The Impacts of Agricultural Energy Use and Cultivable Area on the Cropland Footprint in Light of the EKC Model: Evidence from the Top Ten Most Successful Countries in Agriculture

Abstract

This study examines the impact of agricultural production on environmental degradation. Specifically, it tests the agricultural energy use and arable land variables, along with the agricultural Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis, in the ten most agriculturally successful countries: Australia, Canada, Mexico, Türkiye, United States, Argentina, Brazil, China, India, and Russia. Using annual data from 1992 to 2020, econometric analyses were conducted through Bootstrap ARDL (B-ARDL) and Bootstrap Toda-Yamamoto causality methods. The results only validate the agricultural EKC hypothesis in Türkiye among the countries in the sample. This finding highlights Türkiye's commitment to agricultural structural transformations. Recent developments and support in Türkiye’s agricultural sector align with the study's findings. Policy recommendations focused on how these developments could threaten food security.

Keywords

• Cropland
• Agricultural energy use
• Cultivable agricultural area
• B-ARDL
• Agricultural EKC

References

1. Ağır M S, Derin Güre P & Sentürk B (2023). The Intersection of Agriculture and Energy in Türkiye, AgriPV: A Preliminary Evaluation. Hacettepe University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences (In Turkish) DOI: 10.17065/huniibf.1250434.
2. Ahmad M, Dai J, Mehmood U & Abou Houran M (2023). Renewable energy transition, resource richness, economic growth, and environmental quality: Assessing the role of financial globalization. Renewable Energy DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.119000
3. Alakbarov N, Gündüz M & Şaşmaz M Ü (2024). Exploring the link between economic growth, energy consumption, and environmental pollution in G20. Natural Resources Forum DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12440
4. Alam I & Quazi R (2003). Determinants of Capital Flight: An econometric case study of Bangladesh. International Review of Applied Economics DOI: 10.1080/713673164
5. Alam M S, Duraisamy P, Siddik A B, Murshed M, Mahmood H, Palanisamy M & Kirikkaleli D (2023). The impacts of globalization, renewable energy, and agriculture on CO2 emissions in India: Contextual evidence using a novel composite carbon emission-related atmospheric quality index. Gondwana Research DOI: 10.1016/j.gr.2023.04.005
6. Apergis N (2016). Environmental Kuznets curves: new evidence on both panel and country-level CO2 emissions. Energy Economics DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2015.12.007
7. Aydoğan B & Vardar G (2020). Evaluating the role of renewable energy, economic growth and agriculture on CO2 emission in E7 countries. International Journal of Sustainable Energy DOI: 10.1080/14786451.2019.1686380
8. Bekun F V (2024). Race to carbon neutrality in South Africa: what role does environmental technological innovation play? Applied Energy DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122212

9. Chandio A A, Akram W, Ahmad F & Ahmad M (2020). Dynamic relationship among agriculture-energy-forestry and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions: empirical evidence from China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-09560-z
10. Farooq U, Tabash M I, Anagreh S, Al-Rdaydeh M & Habib S (2023). Economic growth, foreign investment, tourism and electricity generation as determinants of environmental quality: Empirical evidence from the Gulf Cooperation Council region. Environmental Science and Pollution Research DOI: 10.1007/s11356-023-25545-0
11. Gokmenoglu K K & Taspinar N (2018). Testing the agriculture-induced EKC hypothesis: the case of Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-2330-6
12. Granger, C. W. J. (1969). Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross spectral Methods. Econometrica, 37(3), 424. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912791
13. Gülmez A, Altıntaş N & Kahraman Ü O (2020). A puzzle over ecological footprint, energy consumption and economic growth: the case of Türkiye. Environmental and Ecological Statistics DOI: 10.1007/s10651-020-00465-1
14. Hacker S & Hatemi‐J A (2012). A bootstrap test for causality with endogenous lag length choice: theory and application in finance. Journal of Economic Studies DOI: 10.1108/01443581211222635
15. Hafeez M, Yuan C, Shah W U H, Mahmood M T, Li X & Iqbal K (2020). Evaluating the relationship among agriculture, energy demand, finance and environmental degradation in one belt and one road economies. Carbon Management DOI: 10.1080/17583004.2020.1721974 Jebli M B & Youssef S B (2015). The environmental Kuznets curve, economic growth, renewable and non-renewable energy, and trade in Tunisia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.049
16. Karimi Alavijeh N, Salehnia N, Salehnia N & Koengkan M (2023). The effects of agricultural development on CO2 emissions: empirical evidence from the most populous developing countries. Environment, Development and Sustainability DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02567-1
17. Koshta N, Bashir H A & Samad T A (2021). Foreign trade, financial development, agriculture, energy consumption and CO2 emission: testing EKC among emerging economies. Indian Growth and Development Review DOI: 10.1108/igdr-10-2019-0117
18. Li T, Baležentis T, Makutėnienė D, Streimikiene D & Kriščiukaitienė I (2016). Energy-related CO2 emission in European Union agriculture: Driving forces and possibilities for reduction. Applied Energy DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.031
19. Liu X, Zhang S & Bae J (2017). The impact of renewable energy and agriculture on carbon dioxide emissions: investigating the environmental Kuznets curve in four selected ASEAN countries. Journal of Cleaner Production DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.086
20. Liu Y, Mabee W & Zhang H (2021). Conserving fertilizer in China's rural-agricultural development: The reversal shifts and the county-specific EKC evidence from Hubei. Cleaner Environmental Systems DOI: 10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100050
21. McNown R, Sam C Y & Goh S K (2018). Bootstrapping the autoregressive distributed lag test for cointegration. Applied Economics DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2017.1366643
22. Nguyen Q H (2024). The influence of key economic globalization factors on economic growth and environmental quality: An empirical study in Southeast Asian countries. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development DOI: 10.1080/09638199.2022.2159060
23. OECD (2023), Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2023. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/agricultural-policy-monitoring and-evaluation-2023_b14de474-en.html. Access Date: 01.10.2024. OECD-FAO, (2023), Agricultural Outlook 2014-2023, https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/1b93031c-6a78-4c80-b5aa bcf7a0c574fd/content. Access Date: 01.10.2024.
24. Olanipekun I O, Olasehinde-Williams G O & Alao R O (2019). Agriculture and environmental degradation in Africa: The role of income. Science of the Total Environment DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.07.129
25. Ozcan B, Tzeremes P G & Tzeremes N G (2020). Energy consumption, economic growth and environmental degradation in OECD countries. Economic Modelling DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2019.04.010
26. Pakrooh P, Hayati B, Pishbahar E, Nematian J & Brännlund E R (2020). Focus on the provincial inequalities in energy consumption and CO2 emissions of Iran's agriculture sector. Science of the Total Environment DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137029
27. Pata U K (2018). Renewable energy consumption, urbanization, financial development, income and CO2 emissions in Türkiye: testing EKC hypothesis with structural breaks. Journal of Cleaner Production DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.236
28. Pata U K (2021). Linking renewable energy, globalization, agriculture, CO2 emissions, and ecological footprint in BRIC countries: A sustainability perspective. Renewable Energy DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.125
29. Perone G (2024). The relationship between renewable energy production and CO2 emissions in 27 OECD countries: A panel cointegration and Granger non-causality approach. Journal of Cleaner Production DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139655 Pesaran M H, Shin Y & Smith R J (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics DOI: 10.1002/jae.616
30. Phiri J, Malec K, Kapuka A, Maitah M, Appiah-Kubi S N K, Gebeltová Z & Maitah K (2021). Impact of agriculture and energy on CO2 emissions in Zambia. Energies DOI: 10.3390/en14248339
31. Rahman M M & Vu X B (2020). The nexus between renewable energy, economic growth, trade, urbanisation, and environmental quality: A comparative study for Australia and Canada. Renewable Energy DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.03.135
32. Raihan A (2023). An econometric evaluation of the effects of economic growth, energy use, and agricultural value added on carbon dioxide emissions in Vietnam. Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science DOI: 10.1007/s41685-023-00278-7
33. Raihan A & Tuspekova A (2022). The nexus between economic growth, renewable energy use, agricultural land expansion, and carbon emissions: New insights from Peru. Energy Nexus DOI: 10.1016/j.nexus.2022.100067
34. Raihan A, Begum R A, Nizam M, Said M & Pereira J J (2022). Dynamic impacts of energy use, agricultural land expansion, and deforestation on CO2 emissions in Malaysia. Environmental and Ecological Statistics DOI: 10.1007/s10651-022-00532-9
35. Raihan A, Muhtasim D A, Farhana S, Hasan M A U, Pavel M I, Faruk O & Mahmood A (2023). An econometric analysis of Greenhouse gas emissions from different agricultural factors in Bangladesh. Energy Nexus DOI: 10.1016/j.nexus.2023.100179
36. Ramzan M, Razi U, Usman M, Sarwar S, Talan A & Mundi H S (2024). Role of nuclear energy, geothermal energy, agriculture, and urbanization in environmental stewardship. Gondwana Research DOI: 10.1016/j.gr.2023.08.006
37. Rega C, Helming J & Paracchini M L (2019). Environmentalism and localism in agricultural and land-use policies can maintain food production while supporting biodiversity. Findings from simulations of contrasting scenarios in the EU. Land Use Policy DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.05.005
38. Ridzuan N H A M, Marwan N F, Khalid N, Ali M H & Tseng M L (2020). Effects of agriculture, renewable energy, and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions: Evidence of the environmental Kuznets curve. Resources, Conservation and Recycling DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104879
39. Saidmamatov O, Tetreault N, Bekjanov D, Khodjaniyazov E, Ibadullaev E, Sobirov Y & Adrianto L R (2023). The nexus between agriculture, water, energy, and environmental degradation in central Asia-Empirical evidence using panel data models. Energies DOI: 10.3390/en16073206 Sam C Y, McNown R & Goh S K (2019). An augmented autoregressive distributed lag bounds test for cointegration. Economic Modelling DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2018.11.001
40. Sapkota T B, Khanam F, Mathivanan G P, Vetter S, Hussain S G, Pilat A L & Krupnik T J (2021). Quantifying opportunities for greenhouse gas emissions mitigation using big data from smallholder crop and livestock farmers across Bangladesh. Science of the Total Environment DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147344
41. Selcuk M, Gormus S & Guven M (2021). Do agriculture activities matter for the environmental Kuznets curve in the Next Eleven countries? Environmental Science and Pollution Research DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-14825-2
42. Selvanathan S, Jayasinghe M S, Selvanathan E A, Abbas S A & Iftekhar M S (2023). Energy consumption, agriculture, forestation, and CO2 emission nexus: an application to OECD countries. Applied Economics DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2022.2128296
43. Shafiq M N, Gillani S & Shafiq S (2021). Climate Change and Agricultural Production in Pakistan. IRASD Journal of Energy & Environment DOI: 10.52131/jee.2021.0202.0016
44. Sims C A (1980). Macroeconomics and Reality. Econometrica DOI: 10.2307/1912017
45. Song T, Zheng T & Tong L (2008). An empirical test of the environmental Kuznets curve in China: A panel cointegration approach. China Economic Review DOI: 10.1016/j.chieco.2007.10.001
46. Srivastava R K, Shetti N P, Reddy K R, Nadagouda M N, Badawi M, Bonilla-Petriciolet A & Aminabhavi T M (2023). Valorization of biowastes for clean energy production, environmental depollution, and soil fertility. Journal of Environmental Management DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117410
47. Stern D I (2004). The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. World Development DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.03.004
48. Tigchelaar M, Battisti D S, Naylor R L & Ray D K (2018). Future warming increases the capacity for global maize production shocks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1718031115
49. Toda H Y & Yamamoto T (1995). Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics DOI: 10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8
50. Toor M D, Rehman F U, Adnan M, Kalsoom M & Shahzadi L (2020). Relationship between environment and agriculture: a review. SunText Review of Biotechnology DOI: 10.51737/2766-5097.2020.011
51. Trofimov I D (2024). Is there a Kuznets curve for cropland use? The evidence from international panel data. Natural Resources Forum DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12328
52. TURKSTAT (2022). Turkish Labor Force Statistics. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index? World Economic Forum (2022). AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND BEVERAGE. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/08/top-10-countries produce-most-wheat World Population Review (2024). https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/fruit-production-by-country
53. Yurtkuran S (2021). The effect of agriculture, renewable energy production, and globalization on CO2 emissions in Türkiye: A bootstrap ARDL approach. Renewable Energy DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.009
54. Zhang G, Xiao X, Biradar C M, Dong J, Qin Y, Menarguez M A & Moore III B (2017). Spatiotemporal patterns of paddy rice croplands in China and India from 2000 to 2015. Science of the Total Environment DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.223