The Main Macroeconomic Determinants of Environmental Degradation in the Independent Turkic Republics and Türkiye: Panel Data Analysis

Öz

Precautions to prevent environmental degradation, which is important for the continuation of life, are among the most important issues to which all countries attach importance. For a sustainable environment, it is necessary to make both globally common and individual policy arrangements appropriate to the capabilities of each country. In the applied literature, there are very few studies on the main macroeconomic factors affecting environmental degradation in the independent Turkic Republics and Türkiye which have an ecological deficit despite their underground and aboveground natural resources. For this reason, panel data analyses were conducted for the independent Turkic Republics of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Türkiye using annual data for the period 1996-2018, depending on data availability. In the analysis, ecological footprint, which represents environmental degradation, is considered as a dependent variable; GDP per capita, economic complexity index, non-renewable and renewable energy consumption, and trade openness are considered as independent variables. The results of the analyses show that the most important determinants of environmental footprint are GDP per capita, non-renewable energy consumption, and economic complexity index.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ecological deficit
• ecological footprint
• biocapacity
• macroeconomic determinants
• independent Turkic Republics
• panel data analysis

Bağımsız Türk Cumhuriyetleri ve Türkiye’de Çevresel Bozulmanın Temel Makroekonomik Belirleyicileri: Panel Veri Analizleri

Öz

Yaşamın devamı açısından önem arz eden çevresel bozulmayı önlemeye yönelik tedbirler tüm dünya ülkelerinin önem verdikleri temel konular arasında yer almaktadır. Sürdürülebilir çevre için hem küresel boyutta ortak hem de her ülkenin kendi imkânlarına göre bireysel politik tedbirler almaları gereklilik arz etmektedir. Uygulamalı literatürde yeraltı ve yer üstü doğal zenginliklerine rağmen ekolojik açık veren Bağımsız Türk Cumhuriyetleri’nde çevresel bozulmayı etkileyen temel makroekonomik faktörlerin neler olduğuna yönelik çok az sayıda çalışma bulunmaktadır. Bu nedenle çalışmada Türkiye ve Bağımsız Türk Cumhuriyetleri’nden Azerbaycan, Kazakistan, Kırgızistan, Türkmenistan ve Özbekistan için veri mevcudiyetine göre 1996-2018 dönemine ait yıllık veriler kullanılarak panel veri analizleri yapılmıştır. Analizlerde; çevresel bozulmayı temsilen ekolojik ayak izi bağımlı değişken, kişi başına GSYH, ekonomik karmaşıklık endeksi, yenilenemeyen ve yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ile ticari dışa açıklık bağımsız değişkenler olarak ele alınmıştır. Analizlerden elde edilen bulgulara göre ekolojik ayak izinin temel belirleyicilerinin kişi başına GSYH, yenilenemeyen enerji tüketimi ve ekonomik karmaşıklık endeksi olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ekolojik açık
• ekolojik ayak izi
• biyokapasite
• makroekonomik belirleyiciler
• bağımsız Türk Cumhuriyetleri
• panel veri analizi

Kaynakça

1. Aller, Carlos, Lorenzo Ductor, and Daryna Grechyna. “Robust Determinants of CO2 Emissions.” Energy Economics, vol. 96, 2021, pp. 105-154.
2. Ang, James B. “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption, and Output in France.” Energy Policy, vol. 35, no. 10, 2007, pp. 4772-4778. Artan, Seyfettin, Pınar Hayaloğlu, and Burak Seyhan. “The Relationship Between Environmental Pollution, Trade Openness And Economic Growth in Turkey.” Journal of Management and Economics Research, vol. 13, no. 1, 2015, pp. 308-325.
3. Asane-Otoo, Emmanuel. “Carbon Footprint and Emission Determinants in Africa.” Energy, vol. 82, 2015, pp. 426-435.
4. Balogh, Jeremias Mate, and Atilla Jambor. “Determinants of CO2 Emission: A Global Evidence.” International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, vol, 7, no. 5, 2017, pp. 217-226.
5. Breusch, Trevor, and Adrian Pagan. “The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Modelspecification Tests in Econometrics.” Review of Economic Studies, vol. 47, no. 1, 1980, pp. 239-253.
6. Bucak, Çağla. “The Relationship Between Economic Complexity And Ecological Footprint in G8 Countries And Turkey: Toda-Yamamoto Causality Test Analysis.” The Journal of Social Economic Research, vol. 22, no. 1, 2022, pp. 1-16.
7. Can, Muhlis, and Giray Gözgör. “The Impact of Economic Complexity on Carbon Emissions: Evidence From France.” Environmental Science Pollution Research, vol. 24, 2017, pp. 16364-16370.
8. Cutler J. Cleveland, Robert Costanza, Charles A.S. Hall, and Robert Kaufmann. “Energy and the US Economy: A Biophsical Perspective.” Science, vol. 225, no. 4665, 1984, pp. 890-897.

9. Çetin, Murat, and Selin Saygın. “Empirical Analysis of Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: The Example of Turkish Economy.” Journal of Management and Economics, vol. 26, no. 2, 2019, pp. 529- 546.
10. Damirova, Saharnoz, and Nihal Yayla. “The Relationship Between Environmental Pollution and Its Macroeconomic Determinants: A Panel Data Analysis For Selected Countries.” International Journal of Economics and Administrative Studies, vol. 30, 2021, pp. 107-126.
11. Destek, Mehmet Akif, and Samuel Asumadu Sarkodie. “Investigation of Environmental Kuznets Curve for Ecological Footprint: The Role of Energy and Financial Development.” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 650, no. 2, 2019, pp. 2483-2489.
12. Destek, Mehmet, and Avik Sinha. “Renewable, Non-Renewable Energy Consumption, Economic Growth, Trade Openness and Ecological Footprint: Evidence From Organisation For Economic Co- Operation and Development Countries.” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 242, 2020, pp. 118-537.
13. Doğan, Buhari, Behnaz Saboori, and Muhlis Can. “Does Economic Complexity Matter for Environmental Degradation? An Empirical Analysis for Different Stages of Development.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 26, no. 31, 2019, pp. 31900-31912.
14. Doğan, Buhari, Oana M. Driha, Daniel B. Lorente, and Umer Shahzad. “The Mitigating Effects of Economic Complexity and Renewable Energy on Carbon Emissions in Developed Countries.” Sustainable Development, vol. 1, no. 1, 2020, pp. 1-12.
15. Doğan, Eyüp, and Fahri Şeker. “The Influence of Real Output, Renewable and Nonrenewable Energy, Trade and Financial Development on Carbon Emissions in the Top Renewable Energy Countries.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 60, 2016, pp. 1074-1085.
16. Eberhardt, Markus, and Francis Teal. “Productivity Analysis in Global Manufacturing Production.” University of Oxford Department of Economics Discussion Paper, No: 515, http://www.economics.ox.ac.uk/research/WP/pdf/paper515.pdf.
17. Eberhardt, Markus, and Stephen Bond. “Cross-Section Dependence in Nonstationary Panel Models: A Novel Estimator.”, Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA) Paper 17692, https://mpra.ub.uni- muenchen.de/17870/2/MPRA_paper_17870.pdf.
18. Eren, Kasım. “Turkic Republics in The Commonwealth of Independent States.” Journal of Economics and Management Research, vol. 1, no. 1, 2012, pp. 43-73.
19. Ewing, Brad, Steven Goldfinger, Anna Oursler, Anders Reed, David Moore, and Mathis Wackernage. The Ecological Footprint Atlas 2009. Oakland: Global Footprint Network, 2009.
20. Global Footprint Network (2022). National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts (Data Year 2018). https://data.footprintnetwork.org/?_ga=2.142359088.387322034.1654867648- 2016969040.1654867648#/.
21. Grossman, Gene M., and Alan B. Krueger. “Economic Growth and The Environment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 110, no. 2, 1995, pp. 353-377.
22. Günel Tuğay. “Relationship between CO2 Emission and Economic Growth in Turkic Countries: A Panel Causality Analysis.” Sosyoekonomi, vol. 27, no. 40, 2019, pp. 151-164.
23. Gylfason, Tharvaldur, and Gylfi Zoega. “Natural Resources and Economic Growth: The Role of Investment.” The World Economy, nol. 29, no. 8, 2006, pp. 1091-1115.
24. Halıcıoğlu, Ferda. “An Econometric Study of CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption, Income and Foreign Trade in Turkey.” Energy Policy, vol. 37, no. 3, 2009, pp. 1156-1164.
25. Hotunluoğlu, Hakan, and Recep Tekeli. “Analysis and Effects of Carbon Tax: Does Carbon Tax Reduce Emission?” Sosyoekonomi, vol. 6, no. 6, 2007, pp.108-126.
26. Işık, Cem, Serdar Ongan and Dilek Özdemir. “Testing the EKC Hypothesis For Ten US States: An Application of Heterogeneous Panel Estimation Method.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 26, no. 11, 2019, pp. 10846-10853.
27. Khan, Danish Noheed, Muhammad A. Baloch, Shah Saud, and Tehreem Fatima. “The Effect of ICT on CO2 Emissions in Emerging Economies: Does The Level of Income Matters?” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 25, no. 23, 2018, pp. 22850-22860.
28. Kosifakis, Georgios, Athanasios Kampas, and Christos T. Papadas. “Economic Complexity and The Environment: Some Estimates on Their Links.” International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Management and Informatics, vol. 6, no. 3, 2020, pp. 261-271.
29. Leitão, Nuno Carlos, Daniel Balsalobre-Lorente and José María Cantos-Cantos. “The Impact of Renewable Energy and Economic Complexity on Carbon Emissions in BRICS Countries under the EKC Scheme.” Energies, vol. 14, no. 16, 2021, pp. 1-15.
30. Nasreen, Samia, Sofia Anvar, and Ilhan Öztürk. “Financial Stability, Energy Consumption and Environmental Quality: Evidence From South Asian Economies.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 67, no. C, 2017, pp. 1105-1122.
31. Neagu, Olimpia, and Madalin-Ioan Neagu. “The Environmental Kuznets Curve Revisited: Economic Complexity and Ecological Footprint in The Most Complex Economies of the World.” Studia Universitatis “Vasile Goldis” Arad. Economics Series, vol. 32, no. 1, 2022, pp. 78-99.
32. Neagu, Olimpia, and Mircea Constantin Teodoru. “The Relationship between Economic Complexity, Energy Consumption Structure and Greenhouse Gas Emission: Heterogeneous Panel Evidence from the EU Countries.” Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 2, 2019, pp. 1-29.
33. Neagu, Olimpia. “Economic Complexity and Ecological Footprint: Evidence from the Most Complex Economies in the World.” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 21, 2020, pp. 1-18.
34. Ockwell, David G. “Energy and Economic Growth: Grounding our Understanding in Physical Reality.” Energy Policy, vol. 36, 2008, pp. 4600-4604.
35. Özcan, Burcu. “The Nexus Between Carbon Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in Middle East Countries: A Panel Data Analysis.” Energy Policy, vol. 62, 2013, pp. 1138-1147.
36. Öztürk, İlhan, and Ali Acaravcı. “The Long-Run And Causal Analysis of Energy, Growth, Openness and Financial Development on Carbon Emissions in Turkey.” Energy Economics, vol. 36, 2013, pp. 262- 267.
37. Pata, Uğur Korkut. “Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption, Economic Complexity, CO2 Emissions, and Ecological Footprint in the USA: Testing the EKC Hypothesis With A Structural Break.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 28, 2021, pp. 846-861.
38. Pesaran, M. Hashem, and Takashi Yamagata. “Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 142, 2008, pp. 50-93.
39. Pesaran, M. Hashem, Aman Ullah and Takashi Yamagata. “A Bias-Adjusted LM Test of Error Cross-Section Independence” Econometrics Journal, vol. 11, 2008, pp. 105-127.
40. Pesaran, M. Hashem. “A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross-Section Dependence.” Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 22, 2007, pp. 265-312.
41. Salahuddin, Mohammad Khorshed Alam, and Ilhan Ozturk. “The Effects of Internet Usage and Economic Growth on CO2 Emissions in OECD Countries: A Panel Investigation.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Review, vol. 62, 2016, pp. 1226-1235.
42. Sharma, Susan Sunila. “Determinants of Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Empirical Evidence From 69 Countries.” Applied Energy, vol. 88, no. 1, 2011, pp. 376-382.
43. Soytaş, Uğur, and Ramazan Sarı. “Energy Consumption, Economic Growth, and Energy Emissions: Challenges Faced By an EU Candidate Member.” Ecological Economics, vol. 68, no. 6, 2009, pp. 1667- 1675.
44. Soytaş, Uğur, Ramazan Sari, and Bradley T. Ewing. “Energy Consumption, Income, and Carbon Emissions in the United States.” Ecological Economics, vol. 62, no. 3-4, 2007, pp. 482-489.
45. T.R. Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (2018), https://webdosya.csb.gov.tr/db/bolu/icerikler/cevre-20180222082618.pdf.
46. Tamazian, Artur, Juan Piñeiro Chousa, and Krishna Chaitanya Vadlamannati. “Does Higher Economic and Financial Development Lead to Environmental Degradation: Evidence From BRIC Countries.” Energy Policy, vol. 37, no. 1, 2009, pp. 246-253.
47. Tunay, K. Batu. “Interaction of Macroconomic Imbalances in Emerging Economies: The Case of Turkic Republics.” bilig, no. 83, 2017, pp. 171-199.
48. Wang, S.S., Dequn Zhou, Peng Zhou, and Qunwei, Wang. “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in China: A Panel Data Analysis.” Energy Policy, vol. 39, no. 9, 2011, pp. 4870-4875.
49. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF-Turkey). “Turkey Ecological Footprint Report.” 2012, https://www.footprintnetwork.org/content/images/article_uploads/Turkey_Ecological_Footprint_Report_Turkish.pdf.
50. Yapraklı, Sevda, and Erdemalp Özden. “The Effect of Sustainable Development on Economic Complexity in OECD Countries.” International and Multidisciplinary Journal in Social Sciences, vol. 10, no. 2, 2021, pp. 151-180.
51. Yapraklı, Sevda. Energy-Driven Growth: Applications to the Turkish Industrial Sector. 1st Edition, Istanbul: Beta Publications, 2013.
52. Yeter, Fatih, İlhan Eroğlu, Nalan Kangal, and Mustafa N. Çoban. “Relationship Between Economic Growth, Energy Consumption And Environmental Deterioration: Panel Data Analysis on Turkic Republics Abstract.” Turkish World Studies, vol. 129, no. 255, 2021, pp. 405-432.