Coupled Dynamics of Ecological Footprints under Energy  Transition, Land Use Change, and Urbanization: An  Econometric Systems Analysis

Nihar  Chinchwade; Shipon Chandra Barman; Md Arman Hossain; Mitu  Karmakar

doi:10.31149/ijefsd.v8i1.5613

Authors

Nihar Chinchwade
nchin5@unh.newhaven.edu
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of New Haven, West Haven, USA.
Shipon Chandra Barman Department of Industrial Engineering, University of New Haven, West Haven, USA.
Md Arman Hossain Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of New Haven, West Haven, USA
Mitu Karmakar Department of Management Information Systems(MIS), International American University, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Vol. 6 No. 3 (2024): International Journal on Economics, Finance and Sustainable Development (IJEFSD)

Articles

September 30, 2024

Downloads

View Article

Abstract
How to Cite
Metrics
References

Background: Ecological footprint changes is determined through measuring the
interrelations amongst urban development, land-use transformation, energy transition and GDP
growth. An econometric system analysis builds a foundation for modeling these coupling systems
and provides insight into the future of these connections. The analysis also highlights ongoing
energy transitions influence ecological footprint dynamics alongside urbanization and land use
change. Methods: This study used an integrated econometric systems approach to analyze the
dynamics of energy footprints (EFs) between 1990-2023. Descriptive statistics provide information
about the long-term trends (up), Pearson’s correlations allow for analysis of relationships between
variables, while PCA reveals the major determinants of Energy Footprints with relative
contributions through weighted coefficients. The Vector Error Correction Model provides insight
into both short-term adjustments and long-term equilibrium for Energy Footprints, urbanization,
land-use change, land surface temperature, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, energy
transition, and GDP per capita. Results: Findings show that the continued growth of cities and
changing land uses are putting significant ecological pressure. The VECM indicates that 41% of
annual deviations from the long-term mean (average) are being corrected by the system,
demonstrating the long-term relationship between these two systems is stable. Conclusion: To
rebalance the demand for growth against the ecological capacities of our planet, integrated land use
planning, green infrastructure, and sustainable development policies must be created as a result of
combined impacts of urbanization, land-use changes and changes in energy consumption.

Chinchwade, N. ., Shipon Chandra Barman, Md Arman Hossain, & Karmakar, M. . (2024). Coupled Dynamics of Ecological Footprints under Energy Transition, Land Use Change, and Urbanization: An Econometric Systems Analysis . International Journal on Economics, Finance and Sustainable Development, 6(3), 592–602. https://doi.org/10.31149/ijefsd.v8i1.5613

Download Citation

Y. Dong, G. Jin, and X. Deng, “Dynamic interactive effects of urban land-use efficiency, industrial

transformation, and carbon emissions,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 270, p. 122547, 2020,

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122547.

Danish, R. Ulucak, and S. U. Khan, “Determinants of the ecological footprint: Role of renewable energy,

natural resources, and urbanization,” Sustainable Cities and Society, vol. 54, p. 101996, 2019,

doi:10.1016/j.scs.2019.101996.

S. P. Nathaniel, “Ecological footprint, energy use, trade, and urbanization linkage in Indonesia,” GeoJournal,

vol. 86, no. 5, pp. 2057–2070, 2020, doi:10.1007/s10708-020-10175-7.

Y. Sun, J. Jia, M. Ju, and C. Chen, “Spatiotemporal dynamics of direct carbon emission and policy implication

of energy transition for China’s residential consumption sector,” Land, vol. 11, no. 7, p. 1039, 2022,

doi:10.3390/land11071039.

M. Usman and N. Hammar, “Dynamic relationship between technological innovations, financial

development, renewable energy, and ecological footprint,” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol.

, no. 12, pp. 15519–15536, 2020.

A. Raihan and A. Tuspekova, “Dynamic impacts of economic growth, renewable energy use, urbanization,

industrialization, tourism, agriculture, and forests on carbon emissions in Turkey,” Carbon Research, vol. 1,

no. 1, 2022.

M. Murshed et al., “Foreign direct investments, renewable electricity output, and ecological footprints,” Asia

Pacific Financial Markets, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 33–78, 2021.

P. Azizi et al., “An integrated modelling approach to urban growth and land use/cover change,” Land, vol.

, no. 10, p. 1715, 2022.

W. Zhang and H. Xu, “Effects of land urbanization and land finance on carbon emissions,” Land Use Policy,

vol. 63, pp. 493–500, 2017.

H. Chen, “Evaluation and analysis of eco-security in environmentally sensitive areas using an emergy

ecological footprint,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 14, no. 2, p. 136,

Y. D. Wei and X. Ye, “Urbanization, urban land expansion and environmental change in China,” Stochastic

Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 757–765, 2014.

H. Liu, I. Khan, A. Zakari, and M. Alharthi, “Roles of trilemma in the world energy sector and transition

towards sustainable energy,” Energy Policy, vol. 170, p. 113238, 2022.

A. A. Alola, T. S. Adebayo, and S. T. Onifade, “Examining the dynamics of ecological footprint in China,”

International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 263–276, 2021.

O. B. Muoneke, K. I. Okere, and C. N. Nwaeze, “Agriculture, globalization, and ecological footprint,”

Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 29, pp. 54652–54676, 2022.

Z. Zhao et al., “Land eco-efficiency for new-type urbanization in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region,”

Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 137, pp. 19–26, 2018.

J. Liu, Y. Tian, K. Huang, and T. Yi, “Spatial-temporal differentiation of the coupling coordinated

development of regional energy–economy–ecology system,” Ecological Indicators, vol. 124, p. 107394, 2021.

L. Sonter, D. Barrett, C. Moran, and B. Soares-Filho, “A land system science meta-analysis suggests we

underestimate intensive land uses,” Journal of Land Use Science, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 191–204, 2013.

N. Kongbuamai, Q. Bui, and S. Nimsai, “The effects of renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption

on the ecological footprint,” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 28, pp. 27885–27899, 2021.

M. S. Karimi et al., “Exploring the influence of economic freedom index on fishing grounds footprint,”

Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 6251–6266, 2021.

M. Gao, Z. Wang, and H. Yang, “Review of urban flood resilience,” International Journal of Environmental

Research and Public Health, vol. 19, no. 14, p. 8837, 2022.

E. Nketiah et al., “The impact of ecological footprint in West Africa,” International Journal of Sustainable

Development & World Ecology, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 514–529, 2022.

D. Khan et al., “Link between technically derived energy efficiency and ecological footprint,” Energies, vol.

, no. 13, p. 3923, 2021.

C. Ma and M. Qamruzzaman, “An asymmetric nexus between urbanization and technological innovation

and environmental sustainability,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 13, 2022.

J. Kazak, “Decision support system for sustainable urbanization and thermal comfort,” Sustainability, vol.

, no. 4, p. 1083, 2018.

A. Strapasson et al., “EU land use futures: Modelling food, bioenergy and carbon dynamics,” Energy Strategy

Reviews, vol. 31, p. 100545, 2020.

M. A. Ansari et al., “Environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint,” Carbon Management, vol. 11, no.

, pp. 355–368, 2020.

Z. Langnel and G. B. Amegavi, “Globalization, electricity consumption and ecological footprint,” Sustainable

Cities and Society, vol. 63, p. 102482, 2020.

[28] H. Yang and Q. Wu, “Land use eco-efficiency and its convergence characteristics,” International Journal

of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 16, no. 17, p. 3172, 2019.

Z. Zahoor et al., “Abundance of natural resources and environmental sustainability,” Environmental Science

and Pollution Research, vol. 29, pp. 82365–82378, 2022.

U. Qayyum, S. Sabir, and S. Anjum, “Urbanization, informal economy, and ecological footprint quality in

South Asia,” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 28, no. 47, pp. 67011–67021, 2021.

H. Xu and W. Zhang, “The causal relationship between carbon emissions and land urbanization quality,”

Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 137, pp. 241–248, 2016.

H. Weber and J. D. Sciubba, “The effect of population growth on the environment,” European Journal of

Population, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 379–402, 2018.

C. Zhou et al., “Spatiotemporal analysis of interactions between seasonal water, climate, land use, policy,

and socioeconomic changes,” Water Research, vol. 209, p. 117937, 2021.

T. Lv et al., “The spatial spillover effect of transportation networks on ecological footprint,” Ecological

Indicators, vol. 132, p. 108309, 2021.

International Journal on Economics, Finance and Sustainable Development

Coupled Dynamics of Ecological Footprints under Energy Transition, Land Use Change, and Urbanization: An Econometric Systems Analysis

Authors

Downloads

sinta 5

menu_submiss

TEMPLATE

index2

citedness

publsh_asosiation

collaboration

Visitor

International Journal of Economic, Finance and Sustainable Development