How Does State Fragility Drive Environmental Degradation? A Multidimensional Analysis of Governance and Socio-Economic Vulnerabilities

IF 1.7 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Kyklos Pub Date : 2026-04-06 Epub Date: 2025-12-19 DOI:10.1111/kykl.70031
Cristian Barra, Luca Esposito, Pasquale Marcello Falcone
{"title":"How Does State Fragility Drive Environmental Degradation? A Multidimensional Analysis of Governance and Socio-Economic Vulnerabilities","authors":"Cristian Barra,&nbsp;Luca Esposito,&nbsp;Pasquale Marcello Falcone","doi":"10.1111/kykl.70031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The growing crises in the environmental sector worldwide have increased the call for better comprehension of the linkage among governance, socio-economic stability, and environmental degradation. In this respect, state fragility—a term covering governance gaps, political instability, and economic turmoil—has emerged as a vital and rather unexplored cause of environmental degradation. This study examines how state fragility drives environmental degradation by analyzing the Fragile States Index (FSI) and PM2.5 air pollution across 130 countries from 2006 to 2020. Using generalized least squares (GLS) and Lewbel (2012) heteroskedasticity-based IV estimators, we disaggregate FSI into cohesion, economic, political, social, and external-intervention dimensions to identify heterogeneous effects. Results show that higher overall fragility is associated with increased PM2.5 and CO2 emissions, with economic and political fragility exerting the strongest positive impacts. Social pressures and external interventions also worsen air quality, while cohesion's effect is context-dependent—positive in baseline GLS but negative after addressing endogeneity—suggesting measurement and endogeneity issues. Controls reveal trade openness tends to raise pollution, whereas FDI and stronger institutions reduce it. Findings are more pronounced in low-income countries, underscoring sample heterogeneity. Policy implications stress strengthening governance, mobilizing green finance, and aligning external assistance with environmental objectives to break the fragility–pollution nexus.</p>","PeriodicalId":47739,"journal":{"name":"Kyklos","volume":"79 2","pages":"399-428"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/kykl.70031","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kyklos","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/kykl.70031","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The growing crises in the environmental sector worldwide have increased the call for better comprehension of the linkage among governance, socio-economic stability, and environmental degradation. In this respect, state fragility—a term covering governance gaps, political instability, and economic turmoil—has emerged as a vital and rather unexplored cause of environmental degradation. This study examines how state fragility drives environmental degradation by analyzing the Fragile States Index (FSI) and PM2.5 air pollution across 130 countries from 2006 to 2020. Using generalized least squares (GLS) and Lewbel (2012) heteroskedasticity-based IV estimators, we disaggregate FSI into cohesion, economic, political, social, and external-intervention dimensions to identify heterogeneous effects. Results show that higher overall fragility is associated with increased PM2.5 and CO2 emissions, with economic and political fragility exerting the strongest positive impacts. Social pressures and external interventions also worsen air quality, while cohesion's effect is context-dependent—positive in baseline GLS but negative after addressing endogeneity—suggesting measurement and endogeneity issues. Controls reveal trade openness tends to raise pollution, whereas FDI and stronger institutions reduce it. Findings are more pronounced in low-income countries, underscoring sample heterogeneity. Policy implications stress strengthening governance, mobilizing green finance, and aligning external assistance with environmental objectives to break the fragility–pollution nexus.

Abstract Image

国家脆弱性如何驱动环境退化?治理和社会经济脆弱性的多维分析
世界范围内环境部门日益严重的危机使人们更加需要更好地理解治理、社会经济稳定和环境退化之间的联系。在这方面,国家脆弱性——一个涵盖治理差距、政治不稳定和经济动荡的术语——已经成为环境退化的一个重要且相当未被探索的原因。本研究通过分析2006年至2020年130个国家的脆弱国家指数(FSI)和PM2.5空气污染,探讨了国家脆弱性如何推动环境退化。利用广义最小二乘(GLS)和Lewbel(2012)基于异方差的IV估计器,我们将金融服务指数分解为凝聚力、经济、政治、社会和外部干预维度,以识别异质性效应。结果表明,总体脆弱性的提高与PM2.5和CO2排放量的增加有关,其中经济和政治脆弱性的积极影响最大。社会压力和外部干预也会使空气质量恶化,而凝聚力的影响在基线GLS中是上下文相关的积极影响,但在解决了内生性问题后是消极的,这表明测量和内生性问题。管制表明,贸易开放往往会增加污染,而外国直接投资和更强有力的制度则会减少污染。研究结果在低收入国家更为明显,强调了样本的异质性。政策影响强调加强治理,动员绿色金融,使外部援助与环境目标保持一致,以打破脆弱性与污染之间的联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Kyklos
Kyklos ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
10.50%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: KYKLOS views economics as a social science and as such favours contributions dealing with issues relevant to contemporary society, as well as economic policy applications. Since its inception nearly 60 years ago, KYKLOS has earned a worldwide reputation for publishing a broad range of articles from international scholars on real world issues. KYKLOS encourages unorthodox, original approaches to topical economic and social issues with a multinational application, and promises to give fresh insights into topics of worldwide interest
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书