Cumhuriyetin 100. Yılında Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (EKC) Hipotezinin Tarım-Çevre Göstergeleriyle Sürdürülebilir Büyüme İçin Yeniden İncelenmesi

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 16 Sayı: Cumhuriyet’in 100. Yılında Türkiye'nin İktisadi ve Siyasi Gelişimi, 50 - 61, 29.10.2024

Maya Moalla

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, 2000Q1'den 2020Q4'e kadar olan dönemde Türkiye'deki Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (EKC) hipotezini yeniden incelemektir.
Tasarım/Yöntem: EKC hipotezini doğrulamak için, 13 değişkene dayalı olarak Temel Bileşen Analizi (PCA) ile yeniden yapılandırılan tarım-çevre göstergeleri dikkate alınarak Gecikmesi Dağıtılmış Otoregresif Model (ARDL) analizi yapılmıştır.
Bulgular: Sonuçlar, başlangıçta ekonomik faaliyetlerin emisyonları artırdığı, ancak sürdürülebilir yatırımların temiz teknolojilere ve verimliliğe yöneltilmesiyle çevrenin iyileştiği Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (EKC) hipotezini doğrulamaktadır. Çalışma, sürdürülebilir tarım uygulamalarının teşvik edilmesini, temiz teknolojilere ve altyapıya yönelik yatırımların artırılmasını ve metan emisyonlarını azaltmak için düzenleyici tedbirlerin güçlendirilmesini önermektedir. Bu sonuçlar, mevcut literatürle uyumlu olup onu desteklemektedir.
Sınırlılıklar: Bu çalışmanın sınırlılıkları, tarım-çevre göstergelerinin veri kısıtlamalarından kaynaklanmaktadır.
Özgünlük/Değer: Bu araştırma, Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (EKC) hipotezini doğrulamak için Narayan ve Narayan'ın (2010) alternatif yöntemini kullanmakta, Cole et al. (1997) yöntemini takip ederek geniş bir çevresel gösterge dizisini analiz etmekte, Türkiye'nin ekonomik uyumunu sürdürülebilir kalkınma hedefleriyle değerlendirmek amacıyla tarım-çevre göstergelerine odaklanmakta ve bu göstergeleri 13 değişken kullanarak Temel Bileşen Analizi (PCA) ile yeniden yapılandırmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

EKC hipotezi, Büyüme, Tarım-Çevre göstergeleri

Reinvestigating the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Hypothesis with agri-environmental Indicators for Sustainable Growth in the 100th Anniversary of the Republic

Öz

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to re-investigate the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis in Turkey over the period spanning from 2000Q1 to 2020Q4.
Design/Methodology: ARDL analysis was conducted to validate the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis considering the agri-environmental indicators reconstructed by utilizing the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) based on 13 variables.
Findings: The results corroborate the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis, where initially economic activities boost releases, but sustained investments in cleaner technologies and efficiency eventually improve the environment. The study suggests promoting sustainable agricultural practices, increasing investments in clean technologies and infrastructure, and enhancing regulatory measures to mitigate methane emissions. These results align with and support the existing body of literature.
Limitations: The data limitation of agri-environmental indicators.
Originality/Value: it applies Narayan and Narayan's (2010) alternative method to validate the EKC hypothesis, offers a nuanced, EKC analysis by examining a wide range of environmental indicators following Cole et al. (1997), focuses on agri-environmental indicators to assess Turkey's economic alignment with sustainable development goals, and reconstructs these indicators using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with 13 variables.

Anahtar Kelimeler

EKC hypothesis, Growth, Agri-environmental indicators

Kaynakça

• Alharthi, M., Dogan, E., & Taskin, D. (2021). Analysis of CO2 Emissions and Energy Consumption by Sources in MENA Countries: Evidence from Quantile Regressions. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(29), 38901–38908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13356-0
• Andreoni, J. & Levinson, A. (2001). The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Public Economics, 80(2), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0047-2727(00)00110-9
• Beşe, E. & Friday, H. S. (2022). The Relationship Between External Debt and Emissions and Ecological Footprint Through Economic Growth: Turkey. Cogent Economics & Finance, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2022.2063525
• Bekun, F. V., Alola, A. A., Gyamfi, B. A., & Yaw, S. S. (2021). The relevance of EKC hypothesis in energy intensity real-output trade-off for sustainable environment in EU-27. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14251-4
• Boluk, G. & Karaman, S. (2024). The impact of agriculture, energy consumption and economic growth on ecological footprint: testing the agriculture-induced EKC for Türkiye. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04672-9
• Cho, C. H., Chu, Y. P., & Yang, H. Y. (2013). An Environment Kuznets Curve for GHG Emissions: A Panel Cointegration Analysis. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 9(2), 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567241003773192
• Cole, M. A., Rayner, A. J., & Bates, J. M. (1997). The environmental Kuznets curve: an empirical analysis. Environment and Development Economics, 2(4), 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355770x97000211
• Çobanoğulları, G. (2024). Exploring the link between CO2 emissions, health expenditure, and economic growth in Türkiye: evidence from the ARDL model. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04835-8
• Daştan, M. & Eygü, H. (2023). An empirical investigation of the link between economic growth, unemployment, and ecological footprint in Turkey: Bridging the EKC and EPC hypotheses. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04106-y
• Degirmencioglu Aydin, N. & Aydin, M. (2023). An Environmental Impact Assessment of Major Economic Sectors in Turkey: Economics and Law Perspective. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01400-y
• Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey. Ecological Economics, 49(4), 431–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.011
• Ehrlich, I. (1996). Crime, punishment and the market for offenses. Journal of Eco- nomic Perspective, 10(1), 43-67.
• Farooq, S., Ozturk, I., Majeed, M. T., & Akram, R. (2022). Globalization and CO2 emissions in the presence of EKC: A global panel data analysis. Gondwana Research, 106, 367–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2022.02.002
• Fujii, H. & Managi, S. (2015). Economic development and multiple air pollutant emissions from the industrial sector. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(3), 2802–2812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5523-2
• Galeotti, M., Lanza, A., & Pauli, F. (2006). Reassessing the environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: A robustness exercise. Ecological Economics, 57(1), 152–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.031
• Grossman, G. & Krueger, A. (1991). Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914
• Gawande, K., Berrens, R. P., & Bohara, A. K. (2001). A consumption-based theory of the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecological Economics, 37(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-8009(00)00269-x
• IEA. (2022). Global Methane Tracker 2022. IEA. Paris https://www.iea.org/re- ports/global-methane-tracker-2022, License: CC BY 4.0
• Işık, C., Ongan, S., Bulut, U., Karakaya, S., Irfan, M., Alvarado, R., Ahmad, M., & Rehman, A. (2021). Reinvestigating the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis by a composite model constructed on the Armey curve hypothesis with government spending for the US States. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(11), 16472–16483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16720-2
• Karahasan, B. C. & Pinar, M. (2021). The environmental Kuznets curve for Turkish provinces: a spatial panel data approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(17), 25519–25531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17706-w
• Kuznets, P. & Simon, P. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. American Economic Review 45, 1 – 28.
• Lıpford, J. W. & Yandle, B. (2010). Environmental Kuznets curves, carbon emissions, and public choice. Environment and Development Economics, 15(4), 417–438. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355770x10000124
• Liu, W. (2020). EKC test study on the relationship between carbon dioxide emission and regional economic growth. Carbon Management, 11(4), 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2020.1768776
• Magazzino, C., Madaleno, M., Waqas, M., & Leogrande, A. (2024). Exploring the determinants of methane emissions from a worldwide perspective using panel data and machine learning analyses. Environmental Pollution, 123807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2024.123807
• Ojaghlou, M., Ugurlu, E., Kadłubek, M., & Thalassinos, E. (2023). Economic Activities and Management Issues for the Environment: An Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) and STIRPAT Analysis in Turkey. Resources, 12(5), 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources12050057
• Osabuohien, E. S., Efobi, U. R., & Gitau, C. M. W. (2013). External Intrusion, Internal Tragedy: Environmental Pollution and Multinational Corporations in Sub-Saharan Africa. In Principles and Strategies to Balance Ethical, Social and Environmental Concerns with Corporate Requirements (pp. 93–118). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/s2051-5030(2013)0000012010
• Panayotou, T. (1995). Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development. In Beyond Rio (pp. 13–36). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24245-0_2.
• Pesaran, M. H. & Shin, Y. (1999). An Autoregressive Distributed-Lag Modelling Approach to Cointegration Analysis. In S. Strom (Ed.), Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century (pp. 371–413). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139052221.011.
• Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.616
• Narayan, P. K. & Narayan, S. (2010). Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: Panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy Policy, 38(1), 661–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.09.005.
• Shafik, N. (1994). Economic Development and Environmental Quality: An Econometric Analysis. Oxford Economic Papers, 46(Supplement_1), 757–773. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/46.supplement_1.757.
• Shahbaz, M., Raghutla, C., Song, M., Zameer, H., & Jiao, Z. (2020). Public-private partnerships investment in energy as new determinant of CO2 emissions: The role of technological innovations in China. Energy Economics, 86, 104664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104664.
• Shahbaz, M. & Sinha, A. (2019). Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: a literature survey. Journal of Economic Studies, 46(1), 106–168. https://doi.org/10.1108/jes-09-2017-0249
• Shokoohi, Z., Dehbidi, N. K., & Tarazkar, M. H. (2022). Energy intensity, economic growth and environmental quality in populous Middle East countries. Energy, 239, 122164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.122164
• Stern, D. I. (2004). The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419–1439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.03.004.
• Taguchi, H. (2013). The environmental kuznets curve in Asia: The case of sulphur and carbon emissions. Asia-Pacific Development Journal, 19(2), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.18356/9eb232aa-en
• Touitou, M. & Langarita, R. (2021). Environmental Kuznets Curve for Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth in Algeria. Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, 15(4), 418–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/09738010211036261
• WDI (2018). World Development Indicator. World Bank. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
• Zeraibi, A., Radulescu, M., Khan, M. K., Hafeez, M., & Jahanger, A. (2023). Analyzing the linkage between public debt, renewable electricity output, and CO2 emissions in emerging economies: Does the N-shaped environmental Kuznets curve exist? Energy & Environment, 0958305X2311516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305x231151678