Biocracy refers to a system of governance and decision-making that prioritizes the well-being and health of living systems, including ecosystems, species, and human communities. Biocracy promotes holistic, participatory, and adaptive management, integrating science, traditional knowledge, and collective decision-making. The goal is to cultivate a mutually enriching relationship between humans and the natural world. As a result, all human actions have an impact on Biocracy. This study covers annual data from 2010 to 2022 for a group of member countries of the COP28 with the percentage of emissions reduction needed to meet the 1.5-degree Celsius target by 2030 among current top emitters and employs the tobit panel model with a limited dependent variable (LDV). The primary economic variables that substantially influence Biocracy are GDP growth, foreign investment, inflation rate, employment, trade-related variables (exports and imports), and governance. The results indicate that the governance index and imports variable have the most significant positive effect on Biocracy, and the elasticity of governance has the largest impact on Biocracy among all the variables studied. The study’s objective is to identify strategies to enhance Biocracy without hindering economic growth, with an emphasis on the role of good governance.

1. Li H, Xu R. Impact of fiscal policies and natural resources on ecological sustainability of BRICS region: Moderating role of green innovation and ecological governance. Resources Policy. 2023; 85: 103999. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103999

2. Zhang W, Wen L. Research on the analysis of the coupling coordination degree of Shaanxi’s atmospheric ecological governance and urban clean governance based on environmental sustainability. Ecological Indicators. 2023; 155: 68–110. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111068

3. Qi X, Wang B, Gao Q. Environment, social and governance research of infrastructure investment: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2023; 425: 139030. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139030

4. Li JM, Jiang SS. How can governance strategies be developed for marine ecological environment pollution caused by sea-using enterprises?—A study based on evolutionary game theory. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2023; 232: 106447. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106447

5. Huang A, Tian L, Li Y, et al. Regional complex system simulation optimization through linking governance and environment performance: A case study of water environmental carrying capacity based on the SDES model. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2024; 104: 107356. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107356

6. Ni Z, Yang J, Razzaq A. How do natural resources, digitalization, and institutional governance contribute to ecological sustainability through load capacity factors in highly resource-consuming economies? Resources Policy. 2022; 79: 103068. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103068

7. Wang Y, Zhang M. The role of environmental justice: Environmental courts, analysts’ earnings pressure and corporate environmental governance. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2024; 104: 107299. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107299

8. Wapner P. Politics Beyond the State: Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics. World Politics. 1995; 47(3): 311–340. doi: 10.4324/9781315092546

9. Sjöstedt M, Jagers SC. Democracy and the environment revisited: The case of African fisheries. Marine Policy. 2014; 43: 143–148. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2013.05.007

10. Kashwan P. Inequality, democracy, and the environment: A cross-national analysis. Ecological Economics. 2017; 131: 139–151. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.08.018

11. Ronaghi M, Scorsone E. The Impact of Governance, Education, Smoking, et al. Archives of Epidemiology & Public Health Research. 2023; 2(1). doi: 10.33140/aephr.02.01.07

12. Ronaghi M, Scorsone E. The Impact of Governance on Poverty and Unemployment Control Before and After the Covid Outbreak in the United States. Journal of Poverty. 2023; 28(4): 318-338. doi: 10.1080/10875549.2023.2173708

13. Ronaghi M, Scorsone E. The Impact of COVID-19 Outbreak on CO2 Emissions in the Ten Countries with the Highest Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Zhang X, ed. Journal of Environmental and Public Health. 2023; 2023: 1–10. doi: 10.1155/2023/4605206

14. Ronaghi M, Reed M, Saghaian S. The impact of economic factors and governance on greenhouse gas emission. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies. 2019; 22(2): 153–172. doi: 10.1007/s10018-019-00250-w

15. Sunde U, Cervellati M, Fortunato P. Are all democracies equally good? The role of interactions between political environment and inequality for rule of law. Economics Letters. 2008; 99(3): 552–556. doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2007.10.010

16. International Monetary Fund. Available online: https://www.imf.org/en/Home (accessed on 12 November 2024).

17. Gütschow, J., Pflüger, M. Climate Action Tracker. 2023. Available online: https://climateactiontracker.org/

18. UNITED NATION 2023. Available online: https://unfoundation.org/what-we-do/issues/climate-and-energy/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiA_NC9BhCkARIsABSnSTYCWsuZDjWLVlWLsX5AramOBnXxWbwe0uWKgMANVcPPhil9cP4SIJAaAuxoEALw_wcB (accessed on 12 November 2024).

19. UNFCCC3 United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change 2023. Available online: https://globalinsolvency.com/united-nations-framework-convention-climate-change?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiA2cu9BhBhEiwAft6IxB7agCOzEXA_Jr__LlTsAKbO4D8Eui7VqNl4_HGy-1Jig86l0hBIEhoCCesQAvD_BwE (accessed on 12 November 2024).

20. IEA4 World energy outlooks. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook (accessed on 12 November 2024).

21. IHME, Global Burden of Disease. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/outdoor-air-pollution (accessed on 12 November 2024).

22. Zhang T, Zhao F. A study on the relationships among green finance, environmental pollution and economic development. Energy Strategy Reviews. 2024; 51: 90–100. doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2023.101290

23. Bontempi E, Coccia M. International trade as a critical parameter of COVID-19 spread that outclasses demographic, economic, environmental, and pollution factors. Environmental Research. 2021; 201: 111514. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111514

24. Ronaghi M, Ronaghi MH, Kohansal M. Agricultural Governance. GlobeEdit; 2020.

25. Ronaghi M, Scorsone E. The negative impact of the Ukraine war on the Us economy. Journal Of Environmental Science And Public Health. 2022; 2(7): 111–122.

26. Yu Y, Li K, Duan S, et al. Economic growth and environmental pollution in China: New evidence from government work reports. Energy Economics. 2023; 124: 106803. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106803

27. Deng QS, Alvarado R, Cuesta L, et al. Asymmetric impacts of foreign direct investment inflows, financial development, and social globalization on environmental pollution. Economic Analysis and Policy. 2024; 76: 236–251. doi: 10.1016/j.eap.2022.08.008

28. Chen X, Liang X. Foreign direct investment and environmental pollution: A fiscal decentralization perspective. Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment. 2021; 19(1): 34–40. doi: 10.1016/j.cjpre.2021.12.004

29. Feyzi K, Ronaghi M. Effective Factors on Education Policies and Academic Technology. Education Strategies in Medical Sciences. 2014; 7(3): 167–173.

30. Kahouli B, Chaaben N. Investigate the link among energy Consumption, environmental Pollution, Foreign Trade, Foreign direct Investment, and economic Growth: Empirical evidence from GCC countries. Energy and Buildings. 2022; 266: 112117. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112117

31. Yang G, Zheng Q. Impact of China’s outward foreign direct investment on environmental pollution in the home country. Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment. 2021; 19(3): 221–229. doi: 10.1016/j.cjpre.2021.12.024

32. Amara D, Qiao J, Zada M. How to reconcile the climate change issue with economic growth? Spatial dual mediating effects of carbon emissions and foreign investment. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2023; 411: 137285. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137285

33. Mahajan M, Narayan N. CO2 emissions response to GDP and crude oil price shocks: Evidence from India and China using SVAR Model 2025; 9:100479. doi: 10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100479

34. Zubair AO, Abdul Samad AR, Dankumo AM. Does gross domestic income, trade integration, FDI inflows, GDP, and capital reduce CO2 emissions? Empirical evidence from Nigeria. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability. 2020; 2: 100009. doi: 10.1016/j.crsust.2020.100009

35. Sarkodie SA, Ahmed MY, Owusu PA. Advancing COP26 climate goals: Leveraging energy innovation, governance readiness, and socio-economic factors for enhanced climate resilience and sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2023; 431: 139757. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139757

36. Solaymani S, Montes O. The role of financial development and good governance in economic growth and environmental sustainability. Energy Nexus. 2023; 13: 100268. doi: 10.1016/j.nexus.2023.100268

37. Adedeji AA, Ogunbayo I, Ajayi PI, et al. Energy security, governance quality, and economic performance in sub-Saharan Africa. Next Energy. 2024; 2: 100055. doi: 10.1016/j.nxener.2023.100055

38. Ronaghi M. Effects of covid-19 on Iran’s livestock and meat market. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology. 2022; 24(5), 1017–1028.

39. Galvan LPC, Bhatti UA, Campo CC, et al. The Nexus Between CO2 Emission, Economic Growth, Trade Openness: Evidences From Middle-Income Trap Countries. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 2022; 10. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.938776

40. Liu Y, Chen S, Chen B, et al. Analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in China’s bilateral trade: a non-competitive import input–output approach. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017; 163: S410–S419. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.085

41. Zhang S, Liu X, Bae J. Does trade openness affect CO2 emissions: evidence from ten newly industrialized countries? Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2017; 24(21): 17616–17625. doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-9392-8

42. Huang Y, Chen F, Wei H, et al. The Impacts of FDI Inflows on Carbon Emissions: Economic Development and Regulatory Quality as Moderators. Frontiers in Energy Research. 2022; 9: 18–38. doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2021.820596

43. Brand C, Coenen G, Hutchinson J, Guilhem A. How will higher carbon prices affect growth and inflation?. Climate change. 2023; 1–8.

44. Ramseur JUS. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trends and Projections from the Inflation Reduction Act. Congressional Research Service. 2023: 1–20.

45. Moessner R. Effects of Carbon Pricing on Inflation. SSRN Electronic Journal. Published online 2022. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4033600

46. Dorband I, Lall S, Schoder C. Carbon taxes, complementary policies, and the labor market. Global Economy & Development. 2022: 114–120

47. Heutel G. Do climate policies ‘kill jobs’? An economist on why they don’t cause massive unemployment. Available online: https://theconversation.com/do-climate-policies-kill-jobs (accessed on 5 October 2024).

48. Chan I, Sagatelova M, Laska A, et al. Employment Impacts in a Decarbonized Economy. Decarb America Research Initiative. 2023: 1–9.

49. WJP Rule of Law Index 2023 Global Press Release. Available online: https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/ (accessed on 12 November 2024).

50. Lee J, Han H, Wang B. Greenhouse gas emissions, firm value, and the investor base: Evidence from Korea. Emerging Markets Review. 2023; 56(10): 48–62. doi: 10.1016/j.ememar.2023.101048

51. Bruno G. Limited Dependent Panel Data Models: A Comparative Analysis of Classical and Bayesian Inference among Econometric Packages. Bank of Italy Research Department; 2004.

52. Busse M, Bernard AB. (2003). Consistent Standard Errors in Panel Tobit with Autocorrelation. Available online: DOI:10.2139/ssrn.439061

53. Khan Y, Hassan T, Guiqin H, et al. Analyzing the impact of natural resources and rule of law on sustainable environment: A proposed policy framework for BRICS economies. Resources Policy. 2023; 86(10): 40–70. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104070.

54. Chang SH. Simulation estimation of dynamic panel Tobit models. Published online in Wiley Online Library. Journal of Applied Econometric. 2015: 1–35.

55. Wooldridge JM. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Business & Economics; 2002.

56. Zhao L, Zhao R. Ecological rule of law and enterprise green innovation — Evidence from China's environmental courts. 2025; 374: 124081, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.124081

57. Olsen RJ. Note on the Uniqueness of the Maximum Likelihood Estimator for the Tobit Model. Econometrica. 1978; 46(5): 1211. doi: 10.2307/1911445

58. Brown S, Greene W, Harris M. An inverse hyperbolic sine heteroskedastic latent class panel tobit model: An application to modelling charitable donations. 2015; 50: 228-236. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2015.06.018

59. Zra’nzhad M, Anwari I. Using panel data in econometrics. Economic Studies. 2005; 2: 21–52.

60. Reed M, Saghaian M, Ronaghi M. The Effects of Good Governance on The Agricultural Sector. International Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Research. 2020; 6(1): 2–20. doi: 10.46609/IJAER.2020.v06i01.002

61. Chen Y, Ma Y, Wang Y, et al. Impact of China’s marine governance policies on the marine ecological environment—A case study of the Bohai rim. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2023; 246: 106913. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106913

62. Li Q, Wu S, Liu Q, et al. Role of global value chains in embodied domestic CO2 emissions of China’s manufacturing exports: Normal and processing trade heterogeneity. Energy Economics. 2024; 132: 107346. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107346

63. Bergougui B. Moving toward environmental mitigation in Algeria: Asymmetric impact of fossil fuel energy, renewable energy and technological innovation on CO2 emissions. Energy Strategy Reviews. 2024; 51: 101281. doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2023.101281

64. Tang J, Jiang Y. Natural resources-environment dilemma: The context of foreign direct investment and international trade. Resources Policy. 2024; 89: 104597. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104597

65. Kopidou D, Tsakanikas A, Diakoulaki D. Common trends and drivers of CO 2 emissions and employment: a decomposition analysis in the industrial sector of selected European Union countries. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016; 112: 4159–4172. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.079

66. Kumar S, Shukla AK, Muhuri PK, et al. CO2 emission based GDP prediction using intuitionistic fuzzy transfer learning. Ecological Informatics. 2023; 77: 102206. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2023.102206

67. Hoa PX, Xuan VN, Phuong Thu NT. Nexus of innovation, renewable consumption, FDI, growth and CO2 emissions: The case of Vietnam. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2023; 9(3): 100100. doi: 10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100100

68. Dong Y, Wong W, Muda I. Do natural resources utilization and economic development reduce greenhouse gas emissions through consuming renewable and Clean Technology? A case study of China towards sustainable development goals. Resources Policy. 2023; 85(B): 103–192. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103921

69. World Bank. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. World Bank; 2022.