Does trade openness improve environmental quality? New evidence from the CO₂–renewable energy nexus

Öz

This study analyses the relationships between trade openness, renewable energy consumption, and economic growth on CO₂ emissions in Türkiye over the period 1990-2021, employing Granger Causality tests and the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) approach to capture both short- and long-run dynamics. The ARDL results reveal a stable long-run cointegration among the variables. Economic growth is found to increase CO₂ emissions, with a 1% rise in income per capita raising emissions by approximately 0.70%, reflecting the carbon-intensive nature of economic expansion. In contrast, renewable energy consumption significantly reduces emissions, with a 1% increase leading to a decline of about 0.16%. Trade openness also exerts a negative long-run effect on emissions, while remaining insignificant in the short run. Granger causality results suggest short-run causal effects from GDP and CO₂ emissions to trade openness, highlighting trade as the most responsive channel in the short term. The results highlight the importance of distinguishing between short-run and long-run effects when assessing the environmental impacts of economic activities. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Carbon emissions
• Renewable energy
• Trade openness
• Economic growth
• Türkiye
• Environmental sustainability

Kaynakça

1. [1] Jacobson TA, Kler JS, Hernke MT, Braun RK, Meyer KC, Funk WE. Direct human health risks of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide. Nature Sustainability. 2019 Aug;2(8):691-701.
2. [2] Climate Transparency. Turkey: Climate Transparency Report 2022. Retrieved from. (2022). https://www.climate-transparency.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/CT2022-Turkey-Web.pdf
3. [3] Grossman GM, Krueger AB. Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. (NBER Working Papers 3914). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. 1991. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w3914/w3914.pdf
4. [4] Hove S, Tursoy T. An investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve in emerging economies. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019 Nov 1;236:117628.
5. [5] McConnell KE. Income and the demand for environmental quality. Environment and development Economics. 1997 Jul;2(4):383-99.
6. [6] Mukhtarov S. Do renewable energy and total factor productivity eliminate CO2 emissions in Turkey?. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies. 2024 Apr;26(2):307-24.
7. [7] Frankel JA, Rose AK. Is trade good or bad for the environment? Sorting out the causality. Review of economics and statistics. 2005 Feb 1;87(1):85-91.
8. [8] Antweiler W, Copeland BR, Taylor MS. Is free trade good for the environment?. American economic review. 2001 Sep 1;91(4):877-908.

9. [9] Cetin M, Ecevit E, Yucel AG. The impact of economic growth, energy consumption, trade openness, and financial development on carbon emissions: empirical evidence from Turkey. Environmental science and pollution research. 2018 Dec;25(36):36589-603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3526-5.
10. [10] Raihan A, Tuspekova A. Dynamic impacts of economic growth, renewable energy use, urbanization, industrialization, tourism, agriculture, and forests on carbon emissions in Turkey. Carbon Research. 2022 Sep 26;1(1):20.
11. [11] Şahin S, Doğan M, Kaplan EA. The role of environmental technologies in carbon decoupling: A pathway to zero emissions in Turkiye. Journal of Environmental Management. 2025 Oct 1;393:127143.
12. [12] International Energy Agency. Türkiye – Countries & Regions – IEA. 2023. Retrieved from https://www.iea.org/countries/turkiye.
13. [13] Oğuz S. The link between trade openness, economic growth, energy use and carbon emissions: analysis with a conceptual model proposal. Sosyoekonomi. 2024 Mar;32(60):181-95. https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2024.02.09
14. [14] Eylasov N, Gasim N, Aliyev F, Şahinler AN. Impact of renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions in Türkiye: Evidence from ARDL and Bayer-Hanck Cointegration Techniques. Green Economics. 2023;1(2):111-25.
15. [15] Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources. Türkiye National Energy Plan 2022; 2022. Retrieved from https://enerji.gov.tr/Media/Dizin/EIGM/tr/Raporlar/TUEP/T%C3%BCrkiye_National_Energy_Plan.pdf.
16. [16] Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources. One step closer to net-zero 2035 [News release]; 2024, December 3. Retrieved from https://www.enerji.gov.tr/news-detail?id=21412.
17. [17] World Bank. renewable energy consumption (% of total final energy consumption) – Türkiye. 2021. Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.FEC.RNEW.ZS
18. [18] International Energy Agency. Turkey’s success in renewables is helping diversify its energy mix and increase its energy security. 2021. Retrieved from https://www.iea.org/news/turkey-s-success-in-renewables-is-helping-diversify-its-energy-mix-and-increase-its-energy-security.
19. [19] OECD Trade Facilitation and the Global Economy, OECD Publishing, Paris. 2018. ISBN 978-92-64-27757-1 (PDF) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264277571-en.
20. [20] Safaeimanesh S, Jenkins GP. Trade facilitation and its impacts on the economic welfare and sustainable development of the ECOWAS region. Sustainability. 2020 Dec 26;13(1):164.
21. [21] Safaeimanesh S, Jenkins GP. Estimation of the potential economic welfare to be gained by the South African Customs Union from trade facilitation. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences. 2021;24(1):1-4.
22. [22] Copeland BR, Shapiro JS, Taylor MS. Globalization and the Environment. InHandbook of international economics 2022 Jan 1 (Vol. 5, pp. 61-146). Elsevier.
23. [23] Sun J, Qamruzzaman M. Technological innovation, trade openness, natural resources, clean energy on environmental sustainably: a competitive assessment between CO2 emission, ecological footprint, load capacity factor and inverted load capacity factor in BRICS+ T. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 2025 Feb 4;12:1520562.
24. [24] Savaş Y. The Impact of Economic Growth, Fuel Consumption, Agriculture, Trade Openess on Environmental Degradation in Turkiye: Evidence from Environmental Kuznets Curve. TÜRK KAMU YÖNETİMİ DERGİSİ. 2023 Jun 30;4(1).
25. [25] Afreefir MA, Khalifa WM. Achieving Environmental Sustainability in Turkey: The Role of Green Production Processes, Trade Globalization, Renewable Energy Consumption and Economic Growth. Sustainability. 2025 Nov 4;17(21):9823.
26. [26] Acaroğlu H, Kartal HM, García Márquez FP. Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in terms of ecological footprint and CO2 emissions through energy diversification for Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2023 May;30(22):63289-304.
27. [27] Savaş DA. RENEWABLE ENERGY AND CO₂ EMISSIONS: A CASE STUDY OF TURKIYE (1985-2022). Akademik Yaklaşımlar Dergisi. (2024). ;15(3):1450-72. https://doi.org/10.54688/ayd.1514919.
28. [28] Pesaran MH, Shin Y. An autoregressive distributed lag modelling approach to cointegration analysis. Cambridge, UK: Department of Applied Economics, University of Cambridge; 1995 Mar 3. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521633230.011.
29. [29] World Bank. World Development Indicators. 2025. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators. 
30. [30] Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ. Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of applied econometrics. 2001 May;16(3):289-326. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.616
31. [31] Malik, M.A. (2021). Economic growth, energy consumption, and environmental quality nexus in Turkey: Evidence from simultaneous equation models. Environ Science and Pollution Research 28 (34), 41988–41999. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13468-7.
32. [32] Wu R, Ma T, Chen D, Zhang W. International trade, CO2 emissions, and re-examination of “Pollution Haven Hypothesis” in China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022 Jan;29(3):4375-89.
33. [33] European Commission.. Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, CBAM, Taxation and Customs Union. 2023. https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_en.
34. [34] European Commission. CBAM successfully entered into force on 1 January 2026. 2026 https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/news/cbam-successfully-entered-force-1-january-2026-2026-01-14_en
35. [35] OECD. Environment at a glance: Türkiye. 2024. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/environment-at-a-glance-country-notes_59ce6fe6-en/turkiye_80948100-en.html.
36. [36] Maliszewska, M., Fischer, C., Jung, E., & Chepeliev, M. Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) Exposure Indices Methodological Note. Prosperity Notes Series. World Bank (2025).. https://hdl.handle.net/10986/43614.
37. [37] Beaufils, T.. Between challenges and opportunities: The impacts of the EU CBAM in Türkiye. IPC–Mercator Policy Brief. 2026. https://ipc.sabanciuniv.edu/Content/Images/CKeditorImages/20260227-10022261.pdf.
38. [38] U.S. Energy Information Administration. Country Analysis Brief: Türkiye. 2023. Retrieved from https://www.eia.gov/international/content/analysis/countries_long/Turkiye/turkiye.pdf [eia.gov].
39. [39] Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources. YEKA tender results and renewable capacity updates 2025/2026. 2026. https://enerji.gov.tr/.
40. [40] Dumrul Y, Bilgili F, Dumrul C, Kılıçarslan Z, Rahman MN. The impacts of renewable energy production, economic growth, and economic globalization on CO2 emissions: evidence from Fourier ADL co-integration and Fourier-Granger causality test for Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2023 Sep;30(41):94138-53.
41. [41] Adebayo TS, Oladipupo SD, Rjoub H, Kirikkaleli D, Adeshola I. Asymmetric effect of structural change and renewable energy consumption on carbon emissions: designing an SDG framework for Turkey. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2023 Jan;25(1):528-56.