KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 17 Sayı: 49

Yeşil Finans Çevresel Bozulmayı Azaltır Mı? Orta-Üst ve Yüksek Gelirli Ülkelerden Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Üzerine Bulgular

Does Green Finance Mitigate Environmental Degradation? Evidence on the Environmental Kuznets Curve from Upper-Middle and High-Income Countries

Burcu Bahçeci Başkurt(IZMIR KATIP CELEBI UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-2552-3129
Sayfa
271–295
Yayın Tarihi
2026-02-28
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bulgular Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezine karışık destek sunmakta, yüksek gelirli ülkelerde güçlü, üst-orta gelirli ülkelerde sınırlı kanıt göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Bu araştırma, 2014-2021 döneminde 36 üst-orta ve yüksek gelirli ülkenin panel verisini kullanarak yeşil finansman ve insani kalkınmanın çevresel bozulma üzerindeki etkilerini incelemektedir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Ekonomik büyüme ile çevresel kalite arasındaki doğrusal olmayan ilişkiyi değerlendirmek için Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezi test edilmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bulgular Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezine karışık destek sunmakta, yüksek gelirli ülkelerde güçlü, üst-orta gelirli ülkelerde sınırlı kanıt göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:2014-2021 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Yeşil Finans · Beşeri Gelişim · Çevresel Bozulma

Özet

Bu araştırma, 2014-2021 döneminde 36 üst-orta ve yüksek gelirli ülkenin panel verisini kullanarak yeşil finansman ve insani kalkınmanın çevresel bozulma üzerindeki etkilerini incelemektedir. Çevresel bozulma ekolojik ayak izi ve kişi başına CO₂ emisyonları ile ölçülmektedir. Temel değişkenler yeşil finansman, İnsani Kalkınma Endeksi, gayri safi yurtiçi hasıla, nüfus yoğunluğu, doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar ve doğal kaynak rantlarını kapsamaktadır. Ekonomik büyüme ile çevresel kalite arasındaki doğrusal olmayan ilişkiyi değerlendirmek için Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezi test edilmiştir. Sabit etkili panel regresyon modelleri, Driscoll-Kraay standart hataları ve wild bootstrap yöntemleri güçlü çıkarım sağlamaktadır. Bulgular Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezine karışık destek sunmakta, yüksek gelirli ülkelerde güçlü, üst-orta gelirli ülkelerde sınırlı kanıt göstermektedir. Yeşil finansman ve insani kalkınma çevresel bozulmayı önemli ölçüde azaltmakta, yeşil finansman tüm yaklaşımlar ve gelir gruplarında en tutarlı politika aracı olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Doğal kaynak rantları çevresel bozulmayla marjinal pozitif ilişki gösterirken, doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar ve nüfus yoğunluğu sınırlı etki göstermektedir. Çalışma, yeşil finansal piyasaların genişletilmesinin çevresel iyileşme için en güvenilir strateji olduğunu, etkili uygulama için gelir farklılaştırılmış yaklaşımlar gerektirdiğini önermektedir. Bu bulgular, çevresel koruma ile ekonomik kalkınmayı dengelemeye çalışan ülkeler için güçlü politika rehberliği sunmaktadır.

Abstract

The study examines the effects of green finance and human development on environmental degradation using panel data of 36 upper-middle and high-income countries from 2014 to 2021. Environmental degradation is measured through ecological footprint and per capita CO₂ emissions. Key variables comprise green finance, Human Development Index, gross domestic product, population density, foreign direct investments, and natural resource rents. The Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis is tested to assess the non-linear relationship between economic growth and environmental quality. Panel regression models with fixed effects, Driscoll-Kraay standard errors, and wild bootstrap methods ensure robust inference. Findings provide mixed support for the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis, with stronger evidence in high-income countries and limited support in upper-middle-income countries. Both green finance and human development significantly reduce environmental degradation, with green finance emerging as the most consistent policy instrument across all approaches and income groups. Natural resource rents show marginal positive associations with environmental degradation, while foreign direct investments and population density demonstrate limited effects. The study suggests that expanding green financial markets represents the most reliable strategy for environmental improvement, with income-differentiated approaches required for effective implementation. These findings offer robust policy guidance for countries seeking to balance environmental preservation with economic development.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Başkurt, B. B. (2026). Yeşil Finans Çevresel Bozulmayı Azaltır Mı? Orta-Üst ve Yüksek Gelirli Ülkelerden Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Üzerine Bulgular. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 49, 271–295. https://doi.org/10.21076/vizyoner.1671936

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (94)

  1. Abbasi, M. A., Nosheen, M., & Rahman, H. U. (2023). An approach to the pollution haven and pollution halo hypotheses in Asian countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(49), 49270–49289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25548-x
  2. Abbass, K., Song, H., Mushtaq, Z., & Khan, F. (2022). Does technology innovation matter for environmental pollution? Testing the pollution halo/haven hypothesis for Asian countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(64), 89753–89771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21929-w
  3. Abid, M. (2016). Impact of economic, financial, and institutional factors on CO2 emissions: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa economies. Utilities Policy, 41, 85-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2016.06.009
  4. Akbulut, H., & Yereli, A. B. (2023). A new look at the pollution halo hypothesis: The role of environmental policy stringency. Estudios de economía, 50(1), 31-54. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/285102
  5. Anser, M. K., Usman, M., Godil, D. I., Shabbir, M. S., Sharif, A., Tabash, M. I., & Lopez, L. B. (2021). Does globalization affect the green economy and environment? The relationship between energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions, and economic growth. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(37), 51105-51118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14243-4
  6. Arogundade, S., Biyase, M., & Hassan, A. S. (2022). Spatial impact of foreign direct investment on ecological footprint in Africa. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 51589–51608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18831-w
  7. Bulut, Ü., Ucler, G., & Inglesi-Lotz, R. (2021). Does the pollution haven hypothesis prevail in Turkey? Empirical evidence from nonlinear smooth transition models. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 38563–38572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13476-7
  8. Cameron, A.C., Gelbach, J.B., & Miller, D.L. (2008). Bootstrap-based improvements for inference with clustered errors. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(3), 414-427. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.90.3.414
  9. Chandran, V. G. R., & Tang, C. F. (2013). The impacts of transport energy consumption, foreign direct investment and income on CO2 emissions in ASEAN-5 economies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 24, 445–453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.054
  10. Chang, T., Gupta, R., Inglesi-Lotz, R., & Simo-Kengne, B. (2022). Green bonds and renewable energy consumption: Evidence from emerging markets. Energy Economics, 104, 105664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106356
  11. Chirilus, A., & Costea, A. (2023). The effect of FDI on environmental degradation in Romania: Testing the pollution haven hypothesis. Sustainability, 15(13), 10733. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310733
  12. Climate Bonds Initiative. (2023). Sustainable debt: Global state of the market 2022. Retrieved March 17, 2024 from https://www.climatebonds.net/resources/reports/global-state-market-report-2022
  13. Cole, M. A., & Elliott, R. J. (2005). FDI and the capital intensity of “dirty” sectors: A missing piece of the pollution haven puzzle. Review of Development Economics, 9(4), 530-548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9361.2005.00292.x
  14. Dasgupta, S., Laplante, B., Wang, H., & Wheeler, D. (2002). Confronting the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(1), 147-168. https://doi.org/10.1257/0895330027157
  15. Destek, M. A., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Investigation of environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint: The role of energy and financial development. Science of the Total Environment, 650, 2483-2489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.017
  16. Dietz, T., & Rosa, E. A. (1997). Effects of population and affluence on CO₂ emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94(1), 175-179. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.1.175
  17. Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecological Economics, 49(4), 431-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.011
  18. Driscoll, J. C., & Kraay, A. C. (1998). Consistent covariance matrix estimation with spatially dependent panel data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(4), 549-560. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465398557825
  19. Du, Y., & Wang, W. (2023). The role of green financing, agriculture development, geopolitical risk, and natural resource on environmental pollution in China. Resources Policy, 82, 103440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103440
  20. Eskeland, G. S., & Harrison, A. E. (2003). Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis. Journal of Development Economics, 70(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(02)00084-6
  21. Feng, Y., Xiao, Z., Zhou, J., & Ni, G. (2023). Asymmetrically examining the impact of green finance and renewable energy consumption on environmental degradation and renewable energy investment: The impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the Chinese economy. Energy Reports, 9, 5458-5472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.04.361
  22. Flammer, C. (2021). Corporate green bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 499-516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.01.010
  23. Friede, G., Busch, T., & Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: Aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5(4), 210-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917
  24. Galeotti, M., Lanza, A., & Pauli, F. (2006). Reassessing the environmental Kuznets curve for CO₂ emissions: A robustness exercise. Ecological Economics, 57(1), 152-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.031
  25. Global Footprint Network. (2024). National footprint and biocapacity accounts, 2023 edition. Retrieved November 26, 2024 from https://data.footprintnetwork.org
  26. Greene, W. H. (2012). Econometric analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
  27. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353-377. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118443
  28. Gökmenoğlu, K., & Taşpınar, N. (2016). The relationship between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth and FDI: The case of Turkey. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 25(5), 706–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2015.1119876
  29. Guzel, A. E., & Okumus, İ. (2020). Revisiting the pollution haven hypothesis in ASEAN-5 countries: New insights from panel data analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 18157–18167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08317-y
  30. Hammoudeh, S., Ajmi, A. N., & Mokni, K. (2020). Relationship between green bonds and financial and environmental variables: A novel time-varying causality. Energy Economics, 92, 104941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104941
  31. Hoechle, D. (2007). Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence. Stata Journal, 7(3), 281-312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0700700301
  32. Holtbrügge, D., & Raghavan, N. (2025). Environmental effects of foreign direct investment in India: Pollution haven or pollution halo? Critical Perspectives on International Business, 21(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-06-2024-0064
  33. IPCC. (2023). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
  34. Jones, C. M., & Kammen, D. M. (2011). Quantifying Carbon Footprint Reduction Opportunities for US Households and Communities. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(9), 4088-4095. https://doi.org/10.1021/es102221h
  35. Jorgenson, A. K., & Burns, T. J. (2007). The political-economic causes of change in the ecological footprints of nations, 1991–2001: A quantitative investigation. Social Science Research, 36(2), 834-853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2006.06.003
  36. Kaika, D., & Zervas, E. (2013). 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
  37. Khan, A., Chenggang, Y., Yi, W. X., Hussain, J., Sicen, L., & Bano, S. (2021). Examining the pollution haven, and environmental Kuznets hypothesis for ecological footprints: An econometric analysis of China, India, and Pakistan. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 26(3), 462–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/13547860.2020.1761739
  38. Kivyiro, P., & Arminen, H. (2014). Carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, and foreign direct investment: Causality analysis for Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy, 74, 595–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.07.025
  39. Le Billon, P. (2001). The political ecology of war: Natural resources and armed conflicts. Political Geography, 20(5), 561-584. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(01)00015-4
  40. Lee, C. C., Wang, F., Lou, R., & Wang, K. (2023). How does green finance drive the decarbonization of the economy? Empirical evidence from China. Renewable Energy, 204, 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.01.058
  41. Liu, H., & Kim, H. (2018). Ecological footprint, foreign direct investment, and gross domestic production: Evidence of Belt & Road Initiative countries. Sustainability, 10(10), 3527. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103527
  42. Liu, P., Rahman, Z. U., Jóźwik, B., & Doğan, M. (2024). Determining the environmental effect of Chinese FDI on the Belt and Road countries' CO2 emissions: An EKC-based assessment in the context of pollution haven and halo hypotheses. Environmental Sciences Europe, 36, 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-024-00866-0
  43. Liu, Z., He, C., Zhou, Y., & Wu, J. (2014). How much of the world’s land has been urbanized, really? A hierarchical framework for avoiding confusion. Landscape ecology, 29, 763-771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0034-y
  44. MacKinnon, J. G., & Webb, M. D. (2018). The wild bootstrap for few (treated) clusters. The Econometrics Journal, 21(2), 114-135. https://doi.org/10.1111/ectj.12107
  45. Mehlum, H., Moene, K., & Torvik, R. (2006). Institutions and the resource curse. Economic Journal, 116(508), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01045.x
  46. Meo, M. S., & Abd Karim, M. Z. (2022). The role of green finance in reducing CO2 emissions: An empirical analysis. Borsa Istanbul Review, 22(1), 169-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2021.03.002.
  47. Mehboob, M. Y., Ma, B., Mehboob, M. B., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Does green finance reduce environmental degradation? The role of green innovation, environmental tax, and geopolitical risk in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 435, 140353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140353
  48. Mert, M., & Çağlar, A. E. (2020). Testing pollution haven and pollution halo hypotheses for Turkey: A new perspective. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 32933–32943. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09469-7
  49. Mert, M., & Bölük, G. (2016). Do foreign direct investment and renewable energy consumption affect CO2 emissions? New evidence from a panel ARDL approach to Kyoto Annex countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23, 21669–21681. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7413-7
  50. Mikayilov, J. I., Galeotti, M., & Hasanov, F. J. (2018). The impact of economic growth on CO2 emissions in Azerbaijan. Journal of cleaner production, 197, 1558-1572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.269
  51. Murshed, M., Haseeb, M., & Alam, M. S. (2022). The environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for carbon and ecological footprints in South Asia: the role of renewable energy. GeoJournal, 87(3), 2345-2372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10370-6
  52. Nathaniel, S., Aguegboh, E., Iheonu, C., Sharma, G., & Shah, M. (2020). Energy consumption, FDI, and urbanization linkage in coastal Mediterranean countries: Re-assessing the pollution haven hypothesis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 35474–35487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09521-6
  53. OECD. (2022). OECD Guidance on Transition Finance. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/publications/oecd-guidance-on-transition-finance-7c68a1ee-en.htm
  54. Ozcelik, O., Bardakci, H., Barut, A., Usman, M., & Das, N. (2024). Testing the validity of pollution haven and pollution halo hypotheses in BRICMT countries by Fourier Bootstrap AARDL method and Fourier Bootstrap Toda-Yamamoto causality approach. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 17, 1491–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-024-01522-5
  55. Ozkan, O., Coban, M. N., Iortile, I. B., & Usman, O. (2023). Reconsidering the environmental Kuznets curve, pollution haven, and halo hypotheses with carbon efficiency in China: A dynamic ARDL simulations approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 68163–68176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26671-5
  56. Padhan, L., & Bhat, S. (2024). Pollution haven or pollution halo in the context of emerging economies: A two-step system GMM approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05616-z
  57. Pao, H. T., & Tsai, C. M. (2011). Multivariate Granger causality between CO₂ emissions, energy consumption, FDI and GDP: Evidence from a panel of BRIC countries. Energy, 36(1), 685-693.
  58. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
  59. Polloni-Silva, E., Ferraz, D., Camioto, F. d. C., Rebelatto, D. A. d. N., & Moralles, H. F. (2021). Environmental Kuznets Curve and the pollution-halo/haven hypotheses: An investigation in Brazilian municipalities. Sustainability, 13(8), 4114. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084114
  60. Rasoulinezhad, E., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2022). Role of green finance in improving energy efficiency and renewable energy development. Energy efficiency, 15(2), 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-022-10021-4
  61. Roodman, D., MacKinnon, J. G., Nielsen, M. Ø., & Webb, M. D. (2019). Fast and wild: Bootstrap inference in Stata using boottest. The Stata Journal, 19(1), 4-60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X19830877
  62. Saboori, B., Sulaiman, J., & Mohd, S. (2012). Economic growth and CO₂ emissions in Malaysia: A cointegration analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Energy Policy, 51, 184-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.065
  63. Sachs, J., Lafortune, G., Kroll, C., Fuller, G., & Woelm, F. (2022). Sustainable Development Report 2022. Cambridge University Press.
  64. Sachs, J. D., & Warner, A. M. (2001). The curse of natural resources. European Economic Review, 45(4-6), 827-838. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00125-8
  65. Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Ozturk, I. (2019). The effects of electricity consumption, economic growth, financial development and foreign direct investment on CO₂ emissions in Kuwait. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 2002-2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.009
  66. Saqib, N., Ozturk, I., Usman, M., Sharif, A., & Razzaq, A. (2023). Pollution Haven or Halo? How European countries leverage FDI, energy, and human capital to alleviate their ecological footprint. Gondwana Research, 116, 136–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2022.12.018
  67. Sarkodie, S. A., & Adams, S. (2020). Renewable energy, nuclear energy, and environmental pollution: Accounting for political institutional quality in South Africa. Science of the Total Environment, 711, 135178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.320
  68. Sarkodie, S. A., & Strezov, V. (2019). A review on Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis using bibliometric and meta-analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 649, 128-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.276
  69. Seker, F., Ertuğrul, H. M., & Çetin, M. (2015). The impact of foreign direct investment on environmental quality: A bounds testing and causality analysis for Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.118
  70. Shafik, N. (1994). Economic development and environmental quality: An econometric analysis. Oxford Economic Papers, 46, 757-773. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/46.Supplement_1.757
  71. Sharif, A., Sofuoglu, E., Kocak, S., & Anwar, A. (2024). Can green finance and energy provide a glimmer of hope towards sustainable environment in the midst of chaos? Evidence from Malaysia. Renewable Energy, 223, 119982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2024.119982
  72. Solarin, S. A., Al-Mulali, U., Musah, I., & Ozturk, I. (2017). Investigating the pollution haven hypothesis in Ghana: An empirical investigation. Energy, 124, 706–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.089
  73. Stern, D. I. (2004). The rise and fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419-1439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.03.004
  74. Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., & Yoshino, N. (2019). The way to induce private participation in green finance and investment. Finance Research Letters, 31, 98-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2019.04.016
  75. Tang, C. F., & Tan, B. W. (2015). The impact of energy consumption, income and foreign direct investment on carbon dioxide emissions in Vietnam. Energy, 79, 447–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.11.033
  76. Tolliver, C., Keeley, A. R., & Managi, S. (2020). Policy targets behind green bonds for renewable energy: Do climate commitments matter?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 157, 120051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120051
  77. Uche, E., Omoke, P. C., Silva-Opuala, C., & Al-Faryan, M. A. S. (2023). Re-estimating the pollution haven–halo hypotheses for Brazil via a machine learning procedure. Journal of International Development, 36(2), 1274-1292. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3868
  78. Udeagha, M. C., & Ngepah, N. (2023). The drivers of environmental sustainability in BRICS economies: do green finance and fintech matter?. World Development Sustainability, 3, 100096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wds.2023.100096
  79. Udemba, E. N. (2020). Ecological implication of offshored economic activities in Turkey: Foreign direct investment perspective. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 38015–38028. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09629-9
  80. Udemba, E. N. (2021). Nexus of ecological footprint and foreign direct investment pattern in carbon neutrality: New insight for United Arab Emirates (UAE). Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 34367–34385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12678-3
  81. Wang, K. H., Zhao, Y. X., Jiang, C. F., & Li, Z. Z. (2022). Does green finance inspire sustainable development? Evidence from a global perspective. Economic Analysis and Policy, 75, 412-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2022.06.002
  82. Wang, X., & Liu, H. (2024). Effect of foreign direct investment on firms’ pollution intensity: Evidence from a natural experiment in China. Environment and Development Economics, 29(3), 338–357. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X2400010X
  83. Wang, X., Zhao, H., & Bi, K. (2021). The measurement of green finance index and the development forecast of green finance in China. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 28, 263-285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10651-021-00483-7
  84. Wang, Z., Peng, M. Y. P., Anser, M. K., & Chen, Z. (2023). Research on the impact of green finance and renewable energy on energy efficiency: the case study E− 7 economies. Renewable Energy, 205, 166-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.12.077
  85. World Bank. (2024). World development indicators. Retrieved March 17, 2024 from https://databank.worldbank.org/
  86. Wu, C.F.J. (1986). Jackknife, bootstrap and other resampling methods in regression analysis. Annals of Statistics, 14(4), 1261-1350. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176350142
  87. Yılancı, V., Cutcu, I., Çayır, B., & Sağlam, M. S. (2023). Pollution haven or pollution halo in the fishing footprint: Evidence from Indonesia. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 188, 114626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.114626
  88. Zafar, M. W., Zaidi, S. A. H., Khan, N. R., Mirza, F. M., Hou, F., & Kirmani, S. A. A. (2019). The impact of natural resources, human capital, and foreign direct investment on the ecological footprint: The case of the United States. Resources Policy, 63, 101428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101428
  89. Zarsky, L. (1999). Havens, halos and spaghetti: untangling the evidence about foreign direct investment and the environment. Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment, 13(8), 47-74.
  90. Zhang, Y. (2022). How economic performance of OECD economies influences through green finance and renewable energy investment resources? Resources Policy, 79, 102925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102925
  91. Zhang, C., Wang, C., Jin, H., Xu, M., Balezentis, T., & Agnusdei, L. (2025). The impact of green finance on energy transition and carbon emission targets: Exploring the double threshold and spatial spillover effects among the regions. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 73, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2024.12.012
  92. Zhang, C., & Zhou, X. (2016). Does foreign direct investment lead to lower CO₂ emissions? Evidence from a regional analysis in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 58, 943–951. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.226
  93. Zhang, D., Mohsin, M., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2022). Does green finance counteract the climate change mitigation: Asymmetric effect of renewable energy investment and R&D. Energy Economics, 113, 106183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106183
  94. Zhu, H., Duan, L., Guo, Y., & Yu, K. (2016). The effects of FDI, economic growth and energy consumption on carbon emissions in ASEAN-5: evidence from panel quantile regression. Economic Modelling, 58, 237-248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2016.05.003