АНАЛИЗ ВОЗДЕЙСТВИЯ ДИВЕРСИФИКАЦИИ ЭКСПОРТА НА ЭКОЛОГИЧЕСКИЙ СЛЕД В РАЗВИТЫХ И РАЗВИВАЮЩИХСЯ СТРАНАХ
Аннотация
В условиях глобализации и стремительного развития международной торговли диверсификация торговых потоков становится важным аспектом экономической стратегии многих стран. Однако, несмотря на очевидные экономические преимущества, данный процесс может иметь значительные негативные последствия для экологии. Увеличение объёмов торговли, расширение ассортимента товаров и услуг, а также рост транспортных перевозок приводят к повышению уровня загрязнения окружающей среды, истощению природных ресурсов и разрушению экосистем. Данная статья направлена на эмпирический анализ влияния диверсификации торговли на экологическую устойчивость. В работе рассматривается влияние диверсификации экспорта на экологический след на основе выборки развитых и развивающихся стран. Исследование опирается на гипотезу Pollution Haven. Для эконометрического анализа использован метод panel ARDL. Все данные охватывают период с 1996 по 2020 годы и включают 112 стран: 42 развитые и 70 развивающихся. В ходе исследования было установлено, что увеличение диверсификации экспорта приводит к росту экологического следа во всех группах стран. Это подчёркивает необходимость разработки более устойчивых торговых стратегий, которые учитывают экологические последствия и способствуют снижению негативного воздействия на окружающую среду.
Скачивания
Данные скачивания пока не доступны.
Литература
1. Alhassan A., Usman O., Ike G., Asumadu Sarkodie S. Impact assessment of trade on environmental performance: accounting for the role of government integrity and economic development in 79 countries // Heliyon. 2020. Vol. 6. № 9. P. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05046.
2. Gozgor G. Does trade matter for carbon emissions in OECD countries? Evidence from a new trade openness measure // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2017. Vol. 24, № 36. P. 27813–27821. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-0361‑z.
3. Ling C. H., Ahmed K., Binti Muhamad R., Shahbaz M. Decomposing the trade-environment nexus for Malaysia: what do the technique, scale, composition, and comparative advantage effect indicate? // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2015. Vol. 22, № 24. P. 20131–20142. DOI: 10.1007/s11356–015-5217-9.
4. Copeland B.R., Taylor M. S. Trade, growth and the environmen // Journal of Economic literature. 2004. Vol. 42. № 1. P. 7–71. DOI: 10.3386/w9823.
5. Copeland B.R., Taylor M. S. North-South Trade and the Environment // Journal of Economic Literature. 2017. Vol. 109, № 3. P. 755–787. DOI: 10.4324/9781315201986–17.
6. Murshed M. An empirical re-investigation for verifying the pollution haven hypothesis concerning the foreign direct investment-carbon intensity nexus: Contextual evidence from BRICS // Environmental Challenges. 2023. Vol. 13, № 58. P. 1–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.envc.2023.100793.
7. Shen J., Liu W., Chu J. Does migration of pollution-intensive industries impact environmental efficiency? Evidence supporting “Pollution Haven Hypothesis” // Journal of Environmental Management. 2019. Vol. 242, № 3. P. 142–152. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.072.
8. Jiang W., Cole M., Sun J., Wang S. Innovation, carbon emissions and the pollution haven hypothesis: Climate capitalism and global re-interpretations // Journal of Environmental Management. 2022. Vol. 307, № 1. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114465.
9. Yang J., Guo H., Liu B., Shi R., Zhang B., Ye W. Environmental Regulation and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis: Do Environmental Regulation Measures Matter? // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018. Vol. 202, P. 993–1000. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.144.
10. Porter M. E. America’s Green Strategy // Scientific American. 1991. Vol. 264, № 4. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0491-168.
11. Porter M.E., van der Linde C. Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship // Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1995. Vol. 9, № 4. P. 97–118. DOI: 10.1257/jep.9.4.97.
12. Doğan B., Saboori B., Can M. Does economic complexity matter for environmental degradation? An empirical analysis for different stages of development // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2019. Vol. 26, № 31. P. 31900–31912. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-06333-1.
13. Can M., Dogan B., Saboori B. Does trade matter for environmental degradation in developing countries?
New evidence in the context of export product diversification // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020. Vol. 27. P. 14702–14710. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-08000-2.
14. Dogan B., Madaleno M., Tiwari A. K., Hammoudeh S. Impacts of export quality on environmental degradation: does income matter? // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020. Vol. 27, № 8. P. 13735–13772. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-07371-5.
15. Liu H., Kim H., Liang S., Kwon O. S. Export Diversification and Ecological Footprint: A Comparative Study on EKC Theory among Korea, Japan, and China // Sustainability. 2018. Vol. 10, № 10. DOI: 10.3390/su10103657.
16. Mania E. Export Diversification and CO 2 Emissions: An Augmented Environmental Kuznets Curve // Journal of International Development. 2019. Vol. 32, № 2. P. 168–185. DOI: 10.1002/jid.3441.
17. Shahzad U., Ferraz D., Doğan B., Rebelatto D. Export Product Diversification and CO2 Emissions: Contextual evidences from Developing and Developed Economies // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020. Vol. 276, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro. 2020.124146.
18. Cui J., Lapan H., Moschini G. Productivity, Export, and Environmental Performance: Air Pollutants in the United States // American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 2015. Vol. 98, № 2. P. 447–467. DOI: 10.1093/ajae/aav066.
19. Holladay J. Exporters and the environment // Canadian Journal of Economics. 2016. Vol. 49, № 1. P. 147–172. DOI: 10.1111/caje.12193.
20. Blyde J., Ramirez M. Exporting and environmental performance: Where you export matters // The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development. 2021. Vol. 31, № 5. P. 672–691. DOI: 10.1080/09638199.2021.2003424.
21. Iqbal N., Abbasi KR., Shinwari R., Guangcai W., Ahmad M., Tang K. Does exports diversification and environmental innovation achieve carbon neutrality target of OECD economies? // Journal of Environmental Management. 2021. Vol. 291. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112648.
22. Toktaş Y. The impact of export diversification on CO2 emissions: evidence from Poland // Acta Scientiarum Polonorum — Oeconomia. 2022. Vol. 20, № 3. P. 45–54. DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2021.20.3.24
23. Hu G., Can M., Paramati S. R., Doğan B., Fang, J. The effect of import product diversification on carbon emissions: New evidence for sustainable economic policies // Economic Analysis and Policy. 2020. Vol. 65. P. 198–210. DOI: 10.1016/j.eap.2020.01.004.
24. Levin A., Lin C. F., Chu C. S.J. Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties // Journal of Econometrics. 2002. Vol. 108, № 1. P. 1–24. DOI: 10.1016/s0304-4076(01)00098-7
25. Im K.S., Pesaran M. H., Shin Y. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels // Journal of Econometrics. 2003. Vol. 115, № 1. P. 53–74. DOI: 10.1016/s0304-4076(03)00092-7.
26. Bazan G. Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the earth // Electronic Green Journal. 1997. Vol. 1, № 7. DOI: 10.5070/g31710273.
27. Borucke M., Moore D., Cranston G., Gracey K., Iha K., Larson J., Galli A. Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: The National Footprint Accounts’ underlying methodology and framework // Ecological Indicators. 2013. Vol. 24. P. 518–533. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.005.
28. Finger JM., Kreinin ME. A Measure of `Export Similarity’ and Its Possible Uses // The Economic Journal. 1979. Vol. 89, № 356. P. 905–912. DOI: 10.2307/2231506.
2. Gozgor G. Does trade matter for carbon emissions in OECD countries? Evidence from a new trade openness measure // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2017. Vol. 24, № 36. P. 27813–27821. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-0361‑z.
3. Ling C. H., Ahmed K., Binti Muhamad R., Shahbaz M. Decomposing the trade-environment nexus for Malaysia: what do the technique, scale, composition, and comparative advantage effect indicate? // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2015. Vol. 22, № 24. P. 20131–20142. DOI: 10.1007/s11356–015-5217-9.
4. Copeland B.R., Taylor M. S. Trade, growth and the environmen // Journal of Economic literature. 2004. Vol. 42. № 1. P. 7–71. DOI: 10.3386/w9823.
5. Copeland B.R., Taylor M. S. North-South Trade and the Environment // Journal of Economic Literature. 2017. Vol. 109, № 3. P. 755–787. DOI: 10.4324/9781315201986–17.
6. Murshed M. An empirical re-investigation for verifying the pollution haven hypothesis concerning the foreign direct investment-carbon intensity nexus: Contextual evidence from BRICS // Environmental Challenges. 2023. Vol. 13, № 58. P. 1–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.envc.2023.100793.
7. Shen J., Liu W., Chu J. Does migration of pollution-intensive industries impact environmental efficiency? Evidence supporting “Pollution Haven Hypothesis” // Journal of Environmental Management. 2019. Vol. 242, № 3. P. 142–152. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.072.
8. Jiang W., Cole M., Sun J., Wang S. Innovation, carbon emissions and the pollution haven hypothesis: Climate capitalism and global re-interpretations // Journal of Environmental Management. 2022. Vol. 307, № 1. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114465.
9. Yang J., Guo H., Liu B., Shi R., Zhang B., Ye W. Environmental Regulation and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis: Do Environmental Regulation Measures Matter? // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2018. Vol. 202, P. 993–1000. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.144.
10. Porter M. E. America’s Green Strategy // Scientific American. 1991. Vol. 264, № 4. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0491-168.
11. Porter M.E., van der Linde C. Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship // Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1995. Vol. 9, № 4. P. 97–118. DOI: 10.1257/jep.9.4.97.
12. Doğan B., Saboori B., Can M. Does economic complexity matter for environmental degradation? An empirical analysis for different stages of development // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2019. Vol. 26, № 31. P. 31900–31912. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-06333-1.
13. Can M., Dogan B., Saboori B. Does trade matter for environmental degradation in developing countries?
New evidence in the context of export product diversification // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020. Vol. 27. P. 14702–14710. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-08000-2.
14. Dogan B., Madaleno M., Tiwari A. K., Hammoudeh S. Impacts of export quality on environmental degradation: does income matter? // Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020. Vol. 27, № 8. P. 13735–13772. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-07371-5.
15. Liu H., Kim H., Liang S., Kwon O. S. Export Diversification and Ecological Footprint: A Comparative Study on EKC Theory among Korea, Japan, and China // Sustainability. 2018. Vol. 10, № 10. DOI: 10.3390/su10103657.
16. Mania E. Export Diversification and CO 2 Emissions: An Augmented Environmental Kuznets Curve // Journal of International Development. 2019. Vol. 32, № 2. P. 168–185. DOI: 10.1002/jid.3441.
17. Shahzad U., Ferraz D., Doğan B., Rebelatto D. Export Product Diversification and CO2 Emissions: Contextual evidences from Developing and Developed Economies // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020. Vol. 276, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro. 2020.124146.
18. Cui J., Lapan H., Moschini G. Productivity, Export, and Environmental Performance: Air Pollutants in the United States // American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 2015. Vol. 98, № 2. P. 447–467. DOI: 10.1093/ajae/aav066.
19. Holladay J. Exporters and the environment // Canadian Journal of Economics. 2016. Vol. 49, № 1. P. 147–172. DOI: 10.1111/caje.12193.
20. Blyde J., Ramirez M. Exporting and environmental performance: Where you export matters // The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development. 2021. Vol. 31, № 5. P. 672–691. DOI: 10.1080/09638199.2021.2003424.
21. Iqbal N., Abbasi KR., Shinwari R., Guangcai W., Ahmad M., Tang K. Does exports diversification and environmental innovation achieve carbon neutrality target of OECD economies? // Journal of Environmental Management. 2021. Vol. 291. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112648.
22. Toktaş Y. The impact of export diversification on CO2 emissions: evidence from Poland // Acta Scientiarum Polonorum — Oeconomia. 2022. Vol. 20, № 3. P. 45–54. DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2021.20.3.24
23. Hu G., Can M., Paramati S. R., Doğan B., Fang, J. The effect of import product diversification on carbon emissions: New evidence for sustainable economic policies // Economic Analysis and Policy. 2020. Vol. 65. P. 198–210. DOI: 10.1016/j.eap.2020.01.004.
24. Levin A., Lin C. F., Chu C. S.J. Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties // Journal of Econometrics. 2002. Vol. 108, № 1. P. 1–24. DOI: 10.1016/s0304-4076(01)00098-7
25. Im K.S., Pesaran M. H., Shin Y. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels // Journal of Econometrics. 2003. Vol. 115, № 1. P. 53–74. DOI: 10.1016/s0304-4076(03)00092-7.
26. Bazan G. Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the earth // Electronic Green Journal. 1997. Vol. 1, № 7. DOI: 10.5070/g31710273.
27. Borucke M., Moore D., Cranston G., Gracey K., Iha K., Larson J., Galli A. Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: The National Footprint Accounts’ underlying methodology and framework // Ecological Indicators. 2013. Vol. 24. P. 518–533. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.005.
28. Finger JM., Kreinin ME. A Measure of `Export Similarity’ and Its Possible Uses // The Economic Journal. 1979. Vol. 89, № 356. P. 905–912. DOI: 10.2307/2231506.
Опубликована
2025-09-09
Как цитировать
ПОЛУЕСОВА, Елена Владимировна.
АНАЛИЗ ВОЗДЕЙСТВИЯ ДИВЕРСИФИКАЦИИ ЭКСПОРТА НА ЭКОЛОГИЧЕСКИЙ СЛЕД В РАЗВИТЫХ И РАЗВИВАЮЩИХСЯ СТРАНАХ.
ВЕСТНИК ЧЕЛЯБИНСКОГО ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА, [S.l.], n. 3 (497), p. 71-81, sep. 2025.
ISSN 2782-4829.
Доступно на: <https://journals.csu.ru/index.php/BulletinCSU/article/view/2879>. Дата доступа: 29 mar. 2026
doi: https://doi.org/10.47475/1994-2796-2025-497-3-71-81.
Раздел
Статьи
Ключевые слова
экологический след
экология
устойчивое развитие
диверсификация экспорта
эконометрический анализ
ARDL
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution-NonCommercial» («Атрибуция — Некоммерческое использование») 4.0 Всемирная.
