ÇEVRESEL PHILLIPS EĞRİSİ YAKLAŞIMIYLA MINT ÜLKELERİNDE BÜYÜME–ÇEVRE İKİLEMİNİN ANALİZİ

Abstract

Bu çalışma, MINT ülkelerinde çevre–ekonomi ilişkisini temel makroekonomik göstergeler çerçevesinde ele alarak, 1991–2021 dönemi için Çevresel Phillips Eğrisi (EPC) hipotezinin uzun dönemli geçerliliğini panel veri yöntemleri aracılığıyla ampirik olarak test etmektedir. Panel AMG yöntemiyle elde edilen bulgular, işsizlik oranındaki artışın çevresel kaliteyi artırdığını ortaya koymakta ve bu yönüyle EPC hipotezinin MINT ülkeleri genelinde -panel düzeyinde- geçerli olduğunu göstermektedir. Ülke bazlı analiz sonuçları ise, söz konusu ilişkinin yalnızca Endonezya ve Türkiye için istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve hipotezle uyumlu olduğunu, buna karşılık Meksika ve Nijerya için EPC ilişkisinin geçerli olmadığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu durum, EPC hipotezinin ülkeler arasında heterojenlik arz eden yapısal koşullara bağlı olarak farklı biçimlerde tezahür edebileceğine işaret etmektedir. Ayrıca, çalışmada analize dâhil edilen diğer açıklayıcı değişkenler olan ekonomik büyüme, enerji tüketimi ve doğal kaynak rantının da çevresel kalite üzerinde uzun dönemde anlamlı ve olumsuz etkiler yarattığı tespit edilmiştir. Bu bulgular, MINT ülkelerinde çevresel baskıların yalnızca iş gücü piyasasındaki dalgalanmalardan değil, aynı zamanda enerji yoğun büyüme modelleri ve kaynak kullanımına dayalı kalkınma stratejilerinden beslendiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Öte yandan, Driscoll-Kraay tahmincisiyle gerçekleştirilen sağlamlık analizleri, temel modelde elde edilen katsayıların yön ve anlamlılık bakımından korunduğunu göstererek, sonuçların istatistiksel tutarlılığını ve ampirik güvenilirliğini desteklemektedir. Bu çerçevede ulaşılan bulgular, çevresel kazanımların kısa vadeli ekonomik durgunluklarla sınırlı kalmaması, aksine yapısal dönüşümlerle desteklenerek uzun vadede sürdürülebilir nitelik kazanması gerektiğine işaret etmektedir.

Keywords

• Çevresel Phillips Eğrisi
• MINT Ülkeleri
• Enerji Tüketimi
• Panel AMG

ANALYZING THE GROWTH–ENVIRONMENT DILEMMA IN MINT COUNTRIES THROUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL PHILLIPS CURVE APPROACH

Abstract

This study empirically tests the long-run validity of the Environmental Phillips Curve (EPC) hypothesis for MINT countries over the period 1991–2021, by examining the environment–economy relationship within the framework of key macroeconomic indicators using panel data methods. The findings obtained through the Panel AMG estimator reveal that an increase in the unemployment rate leads to an improvement in environmental quality, thereby confirming the validity of the EPC hypothesis at the panel level for MINT countries. However, country-specific results indicate that this relationship is statistically significant and consistent with the hypothesis only for Indonesia and Türkiye, while the EPC is not supported in the cases of Mexico and Nigeria. This divergence suggests that the validity of the EPC hypothesis may differ across countries due to heterogeneous structural conditions. Furthermore, the other explanatory variables included in the analysis -namely economic growth, energy consumption, and natural resource rents- are also found to have significant and adverse long-run effects on environmental quality. These findings indicate that environmental pressures in MINT countries stem not only from fluctuations in labor markets but also from growth models that are heavily reliant on energy use and resource-intensive development strategies. On the other hand, robustness checks conducted using the Driscoll-Kraay estimator confirm the consistency of the coefficients in terms of both sign and statistical significance, thereby reinforcing the reliability and robustness of the empirical results. In this context, the findings highlight the necessity of structural transformations to ensure that environmental improvements are not limited to short-term economic contractions but rather attain a sustainable nature in the long run.

Keywords

• Environmental Phillips Curve
• MINT Countries
• Energy Consumption
• Panel AMG

References

1. Addison, R., Akutcha, E., & Debrah, G. (2024). “Does The Environmental Phillips Curve Hypothesis Hold within the Ghanaian Context?.” Scientific African, 26, E02400, 1-12.
2. Ahmed, Z., Ahmad, M., Caglar, A. E., & Pinzon, S. (2025). “Achieving Carbon Neutrality and SDGS: Assessing Roles of Solar Energy, Government Stability, and Population Aging in Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 32(2), 127-141.
3. Akkuş, G. E. (2012). “Phillips Eğrisi: Enflasyon-İşsizlik Değiş-Tokuşu Teorik Bir İnceleme”. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 62(2), 99-151.
4. Anser, M. K., Apergis, N., Syed, Q. R., & Alola, A. A. (2021). “Exploring A New Perspective of Sustainable Development Drive Through Environmental Phillips Curve in the case of the BRICST Countries”. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(35), 48112-48122.
5. Ayad, H., & Djedaiet, A. (2024). “Does the Unemployment Rate Matter for Environmental Issues in the G7 Nations? New Testing for the Environmental Phillips Curve Using the Load Capacity Factor”. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1-31.
6. Azimi, M. N., & Rahman, M. M. (2024). “Examining the Environmental Phillips Curve Hypothesis in G7 Nations: Critical Insights from Wavelet Coherence and Wavelet Causality Analysis”. Quality & Quantity, 58(6), 5683-5713.
7. Ball, L., Mankiw, N. G., & Romer, D. (1988). “The New Keynesian Economics and The Output-Inflation Trade-Off ”, Brookings Papers On Economic Activity, 1988(1), 1-82.
8. Barro, R. J. (1977). “Unanticipated Money Growth and Unemployment in the United States”. Beihefte Zu Kredit Und Kapital, 186.

9. Bilgili, Y. (2018). “Karşılaştırmalı İktisat Okulları (Makro İktisadın Teorik Esasları)”, 4T Yayınevi, İstanbul.
10. Birol, Ö. H. (2013). “Adaptive Expectations of Milton Friedman and Monetarists and Phillips Curve; And the Comparison of them with Other Macroeconomic Schools.” GSTF Journal On Business Review (GBR), 3(1), 1-13.
11. Bokhari, A. A. (2020). “The Twinning of Inflation and Unemployment Phenomena in Saudi Arabia: Phillips Curve Perspective”. Contemporary Economics, 14(2), 254-271.
12. 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.
13. Daştan, M., & Eygü, H. (2024). “An Empirical Investigation of the Link Between Economic Growth, Unemployment, and Ecological Footprint in Turkey: Bridging The EKC and EPC Hypotheses”. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(7), 18957-18988.
14. Djedaiet, A. (2023). “Does Environmental Quality React Asymmetrically to Unemployment and Inflation Rates? African OPEC Countries’ Perspective”. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(46), 102418-102427.
15. Driscoll, J. C., & Kraay, A. C. (1998). “Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation with Spatially Dependent Panel Data”. Review Of Economics And Statistics, 80(4), 549-560.
16. Eberhardt, M., & Bond, S. (2009). Cross-Section Dependence in Nonstationary Panel Models: A Novel Estimator. Eberhardt, M., & Teal, F. (2010). “Productivity Analysis in Global Manufacturing Production (Discussion Paper No. 515)”. Department Of Economics, University Of Oxford.
17. Friedman, M. (1968). “The Role of Monetary Policy”. The American Economic Review, 58(1), 1-17.
18. Goodhart, C., & Pradhan, M. (2020). “The Phillips Curve. In The Great Demographic Reversal: Ageing Societies, Waning Inequality, and An Inflation Revival (Pp. 117-128)”. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
19. Göçer, İ. (2013). “Ar-Ge Harcamalarının Yüksek Teknolojili Ürün İhracatı, Dış Ticaret Dengesi ve Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerindeki Etkileri”. Maliye Dergisi, 165(2), 215-240.
20. Hacıimamoğlu, T. (2023a). “MIKTA Ülkelerinde Çevresel Phillips Eğrisi Hipotezinin Test Edilmesi: CS-ARDL Testi Yaklaşımı”. Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13(1), 301-316.
21. Hacıimamoğlu, T. (2023b). “A New Approach to Sustainable Development: Analysis of the Environmental Phillips Curve Hypothesis”. Sosyoekonomi, 31(56), 11-25.
22. Hein, E. (2008). “A Kaleckian Alternative to the New Consensus on Monetary Policy and Wage Bargaining: Trying to Make Sense of The NAIRU. In Money, Distribution Conflict and Capital Accumulation: Contributions to ‘Monetary Analysis’ (Pp. 133-152)”. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
23. Hetzel, R. L. (2025). “Monetarism and Monetary Policy”. Southern Economic Journal, 91(4), 1347-1371.
24. Hiç, Ö. (2020). “What It Means to Be A New Classical Economist”. International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies (IJPSAT), 23(1), 435-439.
25. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). “Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels”. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74.
26. Kashem, M. A., & Rahman, M. M. (2020). “Environmental Phillips Curve: OECD and Asian NICs Perspective”. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(25), 31153-31170.
27. Kazemı, B. (2025). “MENA Ülkelerinde Enflasyonun Gölgesinde Karbon Emisyonlarının İncelenmesi: Panel Veri Analizi (2000–2023)”. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(3), 894-910.
28. King, R. G., & Watson, M. W. (1994). “The Post-War US Phillips Curve: A Revisionist Econometric History”. In Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Vol (41), 157-219.
29. Kinnunen, J., Georgescu, I., & Nica, I. (2024). “Evaluating the environmental Phillips Curve hypothesis in the STIRPAT framework for Finland”. Sustainability, 16(11), 4381.
30. Klamer, A. (1984). “The New Classical Economists: Conversations with the New Classical Economists and Their Opponents”, Wheatsheaf Books, Brighton.
31. Konya, S. (2024). “Çevresel Phillips Eğrisi Hipotezinin Cinsiyet Bakış Açısıyla Test Edilmesi: MINT Ülkelerinden Ampirik Kanıtlar”. JOEEP: Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 9(1), 273-284.
32. Lucas Jr, R. E. (1972). “Expectations and The Neutrality Of Money”. Journal of Economic Theory, 4(2), 103-124.
33. Lucas Jr, R. E., & Rapping, L. A. (1969a). “Real Wages, Employment, and Inflation”. Journal of Political Economy, 77(5), 721-754.
34. Lucas, R. E., & Rapping, L. A. (1969b). “Price Expectations and The Phillips Curve”. The American Economic Review, 59(3), 342-350.
35. Mankiw, N.G. (2010). Makroekonomi, Çev. Ömer Faruk Çolak, Efil Yayınevi, Ankara.
36. Modigliani, F., & Papademos, L. (1975). “Targets for Monetary Policy in the Coming Year”. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1975(1), 141-165.
37. Muth, J. F. (1960). “Optimal Properties of Exponentially Weighted Forecasts”. Journal of The American Statistical Association, 55(290), 299-306.
38. Muth, J. F. (1961). “Rational Expectations and the Theory of Price Movements”. Econometrica: Journal of The Econometric Society, 315-335.
39. Okun, A. M. (1962). “Real GDP Growth and the Unemployment Rate”. Cowles Foundation, Yale University. Özyalçın, Ö. F., Kesingöz, H., Konak, A., & Dilek, S. (2018). “Ülkeden Ülkeye Eğimi Farklılaşan Philips Eğrisi”. In VI. International Multidisciplinary Congress Of Eurasia, 4(6), 311-319.
40. Pesaran, M. H. (2006). “Estimation and Inference in Large Heterogeneous Panels with A Multifactor Error Structure”. Econometrica, 74(4), 967-1012.
41. 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.
42. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). “Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels”. Journal Of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93.
43. 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.
44. Phelps, E. S. (1967). “Phillips Curves, Expectations of Inflation and Optimal Unemployment Over Time”. Economica, 254-281.
45. Phillips, A. W. (1958). “The Relation Between Unemployment and the Rate of Change of Money Wage Rates in The United Kingdom, 1861-1957”. Economica, 25(100), 283-299.
46. Rahman, M. M., Mi̇çooğulları, S. A., Deği̇rmen, S., Alancıoğlu, E., & Moalla, M. (2025). “Exploring the Environmental Phillips Curve: How Do Globalization, Economic Growth, and Institutional Quality Shape Load Capacity Factors in Highly Globalized European Countries?”. Journal Of Environmental Management, 390, 126322.
47. Rayhan, I., Al Nahian, M. A., & Siddika, A. (2020). “Re-Evaluating The Environmental Kuznets Curve and Environmental Phillips Curve in Bangladesh: An Augmented ARDL Bounds Test Approach with A Structural Break”. The Jahangirnagar Economic Review, 31, 109-134.
48. Sahin, G., Naimoglu, M., Kavaz, I., & Sahin, A. (2025). “Examining the Environmental Phillips Curve Hypothesis in the Ten Most Polluting Emerging Economies: Economic Dynamics and Sustainability”. Sustainability, 17(3), 920, 1-19.
49. Samuelson, P. A., & Solow, R. M. (1960). “Analytical Aspects of Anti-Inflation Policy”. The American Economic Review, 50(2), 177-194.
50. Saputra, I. A. G., Subroto, W. T., Sakti, N. C., & Mahendra, A. M. (2024). “Decoding Inflation and Unemployment: Exploring the Phillips Curve’s Insights on Short-Term And Long-Term Economic Dynamics”. IJEMS, 1(4), 228-241.
51. Sargent, T. J. (1978). “Estimation of Dynamic Labor Demand Schedules Under Rational Expectations”. Journal of Political Economy, 86(6), 1009-1044.
52. Sarosh, S., & Yen, C. M. (2024). The impact of natural resource rents on environmental degradation in case of USA: The role of technological innovation and renewable energy consumption. Asian Journal of Economics and Empirical Research, 11(2), 149-158.
53. Shahzad, U. (2020). Environmental taxes, energy consumption, and environmental quality: Theoretical survey with policy implications. Environmental science and pollution research, 27(20), 24848-24862.
54. Swamy, P. A. V. B. (1970). “Efficient Inference in A Random Coefficient Regression Model”. Econometrica: Journal Of The Econometric Society, 311-323.
55. Tabar, Ç., & Çetin, I. K. (2016). “Türkiye Ekonomisi Özelinde Phillips Eğrisi Analizi”. Journal of Life Economics, 3(4), 79-100.
56. Tahir, M., Burki, U., Alsabhan, T. H., Jaboob, M., Najam, U., & Marimuthu, M. (2025). “Environmental Phillips and Kuznets Curves in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development States: Fresh Insights”. Chinese Journal of Population, Resources and Environment, 23(3), 301-309.
57. Tanveer, A., Song, H., Faheem, M., & Chaudhry, I. S. (2022). “Validation of Environmental Philips Curve in Pakistan: A Fresh Insight Through ARDL Technique”. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(17), 25060-25077.
58. Teeli, A. A., Rao, S., Lone, A. R., Soltani, H., & Ben-Salha, O. (2025). “Zero Emissions and Zero Unemployment: A Feasible Future or Conflicting Objectives?”. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 15(3), 727-734.
59. Tobin, J. (1980). “Stabilisation Policy Ten Years After”, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 1980, No : 1, 19-89.
60. Ünsal, E. (2013). Makro İktisat, 10. Baskı, İmaj Yayınevi, Ankara.
61. Wallace, N., & Sargent, T. (1976). “Rational Expectations and the Theory of Economic Policy”. Journal of Monetary Economics, 2(2), 169-183.
62. Westerlund, J., & Edgerton, D. L. (2007). “A Panel Bootstrap Cointegration Test”. Economics Letters, 97(3), 185-190.
63. Yavuz, E., Kilic, E., & Caglar, A. E. (2024). “A New Hypothesis for the Unemployment-Environment Dilemma: Is the Environmental Phillips Curve Valid in the Framework of Load Capacity Factor in Turkiye?”. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(11), 29475-29492.
64. Zellner, A. (1962). “An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias”. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 57(298), 348-368.