The relationship between renewable energy consumption and health expenditures: The case of G-7 countries

Öz

This study examines the impact of renewable energy consumption, economic growth, and death rates on healthcare expenditures in G-7 countries over the 1992-2023 period using panel data analysis. Preliminary analyses indicate cross-sectional dependence and heterogeneity across countries. The Fourier LM unit root test reveals that the variables are non-stationary, while the LM Bootstrap cointegration test supports a long-run relationship. Panel-wide AMG estimation results indicate that renewable energy consumption reduces healthcare expenditures, while economic growth and death rates increase healthcare expenditures. Country-based results indicate that renewable energy consumption reduces healthcare expenditures in Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom. While economic growth increases healthcare expenditures in France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom, death rates increase healthcare expenditures in France, Germany, and the United States, and decrease them in Japan. Furthermore, according to the Dumitrescu & Hurlin causality test, there is a unidirectional causality relationship running from renewable energy consumption and economic growth to healthcare expenditures. The findings show that energy and health policies should be integrated and that renewable energy investments can have positive effects on health systems.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Health expenditures
• Renewable energy consumption
• Economic growth
• Death rate
• G-7 countries
• Panel data analysis

Kaynakça

1. [1] Akar T, Sarıtaş T, Akar G. Yenilenebilir enerji ve sağlık harcamaları ilişkisi: AB ülkelerinden kanıtlar. Balkan Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 2023; 12(23): 43-48.
2. [2] Anderson GF, Hussey P, Petrosyan V. It’s still the prices, stupid: Why the US spends so much on health care, and a tribute to Uwe Reinhardt. Health Affairs 2020; 38(1): 87-95.
3. [3] Apergis N, Danuletiu DC. Renewable energy and economic growth: Evidence from the sign of panel long-run causality. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 2014; 4(4): 578-587.
4. [4] Apergis N, Payne JE. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption-growth nexus: Evidence from a panel error correction model. Energy Economics 2012; 34(3): 733-738.
5. [5] Apergis N, Payne JE. Renewable energy, output, CO₂ emissions, and fossil fuel prices in Central America: Evidence from a nonlinear panel smooth transition vector error correction model. Energy Economics 2014; 42: 226-232.
6. [6] Apergis N, Ben Jebli M, Ben Youssef S. Does renewable energy consumption and health expenditures decrease carbon dioxide emissions? Evidence for sub-Saharan Africa countries. Renewable Energy 2018; 127: 1011-1016.
7. [7] Atılgan D, Günay E. Yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi sağlık harcamaları üzerinde etkili mi? AB ülkeleri örneği. Hitit Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 2024; 17(1): 39-53.
8. [8] Aydın B, Çamkaya S. Nükleer enerji tüketimi, yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ve karbon emisyonlarının sağlık harcamaları üzerindeki etkileri. Bulletin of Economic Theory and Analysis 2024; 9(2): 493-513.

9. [9] Baltagi BH. Econometric analysis of panel data. 6th ed. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2021.
10. [10] Becker R, Enders W, Lee J. A stationarity test in the presence of an unknown number of smooth breaks. Journal of Time Series Analysis 2006; 27(3): 381-409.
11. [11] Bhattacharya M, Paramati SR, Ozturk I, Bhattacharya S. The effect of renewable energy consumption on economic growth: Evidence from top 38 countries. Applied Energy 2016; 162: 733-741.
12. [12] Breusch TS, Pagan AR. The Lagrange Multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies 1980; 47(1): 239-253.
13. [13] Burke MJ, Stephens JC. Political power and renewable energy futures: A critical review. Energy Research & Social Science 2018; 35: 78-93.
14. [14] Büyüközkan G, Karabulut Y. Energy project performance evaluation with sustainability perspective. Energy 2017; 119: 549-560.
15. [15] Caruso G, Colantonio E, Gattone SA. Relationships between renewable energy consumption, social factors, and health: A panel vector auto regression analysis of a cluster of 12 EU countries. Sustainability 2020; 12(7): 2915.
16. [16] Cohen AJ, Brauer M, Burnett R, Anderson HR, Frostad J, Estep K, et al. Estimates and 25-year trends of the global burden of disease attributable to ambient air pollution: An analysis of data from the Global Burden of Diseases Study 2015. The Lancet 2017; 389(10082): 1907-1918.
17. [17] Çetin M. The long run relationship between health expenditure and renewable energy consumption in BRICS-T countries: Panel ARDL evidence. The 5th International Congress on Political, Economic and Social Studies (ICPESS), Nigde, Turkey, 2018.
18. [18] Dieleman JL, Cao J, Chapin A, et al. US health care spending by payer and health condition, 1996–2016. JAMA 2020; 323(9): 863-884.
19. [19] Dorbonova İ, Sugözü İH. Analyzing the relationship between health expenditure, renewable energy and life expectancy: Evidence from Asian countries. ESAM Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 2024; 5(1): 111-134.
20. [20] Dumitrescu EI, Hurlin C. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling 2012; 29(4): 1450-1460.
21. [21] Eberhardt M, Bond S. Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: A novel estimator. MPRA Paper No. 17692. 2009.
22. [22] Ecevit E, Çetin M. Ekonomik büyüme, yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi, finansal gelişme ve kentleşmenin sağlık harcamaları üzerindeki etkisi: Türkiye ekonomisi üzerine bir zaman serisi kanıtı. Sosyal Bilimler Metinleri 2022; 2022(2): 84-98.
23. [23] Ecevit E, Çetin M, Yücel AG. Türkiye’de yenilenebilir enerji ve sağlık: Eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi. Erciyes Akademi 2022; 36(1): 138-156.
24. [24] Eryer A. The relationship between health expenditures and renewable energy consumption in the Turkish economy. Black Sea Journal of Public and Social Science 2025; 8(1): 28-34.
25. [25] Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi). Germany’s energy transition: Energiewende. Berlin, Germany, 2011.
26. [26] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Global warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, US, 2018.
27. [27] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change. Working Group III contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, US, 2022.
28. [28] International Energy Agency (IEA). World energy outlook 2021a. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2021
29. [29] International Energy Agency (IEA). Net zero by 2050: A roadmap for the global energy sector. 2021b. https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050
30. [30] International Energy Agency (IEA). World energy outlook 2022. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2022
31. [31] International Energy Agency (IEA), https://www.iea.org, 2024.
32. [32] International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). Global energy transformation: A roadmap to 2050 (2019 edition). Abu Dhabi, 2019.
33. [33] International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), https://www.irena.org/Statistics/View-Data-by-Topic/Capacity-and-Generation/Technologies, 2021.
34. [34] IPCC. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, US, 2021.
35. [35] Jacobson MZ, et al. 100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States. Energy & Environmental Science 2015; 8(7): 2093-2117.
36. [36] Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJR, Adeyi O, Arnold R, Basu NN, et al. The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. The Lancet 2018; 391(10119): 462-512.
37. [37] Lelieveld J, Klingmüller K, Pozzer A, Burnett RT, Haines A, Ramanathan V. Effects of fossil fuel and total anthropogenic emission removal on public health and climate. PNAS 2019; 116(15): 7192-7197.
38. [38] Markandya A, Wilkinson P. Electricity generation and health. The Lancet 2007; 370(9591): 979-990.
39. [39] Mehmood U, Agyekum EB, Kamel S, Shahinzadeh H, Moshayedi AJ. Exploring the roles of renewable energy, education spending, and CO2 emissions towards health spending in South Asian countries. Sustainability 2022; 14(6): 3549.
40. [40] Morris C, Jungjohann A. Energy democracy: Germany’s Energiewende to renewables. Palgrave Macmillan, Switzerland, 2016.
41. [41] Natural Resources Canada, Energy Factbook 2022–2023. Natural Resources, Canada, 2022.
42. [42] Nawab T, Muneza C, Afghan M. Impact of renewable energy consumption and health expenditure on air pollutants: Implications for sustainable development in ASEAN countries. IRASD Journal of Energy & Environment 2021; 2(2): 78-89.
43. [43] Nazlıoğlu S, Karul C. Panel LM unit root test with gradual structural shifts. 40th International Panel Data Conference, Thessaloniki, Greece, 7–8 July 2017: 1-26.
44. [44] Omri A, Nguyen DK. On the determinants of renewable energy consumption: International evidence. Energy 2014; 72: 554-560.
45. [45] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Health at a glance 2019: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 2019.
46. [46] Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development (OECD) & European Commission, Health at a Glance: Europe 2024. OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 2024.
47. [47] Organisation for Economic Co operation and Development (OECD), https://www.oecd.org/en/data, 2025.
48. [48] Organisation for Economic Co operation and Development (OECD). Health expenditure and financing. OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 2023.
49. [49] Öndes H. Yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ve sağlık harcamaları karbondioksit emisyonunu azaltır mı? Business and Organization Research Izmir (International Conference), Yaşar Üniversitesi, İzmir, Türkiye, 2019.
50. [50] Pata UK. Do renewable energy and health expenditures improve load capacity factor in the USA and Japan? A new approach to environmental issues. The European Journal of Health Economics 2021; 22(9): 1427-1439.
51. [51] Pesaran MH, Yamagata T. Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics 2008; 142(1): 50-93.
52. [52] Pesaran MH. General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Faculty of Economics 2004; 1240(1): 13-49.
53. [53] Pesaran MH, Ullah A, Yamagata T. A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross section independence. The Econometrics Journal 2008; 11(1): 105-127.
54. [54] Rafindadi AA, Ozturk I. Impacts of renewable energy consumption on the German economic growth: Evidence from combined cointegration test. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017; 75: 1130-1141.
55. [55] Raihan A, Farhana S, Muhtasim DA, et al. The nexus between carbon emission, energy use, and health expenditure: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. Carbon Research 2022; 1(30).
56. [56] REN21. Renewables 2023 global status report. Paris, France, 2023.
57. [57] Sadorsky P. Do urbanization and industrialization affect energy intensity in developing countries? Energy Economics 2013; 37: 52-59.
58. [58] Saidi K, Omri A. The impact of renewable energy on carbon emissions and economic growth in 15 major renewable energy-consuming countries. Environmental Research 2020; 186: 109567.
59. [59] Shahzad K, Jianqiu Z, Hashim M, Nazam M, Wang L. Impact of using information and communication technology and renewable energy on health expenditure: A case study from Pakistan. Energy 2020; 204: 117956.
60. [60] Sovacool BK, Schmid P, Stirling A, Walter G, MacKerron G. Differences in carbon emissions reduction between countries pursuing renewable electricity versus nuclear power. Nature Energy 2020; 5(11): 928-935.
61. [61] Sovacool BK, Sidortsov RV, Jones BR. Energy security, equality and justice. 1st ed. Routledge, UK, 2013.
62. [62] Swamy PAVB. Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model. Econometrica 1970; 38(2): 311-323.
63. [63] Triki R, Kahouli B, Tissaoui K, Tlili H. Assessing the link between environmental quality, green finance, health expenditure, renewable energy, and technology innovation. Sustainability 2023; 15(5): 4286.
64. [64] Ullah I, Rehman A, Khan FU, Shah MH, Khan F. Nexus between trade, CO2 emissions, renewable energy, and health expenditure in Pakistan. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management 2020; 35(4): 818-831.
65. [65] United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window — Climate crisis calls for rapid transformation of societies. Nairobi, Kenya, 2022.
66. [66] Watts N, Amann M, Arnell N, et al. The 2018 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change. The Lancet 2018; 392(10163): 2479-2514.
67. [67] Westerlund J, Edgerton DL. A panel bootstrap cointegration test. Economics Letters 2007; 97(3): 185-190.
68. [68] Wooldridge JM. Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. 2nd ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, London, UK, 2010.
69. [69] World Bank, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator, 2025.
70. [70] World Health Organization (WHO). Air pollution and child health: Prescribing clean air. Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
71. [71] World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Global Air Quality Guidelines: Particulate Matter (PM₂.₅ and PM₁₀), Ozone, Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide and Carbon Monoxide. Geneva, Switzerland, 2021.
72. [72] World Health Organization (WHO), https://apps.who.int/nha/database, 2022.
73. [73] Yadav M, Aneja R, Ahmed W. Do clean energy transition, environment degradation, and energy efficiency influence health expenditure: Empirical evidence from emerging countries. Journal of Cleaner Production 2023; 428: 139355.