DOI: https://doi.org/10.61435/ijred.2026.62490
View PDF Download fulltext

E-government, innovation, and renewable energy transition: A triadic model for pollution reduction in developing economies

1School of Business and Economics, United International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh

2School of Human and Social Sciences, Libyan International University, Benghazi, Libya

3School of Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University Sydney, Australia

Received: 15 Mar 2026; Revised: 18 Jul 2026; Accepted: 15 Aug 2026; Published: 7 Sep 2026.
Editor(s): Grigorios Kyriakopoulos
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Centre of Biomass and Renewable Energy (CBIORE)
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

In developing economies, the pressure to achieve environmental sustainability is growing as digital transformation and energy transition take precedence. However, empirical evidence on the relationship between digital governance, the adoption of technological innovations, and renewable energy, and its impact on the environment is still scarce. This study investigates the direct and interactive effects of e-government, technological innovations, and renewable energy use on pollution reduction in the Next Eleven (N-11) economies from 2003 to 2022. This study proposes a triadic framework for the direct and indirect effects of digital governance on the environment based on two theoretical models: the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Per capita CO₂ emissions were used as a proxy for environmental quality, and the United Nations E-Government Development Index (EGDI) was used as a proxy for e-government. Cross-Sectionally Augmented Autoregressive Distributed Lag (CS-ARDL), Common Correlated Effects Mean Group (CCEMG), Augmented Mean Group (AMG), and dynamic generalised method of moments (GMM) estimators are employed to solve the problems of cross-sectional dependence, heterogeneity, endogeneity, and dynamic relationships. The results show that e-government has a significant negative effect on environmental pollution in both the short and the long run. Technological advancements and the use of renewable energy have their own impacts on reducing emissions and enhancing the environmental impact of digital governance. The results of the marginal effects analysis also show that the pollution-decreasing effect of digital governance increases significantly with improvements in innovation and renewable energy use. Human capital development and environmental taxation contribute to improving the environment, whereas dependency on natural resources creates environmental pressure. The findings of this study assist in growing the literature on digital sustainability by offering evidence that three case variables–digital governance, technological innovation, and renewable energy transition – are complementary drivers of environmental performance in developing economies. The results indicate that policies to foster integrated digital governance systems, innovation ecosystems, and renewable energy growth could help accelerate pollution reduction and transition to more sustainable models of development in emerging economies.

Keywords: Government digitization; Pollution reduction; Technological innovation; Renewable energy; N-11 countries

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Research Article
Language : EN
Recent articles
Economic and global warming impact assessment of biomass power generation in Thailand Effect of solution pH and concentration of Dewandaru fruit extract as a natural dye on optical characteristics and performance of dye-sensitized solar cells Multiple pathways to a low-carbon future: Examining evidence from the BRICS+ More recent articles
Most cited articles
Sizing and Optimization for Hybrid Central in South Algeria Based on Three Different Generators Optimization of Concentration and EM4 Augmentation for Improving Bio-Gas Productivity from Jatropha curcas Linn Capsule Husk Biohydrogen Production by Reusing Immobilized Mixed Culture in Batch System Implications of Charcoal Briquette Produced by Local Communities on Livelihoods and Environment in Nairobi- Kenya 2D Numerical Simulation and Sensitive Analysis of H-Darrieus Wind Turbine More cited articles
  1. Adanma, U. M., & Ogunbiyi, E. O. (2024). Assessing the economic and environmental impacts of renewable energy adoption across different global regions. Engineering Science & Technology Journal, 5(5), 1767-1793. https://doi.org/10.51594/estj.v5i5.1154
  2. Adha, R., Hong, C.-Y., Agrawal, S., & Li, L.-H. (2023). ICT, carbon emissions, climate change, and energy demand nexus: The potential benefit of digitalization in Taiwan. Energy & Environment, 34(5), 1619-1638. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X221093458
  3. Alfiani, H., Aditya, S. K., Lusa, S., Sensuse, D. I., Putro, P. A. W., & Indriasari, S. (2024). E-government issues in developing countries using TOE and UTAUT frameworks: A systematic review. Policy & Governance Review, 8(2), 169-191. https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v8i2.932
  4. Apergis, N., & Payne, J. E. (2014). Renewable energy, output, CO2 emissions, and fossil fuel prices in Central America: Evidence from a nonlinear panel smooth transition vector error correction model. Energy Economics, 42, 226-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.01.003
  5. Banda, L. G., & Du Plessis, D. J. (2024). The contingent role of state capacity on the impact of e-government on environmental sustainability in developing countries. Frontiers in Political Science, 6, 1459973. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2024.1459973
  6. Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2014). ICT, public values and transformative government: A framework and programme for research. Government Information Quarterly, 31(1), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.06.002
  7. Bartolacci, F., Caputo, A., & Soverchia, M. (2020). Sustainability and financial performance of small and medium sized enterprises: A bibliometric and systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1297-1309. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2434
  8. Befeke, C. L., Huang, D., Bosah, C. P., & Shaw, W. (2023). The impact of natural resource consumption on carbon emissions: Evidence of a symmetric and asymmetric effect from Sub-Saharan Africa. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(33), 80963-80977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28174-9
  9. Byaro, M., Nkonoki, J., & Mafwolo, G. (2023). Exploring the nexus between natural resource depletion, renewable energy use, and environmental degradation in sub-Saharan Africa. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(8), 19931-19945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-23104-7
  10. Cao, X., Deng, M., Song, F., Zhong, S., & Zhu, J. (2019). Direct and moderating effects of environmental regulation intensity on enterprise technological innovation: The case of China. PLOS ONE, 14(10), e0223175. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223175
  11. Chen, Y., & Li, Q. (2024). The impact of e-government on the new generation productive capacities: Evidence from cross-country data. Sustainability, 16(8), 3233. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083233
  12. Chohan, S. R., & Hu, G. (2020). Success factors influencing citizens' adoption of IoT service orchestration for public value creation in smart government. IEEE Access, 8, 208427-208448. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3036054
  13. Christensen, L. (2024). Renewable energy adoption and carbon emission reductions in Copenhagen, Denmark. International Journal of Climatic Studies, 3(3), 26-38. https://doi.org/10.47604/ijcs.2971
  14. Chung, C.-S., Choi, H., & Cho, Y. (2022). Analysis of digital governance transition in South Korea: Focusing on the leadership of the president for government innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010002
  15. Cruz-Pérez, N., Rodríguez-Alcántara, J. S., Koronaiou, V. L. P., Jančula, A., Rodríguez-Martín, J., García-Gil, A., ... & Santamarta, J. C. (2024). SWOT analysis of the benefits of hydropower energy in four archipelagos. Civil Engineering Journal, 10(7), 2370-2383. https://doi.org/10.28991/CEJ-2024-010-07-019
  16. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  17. Devianto, D., Saputra, R., Yollanda, M., Maiyastri, M., Asdi, Y., Permana, D., ... & Herdiani, E. T. (2025). The BVAR model for analyzing CO2 emissions on renewable energy, economic growth, and forest area. Emerging Science Journal, 9(3), 1158-1173. https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2025-09-03-02
  18. Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecological Economics, 49(4), 431-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.011
  19. Dong, Z., & Yao, S. (2024). Digital finance reduces urban carbon footprint pressure in 277 Chinese cities. Scientific Reports, 14, 16526. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-67315-z
  20. El Hazbi, F., & Mounir, Y. (2023). Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices and environmental performance: The mediation role of technology innovation. E3S Web of Conferences, 412, 01009. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202341201009
  21. Fazal, S., & Azam, A. (2023). Moderating role of governance in growth-technology-environment nexus: Evidence from developing economies. iRASD Journal of Economics, 5(2), 486-508. https://doi.org/10.52131/joe.2023.0502.0141
  22. Floridi, L. (2018). Soft ethics and the governance of the digital. Philosophy & Technology, 31, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0303-9
  23. George, G., Merrill, R. K., & Schillebeeckx, S. J. D. (2021). Digital sustainability and entrepreneurship: How digital innovations are helping tackle climate change and sustainable development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 45(5), 999-1027. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258719899425
  24. Gil-Garcia, J. R., Dawes, S. S., & Pardo, T. A. (2018). Digital government and public management research: Finding the crossroads. Public Management Review, 20(5), 633-646. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1327181
  25. González-Blanco, J., Coca-Pérez, J. L., & Guisado-González, M. (2018). The contribution of technological and non-technological innovation to environmental performance. Sustainability, 10(11), 4014. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114014
  26. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353-377. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118443
  27. Han, S., Peng, D., Guo, Y., Aslam, M. U., & Xu, R. (2025). Harnessing technological innovation and renewable energy and their impact on environmental pollution in G-20 countries. Scientific Reports, 15, 2236. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-85182-0
  28. International Energy Agency. (2017). Digitalisation and energy. International Energy Agency
  29. International Renewable Energy Agency. (2019). Innovation landscape for a renewable-powered future: Solutions to integrate variable renewables. International Renewable Energy Agency
  30. Janowski, T., Estevez, E., & Baguma, R. (2018). Platform governance for sustainable development: Reshaping citizen-administration relationships in the digital age. Government Information Quarterly, 35(4), S1-S16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.002
  31. Johnstone, N., Haščič, I., & Popp, D. (2010). Renewable energy policies and technological innovation: Evidence based on patent counts. Environmental and Resource Economics, 45(1), 133-155
  32. Kyeong, K., Ra, H., Park, J., & Im, T. (2023). How does the government interact with citizens within an electronic governance system? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(4), 1079-1096. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221100109
  33. Li, C., Chen, X., & Yuan, C. (2025). Does digital government reduce carbon emissions? Empirical evidence from global sources. Journal of Environmental Management, 380, 125081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.125081
  34. Li, J., Zhan, G., Dai, X., Qi, M., & Liu, B. (2022). Innovation and optimization logic of grassroots digital governance in China. Sustainability, 14(24), 16470. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416470
  35. Li, W., Elheddad, M., & Doytch, N. (2021). The impact of innovation on environmental quality: Evidence for the non-linear relationship of patents and CO2 emissions in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 292, 112781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112781
  36. Liao, Z., & Zhang, M. (2020). The influence of responsible leadership on environmental innovation and environmental performance: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(5), 2016-2027. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1942
  37. Liu, H., Wang, L., & Shen, Y. (2023). Can digital technology reduce carbon emissions? Evidence from Chinese cities. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 11, 1205634. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2023.1205634
  38. Liu, R., Abdul Rahman, M. R. C., & Jamil, A. H. (2025). Responding to climate policy risk through the dynamic role of green innovation: Evidence from carbon information disclosure in emerging markets. Risks, 13(5), 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks13050092
  39. Ma, Z., & Wu, F. (2023). Smart city, digitalization and CO2 emissions: Evidence from 353 cities in China. Sustainability, 15(1), 225. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010225
  40. Meijer, A., & Boon, W. (2021). Digital platforms for the co-creation of public value. Policy & Politics, 49(2), 231-248. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16115951032181
  41. Mensah, I. K., & Mwakapesa, D. S. (2025). The impact of e-government information quality (EGIQ) dimensions on the adoption of electronic government services. Information Development, 41(2), 265-284. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669231155164
  42. Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
  43. Mesagan, E. P., & Vo, X. V. (2023). Does natural resource rent and consumption interplay worsen Africa's pollution? Heterogeneous panel approach with cross-sectional dependence. Resources Policy, 82, 103562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103562
  44. Michailidis, M., Kantartzis, A., Arabatzis, G., & Zafeiriou, E. (2025). Decarbonization pathways in selected MENA countries: Panel evidence on transport services, renewable energy, and the EKC hypothesis. Energies, 18(21), 5571. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18215571
  45. Michailidis, M., Zafeiriou, E., Kantartzis, A., Galatsidas, S., & Arabatzis, G. (2025). Governance, energy policy, and sustainable development: Renewable energy infrastructure transition in developing MENA countries. Energies, 18(11), 2759. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18112759
  46. Mol, A. P. J., & Sonnenfeld, D. A. (2000). Ecological modernisation around the world: An introduction. Environmental Politics, 9(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010008414510
  47. Mu, D., Liang, X., & Yang, D. (2025). E-government development and environmental performance: Unravelling the dual mediation of regulatory enforcement and citizen participation in China. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 91(3), 409-426. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523251352723
  48. Musah, M., Owusu-Akomeah, M., Kumah, E. A., Mensah, I. A., Nyeadi, J. D., Murshed, M., ... & Alfred, M. (2022). Green investments, financial development, and environmental quality in Ghana: Evidence from the novel dynamic ARDL simulations approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(21), 31972-32001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17685-y
  49. Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A., & Song, M. (2017). Digital innovation management: Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 223-238
  50. Padhan, L., & Bhat, S. (2024). Nexus between foreign direct investment and ecological footprint in BRICS and Next-11: The moderating role of green innovation. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 35(4), 799-817. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-07-2023-0204
  51. Pariyar, A., Guo, P., Pan, G., & Dastgeer, A. (2024). Impacts of digital trade on environmental quality in developing countries. iRASD Journal of Economics, 6(1), 229-241. https://doi.org/10.52131/joe.2024.0601.0204
  52. Patergiannaki, Z., & Pollalis, Y. (2023). E-government maturity assessment: Evidence from Greek municipalities. Policy & Internet, 15(1), 6-35. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.317
  53. Qayyum, M., Ali, M., Nizamani, M. M., Li, S., Yu, Y., & Jahanger, A. (2021). Nexus between financial development, renewable energy consumption, technological innovations and CO2 emissions: The case of India. Energies, 14(15), 4505. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14154505
  54. Ramadani, L., Yovadiani, A., & Dewi, F. (2022). When innocence is no protection: The role of technology adoption and trust in e-government services. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 16(1), 68-80. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-09-2021-0142
  55. Ramzan, M., Razi, U., Quddoos, M. U., & Adebayo, T. S. (2023). Do green innovation and financial globalization contribute to ecological sustainability and energy transition in the United Kingdom? Sustainable Development, 31(1), 393-414. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2399
  56. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press
  57. Rongjuan, W. (2023). How multiple interactions between policy instruments and the policy environment affect environmental governance efficiency. Energy & Environment, 34(3), 621-639. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X221107346
  58. Sahoo, B., Behera, D. K., & Rahut, D. (2022). Decarbonization: Examining the role of environmental innovation versus renewable energy use. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(32), 48704-48719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18686-1
  59. Salam, M., Farooq, M. S., Ikram, A., Shahzad, M., Ali, A., & Jaafar, N. (2025). Revised artificial intelligence device use acceptance (RAIDUA) model: Exploring privacy concerns for socially responsible AI deployment and ethical AI leadership. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 9(2), 496-518. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-02-2025-0322
  60. Salam, M., Radović-Marković, M., Farooq, M. S., Marković, D., & Vučeković, M. (2026). Artificial intelligence driven digital transformation: Mediating the relationship between artificial intelligence readiness and business process efficiency. IPSI Transactions on Internet Research, 22(2), 32-41. https://doi.org/10.58245/ipsi.tir.2602.04
  61. Shen, X., Zhao, H., Yu, J., Wan, Z., He, T., & Liu, J. (2022). Digital economy and ecological performance: Evidence from a spatial perspective. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 969878. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.969878
  62. Sinha, A., Shahbaz, M., & Balsalobre-Lorente, D. (2017). Exploring the relationship between energy usage segregation and environmental degradation in N-11 countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 1217-1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.071
  63. Song, T., Li, H., & Feng, Z. (2024). Policy and market mechanisms for promoting sustainable energy transition: Role of government and private sector. Economic Change and Restructuring, 57(4), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-024-09734-6
  64. Spaargaren, G., & Mol, A. P. J. (1992). Sociology, environment, and modernity: Ecological modernization as a theory of social change. Society & Natural Resources, 5(4), 323-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941929209380797
  65. Stankovich, M., & Neftenov, N. (2022). Cross pollination and digitalization of public sector data: Opportunities and challenges. Inter-American Development Bank. https://doi.org/10.18235/0004355
  66. United Nations. (2022). United Nations e-government survey 2022: The future of digital government. United Nations
  67. Visnjic, I., Wiengarten, F., & Neely, A. (2016). Only the brave: Product innovation, service business model innovation, and their impact on performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(1), 36-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12254
  68. Wa, D., & Zhang, Z. (2023). Research on e-government adoption in environmental governance from the perspective of public participation. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 32(2), 1383-1391. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/153076
  69. Wang, J., You, S., Agyekum, E. B., Matasane, C., & Uhunamure, S. E. (2022). Exploring the impacts of renewable energy, environmental regulations, and democracy on ecological footprints in the Next Eleven nations. Sustainability, 14(19), 11909. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911909
  70. Wang, M., Li, Y., Wang, Z., Shi, Y., & Zhou, J. (2024). The synergy impact of external environmental pressures and corporate environmental commitment on innovations in green technology. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(2), 854-878. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2604
  71. Wang, P., Han, W., Rizvi, S. K. A., & Naqvi, B. (2022). Is digital adoption the way forward to curb energy poverty? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 180, 121722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121722
  72. Wang, T., Wang, D., & Zeng, Z. (2024). Research on the construction and measurement of digital governance level system of county rural areas in China: Empirical analysis based on entropy weight TOPSIS model. Sustainability, 16(11), 4374. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114374
  73. Xie, F., Guan, X., Zhu, J., Ruan, J., Wang, Z., & Liu, H. (2023). Environmental protection goes digital: A policy perspective on promoting digitalization for sustainable development in China. Sustainability, 15(13), 10673. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310673
  74. Xu, X., Imran, M., Ayaz, M., & Lohana, S. (2022). The mediating role of green technology innovation with corporate social responsibility, firm financial, and environmental performance. Sustainability, 14(24), 16951. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416951
  75. Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). Research commentary-The new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724-735. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0322
  76. Zeng, F., Chen, Y., Wei, B., Wang, P., & Yang, S. (2024). Exploring the multiple paths of digital government development: A dynamic QCA analysis based on organizational transformation. IEEE Access, 12, 18451-18472. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3358375
  77. Zhang, D., & Ullah, S. (2023). Towards a green economy in China? Examining the impact of the Internet of Things and environmental regulation on green growth. Sustainability, 15(16), 12528. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612528
  78. Zhang, R., Jing, L., Li, Y., & Guo, X. (2025). The role of technological innovation and institutional quality in environmental and economic growth sustainability in emerging Asian countries. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1510120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1510120
  79. Zhong, K. (2022). Does the digital finance revolution validate the Environmental Kuznets Curve? Empirical findings from China. PLOS ONE, 17(1), e0257498. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257498
  80. Zhu, X., Meng, X., & Teng, C. (2024). Coordination of interests between local environmental protection departments and enterprises under China's environmental regulation policies. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1309955. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1309955

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-09-24 21:16:06

No citation recorded.