Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2021) 28:22011–22021

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-12071-6

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Globalization, urbanization, and deforestation linkage

in Burkina Faso
Claire Emilienne Wati Yameogo 1

Received: 17 July 2020 / Accepted: 13 December 2020 / Published online: 7 January 2021
# The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
This study examines the effect of globalization and urbanization on deforestation in Burkina Faso, over the period 1980 to 2017.
The study employed the autoregressive distributive lag (ARDL) model and the Toda-Yamamoto Granger causality approach.
Empirical findings affirmed that globalization, urbanization, and agricultural land have a positive and significant effect on
deforestation in the long run, while population density reduces the deforestation rate, thus indicating an improvement in
environmental quality. On the other hand, urbanization, economic growth, and population density have a positive and significant
impact on deforestation in the short run. Furthermore, the Granger causality approach confirmed a bidirectional association
between deforestation and urbanization and between globalization and agricultural land, as well as between urbanization and
population density. The result further affirmed a unidirectional causal link running from urbanization to agricultural land. Based
on the empirical findings, the study recommends that the government should ensure more regulation on the removal of barriers to
international trade. The study further recommends that the government should implement relevant agricultural policies to guard
against deforestation since the results of the study suggest that agriculture contributes negatively to deforestation in Burkina Faso.

Keywords Globalization . Urbanization . Financial development . Deforestation . Burkina Faso

Introduction Following the ecological modernization theory, urbaniza-

The rate of urban and population growth in Burkina Faso has
been astronomical and immense. Statistics report from World
Development Indicator (World Bank 2020) affirmed that the
proportion of people living in urban areas was estimated at
8.80% in 1980, 13.81% in 1990, 17.84% in 2000, 24.63% in
2010, and 28.74% in 2017. Besides being landlocked, the
country is one of the least developed in the world and on the
continent of Africa. However, the country’s average annual
rate of change in the urban population was 9.14% in 1980,
5.29% in 2010, and 5.03% in 2017, respectively (World Bank
2020), and this has resulted in the problem of deforestation,
which has constituted environmental degradation (Abbasi
et al. 2020).
Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues
* Claire Emilienne Wati Yameogo
emilieyam@yahoo.fr
1
Department of Economics, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria
tion could have positive or negative effects on the quality of
the environment, depending on the country’s level of modern-
ization. An empirical study by Li et al. (2017) revealed that
migration from rural areas to urban areas expands forest den-
sity owing to abandoned agricultural lands. More so, in-
creased urbanization equally leads to demand for more agri-
cultural land owing to the population explosion which could
result in incessant deforestation in the country. Furthermore, it
is ostensible to note that in the past few decades Burkina Faso
has benefitted from globalization, following the opening up of
her trade to foreign investment.
However, the intent to liberalizing trade, allowing for
foreign investment as well as creating an enabling business
environment has resulted in enhanced energy demand
which has in turn encouraged environmental degradation.
For instance, Burkina Faso’s economy depends heavily on
the agricultural sector and it has increased population and
urbanization rates, leading to deforestation. A report from
the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2006) con-
firmed an annual loss of wood of 12,600 hectares
representing 90% of woodcuts, due to consumption, urban-
ization, and industrialization, thus leading to forest
22012
depletion. More so, scholars have affirmed that this is
harmful to the environment, as it shows that the consump-
tion of forest wood in the country is higher than
regenerating it in the country due to poor fertility of the
land.
Based on the above premise, it is evident that few studies
have explored the issue of deforestation, carbon dioxide emis-
sions, and environmental degradation. Studies (see Al-Mulali
et al. 2015; Shahbaz et al. 2016; Twerefou et al. 2016; Danish
et al. 2017; Shahbaz et al. 2018; Zafar et al. 2019; Omojolaibi
et al. 2020; Yameogo and Dauda 2020; and Bayar et al. 2020)
focused more on carbon dioxide emissions as the environmen-
tal degradation index, which is a critical lacuna in the litera-
ture. Following the FAO statistics, as cited by Mongabay
(2020), the country deforested about 1,198,000 hectares of
the total forest area between 1990 and 2010, which affirms
the critical role deforestation plays in climate change, environ-
mental quality, and economic activities as well as in human
health.
Deforestation is also responsible for desert encroachment
in the country. Subsequent studies affirmed that the country
adopted some measures and implemented regulatory policies
to checkmate CO2 emissions and deforestation to protect the
environment. Among these laws are the environmental laws
of 1992 and the forest code as defined in the 006-97/ADP law
promulgated in 1997. The law as amended in 2011 shows that
forests play an integral part of the national heritage; as a result,
its sustainable management as regards the laydown regula-
tions can help protect the environment, prevent forestry ex-
ploitation, and promote and enhance afforestation and wildlife
heritage.
Based on this premise, this study tends to investigate the
link between globalization, urbanization, and environmental
degradation in the country, with deforestation employed as an
indicator. Furthermore, it appears that there is a dearth of
literature on the effects of globalization and urbanization on
deforestation in Burkina Faso. This informs the rationale of
the study over the period from 1980 to 2017. In addition, this
study is structured into five sections. The “Introduction” sec-
tion discusses the introduction; the review of literature is
discussed in “Empirical review”, while “Data and methodol-
ogy” discusses the theoretical framework as well as method-
ology. The “Empirical evidence” section discusses the empir-
ical evidence and data interpretation, while the “Conclusion
and policy recommendation” section discusses the conclusion
and policy implication.
Empirical review
Studies have been reviewed as regards the effect of globaliza-
tion and urbanization on deforestation; however, there has not
been any consensus, as some studies affirmed that
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021
globalization and urbanization have a positive influence on
deforestation, while few other studies assert a negative effect
on deforestation. However, to the best of the researcher’s
knowledge, few studies have been done in this area in
Burkina Faso, but none of these studies has been able to rec-
oncile the controversy in the previous studies. Based on this,
this present intends to extend the frontier of knowledge by
focusing on issues relating to globalization, urbanization,
and deforestation linkages in Burkina Faso.
For instance, Ahmed et al. (2014) employed the
autoregressive distributed lag bounds (ARDL) approach to in-
vestigate the effects of economic growth, energy consumption,
and trade on Pakistan’s deforestation rate, over the period 1980 to
2013. The findings of the study affirmed that economic growth,
energy consumption, and population enhance deforestation in the
short and long run, while trade openness reduces deforestation
which confirmed the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC).
Further results revealed a bidirectional causality relationship be-
tween economic growth and energy consumption. In the same
vein, Culas (2007) examined the validity of the environmental
Kuznets curve (EKC) in selected countries in Latin America,
Africa, and Asia, employing deforestation as the environmental
degradation indicator. The results only validate the EKC for
Latin America and showed that population density, debt, and
proportion of forest area contributed to reducing deforestation.
More recently, the ARDL was also employed by Zambrano-
Monserrate et al. (2018) to analyze the relationship between de-
forestation, economic growth, and agricultural exports over the
period 1974 to 2013, in selected European countries. The results
of the study confirmed the EKC hypothesis for the selected
countries, except for Greece. More so, Maji (2015) investigates
the effect of trade openness on deforestation in Nigeria over the
period 1981 to 2011. The study employed the ARDL approach
and found that economic growth and trade significantly reduced
the deforestation rate, while the population contributed to
environmental degradation in the long run. Similarly, the ARDL
approach was also employed by Maji et al. (2017) to examine the
relationship between economic growth, energy consumption, pop-
ulation, and deforestation in Nigeria between 1981 and 2011. The
results of the study affirmed that income enhances environmental
quality by significantly reducing deforestation, while population
growth significantly increased deforestation in the country.
A recent study by Nathaniel and Bekun (2019) on the im-
pact of energy consumption, trade, and urbanization on defor-
estation in Nigeria for the period 1971 to 2015, employing the
Bayer-Hanck cointegration test and the ARDL approach for
estimation, shows that energy consumption and urbanization
increases deforestation, while further results revealed a
unidirectional relationship running from urbanization to
deforestation. In the same vein, Coulibaly (2017) examined
the impact of macroeconomic policies on deforestation from
1960 to 2015 in Côte d’Ivoire. The results of the analysis
affirmed that agricultural activities increase deforestation,
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021
leading to environmental degradation, while population
growth contributed inversely to deforestation.
Furthermore, employing the fully modified ordinary least
squares (FMOLS) approach, Wang et al. (2016) investigate
the role of urbanization on the evolution of energy
consumption and carbon dioxide emissions in selected
ASEAN countries from 1980 to 2009. The results affirmed
that urbanization enhances carbon emissions, as well as
producing a unidirectional relationship between
urbanization, energy consumption, and carbon dioxide
emissions. Also, Li et al. (2017) analyzed the effects of glob-
alization and trade on forest transition for 76 selected devel-
oping countries for the period 1990 to 2010. The feasible
generalized least squares (FGLS) method was employed and
the findings indicated that total export and import related for-
est products reduced forest volume, density, and forest area,
while economic growth and population density increased for-
est area and forest volume.
Employing the fixed-effects (FE) model, Faria and
Almeida (2016) examined the effect of trade openness on
deforestation in 732 municipalities of the Brazilian Amazon
during the period from 2000 to 2010. The results of the study
affirmed that trade flows and economic growth contributed
inversely to deforestation. In the same, Leblois et al. (2017)
employed the fixed-effects (FE) model to investigate the ef-
fects of agricultural production, economic growth, population,
and institutions on deforestation in selected developed and
developing countries from 2001 to 2010. They found that all
the variables, except terms of trade and institutions,
contributed to deforestation and environmental degradation.
Similarly, Combes et al. (2018) employed the system of gen-
eralized method of moments (GMM) to examine the relation-
ship between domestic credit, natural capital, public spending,
and deforestation over the period 2001–2012. The results
showed that economic growth, population, domestic credit,
and public spending increased deforestation in developing
countries.
To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, there has
been no study on deforestation in the context of Burkina
Faso. As such, this study tends to extend the frontier of
knowledge by investigating the relationship between
globalization, urbanization, and deforestation in Burkina
Faso, which is the contribution to knowledge. This study
also examines how agricultural land influences deforesta-
tion, which was ignored in previous empirical studies.
Table 9 in the Appendix summarizes previous studies that
have identified the drivers of deforestation.
Data and methodology
This study employed time-series data on the Burkina
Faso economy for the period 1980 to 2017, with
22013
deforestation proxied with environmental quality index,
while globalization and urbanization are used as the
explanatory variables. The effect of globalization, urban-
ization, and agricultural products on deforestation has
been recognized in many previous research papers (see
Maji 2015; Wang et al. 2016; Li et al. 2017; Zambrano-
Monserrate et al. 2018; Nathaniel and Bekun 2019).
Based on Culas (2012), Li et al. (2017), Combes
et al. (2018), and other previous studies, agricultural
land, economic growth, and population density are
employed as control variables. The source and measure-
ments of data are specified in Table 1 below.
Model specification
To examine the impact of globalization and urbanization
on deforestation in Burkina Faso, the study first spec-
ifies a baseline model following the globalization-
environmental quality frameworks suggested by Leblois
et al. (2017), Bergh and Nilsson (2014), and Nathaniel
and Bekun (2019), with a little modification to accom-
modate agricultural lands. The derived model is as fol-
lows:
DEF ¼ f ðGLO; UR; AGR; GDP; POPÞ ð1Þ
where DEF is the deforestation, GLO is the globaliza-
tion index, UR is the urbanization, AGR is the agricul-
tural expansion, GDP is the economic growth per
capita, and POP denotes the population density. The
log-linear form is applied to all the variables of the
study to produce more efficient results and to reduce
dispersion (Tsaurai 2017; Sinha and Shahbaz 2018;
Zafar et al. 2019; Alshubiri and Elheddad, 2019).
Equation 2 is then specified as:
lnDEFt ¼ α0 þ α1 lnGLOt þ α2 lnURt þ α3 lnAGRt
þ α4 lnGDPt þ α5 lnPOPt þ εt ð2Þ
where DEF is the deforestation, t indicates the period
(1980–2017), εt is the error term, and the α1, α2, α3,
α4, and α5 coefficients correspond to globalization, ur-
banization, agricultural expansion, economic growth per
capita, and population density, respectively.
This study employed the ARDL techniques of Pesaran
et al. (2001) for the estimation. The model allows for
distinguishing and determining the long-run and short-run es-
timates and avoids the problem of autocorrelation and
endogeneity in the variables (Pesaran et al. 2001). It also al-
lows for deriving unbiasedness in the long-run outputs. Also,
the technique can be applied irrespective of the order of inte-
gration of the variables, i.e., I(0) or I(1). Therefore, the general
form for the ARDL model is as follows:
22014 Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021

Table 1 Description of variables

Variable Symbol Measurement Source

Globalization GLO KOF index Dreher (2006)

Urbanization UR % of the total population World Development Indicators (WDI)
Deforestation DEF % Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
Agricultural land AGR % of the total land WDI
Gross domestic product GDP Constant 2010 $US per capita WDI
Population density POP People per hectare WDI

Source: Author’s compilation

ΔlnDEFt ¼ φ0 þ φ1 lnDEFt−1 þ φ2 lnGLOt−1 to investigate the stationarity properties of the variables.

þ φ3 lnURt−1 þ φ4 lnAGRt−1 þ φ5 lnGDPt−1
p and population density, which are stationary at level I(0).
þ φ6 lnPOPt−1 þ ∑ δi ΔlnDEF2;t−i
i¼1
q r
þ ∑ δ j ΔlnGLOt− j þ ∑ δl ΔlnURt−k
j¼0 k¼0
s t
þ ∑ δl ΔlnAGRt−l þ ∑ δm ΔlnGDPt−m
l¼0 m¼0
u
þ ∑ δn ΔlnPOPt−n þ εt ð3Þ
n¼0
where φ0 is constant, p, q, r, s, t, u, and v are optimal lag
length. φ1, φ2, φ3, φ4, φ5, and φ6 are the long-run estimates.
Also, Δ and εt are the first-difference operator and the error
correction term, respectively. The null hypothesis of no
cointegration; i.e., φ1 = φ2 = φ3 = φ4 = φ5 = φ6 = 0 is tested
against the alternative, for the bounds test.
Table 3 presents the results of the unit root tests. Both tests
present similar results as all variables, except for urbanization
There is a mix of stationarity (level and difference), as the
variables of the model are stationary at I(0) and I(1), thus
fulfilling the requirements of the ARDL model.
The Zivot and Andrews (1992) structural break unit
root is also employed to check for the presence of
structural break. This is because the ADF and PP tests
sometimes produce biased results when there is a struc-
tural break (Dogan and Ozturk 2017). The null hypoth-
esis of unit root with a structural break is tested against
the alternative and the results are provided in Table 4
below. The structural breaks of the series are found to
be in the years 1989, 1998, 2002, 2001, 1991, 1996,
and 1997 (with lag 1) for deforestation, globalization,
urbanization, agricultural land, financial development,
economic growth, and population density, respectively.

Lag order of selection

Empirical evidence
To reduce the problem of endogeneity and eliminate residual
Summary statistics correlation (Ali et al. 2016), it is necessary to determine the
appropriate lag selection before conducting any other
Table 2 presents a descriptive summary of the variables.
Globalization has a mean value of 3.60, a minimum value of Table 2 Descriptive tests
3.30, and a maximum value of 3.98. The mean value of ur-
banization is 2.85, which shows a moderate average urbani- lnDEF lnGLO lnUR lnAGR lnGDP lnPOP
zation rate, while the maximum value reached a moderate rate
Mean 3.154 3.605 2.849 3.627 6.084 3.716
of 3.35. Deforestation has a mean value of 3.15, a minimum
Median 3.143 3.590 2.823 3.590 6.058 3.705
value of 2.96, and a maximum value of 3.39. All the variables
Maximum 3.394 3.989 3.358 3.806 6.531 4.251
are platykurtic and not normally distributed; moreover, all the
Minimum 2.962 3.302 2.175 3.469 5.743 3.216
variables are positively skewed, except urbanization. There is
Std. Dev. 0.128 0.236 0.333 0.115 0.252 0.313
also a variation between the minimum (5.74) and the maxi-
Skewness 0.323 0.326 − 0.150 0.289 0.322 0.078
mum values (6.53) of economic growth.
Kurtosis 2.036 1.620 1.981 1.602 1.653 1.791
Jarque-Bera 2.132 3.687 1.784 3.621 3.528 2.352
Unit root test Probability 0.344 0.158 0.410 0.164 0.171 0.308

The augmented Dickey and Fuller (ADF) (1979, 1981) and Note: *** shows significance at 1% level
the Phillip and Perron (PP) (1988) unit root tests are employed Source: Author’s compilation
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021 22015

Table 3 Unit root tests

Variables Augmented Dickey-Fuller Phillip Perron

Level First difference Level First difference

T-statistic Prob T-statistic Prob T-statistic Prob T-statistic Prob

lnDEF − 1.283 0.8921 − 4.864*** 0.0004 − 1.111 0.9272 − 6.300*** 0.0000

lnGLO − 2.418 0.3700 − 5.304*** 0.0001 − 2.285 0.4422 − 6.404*** 0.0000
lnURB − 5.204*** 0.0001 - - − 3.325* 0.0624 - -
lnAGR − 2.378 0.3916 − 4.450*** 0.0018 − 2.916 0.1567 − 7.708*** 0.0000
lnGDP − 1.782 0.7133 − 5.760*** 0.0000 − 1.848 0.6812 − 6.829*** 0.0000
lnPOP − 3.288* 0.0858 - - − 4.869*** 0.0004 - -

Note: *** and * show significance at the 1% and 10% levels, respectively
Source: Author’s compilation

estimation. The vector autoregression (VAR) model is then
employed for the most efficient results. The Akaike informa-
tion criterion (AIC) is selected as the most appropriate criteri-
on. The result presented in Table 5 shows that the appropriate
lag length is 3. Afterward, the cointegration test was also
estimated.
ARDL bound test
The null hypothesis of no cointegration of the bound test was
tested against the alternative of cointegration, based on the F-
statistic test for the null hypothesis. The results in Table 6
below indicate rejection of the null hypothesis, thus suggest-
ing long-run cointegration among the variables at the critical
value of 1%.
Results of elasticities
The ARDL elasticities are displayed in Table 7. A per-
centage change in the first lag of deforestation is asso-
ciated with a 0.47% increase in deforestation on
average, all things being equal, at a statistical signifi-
cance of 1%. However, it is confirmed that globaliza-
tion significantly increases deforestation in the long run,
which might be possible through trade patterns. More
so, wood from the forest is internationally traded for
the country’s economic growth. Given this scenario, it
may be stated that Burkina Faso’s openness to trade has
been harmful to the environment, implying that global-
ization seems to have no significant effect on the evo-
lution of forests in Burkina Faso. This result is similar
to that of Leblois et al. (2017) in the case of developing
countries. Conversely, the finding contradicts that of
Ahmad et al. (2014) and Maji (2015), where trade sig-
nificantly reduced deforestation in Pakistan and Nigeria,
respectively.
Moreover, the study also notes a positive and strong
coefficient of urbanization in the short and long run.
This suggests that urbanization contributes to deforesta-
tion. The coefficient of urbanization shows that a 1%
increase in urbanization leads to an increase in defores-
tation by 0.31% in the long run, other things remaining
constant. This is in line with the study of Nathaniel and

Table 4 Zivot and Andrew unit root test

Variables Level Time Break First Difference Time Break Table 5 Lag selection
T-statistic T-statistic
Lag LogL LR FPE AIC SC HQ
lnDEF − 7.037*** 1987 − 7.255*** 1989
0 405.944 NA 4.78E-18 − 22.854 − 22.587 − 22.762
lnGLO − 4.940* 1998 − 7.022*** 1998
1 730.296 518.9629 3.45E-25 − 39.331 − 37.465 − 38.687
lnURB − 4.186 2002 - -
2 846.258 145.7802 4.33E-27 − 43.900 − 40.434 − 42.704
lnAGR − 4.483 2008 − 8.400*** 2001
3 944.321 89.658* 2.19e-28* − 47.447* − 42.380* − 45.698*
lnGDP − 5.450** 1996 − 7.939*** 1996
lnPOP − 4.965* 1997 - - NA, not applicable; AIC, Akaike information criterion; FPE, final predic-
tion error; HQ, Hannan Quinn information criterion; LR, sequentially
Note: ***, **, and * show significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, modified LR statistic; SIC, Schwarz information criterion and * indicates
respectively lag length
Source: Author’s compilation Source: Author’s compilation
22016 Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021

Table 6 Cointegration bound test

Estimated models Lag length F-statistics Correlation LM test Heteroskedasticity test Decision

DEF = f (GLO, UR, AGR, GDP, POP) 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 1 5.429 0.9970 0.1481 Yes
GLO = f (DEF, UR, AGR, GDP, POP) 1, 0, 1, 2, 0, 0 5.997 0.0718 0.1595 Yes
UR = f (DEF, GLO, AGR, GDP, POP) 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1 7.6331 0.4670 0.3301 Yes
AGR = f (DEF, GLO, UR, GDP, POP) 1, 0, 0, 0, 2, 1 6.3988 0.4036 0.2672 Yes
GDP = f (DEF, GLO, UR, AGR, POP) 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 7.6283 0.1252 0.1792 Yes
POP = f (DEF, GLO, UR, AGR, GDP) 1, 3, 0, 1, 0, 0 6.475 0.7601 0.3218 Yes
Lower Bound Upper bound Significance level
3.06 4.15 1%
2.39 3.38 5%
2.08 3 10%

Source: Author’s compilation

Bekun (2019), as well as Defries et al. (2010), who the movement of the population from rural areas to
found that urbanization degrades environmental quality urban areas because of higher living standards. This
in the long and short runs. The possible explanation is search for better conditions of life also comes with a
high demand for land, which in turn leads to woodcuts,
hence deforestation. However, the wood from deforesta-
Table 7 ARDL results tion could also be used as an input for household ac-
tivities or trade patterns, thereby minimizing the nega-
Variables Dependent variable: lnCO2 tive effects of urbanization on the nation.
Agricultural land elasticities can increase environmen-
Coefficient Std. errors T-stats Prob
tal degradation although not significant; however, it
Short-run coefficients might not support the conclusion that forests are under
lnDEF (− 1) 0.474*** 0.144 3.297 0.003 the pressure of agricultural land expansion in Burkina
lnGLO − 0.024 0.049 − 0.490 0.628 Faso. The results also conformed with the findings by
lnUR 0.493** 0.179 2.757 0.010 Culas (2007) and Combes et al. (2018), as well as
lnUR (− 1) − 0.472*** 0.146 − 3.228 0.003 Nathaniel and Bekun (2019), who affirmed that eco-
lnAGR 0.020 0.054 0.364 0.718 nomic growth increases the deforestation rate in the
lnGDP 0.468** 0.150 2.376 0.018 short run in some countries, like Nigeria. Other results
lnPOP − 7.709** 3.242 − 2.378 0.025 by some scholars negate the results of Maji (2015) and
lnPOP (− 1) 7.493** 3.188 2.350 0.026 Defries et al. (2010), who found that annual economic
ECT (− 1) − 0.692*** 0.100 − 6.922 0.000 growth reduces deforestation in Nigeria and three other
Long-run coefficients tropical regions, respectively. A 1% increase in econom-
lnGLO 0.294** 0.172 3.316 0.020 ic growth leads to an increase in deforestation by 0.47%
lnUR 0.308** 0.131 2.363 0.027
in the short run, other things remaining constant.
lnAGR 0.227* 0.083 3.324 0.074
Additionally, Burkina Faso’s economic growth is driven
lnGDP − 0.118 0.124 − 0.951 0.351
by cotton and gold production, with the country being
Africa’s fourth-largest producer of gold (IMF, 2020).
lnPOP − 0.521*** 0.079 − 6.568 0.000
However, the mining sector requires free land that also
C 5.185*** 0.416 12.457 0.000
pushes back and destroys forests, hence the environ-
Diagnostic tests
ment, thus explaining the positive association between
R-square 0.9978 Serial correlation 0.5552 0.5821
economic growth and deforestation. In other words, for
F-statistic 978.339*** Normality 0.1412 0.9317
the country to sustain its strong growth rate, it is im-
ARDL (1.0.1.0.0.1) Heteroskedasticity 4.0171 0.0585
perative to protect the forest land cover.
CUSUM Stable Ramsey reset 0.0359 0.9519
Finally, a negative and statistically strong relationship
Note: ***, **, and * show significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, between population density and deforestation was
respectively observed in the short and long runs, implying that a
Source: Author’s compilation percent increase in population tends to significantly
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021
reduce the deforestation rate in Burkina Faso. This
result negates the idea that forests are under the
pressure of the size of the population. More so, the
result is in line with the findings of Culas (2007) but
contradicts that of Kwakwa et al. (2014), Maji and
Habibullaha (2015), Combes et al. (2018), and
Nathaniel and Bekun (2019).
The coefficient of error correction term (ECT) is neg-
ative (− 0.692) and significant at a 1% level, thus im-
plying that a 69.2% deviation from the long-run equi-
librium is corrected and that it takes approximately a
year and 5 months for an adjustment. More so, the
value of the R-square is 0.99, implying that 99% of
the variation in deforestation is explained by the explan-
atory regressor. The probability of the F-statistic shows
the significance of the model because the probability of
the model is significant at a 1% level, showing that the
overall model is good and significant. Furthermore, the
results present no serial correlation and
heteroscedasticity related to the estimated model.
Subsequently, the stability of the model, as proposed
by Brown et al. (1975), is also examined (see Fig. 1).
For instance, Fig. 1 shows the results of the cumulative
sum (CUSUM) and the cumulative sum of squares
(CUSUM square) of recursive residuals, with both fig-
ures revealing that the model is stable at a 5% level of
statistical significance.
The Granger causality test
Since cointegration does not indicate the direction of the
causality, there is a need to carry out this analysis. The
Toda-Yamamoto (1995) Granger non-causality technique
is thereafter employed because it provides a clear pic-
ture of the direction of the causality. One of the advan-
tages of using this method is its amiability to analyze
15
10
5
-5
-10
-15
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
CUSUM 5% Significance
Fig. 1 CUSUM and CUSUM Square tests. Source: Author’s compilation
22017
causality tests on variables that are I(0) or I(1) (Kumar
et al. 2015). The null hypothesis of no-causality is test-
ed against the alternative. The results presented in
Table 8 reveal a feedback relationship between defores-
tation and urbanization, globalization and agricultural
land, and between globalization and economic growth.
However, Nathaniel and Bekun (2019) found a uni-
directional causal relationship between urbanization and
deforestation; that is, urbanization Granger causes
deforestation in Nigeria. Wang et al. (2016) also found
that urbanization Granger causes environmental degrada-
tion in ASEAN countries. A bidirectional causal rela-
tionship was also found between urbanization and pop-
ulation. A unidirectional causal relationship was found
running from urbanization to agricultural land at a 5%
level of statistical significance and from urbanization to
economic growth at a 10% level of statistical signifi-
cance. Subsequently, a unidirectional causality relation-
ship was found running from economic growth to agri-
cultural land at a 1% level of statistical significance.
The results further reveal a unidirectional causal rela-
tionship running from population density to globaliza-
tion and from population density to agricultural land at
a 5% level of statistical significance.
Conclusion and policy recommendation
Conclusion
This study explored the role of globalization and urban-
ization while examining the role of agricultural land,
economic growth per capita, and population density on
deforestation in Burkina Faso over the period 1980 to
2017. The stationarity of data was checked with the
ADF and PP unit root tests, with the tests confirming
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.4
0.0
-0.4
2014 2016 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
CUSUM of Squares 5% Significance
22018
Table 8 Granger causality test
lnDEF lnGLO lnUR
lnDEF 0.220 (0.803) 7.524** (0.002)
lnGLO 1.885 (0.168) 3.294* (0.050)
lnUR 12.670*** (0.000) 0.636 (0.535)
lnAGR 1.949 (0.159) 2.947* (0.067) 4.147** (0.025)
lnGDP 1.358 (0.271) 3.102* (0.059) 2.971* (0.066)
lnPOP 1.206 (0.313) 1.330 (0.278) 12.464*** (0.000)
Note: ***, **, and * show significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, respectively. p values are in the parenthesis
Source: Author’s compilations
variables are integrated at first difference and level. The
paper also employed the ARDL bound cointegration test
to investigate the long-run equilibrium relationship
among variables estimated. The bound test result con-
firmed the existence of a long-run equilibrium relation-
ship between globalization, urbanization, agricultural
land, economic growth, population density, and defores-
tation. More so, the findings affirmed that urbanization
and economic growth significantly increased the defor-
estation rate, while population density reduces the de-
forestation rate in the short run.
The long-run result, however, affirmed that globaliza-
tion, urbanization, and agricultural land significantly in-
crease deforestation, indicating environmental degrada-
tion. However, these findings inform the need for poli-
cies to be galvanized on urbanization and population to
control and maintain reasonable sustainable development
goals (SDG) and other strategies for development.
Furthermore, the direction of relationships was also ex-
plored via the Toda-Yamamoto (1995) Granger non-
causality approach. The results reveal a bidirectional
causal relationship between deforestation and urbaniza-
tion, between globalization and agricultural land, and
between urbanization and population density. Finally, a
unidirectional causal relationship was also found run-
ning from urbanization to agricultural land at a 5% level
of statistical significance.
Policy recommendation
Given that this study’s findings strongly support the
need for policies that enhance urbanization and popula-
tion density control in the bid to reduce deforestation,
the paper suggests that initiating well-managed popula-
tion control and urbanization policies will have a strong
effect on reducing environmental degradation. Therefore,
the study recommends that the government should make
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021
lnAGR lnGDP lnPOP
0.875 (0.426) 0.660 (0.523) 2.402 (0.107)
5.054** (0.012) 6.349*** (0.004) 4.544** (0.041)
0.677 (0.515) 1.122 (0.338) 18.218*** (0.000)
6.250*** (0.005) 3.468** (0.043)
0.181 (0.835) 2.404 (0.106)
0.050 (0.950) 1.467 (0.246)
more funds available and make sure the redistribution of
the aggregate income is well done, thereby helping to
boost citizens’ entrepreneurial skills and economic activ-
ities. More so, regarding the globalization index, the
findings suggest the need for the government to ensure
more regulation on the removal of barriers to interna-
tional trade. The study further recommends the initiation
of relevant policies in the agricultural sector, since it
was found from the result that agriculture contributes
to deforestation in Burkina Faso. Finally, instead of
providing more land for activities that degrade the en-
vironment, the government should invest in
environment-friendly activities and technologies that
can boost farmers’ profits.
Limitation and suggestion for further study
This study has some limitations. It suffered from data
availability; some determinants of deforestation were not
added to the estimated model. Future researchers could
focus more on this. Also, other studies can do a com-
parative analysis between Burkina Faso and other coun-
tries. Future studies should also analyze the impact of
the different dimensions of globalization on deforesta-
tion to help countries achieve appropriate and sustain-
able development.
Data availability Available from the corresponding author on reasonable
request.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The author declares that she has no conflict of
interest.
Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable.
Consent for publication Not applicable.
Appendix
Table 9 Main empirical results

Authors Country Period Model Dependent Globalization Economic Urbanization Energy Agricultural Population Institutional Financial
variable growth consumption land quality development

Defries et al. (2010) 41 countries 2000–2005 OLS Annual forest θ X Xb,d

loss
Culas (2012) Latin 1972–1994 FE and RE Deforestation θ θ θc
America,
Africa,
and Asian
countries
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021

Ahmed et al. (2014) Pakistan 1980–2013 ARDL Deforestation θa X X X

Ahmad et al. (2018) Pakistan 1994–2016 Analytical analysis Deforestation X X
Leblois et al. (2017) Developing 2001–2010 OLS, FE, RE, and Deforestation X X X X X
countries GMM
a
Abbasi et al. (2020) Asian-8 1982–2017 FMOLS CO2 X X X X X
countries
Zambrano-Monserrate 5 European 1974–2013 ARDL Deforestation X Xb
et al. (2018) countries
Nathaniel and Bekun Nigeria 1971–2015 ARDL Deforestation θa X X X X
(2019)
Maji et al. (2017) Nigeria 1981–2011 ARDL Deforestation θ X
Combes et al. (2018) Developing 2001–2012 GMM Deforestation X X X
countries
Maji (2015) Nigeria 1981–2011 ARDL Deforestation θa θ X
Enaruvbe and Atafo Nigeria 1987, 2002, Primary analysis Deforestation X X
(2014) and 2013

OLS, ordinary least squares; FGLS, feasible weighted least squares; FMOLS, fully modified OLS; FE, fixed-effects model; RE, random-effects model; GMM, generalized method of moments; ARDL,
autoregressive distributive lag
X, the variable was found to have a significant role in deforestation
θ, the variable was found to have a significant role in environmental improvement
a
Trade openness
b
Agricultural exports
c
Debt
d
Agricultural trade per capita
22019
22020
References
Abbasi MA, Parveen S, Khan S, Kamal MA (2020) Urbanization and
energy consumption effects on carbon dioxide emissions: evidence
from Asian-8 countries using panel data analysis. Environ Sci Pollut
Res 27:18029–18043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08262-
w and deforestation: empirical evidence from the Brazilian Amazon.
Ahmad A, Mirza SN, Nizami S (2014) Assessment of biomass and car-
bon stocks in the coniferous forest of Dir Kohistan, KPK Pakistan. J
Agric Sci 51:35–350
Ahmad A, Liu QJ, Nizami SM, Mannan A, Saeed S (2018) Carbon
emission from deforestation, forest degradation and wood harvest
in the temperate region of Hindukush Himalaya, Pakistan between
1994 and 2016. Land Use Policy 78:781–790
Ahmed K, Shahbaz M, Qasim A, Long W (2014) The linkages between
deforestation, energy, and growth for environmental degradation in
Pakistan. Ecol Indic 49:95–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.
2014.09.040
Al-Mulali U, Saboori B, Ozturk I (2015) Investigating the environmental
Kuznets curve hypothesis in Vietnam. Energy Policy 76:123–131
Ali HS, Law SH, Zannah TI (2016) Dynamic impact of urbanization,
economic growth, energy consumption, and trade openness on
CO2 emissions in Nigeria. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:12435–12443
Alshubiri F, Elheddad M (2019) Foreign finance, economic growth, and
CO2 emissions Nexus in OECD countries. Intern J Climate Change
Strat Manag 12(2):161–181. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-12-
2018-0082
Bayar Y, Diaconu L, Maxim A (2020) Financial development and CO2
emissions in post-transition European Union countries.
Sustainability 12:2640. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072640
Bergh A, Nilsson T (2014) Is globalization reducing absolute poverty?
World Dev 62:42–61
Brown RL, Durbin J, Evans JM (1975) Techniques for testing the con-
stancy of regression relations over time. J Royal Stat Soc Ser B 37:
149–163
Combes JL, Delacote P, Motel PC, Yogo TU (2018) Public spending,
credit, and natural capital: does access to capital foster deforestation?
Econ Model 73:306–316
Coulibaly N (2017) Macroeconomics policies and deforestation in Côte
d’Ivoire. J Energy Nat Res 5(6):78–91. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.
jenr.20160506.12
Culas RJ (2007) Deforestation and the environmental Kuznets curve: an
institutional perspective. Ecol Econ 61(23):429–437
Culas R (2012) REDD and forest transition: tunneling through the envi-
ronmental Kuznets curve. Ecol Econ 79:44–51
Danish, Zhang B, Wang B, Wang Z (2017) Role of renewable energy and
non-renewable energy consumption on EKC: evidence from
Pakistan. J Clean Prod 156:855–864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2017.03.203
DeFries RS, Rudel T, Uriarte M, Hansen M (2010) Deforestation driven
by urban population growth and agricultural trade in the twenty-first
century. Nat Geosci 3:178–181. https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO756
Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1979) Distribution of the estimators for
autoregressive time series with a unit root. J Am Stat Assoc
74(366a):427–431
Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1981) Likelihood ratio statistics for
autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica 49:1057–
1072
Dogan E, Ozturk I (2017) The influence of renewable and non-renewable
energy consumption and real income on CO2 emissions in the USA:
evidence from structural break tests. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(11):
10846–10854
Dreher A (2006) Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new
index of globalization. Appl Econ 38:1091–1110. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00036840500392078
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021
Enaruvbe GO, Atafo OP (2014) Analysis of deforestation pattern in the
Niger Delta region of Nigeria. J Land Use Sci 11(1):113–130.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2014.965279
FAO (2006). Forest policy proposal for ECOWAS. FAO Technical
Cooperation Programme Project, TCP/RAF/2918. 50 pp.
Faria WR, Almeida AN (2016) Relationship between openness to trade
Ecol Econ 121:85–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.
014
IMF (2020) World Economic Outlook Database, April 2020. www.imf.
org. Retrieved 03/07/2020
Kumar RR, Stauvermann P, Loganathan N, Kumar RD (2015) Exploring
the role of energy, trade, and financial development in explaining
economic growth in South Africa: a revisit. Renew Sust Energ Rev
52:1300–1311 https://eprints.qut.edu.au/88919/
Kwakwa PA, Arku FS, Aboagye S (2014) Environmental degradation
effect of agricultural and industrial growth in Ghana. J Rural Indust
Dev 2(2):22–29
Leblois A, Damette O, Wolfersberger J (2017) What has driven defores-
tation in developing countries since the 2000s? Evidence from new
remote-sensing data. World Dev 92:82–102. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.worlddev.2016.11.012
Li L, Liu J, Cheng B, Chhatre A, Dong J, Liang W (2017) Effects of
economic globalization and trade on forest transitions: evidence
from 76 developing countries. For Chron 93(2):171–179
Maji IK (2015) The link between trade openness and deforestation for
environmental quality in Nigeria. Geo J 82(1):131–138
Maji IK, Habibullaha MS (2015) Impact of economic growth, energy
consumption, and foreign direct investment on CO2 emissions: ev-
idence from Nigeria. World Appl Sci J 33(4):640–645
Maji IK, Abdul-Rahim AS, Ndawayo AB, Ofozor CA, Basiru HA, Bin
Mubarak SM (2017) The relationship between income, energy con-
sumption, population, and deforestation for environmental quality in
Nigeria. Intern J Green Econ 11(3/4):204–216. https://doi.org/10.
1504/IJGE.2017.089850
Mongabay (2020) Deforestation statistics for Burkina Faso. from
rainforests.mongabay.com
Nathaniel SP, Bekun FS (2019) Environmental management amidst en-
ergy use, urbanization, trade openness, and deforestation: the
Nigerian experience. J Public Aff 20:e2037
Omojolaibi JA, Yameogo CEW, Ogunbusola OJ (2020) Carbon dioxide
emissions and institutional quality in ECOWAS. J Acad Res Econ
12(1):69–90
Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith R (2001) Bound testing approaches to the
analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16(3):289–326. https://
doi.org/10.1002/jae.616
Phillips PC, Perron P (1988) Testing for a unit root in time series regres-
sion. Biometrika 75(2):335–346
Shahbaz M, Shahzad SJH, Ahmad N, Alam S (2016) Financial develop-
ment and environmental quality: the way forward. Energy Policy
98:353–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.09.002
Shahbaz M, Shahzad SJH, Mahalik MK, Hammoudeh S (2018) Does
globalization worsen environmental quality in developed econo-
mies? Environ Model Assess 23:141–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10666-017-9574-2
Sinha A, Shahbaz M (2018) Estimation of environmental Kuznets curve
for CO2 emission: role of renewable energy generation in India.
Renew Energy 119:703–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.
2017.12.058
Toda HY, Yamamoto T (1995) Statistical inferences in vector
autoregression with possibly integrated processes. J Econ 66(1–2):
225–250
Tsaurai K (2017) Examining the inter-linkages between trade openness,
human capital development, and growth in selected emerging mar-
kets. Acad Acc Financ Stud J 21(3):1–14
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2021) 28:22011–22021
Twerefou DK, Adusah-Poku F, Bekoe W (2016) An empirical examina-
tion of the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for carbon di-
oxide emissions in Ghana: an ARDL approach. Environ Socio-Econ
Stud 4(4):1–12
Wang Y, Chen L, Kubota J (2016) The relationship between urbaniza-
tion, energy use, and carbon emissions: evidence from a panel of
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. J
Clean Prod 112(2):1368–1374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2015.06.041
World Bank (2020) World development indicators (WDI). The World
Bank, Washington DC. http://databank.worldbank.org/data
Yameogo CEW, Dauda ROS (2020) The effect of income inequality and
economic growth on environmental quality: a comparative analysis
between Burkina Faso and Nigeria. J Public Aff:e2566
Zafar MW, Saud S, Hou F (2019) The impact of globalization and finan-
cial development on environmental quality: evidence from selected
22021
countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD). Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:13246–13262.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04761-7
Zambrano-Monserrate MA, Carvajal-Lara C, Urgilés-Sanchez R, Ruano
MA (2018) Deforestation as an indicator of environmental degrada-
tion: analysis of five European countries. Ecol Indic 90:1–8. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.02.049
Zivot E, Andrews DWK (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the
oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat 10(3):
251–270. https://doi.org/10.2307/1391541
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.