Sectoral contributions to sustainable development in Türkiye: Which sector is more effective?

Öz

Enhancing sustainable development performance requires an assessment of the relative roles of economic sectors in this process. However, comparative empirical evidence regarding the sectoral structure of sustainable development is limited, particularly for Türkiye. Therefore, this study examines the long-run relationship between sectoral structure and sustainable development in Türkiye by focusing on agriculture, industry, construction, and services. The empirical analysis uses annual data for the period 2000–2022 and proceeds in three steps. First, the stationarity properties of the variables are examined using ADF, PP, and Zivot–Andrews unit root tests. The Johansen cointegration test is then applied to determine whether a long-run equilibrium relationship exists among the variables. Finally, long-run coefficients are estimated using the DOLS estimator, while the FMOLS estimator is used as a robustness check. The findings show that all sectoral shares are positively associated with the sustainable development index in the long run. Based on the DOLS results, the services sector has the highest coefficient at 0.882, followed by the agriculture, industry, and construction sectors with coefficients of 0.302, 0.265, and 0.193, respectively. The FMOLS robustness check supports the DOLS long-run estimates. The study contributes to the literature by providing comparative sector-level evidence for Türkiye. It also highlights that sustainable development strategies should not rely on a single sector, but should be designed through balanced and sector-specific policies that account for sectoral differences.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sustainable Development
• Sectoral Analysis
• DOLS
• FMOLS
• Türkiye

Türkiye’de sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya sektörel katkılar: Hangi sektör daha etkili?

Öz

Sürdürülebilir kalkınma performansının güçlendirilmesi, ekonomik sektörlerin bu süreçteki göreli rollerinin anlaşılmasını gerektirmektedir. Ancak sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın sektörel yapısına ilişkin karşılaştırmalı ampirik kanıtlar, özellikle Türkiye için sınırlı düzeydedir. Bu nedenle bu çalışma, tarım, sanayi, inşaat ve hizmetler sektörlerine odaklanarak Türkiye’de sektörel yapı ile sürdürülebilir kalkınma arasındaki uzun dönemli ilişkiyi incelemektedir. Çalışmanın ampirik analizi 2000–2022 dönemine ait yıllık verilere dayanmakta ve üç aşamalı bir yöntem izlemektedir. İlk olarak, değişkenlerin durağanlık özellikleri ADF, PP ve Zivot–Andrews birim kök testleriyle incelenmiştir. Daha sonra, değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli bir denge ilişkisinin bulunup bulunmadığını belirlemek amacıyla Johansen eşbütünleşme testi uygulanmıştır. Son olarak, uzun dönem katsayıları DOLS tahmincisiyle tahmin edilmiş; FMOLS tahmincisi ise sağlamlık kontrolü olarak kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, tüm sektör paylarının uzun dönemde sürdürülebilir kalkınma endeksi ile pozitif ilişkili olduğunu göstermektedir. DOLS sonuçlarına göre, hizmetler sektörü 0,882 ile en yüksek katsayıya sahiptir; bunu sırasıyla 0,302, 0,265 ve 0,193 katsayılarıyla tarım, sanayi ve inşaat sektörleri izlemektedir. FMOLS sağlamlık kontrolü, DOLS uzun dönem tahminlerini desteklemektedir. Çalışma, Türkiye’de sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın sektörel yapısına ilişkin karşılaştırmalı ampirik kanıt sunarak literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır. Ayrıca sürdürülebilir kalkınma stratejilerinin tek bir sektöre dayanmaması; sektörlerin farklı rollerini dikkate alan dengeli ve sektör odaklı politikalarla tasarlanması gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma
• Sektörel Analiz
• DOLS
• FMOLS
• Türkiye

Kaynakça

1. Abdiraimov, M. (2016). Sürdürülebilir gelişme yaklaşımında yeşil ekonominin önemi. Uluslararası Yönetim ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 3(6), 29-39.
2. Acaravcı, A., and Erdoğan, S. (2018). Yenilenebilir enerji, çevre ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Seçilmiş ülkeler için ampirik bir analiz. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 13(1), 53-64. https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.359419
3. Akdağ, S., and İskenderoğlu, Ö. (2018). Avrupa birliğine üye ve aday ülkelerde yenilenemeyen enerji, yenilenebilir enerji ve nükleer enerji tüketiminin ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi. Turkish Studies, 13, 30. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.14423
4. Akram, R., Chen, F., Khalid, F., Ye, Z., and Majeed, M. T. (2020). Heterogeneous effects of energy efficiency and renewable energy on carbon emissions: Evidence from developing countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119122
5. Akusta, E. (2024). Does Globalization Promote or Hinder Sustainable Development? Evidence from Türkiye on the Three Dimensions of Globalization. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (66), 117-137. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1559282
6. Akusta, E. (2026). Unveiling the nexus between economic complexity and environmental sustainability: Evidence from BRICS-T countries. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 21(1), 179–207. https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.1582854
7. Alagöz, M. (2007) Sürdürülebilir kalkınmada çevre faktörü: Teorik bir bakış. Akademik Bakış 11: 1-12.
8. Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., Piquer-Rodríguez, M., Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., and Manzano-Agugliaro, F. (2019). Worldwide research trends on sustainable land use in agriculture. Land Use Policy, 87(1), 104069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104069

9. Badunenko, O., and Romero-Avila, D. (2014). Productivity growth across Spanish regions and industries: a production-frontier approach. Regional Studies, 48(7), 1242-1262. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2012.709611
10. Balaban, O. (2012). The negative effects of construction boom on urban planning and environment in Turkey: Unraveling the role of the public sector. Habitat International, 36(1), 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2011.05.003
11. Bekar, S. A. (2018). The Relationship Between CO2 Emission and Economic Growth in Turkey: 1977-2011. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 193-206. https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.428059
12. Canikli, S. (2022). Sürdürülebilir finans mekanizmaları, araçları ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma ilişkisi. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 22(1), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.25294/auiibfd.903364
13. Carree, M. A., Klomp, L., and Thurik, A. R. (2000). Productivity convergence in OECD manufacturing industries. Economics letters, 66(3), 337-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(99)00228-1
14. Çelik, Y. (2006). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramı ve sağlık. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 9(1), 19-37.
15. Cheng, Y., Zhang, N., Kirschen, D. S., Huang, W., and Kang, C. (2020). Planning multiple energy systems for low-carbon districts with high penetration of renewable energy: An empirical study in China. Applied energy, 261 (1), 114390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114390
16. Cyrek, M., & Fura, B. (2019). Employment for sustainable development: Sectoral efficiencies in EU countries. Social Indicators Research, 143, 277–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1970-8
17. Di Foggia, G. (2018). Energy efficiency measures in buildings for achieving sustainable development goals. Heliyon, 4(11), e00953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00953
18. Dickey, D. A., and Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366), 427–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1979.10482531
19. Diesendorf, M. (2020). Principles of ecological sustainability. In Human ecology, human economy (pp. 64-97). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003136866-4
20. Djordjević, B., Krmac, E., and Mlinarić, T. J. (2018). Non-radial DEA model: A new approach to evaluation of safety at railway level crossings. Safety science, 103, 234-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.12.001
21. Ecevit, E., Çetin, M., and Yücel, A. G. (2022). Türkiye’de yenilenebilir enerji ve sağlık: eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi. Erciyes Akademi, 36(1), 138-156. https://doi.org/10.48070/erciyesakademi.1039755
22. Farhani, S., and Rejeb, J. B. (2012). Energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emissions: Evidence from panel data for MENA region. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 2(2), 71-81.
23. Fida, S., and Saeed, S. (2023). Modelling emission consequences of sectoral value-added: Exploring mediation of financial development and moderation of environmental regulations in European Union. Journal of Cleaner Production, 428, 139373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139373
24. Goubran, S. (2019). On the role of construction in achieving the SDGs. Journal of Sustainability Research, 1, e190020. https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20190020
25. Govindan, K., Shankar, K. M., and Kannan, D. (2020). Achieving sustainable development goals through identifying and analyzing barriers to industrial sharing economy: A framework development. International journal of production economics, 227, 107575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.107575
26. Granvik, M., Lindberg, G., Stigzelius, K. A., Fahlbeck, E., and Surry, Y. (2012). Prospects of multifunctional agriculture as a facilitator of sustainable rural development: Swedish experience of Pillar 2 of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift-Norwegian Journal of Geography, 66(3), 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2012.681684
27. Güvercin, S. (2024). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için yeşil lojistiğin önemi dünya ve Türkiye’deki uygulama örnekleri. The Journal of Social Sciences, 19(19), 465-481. https://doi.org/10.16990/SOBIDER.4003
28. Halkos, G. E., and Polemis, M. L. (2018). The impact of economic growth on environmental efficiency of the electricity sector: A hybrid window DEA methodology for the USA. Journal of Environmental Management, 211, 334-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.01.067
29. Harris, J. M., and Roach, B. (2017). Environmental and natural resource economics: A contemporary approach. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315620190
30. Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(2–3), 231–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(88)90041-3
31. Kanter, D. R., Schwoob, M.-H., Baethgen, W. E., Bervejillo, J. E., Carriquiry, M., Dobermann, A., Ferraro, B., Lanfranco, B., Mondelli, M., Penengo, C., Saldias, R., Silva, M. E., & Soares de Lima, J. M. (2016). Translating the Sustainable Development Goals into action: A participatory backcasting approach for developing national agricultural transformation pathways. Global Food Security, 10, 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.08.002
32. Karabıçak, M., and Özdemir, M. B. (2015). Sürdürülebilir kalkinmanin kavramsal temelleri. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 6(13), 44-49.
33. Karamikli, A., and Şaşmaz, M. Ü. (2021). Türkiye'de yenilenebilir enerji tüketiminin ekonomik büyüme ve sağlık harcamaları üzerindeki etkisi. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, (46). https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.846221
34. Koçaslan, G. (2010). Sürdürülebilir kalkinma hedefi çerçevesinde Türkiye’nin rüzgar enerjisi potansiyelinin yeri ve önemi. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (1), 53-61.
35. Koengkan, M., Fuinhas, J. A., Oliveira, F. P., Ursavaş, U., and Moreno, N. (2023). Building a sustainable future: How eco-friendly homes are driving local economic development in Lisbon metropolitan area. Energies, 16(13), 4855. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16134855
36. Laurinavičius, E., and Rimkuvienė, D. (2017). The comparative efficiency analysis of EU members agriculture sectors. Rural Sustainability Research, 37(332), 10-19. https://doi.org/10.1515/plua-2017-0002
37. Lean, H. H., and Smyth, R. (2010). CO2 emissions, electricity consumption and output in ASEAN. Applied energy, 87(6), 1858-1864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.02.003
38. Lisowski, S., Bunsen, J., Berger, M., and Finkbeiner, M. (2023). Quantifying industry impacts on the Sustainable Development Goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 400, 136661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136661
39. Liu, L., Wang, Z., Wang, Y., Wang, J., Chang, R., He, G., ... and Li, S. (2020). Optimizing wind/solar combinations at finer scales to mitigate renewable energy variability in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 132, 110151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110151
40. Liu, Z., Lam, J. F., Chen, H., Lin, G., and Chen, H. (2023). Can green investment improve China’s regional energy consumption structure? novel findings and implications from sustainable energy systems perspective. Frontiers in Energy Research, 11, 127. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2023.1273347
41. Luken, R. A., Saieed, A., and Magvasi, M. (2022). Industry-related Sustainable Development Goal-9 progress and performance indices and policies for Sub-Saharan African countries. Environmental Development, 42, 100694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2021.100694
42. Makarova, A. S., Jia, X., Kruchina, E. B., Kudryavtseva, E. I., and Kukushkin, I. G. (2019). Environmental performance assessment of the chemical industries involved in the Responsible Care® Program: Case study of the Russian Federation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 222, 971-985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.218
43. Mancini, L., and Sala, S. (2018). Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resources Policy, 57, 98-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.02.002
44. Mansell, P., Philbin, S. P., and Konstantinou, E. (2020). Delivering UN Sustainable Development Goals’ impact on infrastructure projects: An empirical study of senior executives in the UK construction sector. Sustainability, 12(19), 7998. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12197998
45. Martino, R. (2015). Convergence and growth. Labour productivity dynamics in the European Union. Journal of Macroeconomics, 46, 186-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2015.09.005
46. Maudos, J., Pastor, J. M., and Serrano, L. (2000). Efficiency and productive specialization: An application to the Spanish regions. Regional studies, 34(9), 829-842. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400020002967
47. Mensah, J. (2019). Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent social sciences, 5(1), 1653531. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2019.1653531
48. Mohamed, M. M. A., Liu, P., and Nie, G. (2022). Causality between technological innovation and economic growth: Evidence from the economies of developing countries. Sustainability, 14(6), 3586. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063586
49. Nazarko, J., and Chodakowska, E. (2015). Measuring productivity of construction industry in Europe with Data Envelopment Analysis. Procedia Engineering, 122, 204-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.10.026
50. Öçal, B. (2021). Tersine lojistik uygulamalarının çevresel ve sosyal sürdürülebilirliğe etkisi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(4), 521-532.
51. O'Leary, E., and Webber, D. J. (2015). The role of structural change in European regional productivity growth. Regional Studies, 49(9), 1548-1560. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.839868
52. Oqubay, A., and Lin, J. Y. (Eds.). (2020). The Oxford handbook of industrial hubs and economic development. Oxford University Press, USA. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198850434.001.0001
53. Özaslan, A. (2023). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma yolunda yeşil büyüme stratejilerinin kentlere yansıması. Sağlık ve Sosyal Refah Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(1), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.55050/sarad.1183810
54. Özer, Y. E. (2016). Türkiye’nin yenilenebilir ve temiz enerji konusunda ABD, Çin ve Avrupa Birliği ile karşılaştırmalı analizi. Hitit Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(1), 137-155. https://doi.org/10.17218/husbed.53941
55. Phillips, P. C. B., and Hansen, B. E. (1990). Statistical inference in instrumental variables regression with I(1) processes. The Review of Economic Studies, 57(1), 99–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297545
56. Phillips, P. C., and Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/75.2.335
57. Pisani, J. A. (2006). Sustainable development–historical roots of the concept. Environmental sciences, 3(2), 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/15693430600688831
58. Sachs, J. D. (2019). The ages of globalization: Geography, technology, and institutions. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/sach19374
59. Sachs, J. D., Lafortune, G., and Fuller, G. (2024). The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future. Sustainable Development Report 2024. Paris: SDSN; Dublin: Dublin University Press. https://doi.org/10.25546/108572
60. Sadorsky, P. (2009). Renewable energy consumption and income in emerging economies. Energy policy, 37(10), 4021-4028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.05.003
61. Saikkonen, P. (1991). Asymptotically efficient estimation of cointegration regressions. Econometric Theory, 7(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466600004217
62. Santos Beckert, D., Canciglieri, M. B., Tortato, U., and Junior, O. C. (2023). An Initial Exploration of Lean and Sustainable Development with a Focus on Service. In Sustainability in Practice: Addressing Challenges and Creating Opportunities in Latin America (pp. 221-231). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34436-7_13
63. Sarkar, A. N. (2013). Promoting eco-innovations to leverage sustainable development of eco-industry and green growth. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(1), 171-171. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2013.v2n1p171
64. Sharif, A., Baris-Tuzemen, O., Uzuner, G., Ozturk, I., and Sinha, A. (2020). Revisiting the role of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on Turkey’s ecological footprint: Evidence from Quantile ARDL approach. Sustainable cities and society, 57, 102138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102138
65. Shi, L., Han, L., Yang, F., and Gao, L. (2019). The evolution of sustainable development theory: Types, goals, and research prospects. Sustainability, 11(24), 7158. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247158
66. Şimşek, O., and Tunalı, H. (2022). Yeşil finansman uygulamalarının sürdürülebilir kalkınma üzerindeki rolü: Türkiye projeksiyonu. Ekonomi ve Finansal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(1), 16-45.
67. Stock, J. H., and Watson, M. W. (1993). A simple estimator of cointegrating vectors in higher order integrated systems. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 61(4), 783–820. https://doi.org/10.2307/2951763
68. TR Ministry of Treasury and Finance (MTF). (2024). İktisadi faaliyet kollarına göre gayri safi yurtiçi hasıla [Gross domestic product by kind of economic activity; based on TurkStat data]. https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/uploads/2023/04/I-URETIM-3.pdf
69. Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat). (2024). Gross Domestic Product Statistics. Turkish Statistical Institute. https://veriportali.tuik.gov.tr/en/
70. Türkmen, M., and Kılıç, F. (2020). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma anlayışına yönelik döngüsel ekonomi modeli. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi, 55(4). https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.20.11.1452
71. Wan, Y., and Sheng, N. (2022). Clarifying the relationship among green investment, clean energy consumption, carbon emissions, and economic growth: a provincial panel analysis of China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(6), 9038-9052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16170-w
72. Wong, W. K. (2006). OECD convergence: A sectoral decomposition exercise. Economics Letters, 93(2), 210-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2006.05.004
73. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987). Our Common Future (1.Baskı). New York: Oxford University Press.
74. Xiong, Y., and Dai, L. (2023). Does green finance investment impact on sustainable development: Role of technological innovation and renewable energy. Renewable Energy, 214, 342-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.06.002
75. Xu, J. (2015). Striving for a strong services sector. In Managing the Middle-Income Transition (pp. 384-402). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783477708.00023
76. Yeni, O. (2014). Sürdürülebilirlik ve sürdürülebilir kalkinma: bir yazin taramasi. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(3), 181-208.
77. Yücel, U., Özdemir, E., and Ayaz, M. (2021). Yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarından üretilen elektrik enerjisi teşvik yöntemlerinin incelenmesi. Düzce Üniversitesi Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 9(2), 774-790. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.774963
78. Zivot, E., and Andrews, D.W.K. (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251-70. https://doi.org/10.1198/073500102753410372