Inferential Analysis Results On Carbon Emission

Group Statistics

Findings from the inferential analysis have been shown in the current section. The inferential analysis is used to test the proposed hypothesis and the same has been done in the current research also. For this research the t- test has been conducted and the results from the t test are discussed below(Kuada 2012; Rosa1 & Luana Caroline Silva 2017).

The first t test has been conducted to examine whether there is significant difference in the carbon emission between the developed and the developing countries. As the results indicate the mean reduction in carbon emission for the developed country was 8.28 % whereas the average reduction for the developing countries is 17.99 %. This clearly indicates that the developed country is slow in reducing the carbon emission as compared to the developing countries. For the current research the USA has been taken as the developed country and the developing countries includes India, China and Brazil(Müller-Falcke 2002; Panayotou & Sachs 2005).

Group Statistics
	Developed or Developing	N Save Time On Research and Writing Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper. Get My Paper	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
percentage change in Co2 emission from previous year	Developed	53	-8.2811	5.80209	.79698
Developing	53	-17.9940	45.33302	6.22697

Table 1 Results from the group statistics of the t test

Independent Samples Test
	Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances	t-test for Equality of Means
F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower	Upper
percentage change in Co2 emission from previous year	Equal variances assumed	4.052	.047	1.547	104	.125	9.71283	6.27776	-2.73621	22.16187
Equal variances not assumed			1.547	53.703	.128	9.71283	6.27776	-2.87492	22.30058

Table 2 Results from the independent sample t test The t test has been conducted to examine whether there is significant difference in the carbon emission for the firms who have integrated climate change into their business strategy from those who have not taken into consideration the climate change while preparing their business strategies. Results from t test are shown in the table below.

Group Statistics
	climate change integrated into your business strategy?	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
percentage change in Co2 emission from previous year	Yes	95	-13.7219	34.27817	3.51687
No	11	-8.0909	5.94062	1.79116

Table 3 Results from the group statistics of the t test

Independent Samples Test
	Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances	t-test for Equality of Means
F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower	Upper
percentage change in Co2 emission from previous year	Equal variances assumed	.490	.486	-.542	104	.589	-5.63099	10.39567	-26.24598	14.98401
Equal variances not assumed			-1.427	91.328	.157	-5.63099	3.94672	-13.47028	2.20831

Table 4 Results from the independent sample t test

The results from the t test shows that the significance value is more than 0.05 which shows that there is no significant difference between the two groups.

Hypothesis testing:

H0: There is no significant difference in developed and developing countries in terms of reduction in the carbon emission as compared to the previous year.

H1: H0: There is significant difference in developed and developing countries in terms of reduction in the carbon emission as compared to the previous year.

To test the above hypothesis the t- test has been conducted and the results from the test show that the significance value is less than 0.05. Since the current research is based on the 95 % confidence interval, the null hypothesis can be rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis.

Discussion

The results from the first t- test shows that the Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances is significant as the significance value is less than the critical value of 0.05. For the current research the significance level of 95 % has been taken into consideration. On the basis of the results it can be concluded that there is significant difference in reduction in the carbon emission among the developing and the developed countries. One of the main reason for such results may be the role of the government in developed and developing countries.

The developed countries have already achieved the higher growth and the per capita income in these countries are very high. It has been argued my many scholars that the clean environment is the luxury goods and only with the higher income one can afford the luxury products. So, the people in the developed countries can afford the clean environment which is not the case for the developing countries(Chakraborty & Reagle 2003; Vivarelli 2014).

Independent Samples Test

Another important factor is the role of government. In the developed countries, the government are more concerned about the environment, so the rule and regulations related to pollution are stricter and the projects are not passed if they do not pass the environmental regulations. Also the people are more concerned about their environment in the developed countries.

On the other hand the developing countries are still trying to achieve the higher growth which is expected to bring down the poverty through the trickledown effect and increase the per capita income of the people. So, the government rules and the regulation related to the environment are less strict as compared to the developed countries. The high number of manufacturing firms in the developing countries such as China and India are due to the less strict environmental regulations. Some of the researchers have even tested the pollution haven hypothesis for these two countries and most of the researchers have found that the developing countries have lax environmental policies so that the higher foreign direct investment can be attracted(Heckscher 2012; Antonio et al. 2013; He & Fu 2011; UNCTAD 2011).  

However some of the studies do not find such evidences in these countries. Overall, when the government is supportive for the environmental degradation and carbon emission, the firms are expected to produce more products which means more carbon emission in the environment. In the recent time there has been a debate going on about curbing the carbon emission from the developing countries as the developing countries are producing more carbon as compared to the developed countries.

However, the developing countries are arguing that the now developed countries were more producing much larger carbon when they were in the developing phase and this is the strategy of the developed countries to stop the high growth in the developing countries. On the other hand the developed countries argues that it is high time we should think about the climate change and start immediate actions to reduce the carbon emission. This is ongoing debate between the developing and the developed countries which is also related to the globalization.

Another important factors which leads to higher carbon emission in the developing countries is due to lack of the technological advancement which are more environment friendly and produce less carbon. In the developed countries there is huge investment in research and development and also a huge support from the government to develop the technologies which produce less carbon. With the use of such technologies and process the manufacturing firms are producing less carbon with same amount output.

On the other hand, most of the firms in the developing countries are using the old techniques. The adoption of the new technologies in the developing countries is less because the new technologies are either too expensive which the firms cannot afford or such technologies are not available due to patent and the copy right issues. Also the government support is very less in terms of the research and development of new process and techniques(Phimphanthavong 2013; Lo´pez-Gamero, Molina-Azor?´n & S 2009; Honglei, Xiaorong & Qiufeng 2010; Thompson 2014).

Hypothesis testing

Another t- test was conducted to test whether there is significant difference in the carbon emission for the firms which taken into consideration the climate change while making their business strategies from those firms who do not take into consideration climate change. As shown in the table 4, the Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances is 0.49. However the significance value is more than the critical value of 0.05. So, it can be concluded that there is no significant difference in the carbon reduction for these two types of the firms.

However it was expected that reduction in the carbon emission is higher for those firms who thinks about the climate change as compared to the firms who makes their business strategies without taking the climate change into account. The different in the current research is may be because of the sample included for the analysis.  The issues of climate change has been one of the serious concern of the global world and there has been various steps taken by national and international organisations in the recent time.

The Paris agreement is one of the latest example to show, how important climate change has become.  However, the recent decision of USA to withdraw from the agreement has made the entire agreement in danger. This is because USA is one of the highest producer of carbon emission in the entire world. Now, the time has come that all the countries come together to think seriously about the climate change and start making the planet more livable for all the species.

Apart from the above results, the current research can be of great importance in terms of both the managerial and the academic usage. In terms of the managerial implication, the results from the study can be used by various government organization and the environmental institutes to frame policies related to environmental regulations. This will also help the managers in the firms to know about their carbon emission and start preparing strategies to reduce the carbon emission. On the other hand this research have theoretical implications also. The research methods and the analysis techniques used in this paper can be used to build model and theories in other research. Also the current research is expected to contribute to existing environmental theories.

Limitations of the research

Some of the major limitations of the current research are as follows:

• The sample size included in this study is only 106 which is very less. Also the sample includes the data only from the four countries.
• Another limitation was related to the data processing. Since the data was collected from the CDP data base a lot of data cleaning was required.
• Since the sample is very less and only few countries are involved, it will be very difficult to generalize the results from the current research to entire population.
• The analysis techniques used for the current research are only the quantitative methods, whereas the qualitative methods were not used.
• Only the t-test was conducted, no other techniques was used.
• Limitations related to the cost and the time devoted to the research.

Future research

Future research can be conducted using following points:

• A large sample size can be used which will make the results more robust.
• Data from other sources can also be used which will give more clear picture.
• Similar research can be conducted taking into account more countries which will help to generalize the results from the study.
• Also, further research can be conducted using other statistical techniques such as the correlation analysis, chi square test, regression analysis etc.
• Qualitative analysis can be conducted on the similar area which will provide more in-depth knowledge about the topic.

References

Antonio, L, Lopez, Arce, Guadalupe, Kronenberg & Tobias 2013, ‘Pollution haven hypothesis in emissions embodied in world trade: The relevance of global value chains’, The wealth of nations in a globalizing world, pp. 18–19.

Chakraborty, C & Reagle, D 2003, ‘Liberalization, FDI, and Growth in Developing Countries: A Panel Cointegration Approach’, Economic Inquiry, vol. 8, pp. 510–566.

He, J & Fu, J 2011, Is «?Pollution Haven?» Hypothesis valid for China’s manufacture sectors? An empirical analysis based on carbon embodied in trade,.

Heckscher, T 2012, ‘Pollution Haven Hypothesis’,.

Honglei, C, Xiaorong, Z & Qiufeng, C 2010, ‘Export-oriented Economy & Environmental Pollution in China: the Empirical Study by Simultaneous Equation Model’, Energy Procedia, vol. 5, pp. 884–889.

Kuada, J 2012, Research Methodology: A Project Guide for University Students, Samfundslitteratur.

Lo´pez-Gamero, MD, Molina-Azor?´n, JF & S, EC-C 2009, ‘The whole relationship between environmental variables and firm performance: Competitive advantage and firm resources as mediator variables’, Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 30, pp. 1–12.

Müller-Falcke, D 2002, ‘Use and Impact of Information and Communication Technologies in Developing Countries’ Small Businesses’, Development Economics and Policy, vol. 27.

Panayotou, T & Sachs, J 2005, ., Developing Countries and the Control of Climate Change: A Theoretical Perspective and Policy Implications, Madrid.

Phimphanthavong, H 2013, ‘The Impacts of Economic Growth on Environmental Conditions in Laos’, International Journal of Business Management and Economic Research, vol. 4, pp. 766–774.

Rosa1, FS da & Luana Caroline Silva 2017, ‘Environmental sustainability in hotels, theoretical and methodological contribution’, Brazilian Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 39–60.

Thompson, A 2014, ‘Environmental Kuznets Curve for Water Pollution?: The Case of Border Countries’, Modern Economy, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 66–69.

UNCTAD 2011, World Investment Report 2011: Non-Equity Modes of International Production and Development, New York and Geneva.

Vivarelli, M 2014, ‘Innovation, employment and skills in advanced and developing countries: A survey of economic literature.’, ournal of Economic Issues, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 123–154.