energies

Article
ICT, Energy Intensity, and CO2 Emission Nexus
Melike E. Bildirici 1 , Rui Alexandre Castanho 2 , Fazıl Kayıkçı 1 and Sema Yılmaz Genç 1, *

1 Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Studies, Davutpaşa Campus, Yıldız
Technical University, Esenler, Istanbul 34220, Turkey; [email protected] (M.E.B.);
[email protected] (F.K.)
2 Faculty of Applied Sciences, WSB University, 41-300 Dabrowa Górnicza, Poland; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: The relationship between information and communication technology investment (ICT),
environmental impacts, and economic growth has received increasing attention in the last 20 years.
However, the relationship between ICT, energy intensity, environmental impacts, and economic
growth was relatively neglected. In this paper, we aimed to contribute to the environmental literature
by simultaneously analyzing the relationship between ICT, energy intensity, economic growth,
Carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emissions, and energy consumption for the period of 1990–2020 in G7 countries.
We employed the Panel Quantile Auto Regressive Distributed Lag (PQARDL) method and Panel
Quantile Granger Causality (PQGC) methods. According to the results of PQARDL method, energy
consumption, ICT, CO2 emission, and energy intensity have effects on economic growth in the
long and short run. According to the of PQGC methods allowing causality results for different
quantiles, there is evidence of a bidirectional causality between ICT investment and economic
growth for all quantiles and evidence of a unidirectional causality from ICT to energy consumption
and from CO2 emissions to ICT investment and energy efficiency. Our results indicate that the
governments of the G7 countries have placed energy efficiency and ICT investment at the center of
their policies while determining their environmental and energy policies, since energy consumption
is a continuous process.

Citation: Bildirici, M.E.; Castanho, Keywords: information and communication technologies (ICT) investment; energy intensity; economic
R.A.; Kayıkçı, F.; Genç, S.Y. ICT, growth; CO2 emissions and energy consumption; Panel Quantile Auto Regressive Distributed Lag
Energy Intensity, and CO2 Emission method; Panel Quantile Granger Causality methods
Nexus. Energies 2022, 15, 4567.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en15134567

Academic Editor: David Borge-Diez

1. Introduction
Received: 14 May 2022
Accepted: 18 June 2022
Information and communication technologies (ICT) investment have had a remarkable
Published: 22 June 2022
influence on economic, social, and cultural life recently. Information and communication
technology with the wide-spread usage of internet, computers, and mobile phones has
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral been growing rapidly for past 20 years [1,2]. Over the last two decades, there has been a
with regard to jurisdictional claims in huge advancement in ICT, enabling dramatic spread of internet and mobile technology [3].
published maps and institutional affil-
In the 1980s, it was accepted that the economies changed towards more intensive use of
iations.
information technology. During the 1990s, the adoption of ICTs increased rapidly.
The utilization of ICTs naturally has given rise to an increase in energy demand.
According to a report published by [4], if the IT sector, especially data centers, were a
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
country, it would be the fifth largest electricity consumer in the world. In spite of the fact
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
that ICT usage raises electricity consumption at the micro level, it increases energy intensity
This article is an open access article by increasing the productivity [5].
distributed under the terms and The usage of ICT is defined as the “diverse set of technological tools and resources
conditions of the Creative Commons used to communicate and to create, disseminate, store, and manage information” by [6].
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// Manochehri et al. [7] claim that firms should establish necessary infrastructure and hire
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ skilled ICT labor to benefit from ICT adoption. The business environment changes fast and
4.0/). this leads to increased reliance on ICTs to acquire methods and competitiveness, increase

Energies 2022, 15, 4567. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15134567 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2022, 15, 4567 2 of 15

profit, and remain powerful in today’s dynamic market [8]. This has been a primary source
of adopting innovative activities, which are technology-based [9].
The analysis of the relationship between information technology and energy consump-
tion goes back to 1950s with Thirring [6], but this relationship drew little attention until the
1980s. After the oil shocks in 1974 and 1979, some papers investigated the way of reducing
energy consumption via information technology. After the pioneering papers of [10,11],
some papers in pursuit of these papers investigated the relationship between ICT and
economic growth, and some other papers tested the relationship between information tech-
nology and energy consumption. Then, some studies analyzed the relationship between
energy consumption, CO2 emissions, and information technology.
Nowadays, CO2 emissions caused by human activity have become a serious threat
worldwide and have risen to an irreversible level. The dramatic increase in consumption of
fossil fuel energy led to this serious level of CO2 emissions [12]. According to International
Energy Agency (2019), worldwide CO2 emissions increased by 33.1 billion tons in 2018
due to the impact of fossil fuel energy consumption. In GEO-4 (4. Global Environment
Outlook: UN, 2007) and GEO-6 (6. Global Environment Outlook: UN, 2019), industrial
activities were cited guilty of GHG emissions, which increased the worldwide temperature
by 0.74% [13].
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s special report on renewable
energy and climate change mitigation showed that the use of renewable energy is increasing
globally. CO2 emissions are therefore a very important problem. International Monetary
Fund (IMF) pointed out that due to the impact of COVID-19, the global economy would
experience a recession in 2020, and the economic growth rate would drop to −3% [14,15].
The monthly average CO2 concentrations (i.e., 414.50 ppm in March 2020 against
411.97 ppm in March 2019) recorded by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), on the other hand, reveal that global atmospheric CO2 concentrations have not
yet dropped. It is a fact that there has been a decline in fossil fuel/carbon burning in various
areas of the world, including urban and industrial zones, due to COVID-19, but there is
no evident change in CO2 emissions [16]. As CO2 levels are influenced by the variability
of plant-soil carbon cycles, as well as the nature of the carbon budget, atmospheric CO2
concentrations are expected to rise unless annual emissions are reduced to zero [16–18].
Researchers predicted a drop equivalent to 5.5 percent of 2019’s global total emissions for
2020 [19], while a more comprehensive assessment, taking COVID-19 forced confinement
into account, projected an annual CO2 emission reduction of 4 percent if pre-pandemic
conditions returned by mid-June 2020, or up to 7 percent if some worldwide restrictions
remained in place until the end of 2020 [18]. Nevertheless, global CO2 emissions must
be reduced by 7.6 percent per year [19,20] in order to avoid exceeding the 1.5 ◦ C global
temperature increase beyond pre-industrial levels, which is the threshold indicating a
temperature limit within which the most catastrophic climatic dangers are present [21].
To our knowledge, these studies did not simultaneously analyze the relationship be-
tween energy intensity, energy consumption and ICT, economic growth and CO2 emissions.
This paper aims to contribute to the energy and environmental literature by simultaneously
analyzing the relationship between ICT investment, energy intensity, economic growth,
CO2 emissions, and energy consumption by employing Panel Quantile Auto Regressive
Distributed Lag (PQARDL) and Panel Quantile Granger Causality (PQGC) methods for
the period of 1990–2020 in G7 countries. This paper contributes to the related literature
on theory and application points. By referring [22,23], we used PQARDL method. For
panel data, the PQARDL model allows for the testing of the long-run relationship with
the related short-run movements for quantiles. In pursuit of these papers, the PQARDL
method will apply and the PQGC method will apply [24]. So, for panel data, the PQARDL
model will allow for the testing of the long-run and short-run results for quantiles. The
PQGC method will determine the direction of causality for quantiles that is robust to
outliers and heavy distributions. These methods will offer some improvements to solve
the econometric model due to quantile methods. Firstly, contrary to the panel models, the
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 3 of 15

PQARDL method offers a more comprehensive picture of the short- and long-run results.
Secondly, the PQARDL method has some advantages over the panel ARDL method. It
is robust to outliers and heavy distributions. More robust results can be obtained from
PQRDL. Thirdly, when the variables are analyzed as a whole with traditional methods
without considering the quantiles, traditional cointegration methods can cause spurious
estimations whereas quantile methods do not. Fourth, moreover, the ecm coefficients deter-
mined by the PQARDL method provide information for each quantile unlike other tests.
This technique can obtain the estimated coefficients across the different quantiles. Lastly,
by depending on the Granger causality results obtained for different quantiles, this paper
will offer important implications for ICT policies, energy policies, and growth policies in
G7 countries.
This paper will contribute to the related literature on theory and application points.
Concerning environmental literature, it will contribute to the theory by determining the
contribution of the selected variables on a sustainable environment. Concerning application
points, to our knowledge, this paper is the first paper that simultaneously applies the
PQARDL and PQGC methods to analyze the relation between energy intensity, energy
consumption and ICT, economic growth, and CO2 emissions. The employment of the
PQARDL method and PQGC methods will provide important implications for ICT policies,
energy policies, and growth policies in G7 countries as mentioned above.
The literature review is given in the next section. The econometric methodology and
model utilized in this study are provided in section three. Section four will address the
empirical results, and the last section will provide a discussion of the findings together
with policy implications.

2. The Literature Review

As mentioned above, the analysis of the relationship between information technology
and energy consumption goes back to 1950s with [10], but this relationship drew little atten-
tion until the 1980s (e.g., Walker, 1985, 1986). There are lots of works examining the effect
of ICT (especially telecommunications infrastructure and tele density) on economic growth
recently. The studies conducted by [25,26] were the earliest attempts to use causality tests
to investigate the causal relationship between economic growth and telecommunications
development. Madden and Savage [27], Cronin, et al. [25], Cronin, et al. [26], Dutta [28],
Chakraborty and Nandi [29] have confirmed the existence of a unidirectional causality from
ICT to economic growth, but Shinjo and Zhang [30] found a unidirectional causality from
economic growth to ICT investment. Pradhan et.al. [31] tested the relationship between
the development of telecommunications infrastructure (DTI) and economic growth in G-20
countries over the period 1991–2012 via panel vector auto-regressive model and Granger
causality. They determined a bidirectional causality between DTI and economic growth. In
this perspective, refs. [25,26] determined a bidirectional causality between telecommunica-
tions infrastructure and economic growth in the United States of America (USA).
Some papers analyzed the relationship between ICT and energy consumption. Cho et al. [32]
tested the relationship between ICT and electricity consumption in South Korea from 1991
to 2003. Røpke et al. [33] tested the effect of ICT on household electricity consumption
in Denmark. According to the results, the integration of ICT development increases elec-
tricity consumption. Ishida [34] revealed the presence of a long-run relationship between
the functions of energy demand and production. It is concluded that, while ICT reduces
energy consumption moderately, it does not lead to an increase in GDP. Salahudin and
Alam [5] analyzed the relationship between economic growth, internet use, and electricity
consumption by using the ARDL bounds test and Granger causality test for Australia
over the period 1985–2012. They determined a unidirectional causal relationship between
internet usage and electricity consumption and economic growth. Awad [35] found ICT
have no apparent effect on environmental quality. Bastida et al. [36] found that household
electricity consumption can be reduced by ICT-based effects on consumer behavior. Some
papers focused on the relationship between ICT investment and energy efficiency. Pana-
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 4 of 15

jotovic et al. [37] linked ICT to the overall efficiency of energy use. Laitner [38] accented
that ICT escalates both economic growth and the efficiencies of energy use. Laitner [38]
found evidence for 13 Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
countries where ICT led to a higher energy efficiency by decreasing the electricity demand.
Some papers analyzed the relationship between the consumption of ICT goods and ser-
vices’ energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Moyer and Hughes [39] and Avom et al. [40]
found that ICT can directly aggravate the CO2 emissions. In [41], 16 EU countries over the
1990–2017 period were analyzed. The results showed that there is a unidirectional causality
from electricity consumption and ICT usage to CO2 emissions and improved GDP. ICT and
power use increase, causing CO2 emissions to grow and Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
to rise. In [42] it was found that, for G7 countries from 1990 to 2014, ICT had a positive
long-term effect on CO2 emissions. Nevertheless, their interaction reveals a mixture of
impacts on economic growth, both negative in the long term and positive in the short term.
In [43] it was found that, for 16 EU countries from 1990–2017, ICT and power use increase
caused CO2 emissions to grow and GDP to rise. Miśkiewicz et al. [44] analyzed climate
change, innovation and information technology, and CO2 emissions for Visegrád countries
(Hungary, Poland, Check Republic, and Slovakia) from 2007–2016 and found the develop-
ment of information and innovation technologies had a statistically significant effect on
CO2 emissions. Furthermore, according to [40], despite the consumption of ICT goods and
services being argued to directly aggravate the CO2 emissions into the atmosphere, the
impacts can indirectly be reversed through the ICT-enabled enhancement of energy use
efficiencies and greening of the ICT sector. Bastida et al. [36] found ICT-based effects on
consumer behavior can reduce household final electricity consumption by 0–5%. These
and other findings from the literature are used to define parameter values, which reflect the
efficacy of ICT at changing household energy usage patterns, and ultimately decreasing
GHG emissions from the electricity sector.
Some papers focused on the relationship between ICT–RE consumption [37] have also
linked ICT to the overall efficiency of energy use. Laitner [38] accented that ICT escalates
both economic and efficiencies of energy use. Moyer and Hughes [36], Khan et al. [45],
Park et al. [46], Raheem et al. [42], and Avom et al. [40] found that ICT can directly aggravate
CO2 emissions. Murshed [47] analyzed the non-linear impacts of ICT trade for some South
Asian economies: The results reveal that ICT trade increases renewable energy consumption,
reduces the intensity of energy use, and reduces carbon-dioxide emissions. Danish et al. [48]
found that ICT decreases the level of CO2 released in high-and middle-income countries,
but ICT increases CO2 released in low-income countries. Asongu et al. [49] studied the
impact of ICT on CO2 by a generalized method of moment method. According to their
results, growing ICT decreases CO2 release. Adha et al. [50] analyzed 20 cities in Taiwan
and found a bidirectional causality between ICT and electricity demand, climate change
indirectly affects the use of electricity through household appliances. Zhu et al. [51]
analyzed the relationship between energy consumption and environmental pollution.
Table 1 shows some results about the relationship between ICT, renewable energy,
economic growth, CO2 emissions, and energy consumption for 2020 and 2021.

Table 1. The literatures between ICT, renewable energy, economic growth, CO2 emissions, and
energy consumption.

Author(s) Countries Data Period Methodology Variables Finding(s)

FD is a weak determinant while
ICT has a positive long-term
impact on emissions. ICT and FD
variables were found to have a
Raheem et al. ICT, financial development, negative effect on economic
G7 countries 1990–2014 PMG
[42] GDP, CO2 emissions growth. Nevertheless, their
interaction reveals a mixture of
impacts on economic growth,
both positive in the short term
and negative in the long term.
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 5 of 15

Table 1. Cont.

Author(s) Countries Data Period Methodology Variables Finding(s)

ICT and financial development
degraded the environmental
quality of the SSEA region,
implying that ICT products and
ICT, financial development,
South and services are not efficient in terms
Arshad et al. Southeast Asian 1990–2014 Kuznets curve (EKC) energy consumption, trade,
of energy in both potential
[43] (SSEA) region hypothesis economic growth,
CO2 emissions countries and developed
countries, and the majority of
financial investments are located
in unfriendly environmental
projects in potential countries.
ICT penetration, electricity
Magazzino consumption, economic ICT and power use increase,
16 EU countries 1990–2017 Dumitrescu-Hurlin causing CO2 emissions to grow
et al. [41] panel causality test growth, urbanization, and
and GDP to rise.
environmental pollution
Visegrád
countries OLS, fully modified Climate change, innovation The development of information
Miśkiewicz (Hungary, OLS (FMOLS), and information technology, and innovation technologies has a
2000–2019
[44] Poland, Check dynamic OLS greenhouse gas statistically significant effect on
Republic, (DMOLS) (GHG) emission GHG emissions.
Slovakia)
Environmental technologies in
Canada assist to decrease
Financial development, environmental degradation in
environmental-related both the short and long term.
technologies, research and Simultaneously, financial
Time series model development, energy
(Dynamic ARDL development, energy intensity,
Khan et al. [45] Canada 1989–2020
intensity, renewable energy renewable energy generation,
simulations)
production, natural research and development,
resource depletion, natural resource depletion, and
sustainability temperature factors contribute to
Canada’s environmental
deterioration.
Globalization, growth of GDP
Renewable energy development, and technological
Adebayo and consumption, CO2 innovation all contribute to
Japan 1990–2015 Wavelet emissions, economic increased CO2 emissions in Japan,
Kirikkaleli [52] transformation growth, technological whereas renewable energy use
innovation, globalization reduces CO2 emissions in the
short and medium term.

3. Data and Methodology

3.1. Data
In this study, annual data were used that cover the period of 1990–2020. CO2 emissions,
economic growth (Real GDP in constant 2005 USD), information and communication technolo-
gies (ICT investment), energy consumption, and energy intensity are used. Table 2 defines the
variables. Data were taken from World Bank [40]. We used logarithmic transformation for
all variables.
Table 3 presents descriptive statistics. ICT and Y variables have negative skewness
whereas others have positive.

3.2. Methodology
Methodology was given two sub-titles, PQARDL and PQGC.
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 6 of 15

Table 2. Variables.

Variables Data Sources Metrics

Information and communication
ict World Bank Individuals using the Internet
technologies
y Economic growth World Bank Real GDP in constant 2005 USD
ec Energy consumption World Bank kg of oil equivalent
co CO2 emissions World Bank metric tons
c Energy efficiency World Bank MJ$2011 PPP GDP

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics.

Descriptive Statistics
Variables
Max Std. Dev. Kurtosis Skewness
co CO2 emissions 1.311 0.180 2.020 0.194
y Economic growth 3.868 1.336 2.585 −0.645
ict ICT 1.98 0.929 2.071 −0.479
c Energy consumption 3.927 0.160 1.994 0.546
ec Energy intensity 1.024 0.143 2.486 0.509

3.2.1. PQARDL Method

Unlike panel models, the PQARDL technique provides a more complete picture of
short- and long-term outcomes. Outliers and heavy distributions are not a problem in
this technique. Compared to the panel ARDL approach, the PQARDL method has a few
advantages. PQRDL can produce more reliable results. Koenker and Bassett [53] proposed
panel quantile regression (PQR), which has several advantages over OLS regression. The
PQR results are more reliable than other one [54]. It is also necessary to use PQR to shape
distributional assumptions [55]. Furthermore, the properties of the whole conditional
distribution of the selected variables can be captured using this technique [56,57]. To this
end, quantile regression was proposed by [53] to investigate asymmetric aspects of variable
distributions [57]. Refs. [22–24,51,58] applied PQARDL technique
The conditional quantile of yi is

Qyi (τ | xi ) = xiT β τ (1)

PQR is robust to heavy distributions and outliers [22–24,51].

The Panel Quantile Autoregressive Distributed Lags method is developed as follows:
p q
Qyi (τk |αi , xit ) = αi (τk ) + ∑αj (τk )yit−j + ∑ βm (τk )xitT−m , i = 1, . . . , N; t = 1, . . . , T (2)
j =1 m =0

and t is the index of time. The parameter estimate is calculated as follows

p q
Yit = αi (τk ) + ∑αj (τk )yit−j + ∑ βm (τk )xitT−m + ε it (τk ) i = 1, . . . , N; t = 1, . . . , T (3)
j =1 m =0

Equation (3) is accepted as the panel quantile autoregressive distributed lag (PQARDL).
ε it (τk ) is donated as Yi − Qyi (τk |αi , xit ) and rewritten as follows
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 7 of 15

q −1 p
Yit = αi (τk ) + ∑ Wit− j δit,j (τk ) + Xit′ γ0 (τk ) + ∑ θit,m (τk )Yit−m + ε it (τk ) i = 1, . . . , N; t = 1, . . . , T
j =0 m =0
p p (4)
where γ0 (τk ) := ∑ θit,m (τk ), Wit := ∆Xit and δit,j (τk ) := − ∑ θit,m (τk ). For given τ ∈ (0, 1)
j =0 i = j +1

Dynamics are obtained by solving the minimization problem:

K T N p p
min ∑ ∑∑
(α,β) k=1 t=1 n=1
wk ρτk (yit − αi − ∑ Wit′ δit,j (τk ) + ∑ φit,m Yt− j ). (5)
j =0 i = j +1

The PQARDL process is used as follows:

p −1 q −1
Qyi (τk |. ) = αi (τk ) + ς(τk )(Yit−1 − Xit′ −1 β(τ )) + ∑ φj (τk )yit− j + ∑ λm (τk )∆xitT−m , i = 1, . . . , N; t = 1, . . . , T
j =1 m =0
p p p (6)
where ς(τk ) = ∑ φj (τk ) − 1, λ0 (τk ) = γ(τk ) + δ0 (τk ), φj (τk ) = − ∑ φi (τk ) and λ j (τk ) = − ∑ δi (τk )
j =1 i = j +1 i = j +1

3.2.2. Panel Quantile Granger Causality (PQGC) Method

Troster et al. [59] developed the procedure for time series. Their method for Granger-
causality in quantiles does not require the smoothing parameters to be determined. The
test contains testing the null hypothesis of non-causality between two variables, say from
Zt to Yt :    
H0Z9Y : FY y| Ii,t Y Z
, Ii,t = FY y| Ii,t Y
for all y ∈ R (7)
 ′ 
Y , I Z ′ ∈ Rd d = s + q, and I Y = (Y ′ s Z ′
Ii,t Ii,t i,t i,t i,t−1 , . . . , Yi,t−s ) ∈ R and Ii,t = ( Zi,t−1 , . . . , Zi,t−q )
∈ Rq . The test for Granger (non)-causation from Zt and Yt in distribution—that is, across
τ-quantiles—for Equation (7) is:
   
H0QC Z9Y : QY,Zτ
Y Z
Yi,t | Ii,t , Ii,t = QYτ Yi,t | Ii,t Y
for all τ ∈ τ (8)

where the τ-quantiles of Fy = ( .| IitY , IitZ ) and Fy = ( .| IitY ) are represented by QY,Z Y
τ ( .| Ii,t ) and
QY,Z
τ
Y ), respectively. In addition, τ ⊂ (0, 1) is a compact set and the following
= ( .| Ii,t
restrictions satisfied by Yit′ ’s conditional τ-quantiles is defined
n   o
P Yi,t ≤ QYτ Yi,t | Ii,t Y Y
Ii,t := τ, for all τ ∈ τ
n
Y,Z
  o (9)
Y , IZ Y Z
P Yi,t ≤ Qτ Yi,t | Ii,t i,t Ii,t , Ii,t := τ, for all τ ∈ τ
n h io
And E{Yi,t ≤ Qτ ( Yi,t | Ii,t )| Ii,t } = E 1 Yi,t ≤ Qτ ( Yi,t | Ii,t ) Ii,t the null hypothesis of
Granger non-causality is rewritten as

H0Z9Y :  ) ItY , ItZ τ

E 1 Yt ≤ m ItY , θ0 (τ

 

(10)
H0Z9Y : E 1 Yt ≤ m ItY , θ0 (τ ) ItY , ItZ 6= τ

And m( Itg , θ0 (τ )) spesifies QYτ ( .| Itg ).

The test statistic for the direction of the Granger-causality is as follows:

1 n ′
Ti, n j∑
SiT = Ψ.ij WΨ.ij (11)
=1

where n denotes the equidistributed points over the grid

Energies 2022, 15, 4567 8 of 15

τi,n = {τij }nj=1

W is a T × T matrix.
h i
wt,s = exp −0.5( It − Is )2 , Ψ is T × n, matrix with elements and

Ψi,j = Ψτj (Yig − m( Iig , Qτ (τj )). (12)

4. Results
To explore cross-sectional dependence, the results were given in Table 4. Four different
tests were applied. If the results of all all tests point to same inference, results will be
accepted as true. According to test results, the decision about using the first-generation or
second-generation unit rot tests will be made.

Table 4. Cross-sectional dependence tests.

Bias-Corrected
Variables Breusch-Pagan LM Pesaran Scaled LM Pesaran CD
Scaled LM Test
y 263.93 36.40 36.38 14.07
c 316.44 44.50 44.49 17.08
ce 471.08 68.36 68.32 21.29
ict 634.91 93.64 93.63 25.19
co 262.80 36.23 36.21 13.57

Table 4 shows that at the 1% level, the tests provide rejection of the null hypothesis of
no cross-sectional dependence. To avoid inconsistency, LLC, ADF Fisher X2 , PP Fisher X2 ,
and CIPS tests were applied.
Table 5 shows the findings determined by the LLC, ADF Fisher X2 , PP Fisher X2 , and
CIPS tests. For the variables, it was determined the evidence of I (1). Before applying
PQARDL, we made PARDL tests in order to determine the dependent variable. After
determining the dependent variable, we set up the PQARDL model. According to the
results in Table 6, y is determined as dependent variable.

Table 5. LLC and CIPS Results.

Level First Difference Decision

ADF Fisher X2 PP Fisher X2 ADF Fisher X2 PP Fisher X2
LLC CIPS LLC CIPS
Square Chi-Square Square Chi-Square
co 1.59 1.85 6.81 10.16 −12.36 −17.81 194.51 192.98 I(1)
ec 3.59 5.39 2.91 4.08 −3.84 −6.13 66.58 130.41 I(1)
c 3.59 3.85 4.81 8.16 −3.09 −5.06 51.94 137.78 I(1)
y −1.03 −2.49 9.81 11.39 −4.80 −9.09 98.90 144.13 I(1)
ict −1.58 0.01 10.24 18.61 −7.47 −6.75 71.57 168.04 I(1)

Table 6. The Results of the Panel ARDL Bounds Testing Cointegration Tests.

Dependent/Independent Cointegration Ramsey’s Reset Breusch-Godfrey

Statistic Jarque-Bera Test
Variable Result Test Test
(lco/ly, lec, lc, lict) 2.07 No-Cointegration
(lc/lco, lec, ly, lict) 1.17 No-Cointegration
(ly/lco, lec, lc, lict) 14.81 Cointegration 0.27 (0.59) 1.59 (0.21) 2.58 (0.27)
(lec/ly, lec, lco, lict) 2.33 No-Cointegration
(lict/ly, lec, lc, lco) 1.88 No-Cointegration

Table 6 shows the estimated F statistic and that the values are all above the upper
critical bounds. When economic growth is accepted as the dependent variable, our model
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 9 of 15

gives successful results. After this stage, we can proceed with short-run and long-run
estimations. In Tables 7 and 8, both PARDL and PQARDL results are presented to compare
the results and to show the consistency.

Table 7. Long-run Results.

PARDL PQARDL
0.1th 0.25th 0.5th 0.75th 0.95th
0.106 0.923 0.949 0.718 0.678 1.37
lict
(2.21) (2.66) (2.97) (2.04) (2.04) (2.15)
−1.963 1.832 2.1814 1.230 1.861 1.264
lco
(1.09) (4.47) (4.21) (3.15) (2.92) (2.50)
−0.877 1.01 0.1825 0.238 −0.275 −0.905
lc
(2.89) (2.18) (2.03) (2.05) (−1.93) (−2.33)
1.249 1.008 2.087 1.522 1.046 1.210
lec
(1.58) (4.10) (2.57) (2.33) (2.38) (3.40)

Table 8. Short-run PQARDL and PARDL Results.

Dependent Variable: Y
PQARDL PARDL
0.1th 0.25th 0.5th 0.75th 0.95th
1.825 1.135 1.205 0.5809 1.2564 1.83
∆lc
(4.21) (2.11) (3.12) (2.86) (3.19) (2.15)
1.77 1.081 1.156 1.0733 0.3141 −1.71
∆lec
(8.20) (4.50) (3.99) (2.66) (3.64) (3.18)
0.684 0.705 0.663 0.7742 1.0787 −1.91
∆lict
(2.54) (2.77) (2.02) (1.93) (1.92) (2.53)
−1.26 −1.96 −0.46 1.4533 1.0557 1.58
∆lco
(−5.31) (−2.29) (−0.09) (2.35) (3.54) (1.99)
−0.26 −0.45 −0.37 −0.33 −0.39 −0.56
ecm
(2.13) (1.96) (1.89) (2.07) (2.11) (1.86)

4.1. Long-Run Coefficients

In Tables 7 and 8, according to the results, all variables have statistically significant
impacts on economic growth. In addition, the tables provide results between the PARDL
and PQARDL models. Comparison between models gives the superiority of the applied
model over the PARDL model.
The coefficients of energy consumption (c) are positive except the 75th and 95th
quantiles. The results for 0.75th and 0.95th quantiles have negative coefficients and these
results are similar to PARDL. The coefficients of CO2 emission are positive in all quantiles of
the PQARDL model but negative in the PARDL model. The coefficients of energy intensity
(ec) and information and communication technologies (ict) are positive in all quantiles.
They have a positive impact on economic growth on the long run. lec and lco variables are
statistically insignificant in the PARDL model. Coefficients can be evaluated as elasticities;
energy consumption and ICT elasticities of economic growth are smaller than 1 in more
cases, except for the 0.95 quantiles for ict and the 0.75 and 0.95 quantiles for c, which have
negative coefficients. Energy intensity and CO2 emission elasticities of growth are greater
than 1 in all cases.

4.2. Short-Run Coefficients

The coefficients of energy consumption (c) differ according to quantiles. The coeffi-
cients of CO2 emission (co) are negative until 0.75th quantile, then they become positive for
other quantiles. The coefficients of energy intensity (ec) and information and communica-
tion technologies (ict) are positive in all quantiles but negative in the PARDL model.
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 10 of 15

We found that energy consumption, energy intensity, CO2 emissions, and information
and communication technologies have statistically significant effects on economic growth
in the short run. All coefficients of ECM are statistically significant and negative as expected.
They range between −0.26 and −0.45. In the PARDL model, the ECM coefficient has a high
value at −0.56. This indicates a relatively rapid adjustment to the long-term equilibrium.
In PQARDL, the ECM coefficient at the 0.1 quantile is relatively low at −0.26. In this model,
the highest ECM coefficient is obtained at the 0.25 quantile, which has a value of −0.45. The
ECM coefficients obtained by the PQARDL method are lower in value than those obtained
by PARDL.

4.3. Causality
In Table 9, the results indicate that there is a unidirectional causality from information
communication technologies to energy consumption (except at the 0.25th quantile bidi-
rectional causality), from information communication technologies to economic growth
(except at the 0.75th quantile bidirectional causality), and from information communication
technologies to energy efficiency. There is also a unidirectional causality from energy
consumption to CO2 emissions for the 0.10th, 0.50th, and 0.95th quantiles, a bidirectional
causality for the 0.25th quantile, and none causality for the 0.75th quantile. It was found the
evidence of unidirectional causality from energy consumption to economic growth for all
quantiles. The evidence of a unidirectional causality from energy consumption to economic
growth corrects the growth hypothesis for all quantiles. There is also a unidirectional
causality from CO2 emissions to economic growth (except bidirectional causality for the
0.95th quantile) for all quantiles. There is evidence of a bidirectional causality between
energy efficiency and economic growth for all quantiles.

Table 9. Causality results.

0.1 0.25 0.5 0.75 0.95

∆lco→∆lc 0.45 2.77 0.453 1.37 0.51
∆lc→∆lco 2.55 2.62 2.571 1.78 2.90
Direction of causality C→CO ←→ C→CO None C→CO
∆lec→∆lc 7.11 3.65 7.11 2.38 2.74
∆lc→∆lec 1.18 8.99 11.8 2.02 6.90
Direction of causality EC→C ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→
∆ly→∆lc 0.74 0.49 0.748 0.19 0.49
∆lc→∆ly 9.60 5.21 9.60 5.41 2.89
Direction of causality C→Y C→Y C→Y C→Y C→Y
∆lict→∆lc 9.04 5.05 9.04 15.54 3.25
∆lc→∆lict 0.33 5.83 0.244 0.33 0.92
Direction of causality ICT→C ←→ ICT→C ICT→C ICT→C
∆lec→∆lco 0.96 0.87 0.96 0.24 0.55
∆lco→∆lec 8.82 4.76 8.82 11.85 3.71
Direction of causality CO→EC CO→EC CO→EC CO→EC CO→EC
∆ly→∆lco 0.11 0.40 0.11 0.05 3.97
∆lco→∆ly 8.49 4.55 8.49 3.65 2.82
Direction of causality CO→Y CO→Y CO→Y CO→Y ←→
∆lict→∆lco 0.69 0.16 1.69 1.56 0.21
∆lco→∆lict 4.79 2.20 5.17 4.346 3.43
Direction of causality CO→ICT CO→ICT CO→ICT CO→ICT CO→ICT
∆ly→∆lec 7.27 5.84 7.27 8.56 5.31
∆lec→∆ly 6.98 9.07 2.89 2.70 5.96
Direction of causality ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→
∆lict→∆lec 4.52 2.71 4.52 3.65 3.78
∆lec→∆lict 0.50 0.45 1.12 0.30 0.98
Direction of causality ICT→EC ICT→EC ICT→EC ICT→EC ICT→EC
∆lict→∆ly 2.54 2.85 2.54 2.41 2.63
∆ly→∆lict 1.06 0.58 1.06 3.43 1.68
Direction of causality ICT→Y ICT→Y ICT→Y ←→ ICT→Y
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 11 of 15

In the literature, economic growth is the Granger cause of environmental degrada-

tion, which is defined in Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis, but in our results
CO2 emissions are the Granger cause of economic growth. G7 countries should increase
energy efficiency to overcome environmental degradation according to our results, and we
determined that ICT is an important factor for sustaining energy efficiency.

5. Discussion
This study utilizes the panel quantile method together with ARDL and Granger
Causality methods and these methods allow for obtaining and comparing different results
in the long- and short-run for all quantiles and direction of causality for all quantiles. In
the PQARDL model, energy consumption, ICT investments, CO2 emissions, and energy
intensity have positive and statistically significant effects on economic growth in the long
run. Energy consumption and ICT investments elasticities of economic growth are smaller
than one in more cases, whereas energy intensity and CO2 emission elasticities of growth
are greater than one. ECM coefficients for all quantiles are statistically significant and
negative as expected. The ECM coefficients change between −0.26 and −0.45 for different
quantiles. We applied a PARDL model to compare the coefficients of variables and ECM.
By the PARDL model, the ECM coefficient was found as −0.56. This is a very important
difference in the context of economic policy proposals, because the long-term equilibrium
adjustment is faster in the PARDL model than in the PQARDL model. The policies to be
implemented in this context may differ.
According to our causality results, the evidence of a unidirectional causality from ICT
to economic growth was determined (except at the 0.75th quantile) and in the 0.75 quantile,
evidence of a bidirectional causality was found. In the 0.75 quantile, ICT is the Granger
cause of economic growth and economic growth is the Granger cause of ICT. On the other
hand, the evidence of a unidirectional causality from ICT to energy efficiency, and from
ICT to energy consumption (except at the 0.25 quantile) were determined. Evidence of
a unidirectional causality from CO2 emissions to ICT was determined, and from CO2
emissions to energy efficiency. CO2 emissions are the Granger cause of ICT and energy
efficiency. Except at the 0.25th and 0.75th quantiles, evidence determined a unidirectional
causality from energy consumption to CO2 emissions, and it was found a bidirectional
causality for the 0.25th quantile and none causality for 0.75 quantile. Increasing ICT causes
rising energy consumption, and energy consumption is the Granger cause of both GDP
growth and CO2 emissions (except at the 0.75th quantile). As an interesting result, CO2
emissions are the Granger cause of economic growth. In the literature, economic growth
is the Granger cause of environmental degradation, which is defined in Environmental
Kuznets Curve Hypothesis. Similar to our results, Wang et al. [60] accented for 134 countries
that the positive impact of economic growth on ecological footprint is higher than that of
CO2 releases.
According to our results, G7 countries should increase energy efficiency to overcome
environmental degradation, and ICT is an important factor for sustainable energy efficiency.
The governments have to design energy policies with expanding ICT investment in the
context of its effects on economic growth. In the short-term, increasing ICT can cause
rising energy consumption, and the increase in energy consumption initially increases
environmental pollution. Similar to our results, refs. [2,5] showed that an increase in ICT
will increase energy consumption. Additionally, ref. [49] showed that ICT investments
are responsible for rising CO2 emissions. In the context of ICT, large datacenters and
mobile data traffic can be an enormous threat on the environment [61]. Moreover, both the
processing and production of ICT appliances are responsible for rising CO2 releases [49].
However, in long term, it creates positive effects on environmental pollution due to its
positive effects on energy efficiency, and ICT will support consumers to use energy more
efficiently through contributing to switching to a low-carbon energy mechanism. As
another important effect in the long run, ICT leads to economic growth. It will provide
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 12 of 15

more leisure time for employees and higher profits for companies because it increases
productivity and efficiency.
The governments in G7 countries must determine the policies to provide efficient
energy at home and in workplaces, businesses, etc. At home and at workplaces, businesses,
etc., the use of environmentally friendly appliances that meet green appliance standards
can be promoted, and efficient technologies in workplace, businesses, etc., can be adopted.
In G7 countries in the long-run, the transformation to e-books, e-paper, and email
leads to the consumption of less energy [46]. Moreover, in these countries, online services
decrease the necessity for a physical presence, and can decrease business travel. All these
advancements can provide opportunities for saving energy consumption [48]. On the other
hand, teleconferencing and teleworking can decline CO2 release by decreasing energy
consumption. Moreover, G7 countries have benefitted from technology spillover effects for
the last 30 years. Traditional industry in these countries shifts to higher energy efficiency
under the effect of the usage of ICT technologies. Our findings are consistent with other
works (see for similar results; [46,48]).
The energy efficiency policies must be supported with energy conservation pro-
grams [50]. These programs are connected to the community’s efforts to decrease their
energy usage by embracing energy-saving behaviors. The governments in these countries
must to coordinate ICT policies, environmental policies, energy policies, and economic
growth policies.
As emphasized by some papers, positive effects on the environment can be increased by
increasing renewable energy consumption. Renewable energy consumption has a positive
impact on CO2 release, moreover, it positively impacts economic development [61–63].

6. Conclusions and Discussion

In this paper, we analyzed the cointegration and causality between ICT, energy in-
tensity, CO2 emissions, energy consumption, and economic growth by employing the
PQARDL and PQGC methods in G7 countries for the period of 1990–2020. According to
the results of the PQGC method, there is a unidirectional causality from ICT to economic
growth and for 0.75th quantile there is a bidirectional causality between economic growth
and ICT. The evidence of a unidirectional causality from ICT to energy efficiency, and from
ICT to energy consumption (except at the 0.25 quantile) were determined. As another
result, it was found that CO2 emissions are the Granger cause of ICT, economic growth,
and energy efficiency. And except at the 0.75th quantiles, energy consumption is Granger
cause of CO2 emissions.
These results suggest policymakers should accelerate economic growth and promote
ICT advancements to have more renewable energy output, which causes greater energy
savings and a cleaner environment. Policymakers have to promote energy intensity and
energy consumption policies (subsidize both consumption and production up to certain
level) to accelerate economic growth and to support a sustainable environment. ICT
application in economic activities can promote renewable energy consumption compared
to nonrenewable energy consumption and helps to overcome limitations of renewable
energy through facilitating the storage of renewable energy generation.
This study explores the causality relationships between ICT, energy intensity, CO2
emissions, energy consumption, and economic growth empirically and can be a candidate
for further academic research, especially for energy economics and innovation economics
researchers. Results of this study can be used to analyze similar or different variables about
these subjects in the future. This study can also shed light on economic policies, energy
policies, and innovation policies through its conclusions.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.E.B.; methodology, M.E.B., F.K. and S.Y.G.; software,
M.E.B., F.K. and S.Y.G.; validation, M.E.B., R.A.C., F.K. and S.Y.G.; formal analysis, M.E.B.; in-
vestigation, M.E.B., R.A.C., F.K. and S.Y.G.; resources, S.Y.G.; data curation, M.E.B. and S.Y.G.;
writing—original draft preparation, M.E.B., F.K. and S.Y.G.; writing—review and editing, M.E.B.
and S.Y.G.; visualization, M.E.B., R.A.C., F.K. and S.Y.G.; supervision, M.E.B. and S.Y.G.; project
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 13 of 15

administration, M.E.B. and S.Y.G.; funding acquisition, R.A.C. All authors have read and agreed to
the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The project is funded under the program of the Minister of Science and Higher Education
titled “Regional Initiative of Excellence” in 2019–2022, project number 018/RID/2018/19, the amount
of funding PLN 10 788 423,16”.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Dataset can be downloaded from World Bank.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Mills, M. The Internet Begins with Coal: A Preliminary Exploration of the Impact of the Internet on Electricity Consumption: A Green
Policy Paper for the Greening Earth Society; Mills-McCarthy & Associates: Chevy Chase, MD, USA, 1999.
2. Sadorsky, P. Information communication technology and electricity consumption in emerging economies. Energy Policy 2012, 48,
130–136. [CrossRef]
3. Shahiduzzaman, M.; Alam, K. Information technology and its changing roles to economic growth and productivity in Australia.
Telecommun. Policy 2014, 38, 125–135. [CrossRef]
4. Greenpeace. How Clean is Your Cloud? Amsterdam: Greenpeace International. 2012. Available online: http://www.greenpeace.org/
international/Global/international/publications/climate/2012/iCoal/HowCleanisYourCloud.pdf (accessed on 25 October 2021).
5. Salahuddin, M.; Alam, K. Internet usage, electricity consumption and economic growth in Australia: A time series evidence.
Telemat. Inform. 2015, 32, 862–878. [CrossRef]
6. Blurton, C. New Directions of ICT-Use in Education. 2002. Available online: http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/lwf/
dl/edict.pdf (accessed on 19 September 2021).
7. Manochehri, N.N.; Al-Esmail, R.; Ashrafi, R. Examining the impact of information and communication technologies (ICT) on
enterprise practices: A preliminary perspective from Qatar. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. EJISDC 2012, 51, 1–16. [CrossRef]
8. Stanimirovic, D. A framework for information and communication technology induced transformation of the healthcare business
model in Slovenia. J. Glob. Inf. Technol. Manag. 2015, 18, 29–47. [CrossRef]
9. Siegel, D.; Cassia, L.; Minola, T.; Pateari, S. (Eds.) Entrepreneurship and Technological Change; Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.:
Northampton, MA, USA, 2011; pp. 13–15.
10. Thirring, W. A soluble relativistic field theory. Ann. Phys. 1958, 3, 91–112. [CrossRef]
11. Jipp, A. Wealth of nations and telephone density. Telecommun. J. 1963, 30, 199–201.
12. Bildirici, M.E. Chaotic Dynamics on Air Quality and Human Health: 4 Evidence from China, India, and Turkey. Nonlinear Dyn.
Psychol. Life Sci. 2022, 25, 207.
13. Karcagi-Kováts, A. Performance indicators in CSR and sustainability reports in Hungary. Appl. Stud. Agribus. Commer. 2012, 6,
137–142. [CrossRef]
14. Gopinath, G. Limiting the economic fallout of the coronavirus with large targeted policies. In Mitigating the COVID-19 Economic
Crisis: Act Fast and Do Whatever It Takes; CEPR Press: London, UK, 2020; pp. 41–48.
15. Wang, Q.; Su, M. A preliminary assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on environment—A case study of China. Sci. Total Environ.
2020, 728, 138915. [CrossRef]
16. Alava, J.J.; Singh, G.G. Changing air pollution and CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lesson learned and future
equity concerns of post-COVID recovery. Environ. Sci. Policy 2022, 130, 1–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Ehlert, D.; Zickfeld, K. What determines the warming commitment after cessation of CO2 emissions? Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 015002.
[CrossRef]
18. Le Quéré, C.; Jackson, R.B.; Jones, M.W.; Smith, A.J.P.; Abernethy, S.; Andrew, R.M.; De-Gol, A.J.; Willis, D.R.; Shan, Y.; Canadell,
J.G.; et al. Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confinement. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2020,
10, 647–653. [CrossRef]
19. Evans, S. Analysis: Coronavirus Set to Cause Largest Ever Annual Fall in CO2 Emissions. Carbon Brief. 2020. Available online:
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-coronavirus-set-to-cause-largest-ever-annual-fall-in-co2-emissions/ (accessed on 13
March 2021).
20. UNEP. Emissions Gap Report 2019. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi. 2019. Available online: http://www.
unenvironment.org/emissionsgap (accessed on 26 October 2021).
21. IPCC. Summary for Policymakers. In Global Warming of 1.5 ◦ C; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
22. Bildirici, M. Refugees, governance, and sustainable environment: PQARDL method. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29,
39295–39309. [CrossRef]
23. Bildirici, M. The impacts of governance on environmental pollution in some countries of Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa:
The evidence from panel quantile regression and causality. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 17382–17393. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 14 of 15

24. Cho, S.J.; Kim, T.H.; Shin, Y. Quantile cointegration in the autoregressive distributed-lag modeling framework. J. Econom. 2015,
188, 281–300. [CrossRef]
25. Cronin, F.J.; Parker, E.B.; Colleran, E.K.; Gold, M.A. Telecommunications infrastructure and economic growth: An analysis of
causality. Telecommun. Policy 1991, 15, 529–535. [CrossRef]
26. Cronin, F.J.; Parker, E.B.; Colleran, E.K.; Gold, M.A. Telecommunications infrastructure investment and economic development.
Telecommun. Policy 1993, 17, 415–430. [CrossRef]
27. Madden, G.; Savage, S.J. CEE telecommunications investment and economic growth. Inf. Econ. Policy 1998, 10, 173–195. [CrossRef]
28. Dutta, A. Telecommunications and economic activity: An analysis of Granger causality. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2001, 17, 71–95.
29. Chakraborty, C.; Nandi, B. Privatization, telecommunications and growth in selected Asian countries: An econometric analysis.
Commun. Strateg. 2003, 52, 31–47.
30. Shinjo, K.; Zhang, X. ICT capital investment and productivity growth: Granger causality in Japanese and the USA industries.
In Proceedings of the 15th European Regional International Telecommunications Society Conference, Berlin, Germany, 2–5
September 2004.
31. Pradhan, M.; Suryadarma, D.; Beatty, A.; Wong, M.; Gaduh, A.; Alisjahbana, A.; Prama Artha, R. Improving educational quality
through enhancing community participation: Results from a randomized field experiment in Indonesia. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ.
2014, 6, 105–126. [CrossRef]
32. Cho, Y.; Lee, J.; Kim, T.-Y. The impact of ICT investment and energy price on industrial electricity demand: Dynamic growth
model approach. Energy Policy 2007, 35, 4730–4738. [CrossRef]
33. Røpke, I.; Haunstrup Christensen, T.; Ole Jensen, J. Information and communication technologies—A new round of household
electrification. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 1764–1773. [CrossRef]
34. Ishida, H. The effect of ICT development on economic growth and energy consumption in Japan. Telemat. Inform. 2015, 32, 79–88.
[CrossRef]
35. Awad, A. Is there any impact from ICT on environmental quality in Africa? Evidence from second-generation panel techniques.
Environ. Chall. 2022, 7, 100520.
36. Bastida, L.; Cohen, J.J.; Kollmann, A.; Moya, A.; Reichl, J. Exploring the role of ICT on household behavioural energy efficiency to
mitigate global warming. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 103, 455–462. [CrossRef]
37. Panajotovic, B.; Jankovic, M.; Odadzic, B. ICT and smart grid. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Telecommu-
nication in Modern Satellite Cable and Broadcasting Services (TELSIKS), Nis, Serbia, 5–8 October 2011; pp. 118–121. Available
online: https://www.telsiks.org.rs/telsiks2011/TELSIKS_2011_Conference_Program.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2021).
38. Laitner, J. The energy efficiency benefits and the economic imperative of ICT-enabled systems. In Proceedings of the ICT
Innovations for Sustainability, Zurich, Switzerland, 14–16 February 2013; Hilty, L., Aebischer Içinde, B., Eds.; Springer: Cham,
Switzerland, 2015; pp. 37–48.
39. Moyer, J.D.; Hughes, B.B. ICTs: Do they contribute to increased carbon emissions? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2012, 79, 919–931.
[CrossRef]
40. Avom, D.; Nkengfack, H.; Kaffo Fotio, H.; Totouom, A. ICT and environmental quality in Sub-Saharan Africa: Effects and
transmission channels. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 155, 120028. [CrossRef]
41. Magazzino, C.; Icon, D.P.; Fusco, G.; Schneider, N. Investigating the link among ICT, electricity consumption, air pollution, and
economic growth in EU countries. Energy Sources Part B Econ. Plan. Policy 2021, 16, 976–998. [CrossRef]
42. Raheem, I.D.; Kumar Tiwari, A.; Balsalobre-Lorente, D. The role of ICT and financial development in CO2 emissions and economic
growth. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 1912–1922. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. Arshad, Z.; Robaina, M.; Botelho, A. The role of ICT in energy consumption and environment: An empirical investigation of
Asian economies with cluster analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 32913–32932. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Miśkiewicz, R.; Rzepka, A.; Borowiecki, R.; Olesinki, Z. Energy Efficiency in the Industry 4.0 Era: Attributes of Teal Organisations.
Energies 2021, 14, 6776. [CrossRef]
45. Khan, D.N.; Baloch, M.A.; Saud, S.; Fatima, T. The effect of ICT on CO2 emissions in emerging economies: Does the level of
income matters? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 22850–22860.
46. Park, Y.; Meng, F.; Baloch, M.A. The effect of ICT, financial development, growth, and trade openness on CO2 emissions: An
empirical analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 30708–30719. [CrossRef]
47. Murshed, M. An empirical analysis of the non-linear impacts of ICT-trade openness on renewable energy transition, energy
efficiency, clean cooking fuel access and environmental sustainability in South Asia. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 36254–36281.
[CrossRef]
48. Zhang, J.W.; Hassan, S.T.; Iqbal, K. Toward achieving environmental sustainability target in Organization for Economic Coopera-
tion and Development countries: The role of real income, research and development, and transport infrastructure. Sustain. Dev.
2019, 28, 83–90. [CrossRef]
49. Asongu, A.S.; le Roux, S.; Biekpe, N. Environmental degradation, ICT and inclusive development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy
Policy 2017, 111, 353–361. [CrossRef]
50. Adha, R.; Hong, C.-Y.; Agrawai, S.; Li, L.-H. ICT, carbon emissions, climate change, and energy demand nexus: The potential
benefit of digitalization in Taiwan. Energy Environ. 2021. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022, 15, 4567 15 of 15

51. Zhu, H.; Duan, L.; Guo, Y.; Yu, K. The effects of FDI, economic growth and energy consumption on carbon emissions in ASEAN-5:
Evidence from panel quantile regression. Econ. Model. 2016, 58, 237–248. [CrossRef]
52. Adebayo, T.S.; Kirikkaleli, D. Do renewable energy consumption and financial development matter for environmental sustain-
ability? New global evidence. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 29, 583–594.
53. Koenker, R.; Bassett, G., Jr. Regression quantiles. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 1978, 46, 33–50. [CrossRef]
54. Bera, A.K.; Galvao, A.F.; Montes-Rojas, G.V.; Park, S.Y. Asymmetric laplace regression: Maximum likelihood, maximum entropy
and quantile regression. J. Econom. Methods 2016, 5, 79–101. [CrossRef]
55. Sherwood, B.; Wang, L. Partially linear additive quantile regression in ultra-high dimension. Ann. Stat. 2016, 44, 288–317.
[CrossRef]
56. Yu, K.; Jones, M. Local linear quantile regression. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1998, 93, 228–237. [CrossRef]
57. Chen, X.; Liu, W.; Zhang, Y. Quantile regression under memory constraint. Ann. Stat. 2019, 47, 3244–3273. [CrossRef]
58. Mensi, W.; Shahzad, S.J.H.; Hammoudeh, S.; Hkiri, B.; Yahyaee, K.H.A. Long-run relationships between US financial credit
markets and risk factors: Evidence from the quantile ARDL approach. Financ. Res. Lett. 2019, 29, 101–110. [CrossRef]
59. Troster, V.; Shahbaz, M.; Uddin, G.S. Renewable energy, oil prices, and economic activity: A Granger-causality in quantiles
analysis. Energy Econ. 2018, 70, 440–452. [CrossRef]
60. Wang, Q.; Wang, X.; Li, R. Does urbanization redefine the environmental Kuznets curve? An empirical analysis of 134 Countries.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 76, 103382. [CrossRef]
61. Lennerfors, T.T.; Fors, P.; van Rooijen, J. ICT and environmental sustainability in a changing society: The view of ecological World
Systems Theory. Inf. Technol. People 2015, 28, 758–774. [CrossRef]
62. Bildirici, M.E.; Özaksoy, F. The relationship between economic growth and biomass energy consumption in some European
countries. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2013, 5, 023141. [CrossRef]
63. Bildirici, M.E. The relationship between economic growth and biomass energy consumption. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2012, 4, 023113.
[CrossRef]