Validity of Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis for Turkey: Evidences from Co-Integration Test With a Structural Break and Error Correction

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to determine the validity of Environmental Kuznets Curve(EKC) hypothesis for Turkey by CO2 per capita, GDP per capita, and Energy consumption per capita variables in 1960-2014 sample period. For this purpose, the Gregory-Hansen co-integration method with a structural break was used. Empirical evidences reveal that the EKC hypothesis is not valid, co-integration relationship with structural break exists among the variables, and the error correction mechanism works. Estimated Environmental Kuz-nets Curve is N shaped. The first period in which economic growth occurs, environmental pollution increases and after reaching a certain welfare level decreases. However, environmental pollution increases during the following period. According to ECM estimations, 81% of the shocks that arise from GDP per capita and energy consumption per capita are eliminated in one period and the system reaches to long-run equilibrium again.

Keywords

• Environmental Kuznets Curve
• Co-integration Test with Structural Break
• Environ-mental Pollution
• Turkey

Türkiye’de Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezinin Test Edilmesi: Yapısal Kırılmalı Eşbütünleşme Testi ile Hata Düzeltme Modelinden Kanıtlar

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı Türkiye için 1960-2014 döneminde Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (EKC) hipotezini, kişi başı karbondioksit miktarı, kişi başı gelir düzeyi ve kişi başı enerji tüketimi değişkenlerini kullanarak analiz etmektir. Bu amaçla, Gregory-Hansen yapısal kırılmalı eş-bütünleşme tekniği kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, Türkiye’de EKC hipotezinin geçerli olmadığını, değişkenler arasında yapısal kırılmalı eş-bütünleşme ilişkisinin bulunduğunu ve hata düzeltme mekanizmasının çalıştığını göstermektedir. Tahmin edilen Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisinin biçimi N şeklindedir. Ekonomik büyümenin yaşandığı ilk periyotta çevresel kirlilik artmakta ve belirli bir refah seviyesine ulaşınca azalmakta olsa da ilerleyen süreçte çevresel kirlilik artmaktadır. ECM tahminlerine göre ise kişi başı gelir düzeyi ve kişi başı enerji tüketiminden kaynaklanan şokların %81’i bir dönem içinde giderilmekte ve sistem yeniden uzun dönem dengesine gelmektedir

Keywords

• Çevresel Kuznets eğrisi,
• çevre kirliliği,
• Yapısal kırılmalı eş bütünleşme testi,
• Türkiye

References

1. Akbostanci, E., Türüt-Aşik, S., ve Tunç, G. I. (2009). The relationship between income and environment in Turkey: Is there an environmental Kuznets curve? Energy Policy, 37(3), 861–867.
2. Alam, M. M., Murad, M. W., Noman, A. H. M. ve Ozturk, I. (2016). Relationships among carbon emissions, economic growth, energy consumption and population growth: Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis for Brazil, China, India and Indonesia. Ecological Indicators, 70, 466–479.
3. Al-Mulali, U., Weng-Wai, C., Sheau-Ting, L. ve Mohammed, A. H. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis by utilizing the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation. Ecological Indicators, 48, 315–323.
4. Apergis, N. ve Ozturk, I. (2015). Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Asian countries. Ecological Indicators, 52, 16–22.
5. Baek, J. (2015). Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: The case of Arctic countries. Energy Economics, 50, 13–17.
6. Bölük, G. ve Mert, M. (2015). The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: An ARDL approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 587–595.
7. Copeland, B. R. ve Taylor, M. S. (2004). Trade, Growth, and the Environment. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(1), 7–71.
8. Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecological Economics, 49(4), 431–455.

9. Esteve, V. ve Tamarit, C. (2012). Threshold cointegration and nonlinear adjustment between CO2and income: The Environmental Kuznets Curve in Spain, 1857-2007. Energy Economics, 34(6), 2148–2156.
10. Farhani, S., Mrizak, S., Chaibi, A. ve Rault, C. (2014). The environmental Kuznets curve and sustainability: A panel data analysis. Energy Policy, 71, 189–198.
11. Fodha, M. ve Zaghdoud, O. (2010). Economic growth and pollutant emissions in Tunisia: An empirical analysis of the environmental Kuznets curve. Energy Policy, 38(2), 1150–1156.
12. Fosten, J., Morley, B. ve Taylor, T. (2012). Dynamic misspecification in the environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from CO2and SO2emissions in the United Kingdom. Ecological Economics, 76, 25–33.
13. Gregory, A. W. ve Hansen, B. E. (1996). Residual-based tests for cointegration with regime shifts in models. Journal of Econometrics, 70, 99–126.
14. Grossman, G. M. ve Krueger, A. B (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement NBER WORKING PAPERS SERIES (3914).
15. Grossman G.M. ve Krueger A.B. (1995). Economic Growth and the Environment The Quarterly Journal of Economics 110(2), 353–377.
16. Hansen B.E. (1992). Test for Parameter Instability in Regressions with I(1) processes. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10(3), 321-335.
17. Hansen B.E. ve Gregory A.W. (1996). Tests for Cointegration in Models with Regime and Trend Shifts. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 58(3), 555-560
18. Iwata, H., Okada, K. ve Samreth, S. (2010). Empirical study on the environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 in France: The role of nuclear energy. Energy Policy, 38(8), 4057–4063.
19. Jalil, A. ve Mahmud, S. F. (2009). Environment Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: A cointegration analysis for China. Energy Policy, 37(12), 5167–5172.
20. Kaika, D. ve Zervas, E. (2013). The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) theory-Part A: Concept, causes and the CO2emissions case. Energy Policy, 62, 1392–1402.
21. Kijima, M., Nishide, K. ve Ohyama, A. (2010). Economic models for the environmental Kuznets curve: A survey. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 34(7), 1187–1201.
22. Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic Growth and Income Inequality. The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1-28
23. Lau, L. S., Choong, C. K. ve Eng, Y. K. (2014). Investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve for carbon emissions in Malaysia: DO foreign direct investment and trade matter? Energy Policy, 68, 490–497.
24. Luzzati, T. ve Orsini, M. (2009). Investigating the energy-environmental Kuznets curve. Energy, 34(3), 291–300.
25. Nasir, M. ve Ur Rehman, F. (2011). Environmental Kuznets Curve for carbon emissions in Pakistan: An empirical investigation. Energy Policy, 39(3), 1857–1864.
26. Nelson, C. R. ve Plosser, C. I. (1982). Trends And Random Walks In Macroeconmic Time Series. Some evidence and imlications. Journal of Monetary Economics 10, 10(I 982), 139–162.
27. Ozturk, I. ve Al-Mulali, U. (2015). Investigating the validity of the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Cambodia. Ecological Indicators, 57, 324–330.
28. Saboori, B., Sulaiman, J. ve Mohd, S. (2012). Economic growth and CO2emissions in Malaysia: A cointegration analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Energy Policy, 51, 184–191.
29. Selden, T. M. ve Song, D. (1994). Environmental quality and development: Is there a kuznets curve for air pollution emissions? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 27, 147-162.
30. Stern, D. I. (2017). The environmental Kuznets curve after 25 years. Journal of Bioeconomics, 19(1), 7–28
31. Tiwari, A. K., Shahbaz, M. ve Adnan Hye, Q. M. (2013). The environmental Kuznets curve and the role of coal consumption in India: Cointegration and causality analysis in an open economy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 18, 519–527.
32. Zivot E. ve Andrews D.W.K. (1992) Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 20(