The Relatıonshıp Between Unemployment And Ecologıcal Footprınt: BRICST countries

Öz

In this article, the relationship between unemployment and ecological footprint for BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and Turkey) was examined. Ecological footprint has been preferred as an environmental indicator. It has been determined in the literature that it is a broader and more detailed concept than other environmental indicators. In the model, annual data for the period 2000-2022, ecological footprint, unemployment, economic growth and renewable energy consumption variables were used. The seemingly unrelated regression method was applied to estimate the relationship between these variables. according to the estimation results, it has been determined that unemployment, economic growth and renewable energy consumption are significant at the level of 1% significance on the ecological footprint. These results make it easy to explain the ecological footprint of the independent variables, which is the dependent variable. In addition, it has been concluded that unemployment and economic growth variables increase the ecological footprint in the BRICS-T countrys, while renewable energy consumption reduces the ecological footprint.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• unemplyment
• renewable energy
• ecologial footprint

İşsizlik ve Ekolojik Ayak İzi Arasındaki İlişki: BRICST ülkeleri

Öz

Bu çalışmada, BRICS-T (Brezilya, Rusya, Hindistan, Çin, Güney Afrika ve Türkiye) ülkeleri için işsizlik ve ekolojik ayak izi arasındaki ilişki incelenmiştir. Çevresel gösterge olarak ekolojik ayak izi tercih edilmiştir. Diğer çevresel göstergelerden daha geniş ve detaylı bir kavram olduğu literatürde tespit edilmiştir. Modelde 2000-2022 dönemine ait yıllık veriler, ekolojik ayak izi, işsizlik, ekonomik büyüme ve yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi değişkenleri kullanılmıştır. Bu değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiyi tahmin etmek için görünürde ilişkisiz regresyon yöntemine başvurulmuştur. Tahmin sonuçlarına göre, işsizlik, ekonomik büyüme ve yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ekolojik ayak izi üzerinde %1 anlamlılık düzeyinde anlamlı olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Bu sonuçlar, bağımsız değişkenlerin bağımlı değişken olan ekolojik ayak izini açıklamada kolaylık sağlamaktadır. Ayrıca BRICS-T ülkelerinde işsizlik ve ekonomik büyüme değişkenleri ekolojik ayak izini artırdığı; yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ise ekolojik ayak izini azalttığı sonucuna rastlanılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• işsizlik
• yenilenebilir enerji
• ekolojik ayak izi

Kaynakça

1. Aceleanu, M., Serban, A., & Burghelea, C. (2015). Greening the youth employment-A chance for sustainable development. Sustainability 7(3), 2623–2643. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7032623
2. Adesina, K. S. & Mwamba, J. W. M. (2019). Does economic freedom matter for CO2 emissions? lessons from Africa. The Journal of Developing Areas, 53(3), 155-167.
3. Alkan, Ö., ve Kılıçtek, B. (2020). Görünürde ilişkisiz regresyon modeli ile alkol ve tütün kullanım süresini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi. Ekev Akademi Dergisi, 84, 511-528.
4. Anser, M. K., Apergis, N., Syed, Q. R., & Alola, A. A. (2021). Exploring a new perspective of sustainable development drive through environmental Phillips curve in the case of the BRICST countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(35), 48112-48122.
5. Baloch, M. A., & Zhang, J., (2019). The effect of financial development on ecological footprint in BRI countries: Evidence From Panel Data Estimation. Environmental science and pollution research, 26, 6199–6208.
6. Berger, D. (2022). Investor sentiment: A retail trader activity approach. Review of accounting and Finance, 21(2), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAF-06-2021-0152
7. Blankenberg, A.K., & Alhusen, H. (2019). On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist. Center for European. Governance, and Economic Development Research, 350. https://ssrn.com/abstract= 3473702 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3473702
8. Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). the lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 1(47), 239–253.

9. Charfeddine, L. (2017). The impact of energy consumption and economic development on ecological footprint and co2 emissions: evidence from a markov switching equilibrium correction model. Energy Economics, 65, 355–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.05.009
10. Chen, D. D., Gao, W. S., Chen, Y. Q., & Zhang, Q. (2010). Ecological footprint analysis of food consumption of rural residents in China in the latest 30 years. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 1, 106-115.
11. Cui, Y., Wang, G., Irfan, M., Wu, D., & Cao, J. (2022). The effect of green finance and unemployment rate on carbon emissions in China. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 887341.
12. Çetin, M., Kapçak, S., & Can, A. (2022). Türkiye'de demokrasinin ekolojik ayak izi üzerindeki etkisi: ARDL Sınır Testi. Balkan & Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences, 8, 136-145.
13. Desha, C., Robinson, D., & Sproul, A. (2015). Working in partnership to develop engineering capability in energy efficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 283–291. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.03.099
14. Dogan, E., Majeed, M. T., & Luni, T. (2022). Revisiting the nexus of ecological footprint, unemployment, and renewable and non-renewable energy for South Asian economies: Evidence from novel research methods. Renewable Energy, 194, 1060-1070.
15. Duarte, R., Feng, K., Hubacek, K., Sanchez-Choliz, J., Sarasa, C., & Sun, L. ( 2016). Modeling the carbon consequences of pro-environmental consumer behavior. Applied Energy, 184, 1207–1216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.09.101
16. Eissa, A. A. E. (2023). Investigating the relationship between economic growth and ecological footprint in Egypt. MSA-Management Sciences Journal, 2(3), 122-145.
17. Ewing, B., Moore, D., Goldfinger, S. H., Oursler, A., Rees, A. & Wackernagel, M. (2010). Ecological Footprint Atlas Global Footprint Network, Oakland. In Global Footprint Network. Available At https://Www.Footprintnetwork.Org/Content/İmages/Uploads/Ecological_Footprint_Atlas_2010.Pdf Granados, J. A. T. & Spash, C. L. (2019). Policies to reduce CO2 emissions: Fallacies and evidence from the United States and California. Environmental Science & Policy, 94, 262-266.
18. Greene, W.H. (2003). Econometric analysis, Pearson education. Hastik R, Walzer C, Haida C, Garegnani G, Pezzutto S, Abegg B, & Geitner C. (2016) Using the “footprint” approach to examine the potentials and impacts of renewable energy sources in the European alps. Mt Res Dev 36(2), 130–140.
19. Huang, J., Li, X., Wang, Y., & Lei, H. (2021). The effect of energy patents on China's carbon emissions: Evidence from the STIRPAT model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121110.
20. Ikram, M., Ferasso, M., Sroufe, R., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Assessing green technology indicators for cleaner production and sustainable investments in a developing country context. Journal of Cleaner Production, 322, 129090.
21. Ivrendi, M., & Guloglu, B. (2010). Monetary shocks, exchange rates and trade balances: Evidence from inflation targeting countries. Economic Modelling, 27(5), 1144-1155.
22. Javaheri, B., Ghaderi, S., Ghomashi, N.,& Amani, R.(2021). Investigating the Impact of Economic Complexity and Ecological Footprint on Economic Growth in OPEC Countries. The Economic Research.
23. Kapçak, S. (2022). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerde mutluluk ve ekonomik büyümenin ekolojik ayak izi üzerindeki etkisi. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(2), 136-146.
24. Kapçak, S., & Özdemir, İ. (2023). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerde dış ticaret, işsizlik ve enflasyonun ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi: Panel veri analizi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 24(2), 243-254.
25. Katircioglu S, Gokmenoglu, K. K, & Eren, B.M., (2018). Testing the role of tourism development in ecological footprint quality: Evidence from top 10 tourist destinations. Environmental science and pollution research, 25, 33611–33619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3324-0
26. Keleş, S. S. (2022). BRICS-T Ülkelerinde küreselleşme, ekonomik karmaşıklık ve gelir eşitsizliği: Heterojen Panel Veri Analizi, Journal of Emergıng Economıes And Polıcy, 7(2), 379-388.
27. Keskin, H. İ. (2019). Türkiye’nin turizm talebinin tahmininde görünürde ilişkisiz regresyon modelinin kullanılması. Journal of Tourism Theory and Research, 5(2), 182-190.
28. Liu, D. ve Xiao, B. (2018). Can China achieve its carbon emission peaking? A scenario analysis based on STIRPAT and system Dynamics model. Ecological Indicators, 93, 647-657.
29. Mayer A (2016) Is unemployment good for the environment? Resour. Energy Econ 45, 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2016.04.00
30. Mulderij, L. S., Hernandez, J. I., Mouter, N., Verkooijen, K. T., & Wagemakers, A. (2021). Citizen preferences regarding the public funding of projects promoting a healthy body weight among people with a low income. Social Science & Medicine, 280, 114015.
31. Nathaniel, S. & Khan, S.A.R. (2019). The nexus between urbanization, renewable energy, trade, and ecological footprint in ASEAN countries. Journal Of Cleaner Production, 272, 1-9.
32. Ng, C. F., Yii, K. J., Lau, L. S., & Go, Y. H. (2022). Unemployment rate, clean energy, and ecological footprint in OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-10.
33. Öztunalı Kayır, G. (2003) Doğaya Dönüş: Topluma Ekolojik Bakış, Bağlam Yayınları, İstanbul. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large Panels. Journal of Econometrics. 142(1), 50-93.
34. Rashid, A., Irum, A., Malik, I. A., Ashraf, A., Rongqiong, L., Liu, G., & Yousaf, B. (2018). Ecological footprint of Rawalpindi; Pakistan's first footprint analysis from urbanization perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 170, 362-368.
35. Romuald, K. S. (2011). Democratic Institutions and Environmental Quality. Effects And Transmission Channels. Congress, Switzerland.
36. Rudolph A, & Figge, L. (2017). Determinants of ecological footprints: What İs the role of globalization? Ecol Indic 81, 348–361. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ecolind.2017.04.060
37. Shastri, S., Mohapatra, G., & Giri, A. K. (2023). The Environmental Philips Curve from a gender perspective: empirical evidence from India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(7), 17487-17496.
38. Solarin, S.A., & Al-Mulali, U., (2018). Influence of foreign direct investment on indicators of environmental degradation. Enviromental Science and Pollution Research, 25(25), 24845-24859.
39. Swamy, P (1971). Statistical ınference in Random coefficient regression models. New York. Springer. Şahin, G. (2022). Kömür ihraç eden ülkelerde STIRPAT Modeline dayalı çevresel etki analizi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 73, 196-216.
40. Tanveer, A., Song, H., Faheem, M., & Chaudhry, I. S. (2022). Validation of environmental philips curve in Pakistan: a fresh insight through ARDL technique. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-18.
41. Ulucak, R., & Erdem, E. (2017). Ekonomik büyüme modellerinde çevre: ekolojik ayak izini esas alan bir uygulama. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 35(4), 115-147.
42. Ulusoy, T., & Şen, Ş. (2019). Emisyon ticareti ve karbon emisyonlarının firma değerine olan etkisi. Social Sciences, 14(4), 1827-1840.
43. UNDP. (2021). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için küresel amaçlar. Erişim tarihi: (09 Eylül 2021 https://Www.Kureselamaclar.Org/
44. Ursavaş, N. (2021). Türkiye’de demokrasinin ekolojik ayak izi üzerindeki etkisi. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 56(4), 2745-2757.
45. Wang, Q., Wang, L., and Li, R. (2022c). Renewable energy and economic growth revisited: The dual roles of resource dependence and anticorruption regulation. Environmental science and pollution research. 337, 130514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130514
46. Yan, K., Zhou, X., & Chen, J. (2022). Collaborative deep learning framework on ıot data with bidirectional NLSTM neural networks for energy consumption forecasting. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 163, 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpdc.2022.01.012
47. Zafar, M.W., Zaidi, S.A.H., Khan, N.R., Mirza, F.M., Hou, F., & Kirmani, S.A.A., (2019). The impact of natural resources, human capital, and foreign direct investment on the ecological footprint: The Case of The United States. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 63, 101428.
48. Zellner A., (1962). Estimators For Seemigly Unrelated Regression Equations: Some Finite Sample Results. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58, 977-992.