Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

AWAKEN of FORTHCOMING DANGER: THE RELATIONSHIP between ECONOMIC GROWTH, POPULATION and ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION

Year 2016, Volume: 19 Issue: 41.YIL ÖZEL SAYISI, 57 - 73, 28.12.2016

Abstract

Studies with
regard to environment had attention in early 20th century and this
trend has thoroughly increased after World War II. After the term of
environment is accepted as an economic term studies about it are getting
deeper. Especially, the issue of global environmental pollution has been rising
since 1990s and economies of the globe are busy to save environment by
different public policies. There is a linear relationship between economic
growth and environmental pollution. Even though studies conducted in the
literature revealed different conclusions, the common feature about it is that
the relationship between these two variables is strong. Commonly, economic
growth and pollution have the same direction but some studies revealed that
there is a negative relationship between these two phenomena. There are many different
studies focus on CO2-economic growth relations in literature, but
concept of this study is more comprehensive. The data includes 61 countries’
carbon dioxide emissions, population, level of per capita income, which of 27
are from high-income, 24 are from middle-income, 10 are from low-income. A
Panel Data Analysis is conducted for the annual cross-country data which is
between 1990-2013 (24 years, annual data) in order to examine relationship
between economic growth and environmental pollution. The findings of the study
are matching the general trend of literature. Three variables interact with
each other. Population is granger cause of wealth and vice versa. At the same
time time population is granger cause carbon emissions rate but there are no interaction
from carbon emissions rate to population. On the other side, increasing of per
capita welfare is granger cause of carbon emissions and vice versa. It is
revealed in this study that there is a strong and important correlation between
population, level of per capita income and carbon dioxide emissions.

References

  • Arouri, M.El Hedi, A.Ben Youssef, H.M’henni ve C.Rault; (2012), “Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in Middle East and North African Countries,” Energy Policy 45 (2012), pp:342-349.
  • Azomahou, T., F.Laisney ve P.Nguyen Van; (2005), “Economic Development and CO2 Emissions: A Nonparametric Panel Approach,” Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper, No:05-56, Mannheim, Germany.
  • Bovenberg, A. Lans ve S.Smulders; (1995), “Environmental Quality and Pollution-Augmenting Technological Change in a Two-Sector Endogenous Growth Model,” Journal of Public Economics, 57, pp:369-391.
  • Çınar, S., M.Yılmazer ve T.A. Fazlılar; (2012), “Kirlilik Yaratan Sektörlerin Ticareti ve Çevre: Gelişmiş ve Gelişmekte Olan Ülkeler Karşılaştırması,” Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 13 (2), pp:212-226.
  • Dinda, S.; (2004), “Envirnmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey,” Ecological Economics, 49 (2004), pp:431-455.
  • Gergel, S.E., E.M. Bennet, Ben K. Greenfield, S.King, K.A. Overdevest ve B.Sturnborg; (2004), “A Test of the Environmental Kuznets Curve Using Long-Term Watershed Inputs,” Ecological Applications, 14, pp:555-570.
  • Grossman, G.M ve A.B. Krueger; (1994), “Economic Growth and the Environment,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, No:4634, USA.
  • International Energy Agency; (2016), Country Statistics, http://www.iea.org/statistics/, (Erişim:24.04.2016).
  • Jebli, M.Ben, S.Ben Youssef ve İ.Öztürk; (2016), “Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypotesis: The Role of Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption and Trade in OECD Countries,” Ecological Indicators, 60, pp:824-831.
  • Kaika, D. ve E.Zervas; (2013), “The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Theory-Part A: Concept, Causes and the CO2 Emissions Case,” Energy Policy, 62 (2013), pp:1392-1402.
  • Kanjilal, K. ve S.Ghosh; (2013), “Environmental Kuznets Curve for India: Evidence from Tests for Cointegration with Unknow Structural Breaks,” Energy Policy, 56 820139, pp:509-515.
  • Karakaş, A.; (2014), “Economic Growth-CO2 Emissions Relationship in OECD and Non-OECD Countries: A Panel Data Analysis fort he Period between 1990-2011,” The International Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, ISSN:2321-9203, Vol:2, No:3,pp: 57-62, March 2014.
  • Knight, K.W. ve J.B. Schor; (2014), “Economic Growth and Climate Change: A Cross-National Analysis of Territorial and Comsumption Based Carbon Emission in High Income Countries,” Sustainability, 2014, 6, pp:3722-3731.
  • Kuznets, S.; (1955), “Economic Growth and Income Iequality,” The American Economic Review, Vol:XLV, No:1, March 1955.
  • Lin, B. ve M.Moubarak; (2014), “Renewable Energy Consumption-Economic Growth Nexus for China,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol:40, December 2014, pp:111-117.
  • Long, X., E.Y.Naminse, J.Du ve J.Zhuang; (2015), “Nonrenewable Energy, Renewable Energy, Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth in China from 1952 to 2012,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol:52, December 2015, pp:680-688.
  • Ong, S.M. ve S.Kun Sek; (2013), “Interactions between Economic Growth and Environmental Quality: Panel and Non-Panel Analyses,” Applied Mathematical Sciences, Vol:7, No:14, pp:687-700.
  • Panayotou, T.; (1993), Empirical Tests and Policy Analysis of Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development, World Employment Programme Research Working Paper, Wep 2-22, WP:238, Geneva.
  • Saboori, B., J.Sulaiman ve S.Mohd; (2012), “Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in Malaysia: A Cointegration Analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve,” Energy Policy, 51 (2012), pp:184-191.

Yaklaşan Tehlikenin Farkına Varmak: İktisadi Büyüme, Nüfus ve Çevre Kirliliği İlişkisi

Year 2016, Volume: 19 Issue: 41.YIL ÖZEL SAYISI, 57 - 73, 28.12.2016

Abstract

Çevre ile ilgili çalışmalar 20. yüzyılın başlarından
itibaren iktisat yazınında ilgi görmesine karşın İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrasında
bu eğilim iyiden iyiye artmıştır. Çevrenin iktisadi bir değişken olarak kabul
edilmesi ile birlikte bu alandaki çalışmalar derinleştirilmiştir. Özellikle,
1990’lardan sonra küresel çevre kirliliğine ve çevrenin korunmasına yönelik
eğilimler ve kamusal politikalar artmaya başlamıştır. Ekonomik büyüme ve çevre
kirliliği arasında doğrusal bir bağlantı vardır. Literatürde, yapılan
araştırmalardan farklı sonuçlar çıkmasına rağmen bu iki değişken arasındaki
bağlantının güçlü olduğu görülmektedir. Ekonomik büyüme ile kirlilik arasında
çoğunlukla eş yönlü ilişki tespit edilirken bazı çalışmalarda ekonomik büyüme
ile kirlilik arasında ters yönlü bir ilişki de tespit edilmektedir. Ekonomik
büyüme ile çevre kirliliği arasındaki ilişkiye odaklanmış olan çok sayıda
çalışma mevcuttur ancak bu çalışma diğerlerinden biraz daha kapsamlıdır. Bu
çalışmada, dünya bankası verilerinden hareketle sınıflandırılmış olan 27 yüksek
gelir gurubundaki ülke, 24 orta gelir gurubundaki ülke ve 10 düşük gelir
gurubundaki ülkeden olan toplamda 61 ülkenin 1990-2013 yılları arasındaki (24
yıl, yıllık veriler)  ele alınarak bir
panel veri analizi yapılmıştır. Çalışmada elde edilen bulgular literatürün
genel eğilimleri ile uyumludur. Üç farklı değişkenin birbiri ile etkileşimi söz
konusudur. Nüfus kişi başı refahın bir Granger nedenidir. Aynı zamanda nüfus
karbondioksit artışına neden olurken tersi durumun geçerli olmadığı
görülmektedir. Diğer yandan, kişi başı refah karbon emisyonunu artırırken bunun
tersi de geçerlidir. Gelir, nüfus ve kirlilik verileri, Uluslararası Enerji
Ajansı (IEA) yıllık ülke verileridir. Analiz sonucunda, nüfus, gelir düzeyi ve
CO2 emisyonu arasında güçlü bir ilişkinin varlığı test edilmiştir. 

References

  • Arouri, M.El Hedi, A.Ben Youssef, H.M’henni ve C.Rault; (2012), “Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in Middle East and North African Countries,” Energy Policy 45 (2012), pp:342-349.
  • Azomahou, T., F.Laisney ve P.Nguyen Van; (2005), “Economic Development and CO2 Emissions: A Nonparametric Panel Approach,” Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper, No:05-56, Mannheim, Germany.
  • Bovenberg, A. Lans ve S.Smulders; (1995), “Environmental Quality and Pollution-Augmenting Technological Change in a Two-Sector Endogenous Growth Model,” Journal of Public Economics, 57, pp:369-391.
  • Çınar, S., M.Yılmazer ve T.A. Fazlılar; (2012), “Kirlilik Yaratan Sektörlerin Ticareti ve Çevre: Gelişmiş ve Gelişmekte Olan Ülkeler Karşılaştırması,” Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 13 (2), pp:212-226.
  • Dinda, S.; (2004), “Envirnmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey,” Ecological Economics, 49 (2004), pp:431-455.
  • Gergel, S.E., E.M. Bennet, Ben K. Greenfield, S.King, K.A. Overdevest ve B.Sturnborg; (2004), “A Test of the Environmental Kuznets Curve Using Long-Term Watershed Inputs,” Ecological Applications, 14, pp:555-570.
  • Grossman, G.M ve A.B. Krueger; (1994), “Economic Growth and the Environment,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, No:4634, USA.
  • International Energy Agency; (2016), Country Statistics, http://www.iea.org/statistics/, (Erişim:24.04.2016).
  • Jebli, M.Ben, S.Ben Youssef ve İ.Öztürk; (2016), “Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypotesis: The Role of Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption and Trade in OECD Countries,” Ecological Indicators, 60, pp:824-831.
  • Kaika, D. ve E.Zervas; (2013), “The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Theory-Part A: Concept, Causes and the CO2 Emissions Case,” Energy Policy, 62 (2013), pp:1392-1402.
  • Kanjilal, K. ve S.Ghosh; (2013), “Environmental Kuznets Curve for India: Evidence from Tests for Cointegration with Unknow Structural Breaks,” Energy Policy, 56 820139, pp:509-515.
  • Karakaş, A.; (2014), “Economic Growth-CO2 Emissions Relationship in OECD and Non-OECD Countries: A Panel Data Analysis fort he Period between 1990-2011,” The International Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, ISSN:2321-9203, Vol:2, No:3,pp: 57-62, March 2014.
  • Knight, K.W. ve J.B. Schor; (2014), “Economic Growth and Climate Change: A Cross-National Analysis of Territorial and Comsumption Based Carbon Emission in High Income Countries,” Sustainability, 2014, 6, pp:3722-3731.
  • Kuznets, S.; (1955), “Economic Growth and Income Iequality,” The American Economic Review, Vol:XLV, No:1, March 1955.
  • Lin, B. ve M.Moubarak; (2014), “Renewable Energy Consumption-Economic Growth Nexus for China,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol:40, December 2014, pp:111-117.
  • Long, X., E.Y.Naminse, J.Du ve J.Zhuang; (2015), “Nonrenewable Energy, Renewable Energy, Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth in China from 1952 to 2012,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol:52, December 2015, pp:680-688.
  • Ong, S.M. ve S.Kun Sek; (2013), “Interactions between Economic Growth and Environmental Quality: Panel and Non-Panel Analyses,” Applied Mathematical Sciences, Vol:7, No:14, pp:687-700.
  • Panayotou, T.; (1993), Empirical Tests and Policy Analysis of Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development, World Employment Programme Research Working Paper, Wep 2-22, WP:238, Geneva.
  • Saboori, B., J.Sulaiman ve S.Mohd; (2012), “Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in Malaysia: A Cointegration Analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve,” Energy Policy, 51 (2012), pp:184-191.
There are 19 citations in total.

Details

Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Adem Karakaş

Publication Date December 28, 2016
Submission Date December 29, 2016
Published in Issue Year 2016 Volume: 19 Issue: 41.YIL ÖZEL SAYISI

Cite

APA Karakaş, A. (2016). Yaklaşan Tehlikenin Farkına Varmak: İktisadi Büyüme, Nüfus ve Çevre Kirliliği İlişkisi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 19(41.YIL ÖZEL SAYISI), 57-73.

Journal of Selçuk University Social Sciences Vocational School is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY NC).