Çevresel Kalite, Küreselleşme ve Kurumlar Arasındaki İlişki: G-20 Ülkeleri İçin Bir Analiz

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 1, 238 - 251, 27.03.2022

Bersu Bahtiyar , Aykut Yağlıkara

https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.917814

Cited By: 1

Öz

Küreselleşme, hem gelişmiş ülkeler, hem de gelişmekte olan ve az gelişmiş ülkeler için önemli sosyo-ekonomik ve politik etkiler yaratan bir unsurdur. Ülkeler arasındaki sınırların kalkmasıyla birlikte artan ekonomik hareketlilik üretim artışını beraberinde getirmekle birlikte, doğal kaynakların sürdürülebilirliği ve çevresel unsurlar açısından olumsuz sonuçların oluşabilmesine neden olmaktadır. Bu durum, ülkelerin sürdürülebilirliği ve çevresel kaliteyi dikkate alan ekonomik politikalara olan ilgisini artırmıştır. Bu bağlamda, bu çalışmada G-20 ülkeleri için çevresel kalite, küreselleşme ve kurumlar arasındaki dinamik ilişkinin incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. 1990-2018 dönemini kapsayan çalışmada panel nedensellik ve panel eşbütünleşme yöntemi kullanılarak çalışmaya konu olan 19 ülke için çevresel kalite, küreselleşme, kurumlar, yenilenebilir enerji ve ekonomik büyüme değişkenleri arasındaki ilişkinin geçerliliği ve yönü incelenmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçlarına göre, uzun dönemde çevresel kalite ve küreselleşme arasında nedensellik ilişkisi varken, çevresel kalite ve kurumlar arasında bir nedensellik ilişkisinin olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Bununla birlikte, ülkeler bazında değişkenler arasındaki ilişkinin boyutu farklılaşmaktadır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Küreselleşme, çevresel kalite, kurumsal kalite, G-20 ülkeleri, panel veri analizi

The Relationship between Environmental Quality, Globalization and Institutions: An Analysis for G-20 Countries Case

Öz

Globalization is an important factor that creates socio-economic and political effects for both developed countries and developing, underdeveloped countries. Economic mobility which increased with disappearance of the borders between countries, ensured increasing in global production level. However, it also caused negative consequences in terms of sustainability of natural resources and environmental factors. This has increased the interest of countries in socio-economic policies that consider the sustainability and environmental quality. In this context, this paper aims to examine the dynamic relationship between environmental quality, globalization and institutions for G-20 countries. The study examines validity and direction of the relationship between environmental quality, globalization, institutions, renewable energy and economic growth for these 19 countries covering the period of 1990-2018 by using panel causality and panel cointegration methods. According to the results of the study, in the long term, it is determined that while there is a causal relationship between environmental quality and globalization, there is no causality relationship between environmental quality and institutions. On the other hand, the extent of the relationship of variables differs across countries.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Globalization, environmental quality, institutions, G-20 countries, panel data analysis

Kaynakça

• Ahad, M., ve Khan, W. (2016). Does globalization impede environmental quality in Bangladesh? The role of real economic activities and energy use. Bulletin of Energy Economics, 4(3), 258-279.
• Ali, H. S., Zeqiraj, V., Lin, W. L., Law, S. H., Yusop, Z., Bare, U. A. A., ve Chin, L. (2019). Does quality institutions promote environmental quality?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(11), 10446-10456.
• Amuakwa-Mensah, F., ve Adom, P. K. (2017). Quality of institution and the FEG (forest, energy intensity, and globalization)-environment relationships in sub-Saharan Africa. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(21), 17455-17473.
• Baliamoune-Lutz, M. (2017). Trade and environmental quality in African countries: Do institutions matter?. Eastern Economic Journal, 43(1), 155-172.
• Baloch, M. A., Ozturk, I., Bekun, F. V., ve Khan, D. (2021). Modeling the dynamic linkage between financial development, energy innovation, and environmental quality: Does globalization matter?. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(1), 176-184.
• Bayar, Y., ve Sasmaz, M. U. (2017). Impact of foreign direct investments on unemployment in emerging market economies: A co-integration analysis. International Journal of Business and Economic Sciences Applied Research (IJBESAR), 10(3), 90-96.
• BP (2020). BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2020.
• Breitung, J. (2005). A parametric approach to the estimation of cointegration vectors in panel data. Econometric Reviews, 24(2), 151-173.
• Breusch, T. S., ve Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The review of economic studies, 47(1), 239-253.
• Dasgupta, S., ve De Cian, E. (2016). Institutions and the environment: existing evidence and future directions.
• Dreher, A. (2006). Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Applied economics, 38(10), 1091-1110.
• Dumitrescu, E. I., ve Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
• Gygli, S., Haelg, F., Potrafke, N., ve Sturm, J. E. (2018). The KOF globalisation index-revisited, 14(3), 543-574.
• Haseeb, A., Xia, E., Baloch, M. A., ve Abbas, K. (2018). Financial development, globalization, and CO 2 emission in the presence of EKC: evidence from BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(31), 31283-31296.
• Hosseini, H. M., ve Kaneko, S. (2013). Can environmental quality spread through institutions?. Energy Policy, 56, 312-321.
• Lau, L. S., Choong, C. K., ve Eng, Y. K. (2014). Carbon dioxide emission, institutional quality, and economic growth: empirical evidence in Malaysia. Renewable energy, 68, 276-281.
• Lopez, L., ve Weber, S. (2017). Testing for Granger causality in panel data. The Stata Journal, 17(4), 972-984.
• Lv, Z., ve Xu, T. (2018). Is economic globalization good or bad for the environmental quality? New evidence from dynamic heterogeneous panel models. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 137, 340-343.
• Mavragani, A., Nikolaou, I. E., ve Tsagarakis, K. P. (2016). Open economy, institutional quality, and environmental performance: A macroeconomic approach. Sustainability, 8(7), 601.
• Mayer, A. (2017). Democratic institutions and the energy intensity of well-being: a cross-national study. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 7(1), 1-10.
• Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74(4), 967-1012.
• Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of applied econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
• Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., ve Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias‐adjusted LM test of error cross‐section independence. The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127.
• Saud, S., Chen, S., ve Haseeb, A. (2019). Impact of financial development and economic growth on environmental quality: an empirical analysis from Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(3), 2253-2269.
• Shahbaz, M., Nasir, M. A., ve Roubaud, D. (2018). Environmental degradation in France: the effects of FDI, financial development, and energy innovations. Energy Economics, 74, 843-857.
• Teng, J. Z., Khan, M. K., Khan, M. I., Chishti, M. Z., ve Khan, M. O. (2021). Effect of foreign direct investment on CO 2 emission with the role of globalization, institutional quality with pooled mean group panel ARDL. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(5), 5271-5282.
• Twerefou, D. K., Danso-Mensah, K., ve Bokpin, G. A. (2017). The environmental effects of economic growth and globalization in Sub-Saharan Africa: a panel general method of moments approach. Research in International Business and Finance, 42, 939-949.
• V-Dem (2020). https://www.v-dem.net/en/data/data-version-9, (Erişim Tarihi: 07.02.2021).
• Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193-233.
• World Development Indicators (WDI) (2021). World development indicators. www.data.worldbank.org/indicators, (Erişim Tarihi: 07.02.2021).
• Yameogo, C. E., Omojolaibi, J. A., ve Dauda, R. O. (2020). Economic globalisation, institutions and environmental quality in Sub-Saharan Africa. Research in Globalization, 100035.
• You, W., ve Lv, Z. (2018). Spillover effects of economic globalization on CO2 emissions: a spatial panel approach. Energy Economics, 73, 248-257.
• Zafar, M. W., Saud, S., ve Hou, F. (2019). The impact of globalization and financial development on environmental quality: evidence from selected countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(13), 13246-13262.