Sınırda karbon düzenleme (SKD) mekanizması çerçevesinde karbon salınımı açıklamalarının incelenmesi

Year 2023, Volume: 16 Issue: 4, 970 - 986, 29.10.2023

Elif Ensari Alpay Mehpare Karahan Gökmen

https://doi.org/10.25287/ohuiibf.1288775

Abstract

Önceleri bölgesel bazda görülen çevreye karşı duyarlılık 1970’li yıllarda küresel boyutta ele alınmaya başlamıştır. Bu konuda son zamanlarda Avrupa Birliği (AB’nin iklim değişikliğiyle mücadele ve iklim değişikliğinin etkilerini azaltmak amacıyla öncü çalışmalar gerçekleştirdiğini görüyoruz. Çevresel ve ekonomik açıdan bir dönüm noktası niteliğinde olan ve 2019 yılında ilan edilen Yeşil Mutabakat bu uygulamalar arasında öne çıkmaktadır. Mutabakatın önde gelen uygulama aracı olan Sınırda Karbon Düzenleme (SKD) Mekanizması ise AB ile ticari ilişkisi olan herkesi ilgilendirmektedir. Türkiye’nin dış ticaretinde büyük bir paya sahip olan Avrupa Birliği’nin ilgili düzenlemeyi hayata geçirmesi ülkemiz ekonomisi açısından ciddi bir risk unsuru oluşturacak olsa da yeşil dönüşüm için fırsat oluşturacağı düşünülebilir. Bu kapsamda 2026’da uygulamaya geçilecek olan düzenlemeye Türkiye’nin ne kadar hazır olduğu araştırılmak istenmiştir. Borsa İstanbul (BİST)’da işlem gören ve Sınırda Karbon Düzenleme Mekanizması kapsamında ilk etapta ele alınan karbon salınımı yoğun olan demir-çelik, alüminyum, çimento, gübre ve elektrik sektörlerinde faaliyet gösteren firmalar üzerinde yapılan incelemede, genel olarak şirketlerin henüz daha istenen seviyede karbon salınımı açıklamaları yapmadıkları sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca analize dâhil olan sektörlerdeki işletmelerin çok az kısmının karbon salınımlarına dair açıklamalarını raporlar aracılığıyla yaptıkları sonucuna varılmıştır.

Keywords

Sınırda Karbon Düzenleme Mekanizması, Yeşil Mutabakat, Karbon Salınımı Açıklamaları

An analysis of carbon emission disclosures within the framework of carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)

Abstract

Environmental consciousness that was effective at local level priorly has been addressed globally since 1970’s. European Union (EU) has been recently pioneering efforts in this area to combat climate change and to diminish the effects of climate change. Green Deal announced in 2019 and which is an environmental and social milestone is standing out among those works. Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) that is the leading practice of the Deal is concerning each party having a trade relation with EU. Though implementation of the regulation by EU that has a large share in foreign trade of Turkey can be attributed as an important risk, it can be turned into an opportunity for green conversion. In this context it is purposed to survey the readiness of Turkey for the regulation that will be in force by 2026. In the examination carried out on the companies listed in Borsa İstanbul (BIST) and operating in the iron-steel, aluminum, cement, fertilizer and electricity sectors, that are stated to be with high carbon emission and are addressed in the first place within CBAM, it is seen that in general the companies are not disclosing carbon emissions at a desired level. In addition, it was concluded that very few of the companies in the sectors included in the analysis disclose information about their carbon emissions in reports.

Keywords

Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, European Green Deal, Carbon Emission Disclosures

References

• Akbaş, H. E., & Canikli, S. (2018). Determinants of voluntary greenhouse gas emission disclosure: An empirical investigation on Turkish firms. Sustainability, 11(1), 2–24, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11010107.
• Akhiroh, T., & Kiswanto, K. (2016). The determinant of carbon emi-ssion disclosures. Accounting Analysis Journal, 5(4), 326–336, Erişim adresi: http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/aaj.
• Akhter, F., Hossain, M. R., Elrehail, H., Rehman, S. U., & Almansour, B. (2022). Environmental disclosures and corporate attributes, from the lens of legitimacy theory: a longitudinal analysis on a developing country. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, (ahead-of-print), Erişim adresi: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2444-8494.htm.
• Alsaifi, K., Elnahass, M., & Salama, A. (2020). Carbon disclosure and financial performance: UK environmental policy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(2), 711–726, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bse.2426.
• Astuti, T. W., & Setiany, E. (2021). The Effect of Board Characteristics on Carbon Emission Disclosure. International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research, 3(5), 207–216, Erişim adresi: https://www.ijmsssr.org/paper/IJMSSSR00537.pdf.
• Bahari, N. A. S., Alrazi, B., & Husin, N. M. (2016). A comparative analysis of carbon reporting by electricity generating companies in China, India, and Japan. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35, 74–81, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)00011-3.
• Bazhair, A. H., Khatib, S. F., & Al Amosh, H. (2022). Taking stock of carbon disclosure research while looking to the future: a systematic literature review. Sustainability, 14(20), 2–24, https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013475.
• Bebbington, J., & González, C.L. (2008). Carbon trading: Accounting and reporting issues. European Accounting Review, 17(4),697–717, https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180802489162.
• Blanco, C., Caro, F., & Corbett, C. J. (2017). An inside perspective on carbon disclosure. Business Horizons, 60(5), 635–646, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.05.007.
• Boiral, O., Brotherton, M. C., Rivaud, L., & Talbot, D. (2022). Comparing the uncomparable? An investigation of car manufacturers' climate performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(5), 2213–2229, Erişim adresi: wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/bse.
• Bolton, P., & Kacperczyk, M. T. (2021). Carbon disclosure and the cost of capital. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3755613.
• Borghei, Z. (2021). Carbon disclosure: A systematic literature review. Accounting & Finance, 61(4), 5255–5280, https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12757.
• Bui, B., & Fowler, C. J. (2019). Strategic responses to changing climate change policies: The role played by carbon accounting. Australian Accounting Review, 29(2), 360–375, https://doi.org/ 10.1111/auar.12213.
• Bui, B., Houqe, M. N., & Zaman, M. (2020). Climate governance effects on carbon disclosure and performance. The British Accounting Review, 52(2), 2–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.100880
• Choi, B. B., Lee, D., & Psaros, J. (2013). An analysis of Australian company carbon emission disclosures. Pacific Accounting Review, 25(1), 58–79, https://doi.org/10.1108/01140581311318968.
• Choi, B., & Luo, L. (2021). Does the market value greenhouse gas emissions? Evidence from multi-country firm data. The British Accounting Review, 53(1), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2020.100909.
• Council of the European Union (2020). Interinstitutional File: 2020/0036(COD), Retrieved from https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/46514/st12261-en20.pdf.
• Çayırağası, F. (2022). Avrupa Yeşil Mutabakatı, Avrupa Birliği ile Türkiye arasındaki ihracat ve sınırda karbon ayarlaması üzerine değerlendirme, Vergi Raporu Dergisi, (276), 69–84, Erişim adresi: https://www.vergiraporu.com.tr.
• Desai, R. (2022). Determinants of corporate carbon disclosure: A step towards sustainability reporting. Borsa Istanbul Review, 22(5), 886–896 Erişim adresi: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/borsa-istanbul-review.
• Dhaliwal, D. S., Li, O. Z., Tsang, A., & Yang, Y. G. (2011). Voluntary nonfinancial disclosure and the cost of equity capital: The initiation of corporate social responsibility reporting. The accounting review, 86(1), 59–100, https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.00000005.