The impact of CO₂ emissions from different types of transport on countries’ logistics efficiency: Case of ITF member countries

  • 75 Views
  • 18 Downloads

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

This study provides empirical evidence that CO₂ emissions from transport (total and by transport types) have an impact on countries’ logistics efficiency, both in general (Logistics Performance Index) and in terms of its individual indicators (volumes of freight transport (total and by transport types) and total investments in transport infrastructure). The aim is to empirically demonstrate the impact of CO₂ emissions from different modes of transport on the logistics efficiency of countries, specifically using data from 60 International Transport Forum (ITF) member countries. The Granger causality analysis, based on VAR modeling for six periods evaluated by the World Bank (2007, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018), demonstrates that in 50% of the countries, changes in CO₂ emissions from transport are the cause of the shifts in the Logistics Performance Index (increasing emissions can impede logistics efficiency). The sample was reduced to these countries for the regression modeling. Regression modeling (with fixed and random effects, Hausman test, for 2002–2021 on panel data for countries in which direct causality was confirmed) showed that a one-unit increase in total CO2 emissions from transport (in general and in air transport) is associated with 0.12 and 0.21 decrease in total investments in transport infrastructure. An increase in road CO2 emissions is associated with a 0.49 decrease in road freight transport (ton-km per thousand units of GDP). An increase in CO2 rail emissions is associated with a 0.15 increase in total investments in transport infrastructure and a 0.12 increase in total freight transport.

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Table 1. Summary statistics
    • Table 2. The results of the fixed-effects model to estimate the impact of CO2 emissions from transport (total and by transport types) on total investments in transport infrastructure
    • Table 3. The results of the random-effects model to estimate the impact of CO2 emissions from transport (total and by transport types) on total investments in transport infrastructure
    • Table 4. The results of the fixed and random-effect models to estimate the impact of CO2 emissions from transport (total and by transport types) on total inland freight transport
    • Table 5. The results of regression modeling to assess the impact of CO2 emissions by a specific mode of transport on the volume of freight transportation by the same mode of transport
    • Table A1. Granger causality test results
    • Table A2. The results of the determination of causality direction based on the Granger test interpretation
    • Conceptualization
      Lala Hamidova, Leyla Alikhanova, Lala Kasumova
    • Formal Analysis
      Lala Hamidova, Leyla Alikhanova, Lala Kasumova
    • Investigation
      Lala Hamidova
    • Methodology
      Lala Hamidova
    • Supervision
      Lala Hamidova, Leyla Alikhanova, Lala Kasumova
    • Validation
      Lala Hamidova, Leyla Alikhanova, Lala Kasumova
    • Writing – review & editing
      Lala Hamidova, Leyla Alikhanova, Lala Kasumova
    • Project administration
      Leyla Alikhanova, Lala Kasumova
    • Software
      Leyla Alikhanova, Taira Karimova
    • Data curation
      Taira Karimova, Firuza Mirzayeva
    • Funding acquisition
      Taira Karimova, Firuza Mirzayeva
    • Resources
      Taira Karimova, Firuza Mirzayeva
    • Visualization
      Taira Karimova, Firuza Mirzayeva
    • Writing – original draft
      Taira Karimova, Firuza Mirzayeva
Related Articles

  • Sustainable Development Goals in agriculture and responsible investment: A comparative study of the Czech Republic and Ukraine

    Alex PlastunORCID Researcher ID, Inna MakarenkoORCID Researcher ID, Tetiana GrabovskaORCID Researcher ID, Ricardo Situmeang , Serhii BashlaiORCID Researcher ID doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.19(2).2021.06
    Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 19, 2021         Issue #2         pp. 65-76 Views: 1429 Downloads: 1104 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    This paper explores some Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs – 2 and 12) in agriculture for the Czech Republic and Ukraine. The idea is to find out best practices in implementing SDGs 2 and 12 within the responsible investment framework. For these purposes, benchmarking (comparative analysis) is used. Using data over the period of 2017–2020, a general comparative review of global and national targets of SDGs 2 and 12 in Ukraine and the Czech Republic is provided. The results justify the merely incorporation and compliance of these targets at the national and global levels. The identified problems in achieving SDG 2 and SDG 12 are common for Ukraine and the Czech Republic and relate to unequal access to investment and financial resources. Recommendations and solutions to the most important problems based on the responsible investment instruments are proposed in this paper. The research findings can be useful for regulators (both in agriculture and in the financial market), companies and a wide group of other stakeholders in promoting responsible investment to make more comprehensive progress towards SDG 2 and 12 in Czech Republic and Ukraine by 2030.

    Acknowledgment
    Authors are grateful to the Czech government for the support provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, which allowed this scientific cooperation to start within the project “AgriSciences Platform for Scientific Enhancement of HEIs in Ukraine”.

  • The impact of infrastructure investments on the country’s economic growth

    Zohrab IbrahimovORCID , Sakina HajiyevaORCID , İlgar SeyfullayevORCID Researcher ID, Umid MehdiyevORCID , Zanura AliyevaORCID doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.21(2).2023.39
    Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 21, 2023         Issue #2         pp. 415-425 Views: 905 Downloads: 289 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    This study aims to assess the positive impact of infrastructure investments on the dynamics of economic growth. The sample includes ten countries (Azerbaijan, Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, China, Georgia, Mexico, Moldova, Serbia, and Turkey) for 2011–2020 that meet the following criteria:

    • belong to upper-middle-income economies (according to the World Bank Atlas method);
    • the OECD statistical database contains data on investment volumes in infrastructure development of road, railway transport, inland waterways, sea, and airports (by all financing sources). The primary focus was put on the analysis of this issue in Azerbaijan.

    GDP per capita growth was selected as the resulting parameter; the main dependent variable was infrastructure investment volumes (total inland and infrastructure road, rail, and air investment), and additional dependent variables were a foreign direct investment (net inflows) and gross domestic investment. Shapiro-Wilk test (for checking normal data), Spearman and Pearson methods (for correlation estimation), Granger test (for detecting causal relationships), and Arellano-Bond dynamic panel-data estimation (for influence formalization) were used. As a result, the following parameters exert the greatest influence on economic growth level: value of gross domestic investment (its growth by 1% causes GDP per capita growth to increase by 0.54% without a time lag); value of infrastructure investment inland (total) (by 1.51% with a three-year lag); value of infrastructure road investment (by 0.41% with a three-year lag). These results can help future research and decision-making at different management levels to strengthen economic growth through infrastructure investment.

  • Do environmental protection investments contribute to environmentally-oriented SDGS?

    Anna VorontsovaORCID Researcher ID, Oleksandra RieznykORCID , Alla TreusORCID , Zhanna OleksichORCID Researcher ID, Nataliia OvcharovaORCID doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.13(1).2022.12
    Environmental Economics Volume 13, 2022         Issue #1         pp. 141-154 Views: 511 Downloads: 147 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯ

    The most vital problems of humanity mentioned in SDGs are the consequences of climate change and biodiversity loss and problems with access to water and forest resources. Although there is a deep understanding of the problems, there are reasons that do not allow finding swift solutions, and the increasing funding gap for the relevant SDGs is one of them. This study aims to establish the connection between environmental protection investments and the achievement of environmentally oriented sustainable development goals across 31 European countries (26 EU Member States, 3 EFTA Countries, and Ukraine as a Candidate to EU). The paper employed the PLS-SEM approach. The obtained results proved that the accumulated amount of environmental protection investments does not have a statistically significant relationship with the integral indicators of SDG 6 “Clear water and sanitation,” SDG 13 “Climate action,” and SDG 15 “Life on land” (the coefficient of determination, the path coefficient, and the reliability coefficients were insignificant). The study of a similar relationship between the level and the directions of SDGs 6, 13, and 15 achievements also did not reveal any significant results. As the last step of the analysis, the hypothesis about a relationship between environmental protection investments and Environmental Performance Index components was also rejected. Therefore, the statistical significance and relevance of the analyzed indicators were not confirmed. Based on this, a conclusion was made about the insufficiency of investment resources for environmental protection to overcome the gap in achieving environmentally-oriented SDGs.

Download Preview
Close
Environmental Economics
Environmental Economics