EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON THE IMPACT OF TRADE OPENNESS ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN NIGERIA

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jun 30, 2022
Download
PDF
Statistic
Vol. 6 No. 1 (2022): June 2022

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Nanwul Diyemang FELIX
Department of Economics, University of Jos, Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria
Gabriel Attah ADEJOR
Department of Economics, University of Jos, Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria

Abstract

Global decline in environmental quality has been an issue of concern among researchers. Prominent factors identified in connection with this include industrialization, population growth, pollution, agricultural activities and increased global trade. This study, therefore, investigated the impact of trade openness on environmental quality in Nigeria using time series data from 1980 to 2021. The Phillip-Perron (PP) unit root test was used to establish the stationarity properties of the data while the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL)/Bound test for cointegration showed that there exists a short run relationship between trade openness and environmental quality. Findings support the postulation that trade openness leads to Nigeria being a pollution haven for the industrialized countries of the world, while agricultural activities have insignificant effect on environmental quality in Nigeria. The study, therefore, concludes that trade openness does not contribute significantly to decline in environmental quality in Nigeria. It is recommended that Nigeria should strengthen her trade and environmental policies to avoid being a dumping ground for the industrialized countries.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

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

References

  1. Ajayi, P., & Ogunrinola, A. (2020). Growth, trade openness and environmental degradation in Nigeria. Munich Personal RePec Archive (MPRA) Paper, 100713. Available online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/100713. Accessed on 15/06/22.
  2. Alvi, S., Chaudhry, I. S., Farooq, F., & Safdar, N. (2019). Trade liberalization, foreign direct investment inflows, environmental quality and economic growth nexus: A comparative analysis of Pakistan and China. Review of Applied Management and Social Sciences, 2(1), 17–26.
  3. Bello, A. K., & Abimbola, O. M. (2010). Does the level of economic growth influence environmental quality in Nigeria?: A test of Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Hypothesis. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 7(4), 325–329.
  4. Bernard, J., & Mandal, S. K. (2016). The impact of trade openness on environmental quality: An empirical analysis of emerging and developing economies. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Environmental and Economic Impact on Sustainable Development (EID 2016). Available at www.witconferences.com. Accessed on 18/02/22.
  5. Carvalho, T. S., & Almeida, E. (2011). The global environmental Kuznets curve and the Kyoto protocol, CEP, 36036, 330. Available at www.pdfs.semanticscholar.org Accessed 30/09/2017
  6. Cherniwchan. J. (2017). Trade liberalization and the environment: Evidence from NAFTA and U.S. manufacturing. Journal of International Economics, 105, 130–149.
  7. Chua, S. (1999). Economic growth, liberalization, and the environment: A review of the economic evidence. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 24, 391–430.
  8. Daniels, J., Radebaugh, L., & Sullivan, D. (2011). International Business: Environments and Operations (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
  9. Dinh, M. (2020). Essays on trade liberalization and the environment. A Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado.
  10. Feridun, M., Ayadi, F. S., & Balouga, J. (2006). Impact of trade liberalization on the environment in developing countries; A case of Nigeria. Journal of Developing Societies, 22(731), 39–56.
  11. Field, B. C., & Field, M. K. (2017). Environmental Economics: An Introduction (7th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill Education.
  12. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1993). Environmental impact of North America Free Trade Agreement. In P. Garber (Ed.), The Mexico-US free trade agreement. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press
  13. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 353–377.
  14. He, S. (2019). The impact of trade on environmental quality: A business ethics perspective and evidence from China. Business Ethics and Leadership, 3(4), 43–48.
  15. Kijima, M., Nishide, K., & Ohyama, A. (2010). EKC-type transitions and environmental policy under pollutant uncertainty and cost irreversibility. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 35(5), 746–763.
  16. Mukhopadhyay, K., & Chakraborty, D. (2005). Is liberalization of trade good for the environment? Evidence from India. Asia-Pacific Development Journal, 12(1), 109–136.
  17. Naazneen, H. B., Kaiser, K., Minh, T., & Viñuela, L. (2012). Rents to Riches? The Political Economy of Natural Resource-Led Development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
  18. Raza, A., Sui, H., Jermsittiparsert, K., Zukiewicz-Sobczak, W., & Sobczak, P. (2021). Trade Liberalization and Environmental Performance Index: Mediation Role of Climate Change Performance and Greenfield Investment. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9734.
  19. Spence, M. (2011). Trade Liberalization and Environmental Protection. Available at https://www.e-ir.info/2011/03/15/trade-liberalization-and-environmental-protection/. Accessed on 18/02/22.
  20. United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP). (2000). Environment and Trade: A Handbook. Available at https://www.unep.org. Accessed on 14/06/2022.