A Quantitative Analysis of Foreign Direct Investment, Development Foreign Assistance, and Personal Remittance Earnings on Environmental Sustainability (SDG13) in Developing Economies: Does Corruption Matter?
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Theoretical Framework
2.1.1. Fundamental Theoretical Perspectives on IFRs and Environmental Sustainability
2.1.2. The Moderating Role of Corruption: An Institutional Theory Perspective
2.2. Nexus Between FDI and Environmental Sustainability
2.3. Nexus Between Remittance of International Earnings of Immigrants and Environmental Sustainability
2.4. Nexus Between Development Foreign Aid and Environmental Sustainability
3. Methods
3.1. Sample Selections
3.2. Variable Selections
3.3. Model Specifications and Estimations
3.3.1. Static Panel Estimators: Fixed Effect (FE)
3.3.2. Dynamic Panel Estimators: GMM
3.3.3. Moderation Analysis
3.3.4. Diagnostic and Robustness Checks
3.3.5. Methodological Framework and Model Progression Logic
- Fixed Model: Introduce country-specific fixed effects to control for unobserved, time-invariant heterogeneity across nations, testing the robustness of the initial findings.
- Base Model (SGMM): Recognising potential endogeneity and the persistence of environmental conditions, we extend the model to a dynamic specification. This is our preferred model as it addresses reverse causality, omitted variable bias, and introduces the lagged dependent variable (Model 1) to estimate a foundational understanding of the relationships between IFRs and environmental sustainability.
- Extended Model SGMM: This study then introduced control variables (Model 2) to understand the influence of internal factors, together with IFRs and environmental sustainability.
- Moderating Models (Interaction Effects): Building on the robust dynamic framework, we introduce interaction terms between corruption and each IFR (FDI, DFA, PRE) to create separate models (Models 3–6). This final step moves from establishing if a relationship exists to understanding how it is conditioned by the critical factor of corruption.

4. Results and Discussions
4.1. Base Model of SGMM
4.2. Extended Model with the Incorporation of Internal Economic Variables and SDG
4.3. Moderation Role of Corruption Model
5. Conclusions and Policy Implications
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
| Bangladesh | Djibouti | Guinea | Kazakhstan | Maldives | Togo |
| Azerbaijan | Egypt | Guyana | Kenya | Pakistan | Uganda |
| Bosnia | Gabon | Indonesia | Kyrgyz Republic | Sudan | Uzbekistan |
| Cambodia | Gambia | Iraq | Lebanon | Tajikistan | |
| Comoros | Ghana | Jordan | Malawi | Tanzania |
Appendix B
| Variables | Observation | Mean | Std. Dev | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| lnBC | 420 | 16.27 | 1.66 | 12.31 | 19.63 |
| lnPRE | 420 | 20.54 | 2.34 | 0.69 | 24.17 |
| lnDFA | 417 | 20.18 | 1.35 | 16.09 | 22.79 |
| lnFDI | 400 | 20.51 | 1.79 | 12.15 | 23.95 |
| lnEMP | 420 | 1.31 | 0.83 | −1.51 | 3.06 |
| lnTED | 420 | 3.68 | 1.04 | −0.24 | 7.86 |
| lnGFC | 420 | 3.25 | 4.44 | −4.61 | 24.28 |
| lnDCP | 420 | 3.10 | 0.85 | −0.71 | 4.89 |
| lnSTD | 420 | 3.20 | 1.55 | −1.97 | 8.02 |
| CC | 420 | −0.77 | 0.41 | −1.5 | 0.25 |
Appendix C
| Variables | Base Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Const | −4.1234 *** (0.0011) | −11.996 *** (0.0000) | −8.904 *** (0.0000) | −8.842 *** (0.0000) | −8.804 *** (0.0000) | −8.926 *** (0.0000) |
| Ln PRE | 0.0391 (0.1587) | 0.127 *** (0.009) | 0.127 *** (0.009) | 0.118 ** (0.021) | 0.126 ** (0.01057) | 0.324 *** (0.020) |
| Ln DFA | 0.0391 *** (0.0000) | 0.112 (0.101) | 0.112 (0.101) | 0.113 * (0.098) | 0.1017 (0.30006) | −0.349 ** (0.1469) |
| Ln FDI | 0.5043 *** (0.0000) | 0.489 *** (0.0000) | 0.489 *** (0.0000) | 0.569 *** (0.0000) | 0.590 *** (0.0000) | 0.816 *** (0.000) |
| Ln EMP | - | −0.290 *** (0.0005) | −0.290 *** (0.0005) | −0.29 *** (0.0000) | −0.288 *** (0.0000) | −0.25 *** (0.0000) |
| Ln TED | - | −0.007 *** (0.923) | −0.007 *** (0.923) | −0.005 (0.0000) | −0.006 (0.9929) | 0.0765 (0.3521) |
| Ln GFC | - | −0.061 *** (0.0001) | −0.061 *** (0.0001) | −0.06 *** (0.0026) | −0.062 *** (0.0000) | −0.0525 (0.0001) |
| Ln DCP | - | −1.659 *** (0.0000) | −1.659 *** (0.0000) | −0.66 *** (0.0000) | −0.653 *** (0.0000) | −0.6475 *** (0.0000) |
| Ln STD | - | 0.165 *** (0.0526) | 0.165 *** (0.0526) | −0.165 ** (0.0411) | −0.0167 *** (0.0000) | −0.175 * (0.0887) |
| LnFDI × CC | - | −0.0125 *** (0.008) | 0.3210 *** (0.003) | |||
| Ln PRE × CC | - | 0.013 (0.2269) | 0.0.2737 ** (0.017) | |||
| LnDFA × CC | - | 0.0147 *** (0.0034) | −0.61750 ** (0.0003) | |||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.398 | 0.536 | 0.545 | 0.536 | 0.538 | 0.58 |
References
- Islam, M.S.; Azad, A.K. The Impact of Personal Remittance and RMG Export Income on Income Inequality in Bangladesh: Evidence from an ARDL Approach. Rev. Econ. Political Sci. 2024, 9, 134–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayamba, E.C.; Haibo, C.; Abdul-Rahaman, A.-R.; Serwaa, O.E.; Osei-Agyemang, A. The Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Sustainable Development in China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 25625–25637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huo, W.; Ullah, M.R.; Zulfiqar, M.; Parveen, S.; Kibria, U. Financial Development, Trade Openness, and Foreign Direct Investment: A Battle between the Measures of Environmental Sustainability. Front. Environ. Sci. 2022, 10, 851290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, B. Does China’s OFDI Successfully Promote Environmental Technology Innovation? Complexity 2021, 2021, 8389560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, A.; Nankpan, M.N.; Zhou, B.; Forson, J.A.; Nkrumah, E.N.K.; Adjavon, S.E. A Cop28 Perspective: Does Chinese Investment and Fintech Help to Achieve the SDGs of African Economies? Sustainability 2024, 16, 3084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Wang, R. Research on the Environmental Effects of China’s Outward Foreign Direct Investment (OFDI): Empirical Evidence Based on the Implementation of the “Belt and Road” Initiative (BRI). Sustainability 2022, 14, 12868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udeagha, M.C.; Breitenbach, M.C. Revisiting the Nexus between Fiscal Decentralization and CO2 Emissions in South Africa: Fresh Policy Insights. Financ. Innov. 2023, 9, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shah, S.Q.A.; Waris, U.; Ahmed, S.; Agyekum, E.B.; Hussien, A.G.; Kamal, M.; ur Rehman, M.; Kamel, S. What Is the Role of Remittance and Education for Environmental Pollution? Analyzing in the Presence of Financial Inclusion and Natural Resource Extraction. Heliyon 2023, 9, e17133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musah, M.; Boateng, F.; Kumah, E.A.; Adebayo, T.S. Financial Flows and Environmental Quality in Ecowas Member States: Accounting for Residual Cross-Sectional Dependence and Slope Heterogeneity. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2024, 26, 1195–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kibria, M.G. Environmental Downfall in Bangladesh: Revealing the Asymmetric Effectiveness of Remittance Inflow in the Presence of Foreign Aid. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 731–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, L.; Dong, D.; Dong, X. Natural Resources Extraction, Financial Expansion and Remittances: South Asian Economies Perspective of Sustainable Development. Resour. Policy 2023, 84, 103767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Yang, L. Natural Resources, Remittances and Carbon Emissions: A Dutch Disease Perspective with Remittances for South Asia. Resour. Policy 2023, 85, 104001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Raza, K.; Alharthi, M. The Nexus between Remittances, Education, and Energy Consumption: Evidence from Developing Countries. Energy Strategy Rev. 2023, 46, 101069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, T.P.T.; Nguyen, V.A.; Ly-My, D. Does Aid for Trade Affect the Quality of the Environment? Evidence from Aid for Trade Recipient Countries. J. Int. Dev. 2023, 35, 2465–2484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Enusah, A.; Aboagye-Otchere, F.; Agyenim-Boateng, C. The Effect of Renewable Energy Aid and Governance Quality on Environmental Tax Effort in Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy Rep. 2024, 11, 4165–4176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Wang, X.; Li, R. Does Official Development Assistance Alleviate the Environmental Pressures During the Urbanization of Recipient Countries? Evidence from the Sub-Saharan Africa Countries. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2022, 95, 106787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.A.; Ali, S.; Anser, M.K.; Nassani, A.A.; Al-Aiban, K.M.; ur Rahman, S.; Zaman, K. From Desolation to Preservation: Investigating Longitudinal Trends in Forest Coverage and Implications for Future Environmental Strategies. Heliyon 2024, 10, e25689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arvin, M.B.; Pradhan, R.P.; Nair, M.S.; Dabir-Alai, P. Exploring the Temporal Links between Foreign Aid, Institutional Quality, and CO2 Emissions for Poorer Countries. Energy Build. 2022, 270, 112287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- D’Adamo, I.; Gastaldi, M.; Nallapaneni, M.K. Europe Moves toward Pragmatic Sustainability: A More Human and Fraternal Approach. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandey, H.P.; Maraseni, T.N.; Apan, A. Assessing the Theoretical Scope of Environmental Justice in Contemporary Literature and Developing a Pragmatic Monitoring Framework. Sustainability 2024, 16, 10799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, Y.-B. Emission Transfers, Pollution Havens, and Environmental Regulations. Int. Tax Public Financ. 2025, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chanda, R.; Ghosh, C.; Sinha Ray, R. Can Governance Moderate FDI Inflows to Convert the Pollution Haven to a Halo? Revisiting the BRICS Context Using the Panel ARDL Approach. Appl. Econ. 2025, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- André, F.J.; Ranocchia, C.; Rubio, S.J. Porter Hypothesis Vs. Pollution Haven Hypothesis: Can an Environmental Policy Generate a Win-Win Solution? Energy Econ. 2025, 146, 108477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.K.; Kazak, J. Energy Poverty and Environmental Degradation in South Asian Countries with the Role of Poverty, Globalization and Institutional Quality: Static Panel Data Approach. Environ. Sustain. Indic. 2025, 27, 100841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leal, P.H.; Marques, A.C.; Shahbaz, M. Does Climate Finance and Foreign Capital Inflows Drive De-Carbonisation in Developing Economies? J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 347, 119100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amowine, N.; Balezentis, T.; Zhou, Z.; Streimikiene, D. Transitions Towards Green Productivity in Africa: Do Sovereign Debt Vulnerability, Eco-Entrepreneurship, and Institutional Quality Matter? Sustain. Dev. 2024, 32, 3405–3422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rani, T.; Wang, F.; Rauf, F.; Ain, Q.U.; Ali, H. Linking Personal Remittance and Fossil Fuels Energy Consumption to Environmental Degradation: Evidence from All SAARC Countries. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023, 25, 8447–8468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.S. Do Personal Remittances Cause Environmental Pollution? Evidence from the Top Eight Remittance-Receiving Countries. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 35768–35779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naheed, Z.; Nasreen, S.; Tiwari, A.K.; Arsh, S. Analyzing the Effectiveness of Energy Aid for Driving the Transition Towards Energy Decarbonization; Evidence from Asian Developing Countries. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 360, 121125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mahalik, M.K.; Villanthenkodath, M.A.; Mallick, H.; Gupta, M. Assessing the Effectiveness of Total Foreign Aid and Foreign Energy Aid Inflows on Environmental Quality in India. Energy Policy 2021, 149, 112015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ha, L.T. The Nexus of Foreign Aid, Institutional Quality, and Climate-Related Financial Policies: Evidence from the Global Database. In Proceedings of the Natural Resources Forum, Prince George, BC, Canada, 16–18 January 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Balsalobre-Lorente, D.; Driha, O.M.; Halkos, G.; Mishra, S. Influence of Growth and Urbanization on CO2 Emissions: The Moderating Effect of Foreign Direct Investment on Energy Use in BRICS. Sustain. Dev. 2022, 30, 227–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aydin, M.; Koc, P.; Sahpaz, K.I. Investigating the EKC Hypothesis with Nanotechnology, Renewable Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and Ecological Footprint in G7 Countries: Panel Data Analyses with Structural Breaks. Energy Sources Part B Econ. Plan. Policy 2023, 18, 2163724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarabdeen, M.; Elhaj, M.; Alofaysan, H. Exploring the Influence of Digital Transformation on Clean Energy Transition, Climate Change, and Economic Growth among Selected Oil-Export Countries through the Panel ARDL Approach. Energies 2024, 17, 298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bajrami, R.; Tafa, S.; Gashi, A.; Hashani, M. Analysing the Impact of Money Supply on Economic Growth: A Panel Regression Approach for Western Balkan Countries (2000–2023). Reg. Sci. Policy Pract. 2025, 17, 100159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arellano, M.; Bond, S. Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations. Rev. Econ. Stud. 1991, 58, 277–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roodman, D. A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 2009, 71, 135–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arellano, M.; Bover, O. Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error-Components Models. J. Econom. 1995, 68, 29–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, L.P. Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 1982, 50, 1029–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sargan, J.D. The Estimation of Economic Relationships Using Instrumental Variables. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 1958, 26, 393–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, L.; Pei, T.; Zhang, J.; Tian, Y. The “Pollution Halo” Effect of FDI: Evidence from the Chinese Sichuan–Chongqing Urban Agglomeration. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 11903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Wang, L. The Nonlinear Effects of Population Aging, Industrial Structure, and Urbanization on Carbon Emissions: A Panel Threshold Regression Analysis of 137 Countries. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 287, 125381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, M.; Jiang, P.; Majeed, A.; Raza, M.Y. Does Financial Development and Foreign Direct Investment Improve Environmental Quality? Evidence from Belt and Road Countries. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 23586–23601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opršal, Z.; Harmáček, J. Is Foreign Aid Responsive to Environmental Needs and Performance of Developing Countries? Case Study of the Czech Republic. Sustainability 2019, 11, 401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, A.; Audi, M.; Hamadeh, H.F. Unveiling the Role of Business Freedom to Determine Environmental Degradation in Developing Countries. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2023, 13, 157–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sadekin, M.N. Analyzing the Impact of Remittance and Electricity Consumption on Ecological Footprint in South Asia: The Role of Globalization Using Panel ARDL and MMQR Method. Discov. Sustain. 2025, 6, 301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saidi, M.; Saidi, A.; Ochi, A. Migrants’ Remittances and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan African Countries: Nonlinearity and Threshold Analysis. Res. Sq. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Topxhiu, R.M.; Krasniqi, F.X. Remittances, Financial Development and Economic Growth-a Dynamic Panel Data Approach. Contemp. Econ. 2025, 19, 208–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uddin, K.M.K.; Rahman, M.M.; Saha, S. Corrigendum to “the Impact of Green Tax and Energy Efficiency on Sustainability: Evidence from Bangladesh. Energy Rep. 2024, 11, 470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S.; Khan, M.K.; Muhammad, B. Impact of Financial Development and Energy Consumption on Environmental Degradation in 184 Countries Using a Dynamic Panel Model. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 9542–9557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gavi, K.; Emmanuel, M. Sustainable Economic Growth through Remittances and Energy Innovation: The Case of Kenya, Iraq, and ASEAN. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388894523_Sustainable_Economic_Growth_Through_Remittances_and_Energy_Innovation_The_Case_of_Kenya_Iraq_and_ASEAN (accessed on 15 September 2025).
- Liu, S.; Li, D.; Chen, X. Environmental Regulatory Pressures and the Short-Term Debt for Long-Term Investment of Heavy-Polluting Enterprises: Quasi-Natural Experiment from China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 62625–62640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fay, M. Inclusive Green Growth: The Pathway to Sustainable Development; World Bank Publications: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Meng, X.; Li, T.; Ahmad, M.; Qiao, G.; Bai, Y. Capital Formation, Green Innovation, Renewable Energy Consumption and Environmental Quality: Do Environmental Regulations Matter? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udeagha, M.C.; Breitenbach, M.C. Investigating Financial Development and Its Direct and Indirect Environmental Effects in South Africa: Fresh Policy Insights. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2024, 36, 428–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdioğlu, N. Exploring the Moderating Effect of Institutional Quality on the Nexus between Remittances and Financial Development: A Comprehensive Analysis. İşletme Araştırmaları Derg. 2024, 16, 1432–1444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alesina, A.; Weder, B. Do Corrupt Governments Receive Less Foreign Aid? Am. Econ. Rev. 2002, 92, 1126–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogner, H.-H.; Leung, K.-K. The Effectiveness of Foreign Aid for Sustainable Energy and Climate Change Mitigation. In Aid Effectiveness for Environmental Sustainability; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 81–124. [Google Scholar]
- Honig, D. When Reporting Undermines Performance: The Costs of Politically Constrained Organizational Autonomy in Foreign Aid Implementation. Int. Organ. 2019, 73, 171–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morris, M. Chinese Firms and Adherence to Global Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Standards in Developing Countries: Is There Potential to Create Common Ground? IDOS Discussion Paper; IDOS: Bonn, Germany, 2023. [Google Scholar]
| Variable Represents | Abbreviation | Variable Definition | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent Variables | |||
| Environmental sustainability | BC | Bio-capacity is defined as Ecosystems’ capacity to produce biological materials used by people and to absorb waste material generated by humans, under current management schemes and extraction technologies. | UNEP Global Material Flows Database |
| Independent Variables | |||
| International Financial resources | FDI | Foreign Direct Investment net inflow (% of GDP) | WBDI |
| PRE | Personal remittances received (current US$) | WBDI | |
| DFA | Net aid received/Official Development Assistance (ODA) | WBDI | |
| Control Variables | |||
| Internal Financial Resources | TED | Total reserves (% of Total External Debt) | WBDI |
| STD | Short-term debt (% of total reserves) | WBDI | |
| GFC | Gross fixed capital formation (% of GDP) | WBDI | |
| DCS | Domestic credit to private sector (% of GDP) | WBDI | |
| Social factor | EMP | Employers are those workers who, working on their own account or with one or a few partners. | WBDI |
| Institutional Quality | Control of Corruption (CC) | Control of Corruption captures perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for private gain, including both petty and grand forms of corruption, as well as “capture” of the state by elites and private interests. Estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator, in units of a standard normal distribution, i.e., ranging from approximately −2.5 to 2.5. | WBDI |
| Moderation Variables | FDI × CC | FDI × Control of Corruption | Authors developed (AD) |
| DFA × CC | Foreign Aid × Control of Corruption | AD | |
| PRE × CC | Remittance earning × Control of Corruption | AD | |
| Variable | lnBC | lnFDI | lnPRE | lnDFA | lnEMP | lnCC | lnTED | lnGCP | lnDCP | lnSTD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| lnBC | 1.0000 | |||||||||
| lnFDI | 0.7701 | 1.0000 | ||||||||
| lnPRE | 0.2877 | 0.2641 | 1.0000 | |||||||
| lnDFA | 0.0596 | 0.0519 | 0.5395 | 1.0000 | ||||||
| lnEMP | −0.1085 | −0.0356 | 0.0506 | −0.1377 | 1.0000 | |||||
| lnCC | 0.1345 | 0.2696 | −0.0008 | −0.0055 | 0.0133 | 1.0000 | ||||
| lnTED | −0.0766 | −0.0952 | −0.0030 | 0.0410 | 0.0837 | −0.0557 | 1.0000 | |||
| lnGFC | −0.0239 | −0.0290 | 0.1329 | −0.0410 | 0.2867 | −0.1421 | 0.2917 | 1.0000 | ||
| lnDCP | 0.0239 | 0.1933 | 0.0832 | 0.1066 | 0.0770 | 0.3275 | 0.0341 | −0.1648 | 1.0000 | |
| lnSTD | 0.0561 | −0.0328 | −0.0884 | 0.0933 | 0.1203 | −0.2696 | −0.0703 | −0.0342 | −0.1448 | 1.0000 |
| Variables | ADF Statistics Without Constant | ADF Statistics with Constant | ADF Statistics with Constant and Trend | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| lnBC | 0.029 (0.001) | 0.036 (0.004) | 0.036 (0.021) | 1st Order |
| lnFDI | −0.065 (0.000) | −0.050 (0.000) | 0.049 (0.000) | 1st Order |
| lnPRE | 0.178 (0.000) | 0.186 (0.000) | 0.185 (0.011) | 1st Order |
| lnDFA | −0.120 (0.000) | −0.069 (0.000) | −0.067 (0.000) | 1st Order |
| lnEMP | 0.018 (0.046) | 0.033 (0.010) | 0.034 (0.047) | 1st Order |
| lnTED | −0.021 (0.000) | −0.002 (0.000) | −0.000 (0.000) | 1st Order |
| lnGFC | 0.105 (0.000) | 0.102 (0.000) | 0.102 (0.000) | 1st Order |
| lnDCP | 0.061 (0.003) | 0.061 (0.004) | 0.086 (0.001) | 1st Order |
| lnSTD | 0.019 (0.000) | 0.020 (0.003) | 0.022 (0.017) | 1st Order |
| lnCC | −0.018 (0.019) | 0.022 (0.000) | 0.022 (0.000) | 1st Order |
| Variables | Base Model | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BC (−1) | −0.2165 *** (0.0000) | −0.397 *** (0.0000) | −0.433 *** (0.0000) | −0.435 *** (0.0000) | −0.432 *** (0.0000) | −0.415 *** (0.000) |
| Const | −4.1234 *** (0.0011) | −11.996 *** (0.0000) | −8.904 *** (0.0000) | −8.842 *** (0.0000) | −8.804 *** (0.0000) | −8.926 *** (0.0000) |
| Ln PRE | −0.0831 (0.1587) | 0.127 ** (0.0382) | 0.123 * (0.064) | 0.141 * (0.0544) | 0.118 ** (0.01565) | 0.2947 ** (0.020) |
| Ln DFA | −0.0211 (0.7758) | 0.152 (0.4141) | 0.066 (0.0000) | 0.063 (0.0000) | 0.070 (0.30006) | −0.393 (0.1469) |
| Ln FDI | 0.3099 *** (0.0000) | 0.489 *** (0.0000) | 0.584 *** (0.0001) | 0.569 *** (0.0000) | 0.565 *** (0.0000) | 0.822 *** (0.000) |
| Ln EMP | - | 0.749 *** (0.0000) | 0.6667 *** (0.0000) | 0.656 *** (0.0000) | 0.704 *** (0.0000) | 0.644 *** (0.0030) |
| Ln TED | - | −0.596 *** (0.0000) | −0.676 *** ((0.0002) | −0.683 *** (0.0000) | −0.630 *** (0.0000) | −0.567 *** (0.0007) |
| Ln GFC | - | −0.104 *** (0.0000) | −0.075 *** (0.0022) | −0.073 *** (0.0026) | −0.080 *** (0.0000) | −0.063 *** (0.0007) |
| Ln DCP | - | −1.432 *** (0.0000) | −1.300 *** (0.0000) | −1.306 *** (0.0000) | −1.290 *** (0.0000) | −1.242 *** (0.0000) |
| Ln STD | - | −0.209 * (0.0526) | −0.213 ** (0.0404) | −0.211 ** (0.0411) | −0.197 *** (0.0083) | −0.175 * (0.0887) |
| LnFDI × CC | - | 0.2517 (0.01798) | 0.362867 (1.1492) | |||
| Ln PRE × CC | - | 0.0184 (0.2269) | 0.290656 (0.1584) | |||
| LnDFA × CC | - | 0.01569 (0.2662) | −0.6550 * (0.0589) | |||
| Standard error of residuals | 2.237 | 1.676 | 1.663 | 1.6607 | 1.6688 | 1.6463 |
| AR (1) | −4.29 (0.000) | −3.6536 (0.0003) | −3.7359 (0.0002) | −3.7408 (0.0000) | −4.7639 (0.0000) | −3.2314 (0.0012) |
| AR (2) | 1.767 (1.000) | 0.70009 (1.0000) | 0.4709 (0.6377) | 0.4405 (0.6596) | 0.67448 (0.5000) | 0.24965 (0.8029) |
| Sargan Test Chi-square | 27.964 (1.000) | 27.0095 (1.000) | 27.196 (1.0000) | 27.1439 (1.0000) | 247.217 (1.0000) | 27.506 (1.0000) |
| Wald (joint) Test | 57.849 (0.000) | 308.457 (0.0000) | 235.799 (0.0000) | 231.34 (0.0000) | 606.263 (0.0000) | 2367.65 (0.0000) |
| Observations | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 | 343 |
| Code | Hypothesis | Relationships/Findings |
|---|---|---|
| Base Model | ||
| H1 | DI has a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do improve environmental sustainability |
| H2 | Remittance earnings have a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do not significant |
| H3 | Development foreign assistance has a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do not significant |
| Base Model with Control Variables (Internal Financial Resources) | ||
| H1 | FDI has a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do improve environmental sustainability |
| H2 | Remittance earnings have a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do improve environmental sustainability |
| H3 | Development foreign assistance has a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do not significant |
| Moderation Effects Model | ||
| H4 | FDI × corruption has a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do not significant |
| H5 | Remittance earnings × corruption has a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do not significant |
| H6 | Development foreign assistance × corruption has a significant impact on environmental sustainability in developing countries from OIC member countries. | Do not significant |
| H7 | FDI × corruption, Remittance earnings × corruption, and development of foreign aid × corruption have a significant impact on environmental sustainability in OIC member countries. | Only DFA × CC has significant and negative impact on environmental sustainability. FDI × CC and PRE × CC are insignificant |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sarabdeen, M. A Quantitative Analysis of Foreign Direct Investment, Development Foreign Assistance, and Personal Remittance Earnings on Environmental Sustainability (SDG13) in Developing Economies: Does Corruption Matter? Sustainability 2025, 17, 11218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411218
Sarabdeen M. A Quantitative Analysis of Foreign Direct Investment, Development Foreign Assistance, and Personal Remittance Earnings on Environmental Sustainability (SDG13) in Developing Economies: Does Corruption Matter? Sustainability. 2025; 17(24):11218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411218
Chicago/Turabian StyleSarabdeen, Masahina. 2025. "A Quantitative Analysis of Foreign Direct Investment, Development Foreign Assistance, and Personal Remittance Earnings on Environmental Sustainability (SDG13) in Developing Economies: Does Corruption Matter?" Sustainability 17, no. 24: 11218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411218
APA StyleSarabdeen, M. (2025). A Quantitative Analysis of Foreign Direct Investment, Development Foreign Assistance, and Personal Remittance Earnings on Environmental Sustainability (SDG13) in Developing Economies: Does Corruption Matter? Sustainability, 17(24), 11218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411218

