İnsani gelişme ve yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi çevresel sürdürülebilirlik için önemli mi? Türkiye için ampirik bir analiz

Year 2024, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 149 - 163, 31.12.2024

Şeyma Şahin Kutlu

https://doi.org/10.58588/aru-jfeas.1566884

Abstract

Günümüzde küresel ekonomilerin kalkınma anlayışının ana odak noktası sürdürülebilirlik kavramıdır. Bu anlayış ile ekonomik çıktılar, çevresel ve sosyal boyutlarıyla birlikte değerlendirilmektedir. Daha açık bir ifade ile, bu yaklaşım salt ekonomik çıktılara odaklanmaktan ziyade çevresel ve toplumsal faydaların da öncelendiği bir çerçeve sunmaktadır. Bu durum politika yapıcılara ekonomi ve çevre arasındaki çelişkide dengeyi sağlamaya yönelik sorumluluklar yüklemektedir. Bu çalışma, insani gelişme ile yenilenebilir enerji tüketiminin çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerindeki etkisini Türkiye ekonomisi için değerlendirmektedir. Ampirik analiz yöntemi olarak ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımının kullanıldığı çalışmanın veri aralığı 1990-2020 dönemidir. Çalışmanın amacı doğrultusunda ekolojik ayak izi, insani gelişme endeksi, yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ve sanayileşme değişkenleri analize dahil edilmiştir. Analizlerden elde edilen bulgular, uzun dönemde insani gelişmenin ekolojik ayak izini azaltarak çevresel sürdürülebilirliği desteklediğini göstermektedir. Bunun yanı sıra bulgular, yenilenebilir enerji tüketiminin ekolojik ayak izi üzerine kısa ve uzun dönemli etkisinin negatif olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Öte yandan çalışma bulguları, uzun dönemde sanayileşmenin Türkiye’de çevresel sürdürülebilirliği olumsuz yönde etkilediğine işaret etmektedir.

Keywords

İnsani Gelişme, Yenilenebilir Enerji Tüketimi, Türkiye

Are human development and renewable energy consumption important for environmental sustainability? An empirical analysis for Türkiye

Abstract

Today, the main focus of the development approach of global economies is the concept of sustainability. The evaluation of economic outcomes considers their environmental and social dimensions. This approach prioritizes environmental and social benefits rather than focusing solely on economic results. This situation imposes responsibilities on policymakers to ensure balance in the contradiction between the economy and the environment. The study examines the impact of human development and renewable energy consumption on environmental sustainability for the Turkish economy. The ARDL bounds test approach was used for the analysis. The analysis includes the periods 1990-2020. Ecological footprint, human development index, renewable energy consumption, and industrialization variables were included in the analysis. Findings from the analysis show that human development supports environmental sustainability by reducing its ecological footprint in the long term. In addition, the findings reveal that renewable energy consumption has a negative short—and long-term impact on ecological footprint. On the other hand, the study findings indicate that industrialization negatively affects Turkey's long-term environmental sustainability.

Keywords

Human Development, Renewable Energy Consumption, Türkiye

References

• Abid, M., Sakrafi, H., Gheraia, Z. ve Abdelli, H. (2022). Does renewable energy consumption affect ecological footprints in Saudi Arabia? A Bootstrap Causality Test. Renewable Energy, 189, 813-821.
• Achuo, E. D., Miamo, C. W. ve Nchofoung, T. N. (2022). Energy consumption and environmental sustainability: what lessons for posterity? Energy Reports, 8, 12491-12502.
• Akadiri S. S., Alola, A. A., Olasehinde-Williams, G. ve Etokakpan M.U. (2020). The role of electricity consumption, globalization and economic growth in carbon dioxide emissions and its implications for environmental sustainability targets. Science of The Total Environment, 708, 134653, 1-31.
• Al-Mulali, U., Saboori, B. ve Ozturk, I. (2015). Investigating the environmental kuznets curve hypothesis in Vietnam. Energy Policy, 76, 123-131.
• Alola, A. A., Bekun, F.V. ve Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Dynamic impact of trade policy, economic growth, fertility rate, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on ecological footprint in Europe. Science of the Total Environment, 685, 702-709.
• Altay Topçu, B. (2021). The impact of export, import, and renewable energy consumption on Turkey’s ecological footprint. Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting, 8(1), 31-38.
• Ansari, M.A. ve Villanthenkodath, M. A. (2021). Does tourism development promote ecological footprint? A nonlinear ARDL approach. Anatolia, 33(4), 614-626.
• Asongu, S. A., Iheonu, C.O. ve Odo, K. O. (2019). The conditional relationship between renewable energy and environmental quality in Sub-Saharan Africa. EXCAS Working Paper, 19074, 1-21.
• Balaguer, J. ve Cantavella, M. (2018). The role of education in the environmental kuznets curve, evidence from Australian Data. Energy Economics, 70(1), 289-296.
• Bano S., Zhao Y., Ahmad A., Wang, S. ve Liu, Y. (2018). Identifying the impacts of human capital on carbon emissions in Pakistan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 1082-1092.
• Behera, S. R. ve Dash, D. P. (2017). The effect of urbanization, energy consumption, and foreign direct investment on the carbon dioxide emission in the SSEA (South and Southeast Asian) region. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 70, 96-106.
• Berdysheva, S. ve Ikonnikova, S. (2021). The energy transition and shifts in fossil fuel use: the study of international energy trade and energy security dynamics. Energies, 14(17), 1-26.
• Birleşmiş Milletler Kalkınma Programı (2023). İnsani Gelişme Raporu, https://www.undp.org/tr/turkiye/publications/human-development-report-2023, Erişim Tarihi: 01.06.2024.
• Charfeddine, L. ve Kahia, M. (2019). Impact of renewable energy consumption and financial development on CO2 emissions and economic growth in the MENA region: a Panel Vector Autoregressive (PVAR) Analysis. Renewable Energy, 139, 198-213.
• Çamkaya, S., Karaaslan, A. ve Uçan, F. (2023). Investigation of the effect of human capital on environmental pollution: empirical evidence from Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 23925–23937.
• Çelik, S. ve Ünlü, A. (2024). Ticari açıklık ve çevre kirliliği ilişkisine yönelik ampirik kanıtlar: MINT ülkeleri örneği. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23(89), 144-158.
• Chang, S., Chen, B. ve Song, Y. (2023). Militarization, renewable energy utilization, and ecological footprints: evidence from RCEP economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 391, 136298.
• Chen Y., Lee C.C. ve Chen M. (2022). Ecological footprint, human capital, and urbanization. Energy Environment, 33(3), 1-4.
• Danish, Ulucak, R. ve Khan, S.U.D. (2020). Determinants of the ecological footprint: role of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanization. Sustainable Cities and Society, 54, 1-33.
• Dar, J. A. ve Asif, M. (2018). Does financial development improve environmental quality in Turkey? An application of endogenous structural breaks based cointegration approach. Management of Environmental Quality, 29(2), 368-384.
• Enerji ve Tabii Kaynaklar Bakanlığı (2022). 2022 Değerlendirme Toplantısı, https://enerji.gov.tr/haber-detay?id=21085, Erişim Tarihi: 15.03.2024.
• Grossman, G. ve Kreuger, A. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER Working Paper, 3914, 1-57.
• Hofert, M. I. (2010). Farewell to fossil fuels? Science, 329(5997), 1292–1294.
• İnal, V., Addi, H.M., Çakmak, E. E., Torusdağ, M. ve Çalışkan, M. (2022). The nexus between renewable energy, CO2 emissions, and economic growth: empirical evidence from African oil-producing countries. Energy Reports, 8, 1634-1643.
• Jain, M. ve Nagpal, A. (2019). Relationship between environmental sustainability and human development index: a case of selected South Asian Nations. Vision, 23(2), 125–133.
• Jeetoo, J. ve Chinyanga, E. R. (2023). A spatial econometric analysis of the environment kuznets curve and pollution haven hypothesis in Sub-Saharan Africa. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 58169–58188.
• Koçak, E. (2024). Yenilenebilir enerjinin ekolojik ayak izi üzerine etkisi: Türkiye örneği. Politik Ekonomik Kuram, 8(1), 256-265.
• Li, X. ve Ullah S. (2022). Caring for the environment: how CO2 emissions respond to human capital in BRICS economies? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 18036–18046.
• Munir, K. ve Riaz, N. (2019). Energy consumption and environmental quality in South Asia: evidence from panel non-linear ARDL. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 29307-29315.
• Nathaniel, S. P., Yalçıner, K. ve Bekun, F.V. (2021). Assessing the environmental sustainability corridor: linking natural resources, renewable energy, human capital, and ecological footprint in BRICS. Resources Policy, 70, 101924.
• Oliver, M.E. ve Upton, G.B. (2022). Are energy endowed countries responsible for conditional convergence? The Energy Journal, 43(3), 1-39.
• Omri, E. ve Saadaoui, H. (2022). An empirical ınvestigation of the relationships between nuclear energy, economic growth, trade openness, fossil fuels, and carbon emissions in France: fresh evidence using asymmetric cointegration. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 13224–13245.
• Opoku, E.E.O., Dogah, K. E. ve Aluko, O. A. (2022). The contribution of human development towards environmental sustainability. Energy Economics, 106, 1-15.
• Pata, U. K. ve Çağlar, A. E. (2021). Investigating the EKC hypothesis with renewable energy consumption, human capital, globalization and trade openness for China: Evidence from augmented ARDL approach with a structural break. Energy, 216, 119220.
• Patnaik, R. (2018). Impact of industrialization on environment and sustainable solutions – reflections from a South Indian region. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 120, 1-8.
• Pelău, C. ve Chinie, A.C. (2018). Econometric model for measuring the impact of the education level of the population on the recycling rate in a circular economy. Amfiteatru Economic, 20(48), 340-355.
• Pesaran, M.H., Shin, Y. ve Smith, R.S. (2001). Bound testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289-326.
• Şahin Kutlu, Ş. ve Kutlu, M. (2022). Turizm faaliyetlerinin ekolojik ayak izi üzerine etkisi: Türkiye örneği. Maliye Dergisi, 182, 233-249.
• Sargın, S. A., Baltacı, F., Katipoğlu, M., Erdik, C., Arbatlı, M. S., Karaardıç, H., Yumuşak A. ve Büyükcengiz, M. (2016). Öğretmen adaylarının çevreye karşı bilgi, davranış ve tutum düzeylerinin araştırılması. Education Sciences, 11(1), 1-22.
• Shah, W.U.H., Yasmeen, R. ve Padda, I.U.H. (2019). An analysis between financial development, institutions, and the environment: a global view. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 21437–21449.
• Shao, Q., Wang, X., Zhou, Q. ve Balogh, L. (2019). Pollution haven hypothesis revisited: a comparison of the BRICS and MINT countries based on VECM approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 227, 724-738.
• Sharif, A., Barış-Tüzemen, Ö., Uzuner, G., Öztürk, İ. ve Sinha, A. (2020). Revisiting the role of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on Turkey’s ecological footprint: evidence from quantile ARDL approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 57, 102138.
• Sharma, R., Sinha, A. ve Kautish, P. (2021). Does renewable energy consumption reduce ecological footprint? Evidence from eight developing countries of Asia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 285, 124867.
• Sulaiman, C., Abdul-Rahim, A.S. ve Ofozor, C. A. (2020). Does wood biomass energy use reduce CO2 emissions in European Union Member Countries? Evidence from 27 members. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 119996.
• Teixeira, A. A. C. ve Queirós, A. S. S. (2016). Economic growth, human capital and structural change: a dynamic panel data analysis. Research Policy, 45(8), 1636-1648.
• Usman, M., Makhdum, M. S. A. ve Kousar, R. (2020). Does financial ınclusion, renewable and non-renewable energy utilization accelerate ecological footprints and economic growth? Fresh evidence from 15 highest emitting countries. Sustainable Cities and Society, 65, 102590.
• Usta, C. (2023). Doğrudan yabancı yatırımlarının çevresel kirliliğe etkisi: N-11 ülkeleri örneği. Uluslararası Ekonomi, İşletme ve Politika Dergisi, 7(1), 58-73.
• Voumik, L. C. ve Ridwan, M. (2023). Impact of FDI, industrialization, and education on the environment in Argentina: ARDL approach. Heliyon, 9(1), 1-12.
• Wang, Z., Rasool, Y., Asghar, M. M. ve Wang, B. (2019). Dynamic linkages among CO2 emissions, human development, financial development, and globalization: empirical evidence based on PMG Long-Run panel estimation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 36248–36263.
• Yao, Y., Ivanovski, K., Inekwe, J. ve Smyth, R. (2019). Human capital and energy consumption: evidence from OECD countries. Energy Economics, 84, 104534.
• Yao, Y., Ivanovski, K., Inekwe, J. ve Smyth, R. (2020). Human capital and CO2 emissions in the long run. Energy Economics, 91, 104907.
• Zafar, A., Ullah, S., Majeed, M. T. ve Yasmeen, R. (2020). Environmental pollution in Asian economies: does the industrialisation matter? Opec Energy Review, 44(3), 227-248.
• Zafar, M. W., Zaidi, S. A. H., Khan, N.R., Mirza, F. M., Hou, F. ve Kirmani, S. A. A. (2019). The impact of natural resources, human capital, and foreign direct investment on the ecological footprint: the case of the United States. Resources Policy, 63, 101428.
• Zhu, D., Mortazavi, S. M., Maleki, A., Aslani, A. ve Yousefi, H. (2020). Analysis of the robustness of energy supply in Japan: role of renewable energy. Energy Reports, 6, 378-391.