Kiran Jameel
Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Institute of Business Management, Karachi, Pakistan
Laeeq Razzak Janjua
Ph. D., Lecturer, WSB University, Poland
Abstract
This paper investigates the complex interaction among remittance inflows, governance quality, and environmental sustainability by evaluating their combined impact on the ecological footprint of the top 20 remittance-receiving economies from 2000 to 2023. In contrast with the conventional environmental research in which only economic growth or globalization was effectively allocated. This research involves not only economic and globalization but also institutional and financial dimension to better understand the pattern of environmental degradation in the remittance-dependent countries. The Study applied a Method of Moments Quantile Regression (MMQR) panel estimation allowing for country effects and quantile-dependent effects. Explaining more than mean-based estimates, this approach helps to illuminate how the relationship between remittances, governance and ecological footprint vary across different levels of environmental pressure. This research found that remittances have a double effect, it improves household welfare and development but also increase ecological footprint, particularly in lower and middle quantile where environmental deterioration is more clear. Environmental impact is mitigated by stronger governance quality than at higher quantiles, particularly in regulatory quality, corruption control, and government efficiency. Strong institutions can considerably lower the environmental risks associated with remittance-fueled investment and consumption because of the relationship between remittances and governance. These findings highlight the necessity of strong institutions to guarantee environmental sustainability in remittance-receiving nations. To assurance that remittances support opportunities for green development, policy recommendations emphasize the necessity of integrating governance reforms with environmental regulations and immigrants engagement programs.
Keywords: Ecological Footprint, Remittances, Governance, Environmental Sustainability, Panel MMQR, Institutional Quality, Top Remittance-Receiving Countries
JEL: F24, Q56, Q58, O44
DOI: 10.52244/c2025.7
References
Akhundov, R., Tangirov, A., & Sultonov, A. (2025). Political dimensions of global ecological governance frameworks. BIO Web of Conferences, 151, 02008. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/202515102008
Alvarado, R., Tillaguango, B., López-Sánchez, M., Ponce, P., & Işık, C. (2022). Heterogeneous impact of natural resources on income inequality: The role of the shadow economy and human capital index. Economic Analysis and Policy, 75, 749–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2022.07.006
Cazachevici, A., Havranek, T., & Horvath, R. (2023). Remittances and economic growth: A meta-analysis. World Development, 162, 106122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106122
Chiou, W. J. P., Fu, S. H., Lin, J. B., & Tsai, W. (2025). Exploring the impacts of economic policies, policy uncertainty, and politics on carbon emissions. Environmental and Resource Economics, 1–25.
Giannetti, B. F., Alves-Pinto Junior, M. J., Chirinos-Marroquín, M., Velazquez, L., Munguia, N., Agostinho, F., … & Liu, G. (2025). Sustainability in universities: The triad of ecological footprint, happiness, and academic performance among Brazilian and international students. Sustainability, 17(3), 950.
Hussain, J., Zhou, K., & Khan, M. K. (2023). The role of governance in the remittance-growth nexus: Evidence from panel threshold analysis. Economic Modelling, 121, 106203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2023.106203
International Organization for Migration. (2024). World migration report 2024. https://publications.iom.int/books/world-migration-report-2024
Javed, A., Rapposelli, A., Adedoyin, F. F., & Arshad, Z. (2025). Examining the role of remittances, technological innovation, and foreign direct investment on environmental quality in Pakistan: Fresh evidence from a novel dynamic ARDL simulation approach. Social Indicators Research, 1–29.
Kamil, R., Appiah, K. O., Agana, J. A., & Saeed, U. F. (2025). Advancing carbon neutrality agenda: Does governance quality and environmental tax matter? Evidence from novel MMQR and heterogeneous analysis. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1–30.
Konadu-Yiadom, E., Domeher, D., Appiah, K. O., & Frimpong, J. M. (2025). Digital finance, institutional quality, and carbon dioxide emissions in Africa. Climate and Development, 1–18.
Maciejewska, K., & Reizer, M. (2025). Evaluating the impacts of different car washing systems on carbon footprint: Insights from Poland. Sustainability, 17(4), 1384.
Machado, J. A. F., & Santos Silva, J. M. C. (2019). Quantiles via moments. Journal of Econometrics, 213(1), 145–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2019.04.009
Mughal, N., Arif, A., Jain, V., Chupradit, S., Shabbir, M. S., Ramos-Meza, C. S., & Zhanbayev, R. (2023). The role of technological innovation in environmental pollution, energy consumption and sustainable economic growth: Evidence from South Asian economies. Energy Strategy Reviews, 39, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2021.100745
Nathaniel, S. P., Solomon, C. J., Khudoykulov, K., & Fakher, H. A. (2025). Linking resource richness, digital economy, and clean energy to ecological footprint and load capacity factor in emerging markets. In Natural Resources Forum. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Nasir, U., Haq, I. U., Farooq, U., Hussain, I., & Abid, S. (2025). Institutional quality’s contribution to environmental degradation: China’s case. (Note: journal name and complete details are missing — add if available).
Ogbuabor, J. E., Agu, C., Onah, B. U., & Urama, C. E. (2025). Economic complexity and sectoral performance in Africa: The role of economic governance institutions. Sustainable Development.
Ratha, D., De, S., Kim, E. J., Plaza, S., Seshan, G. K., & Yameogo, N. D. (2023). Migration and development brief 38: Remittances remain resilient but are slowing. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-10233
Sadekin, M. N. (2025). Analyzing the impact of remittance and electricity consumption on ecological footprint in South Asia: The role of globalization using panel ARDL and MMQR method. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), 301.
Sun, J., & Qamruzzaman, M. (2025). Technological innovation, trade openness, natural resources, clean energy on environmental sustainably: A competitive assessment between CO2 emission, ecological footprint, load capacity factor and inverted load capacity factor in BRICS+ T. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1520562.
Sultanova, G., & Naser, H. (2025). Navigating sustainability: How export diversification influences ecological footprints in developed and developing countries. Discover Sustainability, 6(1), 316.
Tiwari, P. (2025). Green or grey? Decoding the impact of FDI and remittances on CO2 emissions. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1–23.
Toumi, S. (2025). Unveiling impact of financial development, renewable energy, and technological innovation on ecological footprint in major remittance-receiving economies–A PQARDL approach. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 14(1), 180–199.
Tunio, F. H., Nabi, A. A., Memon, R. U. R., Fraz, T. R., & Haluza, D. (2025). Sustainability in high-income countries: Urbanization, renewables, and ecological footprints. Energies, 18(7), 1599.
Wackernagel, M., Lin, D., Evans, M., Hanscom, L., & Raven, P. (2021). Defying the footprint oracle: Implications of country resource trends. Sustainability, 13(4), 2164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042164
Wada, I. (2025). Dynamic environmental convergence in top remittance economies: The role of total factor productivity, personal remittances, and renewable energy consumption. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1–43.
World Bank. (2024). Migration and development brief 40: Remittance flows remain strong despite global headwinds. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/migrationremittancesdiasporaissues/brief/migration-and-development-brief-40