Ekonomik Büyüme, Dijitalleşme ve Yenilenebilir Enerjinin Karbon Emisyonları Üzerindeki Etkisi: OECD Ülkeleri Üzerine İkinci Nesil Bir Panel Veri Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 38 OECD üyesi ülkenin 2000-2022 dönemine ait verilerini kullanarak ekonomik büyüme, bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri (BİT) ile yenilenebilir enerji tüketiminin çevresel kalite (karbon emisyonları) üzerindeki uzun dönemli etkilerini incelemek ve Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (ÇKE) hipotezinin geçerliliğini test etmektir. Analiz sürecinde, küreselleşmenin yarattığı makroekonomik şokları ve ülkeler arası etkileşimi dikkate alabilmek amacıyla yatay kesit bağımlılığını kontrol eden ikinci nesil panel veri teknikleri (Pesaran CD, CIPS Birim Kök ve Westerlund Eşbütünleşme) kullanılmıştır. Uzun dönem esneklik katsayıları Havuzlanmış Ortalama Grup (PMG/ARDL) ve Dinamik En Küçük Kareler (DOLS) tahmincileri ile elde edilmiştir. Elde edilen ampirik bulgular, OECD ülkelerinde ekonomik büyüme ile karbon emisyonları arasında ters "U" şeklinde bir ilişkinin varlığını (ÇKE hipotezini) güçlü bir şekilde doğrulamaktadır. Eğrinin dönüm noktası, kişi başına düşen milli gelirde yaklaşık 53.103 ABD Doları olarak hesaplanmıştır. Ayrıca, internet kullanımı ile temsil edilen BİT penetrasyonundaki ve yenilenebilir enerji tüketimindeki artışların uzun dönemde karbon emisyonlarını istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve asimetrik düzeylerde azalttığı kanıtlanmıştır. Çalışma, çevresel sürdürülebilirliğin sağlanması ve Paris İklim Anlaşması hedeflerine ulaşılabilmesi için OECD ülkelerinin sadece büyüme odaklı değil; yeşil enerji destekli ve dijital optimizasyona (Yeşil BİT) dayalı bir kalkınma modeli benimsemeleri gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi
• Karbon Emisyonu
• Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri (BİT)
• Yenilenebilir Enerji
• İkinci Nesil Panel Veri Analizi
• OECD.

The Impact of Economic Growth, Digitalization, and Renewable Energy on Carbon Emissions: A Second-Generation Panel Data Analysis on OECD Countries

Öz

The objective of this study is to examine the long-term effects of economic growth, information and communication technologies (ICT), and renewable energy consumption on environmental quality (carbon emissions) and to test the validity of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis, using data from 38 OECD member countries for the period 2000-2022. During the analysis, second-generation panel data techniques (Pesaran CD, CIPS Unit Root, and Westerlund Cointegration) were employed to control for cross-sectional dependence, thereby accounting for macroeconomic shocks and cross-country interactions driven by globalization. Long-run elasticity coefficients were obtained using Pooled Mean Group (PMG/ARDL) and Dynamic Ordinary Least Squares (DOLS) estimators. The empirical findings strongly confirm the existence of an inverted "U" shaped relationship (the EKC hypothesis) between economic growth and carbon emissions in OECD countries. The turning point of the curve is calculated at approximately 53,103 USD per capita income. Furthermore, it is proven that increases in ICT penetration, represented by internet usage, and renewable energy consumption significantly and asymmetrically reduce carbon emissions in the long run. The study concludes that in order to ensure environmental sustainability and achieve the targets of the Paris Agreement, OECD countries must adopt a development model that is not solely growth-oriented, but rather supported by green energy and driven by digital optimization (Green ICT).

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Environmental Kuznets Curve
• Carbon Emission
• Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)
• Renewable Energy
• Second-Generation Panel Data Analysis
• OECD.

Kaynakça

1. Almeida, D., Carvalho, L., Ferreira, P., Dionísio, A., & Haq, I. U. (2024). Global dynamics of environmental Kuznets curve: A cross-correlation analysis of income and CO2 emissions. Sustainability, 16(20), 9089. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16209089
2. Amri, F., Ben Zaied, Y., & Ben Lahouel, B. (2019). ICT, total factor productivity, and carbon dioxide emissions in Tunisia. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 212-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.05.028
3. Añón Higón, D., Gholami, R., & Shirazi, F. (2017). ICT and environmental sustainability: A global perspective. Telematics and Informatics, 34(4), 85-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.01.001
4. Avom, D., Ndoung, M., & Carmignani, F. (2020). Information and communication technology (ICT) and environmental quality in Sub-Saharan Africa. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(30), 37746-37761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08144-8
5. Balsalobre-Lorente, D., Shahbaz, M., Roubaud, D., & Farhani, S. (2018). How economic growth, renewable electricity and natural resources contribute to CO2 emissions? Energy Policy, 113, 356-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.050
6. Brock, W. A., & Taylor, M. S. (2005). Economic growth and the environment: A review of theory and empirics. Handbook of Economic Growth, 1(B), 1749-1821. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0684(05)01028-2
7. Chien, F., Anwar, A., Hsu, C. C., Zhang, Y. Q., Ahmad, P., & Bokhari, A. (2021). The role of information and communication technology in meeting carbon mitigation targets and achieving sustainable development in BRICS. Journal of Cleaner Production, 311, 127641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127641
8. Danish, Khan, N., Baloch, M. A., Saud, S., & Fatima, T. (2018). The effect of ICT on CO2 emissions in emerging economies: Does the level of income matters? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(23), 22850-22860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2379-2

9. Demir Gülbahar, S., Şahin Dağlı, S. ve Çelik, İ. (2022). Çevresel Kuznets eğrisi hipotezi'nin Türkiye'de geçerliliğinin testi. Muhasebe ve Finans İncelemeleri Dergisi, 5(2), 150-162. https://doi.org/10.32951/mufider.1133427
10. Erdinç, Z. ve Aydınbaş, G. (2023). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için çevre kirliliği ile ilişkili unsurların tespiti: Panel veri analizi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 25(3), 1050-1067. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1081596
11. Godil, D. I., Yu, Z., Sharif, A., & Usman, 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2167
12. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 3914. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914
13. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353-377. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118443
14. Haldar, A., & Sethi, N. (2022). Environmental effects of information and communication technology-Exploring the roles of renewable energy, innovation, trade and financial development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 153, 111754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111754
15. Haseeb, A., Xia, E., Saud, S., Ahmad, A., & Khurshid, H. (2019). Does information and communication technologies improve environmental quality in the era of globalization? An empirical analysis of BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(9), 8594-8608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04331-x
16. Kılınç, E. (2021). Ekolojik ayak izi-enerji Ar-Ge harcamaları ilişkisi: OECD ülkeleri örneği. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(3), 851-867. https://doi.org/10.25287/ohuiibf.869408
17. Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1-28.
18. Lee, J. W., & Brahmasrene, T. (2014). ICT, CO2 emissions and economic growth: Evidence from ASEAN. Telematics and Informatics, 31(1), 45-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2013.04.002
19. Nathaniel, S. P., Yalçınkaya, Ö., & Bekun, F. V. (2021). Assessing the environmental sustainability corridor: Linking natural resources, renewable energy, human capital, and ecological footprint in BRICS. Resources Policy, 70, 101924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101924
20. Panayotou, T. (1997). Demystifying the environmental Kuznets curve: Turning a black box into a policy tool. Environment and Development Economics, 2(4), 465-484. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X9700013X
21. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0435, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
22. 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.
23. Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., & Ozturk, I. (2016). The effects of internet usage and economic growth on CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 1226-1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.018
24. Shabani, Z. (2024). Evaluating the environmental Kuznets curve: The role of renewable energy. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 14(1), 540-547. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijeep.15284
25. Shan, S., Genç, S. Y., Kamran, H. W., & Dinca, G. (2021). Role of green technology innovation and renewable energy in carbon neutrality: A sustainable investigation from Turkey. Journal of Environmental Management, 294, 113004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113004
26. StataCorp. (2021). Stata Statistical Software: Release 17. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC.
27. Stern, D. I. (2004). The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419-1439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.03.004
28. Tahvonen, O., & Kuuluvainen, J. (1993). Economic growth, pollution, and renewable resources. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 24(2), 101-118.
29. Ulucak, R., & Bilgili, F. (2018). A robust investigation of the relationship between ecological footprint and real income: Evidence from the top 10 emitting countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 156-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.043
30. Usman, A., Ozturk, I., Ullah, S., & Hassan, A. (2021). Does ICT have symmetric or asymmetric effects on CO2 emissions? Evidence from selected Asian economies. Technology in Society, 67, 101692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101692
31. Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709-748.
32. World Bank. (2023). World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Erişim adresi: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
33. Zafar, M. W., Shahbaz, M., Hou, F., & Sinha, A. (2019). From nonrenewable energy to renewable energy: Does the environmental Kuznets curve exist for OECD countries? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 108, 316-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.03.003