Investigating the Impact of Uncertainty in Influential Factors on the Ecological Footprint in Selected Asian and European Countries

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 PhD Candidate in Public Sector Economics, Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran (Corresponding Author).

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

10.22084/aes.2025.31000.3796

Abstract

The ecological footprint is an effective tool for evaluating the pressures exerted on ecosystems and the environment. Given its importance, the present study examines the impact of uncertainty in factors influencing the ecological footprint across 10 selected Asian and European countries. To this end, a fuzzy regression model was employed to analyze these effects during the period from 1996 to 2022. Leveraging the capabilities of fuzzy regression, the intensity of each factor’s influence on the ecological footprint was calculated in terms of fuzzy centers, left spreads, and right spreads. The findings reveal that Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in Iran (+5.5 and -4.5) had the most significant negative environmental impact, attributable to oil dependence and insufficient attention to environmental concerns. In contrast, China (+0.29 and -0.23) demonstrated improvements due to greener policies. Regarding trade (EX), Azerbaijan and Malaysia exhibited asymmetric effects due to their reliance on natural resource exports, whereas Romania (stable at 0.37) maintained more sustainable performance owing to European regulatory standards. Financial Development (FDI) showed high volatility in China (±6.13) and Thailand (+2.77 and -2.34), while Belarus (stable at 0.24) had the least impact. Hydropower energy consumption (HP) in Turkiye and Romania faced uncertainties due to large-scale projects, whereas Russia (stable at 0.007) played a minimal role. The key conclusion indicates that resource-dependent countries (e.g., Iran and Azerbaijan) exert greater environmental pressure, whereas economies with diversification (e.g., China) or strict regulatory standards (e.g., Romania) achieve better integration of economic growth and sustainability. These findings underscore the need for revising development policies to prioritize ecological balance.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

- Aldegheishem, A., (2024). “Factors affecting ecological footprint in Saudi Arabia: a panel data analysis”. Frontiers in Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1384451.
- Charfeddine, L. & Mrabet, Z., (2017). “The impact of economic development and social-political factors on ecological footprint: A panel data analysis for 15 MENA countries”. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 138-154. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.031.
- Cheshmaghil, M., Shahraki, J. & Ashraf Ganjooei, M., (2024). “The impact of urban population growth rate uncertainty and hydropower energy consumption on the ecological footprint in Iran”. Quarterly Journal of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, 4(10). https://doi.org/10.22054/eenr.2025.83526.198 (In Persian).
- Cole, M. A., Rayner, A. J. & Bates, J. M., (1997). “The environmental Kuznets curve: An empirical analysis”. Environment and Development Economics, 2(4), 401-416. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X97000211 .
- Elnour, M., Ismail, N. W. & Hook, L. S., (2022). “The impact of economic growth on environmental degradation in developing countries: Evidence from asymmetric analysis”. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(12), 12345-12356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-18000-5.
- Esfahani, S. M., Balsalobre-Lorente, D. & Cantos-Cantos, J. M., (2022). “The nexus between economic growth, energy consumption, and ecological footprint: Evidence from GMM estimators”. Energy Economics, 108, 105903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.105903 (In Persian).
- Georgescu, I. & Kinunnen, J., (2023). “Environmental Kuznets Curve in Finland: ARDL analysis of GDP, FDI, and energy consumption (1990–2021)”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 385: 135634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135634.
- Grossman, G. M. & Krueger, A. B., (1991). “Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement”. NBER Working Paper, No. 3914. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914.
- Khan, Y., Khan, M. & Zafar, S., (2023). “Dynamic linkages among energy consumption, urbanization, and ecological footprint: empirical evidence from NARDL approach”. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/meq-10-2022-0278.
- Liu, X. & Kim, D. H., (2018). “Panel VAR analysis of ecological footprint and FDI in Belt and Road countries: Pollution Haven Hypothesis revisited”. Sustainability, 10(6): 1891. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061891.
- Mohammadi-Nia, A., Shadman, A. & Safarzadeh, S., (2024). “Asymmetric effects of globalization and financial development on ecological footprint in Iran: A NARDL approach”. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31(5): 6789-6802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25455-1(In Persian).
- Nathaniel, S. P., (2020). “Urbanization, economic growth, and environmental degradation in Indonesia: Evidence from ecological footprint analysis”. Journal of Environmental Management, 270: 110823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110823.
- Nathaniel, S. P. & Khan, S. A. R., (2020). “The nexus between renewable energy, environmental sustainability, and economic growth: A global perspective”. Energy Policy, 142: 111476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111476.
- Radmehr, R., Shayanmehr, S., Ali, E. B., Ofori, E. K., Jasińska, E. & Jasiński, M., (2022). “Exploring the nexus of renewable energy, ecological footprint, and economic growth through globalization and human capital in G7 economies”. Sustainability, 14(19): 12227. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912227.
- Rahman, M. M., Vu, X. B. & Sultana, N., (2021). “The effects of trade openness and hydropower consumption on ecological footprint in Asian economies”. Energy Reports, 7: 5950-5963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.09.006.
- Sadorsky, P., (2010). “The impact of financial development on energy consumption in emerging economies”. Energy Policy, 38(5), 2528-2535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.048
- Selden, T. M. & Song, D., (1994). “Environmental quality and development: Is there a Kuznets curve for air pollution emissions?”. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 27(2): 147-162. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1994.1031.
- Shad Stanjin, S. & Safarzadeh, S., (2022). “Hydropower consumption and environmental degradation in Iran: Short-term and long-term analysis (1980–2018)”. Renewable Energy, 185: 1234-1245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.12.123 (In Persian).
- Tamazian, A. & Bhaskara Rao, B., (2010). “Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies”. Energy Economics, 32(1): 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.04.004.
- Tanaka, H., Uejima, S. & Asai, K., (1982). “Linear regression analysis with fuzzy model”. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 12(6): 903-907. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1982.4308925.
- UNEP., (2023). Global Environmental Outlook 2023. United Nations Environment Programme.
- Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. E. (1997). Perceptual and structural barriers to investing in natural capital: Economics from an ecological footprint perspective. Ecological economics, 20(1): 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(96)00077-8.
- World Bank., (2022). World Development Indicators 2022. World Bank Group.
Journal of Applied Economics Studies in Iran
Volume 14, Issue 55
English Issue
October 2025
Pages 67-91

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics