AMERİKA BİRLEŞİK DEVLETLERİ’NDE ÇEVRESEL PHILLIPS EĞRİSİ: CİNSİYET TEMELLİ BİR YAKLAŞIM

Öz

Çevresel Phillips Eğrisi (ÇPE) hipotezine göre sürdürülebilir istihdam ve çevresel hedeflere aynı anda ulaşılamamaktadır. Bu nedenle ÇPE analizleri, hükümetlerin iki kritik alanda çözüm bulma çabalarına ışık tutmaktadır. Bu çalışma, 1965–2024 dönemi için Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde toplam ve cinsiyete göre ayrıştırılmış işsizlik oranları çerçevesinde ÇPE’nin geçerliliğini test etmektedir. Bu motivasyonla çalışma, VAR (Vector Autoregression) modeli ve dalgacık tutarlılık analizini kullanarak toplam işsizlik oranı (İO), kadın işsizlik oranı (KİO), erkek işsizlik oranı (EİO), gayrisafi yurt içi hasıla (GSYH) ve birincil enerji tüketiminin (ENT) ekolojik ayak izi (EA) üzerindeki etkilerini ampirik olarak araştırmaktadır. Etki-tepki fonksiyonu sonuçları, İO ve EİO değişkenleri açısından ÇPE hipotezini güçlü biçimde desteklerken, daha sınırlı dönemler dikkate alındığında KİO değişkeni için de benzer bir ilişkinin varlığına işaret etmektedir. Diğer taraftan, GSYH ve ENT değişkenlerinin EA üzerindeki pozitif etkisi, ekonomik büyüme ve enerji tüketiminin çevresel bozulmayı artırdığını göstermektedir. WCA bulguları ise büyük oranda VAR modelini desteklemektedir. Bu sonuçlar, istihdam artışı, ekonomik genişleme ve enerji kullanımının sürdürülebilir çevre politikaları açısından potansiyel riskler taşıdığını ortaya koymaktadır. Dolayısıyla, politika yapıcıların, özellikle istihdamın yoğun olduğu sektörlerde yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarını ve çevre dostu teknolojileri teşvik ederek, işsizlik ile çevresel bozulma arasında zorunlu bir tercih yapma gerekliliğini azaltmaları önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevresel Phillips Eğrisi
• İşsizlik ve Çevre
• Ekolojik Ayak İzi

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma, yazarların herhangi biri tarafından insan denekler veya hayvanlar üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiş herhangi bir çalışma içermemektedir. Çalışmalarda uygulanan tüm prosedürler, ilgili kurumsal ve/veya ulusal araştırma kurullarının etik standartlarına uygundur.

ENVIRONMENTAL PHILLIPS CURVE IN THE UNITED STATES: A GENDER-BASED APPROACH

Öz

Sustainable employment and environmental goals cannot be achieved simultaneously, according to the Environmental Phillips Curve (EPC) hypothesis. EPC analyses can therefore shed light on governments’ efforts to find solutions in two critical areas. This paper tests the validity of the EPC in the United States over the period 1965–2024, using total and gender-disaggregated unemployment rates. With this motivation, the paper empirically investigates the effects of total unemployment rate (UR), female unemployment rate (FUR), male unemployment rate (MUR), gross domestic product (GDP) and primary energy consumption (PEC) on the ecological footprint (EF) using a vector autoregression (VAR) model and wavelet coherence analysis. The results of the impulse-response function strongly support the EPC hypothesis with respect to the UR and MUR variables, while they also indicate the existence of a similar relationship for the FUR variable over shorter periods. Conversely, the positive impact of the GDP and PEC variables on EF indicates that economic growth and energy consumption lead to increased environmental degradation. The WCA findings largely support the VAR model. These results reveal that increases in employment, economic expansion, and energy use carry potential risks from the perspective of sustainable environmental policies. Hence, it is recommended that policymakers reduce the necessity of making a difficult trade-off between unemployment and environmental degradation by promoting renewable energy sources and environmentally friendly technologies, particularly in laborintensive sectors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Environmental Phillips Curve
• Unemployment and Environment
• Ecological Footprint.

Etik Beyan

This paper does not contain any studies conducted on human subjects or animals by any of the authors. All procedures performed in the studies comply with the ethical standards of the relevant institutional and/or national research ethics committees.

Kaynakça

1. Akerlof, G. A., Dickens, W. T., Perry, G. L., Bewley, T. F., & Blinder, A. S. (2000). Near-rational wage and price setting and the long-run Phillips curve. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 31(1), 1-60.
2. Anser, M.K., Apergis, N., Syed, Q.R., & Alola, A.A. (2021). Exploring a new perspective of sustainable development drive through environmental Phillips curve in the case of the BRICST countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(35), 48112-48122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14056-5
3. Atkeson, A., & Ohanian, L.E. (2001). Are Phillips curves useful for forecasting inflation?. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review, 25(1), 2-11.
4. Attfield, C. L. F., & Silverstone, B. (1998). Okun’s Law, cointegration and gap variables. Journal of Macroeconomic, 20(3), 625-637. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0164-0704(98)00076-7
5. Ayad, H., & Djedaiet, A. (2026). Does the unemployment rate matter for environmental issues in the G7 nations? New testing for the environmental Phillips curve using the load capacity factor. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 28, 187-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04956-0
6. Azimi, M. N., & Rahman, M. M. (2024). Examining the Environmental Phillips Curve hypothesis in G7 nations: Critical insights from Wavelet Coherence and Wavelet Causality Analysis. Quality & Quantity, 58(6), 5683-5713. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-024-01909-7
7. Bhowmik, R., Syed, Q.R., Apergis, N., Alola, A.A., & Gai, Z. (2022). Applying a dynamic ARDL approach to the Environmental Phillips Curve (EPC) hypothesis amid monetary, fiscal, and trade policy uncertainty in the USA. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 14914–14928. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16716-y
8. Blanchard, O. J. (1986). The wage price spiral. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 101(3): 543-566. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1885696

9. Boserup, E. (2007). Woman's role in economic development. London: Earthscan.
10. Burger, J., & Gochfeld, M. (2010). Gender differences in resource use and evaluatuon of attributes of places of resource use by native Americans and Caucasians from Western Idaho: Relevance to risk evaluations. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 73(24), 1655-1664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2010.516242
11. Caglar, A. E., Yavuz, E., Mert, M., & Kilic, E. (2022). The ecological footprint facing asymmetric natural resources challenges: Evidence from the USA. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(7), 10521-10534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16406-9
12. Carmona, M., Feria, J., Golpe, A. A., & Iglesias, J. (2017). Energy consumption in the US reconsidered. Evidence across sources and economic sectors. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 77, 1055-1068. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.227
13. Chun-Lin, L. (2010). A tutorial of the wavelet transform. NTUEE, Taiwan, 21(22).
14. Dai, S., Dair, Y., & Yu, H. (2024). The effect of gender gap in labor market participation on carbon emission efficiency: State-level empirical evidence from the US. Energy & Environment, 1-27, 0958305X241277623. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0958305X241277623
15. Dankelman, I., & Davidson, J. (1988). Women and environment in the third world: alliance for the future. London: Earthscan Publications.
16. Das, U. (2022). Role of women in environmental protection. International Journal of Political Science and Governance, 4(2), 125-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.33545/26646021.2022.v4.i2b.183
17. Dastan, M., & Eygu, H. (2023). An empirical investigation of the link between economic growth, unemployment, and ecological footprint in Turkey: Bridging the EKC and EPC hypotheses. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26, 18957–18988. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04106-y
18. Desrochers, J. E., Albert, G., Milfont, T. L., Kelly, B., & Arnocky, S. (2019). Does personality mediate the relationship between sex and environmentalism?. Personality and Individual Differences, 147, 204-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.026
19. 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
20. Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica: Journal of The Econometric Society, 49(4), 1057-1072. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912517
21. Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis: A survey. Ecological Economics, 49(4), 431-455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.011
22. Djedaiet, A. (2023). Does environmental quality react asymmetrically to unemployment and inflation rates? African OPEC countries’ perspective. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 102418–102427. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-29621-3
23. Dogan, E., Majeed, M. T., & Luni, T. (2022). Revisiting the nexus of ecological footprint, unemployment, and renewable and non-renewable energy for South Asian economies: Evidence from novel research methods. Renewable Energy, 194, 1060-1070. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.05.165
24. Dong, F., Wang, Y., Su, B., Hua, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2019). The process of peak CO2 emissions in developed economies: A perspective of industrialization and urbanization. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 61-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.010
25. Durani, F., Bhowmik, R., Sharif, A., Anwar, A., & Syed, Q. R. (2023). Role of economic uncertainty, financial development, natural resources, technology, and renewable energy in the environmental Phillips curve framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 420, 138334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138334
26. EI (2026). Energy Institute, 2025 statistical review of world energy. Retrieved from https://www.energyinst.org/statistical-review. Accessed 05.01.2026.
27. Ergen, E. (2026). Analysis of trade openness and economic growth in emerging markets. Revista Mexicana de Economía y Finanzas Nueva Época REMEF, 21(3), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.21919/remef.v21i3.1349
28. Fischer, S. (1977). Long-term contracts, rational expectations, and the optimal money supply rule. Journal of Political Economy, 85(1), 191-205.
29. Fisher, I. (1926). A statistical relation between unemployment and price changes. International Labour Review, 13(6), 785-792.
30. GFN (2026). Global Footprint Network. Retrieved from https://data.footprintnetwork.org/?_ga=2.94417625.411402258.1706209527-1940855925.1706209527#/analyzeTrends?type=EFCtot&cn=5001. Accessed 05.01.2026.
31. Graps, A. (1995). An introduction to wavelets. IEEE Computational Science and Engineering, 2(2), 50-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/99.388960
32. Grinsted, A., Moore, J. C., & Jevrejeva, S. (2004). Application of the cross wavelet transform and wavelet coherence to geophysical time series. Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 11(5/6), 561-566. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/npg-11-561-2004
33. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER Working Paper 3914. http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/w3914
34. Haciimamoğlu, T. (2023). A new approach to sustainable development: Analysis of the environmental Phillips Curve hypothesis. Sosyoekonomi, 31(56), 11-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2023.02.01
35. Han, T. T. T., & Lin, C. Y. (2025). Exploring long-run CO2 emission patterns and the environmental Kuznets curve with machine learning methods. Innovation and Green Development, 4(1), 100195. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.igd.2024.100195
36. Hassan, S. T., Wang, P., Khan, I., & Zhu, B. (2023). The impact of economic complexity, technology advancements, and nuclear energy consumption on the ecological footprint of the USA: Towards circular economy initiatives. Gondwana Research, 113, 237-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2022.11.001
37. IMF (2026). International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook. Retrieved from https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2025/April. Accessed 05.01.2026.
38. Kartal, M. T., Ayhan, F., Sarıhan, A. Y., & Altaylar, M. (2025a). Examining a (symmetric) relationship of renewable energy, healthcare expenditures, and export with environmental degradation: Evidence from OECD countries by ARDL approaches. Journal of Environmental Management, 390, 126236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.126236
39. Kartal, M. T., Santosh, M., Taşkın, D., Depren, S. K., & Ayhan, F. (2025b). Impact of productive capacity shifts, energy-related R&D investments, energy use, and income on environmental degradation: Evidence from leading developed countries. Renewable Energy, 251, 123338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2025.123338
40. Kashem, M. A., & Rahman, M. M. (2020). Environmental Phillips curve: OECD and Asian NICs perspective. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 31153-31170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08620-8
41. Kinnunen, J., Georgescu, I., & Nica, I. (2024). Evaluating the environmental Phillips Curve hypothesis in the STIRPAT framework for Finland. Sustainability, 16(11), 4381. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su16114381
42. Kirikkaleli, D., & Ozun, A. (2019). Co‐Movement of political risk and sovereign credit risk: A Wavelet coherence analysis for Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela. Social Science Quarterly, 100(6), 2094-2114. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12709
43. Koyuncu Cakmak, T., Beser, M. K., & Alola, A. A. (2025). Environmental effect of high-, upper, and lower middle income economies’ energy mix: Is there a trade-off between unemployment and environmental quality?. Energy & Environment, 36(2), 851-869. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0958305X231187034
44. Lasisi, T. T., Alola, A. A., Eluwole, K. K., Ozturen, A., & Alola, U. V. (2020). The environmental sustainability effects of income, labour force, and tourism development in OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 21231-21242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08486-w
45. Leach, M. (1992). Gender and the environment: Traps and opportunities. Development in Practice, 2(1), 12-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/096145249100076511
46. Lee, J. (2000). The robustness of Okun’s Law: Evidence from OECD countries. Journal of Macroeconomics, 22(2), 331-356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0164-0704(00)00135-X
47. Li, Q., & Zhang, S. (2025). Impact of globalization and industrialization on ecological footprint: Do institutional quality and renewable energy matter?. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 13, 1535638. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2025.1535638
48. Lipsey, R. G. (1960). The relation between unemployment and the rate of change of money wage rates in the United Kingdom 1862-1957: A further analysis, Economica, 27(105), 1-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2551424
49. Malik, Z., & Shaikh, O. (2023). The EPC hypothesis revisited in G-20 countries: A novel panel data analysis. IJCRT, 11(3), e305-e317.
50. Martín-López, B., Iniesta-Arandia, I., García-Llorente, M., Palomo, I., Casado-Arzuaga, I., Amo, D. G. D., … Montes, C. (2012). Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS One, 7(6), e38970. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038970
51. Mercan, N. (2024). Analyzing the relationship between public revenues and public expenditures by Wavelet method: Evidence from G7 countries. Journal of the Faculty of Political Science (NEUSBF), 6(2), 261-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.51124/jneusbf.2024.88
52. Nazlioglu, S., Gormus, N. A., & Soytas, U. (2016). Oil prices and real estate investment trusts (REITs): Gradual-shift causality and volatility transmission analysis. Energy Economics, 60, 168-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2016.09.009
53. Ng, C. F., Yii, K. J., Lau, L. S., & Go, Y. H. (2022). Unemployment rate, clean energy, and ecological footprint in OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 42863–42872. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17966-6
54. Okun, M. A. (1962). Potential GNP: Its measurement and significance. Cowles Foundation Paper no. 190.
55. Onakpojeruo, C., Seraj, M., & Ozdeser, H. (2025). The impacts of gross domestic product and non-renewable energy on CO2 emissions in India. SN Business & Economics, 5(1), 3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43546-024-00773-9
56. Özgen, F. B., & Güloğlu, B. (2004). Türkiye'de iç borçların iktisadi etkilerinin VAR tekniği ile analizi. METU Studies in Development, 3, 93-114.
57. Pata, U. K. (2021). Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption, economic complexity, CO 2 emissions, and ecological footprint in the USA: Testing the EKC hypothesis with a structural break. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 846-861. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10446-3
58. Peng, F., Anwar, S., & Kang, L. (2020). Job movement and real wage flexibility in eastern and western parts of Germany. Journal of Economics and Finance, 44(4), 764-789.
59. Percival, D., & Walden, A. T. (2000). Wavelet methods for time series analysis (Vol. 4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
60. Phelps, E. S. (1967). Phillips curves, expectations of inflation and optimal unemployment over time. Economica, 34(135), 254-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2552025
61. Phillips, A. W. (1958). The relation between unemployment and the rate of change of money wage rates in the United Kingdom, 1861-1957, Economica, 25(100), 283-299. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2550759
62. Raihan, A., & Tuspekova, A. (2022). Dynamic impacts of economic growth, renewable energy use, urbanization, industrialization, tourism, agriculture, and forests on carbon emissions in Turkey. Carbon Research, 1(1), 20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s44246-022-00019-z
63. Rayhan, I., Al Nahian, M.A., & Siddika, A. (2020). Re-evaluating the environmental Kuznets curve and environmental Phillips curve in Bangladesh: An augmented ARDL bounds test approach with a structural break. The Jahangirnagar Economic Review, 31, 109-134.
64. Razi, U., Cheong, C. W., Shams, S., Sarker, T., Sharif, A., & Afshan, S. (2025). Assessing the turbulence: Wavelet coherence and causality analysis of energy price volatility and exchange rate instability. Energy, 331, 136948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.136948
65. Rua, A., & Nunes, L.C. (2009). International comovement of stock market returns: A wavelet analysis. Journal of Empirical Finance, 16(4), 632-639. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2009.02.002
66. Sadiq, M., Shinwari, R., Wen, F., Usman, M., Hassan, S. T., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2023). Do globalization and nuclear energy intensify the environmental costs in top nuclear energy-consuming countries?. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 156, 104533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2022.104533
67. Sahin, G., Naimoglu, M., Kavaz, I., & Sahin, A. (2025). Examining the environmental Phillips curve hypothesis in the ten most polluting emerging economies: Economic dynamics and sustainability. Sustainability, 17(3), 920. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su17030920
68. Salari, M., Javid, R. J., & Noghanibehambari, H. (2021). The nexus between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, and economic growth in the US. Economic Analysis and Policy, 69, 182-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2020.12.007
69. Samuelson, P. A., & Solow, R. M. (1960). Analytical aspects of anti-inflation policy. The American Economic Review, 50(2), 177-194.
70. Sarkodie, S., & Strezov, V. (2018). Empirical study of the environmental Kuznets curve and environmental sustainability curve hypothesis for Australia, China, Ghana and USA. Journal of Cleaner Production, 201, 98-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.039
71. Shahbaz, M., Ozturk, I., Afza, T., & Ali, A. (2013). Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve in a global economy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 25, 494-502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.05.021
72. Shahbaz, M., Solarin, S. A., Hammoudeh, S., & Shahzad, S. J. H. (2017). Bounds testing approach to analyzing the environment Kuznets curve hypothesis with structural beaks: The role of biomass energy consumption in the United States. Energy Economics, 68, 548-565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.10.004
73. Shahzad, U., Fareed, Z., Shahzad, F., & Shahzad, K. (2021). Investigating the nexus between economic complexity, energy consumption and ecological footprint for the United States: New insights from quantile methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 123806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123806
74. Shang, L., & Xu, P. (2022). Can carbon emission regulation achieve a dual target of low carbon and employment? An empirical analysis based on China’s provincial panel data. Frontiers in Energy Research, 10, 926443. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2022.926443
75. Shastri, S., Mohapatra, G., & Gir, A. K. (2023). The environmental Philips curve from a gender perspective: Empirical evidence from India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(7), 17487-17496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-23336-7
76. Sims, C. A. (1980). Macroeconomics and reality. Econometrica, 48(1), 1-48. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912017
77. Smith, G. (1974). Okun’s Law revisited. Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper, No: 380.
78. Snowdon, B., & Vane, H. R. (2005). Modern macroeconomics: Its origins, development and current state, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
79. Sugiharti, L., Akter, S., Das, M. K., Pattak, D. C., Esquivias, M. A., & Akter, S. (2025). Population dynamics, economic growth, energy mix, and environmental pollution in ASEAN: Exploring the role of renewable, nuclear, and nonrenewable energy using the CCEMG approach. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 26, 100598. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2025.100598
80. Tanveer, A., Song, H., Faheem, M., & Chaudhry, I. S. (2022). Validation of environmental Philips curve in Pakistan: A fresh insight through ARDL technique. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 25060–25077. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17099-w
81. Tariq, S., Mehmood, U., Ul Haq, Z., & Mariam, A. (2022). Exploring the existence of environmental Phillips curve in South Asian countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(23), 35396-35407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-18099-6
82. Toda, H. Y., & Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics, 66(1-2), 225-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8
83. Torrence, C., & Compo, G. P. (1998). A practical guide to wavelet analysis. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 79(1), 61-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079<0061:APGTWA>2.0.CO;2
84. Torrence, C., & Webster, P. J. (1999). Interdecadal changes in the ENSO–monsoon system. Journal of Climate, 12(8), 2679-2690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1999)012<2679:ICITEM>2.0.CO;2
85. UN (2024). United Nations, Conferences - environment and sustainable development Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/conferences/environment. Accessed 05.01.2024.
86. US Department of Labor (2024a). Women’s Bureau. Retrieved from https://www.dol.gov/agencies/wb/data/occupations-decades-100. Accessed 15.01.2024.
87. US Department of Labor (2024b). Women’s Bureau. Retrieved from https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/women.s.bureau.department.of.labor/viz/Occupationswithlargestshareofwomen2019/Dashboard1. Accessed 15.01.2024.
88. Usman, O., Akadiri, S. S., & Adeshola, I. (2020). Role of renewable energy and globalization on ecological footprint in the USA: Implications for environmental sustainability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(24), 30681-30693. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09170-9
89. Vacha, L., & Barunik, J. (2012). Co-movement of energy commodities revisited: Evidence from wavelet coherence analysis. Energy Economics, 34(1), 241-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2011.10.007
90. Wang, Q., Jiang, X. T., Yang, X., & Ge, S. (2020). Comparative analysis of drivers of energy consumption in China, the USA and India–a perspective from stratified heterogeneity. Science of the Total Environment, 698, 134117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134117
91. WB (2026). World Bank, World Development Indicators. Retrieved from https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators#. Accessed 05.01.2026.
92. Weber, C. E. (1995). Cyclical output, cyclical unemployment, and Okun’s coefficient: A new approach. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 10, 433-445. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jae.3950100407
93. Wuyep, S. Z., Dung, V. C., Buhari, A. H., Madaki, D. H., & Bitrus, B. A. (2014). Women participation in environmental protection and management: Lessons from plateau state, Nigeria. American Journal of Environmental Protection, 2(2), 32-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.12691/env-2-2-1
94. Yavuz, E., Ergen, E., Avci, T., Akcay, F., & Kilic, E. (2024b). Do the effects of aggregate and disaggregate energy consumption on different environmental quality indicators change in the transition to sustainable development? Evidence from wavelet coherence analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31, 67259–67279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-30829-6
95. Yavuz, E., Kılıç, E., & Akçay, F. (2024c). What is the role of environmental stress on public health? Asymmetric evidence on carbon emissions, ecological footprint, and load capacity factor. Environmental Research and Technology, 7(3), 291-302. https://doi.org/10.35208/ert.1419914
96. Yavuz, E., Kilic, E., & Caglar, A. E. (2024a). A new hypothesis for the unemployment-environment dilemma: Is the environmental Phillips curve valid in the framework of load capacity factor in Turkiye?. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26, 29475–29492. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04258-x
97. Zafar, M. W., Zaidi, S. A. H., Khan, N. R., Mirza, F. M., Hou, F., & Kirmani, S. A. A. (2019). The impact of natural resources, human capital, and foreign direct investment on the ecological footprint: The case of the United States. Resources Policy, 63, 101428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101428