sustainability

Article
The Impact of Renewable Energy Sources on the Sustainable
Development of the Economy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Oriza Candra 1 , Abdeljelil Chammam 2 , José Ricardo Nuñez Alvarez 3 , Iskandar Muda 4, *
and Hikmet Ş. Aybar 5,6, *

1 Department Teknik Elektro, Universitas Negeri Padang, Padang 20506, Indonesia

2 College of Engineering, Department of Electrical Engineering, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University,
Alkharj 11942, Saudi Arabia
3 Department of Energy, Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla 080002, Colombia
4 Department of Doctoral Program, Faculty Economic and Business, Universitas Sumatera Utara,
Medan 20222, Indonesia
5 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC, Via Mersin 10,
Famagusta 99628, Turkey
6 Department of Medical Research, China Medical University Hospital, China Medical University,
Taichung 404, Taiwan
* Correspondence: iskandar1@usu.ac.id (I.M.); hikmet.aybar@emu.edu.tr (H.Ş.A.)

Abstract: Growing population and limited energy resources have impacted energy consumption.
Limited fossil fuel resources and increased pollution threaten national and human societies. These
elements emphasize energy sources. Renewable energy use affects growth. All new energy sources,
including renewables, are crucial for global economic growth. Economic and environmental issues
have led to new approaches in international environmental law, including the green economy. This
study employs structural vector auto-regression (SVAR) to compare the effects and outcomes of
increasing the use of renewable energy in the context of economic growth and greenhouse gas
emissions in middle income countries (MICs) and high income countries (HICs). The results show
that these indicators demonstrate that the production of energy from renewable sources has positive
Citation: Candra, O.; Chammam, A.; short-term and long-term economic effects with varying contributions. However, renewable energies
Alvarez, J.R.N.; Muda, I.; Aybar, H.Ş. have a greater impact on the green economy in selected MICs than in selected HICs. Therefore,
The Impact of Renewable Energy the promotion of macroeconomic indicators is viewed as one of the reasons for the development of
Sources on the Sustainable policies to increase energy production from renewable sources in selected countries.
Development of the Economy and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Keywords: renewable energy source; GDP; CO2 emission; economy
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032104

Academic Editor: Mohammad

Hossein Ahmadi 1. Introduction
Received: 18 November 2022
The subject of climate change is a significant one that has led to a great deal of
Revised: 7 January 2023 difficulty globally [1–3]. The burning of fossil fuels contributes to the acceleration of climate
Accepted: 18 January 2023 change [4,5]. As a result, the utilization of environmentally friendly and renewable energy
Published: 22 January 2023 sources (RESs) can be a suitable alternative to the utilization of fossil fuels. [6]. These
resources are replenishable, and in addition, they do not produce any pollution; as a result,
they contribute to the conservation of the environment [7,8].
Investment in renewable energy can become a new stimulus for economic growth,
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. increase in national income, improvement of trade balance, development of industries,
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. and increase in employment [9]. Some countries with a low and middle economic growth
This article is an open access article rate can provide the basis for its improvement and promotion through the adoption of
distributed under the terms and optimal policies for the development of renewable energies. For this purpose, first of all,
conditions of the Creative Commons
there should be a correct understanding of the economic value of the development of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
renewable energies and its value-adding parts [10]. Therefore, it is necessary to identify
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
the influencing variables in the first step and then evaluate the contribution of each of
4.0/).

Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032104 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 2 of 11

them in the value chain of renewable energy development [11]. Value creation, from the
perspective of the traditional definition of economy, includes a wide range of economic
benefits for countries with a sustainable development approach. In other words, value
creation includes job creation, improvement of health and education, reduction in poverty,
and reduction in negative environmental effects [12,13]. The development of renewable
energy has created millions of jobs directly and indirectly [14].
It Is very difficult and complex to conceptualize economic works in a comprehensive
and complete framework that can be measured, collected, and compared, as numerical
measurement of some variables, such as education, is very difficult [15]. On the other hand,
the prioritization between variables is not the same for different countries, and as a result,
the effects of project changes will also be different [16].
Many economic systems are dynamic, complex, unpredictable, and sensitive to the
initial conditions [17]. Therefore, using mathematical and econometric models, it is not
possible to achieve a correct understanding of economic and social systems and to analyze
and predict the relationships between them. Most of the time, one of the two modeling-
based econometric methods or economic analysis are used in economic studies and reviews
to look at how indicators affect each other [18]. Valid international reports, databases,
and existing articles should answer this basic question: what has the development of
renewable energies done to macroeconomic indicators in different countries? The effects of
the development of renewable energies on each of them have been studied [19].
Although the benefits of renewable energy development are increasing significantly,
few economic analysis studies have been undertaken in this field. In this article, we have
discussed the potential capacities in different parts of the renewable energy value chain,
focusing on the development of solar and wind energy [20]. In the following, we have
discussed the impact of the development of renewable energies on employment and the
added value resulting from the development of renewable energies. Furthermore, how the
development of renewable energy affects the GDP and the impact of renewable energy on
public welfare have also been investigated [21].
The economic and social effects of renewable energy development are divided into
four main sections: economic effects, distribution effects, energy system development
effects, and other effects [22]. In order to examine each of these works, it is necessary to
identify the main and influential indicators. Some of the most important indicators are:
employment, added value, gross domestic product, and economic prosperity [23].
Most of the studies conducted regarding the impact of the development of renewable
energies on the mentioned indicators are limited to the estimation and analysis of the
changes made in economic growth due to the use of renewable energies, some of which are
mentioned below.
Some researchers have investigated the relationship between the development of
renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on economic growth in different coun-
tries. The results show the existence of a positive and significant relationship between the
consumption of renewable energy and economic growth in the long term [24–26]. Further-
more, there is a two-way causal relationship between non-renewable energy consumption
and economic growth in the long and short term [27].
Wang et al. [28] determined if and how trade decouples carbon emissions. To analyze
and quantify the impact, Tapio decoupling and structural threshold models are combined.
The analysis includeed panel data from 2000 to 2018 for 124 countries. Results revealed a
weak dissociation between trade openness, economic growth, and carbon emissions. Using
the EKC theory, Wang et al. [29] evaluated trade openness, human capital, renewable energy,
and natural resource rent on carbon emissions. Second-generation econometric tests, GMM,
and FMOLS were developed from 1990 to 2018. Open trade, human capital, renewable
energy consumption, and natural resource rents confirm EKC. Wang et al. [30] studied
income inequality’s impact on the EKC hypothesis. Income inequality is the threshold
variable, economic growth is the explanatory variable, and carbon emission is the explained
variable. The threshold panel model was created utilizing the data of 56 economies. The
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 3 of 11

empirical results revealed that income inequality has shifted the link between economic
growth and carbon emissions from an inverted U-shaped to an N-shaped curve, which
increases the complexity of decoupling economic development and carbon emissions.
Li et al. [31] investigated the impact of structural changes on per capita carbon emissions
from energy, trade, society, and economics. From 1990 to 2015, 147 countries and four
income categories were evaluated using OLS, FMOLS, and the Granger causality test.
Global carbon emissions were most affected by economic growth and structure.
In addition, by using the panel co-accumulation method, Pao et al. investigated the
relationship between economic growth and the demand for renewable energy and environ-
mental pollutants in the countries of Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, and Turkey [32]. The
results show that the long-term causal relationship is from the side of renewable energy
demand towards economic growth, and the relationship between them is positive in the
short term.
Based on the cointegration technique and the panel vector error correction model,
Cho et al. investigated the relationship between renewable energy consumption and
economic growth [33]. By examining the causality between the variables of renewable
energy consumption and economic growth, they concluded that there is a long-term
equilibrium relationship between the variables of renewable energy consumption, economic
growth, capital, and labor.
In South America, a specific study regarding the impact of renewable energy devel-
opment on macroeconomic indicators has not been conducted in a consistent manner.
Furthermore, considering the environmental concerns caused by the consumption of fossil
fuels, it is inevitable to choose appropriate policies for the development of investment and
consumption of renewable energies [34]. The requirement of this important matter is the
awareness of the policy makers and planners regarding how the development of renewable
energies affects macroeconomic variables in order to make appropriate decisions. The
evidence shows that although the potential for middle income countries to use renewable
resources is very high, they have not been properly exploited so far [35].
Making significant investments in the field of renewable energy has caused many
changes in the global energy industry and the rapid growth of the global share of renewable
energy in the total amount of electricity production. Although dealing with climate change
is one of the main and important goals of renewable energy development, decentralization
of energy systems and the resulting positive economic effects are the most important
goals of renewable energy development. On the other hand, the evaluation of the actions
resulting from the economic effects of renewable energies on the development of regions is
faced with many methodological and experimental limitations. Investigating the added
value of renewable energy development is one of the proposed solutions to measure its
economic impact on different societies [36].
This study aims to investigate and compare the effects and results of increasing
the use of renewable energy in the process of economic growth and gas emissions in
middle income countries (MICs) and high income countries (HICs) using the structural
vector auto-regression (SVAR) model. The next section is devoted to the review of the
subject literature and the introduction of the research method, in the third section, the
experimental model and the results of this research are presented, and finally, the conclusion
and recommendations will be found in the fourth section.

2. Method
Investigating the development of renewable energies on macroeconomic indicators
has received increasing attention in recent years. In this research, based on the economic
analysis method and according to the identified macroeconomic indicators, the impact of
the development of renewable energies on each of these indicators is scientifically analyzed
and investigated. Using theoretical foundations and empirical study to investigate the
impact of renewable energies on the green economy, 3 variable (CO2 , RES, and GDP) SVAR
models have been used with adjustments.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 4 of 11

In this study, the long-term limitation method was used, and the Xt vector included the
considered variables in the form of the following relationship, in which Equation (1) exists:

Xt = ( LRES, LGDP, LCO2 ) (1)

where, LRES, LGDP, and LCO2 are the logarithm of renewable energy source consumption,
gross domestic product, and carbon dioxide emissions (the main greenhouse gas) as an
indicator of the green economy, respectively.
The data of renewable energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions have been
collected from the Energy Information Administration (EIA). The statistical population
was selected based on the criteria of the World Bank. The World Bank classifies countries
according to geographic regions or according to income level. The selected countries in this
study were selected based on income level. The World Bank has classified countries based
on per capita income into low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries [37]. In
addition, in order to compare the impact of renewable energies on the green economy in 2
different structures, another group has been selected in this article. This group includes
countries with HICs. It should be noted that in the selection of selected MICs and HICs,
the selected countries are producers and consumers of renewable energy. In addition, the
statistical data of the variables used in this article were available.
In economic data, it is assumed that there is a long-term and balanced relationship
between the variables mentioned in an economic theory. In applied econometric analysis,
in order to estimate long-term relationships between variables, their mean and variance
are considered constant over time and independent of the time factor, and as a result,
behavioral stability is implicitly assumed for them. However, it has been found in applied
research that in most cases the stability of behavior with time series variables is not realized.
It is possible to interpret the model by forming orthogonal structural impulses. In
this study, 3 structural impulses are formed in the form of a matrix, which are presented
in Equation (2):  
ε t = ε LRES , ε LGDP , ε LCO2 (2)

where, ε LRES , ε LGDP , and ε LCO2 are the impulses of renewable energy source consump-
tion, gross domestic product, and carbon dioxide emissions, respectively. Based on this,
Equation (1) can be expressed in matrix form as follows:
    LRES 
LRES M11 ( L) M12 ( L) M13 ( L) ε
 LGDP =  M21 ( L) M22 ( L) M23 ( L)ε LGDP  (3)
LCO2 M31 ( L) M32 ( L) M33 ( L) ε LCO2

In this matrix, M ( L) = ∑∞ J =0 M J ( L ) represents the long-term matrix M ( L ). The

variables are arranged as CO2 , GDP, RES and it is assumed that the first variable, that is,
RES, affects GDP and CO2 variables, but does not receive any effect from these variables.
The second variable, GDP, only received a shock from the first variable and has no effect on
the first variable, but it can affect the CO2 variable. In this order, the matrix of long-term
coefficients will be formed in the form of a lower triangular matrix:
 
M11 ( L) 0 0
 M21 ( L) M22 ( L) 0  (4)
M31 ( L) M32 ( L) M33 ( L)

2.1. The Granger Causality Test

The Granger causality test was used to find the direction of causality between the
gross domestic product and the amount of renewable energy consumption [38]. After
confirming the existence of the causal relationship and determining its direction, we will
model and examine the relationship between the above variables. In the regression method,
the main goal is to check if there is a relationship between the dependent variables and
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 5 of 11

between the independent variables of the research [39,40]. In addition, the data analysis
will be undertaken in the descriptive statistics section by calculating the central indices
including mean, median, and dispersion indices of the standard deviation of skewness and
skewness elongation.
First, due to the importance of the validity of the data in the reliability of the results of
statistical tests, we have checked the validity of the data. In the following and after proving
the existence of the relationship of causality and its direction, mixed data and methods of
fixed effects and random effects were used to test the hypotheses.
Granger causality test results are very sensitive to the choice of lag length; if the
length of the selected interval is less than the length of the actual interval, the removal of
appropriate intervals causes bias, and if the length of the selected interval is longer than the
length of the actual interval, the additional intervals in the VAR model make the estimates
ineffective. Therefore, the main problem of the standard Granger causality test is the great
sensitivity to the choice of the interval length, so that different interval lengths will lead
to different results in most cases [41]. For this reason, in order to solve the problem and
choose the optimal interval length for each of the variables, it was introduced the method
of systematic self-explanation
Choosing the optimal interval length in Granger causality tests is undertaken in
2 steps. In the first step, sums of self-explanatory regressions on the dependent variable are
estimated [42]. In the regression equations of this step, the dependent variable interval is
started from 1, and then an interval is added to each regression compared with the next
regression. It is better to increase the length of the break as much as possible.
The regressions that are estimated will be as follows:

α± ∑ ∼ βγ + (ε it ) (5)

After all the regressions are estimated, the final prediction error (FPE) measure is
calculated for each regression equation.

T + m + 1 ESS (m)
FPE(m) = . (6)
T–m–1 T
Where T is the sample size and ESS is the sum of squared residuals. The interval that
produces the minimum FPE criterion will be the optimal interval length. The test ends with
the determination of the first rank M In the second step, and other variable intervals enter
the regression equations.
Sometimes the data that we are dealing with include both time series and cross-
sectional data. Such a set of data is generally known as a panel of data or data panel.

2.2. F-Limmer Test

In estimating the panel data model, we face 2 general situations. The first case is that
the width from the origin is the same for all sections, in which case we are faced with
the data pool model [43]. In the second mode, the width from the origin is different for
all sections, which is called data panel mode. To identify the above 2 cases, a test called
F-Limmer is used. The F-Limmer test is used to choose between pool data and panel data
(combined) regression methods.
The statistics of this test are as follows:
If the calculated values of F are less than the value of the table, the null hypothesis
of F is accepted if the calculated values are calculated as F and only one width from the
origin should be used. However, if it is a table, the null hypothesis is rejected and group
effects are accepted, and the width of F more than different origins should be included in
the estimation.  
R2f e − R2pool /(n − 1)
F=   (7)
1 − R2f e / (n − t − k )
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 6 of 11

3. Results and Discussion

Reliability Test of Variables
Before estimating the model, it is necessary to be sure about the reliability of the
variables, because unreliable variables cause false regression. For this reason, the Granger
and F-Limmer tests are used to check the reliability of the variables. The results of the test
show that all the variables were at a reliable level and were identified as non-significant
depending on the level of zero. There is no differentiation in the variables. The results of
this test are presented in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1. Granger causality test result.

Cause
Effect LRES LGDP LCO2
MIC HIC MIC HIC MIC HIC
LRES - - - - - -
LGDP 1.33 (0.38) 1.38 (0.103) - - - -
LCO2 4.78 (0.22) 5.39 (0.44) 6.92 (0.11) 5.51 (0.29) - -
Parentheses are p-values.

Table 2. F-Limmer test result.

F Value p Value
MIC 66.29 0.193
HIC 51.55 0.202

Considering that the F-statistic of the research model is not significant at the 1% error
level, the tabular data method is not preferred over the consolidated data method.
Instantaneous response functions actually show the dynamic behavior of variables
over time and when an impulse as large as one standard deviation occurs. By using this
tool, it is possible to analyze the interrelationships between variables in the SVAR model.
Figures 1 and 2 show the reaction of system variables due to structural impulses equal
to one standard deviation for the next 18 periods for MICs and HICs, respectively. The
changes in GDP in response to the RES shock in MICs were unchanged until the first
period and since then it has shown a positive response; this positive response is not only a
fluctuating state, but it continues until the end of the period and also shows an increasing
trend. This was consistent with the results of Wang and Wang’s [44] findings. The positive
response in HICs is constant and does not increase (Figure 2a). In the final estimate, the
response of the changes to the GDP shock in MICs is estimated to be positive.
Figures 1b and 2b show the effect of GDP shock and the response of CO2 changes to
this shock in up to 18 periods in MICs and HICs, respectively. In MICs and HICs, changes
in GDP did not change in the beginning until the second period, and in the third period, it
shows a positive change. This response has also fluctuated, and its effect continues even
until the end of the 18th period. A positive value has also been evaluated in the estimation
of the relationship between GDP changes and RES. This shock for HICs has a positive
change in the first period. However, it was constant in the other periods.
Sustainability 2023,15,
Sustainability2023, 15,2104
x FOR PEER REVIEW 77 of
of 11
13

Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13

Figure1.1.Analysis
Figure Analysisofofthe
theinstantaneous
instantaneous response
response of of
(a)(a) LGDP
LGDP to the
to the LRES
LRES shock,
shock, andand (b) LCO2
(b) LCO2 to
to the
the LGDP shock for MICs.
LGDP shock for MICs.

Figure2.2.Analysis
Figure Analysisofofthe
theinstantaneous
instantaneous response
response of of
(a)(a) LGDP
LGDP to the
to the LRES
LRES shock,
shock, andand (b) LCO2
(b) LCO2 to
to the
the LGDP shock for HICs.
LGDP shock for HICs.

In Figure
In Figure3,3,the theRES
RESshock
shockeffect
effecton onCOCO2changes
changes up uptoto1818periods
periodsisisshown.
shown. This
This
2
Figureshows
Figure showsthatthatup uptotothe
thefirst
firsttime
timeperiod,
period,CO CO22did
didnot
notshow
showany anyresponse
responseto tothe
theRES
RES
shock, and from the first period to the third period, it has an upward
shock, and from the first period to the third period, it has an upward trend. From this stage trend. From this
onwards, it shows an increasing trend, and the shock will continue to do so until the endthe
stage onwards, it shows an increasing trend, and the shock will continue to do so until of
endperiod.
the of the period.
This was This wasinequal
equal MICs inand
MICs andhowever,
HICs; HICs; however,
this shockthishas
shock
more haseffect
moreoneffect
the
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 13
on 2the
CO in CO
MICs2 inthan
MICsHICs.than HICs.
In theIn the estimate,
final final estimate, as shown,
as shown, the response
the response of COof2CO 2 changes
changes to
to the
the RESRES shock
shock in MICs
in MICs is estimated
is estimated to positive.
to be be positive.

Figure 3. Analysis of the instantaneous response of LCO2 to the LRES shock for (a) MICs and (b)
Figure 3. Analysis of the instantaneous response of LCO2 to the LRES shock for (a) MICs and
HICs.
(b) HICs.
Instantaneous feedback functions are used to check the sign and how each variable
Instantaneous
changes feedback
due to different functions
structural arehowever,
shocks; used to each
checkof the sign and
the shocks how
in the each variable
fluctuations
changes
of thedue to different
variables structural
have a different shocks;
degree however, each
of importance. of theinshocks
Therefore, order toincompare
the fluctuations
the
importance of each of the shocks, the method of variance analysis can be used. This
method explains the contribution of each of the structural shocks in the variance of the
variables in the short term and the long term. It can be concluded to what extent the fore-
cast error variance in the two variables, GDP and CO2, is explained by the shocks imposed
on the variables in the model for MICs and HICs (Figure 4). Based on this, it is observed
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 8 of 11

of the variables have a different degree of importance. Therefore, in order to compare the
importance of each of the shocks, the method of variance analysis can be used. This method
explains the contribution of each of the structural shocks in the variance of the variables
in the short term and the long term. It can be concluded to what extent the forecast error
variance in the two variables, GDP and CO2 , is explained by the shocks imposed on the
variables in the model for MICs and HICs (Figure 4). Based on this, it is observed that
during this 18-year period, the shock of real production makes the largest contribution to
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEERits fluctuations. The CO2 shock provided a higher explanatory power compared with other
REVIEW 10 of 13
shocks, and GDP and RES shocks are in the following ranks, so that during this 18-year
period, the contribution of GDP explanation is always higher than RESs. As a result, it will
also have a higher contribution.

Figure
Figure 4. Variance
4. Variance analysis
analysis of (a)
of (a) MICs
MICs andand
(b)(b) HICs
HICs forecast
forecast error.
error.

4. 4. Conclusions
Conclusions
In In recentyears,
recent years,concerns
concernsabout about the depletion
depletion of ofnon-renewable
non-renewableenergy energyresources
resources and
andthethe pollution
pollution caused
caused by by
thethe consumption
consumption of these
of these types types of resources
of resources havehave led many
led many coun-
countries to consider
tries to consider RESs.RESs. For this
For this reason,
reason, extensive
extensive studies studies
have have been conducted
been conducted in
in relation
relation
to RESs toand
RESs theand the methods
methods of obtaining
of obtaining them,has
them , which which
led tohas
anled to an in
increase increase in the
the production
production
of renewable of renewable
energy inenergy in developed
developed and developing
and developing countries. countries.
For thisFor this purpose,
purpose, our goal
our goal was to analyze the effect that increasing the share of renewable
was to analyze the effect that increasing the share of renewable energy sources in the pro- energy sources
in duction
the production of electricity
of electricity can havecan on have
gross on gross domestic
domestic product and product and the of
the emission emission
greenhouseof
greenhouse gases. In order to analyze the problem, we used several
gases. In order to analyze the problem, we used several methods, including the SVAR methods, including the
SVAR
methodmethod because
because thisthis method
method payspays attention
attention to the
to the interrelationships
interrelationships of of
allall variables
variables and
andis is abletotopredict
able predictthe theeffects
effects of
of policies
policies andandimportant
importanteconomiceconomicchanges.
changes.Thus,
Thus, inin
thisthis
study, a three-variable SVAR model (RESs, GDP, CO ) was formed
study, a three-variable SVAR model (RESs, GDP, CO2) was formed for MICs and HICs. In
2 for MICs and HICs. In
future
future research,
research, this issue
this will
issue be be
will investigated
investigated using
using this model
this modelalongside
alongside instantaneous
instantaneous
reaction functions and variance
reaction functions and variance analysis. analysis.
TheTheresults
resultsof of
estimating
estimating thethe
structural
structural model
model of of
GDP GDP and COCO
and 2 show an effect on the
2 show an effect on the
autocorrelation vector that a positive shock in RESs
autocorrelation vector that a positive shock in RESs has a positive effecthas a positive effect ononchanges
changes in in
economic
economic growth.
growth.Since energy
Since energyis a is
driving forceforce
a driving in economic
in economic growth and development,
growth and development, it is
expected that a positive relationship will be established. However, contrary
it is expected that a positive relationship will be established. However, contrary to expec- to expectations,
it was observed
tations, it wasthat the positive
observed that theparticipation in RESs has ainpositive
positive participation RESs has effect on CO2effect
a positive emissions,
on CO2
and we can see that in the economy of MICs the use of renewable
emissions, and we can see that in the economy of MICs the use of renewable energy energy has not reducedhas
CO2 emissions; the reason for this can be attributed to the low share of this type of energy in
not reduced CO2 emissions; the reason for this can be attributed to the low share of this
the total energy portfolio of the country searched so that despite the high capacity of RESs
type of energy in the total energy portfolio of the country searched so that despite the high
in MICs, very limited use of this energy source has been made. On the other hand, weak
capacity of RESs in MICs, very limited use of this energy source has been made. On the
and old technology in the domestic production process has led to more CO2 emissions
other hand, weak and old technology in the domestic production process has led to more
and more energy use. This can become an important factor in neutralizing the positive
CO2 emissions and more energy use. This can become an important factor in neutralizing
effect of using RESs. In addition, variance analysis shows that the contribution of RESs in
the positive effect of using RESs. In addition, variance analysis shows that the contribution
explaining the variance of GDP and CO2 prediction error is at a low level.
of RESs in explaining the variance of GDP and CO2 prediction error is at a low level.
Based on the obtained results, it is recommended that increasing the share of renew-
able energy from the total energy produced should be on the work horizon of politicians.
Despite the high initial cost of renewable energy production, the jump in the GDP as a
result of using this energy is obtained, and it can compensate the initial costs and bring
more stable and reliable economic growth due to the stable nature of renewable energy.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 9 of 11

Based on the obtained results, it is recommended that increasing the share of renewable
energy from the total energy produced should be on the work horizon of politicians. Despite
the high initial cost of renewable energy production, the jump in the GDP as a result of
using this energy is obtained, and it can compensate the initial costs and bring more stable
and reliable economic growth due to the stable nature of renewable energy. Regardless of
economic fluctuations, it is important to use energy in the direction of growth and provide
economic development. In addition to increasing energy security by increasing diversity
in the country’s energy portfolio, this will lead to improved population health due to its
compatibility with the environment.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, I.M. and H.Ş.A.; methodology, O.C.; software, A.C.;
validation, J.R.N.A., O.C. and H.Ş.A.; formal analysis, I.M.; investigation, J.R.N.A.; resources, I.M.;
data curation, H.Ş.A.; writing—original draft preparation, A.C.; writing—review and editing, H.Ş.A.;
visualization, H.Ş.A. 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.

References
1. Yavari, F.; Salehi Neyshabouri, S.A.; Yazdi, J.; Molajou, A.; Brysiewicz, A. A Novel Framework for Urban Flood Damage
Assessment. Water Resour. Manag. 2022, 36, 1991–2011. [CrossRef]
2. Azizi, H.; Nejatian, N. Evaluation of the Climate Change Impact on the Intensity and Return Period for Drought Indices of SPI
and SPEI (Study Area: Varamin Plain). Water Supply 2022, 22, 4373–4386. [CrossRef]
3. Molajou, A.; Afshar, A.; Khosravi, M.; Soleimanian, E.; Vahabzadeh, M.; Variani, H.A. A New Paradigm of Water, Food, and
Energy Nexus. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Molajou, A.; Pouladi, P.; Afshar, A. Incorporating Social System into Water-Food-Energy Nexus. Water Resour. Manag. 2021,
35, 4561–4580. [CrossRef]
5. Afshar, A.; Soleimanian, E.; Akbari Variani, H.; Vahabzadeh, M.; Molajou, A. The Conceptual Framework to Determine
Interrelations and Interactions for Holistic Water, Energy, and Food Nexus. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022, 24, 10119–10140.
[CrossRef]
6. Sharifpur, M.; Ahmadi, M.H.; Rungamornrat, J.; Malek Mohsen, F. Thermal Management of Solar Photovoltaic Cell by Using
Single Walled Carbon Nanotube (SWCNT)/Water: Numerical Simulation and Sensitivity Analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11523.
[CrossRef]
7. Kandemir, S.Y.; Yayli, M.O.; Acikkalp, E. Assessment of Electric Energy Generation Using Wind Energy in Turkey. In Proceedings
of the 7th Iran Wind Energy Conference (IWEC2021), Shahrood, Iran, 17–18 May 2021; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2021; pp. 1–3.
8. Coban, V.; Guler, E.; Kilic, T.; Kandemir, S.Y. Precipitation Forecasting in Marmara Region of Turkey. Arab. J. Geosci. 2021, 14, 86.
[CrossRef]
9. Li, L.; Lin, J.; Wu, N.; Xie, S.; Meng, C.; Zheng, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhao, Y. Review and Outlook on the International Renewable Energy
Development. Energy Built Environ. 2022, 3, 139–157. [CrossRef]
10. Zou, C.; Xiong, B.; Xue, H.; Zheng, D.; Ge, Z.; Wang, Y.; Jiang, L.; Pan, S.; Wu, S. The Role of New Energy in Carbon Neutral. Pet.
Explor. Dev. 2021, 48, 480–491. [CrossRef]
11. Abdullah, W.S.W.; Osman, M.; Kadir, M.Z.A.A.; Verayiah, R. The Potential and Status of Renewable Energy Development in
Malaysia. Energies 2019, 12, 2437. [CrossRef]
12. Qadir, S.A.; Al-Motairi, H.; Tahir, F.; Al-Fagih, L. Incentives and Strategies for Financing the Renewable Energy Transition: A
Review. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 3590–3606. [CrossRef]
13. Khan, I.S.; Ahmad, M.O.; Majava, J. Industry 4.0 and Sustainable Development: A Systematic Mapping of Triple Bottom Line,
Circular Economy and Sustainable Business Models Perspectives. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 297, 126655. [CrossRef]
14. Markaki, M.; Belegri-Roboli, A.; Michaelides, P.; Mirasgedis, S.; Lalas, D.P. The Impact of Clean Energy Investments on the Greek
Economy: An Input–Output Analysis (2010–2020). Energy Policy 2013, 57, 263–275. [CrossRef]
15. Colombo, E.; Mercorio, F.; Mezzanzanica, M. AI Meets Labor Market: Exploring the Link between Automation and Skills. Inf.
Econ. Policy 2019, 47, 27–37. [CrossRef]
16. Potrč, S.; Čuček, L.; Martin, M.; Kravanja, Z. Sustainable Renewable Energy Supply Networks Optimization—The Gradual
Transition to a Renewable Energy System within the European Union by 2050. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 146, 111186.
[CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 10 of 11

17. Alawida, M.; Samsudin, A.; Teh, J. Sen Enhanced Digital Chaotic Maps Based on Bit Reversal with Applications in Random Bit
Generators. Inf. Sci. 2020, 512, 1155–1169. [CrossRef]
18. Smirnova, E.; Kot, S.; Kolpak, E.; Shestak, V. Governmental Support and Renewable Energy Production: A Cross-Country Review.
Energy 2021, 230, 120903. [CrossRef]
19. Wang, B.; Zhao, W. Interplay of Renewable Energy Investment Efficiency, Shareholder Control and Green Financial Development
in China. Renew. Energy 2022, 199, 192–203. [CrossRef]
20. Yuping, L.; Ramzan, M.; Xincheng, L.; Murshed, M.; Awosusi, A.A.; BAH, S.I.; Adebayo, T.S. Determinants of Carbon Emissions
in Argentina: The Roles of Renewable Energy Consumption and Globalization. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 4747–4760. [CrossRef]
21. Zahraoui, Y.; Basir Khan, M.R.; Alhamrouni, I.; Mekhilef, S.; Ahmed, M. Current Status, Scenario, and Prospective of Renewable
Energy in Algeria: A Review. Energies 2021, 14, 2354. [CrossRef]
22. Li, R.; Leung, G.C.K. The Relationship between Energy Prices, Economic Growth and Renewable Energy Consumption: Evidence
from Europe. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 1712–1719. [CrossRef]
23. Levenda, A.M.; Behrsin, I.; Disano, F. Renewable Energy for Whom? A Global Systematic Review of the Environmental Justice
Implications of Renewable Energy Technologies. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2021, 71, 101837. [CrossRef]
24. Belaïd, F.; Zrelli, M.H. Renewable and Non-Renewable Electricity Consumption, Environmental Degradation and Economic
Development: Evidence from Mediterranean Countries. Energy Policy 2019, 133, 110929. [CrossRef]
25. Pata, U.K. Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption, Economic Complexity, CO2 Emissions, and Ecological Footprint
in the USA: Testing the EKC Hypothesis with a Structural Break. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 846–861. [CrossRef]
26. Wall, W.P.; Khalid, B.; Urbański, M.; Kot, M. Factors Influencing Consumer’s Adoption of Renewable Energy. Energies 2021,
14, 5420. [CrossRef]
27. Jin, L.; Chang, Y.; Wang, M.; Zheng, X.; Yang, J.; Gu, J. The Dynamics of CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption, and Economic
Development: Evidence from the Top 28 Greenhouse Gas Emitters. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 36565–36574. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
28. Wang, Q.; Wang, L.; Li, R. Trade Protectionism Jeopardizes Carbon Neutrality—Decoupling and Breakpoints Roles of Trade
Openness. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2023, 35, 201–215. [CrossRef]
29. Wang, Q.; Zhang, F.; Li, R. Revisiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis in 208 Counties: The Roles of Trade Openness,
Human Capital, Renewable Energy and Natural Resource Rent. Environ. Res. 2023, 216, 114637. [CrossRef]
30. Wang, Q.; Yang, T.; Li, R. Does Income Inequality Reshape the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Hypothesis? A Nonlinear
Panel Data Analysis. Environ. Res. 2023, 216, 114575. [CrossRef]
31. Li, R.; Wang, Q.; Liu, Y.; Jiang, R. Per-Capita Carbon Emissions in 147 Countries: The Effect of Economic, Energy, Social, and
Trade Structural Changes. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021, 27, 1149–1164. [CrossRef]
32. Pao, H.-T.; Li, Y.-Y. Hsin-Chia Fu Clean Energy, Non-Clean Energy, and Economic Growth in the MIST Countries. Energy Policy
2014, 67, 932–942. [CrossRef]
33. Cho, S.; Heo, E.; Kim, J. Causal Relationship between Renewable Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: Comparison
between Developed and Less-Developed Countries. Geosyst. Eng. 2015, 18, 284–291. [CrossRef]
34. Hdom, H.A.D. Examining Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Fossil & Renewable Electricity Generation and Economic Growth: Evidence
from a Panel of South American Countries. Renew. Energy 2019, 139, 186–197. [CrossRef]
35. Wang, R.; Hsu, S.-C.; Zheng, S.; Chen, J.-H.; Li, X.I. Renewable Energy Microgrids: Economic Evaluation and Decision Making for
Government Policies to Contribute to Affordable and Clean Energy. Appl. Energy 2020, 274, 115287. [CrossRef]
36. Bisello, A.; Grilli, G.; Balest, J.; Stellin, G.; Ciolli, M. Co-Benefits of Smart and Sustainable Energy District Projects: An Overview
of Economic Assessment Methodologies. In Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions; Springer: Cham, Switzerland,
2017; pp. 127–164. ISBN 9783319448992.
37. Fantom, N.; Serajuddin, U. The World Bank’s Classification of Countries by Income; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
38. Lopez, L.; Weber, S. Testing for Granger Causality in Panel Data. Stata J. 2017, 17, 972–984. [CrossRef]
39. Wang, Q.; Li, L.; Li, R. Uncovering the Impact of Income Inequality and Population Aging on Carbon Emission Efficiency: An
Empirical Analysis of 139 Countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 857, 159508. [CrossRef]
40. Wilcox, R. Regression: Determining Which of p Independent Variables Has the Largest or Smallest Correlation with the Dependent
Variable, Plus Results on Ordering the Correlations Winsorized. J. Mod. Appl. Stat. Methods 2020, 18, 8. [CrossRef]
41. Bruns, S.B.; Stern, D.I. Lag Length Selection and P-Hacking in Granger Causality Testing: Prevalence and Performance of
Meta-Regression Models. Empir. Econ. 2019, 56, 797–830. [CrossRef]
42. Li, Y.; Goodell, J.W.; Shen, D. Does Happiness Forecast Implied Volatility? Evidence from Nonparametric Wave-Based Granger
Causality Testing. Q. Rev. Econ. Financ. 2021, 81, 113–122. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2104 11 of 11

43. Shahabadi, A.; Samari, H.; Nemati, M. Factors Affecting Environmental Performance Index (EPI) in Selected OPEC Countries.
Iran. Econ. Rev. 2017, 21, 457–467. [CrossRef]
44. Wang, Q.; Wang, L. Renewable Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in OECD Countries: A Nonlinear Panel Data
Analysis. Energy 2020, 207, 118200. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.