MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413411270 · doi:10.30638/eemj.2025.098

ASSESSING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF MONETARY POLICY IN THE WORLD LARGEST CARBON EMITTERS: AN EMPIRICAL APPROACH

2025· article· en· W4413411270 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zihao Wu, Muhammad Zakaria, Naseeb Ullah, Khorshed Alam, Hamid Mahmood

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Engineering and Management Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental policyCarbon fibersNatural resource economicsEconomicsEnvironmental scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examines the effect of monetary policy on carbon emissions of the top ten carbon-emitting countries in the world, including China, USA, India, Russia, Japan, Germany, South Korea, Iran, Canada, and Saudi Arabia.For empirical analysis, data is collected from 1992 to 2020, and the panel cointegration technique is applied for estimation.The independent variables included are income, interest rate, urbanization, energy consumption, trade openness, and government fiscal expansion.The estimated results reveal the long-term negative influence of high interest rates on carbon emissions, suggesting that contractionary monetary policy could potentially serve as a mean to mitigate environmental degradation.Economic growth is found to have a nonlinear influence on carbon emissions, validating the existence of the Environmental Kuznet Curve in these countries.It implies that carbon emissions first rise in tandem with economic growth, but subsequently start to decrease as economic growth continues to rise.Energy consumption, urbanization, and government fiscal expansion are found to deteriorate environmental degradation through increased carbon emissions, while trade upgrades the environment by decreasing emissions.These results are robust with alternative equation specifications and estimation technique.These results have important policy implications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Engineering and Management JournalSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207