İklim Değişimi Performans İndeksine Göre Ülkelerin CO2 Salınım Yoğunluk Performansının Yakınsama Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmada, İklim Değişim Performans İndeksine Bruck, Marten ve Bals, 2013 göre iyi, orta, kötü ve çok kötü performansa sahip ülkelerin salınım yoğunluk performansı açısından grup ortalamasına doğru yakınsama gösterip göstermedikleri incelenmektedir. Çalışmanın amacı iklim değişiminde aynı performansa sahip ülkelerin salınım yoğunluk performansı açısından da benzer davranışlar sergileyip sergilemediklerini incelemektir. Salınım yoğunluk performans indeksi olarak, ülke salınımının küresel salınım içerisindeki payının, ülke GSYİH’sının küresel GSYİH içerisindeki payına oranı kullanılmaktadır. Analizde doğrusal olmayan zaman serisi tekniğine dayanan KSS ve AESTAR birim kök testleri uygulanmaktadır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre; her bir ülke grubu için salınım yoğunluk performansı açısından ortalamaya yakınsama davranışı bulunmaktadır. Ancak bu yakınsama davranışının, iyi grup ülkelerinde ve kötü grup ülkelerinde daha yoğun olması dikkat çekicidir. Gruplar arası yakınsama davranışına bakıldığında ise AESTAR testine göre yalnızca orta performans düzeyine sahip ülkeler grup ortalamasının, iyi performansa sahip ülkeler grup ortalamasına yakınsadığı görülmektedir. ADF ve KSS testlerine göre ise grup ortalamaları arasında bir yakınsama davranışı bulunmamaktadır. Bundan dolayı, salınım yoğunluk performansının yakınsama analizinde, doğrusal olmayan zaman serisi tekniğine dayanan birim kök testlerinin geleneksel ADF birim kök testlerine göre daha kullanışlı olduğu da ifade edilebilir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Karbondioksit emisyonu, Yakınsama Analizi, SalınımYoğunluk Performans Endeksi

The Convergence Analysis of CO2 Emissions Intensity Performance of The Countries According to the Climate Change Performance Index

Öz

In this study, it is analysed whether the countries with good, moderate, poor and very poor performance according to the Climate Change Performance Index Bruck, Marten and Bals, 2013 converge towards the average group in terms of emission intensity performance. The aim of the study is to examine whether the countries with same performances in climate change also display similar attitudes in terms of emission intensity performance. As the emission intensity performance index, ratio of the country’s share in global emissions release to the share of the country's GDP in global GDP has been used. In the analysis, KSS and AESTAR units root tests based on nonlinear time series analysis techniques have been applied. According to the findings; there is convergence behaviour towards the average in terms of emissions intensity performance for each country group. However, it is noteworthy that, this convergence behaviour is more intense in group of countries performance. Regarding the convergence behaviour between the groups, only the group average of the countries with moderate performance converges towards the group average of the countries with good performance according to the AESTAR test. However, convergence behaviour does not exist between the group averages according to the ADF and KSS tests. For this reason, in the convergence analysis of the emissions intensity performance, unit root tests based on nonlinear time series technique is more useful than the traditional ADF unit root test

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Convergence Analysis, Emission Intensity Performance Index

Kaynakça

1. Aldy, J. E. (2006), “Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Convergence or Divergence?”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 33(4),533-555.
2. Barassi, M. R., Cole, M. A. & Elliott, R. J. R. (2011), “The Stochastic Convergence of CO2Emissions: A Long Memory Approach”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 49(3),367-385.
3. Barassi, M. R., Cole, M. A. & Elliott, R. J. R. (2008), “Stochastic Divergence or Convergenceof Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Re-examining the Evidence”, Environmental and Resource Economics,40(1),121-137.
4. Burck, J., Marten, F. & Bals, C. (2013), “The Climate Change Performance Index, Results 2014”, Germanwatch and Climate Action Network Europe, November 2013, ISBN 978-3-943704-15-0, www.germanwatch.org/en/ccpi.
5. Burck, J., Hermwille, L. & Bals, C. (2014), “The Climate Change Performance Index, Background and Methodology”, Germanwatch and Climate Action Network Europe, December 2014, ISBN 978-3-943704-25-9, www.germanwatch.org/en/ccpi_bame.
6. Ezcurra, R. (2007), “Is There Cross-Country Convergence in Carbon Dioxide Emissions?”, Energy Policy, 35(2),1363-1372.
7. Chang, T., Lee, C. ve Liu, W. (2012), “Non Linear Adjustment to Purchasing Power Parity for ASEAN Countries”, Japan and World Economy, 24(4),325-331.
8. Huang, B., Meng, L. (2013), “Convergence of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Urban China: A spatio-Temporal Perspective”, Applied Geography, 40,21-29.

9. IPCC, (2015), “Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2015”, ISBN 978-92-9169-143-2, www.ipcc.ch.
10. GCI, (2016), Contraction & Convergence (C&C) Climate Truth & Reconciliation, http://www.gci.org.uk/ erişim tarihi: 12.01.2016.
11. Jobert, T., Karanfil, F. ve Tykhonenko, A. (2010), “Convergence of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the EU: Legend or Reality?”, Energy Economics, 32(6),1364-1373.
12. Kanjilal, K. Ve Ghosh, S. (2002), “Future Industrial Co2 Emission and Consequences of CO2 Abatement Strategies on the Indian Economy”, Pasific and Asian Journal of Energy, 12(2),123-128.
13. Kapetanios, G., Yongcheal, S. ve Andy, S. (2003), “Testing for Unit Root in the Nonlinear STAR Framework”, Journal of Econometrics, 112(2),359-379.
14. Lanne, M., and Liski, M. (2004), “Trends and Breaks in Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1870-2028”, The Energy Journal, 25(4), 41-65.
15. Lee, C. C. ve Chang, C. P. (2008), “New Evidence on the Convergence of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Panel Seemingly Unrelated Regressions Augmented Dickey-Fuller tests”, Energy, 33(9),1468-1475.
16. Lee, C. C. ve Chang, C. P. (2009), “Stochastic Convergence of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Multiple Structural Breaks in OECD Countries”, Economic Modelling, 26(6),1375-1381.
17. Leybourne, S. Newbold, P. Ve Vougas, D. (1998), “Unit Roots and Smooth Transitions”, Journal of Time Series Analysis, 19(1),83-97.
18. Li, X-L., Tang, D.P. and Chang, T. (2014), “CO2 Emissions Converge in the 50 U.S. States – Sequential Panel Selection Method”, Economic Modelling, 40,320-333.
19. Li, X. ve Lin, B. (2013), “Global Convergence in Per Capita CO2 Emissions”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 24,357-363.
20. Nelson, C.R., ve Plosser, C.I. (1982), “Trends and Random Walks in Macroeconomics Time Series: Some Evidence and Implications”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 10,139-162.
21. Nguyen-Van, P. (2005), “Distribution Dynamics of CO2 Emissions”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 32(4),495-508.
22. Ordas-Criado, C., Grether, J. M. (2011), “Convergence in Per Capita CO2 Emissions: A Robust Distributional Approach”, Resorces and Energy Economics, 33(3), 637- 665.
23. Panopoulou, E., Pantelidis, T. (2009), “Club Convergence in Carbon Dioxide Emissions”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 44(1),47-70.
24. Pettersson, F., Maddison, D., Acar, S.ve Söderholm, P. (2014), “Convergence of Carbon Dioxide Emissions: A Review of the Literature”, International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 7(2),141-178.
25. Quere, L. C. Raupach, M. R. Canadell, J. G. Marland, G. (2009), “Trends in the Sources and Sinks of Cabon Dioxide”, Nature Geoscience, 2,831-826.
26. Romero-Avila, D. (2008), “Convergence in Carbon Dioxide Emissions among Industrialised Countries Revisited”, Energy Economics, 30(5),2265-2282.
27. Sollis, R. (2004), “Asymmetric Adjustment and Smooth Transitions: A Combinations of Some Unit Root Tests”, Journal of Time Series Analysis, 25(3),409-417.
28. Sollis, R. (2009), “A Simple Unit Root Test Asymmetric STAR Nonlinearity With An Application To Real Exchange Rates In Nordic Countries”, Economic Modelling, 26(1),118-125.
29. Stern, D.I. (2014), “The Enviromental Kuznets Curve: A Primer”, CCEP Working Paper 1404.
30. Strazicich, M. C., List, J. A. (2003), “Are CO2 Emission Levels Converging Among Industrial Countries?”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 24(3),263-271.
31. Sun, L. ve Wang, M. (1996), “Global Warming and Global Dioxide Emissions: An Empirical Study”, Journal of Environmental Management, 46(4),327-343.
32. Şaylan, İ.B. (2010), “İklim Değişikliği ile Uluslararası Mücadelenin Ekonomik ve Mali Boyutu ve Avrupa Birliği Politikaları” T.C. Maliye Bakanlığı Avrupa Birliği ve Dış İlişkiler Dairesi Başkanlığı, Avrupa Birliği Uzmanlık Tezi.
33. United Nations, (1992), “United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, United Nations”,FCCC/INFORMAL/84,Ge.05- 62220(E),200705.https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf.
34. United Nations, (2012), “World Investment Report 2002: Transnational Corporations and Export Competetiveness”, United Nations Conference Trade and Development, UNCTAD/WIR/2002, New York and Geneva.
35. Wang, Y., Zhang, P. Huang, D. Cai, C. (2014), “Convergence Behavior of Carbon Dioxide Emissions in China”, Economic Modelling, 43,75-80.
36. Wang, J. ve Zhang, K. (2014), “Convergence of Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Different Sectors in China”, Energy, 65,605-611.
37. Westerlund, J., Basher, S. A. (2007), “Testing for Convergence in Carbon Dioxide Emissions Using a Century of Panel Data”, MPRA Paper No. 3262, http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/3262/
38. Yavuz, N. C., Yılancı, V. (2013), “Convergence in Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions Among G7 Countries: A TAR Panel Unit Root Approach”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 54(2),83-291.