The Role of Trade Liberalization in Carbon Dioxide Emission: Evidence From Heterogeneous Panel Estimations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present globalized world, production forms are progressively divided across nations. Consequently, domestic consumption in one nation is progressively fulfilled by worldwide supply chains. This spectacle has pulled policy and widespread intellectual discussions on the assignment of greenhouse gas (GHG) emanations, especially carbon dioxide (CO2) emission; these are accountabilities connected to global trade since worldwide trade causes net carbon dioxide emission. The aim of the present study is to examine the impact of trade liberalization on carbon dioxide emission. We used the panel data of 105 developed and developing countries from 1990 to 2017. The results of FMOLS and DOLS confirm that all variables are connected in the long-run period. The results of long run coefficient confirm that that the trade liberalization has a positive effect on environmental degradation and cause to increase environmental degradation. Likewise, economic growth and energy consumption has also a positive and significant impact on environmental degradation. However, we find an evidence of negative and significant impact of renewable energy utilization on environmental degradation. Finally, the results of heterogeneous panel causality confirm that there is a uni-directional causal relationship between trade liberalization and environmental degradation where causality is running from trade liberalization to environmental degradation. However, we find a bi-directional causal relationship of environmental degradation with energy utilization and renewable energy utilization in all selected developed and developing countries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".