TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİNDE KİRLİLİK SIĞINAĞI VE KİRLENME HALE HİPOTEZLERİ ÜZERİNE AMPİRİK BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Yıl 2019, Sayı: 33, 104 - 140, 30.04.2019

Güller Şahin , Levent Gökdemir , Fatih Volkan Ayyıldız

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı, uluslararası ticaretin çevre
kirliliği üzerindeki etkisini kirlilik sığınağı ve kirlenme hale hipotezleri
kapsamında Türkiye örneğinde 1990-2015 dönemi içerisinde incelemektir. Amaç bağlamında
sera gazı salınımları, doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar, imalat sanayisinde katma
değer ve uluslararası ticarete ilişkin üç farklı parametre kullanılmıştır. Temel
bulgular: (1) Eşbütünleşme sonuçları, değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli bir
ilişkinin varlığının; değişkenlerin çoğunlukla sera gazı salınımlarını
artırdığının (2) Hata Düzeltme Modeli sonuçları, 1 birimlik sapmanın yaklaşık
%12’sinin bir sonraki dönemde düzelerek kısa dönem dengesizliklerinin ortadan
kalktığının kanıtlarını sunmuştur. Sonuçlar, Türkiye’nin açık piyasa yapısına
bağlı olarak ticaretin kirliliği genel anlamda artırdığını ve kirlilik sığınağı
hipotezinin kanıtlarının güçlü olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kirlilik Sığınağı Hipotezi, Kirlenme Hale Hipotezi, Türkiye, Eşbütünleşme Metodolojisi

Kaynakça

• Ahking, F. W. (2002). Model mis-specification and Johansen’s co-integration analysis: an application to the US money demand. J Macroecon, 24, 51-66.
• Atıcı, C., Kurt, F. (2007). Türkiye’nin Dış Ticareti ve Çevre Kirliliği: Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Yaklaşımı. Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, 13 (2), 61-69.
• Birdsall, N., Wheeler, D. (1993). Trade Policy and Industrial Pollution in Latin America: Where Are the Pollution Havens?. Journal of Environment & Development 2, 1, 137-150.
• Cole, M. A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48, 71-81.
• Cole, M. A., Fredriksson, Per G. (2009). Institutionalized pollution havens. Ecological Economics, 68, 1239-1256.
• Copeland, B. R., Taylor, M. S. (1994). North-South Trade and the Environment, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109 (3), 755-787.
• Dean, J. M., Lovely, M. E., Wang, H. (2005). Are Foreign Investors Attracted to Weak Envıronmental Regulatıons? Evaluating the Evidence from China. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper: 3505.
• Dick, C. (2010). Do environmental characteristics influence foreign direct investment growth? A cross-national study, 1990-2000. Int J Comp Sociol, 51 (3): 192-210.
• Dickey D. A., Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427-431.
• Dong, B., Gong, J., Zhao, X. (2012). FDI and environmental regulation: pollution haven or a race to the top?. J Regul Econ, 41, 216-237.
• Elliott R. J. R., Shimamoto, K. (2008). Are ASEAN Countries Havens for Japanese Pollution-Intensive Industry?. The World Economy, 236-254.
• Engle, R. F., Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-Integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55, 251-276.
• Eskeland, G., Harrison, A. (2003). Moving to Greener Pastures? Multinationals and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis. Journal of Development Economics, 70 (1), 1-23.
• Ferrara, I., Missios, P., Yildiz, H. M. (2009). Foreign Direct Investment and the Choice of Environmental Policy. 1-36.
• <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46450194, 18.06.2017>.
• Gill, F. L., Viswanathan, K. K., Abdul Karim, M. Z. (2018). The Critical Review of the Pollution Haven Hypothesis, International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 8 (1), 167-174.
• Gonzalo, J. (1994). Five alternative methods of estimating long-run equilibrium relationships. J Econ, 60, 203-233.
• Grossman, G. M., Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER Working Paper No 3914.
• Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. J Econ Dyn Control, 12, 231-254.
• Johansen, S. (1992). Determination of cointegration rank in the presence of a linear trend. Oxf Bull Econ Stat, 54, 383-397.
• Johansen, S. (1995). Likelihood-based inference in cointegrated vector auto-regressive models. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Kearsley, A., Riddel, M. (2010). A further inquiry into the Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Environmental Kuznets Curve, Ecological Economics, 69, 905-919.
• Kellenberg, D. K. (2009). An empirical investigation of the pollution haven effect with strategic environment and trade Policy. Journal of International Economics, 78, 242-255.
• Keller, W., Levinson, A. (1999). Environmental Compliance Costs and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows to U.S. States. NBER Working Paper Series: 7369.
• Kivyiro, P., Arminen, H. (2014). Carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, and foreign direct investment: causality analysis for Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy, 74, 595-606.
• Lee, H., Roland-Holst, D. (1997). The environment and welfare implications of trade and tax policy. Journal of Development Economics, 52, 65-82.
• Letchumanan, R., Kodama, F. (2000). Reconciling the conflict between the ‘pollution-haven’ hypothesis and an emerging trajectory of international technology transfer, Research Policy, 29, 59-79.
• Lopéz, L. A., Arce, G., Kronenberg, T., Rodrigues, J. F. D. (2018). Trade from resource-rich countries avoids the existence of a global pollution haven hypothesis, Journal of Cleaner Production, 175, 599-611.
• Lopéz, L. A., Arce, G., Zafrilla, J. E. (2013). Parcelling virtual carbon in the pollution haven hypothesis. Energy Econ, 39, 177-186.
• McGuire, M. C. (1982). Regulation, Factor Rewards, and International Trade. Journal of Public Economics, 17, 335-354.
• Neumayer, E. (2001). Pollution havens: an analysis of policy options for dealing with an elusive phenomenon, Journal of Environment & Development, 10 (2), 147-177.
• Pantula, S. G. (1989). Testing for unit roots in time series data. Econ Theory, 5, 256-271.
• Phillips, P. C. B., Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression. Biomètrika, 75 (2), 336-346.
• Pethig, R. (1976). Pollution, Welfare, and Environmental Policy in the Theory of Comparative Advantage. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2, 160-169.
• Reinsel, G. C., Ahn, S. K. (1992). Vector autoregressive models with unit roots and reduced rank structure: estimation, likelihood ratio test and forecasting. J Time Ser Analysis, 13, 353-75.
• Sapkota, P., Bastola, U. (2017). Foreign direct investment, income, and environmental pollution in developing countries: Panel data analysis of Latin America. Energy Economics, 64, 206-212.
• Shafik, N., Bandyopadhyay, S. (1992). Economic Growth and Environmental Quality: Time Series and Cross-Country Evidence. Background Paper for the World Development Report, The World Bank, Washington.
• Siebert, H. (1977). Environmental Quality and the Gains from Trade. Kyklos, 30, 657-673.
• Solarin, S. A., Al-Mulali, U., Musah, I., Ozturk, I. (2017). Investigating the pollution haven hypothesis in Ghana: An Empirical investigation. Energy, 124, 706-719.
• Sun, C., Zhang, F., Xu, M. (2017). Investigation of pollution haven hypothesis for China: An ARDL approach with breakpoint unit root tests. Journal of Cleaner Production, 161, 153-164.
• Tamazian, A., Chousa, J. P., Vadlamannati K. C. (2009). Does higher economic and financial development lead to environmental degradation: evidence from BRIC countries. Energy Policy, 37 (1), 246-53.
• Tamazian, A., Rao B. B. (2010). Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies. Energy Econ, 32 (1), 137-45.
• The World Bank. (2018). http://databank.worldbank.org/data/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG/1ff4a498/Popular-Indicators. Erişim Tarihi: 21.04.2018.
• Vukina, T., Beghin, J. C., Solakoğlu, E. G. (1999). Transition to Markets and the Environment: Effects of the Change in the Composition of Manufacturing Output. Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Working Paper 99-WP 216.
• Tang, C. F. & Tan, B. W. (2015). The impact of energy consumption, income and foreign direct investment on carbon dioxide emissions in Vietnam. Energy, 79, 447-54.
• Zeren, F. (2015). Doğrudan Yabancı Yatırımların CO2 Emisyonuna Etkisi: Kirlilik Hale Hipotezi mi Kirlilik Cenneti Hipotezi mi. Journal of Yasar University, 10 (37), 6442-6448.
• Zhang, C., Zhou, X. (2016). Does foreign direct investment lead to lower CO2 emissions? Evidence from a regional analysis in China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev, 58, 943-951.
• Zhang, Z., Zhu, K., Hewings, G. J. D. (2017). A multi-regional input–output analysis of the pollution haven hypothesis from the perspective of global production fragmentation. Energy Economics, 64, 13-23.
• Zheng, D., Shi, M. (2017). Multiple environmental policies and pollution haven hypothesis: Evidence from China’s polluting industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 295-304.
• Zheng, S., Kahn, M. E., Liu, H. (2010). Towards a system of open cities in China: home prices, FDI flows and air quality in 35 major cities. Reg Sci Urban Econ, 40 (1), 1-10.
• Zhu, H., Duan, L., Guo, Y., Yu, K. (2016). The effects of FDI, economic growth and energy consumption on carbon emissions in ASEAN-5: evidence from panel quantile regression. Econ Model, 58, 237-248.
• Xing, Y., Kolstad, C. D. (1996). Environment and Trade: A Review of Theory and Issues, MPRA Paper No. 27694, Posted 28.