بررسی اثر توسعۀ مالی، تجارت و رشد اقتصادی بر انتشار دی‌اکسیدکربن در کشورهای بریکس

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه اقتصاد اسلامی، دانشکدۀ اقتصاد، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی تهران، ایران

چکیده

با افزایش نگرانی‌های جهانی نسبت به تغییرات اقلیمی و پیامدهای زیست‌محیطی آن، تحلیل رابطه بین متغیرهای اقتصادی و انتشار آلاینده‌ها، به‌ویژه در اقتصادهای نوظهور، اهمیتی دوچندان یافته است. کشورهای عضو بریکس به‌عنوان اقتصادهای پیشرو و درحال‌توسعه، نه‌تنها نقش کلیدی در رشد اقتصاد جهانی ایفا می‌کنند؛ بلکه ازجمله بزرگ‌ترین تولیدکنندگان و مصرف‌کنندگان انرژی فسیلی و آلاینده‌های زیست‌محیطی به شمار می‌روند. این پژوهش باهدف بررسی اثر توسعه مالی، تجارت، رشد اقتصادی و سرمایه‌گذاری مستقیم خارجی بر انتشار دی‌اکسیدکربن در کشورهای بریکس انجام‌شده و می‌کوشد به این پرسش پاسخ دهد که آیا این متغیرها منجر به افزایش آلودگی شده و فرضیۀ پناهگاه آلودگی را تأیید می‌کنند یا در کاهش انتشار آلاینده‌ها مؤثرند؟ برای این منظور، از روش پانل دیتا طی دورۀ 1997 تا 2020 بهره گرفته شده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد در کشورهای بریکس توسعۀ مالی 8 درصد، سرمایه‌گذاری مستقیم خارجی 4 درصد، رشد تجارت 53 درصد و رشد اقتصادی 49 درصد به افزایش انتشار دی‌اکسیدکربن می‌انجامد. توسعه مالی و ورود سرمایه‌های خارجی بیشتر در بخش‌های آلاینده و انرژی‌بر متمرکزشده و کمتر به‌سمت فنّاوری‌های پاک هدایت شده‌اند؛ علاوه براین، تجارت خارجی نیز به‌جای انتقال فنّاوری‌های سبز، موجب تشدید تولید صنعتی و مصرف انرژی‌های فسیلی شده است. اعمال سیاست‌های محیط‌زیستی سخت‌گیرانه، جهت‌دهی سرمایه‌گذاری‌ها به‌سوی انرژی‌های تجدیدپذیر و فنّاوری‌های پاک و ارتقای بهره‌وری انرژی ‌برای دستیابی به توسعۀ پایدار در این کشورها، ازجمله ایران، پیشنهاد می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Examining the Impact of Financial Development, Trade, and Economic Growth on Carbon Dioxide Emissions in BRICS Nations

نویسنده [English]

  • Fatemeh Sorkhedehi
Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Amid growing global concerns about climate change and its environmental consequences, analyzing the relationship between economic variables and pollutant emissions particularly in emerging economies has gained considerable scholarly and policy relevance. The BRICS countries, as leading emerging economies experiencing rapid growth, play a pivotal role in global economic expansion while simultaneously ranking among the world's largest producers and consumers of fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions. This study examines the impact of financial development, foreign direct investment (FDI), and trade expansion on CO₂ emissions across the BRICS nations.
Main question
This study examines the impact of financial development, foreign direct investment (FDI), and trade expansion on carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions in the BRICS countries. It investigates whether these variables contribute to elevated pollution levels thereby supporting the pollution haven hypothesis or whether they facilitate emission reductions in line with the pollution halo hypothesis. To address this question, the study employs panel data analysis spanning the period 1997 to 2020.
Literature Review
Zafar et al. (2019) examined data from G7 and N11 economies, yielding noteworthy findings. Their study indicates that bank-based financial development reduces pollution in G7 economies, whereas it increases pollution in N11 economies. Further results reveal that stock market development contributes to elevated emissions in G7 economies, while its impact is attenuated in N11 economies. Amri and Saadawi (2022) employed the nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) approach to investigate the effects of nuclear energy, fossil fuels, trade openness, and economic growth on carbon emissions in France, thereby confirming the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis. Adel et al. (2024), focusing on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Pakistan using time series data spanning 2000 to 2022, found that increased electricity consumption, international trade, transportation activities, and foreign direct investment (FDI) lead to higher CO₂ emissions; however, FDI can mitigate emissions when channeled toward green technologies. Hassan et al. (2023) explored the impact of financial development, trade openness, renewable energy consumption, and fossil fuel consumption on CO₂ emissions, demonstrating that fossil fuel consumption degrades environmental quality, whereas renewable energy use, financial development, and trade openness contribute to environmental improvement. Gikci et al. (2022) analyzed panel data from 13 developing countries and major emerging economies including China based on continuous data derived from the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, revealing significant relationships among economic growth, energy consumption, and CO₂ emissions. They found that financial development and CO₂ emissions are cointegrated in the long run, with financial development exacerbating environmental pollution. Consequently, energy economists and policymakers in emerging markets should account for the impact of financial development on energy consumption and carbon emissions in future research and policy design.
Methodology and Data
The dataset employed in this study spans the period 1997 to 2020 and is extracted exclusively from the World Bank database. The dependent variable is carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, denoted as LCO₂ (natural logarithm of CO₂ emissions). The independent variables comprise financial development (LFIN, measured as the natural logarithm of the ratio of broad money [M3] to GDP), trade openness (LTRAD), gross domestic product (LGDP), and foreign direct investment (LFDI), all expressed in natural logarithmic form to mitigate heteroskedasticity and facilitate elastic interpretation of coefficients.
Findings
The empirical results derived from panel data analysis of the BRICS countries reveal a positive and statistically significant relationship between carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions and four key determinants: economic growth, foreign direct investment (FDI), financial development, and trade openness. Notably, financial development alongside economic growth—exerts a pronounced influence on both energy consumption and carbon emissions. Consequently, energy economists should explicitly account for the role of financial development when modeling energy emissions linkages in future research on emerging economies.
In the BRICS context, economic expansion and rising trade volumes, when coupled with FDI inflows, frequently stimulate the growth of emissions-intensive industries. This dynamic elevates aggregate emissions levels, thereby corroborating both the pollution haven hypothesis and the scale effect predicted by environmental economics theory. Under these conditions, although FDI possesses the potential to transfer cleaner production technologies, the absence of stringent mandatory environmental regulations across most BRICS jurisdictions has channeled investment predominantly toward resource extraction and pollution-intensive manufacturing. As a result, the environmental benefits of technological spillovers have been largely offset by the expansion of environmentally degrading economic activities.
Conclusions
These findings indicate that economic growth and financial development in the BRICS countries have predominantly stimulated fossil fuel consumption and the expansion of emissions-intensive industries, rather than advancing sustainable development pathways or fostering the adoption of green technologies. Furthermore, trade expansion and foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows have not been sufficiently channeled toward green projects or the trade of clean technologies; instead, they have been largely directed toward pollution-intensive sectors. The positive and statistically significant effect of economic growth on CO₂ emissions suggests that the BRICS economies remain positioned on the ascending segment of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC), wherein rising income levels are associated with escalating fossil fuel dependence and environmental degradation.
To transition toward sustainable development trajectories, BRICS countries must implement targeted policies that steer financial development and investment flows toward renewable energy infrastructure and green innovation. Concurrently, stricter environmental screening mechanisms should be imposed on foreign investments and trade activities to prevent the inflow of pollution-intensive technologies and incentivize the transfer of cleaner production methods.
In conclusion, BRICS nations require intelligently designed policy frameworks capable of harnessing financial development and international trade opportunities to mitigate environmental pollution and advance green growth. Trade policies should prioritize the exchange of sustainable goods and services, while regulatory measures should restrict the cross-border movement of highly polluting industries. Supporting research and development (R&D) in green technologies integrated with, rather than subordinated to, economic expansion can further enhance environmental quality. The sustained implementation of such policies over the long term can enable BRICS countries to decouple economic growth from carbon emissions and align their development pathways with global sustainability imperatives.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: Financial Development
  • Trade
  • CO₂ Emissions
  • BRICS Countries
  • Panel Data
آذربایجانی، ک؛ سرخوش سرا، ع و یونس پور، س. (1397). تحلیل تأثیر سرمایه‌گذاری مستقیم خارجی و آزادسازی تجاری در کیفیت محیط‌زیست و استفاده از انرژی‌های پاک: مطالعه کشورهای منتخب درحال‌توسعه. اقتصاد و تجارت نوین، (4)13، 27-1. https://journals.ihcs.ac.ir/article_3885.html
بهرامی، ا؛ بهبودی، د؛ سلمانی بیشک، م و رو شکری، م. (۱۳۹۸). نقش توسعۀ مالی و آزادسازی تجاری بر انتشار گاز دی‌اکسیدکربن در ایران. فصلنامه سیاست‌های راهبردی و کلان، (۲۵) ۷، ۱۲۴-۱۴۱. https://doi.org/10.32598/JMSP.7.1.124
رئیسی ورکانی، م؛ خاقانی، م و ورهرامی، و. (۱۴۰۳). تأثیر توسعۀ مالی و سرمایه‌گذاری مستقیم خارجی بر مصرف انرژی‌های تجدیدپذیر در ایران. فصلنامه اقتصاد محیط‌زیست و منابع طبیعی، (۴) ۹، 143-113.  https://doi.org/10.22054/EENR.2025.81780.190
سالاری، ز و شهرکی، م. (۱۴۰۳). اثرات متقابل توسعه مالی با سرمایه انسانی و کیفیت نهادی بر تخریب محیط‌زیست: روش هم‌جمعی پانلی. تحلیل‌های اقتصادی توسعه ایران (سیاست‌گذاری پیشرفت اقتصادی)، (1) ۲۵، 226-207. ‌ https://doi.org/10.22051/ieda.2024.45430.1381
کوچکی، ا و جلائی اسفندآبادی، س. ع. (1398). اثر رابطه غیرخطی دولت بر رشد اقتصادی و ارتباط آن با منحنی زیست‌محیطی کوزنتس در ایران. فصلنامه اقتصاد محیط‌زیست و منابع طبیعی، (4)3، 72-47. https://doi.org/10.22054/eenr.2019.1246
References
Acheampong, A. O., Amponsah, M., & Boateng, E. (2020). Does financial development mitigate carbon emissions? Evidence from heterogeneous financial economies. Energy Economics, 88, 104768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104768
Adeel, M., Wang, B., Ke, J., & Mvitu, I. M. (2024). The nonlinear dynamics of CO2 emissions in Pakistan: A comprehensive analysis of transportation, electricity consumption, and foreign direct investment. Sustainability, 17(1), 189. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17010189
Azerbaijani, Karim, Sarkhosh Sara, Ali, & Younespour, Sanaz. (2019). Analyzing the Effect of Foreign Direct Investment and Trade Openness on Environmental Quality and Clean Energy: A Study of the Selected Developing Countries. Journal of New Economy & Commerce, 13(4), 1-27 [in Persian].
Balogh, J. M., Jámbor, A. (2017). Determinants of CO2 emission: A global evidence. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 7(5), 217–226.
Bahrami, El., Behbudi, D., Salmani Bishak, M. R., Shokri, M. (2019). The Impact of Financial Development and Trade Liberalization on CO2 Emission in Iran. Journal of the Macro and Strategic Policies, 7(25), 124-140. [In Persian].SID. https://sid.ir/paper/690693/en
Birdsall, N., Wheeler, D. (1993). Trade policy and industrial pollution in Latin America: Where are the pollution havens? The Journal of Environment & Development, 2(1), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/107049659300200107
Blunden, J., Boyer, T. (Eds.). (2021). State of the climate in 2020. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 102(8), S1–S475. https://doi.org/10.1175/2021BAMSStateoftheClimate.1
Cherniwchan, J., Copeland, B. R., Taylor, M. S. (2017). Trade and the environment: New methods, measurements, and results. Annual Review of Economics, 9, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-063016-103756
Cole, M. A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: Examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolec.2003.09.007
Copeland, B. R., Taylor, M. S. (2004). Trade, growth, and the environment. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(1), 7-71. https://doi.org/10.1257/002205104773558047
Dean, J. M., Lovely, M. E., Wang, H. (2009). Are foreign investors attracted to weak environmental regulations? Evaluating the evidence from China. Journal of Development Economics, 90(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2008.11.007
Frankel, J. A., Romer, D. (2017). Does trade cause growth? In Global Trade (pp. 255–276). Routledge.
Goldsmith, R. W. (1969). Financial structure and economic growth in advanced countries. Princeton University Press.
Grossman, G. M., Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NBER Working Paper No. w3914). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w3914
Habiba, U., Xinbang, C. (2022). The impact of financial development on CO2 emissions: New evidence from developed and emerging countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 31453–31466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18533-3
Hasan, M. B., Wieloch, J., Ali, M. S., Zikovic, S., Uddin, G. S. (2023). A new answer to the old question of the environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC): Does it work for BRICS countries? Resources Policy, 83, 104332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104332
Koochaki, E., Jalaee Esfand Abadi, S.A.M. (2019). The Impact of Armey Curve on Kuznets Environmental Curve in Iran. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, 3(4), 47-72 [in Persian].. https://doi.org/10.22054/eenr.2019.1246
Mckinnon, R. I. (1973). Money and capital in economic development. Brookings Institution.
Raeisi Varkani, M., Khaghani, M. & Varahrami, V. (2024). The Effect of Financial Development and Foreign Direct Investments on the Consumption of Renewable Energy in Iran. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, 4(9), 113–143 [in Persian].https://doi.org/10.22054/EENR.2025.81780.190
Rafique, M. Z., Li, Y., Larik, A. R., Monaheng, M. P. (2020). The effects of FDI, technological innovation, and financial development on CO2 emissions: Evidence from the BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 23899–23913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08715-2
Salari, Z., Shahraki, M. (2024). The Interaction Effects of Financial Development with Human Capital and Institutional Quality on Environmental Degradation: Panel Cointegration Approach. Iranian Economic Development Analyses, 10(1), 207–226 [in Persian].https://doi.org/10.22051/ieda.2024.45430.1381
Shahbaz, M., Lean, H. H., Shabbir, M. S. (2013). Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Pakistan: Cointegration and Granger causality. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(5), 2947-2953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.02.015
Shahbaz, M., Loganathan, N., Muzaffar, A. T., Ahmed, K., Jabran, M. A. (2016). How urbanization affects CO2 emissions in Malaysia? The application of STIRPAT model. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 57, 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.096.
Saygın E, Gök A, Yamak T. The Effect of Financial Development on CO2 Emissions: A Nonlinear Dynamic Panel Data Analysis. Open Environ Res J, 2025; 18: e18742130356943. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/0118742130356943250225042742.
Tamazian, A., Rao, B. B. (2010). Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies. Energy Economics, 32, 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.04.004
Zafar, M. W., Zaidi, S. A. H., Sinha, A., Gedikli, A., Hou, F. (2019). The role of stock market and banking sector development, and renewable energy consumption in carbon emissions: insights from G–7 and N–11 countries. Resources Policy, 62, 427–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.05.003