The Relationship between Remittances and CO2 Emissions in Türkiye: An Analysis within the Framework of the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis

Öz

This study investigates the relationship between migrant transfers and CO2 emissions in Turkey within the framework of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis, based on annual data from 1974 to 2022. The ARDL bounds testing approach is employed to explore both short- and long-term effects, while FMOLS, DOLS, and CCR methods are used to test the robustness of the results. The findings confirm that the EKC hypothesis holds for Turkey in long run, indicating that economic growth can eventually reduce environmental pollution once a certain income level is achieved. However, it is observed that Turkey’s current income level remains insufficient to significantly mitigate environmental degradation. Moreover, the analysis reveals that remittance inflows contribute to increasing CO2 emissions by boosting consumption and infrastructure investments. This dual impact highlights that while remittances support economic development, they may also generate negative environmental externalities. The study emphasizes importance of strategically managing remittance flows, suggesting that channeling them into renewable energy, green technologies, and sustainable infrastructure is vital for achieving environmental sustainability goals. By addressing the interconnected dynamics of migration, economic growth, and environmental quality, the study fills a gap in the existing literature and provides valuable policy recommendations for aligning economic and environmental objectives.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• EKC Hypothesis
• Remittances
• CO2 emissions
• ARDL.

Türkiye’de Göçmen Dövizleri ve CO2 Emisyonları İlişkisi: Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezi Çerçevesinde Bir Analiz

Öz

Bu çalışmada, 1974-2022 dönemindeki yıllık veriler kullanılarak Türkiye’de göçmen transferleri ile CO2 emisyonları arasındaki ilişki çevresel Kuznets eğrisi (EKC) hipotezi kapsamında incelemektedir. Araştırmada hem kısa hem de uzun dönem etkileri analiz etmek amacıyla ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı kullanılmıştır. Ek olarak, elde edilen sonuçların güvenilirliğini artırmak ve modelin sağlamlığını test etmek için FMOLS, DOLS ve CCR gibi alternatif tekniklerden de yararlanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, Türkiye’de uzun vadede EKC hipotezinin geçerli olduğunu, yani ekonomik büyümenin belirli bir aşamadan sonra çevresel kirliliği azaltabileceğini ortaya koymaktadır. Ancak mevcut gelir düzeyinin çevresel bozulmayı azaltacak yeterli seviyeye ulaşmadığı belirlenmiştir. Özellikle göçmen transferleri, artan tüketim harcamaları ve altyapı yatırımları yoluyla CO2 emisyonlarını artırıcı bir etki yaratmaktadır. Bu durum, işçi dövizlerinin ekonomik büyümeyi teşvik etmekle birlikte çevre üzerinde olumsuz dışsallıklara da neden olabileceğini göstermektedir. Çalışma, göçmen transferlerinin etkili bir şekilde yönetilmesi gerektiğini ve bu kaynakların yenilenebilir enerji projelerine, yeşil altyapı yatırımlarına ve çevre dostu teknolojilere yönlendirilmesinin sürdürülebilir kalkınma hedefleri açısından kritik önemde olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Göç, kalkınma ve çevre dinamiklerini bütüncül bir şekilde ele alan bu çalışma, literatürdeki önemli bir boşluğu doldurmakta ve politika yapıcılara çevresel ve ekonomik hedeflerin uyumlaştırılması konusunda değerli çıkarımlar sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• : EKC Hipotezi
• Göçmen Dövizleri
• CO2 emisyonları
• ARDL

Kaynakça

1. Abadan-Unat, N. (2002). Bitmeyen Göç. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
2. Acaroğlu, H., Kartal, H. M., & García Márquez, F. P. (2023). Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in terms of ecological footprint and CO2 emissions through energy diversification for Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(22), 63289-63304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26278-w.
3. Adams, R. H., & Cuecuecha, A. (2013). The impact of remittances on investment and poverty in Ghana. World Development, 50, 24-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.04.009.
4. Adams, R.H. (1998). Remittances, investment, and rural asset accumulation in Pakistan. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 47(1), 155-173. https://doi.org/10.1086/452390.
5. Ahmad, M., Khan, Z., Ur Rahman, Z., & Khan, S. (2018). Does financial development asymmetrically affect CO2 emissions in China? An application of the nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) model. Carbon Management, 9(6), 631-644. https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2018.1529998.
6. Ahmad, W., Öztürk, İ., & Majeed, M.T. (2022). How do remittances affect environmental sustainability in Pakistan? Evidence from NARDL approach, Energy, 243, 122726 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.122726.
7. Akbostancı, E., Tunç, G. İ., & Türüt-Aşık, S. (2009). The relationship between income and environment in Turkey: Is there an environmental Kuznets curve? Energy Policy, 37(3), 861-867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.09.088.
8. Akınlo, T. (2022). Asymmetric Effect of Remittances on Environmental Degradation in Nigeria. Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies, 10(3), 2250019 https://doi.org/10.1142/S2345748122500191.

9. Akram, R., Chen, F., Khalid, F., Ye, Z. & 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.
10. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106187.
11. Apergis, N., & Payne, J. E. (2010). The emissions, energy consumption, and growth nexus: evidence from the commonwealth of independent states. Energy Policy, 38(1), 650-655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.08.029.
12. Biyase, M., Kirsten, F., Mbatha, S., & Ataro, B. (2024). Remittance and carbon dioxide emissions in the Southern African Customs Union region: Is there a modified environmental Kuznets curve?, Sustainable Futures, 8, 100315 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2024.100315.
13. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.138.
14. Das, A., & Serieux, J. (2010). Remittances and Reverse Flows in Developing Countries. The IDEAs Working Paper Series, Paper No 2.
15. Dash, R.K., Gupta, D.J. & Singh, N. (2024). Remittances and environment quality: Asymmetric evidence from South Asia. Research in Globalization, 8, 1000182 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2023.100182.
16. Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366a), 427-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1979.10482531.
17. Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecological Economics, 49(4), 431-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.011.
18. Dustmann, C., & Kirchkamp, O. (2001). The Optimal Migration duration and Activity Choice After Remigration (IZA Discussion Paper 266.).
19. Erdoğan, S., & Bozkurt, H. (2009). Türkiye’de cari açığın belirleyicileri: MGARCH modelleri ile bir inceleme. Maliye ve Finans Yazıları, 1(84), 135-172.
20. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working Paper No. 3914. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914.
21. Halliru, A. M., Loganathan, N., Hassan, A. A. G., Mardani, A., & Kamyab, H. (2020). Re-examining the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in the Economic Community of West African States: A panel quantile regression approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 276, 124247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124247.
22. Lin, B., Omoju, O. E., Nwakeze, N. M., Okonkwo, J. U., & Megbowon, E. T. (2016). Is the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis a sound basis for environmental policy in Africa?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 712-724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.173.
23. Mendola, M. (2008). Migration and technological change in rural households: Complements or substitutes? Journal of Development Economics, 85(1-2), 150-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2006.07.003.
24. Ojaghlou, M., Ugurlu, E., Kadłubek, M., & Thalassinos, E. (2023). Economic activities and management issues for the environment: an environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) and STIRPAT analysis in Turkey. Resources, 12(5), 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources12050057. OWD. (2025). Our World in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/explorers.
25. Panayotou, T. (1997). Demystifying the environmental Kuznets curve: Turning a black box into a policy tool. Environment and Development Economics, 2(4), 465-484. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X97000259.
26. 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. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2678547.
27. Phillips, P. C., & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346. https://doi.org/10.2307/2336182.
28. Rahman, Z.U., Cai, H., & Ahmad M (2023). A new look at the remittances-FDI-energy-environment nexus in the case of selected Asian nations. The Singapore Economic Review. 68(1),157-175. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217590819500176.
29. Sharma, K., Bhattarai, B. & Ahmed, S. (2019). Aid, growth, remittances, and carbon emissions in Nepal, The Energy Journal, 40(1),129-142 https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.40.1.ksha.
30. Stern, D. I. (2004). The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419-1439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.03.004.
31. Thapa, S., and S. Acharya (2017). Remittances and household expenditure in Nepal: Evidence from cross-section data. Economies, 5(16), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies5020016.
32. Usama, A.M, Solarin S.A, & Salahuddin, M. (2020). The prominence of renewable and non-renewable electricity generation on the environmental Kuznets curve: a case study of Ethiopia. Energy, 211, 118665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118665.
33. Üzümcü, A. (2020). Uluslararası Göç ve Ekonomi. Küreselleşen Dünyada Fırsat Eşitliği Arayışında Uluslararası Göç ve Türkiye’nin Suriye Deneyimi, 185-225.
34. Üzümcü, A., & Başar, S. (2011). Türkiye’nin cari işlemler bilançosu açığı üzerinde enerji ithalatı ve iktisadi büyümenin etkisi: 2003–2010 dönemi üzerine bir analiz. Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar Dergisi, 48(558), 5-22.
35. WDI. (2025). World Bank Development Indicators. Retrived From: 05 December 2024. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators.
36. Yahyaoui, I., & Bouchoucha, N. (2021). The long‐run relationship between ODA, growth and governance: An application of FMOLS and DOLS approaches. African Development Review, 33(1), 38-54. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8268.12489.
37. Yang, B., Jahanger, A. & Ali, M. (2021). Remittance inflows affect the ecological footprint in BICS countries: do technological innovation and financial development matter?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 23482–23500 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12400-3.
38. Yang. B, Jahanger, A., & Khan, M.A. (2020). Does the inflow of remittances and energy consumption increase CO2 emissions in the era of globalization? A global perspective. Air Qual Atmos Health, 13(11), 1313-1328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00885-9.
39. Zeraibi, A., Ahmed, Z., Shehzad, K., Murshed, M., Nathaniel, S. P., & Mahmood, H. (2022). Revisiting the EKC hypothesis by assessing the complementarities between fiscal, monetary, and environmental development policies in China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17288-7.
40. Zivot, E., & Andrews, D. (1992). Further evidence on the great crash, the oil- price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.