تحلیل اثر تکانه کیفیت نهادی بر عملکرد اقتصاد و کیفیت زیست‌محیطی

غریبی, فاطمه; ابراهیمی, مهرزاد; زارع, هاشم

doi:10.22054/eenr.2025.86501.211

تحلیل اثر تکانه کیفیت نهادی بر عملکرد اقتصاد و کیفیت زیست‌محیطی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

فاطمه غریبی ¹

مهرزاد ابراهیمی ²

هاشم زارع ³

¹ دانشجوی دکتری، گروه اقتصاد، دانشکده اقتصاد و مدیریت، واحد شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شیراز، ایران.

² دانشیار گروه اقتصاد،دانشکده اقتصاد و مدیریت، واحد شیراز،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی ،شیراز ،ایران.

³ دانشیار گروه اقتصاد، دانشکده اقتصاد و مدیریت، واحد شیراز،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی ،شیراز ،ایران.

10.22054/eenr.2025.86501.211

چکیده

ابزارهای سیاستی برای توسعه پایدار با هدف ایجاد تعادل بین مفهوم توسعه اقتصادی، تخریب محیط ‌زیست و عدالت اجتماعی ضروری هستند. سیاست‌های زیست‌محیطی مناسب و باکیفیت در یک اقتصاد می‌تواند یکی از عوامل کلیدی تعیین‌کننده برای بهبود کیفیت محیط ‌زیست باشد؛ بنابراین، نهادهای باکیفیت باید به‌عنوان مرجعی برای ارائه قوانین مناسب در نظر گرفته شوند. با توجه به اهمیت این موضوع، در این مطالعه با استفاده از یک الگوی تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی و با در نظر گرفتن مصادره محصول، اثرات اقتصادی و زیست‌محیطی کیفیت نهادی در ایران طی دوره 21/03/2001-23/09/2022 بررسی شد. نتایج تخمین الگو نشان ‌داد که بهبود کیفیت نهادی به دلیل افزایش بهره‌وری سرمایه و نیروی کار، رشد اقتصادی را افزایش می‌دهد. همچنین، کاهش فساد و فعالیت‌های رانت‌جویانه منجر به پیگیری جدی‌تر برنامه‌های حفاظت از محیط ‌زیست می‌شود که منجر به بهبود کیفیت محیط ‌زیست می‌شود. با توجه به نتایج حاصل از برآورد الگو توصیه می‌شود که دولتمردان و سیاست‌گذاران، با اتخاذ تدابیر ضد فساد و رشوه، شرایط را برای تخصیص بهینه منابع و کاهش فعالیت‌های رانت‌جویی مهیا سازند تا از این طریق، هدف نیل به توسعه پایدار محقق گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

کیفیت نهادی

عملکرد اقتصاد

کیفیت زیست‌محیطی

الگوی تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی

عنوان مقاله English

Investigating the Effect of Institutional Quality Shock on Economic Performance and Environmental Quality

نویسندگان English

Fatemeh Gharibi ¹

mehrzad ebrahimi ²

Hashem Zare ³

¹ PhD student, Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran.

² Associate Professor Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran.

³ Associate Professor Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran.

چکیده English

Abstract
Introduction
Institutional economists have long emphasized the critical role of institutions in shaping the trajectory of economic growth. Institutions—both formal (such as contract enforcement and property rights) and informal (such as traditions, beliefs, and trust)—constitute the “rules of the game” that define the social, economic, and political structures of a society. The profitability of economic activities is determined by these institutions alongside technology; however, overall economic performance fundamentally depends on institutional quality. Institutional quality reflects the strength, stability, and effectiveness of institutions in reducing uncertainty, lowering transaction costs, and facilitating coordination among economic agents. Empirical evidence shows that nations with strong institutions—those that uphold property rights and encourage free investment—have experienced economic “miracles,” whereas countries with weak institutions have endured prolonged stagnation and persistent poverty.
In developed economies (the Global North), institutions characterized by transparency and accountability foster economic growth through investment protection, political stability, and adherence to the rule of law. In contrast, institutions in developing economies (the Global South) often fail to provide adequate support for productive investment. In these contexts, property rights are frequently insecure, economic and political power is concentrated among elites, and access to education and productive opportunities is limited. As a result, weak institutional performance exerts a negative influence on economic growth and productivity.
At the same time, higher levels of economic growth are often associated with greater environmental degradation, as intensified production and consumption exert mounting pressure on ecological systems. One of the most pressing concerns worldwide is climate change and global warming, primarily driven by the rapid accumulation of greenhouse gases (GHGs), particularly carbon dioxide (CO₂). Factors such as rapid population growth, industrial expansion, and reliance on non-renewable energy sources significantly contribute to CO₂ emissions. Therefore, achieving sustainable development necessitates policy instruments that balance economic growth, environmental preservation, and social equity. High-quality institutions are essential for designing and enforcing effective environmental policies that mitigate ecological degradation. Given these considerations, the present study aims to examine the effects of institutional quality on economic growth and environmental quality.
Method
This study employs a Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) model that incorporates a product expropriation mechanism to analyze the economic and environmental effects of institutional quality shocks in Iran from March 21, 2001, to September 23, 2022. In the model, rent-seeking behavior is endogenously determined, meaning that households allocate their time between productive activities and rent-seeking. Improvements in institutional quality reduce available rent opportunities and discourage opportunistic behavior. Model parameters were estimated using the Bayesian approach in conjunction with the Random Walk Metropolis–Hastings algorithm. The observable variables include seasonally adjusted data on Gross Domestic Product, private consumption, investment, government expenditure, and oil revenues, all of which were detrended using the Hodrick–Prescott (HP) filter.
Results
The model estimation results indicate that enhanced institutional quality increases the productivity and supply of both labor and capital by reducing corruption and fostering greater motivation and effort. Consequently, factor participation rises while rent-seeking behavior declines. Furthermore, due to the complementary relationship between production inputs, investment expands, leading to higher economic growth. Reductions in corruption and rent-seeking also strengthen the implementation of environmental protection initiatives, thereby improving overall environmental quality.
Conclusion
Based on the model’s findings, it is recommended that governments and policymakers implement comprehensive anti-corruption and anti-bribery measures to promote optimal resource allocation and reduce rent-seeking activities. Strengthening institutional quality enables economies to achieve the dual objectives of sustained economic growth and environmental sustainability, contributing to long-term sustainable development.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Keywords: Institutional Quality

Economic Performance

Environmental Quality

Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE)

آهنگری، عبدالمجید و رضایی، روح‌الله. (1390). بررسی رابطه علّی بین دموکراسی و رشد اقتصادی: با استفاده از داده‌های ترکیبی. الگوسازی اقتصادی، (13)5، 47-65.

https://journals.iau.ir/article_555545.html.

پاشا زانوس، پگاه؛ بهرامی، جاوید؛ توکلیان، حسین و محمدی، تیمور. (1398). بررسی عملکرد رژیم‌های ارزی بر نوسانات تولید و تورم در شرایط ادغام مالی بین‌المللی برای اقتصاد ایران: رهیافت تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی. اقتصاد و تجارت نوین، 14، 41-69.

https://jnet.ihcs.ac.ir/article_4990.html.

توکلیان، حسین. (1399). الگوهای تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی در ایران: وضعیت پایدار تصادفی یا قطعی؟ فصلنامه تحقیقات اقتصادی، (4)55، 781-812 .

https://doi.org/10.22059/jte.2021.317990.1008424.

ثقفی، پویا. (1394). بررسی تأثیر عوامل نهادی بر بهره‌وری کل عوامل تولید در کشورهای منتخب درحال‌توسعه. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد گروه اقتصاد، تبریز: دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی.

حسینی، نیلوفر سادات و اصغرپور، حسین. (1400). درجه عبور نرخ ارز و آثار تکانه پولی در یک الگوی تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی. پژوهش‌های رشد و توسعه اقتصادی، (42)11، 131-154.

https://doi.org/10.30473/egdr.2019.48777.5416.

حیدری، حسن و علی‌نژاد، رقیه. (1393). بررسی تأثیر متغیر نهادی حاکمیت قانون بر رشد اقتصادی در هشت کشور بزرگ اسلامی. دانشنامه حقوق اقتصادی، (5)21، 98-120.

https://doi.org/10.22067/le.v21i5.48145.

دهقان منشادی، محمد؛ اسلاملوئیان، کریم؛ هادیان، ابراهیم و دهقان شبانی، زهرا. (1399). اثر کیفیت نهادی بر چرخه تجاری و پویایی‌های متغیرهای کلان اقتصادی در ایران. اقتصاد و الگوسازی، (1)11، 29-66. https://doi.org/10.29252/jem.2020.100518

رافعی، میثم؛ بهرامی، جاوید و دانش جعفری، داوود. (1393). ارزیابی سیاست مالی برای اقتصاد ایران در یک الگوی تعادل عمومی پویای تصادفی مبتنی بر ادوار تجاری حقیقی. پژوهشنامه اقتصادی، (54)14، 33-65. https://joer.atu.ac.ir/article_797.html?lang=fa

رضاقلی‌زاده، مهدیه و عالمی، امیرحسین. (1402). کیفیت نهادی و فرار مالیاتی در ایران. فصلنامه اقتصاد مقداری، (4)20، 38-86. https://doi.org/10.22055/jqe.2021.35404.2283

رنانی، م. و مؤیدفر، ر. (۱۳۹۶). چرخه‌های افول اخلاق و اقتصاد: سرمایه اجتماعی و توسعه در ایران. تهران: انتشارات طرح نقد.

کریمی، محمدشریف؛ حیدریان، مریم و دورباش، معصومه. (1396). بررسی ارتباط و تأثیر شاخص‌های حکمرانی خوب بر رشد اقتصادی در ایران؛ با رویکرد تصحیح خطای برداری. جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی و توسعه، (1)6، 127-155. https://sociology.tabrizu.ac.ir/ article_6979_50ff146a19d7ca8bd7f05aa45a78c9d5.pdf.

ماجد، وحید و صفری اصل، سجاد. (1398). اثر بهره‌وری و کیفیت نهادی بر کیفیت محیط زیست (شواهدی از اقتصادهای در حال ‌توسعه). فصلنامه پژوهش‌ها و سیاست‌های اقتصادی، (89)27، 139-162. http://qjerp.ir/article-1-2179-fa.html

مختاری، دلینا؛ محمدزاده، یوسف و محسنی زنوزی، سید جمال‌الدین. (1400). تأثیر رشد نقدینگی بر روی رشد اقتصادی: نقش کیفیت نهادها رویکرد (PSTR)، تحقیقات اقتصادی، (1)56، 143-111. https://jte.ut.ac.ir/article_84929_0865ae99ddfd6601a02 a90073b26c47c.pdf.

مداح، مجید و عبدالهی، مریم. (1391). اثر کیفیت نهادها بر آلودگی محیط ‌زیست در چارچوب منحنی کوزنتس با استفاده از الگوهای پانل دیتا ایستا و پویا (مطالعه موردی: کشورهای عضو سازمان اجلاس اسلامی). پژوهشنامه اقتصاد انرژی ایران، 2(5)2، 171-186. https://jiee.atu.ac.ir/article_778_c01ef570e84784aefc87024f8458c127.pdf

References

Acemoglu, D. (2008). Introduction to Modern Economic Growth. Princeton University Press. https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Modern-Economic-Growth-Acemoglu/dp/0691132925#detailBullets_feature_div

Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. (2008). The role of institutions in growth and development (English). Commission on growth and development working paper, no. 10 Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents. worldbank.org/curated/en/232971468326415075/The-role-of-institutions-in-growth-and-development

Ahangari, A., & Rezaei, R. (2011). Investigating the causal relationship between democracy and economic growth: Using panel data. Economic Modeling, 5(13), 47–65. https://journals.iau.ir/article_555545.html. [In Persian]

Alexiou, C., Tsaliki, P. V., & Osman, H. (2014). Institutional quality and economic growth: Empirical evidence from the Sudanese economy. Economic annals, 59, 119-137. https://doi.org/10.2298/EKA1403119A

Ali, H. S., Zeqiraj, V., Lin, W. L., Law, S. H., Yusop, Z., Bare, U. A. A., & Chin, L. (2019). Does quality institutions promote environmental quality? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(11), 10446-10456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04670-9

Angelopoulos, K., Economides, G., & Vassilatos, V. (2011). Do institutions matter for economic fluctuations? Weak property rights in a business cycle model for Mexico. Review of Economic Dynamics, 14(3), 511-531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2010.04.002

Angelopoulos, K., Economides, G., & Philippopoulos, A. (2013). First-and second-best allocations under economic and environmental uncertainty. International Tax and Public Finance, 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10797-012-9234-z

Balcerzak, A. P., & Pietrzak, M. B. (2016). Quality of Institutions and Total Factor Productivity in European Union. Statistics in Transition new series, 17(3), 497-514. https://doi.org/10.21307/stattrans-2016-034

Boujelbene, T. (2021). Nonlinearity Relationship of Inflation and Economic Growth: Role of Institutions Quality. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 24(1), 166-179. https://ideas.repec.org/a/rjr/romjef/vy2021i1 p166-179.html

Castiglione, C., Infante, D., & Smirnova, J. (2012). Rule of law and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: Evidence for carbon emissions. International Journal of Sustainable Economy, 4, 245-269. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSE.2012.047932

Cheon, S., Dowall, D. E., & Song, D.-W. (2010). Evaluating impacts of institutional reforms on port efficiency changes: Ownership, corporate structure, and total factor productivity changes of world container ports. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 46(4), 546-561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2009.04.001

Dehghan-Manshadi, M., Eslamlouiyan, K., Hadian, E., & Dehghan-Shabani, Z. (2020). The effect of institutional quality on business cycles and macroeconomic dynamics in Iran. Journal of Economics and Modeling, 11(1), 29–66. https://doi.org/10.29252/jem.2020.100518 [In Persian].

Dias, J., & Tebaldi, E. (2012). Institutions, human capital, and growth: The institutional mechanism. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 23(3), 300-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2012.04

Dirir, S. (2023). The Effect of Institutional Quality on Economic Growth: Evidence from Tripartite Approaches in the Context of War-Torn Countries. Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, 14, 508-535. https://doi.org/10.15388/omee.2023.14.3

Egbetokun, S., & Ogundipe, A. (2016). Attaining EKC in Africa: Why Institutions Really Matter. Research Journal of Applied Science, 11. https://doi.org/10.3923/rjasci.2016.884.890

Foster, N., Pöschl, J., & Stehrer, R. (2012). Manufacturing Productivity: Effects of Service Sector Innovations and Institutions. The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, 3(1), 1-16. https://wiiw.ac.at/manufacturing-productivity-effects-of-service-sector-innovations-and-institutions-p-2759.html

Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. The Mexico-US Free Trade Agreement, 11(2), 13. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/ w3914/w3914.pdf

Heydari, H., & Alinejad, R. (2014). The impact of the institutional variable of rule of law on economic growth in eight large Islamic countries. Economic Law Encyclopedia, 21(5), 98–120. https://doi.org/10.22067/ le.v21i5.48145 [In Persian]

Hosseini, N. S., & Asgharpoor, H. (2021). Exchange rate pass-through and the effects of monetary shocks in a DSGE model. Economic Growth and Development Research, 11(42), 131–154. https://doi.org/10.30473/ egdr.2019.48777.5416 [In Persian]

Hussen, M. S. (2023). Institutional quality and economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: a panel data approach. Journal of Economics and Development, 25(4), 332-348. https://doi.org/10.1108/JED-11-2022-0231

Ibrahim, M. H., & Law, S. H. (2016). Institutional Quality and CO Emission–Trade Relations: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. South African Journal of Economics, 84(2), 323-340. https://doi.org/10.1111/ saje.12095

Justiniano, A., Primiceri, G. E., & Tambalotti, A. (2010). Investment shocks and business cycles. Journal of Monetary Economics, 57(2), 132-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2009.12.008

Kandil, M. (2009). Determinants of Institutional Quality and Their Impact on Economic Growth in the MENA Region. International Journal of Development Issues, 8, 134-167. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 14468950910997693

Karimi, M. S., Heydarian, M., & Dourbash, M. (2017). Investigating the relationship and impact of good governance indicators on economic growth in Iran: A vector error correction approach. Economic Sociology and Development, 6(1), 127–155. https://sociology.tabrizu.ac.ir/ article_6979_50ff146a19d7ca8bd7f05aa45a78c9d5.pdf [In Persian]

Katircioglu, S., Katircioĝlu, S., & Saqib, N. (2020). Does higher education system moderate energy consumption and climate change nexus? Evidence from a small island. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 13(2), 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-019-00778-6

Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The worldwide governance indicators: methodology and analytical issues (English). Policy Research Working Paper, no. WPS 5430 Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/630421468336563314/ The-worldwide-governance-indicators-methodology-and-analytical-issues

Kaufmann, D., & Kraay, A. C. (2024). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and 2024 Update (English) (Policy Research Working Paper, Issue. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/ 099005210162424110/IDU17c6f0b9e1f0c214b1d1b30d176c4644af69e

Lau, L.-S., Choong, C.-K., & Eng, Y.-K. (2014). Carbon dioxide emission, institutional quality, and economic growth: Empirical evidence in Malaysia. Renewable Energy, 68, 276-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.renene.2014.02.013

Li, H., & Peng, W. (2020). Carbon Tax, Subsidy, and Emission Reduction: Analysis Based on DSGE Model. Complexity, 2020(1), 6683482. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6683482

Maddah, M., & Abdollahi, M. (2012). The effect of institutional quality on environmental pollution within the Kuznets curve framework using static and dynamic panel data models (case study: OIC member countries). Iranian Journal of Energy Economics, 2(5), 171–186. https://jiee.atu. ac.ir/article_778_c01ef570e84784aefc87024f8458c127.pdf [In Persian]

Majd, V., & Safari-Asl, S. (2019). The effect of productivity and institutional quality on environmental quality: Evidence from developing economies. Quarterly Journal of Economic Research and Policies, 27(89), 139–162. http://qjerp.ir/article-1-2179-fa.html [In Persian]

Mokhtari, D., Mohammadzadeh, Y., & Mohseni-Zenouzi, S. J. (2021). The impact of liquidity growth on economic growth: The role of institutional quality (PSTR approach). Economic Research Journal, 56(1), 111-143. https://jte.ut.ac.ir/article_84929_0865ae99ddfd6601a02a90073b26c47c.pdf [In Persian]

North, D. C. (2010). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. İstanbul: Sabancı University. https://www.kitapyurdu.com/ kitap/kurumlar-kurumsal-degisim-ve-ekonomik-performans/49199.html

Pasha-Zanous, P., Bahrami, J., Tokelian, H., & Mohammadi, T. (2019). Evaluating the performance of exchange rate regimes on output and inflation volatility under international financial integration: A DSGE approach for the Iranian economy. Journal of New Economy and Commerce, 14, 41–69. https://jnet.ihcs.ac.ir/article_4990.html [In Persian]

Rafei, M., Bahrami, J., & Danesh-Jafari, D. (2014). Evaluation of fiscal policy for the Iranian economy in a DSGE model based on real business cycles. Journal of Economic Research, 14(54), 33-65. https://joer.atu.ac.ir/article_797.html [In Persian]

Renani, M., & Moayedfar, R. (2017). Cycles of moral and economic decline: Social capital and development in Iran. Tehran, Iran: Tarh-e Naqd Publications. [in Persian]

Rezaqolizadeh, M., & Alami, A. H. (2023). Institutional quality and tax evasion in Iran. Quarterly Journal of Quantitative Economics, 20(4), 38–86. https://doi.org/10.22055/jqe.2021.35404.2283 [In Persian]

Riti, J. S., Shu, Y., & Kamah, M. (2021). Institutional quality and environmental sustainability: The role of freedom of press in most freedom of press countries. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 91, 106656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2021.106656

Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A., & Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions Rule: The Primacy of Institutions Over Geography and Integration in Economic Development. Journal of Economic Growth, 9(2), 131-165. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOEG.0000031425.72248.85

Sachs, J. (2003). Institutions Don't Rule: Direct Effect of Geography on Per Capita Income. NBER Working Paper No. w9490. https://doi.org/ 10.3386/w9490

Saghafi, P. (2015). The impact of institutional factors on total factor productivity in selected developing countries (Master’s thesis). Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran. [In Persian]

Salman, M., Long, X., Dauda, L., & Mensah, C. N. (2019). The impact of institutional quality on economic growth and carbon emissions: Evidence from Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production, 241, 118331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118331

Samadi, A. H., & Alipourian, M. (2021). Measuring Institutional Quality: A Review. In N. Faghih & A. H. Samadi (Eds.), Dynamics of Institutional Change in Emerging Market Economies, Theories, Concepts and Mechanisms (pp. 143-171). Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61342-6

Shafik, N., & Bandyopadhyay, S. (1992). Economic Growth and Environmental Quality: Time Series and Cross-Country Evidence. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23723867_Economic_Growth_and_Environmental_Quality_Time_Series_and_Cross-Country_Evidence

Sharma, S. S. (2011). Determinants of carbon dioxide emissions: Empirical evidence from 69 countries. Applied Energy, 88(1), 376-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.07.022

Tabellini, G. (2010). Culture and Institutions: Economic Development in the Regions of Europe. Journal of the European Economic Association, 8(4), 677-716. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-4774.2010.tb00537.x

Tavakolian, H. (2020). Stochastic or deterministic steady state? DSGE models in Iran. Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, 55(4), 781–812. https://doi.org/10.22059/jte.2021.317990.1008424 [In Persian]

Uddin, I., Ahmad, M., Ismailov, D., Balbaa, M. E., Akhmedov, A., Khasanov, S., & Haq, M. U. (2023). Enhancing institutional quality to boost economic development in developing nations: New insights from CS-ARDL approach. Research in Globalization, 7, 100137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2023.100137

Vasilev, A. (2021). A Real-Business-Cycle model with institutional quality: The Case of Bulgaria (1999-2018). Review of Economics, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1515/roe-2020-0035

Zhang, Q., Wang, Y., & Liu, L. (2023). Carbon Tax or Low-Carbon Subsidy? Carbon Reduction Policy Options under CCUS Investment. Sustainability, 15(6), 5301. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5301

Zheng, H., Hu, J., Guan, R., & Wang, S. (2016). Examining Determinants of CO2 Emissions in 73 Cities in China. Sustainability, 8(12), 1296. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/12/1296