Çevresel Ar-Ge Harcamalarını Hızlandırmak Karbon Emisyonlarını Azaltır Mı?: Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezi Perspektifinde Panel Kantil Regresyon Kanıtları

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 1995 ve 2018 yıllarını içeren seçilmiş 30 OECD ülkesi için ekonomik büyüme, enerji kullanımı, yenilenebilir enerji kullanımı ve çevresel araştırma geliştirme (Ar-Ge) harcamalarının CO2 emisyonları dağılımları üzerindeki etkilerini, Koenker (2004) tarafından geliştirilen panel kantil regresyon yöntemi ile tahmin etmektir. Bulgular, Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (ÇKE) hipotezinin geçerli olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. İlave olarak, yenilenebilir enerji kullanımının ve çevresel Ar-Ge harcamalarının CO2 emisyonlarını azalttığını, enerji kullanımının ise CO2 emisyonlarını artırdığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, kantil katsayılarının sağlamlığı Gaussian sabit etki ve Bayesian sabit etki regresyon yöntemleri kullanılarak test edilmiştir. Böylece, çevresel Ar-Ge harcamalarını artırmaya yönelik politikaların geliştirilmesinin çevresel sürdürülebilirlik açısından önemli bir bileşen olduğu saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevresel Ar-Ge Harcamaları
• Panel Kantil Regresyon
• Enerji kullanımı
• ÇKE

Does Accelerating Environmental R&D Spending Reduce Carbon Emissions?: Evidence for Panel Quantile Regression in the Perspective of the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis

Öz

This study aims to analyze the effects of economic growth, energy use, renewable energy use, and environmental research and development (R&D) expenditures on CO2 emissions distributions for 30 selected OECD countries covering the years 1995 and 2018, using the panel quantile regression method developed by Koenker (2004). The findings revealed that the Environmental Kuznets Curve (ÇKE) hypothesis is valid. In addition, it shows that renewable energy use and environmental R&D expenditures reduce CO2 emissions, while energy use increases CO2 emissions. In addition, the robustness of the quantile coefficients was tested using Gaussian fixed-effect and Bayesian fixed-effects regression methods. Thus, it has been determined that the development of policies to increase environmental R&D expenditures is an important component in terms of environmental sustainability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Environmental R&D Expenditures
• ÇKE
• Panel Quantile Regression
• Energy use

Kaynakça

1. Abbas, J., Balsalobre-Lorente, D. ve Aljuaid, M. (2023). Environmental-Related Technologies and Carbon Neutrality Challenges in Emerging Economies? A Case Study of China. https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2426437/v1/6d5d6c51- 8f8a-4e5a-9c06-e51c7482cff0.pdf?c=1672857072, (10.03.2023)
2. Abid, A., Mehmood, U., Tariq, S. ve Haq, Z. U. (2022). The Effect of Technological Innovation, FDI, and Financial Development on CO2 Emission: Evidence from the G8 Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021- 15993-x
3. Adebayo, T. S., Awosusi, A. A., Rjoub, H., Agyekum, E. B. ve Kirikkaleli, D. (2022). The Influence of Renewable Energy Usage on Consumption- Based Carbon Emissions in MINT Economies. Heliyon, 8(2), e08941.
4. Adebayo, T. S., Uhunamure, S. E. ve Shale, K. (2023). A Time-Varying Approach to the Nexus Between Environmental Related Technologies, Renewable Energy Consumption and Environmental Sustainability in South Africa. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 4860. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32131-4
5. Adedoyin, F., Abubakar, I., Bekun, F. V. ve Sarkodie, S. A. (2020). Generation of Energy and Environmental-Economic Growth Consequences: Is There Any Difference Across Transition Economies?. Energy Reports, 6, 1418-1427.
6. Afshan, S., Ozturk, I. ve Yaqoob, T. (2022). Facilitating Renewable Energy Transition, Ecological Innovations and Stringent Environmental Policies to Improve Ecological Sustainability: Evidence From MM-QR Method. Renewable Energy, 196, 151-160.
7. Akram, R., Chen, F., Khalid, F., Huang, G. ve Irfan, M. (2021). Heterogeneous Effects of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy on Economic Growth of BRICS Countries: A Fixed Effect Panel Quantile Regression Analysis. Energy, 215, 119019.
8. Alam, M. S., Apergis, N., Paramati, S. R. ve Fang, J. (2021). The Impacts of R&D Investment and Stock Markets on Clean‐Energy Consumption and CO2 Emissions in OECD Economies. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 26(4), 4979-4992.

9. Albulescu, C. T., Tiwari, A. K., Yoon, S. M. ve Kang, S. H. (2019). FDI, Income, and Environmental Pollution in Latin America: Replication and Extension Using Panel Quantiles Regression Analysis. Energy Economics, 84, 104504.
10. Alharthi, M., Dogan, E. ve Taskin, D. (2021). Analysis of CO2 Emissions and Energy Consumption by Sources in MENA Countries: Evidence from Quantile Regressions. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 38901-38908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021- 13356-0
11. Amin, N., Shabbir, M. S., Song, H., Farrukh, M. U., Iqbal, S. ve Abbass, K. (2023). A Step Towards Environmental Mitigation: Do Green Technological Innovation and Institutional Quality Make A Difference?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 190, 122413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122413
12. Amri, F. (2018). Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Total Factor Productivity, ICT, Trade, Financial Development, and Energy Consumption: Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis for Tunisia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25, 33691-33701.
13. Ansari, M. A. (2022). Re-visiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve for ASEAN: A Comparison Between Ecological Footprint and Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 168, 112867.
14. Anser, M. K., Apergis, N. ve Syed, Q. R. (2021). Impact of Economic Policy Uncertainty on CO2 Emissions: Evidence from Top Ten Carbon Emitter Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 29369-29378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12782-4
15. Apergis, N., Kuziboev, B., Abdullaev, I. ve Rajabov, A. (2023). Investigating the Association Among CO2 Emissions, Renewable and Non-renewable Energy Consumption in Uzbekistan: An ARDL Approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(14), 39666-39679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-25023-z
16. Arshad, Z., Robaina, M., Shahbaz, M. ve Veloso, A. B. (2020). The Effects of Deforestation and Urbanization on Sustainable Growth in Asian Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 10065-10086.
17. Ayad, H., Sari-Hassoun, S. E., Usman, M. ve Ahmad, P. (2023). The Impact of Economic Uncertainty, Economic Growth and Energy Consumption on Environmental Degradation in MENA Countries: Fresh Insights from Multiple Thresholds NARDL Approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(1), 1806-1824.
18. Aydin, M., Degirmenci, T., Gurdal, T. ve Yavuz, H. (2023). The Role of Green Innovation in Achieving Environmental Sustainability in European Union Countries: Testing The Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis. Gondwana Research, 118, 105-116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2023.01.013
19. Ayhan, F., Kartal, M. T., Kılıç Depren, S. ve Depren, Ö. (2023). Asymmetric Effect of Economic Policy Uncertainty, Political Stability, Energy Consumption, And Economic Growth on CO2 Emissions: Evidence from G-7 Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(16), 47422-47437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023- 25665-7
20. Baloch, M. A., Ozturk, I., Bekun, F. V. ve Khan, D. (2021). Modeling the Dynamic Linkage Between Financial Development, Energy Innovation, and Environmental Quality: Does Globalization Matter?. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(1), 176-184.
21. Balsalobre, D., Álvarez, A. ve Cantos, J. M. (2015). Public Budgets for Energy RD&D and the Effects on Energy Intensity and Pollution Levels. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22, 4881-4892.
22. Balsalobre-Lorente, D., Ibáñez-Luzón, L., Usman, M. ve Shahbaz, M. (2022). The Environmental Kuznets Curve, Based on the Economic Complexity, and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis in PIIGS Countries. Renewable Energy, 185, 1441-1455.
23. Basoglu, A. ve Uzar, U. (2019). An Empirical Evaluation About the Effects of Environmental Expenditures on Environmental Quality in Coordinated Market Economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 23108-23118.
24. Bilal, A., Li, X., Zhu, N., Sharma, R. ve Jahanger, A. (2022). Green Technology Innovation, Globalization, and CO2 Emissions: Recent Insights from the OBOR Economies. Sustainability, 14(1), 236.
25. Chen, F., Ali, S., Ma, J., Arshad, S. ve Ahmad, S. (2023). Material Productivity and Environmental Degradation: Moderating Role of Environment-Related Technologies in Achieving Carbon Neutrality. Gondwana Research, 117, 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2023.01.010
26. Chhabra, M., Giri, A. K. ve Kumar, A. (2022). Do Technological Innovations and Trade Openness Reduce CO2 Emissions? Evidence from Selected Middle-Income Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(43), 65723-65738.
27. Choi, I. (2001). Unit Root Tests For Panel Data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20, 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261- 5606(00)00048-6.
28. Churchill, S. A., Inekwe, J. ve Ivanovski, K. (2021). R&D Expenditure and Energy Consumption in OECD Nations. Energy Economics, 100, 105376.
29. Dai, J., Ahmed, Z., Sinha, A., Pata, U. K. ve Alvarado, R. (2023). Sustainable Green Electricity, Technological Innovation, and Ecological Footprint: Does Democratic Accountability Moderate the Nexus?. Utilities Policy, 82, 101541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2023.101541
30. Danish, -, Ulucak, R. (2020). How Do Environmental Technologies Affect Green Growth? Evidence from BRICS Economies. Science of the Total Environment, 712, 136504.
31. Danish, Ulucak, R. ve Baloch, M. A. (2023). An Empirical Approach to the Nexus Between Natural Resources and Environmental Pollution: Do Economic Policy and Environmental-Related Technologies Make Any Difference?. Resources Policy, 81, 103361.
32. Dauda, L., Long, X., Mensah, C. N. ve Salman, M. (2019). The Effects of Economic Growth and Innovation on CO2 Emissions in Different Regions. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 15028- 15038.
33. Demir, Y., İşleyen, Ş. ve Özen, K. (2023). Seçili Enerji Tüketimlerinin Karbondioksit Emisyonu Üzerindeki Etkisinin ARDL Sınır Testi ile Belirlenmesi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (59), 80-107.
34. Dong, K., Dong, X. ve Jiang, Q. (2020). How Renewable Energy Consumption Lower Global CO2 Emissions? Evidence from Countries with Different Income Levels. The World Economy, 43(6), 1665-1698.
35. Erdoğan, S., Yıldırım, S., Yıldırım, D. Ç. ve Gedikli, A. (2020). The Effects of Innovation on Sectoral Carbon Emissions: Evidence from G20 Countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 267, 110637.
36. Fakher, H. A., Ahmed, Z., Acheampong, A. O. ve Nathaniel, S. P. (2023). Renewable Energy, Nonrenewable Energy, and Environmental Quality Nexus: An Investigation of the N-shaped Environmental Kuznets Curve Based on Six Environmental Indicators. Energy, 263, 125660.
37. Fang, Z. (2023). Assessing the Impact of Renewable Energy Investment, Green Technology Innovation, and Industrialization on Sustainable Development: A Case Study of China. Renewable Energy, 205, 772-782.
38. Fernández, Y. F., López, M. F. ve Blanco, B. O. (2018). Innovation for Sustainability: The Impact of R&D Spending on CO2 Emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 3459-3467.
39. Fraumeni, B. M. ve Okubo, S. (2005). R&D in the National Income and Product Accounts: A First Look at its Effect on GDP. Measuring Capital in the New Economy içinde (ss. 275-322). University of Chicago Press.
40. Freire, F. D. S., da Silva, N. O. ve De Oliveira, V. R. F. (2023). Economic Growth and Greenhouse Gases in Brazilian States: Is the Environmental Kuznets Curve Applicable Hypothesis?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(15), 44928-44942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25411-z
41. Ganda, F. (2019). The Impact of Innovation and Technology Investments on Carbon Emissions in Selected Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 217, 469-483.
42. Gholipour, H. F. ve Farzanegan, M. R. (2018). Institutions and the Effectiveness of Expenditures on Environmental Protection: Evidence from Middle Eastern Countries. Constitutional Political Economy, 29, 20-39.
43. Godil, D. I., Yu, Z., Sharif, A., Usman, R. ve Khan, S. A. R. (2021). Investigate the Role of Technology Innovation and Renewable Energy in Reducing Transport Sector CO2 Emission in China: A Path toward Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development, 29(4), 694-707.
44. Grossman, G. M. ve Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. https://www.nber.org/papers/w3914, (18.03.2023)
45. Grossman, G. M. ve Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic Growth and the Environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353-377.
46. Haldar, A. ve Sethi, N. (2021). Effect of Institutional Quality and Renewable Energy Consumption on CO2 emissions− An Empirical Investigation for Developing Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(12), 15485-15503.
47. Hao, Y. ve Chen, P. (2023). Do Renewable Energy Consumption and Green Innovation Help to Curb CO2 Emissions? Evidence from E7 Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(8), 21115-21131.
48. Hussain, M. ve Dogan, E. (2021). The Role of Institutional Quality and Environment-Related Technologies in Environmental Degradation for BRICS. Journal of Cleaner Production, 304, 127059.
49. Hussain, M., Mir, G. M., Usman, M., Ye, C. ve Mansoor, S. (2022). Analysing the Role of Environment-Related Technologies and Carbon Emissions in Emerging Economies: A Step towards Sustainable Development. Environmental Technology, 43(3), 367-375.
50. Ibrahim, R. L. ve Ajide, K. B. (2021). Nonrenewable and Renewable Energy Consumption, Trade Openness, and Environmental Quality in G-7 countries: The Conditional Role of Technological Progress. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 45212-45229. IEA (2021), World Energy Balances: Overview, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-balances-overview, License: CC BY 4.0., (02.03.2023)
51. IEA (2022), Global Energy Review: CO2 Emissions in 2021, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-co2-emissions-in-2021-2, License: CC BY 4.0, (02.03.2023)
52. Iqbal, A., Tang, X. ve Rasool, S. F. (2023). Investigating the Nexus Between CO2 Emissions, Renewable Energy Consumption, FDI, Exports and Economic Growth: Evidence from BRICS Countries. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(3), 2234-2263.
53. Iqbal, N., Abbasi, K. R., Shinwari, R., Guangcai, W., Ahmad, M. ve Tang, K. (2021). Does Exports Diversification and Environmental Innovation Achieve Carbon Neutrality Target of OECD Economies?. Journal of Environmental Management, 291, 112648.
54. IRENA (2019), Global Energy Transformation: A Roadmap to 2050 (2019 edition), International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi.
55. Isiksal, A. Z., Assi, A. F., Zhakanov, A., Rakhmetullina, S. Z. ve Joof, F. (2022). Natural Resources, Human Capital, and CO2 Emissions: Missing Evidence from the Central Asian States. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(51), 77333-77343.
56. Islam, M. S., Hossain, M. E., Khan, M. A., Rana, M. J., Ema, N. S. ve Bekun, F. V. (2022). Heading towards Sustainable Environment: Exploring the Dynamic Linkage Among Selected Macroeconomic Variables and Ecological Footprint Using a Novel Dynamic ARDL Simulations Approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-20.
57. Jahanger, A., Ozturk, I., Onwe, J. C., Joseph, T. E. ve Hossain, M. R. (2023). Do Technology and Renewable Energy Contribute to Energy Efficiency and Carbon Neutrality? Evidence from Top Ten Manufacturing Countries. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 56, 103084.
58. Jahanger, A., Usman, M. ve Ahmad, P. (2022). Investigating the Effects of Natural Resources and Institutional Quality on CO2 Emissions During Globalization Mode in Developing Countries. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 20(9), 9663-9682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04638-2
59. Javed, A., Rapposelli, A., Khan, F. ve Javed, A. (2023). The Impact of Green Technology Innovation, Environmental Taxes, and Renewable Energy Consumption on Ecological Footprint in Italy: Fresh Evidence from Novel Dynamic ARDL Simulations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 191, 122534.
60. Jiang, S., Chishti, M. Z., Rjoub, H. ve Rahim, S. (2022). Environmental R&D and Trade-Adjusted Carbon Emissions: Evaluating The Role of International Trade. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(42), 63155-63170.
61. Jiang, Y., Hossain, M.R., Khan, Z. et al. (2023). Revisiting Research and Development Expenditures and Trade Adjusted Emissions: Green Innovation and Renewable Energy R&D Role for Developed Countries. Journal of Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01220-0
62. Jin, L., Duan, K., Shi, C. ve Ju, X. (2017). The Impact of Technological Progress in the Energy Sector on Carbon Emissions: An Empirical Analysis from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(12), 1505.
63. Kao, C. (1999). Spurious Regression and Residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Panel Data. Journal of Econometrics, 90(1), 1–44.
64. Karimi Alavijeh, N., Ahmadi Shadmehri, M. T., Nazeer, N., Zangoei, S. ve Dehdar, F. (2023). The Role of Renewable Energy Consumption on Environmental Degradation in EU Countries: Do Institutional Quality, Technological Innovation, and GDP Matter?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(15), 44607-44624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25428-4
65. Khan, H., Khan, I. ve Binh, T. T. (2020). The Heterogeneity of Renewable Energy Consumption, Carbon Emission and Financial Development in the Globe: A Panel Quantile Regression Approach. Energy Reports, 6, 859-867.
66. Khan, H., Weili, L. ve Khan, I. (2022). Examining the Effect of Information and Communication Technology, Innovations, and Renewable Energy Consumption on CO2 Emission: Evidence from BRICS Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(31), 47696-47712.
67. Khan, I., Zakari, A., Ahmad, M., Irfan, M. ve Hou, F. (2022). Linking Energy Transitions, Energy Consumption, and Environmental Sustainability in OECD Countries. Gondwana Research, 103, 445-457.
68. Khan, M. K., Babar, S. F., Oryani, B., Dagar, V., Rehman, A., Zakari, A. ve Khan, M. O. (2022). Role of Financial Development, Environmental- Related Technologies, Research and Development, Energy Intensity, Natural Resource Depletion, and Temperature in Sustainable Environment in Canada. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 622-638.
69. Khan, M. K., Teng, J. Z., Khan, M. I. ve Khan, M. O. (2019). Impact of Globalization, Economic Factors and Energy Consumption on CO2 Emissions in Pakistan. Science of the Total Environment, 688, 424- 436.
70. Kihombo, S., Saud, S., Ahmed, Z. ve Chen, S. (2021). The Effects of Research and Development and Financial Development on CO2 Emissions: Evidence from Selected WAME Economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(37), 51149-51159.
71. Kim, Y. ve Schmidt, P. (2000). A Review and Empirical Comparison of Bayesian and Classical Approaches to Inference on Efficiency Levels in Stochastic Frontier Models with Panel Data. Journal of productivity Analysis, 14(2), 91-118.
72. Kirikkaleli, D. ve Ali, K. (2023). Patents on Environmental Technologies and Environmental Degradation in a Scandinavian Country: Evidence from Novel Fourier‐based Estimators. Geological Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/gj.4722
73. Kirikkaleli, D., Güngör, H. ve Adebayo, T. S. (2022). Consumption‐ based carbon emissions, renewable energy consumption, financial development and economic growth in Chile. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(3), 1123-1137.
74. Kirikkaleli, D., Sofuoğlu, E. ve Ojekemi, O. (2023). Does Patents on Environmental Technologies Matter for the Ecological Footprint in the USA? Evidence from the Novel Fourier ARDL Approach. Geoscience Frontiers, 101564.
75. Kocoglu, M., Awan, A., Tunc, A. ve Aslan, A. (2022). The Nonlinear Links Between Urbanization and CO2 in 15 Emerging Countries: Evidence from Unconditional Quantile and Threshold Regression. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(12), 18177-18188.
76. Koenker, R. (2004). Quantile Regression for Longitudinal Data. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 91(1), 74-89.
77. Koenker, R. ve Bassett Jr, G. (1978). Regression Quantiles. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 33-50.
78. Komen, M. H., Gerking, S. ve Folmer, H. (1997). Income and Environmental R&D: Empirical Evidence from OECD Countries. Environment and Development Economics, 2(4), 505-515.
79. Koseoglu, A., Yucel, A. G. ve Ulucak, R. (2022). Green Innovation and Ecological Footprint Relationship for a Sustainable Development: Evidence from Top 20 Green Innovator Countries. Sustainable Development, 30(5), 976-988.
80. Lanoie, P., Laurent‐Lucchetti, J., Johnstone, N. ve Ambec, S. (2011). Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 20(3), 803-842.
81. Lee, K. H., Min, B. ve Yook, K. H. (2015). The Impacts of Carbon (CO2) Emissions and Environmental Research and Development (R&D) Investment on Firm Performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 167, 1-11.
82. Lichtenberg, F.R., (1992). R&D Investment and International Productivity Differences. NBER Working Paper Series, 4161.
83. Liu, H., Wong, W. K., Cong, P. T., Nassani, A. A., Haffar, M. ve Abu- Rumman, A. (2023). Linkage among Urbanization, Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and Carbon Emissions. Panel Data Analysis for China Using ARDL Model. Fuel, 332, 126122.
84. Liu, Y., Lei, P., Zhao, Z. ve Sun, Y. (2023). Influence of Green Financing, Technology Innovation, and Trade Openness on Consumption- Based Carbon Emissions in BRICS Countries. Economic Research- Ekonomska Istraživanja, 36(2), 2142262.
85. Mahmood, H., Alkhateeb, T. T. Y., Al-Qahtani, M. M. Z., Allam, Z. A., Ahmad, N. ve Furqan, M. (2019). Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and Pollution in Saudi Arabia. https://mpra.ub.uni- muenchen.de/109143/
86. Mahou, Y., Ben Youssef, S. ve Ben Jebli, M. (2022). Inspecting the Influence of Renewable Energy and R&D in Defending Environmental Quality: Evidence for California. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(59), 88751-88762.
87. Mehmood, U. (2023). Analyzing the Role of Political Risk, GDP, and Eco-Innovations Towards CO2 Emissions in South Asian Countries. Journal of Knowladge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023- 01292-y
88. Mensah, C. N., Long, X., Dauda, L., Boamah, K. B., Salman, M., Appiah- Twum, F. ve Tachie, A. K. (2019). Technological Innovation and Green Growth in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 240, 118204.
89. Mohsin, M., Orynbassarov, D., Anser, M. K. ve Oskenbayev, Y. (2023). Does Hydropower Energy Help to Reduce CO2 Emissions in European Union Countries? Evidence from Quantile Estimation. Environmental Development, 45, 100794.
90. Nosheen, M., Iqbal, J. ve Abbasi, M. A. (2021). Do Technological Innovations Promote Green Growth in the European Union?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 21717-21729.
91. OECD (2010). Taxatİon, Innovatıon and the Environment. https://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/tools-evaluation/46177075.pdf, (15.04.2023).
92. OECD (2020). OECD Green Budgeting Framework. https://www.oecd.org/environment/green-budgeting/OECD- Green-Budgeting-Framework-Highlights.pdf, (29.03.2023)
93. OECD (2022). Assessing environmental impact of measures in the OECD Green Recovery Database. https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/assessing- environmental-impact-of-measures-in-the-oecd-green-recovery-database-3f7e2670/#snotes-d4e970,(29.03.2023)
94. OECD (2023). Patents on Environment Technologies (indicator). doi: 10.1787/fff120f8-en (23.04.2023) Oyebanji, M. O. ve Kirikkaleli, D. (2022). Green technology, green electricity, and Environmental Sustainability in Western European Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(13), 38525-38534.
95. Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 653–670.
96. Pedroni, P. (2004). Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis. Econometric Theory, 20(3), 597–625.
97. Qalati, S. A., Kumari, S., Tajeddini, K., Bajaj, N. K. ve Ali, R. (2023). Innocent Devils: The Varying Impacts of Trade, Renewable Energy and Financial Development on Environmental Damage: Nonlinearly Exploring the Disparity between Developed and Developing Nations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 386, 135729.
98. Raihan, A., Pavel, M. I., Muhtasim, D. A., Farhana, S., Faruk, O. ve Paul, A. (2023). The Role of Renewable Energy Use, Technological Innovation, and Forest Cover Toward Green Development: Evidence from Indonesia. Innovation and Green Development, 2(1), 100035.
99. Razzaq, A., Wang, Y., Chupradit, S., Suksatan, W. ve Shahzad, F. (2021). Asymmetric Inter-Linkages between Green Technology Innovation and Consumption-Based Carbon Emissions in BRICS Countries Using Quantile-on-Quantile Framework. Technology in Society, 66, 101656.
100. Safi, A., Chen, Y., Wahab, S., Zheng, L. ve Rjoub, H. (2021). Does Environmental Taxes Achieve the Carbon Neutrality Target of G7 Economies? Evaluating the Importance of Environmental R&D. Journal of Environmental Management, 293, 112908.
101. Shah, S. A. R., Zhang, Q., Abbas, J., Balsalobre-Lorente, D. ve Pilař, L. (2023). Technology, Urbanization and Natural Gas Supply Matter for Carbon Neutrality: A New Evidence of Environmental Sustainability under the Prism of COP26. Resources Policy, 82, 103465.
102. Shahbaz, M., Nasir, M. A., Hille, E. ve Mahalik, M. K. (2020). UK's Net-Zero Carbon Emissions Target: Investigating the Potential Role of Economic Growth, Financial Development, and R&D Expenditures Based on Historical Data (1870–2017). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 161, 120255.
103. Shao, X., Zhong, Y., Li, Y. veAltuntaş, M. (2021a). Does Environmental and Renewable Energy R&D Help to Achieve Carbon Neutrality Target? A Case of the US Economy. Journal of Environmental Management, 296, 113229.
104. Shao, X., Zhong, Y., Liu, W. ve Li, R. Y. M. (2021b). Modeling the Effect of Green Technology Innovation and Renewable Energy on Carbon Neutrality in N-11 Countries? Evidence from Advance Panel Estimations. Journal of Environmental Management, 296, 113189.
105. Sharif, A., Kartal, M. T., Bekun, F. V., Pata, U. K., Chan, L. F. ve Depren, S. K. (2023). Role of Green Technology, Environmental Taxes, and Green Energy Towards Sustainable Environment: Insights from Sovereign Nordic Countries by CS-ARDL Approach. Gondwana Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2023.01.009
106. Sheikh, A. ve Hassan, O. I. (2023). Impact of Economic Growth, Energy use and Research and Development Expenditure on Carbon Emissions: An Analysis of 29 OECD Countries. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 13(1), 454-464.
107. Simionescu, M. (2021). The Nexus between Economic Development and Pollution in the European Union New Member States. The Role of Renewable Energy Consumption. Renewable Energy, 179, 1767-1780.
108. Su, Z. W., Umar, M., Kirikkaleli, D. ve Adebayo, T. S. (2021). Role of Political Risk to Achieve Carbon Neutrality: Evidence from Brazil. Journal of Environmental Management, 298, 113463.
109. Syed, Q. R., Bhowmik, R., Adedoyin, F. F., Alola, A. A. ve Khalid, N. (2022). Do Economic Policy Uncertainty and Geopolitical Risk Surge CO2 Emissions? New Insights from Panel Quantile Regression Approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(19), 27845-27861.
110. Takalo, S. K. ve Tooranloo, H. S. (2021). Green Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 122474.
111. Terzioğlu, M. K., Yücel, M. A., Demirkıran, S. ve Acaroğlu, D. (2020). Kentsel İnovasyonun Kentleşme Üzerine Mekânsal Etkisi. İdealkent, 11(30), 592-620.
112. Tiwari, A. K., Kocoglu, M., Banday, U. J. ve Awan, A. (2022). Hydropower, Human Capital, Urbanization and Ecological Footprints Nexus in China and Brazil: Evidence from Quantile ARDL. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(45), 68923- 68940.
113. Triki, R., Kahouli, B., Tissaoui, K. ve Tlili, H. (2023). Assessing the Link between Environmental Quality, Green Finance, Health Expenditure, Renewable Energy, and Technology Innovation. Sustainability, 15(5), 4286.
114. Tsiantikoudis, S., Zafeiriou, E., Kyriakopoulos, G. ve Arabatzis, G. (2019). Revising the Environmental Kuznets Curve for Deforestation: An Empirical Study for Bulgaria. Sustainability, 11(16), 1-16.
115. Udeagha, M. C. ve Breitenbach, M. C. (2023). On the Asymmetric Effects of Trade Openness on CO2 Emissions in SADC with a Nonlinear ARDL Approach. Discover Sustainability, 4(1), 2.
116. Ulku, H., (2004). R&D, Innovation, and Economic Growth: An Empirical Analysis. IMF Working Paper, 04/185.
117. Ulucak, R., Khan, S. U. D., Baloch, M. A. ve Li, N. (2020). Mitigation Pathways toward Sustainable Development: Is There Any Trade‐off between Environmental Regulation and Carbon Emissions Reduction? Sustainable Development, 28(4), 813-822.
118. Usman, M. ve Hammar, N. (2021). Dynamic Relationship between Technological Innovations, Financial Development, Renewable Energy, and Ecological Footprint: Fresh Insights Based on the STIRPAT Model for Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(12), 15519-15536.
119. Van Roy, V., Vértesy, D. ve Vivarelli, M. (2018). Technology and Employment: Mass Unemployment or Job Creation? Empirical Evidence from European Patenting Firms. Research Policy, 47(9), 1762-1776.
120. Wang, N., Wei, C., Zhao, X., Wang, S., Ren, Z. ve Ni, R. (2023). Does Green Technology Innovation Reduce Anthropogenic PM2. 5 Emissions? Evidence from China's Cities. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 14(3), 101699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2023.101699
121. Wang, Q., Zhang, F. ve Li, R. (2023). Revisiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis in 208 Counties: The Roles of Trade Openness, Human Capital, Renewable Energy and Natural Resource Rent. Environmental Research, 216, 114637.
122. Wang, R., Mirza, N., Vasbieva, D. G., Abbas, Q. ve Xiong, D. (2020). The nexus of Carbon Emissions, Financial Development, Renewable Energy Consumption, and Technological Innovation: What should be the Priorities in light of COP 21 Agreements?. Journal of Environmental Management, 271, 111027.
123. Wang, R., Usman, M., Radulescu, M., Cifuentes-Faura, J. ve Balsalobre-Lorente, D. (2023). Achieving Ecological Sustainability Through Technological Innovations, Financial Development, Foreign Direct Investment, and Energy Consumption in Developing European Countries. Gondwana Research, 119, 138-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2023.02.023
124. Wen, J., Ali, W., Hussain, J., Khan, N. A., Hussain, H., Ali, N. ve Akhtar, R. (2021a). Dynamics between Green Innovation and Environmental Quality: New Insights into South Asian Economies. Economia Politica, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40888-021-00248-2
125. Wen, J., Mughal, N., Zhao, J., Shabbir, M. S., Niedbała, G., Jain, V. ve Anwar, A. (2021b). Does Globalization Matter for Environmental Degradation? Nexus among Energy Consumption, Economic Growth, and Carbon Dioxide Emission. Energy Policy, 153, 112230.
126. Westerlund, J. (2005). New Simple Tests For Panel Cointegration. Econometric Reviews, 24(3), 297–316.
127. Wu, X. ve Gao, M. (2021). Effects of Different Environmental Regulations and their Heterogeneity on Air Pollution Control in China. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 60(2-3), 140-166.
128. Xia, Q. (2022). Does Green Technology Advancement and Renewable Electricity Standard Impact on Carbon Emissions in China: Role of Green Finance. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(3), 6492-6505.
129. Yan, D., Kong, Y., Ren, X., Shi, Y. ve Chiang, S. (2019). The Determinants of Urban Sustainability in Chinese Resource-based Cities: A Panel Quantile Regression Approach. Science of the Total Environment, 686, 1210-1219.
130. Yii, K. J. ve Geetha, C. (2017). The Nexus Between Technology Innovation and CO2 Emissions in Malaysia: Evidence from Granger Causality Test. Energy Procedia, 105, 3118-3124.
131. Yücel, M. A. ve Terzioğlu, M. K. (2023). Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma ve Eko- İnovasyon: Dinamik Mekânsal Etkileşim. Verimlilik Dergisi, 171-186.
132. Zachariadis, M. (2003). R&D, Innovation, and Technological Progress: a Test of the Schumpeterian Framework without Scale Effects. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne D'économique, 36(3), 566-586.
133. Zafar, M. W., Zaidi, S. A. H., Sinha, A., Gedikli, A. ve Hou, F. (2019). The Role of Stock Market and Banking Sector Development, and Renewable Energy Consumption in Carbon Emissions: Insights from G-7 and N-11 Countries. Resources Policy, 62, 427-436.
134. Zhang, M., Abbasi, K. R., Inuwa, N., Sinisi, C. I., Alvarado, R. ve Ozturk, I. (2023). Does Economic Policy Uncertainty, Energy Transition and Ecological Innovation Affect Environmental Degradation in the United States? Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 36(1), 1- 28.
135. Zhou, A. ve Li, J. (2019). Heterogeneous Role of Renewable Energy Consumption in Economic Growth and Emissions Reduction: Evidence from a Panel Quantile Regression. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 22575-22595.
136. Zhou, X., Jia, M., Altuntaş, M., Kirikkaleli, D. ve Hussain, M. (2022). Transition to Renewable Energy and Environmental Technologies: The Role of Economic Policy Uncertainty in Top Five Polluted Economies. Journal of Environmental Management, 313, 115019.
137. Zhu, H., Duan, L., Guo, Y. ve Yu, K. (2016). The Effects of FDI, Economic Growth and Energy Consumption on Carbon Emissions in ASEAN-5: Evidence from Panel Quantile Regression. Economic Modelling, 58, 237-248.
138. Zhu, H., Xia, H., Guo, Y. ve Peng, C. (2018). The Heterogeneous Effects of Urbanization and Income Inequality on CO2 Emissions in BRICS Economies: Evidence from Panel Quantile Regression. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25, 17176-17193.