Seçilmiş Ekonomik Değişkenlerin Ekolojik Ayak İzine Etkisinin Analizi: BRICS-T Ülkeleri Örneği

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 31 Sayı: 58, 277 - 288, 26.10.2023

Erhan Duman

https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2023.04.14

Cited By: 2

Öz

Küreselleşme, hızlı kentleşme, aşırı tüketim, iklim değişikliği ve artan sanayileşme faaliyetleri insanlığın çevre üzerindeki talep baskısının artmasına neden olmuştur. Bu çalışmada BRICS-T ülkelerinde 1992-2018 dönemine ait kişi başına düşen gelir, dışa açıklık, doğrudan yabancı yatırım, yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ve toplam ar-ge harcamalarının ekolojik ayak izine etkisi FMOLS ve DOLS yöntemleriyle araştırılmıştır. İnceleme sonucunda, BRICS-T ülkelerinde kişi başına düşen gelir, dışa açıklık ve doğrudan yabancı yarımlardaki %1 puanlık artış sırasıyla ekolojik ayak izini %0,21, %0,29 ve 0,39 oranında artırmaktadır. Yenilebilir enerji tüketimi ve ar-ge harcamalarındaki %1 puanlık artış ise ekolojik ayak izini %0,71 ve %0,55 oranında azaltmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

BRICS-T Ülkeleri, Seçilmiş Ekonomik Değişkenler, Ekolojik Ayak İzi, Panel Veri Analizi

Analysis of the Effect of Selected Economic Variables on Ecological Footprint: The Case of BRICS-T Countries

Öz

Globalisation, rapid urbanisation, excessive consumption, climate change and increasing industrialisation activities have increased the demand pressure of humanity on the environment. In this study, the effects of per capita income, openness, foreign direct investment, renewable energy consumption and total R&D (research and development) expenditures on the ecological footprint of the BRICS-T (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa-Türkiye) countries for the period 1992-2018 were investigated by FMOLS (Fully Modified Least Squares) and DOLS (Dynamic Least Squares) methods. As a result of the review, a 1% percentage increase in per capita income, openness and foreign direct investment in BRICS-T countries increased the ecological footprint by 0,21%, 0,29% and 0,39%, respectively. The 1% point increase in renewable energy consumption and R&D expenditures reduces the ecological footprint by 0.71% and 0.55%.

Anahtar Kelimeler

BRICS-T Countries, Selected Economic Variables, Ecological Footprint, Panel Data Analysis

Kaynakça

• Adedoyin, F.F. et al. (2020), “An Assessment of Environmental Sustainability Corridor: The Role of Economic Expansion and Research and Development in EU Countries”, Science of The Total Environment, 713(1), 1-10.
• Al-Mulali, U. & I. Ozturk (2015), “The Effect of Energy Consumption, Urbanization, Trade Openness, Industrial Output, and The Political Stability on The Environmental Degradation in The MENA (Middle East And North African) Region”, Energy, 84(1), 382-389.
• Al-Mulali, U. et al. (2015), “Does Moving Towards Renewable Energy Cause Water and Land Inefficiency? An Empirical Investigation”, Energy Policy, 93, 303-314.
• Ansari, M.A. (2022), “Re-visiting The Environmental Kuznets Curve for ASEAN: A Comparison Between Ecological Footprint and Carbon Dioxide Emissions”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 168, 1-14.
• Aşıcı, A.A. & S. Acar (2016), “Does Income Growth Relocate Ecological Footprint?”, Ecological Indicator, 61, 707-714.
• Bagliani, M. et al. (2008), “A Consumption-Based Approach to Environmental Kuznets Curves Using The Ecological Footprint Indicator”, Ecological Economics, 65(3), 650-661.
• Bel, G. & S. Joseph (2018), “Climate Change Mitigation and The Role of Technological Change: Impact on Selected Headline Targets of Europe's 2020 Climate and Energy Package”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 3798-3807.
• Doytch, N. (2020), “The Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on The Ecological Footprints of Nations”, Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 8, 1-13.
• Duman, E. (2018), Teknolojik-Ekonomik Büyüme Modelleri ve Türkiye, İksad Publication House, İstanbul.
• Gallagher, K.P. (2009), “Economic Globalization and The Environment”, Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 34(1), 279-304.
• Ghita, S.I. et al. (2018), “Perspectives of Ecological Footprint in European Context Under the Impact of Information Society and Sustainable Development”, Sustainability, 10(9), 1-25.
• Global Footprint Network (2022), Supply And Demand, Explore Data, <https://data.footprintnetwork.org/?_ga=2.126881989.991414474.15810135641420927460.1581013564#/exploreData>, 10.10.2022.
• Global Footprint Network (2022), Our Ecological Footprint, Our Work, <https://www.footprintnetwork.org/our-work/ecological-footprint/>, 09.10.2022.
• Grossman, G.M. & A.B. Krueger (1991), “Environmental Impacts of A North American Free Trade Agreement”, National Bureau Economic Research, 39(14), 1-57.
• Gülmez, A. vd. (2021), “Ekonomik Büyüme, Ticari Açıklık ve Enerji Tüketiminin Ekolojik Ayak İzine Etkileri: G7 Ülkeleri İçin Panel Eşbütünleşme Analizi”, Econder International Academic Journal, 5(2), 329-342.
• Hervieux, M.S. & O. Darné (2015), “Environmental Kuznets Curve And Ecological Footprint: A Time Series Analysis”, Economics Bulletin, 35(1),814-826.
• Hsiao, C. (2003), Analysis of Panel Data, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Johansen, S. (1988), “Statistical Analysis of Cointegration Vectors”, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(1), 231-254.
• International Energy Services (2022), Statistics, Online Data Services, R&D Budgets, <http://wds.iea.org/WDS/Common/Login/login.aspx>, 08.10.2022.
• Irshad, H. & A. Hussain (2017), “Analysis of Ecological Efficiency and Its Influencing Factors in Developing Countries”, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Department of Environmental Economics, Working Paper, No. 11.
• Kao, C. (1999), “Spurious Regression and Residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Panel Data”, Journal of Econometrics, 90, 1-44.
• Kazgan, G. (1985), Ekonomide Dışa Açık Büyüme, Altın Kitaplar Yayınevi, İstanbul.
• Kılınç, E.C. (2021), “Ekolojik Ayak İzi-Enerji Ar-Ge Harcamaları İlişkisi: OECD Ülkeleri Örneği”, Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 14(2), 527-541.
• Le, T.H. et al. (2016), “Trade Openness and Environmental Quality: International Evidence”, Energy Policy, 92, 45-55.
• Murshed, M. et al. (2022), “Foreign Direct Investments, Renewable Electricity Output, And Ecological Footprints: Do Financial Globalization Facilitate Renewable Energy Transition and Environmental Welfare in Bangladesh?”, Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, 29, 33-78.
• Pata, U.K. & V. Yılancı (2020), “Financial Development, Globalization and Ecological Footprint in G7: Further Evidence from Threshold Cointegration and Fractional Frequency Causality Tests”, Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 27(2020), 803-825.
• Pedroni, P. (2000), “Fully-Modified OLS for Heterogeneous Cointegrated Panels”, Advances in Econometrics, 15, 93-130.
• The World Bank (2022), Countries and Economies, Data, <https://data.worldbank.org/country>, 08.09.2022.
• Wackernagel, M. & W. Rees (1996), Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth, New Society Publishers, Philadelphia.
• Wang, Y. et al. (2013), “Estimating the Environmental Kuznets Curve for Ecological Footprint At The Global Level: A Spatial Econometric Approach”, Ecological Indicator, 34, 15-21.