SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3

THE EFFECTS OF NATURAL RESOURCE RENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN NIGERIA

Nijerya’da doğal kaynak rantı ve ekonomik büyümenin çevre kalitesi üzerine etkileri

Mehmet Uçar(NEVŞEHİR HACI BEKTAŞ VELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6078-7536
Mücahit Ülger(KIRŞEHİR AHİ EVRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0300-099X
Mert Anıl Atamer(NEVŞEHİR HACI BEKTAŞ VELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1238-9020
Pages
1668–1691
Publication Date
2024-09-29
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results emphasize that Nigeria should develop environmentally friendly policies by taking environmental impacts into account when creating sustainable development strategies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examined the effects of natural resource rent and economic growth on environmental quality in Nigeria during the 1990-2020 period.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Granger causality and impulse-response analysis were carried out using three different environmental quality indicators such as CO2 emissions, ecological footprint and load capacity factor.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results emphasize that Nigeria should develop environmentally friendly policies by taking environmental impacts into account when creating sustainable development strategies.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Doğal kaynak rantı · Ekonomik büyüme · CO2 emisyonu

Abstract

This study examined the effects of natural resource rent and economic growth on environmental quality in Nigeria during the 1990-2020 period. Granger causality and impulse-response analysis were carried out using three different environmental quality indicators such as CO2 emissions, ecological footprint and load capacity factor. According to Granger causality analysis, one-way causality relationships were found from CO2 emissions to natural resource rent, from economic growth to CO2 emissions, and from economic growth to ecological footprint. Impulse-response analysis revealed that shocks to natural resource rent and economic growth variables caused significant reactions in environmental quality indicators. While the amount of CO2 emissions responded to a one standard deviation shock to natural resource rent and economic growth, the ecological footprint responded to these shocks by increasing and decreasing from the first period. While the load capacity factor responded to a one standard deviation shock to natural resource rent by decreasing in the first four periods and then increasing in four periods, the load capacity factor responded to a one standard deviation shock to economic growth by decreasing in the first four periods and then increasing in two periods. These results emphasize that Nigeria should develop environmentally friendly policies by taking environmental impacts into account when creating sustainable development strategies.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Nijerya’da 1990-2020 döneminde doğal kaynak rantı ve ekonomik büyümenin çevresel kalite üzerindeki etkilerini incelemiştir. CO2 emisyonları, ekolojik ayak izi ve yük kapasitesi faktörü gibi üç farklı çevre kalitesi göstergesi kullanılarak Granger nedensellik ve etki-tepki analizleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Granger nedensellik analizine göre, CO2 emisyonlarından doğal kaynak rantına, ekonomik büyümeden CO2 emisyonlarına ve ekonomik büyümeden ekolojik ayak izine doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkileri bulunmuştur. Etki-tepki analizleri, doğal kaynak rantı ve ekonomik büyüme değişkenlerine verilen şokların çevresel kalite göstergelerinde önemli tepkilere yol açtığını ortaya koymuştur. Doğal kaynak rantına ve ekonomik büyümeye verilen bir standart sapmalık şoka CO2 emisyon miktarı artış yönünde tepki verirken, ekolojik ayak izi bu şoklara ilk dönemden itibaren artarak azalış yönünde tepki vermiştir. Doğal kaynak rantına verilen bir standart sapmalık şoka yük kapasitesi faktörü ilk dört dönem azalış sonrasındaki dört dönem artış şeklinde tepki verirken, ekonomik büyümeye verilen bir standart sapmalık şoka yük kapasitesi faktörü ilk dört dönem azalış sonrasındaki iki dönem artış şeklinde tepki vermiştir. Bu sonuçlar, Nijerya’nın sürdürülebilir kalkınma stratejilerini oluştururken, çevresel etkileri dikkate alarak çevre dostu politikalar geliştirmesi gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Uçar, M., Ülger, M., Atamer, M. A. (2024). THE EFFECTS OF NATURAL RESOURCE RENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN NIGERIA. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3, 1668–1691. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1514967

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (78)

  1. Abdulmagid Basheer Agila, T., & Khalifa, W. M., & Saint Akadiri, S., & Adebayo, T. S., & Altuntaş, M. (2022). Determinants of load capacity factor in South Korea: does structural change matter?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(46), 69932-69948.
  2. Acheampong, A. O. (2018). Economic growth, CO2 emissions and energy consumption: what causes what and where?. Energy Economics, 74, 677-692.
  3. Addai, K., & Serener, B., & Kirikkaleli, D. (2022). Empirical analysis of the relationship among urbanization, economic growth and ecological footprint: evidence from Eastern Europe. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(19), 27749-27760.
  4. Adebayo, T. S., & Pata, U. K., & Akadiri, S. S. (2024). A comparison of CO2 emissions, load capacity factor, and ecological footprint for Thailand’s environmental sustainability. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(1), 2203-2223.
  5. Adebayo, T. S., & Ullah, S., & Kartal, M. T., & Ali, K., & Pata, U. K., & Ağa, M. (2023). Endorsing sustainable development in BRICS: The role of technological innovation, renewable energy consumption, and natural resources in limiting carbon emission. Science of the Total Environment, 859, 160181.
  6. Agboola, M. O., & Bekun, F. V., & Joshua, U. (2021). Pathway to environmental sustainability: nexus between economic growth, energy consumption, CO2 emission, oil rent and total natural resources rent in Saudi Arabia. Resources Policy, 74, 102380.
  7. Ahmad, M., & Jiang, P., & Majeed, A., & Umar, M., & Khan, Z., & Muhammad, S. (2020). The dynamic impact of natural resources, technological innovations and economic growth on ecological footprint: an advanced panel data estimation. Resources Policy, 69, 101817.
  8. Ahmed, Z. vd. (2019). Does globalization ıncrease the ecological footprint? Empirical evidence from Malaysia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, (26), 18565–18582.
  9. Ahmed, Z., & Asghar, M. M., & Malik, M. N., & Nawaz, K. (2020). Moving towards a sustainable environment: the dynamic linkage between natural resources, human capital, urbanization, economic growth, and ecological footprint in China. Resources Policy, 67, 101677.
  10. Akadiri, S. S., & Adebayo, T. S., & Riti, J. S., & Awosusi, A. A., & Inusa, E. M. (2022). The effect of financial globalization and natural resource rent on load capacity factor in India: an analysis using the dual adjustment approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(59), 89045-89062.
  11. Ali, Q., & Yaseen, M. R., & Anwar, S., & Makhdum, M. S. A., & Khan, M. T. I. (2021). The impact of tourism, renewable energy, and economic growth on ecological footprint and natural resources: A panel data analysis. Resources Policy, 74, 102365.
  12. 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. Journal of Cleaner Production, 318, 128585.
  13. Apaydın, Ş. (2020). Küreselleşmenin ekolojik ayakizi üzerindeki etkileri: Türkiye örneği. Ekonomi Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(1), 23-42.
  14. Appiah, M., & Li, M., & Naeem, M. A., & Karim, S. (2023). Greening the globe: Uncovering the impact of environmental policy, renewable energy, and innovation on ecological footprint. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 192, 122561.
  15. Arslan, H. M., & Khan, I., & Latif, M. I., & Komal, B., & Chen, S. (2022). Understanding the dynamics of natural resources rents, environmental sustainability, and sustainable economic growth: new insights from China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(39), 58746-58761.
  16. Auty, R. (2002). Sustaining development in mineral economies: The resource curse thesis. Routledge.
  17. Awosusi, A. A., & Kutlay, K., & Altuntaş, M., & Khodjiev, B., & Agyekum, E. B., & Shouran, M., & Kamel, S. (2022). A roadmap toward achieving sustainable environment: evaluating the impact of technological innovation and globalization on load capacity factor. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(6), 3288.
  18. Baloch, M. A., & Zhang, J., & Iqbal, K., & Iqbal, Z. (2019). The effect of financial development on ecological footprint in BRI countries: Evidence from panel data estimation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 6199–6208.
  19. Bekun, F. V., & Alola, A. A., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Toward a sustainable environment: Nexus between CO2 emissions, resource rent, renewable and nonrenewable energy in 16-EU countries. Science of the Total Environment, 657, 1023-1029.
  20. Ben-Salha, O., & Dachraoui, H., & Sebri, M. (2021). Natural resource rents and economic growth in the top resource-abundant countries: a PMG estimation. Resources Policy, 74, 101229.
  21. Bilgili, F., & Koçak, E., & Bulut, Ü. (2016). The dynamic impact of renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions: a revisited Environmental Kuznets Curve approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 54, 838-845.
  22. Bosah, C. P., & Li, S., & Ampofo, G. K. M., & Sangare, I. (2023). A continental and global assessment of the role of energy consumption, total natural resource rent, and economic growth as determinants of carbon emissions. Science of The Total Environment, 892, 164592.
  23. Çakmak, E. E. & Acar, S. (2022). The nexus between economic growth, renewable energy and ecological footprint: An empirical evidence from most oil-producing countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 352, 1-8.
  24. Dao, N. B., & Chu, L. K., & Shahbaz, M., & Tran, T. H. (2024). Natural resources-environmental technology-ecological footprint nexus: Does natural resources rents diversification make a difference?. Journal of Environmental Management, 359, 121036.
  25. Dickey, D.A. & Fuller W.A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with unit root, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427-431.
  26. Ergün, S., & Atay Polat, M. (2015). OECD ülkelerinde CO2 emisyonu, elektrik tüketimi ve büyüme ilişkisi. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi (45), 115-141.
  27. Fang, Z., & Wang, T., & Yang, C. (2024). Nexus among natural resources, environmental sustainability, and political risk: Testing the load capacity factor curve hypothesis. Resources Policy, 90, 104791.
  28. Gelb, A. H. (1988). Oil windfalls: Blessing or curse?. Oxford University Press.
  29. Granger, C. W. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 424-438.
  30. Gülmez, A., & Özdilek, E., & Karakaş, D. N. (2021). Ekonomik büyüme, ticari açıklık ve enerji tüketiminin ekolojik ayak izine etkileri: G7 ülkeleri için panel eşbütünleşme analizi. Econder International Academic Journal, 5(2), 329-342.
  31. Hacıimamoğlu, T., & Cengiz, V. (2024). Are natural resource rents and renewable energy consumption solutions for environmental degradation? Fresh ınsights from a modified ecological footprint model. Sustainability, 16(7), 2736.
  32. Hassan, S. T., & Baloch, M. A., & Mahmood, N., & Zhang, J. (2019). Linking economic growth and ecological footprint through human capital and biocapacity. Sustainable Cities and Society, 47, 101516.
  33. Hassan, S. T., & Xia, E., & Khan, N. H., & Shah, S. M. A. (2019). Economic growth, natural resources, and ecological footprints: evidence from Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 2929-2938.
  34. Huang, S. Z., & Sadiq, M., & Chien, F. (2021). The impact of natural resource rent, financial development, and urbanization on carbon emission. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-13.
  35. Jafari, Y., & Ismail, M. A., & Othman, J., & Mawar, M. Y. (2015). Energy consumption, emissions and economic growth in Bahrain. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 13(4), 297-308.
  36. Jahanger, A., & Ogwu, S. O., & Onwe, J. C., & Awan, A. (2024). The prominence of technological innovation and renewable energy for the ecological sustainability in top SDGs nations: Insights from the load capacity factor. Gondwana Research, 129, 381-397.
  37. Jin, G., & Huang, Z. (2023). Asymmetric impact of renewable electricity consumption and industrialization on environmental sustainability: evidence through the lens of load capacity factor. Renewable Energy, 212, 514-522.
  38. Joo, Y. J., & Kim, C. S., & Yoo, S. H. (2015). Energy consumption, CO2 emission, and economic growth: Evidence from Chile. International Journal Of Green Energy, 12(5), 543-550.
  39. Kang, H., & Li, L., & Feng, J. (2023). Are natural resources a hindrance to ecological footprint? Mineral rents, energy production, and consumption positions. Resources Policy, 86, 104048.
  40. Kasperowicz, R. (2015). Economic growth and CO2 emissions: The ECM analysis. Journal of International Studies, 8(3), 91-98.
  41. Kongbuamai, N., & Zafar, M. W., & Zaidi, S. A. H., & Liu, Y. (2020). Determinants of the ecological footprint in Thailand: the influences of tourism, trade openness, and population density. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 40171-40186.
  42. Li, R., & Hu, S., & Wang, Q. (2024). Reexamining the impact of natural resource rent and corruption control on environmental quality: Evidence from carbon emissions and ecological footprint in 152 countries. In Natural Resources Forum, 48(2), 636-660.
  43. Li, R., & Wang, Q., & Li, L., & Hu, S. (2023). Do natural resource rent and corruption governance reshape the environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint? Evidence from 158 countries. Resources Policy, 85, 103890.
  44. Li, X., & Sun, Y., & Dai, J., & Mehmood, U. (2023). How do natural resources and economic growth impact load capacity factor in selected Next-11 countries? Assessing the role of digitalization and government stability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(36), 85670-85684. Magazzino, C. (2015). Economic growth, CO2 emissions and energy use in Israel. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22(1), 89-97.
  45. Mahmood, H. (2023). The determinants of carbon intensities of different sources of carbon emissions in Saudi Arabia: The asymmetric role of natural resource rent. Economies, 11(11), 276.
  46. Menegak, I., & Angeliki, N. (2011). Growth and renewable energy in Europe: A random effect model with evidence for neutrality hypothesis. Enegy Economics, 33, 257-263.
  47. Mirza, F. M., & Kanwal, A. (2017). Energy consumption, carbon emissions and economic growth in Pakistan: Dynamic causality analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 1233-1240.
  48. Munir, Q., & Lean, H. H., & Smyth, R. (2020). CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in the ASEAN-5 countries: A cross-sectional dependence approach. Energy Economics 85, 1-10.
  49. Nathaniel, S. P., & Adeleye, N., & Adedoyin, F. F. (2021). Natural resource abundance, renewable energy, and ecological footprint linkage in MENA countries. Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 39(2).
  50. Nathaniel, S., & Khan, S. A. R. (2020). The nexus between urbanization, renewable energy, trade, and ecological footprint in ASEAN countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 272, 122709.
  51. Nwani, C., & Adams, S. (2021). Environmental cost of natural resource rents based on production and consumption inventories of carbon emissions: assessing the role of institutional quality. Resources Policy, 74, 102282.
  52. Nwani, C., & Bekun, F. V., & Gyamfi, B. A., & Effiong, E. L., & Alola, A. A. (2023). Toward sustainable use of natural resources: Nexus between resource rents, affluence, energy intensity and carbon emissions in developing and transition economies. In Natural Resources Forum, 47(2), 155-176.
  53. Pao, H. T., & Tsai, C. M. (2010). CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in BRIC countries. Energy policy, 38(12), 7850-7860.
  54. Pata, U. K., & Balsalobre-Lorente, D. (2022). Exploring the impact of tourism and energy consumption on the load capacity factor in Turkey: a novel dynamic ARDL approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(9), 13491-13503.
  55. Pata, U. K., & Isik, C. (2021). Determinants of the load capacity factor in China: a novel dynamic ARDL approach for ecological footprint accounting. Resources Policy, 74, 102313.
  56. Pata, U. K., & Samour, A. (2022). Do renewable and nuclear energy enhance environmental quality in France? A new EKC approach with the load capacity factor. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 149, 104249.
  57. Ragmoun, W. (2023). Ecological footprint, natural resource rent, and industrial production in MENA region: Empirical evidence using the SDM model. Heliyon, 9(9).
  58. Raihan, A., & Voumik, L. C., & Zimon, G., & Sadowska, B., & Rashid, M., & Akter, S. (2024). Prioritising sustainability: how economic growth, energy use, forest area, and globalization impact on greenhouse gas emissions and load capacity in Poland?. International Journal of Sustainable Energy, 43(1), 2361410.
  59. Raza, M. Y., & Tang, S. (2024). Nuclear energy, economic growth and CO2 emissions in Pakistan: Evidence from extended STRIPAT model. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 1-9.
  60. Sachs, J. D., & Warner, A. M. (2001). The curse of natural resources. European Economic Review, 45(4-6), 827-838.
  61. Salahuddin, M., & Alam, K., & Ozturk, I. (2016). The effects of Internet usage and economic growth on CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 1226-1235.
  62. Shen, Y., & Su, Z. W., & Malik, M. Y., & Umar, M., & Khan, Z., & Khan, M. (2021). Does green investment, financial development and natural resources rent limit carbon emissions? A provincial panel analysis of China. Science of the Total Environment, 755, 142538.
  63. Siche, R., & Pereira, L., & Agostinho, F., & Ortega, E. (2010). Convergence of ecological footprint and emergy analysis as a sustainability indicator of countries: Peru as case study. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 15(10), 3182-3192.
  64. Sims, C. A. (1980). Macroeconomics and reality. Econometrica: Journal of The Econometric Society, 1-48.
  65. Sun, Y., & Usman, M., & Radulescu, M., & Pata, U. K., & Balsalobre-Lorente, D. (2024). New insights from the STIPART model on how environmental-related technologies, natural resources and the use of the renewable energy influence load capacity factor. Gondwana Research, 129, 398-411.
  66. Tufail, M., & Song, L., & Adebayo, T. S., & Kirikkaleli, D., & Khan, S. (2021). Do fiscal decentralization and natural resources rent curb carbon emissions? Evidence from developed countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(35), 49179-49190.
  67. Udemba, E. N. (2020). A sustainable study of economic growth and development amidst ecological footprint: New insight from Nigerian Perspective. Science of The Total Environment, 732, 139270.
  68. Ullah, A., & Ahmed, M., & Raza, S. A., & Ali, S. (2021). A threshold approach to sustainable development: nonlinear relationship between renewable energy consumption, natural resource rent, and ecological footprint. Journal Of Environmental Management, 295, 113073.
  69. Ulucak, R., & Khan, S. U. D. (2020). Determinants of the ecological footprint: role of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanization. Sustainable Cities and Society, 54, 101996.
  70. Ulucak, R., & Ozcan, B. (2020). Relationship between energy consumption and environmental sustainability in OECD countries: the role of natural resources rents. Resources Policy, 69, 101803.
  71. Usman, O., & Ozkan, O., & Adeshola, I., & Eweade, B. S. (2024). Analysing the nexus between clean energy expansion, natural resource extraction, and load capacity factor in China: a step towards achieving COP27 targets. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1-22.
  72. Wang, L., & Vo, X. V., & Shahbaz, M., & Ak, A. (2020). Globalization and carbon emissions: is there any role of agriculture value-added, financial development, and natural resource rent in the aftermath of COP21?. Journal of Environmental Management, 268, 110712.
  73. Wang, S., & Zafar, M. W., & Vasbieva, D. G., & Yurtkuran, S. (2024). Economic growth, nuclear energy, renewable energy, and environmental quality: Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve and load capacity curve hypothesis. Gondwana Research, 129, 490-504.
  74. Wang, S. S., & Zhou, D. Q., & Zhou, P., & Wang, Q. W. (2011). CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China: a panel data analysis. Energy Policy, 39, 4870-4875.
  75. Xu, D., & Salem, S., & Awosusi, A. A., & Abdurakhmanova, G., & Altuntaş, M., & Oluwajana, D., & Ojekemi, O. (2022). Load capacity factor and financial globalization in Brazil: the role of renewable energy and urbanization. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 9, 823185.
  76. Yıldız, G. A., & Yıldız, B. (2022). Çevresel sürdürülebilirlik çerçevesinde ekolojik ayak izi ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Türkiye üzerine ampirik bir analiz. Sayıştay Dergisi, 33(126) 473-498.
  77. Zhang, Y., & Khan, I., & Zafar, M. W. (2022). Assessing environmental quality through natural resources, energy resources, and tax revenues. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(59), 89029-89044.
  78. Zhao, W. X., & Samour, A., & Yi, K., & Al-Faryan, M. A. S. (2023). Do technological innovation, natural resources and stock market development promote environmental sustainability? Novel evidence based on the load capacity factor. Resources Policy, 82, 103397.