Sustainable Intentions, Unsustainable Outcomes: Green Technologies, Environmental Taxes, and the Carbon Cost of Economic Growth

Abstract

Environmental degradation has become a global issue. CO2 emissions lie at the heart of this issue. Therefore, the determinants of CO2 emissions are becoming important. This study focuses on the relationship between CO2 emissions and environmental technological innovation, environmental taxes and income for the Turkish economy. Traditional unit root tests and Fourier ADF unit root tests were used in the light of data for the period 1994-2022. Augmented ARDL method was used to determine the long-term relationship. FMOLS, DOLS and CCR were used as long-term estimators. Empirical findings revealed that environmental technical innovations, environmental taxes and increases in income increased CO2 emissions. These results showed that technological innovations and environmental measures were not successful in reducing CO2 emissions. The findings provide important insights into environmental and technology policy implementations for Türkiye, which is among the developing countries.

Keywords

• Environmental technological innovations
• Environmental taxes
• Economic growth
• Jevons paradox
• Augmented ARDL

References

1. 1. Sharma, M.; Singh, K.; Gautam, A. S.; Gautam, S. Aer. Sci. and Eng. 2024, 1-16.
2. 2. Chen, Q.; Bergthorson, J.; Schiemann, M. Ren. and Sus. En. Rev. 2024, 203, 114730.
3. 3. NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) 2024, Understanding the basics of carbondioxide.https://research.noaa.gov/understanding-the-basics-of-carbon-dioxide/ (Accessed 19 March 2025).
4. 4. NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) 2025, Carbon Dioxide. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/?intent=121 (Accessed 19 March 2025).
5. 5. Aithal, S.; Aithal, S. 2016, Opportunities & challenges for green technology in 21st century. MPRA Paper No. 73661. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/73661/(Accessed 19 March 2025).
6. 6. Wang X.; Zhang, T.; Nathwani, J.; Yang, F.; Shao, Q. Tech. For. and Soc. Ch. 2022, 176, 121471.
7. 7. Gronwald, M.; Van Long, N.; Roepke, L. 2017, Three Degrees of Green Paradox: The Weak, The Strong, and the Extreme Green Paradox. Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative. https://www.cireqmontreal.com/wp-content/uploads/cahiers/02-2017-cah.pdf (Accessed 19 March 2025).
8. 8. Herring, H. Energy. 2006, 31 (1), 10-20.

9. 9. Polimeni, J. M.; Polimeni, R. I. Eco. Comp. 2006, 3 (4), 344-353.
10. 10. Bashir, M. F.; Benjiang, M. A.; Shahbaz, M.; Shahzad, U.; Vo, X.V. Energy. 2021, 226, 120366.
11. 11. Fang, G.; Yang, K.; Tian, L.; Ma, Y. Energy. 2022, 260, 125193.
12. 12. Sackitey, G. L. Cog. Eco. & Fin. 2023, 11 (1), 2156094. 13. Mardani, A.; Streimikiene, D.; Cavallaro, F.; Loganathan, N.; Khoshnoudi, M. Sci. of the Tot. Env. 2019, 649, 31-49.
13. 14. Ozturk, İ.; Acaravci, A. Ren. and Sus. Ener. Rev. 2010, 14 (9), 3220-3225.
14. 15. Bilal, A.; Li, X.; Zhu, N.; Sharma, R.; Jahanger, A. Sustainability. 2022, 14 (1), 236.
15. 16. Oğul, B. İnö. Üni. Ulus. Sos. Bil. Der. 2022, 11 (2), 409-427.
16. 17. Kirikkaleli, D.; Ali, K. Geo. J. 2023, 58 (7), 2595-2609.
17. 18. Shan, S.; Genç, S.Y.; Kamran, H.W.; Dinca, G. J. of Env. Man. 2021, 294, 113004.
18. 19. Ahmad, N.; Youjin, L.; Žiković, S.; Belyaeva, Z. Tech. in Soc. 2023, 72, 102184.
19. 20. Khan, A.; Sampene, A.K.; Ali, S. Heliyon. 2023, 9 (6).
20. 21. Kirikkaleli, D.; Adebayo, T. S. Sus. Dev. 2021, 29 (4), 583-594.
21. 22. Adebayo, T. S.; Kırıkkaleli, D. Env., Dev. and Sus. 2021, 23 (11), 16057-16082.
22. 23. Khan, I.; Han, L.; BiBi, R.; Khan, H. Env. Sci. and Pol. Res. 2022, 29 (48), 73085-73099.
23. 24. Gunderson, R.; Yun, S. J. J. of Cle. Pro. 2017, 144, 239-247.
24. 25. Li, H.; Su, Y.; Ding, C.J.; Tian, G.G.; Wu, Z. Tech. Forec. and Soc. Ch. 2024, 207, 123562.
25. 26. Ghazouani, A.; Xia, W.; Ben Jebli, M.; Shahzad, U. Sustainability. 2020, 12 (20), 8680.
26. 27. Omodero, C.O.; Okafor, M.C.; Nmesirionye, J.A.; Abaa, E. O. Environ. Ecol. Res. 2022, 10, 1-10.
27. 28. Al Shammre, A.S.; Benhamed, A.; Ben-Salha, O.; Jaidi, Z. Systems. 2023, 11 (6), 307.
28. 29. Iyke-Ofoedu, M. I.; Takon, S. M.; Ugwunta, D. O.; Ezeaku, H. C.; Nsofor, E. S.; Egbo, O. P. J. of Cle. Pro. 2024, 444, 141210.
29. 30. Scrimgeour, F.; Oxley, L.; Fatai, K. Env. Mod. & Soft. 2005, 20 (11), 1439-1448.
30. 31. Loganathan, N.; Shahbaz, M.; Taha, R. Ren. and Sus. Ene. Rev. 2014, 38, 1083-1091. 32. Onofrei, M.; Vatamanu, A.F.; Cigu, E. Fro. in Env. Sci. 2022, 10, 934885.
31. 33. Lee, J. W.; Brahmasrene, T. Glo. Eco. Rev. 2014, 43 (2), 93-109.
32. 34. Wang, S.; Li, Q.; Fang, C.; Zhou, C. Sci. of the Tot. Env. 2016, 542, 360-371.
33. 35. Kizilkaya, O. Tur. Eco. Rev. 2017, 4 (1), 106-118.
34. 36. Cowan, W. N.; Chang, T.; Inglesi-Lotz, R.; Gupta, R. Ener. Pol. 2014, 66, 359-368.
35. 37. Bengochea-Morancho, A.; Higón-Tamarit, F.; Martínez-Zarzoso, I. Env. and Res. Eco. 2001, 19, 165-172.
36. 38. Ritchie, H. 2021, Many countries have decoupled economic growth from CO2 emissions, even if we take offshored production into account. Our World in Data.
37. 39. IEA, 2022, Türkiye. https://www.iea.org/countries/turkiye/emissions (Accessed 15 March 2025).
38. 40. Abdulkarim, M. J. of Academic Analysis (JAC). 2023, 1 (1), 1-16.
39. 41. Akdağ, N.; Tunalı, H. J. of Academic Analysis (JAC). 2024, 2 (1), 25-38.
40. 42. EDGAR, 2022, GHG Emissions of All World Countries. https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu (Accessed 15 March 2025).
41. 43. OECD, 2025, Environmental tax. https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/environmental-tax.html (Accessed 19 March 2025).
42. 44. World Bank Indicators, 2025, “Data”, available at: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators (accessed 17 March 2025).
43. 45. Shahbaz, M.; Zeshan, M.; Afza, T. Eco. Model. 2012, 29 (6), 2310-2319.
44. 46. Bhattacharya, M.; Paramati, S. R.; Ozturk, I.; Bhattacharya, S.; Appl. Ener. 2016, (162), 733-741.
45. 47. Dickey, D. A.; Fuller, W. A. Econometrica. 1981, 49 (4), 1057-1072.
46. 48. Phillips, P. C. B.; Perron, P. Biometrika. 1988, 75, 335-346.
47. 49. Enders, W.; Lee, J. Econ. Let. 2012, 117 (1), 196-199.
48. 50. Naimoğlu, M.; Sahabi, A.M.; Özbek, S. Sosyoekonomi. 2022, 30 (53), 487-507.
49. 51. Becker, R.; Enders, W.; Lee, J. J. of Time Ser. Analy. 2006, 27 (3), 381-409.
50. 52. Sam, C. Y.; McNown, R.; Goh, S. K. Econ. Model. 2019, 80, 130-141.
51. 53. Pesaran, M. H.; Shin, Y.; Smith, R. J. J. of Ap. Econ. 2001, 16 (3), 289-326.
52. 54. Narayan, P. K. App. Econ. 2005, 37 (17), 1979-1990.
53. 55. Hansen, B. E.; Phillips, P. C. B. Adv. in Econ. 1990, 8, 225-248.
54. 56. Park, J. Y. Econometrica. 1992, 119-143.
55. 57. Stock, J. H.; Watson, M. W. Econometrica. 1993, 783-820.
56. 58. Özbek, S. Ana. Üni. Sos. Bil. Der. 2023, 23 (2), 517-536.
57. 59. Wolff, J. Glo. Pers. 2021, 2 (1), 1-5.
58. 60. Coccia, M. Tech. Fore. and Soc. Ch. 2005, 72 (8), 944-979.
59. 61. Justman, M.; Teubal, M. World Dev. 1991, 19 (9), 1167-1183.
60. 62. Çalışkan, H. K. Pro.-Soc. and Beh. Sci. 2015, 195, 649-654.
61. 63. Pohjola, M. 2000, https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/295500/ (Accessed 18 March 2025).
62. 64. Cavdar, S. C.; Aydin, A. D. Pro.-Soc. and Beh. Sci. 2015, 195, 1486-1495.
63. 65. Veser, M. 2023, The sustainable tech transformation: Paving the way for a greener future. https://www.ey.com/en_ch/insights/sustainability/drive-the-green-transformation-enabled-by-technologyy (Accessed 18 March 2025).
64. 66. Diaconu, M. Theo. & App. Econ. 2011, 18 (10), 127-144.
65. 67. Kane, M.; Galea, D. 2024, The role of technology in sustainable development. https://instituteofsustainabilitystudies.com/insights/guides/the-role-of-technology-in-sustainable-development/ (Accessed 18 March 2025).
66. 68. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) 2025, Carbon Dioxide Emissions. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/carbon-dioxide-emissions
67. 69. Ritchie, H.; Rosado, P.; Roser, M. 2023, CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions (Accessed 19 March 2025).