Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezinin İslami ve İslami Olmayan Gelişmekte Olan Ekonomiler İçin Karşılaştırmalı Olarak Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 11 İslami ve 11 İslami Olmayan gelişmekte olan ülkeler için Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (EKC) hipotezini dikkate alarak karbon emisyonları, enerji tüketimi, ekonomik büyüme, ticarete açıklık ve kentleşme arasındaki ilişkiyi karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemektir. Bu amaçla, MG, AMG ve CCEMG yöntemleri kullanılarak her iki ülke grubu için değişkenler arasındaki uzun dönemli ilişki araştırılmıştır. Sonuçlar, enerji tüketiminin CO2 üzerindeki etkisinin hem ülkeye özel hem de panel sonuçlarında anlamlı ve pozitif olduğunu göstermektedir. İslami olmayan gelişmekte olan ülkelerde, panel sonuçları için kentleşme ile CO2 arasında anlamlı ve pozitif bir ilişki varken, İslami gelişmekte olan ülkelerin çoğunda ülkeye özgü ve panel sonuçları için kentleşmenin CO2 üzerindeki etkisi anlamlı ve negatiftir. Ticari açıklığın CO2 üzerindeki etkisi, İslami ve İslami olmayan gelişmekte olan ülkelerde çoğunda anlamlı ve negatiftir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İslam ülkeleri
• EKC hipotezi
• Gelişmekte Olan Ülkeler
• Ticari Açıklık
• Kentleşme

Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Comparative Empirical Study for Islamic and Non-Islamic Emerging Economies

Öz

The purpose of this study is to empirically investigate the relationships between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness, and urbanization within the framework of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis for 11 Islamic and 11 non-Islamic Emerging Economies in the period of 1990-2018. For this purpose, the long-term relationship between variables are investigated for both country groups using MG, AMG, and CCEMG estimators. The results show that the effect of energy consumption on CO2 is significantly positive in both country specific and panel results. In non-Islamic emerging economies, there is significantly positive relationship between urbanization and CO2 for most country specific and panel results whereas the effect of urbanization on CO2 is significantly negative for most country specific and panel results in Islamic emerging economies. The effect of trade openness on CO2 is significantly negative in most Islamic and non-Islamic emerging economies. In panel results, the effect of trade openness on CO2 is significantly negative in non-Islamic emerging economies while it is insignificantly negative in Islamic emerging economies. The country specific results within the framework of the EKC hypothesis show that the EKC hypothesis is valid for Malaysia and Kuwait in Islamic emerging economies as well as Argentina, China, and Thailand in non-Islamic emerging economies for all models. The panel results represent that the EKC hypothesis is not valid for Islamic emerging economies in all models while valid for non-Islamic emerging economies in MG and AMG models.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Islamic countries
• EKC hypothesis
• Emerging markets
• Trade openness
• Urbanization

Kaynakça

1. Akhtar, M. R. (1996). Towards an Islamic Approach For Environmental Balance. Islamic Economic Studies, 3(2).
2. Al-Bukhari. (2020). Sahih al-Bukhari. https://sunnah.com/bukhari
3. Al-Mulali, U., & Ozturk, I. (2015). The effect of energy consumption, urbanization, trade openness, industrial output, and the political stability on the environmental degradation in the MENA (Middle East and North African) region. Energy, 84, 382–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.03.004
4. Asutay, M. (2013). Islamic moral economy as the foundation of Islamic finance. In Islamic Finance in Europe (pp. 55–68). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781002513.00014
5. Aydin, M., & Turan, Y. E. (2020). The influence of financial openness, trade openness, and energy intensity on ecological footprint: revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10238-9
6. Baltagi, B. H. (2013a). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. In John Wiley & Sons, 2013 (Fifth Edit). John Wiley & Sons.
7. Baltagi, B. H. (2013b). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data - Fifth Edition. In John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
8. Bölük, G., & Mert, M. (2015). The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: An ARDL approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 587–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.138

9. Bozoklu, S., Demir, A. O., & Ataer, S. (2019). Reassessing the environmental Kuznets curve: a summability approach for emerging market economies. Eurasian Economic Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40822-019-00127-z
10. Campisi, D., Gitto, S., & Morea, D. (2018). Shari’ah-Compliant Finance: A Possible Novel Paradigm for Green Economy Investments in Italy. Sustainability, 10(11), 3915. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10113915
11. Cetin, M. A. (2018). Investigating the environmental Kuznets Curve and the role of green energy: Emerging and developed markets. International Journal of Green Energy, 15(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/15435075.2017.1413375
12. Charfeddine, L., & Mrabet, Z. (2017). The impact of economic development and social-political factors on ecological footprint: A panel data analysis for 15 MENA countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 138–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.031
13. Crippa, M., Oreggioni, G., D, G., Muntean, M., Schaaf, E., Lo Vullo, E., Solazzo, E., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Olivier, J. G. ., & Vignati, E. (2019). Fossil CO2 and GHG emissions of all world countries. In Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/687800
14. Destek, M. A., Ulucak, R., & Dogan, E. (2018). Analyzing the environmental Kuznets curve for the EU countries: the role of ecological footprint. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(29), 29387–29396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2911-4
15. Dogan, E., & Inglesi-Lotz, R. (2020). The impact of economic structure to the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis: evidence from European countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(11), 12717–12724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-07878-2
16. Eberhardt, M., & Bond, S. (2009). Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: a novel estimator. 17692. Eberhardt, M., & Teal, F. (2010). Productivity analysis in global manufacturing production. Economics Series Working Papers.
17. Goktas, V., & Chowdury, S. R. H. (2019). The Role of Sustainable Development Goals on Environmental Sustainability: A Dıscourse From an Islamic Perspective. Eurasian Journal of Researches in Social and Economics (EJRSE), 6(5), 279–295.
18. Gormus, S., & Aydin, M. (2020). Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis using innovation: new evidence from the top 10 innovative economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(22), 27904–27913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09110-7
19. Granger, C. W. J., & Newbold, P. (1974). Spurious regressions in econometrics. Journal of Econometrics, 2(2), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(74)90034-7
20. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic Growth and the Environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353–377. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118443
21. Hadri, K., & Kurozumi, E. (2012). A simple panel stationarity test in the presence of serial correlation and a common factor. Economics Letters, 115, 31–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2011.11.036
22. Hasanov, F. J., Mikayilov, J. I., Mukhtarov, S., & Suleymanov, E. (2019). Does CO2 emissions–economic growth relationship reveal EKC in developing countries? Evidence from Kazakhstan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06166-y
23. Hove, S., & Tursoy, T. (2019). An investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve in emerging economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 236, 117628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117628
24. Ike, G. N., Usman, O., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2020). Fiscal policy and CO2 emissions from heterogeneous fuel sources in Thailand: Evidence from multiple structural breaks cointegration test. Science of The Total Environment, 702, 134711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134711
25. Jalil, A., & Feridun, M. (2011). The impact of growth, energy and financial development on the environment in China: A cointegration analysis. Energy Economics, 33(2), 284–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2010.10.003
26. Kamla, R., Gallhofer, S., & Haslam, J. (2006). Islam, nature and accounting: Islamic principles and the notion of accounting for the environment. Accounting Forum, 30(3), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2006.05.003
27. Kapetanios, G., Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2011). Panels with non-stationary multifactor error structures. Journal of Econometrics, 160(2), 326–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2010.10.001
28. Kraft, J., & Kraft, A. (1978). On the relationship between energy and GNP. The Journal of Energy and Development. https://doi.org/10.2307/24806805
29. Li, T., Wang, Y., & Zhao, D. (2016). Environmental Kuznets Curve in China: New evidence from dynamic panel analysis. Energy Policy, 91, 138–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.002
30. Mat Rahim, S. R., & Mohamad, Z. Z. (2018). Green Sukuk for Financing Renewable Energy Projects. Turkish Journal of Islamic Economics, 5(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.26414/m031
31. Narayan, P. K., & Narayan, S. (2010). Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: Panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy Policy, 38(1), 661–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.09.005
32. Olivier, J., & Peters, J. (2018). Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions 2018 report. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
33. Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. (2020). Member States. https://www.oic-oci.org/states/?lan=en Özokcu, S., & Özdemir, Ö. (2017). Economic growth, energy, and environmental Kuznets curve. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 639–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.059
34. Pata, U. K., & Aydin, M. (2020). Testing the EKC hypothesis for the top six hydropower energy-consuming countries: Evidence from Fourier Bootstrap ARDL procedure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 264, 121699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121699
35. Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and Inference in Large Heterogeneous Panels with a Multifactor Error Structure. Econometrica, 74(4), 967–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x
36. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
37. Pesaran, M. H., & Smith, R. (1995). Econometrics Estimating long-run relationships from dynamic heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 68, 79–113.
38. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. Econometrics Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368-423X.2007.00227.x
39. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142, 50–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010
40. Pew Research Center. (2017). World Muslim Population by Country. https://www.pewforum.org/chart/interactive-data-table-world-muslim-population-by-country/
41. Raza, S. A., Shah, N., & Khan, K. A. (2020). Residential energy environmental Kuznets curve in emerging economies: the role of economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and financial development. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(5), 5620–5629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06356-8
42. Riti, J. S., Song, D., Shu, Y., & Kamah, M. (2017). Decoupling CO2 emission and economic growth in China: Is there consistency in estimation results in analyzing environmental Kuznets curve? Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.117
43. Salem, M. A., Hasnan, N., & Osman, N. H. (2012). Some Islamic Views on Environmental Responsibility. 2nd International Conference on Environment Science and Biotechnology.
44. Shahbaz, M., Mahalik, M. K., Shah, S. H., & Sato, J. R. (2016). Time-varying analysis of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, and economic growth nexus: Statistical experience in next 11 countries. Energy Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.08.011
45. Shahbaz, M., Raghutla, C., Song, M., Zameer, H., & Jiao, Z. (2020). Public-private partnerships investment in energy as new determinant of CO2 emissions: The role of technological innovations in China. Energy Economics, 86, 104664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104664
46. Shaikh, S. (2013). Islam and Environmental Economics. Journal of Islamic Banking & Finance, 30(1). Shujah-ur-Rahman, Chen, S., Saleem, N., & Bari, M. W. (2019). Financial development and its moderating role in environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(19), 19305–19319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05290-z
47. Suki, N. M., Sharif, A., Afshan, S., & Suki, N. M. (2020). Revisiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve in Malaysia: The role of globalization in sustainable environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 264, 121669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121669
48. Wang, R., Zameer, H., Feng, Y., Jiao, Z., Xu, L., & Gedikli, A. (2019). Revisiting Chinese resource curse hypothesis based on spatial spillover effect: A fresh evidence. Resources Policy, 64, 101521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101521
49. Wang, S., Zhou, C., Li, G., & Feng, K. (2016). CO2, economic growth, and energy consumption in China’s provinces: Investigating the spatiotemporal and econometric characteristics of China’s CO2 emissions. Ecological Indicators. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.04.022
50. Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 6(69), 709–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x
51. Yasin, I., Ahmad, N., & Chaudhary, M. A. (2020). Catechizing the Environmental-Impression of Urbanization, Financial Development, and Political Institutions: A Circumstance of Ecological Footprints in 110 Developed and Less-Developed Countries. Social Indicators Research, 147(2), 621–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-019-02163-3
52. Yasin, I., Ahmad, N., & Chaudhary, M. A. (2020b). The impact of financial development, political institutions, and urbanization on environmental degradation: evidence from 59 less-developed economies. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00885-w
53. Yasmeen, H., Wang, Y., Zameer, H., & Solangi, Y. A. (2020). Decomposing factors affecting CO2 emissions in Pakistan: insights from LMDI decomposition approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(3), 3113–3123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07187-3
54. Yavuz, N. Ç. (2014). CO2 Emission, energy consumption, and economic growth for Turkey: Evidence from a cointegration test with a structural break. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning and Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2011.567222
55. Zameer, H., Yasmeen, H., Wang, R., Tao, J., & Malik, M. N. (2020). An empirical investigation of the coordinated development of natural resources, financial development and ecological efficiency in China. Resources Policy, 65, 101580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101580
56. Zhang, C., & Lin, Y. (2012). Panel estimation for urbanization, energy consumption and CO2 emissions: A regional analysis in China. Energy Policy, 49, 488–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.048
57. Zhang, S., Liu, X., & Bae, J. (2017). Does trade openness affect CO2 emissions: evidence from ten newly industrialized countries? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(21), 17616–17625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9392-8