Temiz Enerjiye Sahip Ülkelerde Kamu Enerji Harcamalarının ve Enerji Vergilerinin Düşük Karbonlu Enerji Tüketimine Etkisi

Abstract

Küresel çevre sorunları son yıllarda artmış ve acil eylem gerektiren bir sorun hâline gelmiştir. Enerji sektörü, üretilen kirliliğin büyük kısmında sorumludur. Buna karşın düşük karbonlu enerji çözümleri yoluyla bu zorlukları hafifletmenin anahtarını elinde tutmaktadır. Yenilenebilir ve nükleer enerji gibi düşük karbon salınımına sahip enerji kaynaklarına geçişin önemi son yıllarda ivme kazandı. Enerji vergileri ve enerjiye ilişkin araştırma ve geliştirme harcamaları, düşük karbonlu enerji tüketiminin şekillendirilmesinde önemli bir rol oynayabilir. Hükümetler, karbon yoğun yakıtlara vergi uygulayarak ve temiz enerji teknolojilerine yatırımları teşvik ederek düşük karbonlu enerjinin benimsenmesini etkileyebilir. Ayrıca, araştırma ve geliştirmeye yönelik kamu harcamaları, enerji sektöründe yenilikçiliği ve teknolojik ilerlemeleri kolaylaştırmakta, böylece düşük karbonlu enerji çözümlerinin uygulanabilirliğini ve rekabet gücünü artırmaktadır. Bu noktadan hareketle bu çalışma, 1994'ten 2021'e kadar en yüksek temiz enerji kullanımına sahip 10 ülkede kamu enerji harcamalarının ve enerji vergilerinin düşük karbonlu enerjiye etkisini DCCE ve CCE uzun vadeli tahmincileriyle araştırmaktadır. Sonuçlara göre Finlandiya'da enerji vergileri ve enerji harcamaları düşük karbonlu enerji tüketimini teşvik etmektedir. Norveç ve İsviçre'de devlet enerji harcamaları ve Avusturya'da enerji vergileri düşük karbonlu enerji tüketimini olumsuz etkilemektedir. Bu bulgular, hükümetlerin düşük karbonlu enerji teknolojilerine yatırımı etkili bir şekilde teşvik eden, küresel ölçekte sürdürülebilir ve çevre dostu enerji geçişlerini sağlayan kapsamlı politikalar uygulama ihtiyacının altını çiziyor. Gelecek nesillere daha yeşil bir gelecek sağlamak için hükümetlerin ve özel sektörlerin ortak çabaları çok önemlidir.

Keywords

• çevre vergisi
• R&D harcaması
• yenilenebilir enerji
• nükleer enerji
• DCCE

The İmpact of Public Energy Expenditures and Energy Taxes on Low-Carbon Energy Consumption in Countries with Clean Energy

Abstract

Global environmental problems have increased in recent years and have become a problem requiring urgent action. The energy sector is responsible for most of the pollution produced. However, it holds the key to mitigating these challenges through low-carbon energy solutions. The importance of transitioning to energy sources with low carbon emissions, such as renewable and nuclear energy, has gained momentum in recent years. Energy taxes and energy-related research and development (R&D) spending can play an important role in shaping low-carbon energy consumption. Governments can influence the adoption of low-carbon energy by taxing carbon-intensive fuels and encouraging investments in clean energy technologies. Additionally, public spending on R&D facilitates innovation and technological advances in the energy sector, thereby increasing the viability and competitiveness of low-carbon energy solutions. From this point of view, this study investigates the impact of public energy expenditures and energy taxes on low-carbon energy in the 10 nations with the highest clean energy use from 1994 to 2021 with DCCE and CCE estimators. According to the results, energy taxes and energy expenditures encourage low-carbon energy consumption in Finland. Government energy expenditures in Norway and Switzerland and energy taxes in Austria negatively affect low-carbon energy consumption. These findings underscore the need for governments to implement comprehensive policies that effectively encourage investment in low-carbon energy technologies, enabling sustainable and environmentally friendly energy transitions on a global scale. Joint efforts of governments and private sectors are crucial to ensure a greener future for future generations.

Keywords

• environmental tax
• R&D spending
• renewable energy
• nuclear energy
• DCCE

References

1. Ağpak, F., Özçiçek, Ö. (2018). Yenilenebilir enerji kullanımında toplumsal bilgi stokunun rolü. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(2), 7-25. Doi: iibfdkastamonu.325113.
2. Apergis, N., Degirmenci, T., Aydin, M. (2023). Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption, energy technology investment, green technological innovation, and environmental sustainability in the United States: Testing the EKC and LCC hypotheses with novel Fourier estimation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(60), 125570-125584. Doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-30901-1.
3. Aslanturk, O. (2020). The role of renewable energy in ensuring energy security of supply and reducing energy-related import. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy. Doi:10.32479/ijeep.8414.
4. Aydin, M., Bozatli, O. (2023). The effects of green innovation, environmental taxes, and financial development on renewable energy consumption in OECD countries. Energy, 128105. Doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.128105.
5. Aydin, M., Degirmenci, T. (2023). The impact of clean energy consumption, green innovation, and technological diffusion on environmental sustainability: New evidence from load capacity curve hypothesis for 10 European Union countries. Sustainable Development. Doi: 10.1002/sd.2794.
6. Aydin, M., Degirmenci, T., Gurdal, T., Yavuz, H. (2023a). The role of green innovation in achieving environmental sustainability in European Union countries: Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. Gondwana Research, 118, 105-116. Doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2023.01.013.
7. Aydin, M., Degirmenci, T., Yavuz, H. (2023b). The influence of multifactor productivity, research and development expenditure, renewable energy consumption on ecological footprint in G7 Countries: Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 1-16. Doi: 10.1007/s10666-023-09879-0.
8. Bashir, M. F., Ma, B., Bashir, M. A., Radulescu, M., Shahzad, U. (2022). Investigating the role of environmental taxes and regulations for renewable energy consumption: Evidence from developed economies. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 35(1), 1262-1284. Doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2021.1962383.

9. Breitung, J., S. Das. 2005. Panel unit root tests under cross-sectional dependence. Statistica Neerlandica. 59: 414–433. Doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9574.2005.00299.x.
10. Carfora, A., Pansini, R. V., Scandurra, G. (2021). The role of environmental taxes and public policies in supporting RES investments in EU countries: Barriers and mimicking effects. Energy Policy, 149, 112044. Doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2020.112044.
11. Chudik, A., M. H. Pesaran. 2015. Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. Journal of Econometrics 188(2): 393-420. Doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2015.03.007.
12. Churchill, S. A., Inekwe, J., Ivanovski, K. (2021). R&D expenditure and energy consumption in OECD nations. Energy Economics, 100, 105376. Doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105376.
13. Degirmenci, T., Aydin, M. (2023). The effects of environmental taxes on environmental pollution and unemployment: A panel co‐integration analysis on the validity of double dividend hypothesis for selected African countries. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 28(3), 2231-2238. Doi: 10.1002/ijfe.2505.
14. Degirmenci, T., Yavuz, H. (2024). Environmental taxes, R&D expenditures and renewable energy consumption in EU countries: Are fiscal instruments effective in the expansion of clean energy?. Energy, 299, 131466. Doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.131466.
15. Değirmenci, T., Aydın, M. (2024). Türkiye’de Çevresel İnovasyon ve Ar-ge Harcamalarının Düşük Karbonlu Enerji Tüketimine Etkisi. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 25(2), 239-250. Doi: 10.37880/cumuiibf.1382019.
16. Demirbas, A. (2006). Hazardous emissions, global climate change and environmental precautions. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 1(1), 75-84. Doi: 10.1080/009083190881472.
17. Esen, Ö., Yıldırım, D. Ç., Yıldırım, S. (2021). Pollute less or tax more? Asymmetries in the EU environmental taxes–Ecological balance nexus. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 91, 106662. Doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2021.106662.
18. Fang, G., Yang, K., Tian, L., Ma, Y. (2022). Can environmental tax promote renewable energy consumption?—An empirical study from the typical countries along the Belt and Road. Energy, 260, 125193. Doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125193.
19. Gan, J., Smith, C. T. (2011). Drivers for renewable energy: A comparison among OECD countries. Biomass and Bioenergy, 35(11), 4497-4503.
20. Godil, D. I., Sharif, A., Ali, M. I., Ozturk, I., Usman, R. (2021). The role of financial development, R&D expenditure, globalization and institutional quality in energy consumption in India: New evidence from the QARDL approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 285, 112208. Doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112208.
21. IEA. (2024), Energy Technology RD&D Budgets Data Explorer, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/energy-technology-rdd-budgets-data-explorer. Erişim tarihi: 05.07.2024
22. Khezri, M., Heshmati, A., Khodaei, M. (2021). The role of R&D in the effectiveness of renewable energy determinants: a spatial econometric analysis. Energy Economics, 99, 105287. Doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105287.
23. Kılınç, E. C., Kılınç, N. Ş. (2021). Ar-Ge ve inovasyonun yenilenebilir enerji üretimi üzerindeki etkisi: Panel veri analizi. Alanya Akademik Bakış, 5(2), 1087-1105. Doi: 10.29023/alanyaakademik.867232.
24. Kocsis, I., Kiss, J. T. (2015). Renewable energy consumption, R&D and GDP in European Union countries. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, 13(11), 2825-2830.
25. Lee, S., Yoon, B., Shin, J. (2016). Effects of nuclear energy on sustainable development and energy security: Sodium-cooled fast reactor case. Sustainability, 8(10), 979. Doi: 10.3390/su8100979.
26. Lehr, U., Nitsch, J., Kratzat, M., Lutz, C., Edler, D. (2008). Renewable energy and employment in Germany. Energy Policy, 36(1), 108-117. Doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.09.004.
27. Li, W., Cao, N., Xiang, Z. (2023). Drivers of renewable energy transition: The role of ICT, human development, financialization, and R&D investment in China. Renewable Energy, 206, 441-450. Doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.02.027.
28. Majid, M. (2020). Renewable energy for sustainable development in India: current status, future prospects, challenges, employment, and investment opportunities. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 10(1), 1-36. Doi: 10.1186/s13705-019-0232-1.
29. Naimoglu, M., Özbek, S. (2022). İngiltere’de enerji Ar-Ge harcamaları ile enerji tüketimi ilişkisi: Yapısal kırılmalı eşbütünleşme analizi. Isletme ve Iktisat Calismalari Dergisi, 10(1), 35-45.
30. Niu, T., Yao, X., Shao, S., Li, D., Wang, W. (2018). Environmental tax shocks and carbon emissions: An estimated DSGE model. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 47, 9-17. Doi: 10.1016/j.strueco.2018.06.005.
31. Niu, T., Yao, X., Shao, S., Li, D., Wang, W. (2018). Environmental tax shocks and carbon emissions: An estimated DSGE model. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 47, 9-17. Doi: 10.1016/j.strueco.2018.06.005.
32. OECD. (2021). Environmental tax. https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/environmental-tax.html. Erişim tarihi: 05.07.2024
33. Our World in Data. (2023). Low-carbon energy consumption per capita. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-low-carbon-energy. Erişim tarihi: 05.07.2024
34. 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. Doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136802.
35. Peng, G., Meng, F., Ahmed, Z., Oláh, J., Harsányi, E. (2022). A path towards green revolution: How do environmental technologies, political risk, and environmental taxes influence green energy consumption?. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 751. Doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.927333.
36. Pesaran, M. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74(4): 967-1012. Doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x.
37. Pesaran, M. H. (2015). Testing weak cross-sectional dependence in large panels. Econometric reviews, 34(6-10), 1089-1117. Doi: 10.1080/07474938.2014.956623.
38. Pesaran, M. H., Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. Doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010.
39. Qi, X., Guo, Y., Guo, P., Yao, X., Liu, X. (2022). Do subsidies and R&D investment boost energy transition performance? Evidence from Chinese renewable energy firms. Energy Policy, 164, 112909. Doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.112909.
40. RES Legal (2019). Legal Sources on Renewable Energy. http://www.res-legal.eu/home/. Accessed on 22.02.2024
41. Saidi, K., Omri, A. (2020). Reducing CO2 emissions in OECD countries: do renewable and nuclear energy matter?. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 126, 103425. Doi: 10.1016/j.pnucene.2020.103425.
42. Shahzad, U. (2020). Environmental taxes, energy consumption, and environmental quality: Theoretical survey with policy implications. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(20), 24848-24862. Doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-08349-4.
43. Shahzad, U., Radulescu, M., Rahim, S., Isik, C., Yousaf, Z., Ionescu, S. A. (2021). Do environment-related policy instruments and technologies facilitate renewable energy generation? Exploring the contextual evidence from developed economies. Energies, 14(3), 690. Doi: 10.3390/en14030690.
44. Su, C. W., Umar, M., Khan, Z. (2021). Does fiscal decentralization and eco-innovation promote renewable energy consumption? Analyzing the role of political risk. Science of The Total Environment, 751, 142220. Doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142220.
45. Wang, J., Wang, K., Shi, X., Wei, Y. M. (2019). Spatial heterogeneity and driving forces of environmental productivity growth in China: would it help to switch pollutant discharge fees to environmental taxes?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 223, 36-44. Doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.045.
46. Wang, Q., Li, S., Pisarenko, Z. (2020). Heterogeneous effects of energy efficiency, oil price, environmental pressure, R&D investment, and policy on renewable energy--evidence from the G20 countries. Energy, 209, 118322. Doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.118322.
47. Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193-233. Doi: 10.1002/jae.967.
48. Zhang, X., Geng, Y., Tong, Y. W., Kua, H. W., Dong, H., Pan, H. (2021). Trends and driving forces of low-carbon energy technology innovation in China’s industrial sectors from 1998 to 2017: from a regional perspective. Frontiers in Energy, 15(2), 473-486. Doi: 10.1007/s11708-021-0738-z.