AB ülkelerinde iklim değişikliği azaltım dinamikleri: Çevresel ve makroekonomik faktörlerin ampirik bir analizi

Öz

Etkili çevre politikaları ve iklim değişikliğinin azaltılmasına yönelik makroekonomik etkilerin anlaşılması, Avrupa ülkelerinin sürdürülebilir kalkınma hedeflerine ulaşması için hayati öneme sahiptir. Bu makale, Çevre Politikası Sıkılığının (EPS) 2000-2021 yılları arasında AB ülkelerinde iklim değişikliğinin azaltılmasındaki rolünü araştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu çalışma, çevre politikasının, ekonomik büyümenin, ticaret açıklığının, doğrudan yabancı yatırımların ve karbon emisyonlarının iklim değişikliğinin azaltılması üzerindeki potansiyel rolünü 10., 25., 50. ve 75., 90. kantillerde araştırmak için panel kantil regresyon modelini kullanmaktadır. Bulgular, çevre politikası sıkılığının, kişi başına düşen GSYİH'nın ve karbon emisyonlarının daha yüksek kantillerde iklim değişikliğinin azaltılması üzerinde olumlu bir etkiye sahip olduğunu, ticaret açıklığının ise tüm kantillerde olumsuz bir etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Dahası, sonuçlar iklim değişikliğinin azaltılması ile EPS arasında çift yönlü bir nedensellik sağlamaktadır. Bu bulgular, iklim değişikliğinin azaltılmasına yönelik kapsamlı ve etkili bir yaklaşım geliştirmek için politika yapıcıların çevre politikasının titizliğini ekonomik, ticari ve yatırım stratejileriyle dikkatle değerlendirmeleri ve bütünleştirmeleri gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İklim değişikliğinin azaltılması
• Çevre politikasının sıkılığı
• Sürdürülebilir kalkınma
• Panel kantil regresyonu.

Climate change mitigation dynamics in EU countries: An empirical analysis of environmental and macroeconomic factors

Öz

Effective environmental policies and an understanding of macroeconomic impacts on climate change mitigation are vital for achieving the sustainable development goals of the European Union countries. This paper aims to investigate the role of Environmental Policy Stringency (EPS) in climate change mitigation in EU countries from 2000 to 2021. This study employs the panel quantile regression model to investigate the potential role of environmental policy, economic growth, trade openness, foreign direct investments, and CO2 emissions on climate change mitigation at the 10th, 25th, 50th, and 75th, 90th percentiles. The findings indicate that environmental policy stringency, GDP per capita, and CO2 emissions have a positive effect on climate change mitigation at higher quantiles, while trade openness has a negative impact at all quantiles. Furthermore, the results provide a bidirectional causality between climate change mitigation and EPS. These findings emphasize the need for policymakers to carefully evaluate and integrate environmental policy stringency with economic, trade, and investment strategies to develop a comprehensive and effective approach to climate change mitigation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Climate change mitigation
• Environmental policy stringency
• Sustainable development
• Panel quantile regression.

Kaynakça

1. Abid, N., Ahmad, F., Aftab, J., and Razzaq, A. (2023). A blessing or a burden? Assessing the impact of Climate Change Mitigation efforts in Europe using Quantile Regression Models. Energy Policy, 178. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113589
2. Abid, N., Ceci, F., and Ikram, M. (2022). Green growth and sustainable development: dynamic linkage between technological innovation, ISO 14001, and environmental challenges. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(17), 25428–25447. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17518-y
3. Ahmed, K. (2020). Environmental policy stringency, related technological change and emissions inventory in 20 OECD countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 274. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111209
4. Albrizio, S., Kozluk, T., and Zipperer, V. (2017). Environmental policies and productivity growth: Evidence across industries and firms. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 81, 209–226. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2016.06.002
5. Albulescu, C. T., Boatca-Barabas, M. E., and Diaconescu, A. (2022). The asymmetric effect of environmental policy stringency on CO2 emissions in OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(18), 27311–27327. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-18267-8
6. Alcott, B. (2005). Jevons’ paradox. Ecological Economics, 54(1), 9-21. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.020
7. Anser, M. K., Usman, M., Godil, D. I., Shabbir, M. S., Sharif, A., Tabash, M. I., and Lopez, L. B. (2021). Does globalization affect the green economy and environment? The relationship between energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions, and economic growth. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(37), 51105–51118. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14243-4
8. Appiah, M., Li, M., Naeem, M. A., and Karim, S. (2023). Greening the globe: Uncovering the impact of environmental policy, renewable energy, and innovation on ecological footprint. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 192. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122561

9. Bosetti, V., Carraro, C., and Tavoni, M. (2009). Climate change mitigation strategies in fast-growing countries: The benefits of early action. Energy Economics, 31(SUPPL. 2). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.06.011
10. Catalano, M., Forni, L., and Pezzolla, E. (2020). Climate-change adaptation: The role of fiscal policy. Resource and Energy Economics, 59, 101111. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2019.07.005
11. Chang, H. (2023). Do Heterogeneous Environmental Policies Improve Environmental Quality While Promoting Economic Growth? Sustainability, 15(2), 1162. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021162
12. Chu, L. K., Doğan, B., Ghosh, S., and Shahbaz, M. (2023). The influence of shadow economy, environmental policies and geopolitical risk on renewable energy: A comparison of high- and middle-income countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 342. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118122
13. Ciccarelli, M., and Marotta, F. (2024). Demand or Supply? An empirical exploration of the effects of climate change on the macroeconomy. Energy Economics, 129. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.107163
14. Copeland, B. R., and Taylor, M. S. (2004). Trade, growth, and the environment. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(1), 7-71. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1257/002205104773558047
15. Daly, H. E. (1993). The perils of free trade. Scientific American, 269(5), 24-29.
16. Danish, Ulucak, R., Khan, S. U. D., Baloch, M. A., and Li, N. (2020). Mitigation pathways toward sustainable development: Is there any trade-off between environmental regulation and carbon emissions reduction? Sustainable Development, 28(4), 813–822. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2032
17. Ferreira, J. J. M., Fernandes, C. I., and Ferreira, F. A. F. (2020). Technology transfer, climate change mitigation, and environmental patent impact on sustainability and economic growth: A comparison of European countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119770
18. Fischer, C., and Newell, R. G. (2008). Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 55(2), 142–162. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JEEM.2007.11.001
19. Ganji, F., Liu, L., and Fellows, S. (2024). Implications of climate change mitigation and socioeconomic development on the U.S. electric power sector. Energy and Climate Change, 5. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egycc.2024.100125
20. Garrett, T. J., Grasselli, M., and Keen, S. (2020). Past world economic production constrains current energy demands: Persistent scaling with implications for economic growth and climate change mitigation. PLoS ONE, 15(8 August). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237672
21. Grossman, G. M., and Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353-377. Doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2118443
22. Hao, L. N., Umar, M., Khan, Z., and Ali, W. (2021). Green growth and low carbon emission in G7 countries: How critical the network of environmental taxes, renewable energy and human capital is? Science of the Total Environment, 752, 141853. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141853
23. IPCC. (2022). Overarching Frequently Asked Questions and Answers (Sixt Assessment Report: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability). 2022(February), 1.
24. Khan, M. (2020). CO2 emissions and sustainable economic development: New evidence on the role of human capital. Sustainable Development, 28(5), 1279–1288. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/SD.2083
25. Krugman, P. R., Obstfeld, M., and Melitz, M. J. (2015). International Economics: Theory and Policy (10th ed.). Pearson.
26. Ladenburg, J., Kim, J., Zuch, M., and Soytas, U. (2024). Taking the carbon capture and storage, wind power, PV or other renewable technology path to fight climate change? Exploring the acceptance of climate change mitigation technologies – A Danish national representative study. Renewable Energy, 220. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119582
27. Lee, C. C., Wang, C. W., Hong, P. H., and Lin, W. (2024). Environmental policy stringency and bank risks: Does green economy matter? International Review of Financial Analysis, 91. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2023.103040
28. Li, S., and Shao, Q. (2023). How do financial development and environmental policy stringency affect renewable energy innovation? The Porter Hypothesis and beyond. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 8(3). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100369
29. Li, S., Samour, A., Irfan, M., and Ali, M. (2023). Role of renewable energy and fiscal policy on trade adjusted carbon emissions: Evaluating the role of environmental policy stringency. Renewable Energy, 205, 156–165. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.01.047
30. Li, Z., Kuo, Y. K., Mahmud, A. R., Nassani, A. A., Haffar, M., and Muda, I. (2022). Integration of renewable energy, environmental policy stringency, and climate technologies in realizing environmental sustainability: Evidence from OECD countries. Renewable Energy, 196, 1376–1384. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.07.084
31. Magazzino, C., Mele, M., Drago, C., Kuşkaya, S., Pozzi, C., and Monarca, U. (2023). The trilemma among CO2 emissions, energy use, and economic growth in Russia. Scientific Reports, 13(1). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37251-5
32. Obydenkova, A. V., and Salahodjaev, R. (2017). Climate change policies: The role of democracy and social cognitive capital. Environmental Research, 157(April), 182–189. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.05.009
33. Paroussos, L., Fragkiadakis, K., and Fragkos, P. (2020). Macro-economic analysis of green growth policies: the role of finance and technical progress in Italian green growth. Climatic Change, 160(4), 591–608. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02543-1
34. Porter, M. E. (1991). America’s green strategy. Scientific American, 264(4), 168. http://www.citeulike.org/group/2016/article/1096884
35. Shapiro, J. S. (2020). The environmental bias of trade policy. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(2), 831-886. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjaa042
36. Sun, J., and Weng, L. (2024). Dynamics of mitigation measures in urbanizing Africa: Challenges and opportunities for future climate change. Journal of Cleaner Production, 446. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141443
37. Tao, Z., Ren, Z. X., Chen, Y., Huang, X., and Liu, X. (2023). Pathway to sustainable economic growth: Linkage among energy consumption, carbon emissions, climate change and technological innovation. Energy Strategy Reviews, 50, 101253. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESR.2023.101253
38. Tiwari, S., Si Mohammed, K., Mentel, G., Majewski, S., and Shahzadi, I. (2023). Role of circular economy, energy transition, environmental policy stringency, and supply chain pressure on CO2 emissions in emerging economies. Geoscience Frontiers. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101682
39. Tol, R. S. J. (2018). The economic impacts of climate change. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 12(1), 4–25. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rex027
40. Wang, Z., Yen-Ku, K., Li, Z., An, N. B., and Abdul-Samad, Z. (2022). The transition of renewable energy and ecological sustainability through environmental policy stringency: Estimations from advance panel estimators. Renewable Energy, 188, 70–80. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.075
41. Wolde-Rufael, Y., and Mulat-weldemeskel, E. (2023). Effectiveness of environmental taxes and environmental stringent policies on CO2 emissions: the European experience. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(6), 5211–5239. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02262-1
42. Zhang, D., Zheng, M., Feng, G. F., and Chang, C. P. (2022). Does an environmental policy bring to green innovation in renewable energy? Renewable Energy, 195, 1113–1124. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.06.074