Next Article in Journal
Power and Flow Analysis of Axial Induction Control in an Array of Model-Scale Wind Turbines
Previous Article in Journal
Influence of Different Ambient Temperatures on the Discharge Performance of Square Ternary Lithium-Ion Batteries
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Toward Understanding Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development in Developing and Developed Economies: A Review

by
Rabie Said
1,
Muhammad Ishaq Bhatti
2,3,* and
Ahmed Imran Hunjra
4,5
1
Department of Accounting, Data Analytics, Economics and Finance, La Trobe Business School, Melbourne, VIC 3083, Australia
2
SP Jain School of Global Management, Sydney, NSW 2141, Australia
3
La Trobe Business School, Melbourne, VIC 3083, Australia
4
Rabat Business School, International University of Rabat, Sale 11000, Morocco
5
Department of Business Administration, Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan 32200, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2022, 15(15), 5349; https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155349
Submission received: 28 June 2022 / Revised: 15 July 2022 / Accepted: 20 July 2022 / Published: 23 July 2022

Abstract

:
In recent years, there has been an upsurge of studies on sustainable development. The majority of research focuses on developed countries and issues that are incompatible with developing nations. This study addresses a gap in the literature by reviewing the research on developed and developing economies, as well as their social and environmental boundaries, under the renewable energy and sustainable development (RESD) nexus. It also explores how RESD may be applied in extreme situations such as population increase, energy supply disruptions, and transportation shortfalls. The fundamental contribution of this paper is to provide detailed debate from the perspective of economic growth hypotheses and their relationship with energy usage and renewable energy solutions for sustainable growth and development.

1. Introduction

Over the last few years, there has been a surge in research on sustainable growth. Energy is required for economic expansion and renewable energy sources are required for sustainable development [1,2]. Although the developed world has already seen rapid growth in recent years, with renewable energy absorption levels reaching double-digit proportions across several countries’ power generation, many other developing nations are still at a beginning level in renewable energy generation [3]. In addition, non-renewable energy has recently remained the most widely utilized power source in the developing world, accounting for more than 87 percent of energy requirements [4]. Fossil fuels and other non-renewable energy sources generate CO2 emissions as a byproduct. Since non-renewable fuels are the primary source of pollution, several countries have attempted to improve their manufacturing processes and energy use in the wake of recent disasters. Some countries have abandoned fossil fuels in favor of renewable sources, while many others still use fossil fuels as the primary source of energy [5]. Indeed, most energy extraction in developing countries comes from fossil fuels, with less than 20 percent coming from renewable sources [6]. Developing countries face a significant challenge regarding renewable energy investment [7,8,9]. According to Reza et al. [10], the widespread adoption of renewable energy has been hindered by several impediments, including upfront capital requirements, a dearth of financial institutions and investors, competitive pressures from fossil fuels, and a lower level of government support compared to that of traditional fuels.
Research on the relationship between energy production and economic growth is enormous, and it has been increasing, particularly after the well-known work of Kraft [11] on the United States economy. There is a strong correlation between energy production and the supply of resources [12,13]. There are two ways to approach this: supply-side and demand-side strategies. When it comes to economic growth, supply-side analysis shows that renewable energy sources have the same impact on growth as other natural resources such as labor and capital [14]. Therefore, in the fight against global warming, the use of renewable energy sources should take precedence. The demand-side approach has shown that political considerations (policy decisions, tax, incentive schemes, R&D spending) and socioeconomic factors (earnings, CO2 emissions, fossil fuel costs, the proportion of fossil fuels being used in energy consumption) are the primary determinants of the demand for renewable energy [12,14]. This research has expanded to many nations worldwide for several data periods with several adopted methodological techniques. The results achieved are more diverse, with a lack of conformity among researchers on the relationship and the direction of causality between the two variables in developed and developing countries [15,16,17].
Although renewable energy provides various advantages, its percentage of overall energy output is still low. Starting costs for renewable energy are high since fossil fuels are still subsidized and the complete cost of pollution is not reflected in the price of fossil fuels. In addition, energy consumption in developed countries is expanding slowly, and it takes time to modify the present energy infrastructure and energy usage patterns. Fossil fuels, on the other hand, are playing an increasingly important role in supplying the energy needs of developing countries [12,14]. Furthermore, it appears that renewable energy cannot now compete with fossil fuels in terms of cost. Consequently, governments should stimulate the development of renewable energy investments to help them realize their full potential and compete with fossil fuel technologies. The use of renewable energy sources has the potential to reduce power generating costs due to technological advancements, financial improvements, and new market entry opportunities. In coastal zones, the use of solar and wind power may currently compete against fossil fuels in terms of price, even if externalities are taken into account [18]. It is essential, given the relevance of renewable energy sources, to investigate the relationships between renewable energy and economic growth to contribute to the body of literature on energy economics and the development of a sustainable energy system. The primary objective of this review study is to fill the gap and assess the connection between renewable energy production and usage and economic growth in both developing and developed nations around the world.

2. Renewable Energy and Economic Growth

Researchers dispute the association between expanding the usage of renewable energy sources and stimulating the economy. From this perspective, Konuk et al. [19] investigated the connection between economic growth and energy use in developing countries. Their outcomes suggest that biomass energy usage and economic growth go hand in hand. The review study by Jenniches [20] also looked at the financial implications of a shift to generate renewable energy sources in the region. Determining technologies and timeframes for evaluation are critical, in his opinion. Doytch and Narayan [21,22] assessed the influence of manufacturing and service growth on the usage of non-renewable and renewable energy sources. According to their findings, high-growth industries such as the service industry in advanced economies and the manufacturing industry in developing economies benefit from renewable energy. Acheampong et al. [15] found a bi-directional causal association between renewable energy use and economic growth using the GMM-PVAR approach. Koengkan et al. [18] discovered that countries such as Venezuela and Argentina have low levels of renewable energy in their power mix. These governments saw a connection between renewable energy and fossil fuel usage as a viable solution to resource shortages.
Instead of increasing economic growth in several countries, energy conservation measures might slow it down [23]. Another study by Ivanovski et al. [24] suggested a beneficial effect of non-renewable energy on economic activity and development in OECD nations. Zebra et al. [25] investigated renewable energy systems in developing nations. Regarding renewable and non-renewable mini-grid maintenance and production, Asian developing countries surpass African countries. As mini-grid costs come down, renewable energy will become increasingly more accessible on the utility-scale. Economic growth (hurdles) and renewable energy generation are also examined in this context by researchers. It is agreed that there are technological, societal, and governmental barriers to the growth of renewable energy. However, Seetharaman et al. [26] asserted that these variables do not directly impact the results of renewable energy development. The use of renewable energy does not hamper economic growth, according to Islam et al. [27]. Despite this, it has a substantial impact on the economy. Investments in renewable and conventional energy usage have both good and negative effects on income growth, based on the beneficial impact of local and foreign investments on energy demand. The quality of the institution also affects the utilization of renewable energy. It is also negative to renewable energy consumption because urbanization has a beneficial influence on non-renewable power consumption.
To achieve faster and more spectacular economic growth, certain industrialized countries, despite their revolutionary attempts to embrace renewable energy technology, remain tied to the usage of fossil fuel alternatives [28]. Even while renewable energy has an environmental benefit, the economic peace that may be achieved with non-renewable sources of energy benefits different economies and their citizens’ way of life, but it does not benefit the environment. For industrialized countries, renewable energy consumption may not substantially affect economic growth, and several EU nations may not correlate renewable energy and economic development metrics. There has been some discussion and an uncertain economic climate, but the EU countries’ proportion of overall energy consumption is steadily increasing and is not significantly dependent on economic issues [29]. Renewable energy might have a significant economic impact if only fossil fuels were substituted. South Korea’s electricity and power generation would have to pay an additional 35 trillion KRW annually if only renewable energy sources were used [30]. Customers will be unwilling to pay for this strategy since it is impractical. According to their findings, the FDI and investments in renewable energy projects may have “economic advantages” for the region by establishing new job and training possibilities, production and linking activities, etc. Education and mobilization of the general public are also imperative for the region’s renewable energy resources to be fully utilized. According to Oluoch et al. [31], 73 percent of Kenyans highly support the development of renewable energy sources technologies, and 91 percent feel that renewable energy technologies will lower the energy generation costs in the country.
Numerous studies in theory and research suggest that the link between rising economic growth and rising energy consumption might take several different forms. Recent economic studies on renewable energy sources and long-term economic development are necessary in light of the growing public concern over the environmental harm caused by fossil fuel use. For example, the growth, conservation, feedback, and neutrality hypotheses are only a few examples of theories proposed to explain the energy consumption–economic growth connection. Table 1 presents the relationship between renewable energy utilization and economic development. Overall, this study reveals that the wide range of empirical models utilized in these investigations has resulted in inconsistent outcomes.

2.1. Growth Hypothesis

This hypothesis argues that energy use is critical to economic development and other inputs (such as technological advancement, capital investment, and labor) cannot substitute energy’s importance in the production process. According to this theory, reducing energy usage could hurt economic growth. Using panel estimation approaches for the 38 main renewable energy-producing economies from 1990 to 2012, Bhattacharya et al. [42] found that renewable energy usage has a “significant positive effect” on long-term growth in the economy in 57 percent of economies investigated. As a result, the use of renewable energy is an important factor in the development. Inglesi-Lotz [43] investigated 34 OECD countries between 1990 and 2010 using the Pedroni co-integration approach. The findings suggest that using renewable energy has a positive relationship with economic growth. Murshed et al. [59] investigated the association between renewable energy usage and economic development in Argentina from 1971 to 2016. They discovered a long-run relationship between sustainable energy and economic growth using an advanced form of the STIRPAT model. Furthermore, Wang et al. [17] investigated the causation between renewable energy utilization and economic growth using a panel of OECD countries. According to the study, renewable energy usage has a favorable influence on economic development. In addition, Zahoor et al. [63] examined the impact of clean energy investment on China’s economic growth over the period 1970–2016. They found that clean energy investment is positively associated with China’s economic growth.

2.2. Feedback Hypothesis

The feedback hypothesis demonstrates that economic development and energy use are linked reciprocally. Growth in the economy has a negative impact on energy consumption, and the decrease in energy usage has a negative impact on economic growth and its development [4]. A study by Lin and Moubarak [65] suggested that renewable energy has been linked to economic growth in China. This illustrates that China’s economic advancement is supporting the growth of the renewable sector. An investigation of the causation between renewable energy usage and economic development was performed by Rafindadi and Ozturk [66]. According to their findings, increasing the country’s reliance on renewable energy boosts the country’s economic growth by 0.2194 percent for every 1 percent rise in renewable energy consumption. Using data from 1960 to 2017, Acheampong et al. [15] found a positive feedback relationship between renewable energy consumption and economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa. Gyimah et al. [4] investigated the direct and indirect effects of renewable energy consumption on economic growth in Ghana using the Granger causality test based on data from 1990 to 2015. The study’s findings point to a connection between growing economic activity and an increase in the use of renewable energy sources.

2.3. Conservation Hypothesis

According to the conservation theory, energy consumption is a function of economic growth, and the growth concept is absolutely at odds with this (e.g., energy consumption determines economic growth). The hypothesis of conservation has had a great deal of support in recent years. Between 1994 and 2003, Sadorsky [67] employed panel co-integration estimations for a sample of 18 emerging economies to examine the link between renewable energy use and economic growth. The results indicated that economic growth positively influences renewable energy consumption. In addition, the author reported that renewable energy consumption would surge by 3.5 percent if real GDP per capita increased by 1 percent. This means renewable power consumption will increase dramatically as emerging economies gain traction. Menyah and Wolde-Rufael [68], for example, found evidence of one-way causality between economic growth and the utilization of renewable energy in the United States. More recent studies also validated conservation theory [16,61,69].

2.4. Neutrality Hypothesis

According to the neutrality theory, there is no correlation between energy consumption and the economy’s growth. Researchers indicate that energy has little bearing on economic growth. Capital and labor are the essential components of production, while energy is an intermediate input. Despite a multitude of evidence indicating a connection between the use of renewable energy and economic growth, other investigations point out that no such relationship exists in many European countries [33]. Since renewable energy was still in its infancy in Europe during this period, Menegaki [33] proposed that the lack of correlation between GDP growth and renewable energy usage may be attributable to this early stage of development and market penetration.
Toda–Yamamoto causality tests were conducted on the US economy from 1949 to 2010 by Yildirim et al. [36]. The study supported the neutrality hypothesis: no casual association between economic growth and renewable energy use. Vaona [35] used Granger causality tests to confirm the neutrality hypothesis in Italy from 1861 to 2001. More recent studies support this hypothesis. For example, Eyuboglu and Uzar [55] discovered no causal association between renewable energy usage and economic development for a panel of 15 emerging markets from 1990 to 2015. Inal et al. [8] offered similar conclusions for the context of African oil-producing nations from 1990 to 2014. As a result, there is no convincing evidence of a relationship between higher usage of alternative energy sources and enhanced economic development in any manner or direction on this subject. Bulut et al. [54] examined the impact of renewable energy consumption on economic growth for the USA using quarterly data over the period 1977Q1–2019Q3. The results indicated that there is no cointegration between the two variables.
The G7 industrialized countries cannot ensure environmental sustainability despite their economic success. For example, Ahmad et al. [70] showed that financial globalization and eco-innovation decrease the ecological footprint, and urban areas hurt the environment because they increase carbon footprint levels. Amri [71] emphasized the interconnectedness of three parameters across various income groups of countries. Renewable energy use and GDP growth, commerce and renewable energy, trade, and economic growth were linked in all explored countries. Another study focused on renewable energy consumption, ecological footprint, and economic growth in the US. Using the ARDL model, it is possible to link an increase in renewable energy use with the reduction of environmental deterioration [72]. Using different statistical techniques, Armeanu et al. [48] examined the connections between renewable energy, distinct forms of energy, economic growth, carbon intensity, and rapid urbanization in various nations with varying income levels. They discovered that in developed countries, a co-integration exists between renewable energy consumption and carbon releases from renewable and nuclear sources. Using the Granger causality test, there is only one bidirectional causal connection between economic growth and resource consumption in developing countries. In contrast, developed countries have a bidirectional link between energy intensity and carbon emissions.
Researchers such as Hao et al. [73] employed panel data techniques to examine the consequences of green growth in G7 countries in the past 25 years. According to the conclusions of this study, environmental deterioration is affected by both short-term and long-term GDP development. Consequently, the claim that green growth improves the environment is valid. Changing CO2, GDP, green economy, environmental regulation, renewable power consumption, or human resources in all seven G7 countries will affect the other countries.
Conversely, energy usage benefits growth in several low- and middle-income nations, whereas renewable energy sources have a negative effect [50]. Li and Leung (2021) used panel data methodologies to investigate the connection between economic growth, energy prices, and renewable energy use. They showed that increasing renewable energy requires economic growth even in countries such as the G7, whose economies are well-established. In another study, Namahoro et al. [51] showed that renewable energy positively impacts economic growth. Renewable energy use in the G7 countries benefits economic growth, and this positive association is affected by the threshold value. Thus, renewable energy’s function in promoting economic growth is non-linear. For example, renewable energy plays an essential role in fostering economic growth if EU members increase their use above a certain threshold. Concerning renewable energy consumption and economic growth, Chen et al. [45] used a threshold model in their study. These studies, which use 1995–2015 as a baseline, show that renewable energies significantly and favorably impact economic growth in OECD nations but not developed ones. When renewable energy consumption reaches a particular level in emerging and non-OECD countries, it dramatically affects economic growth. According to Sharma et al. [52], switching to renewable energy has more long-term economic benefits than short-term costs using dynamic panel data estimation.

3. Renewable Energy, Energy Consumption, and Economic Growth in Developing Countries

There is a lack of reliable, affordable, and long-lasting electrical power in rural areas of impoverished and developing countries. Due to a lack of renewable energy options, residents in these countries’ urban and rural areas must rely on fossil fuels. Bangladesh’s energy industry is still in its infancy, hindering the country from progressing economically. Sustainable development goals (SDG) can only be achieved if the proportion of renewable energy in the power mix increases and resource usage for energy production is reduced [74].
These include short-term power stations, coal-fired plant operations, and imports from surrounding nations to reduce the imbalance in supply and demand. There is still a long way to go before the country can produce and supply enough electricity. In addition, the country’s considerable use of renewable energy is hampered by growing FDI inflows linked to the energy sector. The region’s increased usage of renewable energy, particularly in Bangladesh, is also being spurred by the region’s growing economy and rising CO2 emissions [75,76,77]. Adding tidal power, another renewable energy source, to the nation’s electrical grid could be crucial [78,79,80,81]. Alam et al. [82] suggested that Bangladesh must adopt renewable energy and demand-side treatment to reduce a detrimental influence on the country’s economy since economic development translates to higher energy usage. Nigeria, one of Africa’s most significant fossil fuel exporters, has recently confronted a considerable energy crisis. This abundant supply of waste and feedstocks could catalyze Nigeria’s economic growth in the future [83,84,85,86].
According to Ramadan [87], government subsidies for installing new renewable energy plants or reducing the financing rates enhance the economic benefits. Ghouchani et al. [88] investigated developing renewable energy in Iran. Long-run technology acquisition plans, regulatory stabilization, and “attraction of foreign investment” are all addressed in this research as potential opportunities for Iran’s energy industry. Policies most flexible to national goals, technological capacity, and economies might be considered while formulating and implementing a renewable energy policy.
Wang and Wang [89] explored the role of alternative renewable consumption on Pakistan’s GDP per capita. They concluded that economic growth is boosted by using fossil fuels. However, this is not useful in the latter phases of the industrial process. In the early phases of the manufacturing industry in Pakistan, adopting renewable energy is not economical. However, it is also good for the ecosystem later in the process. According to Irfan et al. [5], employing renewable energy does not increase Pakistan’s social development. Surprisingly, as a country’s GDP grows, so does its education level. CO2 emissions also have a positive impact on development indicators. Furthermore, trade liberalization stifles Pakistan’s social development. The long-term feedback relationship between ecological impact and social development is supported by causality analysis [90,91].
Pumped hydro energy technology can be employed in Bangladesh, Iran, Pakistan, and Nigeria because it can swiftly handle the load and modify the frequencies to satisfy the energy system’s requirements [62]. Compared with solar energy and wind energy, although it is limited by geographical factors, it can avoid intermittent electricity generation, so the threshold conditions for use are lower.
Doytch and Narayan [19] asserted that using renewable energy boosts the economy’s growth. In South Korea, renewable energy production has economic and environmental benefits. Sim [92] and Shan et al. [93] considered the effect of green sector development and renewable energy in Turkey’s drive for emissions reduction. Renewable energy, energy use, population growth, and per capita income are all interconnected in the long run. Green technology innovations and carbon emissions are being cut, yet at the same time, global energy use, population growth, and per capita carbon emissions are all rising [94]. Nong et al. [95] examined the country’s energy policy for a contemporary period of growing development in Vietnam. It has been shown that renewable energy can offset the adverse effects of environmental challenges on social and economic well-being [37,96].

4. Conclusions

It is no longer a country-specific concern to deal with global warming, environmental degradation, and other associated challenges. The clean development mechanism entails a vast deployment of renewable energy technologies to enhance sustainable development. Energy security is quickly becoming a reality as various renewable energy supplies are exploited because of their potential for mitigating GHG emissions. As part of the UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol incorporates the idea of a “clean development framework”. Developed nations would contribute to emission reduction measures, which would then fund renewable energy programs in the developing world [12,14]. Increasing the usage of green technology and renewable energy sources can help address this problem. However, mass sustainable energy development faces a few obstacles, including unpredictability, input–output cost analysis, higher manufacturing costs, and a lack of knowledge and financial resources. Based on their previous studies, researchers have discovered that renewable energy sources are critical to a country’s overall growth. Developing countries must increase their reliance on renewable energy sources.
Reduced emissions can be recognized by using renewable energy and other natural resources. As a result, global monitoring of the effect of CO2 emissions on the environment is required to assess the effects of climate change. All of these effects are weighted according to the economic situation in each country. The industrial structure is being transformed by green growth and eco-innovation [73]. Developed countries must prioritize a green growth strategy to meet sustainable development goals.
Using renewable energy systems is critical in developing countries with high renewable energy capacity. According to our findings, fossil fuels may be helpful in the early manufacturing phases but are not in the latter stages of production. However, while employing clean energy may not be favorable at the outset of expanding manufacturing activities in developing countries, its benefits extend far beyond the production stage. Policymakers should move quickly to implement comprehensive reforms in renewable energy. Globalization has urged Latin American countries to use renewable energy sources to minimize the effects of climate change [18,70]. Green energy technology development will benefit the region and the world. Policymakers should take advantage of globalization to lower renewable energy technology costs and implement regulations encouraging the usage of these technologies by low-income households. Future research may be undertaken by conducting a bibliometric and content analysis.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.S. and M.I.B.; methodology, R.S. and M.I.B.; formal analysis, R.S., M.I.B. and A.I.H.; resources, R.S., M.I.B. and A.I.H.; writing—original draft preparation, R.S.; writing—review and editing, R.S., M.I.B. and A.I.H.; supervision & project administration, M.I.B. and A.I.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

AbbreviationFull name
ARDL modelAutoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) model
CCEMG approachCommon correlated effect means group model
CS-ARDL approach Cross-sectionally augmented autoregressive distributed lag (CS-ARDL) modeling approach
CSDL approachCross-sectional augmented autoregressive distributed lagged
CO2 emissionsCarbon dioxide emissions
DEA approachData envelopment analysis approach
EU countriesEuropean Union countries
FDIForeign direct investment
FOLS model Fixed effect ordinary least square model
GMM-PVAR modelPanel vector autoregression technique
G7 World’s seven largest developed economies
NARDL modelNonlinear autoregressive distributed lag model
OECD countriesOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries
RESDRenewable energy and sustainable development
SDGSustainable development goals
STIRPAT modelStochastic impacts by regression on population, affluence and technology model
UNFCCCUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

References

  1. Hunjra, A.I.; Azam, M.; Bruna, M.G.; Taskin, D. Role of financial development for sustainable economic development in low middle income countries. Financ. Res. Lett. 2022, 47, 102793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Azam, M.; Hunjra, A.I.; Bouri, E.; Tan, Y.; Al-Faryan, M.A.S. Impact of institutional quality on sustainable development: Evidence from developing countries. J. Envir. Manag. 2021, 298, 113465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Østergaard, P.A.; Duic, N.; Noorollahi, Y.; Mikulcic, H.; Kalogirou, S. Sustainable development using renewable energy technology. Renew. Energy 2020, 146, 2430–2437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Gyimah, J.; Yao, X.; Tachega, M.A.; Hayford, I.S.; Opoku-Mensah, E. Renewable energy consumption and economic growth: New evidence from Ghana. Energy 2022, 248, 123559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Irfan, M.; Zhao, Z.-Y.; Rehman, A.; Ozturk, I.; Li, H. Consumers’ intention-based influence factors of renewable energy adoption in Pakistan: A structural equation modeling approach. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 432–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Larcher, D.; Tarascon, J.-M. Towards greener and more sustainable batteries for electrical energy storage. Nat. Chem. 2015, 7, 19–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ram, M.; Child, M.; Aghahosseini, A.; Bogdanov, D.; Lohrmann, A.; Breyer, C. A comparative analysis of electricity generation costs from renewable, fossil fuel and nuclear sources in G20 countries for the period 2015. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 199, 687–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Inal, V.; Addi, H.M.; Çakmak, E.E.; Torusdağ, M.; Çalışkan, M. The nexus between renewable energy, CO2 emissions, and economic growth: Empirical evidence from African oil-producing countries. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 1634–1643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hunjra, A.I.; Arunachalam, M.; Hanif, M. Financial Development-Economic Growth Nexus: Theoretical Underpinnings, Empirical Evidence, and Critical Reflections. In Economic Growth and Financial Development; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 155–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Raza, W.; Hammad, S.; Shams, U.; Maryam, A.; Mahmood, S.; Nadeem, R. Renewable energy resources current status and barriers in their adaptation for Pakistan. J. Bioprocess. Chem. Eng. 2015, 3, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  11. Kraft, J.; Kraft, A. On the relationship between energy and GNP. J. Energy Dev. 1978, 3, 401–403. [Google Scholar]
  12. Shahzad, U.; Radulescu, M.; Rahim, S.; Isik, C.; Yousaf, Z.; Ionescu, S.A. Do Environment-Related Policy Instruments and Technologies Facilitate Renewable Energy Generation? Exploring the Contextual Evidence from Developed Economies. Energies 2021, 14, 690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wellalage, N.H.; Kumar, V.; Hunjra, A.I.; Al-Faryan, M.A.S. Environmental performance and firm financing during COVID-19 outbreaks: Evidence from SMEs. Financ. Res. Lett. 2022, 47, 102568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ahmed, Z.; Ahmad, M.; Rjoub, H.; Kalugina, O.A.; Hussain, N. Economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and ecological footprint: Exploring the role of environmental regulations and democracy in sustainable development. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Acheampong, A.O.; Dzator, J.; Savage, D.A. Renewable energy, CO2 emissions and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: Does institutional quality matter? J. Policy Model. 2021, 43, 1070–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Chen, Y.; Mamon, R.; Spagnolo, F.; Spagnolo, N. Renewable energy and economic growth: A Markov-switching approach. Energy 2022, 244, 123089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wang, X.; Gao, J.; Chen, Z.; Chen, H.; Zhao, Y.; Huang, Y.; Chen, Z. Evaluation of hydrous ethanol as a fuel for internal combustion engines: A review. Renew. Energy 2022, 194, 504–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Koengkan, M.; Fuinhas, J.A.; Santiago, R. The relationship between CO2 emissions, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, and urbanisation in the Southern Common Market. J. Environ. Econ. Policy 2020, 9, 383–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Konuk, F.; Zeren, F.; Akpınar, S.; Yıldız, Ş. Biomass energy consumption and economic growth: Further evidence from NEXT-11 countries. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 4825–4832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jenniches, S. Assessing the regional economic impacts of renewable energy sources—A literature review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 93, 35–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Doytch, N.; Narayan, S. Does FDI influence renewable energy consumption? An analysis of sectoral FDI impact on renewable and non-renewable industrial energy consumption. Energy Econ. 2016, 54, 291–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Doytch, N.; Narayan, S. Does transitioning towards renewable energy accelerate economic growth? An analysis of sectoral growth for a dynamic panel of countries. Energy 2021, 235, 121290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Soytas, U.; Sari, R. Energy consumption and GDP: Causality relationship in G-7 countries and emerging markets. Energy Econ. 2003, 25, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ivanovski, K.; Hailemariam, A.; Smyth, R. The effect of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on economic growth: Non-parametric evidence. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 286, 124956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zebra, E.I.C.; van der Windt, H.J.; Nhumaio, G.; Faaij, A.P. A review of hybrid renewable energy systems in mini-grids for off-grid electrification in developing countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 144, 111036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Moorthy, K.; Patwa, N.; Gupta, Y. Breaking barriers in deployment of renewable energy. Heliyon 2019, 5, e01166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Islam, M.; Irfan, M.; Shahbaz, M.; Vo, X.V. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption in Bangladesh: The relative influencing profiles of economic factors, urbanization, physical infrastructure and institutional quality. Renew. Energy 2022, 184, 1130–1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shrinkhal, R. Economics, Technology, and Environmental Protection: A critical analysis of phytomanagement. In Phytomanagement of Polluted Sites; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 569–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ogonowski, P. Application of VMCM, to assess of renewable energy impact in European Union Countries. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2021, 192, 4762–4769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Park, S.-H.; Jung, W.-J.; Kim, T.-H.; Lee, S.-Y.T. Can Renewable Energy Replace Nuclear Power in Korea? An Economic Valuation Analysis. Nucl. Eng. Technol. 2016, 48, 559–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Oluoch, S.; Lal, P.; Susaeta, A.; Vedwan, N. Assessment of public awareness, acceptance and attitudes towards renewable energy in Kenya. Sci. Afr. 2020, 9, e00512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Apergis, N.; Payne, J.E. The renewable energy consumption–growth nexus in Central America. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 343–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Menegaki, A.N. Growth and renewable energy in Europe: A random effect model with evidence for neutrality hypothesis. Energy Econ. 2011, 33, 257–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Apergis, N.; Payne, J.E. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption-growth nexus: Evidence from a panel error correction model. Energy Econ. 2012, 34, 733–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Vaona, A. Granger non-causality tests between (non)renewable energy consumption and output in Italy since 1861: The (ir)relevance of structural breaks. Energy Policy 2012, 45, 226–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Yıldırım, E.; Saraç, Ş.; Aslan, A. Energy consumption and economic growth in the USA: Evidence from renewable energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 6770–6774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ocal, O.; Aslan, A. Renewable energy consumption–economic growth nexus in Turkey. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 28, 494–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Pao, H.-T.; Fu, H.-C. Renewable energy, non-renewable energy and economic growth in Brazil. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 25, 381–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Al-Mulali, U. Investigating the impact of nuclear energy consumption on GDP growth and CO2 emission: A panel data analysis. Prog. Nucl. Energy 2014, 73, 172–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ozturk, I.; Bilgili, F. Economic growth and biomass consumption nexus: Dynamic panel analysis for Sub-Sahara African countries. Appl. Energy 2015, 137, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Alper, A.; Oguz, O. The role of renewable energy consumption in economic growth: Evidence from asymmetric causality. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 60, 953–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bhattacharya, M.; Paramati, S.R.; Ozturk, I.; Bhattacharya, S. The effect of renewable energy consumption on economic growth: Evidence from top 38 countries. Appl. Energy 2016, 162, 733–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Inglesi-Lotz, R. The impact of renewable energy consumption to economic growth: A panel data application. Energy Econ. 2016, 53, 58–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Kahia, M.; Ben Aïssa, M.S.; Lanouar, C. Renewable and non-renewable energy use—Economic growth nexus: The case of MENA Net Oil Importing Countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 71, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Chen, C.; Pinar, M.; Stengos, T. Renewable energy consumption and economic growth nexus: Evidence from a threshold model. Energy Policy 2020, 139, 111295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Rahman, M.M.; Velayutham, E. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption-economic growth nexus: New evidence from South Asia. Renew. Energy 2020, 147, 399–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Wang, Q.; Wang, L. Renewable energy consumption and economic growth in OECD countries: A nonlinear panel data analysis. Energy 2020, 207, 118200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Armeanu, D.S.; Joldes, C.C.; Gherghina, S.C.; Andrei, J.V. Understanding the multidimensional linkages among renewable energy, pollution, economic growth and urbanization in contemporary economies: Quantitative assessments across different income countries’ groups. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 142, 110818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Li, R.; Leung, G.C. The relationship between energy prices, economic growth and renewable energy consumption: Evidence from Europe. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 1712–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Namahoro, J.; Nzabanita, J.; Wu, Q. The impact of total and renewable energy consumption on economic growth in lower and middle- and upper-middle-income groups: Evidence from CS-DL and CCEMG analysis. Energy 2021, 237, 121536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Namahoro, J.P.; Wu, Q.; Xiao, H.; Zhou, N. The asymmetric nexus of renewable energy consumption and economic growth: New evidence from Rwanda. Renew. Energy 2021, 174, 336–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sharma, G.D.; Tiwari, A.K.; Erkut, B.; Mundi, H.S. Exploring the nexus between non-renewable and renewable energy consumptions and economic development: Evidence from panel estimations. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 146, 111152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Aslan, A.; Ocal, O.; Ozsolak, B.; Ozturk, I. Renewable energy and economic growth relationship under the oil reserve ownership: Evidence from panel VAR approach. Renew. Energy 2022, 188, 402–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Bulut, U.; Shahbaz, M.; Vo, X.V. Renewable energy-economic growth nexus revisited for the USA: Do different approaches for modeling structural breaks lead to different findings? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 30134–30144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Eyuboglu, K.; Uzar, U. Asymmetric causality between renewable energy consumption and economic growth: Fresh evidence from some emerging countries. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 21899–21911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Kuo, Y.; Maneengam, A.; The, C.P.; An, N.B.; Nassani, A.A.; Haffar, M.; Qadus, A. Fresh evidence on environmental quality measures using natural resources, renewable energy, non-renewable energy and economic growth for 10 Asian nations from CS-ARDL technique. Fuel 2022, 320, 123914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Mohsin, M.; Taghizadeh-Hesary, F.; Iqbal, N.; Saydaliev, H.B. The role of technological progress and renewable energy deployment in green economic growth. Renew. Energy 2022, 190, 777–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Mukhtarov, S. The Relationship between Renewable Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in Azerbaijan. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2022, 12, 416–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Murshed, M.; Rashid, S.; Ulucak, R.; Dagar, V.; Rehman, A.; Alvarado, R.; Nathaniel, S.P. Mitigating energy production-based carbon dioxide emissions in Argentina: The roles of renewable energy and economic globalization. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 16939–16958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Steve, Y.S.; Murad, A.B.; Gyamfi, B.A.; Bekun, F.V.; Uzuner, G. Renewable energy consumption a panacea for Sustainable economic growth: Panel causality analysis for African blocs. Int. J. Green Energy 2022, 19, 847–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ślusarczyk, B.; Żegleń, P.; Kluczek, A.; Nizioł, A.; Górka, M. The Impact of Renewable Energy Sources on the Economic Growth of Poland and Sweden Considering COVID-19 Times. Energies 2022, 15, 332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wang, Q.; Dong, Z.; Li, R.; Wang, L. Renewable energy and economic growth: New insight from country risks. Energy 2022, 238, 122018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zahoor, Z.; Khan, I.; Hou, F. Clean energy investment and financial development as determinants of environment and sustainable economic growth: Evidence from China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 16006–16016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Zhao, X.; Mahendru, M.; Ma, X.; Rao, A.; Shang, Y. Impacts of environmental regulations on green economic growth in China: New guidelines regarding renewable energy and energy efficiency. Renew. Energy 2022, 187, 728–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Lin, B.; Moubarak, M. Renewable energy consumption—Economic growth nexus for China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 40, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Rafindadi, A.A.; Ozturk, I. Impacts of renewable energy consumption on the German economic growth: Evidence from combined cointegration test. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 75, 1130–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Sadorsky, P. Renewable energy consumption and income in emerging economies. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 4021–4028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Menyah, K.; Wolde-Rufael, Y. CO2 emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy and economic growth in the USA. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 2911–2915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Islam, M.; Khan, M.K.; Tareque, M.; Jehan, N.; Dagar, V. Impact of globalization, foreign direct investment, and energy consumption on CO2 emissions in Bangladesh: Does institutional quality matter? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 48851–48871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ahmad, M.; Jiang, P.; Murshed, M.; Shehzad, K.; Akram, R.; Cui, L.; Khan, Z. Modelling the dynamic linkages between eco-innovation, urbanization, economic growth and ecological footprints for G7 countries: Does financial globalization matter? Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 70, 102881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Amri, F. Intercourse across economic growth, trade and renewable energy consumption in developing and developed countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 69, 527–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Usman, O.; Alola, A.A.; Sarkodie, S.A. Assessment of the role of renewable energy consumption and trade policy on environmental degradation using innovation accounting: Evidence from the USA. Renew. Energy 2020, 150, 266–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Hao, L.-N.; Umar, M.; Khan, Z.; Ali, W. Green growth and low carbon emission in G7 countries: How critical the network of environmental taxes, renewable energy and human capital is? Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 752, 141853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Baniya, B.; Giurco, D.; Kelly, S. Green growth in Nepal and Bangladesh: Empirical analysis and future prospects. Energy Policy 2021, 149, 112049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Bhuiyan, M.R.A.; Mamur, H.; Begum, J. A brief review on renewable and sustainable energy resources in Bangladesh. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2021, 4, 100208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Murshed, M. Can regional trade integration facilitate renewable energy transition to ensure energy sustainability in South Asia? Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 808–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ahmad, M.; Hasan, G.J. Renewable energy in Bangladesh: Status and potential. In Design, Analysis, and Applications of Renewable Energy Systems; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 607–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Nathaniel, S.; Khan, S.A.R. The nexus between urbanization, renewable energy, trade, and ecological footprint in ASEAN countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 272, 122709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Omri, A. Technological innovation and sustainable development: Does the stage of development matter? Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2020, 83, 106398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Gabr, E.M.; Mohamed, S.M. Energy management model to minimize fuel consumption and control harmful gas emissions. Int. J. Energy Water Resour. 2020, 4, 453–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Chang, T.; Gupta, R.; Inglesi-Lotz, R.; Simo-Kengne, B.; Smithers, D.; Trembling, A. Renewable energy and growth: Evidence from heterogeneous panel of G7 countries using Granger causality. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 52, 1405–1412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Alam, M.J.; Ahmed, M.; Begum, I.A. Nexus between non-renewable energy demand and economic growth in Bangladesh: Application of Maximum Entropy Bootstrap approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 72, 399–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Adewuyi, A. Challenges and prospects of renewable energy in Nigeria: A case of bioethanol and biodiesel production. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 77–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Apergis, N.; Payne, J.E. CO2 emissions, energy usage, and output in Central America. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 3282–3286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Destek, M.A.; Sinha, A. Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 242, 118537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Lise, W.; Van Montfort, K. Energy consumption and GDP in Turkey: Is there a co-integration relationship? Energy Econ. 2007, 29, 1166–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Ramadan, H. Wind energy farm sizing and resource assessment for optimal energy yield in Sinai Peninsula, Egypt. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 161, 1283–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ghouchani, M.; Taji, M.; Cheheltani, A.S.; Chehr, M.S. Developing a perspective on the use of renewable energy in Iran. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 172, 121049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Wang, Q.; Wang, L.; Li, R. Renewable energy and economic growth revisited: The dual roles of resource dependence and anticorruption regulation. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 337, 130514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Stergaard, P.A.; Sperling, K. Towards sustainable energy planning and management. Int. J. Sustain. Energy Plan. Manag. 2014, 1, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Rodríguez-Monroy, C.; Mármol-Acitores, G.; Nilsson-Cifuentes, G. Electricity generation in Chile using non-conventional renewable energy sources—A focus on biomass. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 937–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Shan, S.; Genç, S.Y.; Kamran, H.W.; Dinca, G. Role of green technology innovation and renewable energy in carbon neutrality: A sustainable investigation from Turkey. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 294, 113004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Sim, J. The economic and environmental values of the R&D investment in a renewable energy sector in South Korea. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 189, 297–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Xiong, P.-P.; Dang, Y.-G.; Yao, T.-X.; Wang, Z.-X. Optimal modeling and forecasting of the energy consumption and production in China. Energy 2014, 77, 623–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Nong, D.; Wang, C.; Al-Amin, A.Q. A critical review of energy resources, policies and scientific studies towards a cleaner and more sustainable economy in Vietnam. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 134, 110117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Yurtkuran, S. The effect of agriculture, renewable energy production, and globalization on CO2 emissions in Turkey: A bootstrap ARDL approach. Renew. Energy 2021, 171, 1236–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Key findings of the relationship between renewable energy and economic growth.
Table 1. Key findings of the relationship between renewable energy and economic growth.
AuthorsPeriodCountriesMethodologyMain Result
Apergis and Payne [32]1980–20066 Central American countriesPanel error correction modelE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Menegaki [33]1997–200727 European countriesRandom effect modelE ≠ GDP
Apergis and Payne [34]1990–200780 countriesPanel error correction modelE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Vaona [35]1861–2000ItalyGranger causality testE ≠ GDP
Yildirim et al. [36]1960–2010United StatesToda–Yamamoto causality testE ≠ GDP
Ocal and Aslan [37]1990–2010TurkeyARDL approachGDP → E
Pao and Fu [38]1980–2010BrazilJohansen co-integration testE → GDP
Al-Mulali [39]1990–201030 major nuclear energy-consuming countriesPedroni co-integration testE → GDP
Ozturk and Bilgili [40]1980–200951 Sub-Sahara African countriesPanel co-integration analysesE → GDP
Alper and Oguz [41]1990–2009New EU member countriesCausality test approachE → GDP
Bhattacharya et al. [42]1991–201238 countriesPanel co-integration testE → GDP
Inglesi-Lotz [43]1990–2010OECD countriesPanel co-integration techniqueE → GDP
Kahia et al. [44]1980–2012MENA Net Oil Importing countriesPanel error correction modelE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Chen et al. [45]1995–2015103 countriesGMM and threshold estimation methodsE → GDP
Rahman and Velayutham [46]1990–2014South Asian countriesLong-run co-integration testsE → GDP
Wang and Wang [47]2005–2016OECD countriesPanel threshold regression modelsGDP → E
Acheampong et al. [15]1960–2017Sub-Saharan AfricaGMM-PVAR approachE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Armeanu et al. [48]1990–2014106 countriesGranger causality testE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Doytch and Narayan [22]1984–2019107 countriesSystem GMME → GDP
Konuk et al. [19]1970–201711 developing countriesPanel causality testE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Li and Leung [49]1985–20187 European countriesPanel co-integration and long-run causalityGDP → E
Namahoro et al. [50]1980–2016Lower and middle-income countriesCS-DL and CCEMG approachesE → GDP
Namahoro et al. [51]1990–2015RwandaNARDL and causality testsE → GDP
Sharma et al. [52]1990–201627 European countriesArellano–Bond dynamic panel data estimationE → GDP
Aslan et al. [53]1990–201520 countriesPanel VAR (PVAR) and Granger causality methodsRE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Bulut et al. [54]1977Q1–2019Q3United StatesCointegration methodsE ≠ GDP
Chen et al. [16]1996–2019Norway, New Zealand, and 2MS-VAR)modelGDP → E
Eyuboglu and Uzar [55]1990–201515 emerging countriesBootstrap panel causality testE ≠ GDP
Gyimah et al. [4]1990–2015GhanaGranger causality testE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Kuo et al. [56]1995–201910 Asian countriesCS-ARDL approachE → GDP
Inal et al. [8]1990–2014African oil-producing countriesBootstrap panel LM co-integrationE ≠ GDP
Islam et al. [27]1990–2019BangladeshDynamic ARDL (DARDL) modelGDP → E
Mohsin et al. [57]1990–2018West African StatesDEA approachE → GDP
Mukhtarov [58]1992–2015AzerbaijanToda–Yamamoto causality testGDP → E
Murshed et al. [59]1971–2016ArgentinaAugmented version of STIRPAT modelE Energies 15 05349 i001 GDP
Steve et al. [60]1990–2018Sub-Saharan AfricaDumitrescu–Hurlin Granger causalityE → GDP
Slusarczyk et al. [61]1991–2022Poland and SwedenRegression modelGDP → E
Wang et al. [17]1997–2015OECD countriesPanel threshold modelE → GDP
Wang et al. [62]2002–2018114 countriesFOLS model and threshold model.E → GDP
Zahoor et al. [63]1970–2016ChinaJohansen co-integration testE → GDP
Zhao et al. [64]2003–2018286 Chinese citiesSpatial econometric modelE ≠ GDP
E = energy, GDP = economic growth, ≠ means no relationship, Energies 15 05349 i001 means feedback relationship, → means unidirectional relationship.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Said, R.; Bhatti, M.I.; Hunjra, A.I. Toward Understanding Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development in Developing and Developed Economies: A Review. Energies 2022, 15, 5349. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155349

AMA Style

Said R, Bhatti MI, Hunjra AI. Toward Understanding Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development in Developing and Developed Economies: A Review. Energies. 2022; 15(15):5349. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155349

Chicago/Turabian Style

Said, Rabie, Muhammad Ishaq Bhatti, and Ahmed Imran Hunjra. 2022. "Toward Understanding Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development in Developing and Developed Economies: A Review" Energies 15, no. 15: 5349. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155349

APA Style

Said, R., Bhatti, M. I., & Hunjra, A. I. (2022). Toward Understanding Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development in Developing and Developed Economies: A Review. Energies, 15(15), 5349. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155349

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop