YEŞİL ENERJİ VE YEŞİL BEŞERİ SERMAYE AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ ÜLKELERİNDE ÇEVRE KALİTESİNİN GELİŞMESİNE KATKI SUNAR MI?

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 27 Sayı: 1, 406 - 433

Melike Atay Polat , Suzan Ergün

https://doi.org/10.16953/deusosbil.1561360

Öz

Ekonomik büyüme temel makroekonomik hedeflerin başında gelir ve dünya çapındaki ekonomistlerin odak noktalarından birini oluşturur. Diğer yandan ekonomik büyüme için gerekli kaynakların neredeyse tamamı çevre kirliliğine neden olmaktadır. Bu nedenle küresel ekonominin gelişmesiyle birlikte çevre sorunları ciddi boyutlara ulaşmış ve çeşitli uluslararası kuruluşları ve ülkeleri endişelendirmiştir. Her geçen gün artan çevre kirliliği ve neden olduğu olumsuzluklar ülkeleri bu soruna çözümler bulmaya mecbur bırakmaktadır. Dolayısıyla çevre kalitesine katkı yapacak faktörlerin belirlenmesi sürdürülebilir büyüme için kritik öneme sahiptir. Bu çalışma yeşil enerji ve yeşil beşeri sermayenin çevre kalitesi üzerindeki etkilerini Avrupa Birliği örneğinde incelemiştir. Analizlerde ikinci nesil panel veri testleri kullanılmıştır. Eşbütünleşme testi bulgularına göre değişkenler arasındaki uzun dönem ilişkinin belirlenmesinin ardından, eşbütünleşme katsayılarını tahmin etmek için FMOLS ve DOLS tahmincilerine başvurulmuştur. İlgili tahmincilerin bulgularına göre AB ülkelerinde yeşil beşeri sermaye ve yeşil enerji çevresel kaliteyi iyileştirirken, doğal kaynaklar çevresel kirliliği artırmaktadır. Son olarak Dumitrescu-Hurlin nedensellik bulguları değişkenler arasında çeşitli nedensellik ilişkisini doğrulamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Çevre Kalitesi, Yeşil Enerji, Yeşil Beşeri Sermaye, Avrupa Birliği

DO GREEN ENERGY AND GREEN HUMAN CAPITAL CONTRIBUTE TO THE IMPROVEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY EUROPEAN UNION COUNTRIES?

Öz

Economic growth is one of the main macroeconomic objectives and is one of the focal points of economists around the world. On the other hand, almost all of the resources required for economic growth cause environmental pollution. Therefore, with the development of the global economy, environmental problems have reached serious dimensions and have worried various international organizations and countries. Increasing environmental pollution and the negativities it causes force countries to find solutions to this problem. Therefore, determining the factors that will contribute to environmental quality is critical for sustainable growth. This study examined the effects of green energy and green human capital on environmental quality in the case of the European Union. Second generation panel tests were used in the analyses. After determining the long-term relationship between the variables according to the cointegration test findings, FMOLS and DOLS estimators were used to estimate the cointegration coefficients. According to the findings of relevant forecasters, while green human capital and green energy improve environmental quality in EU countries, natural resources increase environmental pollution. Finally, Dumitrescu-Hurlin causality findings confirmed various causal relationships among the variables.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Environmental Quality, Green Energy, Green Human Capital, European Union

Kaynakça

• Adebayo, T. S., Ullah, S., Kartal, M. T., Ali, K., Pata, U. K., & Ağa, M. (2023). Endorsing sustainable development in BRICS: The role of technological innovation, renewable energy consumption, and natural resources in limiting carbon emission. Science of the Total Environment, 859, 160181.
• Ahakwa, I., Xu, Y., & Tackie, E. A. (2023). Greening human capital towards environmental quality in Ghana: Insight from the novel dynamic ARDL simulation approach. Energy Policy, 176, 113514.
• Ahakwa, I. (2024). Towards land degradation neutrality: Does green energy and green human capital matter?. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 197, 114396.
• Ahakwa, I., & Tackie, E. A. (2024). Natural resources as a double-edged sword towards ecological quality: Can environmental regulations and green human capital rectify the adverse impacts?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 457, 142436.
• Ahakwa, I., Tackie, E. A., Tackie, F. K., Mangudhla, T., Baig, J., ul Islam, S., & Sarpong, F. A. (2024). Greening the path to carbon neutrality in the post-COP26 era: Embracing green energy, green innovation, and green human capital. Innovation and Green Development, 3 (3), 100134.
• Ahmad, M., Ahmed, Z., Yang, X., Hussain, N., & Sinha, A. (2022). Financial development and environmental degradation: do human capital and institutional quality make a difference?. Gondwana Research, 105, 299-310.
• Aqib, M., & Zaman, K. (2023). Greening the workforce: the power of investing in human capital. Archives of the Social Sciences: A Journal Of Collaborative Memory, 1 (1), 31-51.
• Aydin, M., Sogut, Y., & Altundemir, M. E. (2023). Moving toward the sustainable environment of European Union countries: Investigating the effect of natural resources and green budgeting on environmental quality. Resources Policy, 83, 103737.
• Balsalobre-Lorente, D., Sinha, A., Driha, O. M., & Mubarik, M. S. (2021). Assessing the impacts of ageing and natural resource extraction on carbon emissions: a proposed policy framework for European economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 296, 126470.
• Barak, D., Kocoglu, M., Jahanger, A., & Tan, M. (2024). Testing the EKC hypothesis for ecological and carbon intensity of well-being: The role of forest extent. Science of the Total Environment, 945, 173794.
• Bekun, F. V., Alola, A. A., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Toward a sustainable environment: Nexus between CO2 emissions, resource rent, renewable and nonrenewable energy in 16-EU countries. Science of the total Environment, 657, 1023-1029.
• Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The review of economic studies, 47 (1), 239-253.
• Chen, S., Saud, S., Saleem, N., & Bari, M. W. (2019). Nexus between financial development, energy consumption, income level, and ecological footprint in CEE countries: do human capital and biocapacity matter?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 31856-31872.
• Chovancová, J., Petruška, I., Rovňák, M., & Barlák, J. (2024). Investigating the drivers of CO2 emissions in the EU: Advanced estimation with common correlated effects and common factors models. Energy Reports, 11, 937-950.
• Cutcu, I., Beyaz, A., Gerlikhan, S. G., & Kilic, Y. (2023). Is ecological footprint related to foreign trade? Evidence from the top ten fastest developing countries in the global economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 413, 137517.
• Çakar, N. D., Gedikli, A., Erdoğan, S., & Yıldırım, D. Ç. (2021). Exploring the nexus between human capital and environmental degradation: The case of EU countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 295, 113057.
• Dai, J., Ahmed, Z., Alvarado, R., & Ahmad, M. (2024). Assessing the nexus between human capital, green energy, and load capacity factor: policymaking for achieving sustainable development goals. Gondwana Research, 129, 452-464.
• Dogan, E., & Seker, F. (2016). Determinants of CO2 emissions in the European Union: the role of renewable and non-renewable energy. Renewable Energy, 94, 429-439.
• Dogan, E., Ulucak, R., Kocak, E., & Isik, C. (2020). The use of ecological footprint in estimating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for BRICST by considering cross-section dependence and heterogeneity. Science of the total environment, 723, 138063.
• Du, Q., Wu, N., Zhang, F., Lei, Y., & Saeed, A. (2022). Impact of financial inclusion and human capital on environmental quality: evidence from emerging economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (22), 33033-33045.
• Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic modelling, 29 (4), 1450-1460.
• Dzwigol, H., Kwilinski, A., Lyulyov, O., & Pimonenko, T. (2023). The role of environmental regulations, renewable energy, and energy efficiency in finding the path to green economic growth. Energies, 16 (7), 3090.
• Esquivias, M. A., Sugiharti, L., Rohmawati, H., Rojas, O., & Sethi, N. (2022). Nexus between technological innovation, renewable energy, and human capital on the environmental sustainability in emerging Asian economies: a panel quantile regression approach. Energies, 15 (7), 2451.
• Ganda, F. (2022a). The environmental impacts of human capital in the BRICS economies. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 13 (1), 611-634.
• Ganda, F. (2022b). The nexus of financial development, natural resource rents, technological innovation, foreign direct investment, energy consumption, human capital, and trade on environmental degradation in the new BRICS economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (49), 74442-74457.
• Grossman, G. M. & Krueger A. B.(1991). Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement, National Bureau of Economic Research.
• Hao, L. N., Umar, M., Khan, Z., & Ali, W. (2021). Green growth and low carbon emission in G7 countries: how critical the network of environmental taxes, renewable energy and human capital is?. Science of the Total Environment, 752, 141853.
• Hodžić, S., Šikić, T. F., & Dogan, E. (2023). Green environment in the EU countries: The role of financial inclusion, natural resources and energy intensity. Resources policy, 82, 103476.
• Iorember, P. T., Jelilov, G., Usman, O., Işık, A., & Celik, B. (2021). The influence of renewable energy use, human capital, and trade on environmental quality in South Africa: multiple structural breaks cointegration approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 13162-13174.
• Isiksal, A. Z., Assi, A. F., Zhakanov, A., Rakhmetullina, S. Z., & Joof, F. (2022). Natural resources, human capital, and CO2 emissions: Missing evidence from the Central Asian States. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (51), 77333-77343.
• Jahanger, A., Yang, B., Huang, W. C., Murshed, M., Usman, M., & Radulescu, M. (2023). Dynamic linkages between globalization, human capital, and carbon dioxide emissions: empirical evidence from developing economies. Environment, development and sustainability, 25 (9), 9307-9335.
• Jebabli, I., Lahiani, A., & Mefteh-Wali, S. (2023). Quantile connectedness between CO2 emissions and economic growth in G7 countries. Resources Policy, 81, 103348.
• Jena, P. K., Mujtaba, A., Joshi, D. P. P., Satrovic, E., & Adeleye, B. N. (2022). Exploring the nature of EKC hypothesis in Asia’s top emitters: role of human capital, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (59), 88557-88576.
• Kahia, M., Omri, A., & Jarraya, B. (2021). Green energy, economic growth and environmental quality nexus in Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 13 (3), 1264.
• Kasman, A., & Duman, Y. S. (2015). CO2 emissions, economic growth, energy consumption, trade and urbanization in new EU member and candidate countries: a panel data analysis. Economic modelling, 44, 97-103.
• Khan, Y., Hassan, T., Tufail, M., Marie, M., Imran, M., & Xiuqin, Z. (2022). The nexus between CO2 emissions, human capital, technology transfer, and renewable energy: evidence from Belt and Road countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (39), 59816-59834.
• Koçak, E., Ulucak, R., & Ulucak, Z. Ş. (2020). The impact of tourism developments on CO2 emissions: An advanced panel data estimation. Tourism Management Perspectives, 33, 100611.
• Li, L., Li, G., Ozturk, I., & Ullah, S. (2023). Green innovation and environmental sustainability: Do clean energy investment and education matter?. Energy & environment, 34 (7), 2705-2720.
• Lin, X., Zhao, Y., Ahmad, M., Ahmed, Z., Rjoub, H., & Adebayo, T. S. (2021). Linking innovative human capital, economic growth, and CO2 emissions: an empirical study based on Chinese provincial panel data. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18 (16), 8503.
• Liu, H., Alharthi, M., Atil, A., Zafar, M. W., & Khan, I. (2022). A Non-Linear Analysis of the Impacts of Natural Resources and Education on Environmental Quality: Green Energy and its Role in the Future. Resources Policy, 79, 102940.
• Liu, D., Wang, G., Sun, C., Majeed, M. T., & Andlib, Z. (2023). An analysis of the effects of human capital on green growth: effects and transmission channels. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30 (4), 10149-10156.
• Ma, Y., Chen, S. C., & Ruangkanjanases, A. (2021). Understanding the antecedents and consequences of green human capital. Sage Open, 11 (1), 2158244020988867.
• Ma, F., Saleem, H., Ding, X., Nazir, S., & Tariq, S. (2024). Do natural resource rents, green technological innovation, and renewable energy matter for ecological sustainability? Role of green policies in testing the environmental kuznets curve hypothesis. Resources Policy, 91, 104844.
• Mahalik, M. K., Mallick, H., & Padhan, H. (2021). Do educational levels influence the environmental quality? The role of renewable and non-renewable energy demand in selected BRICS countries with a new policy perspective. Renewable Energy, 164, 419-432.
• Mahmood, N., Wang, Z., & Hassan, S. T. (2019). Renewable energy, economic growth, human capital, and CO 2 emission: an empirical analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 20619-20630.
• Mehmood, U. (2022). Environmental degradation and financial development: do institutional quality and human capital make a difference in G11 nations?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (25), 38017-38025.
• Nathaniel, S. P., Yalçiner, K., & 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.
• Ni, L., Ahmad, S. F., Alshammari, T. O., Liang, H., Alsanie, G., Irshad, M., ... & Ayassrah, A. Y. B. A. (2023). The role of environmental regulation and green human capital towards sustainable development: The mediating role of green innovation and industry upgradation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 421, 138497.
• Ozcan, B. (2013). The nexus between carbon emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Middle East countries: a panel data analysis. Energy policy, 62, 1138-1147.
• Pata, U. K., Caglar, A. E., Kartal, M. T., & Depren, S. K. (2023). Evaluation of the role of clean energy technologies, human capital, urbanization, and income on the environmental quality in the United States. Journal of Cleaner Production, 402, 136802.
• Pedroni, P. (2000). Fully modified OLS for heterogeneous cointegrated panels. Advanced in Econometrics, 15, 93-130.
• Peng, W., Xu, J., & He, Z. (2023). The impact of human capital on green economic efficiency: evidence from 280 prefectural cities in China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30 (28), 72415-72429.
• Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers. Economics, 1240 (1), 1.
• Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of applied econometrics, 22 (2), 265-312.
• Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of econometrics, 142 (1), 50-93.
• Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias‐adjusted LM test of error cross‐section independence. The econometrics journal, 11 (1), 105-127.
• Saqib, N., Ozturk, I., Usman, M., Sharif, A., & Razzaq, A. (2023). Pollution haven or halo? How European countries leverage FDI, energy, and human capital to alleviate their ecological footprint. Gondwana Research, 116, 136-148.
• Sarkodie, S. A., Adams, S., Owusu, P. A., Leirvik, T., & Ozturk, I. (2020). Mitigating degradation and emissions in China: the role of environmental sustainability, human capital and renewable energy. Science of the Total Environment, 719, 137530.
• Shahnazi, R., & Shabani, Z. D. (2021). The effects of renewable energy, spatial spillover of CO2 emissions and economic freedom on CO2 emissions in the EU. Renewable Energy, 169, 293-307.
• Sheraz, M., Deyi, X., Ahmed, J., Ullah, S., & Ullah, A. (2021). Moderating the effect of globalization on financial development, energy consumption, human capital, and carbon emissions: evidence from G20 countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 35126-35144.
• Slathia, P., Vashishtha, A., Jena, P. K., & Sahu, P. K. (2024). Examining the dynamic impact of carbon emissions, renewable energy and economic growth on healthcare expenditure in Asian countries. Heliyon, 10, e30136.
• Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (1993). A simple estimator of cointegrating vectors in higher order integrated systems. Econometrica, 61(4), 783-820.
• Tao, H., Tao, M., & Wang, R. (2022). Do education human capital and environmental regulation drive the growth efficiency of the green economy in China?. Sustainability, 14 (24), 16524.
• Wang, B., Yan, C., Iqbal, N., Fareed, Z., & Arslan, A. (2022). Impact of human capital and financial globalization on environmental degradation in OBOR countries: Critical role of national cultural orientations. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29 (25), 37327-37343.
• Wang, Q., Zhang, F., & Li, R. (2023). Revisiting the environmental kuznets curve hypothesis in 208 counties: The roles of trade openness, human capital, renewable energy and natural resource rent. Environmental Research, 216, 114637.
• Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23 (2), 193–233.
• World Health Organization. (2022). Billions of people still breathe unhealthy air: new WHO data. World Health Organization, 4.
• Zafar, M. W., Shahbaz, M., Sinha, A., Sengupta, T., & Qin, Q. (2020). How renewable energy consumption contribute to environmental quality? The role of education in OECD countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 268, 122149.
• Zhang, H., Chen, T., & Yu, Y. (2023). From finance to sustainability: Understanding the financial development-environment nexus with the environmental Kuznets curve in East-Asia and Pacific economies. Borsa Istanbul Review, 23 (6), 1448-1457.
• Zhang, S., Xie, W., Sun, S., Wu, F., & Xue, Y. (2024). Nexus of green energy innovation, governance quality, and CO2 emissions in natural resource sector: The role of sustainable human development. Resources Policy, 88, 104493.