ENERJİ TÜKETİMİ, KENTLEŞME VE EKONOMİK BÜYÜME İLİŞKİSİ: OECD ÜLKELERİ ÜZERİNE BİR UYGULAMA

Öz

Bu araştırma, 34 OECD ülkesinde, Panel VAR analizini uygulayarak enerji tüketimi-kentleşme-büyüme ilişkisi hakkında 1996-2015 dönemi için yeni ampirik kanıt sunma amacını taşımaktadır. İki değişkenli Panel VAR analizi modeli, enerji tüketiminin EC GSYH'ye kişi başına düşen reel GSYİH iki yönlü pozitif bir tepkisini ortaya koymaktadır. Dahası, EC'nin UR'ye kentsel toplam nüfusa olumlu tepki verdiği bulunmuştur. Üç değişkenli VAR modeli, GSYİH'nın enerji tüketimi üzerindeki önemli olumlu etkisini göstermektedir. Buna ek olarak, enerji tüketiminin kentleşme üzerinde olumsuz bir etkisi olduğu görülmektedir. Kentleşmenin, enerji tüketiminin yanı sıra ekonomik büyüme üzerinde de olumlu bir etkisi olduğu bulunmuştur. Etki tepki fonksiyonları IRF , kentleşmenin, enerji tüketimine karşı, kısa vadede artan olumlu tepkisini göstermektedir. Kentleşmenin ekonomik büyümeye verdiği tepki olumludur ve kısa vadede katlanarak artmaktadır. Kentleşmenin enerji tüketimine verdiği cevap olumludur, ancak bu etki uzun vadede önemli ölçüde azalmaktadır. GSYİH'nın enerji tüketimine olumlu bir tepkisi olduğu ancak gözlemlenen dönemde bu tepkinin azaldığı görülmektedir. Bu makalenin sonuçları, OECD ülkelerindeki kentli vatandaşların sürdürülebilir enerjiyi teşvik ederek sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya katkıda bulunmadaki rolleri konusunda büyük farkındalıklarını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu nedenle politika yapıcılar, fosil yakıtlara dayalı enerjinin neden olduğu CO2 emisyonlarını azaltmak için kentsel alanlarda yenilenebilir enerjiyi teşvik etmek için gerekli değişiklikleri yapmalıdır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ekonomik Büyüme,Enerji Tüketimi,Panel VAR,Kentleşme

ENERGY CONSUMPTION, URBANIZATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH RELATIONSHIP: AN EXAMINATION ON OECD COUNTRIES

Öz

This research tends to present fresh empirical evidence on the energy consumption-urbanization-growth nexus in the case of 34 OECD countries in the period 1996-2015 by applying Panel VAR analysis. Bivariate Panel VAR models suggest a two directional positive response of energy consumption EC to GDP real GDP per capita . Moreover, EC is found to response positively to the UR urban total population . The trivariate VAR model shows a significant positive impact of lagged GDP on the energy consumption. Additionally, lagged energy consumption is found to have a negative impact on urbanization. Urbanization is found to have a positive impact of the consumption of energy as well as on the economic growth. IRFs suggest a positive increasing short-term response of urbanization to the consumption of energy. The response of urbanization to the economic growth is positive and increases exponentially in the short-run. However, the response of urbanization to the energy consumption is positive but decreases significantly in the long-run. GDP is found to have a positive response to energy consumption but this response is decreasing in the observed period. The results of this paper suggest the great awareness of the urban citizens in OECD countries on their role in contributing to sustainable development by promoting sustainable energy. Hence, the policy makers need to do necessary changes to promote the renewable energy in urban areas in order to reduce CO2 emissions caused by energy based on fossil fuels

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Economic Growth,Energy Consumption,Panel VAR,Urbanization

Kaynakça

1. Abrigo, M. R., & Love, I. (2015). Estimation of panel vector autoregression in Stata: A package of hu/Program/Michael-Abrigo. pdf. Febr 2015 available on
2. http://paneldataconference2015. ceu.
3. Akarca, A. T., & Long, T. V. (1980). On the relationship between energy and GNP: a reexamination. The Journal of Energy and Development, 326-331.
4. Al-Mulali, U., Ozturk, I., & Lean, H. H. (2015). The influence of economic growth, urbanization, trade openness, financial development, and renewable energy on pollution in Europe. Natural Hazards, 79(1), 621-644.
5. Ali, H. S., Law, S. H., & Zannah, T. I. (2016). Dynamic impact of urbanization, economic growth, energy consumption, and trade openness on CO2 emissions in Nigeria. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(12), 12435-12443.
6. Altınay, G. ve E. Karagöl (2004). “Structural break, unit root, and the causality between energy consumption and GDP in Turkey”, Energy Economics, 26, s. 985-994.
7. Amri, F. (2017). Intercourse across economic growth, trade and renewable energy consumption in developing and developed countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 69, 527-534.
8. Andrews, D.W.K. and B. Lu (2001). Consistent model and moment selection procedures for GMM estimation with application to dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 101(1), pp. 123- 164.

9. Canova, F. and Ciccarelli, M. (2013). Panel vector autoregressive models a survey, ECB Working Paper SerieS NO 1507.
10. Erol U., E.S.H. Yu (1987), “On The Causal Relationship Between Energy And Income For Industrializing Countries”, Journal of Economics and Developments ,13, 113-122.
11. Hansen, L.P. (1982). Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica, 50(4), pp. 1029-1054.
12. Khan, M. A., Khan, M. Z., Zaman, K., Irfan, D., & Khatab, H. (2014). Questing the three key growth determinants: Energy consumption, foreign direct investment and financial development in South Asia. Renewable Energy, 68(C), 203-215.
13. Kızılkaya O. (2018), Türkiye'de Enerji Tüketimi ve Büyüme İlişkisi: Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Analizi. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, Prof.Dr. Harun Terzi Özel Sayısı, 59-72.
14. Komal, R., & Abbas, F. (2015). Linking financial development, economic growth and energy consumption in Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 44, 211-220.
15. Kraft, J., Kraft, A., 1978. On the relationship between energy and GNP. Journal of Energy Development 3, 401–403.
16. Lebe, F., & Akbaş, Y. E. (2015). Türkiye'de Sanayileşme, Finansal Gelişme, Ekonomik Büyüme ve Kentleşmenin Enerji Tüketimi Üzerindeki Etkisi: Çoklu Yapısal Kırılmalı Bir Araştırma. Ege Academic Review, 15(2).
17. Love, I. and Zicchino, L. (2006). Financial development and dynamic investment behavior: Evidence from panel VAR. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Vol. 46(2), 190-210.
18. Muslija, A., Satrovic, E. and Unver Erbas, C, (2017). Panel Analysis of Tourism -Economic Growth Nexus, International Journal of Economic Studies, 3(4), 535-545
19. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of applied econometrics, 16(3), 289-326.
20. Satrovic, E., (2018). Merits of Life Insurance, Munich: GRIN Verlag.
21. Satrovic, E. and Muslija, A. (2018). Causality Relationship between Foreign Direct Investment and Tourism. International Journal of Economic and Administrative Studies, Vol. 22, 65-76.
22. Soytas, U., & Sari, R. (2003). Energy consumption and GDP: causality relationship in G-7 countries and emerging markets. Energy economics, 25(1), 33-37.
23. Stern, D.I., (1993). Energy and economic growth in the USA. Energy Economics ,15, 137–150.
24. Stern, D.I., (2000)s. Multivariate cointegration analysis of the role of energy in the US macroeconomy. Energy Economics ,22, 267–283.
25. Sims, C.A. (1980). Macroeconomics and reality. Econometrica, 48(1), 1-48.
26. Wang, S., Li, G., & Fang, C. (2018). Urbanization, economic growth, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions: Empirical evidence from countries with different income levels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 2144-2159.
27. Yang, Y., Liu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2017). An analysis of the implications of China’s urbanization policy for economic growth and energy consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production, 161, 1251-1262.