Environment Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: Evidence from. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:2402–2408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0548-3
Aslan A, Destek M, Okumus I (2018) Sectoral Carbon Emissions and Economic Growth in the US: Further Evidence from Rolling Window Estimation Method. J Clean Prod 200:402–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.237
Atasoy B (2017) Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis Across the U.S.: Evidence from Panel Mean Group Estimators. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 77:731–747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.050
Autor D, Dorn D, Hanson G (2013) The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States. Am Econ Rev 103(6):2121–68. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.6.2121
Bai J, Perron P (1998) Estimating and Testing Linear Models with Multiple Structural Changes. Econometrica 66(1):47–78. https://doi.org/10.2307/2998540
Bai J, Perron P (2003) Computation and Analysis of Multiple Structural Change Models. Jou Econometrics 18(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.659
Baker, C. (2020). The Trump administration’s Major Environmental Deregulations. Available at https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/12/15/the-trump-administrations-major-environmental-deregulations/ Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
Baltagi B (2005) Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. John Wiley and Sons
Baschuk B (2022) US Manufacturers Pumped Up about Supply-Chain Reshoring Trend. Bloomberg, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-02/us-manufacturers-pumped-up-about-supply-chain-reshoring-trend?leadSource%20=%20uverify%20wall
Baum, C. (2000). XTTEST3: Stata Module to Compute Modified Wald Statistics for Groupwise Heteroskedasticity, Statistical Software Components. S414801, Department of Economics, Boston College.
BBC (2019). Report: US 2018 CO2 Emissions Saw Biggest Spike in Years. BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46801108 Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
Carr, T., Chewning, E., Doheny, M. and Padhi, A. (2022). Delivering the U.S. Manufacturing Renaissance. McKinsey & Company, https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/ our-insights/delivering-the-us-manufacturing-renaissance.
Carrion-i-Silvestre J, Perron P, Kim D (2009) GLS-based Unit Root Tests with Multiple Structural Breaks under Both the Null and the Alternative Hypotheses. Economet Theor 25(6):1754–1792. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466609990326
Cary M (2020) Have Greenhouse Gas Emissions from US Energy Production Peaked? State Level Evidence from Six Subsectors. Environ Syst Dec 40:125–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-019-09754-y
Cheng B, Lai T (1997) An Investigation of Co-integration and Causality Between Energy Consumption and Economic Activity in Taiwan. Energy Economics 19:435–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-9883(97)01023-2
Clark T, Linzer D (2015) Should I Use Fixed or Random Effects? Polit Sci Res Methods 3(2):399–408. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2014.32
Clark T, McCracken M (2009) Improving Forecast Accuracy by Combining Recursive and Rolling Forecasts. Int Econ Rev 50(2):363–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2354.2009.00533.x
Cuaresma J (2003) Okun’s Law Revisited. Oxford Bull Econ Stat 65(4):439–451. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.t01-1-00056
Destek M, Shahbaz M, Okumus I, Hammoudeh S, Sinha A (2020) The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Carbon Emissions in G-7 Countries: Evidence from Time-varying Parameters with a Long History. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:29100–29117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09189-y
Dogan E, Turkekul B (2016) CO2 Emissions, Real Output, Energy Consumption, Trade, Urbanization and Financial Development: Testing the EKC Hypothesis for the USA. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:1203–1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5323-8
Dogan E, Recep U, Kocak E, Işik C (2020) The Use of Ecological Footprint in Estimating the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis for BRICST by Considering Cross-Section Dependence and Heterogeneity. Sci Total Environ 732:38063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138063
Du X, Shen L, Wong S, Meng C, Yang Z (2021) Night-time Light Data Based Decoupling Relationship Analysis Between Economic Growth and Carbon Emission in 289 Chinese Cities. Sustain Cities Soc 73:103119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103119
EIA (2017). Power Sector Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall Below Transportation Sector Emissions. Available at https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=29612 Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
EIA (2019). Record U.S. Electricity Generation in 2018 Driven by Record Residential, Commercial Sales. Available at https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=38572. Accessed: Jan 24, 2024
EPA (2023). Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data Explorer, Online https://cfpub.epa.gov/ghgdata/inventoryexplorer/. Accessed: Jan 24, 2024
Erol, U. and Yu, E. (1987). On the Causal Relationship Between Energy and Income for Industrialized, The Journal of Energy and Development 13: 113–122. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24807616.
Freitas L, Kaneko S (2011) Decomposing the Decoupling of CO2 Emissions and Economic Growth in Brazil. Ecol Econ 70:1459–1469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.02.011
Gilli M, Marin G, Mazzanti M, Nicolli F (2017) Sustainable Development and Industrial Development: Manufacturing Environmental Performance Technology and Consumption/production Perspectives. J Environ Econ Policy 6:183–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2016.1249413
Granados J, Spash C (2019) Policies to Reduce CO2 Emissions: Fallacies and Evidence from the United States and California. Environ Sci Policy 94:262–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.01.007
Grand M (2016) Carbon Emission Targets and Decoupling Indicators. Ecol Ind 67:649–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.03.042
Greene W (2000) Econnometric Analysis. Prentice Hall
Grossman, G. and Krueger, A. (1991). Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement, Working Paper 3914, National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914.
Grossman G, Krueger A (1995) Economic Growth and the Environment. Q J Econ 110:353–377. https://doi.org/10.3386/w4634
Hällman, L. (2017). The Rolling Window Method: Precisions of Financial Forecasting, PhD thesis, School of Engineering Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology.
Hausman J (1978) Specification Tests in Econometrics. Econometrica 46:1251–1271. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913827
Heger, M. and Vashold, L. (2021). Decoupling Economic Growth from Emissions in the Middle East and North Africag. Available at https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2021/07/22/decoupling-economic-growth-from-emissions-in-the-middle-east-and-north-africa/ Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
Im Y, Pesaran M, Shin Y (2003) Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panel. J Econ 115:53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
Inglesi-Lotz R (2016) The Impact of Renewable Energy Consumption to Economic Growth: A Panel Data Application. Energy Economics 53:58–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.01.003
International Energy Agency (IEA) (2021). Net Zero by 2050 A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector. https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050. Accessed: Jan 24, 2024
IPCC (2021). Summary for Policymakers, Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press. Available at https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Citation.pdf . Accessed: Jan 24, 2023.
Irfan, U. (2019). After Years of Decline, US Carbon Emissions are Rising Again. Available at https://www.vox.com/2019/1/8/18174082/us-carbon-emissions-2018 Accessed: Jan 24, 2023.
Işik C, Kasımatı E, Ongan S (2017) Analyzing the Causalities Between Economic Growth, Financial Development, International Trade, Tourism Expenditure and/on the CO2 Emissions in Greece. Energy Sources Part B 12:665–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2016.1263251
Işik C, Ongan S, Özdemir D (2019a) Testing the EKC Hypothesis for Ten US States: An Application of Heterogeneous Panel Estimation Method. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:10846–10853. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04514-6
Işik C, Ongan S, Özdemir D (2019b) The Economic Growth/Development and Environmental Degradation: Evidence from the US State-level EKC Hypothesis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:30772–30781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06276-7
Işik C, Pata UK, Ongan S, Radulescu M, Adedoyin F, Bayraktaroğlu E, Aydin S, Ongan A (2020) An Evaluation of the Tourism-induced Environmental Kuznets Curve (T-EKC) Hypothesis: Evidence from G7 Countries. Sustainability 12:9150. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219150
Işik C, Ongan S, Ozdemir D, Ahmad M, Irfan M, Alvarado R, Ongan A (2021) The Increases and Decreases of the Environment Kuznets Curve (EKC) for 8 OECD Countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:8535–28543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12637-y
Işik C, Ongan S, Bulut U, Karakaya S, Irfan M, Alvarado R (2022) Reinvestigating the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis by a composite model constructed on the Armey curve hypothesis with government spending for the US States. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29:16472–16483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16720-2
Kaika D, Zervas E (2016) The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Theory Part A: Concept, Causes and the CO2 Emissions Case. Energy Policy 62:1392–1402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.131
Koirala B, Mysami R (2015) Investigating the Effect of Forest Per Capita on Explaining the EKC Hypothesis for CO2 in the US. J Environ Econ Policy 4:304–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2015.1010456
Kraft J, Kraft A (1978) On the Relationship Between Energy and GNP. J Energ Dev 3:401–403 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/24806805)
Lin C-Y, Liscow Z (2013) Endogeneity in the Environmental Kuznets Curve: An Instrumental Variables Approach. Am J Agr Econ 95:268–274. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aas050
Loo B, Banister D (2016) Decoupling Transport from Economic Growth: Extending the Debate to Include Environmental and Social Externalities. J Transp Geogr 57:134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.10.006
OECD (2001). OECD Environmental Strategy for the First Decade of the 21st. Century: Adopted by OECD Environment Ministers. Available at https://www.oecd.org/env/environment-meetings-at-ministerial-level.htm, Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
OECD (2002). Indicators to Measure Decoupling of Environmental Pressure from Economic Growth. Sustainable Development. SG/SD (2002) 1/Final, Available at https://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?doclanguage=en& https://one.oecd.org/document/sg/sd(2002)1/final/en/pdf, Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
Okun, A. M. (1962). Potential GNP: Its Measurement and Significance, pp. 89–104. In Proceedings of the Business and Economic Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association. Alexandria, VA. American Statistical Association.
Ongan S, Işik C, Ozdemir D (2020) Economic Growth and Environmental Degradation: Evidence from the US Case Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis with Application of Decomposition. J Environ Econ Policy 12:14–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2020.1756419
Ongan S, Işik C, Bulut U, Karakaya S, Alvarado R, Irfan M, Ahmad M, Rehman A, Hussain I (2022) Retesting the EKC Hypothesis Through Transmission of the ARMEY Curve Model: An Alternative Composite Model Approach with Theory and Policy Implications for NAFTA Countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29:46587–46599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-19106-0
Ouyang Y, Li P (2018) On the Nexus of Financial Development, Economic Growth, and Energy Consumption in China: New Perspective from a GMM Panel VAR Approach. Energy Economics 71:238–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.02.015
Pata U (2021) Renewable and Non-renewable Energy Consumption, Economic Complexity, CO2 Emissions, and Ecological Footprint in the USA: Testing the EKC Hypothesis with a Structural Break. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:846–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10446-3
Peter G, Hertwich E (2007) Post-Kyoto Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Production versus Consumption. Clim Change 86:51–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-007-9280-1
Pierce J, Schott P (2016) The Surprisingly Swift Decline of US Manufacturing Employment. Am Econ Rev 107:632–662
Prachowny M (1993) Okun’s Law: Theoretical Foundations and Revised Estimates. Rev Econ Stat 75:331–334. https://doi.org/10.2307/2109440
Rossi B, Inoue A (2012) Out-of-Sample Forecast Tests Robust to the Choice of Window Size. J Bus Econ Stat 30(3):432–453
Saha, D. and Muro, M. (2016). Growth, Carbon, and Trump: State Progress and Drift on Eco- nomic Growth and Emissions Decoupling. Available at https://www.brookings.edu/research/growth-carbon-and-trump-state-progress-and-drift-on-economic-growth-and-emissions-decouplin Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
Sepeda-Miller, K. (2020). Fact-Check: Have Carbon Emissions Increased Under Trump? Better Government Association, https://www.bettergov.org/news/fact-check-have-carbon-emissions-increased-under-trump/, Accessed: Jan 24, 2024.
Shahbaz M, Sinha A (2018) Environmental Kuznets Curve for CO2 Emission: A Literature Survey. Journal of Economic Studies 46:134–144 (https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/86281/)
Shahbaz M, Loganathan N, Zeshan M, Zaman K (2015) Does Renewable Energy Consumption Add in Economic Growth? An Application of Auto-Regressive Distributed Lag Model in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 44:576–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.017
Shahbaz M, Solarin S, Hammoudeh S, Shahzad S (2017) Bounds Testing Approach to Analyzing the Environment Kuznets Curve Hypothesis with Structural Beaks: the Role of Biomass Energy Consumption in the United States. Energy Economics 68:548–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.10.004
Shapiro J, Walker R (2018) Why Is Pollution from US Manufacturing Declining? The Roles of Environmental Regulation, Productivity, and Trade. Ame Econ Rev 108:3814–3854 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26562919)
Shuai C, Chen X, Wu Y, Zhang Y, Tan Y (2019) A Three-step Strategy for DecouplingEconomic Growth from Carbon Emission: Empirical Evidences from 133 Countries. Sci Total Environ 646:524–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.045
Stern D (2004) Environmental Kuznets Curve. Encyclopedia of Energy 2:517–525
Stern D, Common M, Barbier E (1996) Economic Growth and Environmental Degradation: The Environmental Kuznets Curve and Sustainable Development. World Dev 24:1151–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(96)00032-0
Stern, D. (1998). Progress on the Environmental Kuznets Curve?, Environment and Development Economics 3(2): 173–196. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44379213.
Stock J, Watson M (1988) Variable Trends in Economic Time Series. Journal of Economic Perspectives 2:147–174. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.2.3.147
Tapio P (2005) Towards a Theory of Decoupling: Degrees of Decoupling in the EU and the Case of Road Traffic in Finland Between 1970 and 2001. Transp Policy 12:137–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.001
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2015). The Paris Agreement. New York, https://unfccc.int/documents/184656. Accessed: Jan 24, 2023.
Wang Q, Li L (2021) The Effects of Population Aging. Life Expectancy, Unemployment Rate, Population Density, per Capita GDP, Urbanization on per Capita Carbon Emissions, Sustainable Production and Consumption 28:760–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.06.029
Wang Q, Su M (2019) The Effects of Urbanization and Industrialization on Decoupling Economic Growth from Carbon Emission – A Case Study of China. Sustain Cities Soc 51:101758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101758
Wang Z, Yang L (2015) Delinking Indicators on Regional Industry Development and Carbon Emissions: Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Economic Band Case. Ecol Ind 48:41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.035
Wooldridge, J. M. (2012). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, South-Western Cengage Learning.
Wu Y, Zhu Q, Zhu B (2018) Comparisons of Decoupling Trends of Global Economic Growth and Energy Consumption Between Developed and Developing Countries. Energy Policy 116:30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.01.047
Yu, E. and Hwang, B.-K. (1978). The Relationship Between Energy and GNP: Further Results, The Journal of Energy and Development 3: 401–403. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24806805.
Zivot E, Wang J (2006) Modeling Financial Time Series with S-Plus. Springer
Funding
The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Zuyi Wang and Man-Keun Kim. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Zuyi Wang and Man-Keun Kim. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing of interest
We declare that we have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this manuscript.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
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.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, Z., Kim, MK. Decoupling of CO2 emissions and income in the U.S.: A new look from EKC. Climatic Change 177, 52 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-024-03706-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-024-03706-5
Keywords
- CO2 emissions
- Environmental Kuznets curve (EKC)
- Decoupling
- Income growth
- Panel model
- Rolling-window analysis