The Interaction Of CO2 Emission With Economic Growth And Urbanisation: The Sample Of BRICS-T Countries

Öz

In the study, in addition to BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) countries, which have an effective influence in terms of regional relations, the Turkish economy has been analysed. CO2 emissions per capita, GDP per capita and total urbanisation data for the period 1988-2018 are used as variable: As a method in the study, after conducting cross-sectional dependence and heterogeneity research, CADF (Cross-Sectionally Augmented Dickey-Fuller) Panel Unit Root Test and SURADF (Seemingly Unrelated Regression Augmented Dickey Fuller) Panel Unit Root tests were applied for stationarity testing. Then, the long-run relationship is investigated with the Westerlund Panel Cointegration Test with Multiple Structural Breaks and then this relationship is interpreted using the Common Correlated Effects Model (CCE) and the Extended Mean Group (AMG) estimator. Finally, Emirmahmutoğlu and Köse (2011) Panel Causality test is used to analyse the direction and degree of this relationship. As a result of the empirical analysis, it is concluded that the effect of urbanisation on CO2 emissions is more dominant than economic growth for the relevant countries and period. Although mixed results were obtained in the country-based analysis, the bidirectional causality relationship between urbanisation and economic growth and CO2 emission was determined with a significance level of 1%.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• CO2 Emissions
• Panel Data Analysis
• Westerlund Panel Cointegration Test with Multiple Structural Breaks
• Emirmahmutoğlu and Köse (2011) Panel Causality Test.

CO2 Emisyonunun Ekonomik Büyüme ve Kentleşme ile Etkileşimi: BRICS-T Ülkeleri Örneği

Öz

Çalışmada bölgesel ilişki bakımından etkin nüfuza sahip BRICS (Brezilya, Rusya, Hindistan, Çin, Güney Afrika) ülkelerine ek olarak Türkiye ekonomisi tahlil edilmeye çalışılmıştır. 1988-2018 dönemine ait kişi başı CO2 emisyonu, kişi başı GSYH ve toplam kentleşme verileri değişken olarak kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada yöntem olarak yatay kesit bağımlılığı ve heterojenite araştırması yapıldıktan sonra durağanlık sınaması için CADF (Cross-Sectionally Augmented Dickey–Fuller) Panel Birim Kök Testi ve SURADF (Seemingly Unrelated Regression Augmented Dickey Fuller) Panel Birim Kök testleri uygulanmıştır. Daha sonra Westerlund Çoklu Yapısal Kırılmalı Panel Eşbütünleşme Testi ile uzun dönemli ilişki araştırılmış ve ardından Ortak İlişkili Etkiler Modeli (CCE) ve Genişletilmiş Ortalama Grup (AMG) tahmincisi kullanılarak bu ilişki yorumlanmaya çalışılmıştır. Son olarak Emirmahmutoğlu ve Köse (2011) Panel Nedensellik testi ile bu ilişkinin yönü ve derecesi için ampirik analiz kısmına geçilmiştir. Ampirik analiz neticesinde kentleşmenin CO2 emisyonuna etkisinin ilgili ülkeler ve dönem için ekonomik büyümeye göre daha baskın oluğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ülke bazlı analizde karma sonuçlara ulaşılsa da kentleşme ve ekonomik büyümenin CO2 emisyonu ile çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi %1 anlamlılık düzeyi ağırlıklı olmak üzere tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• CO2 Emisyonu
• Panel Veri Analizi
• Çoklu Yapısal Kırılmalı Westerlund Panel Eşbütünleşme Testi
• Emirmahmutoğlu ve Köse (2011) Panel Nedensellik Testi

Etik Beyan

“CO2 Emisyonunun Ekonomik Büyüme Ve Kentleşme İle Etkileşimi: BRICS-T Ülkeleri Örneği” başlıklı çalışmanın yazım sürecinde bilimsel kurallara, etik ve alıntı kurallarına uyulmuş; toplanan veriler üzerinde herhangi bir tahrifat yapılmamış ve bu çalışma herhangi başka bir akademik yayın ortamına değerlendirme için gönderilmemiştir.

Kaynakça

1. Abdulqadir, I. A. (2023). Urbanization, renewable energy, and carbon dioxide emissions: A pathway to achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs) in sub-Saharan Africa. International Journal of Energy Sector Management, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). doi: 10.1108/IJESM-11-2022-0032
2. Acaroğlu, H., Kartal, H. M. ve García Márquez, F. P. (2023). Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in terms of ecological footprint and CO2 emissions through energy diversification for Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(22), 63289-63304. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-26278-w
3. Acheampong, A. O. (2018). Economic growth, CO2 emissions and energy consumption: What causes what and where? Energy Economics, 74, 677-692. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.07.022
4. Ahmad, M., Zhao, Z. Y. ve Li, H. (2019a). Revealing stylized empirical interactions among construction sector, urbanization, energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emissions in China. Science of The Total Environment, 657, 1085-1098. doi: 10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2018.12.112
5. Ahmad, M., Zhao, Z. Y. ve Li, H. (2019b). Revealing stylized empirical interactions among construction sector, urbanization, energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emissions in China. Science of The Total Environment, 657, 1085-1098. doi: 10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2018.12.112
6. Ahmad, M. ve Zhao, Z.-Y. (2018a). Causal linkages between energy investment and economic growth: A panel data modelling analysis of China. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 13(8), 363- 374. doi: 10.1080/15567249.2018.1495278
7. Ahmad, M. ve Zhao, Z.-Y. (2018b). Empirics on linkages among industrialization, urbanization, energy consumption, CO2 emissions and economic growth: A heterogeneous panel study of China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(30), 30617-30632. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-3054-3
8. Altintaş, N. (2020). Kentleşme ve Ekonomik Büyümenin Çevresel Bozulmaya Etkisi: Türkiye Örneği. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 15(26), 4517-4539. doi: 10.26466/opus.725429

9. Ang, J. B. (2007). CO2 emissions, energy consumption, and output in France. Energy Policy, 35(10), 4772-4778. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.03.032
10. Atalay, A. Ç. ve Akan, Y. (2023). OECD Ülkelerinin Yeşil Ekonomi Verilerinin Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezine Göre Test Edilmesi. Trends in Business and Economics, 37(1), 57-67.
11. Aydoğdu, D. G. ve Özşahin, G. (2023). Büyüme, eşitsizlik ve karbon emisyonu: Yükselen piyasa ekonomilerinde çevresel Kuznets eğrisi hipotezinin analizi. Trakya Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi E-Dergi, 12(1), 133-148. doi: 10.47934/tife.12.01.07
12. Aytun, C. (2014). Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezi: Panel Veri Analizi. Akademik Bakış Uluslararası Hakemli Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (44), 0-0.
13. Balin, B. E. ve Akan, D. M. (2015). Ekc Hypothesıs And The Effect Of Innovatıon: A Panel Data Analysıs. Journal of Business Economics and Finance, 4(1), 0-0. doi: 10.17261/Pressacademia.201519952
14. Balsalobre-Lorente, D., Driha, O. M., Halkos, G. ve Mishra, S. (2022). Influence of growth and urbanization on CO2 emissions: The moderating effect of foreign direct investment on energy use in BRICS. Sustainable Development, 30(1), 227-240. doi: 10.1002/sd.2240
15. Bozkurt, C. ve Okumuş, İ. (2015). Türkiye’de Ekonomik Büyüme, Enerji Tüketimi, Ticari Serbestleşme ve Nüfus Yoğunluğunun CO2 Emisyonu Üzerindeki Etkileri: Yapısal Kırılmalı Eşbütünleşme Analizi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32), 23-35.
16. Breuer, J. B., McNown, R. ve Wallace, M. (2002). Series-specific unit root tests with panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 64(5), 527-546. doi: 10.1111/1468-0084.00276
17. Büyükyılmaz, A. ve Mert, M. (2015). CO2 Emisyonu, Yenilenebilir Enerji Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin MS-VAR Yaklaşımı ile Modellenmesi: Türkiye Örneği. Zeitschrift für die Welt der Türken / Journal of World of Turks, 7(3), 103-117.
18. Chancel, L. (2021). Climate Change and The Global Inequality of Carbon Emissions 1990-2020. Paris School of Economics and Sciences Po, 1-36.
19. Cheng, Z. ve Hu, X. (2023). The effects of urbanization and urban sprawl on CO2 emissions in China. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(2), 1792-1808. doi: 10.1007/s10668-022-02123-x
20. Cole, M. A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: Examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48(1), 71-81. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.09.007
21. Coondoo, D. ve Dinda, S. (2002). Causality between income and emission: A country group-specific econometric analysis. Ecological Economics, 40(3), 351-367. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921- 8009(01)00280-4
22. Eberhardt, M. (2012). Estimating panel time-series models with heterogeneous slopes. The Stata Journal, 12(1), 61-71.
23. Eberhardt, M. ve Bond, S. (2009). Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: A novel estimator (Sy 17692). Munich: University Library of Munich, Germany.
24. Emirmahmutoglu, F. ve Kose, N. (2011). Testing for granger causality in heterogeneous mixed panels. Economic Modelling, 28(3), 870-876. doi: 10.1016/J.ECONMOD.2010.10.018
25. Everett, T., Ishwaran, M., Ansaloni, G. P. ve Rubin, A. (2010). Economic growth and the environment. Defra Evindence and Analysis Series, 1-52.
26. Fan, J.-L., Zhang, Y.-J. ve Wang, B. (2017). The impact of urbanization on residential energy consumption in China: An aggregated and disaggregated analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 75, 220-233. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.10.066
27. Frankel, J. (2009). Environmental Effects of International Trade [Working Paper Series:RWP09-006]. HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series.
28. Gierałtowska, U., Asyngier, R., Nakonieczny, J. ve Salahodjaev, R. (2022). Renewable Energy, Urbanization, and CO2 Emissions: A Global Test. Energies, 15(9), 3390. doi: 10.3390/en15093390
29. Grodzicki, T. ve Jankiewicz, M. (2022). The impact of renewable energy and urbanization on CO2 emissions in Europe – Spatio-temporal approach. Environmental Development, 44, 100755. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2022.100755
30. Grossman, G. M. ve Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement (Working Paper Sy 3914). National Bureau of Economic Research. doi: 10.3386/w3914
31. Hao, Y. ve Cho, H. C. (2022). Research on the relationship between urban public infrastructure, CO2 emission and economic growth in China. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(5), 7361-7376. doi: 10.1007/s10668-021-01750-0
32. Hussain, M. N., Li, Z. ve Yang, S. (2023). Heterogeneous effects of urbanization and environment Kuznets curve hypothesis in Africa. Natural Resources Forum, 47(2), 317-333. doi: 10.1111/1477-8947.12284
33. IEA. (2015). Energy and Climate Change-World Energy Outlook Special Report. Geliş tarihi 22 Ocak 2022, gönderen IEA website: https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/WEO2015SpecialReportonEnergyandClimate Change.pdf
34. IEA. (2021). Global Energy Review 2021,Assessing the effects of economic recoveries on global energy demand and CO2 emissions in 2021. Geliş tarihi 03 Ocak 2022, gönderen https://www.iea.org/reports/global- energy-review-2021/co2-emissions
35. 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. doi: 10.1007/s10668-022-02128-6
36. İnal, V., Addi, H. M., Çakmak, E. E., Torusdağ, M. ve Çalışkan, M. (2022). The nexus between renewable energy, CO2 emissions, and economic growth: Empirical evidence from African oil-producing countries. Energy Reports, 8, 1634-1643. doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2021.12.051
37. Jebabli, I., Lahiani, A. ve Mefteh-Wali, S. (2023). Quantile connectedness between CO2 emissions and economic growth in G7 countries. Resources Policy, 81, 103348. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103348
38. Kartal, M. T., Kılıç Depren, S., Ali, U. ve Nurgazina, Z. (2023). Long-run impact of coal usage decline on CO2 emissions and economic growth: Evidence from disaggregated energy consumption perspective for China and India by dynamic ARDL simulations. Energy & Environment, 0(0), 0958305X231152482. doi: 10.1177/0958305X231152482
39. Kiliç, C., Kurt, Ü. ve Balan, F. (2020). Kentleşme ve Sanayileşmenin CO2 Emisyonu Üzerindeki Etkisi: Türkiye İçin ARDL Sınır Testi Yaklaşımı. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18(2), 182-196. doi: 10.18026/cbayarsos.628421
40. Lan-yue, Z., Yao, L., Jing, Z., Bing, L., Ji-min, H., Shi-huai, D., … Ya-qi, Z. (2017). The relationships among energy consumption, economic output and energy intensity of countries at different stage of development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 74, 258-264. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.055
41. Lee, C.-C. ve Lee, J.-D. (2009). Income and CO2 emissions: Evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests. Energy Policy, 37(2), 413-423. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.09.053
42. Li, K. ve Lin, B. (2015). Impacts of urbanization and industrialization on energy consumption/CO2 emissions: Does the level of development matter? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 1107-1122. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.185
43. Liu, Y., Xiao, H., Zikhali, P. ve Lv, Y. (2014). Carbon Emissions in China: A Spatial Econometric Analysis at the Regional Level. Sustainability, 6(9), 6005-6023. doi: 10.3390/su6096005
44. Martínez-Zarzoso, I. ve Maruotti, A. (2011). The impact of urbanization on CO2 emissions: Evidence from developing countries. Ecological Economics, 70(7), 1344-1353. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.02.009
45. Massagony, A. ve Budiono. (2023). Is the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis valid on CO2 emissions in Indonesia? International Journal of Environmental Studies, 80(1), 20-31. doi: 10.1080/00207233.2022.2029097
46. McCoskey, S. ve Kao, C. (1998). A residual-based test of the null of cointegration in panel data. Econometric Reviews, 17(1), 57-84. doi: 10.1080/07474939808800403
47. Mirza, F. M. ve Kanwal, A. (2017). Energy consumption, carbon emissions and economic growth in Pakistan: Dynamic causality analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 1233-1240. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.10.081
48. Myszczyszyn, J. ve Suproń, B. (2022a). Relationship among Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, CO2 Emission, and Urbanization: An Econometric Perspective Analysis. Energies, 15(24), 9647. doi: 10.3390/en15249647
49. Myszczyszyn, J. ve Suproń, B. (2022b). Relationship among Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, CO2 Emission, and Urbanization: An Econometric Perspective Analysis. Energies, 15(24), 9647. doi: 10.3390/en15249647
50. Narayan, P. K. ve Narayan, S. (2010). Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: Panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy Policy, 38(1), 661-666. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.09.005
51. Naseem, S., Hu, X., Shi, J., Mohsin, M. ve Jamil, K. (2023). Exploring the optical impact of information communication technology and economic growth on CO2 emission in BRICS countries. Optik, 273, 170339. doi: 10.1016/j.ijleo.2022.170339
52. Nazlioglu, S., Lebe, F. ve Kayhan, S. (2011). Nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in OECD countries: Cross-sectionally dependent heterogeneous panel causality analysis. Energy Policy, 39(10), 6615- 6621. doi: 10.1016/J.ENPOL.2011.08.007
53. Niu, H. ve Lekse, W. (2018). Carbon emission effect of urbanization at regional level: Empirical evidence from China. Economics, 12(1), 20180044. doi: doi:10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2018-44
54. Orubu, C. O. ve Omotor, D. G. (2011). Environmental quality and economic growth: Searching for environmental Kuznets curves for air and water pollutants in Africa. Energy Policy, 39(7), 4178-4188. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.04.025
55. Otim, J., Watundu, S., Mutenyo, J. ve Bagire, V. (2023). Fossil Fuel Energy Consumption, Economic Growth, Urbanization, and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Kenya. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 13(3), 457-468. doi: 10.32479/ijeep.14292
56. Ozturk, I. ve Acaravci, A. (2010). CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(9), 3220-3225. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.07.005
57. Özbek, S. ve Oğul, B. (2022). Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezinin Geçerliliği: Türkiye Üzerine Ampirik Bir Çalışma. Akademik Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi (AKAD), 14(26), 35-46. doi: 10.20990/kilisiibfakademik.1041209
58. Özokcu, S. ve Özdemir, Ö. (2017). Economic growth, energy, and environmental Kuznets curve. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 639-647. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.059
59. Pata, U. K. (2018). The effect of urbanization and industrialization on carbon emissions in Turkey: Evidence from ARDL bounds testing procedure. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(8), 7740-7747. doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-1088-6
60. Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and Inference in Large Heterogeneous Panels with a Multifactor Error Structure. Econometrica, 74(4), 967-1012.
61. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
62. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A. ve Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias‐adjusted LM test of error cross‐section independence. The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127. doi: 10.1111/j.1368-423X.2007.00227.x
63. Pesaran, M. H. ve Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. doi: 10.1016/J.JECONOM.2007.05.010
64. Polat, M. A. ve Ergün, S. (2023). Türkiye’de Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezinin Ekonomik Büyüme ve Farklı Küreselleşme Türleri Bakımından Analizi. İstanbul İktisat Dergisi, 73(1), 107-142. doi: 10.26650/ISTJECON2022- 1138122
65. Raheem, I. D. ve Ogebe, J. O. (2017). CO emissions, urbanization and industrialization. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 28(6), 851-867. doi: 10.1108/MEQ-09-2015-0177
66. Salahuddin, M., Gow, J., Ali, M. I., Hossain, M. R., Al-Azami, K. S., Akbar, D. ve Gedikli, A. (2019). Urbanization- globalization-CO2 emissions nexus revisited: Empirical evidence from South Africa. Heliyon, 5(6), e01974. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01974
67. Salvador-Guerra, C., Jimber-del-Río, J.-A. ve Vergara-Romero, A. (2023). Environmental Kuznets Curve: An Updated Empirical Vision for Ecuador. TEM Journal, 12(3), 1792-1798.
68. Shahbaz, M., Sbia, R., Hamdi, H. ve Ozturk, I. (2014). Economic growth, electricity consumption, urbanization and environmental degradation relationship in United Arab Emirates. Ecological Indicators, 45, 622-631. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.05.022
69. Siddique, H. M. A., Majeed, D. M. T. ve Ahmad, D. H. K. (2020). The Impact of Urbanization and Energy Consumption on CO2 Emissions in South Asia. South Asian Studies, 31(2). Geliş tarihi gönderen http://journals.pu.edu.pk/journals/index.php/IJSAS/article/view/3083
70. Soytas, U. ve Sari, R. (2009). Energy consumption, economic growth, and carbon emissions: Challenges faced by an EU candidate member. Ecological Economics, 68(6), 1667-1675. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.014
71. The World Bank. (2021). World Development Indicators. World Development Indicators | DataBank. Geliş tarihi gönderen https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators#
72. Topallı, N. (2016). CO2 Emisyonu ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki: Hindistan, Çin, Brezilya ve Güney Afrika için Panel Veri Analizi. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 427-447.
73. Topcu, M., Yazıcı, M. ve Kartal, G. (2019). An investigation of causality between urbanization and carbon emissions in Turkey. Social and Political Interactions, 81.
74. Wang, Q. (2014). Effects of urbanisation on energy consumption in China. Energy Policy, 65, 332-339. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.005
75. Wang, Q., Wu, S., Zeng, Y. ve Wu, B. (2016). Exploring the relationship between urbanization, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions in different provinces of China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 54, 1563-1579. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.090
76. Wang, S., Li, G. ve Fang, C. (2018). Urbanization, economic growth, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions: Empirical evidence from countries with different income levels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 2144-2159. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.025
77. Wang, S., Li, Q., Fang, C. ve Zhou, C. (2016). The relationship between economic growth, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions: Empirical evidence from China. Science of The Total Environment, 542, 360-371. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.10.027
78. Westerlund, J. (2006). Testing for panel cointegration with multiple structural breaks. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 68(1), 101-132. doi: 10.1111/J.1468-0084.2006.00154.X
79. Yıldız, B. (2019). E7 Ülkelerinde CO2 Emisyonu, Enerji Tüketimi, Ekonomik Büyüme ve Kentleşme Arasındaki İlişki. Social Sciences Research Journal, 8(3), 283-297.