How public expenditure in recreational and cultural industry and socioeconomic status caused environmental sustainability in OECD countries?

Figures & data

Figure 1. Public expenditure in recreation, and culture industry. Data source: Authors drawing using OECD public expenditure database.

Table 1. Variable’s description and data source.

Variable name	Acronym	Description	Measurement	Data source
Environmental Sustainability	ES	Consumption-based carbon emissions	Metric tons per capita	Global Carbon Atlas
Public Expenditure on recreation and culture industry	ERCI	Public allocations to promote recreational industry	Million Euros (Converted in USD $)	OECD Statistics
Socio-Economic Status	SEI	Cumulative Index of Socio-economic conditions	Cumulative Index (0–12, lower to higher)	ICRG
Economic growth	GDP	Real Gross Product per Capita	US Dollar	OECD Statistics

Note: Data 1990–2019. Top 10 OECD countries are selected based on ERCI allocations.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics.

Variables	Obs.	Mean	Min.	Max.	Std. Dev.
ES	300	0.657	0.695	1.428	0.356
ERCI	300	3.648	3.210	4.965	0.680
SEI	300	8.550	6.041	10.17	0.425
GDP	300	5.652	3.710	8.724	0.819

Data source: Authors’ calculations.

Table 3. Results of slope homogeneity tests.

Test	Model 1
Delta	12.907***
Delta adjusted	11.350***

Ho: Cross-sections are homogenous.

*** 1% level of significance.

Data source: Authors’ calculations.

Table 4. Results of cross-sectional dependence.

Variables	CD-statistics	p-value
ES	16.341***	0.000
ERCI	11.890***	0.000
SEI	10.635***	0.000
GDP	12.431***	0.000

Ho: Cross-sections are Independent.

*** 1% level of significance.

Data source: Authors’ calculations.

Table 5. Results of stationary analysis.

	Cross-sectionally augmented IPS [CIPS]]				Order of integration
	I [0]		I[I]
Variable	C	C&T	C	C&T
ES	−1.980	−1.764	−3.422***	−3.435***	I [1]
ERCI	−1.465	−1.647	−3.629**	−3.520***	I [1]
SEI	−1.745	−1.928	−4.710***	−3.890***	I [1]
GDP	−2.305	−2.327	−4.113***	−4.015***	I [1]

*** and ** show significant levels at 1% and 5% respectively.

Data source: Authors’ calculations.

Table 6. Westerlund (2007) Panel cointegration Test.

Statistics	Model-4	p-value
Gt	−13.520**	0.000
Ga	−8.492**	0.000
Pt	−11.747***	0.000
Pa	−12.815***	0.000

Ho: No-cointegration exist.

***, **, * show significant levels at 1%, 5%, 10% respectively.

Data source: Authors’ calculations.

Table 7. Results of CS-ARDL

Variables	Coefficients	t-statistics	p-values
Long-run results
ERCI	−0.105***	−3.240	0.000
SEI	−0.115**	−2.463	0.029
ERCI*SEI	−0.124**	−2.844	0.035
GDP	0.857***	4.290	0.000
Short-run results
ECM	−0.420***	−4.665	0.000
ERCI	−0.041**	−2.201	0.027
SEI	−0.085**	−2.140	0.038
ERCI*SEI	−0.108**	2.513	0.026
GDP	0.550***	−4.210	0.000

***, ** and * explain the level of significance at 1%, 5% and 10% respectively.

Data source: Authors’ calculations.

Table 8. Robustness from AMG estimator.

Variables	Coefficients	t-statistics	p-values
Long-run results
EPSI	−0.123***	−4.217	0.000
REC	−0.107**	−2.532	0.034
EPSI*REC	−0.129***	−3.561	0.000
GDP	0.754***	5.127	0.000

***, ** and * explain the level of significance at 1%, 5% and 10%.

Data source: Authors’ calculations.

Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar