The most pressing unresolved issue of our time is that we are causing increasing environmental harm through our manufactured interventions, compared to our efforts to curb atmospheric emissions. The mismatch in the consumption of ecosystem services compared to our cumulative efforts to restore them, exorbitant consumption of fossil-based hydrocarbons, deforestation, building embankments to alter river flows, and unwillingness to pay for the restoration of ecological balance are some of the critical factors that contribute to the ongoing climate risk globally (Mathews et al., 2025; Welsch, 2025). However, desperate attempts have been made to restore environmental sustainability through various international treaties (i.e., Rio Climate Summit, Glasgow Climate Pact, etc.) and the platform of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations. The Conference of Parties (COPs), a wing of the United Nations climate change forum, is also vocal about the global adverse effects of climate change. In this context, climate risk refers to the potential for destructive impacts from climate change, including physical risks, such as damage from flooding, hurricanes, and drought, as well as transition risks, including policy changes and technological shifts (van Zanten and Putintseva, 2025; Ben Ali & Al-Maadid, 2025). These risks can have a severe impact on financial stability, infrastructure, food security, and public health, necessitating robust policy frameworks to mitigate their effects (Lee et al., 2024; Sun et al., 2022). The need for climate legislation, regulations, and policies that can reduce emissions and promote sustainable practices has been one of the most widely recognized aspects of the global climate change narrative. However, the degree to which such legislation translates into tangible action and can reduce climate risk is still insufficiently understood. The interplay between climate legislation and environmental impacts lies at the heart of national and international efforts to mitigate greenhouse gases (GHGs) and promote sustainability. This study examines the impact of environmental legislation on climate risk, providing valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of climate governance and its effectiveness.

Climate legislation encompasses the various laws and regulations that aim to address the complex problems of climate change, including emission reduction mandates, renewable energy targets, carbon pricing mechanisms, and environmental policies that embed sustainability in economic and social governance. The link between the ecological legislation enacted and its impact on climate risk is unclear. Critical determinants include the strictness of the laws, the nature of their enforcement, and the social and economic context of the territory (Trotter et al., 2022). In addition, the origins of rising human-induced and natural climate risks introduce additional complexity to this relationship.

Recent research highlights the range and depth of legislative measures enacted worldwide to mitigate environmental damage and promote renewable energy (Al-Maadid et al., 2025b; Korkut Pata et al., 2025; Radulescu et al., 2025). Chidiogo Uzoamaka Akpuokwe et al. (2024) conducted a systematic review of global legislative actions related to clear emissions reduction targets, renewable energy targets, and carbon pricing mechanisms, which are critical. They concluded that international cooperation and the effective transfer of knowledge are crucial in enhancing the multidimensional aspects of climate change legislation. In a similar effort, Liu and Feng (2023) demonstrate that the differences in promoting renewable energy primarily lie in whether national energy policy focused on such promotion was enacted through legislation. They observe that legislative efforts tend to have a more substantial impact in higher-income countries. Political institutions play a crucial role in designing and implementing climate and clean energy policies (Dent, 2018). Omri and Ben Jabeur (2024) and Omri and Boubaker (2024) argue that strong political institutions are crucial for enforcing the enactment of climate change legislation, which is essential for the transition to renewables and reducing climate risk.

Environmental legislation has played a crucial role in addressing the challenges of climate change and promoting the development of renewable energy. The UK Climate Change Act of 2008 is a model of framework legislation that has led to similar initiatives in other countries, such as Ireland and Mexico, and was an essential step toward demonstrating the necessity of national action within a global framework (Averchenkova et al., 2021; Dobush et al., 2022). According to Torney (2017), the UK environmental legislation has significantly influenced other countries in developing climate regime policies. In this context, Eskander et al. (2021) examined how UK national legislation is increasingly aligning with a globally recognized climate crisis, such that almost every country now has some form of climate legislation. Puri et al. (2023) highlighted the role of regulating contaminants and their emerging regulation in both developed and developing economies in achieving water sustainability and reducing human health risks from environmental pollutants. Moreover, Eskander and Fankhauser (2023) studied the impact of national climate legislation on trade-related carbon emissions. They found that the effect of such laws on domestic carbon emissions is significantly negative, suggesting that legislative measures do not induce higher international emissions, an effect often associated with unilateralist climate policy actions. China recently enacted the Environmental Protection Law (EPL) (Zhang et al., 2016). However, despite passing this law, many implementation challenges remain, indicating that the effectiveness of environmental governance requires more than legislation and necessitates vigorous enforcement and accountability mechanisms. Zhang et al. (2019) investigated the impact of environmental regulation on pollution in China, examining the synergistic effects of industrial agglomeration through Bayesian posterior probability and optimal model structure across 30 provinces from 2003 to 2016. They found that environmental regulations reduced pollution overall in the eastern, central, and northeastern areas but had the opposite effect in the western region, where pollution increased. However, industrial agglomeration, combined with environmental regulation, worsened pollution in most areas but improved it in the northeast. Similarly, Zhou et al. (2023) examined how urban environmental legislation in China has significantly improved local green total factor energy efficiency, influenced by industrial upgrading and the innovation effect, while Chen et al. (2023) highlighted the importance of local government actions aimed at achieving broader environmental objectives. The policies outlined in Canada exemplify the integration of environmental and legislative strategies to promote forest and landscape restoration. Mansuy et al. (2022) discussed policy and legislative support for Forest Landscape Restoration (FLR) in Canada, highlighting how legislation promotes sustainable land management that addresses the challenges of ecological degradation, climate change, and biodiversity loss in Canada. Papu-Zamxaka et al. (2010) highlighted the gap between the enactment of climate legislation and tangible environmental outcomes in South Africa, emphasizing the need for legislation and regulation to be effectively enforced. They noted that contaminants such as mercury have persisted in the environment despite laws banning their use.

The present study examines this effect on the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries for several compelling reasons. Firstly, the GCC economies heavily depend on oil and gas exports, and studying their climate risks can provide valuable insights into global energy strategies. Secondly, the extreme climatic conditions in these countries, such as severe heat and aridity, underscore the need to understand and mitigate climate risks. Given their recent policy pushes for economic diversification and carbon footprint reduction, GCC countries have also presented a valuable testing ground for the impact of such legislation. Third, the legislative measures taken by the GCC can significantly impact global oil markets, providing incentives for energy prices and investment trends that extend far beyond the GCC region, making the study of climate legislation relevant for international stakeholders and international energy firms. Fourth, due to its significant financial resources, the area could serve as a model for the adoption of a green ICT frontier, presenting an opportunity to consider how legal environments promote the transition toward green technologies. Finally, the unprecedented rapid urbanization of GCC countries presents unique challenges and opportunities for sustainable urban and land planning, urging us to explore how climate legislation can inform urban adaptation strategies to mitigate climate risks.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the effect of climate legislation on climate risk, making essential contributions to both the academic literature and practical efforts to implement climate action. This paves the way academically for exploring how practical legal tools are used to address climate impacts, providing an extensive basis for future study. Secondly, the study advances the academic debates on the relationship between climate change and governance, contributing empirical evidence on the link between droughts, extreme weather, legislation, and eco-friendly policy changes. In addition, this study helps raise public awareness of the importance of legal measures in action against climate change, which can boost public support and community engagement in responding to new regulations. Thirdly, this research contributes to the global discussion on environmental justice by demonstrating how legal action can mitigate climate risks, fostering fairness and equality in ecological impacts. As the first GCC-relevant study of its kind, this work provides a key point of reference to support global action in understanding and optimizing legislative management of climate risk. Fourth, this study makes a substantial contribution to achieving four UN Sustainable Development Goals related to climate risk issues, providing a holistic assessment context that aligns with global efforts for sustainable development. The research has a direct relationship with SDG 13 (Climate Action), as it assesses the effectiveness of climate legislation and how different climate legislation impacts risk, providing crucial insights into urgent steps to mitigate climate change. The results further contribute to achieving SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) by harnessing the transformative potential of incorporating climate risk management elements into urban planning for sustainable and resilient city development. Moreover, the study promotes SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) due to the role of technological development in climate risk mitigation, encouraging sustainable industry practices and innovation. It supports SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) because it emphasizes how ICT will drive the development of renewable energy solutions, a crucial step toward the energy systems we desire. Domestic material consumption impacts are relevant to SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and contribute to policies that promote sustainable consumption patterns and efficient resource use. This study is structured as follows. Section 2 describes the methods used for the data collection. Section 3 describes the empirical results. Lastly, Section 4 presents conclusions and policy implications.

The study examined the impact of climate legislation on climate risk, taking into account the roles of GDP, Urbanization, ICT, and DMC in the context of GCC countries, using the Panel QARDL model and Granger Non-Causality Tests. In particular, GDP tends to exacerbate climate risk in almost all quantiles, indicating that economic growth often comes with an environmental cost. Unlike climate legislation and ICT, which effectively mitigate climate risk, significant climate legislation and ICT are recognized as key components of ecological governance. Urbanization appears to have more nuanced implications for climate risk, with its effect not being assertive, suggesting that its current scale in the GCC cannot significantly impact climate risk. Lastly, DMC is often associated with increased climate risk, where current consumption behaviors may be unsustainable and lead to further environmental degradation. The findings present numerous policy implications that could make a significant difference on the ground, considering the availability of resources in the GCC countries. Policymakers can drive significant improvements in legislation and regulation, especially for industries such as crude oil and gas, construction, and transportation, by establishing strict emissions standards and meeting renewable energy needs. The findings of this study reveal that an increase in the quantity of enacted environmental legislation is associated with a significant reduction in climate risk across the GCC countries. This suggests that expanding legislative frameworks remains a critical pathway for mitigating climate vulnerabilities in the region. Accordingly, the key policy implication is the need to intensify the development and enactment of climate-related laws and regulations, ensuring that environmental governance remains dynamic and responsive to evolving challenges. By consistently expanding the legislative base, GCC countries can reinforce their institutional commitment to addressing climate risks and supporting the transition toward more sustainable and resilient economic systems.

The study items have several limitations that impact the interpretation of the results. First and foremost is the availability of data before 2005. Explanatory variables, such as global oil prices and international trading, might not have been fully accounted for in determining climate risk. In this article, certain aspects, such as the assumption of uniform policy implementation within widely variable governance and administrative contexts, may be limiting. Another important consideration is that the effectiveness of climate legislation may depend heavily on the strength of governance institutions. In contexts with strong institutional frameworks, environmental laws are more likely to be implemented, monitored, and enforced rigorously. However, in environments with weaker governance, even well-intentioned regulations may not produce significant outcomes. Although this study does not explicitly model governance quality, we acknowledge its mediating role and recommend that future research incorporate governance indicators, such as regulatory quality, corruption control, or the rule of law, into the empirical framework to better isolate conditional policy effectiveness. While the evidence in this study is quite robust regarding the impacts of environmental legislation in the GCC and the mitigation of climate risk, future research will need to generalize its findings across other oil-dependent or emerging markets with similar structural features. Furthermore, this study does not explicitly incorporate external global drivers such as oil price volatility, foreign direct investment (FDI), or participation in international climate treaties (e.g., the Paris Agreement), all of which are highly relevant to climate policy formation and environmental governance in the GCC region. Given the GCC's dependence on hydrocarbon markets and global capital flows, these factors could significantly moderate or amplify the effectiveness of domestic legislation. We recommend that future studies incorporate global energy shocks, capital mobility, and treaty participation indicators to provide a more comprehensive understanding of climate risk governance under global interdependence. Finally, this study applies a panel framework across the GCC countries, which assumes a degree of policy uniformity. However, this assumption may oversimplify the substantial heterogeneity that exists among GCC members in terms of enforcement strength, institutional capacity, political will, and regulatory effectiveness. For instance, Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 roadmap differs significantly from the UAE’s Net Zero Strategy or Qatar’s ESG initiatives. Future studies should explore country-level fixed effects, spatial interactions, or heterogeneous panel techniques to capture this variation better and produce more granular policy insights. Moreover, future research might analyze the interplay with institutional quality, enforcement mechanisms, and global cooperative agreements. Including firm- or city-level information may also help shed light on how environmental policies affect behavior and outcomes at the micro level. Including additional variables, such as oil and FDI, and dynamic simulations, as well as structural modeling approaches, could be used to assess the long-term transition pathways of alternative policy scenarios.

Research reported in this publication was supported by the Qatar Research Development and Innovation Council under grant #ARG01-0508-230093. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of Qatar Research Development and Innovation Council.

Mohamed Sami Ben Ali: Validation, Supervision, Resources, Project administration, Methodology, Funding acquisition. Alanoud Al-Maadid: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition. Kamal Si Mohammed: Writing – original draft, Software, Formal analysis, Data curation.