THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC GROWTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION IN TURKEY

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 59, 289 - 314, 31.08.2021

Mohammed Alnour

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.861440

Cited By: 5

Öz

This study examines the relationship between economic growth and environmental pollution in Turkey. The research uses annual time series data from 1970 to 2017. Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) and Phillips-Perron (PP) unit root tests were used to test the stationarity of the series. In this the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model is used as an estimation technique. Furthermore, the classical additive decomposition method was used to forecast the pollution. The results indicate that economic growth has a positive significant effect on environmental pollution in the short-run and positive but insignificant effect in the long-run. When the long-run and short-run elasticities were compared it is found that the long-run elasticity is greater than the short-run elasticity which challenges the validity of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis and provides evidence against its existence in Turkey. The paper suggests that robust and effective environmental policies should be strictly implemented and closely monitored to reduce the environmental pollution and to ensure the preservation of resources for future generations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Economic Growth, EKC, Environmental Pollution, CO2, EFP

TÜRKİYE'DE EKONOMİK BÜYÜME İLE ÇEVRE KİRLİLİĞİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türkiye'de ekonomik büyüme ile çevre kirliliği arasındaki ilişkiyi araştırmaktadır.Araştırmada,
1970 –2017 arasındaki yıllık zaman serisi verileri kullanılmıştır.Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) ve
Phillips-Perron (PP) birim kök testleri kullanılmıştır. Bu ARDL yaklaşımı bir tahmin tekniği olarak
kullanılmaktadır. Ayrıca, kirliliği tahmin etmek için klasik katkı ayrıştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Elde
edilenbulgulara göre, ekonomik büyümenin kısa vadede çevre kirliliğine olumlu, uzun vadede ise olumlu
önemsiz etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Uzun vadeli ve kısa vadeli esneklikler karşılaştırıldığında,
uzun vadeli esnekliğin, EKC hipoteziningeçerliliğini desteklemeyen kısa vadeli esneklikten daha büyük
olduğu bulunmuştur ve Türkiye'de Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezinin varlığına karşı kanıt sağlanmaktadır.Çalışma, çevre kirliliğini azaltmak ve gelecek nesillere aktarılacak kaynakların korunmasını sağlamak için sağlam ve etkili çevre politikalarının sıkı bir şekilde uygulanması ve yakından takip edilmesi gerektiğini öne sürmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

EKC, CO2, EFP, Ekonomik Büyüme, Çevre Kirliliği, CO2

Kaynakça

• Adu, D. T., & Denkyirah, E. K. (2018). Economic growth and environmental pollution in West Africa: Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences.
• Ali, W., Abdullah, A., & Azam, M. (2017). Re-visiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Malaysia: fresh evidence from ARDL bounds testing approach. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 77, 990-1000.
• Al-Mulali, U., Ozturk, I., & Solarin, S. A. (2016). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in seven regions: The role of renewable energy. Ecological indicators, 67, 267-282.
• Al-Mulali, U., Saboori, B., & Ozturk, I. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Vietnam. Energy Policy, 76, 123-131.
• Altıntaş, H., & Kassouri, Y. (2020). Is the environmental Kuznets Curve in Europe related to the per-capita ecological footprint or CO2 emissions? Ecological Indicators, 113, 106187.
• Awad, A. (2019). Does economic integration damage or benefit the environment? Africa's experience. Energy Policy, 132, 991-999.
• Ben Jebli, M., Ben Youssef, S., & Ozturk, I. (2015). The role of renewable energy consumption and trade: Environmental Kuznets curve analysis for sub-Saharan Africa countries. African Development Review, 27(3), 288-300.
• Bölük, G., & Mert, M. (2015). The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: an ARDL approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 587-595.
• Charfeddine, L., & Mrabet, Z. (2017). The impact of economic development and social-political factors on ecological footprint: A panel data analysis for 15 MENA countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 138-154.
• Diao, X. D., Zeng, S. X., Tam, C. M., & Tam, V. W. (2009). EKC analysis for studying economic growth and environmental quality: a case study in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(5), 541-548.
• Dickey, David. A. and Wayne Fuller. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366), 427-431.
• Dogan, E., Ulucak, R., Kocak, E., & Isik, C. (2020). The use of ecological footprint in estimating the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis for BRICST by considering cross-section dependence and heterogeneity. Science of the Total Environment, 138063.
• Fiala, N. (2008). Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science. Ecological economics, 67(4), 519-525.
• Furuoka, F. (2015). Financial development and energy consumption: Evidence from a heterogeneous panel of Asian countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 430-444.
• Johansen, S., & Juselius, K. (1994). Identification of the long-run and the short-run structure an application to the ISLM model. Journal of Econometrics, 63(1), 7-36.
• Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of economic dynamics and control, 12(2-3), 231-254.
• Katircioğlu, S. T., & Taşpinar, N. (2017). Testing the moderating role of financial development in an environmental Kuznets curve: empirical evidence from Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68, 572-586.
• Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American economic review, 45(1), 1-28.
• Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C., Schmidt, P., & Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. Journal of econometrics, 54(1-3), 159-178.
• Lacheheb, M., Rahim, A. A., & Sirag, A. (2015). Economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions: Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Algeria. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 5(4), 1125-1132.
• Moutinho, V., Varum, C., & Madaleno, M. (2017). How economic growth affects emissions?: an investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) in Portuguese and Spanish economic activity sectors. Research @ ua, 8, 49-49.
• Mrabet, Z., AlSamara, M., & Jarallah, S. H. (2017). The impact of economic development on environmental degradation in Qatar. Environmental and ecological statistics, 24(1), 7-38. Narayan, P. K., & Narayan, S. (2010). Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: Panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy policy, 38(1), 661-666.
• Özokcu, S., & Özdemir, Ö. (2017). Economic growth, energy, and environmental Kuznets curve. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 639-647.
• Perron, P. (1997). Further evidence on breaking trend functions in macroeconomic variables. Journal of econometrics, 80(2), 355-385.
• 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.
• Phillips, P. C., & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346.
• Rafindadi, A. A. (2016). Revisiting the concept of environmental Kuznets curve in period of energy disaster and deteriorating income: Empirical evidence from Japan. Energy Policy, 94, 274-284.
• Raza, S. A., Shah, N., & Khan, K. A. (2020). Residential energy environmental Kuznets curve in emerging economies: the role of economic growth, renewable energy consumption, and financial development. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(5), 5620-5629.
• Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Ozturk, I. (2016). The effects of Internet usage and economic growth on CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 1226-1235.
• Shahbaz, M., Solarin, S. A., Sbia, R., & Bibi, S. (2015). Does energy intensity contribute to CO2 emissions? A trivariate analysis in selected African countries. Ecological indicators, 50, 215-224.
• Shahbaz, M., Nasir, M. A., & Roubaud, D. (2018). Environmental degradation in France: the effects of FDI, financial development, and energy innovations. Energy Economics, 74, 843-857.
• Sirag, A., Matemilola, B. T., Law, S. H., & Bany-Ariffin, A. N. (2018). Does environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis exist? Evidence from dynamic panel threshold. Journal of environmental economics and policy, 7(2), 145-165.
• Solarin, S. A., & Bello, M. O. (2018). Persistence of policy shocks to an environmental degradation index: the case of ecological footprint in 128 developed and developing countries. Ecological indicators, 89, 35-44.
• Uddin, G. A., Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Gow, J. (2017). Ecological footprint and real income: Panel data evidence from the 27 highest emitting countries. Ecological Indicators, 77, 166-175.
• Ulucak, R., & Bilgili, F. (2018). A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries. Journal of cleaner production, 188, 144-157.
• Ulucak, R., & Lin, D. (2017). Persistence of policy shocks to Ecological Footprint of the USA. Ecological Indicators, 80, 337-343.
• Yilanci, V., & Ozgur, O. (2019). Testing the environmental Kuznets curve for G7 countries: evidence from a bootstrap panel causality test in rolling windows. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(24), 24795-24805.