پژوهش ها و چشم اندازهای اقتصادی

پژوهش ها و چشم اندازهای اقتصادی

بررسی اثرات چندگانه جانشینی انرژی از توسعۀ تکنولوژی بر نرخ رشد بخش کشاورزی

نویسندگان
فاطمه طایی سمیرمی 1
صادق خلیلیان 2
1 دانش آموختۀ دکتری اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
10.22034/25.1.1
چکیده
توسعۀ تکنولوژی که در بخش کشاورزی برای کاهش مصرف انرژی و کاهش انتشار گازهای گلخانه‌ای صورت می‌گیرد، اثرات چندگانه‌ای بر جانشینی انرژی و درنتیجه بر نرخ رشد شاخص‌های اقتصادی و محیط‌زیستی در بخش کشاورزی می‌گذارد. هدف از انجام این مطالعه بررسی اثرات چندگانۀ جانشینی انرژی از توسعۀ تکنولوژی بر نرخ رشد شاخص‌های اقتصادی – محیط ‌زیستی در بخش کشاورزی ایران با کاربرد تابع هزینه ترانسلوگ است. نتایج نشان داد که در صورت افزایش سطح توسعۀ تکنولوژی، جانشینی بین سرمایه و انرژی کاهش و درمقابل جانشینی بین نیروی ‌کار و انرژی افزایش می‌یابد. همچنین نتایج نشان داد که با کاهش میزان جانشینی بین سرمایه و انرژی، اثرات منفی آن بر اقتصاد و کیفیت محیط‌ زیست قابل‌توجه است و درمقابل افزایش میزان جانشینی بین نیروی‌کار و انرژی، اثر مثبتی بر اقتصاد و کیفیت محیط‌ زیست می‌گذارد که میزان این اثرات با افزایش سطح بالاتر توسعۀ تکنولوژی بر جانشینی انرژی بیشتر شده است. از نتایج این مطالعه پیشنهاد می‌شود که برای کاهش اثرات منفی اقتصادی و محیط ‌زیستی از کاهش موجودی سرمایه لازم است تسهیلاتی برای سرمایه‌گذاری بیشتر در بخش کشاورزی ایران اختصاص داده شود
کلیدواژه‌ها
کلیدواژه‌ها: اثرات جانشینی
سرمایه‌گذاری
گازهای گلخانه‌ای
مصرف انرژی

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Multiple Effects of Energy Substitution, Technology Development and Growth Rate in Agricultural Sector

نویسندگان English

fatemeh taei 1
Sadegh Khalilian 2
1 Ph. D. Student, Department of Agricultural Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده English

Aim and Introduction

The purpose of this study is to investigate the multiple effects of energy substitution from technology development on the growth rate of economic-environmental indicators in Iran's agricultural sector using the translog cost function. While one of the main goals of improving energy efficiency with the implementation of the Energy Subsidy Targeting Law in Iran was to deal with the rapid growth of fossil fuels, but looking at the energy consumption situation in the agricultural sector, it is clear that not only with the implementation of this plan, the consumption of fossil fuels has not decreased, but also increased in coparison to the time span before the plan. The increase in the annual growth rate of energy consumption has created many environmental challenges. In this way, the amount of carbon dioxide emissions, which is the most important greenhouse gas in Iran's agricultural sector, has reached from 13,682 tons to 17,639 tons in 2019. In other words, the average increase in the annual growth of carbon dioxide emissions in agricultural sector during this period was equal to 28.92%. The implementation of some energy saving policies may have the opposite effect on energy consumption and the environment as well.

Methodology

Translog cost function has been used to investigate the multiple effects of energy substitution from technology development on the growth rate of economic-environmental indicators in Iran's agricultural sector. The data used for the period 1988 to 2020 were collected from Central Bank, Iran Statistics Center, Ministry of Energy and World Food Organization.

Results and Discussion

The results has revealed that if the level of technology development increases, the substitution between capital and energy decreases and on the contrary, the substitution between labor and energy increases. The results have also shown that by reducing the amount of substitution between capital and energy, its negative effects on the economy and the quality of the environment are significant, and in contrast to the increase in the amount of substitution between labor and energy, it has a positive effect on the economy and the quality of environment. The higher level of technology development has increased the level of energy substitution.

Conclusion

The results of this research have shown that with an increase in the level of technology development on changes in energy consumption, the substitution between production factors in agricultural sector changes, which means that a 25% increase in technology development leads to an increase in energy consumption by 0.567%. In comparison, the changes in energy consumption are aligned with the development level of technology, which means that a small increase in the level of technology development leads to the rebound effects of energy. These energy feedback effects lead to an increase in substitution between capital and energy by 0.068% and a decrease in substitution between labor and energy by 0.412% compared to the initial level of technology development, but with a further increase in the level of technology development, the effect of energy feedback effects on energy substitution decreases. The results have also shown that with an increase in the level of technology development in the targeting period of energy subsidy, the amount of energy return effects increases, but at a higher level of technology development, these energy return effects decrease in the agricultural sector. Therefore, it is concluded that in the early stages of technology development, which is at a lower level, its effects on energy return are significant, but with the development of technology at a higher level, its value has gradually decreased and does not remain stable. The results have also revealed that with an increase in the level of technology development, the degree of substitution between capital and energy decreases and on the other hand, the degree of substitution between labor and energy increases, and these effects are greater at a higher level of technology development. Therefore, increasing the level of technology leads to a decrease in investment and an increase in employment in the agricultural sector at the same time. In addition, it was found that by reducing the substitution between capital and energy, the negative effects on economic indicators and environmental quality are significant. The reason that the development of the level of technology in Iran's agricultural sector has had significant negative economic effects can be seen in the exhaustion of the technology used in the production of this sector. The application of these technologies, will lead to a higher cost of production which in turn result into a lower rates of profitability in the sector. Therefore, the incentive for production, investment and job creation in this sector decreases in the long term.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Keywords: Energy Consumption
Greenhouse gases
Investment
Substitution Effects
Allen RGD. 1938. London School of Economics and Political Science. Mathematical analysis for economists (Vol. 8). London: Macmillan.‌
Alfarisi, S., Mitake, Y., Tsutsui, Y., Wang, H., & Shimomura, Y. (2022). A study of the rebound effect on the product-service system: Why should it be a top priority?. Procedia CIRP, 109, 257-262.‌
Akram, R., Chen, F., Khalid, F., Ye, Z., & Majeed, M. T. (2020). Heterogeneous effects of energy efficiency and renewable energy on carbon emissions: Evidence from developing countries. Journal of cleaner production, 247, 119122.‌
Akram, R., Majeed, M. T., Fareed, Z., Khalid, F., & Ye, C. (2020). Asymmetric effects of energy efficiency and renewable energy on carbon emissions of BRICS economies: evidence from nonlinear panel autoregressive distributed lag model. Environmental science and pollution research, 27, 18254-18268.‌
Ahmed, Z., Ahmad, M., Rjoub, H., Kalugina, O. A., & Hussain, N. (2022). Economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and ecological footprint: Exploring the role of environmental regulations and democracy in sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 30(4), 595-605.‌
Ahmad, N., Youjin, L., Žiković, S., & Belyaeva, Z. (2023). The effects of technological innovation on sustainable development and environmental degradation: Evidence from China. Technology in Society, 72, 102184.‌
Ahmad, M., Jiang, P., Majeed, A., Umar, M., Khan, Z., & Muhammad, S. (2020). The dynamic impact of natural resources, technological innovations and economic growth on ecological footprint: an advanced panel data estimation. Resources Policy, 69, 101817.‌
Asongu, S. A., & Odhiambo, N. M. (2020). Foreign direct investment, information technology and economic growth dynamics in Sub-Saharan Africa. Telecommunications Policy, 44(1), 101838.‌
Ahmed, M., Hafeez, M., Kaium, M. A., Ullah, S., & Ahmad, H. (2023). Do environmental technology and banking sector development matter for green growth? Evidence from top-polluted economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(6), 14760-14769.‌
Adebayo, T. S., Ullah, S., Kartal, M. T., Ali, K., Pata, U. K., & Ağa, M. (2023). Endorsing sustainable development in BRICS: The role of technological innovation, renewable energy consumption, and natural resources in limiting carbon emission. Science of the Total Environment, 859, 160181.‌
Bianchini, S., Damioli, G., & Ghisetti, C. (2023). The environmental effects of the “twin” green and digital transition in European regions. Environmental and Resource Economics, 84(4), 877-918.‌
Bertoldi, P., & Mosconi, R. (2020). Do energy efficiency policies save energy? A new approach based on energy policy indicators (in the EU Member States). Energy Policy, 139, 111320.‌
Baloch, Z. A., Tan, Q., Iqbal, N., Mohsin, M., Abbas, Q., Iqbal, W., & Chaudhry, I. S. (2020). Trilemma assessment of energy intensity, efficiency, and environmental index: evidence from BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 34337-34347.‌
Bendig, D., Schulz, C., Theis, L., & Raff, S. (2023). Digital orientation and environmental performance in times of technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 188, 122272.‌
Chen, C. W. (2021). Clarifying rebound effects of the circular economy in the context of sustainable cities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 66, 102622.‌
Cansino, J. M., Ordóñez, M., & Prieto, M. (2022). Decomposition and measurement of the rebound effect: The case of energy efficiency improvements in Spain. Applied Energy, 306, 117961.‌
Cheng, C., Ren, X., Dong, K., Dong, X., & Wang, Z. (2021). How does technological innovation mitigate CO2 emissions in OECD countries? Heterogeneous analysis using panel quantile regression. Journal of Environmental Management, 280, 111818.‌
Chen, J., Gao, M., Li, D., & Song, M. (2020). Analysis of the rebound effects of fossil and nonfossil energy in China based on sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 28(1), 235-246.‌
Črešnar, R., Dabić, M., Stojčić, N., & Nedelko, Z. (2023). It takes two to tango: technological and non-technological factors of Industry 4.0 implementation in manufacturing firms. Review of Managerial Science, 17(3), 827-853.‌
Chen, X., Rahaman, M. A., Murshed, M., Mahmood, H., & Hossain, M. A. (2023). Causality analysis of the impacts of petroleum use, economic growth, and technological innovation on carbon emissions in Bangladesh. Energy, 267, 126565.‌
Cheng, Y., Zhang, Y., Wang, J., & Jiang, J. (2023). The impact of the urban digital economy on China's carbon intensity: spatial spillover and mediating effect. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 189, 106762.‌
Cao, S., Nie, L., Sun, H., Sun, W., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2021). Digital finance, green technological innovation and energy-environmental performance: Evidence from China's regional economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 327, 129458.‌
Campi, M. C., & Garatti, S. (2018). Introduction to the scenario approach. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.‌
Caglar, A. E. (2023). Can nuclear energy technology budgets pave the way for a transition toward low‐carbon economy: insights from the United Kingdom. Sustainable Development, 31(1), 198-210.‌
Dell’Anna, F. (2021). Green jobs and energy efficiency as strategies for economic growth and the reduction of environmental impacts. Energy Policy, 149, 112031.‌
Debertin DL. 2012. Agricultural production economics.‌
Font Vivanco, D., Freire‐González, J., Galvin, R., Santarius, T., Walnum, H. J., Makov, T., & Sala, S. (2022). Rebound effect and sustainability science: A review. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 26(4), 1543-1563.‌
Haftu, G. G. (2019). Information communications technology and economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: A panel data approach. Telecommunications Policy, 43(1), 88-99.‌
Hashmi, R., & Alam, K. (2019). Dynamic relationship among environmental regulation, innovation, CO2 emissions, population, and economic growth in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Journal of cleaner production, 231, 1100-1109.‌
Hou, H., Zhu, Y., Wang, J., & Zhang, M. (2023). Will green financial policy help improve China’s environmental quality? The role of digital finance and green technology innovation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(4), 10527-10539.‌
Haldar, A., Sucharita, S., Dash, D. P., Sethi, N., & Padhan, P. C. (2023). The effects of ICT, electricity consumption, innovation and renewable power generation on economic growth: An income level analysis for the emerging economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 384, 135607.‌
Husaini, D. H., Lean, H. H., Puah, C. H., & Affizzah, A. D. (2023). Energy subsidy reform and energy sustainability in Malaysia. Economic Analysis and Policy, 77, 913-927.‌
Iram, R., Zhang, J., Erdogan, S., Abbas, Q., & Mohsin, M. (2020). Economics of energy and environmental efficiency: evidence from OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 3858-3870.‌
Iran Statistical Center, Statistical Yearbook, 2019.
Jiang, T., Cao, C., Lei, L., Hou, J., Yu, Y., & Jahanger, A. (2023). Temporal and spatial patterns, efficiency losses and impact factors of energy mismatch in China under environmental constraints. Energy, 282, 128875.‌
Jiakui, C., Abbas, J., Najam, H., Liu, J., & Abbas, J. (2023). Green technological innovation, green finance, and financial development and their role in green total factor productivity: Empirical insights from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 382, 135131.‌
Jiang, Y., & Khan, H. (2023). The relationship between renewable energy consumption, technological innovations, and carbon dioxide emission: evidence from two-step system GMM. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(2), 4187-4202.‌
Jahanger, A., Ozturk, I., Onwe, J. C., Joseph, T. E., & Hossain, M. R. (2023). Do technology and renewable energy contribute to energy efficiency and carbon neutrality? Evidence from top ten manufacturing countries. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 56, 103084.‌
Jahanger, A., Usman, M., Murshed, M., Mahmood, H., & Balsalobre-Lorente, D. (2022). The linkages between natural resources, human capital, globalization, economic growth, financial development, and ecological footprint: The moderating role of technological innovations. Resources Policy, 76, 102569.‌
Kihombo, S., Ahmed, Z., Chen, S., Adebayo, T. S., & Kirikkaleli, D. (2021). Linking financial development, economic growth, and ecological footprint: what is the role of technological innovation?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(43), 61235-61245.‌
Koseoglu, A., Yucel, A. G., & Ulucak, R. (2022). Green innovation and ecological footprint relationship for a sustainable development: Evidence from top 20 green innovator countries. Sustainable development, 30(5), 976-988.‌
Kong, L., Mu, X., Hu, G., & Tu, C. (2023). Will energy efficiency improvements reduce energy consumption? Perspective of rebound effect and evidence from beijing. Energy, 263, 125665.‌
Christensen LR, Jorgenson DW and Lau LJ. 1973. Transcendental logarithmic production frontiers. The review of economics and statistics. 28-45.‌
Li, S., Gao, L., Han, C., Gupta, B., Alhalabi, W., & Almakdi, S. (2023). Exploring the effect of digital transformation on Firms’ innovation performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 8(1), 100317.‌
Li, J., Du, Q., Lu, C., Huang, Y., & Wang, X. (2023). Simulations for double dividend of carbon tax and improved energy efficiency in the transportation industry. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(7), 19083-19096.‌
Liu K, Bai H, Yin S and Lin B. 2018. Factor substitution and decomposition of carbon intensity in China's heavy industry. Energy, 145: 582-591.‌
Myovella, G., Karacuka, M., & Haucap, J. (2020). Digitalization and economic growth: A comparative analysis of Sub-Saharan Africa and OECD economies. Telecommunications Policy, 44(2), 101856.‌
Murshed, M. (2020). 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. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(29), 36254-36281.‌
Manigandan, P., Alam, M. S., Alagirisamy, K., Pachiyappan, D., Murshed, M., & Mahmood, H. (2023). Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals through technological innovation: Juxtaposing the economic and environmental effects of financial development and energy use. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(3), 8239-8256.‌
Mohsin, M., Hanif, I., Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., Abbas, Q., & Iqbal, W. (2021). Nexus between energy efficiency and electricity reforms: a DEA-based way forward for clean power development. Energy Policy, 149, 112052.‌
Manigandan, P., Alam, M. S., Alagirisamy, K., Pachiyappan, D., Murshed, M., & Mahmood, H. (2023). Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals through technological innovation: Juxtaposing the economic and environmental effects of financial development and energy use. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(3), 8239-8256.
Ministry of Energy, Energy Balances, Macro Planning of Electricity and Energy. 2020.
Ministry of Petroleum, Hydrocarbon Balance, International Energy Studies Institute. 2022.
Phillips PCB and Perron P. 1988. Testing for a unit root in time series regressions, Biometrika 75: 335-346.
Romer D. 2011. Advanced Macroeconomics. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Nara, E. O. B., da Costa, M. B., Baierle, I. C., Schaefer, J. L., Benitez, G. B., do Santos, L. M. A. L., & Benitez, L. B. (2021). Expected impact of industry 4.0 technologies on sustainable development: A study in the context of Brazil's plastic industry. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 25, 102-122.‌
Onat, N. C. (2022). How to compare sustainability impacts of alternative fuel Vehicles?. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 102, 103129.‌
Omondi, C., Njoka, F., & Musonye, F. (2023). An economy-wide rebound effect analysis of Kenya's energy efficiency initiatives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 385, 135730.‌
Poponi, S., Arcese, G., Pacchera, F., & Martucci, O. (2022). Evaluating the transition to the circular economy in the agri-food sector: Selection of indicators. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 176, 105916.‌
Peng, H. R., Zhang, Y. J., & Liu, J. Y. (2023). The energy rebound effect of digital development: Evidence from 285 cities in China. Energy, 270, 126837.‌
Raihan, A., Pavel, M. I., Muhtasim, D. A., Farhana, S., Faruk, O., & Paul, A. (2023). The role of renewable energy use, technological innovation, and forest cover toward green development: Evidence from Indonesia. Innovation and Green Development, 2(1), 100035.‌
Romer, D. (2011). Advanced macroeconomics. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Rej, S., Bandyopadhyay, A., Das, N., Hossain, M. E., Islam, M. S., Bera, P., & Yeediballi, T. (2023). The asymmetric influence of environmental-related technological innovation on climate change mitigation: what role do FDI and renewable energy play?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(6), 14916-14931.‌
Rutting, L., Vervoort, J., Mees, H., Pereira, L., Veeger, M., Muiderman, K., ... & Driessen, P. (2023). Disruptive seeds: a scenario approach to explore power shifts in sustainability transformations. Sustainability Science, 18(3), 1117-1133.‌
Skelton, A. C., Paroussos, L., & Allwood, J. M. (2020). Comparing energy and material efficiency rebound effects: an exploration of scenarios in the GEM-E3 macroeconomic model. Ecological Economics, 173, 106544.‌
Su, C. W., Liu, F., Stefea, P., & Umar, M. (2023). Does technology innovation help to achieve carbon neutrality?. Economic Analysis and Policy, 78, 1-14.‌
Siderius, T., & Poldner, K. (2021). Reconsidering the circular economy rebound effect: Propositions from a case study of the Dutch Circular Textile Valley. Journal of Cleaner Production, 293, 125996.‌
Shabani, Z. D., & Shahnazi, R. (2019). Energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions, information and communications technology, and gross domestic product in Iranian economic sectors: A panel causality analysis. Energy, 169, 1064-1078.‌
Sui, B., & Yao, L. (2023). The impact of digital transformation on corporate financialization: The mediating effect of green technology innovation. Innovation and Green Development, 2(1), 100032.‌
Schäfer, A. W., Barrett, S. R., Doyme, K., Dray, L. M., Gnadt, A. R., Self, R., ... & Torija, A. J. (2019). Technological, economic and environmental prospects of all-electric aircraft. Nature Energy, 4(2), 160-166.‌
Shahverdian, M. H., Sohani, A., Pedram, M. Z., & Sayyaadi, H. (2023). An optimal strategy for application of photovoltaic-wind turbine with PEMEC-PEMFC hydrogen storage system based on techno-economic, environmental, and availability indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 384, 135499.
Stern, D. I. (2020). How large is the economy-wide rebound effect?. Energy Policy, 147, 111870.‌
Taghvaee, V. M., Arani, A. A., Soretz, S., & Agheli, L. (2023). Diesel demand elasticities and sustainable development pillars of economy, environment and social (health): comparing two strategies of subsidy removal and energy efficiency. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(3), 2285-2315.‌
Thompson P and Taylor TG. 1995. “The Capital-Energy Substitutability Debate: a New Look”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(3): 565-569.
Turner, K., & Hanley, N. (2011). Energy efficiency, rebound effects and the environmental Kuznets Curve. Energy economics, 33(5), 709-720.‌
Uzawa H. 1962. Production functions with constant elasticities of substitution. The Review of Economic Studies, 29(4): 291-299.‌
Usman, M., Balsalobre-Lorente, D., Jahanger, A., & Ahmad, P. (2023). Are Mercosur economies going green or going away? An empirical investigation of the association between technological innovations, energy use, natural resources and GHG emissions. Gondwana Research, 113, 53-70.‌
Usman, M., & Hammar, N. (2021). Dynamic relationship between technological innovations, financial development, renewable energy, and ecological footprint: fresh insights based on the STIRPAT model for Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(12), 15519-15536.‌
Velez-Henao, J. A., García-Mazo, C. M., Freire-Gonzalez, J., & Vivanco, D. F. (2020). Environmental rebound effect of energy efficiency improvements in Colombian households. Energy Policy, 145, 111697.‌
Wang, J., Wang, W., Liu, Y., & Wu, H. (2023). Can industrial robots reduce carbon emissions? Based on the perspective of energy rebound effect and labor factor flow in China. Technology in Society, 72, 102208.‌
Wei, C., Li, C. Z., Löschel, A., Managi, S., & Lundgren, T. (2023). Digital technology and energy sustainability: Recent advances, challenges, and opportunities. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 190, 106803.‌
Wang, R., Usman, M., Radulescu, M., Cifuentes-Faura, J., & Balsalobre-Lorente, D. (2023). Achieving ecological sustainability through technological innovations, financial development, foreign direct investment, and energy consumption in developing European countries. Gondwana Research, 119, 138-152.‌
Wei, L., Lin, B., Zheng, Z., Wu, W., & Zhou, Y. (2023). Does fiscal expenditure promote green technological innovation in China? Evidence from Chinese cities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 98, 106945.‌
Wu, H., Hao, Y., & Ren, S. (2020). How do environmental regulation and environmental decentralization affect green total factor energy efficiency: Evidence from China. Energy Economics, 91, 104880.‌
Wu, H., Hao, Y., Ren, S., Yang, X., & Xie, G. (2021). Does internet development improve green total factor energy efficiency? Evidence from China. Energy Policy, 153, 112247.‌
Wang X, Wen X and Xie C. 2018. An evaluation of technical progress and energy rebound effects in China's iron and steel industry. Energy Policy, 123: 259-265.‌
Xie, Z., Wu, R., & Wang, S. (2021). How technological progress affects the carbon emission efficiency? Evidence from national panel quantile regression. Journal of Cleaner Production, 307, 127133.‌
Yemelyanov, O., Petrushka, I., Zahoretska, O., Petrushka, K., & Havryliak, A. (2023). Information support for managing energy-saving technological changes at enterprises. Procedia Computer Science, 217, 258-267.‌
Zhang, X., & Wei, C. (2022). The economic and environmental impacts of information and communication technology: A state-of-the-art review and prospects. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 185, 106477.‌
Zhang, T., Wu, K., Tan, Y., & Xu, Z. (2023). Subsidy or not? How much government subsidy can improve performance level of energy-saving service company?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(25), 67019-67039.‌
Zhang, J. (2023). Assessing the impact of R&D Investments, government subsidies on energy efficiency: empirical analysis from the Chinese listed firms. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(2), 3606-3620.‌
Zimmermann, M., Vöhringer, F., Thalmann, P., & Moreau, V. (2021). Do rebound effects matter for Switzerland? Assessing the effectiveness of industrial energy efficiency improvements. Energy Economics, 104, 105703.‌
Zhang, S., Luo, S., & Afshan, S. (2022). Role of climate technologies, financial development, and renewable energy in the facilitation of social, economic, and environmental goals. Renewable Energy, 199, 169-178.‌
Zhang, H., Gao, S., & Zhou, P. (2023). Role of digitalization in energy storage technological innovation: Evidence from China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 171, 113014.‌
Zahra, S. A., Liu, W., & Si, S. (2023). How digital technology promotes entrepreneurship in ecosystems. Technovation, 119, 102457.‌