Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon

Research article

The effect of renewable energy on carbon emissions

through globalization
Gyimah Justice a, George Nyantakyi b, *, Sam Hayford Isaac c
a
College of Economics and Management, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan, China
b
School of Accounting, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan, China
c
School of Management Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Henan Province, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The sustainability of the environment debate cannot be addressed without considering the type of
Globalization energy to use. The pace at which the world is industrializing, globalizing, and developing
Mediation model economically has prompted many researchers to investigate the kind of energy required to pre­
Renewable energy
serve the environment. In this regard, this study employs the mediation model to assess renew­
Carbon emissions
able energy’s direct and indirect effects on carbon emissions through globalization. The data for
Direct effect
Indirect effect the study is from 1990 to 2020. The study’s findings showed that while renewable energy has no
appreciable impact on trade openness, it directly and negatively affects carbon emissions.
However, foreign direct investment has a direct and significant positive effect on carbon emis­
sions, while trade openness has no significant effect. The indirect result revealed that renewable
energy through foreign direct investment has a negative effect on carbon emissions; however,
renewable energy through trade openness has a positive effect on carbon emissions. Policymakers
are encouraged to restrict the trade sector to reduce the trading of high-emission technologies.

1. Introduction

As the world’s population reaches 8 billion, energy consumption and production activities continue to rise, with the majority of
energy consumption coming from nonrenewable sources. The perpetual use of nonrenewable energy has adversely affected the
environment causing global warming [1]. It has been argued by Xu et al. [2] that carbon emissions from nonrenewable energy are an
influential driver of climate change. Also, per the report of the International Panel on Climate Change’s fifth assessment, activities of
human are considered the primary sources of GHG emissions. These human activities, according the IPCC are result of the
post-industrial revolution advancement in population and economy. Again, emphasis has been made by policymakers on the need to
mitigate GHG emissions, which are detrimental to our planet. As a primary goal of the Paris Climate Agreement (COP21), expedited
measures need to be taken to mitigate carbon emissions, or else the emissions of GHG could double up by 2035 from the level it used to
be during the pre-industrial level [3,4]. To prevent planet earth from bypassing a crucial 1.5 ◦ C to achieve net-zero goals, renewable
energy sources have been identified as the answer, which is to emphasize that, the use of renewable energy helps to neutralize the
effect of greenhouse gases [5] and gives a longer period of use than fossil fuels [6] hence its worldwide acceptance.
Globally, the combustion of fossil fuels is considered the highest emitter of greenhouse gases [7]. The environmental consequences
of emissions have brought the world to a universal goal focus, thus the fight to replace fossil fuels with sustainable energy. Irrespective

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: gyimahjustice@gmail.com (G. Justice), nyantakyi.george@gmail.com (G. Nyantakyi), samhayford92@gmail.com (S.H. Isaac).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26894
Received 21 July 2023; Received in revised form 31 January 2024; Accepted 21 February 2024
Available online 23 February 2024
2405-8440/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

of the role fossil fuels play in the development of the economy in many countries especially developing countries, its threat to the
environment has caused environmentalists, government bodies, non-state actors, and all concerned individuals to put measures in
place to replace it [8].
Globalisation is also among the emitters of greenhouse gases, over the past years, most of the West African countries especially
Ghana have received many foreigners because of globalization. As a means of protecting the environment, it is expedient to examine
the effect of globalization on energy on carbon emissions. Ghana is blessed with abundant renewable resources however; the country is
unable to utilize these resources to the fullest. The Major part of its economy still depends on fossil fuels for survival.
Ghana’s energy supply has long relied on gas, biomass, and oil. Ghana’s energy supply in 2019 was around 11,149ktoe, with oil
contributing 38.3% of the total supply. Oil has since remained the most used primary energy supply within the Ghanaian economy
since 2012 [9]. Ghana’s renewable energy sector has experienced quite a slow growth. Between the years 2011 and 2017, the sector
only grew by 15.39%. The country’s renewable energy sector has remained undeveloped, although the government has attempted
several initiatives towards the sector’s development. As a renewable energy source, solar has only 0.3% of Ghana’s energy supply [10].
Undoubtedly, this proves why CO2 emissions have been a concern for the Ghanaian government. In a quest to address these issues of
developing renewable energy to control CO2 emissions, several studies have explored variables that will affect renewable energy use,
and the majority of these studies identified globalization, among others, as an influential factor [2,11,12].
Recently, countries have become increasingly dependent on each other. Countries are more inclined to economic globalization.
Economic globalization has several effects like spreading social values, culture, employment, economic growth, climate change,
foreign investment, and trade openness [2]. In this 21st century, both developing and developed countries have benefited positively
from economic globalization. Nonetheless, developing countries have experienced accompanying negative effects [13]. Globaliza­
tion’s influence on climate change has raised debate among scholars. Some school of thought believes globalization endangers the
environment through GHS emissions [14]. Another school of thought also believes globalization has brought about advancement in
technology which helps in reducing GHS emissions [15]. Globalization in the social and economic context increases carbon emissions,
as opined by Destek [16], contrary to political globalization, which he believes has improved environmental quality in central and
eastern Europe.
Globalization has always been a driver of economic growth in a broad sense. Foreign direct investment and trade openness as a
factor of globalization are also contributing factors to economic growth. Most countries have declared their ports as import-free, while
others have reduced tariffs to promote economic growth. Globalization has propelled the rate of urbanization and eventually, the
demand for energy consumption has increased. Current research elucidates that the accelerated rate of urbanization must be
accompanied by a corresponding energy demand [17]. In an attempt to meet this demand for energy, the majority of developing
countries have resorted to eco-unfriendly fossil energy, which they consider affordable at the expense of renewable energy, which is
environmentally friendly.
Several research has been done on globalization, the carbon emissions nexus and renewable energy, and mixed results have been
established. Aziz et al. [18] in their study, conclude that globalization through foreign direct investment increases energy use
(nonrenewable) which negatively affects the environment. Sun et al. [19] also reveal in their study that globalization increases carbon
emissions. The study of Gyimah and Yao [20] reveals a reverse effect that globalization rather reduces carbon emissions through
increased renewable energy use. However, this study is an addition to other literature in three extinctive phenomena. Firstly, among
the studies that have tried to explore the effect of globalization on carbon emissions, none of them considered examining the indirect
effect as well. Nevertheless, this study evaluates the indirect effect of renewable energy on carbon emissions through globalization
since almost all the studies towards this direction focus on the direct effect thus creating a research direction awareness.
The study employed a mediation model for this analysis. In situations where there is not a clear direct correlation between
renewable energy and carbon emissions, the mediation model recognizes the causal relationship that exists between them. This reveals
the role some variables play in ensuring environmental sustainability. Secondly, to enrich extant literature on renewable energy and
environmental sustainability nexus, the study further considers the direct effect of renewable energy on carbon emissions, the direct
effect of renewable energy on globalization, and the indirect effect on carbon emissions.
The paper unfolds in a structured manner, with section two delving into the comprehensive literature review, section three
elucidating the methodology employed, section four presenting the findings alongside a thoughtful discussion, and section five
encapsulating the conclusive remarks, concluding with a discussion on policy implications.

2. Literature Review

Globalization impacts the growth of an economy by advancing a country’s economic, social, and political attainment; however,
globalization increases CO2 emissions, giving rise to changes in the climate and environmental degradation [21]. As a result, the
correlation between globalization and the environment is causing growing concern. Discovering such a long-standing relationship is
critical for policymakers aiming for environmental sustainability and its development is contingent on environmental, social, and
economic factors. As a natural outcome, globalization increases energy demand, which causes carbon emissions [22]. Carbon emis­
sions (Loss and damage) were a major conservation at the Egypt Climate Conference 27 (COP27). It is accounted that most rich
countries with significant numbers of globalization are responsible for 90 percent of the excess emissions that are causing climate
breakdown. The significance of the study is to examine the mediating role of globalization on carbon emissions.
Globalization has far-reaching effects on CO2 emissions, with three main areas of impact. Firstly, there is the influence on domestic
and commercial energy consumption. Secondly, the construction industry plays a role, with energy-intensive activities aimed at
improving transportation, infrastructure, and residential structures. Lastly, urban growth leads to forest alteration. The rise in

2
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

household appliance usage (such as air conditioners and heating systems), contributes significantly to energy consumption, exacer­
bating the overall impact on greenhouse gas emissions [23]. While the globalization implications on carbon emissions have been
identified; there have been two widely held assumptions about the link between globalization and CO2 emissions. Several researchers
posit that globalization is to be held responsible for lesser CO2 emissions [24–26]. Among others, Saud et al. [27] discovered an
insignificant impact between globalization (natural resources) and CO2 emissions in India, Brazil, and China; but again, globalization
(natural resources) plays a vital role in CO2 emission reduction in Russia. Muhammad and Khan [28] investigated 170 countries’
environmental effects of globalization and discovered that economic globalization reduces CO2 emissions. Whereas others assume that
globalization would adversely cause environmental degradation if the current energy-producing system remained stable [21,29].
Furthermore, globalization is liable for a decline in natural resources, along with economic growth. Globalization has triggered several
environmental effects, spaning everything from ozone depletion, resource overutilization, and forest destruction [30]. Globalization
stimulates economic activity and energyconsumption, which increases carbon emissions. Globalization, on other instances can
improve environmental quality by increasing the inflow of eco-friendly technologies [31,32]. The major contribution of the study to
ascertain globalization as a mediating role for carbon emissions taking to account renewable energy, trade openness, economic growth
and FDI.
Usually, multiple previous studies have looked into the environmental consequences of globalization employing a variety of
methodological approaches that span both country-specific and cross-country analyses [27]. In this regard, the findings have all been
questionable, as existing researchers have found both positive and negative environmental implications related to globalization.
Globalization has been identified as the primary cause of the conversion of the most polluting industries from developing countries to
developed ones. This stands out as the leading factor behind the surge in carbon emissions, suggesting a clear and significant corre­
lation between the two variables. Countries like China, Japan, Brazil, South Africa, and Argentina demonstrate a trend where glob­
alization leads to a reduction in carbon emissions [33–35]. Through the analysis of yearly time series data from 1980 to 2017, a
research study examines how urbanization and globalization influence CO2 emissions in South Africa. Following the confirmation of a
cointegrating relationship, the ARDL model reveals that urban growth is a catalyst for CO2 emissions, while globalization exerts a
significant long-term influence on emissions [36]. In a research endeavor examining carbon emissions in Argentina, it was found that
globalization, coupled with renewable energy consumption (REC), concurrently reduces emissions. However, the research findings
indicated that when combined with the consumption of non-renewable energy sources, globalization contributes to an overall rise in
CO2 emissions, especially over extended periods [37].
Furthermore, a significant body of research also endeavored to examine the relationship between globalization and CO2 emissions,
with notable studies conducted by Khan and Ullah [38] in Pakistan, Sheraz et al. [39] in Malaysia Etokakpan et al. [40], in Turkey
[41], India [42], China [43] and Ghana [44]. Specifically, in the case of Malaysia, the study utilizes the total trade with 10 TPP
members as a gauge of globalization, analyzing its impact on carbon emissions. The findings depict a cointegrated among the variables

Table 1
The summary of the literature review.
Year Country Method Effect

Saud et al. [27] 1990 to N-11 countries Panel estimation techniques Globalization not carbon emissions (Brazil, India,
2014 China)
Globalization reduces carbon emissions (Russia)
Muhammad and 1990 to 170 countries GMM and fixed effect model Economic globalization reduces CO2 emissions
Khan [28] 2018
Xiaoman et al. 1980 to Middle East and North Second-generation panel cointegration Economic globalization reduces CO2 emissions
[34] 2018 Africa (MENA) techniques continuously updated fully
economies modified
continuously updated bias-corrected
Salahuddin et al. 1980 to South Africa ARDL cointegration test Globalization affects carbon emissions (long-term)
[36] 2017
Yuping et al. [37] 1970 to Argentina Autoregressive Distributed Lag model Globalization and renewable reduce carbon
2018 emissions, globalization and nonrenewable cause
carbon emissions (long term)
Khan and Ullah 1975 to Pakistan ARDL bound testing approach Globalization increases carbon emissions
[38] 2014
Sheraz et al. [39] 2003 to 64 Belt and Road (BRI) second-generation methodological Globalization enhances negative environmental
2019 countries approach externality
Shahbaz et al. 1970 to Turkey VECM Granger causality Economic globalization increases carbon emissions
[41] 2010
Shahbaz et al. 1970 to India ARDL bounds testing globalization increases carbon emissions
[42] 2012
Acheampong [44] 1961 to Ghana Stochastic Effect of Return to Population, Political globalization increases carbon emissions
2016 Wealth, and Technology (long-term)
Social globalization reduces carbon emissions (long-
term)
Acheampong et al. 1980 to Sub-Saharan African Fixed and random effect Globalization reduces carbon emissions
[21] 2015 countries
Yameogo et al. 2002 to Sub-Saharan Africa Generalized Methods of Moments Economic globalization reduces carbon emissions
[46] 2017 countries

3
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

[45]. The Stochastic Effect of Return to Population, Wealth, and Technology (STIRPAT) model was used by Acheampong [44] to assess
the influence of political, de facto economic, and social globalization on Ghana’s CO2 emissions, employing a nonlinear autoregressive
distributed lag model. The findings suggest that alterations in political globalization, regardless of being positive or negative,
contribute to a long-term rise in CO2 emissions. Conversely, fluctuations in social globalization, whether positive or negative, are
linked to a reduction in CO2 emissions.
Acheampong et al. [21] conducted a thorough examination of the effect of globalization on CO2 emissions through panel
regression. Their research reveals a noteworthy trend, indicating that globalization exerts a negative influence on environmental
breakdown in Sub-Saharan Africa. In a similar research by Yameogo et al. [46] examines the relationship between economic glob­
alization and environmental quality in Sub-Saharan Africa, considering institutions as a determining factor (SSA). The approach of
GMM was used in a study to compare data from 2002 to 2017. The outcome of that shows that regulation quality positively impacts
environmental degradation in SSA, whereas economic globalization and corrupt practices control negatively impact CO2 emissions.
The summary of the literature review section has been presented in Table 1. The table shows the effect of globalization on CO2
emissions presented in the literature review section.

3. Method and materials

3.1. Theoretical background

As a mediating role, globalization has been one of the contributing factors left undiscussed in relation to its influence on foreign
direct investment (FDI), economic growth, trade openness, carbon emissions, and renewable energy. The findings of Sheraz et al. [39]
a second-generation method on retrieved data (2003–2019) from that of the 64 BRIC countries, records that globalization impacts
socially negative and environmental externality associated with financial development, whereas institutional quality minimizes it.
Moreover, globalization and the quality of institutions (FDI, trade openness) each contribute to the advantageous decrease in emissions
from renewable energy sources. One of the existing studies by Mishkin [47] examined the empirical relationship of Globalization with
FDI and Economic growth (i.e. GDP). From the results, globalization stands to be a primary contributor promulgating the financial
system: debt finance reduction, giving rise to significant investments in concurrent projects and at the intersection of growth in GDP.
Sheraz et al. [39] also conlcudes that globalization is directional in relationship with financial systems and GDP, but energy posed a
hindrance to the manufacturing of goods and services, though it was the source of CO2 emissions. In a country analysis using glob­
alization as a mediating role, a new threshold analysis of Japan revealsShahbaz et al. [48] globalization raises energy demand and CO2
emissions, and that economic growth exacerbates environmental degradation via globalization. Likewise for Pakistan Khan et al. [49]
using the ARDL method to demonstrate that in the short run, there was a positive relationship between trade openness, globalization,
FDI and CO2 emissions. This association persisted in the long run as well. According to the reviewed studies, proponents have
examined various globalization-related factors such as trade openness, FDI, export, and import; however, neither of the research has
looked at different aspects of globalization and assessed their impact on carbon emissions. As a result, by carrying out this study, we are
able to bridge the gap.

Fig. 1. Mediation pathways.

4
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

3.2. Method

Numerous studies have investigated the direct impact of the consumption of renewable energy on CO2 emissions through various
models. However, to improve on the current literature, this study emulates Gyimah et al. [50] to employ the Mediation Model to assess
the indirect effect of renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions using trade openness and foreign direct investment as medi­
ators. The mediation model is utilized when exploring the connection between an independent variable, a dependent variable, and an
intermediary factor in a study. The mediation model can analyze both the direct impact of the independent variable on the mediators
and the dependent variable. The model further helps to understand the existing relationship between the predictor and the outcome
variable when they do not have an obvious direct connection. In other words, the model helps explain best if the influence from the
predictor variable to the outcome variable is mediated by another variable and helps better understand the underlying mechanisms
through which the influence from the predictor variable affects the outcome variable. Again, it broadens the understanding of the
relationships that exist between the two variables (both direct and indirect relationships). Although, the model is not able to check
selection bias, the preliminary tests done have helped address the issue making the data suitable for the study. With this, the data for
the study is regarded as appropriate for the mediation analysis. For example, Qiu et al. [51] employed the mediation model to explain
the direct and indirect effects of online risky behaviour on sleep quality. Gyimah et al. [50] also used the mediation model to
investigate how renewable energy affect economic growth both directly and indirectly. In addition, Liu and Bah [52] also employed
mediation model to assess the effects (direct and indirect) of renewable energy potential on poverty reduction.
Fig. 1 presents the pathway of the variable effects. The independent variable is renewable energy use (X), the mediator is glob­
alization (M), and the dependent variable is the carbon emissions (Y). The authors have developed two equations (Equation (1) & 2) to
estimate the indirect effect of X on Y as the general mediation estimation.
Equation (1) explains the mediator (X) which is specified as the linear function of the independent variable (X).
M = iM + gX + eM (1)
Equation (2) shows how the dependent variable (Y) is specified as a linear function of independent variable (X) and the Mediator
(M).
Y = iY + wX + hM + eY (2)
From the figure, the product of path coefficients “g” and “h” will give the indirect effect. The coefficient “w1” is the direct effect.
Equation (3) explains the total effect
TE = w1 + gh (3)

3.3. Data

The research was undertaken in Ghana, and the data utilized is sourced from World Bank Indicators spanning from 1990 to 2020.
Ghana was selected as the study area due to the implementation of measures in recent years aimed at promoting the utilization of
renewable energy to mitigate emissions. The research variables are sourced from World Bank data and include renewable energy
consumption (expressed as the total percentage of renewable energy consumption), carbon emissions (measured in kilotons), trade
openness (represented as the percentage of Gross Domestic Product), and foreign direct investment (calculated as the total net inflow
percentage of Gross Domestic Product). Descriptive statistics and the correlation between these variables are presented in Table 2 and
Table 3, respectively. While Fig. 2 gives the general view of the trend of the variables for the study.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Direct effect

This section discusses the direct influence of the predictor variable on the mediators, the independent variable effect on the
dependent variable, and the direct impact of the mediator on the dependent variable. The summary of the result is presented in Fig. 3.
The results in Table 4 reveal renewable energy has a significant effect on foreign direct investment in a negative direction (− 0.5323, p
= 0.0021). Gyimah et al. [50] findings corroborate with this outcome. The study by Shahbaz et al. [53] reveals a reverse trend of a
significant positive effect, while the study by Hagert and Marton [54] indicated a mixed significant relationship. Thus, it reduces and
increases renewable energy in the short term and long term respectively. Appiah-Otoo et al. [55] indicated that the enhancement of

Table 2
Descriptive statistics.
ln c ln r ln f ln t

Mean 8.937451 4.103692 1.012232 4.289963

Median 8.893375 4.125572 1.176193 4.275265
Max value 9.905486 4.417977 2.247777 4.754008
Mini value 7.847763 3.725211 − 1.381074 3.749230
Std. Deviation 0.621547 3.725211 1.005142 0.256301

5
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

Table 3
Correlation.
ln c ln r ln f ln t

ln c 1
ln r − 0.9763 1
ln f 0.7757 − 0.7379 1
ln t 0.3370 − 0.1200 0.3383 1

Fig. 2. The trend of the variables.

Fig. 3. Summary of the direct effect.

Table 4
Direct effect.
Direct Effect Coefficient Prob

r→f − 0.5323 0.0021

r→t 0.0872 0.6409
r→c − 0.2800 0.0960
f→c 0.4945 0.0050
t→c 0.1693 0.2292

6
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

foreign direct investment encourages the adoption of renewable energy, fostering economic growth. REC has no significant effect on
trade (0.0872, p = 0.6409). Our findings corroborate with the study of Gyimah et al. [50] whose results revealed that renewable
energy has no significant impact on trade openness. In the study by Hussain et al. [56], the findings revealed that an increase in trade
openness encourages renewable energy investment. The study of Zhongwei and Liu [57] further revealed that trade openness enhance
the adoption of renewable energy use. However, the result is contradicted by the study by Zhang et al. [58] whose results indicated that
trade openness and renewable energy use have a strong nonlinear relationship. Renewable energy has a negative and significant effect
on CO2 emissions (− 0.2800, p = 0.0960). The use of renewable energy helps reduce carbon emissions to promote environmental
sustainability. Li et al. [59] study supports the findings of our study. Their findings indicated that improving renewable energy helps
alleviate environmental pressure. In addition, Wang et al. [60] study revealed that renewable energy development helps to curb carbon
emissions in countries like Canada, Finland, Russia, Slovenia, South Korea, and the UK. The findings of Hussain et al. [61] also
indicated that renewable energy promotes environmental sustainability in five polluted economies. Foreign direct investment has a
positive and significant effect on CO2 emissions (0.4945, p = 0.0050). The result implies that FDI causes carbon emissions which do not
help in the mitigation process. Derindag et al. [62] study supports the findings of our study. Their findings indicated that foreign direct
investment positively affects industrial carbon emissions. In addition, a study by Bui et al. [63] revealed that foreign direct investment
causes carbon emissions. However, Yi et al. [64] study revealed a negative correlational effect between foreign direct investment and
carbon emissions. Lastly, trade openness does not have any effect on CO2 emissions (0.1693, p = 0.2292). Wang and Zhang [65] study
on trade openness and carbon emissions revealed that the improvement of trade openness reduces carbon emissions in both
high-income and upper-middle-middle countries however, an insignificant effect was captured for lower-middle-income countries,
and increased CO2 emissions in low-middle-income countries. In addition, Abokyi et al. [66] study indicated that in the short and long
term, trade openness has a positive relationship with carbon emissions.

4.2. Indirect effect

Table 5 presents the indirect effect outcome. The table indicates that REC through foreign direct investment has a negative sig­
nificant effect on carbon emissions (− 0.2633*). The findings suggest that when FDI acts as the intermediary, renewable energy exhibits
a negative indirect impact on CO2 emissions. However, renewable energy consumption through trade openness positively and
significantly affects CO2 emissions (0.0148*). This means that renewable energy causes carbon emissions if trade openness serves as
the mediator.

5. Conclusion

Demand for energy is rising because of the increased industrial revolution and globalization. Globalization has caused an amazing
rise in energy demand that has an effect on the environment. We found two main perceptions surrounding the effect of globalization on
the environment. One group argues that globalization is not environmentally friendly since it causes carbon emissions and the second
group argues that globalization is environmentally friendly because it exposes a country to clean technologies and other factors to
promote environmental quality. As an augmentation to the current body of knowledge, this study employs the Mediation Model to
investigate the direct and indirect influence of renewable energy on CO2 emissions mediated by globalization. The study utilizes trade
openness and foreign direct investment as proxies for globalization (the mediators). The findings reveal that renewable energy exhibits
a negative influence on foreign direct investment and a negative impact on carbon emissions. However, renewable energy does not
significantly affect trade openness. Nevertheless, foreign direct investment is found to contribute to carbon emissions, while trade
openness shows no significant effect on carbon emissions. Regarding the indirect effects, renewable energy, mediated through foreign
direct investment, demonstrates a negative indirect impact on carbon emissions, while it exhibits a positive indirect effect on carbon
emissions through trade openness. The results imply that, factors of globalization have mixed effects on environmental sustainability
depending on the recipient country.
Foreign investors are promoting environmental quality in Ghana. In this respect, much attention is to be given to the FDI to
accommodate them and make them promote clean energy use in Ghana. In addition, there should be strict measures to control the flow
of these foreign investors to avoid the abuse of given freedom to maintain their negative mediation role towards carbon emissions.
Again, the results indicate that renewable energy through trade openness has a positive indirect effect on carbon emissions. The trade
openness has caused easy possession of high emissions technologies in the country. There should be rigid laws regulating the trading
system in Ghana. More attention should be shifted to the trade sector to restrict the trading of high-emissions technologies.
In spite of the relevance of this study to the ongoing deliberations on globalization and carbon emissions, there are some areas that
future research could work on. Future research can add more variables to the globalization variables to enlarge the scope. Variables
like capital formation and tourism. The authors could not add these variables to the study because of the objective behind the study.
Again, future research can include more countries and even research on the regional or continental level. The authors restricted the
study to only Ghana because of the current rise in globalization issues in the country.

Data availability statement

The data are available upon demand by request to the corresponding author.

7
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

Table 5
Indirect.
Indirect Effect Coefficient

r→f→c − 0.2633a
r→t→c 0.0148a
Total effect − 0.5285a
a
denotes a 1% significant.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to publish

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Gyimah Justice: Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. George Nyantakyi: Writing – review & editing, Writing –
original draft. Sam Hayford Isaac: Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Methodology.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

References

[1] S.A. Sarkodie, S. Adams, P.A. Owusu, T. Leirvik, I. Ozturk, Mitigating degradation and emissions in China: the role of environmental sustainability, human
capital and renewable energy, Sci. Total Environ. 719 (2020) 137530.
[2] L. Xu, X. Wang, W. Guo, Does renewable energy adaptation, globalization, and financial development matter for environmental quality and economic progress?
Evidence from panel of big five (B5) economies, Renew. Energy 192 (2022) 631–640.
[3] M. Sheraz, X. Deyi, J. Ahmed, S. Ullah, A. Ullah, Moderating the effect of globalization on financial development, energy consumption, human capital, and
carbon emissions: evidence from G20 countries, Environmental SciencePollution Research 28 (26) (2021) 35126–35144.
[4] T. Matsumoto, D. Allain-Dupré, J. Crook, A. Robert, An Integrated Approach to the Paris climate Agreement: the Role of Regions and Cities, 2019.
[5] N. Stern, A. Valero, Innovation, growth and the transition to net-zero emissions, Res. Pol. 50 (9) (2021) 104293.
[6] E.S. Obobisa, Achieving 1.5◦ C and net-zero emissions target: the role of renewable energy and financial development, Renew. Energy 188 (2022) 967–985.
[7] E. Abokyi, P. Appiah-Konadu, F. Abokyi, E.F. Oteng-Abayie, Industrial growth and emissions of CO2 in Ghana: the role of financial development and fossil fuel
consumption, Energy Rep. 5 (2019) 1339–1353.
[8] J. Gyimah, U.A. Nwigwe, E.O. Opoku, X. Yao, Promoting environmental sustainability in Africa: the position of globalization, renewable energy, and economic
growth, SN Business & Economics 3 (8) (2023).
[9] G.E. Commission, National Energy Statistics, 2000–2019, Ghana Energy Commission, Accra, Ghana, 2020.
[10] E.B. Ali, E.B. Agyekum, P. Adadi, Agriculture for sustainable development: a SWOT-AHP assessment of Ghana’s planting for food and jobs initiative,
Sustainability 13 (2) (2021) 628.
[11] T. Tahir, T. Luni, M.T. Majeed, A. Zafar, The impact of financial development and globalization on environmental quality: evidence from South Asian
economies, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28 (7) (2021) 8088–8101.
[12] A.M. Awan, M. Azam, I.U. Saeed, B. Bakhtyar, Does globalization and financial sector development affect environmental quality? A panel data investigation for
the Middle East and North African countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 27 (36) (2020) 45405–45418.
[13] M.B. Khan, H. Saleem, M.S. Shabbir, X. Huobao, The effects of globalization, energy consumption and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in South
Asian countries, Energy Environ. 33 (1) (2022) 107–134.
[14] S.S. Akadiri, A.A. Alola, U.V. Alola, C.S. Nwambe, The role of ecological footprint and the changes in degree days on environmental sustainability in the USA,
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 27 (20) (2020) 24929–24938.
[15] G. Justice, P. Seth, N. George, A.S. Philip, S.H. Isaac, Do globalization and economic development promote renewable energy use in Ghana? International
Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management Science 7 (2021) 4.
[16] M.A. Destek, Investigation on the role of economic, social, and political globalization on environment: evidence from CEECs 27 (27) (2020) 33601–33614.
[17] S. Williams, M. Short, Electricity demand forecasting for decentralised energy management, Energy Built Environment 1 (2) (2020) 178–186.
[18] N. Aziz, A. Sharif, A. Raza, K. Jermsittiparsert, The role of natural resources, globalization, and renewable energy in testing the EKC hypothesis in MINT
countries: new evidence from Method of Moments Quantile Regression approach, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28 (11) (2021) 13454–13468.
[19] Y. Sun, A. Anwar, A. Razzaq, X. Liang, M. Siddique, Asymmetric role of renewable energy, green innovation, and globalization in deriving environmental
sustainability: evidence from top-10 polluted countries, Renew. Energy 185 (2022) 280–290.

8
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

[20] J. Gyimah, X. Yao, Globalization and renewable energy impact on carbon emissions in Ghana, Int. J. Glob. Warming 28 (2) (2022) 113–121.
[21] A.O. Acheampong, S. Adams, E. Boateng, Do globalization and renewable energy contribute to carbon emissions mitigation in Sub-Saharan Africa? Sci. Total
Environ. 677 (2019) 436–446.
[22] U. Mehmood, S. Tariq, Globalization and CO2 emissions nexus: evidence from the EKC hypothesis in South Asian countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 27
(29) (2020) 37044–37056.
[23] A. Raihan, D.A. Muhtasim, S. Farhana, M.I. Pavel, O. Faruk, M. Rahman, et al., Nexus between carbon emissions, economic growth, renewable energy use,
urbanization, industrialization, technological innovation, and forest area towards achieving environmental sustainability in Bangladesh, Energy and Climate
Change 3 (2022) 100080.
[24] L.-S. Lau, C.-K. Choong, C.-F. Ng, F.-M. Liew, S.-L. Ching, Is nuclear energy clean? Revisit of Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in OECD countries, Econ.
Modell. 77 (2019) 12–20.
[25] H. Zhu, L. Duan, Y. Guo, K. Yu, The effects of FDI, economic growth and energy consumption on carbon emissions in ASEAN-5: evidence from panel quantile
regression, Econ. Modell. 58 (2016) 237–248.
[26] Z. Li, N. Xu, J. Yuan, New evidence on trade-environment linkage via air visibility, Econ. Lett. 128 (2015) 72–74.
[27] S. Saud, M.A. Baloch, R.N. Lodhi, The nexus between energy consumption and financial development: estimating the role of globalization in Next-11 countries,
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 25 (19) (2018) 18651–18661.
[28] B. Muhammad, M.K. Khan, Foreign direct investment inflow, economic growth, energy consumption, globalization, and carbon dioxide emission around the
world, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 28 (39) (2021) 55643–55654.
[29] H. Haberl, M. Fischer-Kowalski, F. Krausmann, J. Martinez-Alier, V. Winiwarter, A socio-metabolic transition towards sustainability? Challenges for another
Great Transformation, Sustain. Dev. 19 (1) (2011) 1–14.
[30] M. Ahmad, P. Jiang, M. Murshed, K. Shehzad, R. Akram, L. Cui, et al., Modelling the dynamic linkages between eco-innovation, urbanization, economic growth
and ecological footprints for G7 countries: does financial globalization matter? Sustain. Cities Soc. 70 (2021) 102881.
[31] A. Jahanger, M. Usman, M. Murshed, H. Mahmood, D. Balsalobre-Lorente, The linkages between natural resources, human capital, globalization, economic
growth, financial development, and ecological footprint: the moderating role of technological innovations, Resour. Pol. 76 (2022) 102569.
[32] B. Doğan, S. Ghosh, D.P. Hoang, L.K. Chu, Are economic complexity and eco-innovation mutually exclusive to control energy demand and environmental quality
in E7 and G7 countries? Technol. Soc. 68 (2022) 101867.
[33] S. Yang, How globalization is reshaping the environmental quality in G7 economies in the presence of renewable energy initiatives? Renew. Energy 193 (2022)
128–135.
[34] W. Xiaoman, A. Majeed, D.G. Vasbieva, C.E.W. Yameogo, N. Hussain, Natural resources abundance, economic globalization, and carbon emissions: advancing
sustainable development agenda, Sustain. Dev. 29 (5) (2021) 1037–1048.
[35] A. Haseeb, E. Xia, Danish, M.A. Baloch, K. Abbas, Financial development, globalization, and CO2 emission in the presence of EKC: evidence from BRICS
countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 25 (31) (2018) 31283–31296.
[36] M. Salahuddin, J. Gow, M.I. Ali, M.R. Hossain, K.S. Al-Azami, D. Akbar, et al., Urbanization-globalization-CO2 emissions nexus revisited: empirical evidence
from South Africa, Heliyon 5 (6) (2019) e01974.
[37] L. Yuping, M. Ramzan, L. Xincheng, M. Murshed, A.A. Awosusi, S.I. Bah, et al., Determinants of carbon emissions in Argentina: the roles of renewable energy
consumption and globalization, Energy Rep. 7 (2021) 4747–4760.
[38] D. Khan, A. Ullah, Testing the relationship between globalization and carbon dioxide emissions in Pakistan: does environmental Kuznets curve exist? Environ.
Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 26 (15) (2019) 15194–15208.
[39] M. Sheraz, X. Deyi, A. Sinha, M.Z. Mumtaz, N. Fatima, The dynamic nexus among financial development, renewable energy and carbon emissions: moderating
roles of globalization and institutional quality across BRI countries, J. Clean. Prod. 343 (2022) 130995.
[40] M.U. Etokakpan, S.A. Solarin, V. Yorucu, F.V. Bekun, S.A. Sarkodie, Modeling natural gas consumption, capital formation, globalization, CO2 emissions and
economic growth nexus in Malaysia: Fresh evidence from combined cointegration and causality analysis, Energy Strategy Rev. 31 (2020) 100526.
[41] M. Shahbaz, I. Ozturk, T. Afza, A. Ali, Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve in a global economy, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 25 (2013) 494–502.
[42] M. Shahbaz, H. Mallick, M.K. Mahalik, N. Loganathan, Does globalization impede environmental quality in India? Ecol. Indicat. 52 (2015) 379–393.
[43] B. Yan, F. Wang, M. Dong, J. Ren, J. Liu, J. Shan, How do financial spatial structure and economic agglomeration affect carbon emission intensity? Theory
extension and evidence from China, Econ. Modell. 108 (2022) 105745.
[44] A.O. Acheampong, The impact of de facto globalization on carbon emissions: evidence from Ghana, International Economics 170 (2022) 156–173.
[45] S.A. Solarin, U. Al-Mulali, P.K. Sahu, Globalization and its effect on pollution in Malaysia: the role of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement, Environ. Sci.
Pollut. Control Ser. 24 (29) (2017) 23096–23113.
[46] C.E.W. Yameogo, J.A. Omojolaibi, R.O.S. Dauda, Economic globalization, institutions and environmental quality in Sub-Saharan Africa, Research in
Globalization 3 (2021) 100035.
[47] F.S. Mishkin, Globalization and financial development, J. Dev. Econ. 89 (2) (2009) 164–169.
[48] M. Shahbaz, S.J.H. Shahzad, M.K. Mahalik, Is globalization detrimental to CO2 emissions in Japan? New threshold analysis, Environ. Model. Assess. 23 (5)
(2018) 557–568.
[49] M.K. Khan, J.-Z. Teng, M.I. Khan, M.O. Khan, Impact of globalization, economic factors and energy consumption on CO2 emissions in Pakistan, Science of the
total environment 688 (2019) 424–436.
[50] J. Gyimah, X. Yao, M.A. Tachega, I. Sam Hayford, E. Opoku-Mensah, Renewable energy consumption and economic growth: new evidence from Ghana, Energy
(2022) 248.
[51] W.F. Qiu, J.P. Ma, Z.Y. Xie, X.T. Xie, C.X. Wang, Y.D. Ye, Online risky behavior and sleep quality among Chinese college students: the chain mediating role of
rumination and anxiety, Curr. Psychol. (2022) 1–11.
[52] Y. Liu, Z. Bah, Enabling development impact of solar mini-grids through the community engagement: evidence from rural Sierra Leone, Energy Pol. (2021) 154.
[53] M. Shahbaz, A. Sinha, C. Raghutla, X.V. Vo, Decomposing scale and technique effects of financial development and foreign direct investment on renewable
energy consumption, Energy 238 (2022).
[54] M. Hagert, C. Marton, The Effects of FDI on Renewable Energy Consumption, Lund University, 2017.
[55] I. Appiah-Otoo, X. Chen, J.D. Ampah, Exploring the moderating role of foreign direct investment in the renewable energy and economic growth nexus: evidence
from West Africa, Energy (2023) 281.
[56] J. Hussain, K. Zhou, F. Muhammad, D. Khan, A. Khan, N. Ali, et al., Renewable energy investment and governance in countries along the belt & Road Initiative:
does trade openness matter? Renew. Energy 180 (2021) 1278–1289.
[57] H. Zhongwei, Y. Liu, The role of eco-innovations, trade openness, and human capital in sustainable renewable energy consumption: evidence using CS-ARDL
approach, Renew. Energy 201 (2022) 131–140.
[58] M. Zhang, S. Zhang, C.-C. Lee, D. Zhou, Effects of trade openness on renewable energy consumption in OECD countries: new insights from panel smooth
transition regression modelling, Energy Econ. (2021) 104.
[59] R. Li, Q. Wang, l Li, Does renewable energy reduce per capita carbon emissions and per capita ecological footprint? New evidence from 130 countries, Energy
Strategy Rev. 49 (2023).
[60] Q. Wang, J. Guo, R. Li, X.T. Jiang, Exploring the role of nuclear energy in the energy transition: a comparative perspective of the effects of coal, oil, natural gas,
renewable energy, and nuclear power on economic growth and carbon emissions, Environ. Res. 221 (2023) 115290.
[61] M. Hussain, T. Lu, Y. Chengang, Y. Wang, Role of economic policies, renewable energy consumption, and natural resources to limit carbon emissions in top five
polluted economies, Resour. Pol. 83 (2023).
[62] O.F. Derindag, A. Maydybura, A. Kalra, W.K. Wong, B.H. Chang, Carbon emissions and the rising effect of trade openness and foreign direct investment:
evidence from a threshold regression model, Heliyon 9 (7) (2023) e17448.

9
G. Justice et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e26894

[63] T. Bui Minh, T. Nguyen Ngoc, Bui, H. Van, Relationship between carbon emissions, economic growth, renewable energy consumption, foreign direct investment,
and urban population in Vietnam, Heliyon 9 (6) (2023) e17544.
[64] J. Yi, Y. Hou, Z.Z. Zhang, The impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on China’s manufacturing carbon emissions, Innovation and Green Development 2 (4)
(2023).
[65] Q. Wang, F. Zhang, The effects of trade openness on decoupling carbon emissions from economic growth - evidence from 182 countries, J. Clean. Prod. 279
(2021) 123838.
[66] E. Abokyi, P. Appiah-Konadu, K.F. Tangato, F. Abokyi, Electricity consumption and carbon dioxide emissions: the role of trade openness and manufacturing sub-
sector output in Ghana, Energy and Climate Change 2 (2021).

10