Recovery packages are increasingly presented as a route to “build back better”, yet the extent to which green-labelled spending translates into measurable sustainability gains remains uncertain. This study examines how green recovery initiatives and low-carbon economic strategies shape sustainable development outcomes in BRICS, asking what effect green recovery has on sustainable development, how the transition to a low-carbon economy contributes to sustainability performance, and whether low-carbon development mediates the green recovery–sustainable development relationship. Using a quantitative panel design and harmonised secondary data for Brazil, China, India and South Africa over 2000–2023, sustainable development is proxied by adjusted net savings (% of GNI), green recovery by renewable energy investment, and the low-carbon economy by renewable energy consumption (% of total final energy). Panel-corrected standard errors are applied to full-sample and regime-specific estimates (pre-COVID: 2000–2019; COVID: 2020–2023), complemented by country-specific PCSE models, while mediation is assessed using fixed effects with 1,000 bootstrap replications. The results indicate that green recovery exhibits weak and regime-dependent links with sustainable development: it is modestly positive pre-COVID but becomes significantly negative during COVID and remains statistically insignificant in the full sample. In contrast, the low-carbon transition is positively and robustly associated with sustainable development, with a substantially stronger effect during COVID. The estimated indirect effect of green recovery via the low-carbon channel is positive but statistically insignificant, suggesting that green recovery has not yet produced consistent energy-mix shifts capable of transmitting sustainability gains. The study contributes by jointly estimating direct, low-carbon, and mediation pathways under crisis and non-crisis regimes, offering evidence to strengthen SDG 7, SDG 11 and SDG 13 alignment in major emerging economies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: