Türkiye’de Sektörel Enerji Kullanımındaki Değişimlerin İtici Güçleri: Ayrıştırma Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmada, 1970-2018 döneminde ekonomik ve demografik yapısında önemli değişiklikler meydana gelen Türkiye’de sektörel enerji kullanımındaki değişikliklerin itici güçlerini incelemek amaçlanmaktadır. Buradan hareketle çalışmada, bu değişikliklerin tarım, sanayi, konut ve hizmetler ile ulaştırma gibi birincil sektörlerdeki enerji kullanımı üzerindeki etkileri toplamsal tipte ayrıştırma analizi (Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index [LMDI]) yöntemi kullanılarak araştırılmaktadır. Analiz sonuçları; incelenen dönemde ortalama olarak sektörel enerji kullanımının her bir sektörde çıktı etkisi ile arttığını, tarım sektörü hariç diğer sektörlerde ise yoğunluk etkisi ile azaldığını göstermektedir. Diğer bir ifade ile çıktı etkisi üretim artışı kanalıyla sektörel enerji kullanımı üzerinde yoğun bir etkiye sahipken, yoğunluk etkisi sektörlerdeki enerji yoğunluğunun kısmen düşme eğilimi içinde olması nedeniyle sektörel enerji kullanımı üzerinde düşürücü bir etki yaratmaktadır. Yapısal etki ise tarım ve sanayi sektörlerinde enerji kullanımını düşürücü, konut ve hizmetler ile ulaştırma sektörlerinde ise enerji kullanımını arttırıcı etki yaratmaktadır. Sektörlerin enerji kullanımlarında meydana gelen bu etkilerin farklılaşmasının, incelenen dönemde meydana gelen yapısal dönüşüme bağlı olarak ülkenin izlediği ekonomi politikalarının farklılaşmasından kaynaklandığı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sektörel Enerji Kullanımı
• Toplamsal Tipte Ayrıştırma Analizi
• Türkiye

The Driving Forces of Changes in Energy Sector Consumption in Turkey: Decomposition Analysis

Öz

This paper aims to investigate the driving forces of changes in energy sector consumption in Turkey for the 1970-2018 period when significant changes occurred in the economic and demographic structure of the country. For this purpose, the study investigates the effects of these changes on energy consumption in primary sectors such as agriculture, industry, housing and services, and transportation using the additive version of the Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index (LMDI) decomposition analysis. The results of analysis show that on average, energy consumption increased with the influence of the volume of output in each sector, whereas it is decreased with the influence of intensity in sectors except agriculture. In other words, while the output effect has an intense influence on the energy consumption sector through the increase in production, the intensity effect has a decreasing influence on the energy consumption sector due to the decreasing tendency of the energy density in sectors. The structural effect, on the other hand, creates an effect that decreases energy consumption in agriculture and industry sectors, and increases energy consumption in housing and services and transportation sectors. It is thought that the differentiation of these effects occurring in the energy use of the sectors is due to the differentiation of the economic policies followed by the country depending on the structural transformation that occurred in the period examined.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Energy Consumption Sector
• Additive Version of the Decomposition Analysis
• Turkey.

Kaynakça

1. Achão, C. ve Schaeffer, R. (2009). Decomposition Analysis of the Variations in Residential Electricity Consumption in Brazil for the 1980-2007 Period: Measuring the Activity, Intensity and Structure Effects. Energy Policy, 37(12), 5208-5220.
2. Akbostancı, E., Tunç, G. İ. ve Türüt-Aşık, S. (2011). CO2 Emissions of Turkish Manufacturing Industry: A Decomposition Analysis. Applied Energy, 88(6), 2273-2278.
3. Akyürek, Z. (2020). LMDI Decomposition Analysis of Energy Consumption of Turkish Manufacturing Industry: 2005-2014. Energy Efficiency, 13, 649-663.
4. Alves, M. R. ve Moutinho, V. (2013). Decomposition Analysis for Energy-Related CO2 Emissions Intensity over 1996-2009 in Portuguese Industrial Sectors. University of Evora. Working Paper. Evora, Portugal.
5. Ang, B. W. (2005). The LMDI Approach to Decomposition Analysis: A Practical Guide. Energy Policy, 33(7), 867-871.
6. Ang, B. W. ve Choi, K-H. (1997). Decomposition of Aggregate Energy and Gas Emission Intensities for Industry: A Refined Divisia Index Method. The Energy Journal,18(3), 59-73.
7. Ang, B. W. ve Zhang, F. Q. (2000). A Survey of Index Decomposition Analysis in Energy and Environmental Studies. Energy, 25(12), 1149-1176.
8. Ang, B., Zhang, F. ve Choi, K. (1998). Factorizing Changes in Energy and Environmental Indicators through Decomposition. Energy, 23(6), 489-495.

9. Chung, W., Kam, M. S. ve Ip, C. Y. (2011). A Study of Residential Energy Use in Hong Kong by Decomposition Analysis, 1990-2007. Applied Energy, 88(12), 5180-5187.
10. Cleveland, C.J., Costanza, R., Hall, C. A. S. ve Kaufman, R. (1984). Energy and the U.S. Economy: A Biophysical Perspective. Science. 225(4665), 890-897.
11. Ediger, V. Ş. (2008). National Energy Report of Turkey: Energy Situation, Challenges, and Policies for Sustainable Development. AASA Beijing Workshop on Sustainable Energy Development in Asia 2008, November 17-18 in Beijing, China, InterAcademy Council, 77-93.
12. Ediger, V. Ş. ve Huvaz, O. (2006). Examining the Sectoral Energy Use in Turkish Economy (1980-2000) with the help of Decomposition Analysis. Energy Conversion and Management, 47(6), 732-745.
13. Enerji ve Tabii Kaynaklar Bakanlığı (ETKB) (2020). Enerji İşleri Genel Müdürlüğü, Denge Tabloları (1970-2018).Erişim adresi: https://enerji.gov.tr/enerji-isleri-genel-mudurlugu-denge-tablolari.
14. European Commission (2019). Commission Staff Working Document Economic Reform Programme of Turkey (2019-2021). Commission Assessment. Brussels, 8549/19.
15. Fan, F. ve Lei, Y. (2016). Decomposition Analysis of Energy-Related Carbon Emissions from the Transportation Sector in Beijing. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 42, 135-145.
16. Granel, F. (2003). A Comparative Analysıs of Index Decomposition Methods. (Master Thesis), National University of Singapore, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Singapore.
17. Hammond, G. P. ve Norman, J. B. (2012). Decomposition Analysis of Energy-Related Carbon Emissions from UK Manufacturing. Energy, 41(1), 220-227.
18. Hastuti, S. H., Hartono, D., Putranti, T. M. ve Imansyah, M. H. (2020). The Drivers of Energy-Related CO2 Emission Changes in Indonesia: Structural Decomposition Analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-14.
19. Industrial Development Bank of Turkey (TSKB) (2019). Sector Overview Energy. January 2019.
20. Jakovac, P. (2018). Causality between Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: Literature Review. In INTCESS 2018-5th International Conference on Education and Social Sciences. 280-289.
21. Jia, J., Jian, H., Xie, D., Gu, Z. ve Chen, C. (2019). Multi-scale Decomposition of Energy-Related Industrial Carbon Emission by an Extended Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index: A Case Study of Jiangxi, China. Energy Efficiency, 12(8), 2161-2186.
22. Jobert, T. ve Karanfil, F. (2007). Sectoral Energy Consumption by Source and Economic Growth in Turkey. Energy Policy, 35: 5447-5456.
23. Karimu, A., Brännlund, R., Lundgren, T. ve Söderholm, P. (2017). Energy Intensity and Convergence in Swedish Industry: A Combined Econometric and Decomposition Analysis. Energy Economics, 62, 347-356.
24. Kazemi, H. ve Hosseinzadeh, R. (2020). Decomposition Analysis of Changes in Energy Consumption in Iran: Structural Decomposition Analysis. Environmental Energy and Economic Research, 4(3), 231-239.
25. Kim, J. ve Heo, E. (2016). Sources of Structural Change in Energy Use: A Decomposition Analysis for Korea. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 11(4), 309-313.
26. Kulionis, V. ve Wood, R. (2020). Explaining Decoupling in High Income Countries: A Structural Decomposition Analysis of the Change in Energy Footprint from 1970 to 2009. Energy, 116909.
27. Kumbaroğlu, G. (2011). A Sectoral Decomposition Analysis of Turkish CO2 Emissions over 1990-2007. Energy, 36(5), 2419-2433.
28. Lise, W. (2006). Decomposition of CO2 Emissions over 1980-2003 in Turkey. Energy Policy, 34(14), 1841-1852.
29. Moreau, V., Neves, C. A. D. O. ve Vuille, F. (2019). Is Decoupling a Red Herring? The Role of Structural Effects and Energy Policies in Europe. Energy Policy, 128, 243-252.
30. Moutinho, V., Moreira, A. C. ve Silva, P. M. (2015). The Driving Forces of Change in Energy-Related CO2 Emissions in Eastern, Western, Northern and Southern Europe: The LMDI Approach to Decomposition Analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 50: 1485-1499.
31. Nie, H. ve Kemp, R. (2014). Index Decomposition Analysis of Residential Energy Consumption in China: 2002-2010. Applied Energy, 121, 10-19.
32. OECD (2018). OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey. Erişim adresi: www.oecd.org/eco/surveys/economic-survey-turkey.htm.
33. Öniş, Z. (1991). Political Economy of Turkey in the 1980s Anatomy of Unorthodox Liberalism. Strong State and Economic Interest Groups. 2, 27-40
34. Pokrovski, V. N. (2003). Energy in theTheory of Production. Energy, 28(8): 769-788. Rada, C. ve Von Arnim, R. (2012). Structural Transformation in China and India: A Note on Macroeconomic Policies. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 23(3), 264-275.
35. Reuter, M. ve Patel, M. K. (2019). Applying Ex-Post Index Decomposition Analysis to Final Energy Consumption for Evaluating European Energy Efficiency Policies and Targets. Energy Efficiency, 12, 1329-1357.
36. Stern, D. I. (2010). The Role of Energy in Economic Growth. IAEE WorkingPaper. USAEE-IAEE WP 10-055.
37. Stern, D. I. (2020). Energy and Economic Growth. Routledge Handbook of Energy Economics. (Edited by Soytaş, U. ve Sarı, R.). First Published. New York.
38. Stern, D.I. ve Cleveland, C.J. (2004). Energy and Economic Growth. Rensselaer Working Paper in Economics. No.0410. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
39. Taka, G.N., Huong, T.T., Shah, I.H. ve Park, H.-S. (2020). Determinants of Energy-Based CO2 Emissions in Ethiopia: A Decomposition Analysis from 1990 to 2017. Sustainability, 12, 4175.
40. Toman, M. T. ve Jemelkova, B. (2003). Energy and Economic Development: An Assessment of the State of Knowledge. Resources for the Future. Discussion Paper 03-13.
41. Tunç, G. İ., Türüt-Aşık, S. ve Akbostancı, E. (2009). A Decomposition Analysis of CO2 Emissions from Energy Use: Turkish Case. Energy Policy, 37(11), 4689-4699.
42. Turkey Energy Outlook. (2020). Istanbul International Center for Energy and Climate (IICEC). Sabancı University.
43. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK) (2020). Gayrisafi Yurtiçi Hasıla, İktisadi Faaliyet Kollarına (A21) göre Zincirlenmiş Hacim, Endeks ve Değişim Oranları, 1970-2017. Erişim adresi: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Yillik-Gayrisafi-Yurt-Ici-Hasila-2019-33671.
44. Yılmaz, A., Kelleci, S. Ü. ve Bostan, A. (2016). Türkiye Ekonomisinde Sektörel Enerji Tüketiminin Ayrıştırma Yöntemiyle Analizi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(2), 1-27.
45. Yılmaz, M. ve Atak, M. (2010). Decomposition Analysis of Sectoral Energy Consumption in Turkey. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 5(2), 224-231.
46. Zhang, M., Dai, S. ve Song, Y. (2015). Decomposition Analysis of Energy-Related CO2 Emissions in South Africa. Journal of Energy in Southern Africa, 26(1), 67-73.
47. Zhang, M., Li, H., Zhou, M. ve Mu, H. (2011). Decomposition Analysis of Energy Consumption in Chinese Transportation Sector. Applied Energy, 88(6), 2279-2285.
48. Zhang, S., Wang, J. ve Zheng, W. (2018). Decomposition Analysis of Energy-Related CO2 Emissions and Decoupling Status in China’s Logistics Industry. Sustainability, 10(5), 1340.