İklim Değişikliği, Enerji Tüketimi Ve Finansal Sistem Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi: E7 Ülkeleri Örneği

Öz

This study aims to investigate the correlation among climate change, energy consumption, and the financial system, using the E7 countries as a case study. The E7 comprises emerging economies including Brazil, China, India, Russia, Turkey, Indonesia, and Mexico, which are the primary focus of this research.The research delves into the factors impacting CO2 emissions over the long term, spanning from 1992 to 2020. Results reveal a positive correlation between economic growth and fossil fuel usage with CO2 emissions, while a negative correlation is identified between CO2 emissions and variables such as renewable energy consumption, temperature changes, and capital investments.The study underscores the significance of sustainability and environmental policies for the E7 nations. Recommendations include increasing investments in renewable energy sources, encouraging the adoption of carbon-neutral transportation technologies, and supporting initiatives for forest conservation and afforestation.In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into the relationship between climate change, energy consumption, and the financial system within E7 countries, offering policy recommendations for achieving sustainability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İklim Değişikliği
• Enerji Tüketimi
• Finansal Sistem
• E7 Ülkeleri

Examining the Relationship Between Climate Change, Energy Consumption, and the Financial System: The Case of E7 Countries

Öz

This study aims to investigate the correlation among climate change, energy consumption, and the financial system, using the E7 countries as a case study. The E7 comprises emerging economies including Brazil, China, India, Russia, Turkey, Indonesia, and Mexico, which are the primary focus of this research. The research delves into the factors impacting CO2 emissions over the long term, spanning from 1992 to 2020. Results reveal a positive correlation between economic growth and fossil fuel usage with CO2 emissions, while a negative correlation is identified between CO2 emissions and variables such as renewable energy consumption, temperature changes, and capital investments. The study underscores the significance of sustainability and environmental policies for the E7 nations. Recommendations include increasing investments in renewable energy sources, encouraging the adoption of carbon-neutral transportation technologies, and supporting initiatives for forest conservation and afforestation. In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into the relationship between climate change, energy consumption, and the financial system within E7 countries, offering policy recommendations for achieving sustainability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Climate Change
• Energy Consumption
• Financial System
• E7 Countries

Kaynakça

1. Yu Y, Radulescu M, Ifelunini AI, Ogwu SO, Onwe JC, Jahanger A. Achieving Carbon Neutrality Pledge through Clean Energy Transition: Linking the Role of Green Innovation and Environmental Policy in E7 Countries. Energies. 2022; 15(17):6456. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15176456
2. Keleş, S.& Bilgen, S. (2012). Renewable energy sources in Turkey for climate change mitigation and energy sustainability. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(7), p. 5199-5206, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.05.026
3. Rokicki, T., Koszela, G., Ochnio, L., Perkowska, A., Bórawski, P., Bełdycka-Bórawska, A., Gradziuk, B., Gradziuk, P., Siedlecka, A., Szeberényi, A., & Dzikuć, M. (2022). Changes in the production of energy from renewable sources in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Frontiers in Energy Research.
4. European Commission. (2019). What is the European Green Deal. European Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/859152/What_is_the_Europea n_Green_Deal_en.pdf.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 04.02.2024).
5. Bankacılık Düzenleme ve Denetleme Kurumu (BDDK). (2021). 2022-2025 Sürdürülebilir Bankacılık Stratejik Planı.
6. European Commission. (2019). What is the European Green Deal. European Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/859152/What_is_the_Europea n_Green_Deal_en.pdf.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 04.02.2024).
7. Doval, E. ve Negulescu, O. (2014). A Model of Green Investments Approach. Procedia Economics and Finance, 15, 847-852.
8. https://www.climatewatchdata.org/ghg-emissions?end_year=2020&start_year=1990. Erişim Tarihi: 05.04.2024

9. Strobl, E. (2011). The economic growth impact of hurricanes: Evidence from US coastal counties. Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(2), 575-589.
10. Deryugina, T. & Hsiang, S. M. (2014). Does the environment still matter? Daily temperature and income in the United States (No. w20750). National Bureau of Economic Research.
11. Colacito, R., Hoffmann, B. & Phan, T. (2019). Temperature and growth: A panel analysis of the United States. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 51(2-3), 313-368.
12. Bansal, R. & Ochoa, M. (2011). Temperature, aggregate risk, and expected returns (No. w17575). National Bureau of Economic Research.
13. Dell, M., Jones, B. F. & Olken, B. A. (2012). Temperature shocks and economic growth: Evidence from the last half century. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 4(3), 66-95.
14. Burke, M., Hsiang, S. M. & Miguel, E. (2015). Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature, 527(7577), 235-239.
15. Azam, M., Khan, A. Q., Abdullah, H. B. & Qureshi, M. E. (2016). The impact of CO2 emissions on economic growth: evidence from selected higher CO2 emissions economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(7), 6376-6389.
16. Sequeira, T. N., Santos, M. S. & Magalhães, M. (2018). Climate change and economic growth: a heterogeneous panel data approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(23), 22725-22735.
17. Schumacher, I &Henseler, M. (2019). The impact of weather on economic growth and its production factors. Climatic change, 154(3), 417-433.
18. Kahn, M. E., Mohaddes, K., Ng, R. N., Pesaran, M. H., Raissi, M. & Yang, J. C. (2021). Long-term macroeconomic effects of climate change: A cross-country analysis. Energy Economics, 104, 105624.
19. Islam, M.M., Alharthi, M. & Murad, M.W. (2021). The effects of carbon emissions, rainfall, temperature, inflation, population, and unemployment on economic growth in Saudi Arabia: An ARDL investigation, PLoS ONE 16(4): e0248743.
20. Duan, H., Yuan, D., Cai, Z. & Wang, S. (2022). Valuing the impact of climate change on China’s economic growth. Economic Analysis and Policy, 74, 155-174.
21. Zhang, H., Li, L., Cao, J., Zhao, M. & Wu, O. (2011). Comparison of renewable energy policy evolution among the BRICs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,15(9), p. 4904-4909, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.063.
22. Cetin, M. A. (2016) Renewable energy consumption-economic growth nexus in E-7 countries, Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 11:12, 1180-1185, DOI: 10.1080/15567249.2016.1156195
23. Marinaş M-C, Dinu M, Socol A-G, Socol C (2018) Renewable energy consumption and economic growth. Causality relationship in Central and Eastern European countries. PLoS ONE 13 (10): e0202951. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0202951
24. Klimenko, V.V., Klimenko, A.V., Tereshin, A.G. et al. Impact of Climate Change on Energy Production, Distribution, and Consumption in Russia. Therm. Eng. 65, 247–257 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0040601518050051
25. Kasperowicz, R., Bilan, Y. & Štreimikienė, D. (2020). The renewable energy and economic growth nexus in European Countries. Sustainable Development, 28(5), p. 1086,10093, https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2060
26. Mele, M., Gurrieri, A.R., Morelli, G. et al. Nature and climate change effects on economic growth: an LSTM experiment on renewable energy resources. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 41127–41134 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13337-3
27. Botzen WJW, Nees T, Estrada F. Temperature Effects on Electricity and Gas Consumption: Empirical Evidence from Mexico and Projections under Future Climate Conditions. Sustainability. 2021; 13(1):305. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010305
28. Saqib N, Usman M, Radulescu M, Sinisi CI, Secara CG and Tolea C (2022) Revisiting EKC hypothesis in context of renewable energy, human development and moderating role of technological innovations in E-7 countries?. Front. Environ. Sci. 10:1077658. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.1077658
29. Jia H, Fan S, Xia M. The Impact of Renewable Energy Consumption on Economic Growth: Evidence from Countries along the Belt and Road. Sustainability. 2023; 15(11):8644. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118644
30. Germán-Soto, V., Bordallo Favela, R.A. How rising temperatures affect electricity consumption and economic development in Mexico. Environ Dev Sustain (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04527-3
31. Levin, A., Lin, C.F. and Chu, C.S.J. (2002) Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. Journal of econometrics, 108, 1-24.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
32. Harris, R. D. F., & Tzavalis, E. (1999). Inference for Unit Roots in Dynamic Panels Where the Time Dimension Is Fixed. Journal of Econometrics, 91, 201-226.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00076-1
33. Breitung, J. (2000) The Local Power of Some Unit Root Tests for Panel Data. Advances in Econometrics,15,161-177.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0731-9053(00)15006-6
34. Hadri, K. (2000). Testing for Stationarity in Heterogeneous Panel Data. The Econometrics Journal, 3, 148-161. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-423X.00043
35. Im, K., Pesaran, H. and Shin, Y. (2003), “Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 115(1): 53-74.
36. Maddala, G.S. and Wu, S. (1999) A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61, 631-652. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.61.s1.13
37. Choi, I. (2001) Unit Root Tests for Panel Data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20, 249-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5606(00)00048-6
38. Peseran, M. (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for Corss Section Dependence in Panels. IZA Discussion Paper, 1240.
39. Bai, J. & Ng, Serena (2004). A PANIC Attack on Unit Roots and Cointegration, 72, 4, 1127-1177.
40. Phillips, P.C. and Sul, D. (2003). Dynamic Panel Estimation and Homogeneity Testing under Cross Section Dependence. Econometrics Journal, 6, 217-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-423X.00108
41. Moon, H. & Perron, B.(2004). Testing for a unit root in panels with dynamic factors. Journal of Econometrics, 122, 1 , 81-126.
42. T. S. Breusch, A. R. Pagan(1980), The Lagrange Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics, The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 47, Issue 1, 1980, Pages 239–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111
43. Pesaran, M.H. (2007), A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross Section Dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
44. Pesaran, M.H. and Smith, R.(1995), Estimating Lon-Run Relationship from Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels. Journal of Econometrics, 68, 79-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01644-F
45. Pesaran, M.H., Shin, Y. and Smith, R.P. (1999) Pooled Mean Group Estimation of Dynamic Heterogeneou Panels .Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94, 621-634. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1999.10474156
46. Tatoğlu Y. F.(2013). Panel Veri Ekonometrisi Stata Uygulamalı,2. Baskı Beta Yayınları, İstanbul, s:214-220.
47. Tatoğlu Y. F.(2013).İleri Panel Veri Analizi ,2. Baskı Beta Yayınları, İstanbul, s:223-256.