Digitalization and Carbon Footprint: Does ICT Reduce Carbon Footprint?

Digital Technologies Research and Applications

Article

Digitalization and Carbon Footprint: Does ICT Reduce Carbon Footprint?

Downloads

https://doi.org/10.54963/dtra.v4i3.1306
Mohamed, M., Helmy, O., & Ibrahiem, D. M. (2025). Digitalization and Carbon Footprint: Does ICT Reduce Carbon Footprint?. Digital Technologies Research and Applications, 4(3), 136–158. https://doi.org/10.54963/dtra.v4i3.1306
Volume 4 Issue 3: December 2025 (In Progress)
Copyright (c) 2025 Manar Mohamed, Omneia Helmy, Dalia M. Ibrahiem
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright

The authors shall retain the copyright of their work but allow the Publisher to publish, copy, distribute, and convey the work.

License

Digital Technologies Research and Applications (DTRA)  publishes accepted manuscripts under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Authors who submit their papers for publication by DTRA agree to have the CC BY 4.0 license applied to their work, and that anyone is allowed to reuse the article or part of it free of charge for any purpose, including commercial use. As long as the author and original source are properly cited, anyone may copy, redistribute, reuse, and transform the content.

Authors

  • Manar Mohamed

    Department of Financial Economics, School of Business Administration, Ahram Canadian University, Giza 12613, Egypt
  • Omneia Helmy

    Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University, Giza 12613, Egypt
  • Dalia M. Ibrahiem

    Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University, Giza 12613, Egypt

Received: 2 October 2025; Revised: 29 October 2025; Accepted: 31 October 2025; Published: 19 November 2025

The potential economic and social benefits of digitalization are far-reaching and frequently discussed in public discourse. It is often portrayed as a silver bullet for addressing the world’s increasingly urgent environmental challenges. In particular, digitalization is considered a key enabler of a low-carbon economy. However, realizing these technological potentials requires effective implementation in sectors with the greatest capacity for smart solutions—namely, transportation, buildings, and energy—to reduce the carbon footprint. Conversely, digital technologies can also contribute to an increased carbon footprint due to the complexities involved in constructing and maintaining digital infrastructures, as well as rebound effects. Therefore, the impact of digitalization on the carbon footprint is a subject of particular interest. This paper examines the effect of digitalization on the carbon footprint in the MENA region during the period from 2000 to 2022. The Generalized Method of Moments (GMM), Fully Modified Ordinary Least Squares (FMOLS) and the Dumitrsc-Hurlin causality test are employed for this analysis. The GMM results indicate that information and communication technology (ICT) has no significant impact on the carbon footprint in the short run. In contrast, the FMOLS results show that ICT is negatively associated with the carbon footprint in the long run. The causality test indicates robust evidence of unidirectional causality running from ICT to Carbon footprint in the MENA region, asserting the long-run estimation results.

Keywords:

Digitalization Carbon Footprint GMM FMOLS

References

  1. Brennen, J.S.; Kreiss, D. Digitalization. In The International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy; Jensen, K.B., Craig, R.T., Pooley, J.D., et al., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, New Jersey, USA, 2016; pp. 556–565.
  2. Coroamă, V.C.; Mattern, F. Digital Rebound–Why Digitalization Will Not Redeem Us Our Environmental Sins. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on ICT for sustainability, Lappeenranta, Finland, 10–14 June 2019; pp. 1–10.
  3. Moss, J.; Lambert, C.G.; Rennie, A.E. SME application of LCA-based carbon footprints. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2008, 1, 132–141.
  4. Strutt, J.; Wilson, S.; Shorney-Darby, H; et al. Assessing the carbon footprint of water production. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 2008, 100, 80–91.
  5. Wiedmann, T.; Minx, J. A definition of ‘carbon footprint’. Ecol. Econ. Res. Trends 2008, 1, 1–11.
  6. Babiker, M.H.; Fehaid, M. Climate Change Policy in the MENA Region: Prospects, Challenges, and the Implication of Market Instruments. Workshop Paper No. 588. The Economic Research Forum (ERF): Dokki, Cairo, Egypt, 2011.
  7. Hilty, L.; Bieser, J. Opportunities and risks of digitalization for climate protection in Switzerland. University of Zurich: Zurich, Switzerland, 2017.
  8. Göll, E.; Zwiers, J. Technological Trends in the Mena Region: The Cases of Digitalization and Information and Communications Technology (ICT). Middle East and North Africa Regional Architecture: Mapping Geopolitical Shifts, Regional Order and Domestic Transformations. Working Papers No. 23. November 2018. Available online: https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/menara_wp_23.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2025).
  9. OECD. Benchmarking Digital Government Strategies in MENA Countries. 17 February 2017. OECD Publishing: Paris, France. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268012-en
  10. Shahin, M. Ministry of Communications and Information Technology. Egypt's ICT 2030 Strategy. Available online: https://mcit.gov.eg/en/ICT_Strategy (accessed on 29 July 2025).
  11. British Petroleum. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2020, 69th ed. Available online: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2020-full-report.pdf (accessed on 29 May 2025).
  12. Ibrahiem, D.M. Do technological innovations and financial development improve environmental quality in Egypt? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27(10), 10869–10881.
  13. Lange, S.; Pohl, J.; Santarius, T. Digitalization and energy consumption: Does ICT reduce energy demand? Ecol. Econ. 2020, 176, 106760.
  14. Dutta, S.; Lanvin, B. (Eds.). Network Readiness Index 2023. Portulans Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2023. Available online: https://download.networkreadinessindex.org/reports/data/2023/nri-2023.pdf (accessed on 29 July 2025).
  15. Liu, Z.; Deng, Z.; Davis, S.; et al. Monitoring global carbon emissions in 2022. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2023, 4(4), 205–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00406-z
  16. Labzovskii, L.D.; Mak, H.W.; Kenea, S.T.; et al. What can we learn about effectiveness of carbon reduction policies from interannual variability of fossil fuel CO2 emissions in East Asia?. Environ. Sci. Policy. 2019, 96, 132–140.
  17. Dou, X.; Deng Z.; Sun, T.; et al. Global and local carbon footprints of city of Hong Kong and Macao from 2000 to 2015. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 164, 105167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105167
  18. Deng, Z.; Zhu, B.; Davis, S.J.; et al. Global carbon emissions and decarbonization in 2024. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2025, 6(4), 231–233.
  19. Davis, S.J.; Caldeira, K. Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2010, 107, 5687–5692.
  20. Hertwich, E.G.; Peters, G.P. Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 6414–6420.
  21. Hafner, M.; Raimondi, P.P.; Bonometti, B. The MENA region: an economic, energy, and historical context. In The Energy Sector and Energy Geopolitics in the MENA Region at a Crossroad, 1st ed.; Hafner, M., Raimondi, P.P., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 3–25.
  22. Fattouh, B.; El-Katiri, L. Energy poverty in the Arab world: the case of Yemen; Oxford Institute for Energy Studies: Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, 2011.
  23. Mol, A.P.; Spaargaren, G. Ecological modernisation theory in debate: a review. Environ. Polit. 2000, 9, 17–49.
  24. York, R.; Rosa, E.A.; Dietz, T. Ecological modernization theory: Theoretical and empirical challenges. In The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology, 2nd ed; Redclift, M.R., Woodgate, G. Eds.; Edward Elgar Publishing: Northampton, MA, USA, 2010; pp. 77–90.
  25. Christoff, P. Ecological modernisation, ecological modernities. Environ. Polit. 1996, 5, 476–500.
  26. Byrne, J.A.; Gleeson, B.; Howes, M.; et al. Climate Change and Australian Urban Resilience: The Limits of Ecological Modernization as an Adaptive Strategy. In Planning for Climate Change; Davoudi, S., Crawford, J., Mehmood, A., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, OX, UK, 2009; pp. 136–154.
  27. Mol, A.P. Environmental Reform in the Information Age; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2008.
  28. Sonnenfeld, D.A. From brown to green? Late Industrialization, Social Conflict, and Adoption of Environmental Technologies in Thailand's Pulp Industry. Organ. Environ. 1998, 11, 59–87.
  29. York, R.; Rosa, E.A. Key challenges to ecological modernization theory: Institutional efficacy, case study evidence, units of analysis, and the pace of eco-efficiency. Organ. Environ. 2003, 16, 273–288.
  30. Grossman, G.M.; Krueger, A.B. Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. NBER Working Paper No. 3914. National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914
  31. Dinda, S. Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: a survey. Ecol. Econ. 2004, 49, 431–455.
  32. Kuhndt, M.; Geibler, J.V.; Türk, V.; et al. Virtual dematerialisation: eBusiness and factor X. Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy: Wuppertal, Germany, 2003.
  33. Ezzati, M.; Singer, B.H.; Kammen, D.M. Towards an integrated framework for development and environment policy: the dynamics of environmental Kuznets curves. World Dev. 2001, 29, 1421–1434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00044-4
  34. Perkins, R. Environmental leapfrogging in developing countries. Nat. Resour. Forum 2003, 27, 177–188.
  35. Simpson, J.M. Information and Communication Technology Development and Anthropogenic Global Warming: A Cross National Panel Study of ICT Development on Carbon Dioxide Emissions 1990–2009. Doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA, 2013.
  36. Gallagher, K.S. Limits to leapfrogging in energy technologies? Evidence from the Chinese automobile industry. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 383–394.
  37. World Bank. Greening industry - new roles for communities, markets, and governments. Report Number 19851, 01 July 2010. Oxford University Press: New York, USA, 2000.
  38. United Nations Department of Public Information. Agenda 21: Programme of action for sustainable development, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, statement of forest principles: the final text of agreements negotiated by Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 3–14 June 1992, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 1993.
  39. Dasgupta, N. Environmental enforcement and small industries in India: Reworking the problem in the poverty context. World Dev. 2000, 28, 945–967.
  40. Rajagopal, R. Clean technology development—the ultimate solution? Nor. Geogr. Tidsskr. 1992, 46, 193–197.
  41. Angel, D.P.; Rock, M.T.; Feridhanusetyawan, T. Toward clean shared growth in Asia. In Asia’s Clean Revolution; Angel, D., Rock, M., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2000; pp. 76–92.
  42. Goldfrank, W.L. Paradigm Regained? The Rules of Wallerstein's World-System Method. J. World-Syst. Res. 2000, 6, 150–195.
  43. Moran, D.D.; Lenzen, M.; Kanemoto, K.; et al. Does ecologically unequal exchange occur? Ecol. Econ. 2013, 89, 177–186.
  44. Chirot, D.; Hall, T.D. World-system theory. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1982, 8, 81–106.
  45. Schnaiberg, A.; Pellow, D.N.; Weinberg, A. The treadmill of production and the environmental state. In The Environmental State Under Pressure; Mol, A.P., Buttel, F.H., Eds.; Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Leeds, England, UK, 2002; pp. 15–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-1152(02)80004-7
  46. Gould, K.A.; Pellow, D.N.; Schnaiberg, A. Interrogating the treadmill of production: Everything you wanted to know about the treadmill but were afraid to ask. Organ. Environ. 2004, 17, 296–316.
  47. Wright, E.O. Interrogating the treadmill of production: Some questions I still want to know about and am not afraid to ask. Organ. Environ. 2004, 17, 317–322.
  48. Bell, M. An Invitation to Environmental Sociology; Pine Forge Press: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 2012.
  49. York, R.; McGee, J.A. Understanding the Jevons paradox. Environ. Sociol. 2016, 2, 77–87.
  50. York, R.; Rosa, E.A.; Dietz, T. STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts. Ecol. Econ. 2003, 46, 351–365.
  51. Rice, J. Ecological unequal exchange: Consumption, equity, and unsustainable structural relationships within the global economy. Int. J. Comp. Sociol. 2007, 48, 43–72.
  52. Ehrlich, P.R.; Holdren, J.P. Impact of population growth. Science 1971, 171, 1212–1217.
  53. MacKellar, F.L.; Lutz, W.; Prinz, C.; et al. Population, households, and CO2 emissions. Popul. Dev. Rev. 1995, 21, 849–865.
  54. Dietz, T.; Rosa, E.A. Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 1994, 1, 277–300.
  55. Khan, N.; Baloch, M.A.; Saud, S.; et al. The effect of ICT on CO2 emissions in emerging economies: does the level of income matters? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 22850–22860.
  56. Lee, J.W.; Brahmasrene, T. ICT, CO2 emissions and economic growth: evidence from a panel of ASEAN. Glob. Econ. Rev. 2014, 43, 93–109.
  57. Salahuddin, M.; Alam, K.; Ozturk, I. The effects of Internet usage and economic growth on CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 62, 1226–1235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.018
  58. Nizam, H.A.; Zaman, K.; Khan, K.B.; et al. Achieving environmental sustainability through information technology: “Digital Pakistan” initiative for green development. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27(9), 10011–10026.
  59. Al-Mulali, U.; Sheau-Ting, L.; Ozturk, I. The global move toward Internet shopping and its influence on pollution: an empirical analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2015, 22, 9717–9727.
  60. Haseeb, A.; Xia, E.; Saud, S.; et al. Does information and communication technologies improve environmental quality in the era of globalization? An empirical analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 8594–8608.
  61. Ozcan, B.; Apergis, N. The impact of internet use on air pollution: Evidence from emerging countries. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 4174–4189.
  62. Lu, W.C. The impacts of information and communication technology, energy consumption, financial development, and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in 12 Asian countries. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang 2018, 23, 1351–1365.
  63. Zhang, C.; Liu, C. The impact of ICT industry on CO2 emissions: a regional analysis in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 44, 12–19.
  64. Plepys, A. The grey side of ICT. Environ. Impact Assess Rev. 2002, 22, 509–523.
  65. Pamlin, D.; Pahlman, S. Outline for the first global IT strategy for CO2 reductions. WWF: Ulriksdal Palace, Sweden, 2008.
  66. Kang, H. The prevention and handling of the missing data. Korean J. Anesthesiol. 2013, 64, 402–406.
  67. Chi, Y.; Esily, R.R.; Ibrahiem, D.M.; et al. Is North Africa region on track to energy trilemma for enhancing economic progress? The role of population growth and energy usage. Energy Strategy Rev. 2023, 50, 101245.
  68. Blackburne III, E.F.; Frank, M.W. Estimation of nonstationary heterogeneous panels. Stata J. 2007, 7, 197–208.
  69. Yahyaoui, I.; Bouchoucha, N. The Long‐Run Relationship between ODA, Growth and Governance: An Application of FMOLS and DOLS Approaches. Afr. Dev. Rev. 2021, 33, 38–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8268.12489
  70. Joëts, M. On the relationship between forward prices of crude oil and domestic fuel: A panel data cointegration approach. Écon. Int. 2011, 126(2), 39–49.
  71. Apergis, N.; Payne, J.E. Energy consumption and economic growth in Central America: evidence from a panel cointegration and error correction model. Energy Econ. 2009, 31, 211–216.
  72. Alola, A.A.; Ozturk, I.; Bekun, F.V. Is clean energy prosperity and technological innovation rapidly mitigating sustainable energy-development deficit in selected sub-Saharan Africa? A myth or reality. Energy Policy 2021, 158, 112520.
  73. Wang, J.; Ghosh, S.; Olayinka, O.A.; et al. Achieving energy security amidst the world uncertainty in newly industrialized economies: The role of technological advancement. Energy 2022, 261, 125265.
  74. Ma, S.; Appolloni, A. Can financial flexibility enhance corporate green innovation performance? Evidence from an ESG approach in China. J. Environ. Manage. 2025, 387, 125869. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.125869
  75. Wang, Z.; Wang, F. Ma S. Research on the Coupled and Coordinated Relationship Between Ecological Environment and Economic Development in China and its Evolution in Time and Space. Pol. Jo. Environ. Stud. 2025, 34(3), 3333–3342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/188854