The Relationship Between Migration, Carbon Emissions and Economic Growth in G-7 Countries: Dumitrescu-Hurlin Panel Causality Analysis

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 30, 36 - 50, 30.05.2024

Fatih Akın , Selin Dinçer , Mehmet Gökhan Özdemir

https://doi.org/10.20990/kilisiibfakademik.1427932

Cited By: 1

Öz

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between foreign migration, carbon emissions and economic growth in G-7 countries (Germany, USA, United Kingdom, Italy, France, Japan and Canada) for the period 2000-2019 using Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel causality analysis.
Design/Methodology: The methodology of the study utilizes the panel causality test developed by Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012).
Finding: As a result of the analysis, a unidirectional causality was found from external migration to carbon emission, from economic growth to carbon emission and from economic growth to external migration in G-7 countries.
Limitations: The limitations of the study are that the sample consists of only G-7 countries and that three variables, namely outward migration, carbon emissions and economic growth, are used.
Originality/Value: The fact that the relationship between outward migration, carbon emissions and economic growth has been the subject of very few studies in the literature has inspired the emergence of this research. The originality of the research is that it directly addresses the relationship between foreign migration, carbon emissions and economic growth in G-7 countries. At this point, the research is expected to contribute to the literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Migration, Economic Growth, Carbon Emissions, G-7 Countries, Dumitrescu-Hurlin Panel Causality

G-7 Ülkelerinde Göç, Karbon Emisyonu ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Dumitrescu-Hurlin Panel Nedensellik Analizi

Öz

Amaç: Bu araştırmanın amacı, 2000-2019 dönemi için G-7 ülkelerinde (Almanya, ABD, Birleşik Krallık, İtalya, Fransa, Japonya ve Kanada) dış göç, karbon emisyonu ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel nedensellik analizi ile incelemektir.
Tasarım/Yöntem: Çalışmanın yönteminde, Dumitrescu ve Hurlin (2012) tarafından geliştirilen panel nedensellik testi kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Analizler sonucunda G-7 ülkelerinde dış göçten karbon emisyonuna, ekonomik büyümeden karbon emisyonuna ve ekonomik büyümeden dış göçe doğru tek yönlü bir nedensellik tespit edilmiştir.
Sınırlılıklar: Örneklemin yalnızca G-7 ülkelerinden oluşması ve dış göç, karbon emisyonu ve ekonomik büyüme olmak üzere üç değişken kullanılması araştırmanın sınırlılıklarını oluşturmaktadır.
Özgünlük/Değer: Literatürde dış göç, karbon emisyonu ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisinin çok az sayıda araştırmaya konu olması bu araştırmanın ortaya çıkmasında ilham kaynağı olmuştur. Araştırmanın G-7 ülkelerinde dış göç, karbon emisyonu ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi doğrudan ele alması araştırmanın özgün değerini oluşturmaktadır. Bu noktada araştırmanın literatüre katkı sağlaması beklenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Göç, Ekonomik Büyüme, Karbon Emisyonu, G-7 Ülkeleri, Dumitrescu-Hurlin Panel Nedensellik

Kaynakça

• Abdallh, A. A. & Abugamos, H. (2017). A Semi-Parametric Panel Data Analysis on the Urbanisation-Carbon Emissions Nexus for the MENA Countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 78: 1350-1356.
• Ahmad, M., Zhao, Z. & Li, H. (2019). Revealing Stylized Empirical Interactions Among Construction Sector, Urbanization, Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in China. Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 657: 1085-1098.
• Alola, A. A. (2019). Carbon Emissions and the Trilemma of Trade Policy, Migration Policy and Health Care in the US. Carbon Management, C. 10, S. 2: 209-218.
• Alola, A. A., Yalçiner, K., Alola U. V. & Akadiri, S.S. (2019). The Role of Renewable Energy, Immigration and Real Income in Environmental Sustainability Target. Evidence from Europe Largest States. Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 674: 307- 315.
• Altunç, Ö.F., Karakuş, K. & Akyıldız, A. (2017). Uluslararası Göç ve Çevre Kirliliği Arasındaki İlişkinin Ampirik Analizi. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(60): 76-85.
• Arı, A. & Zeren, F. (2011). CO2 Emisyonu ve Ekonomik Büyüme: Panel Veri Analizi. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, C. 18, S. 2: 37-47.
• Ballyn, S. (2011). The Why and the Therefore of Human Migration: A Brief Overview, p. 6-15, (Edt. Renes M.), Lives in Migration: Rupture and Contunity, Australian Studies Centre Publications.
• Barışık, S. (2020). Göç Kavramı, Tanımı ve Türleri. İçinde S. Barışık (Ed.), Küreselleşen Dünyada Fırsat Eşitliği Arayışında Göç ve Türkiye’nin Suriye Deneyimi (s. 1-24). Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
• Barışık, S. & Çetintaş, H. (2004). Beyin Göçü ve Beyin Göçünün Oluşumunda Yüksek Öğrenim, AR-GE Faaliyetleri, Çokuluslu Şirketlerin Rolü, Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 6, S. 2: 139-164.
• Boubtane, E., Dumont, J. C. & Rault, C. (2014). Immigration and Economic Growth in the OECD Countries, 1986- 2006. IZA Discussion Paper Series, (Working Paper No:8681), Germany.
• Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 47, No. 1: 239. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111.
• Cramer J. C. (1998). Population Growth and Air Quality in California. Demography, Vol. 35: 45-56.
• Çelik, O., Çetiner, S., Abdallah, İ., & Udemba, E. N. (2023). Environmental Implication of International Migration on High- and Middle-Income Countries: A Comparative Analysis. Energy & Environment, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X231167464.
• Dedeoğlu, M., Koçak, E. & Uucak, Z. Ş. (2011). The Impact of Immigration on Human Capital and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the USA: An Empirical Investigation. Air Qual Atmos Health, Vol. 14: 705-714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00973-w.
• Destek, M.A., Shahbaz, M. & Okumus, I. (2020). The Relationship Between Economic Growth and Carbon Emissions in G-7 Countries: Evidence from time-Varying Parameters with a Long History. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 27: 29100-29117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09189-y.
• Dumıtrescu, E. I. & Hurlın, C. (2012), Testing for Granger Non-Causality in Heterogeneous Panels. Economic Modelling, Vol. 29, No. 4: 1450-1460.
• Eurostat European Commission (2023, Aralık). Asylum and First Time Asylum Applicants Annual Aggregated Data. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/TPS00191/settings_1/line?lang=en.
• Gao, C., Tao, S., He, Y., Su, B., Sun, M. & Mensah, I. A. (2021). Effect of Population Migration on Spatial Carbon Emission Transfers in China. Energy Policy, Vol. 156: 112450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112450.
• Grossman, G.M. & Krueger, A.B. (1991). Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement (No. w3914). National Bureau of Economic Research.
• Ilık Bilben, S. (2018). Antropojenik İklim Değişikliği Bağlamında Göç Tartışmaları". Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, S. 75: 237-268.
• Kasman, A. & Duman, Y.S. (2015). CO2 Emissions, Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, Trade and Urbanization in New EU Member and Candidate Countries: A Panel Data Analysis. Economic Modelling, Vol. 44: 97-103.
• Lee, E. S. (1966). A Theory of Migration. Demograpy, Vol. 3, No. 1: 47-57.
• Liang, S.,Yang, X., Qi, J., Wang, Y., Xie, W., Muttarak, R. & Guan, D. (2020). CO2 Emissions Embodied in International Migration from 1995 to 2015. Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 54, No. 19: 12530-12538, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c04600.
• Long, H., Li, J. & Liu, H. (2022). Internal Migration and Associated Carbon Emission Changes: Evidence from Cities in China. Energy Economics, Vol. 110: 1-12.
• OECD (2023, Kasım). International Migration Database. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=MIG.
• Özsoy, F., & Özpolat, A. (2020). Do Technological Development and Clean Energy Effect Environmental Awareness?: An Empirical Analysis for Turkey. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, Vol.19 No. 3: 789-804.
• Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for cross Section Dependence in Panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, Vol. 435: 1-39.
• Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross-Section Dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 22: 265-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
• Pesaran, M. H. (2021). General Diagnostic Tests for Cross-Sectional Dependence in Panels. Empirical Economics, Vol. 60, No. 1: 13-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01875-7.
• Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels. Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 142, No. 1: 50-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010
• Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A Bias Adjusted LM Test of Error Cross Section Independence. Econometrics Journal, Vol. 11: 105-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368- 423X.2007.00227.x
• Price, C. E. & Feldmeyer, B. (2012). The Environmental Impact of Immigration: An Analysis of the Effects of Immigrant Concentration on Air Pollution Levels. Population Research and Policy Review, Vol. 31: 119-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-011-9216-3.
• Rafiq, S., Nielsen, I. & Smyth, R. (2017). Effect of Internal Migration on the Environment in China. Energy Economics, Vol. 64: 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.03.009.
• Sevinç, H., Bozkurt, E., Künü, S. & Eroğlu Sevinç, D. (2016). Ekonomik Büyüme ve Göç İlişkisi: Gelişmekte Olan Ülkelere Dayalı Bir Analiz. Uluslararası Avrasya Ekonomileri Konferansı, Kaposvar.
• Solarin S. A & Bello M. O. (2020). Energy Innovations and Environmental Sustainability in the U.S.: The Roles of Immigration and Economic Expansion Using a Maximum Likelihood Method. Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 712: 135594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135594.
• Squalli, J. (2009). Immigration and Environmental Emissions: A U.S. County-Level Analysis. Population and Environment, Vol. 30: 247-260, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-009-0089-x
• Stern, N. (2008). The Economics of Climate Change. American Economic Review, Vol. 98 No. 2: 1-37. DOI: 10.1257/aer.98.2.1.
• Tay Bayramoğlu, A. & Koç Yurkur, A. (2016). Türkiye’de Karbon Emisyonu ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Doğrusal Olmayan Eş bütünleşme Analizi. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Vol. 16, No. 4: 31-46.
• Todaro, M. P. & Smith, S. C. (2014). Economic Development, 12th ed., Harlow: Pearson.
• Uluslararsı Göç Örgütü (IOM) (2013). Göç Terimleri Sözlüğü. NO: 31, https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/iml31_turkish_2ndedition.pdf.
• Üzümcü, A. (2020). Uluslararası Göç ve Ekonomi. İçinde S. Barışık (Ed.). Küreselleşen Dünyada Fırsat Eşitliği Arayışında Göç ve Türkiye’nin Suriye Deneyimi (s.185-224). Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
• Wang, G., Shi, X., Cui, H. & Jiao, J. (2020). Impacts of Migration on Urban Environmental Pollutant Emissions in China: A Comparative Perspective. Chinese Geographical Science, Vol. 30: 45-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11769-020-1096-1
• Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel Cointegration Tests of the Fisher Effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 23: 193-233. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.967.
• World Bank (2021, Aralık). Climate Change Could Force 216 Million People to Migrate Within Their Own Countries by 2050. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2021/09/13/climate-change-could-force-216-million-people-to-migrate-within-their-own-countries-by-2050.
• World Bank (2023a, Aralık). CO2 Emissions (Metric Tons Per Capita). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC.
• World Bank (2023b, Aralık). GDP Per Capita Constant 2015 US$. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.
• World Economic Report (2022, Aralık). The Global Risks Report. 17th Edition, https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2022.pdf.