The Impact of Rural Poverty on the Ecological Footprint as an Indicator of Environmental Degradation in Iran

1. Introduction
Today, the world is facing its most serious challenge, the climate change crisis. It is an undeniable fact that humans are destroying the environment by overusing the planet's resources. The adverse effect of climate change not only damages the environment and ecosystem of countries, but also affects every part of society and economy around the world (Ikram et al., 2021). The impact of climate change is increasingly worrying: floods, droughts, storms, heat waves, rising sea levels, changes in crop growth, and disruptions in various economic systems, especially growth and development, are among these damages. be (Raza et al., 2019; Storlazi et al., 2018). The possible source of this environmental destruction is the emission of carbon dioxide caused by human activities, because economic growth requires industrial production and intense energy consumption, which increases the emission of polluting gases (Nordhaus, 2019). Asymmetry of power between rich and poor people can prevent the control of environmental activities and reduce the severity of environmental policies. In this context, groups with economic power may impose environmental costs on the rest of society through projects with negative environmental effects. Therefore, inequalities in society cause undemocratic decision-making process in adopting environmental policies and neglecting social benefits (Almulali et al., 2015). According to the present material, it can be argued that the countries are facing the phenomenon of environmental degradation, so far, the impact of rural poverty on the ecological footprint of environmental degradation has not been investigated as an indicator of environmental degradation. Recently, international statistical institutes have published appropriate information from different countries related to the ecological footprint, which has made it possible for researchers to use this data for the index of environmental degradation. Therefore, this study seeks to find out how the ecological footprint changes with the increase in rural poverty.
 

Methodology

To achieve the objectives, the data was analyzed through Microfit for the period of 2001-2023. Data were collected from library sources and central and world banks. The ARDL(p,q_1…,p_2) wide-interval self-explanatory model presented by Pesaran and Pesaran (1997) and Shins and Pesaran (1998) is estimated as follows. The analysis of the ARDL method is based on the interpretation of a principle called dynamic, long-term and error correction (Noferesti 2018).
According to the main goal, this article examines the poverty of rural people on the ecological footprint in Iran, which is taken from the study of Khan et al. (2022).
 
 

Findings

Before examining the long-term relationship, the stationarity test was performed for all variables. The long-term relationship of the variables is investigated using t-test and the existence of the long-term relationship of the variables was confirmed. The results of the unit root test show that all the variables except the gross domestic product of the villagers were at a static level. After confirming the long-term relationship between model variables, the long-term relationship was estimated. The results of the long-term relationship show that the inflation rate has the greatest effect on the ecological footprint. The coefficient of rural poverty and gross domestic product shows a positive and significant relationship with the ecological footprint. The coefficient of forest areas shows a negative and significant relationship with the ecological footprint. The coefficient of the error correction sentence in this model is 0.64. That is, in each period, 0.65 percent of the imbalance in the ecological footprint is adjusted and approaches its long-term trend. The poverty variable of the villagers has a positive and significant effect on the ecological footprint. A one percent increase in rural poverty adds 1.65 units to the ecological footprint. The gross domestic product of the villagers and the inflation rate also have a direct and significant relationship in the short term on the ecological footprint. The amount of capital of villagers and the area of ​​forest areas also have a negative and significant relationship in the short term on the ecological footprint.
 

Discussion and Conclusion

In this study, the concept of ecological footprint was proposed as an indicator of environmental degradation, and the short-term and long-term relationship between rural poverty and ecological footprint was investigated using time series data for the ARDL model period of 2023-2001. The results show that there is a positive effect between rural poverty and ecological footprint both in the short term and in the long term. Poverty reduction leads to depletion of environmentally friendly resources such as quality reduction. As poverty increases in villages, poor people use more natural and environmental resources such as natural food, water and energy for their survival. Indiscriminate use of natural resources also leads to poor quality of the environment. Most studies such as the study of Khan et al. (2022), Baluch et al. (2020), Broad &Cavanagh (2015) also stated that the higher level of poverty is the main cause of environmental pollution in less developed countries, the unavailability of basic facilities and awareness. Less about environmental protection leads to increased ecological footprint. As a result, poor people repeatedly misuse and unsustainable exploitation of natural resources for their survival, and as a result, it leads to an increase in environmental pollution. One of the most important reasons for the positive impact of poverty on the ecological footprint or environmental pollution is that urbanization should be controlled and rural employment should be increased. Also, a higher income gap between the rich and the poor creates a greater power gap in society, and this can be the main cause of environmental pollution. Because poor people cannot benefit from environmental quality and all environmental costs are imposed on them. With the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor, the deprived people are abusing and exploiting environmentally friendly resources for their survival.