Tarımsal verimlilik, ekonomik büyüme ve karbon emisyonu arasındaki ilişki: Türk Cumhuriyetlerinden kanıtlar

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, Türk Cumhuriyetleri ülkelerinde (Azerbaycan, Kazakistan, Kırgızistan, Özbekistan, Tacikistan, Türkiye ve Türkmenistan) 1992–2022 dönemi yıllık verileri kullanılarak tarımsal verimlilik, ekonomik büyüme ve karbon (CO₂) emisyonu arasındaki nedensellik ilişkilerinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Tasarım/Metodoloji/Yaklaşım: Analizde, CD ve homojenlik testlerinin ardından ikinci nesil birim kök testi olarak CADF yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Ardından eş bütünleşme testi yapılmıştır. Nedensellik ilişkileri ise Kónya panel nedensellik testiyle analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: Bulgulara göre panel düzeyinde CO₂’den tarımsal verimliliğe doğru bir nedensellik tespit edilirken, tarımsal verimlilikten CO₂’ye doğru bir nedensellik ilişkisi gözlenmemiştir. Benzer şekilde tarımsal verimlilikten ekonomik büyümeye doğru nedensellik ilişkisi bulunurken, ekonomik büyümeden tarımsal verimliliğe doğru herhangi bir nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilememiştir. Ayrıca ekonomik büyüme ile CO₂ arasında panel düzeyinde çift yönlü nedensellik tespit edilmiştir. Yatay kesit düzeyinde ülke bazlı sonuçlar ise ilişkilerin farklılaştığını ortaya koymuştur. Kazakistan’da CO₂ ile tarımsal verimlilik arasında çift yönlü nedensellik, Türkiye ve Türkmenistan’da CO₂’den tarımsal verimliliğe doğru nedensellik bulunmuştur. Kazakistan, Kırgızistan ve Türkiye’de ekonomik büyüme ve CO₂ arasında çift yönlü nedensellik, Özbekistan ve Türkmenistan’da CO₂’den ekonomik büyümeye doğru nedensellik tespit edilmiştir. Tacikistan ve Türkmenistan’da tarımsal verimlilikten ekonomik büyümeye bir nedensellik, Türkiye’de ekonomik büyümeden tarımsal verimliliğe doğru bir nedensellik bulunmuştur. Özgünlük/Değer: Bu çalışma, karbon emisyonu, tarımsal verimlilik ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi Türk Cumhuriyetleri özelinde inceleyen nadir araştırmalardan biri olup, 1992-2022 dönemine ait uzun dönemli veriler ve ikinci nesil panel veri yöntemleri kullanarak literatüre metodolojik ve bölgesel açıdan özgün katkılar sunmaktadır. Elde edilen bulgular, bölgeye özgü dinamikler ışığında sürdürülebilir kalkınma politikalarına yön verecek niteliktedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ekonomik büyüme
• karbon emisyonu
• tarımsal verimlilik
• Türk Cumhuriyetleri

The relationship between agricultural productivity, economic growth and carbon emissions: Evidence from the Turkic Republics

Öz

Purpose: This study aims to examine the causality relationships between agricultural productivity, economic growth and carbon (CO₂) emissions using annual data for the period 1992–2022 in the Turkic Republics (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Türkiye and Turkmenistan). Design/Methodology/Approach: In the analysis, the CADF method was used as the second-generation unit root test after the CD and homogeneity tests. Then, the cointegration test was performed. The panel causality relationships were analyzed using the causality test by Kónya. Findings: According to the findings, while a causality from CO₂ to agricultural productivity was detected at the panel level, no causality was observed from agricultural productivity to CO₂. Similarly, while there was a causal relationship from agricultural productivity to economic growth, no causal relationship from economic growth to agricultural productivity could be detected. In addition, bidirectional causality was found between economic growth and CO₂ at the panel level. At the cross-sectional level, country-based results revealed that relations differed. A bidirectional causality was found between CO₂ and agricultural productivity in Kazakhstan, and a causality from CO₂ to agricultural productivity was found in Türkiye and Turkmenistan. Bidirectional causality between economic growth and CO₂ was found in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Türkiye, and causality from CO₂ to economic growth was found in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. A causality from agricultural productivity to economic growth was found in Tajikistan and Turkmenistan, and economic growth to agricultural productivity in Türkiye. Originality/Value: This study is one of the rare studies examining the relationship between carbon emissions, agricultural productivity and economic growth in the Turkish Republics, and offers original methodological and regional contributions to the literature by using long-term data for the period 1992-2022 and second-generation panel data methods. The findings will guide sustainable development policies in the light of region-specific dynamics.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Economic growth
• carbon emissions
• agricultural productivity
• Turkic Republics

Kaynakça

1. Agboola, M. O. and Bekun, F. V. (2019), "Does agricultural value added induce environmental degradation? Empirical evidence from an agrarian country", Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 26 No. 27, pp. 27660-27676.
2. Agboola, M. O., Bekun, F. V., Osundina, O. A. and Kirikkaleli, D. (2022), "Revisiting the economic growth and agriculture nexus in Nigeria: evidence from asymmetric cointegration and frequency domain causality approaches", Journal of Public Affairs, Vol. 22 No. 1, p. e2271.
3. Akadiri, S. S., Bekun, F. V., Taheri, E. and Akadiri, A. C. (2019), "Carbon emissions, energy consumption and economic growth: a causality evidence", International Journal of Energy Technology and Policy, Vol. 15 No. 2-3, pp. 320-336.
4. Alam, M. J., Begum, I. A., Buysse, J. and Van Huylenbroeck, G. (2012), "Energy consumption, carbon emissions and economic growth nexus in Bangladesh: Cointegration and dynamic causality analysis", Energy policy, Vol. 45, pp. 217-225.
5. Alhassan, H. (2021), "The effect of agricultural total factor productivity on environmental degradation in sub-Saharan Africa", Scientific African, Vol. 12, p. e00740.
6. Ali, E. B. and Anufriev, V. P. (2020), "The causal relationship between agricultural production, economic growth, and energy consumption in Ghana", R-Economy. 2020. Vol. 6. Iss. 4, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 231-241.
7. Ali, S., Gucheng, L., Ying, L., Ishaq, M. and Shah, T. (2019), "The relationship between carbon dioxide emissions, economic growth and agricultural production in Pakistan: an autoregressive distributed lag analysis", Energies, Vol. 12 No. 24, p. 4644.
8. Altıntaş, H. (2013), "Türkiye’de birincil enerji tüketimi, karbondioksit emisyonu ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi", Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 263-294.

9. Appiah, K., Du, J. and Poku, J. (2018), "Causal relationship between agricultural production and carbon dioxide emissions in selected emerging economies", Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 25, pp. 24764-24777.
10. Atchadé, M. N. and Nougbodé, H. (2024), "Statistical investigation on the relationship between climate change, food availability, agricultural productivity, and economic expansion", Heliyon, Vol. 10 No. 12.
11. Awokuse, T. O. and Xie, R. (2015), "Does agriculture really matter for economic growth in developing countries?", Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 77-99.
12. Aydın, F. F., Eştürk, Ö. and Levent, C. (2024), "Tarımsal Verimliliğin Ekonomik Büyüme ve Kentleşme Üzerindeki Etkisi: BRICS-T Ülkeleri Örneği", Tarım Ekonomisi Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
13. Baltagi, B. H. and Baltagi, B. H. (2008), Econometric analysis of panel data, Springer.
14. Bashir, A., Suhel, A., Azwardi, A., Atiyatna, D. P., Hamidi, I. and Adnan, N. (2019), "The causality between agriculture, industry, and economic growth: Evidence from Indonesia", Etikonomi, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 155-168.
15. Bayar, Y. and Şaşmaz, M. Ü. (2016), "Karbon vergisi, ekonomik büyüme ve CO2 emisyonu arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi: Danimarka, Finlandiya, Hollanda, İsveç ve Norveç örneği", International Journal of Applied Economic and Finance Studies, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 32-41.
16. Ben Jebli, M. and Ben Youssef, S. (2019), "Combustible renewables and waste consumption, agriculture, CO2 emissions and economic growth in Brazil", Carbon Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 309-321.
17. Birleşmiş Milletler. (2025). Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Amaçları. [Erişim Tarihi: 01.05.2025] https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals.
18. Breitung, J. and Pesaran, M. H. (2008), "Unit roots and cointegration in panels", The econometrics of panel data: Fundamentals and recent developments in theory and practice, Springer, pp. 279-322.
19. Breusch, T. S. and Pagan, A. R. (1980), "The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics", The review of economic studies, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 239-253.
20. Ceylan, A. and Şahbaz, A. (2024), "Orta Asya Türk Cumhuriyetlerinde Dış Ticaret, Ekonomik Büyüme ve Yoksulluk İlişkisi", Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 667-683.
21. Chandio, A. A., Akram, W., Ozturk, I., Ahmad, M. and Ahmad, F. (2021), "Towards long-term sustainable environment: does agriculture and renewable energy consumption matter?", Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 28 No. 38, pp. 53141-53160.
22. Chang, C.-C. (2010), "A multivariate causality test of carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China", Applied Energy, Vol. 87 No. 11, pp. 3533-3537.
23. Çetin, M., Saygın, S. and Demir, H. (2020), "Tarım sektörünün çevre kirliliği üzerindeki etkisi: Türkiye ekonomisi için bir eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi", Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 329-345.
24. Dağ, K. and Aktaş, E. (2024). "İklim değişikliğinin Türkiye tarımına etkileri.", Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 173-181.
25. Dilanchiev, A., Umair, M. and Haroon, M. (2024), "How causality impacts the renewable energy, carbon emissions, and economic growth nexus in the South Caucasus Countries?", Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 31 No. 22, pp. 33069-33085.
26. Dinç, Ö. G. (2022), "Türkiye’de tarım, sanayi ve hizmet sektörleri ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişki: Bootstrap Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi", İşletme Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 226-233.
27. Dritsaki, C. and Dritsaki, M. (2014), "Causal relationship between energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emissions: A dynamic panel data approach", International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 125-136.
28. Durgun, A. and Bülbül, Ş. (2024), "Enerji ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi: Türk Cumhuriyetleri üzerine panel analiz", 21. Yüzyılda Eğitim ve Toplum, Vol. 13 No. 38, pp. 465-481.
29. Dünya Bankası. (2025). Dünya Kalkınma Göstergeleri. [Erişim Tarihi: 01.02.2025] https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators.
30. Ergül, M. and Karataş, A. R. (2024), "The Relationship between Agricultural Production, Agricultural Exports and Economic Growth in Türkiye: Cointegration and Causality Analysis", Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, Vol. 22 No. 54, pp. 2144-2168.
31. Esso, L. J. and Keho, Y. (2016), "Energy consumption, economic growth and carbon emissions: Cointegration and causality evidence from selected African countries", Energy, Vol. 114, pp. 492-497.
32. FAOSTAT. (2025). Food and Agriculture Organization Statistical Database. [Erişim Tarihi: 10.06.2025] https://www.fao.org/faostat/en.
33. Gorus, M. S. and Aydin, M. (2019), "The relationship between energy consumption, economic growth, and CO2 emission in MENA countries: Causality analysis in the frequency domain", Energy, Vol. 168, pp. 815-822.
34. Guo, L., Song, Y., Zhao, S., Tang, M., Guo, Y., Su, M. and Li, H. (2022), "Dynamic linkage between aging, mechanizations and carbon emissions from agricultural production", International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 19 No. 10, p. 6191.
35. Honrao, P. M. (2016), "A causal analysis of agricultural performance and economic growth in India", Asian Journal of Research in Business Economics and Management, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 27-37.
36. Hu, F., Gan, Y., Cui, H., Zhao, C., Feng, F., Yin, W. and Chai, Q. (2016), "Intercropping maize and wheat with conservation agriculture principles improves water harvesting and reduces carbon emissions in dry areas", European Journal of Agronomy, Vol. 74, pp. 9-17.
37. Kapusuzoğlu, A. (2014), "Causality Relationships between Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth: Results from a Multi-Country Study", International Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 8 No. 2.
38. Katircioglu, S. T. (2006), "Causality between agriculture and economic growth in a small nation under political isolation: A case from North Cyprus", International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 331-343.
39. Kivyiro, P. and Arminen, H. (2014), "Carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, and foreign direct investment: Causality analysis for Sub-Saharan Africa", Energy, Vol. 74, pp. 595-606.
40. Konya, L. (2006), "Exports and growth: Granger causality analysis on OECD countries with a panel data approach", Economic modelling, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 978-992.
41. Konya, S., Küçüksucu, M. and Kabaloğlu, G. (2023), "Türk Cumhuriyetlerinde Okun Yasası'nın Sınanması: 1991-2019 Dönemine Ait Ampirik Bir Analiz", Turkish Studies-Economics, Finance, Politics, Vol. 18 No. 3.
42. Köstekçi, A., Yıldız, A., Gülcü, Y. and Çakır, M. A. (2023), "İyi yönetişimin seçilmiş sosyal ve ekonomik göstergeler üzerindeki etkileri: Orta Asya Türk cumhuriyetleri ve Türkiye örneği", EKEV Akademi Dergisi, No. Özel Sayı, pp. 77-100.
43. Leitão, N. C. and Balogh, J. M. (2020), "The impact of energy consumption and agricultural production on carbon dioxide emissions in Portugal", AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 49-59.
44. Liu, Y., Yan, B. and Zhou, Y. (2016), "Urbanization, economic growth, and carbon dioxide emissions in China: A panel cointegration and causality analysis", Journal of Geographical Sciences, Vol. 26, pp. 131-152.
45. Mirza, F. M. and Kanwal, A. (2017), "Energy consumption, carbon emissions and economic growth in Pakistan: Dynamic causality analysis", Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 72, pp. 1233-1240.
46. Mohammed, R. (2020), "The causality between agriculture and economic growth in the Arab world", Eurasian Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 54-67.
47. Mwangi, M. and Kariuki, S. (2015), "Factors determining adoption of new agricultural technology by smallholder farmers in developing countries", Journal of Economics and sustainable development, Vol. 6 No. 5.
48. Ngarava, S., Zhou, L., Ayuk, J. and Tatsvarei, S. (2019), "Achieving food security in a climate change environment: considerations for environmental Kuznets curve use in the South African agricultural sector", Climate, Vol. 7 No. 9, p. 108.
49. Obradović, S. and Lojanica, N. (2017), "Energy use, CO2 emissions and economic growth–causality on a sample of SEE countries", Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 511-526.
50. Oğul, B. (2022). "İklim değişikliği tarım sektörünü nasıl etkiliyor? Türkiye Ekonomisi üzerine ekonometrik bir uygulama.", Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 151-162.
51. Oyinbo, O. and Rekwot, G. Z. (2014), "The relationships of inflationary trend, agricultural productivity and economic growth in Nigeria", CBN Journal of Applied Statistics, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 35-47.
52. Pesaran, M. H. (2004), "General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers", Economics, Vol. 1240 No. 1, p. 1.
53. Pesaran, M. H. (2007), "A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence", Journal of applied econometrics, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 265-312.
54. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A. and Yamagata, T. (2008), "A bias‐adjusted LM test of error cross‐section independence", The econometrics journal, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 105-127.
55. Pesaran, M. H. and Yamagata, T. (2008), "Testing slope homogeneity in large panels", Journal of econometrics, Vol. 142 No. 1, pp. 50-93.
56. Qiao, H., Zheng, F., Jiang, H. and Dong, K. (2019), "The greenhouse effect of the agriculture-economic growth-renewable energy nexus: evidence from G20 countries", Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 671, pp. 722-731.
57. Rafiq, S., Salim, R. and Apergis, N. (2016), "Agriculture, trade openness and emissions: an empirical analysis and policy options", Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 60 No. 3, pp. 348-365.
58. Raihan, A. (2023). "The dynamic nexus between economic growth, renewable energy use, urbanization, industrialization, tourism, agricultural productivity, forest area, and carbon dioxide emissions in the Philippines.", Energy Nexus, Vol. 9, p. 100180.
59. Raihan, A., Ibrahim, S. and Muhtasim, D. A. (2023), "Dynamic impacts of economic growth, energy use, tourism, and agricultural productivity on carbon dioxide emissions in Egypt", World development sustainability, Vol. 2, p. 100059.
60. Raihan, A. and Said, M. N. M. (2022), "Cost–benefit analysis of climate change mitigation measures in the forestry sector of Peninsular Malaysia", Earth Systems and Environment, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 405-419.
61. Raihan, A. and Tuspekova, A. (2022), "Dynamic impacts of economic growth, renewable energy use, urbanization, industrialization, tourism, agriculture, and forests on carbon emissions in Turkey", Carbon Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 20.
62. Rehman, A., Alam, M. M., Alvarado, R., Işık, C., Ahmad, F., Cismas, L. M. and Pupazan, M. C. M. (2022). "Carbonization and agricultural productivity in Bhutan: Investigating the impact of crops production, fertilizer usage, and employment on CO2 emissions.", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 375, p. 134178.
63. Shahbaz, M., Jam, F. A., Bibi, S. and Loganathan, N. (2016), "Multivariate Granger causality between CO2 emissions, energy intensity and economic growth in Portugal: evidence from cointegration and causality analysis", Technological and Economic Development of Economy, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 47-74.
64. Sirag, A., Matemilola, B. T., Law, S. H. and Bany-Ariffin, A. (2018), "Does environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis exist? Evidence from dynamic panel threshold", Journal of environmental economics and policy, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 145-165.
65. Swamy, P. A. (1970), "Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model", Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pp. 311-323.
66. Şengül, S. (2025). "Uncovering time-varying drivers of agricultural output in Türkiye: A panel ARDL and Kalman Filter Analysis.", Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 119-132.
67. Toyin, M. E. (2016), "Causality relationship between agricultural exports and economic growth: Evidence from South Africa", Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 48 No. 1-2, pp. 129-136.
68. Uddin, M. M. (2015), "Causal relationship between agriculture, industry and services sector for GDP growth in Bangladesh: An econometric investigation", Journal of Poverty, Investment Development, Vol. 8.
69. Urriola Canchari, N. N., Aquino Rodriguez, C. A. and Baral, P. (2018), "The impact of traditional and non-traditional agricultural exports on the economic growth of Peru: a short-and long-run analysis", Studies in Agricultural Economics, Vol. 120 No. 3, pp. 157-165.
70. Usman, M., Anwar, S., Yaseen, M. R., Makhdum, M. S. A., Kousar, R. and Jahanger, A. (2022), "Unveiling the dynamic relationship between agriculture value addition, energy utilization, tourism and environmental degradation in South Asia", Journal of Public Affairs, Vol. 22 No. 4, p. e2712.
71. Özbay, Ü. (2023), "Türkiye'de Sanayileşme, CO2 Emisyonu, Ekonomik Büyüme ve Tarımsal Üretim İlişkisi: Ampirik Bir Uygulama.", Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 79-91.
72. Yang, X., Liu, Y., Bezama, A. and Thrän, D. (2024), "Agricultural carbon emission efficiency and agricultural practices: Implications for balancing carbon emissions reduction and agricultural productivity increment", Environmental Development, Vol. 50, p. 101004.
73. Zhang, K., Dong, J., Huang, L. and Xie, H. (2019), "China's carbon dioxide emissions: An interprovincial comparative analysis of foreign capital and domestic capital", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 237, p. 117753.
74. Zuhal, M. and Göcen, S. (2024), "The relationship between CO2 emissions, renewable energy and economic growth in the US: evidence from symmetric and asymmetric spectral granger causality analysis", Environment, Development and Sustainability, pp. 1-22.