Sürdürülebilir İnsani Kalkınma ve Kent Bağlamında Çevresel Sürdürülebilirliğin Dinamikleri: Semiparametrik Panel İkili Nitel Tercih Modelinden Kanıtlar

Abstract

Son yıllarda kentleşme, altyapı gelişimi, endüstriyel süreçler ve iklim değişikliğinin çevresel bozulmaya önemli boyutta yansımaları bulunmaktadır. Bu yansımaların olası olumsuz etkileri doğrultusunda uygulanacak politikaları ve genel eğilimleri belirlemek oldukça önemlidir. Belirlenen uygun politika ve eğilimler kentsel planlamaya ve insani kalkınmaya yönelik de önemli bilgiler sağlamaktadır. Öte yandan alandaki çalışmalar sağlık ve refahı desteklemek adına gerek doğal kaynakları gerekse küresel ekosistemi korumak için yüksek düzeyde çevresel farkındalık yaratmak ve kentsel sürdürülebilirlik ve sürdürülebilir insani kalkınma hakkında bilgiye erişimi sağlamak konusunda öncü niteliğe sahiptir. Bu doğrultuda çalışmada çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerinde çeşitli faktörlerin etkisini anlamak için uygun bir ekonometrik model olan STIRPAT (The Stochastic Impacts by Regression on Population, Affluence and Technology) yaklaşımında değişkenler belirlenmiştir. Sürekli değişken olarak nüfus, teknoloji ve refah temsili değişkenlerin yanında Kyoto değişkeni, bölgesel ve gelir düzeyinde inceleme için eklenen kukla değişkenler ile ekolojik ayak izi ilişkisini keşfetmek amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla analizde parametrik yaklaşımın varsayımsal sınırlamalardan kaçınılarak, olasılık yoğunluk fonksiyonu vasıtası ile veri setinin gerçekte sahip olduğu fonksiyonel formun belirlenmesine imkan tanıyan semiparametrik panel ikili nitel tercih modeli tahmininin gerçekleştirilmesine odaklanılmıştır. 2000-2018 yıllarını kapsayan 2565 gözlemlik veri seti ile küresel ölçekte 135 ülke için inceleme gerçekleştirilmiştir. Tahmin sonuçları doğrultusunda, atık yönetim stratejilerinin ve geri dönüşüm gibi iklim dostu faaliyetlerin geliştirilmesi gerekliliğine, verimli teknoloji ve kaynak tahsisi içeren ekonominin üretken yapısına vurgu yapılmış, bulguların sürdürülebilir kentsel yeniden gelişim konusunda mevcut karar verme sürecini çevreleyen belirsizliği azaltmak için yol gösterici olduğu belirtilmiştir.

Keywords

• Çevresel Sürdürülebilirlik
• Ekolojik Ayak İzi
• Sürdürülebilir İnsani Kalkınma
• Panel İkili Nitel Tercih Modeli
• Semiparametrik Yaklaşım

Dynamics of Environmental Sustainability in the Context of Sustainable Human Development and the City: Evidence from a Semiparametric Panel Binary Choice Model

Abstract

In recent years, urbanization, infrastructure development, industrial processes and climate change have significant impacts on environmental degradation. It is essential to identify policies and general trends to be implemented in line with the possible negative effects of these reflections. The policies and trends identified also provide important information for urban planning and human development. On the other hand, the work in this field is pioneering in raising a high level of environmental awareness and access to information on urban sustainability and sustainable human development, in order to protect both natural resources and the global ecosystem, and to promote health and well-being. Thus, variables have been identified in the STIRPAT approach (The Stochastic Impacts by Regression on Population, Affluence and Technology), which is a suitable econometric model for understanding the impact of different factors on environmental sustainability. The aim is to explore the relationship between population, technology and income as continuous variables and the region variable as a dummy variable, the income level of countries and the Kyoto variable and the Ecological Footprint. For this aim, the analysis focuses on the estimation of a semiparametric panel binary choice model, which allows the determination of the functional form that the data set actually has through the probability density function, avoiding the hypothetical limitations of the parametric approach. The semiparametric panel binary choice model a global analysis was estimated with 2565 observations for 135 countries with a global scale data set covering the period 2000-2018. In line with the results, the need to improve waste management strategies and climate-friendly activities such as recycling, the productive nature of the economy, including efficient technology and resource allocation, are highlighted, and the results provide guidance to reduce the uncertainty surrounding current decision-making on sustainable urban redevelopment.

Keywords

• Environmental Sustainability
• Ecological Footprint
• Sustainable Human Development
• Panel Binary Choice Model
• Semiparametric Approach

References

1. Adebayo, T.S., Pata, U.K., Akadiri, S. S. (2024). A Comparison of CO2 Emissions, Load Capacity Factor, and Ecological Footprint for Thailand’s Environmental Sustainability. Environment Development and Sustainability, 26: 2203–2223.
2. Adjei, R., Addaney, M., Danquah, L. (2021). The Ecological Footprint and Environmental Sustainability of Students of a Public University in Ghana: Developing Ecologically Sustainable Practices, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 22(7): 1552-1572.
3. Ahmed, Z., Wang, Z., Ali, S. (2019), Investigating the non-linear relationship between urbanization and CO2 emissions: An empirical analysis, Air Quality, Atmosphere and Health, 12(8): 945–953.
4. Aichele, R., Felbermayr, G. (2012). Kyoto and the Carbon Footprint Notions, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 63(3): 336-354.
5. Alam, Md. M., Murad, Md., W., Noman, A., H., Md.Öztürk, İ. (2016). Relationships Among Carbon Emissions, Economic Growth, Energy Consumption and Population Growth: Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis for Brazil, China, India and Indonesia. Ecological Indıcators, 70: 466-479.
6. Alola, A. A., Bekun, F. V., Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Dynamic Impact of Trade Policy, Economic Growth, Fertility Rate, Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption on Ecological Footprint in Europe. Science of The Total Environment, 685,702-709.
7. Amemiya, T. (1985). Advanced Econometrics. Harvard University Press.
8. Ansari, M. A., Villanthenkodath, M.A., Akram, V., Rath, B. N. (2022).The Nexus Between Ecological Footprint, Economic Growth, and Energy Poverty in sub-Saharan Africa: A Technological Threshold Approach. Environment Development and Sustainability. 1-28.

9. Aşıcı A. A., Acar, S. (2018). How Does Environmental Regulation Affect Production Location of non-Carbon Ecological Footprint?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 178: 927–936.
10. Bai, A., Popp, J., Peto, K. S., Gabnai, Z. (2017). The Significance of Forests and Algae in CO2 Balance: A Hungarian Case Study. Sustainability, 9(857): 1–24.
11. Baynes, T.M., Wiedmann, T. (2012). General Approaches for Assessing Urban Environmental Sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(4): 458-464.
12. Bello, M, O., Solarin S. A., Yen, Y. Y. (2018). The İmpact of Electricity Consumption on CO2 Emission, Carbon Footprint, Water Footprint and Ecological Footprint: The Role of Hydropower in an Emerging Economy. Journal of Environment Management, 219: 218–230.
13. Birleşmiş Milletler İklim Değişikliği Çerçeve Sözleşmesi [UNFCCC]. (2015). Paris Agreement. Yürürlüğe giriş tarihi: 4 Kasım 2016. [ https://iklim.gov.tr/paris-anlasmasi-i-34] Erişim Tarihi: 29.97.2024.
14. Birleşmiş Milletler İklim Değişikliği Çerçeve Sözleşmesi [UNFCCC]. (1997). Kyoto Protocol. [https://iklim.gov.tr/kyoto-protokolu-i-35] Erişim Tarihi: 29.97.2024
15. Byaro, M,, Dimoso, P,, Rwezaula, A, (2023), Are Clean Energy Technologies a Panacea for Environmental Sustainability in Sub-Saharan African Countries?, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square [https://doi,org/10,21203/rs,3,rs-2650072/v1], Erişim Tarihi: 17,03,2024
16. Byaro, M., Dimoso, P., Rwezaula, A. (2023). Are Clean Energy Technologies a Panacea for Environmental Sustainability in Sub-Saharan African Countries?. PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square [https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2650072/v1], Erişim Tarihi: 17.03.2024
17. Callicott, J. B., Mumford,K. (1997). Ecological Sustainability as a Conservation Concept. Conservation Biology, 11(1): 32–40.
18. Can, M., Gozgor, G. (2017). The İmpact of Economic Complexity on Carbon Emissions: Evidence from France. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(19): 16364–16370.
19. Chu, L. K. (2020). Economic Structure and Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: New Evidence from Economic Complexity. Applied Economics Letters, 28(7): 612-616.
20. Çağlayan Akay, E., Kangallı, Uyar, S. (2017). R Uygulamalı Nonparametrik Ekonometri . DER Yayınları.
21. Danish., Ulucak, R., Khan, S. U. D. (2020). Determinants of The Ecological Footprint: Role of Renewable Energy, Natural Resources, And Urbanization. Sustainable Cities and Society, 54: 101996.
22. Danish, K., Hassan, S. T., Baloch, M. A., Mahmood, N., Zhang, J. (2019). Linking Economic Growth And Ecological Footprint Through Human Capital And Biocapacity. Sustainable Cities and Society, 47: 101516.
23. Dietz, T., Rosa, E. A. (1997). Effects of Population and Affluence on CO2 Emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94: 175-179.
24. Ehrlich,P,R., Holdren,J,P. (1971). Impact of Population Growth. Science New Series, 171(3977): 1212-1217.
25. Franchini, M., Mannucci, M. P., Pontoni, F., Croci, E. (2015). The Health and Economic Burden of Air Pollution. The American Journal of Medicine, 128(9): 931–932.
26. Friedman, J, H., Stuetzle, W. (1981). Projection Pursuit Regression. Journal of the Americal Statistical Association, 76(376): 817-823.
27. Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., Rubin, D. B. (2013), Bayesian Data Analysis (3rd ed,), Chapman and Hall/CRC,
28. Goodland, R. (1995). The Concept of Environmental Sustainability. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 26(1):1–24.
29. Gözkaman, A. (2024). Avrupa Birliği, Sürdürülebilir İnsani Kalkınma Ve İnsan Hakları. EURO Politika, 1(20): 5-22.
30. Grossman, G., A, Krueger. (1995). Economic Growth and The Environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110: 353–377,
31. Grunewald, N., Martinez-Zarzoso, I. (2016). Did the Kyoto Protocol Fail? An Evaluation of the Effect of The Kyoto Protocol on CO2 Emissions. Environment and Development Economics, 21(1):1-22,
32. Hahn, J., Newey, W. (2004). Jackknife and Analytical Bias Reduction for Nonlinear Panel Data Models. Econometrica, 72: 1295-319.
33. Hoderlein, S., Mommen, E., Yu, K. (2011). Nonparametrik Models in Binary Choice Fixed Effects Panel Data. The Econometrics Journal, 14: 351-367,
34. Holden,E,., Linnerud, K., Banister, D. (2014). Sustainable development: Our Common Future Revisited. Global Environmental Change, 26: 130-139,
35. Huang, L., Wu, J., Yan, L. (2015). Defining and Measuring Urban Sustainability: A Review of Indicators. Landscap Ecology, 30: 1175-1193.
36. Jabeen, G., Wang, D., Işık, C., Alvarad, R., Ongan, S. (2023). Role of Energy Utilization Intensity, Technical Development, Economic Openness, and Foreign Tourism in Environmental Sustainability. Gondwana Research, 127,100-115.
37. Kassouri,Y. (2021). Monitoring the Spatial Spillover Effects of Urbanization on Water, Built-up Land and Ecological Footprints in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Environmental Management, 300: 113690.
38. Khan, M, T., Imran, M. (2023). Unveiling the Carbon Footprint of Europe and Central Asia: Insights into the Impact of Key Factors on CO2 Emissions. Archives of the Social Sciences: A Journal of Collaborative Memory ,1/1: 52-66.
39. Kongbuamai, N., Bui, Q., Yousaf, H., Liu, Y. (2020). The İmpact of Tourism and Natural Resources on The Ecological Footprint: A Case Study of ASEAN Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(16): 1–14.
40. Lane, H. M., Morello‐Frosch, R., Marshall, J. D., Apte, J. S. (2022). Historical Redlining Is Associated with Present-Day Air Pollution Disparities in U.S. Cities. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 9/4:345-350.
41. Le, T,H., Chang, Y., Park, D. (2019). Economic Development and Environmental Sustainability: Evidence from Asia. Empirical Economics, 57: 1129–1156.
42. Liu, J., Clark, L. P., Bechle, M.J., Hajat, A., Kim, S. Y., Robinson, A. L., Sheppard, L., Szpiro, A. A., Marshall, J.D. (2021). Disparities in Air Pollution Exposure in the United States by Race/Ethnicity and Income, 1990-2010. Environ Health Perspective, 129(12):127005.
43. Liu, K., Mahmoud, H.A., Liu,L.,… Alzoubi, H.M. (2024). Exploring the Nexus Between Fintech, Natural Resources, Urbanization, and Environment Sustainability in China: A QARDL Study. Resources Policy, 89: 104557.
44. Jahanger, A., Usman,M., Balsalobre-Lorente,D. (2022). Autocracy, Democracy, Globalization, and Environmental Pollution in Developing World: Fresh Evidence from STIRPAT Model. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(4): e2753.
45. Leemans,R., Solecki, W. (2013). Redefining Environmental Sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(3-4): 272-277.
46. Mol, A. P. J., Spaargaren, G. (2000). Ecological Modernization Theory in Debate: A Review. Environmental Politics, 9(1): 17–49.
47. Morelli, C. (2011). Environmental Sustainability: A Definition for Environmental Professionals. Journal of Environmental Sustainability, 1(1): 1-10.
48. Murshed, M., Rahman, M., A., Alam, M., S., Ahmad, P., Dagar, V. (2021). The Nexus Between Environmental Regulations, Economic Growth, and Environmental Sustainability: Linking Environmental Patents to Ecological Footprint Reduction in South Asia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28: 49967–49988.
49. Nasrollahi, Z., Hashemi, Ms., Bameri, S., Taghvaee V.M. (2020). Environmental Pollution, Economic Growth, Population, Industrialization and Technology in Weak and Strong Sustainability: Using STIRPAT Model. Environment Development and Sustainability, 22: 1105–1122.
50. Nathaniel, S., P, Yalçiner, K, Bekun, F.,V. (2020). Assessing the Environmental Sustainability Corridor: Linking Natural Resources, Renewable Energy, Human Capital, and Ecological Footprint in BRICS. Resources Policy, 70: 101924.
51. Paulson, K. C. (2013). Semiparametric Methods for Choice Models in Panel Data with Persistence, PhD Thesis, San Diego, University of California.
52. Powell, J. L., Stock, J., Stoker, T. (1989). Semiparametric Estimation of Index Coefficient. Econometrica, 57(6): 1403-1430.
53. Powell, J. L. (2010). Semiparametric Estimation. In: Durlauf, S.N., Blume, L.E. (eds) Microeconometrics. The New Palgrave Economics Collection. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
54. Rafique, M. Z., Nadeem, A.M., Xia, W. vd. (2022). Does Economic Complexity Matter for Environmental Sustainability? Using Ecological Footprint as An İndicator. Environment Development and Sustainability, 24: 4623–4640.
55. Rees, W., E. (1996). Ecological Footprint and Appropriated Carrying Capacity: What Urban Economics Leaves Out. Environment and Urbanization, 4: 121-130.
56. Robinson, P. (1988). Root-N-consistent Semiparametric Regression. Econometrica, 56(4): 931-954
57. 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.
58. Sutton, P. (2004). A Perspective on Environmental Sustainability?. A Paper for the Victorian Commissioner for Environmental Sustainability; RSTI Publications: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 1–32.
59. Tessum C.W, Paolella D. A., Chambliss, S. E., Apte, J. S., Hill, J. D. Marshall, J. D. (2021). PM2.5 Polluters Disproportionately and Systemically Affect People of Color in the United States. Science Advance. 7(18):eabf4491
60. Usman, O., Akadiri, S. S., Adeshola, I. (2020). Role of Renewable Energy and Globalization on Ecological Footprint in the USA: Implications for Environmental Sustainability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27: 30681–30693
61. Van Rooij, B., McAllister, L. K. (2014). Orta Düzeydeki Çevresel Zorluklar Gelirli Ülkeler: Brezilya, Çin, Endonezya ve Meksika. Akademik Press.
62. Wackernagel, M., Rees, W. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriola: New Society Publishers.
63. Wang, M., Arshed, N., Munir, M., Rasool, S. F., Lin, W. (2021). Investigation of the STIRPAT Model of Environmental Quality: A Case of Nonlinear Quantile Panel Data Analysis. Environment Development Sustainability, 23, 12217–12232.
64. World Bank (2024). Europe and Central Asia Overview. Erişim Tarihi: 26.07.2024 https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/eca/overview.
65. World Bank (2023). Middle East and North Africa: Climate and Development. Erişim Tarihi: 26.07.2024. https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/mena/overview.
66. Xu,F., Huang,Q.,Yue, H., He, C., Wang, C., Zhang,H. (2020). Reexamining the Relationship Between Urbanization and Pollutant Emissions in China based on The STIRPAT Model. Journal of Environmental Management, 273: 111134.
67. Xue, L., Haseeb, M., Mahmood, H., Alkhateeb, T. T. Y., Murshed, M. (2021).Renewable Energy Use and Ecological Footprints Mitigation: Evidence from Selected South Asian Economies, Sustainability, 13(4):1613.
68. You, W., Lv, Z. (2018). Spillover Effects of Economic Globalization on CO2 Emissions: A Spatial Panel Approach. Energy Economics, 73: 248–257.
69. Zhang, L., Dzakpasu, M., Chen, R., Wang, X, C. (2017). Validity and Utility of Ecological Footprint Accounting: A State of The Art. Review, Sustainable Cities and Society, 32: 411–416.