Effects Of Economic, Political and Social Globalization On Ecological Footprint: The Case Of ASEAN-5 Countries

Öz

In recent years, increasing economic, political and social interactions with the increasing effect of globalization have led to an increase in people's demands and it has been observed that different effects on the environmental quality of countries. In this study, the relationship between ecological footprint, energy consumption and economic, political and social globalization is examined in the ASEAN-5 country sample for the years 1986-2017. Panel cointegration, Augmented Mean Group (AMG) estimator and Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel causality tests were used in the analysis. According to the findings, the variables move together in the long run. In addition, it was obtained with the finding that energy consumption increases the ecological footprint in countries with significant results, and that all three globalization dimensions show different results from country to country. Finally, according to the results of the panel causality test, a bidirectional causality relationship was reached between ecological footprint and political and social globalization, and a unidirectional causality relationship towards energy consumption and economic globalization. There is a bidirectional causality relationship from energy consumption to political and social globalization, and a unidirectional causality relationship to economic globalization.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ecological Footprint
• Globalization
• Panel Data Analysis

Ekonomik, Politik Ve Sosyal Küreselleşmenin Ekolojik Ayak İzi Üzerindeki Etkileri: ASEAN-5 Ülkeleri Örneği

Öz

Son yıllarda küreselleşmenin artan etkisiyle birlikte artan ekonomik, politik ve sosyal etkileşimler insanların taleplerinin artmasına neden olmakta ve ülkelerin çevre kalitelerinin üzerinde farklı etkiler ortaya çıkardığı gözlemlenmektedir. Bu çalışmada ekolojik ayak izi, enerji tüketimi ve ekonomik, politik ve sosyal küreselleşme arasındaki ilişki 1986-2017 yılları arası için ASEAN-5 ülke örnekleminde incelenmektedir. Analizde panel eşbütünleşme, Genişletilmiş Ortalama Grup (AMG) tahmincisi ve Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel nedensellik testleri kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre uzun dönemde değişkenler birlikte hareket etmektedirler. Ayrıca anlamlı sonuç elde edilen ülkelerde enerji tüketiminin ekolojik ayak izini artırdığı, üç küreselleşme boyutunun da ülke ülke farklı sonuçlar ortaya koyduğunu gösterir bulgula elde edilmiştir. Son olarak uygulanan panel nedensellik test sonuçlarına göre ise, ekolojik ayak izi ile politik ve sosyal küreselleşme arasında çift yönlü, enerji tüketimi ve ekonomik küreselleşmeye doğru ise tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisine ulaşılmıştır. Enerji tüketiminden politik ve sosyal küreselleşmeye doğru çift yönlü, ekonomik küreselleşmeye doğru ise tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi bulunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ekolojik Ayak İzi
• Küreselleşme
• Panel Veri Analizi

Kaynakça

1. Ahmad, M. Jiang, P., Murshed,M., Shehzad, K., Akram, R., Cui, L. & Khan, Z. (2021). Modelling The Dynamic Linkages Between Eco-Innovation, Urbanization, Economic Growth And Ecological Footprints For G7 Countries: Does Financial Globalization Matter?, Sustainable Cities and Society, 70, 102881,
2. Ahmed, Z., Wang, Z., & Mahmood, F. (2019). Does Globalization Increase The Ecological Footprint? Empirical Evidence From Malaysia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 18565–18582.
3. Ahmed, Z., Zhang, B., Cary, M. (2021). Linking economic globalization, economic growth, financial development, and ecological footprint: Evidence from symmetric and asymmetric ARDL, Ecological Indicators, 121, 107060,
4. Apaydin, Ş., Ursavaş, U. & Koç, Ü. (2021). The Impact Of Globalization On The Ecological Footprint: Do Convergence Clubs Matter?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 53379–53393.
5. BP (2021). Statistical Review of World Energy.
6. Breusch, T.S. & Pagan, A.R. (1980). The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 47, Issue 1, Pages 239–253.
7. Destek, M.A., & Sarkodie, S.A., (2019). Investigation of environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint: the role of energy and financial development. Science of The Total Environment, 650, 2483e2489.
8. Dreher, A. (2006). Does Globalization Affect Growth? Evidence From A New Index Of Globalizationcall_Made. Applied Economics 38(10), 1091-1110.

9. Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in Heterogeneous Panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
10. Eberhardt, M. & Teal, F. (2011), Econometrics For Grumblers: A New Look At The Literature On crosscountry Growth Empirics, Journal of Economic Surveys, 25(1), 109–155.
11. Eberhardt, M. V & Teal, F., (2010). Productivity Analysis in Global Manufacturing Production, Economics Series Working Papers 515, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
12. Figge, L., Oebels, K. & Offermans, A. (2017). The Effects Of Globalization On Ecological Footprints: An Empirical Analysis. Environment Development and Sustainability 19, 863–876.
13. Gallagher, K.P. (2009). Economic Globalization And The Environment. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 34, 279-304.
14. GFN, (2017). Global Footprint Network: National Footprint Accounts. Https://www.footprintnetwork.org/. (Erişim Tarihi:01.01.2022)
15. Gygli, S., Haelg, F., Potrafke, N. & Sturm, J.E. (2019). The KOF Globalisation Index – Revisited, Review of International Organizations, 14(3), 543-574.
16. Kirikkaleli, D., Adebayo, T.S., & Khan, Z. (2021). Does Globalization Matter For Ecological Footprint in Turkey? Evidence From Dual Adjustment Approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 14009–14017.
17. Langnel, Z., & Amegavi, G.B. (2020). Globalization, Electricity Consumption And Ecological Footprint: An Autoregressive Distributive Lag (ARDL) Approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 63, 102482.
18. Lemos, M.A.. & Agrawal, A. (2006). Environmental Governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31, 297-325.
19. Motoshita, M., Sakagami, M., Kudoh, Y., Tahara, K. & A. Inaba (2015) Potential Impacts Of Information Disclosure Designed To Motivate Japanese Consumers To Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions On Choice Of Shopping Method For Daily Foods And Drinks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 101, 205-214.
20. Pata, U.K. (2021) Linking Renewable Energy, Globalization, Agriculture, CO2 Emissions And Ecological Footprint In BRIC Countries: A sustainability perspective, Renewable Energy, 173, 197-208.
21. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A Bias‐Adjusted LM Test Of Error Cross‐Section Independence, The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127.
22. Pesaran, M.H. (2007). A Simple Panel Unit Root Test In The Presence Of Cross-Section Dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 22(2), 265-312.
23. Peseran, M. (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for Corss Section Dependence in Panels. IZA Discussion Paper, 1240.
24. Phong, L. H. (2019). Globalization, Financial Development, and Environmental Degradation in the Presence of Environmental Kuznets Curve: Evidence from ASEAN-5 Countries. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 9(2), 40–50.
25. Rennen, W., & Martens, P. (2003). The Globalisation Timeline. Integrated Assessment, 4(3), 137–144.
26. Rudolph, A. & Figge, L. (2017) Determinants of Ecological Footprints: What is the role of globalization?, Ecological Indicators.
27. Sabir, S., & Gorus, M.S. (2019). The Impact Of Globalization On Ecological Footprint: Empirical Evidence From the South Asian countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 26, 33387–33398.
28. Saud, S., Chen, S., & Sumayya, A.H. (2020). The Role Of Financial Development And Globalization in The Environment: Accounting Ecological Footprint Indicators For Selected One-Belt-One-Road Initiative Countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 250, 119518.
29. Shahbaz,M., Mallick, H., Mahalik, M.K., & Loganathan, N. (2015). Does Globalization Impede Environmental Quality In India?. Ecological Indicators, 52, 379-393,
30. Sharif, A., Afshan, S. & Qureshi, M.A. (2019). Idolization and Ramification Between Globalization And Ecological Footprints: Evidence From Quantile-On-Quantile Approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 11191–11211.
31. Swamy, P. (1970). Efficient Inference in a Random Coefficient Regression Model. Econometrica, 38(2), 311–323.
32. Ulucak, Z.Ş., İlkay, S.Ç., Özcan, B. & Gedikli, A. (2020). Financial Globalization And Environmental Degradation Nexus: Evidence From Emerging Economies. Resources Policy, 67, 101698.
33. Wang, X. (2021). Determinants Of Ecological And Carbon Footprints To Assess The Framework Of Environmental Sustainability In BRICS Countries: A Panel ARDL and Causality Estimation Model, Environmental Research, 197, 111111.
34. Westerlund, J. (2007), Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69, 709-748.
35. Yang, B., Usman, M. & Jahanger, A. (2021). Do Industrialization, Economic Growth And Globalization Processes İnfluence The Ecological Footprint And Healthcare Expenditures? Fresh Insights Based On The STIRPAT Model For Countries With The Highest Healthcare Expenditures, Sustainable Production and Consumption, 28, 893-910.
36. Yilanci, V., & Gorus, M.S. (2020). Does Economic Globalization Have Predictive Power For Ecological Footprint İn MENA Counties? A Panel Causality Test With A Fourier Function. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 27, 40552–40562 (2020).