The Effects of Democracy on Environment Quality Index in Selected OIC Countries

Document Type: Research Paper


1 Department of Economics, Islamic Azad University, Kerman Branch, Kerman, Iran

2 Department of Economics, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran.


The relationship between democracy and environment has always been controversial. Some scientists found that democracy had a positive impact on reducing environmental disruption. Other scholars claimed that democracy tends to accelerate environmental degradation. Ther are many studies focusing on main determinants of environmental degradation. More recently, democracy is considered to be one of factors affecting environmental quality. This research studies the relationship between democracy and environment quality in selected Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) countries by using panel data model for the period 2000-2010. The results of estimation show that democracy affects environment quality directly in these countries. Moreover, we find that economic growth and trade have positive effect on environmental quality. However, energy consumption and population have negative effect on environment in selected OIC countries.


Article Title [Persian]

بررسی تاثیر دموکراسی بر شاخص کیفیت محیط زیست با تاکید بر منتخبی از کشورهای عضو کنفرانس اسلامی (OIC)

Authors [Persian]

  • محمد حسین نکویی 1
  • رضا زینل زاده 1
  • زین العابدین صادقی 2
1 گروه اقتصاد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد کرمان، کرمان، ایران
2 استادیار گروه اقتصاد دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران
Abstract [Persian]

 حفاظت از محیط زیست یکی از مسائل اساسی در دنیای کنونی به شمار می­رود. مطالعات زیادی در مورد عوامل موثر بر محیط زیست در جهان صورت گرفته است تا این که بتوانند عوامل مخرب زیست محیطی را شناسایی کرده و با آن به طرز صحیحی مقابله کنند. یکی از این عوامل که در مورد تاثیر آن بر تخریب و یا عدم تخریب محیط زیست اختلاف نظر وجود دارد، بحث دموکراسی می­باشد. بر این اساس در این تحقیق به بررسی رابطه بین دموکراسی و کیفیت محیط زیست در منتخبی از کشورهای عضو کنفرانس اسلامی (OIC) با استفاده از الگوی پانل دیتا در طول دوره­ی زمانی 2000-2010 پرداخته شد. نتایج به دست امده حاکی از آن بود که دموکراسی تاثیر مستقیم و معنادار بر کیفیت محیط زیست در این کشورها دارد. همچنین، رشد اقتصادی و تجارت تاثیر مستقیم و معنادار بر کیفیت محیط زیست داشت. از سوی دیگر مصرف انرژی و جمعیت تاثیر منفی و مخرب بر کیفیت محیط زیست در کشورهای منتخب عضو کنفرانس اسلامی داشته است.

Keywords [Persian]

  • کیفیت محیط زیست
  • دموکراسی
  • رشد اقتصادی
  • مصرف انرژی
  • جمعیت
Beckerman, W. (1992). Economic Growth and the Environment: Whose growth? Whose environment? World Development 20, 481-496.

Berge, E. (1994). Democracy and Human Rights: Conditions for Sustainable Resource Utilization. In Who Pays the Price? The Sociocultural Context of Environmental Crisis, edited by B. R. Johnson. Covelo, CA: Island Press.

Bernauer, T and Koubi, V. (2009). Effects of Political Institutions on Air Quality. Ecological Economics, 68(5), 1355–1365.

Callejas, D. G. (2010). Democracy and Environmental Quality in Latin America: A Panel System of Equations Approach, 1995-2008. Borradores Departamento de Economía, 36, 6-9

Carlsson, F. and Lundstrom, S. (2001). Political and Economic Freedom and the Environment: The Case of CO2 Emission. Working Paper in Economics (29), Second Version.

Congleton, R. D. (1992). Political Institutions and Pollution Control. Review of Economics and Statistics, 74, 412–421.

Dargahi, H. and Bahrami Gholami, M. (2011). The effective factors on emission of greenhouse gases in the economies of selected industrial countries and AOPEC countries and political recommendations for Iran: A Data Panel Approach, Quarterly of Environment and Energy Economy, (1), 73-99.

Deacon, R. T. (2009). Public Good Provision under Dictatorship and Democracy, Public Choice 139, 241-262.

Dryzek, J. S. (1987). Rational Ecology: Environment and Political Economy. Oxford: Blackwell.

Farzanegan, M. R and Markwardt, G. (2012). Pollution, Economic Development and Democracy: Evidence from the MENA countries. Joint Discussion Paper Series in Economics. ISSN 1867-3678.

 Fetres, M. H, Ghafari, H, Shahbazi, A. (2010). Study of relation between air pollution and economic growth in AOPEC countries. Economic Researches, 1(1), 59-77.

Fetres, M. H., Najarzadeh, A. Piruzmohammadi, F. (2012). Study of relation between air pollution, energy intensity, and economy opening in Iran. Bimonthly of Economic Policies and Problems, 11, 5-22.

Freedom House Report of Freedom in the World (2013).

Gleditsch, N. P and Bjorn O. S (2003). Democracy and the Environment, In Human Security and the Environment: International Comparisons, edited by Edward Paper and Michael Redclift. London: Elgar.

Hamit-Haggar, M (2010). Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: A Panel Co-integration Analysis from Canadian Industrial Sector Perspective. Energy Economics, 33, 342-361.

Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.

Heilbronner, R. L. (1974). An Inquiry into the Human Prospect. New York: Norton.

Hsiao-Tien, P. and Chung –Ming, T. (2010). Co2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in BRIC countries. Energy Policy, 36(10), 685-7860.

Khalil, S and Inam, Z. (2006). Is Trade Good for Environment? A Unit Root Co-integration Analysis. The Pakistan Development Review, 45, (4), 1187-1196.

Kotov, V and Nikitina, E. (1995). Russia and International Environmental Cooperation, In Green Globe Yearbook of International Cooperation on Environment and Development, edited by H. O. Bergesen and G. Parmann. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic Growth and Income Inequality. American Economic Review

, 45(1), 1-28.

Li, Q and Reuveny, R. (2006). Democracy and environmental degradation, International Studies Quarterly, 50(4), 935–956.

Lake, D. and Baum, M. (2001). The Invisible Hand of Democracy: Political Control and the Provision of Public Service. Comparative Political Studies 34, 587-621.

Maddah, M.; Abdollahi, M. (2012). The effect of quality of organizations on environment pollution in the framework of Kuznets Curve by static and dynamic DPP (Case study: Countries member of Islamic Conference). Quarterly of Environment and Energy Economy, 2, (5), 171-186.

De Mesquita, B. B., A.,  Smith, R. M. Siverson and Morrow, J. D. (2003). The Logic of Political Survival. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

McGuire, M and Olson, M. (1996). The Economics of Autocracy and majority Rule: The Invisible Hand and the Use of Force. Journal of Economic Literature 34, 72-96.

Midlarsky, M. I. (1998). Democracy and the environment: An empirical assessment. Journal of Peace Research, 35(3), 341–361.

Olson, M. (1993). Dictatorship, Democracy and Development. American Political Science review 87, 567-576.

Payne, R. (1995). Freedom and the Environment. Journal of Democracy 6, 41–55.

Paehlke, R. (1996). Environmental Challenges to Democratic Practice. In Democracy and the Environment: Problems and Prospects, edited by William Lafferty and James Meadow croft. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.

Pejuyan, J., Lashkarizadeh, M. (2010). Study of the effective factors on relation of economic growth and environment quality. Quarterly of Economic Researches, 7, (23), 147-163.

Roberts, J. T and Parks, B. C. (2007). A Climate of Injustice: Global Inequality, North–South Politics, and Climate Policy. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.

Schultz, C. B and Crockett, T. R. (1990). Economic Development, Democratization, and Environmental Protection in Eastern Europe. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 18, 53–84.

Scruggs, L. A. (1998). Political and Economic Inequality and the Environment. Ecological Economics, 26(3), 259–275.

Sen, A. (1994). Liberty and Poverty: Political Rights and Economics. New Republic, 210, 31–37.

Shafipur, M. (2008). Air Pollution Engineering. Nashre Shahr Pub.

 Weiss, E. B and Jacobsen H. K. (1999). Getting Countries to Comply with International Agreements. Environment, 41, 16–23.

World Development Indicator (2013).

Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (2012), Available at:

You, W. H., Zhu, H. M., Yu, K and Peng, C. (2015). Democracy, Financial Openness, and Global Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Heterogeneity Across Existing Emission Levels. World Development. 66, 189–207.