This study aims to investigate the impacts of economic growth, energy consumption, and financial development on carbon emissions within the framework of the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Tunisa from 1970 to 2018. The long-run relationship is examined by applying the autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) bounds testing procedure to cointegration and error correction analysis. The empirical findings show a positive monotonic relationship between real GDP and carbon dioxide emissions (CO2), which means that Tunisia has not yet reached the required level of per capita income to get an inverted U-shaped EKC. The results also reveal a positive impact on both the energy consumption and the financial development, suggesting that theses control variables lead to environmental damages by polluting the atmosphere in the long run. At the same time, the paper explores causal links between the variables by referring to the Toda and Yamamoto (1995) Causality Test, and it concludes that financial development and energy consumption play a vital role in the Tunisian economy to achieve sustainable environmental development. Therefore, policy makers should not only focus on economic development, but also undertake a solid green finance regulation to assume an active environmentally friendly processes, and the energy matrix should be transformed in favor of renewable energy to cope with environmental degradation and to ensure sustainable development in Tunisia.

ARDL Bounds Testing; Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC); CO2 Emissions; Economic Growth; Financial Development; Energy Consumption

1. Pindyck RS. Climate change policy: What do the models tell us? Journal of Economic Literature 2013; 51(3): 860–872. doi: 10.1257/jel.51.3.860.

2. Ozturk I, Acaravci A. The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy Economics 2013; 36: 262–267. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.025.

3. Stern N. The economics of climate change: The Stern review. Cambridge University Press; 2007.

4. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Sustainability report and implementation plans [Internet]. Environmental Protection Agency; 2018. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-01/documents/epa-2018-sustainability-plan_508.pdf.

5. International Energy Agency. World energy outlook [Internet]. International Energy Agency; 2014. Available from: http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/WEO2014SUM.pdf.

6. OECD. OECD competition assessment reviews: Tunisia [Internet]. OECD; 2023. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/oecd-competition-assessment-reviews-tunisia.htm.

7. Toda HY, Yamamoto T. Statistical inference in vector auto regressions with possibly integrated process. Journal of Econometrics 1995; 66(1–2): 225–250. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8.

8. Kuznets S. Economic growth and income inequality. The American Economic Review 1955; 45(1): 1–28.

9. Beckerman W. Economic growth and the environment: Whose growth? Whose environment? World Development 1992; 20(4): 481–496. doi: 10.1016/0305-750X(92)90038-W.

10. Pao HT, Tsai CM. Multivariate Granger causality between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, FDI (foreign direct investment) and GDP (gross domestic product): Evidence from a panel of BRIC (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, and China) countries. Energy 2011; 36(1): 685–693. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.09.041.

11. Ekins P. Economic growth and environmental sustainability: The prospects for green growth. Routledge; 2000. p. 45.

12. Grossman GM, Krueger AB. Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research; 1991. doi: 10.3386/w3914.

13. Ekins P. The Kuznets curve for the environment and economic growth: Examining the evidence. Environment and Planning A 1997; 29(5): 805–830. doi: 10.1068/a290805.

14. Stagl S. Delinking economic growth from environmental degradation? A literature survey on the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. Wirtscchafts Universitat Wien Working Paper No. 6. 1999. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.223869.

15. Panayotou T. Economic growth and the environment. CID Working Paper Series. Cambridge: Harvard University; 2000.

16. Borghesi S. The environmental Kuznets curve: A critical survey. In: Franzini M, Nicita A (editors). Economic institutions and environmental policy. Ashgate; 2001.

17. Dasgupta S, Laplante B, Wang H, Wheeler D. Confronting the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Economic Perspectives 2002; 16(1): 147–168. doi: 10.1257/0895330027157.

18. Harbaugh WT, Levinson A, Wilson DM. Reexamining the empirical evidence for an environmental Kuznets curve. The Review of Economics and Statistics 2002; 84(3): 541–551. doi: 10.1162/003465302320259538.

19. Hill RJ, Magnani E. An exploration of the conceptual and empirical basis of the environmental Kuznets curve. Australian Economic Papers 2002; 41(2): 239–254. doi: 10.1111/1467-8454.00162.

20. Galeotti M. Economic growth and the quality of the environment: Taking stock. Environment Development and Sustainability 2007; 9(4): 427–454. doi: 10.1007/s10668-006-9030-y.

21. Yandle B, Bhattarai M, Vijayaraghavan M. Environmental Kuznets curves: A review of findings, methods, and policy implications. PERC Research Study 2004.

22. Stern DI. The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development 2004; 32(8): 1419–1439. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.03.004.

23. Shafik N. Economic development and environmental quality: An econometric analysis. Oxford Economic Papers 1994; 46: 757–773. doi: 10.1093/oep/46.Supplement_1.757.

24. Brock WA, Taylor MS. Economic growth and the environment: A review of theory and empirics. National Bureau of Economic Research; 2004.

25. Kumbaroglu G, Karali N, Arıkan Y. CO2, GDP and RET: An aggregate economic equilibrium analysis for Turkey. Energy Policy 2008; 36(7): 2694–2708. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.03.026.

26. Grossman GM, Krueger AB. Economic growth and the environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 1995; 110(2): 353–377. doi: 10.2307/2118443.

27. Frankel JA, Romer DH. Does trade cause growth? American Economic Review 1999; 89(3): 379–399. doi: 10.1257/aer.89.3.379.

28. Panayotou T. Economic growth and the environment. In: Haenn N, Harnish A, Wilk R (editors). The environment in anthropology. New York: New York University Press; 2016. p. 140–148.

29. Akbostanci E, Turut-Asik S, Tunc GI. The relationship between income and environment in Turkey: Is there an environmental Kuznets curve? Energy Policy 2009; 37(3): 861–867. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.09.088.

30. Birdsall N, Wheeler D. Trade policy and industrial pollution in Latin America: Where are the pollution havens? The Journal of Environment and Development 1993; 2(1): 137–149. doi: 10.1177/107049659300200107.

31. Frankel, JA, Andrew R. An estimate of the effect of common currencies on trade and income. Quarterly Journal of Economics 2002; 117(2): 437–466. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.266691.

32. Kennett M, Steenblik R. Environmental goods and services: A synthesis of country studies. OECD Trade and Environment Working Paper. OECD Publishing; 2005.

33. Sinclair-Desgagné B. The environmental goods and services industry. International Review of Environmental and Resources Economics 2008; 2(1): 69–99.

34. Brown JR, Martinsson G, Petersen BC. Stock markets, credit markets, and technology-led growth. Journal of Financial Intermediation 2017; 32: 45–59. doi: 10.1016/j.jfi.2016.07.002.

35. Rajan RG, Zingales L. Financial dependence and growth. American Economic Review 1998; 88(3): 559–586. doi: 10.3386/w5758.

36. Abidin ISZ, Haseeb M, Azam M, Islam R. Foreign direct investment, financial development, international trade and energy consumption: Panel data evidence from selected ASEAN countries. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 2015; 5(3): 841–850.

37. Bilgili F, Koçak E, Bulut U. The dynamic impact of renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions: A revisited environmental Kuznets curve approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2016; 54: 838–845. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.080.

38. Pablo-Romero MDP, De Jesús J. Economic growth and energy consumption: The energy-environmental Kuznets curve for Latin America and the Caribbean. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2016; 60: 1343–1350. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.03.029.

39. Pal D, Mitra SK. The environmental Kuznets curve for carbon dioxide in India and China: Growth and pollution at crossroad. Journal of Policy Modeling 2017; 39(2): 371–385. doi: 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.03.005.

40. Saudi MHM, Sinaga O, Jabarullah NH. The role of renewable, non-renewable energy consumption and technology innovation in testing environmental Kuznets curve in Malaysia. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 2019; 9(1): 299–307. doi: 10.32479/ijeep.7327.

41. Ang JB. CO2 emissions, energy consumption, and output in France. Energy Policy 2007; 35(10): 4772–4778. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.03.032.

42. Dogan E, Turkekul B. CO2 emissions, real output, energy consumption, trade, urbanization and financial development: Testing the EKC hypothesis for the USA. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2016; 23(2): 1203–1213. doi: 10.1007/s11356-015-5323-8. doi: 10.1007/s11356-015-5323-8.

43. Halicioglu F. An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy 2009; 37(3): 1156–1164. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.11.012.

44. Manu SB, Sulaiman C. Environmental Kuznets curve and the relationship between energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emissions in Malaysia. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development 2017; 8(16): 142–148.

45. Jalil A, Mahmud SF. Environment Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: A cointegration analysis for China. Energy Policy 2009; 37(12): 5167–5172. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.044.

46. Esteve V, Tamarit C. Is there an environmental Kuznets curve for Spain? Fresh evidence from old data. Economic Modelling 2012; 29(6): 2696–2703. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.08.016.

47. Saboori B, Sulaiman J, Mohd S. Economic growth and CO2 emissions in Malaysia: A cointegration analysis of the environmental Kuznets curve. Energy Policy 2012; 51: 184–191. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.065.

48. Ren S, Yuan B, Ma X, Chen X. The impact of international trade on China’s industrial carbon emissions since its entry into WTO. Energy Policy 2014; 69: 624–634. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.02.032.

49. Rafindadi AA. Revisiting the concept of environmental Kuznets curve in period of energy disaster and deteriorating income: Empirical evidence from Japan. Energy 2016; 94: 274–284. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.03.040.

50. Apergis N, Payne JE, Topcu M. Some empirics on the convergence of carbon dioxide emissions intensity across US states. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 2017; 12(9): 831–837. doi: 10.1080/15567249.2017.1310956.

51. Awad A, Warsame MH. Climate changes in Africa: Does economic growth matter? A semi-parametric approach. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 2017; 7(1): 1–8.

52. Shahbaz M, Hoang THV, Mahalik MK, Roubaud D. Energy consumption, financial development and economic growth in India: New evidence from a nonlinear and asymmetric analysis. Energy Economics 2017; 63: 199–212. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2017.01.023.

53. Riti JS, Song D, Shu Y, Kamah M. Decoupling CO2 emission and economic growth in China: Is there consistency in estimation results in analyzing environmental Kuznets curve? Journal of Cleaner Production 2017; 166: 1448–1461. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.117.

54. Shahbaz M, Nasir MA, Roubaud D. Environmental degradation in France: The effects of FDI, financial development, and energy innovations. Energy Economics 2018; 74: 843–857. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2018.07.020.

55. Beşe E, Kalayci S. Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: Evidence from Egypt, Kenya and Turkey. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 2019; 9(6): 479–491. doi: 10.32479/ijeep.8638.

56. Alam R, Adil MH. Validating the environmental Kuznets curve in India: ARDL bounds testing frame-work. OPEC Energy Review 2019; 43(3): 277–300. doi: 10.1111/opec.12156.

57. Bah MM, Abdulwakil MM, Azam M. Income heterogeneity and the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in sub-saharan african countries. GeoJournal 2019; 85(3): 617–628. doi: 10.1007/s10708-019-09985-1.

58. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ. Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics 2001; 16(3): 289–326. doi: 10.1002/jae.616.

59. Pesaran MH, Shin Y. An autoregressive distributed lag modelling approach to cointegration analysis. In: Strom S (editor). Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century: The Ragnar Frisch Centennial Symposium. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999. p. 371–413.

60. Chou MC, Chang T. Rational bubbles in G-7 countries: An empirical note based on the ADL test for threshold cointegration. The Empirical Economics Letters 2016; 15(9): 921–931.

61. Iwata H, Okada K, Samreth S. Empirical study on environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 in France: The role of nuclear energy. Energy Policy 2010; 38(8): 4057–4063. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.031.

62. Ghosh S. Examining carbon emissions economic growth nexus for India: A multivariate cointegration approach. Energy Policy 2010; 38(6): 3008–3014. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.01.040.

63. Jalil A, Feridun M. The impact of growth, energy and financial development on the environment in China: A cointegration analysis. Energy Economics 2011; 33(2): 284–291. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2010.10.003.

64. Shahbaz M, Lean HH. Does financial development increase energy consumption? The role of industrialization and urbanization in Tunisia. Energy Policy 2012; 40: 473–479. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.10.050.

65. Manzoor A, Zia U, Shehzad K. Does environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis hold in the long run: A case study of China. Life Science Journal 2019; 16(5): 56–69. doi: 10.7537/marslsj160519.08.

66. Soytas U, Sari R, Ewing T. Energy consumption, income, and carbon emissions in the United States. Ecological Economics 2007; 62(3–4): 482–489. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.009.

67. Dinda S. Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecological Economics 2004; 49(4): 431–455. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.011.

68. Shahbaz M, Hye QMA, Tiwari AK, Leitão NC. Economic growth, energy consumption, financial development, international trade and CO2 emissions in Indonesia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2013; 25: 109–121. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.04.009.

69. Stamation P, Dritsakis N. Dynamic modeling of causal relation between energy consumption, CO2 emissions, and economic growth in Italy. In: Tsounis N, Vlachvei A (editors). Advances in applied economic research: Proceedings of the international conference on applied economics (ICOAE). Cham: Springer Cham; 2017. p. 99–110.

70. Jiang C, Ma X. The impact of financial development on carbon emissions: A global perspective. Sustainability 2019; 11(19): 5241. doi: 10.3390/su11195241.

71. Sadorsky P. The impact of financial development on energy consumption in emerging economies. Energy Policy 2010; 38(5): 2528–2535. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.048.

72. Zhang YJ. The impact of financial development on carbon emissions: An empirical analysis in China. Energy Policy 2011; 39(4): 2197–2203. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.02.026.

73. Tadesse SA. Financial development and technology. Ann Arbor: William Davidson Institute; 2005.

74. Omri A, Daly S, Rault C, Chaibi A. Financial development, environmental quality, trade and economic growth: What causes what in MENA countries. Energy Economics 2015; 48: 242–252. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2015.01.008.

75. Claessens S, Feijen E. Financial sector development and the millennium development goals. Washington D.C.: World Bank Publications; 2007.

76. Tamazian A, Rao BB. Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies. Energy Economics 2010; 32(1): 137–145. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2009.04.004.

77. Narayan PK. The saving and investment nexus for China: Evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics 2005; 37: 1979–1990. doi: 10.1080/00036840500278103.

78. Charfeddine L, Montassar K. Impact of renewable energy consumption and financial development on CO2 emissions and economic growth in the MENA region: A panel vector autoregressive (PVAR) analysis. Renewable Energy 2019; 139: 198–213. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2019.01.010.

79. Wang S, Zhou D, Zhou P, Wang Q. CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China: A panel data analysis. Energy Policy 2011; 39(9): 4870–4875. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.032.

80. Koengkan M. Is the globalization influencing the primary energy consumption? The case of Latin America and Caribbean countries. Cadernos UniFOA 2017; 12(33): 59–69. doi: 10.47385/cadunifoa.v12.n33.460.

81. Wolde-Rufael Y. Energy demand and economic growth: The African experience. Journal of Policy Modeling 2005; 27(8): 891–903. doi: 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2005.06.003.

82. Esso LJ. Re-examining the finance-growth nexus: Structural break, threshold cointegration and causality evidence from the Ecowas. Journal of Economic Development 2010; 35(3): 57–79.

83. Ndako UB. Financial development and economic growth: Evidence from Nigeria. IUP Journal of Financial Economics 2010; 8(4): 37–58.

84. Odhiambho NM. Financial development and economic growth in Tanzania: A dynamic causality test. African Finance Journal 2005; 7(1): 1–17.

85. Agbetsiafa D. The finance-growth nexus: Evidence from sub-saharan Africa. Savings and Development 2004; 28(3): 271–288.

86. Borensztein E, Gregorio JD, Lee JW. How does foreign direct investment affect economic growth? Journal of International Economics 1998; 45(1): 115–135. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1996(97)00033-0.

87. Stern DI. Energy use and economic growth in the USA: A multivariate approach. Energy Economics 1993; 15(2): 137–150. doi: 10.1016/0140-9883(93)90033-N.

88. Shahbaz M, Lean HH, Shabbir MS. Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Pakistan: Cointegration and granger causality. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2012; 16(5): 2947–2953. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2012.02.015.