Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC GROWTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION IN TURKEY

Year 2021, Issue: 59, 289 - 314, 31.08.2021

Mohammed Alnour

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.861440
Cited By: 7

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between economic growth and environmental pollution in Turkey. The research uses annual time series data from 1970 to 2017. Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Phillips-Perron (PP) unit root tests were used to test the stationarity of the series. In this the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model is used as an estimation technique. Furthermore, the classical additive decomposition method was used to forecast the pollution. The results indicate that economic growth has a positive significant effect on environmental pollution in the short-run and positive but insignificant effect in the long-run. When the long-run and short-run elasticities were compared it is found that the long-run elasticity is greater than the short-run elasticity which challenges the validity of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis and provides evidence against its existence in Turkey. The paper suggests that robust and effective environmental policies should be strictly implemented and closely monitored to reduce the environmental pollution and to ensure the preservation of resources for future generations.

Keywords

Economic Growth EKC Environmental Pollution CO2 EFP

References

  • Adu, D. T., & Denkyirah, E. K. (2018). Economic growth and environmental pollution in West Africa: Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences.
  • Ali, W., Abdullah, A., & Azam, M. (2017). Re-visiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Malaysia: fresh evidence from ARDL bounds testing approach. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 77, 990-1000.
  • Al-Mulali, U., Ozturk, I., & Solarin, S. A. (2016). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in seven regions: The role of renewable energy. Ecological indicators, 67, 267-282.
  • Al-Mulali, U., Saboori, B., & Ozturk, I. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Vietnam. Energy Policy, 76, 123-131.
  • Altıntaş, H., & Kassouri, Y. (2020). Is the environmental Kuznets Curve in Europe related to the per-capita ecological footprint or CO2 emissions? Ecological Indicators, 113, 106187.
  • Awad, A. (2019). Does economic integration damage or benefit the environment? Africa's experience. Energy Policy, 132, 991-999.
  • Ben Jebli, M., Ben Youssef, S., & Ozturk, I. (2015). The role of renewable energy consumption and trade: Environmental Kuznets curve analysis for sub-Saharan Africa countries. African Development Review, 27(3), 288-300.
  • Bölük, G., & Mert, M. (2015). The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: an ARDL approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 587-595.
  • Charfeddine, L., & Mrabet, Z. (2017). The impact of economic development and social-political factors on ecological footprint: A panel data analysis for 15 MENA countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 138-154.
  • Diao, X. D., Zeng, S. X., Tam, C. M., & Tam, V. W. (2009). EKC analysis for studying economic growth and environmental quality: a case study in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(5), 541-548.
  • Dickey, David. A. and Wayne Fuller. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366), 427-431.
  • 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, 138063.
  • Fiala, N. (2008). Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science. Ecological economics, 67(4), 519-525.
  • Furuoka, F. (2015). Financial development and energy consumption: Evidence from a heterogeneous panel of Asian countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 430-444.
  • Johansen, S., & Juselius, K. (1994). Identification of the long-run and the short-run structure an application to the ISLM model. Journal of Econometrics, 63(1), 7-36.
  • Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of economic dynamics and control, 12(2-3), 231-254.
  • Katircioğlu, S. T., & Taşpinar, N. (2017). Testing the moderating role of financial development in an environmental Kuznets curve: empirical evidence from Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68, 572-586.
  • Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American economic review, 45(1), 1-28.
  • Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C., Schmidt, P., & Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. Journal of econometrics, 54(1-3), 159-178.
  • Lacheheb, M., Rahim, A. A., & Sirag, A. (2015). Economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions: Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Algeria. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 5(4), 1125-1132.
  • Moutinho, V., Varum, C., & Madaleno, M. (2017). How economic growth affects emissions?: an investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) in Portuguese and Spanish economic activity sectors. Research @ ua, 8, 49-49.
  • Mrabet, Z., AlSamara, M., & Jarallah, S. H. (2017). The impact of economic development on environmental degradation in Qatar. Environmental and ecological statistics, 24(1), 7-38. Narayan, P. K., & Narayan, S. (2010). Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: Panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy policy, 38(1), 661-666.
  • Özokcu, S., & Özdemir, Ö. (2017). Economic growth, energy, and environmental Kuznets curve. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 639-647.
  • Perron, P. (1997). Further evidence on breaking trend functions in macroeconomic variables. Journal of econometrics, 80(2), 355-385.
  • 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.
  • Phillips, P. C., & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346.
  • Rafindadi, A. A. (2016). Revisiting the concept of environmental Kuznets curve in period of energy disaster and deteriorating income: Empirical evidence from Japan. Energy Policy, 94, 274-284.
  • Raza, S. A., Shah, N., & Khan, K. A. (2020). Residential energy environmental Kuznets curve in emerging economies: the role of economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and financial development. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(5), 5620-5629.
  • Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Ozturk, I. (2016). The effects of Internet usage and economic growth on CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 1226-1235.
  • Shahbaz, M., Solarin, S. A., Sbia, R., & Bibi, S. (2015). Does energy intensity contribute to CO2 emissions? A trivariate analysis in selected African countries. Ecological indicators, 50, 215-224.
  • Shahbaz, M., Nasir, M. A., & Roubaud, D. (2018). Environmental degradation in France: the effects of FDI, financial development, and energy innovations. Energy Economics, 74, 843-857.
  • Sirag, A., Matemilola, B. T., Law, S. H., & Bany-Ariffin, A. N. (2018). Does environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis exist? Evidence from dynamic panel threshold. Journal of environmental economics and policy, 7(2), 145-165.
  • Solarin, S. A., & Bello, M. O. (2018). Persistence of policy shocks to an environmental degradation index: the case of ecological footprint in 128 developed and developing countries. Ecological indicators, 89, 35-44.
  • Uddin, G. A., Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Gow, J. (2017). Ecological footprint and real income: Panel data evidence from the 27 highest emitting countries. Ecological Indicators, 77, 166-175.
  • Ulucak, R., & Bilgili, F. (2018). A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries. Journal of cleaner production, 188, 144-157.
  • Ulucak, R., & Lin, D. (2017). Persistence of policy shocks to Ecological Footprint of the USA. Ecological Indicators, 80, 337-343.
  • Yilanci, V., & Ozgur, O. (2019). Testing the environmental Kuznets curve for G7 countries: evidence from a bootstrap panel causality test in rolling windows. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(24), 24795-24805.

TÜRKİYE'DE EKONOMİK BÜYÜME İLE ÇEVRE KİRLİLİĞİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ

Year 2021, Issue: 59, 289 - 314, 31.08.2021

Mohammed Alnour

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.861440
Cited By: 7

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Türkiye'de ekonomik büyüme ile çevre kirliliği arasındaki ilişkiyi araştırmaktadır.Araştırmada,
1970 –2017 arasındaki yıllık zaman serisi verileri kullanılmıştır.Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) ve
Phillips-Perron (PP) birim kök testleri kullanılmıştır. Bu ARDL yaklaşımı bir tahmin tekniği olarak
kullanılmaktadır. Ayrıca, kirliliği tahmin etmek için klasik katkı ayrıştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Elde
edilenbulgulara göre, ekonomik büyümenin kısa vadede çevre kirliliğine olumlu, uzun vadede ise olumlu
önemsiz etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Uzun vadeli ve kısa vadeli esneklikler karşılaştırıldığında,
uzun vadeli esnekliğin, EKC hipoteziningeçerliliğini desteklemeyen kısa vadeli esneklikten daha büyük
olduğu bulunmuştur ve Türkiye'de Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezinin varlığına karşı kanıt sağlanmaktadır.Çalışma, çevre kirliliğini azaltmak ve gelecek nesillere aktarılacak kaynakların korunmasını sağlamak için sağlam ve etkili çevre politikalarının sıkı bir şekilde uygulanması ve yakından takip edilmesi gerektiğini öne sürmektedir.

Keywords

EKC CO2 EFP Ekonomik Büyüme Çevre Kirliliği CO2

References

  • Adu, D. T., & Denkyirah, E. K. (2018). Economic growth and environmental pollution in West Africa: Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences.
  • Ali, W., Abdullah, A., & Azam, M. (2017). Re-visiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Malaysia: fresh evidence from ARDL bounds testing approach. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 77, 990-1000.
  • Al-Mulali, U., Ozturk, I., & Solarin, S. A. (2016). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in seven regions: The role of renewable energy. Ecological indicators, 67, 267-282.
  • Al-Mulali, U., Saboori, B., & Ozturk, I. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Vietnam. Energy Policy, 76, 123-131.
  • Altıntaş, H., & Kassouri, Y. (2020). Is the environmental Kuznets Curve in Europe related to the per-capita ecological footprint or CO2 emissions? Ecological Indicators, 113, 106187.
  • Awad, A. (2019). Does economic integration damage or benefit the environment? Africa's experience. Energy Policy, 132, 991-999.
  • Ben Jebli, M., Ben Youssef, S., & Ozturk, I. (2015). The role of renewable energy consumption and trade: Environmental Kuznets curve analysis for sub-Saharan Africa countries. African Development Review, 27(3), 288-300.
  • Bölük, G., & Mert, M. (2015). The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: an ARDL approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 587-595.
  • Charfeddine, L., & Mrabet, Z. (2017). The impact of economic development and social-political factors on ecological footprint: A panel data analysis for 15 MENA countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 138-154.
  • Diao, X. D., Zeng, S. X., Tam, C. M., & Tam, V. W. (2009). EKC analysis for studying economic growth and environmental quality: a case study in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(5), 541-548.
  • Dickey, David. A. and Wayne Fuller. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366), 427-431.
  • 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, 138063.
  • Fiala, N. (2008). Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science. Ecological economics, 67(4), 519-525.
  • Furuoka, F. (2015). Financial development and energy consumption: Evidence from a heterogeneous panel of Asian countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 430-444.
  • Johansen, S., & Juselius, K. (1994). Identification of the long-run and the short-run structure an application to the ISLM model. Journal of Econometrics, 63(1), 7-36.
  • Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of economic dynamics and control, 12(2-3), 231-254.
  • Katircioğlu, S. T., & Taşpinar, N. (2017). Testing the moderating role of financial development in an environmental Kuznets curve: empirical evidence from Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68, 572-586.
  • Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American economic review, 45(1), 1-28.
  • Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C., Schmidt, P., & Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. Journal of econometrics, 54(1-3), 159-178.
  • Lacheheb, M., Rahim, A. A., & Sirag, A. (2015). Economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions: Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Algeria. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 5(4), 1125-1132.
  • Moutinho, V., Varum, C., & Madaleno, M. (2017). How economic growth affects emissions?: an investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) in Portuguese and Spanish economic activity sectors. Research @ ua, 8, 49-49.
  • Mrabet, Z., AlSamara, M., & Jarallah, S. H. (2017). The impact of economic development on environmental degradation in Qatar. Environmental and ecological statistics, 24(1), 7-38. Narayan, P. K., & Narayan, S. (2010). Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: Panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy policy, 38(1), 661-666.
  • Özokcu, S., & Özdemir, Ö. (2017). Economic growth, energy, and environmental Kuznets curve. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 639-647.
  • Perron, P. (1997). Further evidence on breaking trend functions in macroeconomic variables. Journal of econometrics, 80(2), 355-385.
  • 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.
  • Phillips, P. C., & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346.
  • Rafindadi, A. A. (2016). Revisiting the concept of environmental Kuznets curve in period of energy disaster and deteriorating income: Empirical evidence from Japan. Energy Policy, 94, 274-284.
  • Raza, S. A., Shah, N., & Khan, K. A. (2020). Residential energy environmental Kuznets curve in emerging economies: the role of economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and financial development. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(5), 5620-5629.
  • Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Ozturk, I. (2016). The effects of Internet usage and economic growth on CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 1226-1235.
  • Shahbaz, M., Solarin, S. A., Sbia, R., & Bibi, S. (2015). Does energy intensity contribute to CO2 emissions? A trivariate analysis in selected African countries. Ecological indicators, 50, 215-224.
  • Shahbaz, M., Nasir, M. A., & Roubaud, D. (2018). Environmental degradation in France: the effects of FDI, financial development, and energy innovations. Energy Economics, 74, 843-857.
  • Sirag, A., Matemilola, B. T., Law, S. H., & Bany-Ariffin, A. N. (2018). Does environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis exist? Evidence from dynamic panel threshold. Journal of environmental economics and policy, 7(2), 145-165.
  • Solarin, S. A., & Bello, M. O. (2018). Persistence of policy shocks to an environmental degradation index: the case of ecological footprint in 128 developed and developing countries. Ecological indicators, 89, 35-44.
  • Uddin, G. A., Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Gow, J. (2017). Ecological footprint and real income: Panel data evidence from the 27 highest emitting countries. Ecological Indicators, 77, 166-175.
  • Ulucak, R., & Bilgili, F. (2018). A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries. Journal of cleaner production, 188, 144-157.
  • Ulucak, R., & Lin, D. (2017). Persistence of policy shocks to Ecological Footprint of the USA. Ecological Indicators, 80, 337-343.
  • Yilanci, V., & Ozgur, O. (2019). Testing the environmental Kuznets curve for G7 countries: evidence from a bootstrap panel causality test in rolling windows. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(24), 24795-24805.
There are 37 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Mohammed Alnour 0000-0003-3276-7380

Publication Date August 31, 2021
Acceptance Date June 1, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021 Issue: 59

Cite

APA Alnour, M. (2021). THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC GROWTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION IN TURKEY. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(59), 289-314. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.861440

Cited By

Yenilenebilir Enerji ve Sanayileşmenin Çevre Üzerindeki Etkisinin STIRPAT-Kaya-EKC Hipotezi Çerçevesinde Analizi: AARDL Modelinden Kanıtlar
Bingöl Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.33399/biibfad.1359874
The path to China's zero‐carbon target: Implications for the relationship between de‐coal, economic output, and carbon dioxide emissions
Sustainable Development
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3111
Effects of urbanization, forestation, internet use, energy consumption, and gross domestic product on environmental degradation in Türkiye
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-023-05157-4
Unveiling the asymmetric response of global food prices to the energy prices shocks and economic policy uncertainty
World Development Sustainability
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wds.2023.100083
Do technological innovation and urbanization mitigate carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector?
Technology in Society
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102128
Do Innovation in Environmental-Related Technologies and Renewable Energies Mitigate the Transport-Based CO2 Emissions in Turkey?
Frontiers in Environmental Science
https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.902562
How do urban population growth, hydropower consumption and natural resources rent shape environmental quality in Sudan?
World Development Sustainability
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wds.2022.100029

Ethical Principles and Ethical Guidelines

The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences places great emphasis on publication ethics, which serve as a foundation for the impartial and reputable advancement of scientific knowledge. In this context, the journal adopts a publishing approach aligned with the ethical standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to preventing potential malpractice. The following ethical responsibilities, established based on COPE’s principles, are expected to be upheld by all stakeholders involved in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors).

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
Make decisions on submissions based on the quality and originality of the work, its alignment with the journal's aims and scope, and the reviewers’ evaluations, regardless of the authors' religion, language, race, ethnicity, political views, or gender.
Respond to information requests from readers, authors, and reviewers regarding the publication and evaluation processes.
Conduct all processes without compromising ethical standards and intellectual property rights.
Support freedom of thought and protect human and animal rights.
Ensure the peer review process adheres to the principle of double-blind peer review.
Take full responsibility for accepting, rejecting, or requesting changes to a manuscript and ensure that conflicts of interest among stakeholders do not influence these decisions.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
Submitted works must be original. When utilizing other works, proper and complete citations and/or references must be provided.
A manuscript must not be under review by another journal simultaneously.
Individuals who have not contributed to the experimental design, implementation, data analysis, or interpretation should not be listed as authors.
If requested during the review process, datasets used in the manuscript must be provided to the editorial board.
If a significant error or mistake is discovered in the manuscript, the journal’s editorial office must be notified.
For studies requiring ethical committee approval, the relevant document must be submitted to the journal. Details regarding the ethical approval (name of the ethics committee, approval document number, and date) must be included in the manuscript.
Changes to authorship (e.g., adding or removing authors, altering the order of authors) cannot be proposed after the review process has commenced.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Accept review assignments only in areas where they have sufficient expertise.
Agree to review manuscripts in a timely and unbiased manner.
Ensure confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript and not disclose any information about it, during or after the review process, beyond what is already published.
Refrain from using information obtained during the review process for personal or third-party benefit.
Notify the journal editor if plagiarism or other ethical violations are suspected in the manuscript.
Conduct reviews objectively and avoid conflicts of interest. If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review.
Use polite and constructive language during the review process and avoid personal comments.
Publication Policy
The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences is a free, open-access, peer-reviewed academic journal that has been in publication since 1981. The journal welcomes submissions in Turkish and English within the fields of economics, business administration, public finance, political science, public administration, and international relations.

No submission or publication fees are charged by the journal.
Every submitted manuscript undergoes a double-blind peer review process and similarity/plagiarism checks via iThenticate.
Submissions must be original and not previously published, accepted for publication, or under review elsewhere.
Articles published in the journal can be cited under the Open Access Policy and Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is given.
The journal is published three times a year, in April, August, and December. It includes original, high-quality, and scientifically supported research articles and reviews in its listed fields. Academic studies unrelated to these disciplines or their theoretical and empirical foundations are not accepted. The journal's languages are Turkish and English.

Submissions are first subject to a preliminary review for format and content. Manuscripts not meeting the journal's standards are rejected by the editorial board. Manuscripts deemed suitable proceed to the peer review stage.

Each submission is sent to at least two expert reviewers. If both reviews are favorable, the article is approved for publication. In cases where one review is positive and the other negative, the editorial board decides based on the reviews or may send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

Articles published in the journal are open access and can be cited under the Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is made.