The Study of Education Effects and Their Comparison on the Environment Pollution at the Different Educational Levels In Selected MENA Countries

Subject Areas : environmental management

Sediqe Atrkar roshan ¹ , Zahra fathi ²

1 - Associate Professor, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran. *(Corresponding Author)
2 - MSc in Economics, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran.

Received: 2015-03-02 Accepted : 2016-03-01 Published : 2017-03-21

Keywords: Co2 Emission Development, Education, GMM, MENA Countries,

Abstract :

Background and Objective: With population growth and industrialization, our environment has been exposed to serious threats in recent decades. One of the most important threats is the human performance that has incurred so many serious damages to the environment, because of the lack of sufficient knowledge. By increasing the knowledgs and understanding of people, we can take a great steps to have a better protection of environment. The purpose of this research is to study the role of education on air pollution (growth of CO2 emission) in selected MENA countries. Method: For hypotheses testing, the dynamic panel data (DPD) and the Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) has been applied for 12 selected MENA countries including Iran during the years between 1992 to 2012. Findings: The findings of this study show the meaningful and positive impact of the education variable (at different educational levels) on the improvement of environmental quality and the decrease of air pollution. Discussion and Counclusion: At the MENA selected countries, the higher the educational level, the less the air pollution decreases. In other words, the effect of education is stronger at the elementary education level. Therefore, the expansion of public education levels with emphasize on elementary schools, about environmental protection in Iran and other MENA countries is suggested for the improvement of environment quality

References:

1. دبیر سیاقی. سیدمنوچهر، 1383، بحران محیط زیست، انتشارات حدیث امروز، قم، چاپ اول.


2. سلیمانی انگیلی. ط ،1384 ، ارزیابی عملکرد محیط زیستی بر اساس استاندارد ایزو 14001 ( مطالعه موردی: شرکت ایران خودرو)، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه تهران.


3. Farzin  Y.H., Bond C.A. (2006). Democracy and environmental quality, Journal of Development Economics, Volume 81, Issue 1, pp. 213-235.


4. Cheah, I., Phau, I. (2011), “Attitudes Towards Environmentally Friendly Products; The Influence Of Ecoliteracy, Interpersonal Influence And Value Orientation”, Marketing Intelligence And Planning, Bradford, Vol. 29, Issue 5, PP: 452.


5. Bimonte, S. (2002) “Information Access, Income Distribution, And The Environmental Kuznets Curve” Ecological Economics, 41(1), 145-156.


6. Hettige H. Et Al. (1996). “Determinants Of Pollution Abatement In Developing Countries: Evidence from South and Southeast Asia” World Development, 24(12), 1891-1904.


7. Jorgenson A.K. (2003). “Consumption and Environmental Degradation: A Cross-National Analysis Of The Ecological Footprint. Social Problems, 50(3), 374-394.


8. Princen T. (2001). “Consumption And Its Externalities: Where Economy Meets Ecology” Global Environmental Politics, 1(3), 11-30.


9. Musolesi, A., Mazzanti, M., Zoboli, R. (2012), A Panel Data Heterogeneous Bayesian Estimation Of Environmental Kuznets Curves For CO2 Emissions, Applied Economics, 1466-4283, Volume 42, Issue 18, PP 2275 – 2287.


10. Frankel J A. (2003).‘The Environment and Globalization’, NBER Working Paper No. 10090.


11. Cole M. (2005).Re-Examining the Pollution- Income Relationship: A Random Coefficients Approach, Economics Bulletin, 14:1-7.


12. Somlanaré Romuald K. (2010). Does Education Really Matter For Environmental Quality? Document De Travail De La Série Etudes Et Documents.


13. Blundell R., And Bond S. (1998). Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions In Dynamic Panel Data Models. Journal of Econometrics 87: 115–143.


14. Arellano M., Bond S. (1991). Some Tests Of Specification For Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence And An Application To Employment Equations, Review Of Economic Studies, Blackwell.


15. Beck T, Demiraguc-Kunt,A.,And .Levin. (2004).Finance, Inequality And Poverty: Cross-Country Evidence, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3338, World Bank, Washington D.C.


16. Green W.H. (2003). Econometric Analysis, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall Inc.


17. Darbo A. (2010).Impact of Income Inequality on Health : Does Inviornment Quality Matter? CERDI, Etudes et Documents, E 2010.06, University Of Auvergne-France.


18. پژویان. جمشید و زندی. فاطمه،1389،ارتباط بین سرمایه گذاری مستقیم خارجی و محیط زیست (مطالعه موردی کشورهای منتخب)، فصل نامه علوم اقتصادی، سال چهارم، شماره 10.


19. World Development Indicators. (2013).Washington, DC: World Bank.doi: 10.1596/978-0-8213-9824-1. License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0


20. Barro R J., And Lee, J-W.(2012). A New Data Set Of Educational Attainment In The World, 1950–2010.


21. Levin A. And Lin, C. F. (1992)."Unit Root Test In Panel Data: Asymptotic And Finite Sample Properties", Discussion Paper, No. 92-93, University Of California.


22. Greene, W. H. 2012, Econometric Analysis, 7th Ed, New Jersey, Upper Saddle River: Pearson International.


23. صالحی. صادق و امام قلی. لقمان،1390، مطالعه تجربی رابطه‌ی آگاهی و رفتارهای زیست محیطی (مطالعه‌ی مناطق شهری و روستایی شهرستان سنندج)، مسایل اجتماعی ایران،سال سوم، شماره 1، صص 147-121.


24. رفیعی. حامد و امیر نژاد .حمید،1388، بررسی نقش آموزش در افزایش تمایل افراد به حفاظت از محیط‌زیست (مطالعه موردی: دریای خزر)، عـلـوم محـیـطی، سال هفتـم، شمـاره اول.


25. شبیری. سید محمد، کوهی. الهام و میبودی .حسین، 1393، مدیریت و مشارکت زنان در توسعه و ارتقاء فرهنگ زیست محیطی،کنفرانس بین‌المللی و آنلاین اقتصاد سبز، مازندران.


26. رمضانی قوام آبادی .محمد حسن،1391، بررسی راهبردی آموزش حفاظت از محیط زیست در ایران : ضرورت ها و تنگناها، فصل نامه راهبرد، سال بیست و یکم، شماره 65، صص 257-233.