IN SMUGGLE WITH CLIMATE CHANGE, EXTRA–BUDGETARY FUND APPLICATION AS AN INSTRUMENT OF GREEN KEYNESIAN ECONOMIC POLICY

Year 2024, Volume: 6 Issue: 1, 51 - 63, 01.02.2024

Mustafa Goktug Kaya Fatih Peksen Yiğit Yıldız

Abstract

Green Keynesian Economics, which is a postmodern reflection of Keynesian economic thought, suggests that negativities, which are possible for environmental problems causing climate change to lead to, should be solved by active role public sector will undertake. As known, carbon emissions, emitted to atmosphere in global scale, may cause climate change via greenhouse effect. This case leads country economies to face to a set of problems. Green Keynesian Economics suggests a mix of simultaneous sustainable policies as a solution for a set of problems under consideration. The aim of this study is to suggest a financial instrument taking place in the scope of Green Keynesian School for Türkiye targeting to achieve net zero carbon emission as of the year 2053.

Keywords

Extra-Budgetary Fund, Green Keynesianism, Climate Change

References

• Acar, Ibrahim Atilla (2006). “Vergilemede Tahsis Ilkesinin Cevre Vergileri Acisindan Degerlendirilmesi”. Suleyman Demirel Universitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakultesi Dergisi, 11(1): 215-232.
• Blackwater, Bill (2012). “Two Cheers for Environmental Keynesianism”. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 23(2): 51-74.
• Cato, Molly Scott (2009). Green Economics: An Introduction to Theory, Policy and Practice. London: Published by Earthscan.
• Harris, Jonathan M. (2013). Green Keynesianism: Beyond Standard Growth Paradigms, Global Development and Environment Institute Working Paper, No. 13-02: 1-19.
• Loiseau, Eleonore, Laura Saikku, Riina Antikainen, Nils Droste, Bernd Hansjurgens, Kati Pitkanen, Pekka Leskinen, Peter Kuikman and Marianne Thomsen (2016). “Green Economy and Related Concepts: An Overview”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139: 361-371.
• McKinsey Global Institute (2020). Climate Risk and Response: Physical Hazards and Socioeconomic Impacts, Climate Risk and Response. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/business%20functions/sustainability/ our%20insights/climate%20risk%20and%20response%20physical%20 hazards%20and%20socioeconomic%20impacts/mgi-climate-risk-and-response- full-report-vf.pdf. Accessed: 01.07.2023.
• Rezai, Armon, Lance Taylor and Reinhard Mechler (2013). “Ecological Macroeconomics: An Application to Climate Change”. Ecological Economics, 85: 69–76.
• Sut Goker, Cagil (2019). Surdurulebilir Cevre Hedefinde Enerjinin Vergilendirilmesi. Istanbul: On Iki Levha Yayincilik.
• Sweeney, Sean (2015). “Green Capitalism Won’t Work.” New Labor Forum, 24(2): 12-17.
• The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2011). Towards Green Growth: A Summary for Policy Makers. Retrieved from https:// www.oecd.org/greengrowth/48012345.pdf. Accessed: 01.07.2023.
• Thompson, Sean (2008). The Limits of Green Keynesianism. Retrieved from https://climateandcapitalism.com/2008/10/09/the-limits-of-green-keynesianism/# more-552. Accessed: 01.07.2023.
• Tienhaara, Kyla (2018). “Green Keynesianism and the Global Financial Crisis.” by Routledge, Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York: Routledge.
• Turkish Statistical Institute (2021). Foreign Trade Statistics. Retrieved from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Dis-Ticaret-Istatistikleri-Ocak- 2022-45536. Accessed: 01.07.2023.
• Wainwright, Joel and Geoff Mann (2018). Climate Leviathan A Political Theory of Our Planetary Future. London-Newyork: Verso Books.
• Yilmaz Turgut, Nukhet (2017). Cevre Politikasi ve Hukuku. Ankara: Imaj Yayinevi.