Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to link.springer.com

Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Testing the EKC hypothesis for ten US states: an application of heterogeneous panel estimation method

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims to test the EKC (Environmental Kuznets Curve) hypothesis for the ten states, having the highest levels of carbon dioxide emissions in the USA, through the independent variables of real GDP, population, and renewable energy and fossil energy consumptions. To this aim, the panel estimation method with cross-sectional dependence is applied to data from 1980 to 2015. The empirical findings of the study indicate that the EKC (inverted U-shaped) hypothesis is valid only for Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New York, and Ohio. Interestingly, the negative impacts of fossil energy consumption on CO2 emission levels in Texas are not detected statistically although this state is the leading oil-producing state. Furthermore, the positive impacts of renewable energy consumption in Florida, officially known as “Sunshine State”, are considerably low when compared with the other states.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from £29.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Aldy JE (2005) An environmental Kuznets curve analysis of US state-level carbon dioxide emissions. J Environ Dev 14(1):48–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alshehry AS, Belloumi M (2015) Energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: the case of Saudi Arabia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 41:237–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andreoni J, Levinson A (2001) The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve. J Public Econ 80:269–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ang JB (2007) CO2 emissions, energy consumption, and output in France. Energy Policy 35(10):4772–4778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apergis N, Christou C, Gupta R (2017) Are there environmental Kuznets curves for US state-level CO2 emissions? Renew Sust Energ Rev 69:551–558

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Atasoy BS (2017) Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis across the US: evidence from panel mean group estimators. Renew Sust Energ Rev 77:731–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckerman, W., 1992. Economic growth and the environment: whose growth? Whose environment?

    Google Scholar 

  • Breusch TS, Pagan AR (1980) The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev Econ Stud 47:239–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Census (2018) US Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/data.html

  • De-Vita G, Katircioglu S, Altinay L, Fethi S, Mercan M (2015) Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in a tourism development context. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(21):16652–16663

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dogan E, Turkekul B (2016) CO 2 emissions, real output, energy consumption, trade, urbanization and financial development: testing the EKC hypothesis for the USA. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(2):1203–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dogan E (2017) CO2 emissions, real GDP, renewable energy and tourism: evidence from panel of the Most-visited countries. Statistika 97(3):63–76

    Google Scholar 

  • EIA (2018) U.S. Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/

  • Farhani S, Mrizak S, Chaibi A, & Rault C (2014) The environmental Kuznets curve and sustainability: A panel data analysis. Energy Policy, 71, 189–198

  • FED (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis) (2017) Economic research. https://research.stlouisfed.org/Farhani

  • Chaibi SA, Rault C (2014) CO2 emissions, output, energy consumption, and trade in Tunisia. Econ Model 38:426–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halicioglu F (2009) An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy 37(3):1156–1164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanif P, Gago-de-Santos (2017) The importance of population control and macroeconomic stability to reducing environmental degradation: an empirical test of the environmental Kuznets curve for developing countries. Environ Dev 23(3):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausman JA (1978) Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46(6):1251–1271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isik, C. (2010) Natural gas consumption and economic growth in Turkey: a bound test approach. Energy Systems, 1(4), 441–456

  • Isik C, & Shahbaz M (2015) Energy consumption and economic growth: a panel data aproach to OECD countries. International Journal of Energy Science, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.12783/ijes.2015.0501.01

  • Isik C, Dogru T, Turk ES (2018) A nexus of linear and non-linear relationships between tourism demand, renewable energy consumption, and economic growth: theory and evidence. Int J Tour Res 20(1):38–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isik 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(7):665–673

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Isik C, Radulescu M (2017) Investigation of the relationship between renewable energy, tourism receipts and economic growth in Europe. Statistika: Statistics and Economy. Journal 97(2):85–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalil A, Mahmud SF (2009) Environment Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: a cointegration analysis for China. Energy Policy 37(12):5167–5172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayanthakumaran K, Verma R, Liu Y (2012) CO2 emissions, energy consumption, trade and income: a comparative analysis of China and India. Energy Policy 42:450–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasman A, Duman Y (2015) CO2 emissions, economic growth, energy consumption, trade and urbanization in new EU member and candidate countries: a panel data analysis. Econ Model 44:97–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katircioglu ST (2014a) International tourism, energy consumption, and environmental pollution: the case of Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 36(2014):180–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katircioglu ST (2014b) Estimating higher education induced energy consumption: the case of northern Cyprus. Energy 66:831–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee JW, Brahmasrene T (2013) Investigating the influence of tourism on economic growth and carbon emissions: evidence from panel analysis of the European Union. Tour Manag 38:69–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • León CJ, Arana JE, Hernández AA (2014) CO2 Emissions and tourism in developed and less developed countries. Appl Econ Lett 21(16):1169–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnani E (2001) The environmental Kuznets curve: development path or policy result? Environ Model Softw 16:157–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConnell KE (1997) Income and the demand for environmental quality. Environ Dev Econ 2:383–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omri A, Daly S, Rault C, Chaibi A (2015) Financial development, environmental quality, trade and economic growth: what causes what in MENA countries. Energy Econ 48:242–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orubu CO, Omotor DG (2011) Environmental quality and economic growth: searching for environmental Kuznets curves for air and water pollutants in Africa. Energy Policy 39(7):4178–4188

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ozturk I, Acaravci A (2010) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 14(9):3220–3225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panayotou T (1993) Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development. In: Working paper WP238. Technology and Employment Programme, International Labour Office, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Pablo-Romero MDP, De Jesús J (2016) Economic growth and energy consumption: the energy-environmental Kuznets curve for Latin America and the Caribbean. Renew Sust Energ Rev 60:1343–1350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16(3):289–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ 22(2):265–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafiq S, Salim R, Nielsen I (2016) Urbanization, openness, emissions, and energy intensity: a study of increasingly urbanized emerging economies. Energy Econ 56:20–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soytas U, Sari R, Ewing BT (2007) Energy consumption, income, and carbon emissions in the United States. Ecol Econ 62(3):482–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soytas U, Sari R (2009) Energy consumption, economic growth, and carbon emissions: challenges faced by an EU candidate member. Ecol Econ 68(6):1667–1675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern DI, Common MS, Barbier EB (1996) Economic growth and environmental degradation: the environmental Kuznets curve and sustainable development. World Dev 24:1151–1160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern DI (2004) The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Dev 32(8):1419–1439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokey NL (1998) Are there limits to growth? Int Econ Rev 39(1):1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suri V, Chapman D (1998) Economic growth, trade and energy: implications for the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecol Econ 25(2):195–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Tourism, Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey

    Cem Işık

  2. Department of Economics, St. Mary’s College of Maryland, St. Mary’s City, MD, 20686, USA

    Serdar Ongan

  3. Department of Economics, Atatürk University, 25240, Erzurum, Turkey

    Dilek Özdemir

Authors
  1. Cem Işık
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Serdar Ongan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dilek Özdemir
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cem Işık.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Nicholas Apergis

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 8 Fixed effect model results
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Işık, C., Ongan, S. & Özdemir, D. Testing the EKC hypothesis for ten US states: an application of heterogeneous panel estimation method. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26, 10846–10853 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04514-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04514-6

Keywords

Jel classification