Abstract
Environmental degradation is one of the main drivers of climate change. One of the most broadly accepted tools to minimize environmental degradation is the introduction of “green products”. This paper introduces the “Green Trade Openness Index” to (a) measure the importance of green products in a region and (b) revisit the trade-environment nexus in a sample study of 31 OECD countries over the period 2007–2017. The empirical analysis confirms the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis and — more importantly — demonstrates for the first time that the presence of green products in a country’s trade basket reduces that country’s ecological footprint. This is essential information for practitioners and policy makers looking for a pathway to sustainable development. Finally, the novel index creates opportunities for future research, as the index can be used as explanatory variable in different research questions and fields of research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and materials
All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article.
References
Acemoglu D, Aghion P, Bursztyn L, Hemous D (2012) The environment and directed technical change. American Economic Review 102:131–166
Ahmed Z, Ahmad M, Rjoub H, Kalugina OA, Hussain N (2021a) Economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and ecological footprint: exploring the role of environmental regulations and democracy in sustainable development. Sustain Dev
Ahmed Z, Cary M, Ali S, Murshed M, Ullah H, Mahmood H (2021b) Moving toward a green revolution in Japan: symmetric and asymmetric relationships among clean energy technology development investments, economic growth, and CO2 emissions. Energy Enviro
Ahmed Z, Cary M, Shahbaz M, Vo XV (2021c) Asymmetric nexus between economic policy uncertainty, renewable energy technology budgets, and environmental sustainability: evidence from the United States. J Clean Prod :127723
Ahmed Z, Le HP (2021) Linking Information Communication Technology, trade globalization index, and CO2 emissions: evidence from advanced panel techniques. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:8770–8781
Ali W, Abdullah A, Azam M (2016) The dynamic linkage between technological innovation and carbon dioxide emissions in Malaysia: an autoregressive distributed lagged bound approach. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 6:389–400
Al-Mulali U, Ozturk I, Lean HH (2015a) The influence of economic growth, urbanization, trade openness, financial development, and renewable energy on pollution in Europe. Nat Hazards 79:621–644
Al-Mulali U, Weng-Wai C, Sheau-Ting L, Mohammed AH (2015b) Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis by utilizing the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation. Ecol Ind 48:315–323
Amir R, Gama A, Werner K (2018) On environmental regulation of oligopoly markets: emission versus performance standards. Environ Resource Econ 70:147–167
APEC (2012) ANNEX C - APEC List of Environmental Goods. Available: https://www.apec.org/meeting-papers/leaders-declarations/2012/2012_aelm/2012_aelm_annexc
Apergis N, Can M, Gozgor G, Lau CKM (2018) Effects of export concentration on CO 2 emissions in developed countries: an empirical analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:14106–14116
Baek J (2016) Do nuclear and renewable energy improve the environment? Empirical evidence from the United States. Ecol Ind 66:352–356
BETA (2021) Green Openness Index. BETA Akademi SSR LAB. Available: https://www.betaakademi.com/green-openness-index
Biswas A, Roy M (2015) Green products: an exploratory study on the consumer behaviour in emerging economies of the East. J Clean Prod 87:463–468
Bretschger L (2015) Greening economy, graying society. MPRA Paper 66218
Bruneau JF (2004) A note on permits, standards, and technological innovation. J Environ Econ Manag 48:1192–1199
Can M, Gozgor G (2017) The impact of economic complexity on carbon emissions: evidence from France. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:16364–16370
Can M, Dogan B, Saboori B (2020) Does trade matter for environmental degradation in developing countries? New evidence in the context of export product diversification. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:14702–14710
Can M, Ahmed Z, Mercan M, Kalugina OA (2021) The role of trading environment-friendly goods in environmental sustainability: does green openness matter for OECD countries? Journal of Environmental Management 295:113038
Claro E, Lucas N, Sugathan M, Marconini M. Lendo E (2007) Trade in environmental goods and services and sustainable development: domestic considerations and strategies for WTO negotiations. ICTSD Environmental Goods and Services Series, Policy Discussion Paper, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, Geneva, Switzerland
Dechezleprêtre A, Glachant M (2014) Does foreign environmental policy influence domestic innovation? Evidence from the wind industry. Environ Resource Econ 58:391–413
Demir C, Cergibozan R, Ari A (2020) Environmental dimension of innovation: time series evidence from Turkey. Environ Dev Sustain 22:2497–2516
Du K, Li P, Yan Z (2019) Do green technology innovations contribute to carbon dioxide emission reduction? Empirical evidence from patent data. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 146:297–303
Dugoua E, Dumas M (2021) Green product innovation in industrial networks: a theoretical model. J Environ Econ Manage 107:102420
Engle RF, Granger CW (1987) Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica :251–276
Essandoh OK, Islam M, Kakinaka M (2020) Linking international trade and foreign direct investment to CO2 emissions: any differences between developed and developing countries? Science of the Total Environment 712:136437
Fischer C, Newell RG (2008) Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation. J Environ Econ Manag 55:142–162
Gao X, Zheng H (2017) Environmental concerns, environmental policy and green investment. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14:1570
Global Footprınt Network (2021) Tools & resources - ecological footprint of countries. Available: https://www.footprintnetwork.org/resources/
Gozgor G, Can M (2016) Export product diversification and the environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from Turkey. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:21594–21603
Greene DL, Plotkın SE (2011) Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. transportation. PEW Center Global Climate Change
Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. National Bureau of economic research Cambridge, Mass.
Guo L, QU Y, Tseng ML (2017) The interaction effects of environmental regulation and technological innovation on regional green growth performance. J Clean Prod 162:894–902
Hao L-N, Umar M, Khan Z, Ali W (2021) Green growth and low carbon emission in G7 countries: how critical the network of environmental taxes, renewable energy and human capital is? Science of The Total Environment 752:141853
He J (2009) China’s industrial SO2 emissions and its economic determinants: EKC’s reduced vs. structural model and the role of international trade. Environ Dev Econ 14:227–262
Hu G, Can M, Paramati SR, Doğan B, Fang J (2020) The effect of import product diversification on carbon emissions: new evidence for sustainable economic policies. Economic Analysis and Policy 65:198–210
Ibrahiem DM (2020) Do technological innovations and financial development improve environmental quality in Egypt? Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:10869–10881
IEA (2013) Redrawing the energy climate map - analysis. International Energy Agency. Available: https://www.iea.org/reports/redrawing-the-energy-climate-map
IEA (2020) Data and statistics. In: Agency IE
Ikram M, Xıa W, Fareed Z, Shahzad U, Rafıque MZ (2021) Exploring the nexus between economic complexity, economic growth and ecological footprint: contextual evidences from Japan. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 47
Jaakkola N, van der Ploeg F (2019) Non-cooperative and cooperative climate policies with anticipated breakthrough technology. J Environ Econ Manag 97:42–66
Kao C (1999) Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics 90:1–44
Kasman A, Duman YS (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
Laplue LD (2019) The environmental effects of trade within and across sectors. J Environ Econ Manag 94:118–139
Loiseau E, Saikku L, Antikainen R, Droste N, Hansjürgens B, Pitkänen K, Leskinen P, Kuikman P, Thomsen M (2016) Green economy and related concepts: an overview. J Clean Prod 139:361–371
Mahmood H, Maalel N, Zarrad O (2019) Trade openness and CO2 emissions: evidence from Tunisia. Sustainability 11:3295
Marchi VD, Maria ED, Micelli S (2013) Environmental strategies, upgrading and competitive advantage in global value chains. Bus Strateg Environ 22:62–72
Marchi VD (2012) Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation: empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Res Policy 41:614–623
Mardani A, Streimikiene D, Cavallaro F, Loganathan N, Khoshnoudi M (2019) Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and economic growth: a systematic review of two decades of research from 1995 to 2017. Sci Total Environ 649:31–49
McAusland C, Millimet DL (2013) Do national borders matter? Intranational trade, international trade, and the environment. J Environ Econ Manag 65:411–437
Mohnen P, Hall BH (2013) Innovation and productivity: an update. Eurasian Bus Rev 3:47–65
Paramati SR, Mo Dz, Huang R (2021) The role of financial deepening and green technology on carbon emissions: evidence from major OECD economies. Finance Res Lett 41:101794
PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (2020) Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions; 2020 Report. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague
Pedroni P (2004) Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Economet Theor 20:597–625
Pesaran (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Economet 22:265–312
Pesaran (2021) General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. Empirical Economics 60:13–50
Pesaran (2004) General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. In: UNIVERSITY, C. (ed.). Cambridge.
Sauvage J (2014) The stringency of environmental regulations and trade in environmental goods. OECD Trade and Environment Working Papers 2014/03
Sebri M, Ben-Salha O (2014) On the causal dynamics between economic growth, renewable energy consumption, CO2 emissions and trade openness: fresh evidence from BRICS countries. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 39:14–23
Shah SMA, Jıang Y, Wu H, Ahmed Z, Ullah I, Adebayo TS (2021) Linking green human resource practices and environmental economics performance: the role of green economic organizational culture and green psychological climate. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18
Shazad U, Farred Z, Shahzad F, Shahzad K (2021) Investigating the nexus between economic complexity, energy consumption and ecological footprint for the United States: new insights from quantile methods. J Clean Prod 279:123806
UNCTAD (1995) Environmentally preferable products (EPPs) as a trade opportunity for developing countries. UNCTAD, Geneva
Wade A, Stolz P, Frischknecht R, Heath G, Sinha P (2018) The product environmental footprint (PEF) of photovoltaic modules—lessons learned from the environmental footprint pilot phase on the way to a single market for green products in the European Union. Progress in Photovoltaics Research 26:553–564
Wang L, Su C-W, Ali S, Chang H-L (2020) How China is fostering sustainable growth: the interplay of green investment and production-based emission. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:39607–39618
Wang C, Lu Y (2020) Can economic structural change and transition explain cross-country differences in innovative activity? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 159, 120194.
World Bank (2008) International trade and climate change - economic, legal, and institutional perspectives
World Bank (2021) World Development Indicators
World Bank (2022) Fossil fuel energy consumption (5 of total) - OECD members
World Economic Forum (2021) The global risks report 2021. Available: https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2021
WTO (2009) Communication under paragraph 31 (III) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration
Yii K-J, Geetha C (2017) The nexus between technology innovation and CO2 emissions in Malaysia: evidence from granger causality test. Energy Procedia 105:3118–3124
Zhang S, Liu X, Bae J (2017) Does trade openness affect CO 2 emissions: evidence from ten newly industrialized countries? Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:17616–17625
Acknowledgements
The Green (Trade) Openness Index (GOP) is constructed and improved by Muhlis Can in BETA Akademi-Social Science Research Lab (SSR Lab). We kindly thank all the Lab members and staff for their comments and suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
MC: Conceptualization; data curation; computation of index; writing—original draft. MBJ: Formal analysis, data handling, and methodology. JB: Writing—original draft, writing—review and editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable
Consent for publication
Not applicable
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Ilhan Ozturk
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Highlights
- New index is developed and introduced to measure trading of Green Products.
- Trading Green goods as strategy to break the development – emissions correlation.
- Green Openness reduces environmental degradations.
- Green Openness Index as lever for future research on green economy.
Appendices
Appendix 1. Core CLEG + product list according to their HS 2007 codes
380210 | 731029 | 841790 | 847982 | 902680 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
730300 | 732490 | 841989 | 848110 | 902710 |
730431 | 761290 | 842121 | 848130 | 902720 |
730490 | 840410 | 842129 | 848140 | 902730 |
730630 | 840420 | 842139 | 850590 | 902750 |
730690 | 840510 | 842199 | 901540 | 902780 |
730900 | 841410 | 842833 | 901580 | 902810 |
731010 | 841780 | 846291 | 902610 | 902820 |
Appendix 2. APEC List of Environmental Goods according to their HS 2007 codes
441872 840290 840410 840420 840490 840690 841182 841199 841290 841780 841790 | 841919 841939 841960 841989 841990 842121 842129 842139 842199 847420 847982 | 847989 847990 850164 850231 850239 850300 850490 851410 851420 851430 851490 | 854140 854390 901380 901390 901580 902610 902620 902680 902690 902710 902720 | 902730 902750 902780 902790 903149 903180 903190 903289 903290 903300 |
Appendix 3. OECD country list
Australia | France | Korea | Portugal |
|---|---|---|---|
Austria | Germany | Lithuania | Slovakia |
Belgium | Greece | Luxemburg | Slovenia |
Canada | Hungary | Mexico | Spain |
Chile | Ireland | Netherland | Sweden |
Czechia | Israel | New Zealand | UK |
Denmark | Italy | Norway | USA |
Finland | Japan | Poland |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Can, M., Ben Jebli, M. & Brusselaers, J. Can green trade save the environment? Introducing the Green (Trade) Openness Index. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29, 44091–44102 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18920-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18920-w