An Empirical Analysis on the Determinants of Environmental Kuznets and Load Capacity Curves of Forests in Türkiye

Abstract

This study emphasizes the need for effective forest management strategies, particularly with regard to the conservation and regeneration of forests, in line with the Sustainable Development Goals. In this regard, the study aims to analyze the effects of economic growth, renewable energy consumption, life expectancy at birth and openness to international trade on the environmental conditions of Türkiye's forests for the period 1974-2021. To achieve this goal, the study tested the long-term relationship between the variables using the Bayer-Hanck cointegration method. Subsequently, the long-run coefficients were estimated using fully modified least squares and the canonical cointegration regression method. The results show that the environmental Kuznets curve and load capacity curve hypotheses are valid for the forests. It is concluded that as Türkiye’s economic growth increases, the environmental conditions of the country's forests will improve in the long term. The study also shows that increasing demand for renewable energy sources and increasing life expectancy have a positive effect on the environment, while increasing openness worsens environmental quality. These results show that it is very important to ensure the sustainability of the country's forests and maintain their biological capacity.

Keywords

• Deforestation
• Life Expectancy
• Environmental Kuznets Curve
• Load Capacity Curves

Türkiye’de Ormanların Çevresel Kuznets ve Yük Kapasite Eğrilerinin Belirleyicileri Üzerine Ampirik Bir Analiz

Öz

Bu çalışma, sürdürülebilir kalkınma hedefleri doğrultusunda, özellikle ormanların korunması ve yenilenmesi ile ilgili etkin orman yönetimi stratejilerine duyulan ihtiyacı vurgulamaktadır. Bununla bağlantılı olarak çalışma; ekonomik büyüme, yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi, doğuşta beklenen yaşam süresi ve ticari dışa açıklığın Türkiye’nin ormanlarının çevresel koşulları üzerindeki etkilerini 1974-2021 dönemi için analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu amacı gerçekleştirmek için çalışmada, Bayer-Hanck eşbütünleşme yöntemi ile değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli ilişki test edilmiştir. Ardından tam düzeltilmiş en küçük kareler ve kanonik eşbütünleşme regresyonu yöntemleri kullanılarak uzun dönem katsayıları tahmin edilmiştir. Sonuçlar, ormanlar için çevresel Kuznets eğrisi ve yük kapasite eğrisi hipotezlerinin geçerli olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Türkiye’nin ekonomik büyümesi arttıkça, ülke ormanlarının çevresel koşullarının uzun vadede iyileştiği sonucuna varılmıştır. Araştırma ayrıca, yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarına yönelik artan talebin ve beklenen yaşam süresinin uzamasının çevre üzerinde olumlu bir etkiye sahip olduğunu, ticari dışa açıklık düzeyindeki artışın ise çevresel kaliteyi kötüleştirdiğini göstermektedir. Elde edilen bu sonuçlar, ülke ormanlarının sürdürülebilirliğini sağlamanın ve biyolojik kapasitelerini korumanın oldukça önemli olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ormansızlaşma
• Beklenen Yaşam Süresi
• Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi
• Yük Kapasite Eğrisi

Kaynakça

1. Ahakwa, I., Tackie, E. A., Sarpong, F. A., Korankye, B., Ofori, E. K., Odai, L. A. Musah, M. (2024). Retraction Note: Revisiting the Impact of Trade Openness on Environmental Sustainability in Belt and Road Countries: A Heterogeneous Panel Approach. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 31(31), 44450. Doi:10.1007/S11356-024-34167-Z.
2. Ahmed, K., Shahbaz, M., Qasim, A. ve Long, W. (2015). The Linkages between Deforestation, Energy and Growth for Environmental Degradation in Pakistan. Ecological Indicators, 49, 95-103.
3. Ajanaku, B. A. ve Collins, A. R. (2021). Economic Growth and Deforestation in African Countries: is the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis Applicable? For Policy Econ., 129:102488.
4. Akhayere, E., Kartal, M. T., Adebayo, T. S. ve Kavaz, D. (2023). Role of Energy Consumption and Trade Openness towards Environmental Sustainability in Turkey. Environ Sci Pollut Res., 30, 21156–21168 Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S11356-022-23639-9
5. Al-Mulali, U., Weng-Wai, C., Sheau-Ting, L. ve Mohammed, A. H. (2015). Investigating The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Hypothesis By Utilizing The Ecological Footprint As An Indicator of Environmental Degradation. Ecol. Indic., 48, 315–323
6. Alola, A. A., Bekun, F. V., ve Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Dynamic Impact of Trade Policy, Economic Growth, Fertility Rate, Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption on Ecological Footprint in Europe. Science of the Total Environment, 685, 702-709.
7. Alola, A. A., Ozkan, O. ve Usman, O. (2023). Role of Non-Renewable Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Driving Environmental Sustainability in India: Evidence From The Load Capacity Factor Hypothesis. Energies, 16(6), 2847.
8. Alola, A., A., Adebayo, T. S., ve Onifade, S. T. (2021). Examining the Dynamics of Ecological Footprint in China with Spectral Granger Causality and Quantile- On-Quantile Approaches. Int. J. Sustainable Development World Ecol., 1. 1–14. Doi:10.1080/13504509.2021.1990158

9. Altıntas, H. ve Kassouri, Y. (2020). Is the Environmental Kuznets Curve in Europe Related to the Per-Capita Ecological Footprint or CO2 Emissions? Ecol. Indicat., 113, 106187 Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Ecolind.2020.106187.
10. Amarante, J. C. A., Besarria, C. D. N., Souza, H. G. D. ve Dos Anjos Junior, O. R. (2021). The Relationship Between Economic Growth, Renewable and Nonrenewable Energy Use And CO2 Emissions: Empirical Evidences For Brazil. Greenhouse Gases: Science And Technology, 11(3), 411-431.
11. Apergis, N. ve Ozturk, I. (2015). Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis in Asian Countries. Ecol. Indic., 52, 16–22.
12. Ayad, H., Hassoun, S. S., Abdelkader, S. B. ve Sallam, O. A. A. J. (2024). Assessing Deforestation in the Brazilian Forests: An Econometric Inquiry into the Load Capacity Curve For Deforestation. Forest Policy and Economics, 159, 103135.
13. Banerjee, A., Dolado, J. ve Mestre, R. (1998). Error-Correction Mechanism Tests For Cointegration in A Single-Equation Framework. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 19(3), 267-283.
14. Barbier, E. B. (2004). Explaining Agricultural Land Expansion and Deforestation in Developing Countries. am. J. Agric. Econ., 86(5), 1347–1353.
15. Bayer, C. ve Hanck, C. (2013). Combining Non‐Cointegration Tests. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 34(1), 83-95.
16. Bekun, F. V. (2024). Race to Carbon Neutrality in South Africa: What Role Does Environmental Technological Innovation Play? Appl. Energy, 354, 122212. Https:// Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Apenergy.2023.122212
17. Bernard, J. ve Mandal, S. K. (2016). The Impact of Trade Openness on Environmental Quality: An Empirical Analysis of Emerging and Developing Economies. WIT Transactions on Ecology and The Environment, 203, 195-208, 10.2495/EID160181.
18. Boswijk, H. P. (1995). Efficient Inference on Cointegration Parameters in Structural Error Correction Models. Journal of Econometrics, 69(1), 133-158.
19. Caglar, A. E., Destek, M. A. ve Manga, M. (2024). Analyzing the load capacity curve hypothesis for the Turkiye: a perspective for the sustainable environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 444, 141232.
20. Caravaggio, N. (2020). A Global Empirical Re-Assessment of the Environmental Kuznets Curve for Deforestation. For. Policy Econ., 119, 102282.
21. Cary, M. ve Bekun, F. V. (2021). Democracy and Deforestation: The Role of Spillover Effects. Forest Policy Econ., 125, 102398.
22. Charfeddine, L. Mrabet, Z. (2017). The Impact of Economic Development and Social-Political Factors on Ecological Footprint: A Panel Data Analysis for 15 MENA Countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 76,138–154.
23. Chen, C., Pinar, M. ve Stengos, T. (2022). Renewable Energy and CO2 Emissions: New Evidence With The Panel Threshold Model. Renewable Energy, 194, 117-128.
24. Cherian, A. (2022). Air Pollution, Clean Energy and Climate Change. Wiley.
25. Cropper, M. ve Griffiths, C. (1994). The Interaction of Population Growth and Environmental Quality. Am Econ Rev., 84(2), 250–254
26. Culas, R. J. (2007). Deforestation and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: An Institutional Perspective. Ecol. Econ., 61(2–3), 429–437.
27. Culas, R. J. (2012). REDD and Forest Transition: Tunneling Through the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Ecol. Econ., 79, 44–51.
28. Çağlar, A. E., Mert, M. ve Boluk, G. (2021). Testing the Role of Information and Communication Technologies and Renewable Energy Consumption in Ecological Footprint Quality: Evidence From World Top 10 Pollutant Footprint Countries. Journal Of Cleaner Production, 298, 126784, ISSN 0959-6526, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Jclepro.2021.126784.
29. Çamkaya, S. (2024). LCC Hipotezi Çerçevesinde Çevresel Kalite ve Kentleşme Arasındaki İlişki: Türkiye’den Ampirik Kanıtlar. Fiscaoeconomia, 8(2), 739-760.
30. Dam, M. M., Kaya, F., ve Bekun, F. V. (2024). On the nexus between real income, renewable energy consumption, and environmental sustainability on life expectancy for BRICS‐T countries: Accessing evidence from quantile regression. In Natural Resources Forum, 48 (4), 1109-1135.
31. Dam, M. ve Sarkodie, S. A. (2023). Renewable Energy Consumption, Real Income, Trade Openness, and Inverted Load Capacity Factor Nexus in Turkiye: Revisiting The EKC Hypothesis With Environmental Sustainability. Sustainable Horizons, 8, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772737823000172?via%3Dihub
32. Danish, K., Ulucak, R. ve Khan, S. U. D. (2020). Determinants of the Ecological Footprint: Role of Renewable Energy, Natural Resources, and Urbanization. Sustain. Cities Soc., 54, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Scs.2019.101996
33. Destek, M. A. ve Sinha, A. (2020). Renewable, Non-Renewable Energy Consumption, Economic Growth, Trade Openness and Ecological Footprint: Evidence From Organisation For Economic Co-Operation and Development Countries. J. Clean. Prod., 242, 118537.
34. Doğan, A. ve Pata, U. K. (2022). The Role of ICT, RveD Spending and Renewable Energy Consumption on Environmental Quality: Testing the LCC Hypothesis For G7 Countries. J. Clean. Prod., 380, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Jclepro.2022.135038.
35. Dong, K., Sun, R. ve Dong, X. (2018a). CO2 Emissions, Natural Gas and Renewables, Economic Growth: Assessing the Evidence From China. Sci Total Environ., Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Scitotenv.2018.05.322.
36. Dong, K., Sun, R., Jiang, H., Zeng, X. (2018b). CO2 Emissions, Economic Growth, and the Environmental Kuznets Curve in China: What Roles Can Nuclear Energy and Renewable Energy Play? J Clean Prod., 96, 51e63. Https://Doi.Org/ 10.1016/J.Jclepro.2018.05.271.
37. Ehrhardt-Martinez, K., Crenshaw, E. M. ve Jenkins, J.C. (2002). Deforestation and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: A Cross-National Investigation of Intervening Mechanisms. Soc. Sci. Q., 83(1), 226–243.
38. Emir, F. ve Karlilar, S. (2023). Application of RALS Cointegration Test Assessing The Role of Natural Resources and Hydropower Energy on Ecological Footprint in Emerging Economy. Energy ve Environment, 34(4), 764-779.
39. Engle, R. F. ve Granger, C. W. (1987). Co-Integration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation, and Testing. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 55(2), 251-276.
40. Fakhri, I., Hassen, T. ve Wassim, T. (2015). Effects of CO2 Emissions on Economic Growth, Urbanization and Welfare: Application to MENA Countries. MPRA Paper; 65683. Https://Mpra.Ub.Uni-Muenchen.De/65683/.
41. FAO, (2020). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020 – Key Findings. Rome. Https://Www.Fao.Org/Documents/Card/En/C/ Ca9825en/.
42. Fareed, Z., Salem, S., Adebayo, T. S., Pata, U. K. ve Shahzad, F. (2021). Role of Export Diversification and Renewable Energy on the Load Capacity Factor in Indonesia: A Fourier Quantile Causality Approach. Front. Environ. Sci., 9, Https://Doi.Org/10.3389/Fenvs.2021.770152.
43. Faria, W. R. ve Almeida, A. N. (2016). Relationship Between Openness to Trade and Deforestation: Empirical Evidence From the Brazilian Amazon. Ecol. Econ., 121, 85–97.
44. Galinato, G. I. ve Galinato, S. P., (2012). The Effects of Corruption Control, Political Stability and Economic Growth on Deforestation-Induced Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Environ. Dev. Econ., 17(1), 67–90.
45. Galli, A. (2015). On the Rationale and Policy Usefulness of Ecological Footprint Accounting: The Case of Morocco. Environ. Sci. Pol., 48, 210–224. Doi:10.1016/ J.Envsci.2015.01.008
46. Galli, A.,Wiedmann, T., Ercin, E., Knoblauch, D., Ewing, B. ve Giljum, S. (2012). Integrating Ecological, Carbon and Water Footprint into A “Footprint Family” of Indicators: Definition and Role in Tracking Human Pressure on the Planet. Ecol. Indicators, 16, 100–112. Doi:10.1016/J.Ecolind.2011.06.017.
47. GFN (2025). Global Footprint Network Country Trends. Https://Data.Footprintnetwork.Org/#/Countrytrends?Cn=231veType=Bcpc,Efcpc.
48. Global Forest Watch (2024). Https://Www.Globalforestwatch.Org/Map/Country/AZE
49. Gokmenoglu, K. K., Olasehinde-Williams, G. O. ve Taspinar, N. (2019). Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: The Role of Deforestation. Energy and Environmental Strategies in The Era Of Globalization, 61-83.
50. Grossman, G. ve Krueger, A. (1991). Environmental Impacts of A North American Free Trade Agreement. Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., 10.3386/W3914.
51. Güneysu, Y. (2023). Türkiye’de Finansal Gelişme, Küreselleşme ve Sanayileşmenin Yük Kapasite Faktörü Üzerindeki Etkisi. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(3), 934-946.
52. Hao, Y., Xu, Y., Zhang, J., Hu, X., Huang, J., Chang, C. P. ve Guo, Y. (2019) Relationship Between Forest Resources and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence From China. J Clean Prod., 214, 848–859
53. Hervieux, M.S. ve Darne, O. (2016). Production and Consumption-Based Approaches for the Environmental Kuznets Curve Using Ecological Footprint. Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 5(3), 318–334.
54. Huang, Y., Haseeb, M., Usman, M. ve Ozturk, I. (2022). Dynamic Association Between ICT, Renewable Energy, Economic Complexity and Ecological Footprint: İs There Any Difference Between E-7 (Developing) And G-7 (Developed) Countries? Technol. Soc., 68, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Techsoc.2021.101853
55. İçen, N. M. E. (2024). Türkiye’de Yük Kapasite Faktörünün Belirleyicileri Nelerdir? Genişletilmiş ARDL Yaklaşımı. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 20(2), 299-312.
56. Jalil, A. ve Mahmud, S. F. (2009). Environment Kuznets Curve for CO2 Emissions: A Cointegration Analysis for China. Energy Pol., 37(12), 5167e72. Https:// Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Enpol.2009.07.044.
57. Jewel, A., Chang, J. B. ve Lee, Y. (2018). Analyzing the Effect of Socio-Economic Factors on Deforestation Using An Environmental Kuznets Curve Model. Kor. J. Agricult. Econ., 59(3), 169–189.
58. Johansen, S. (1991). Estimation and Hypothesis Testing of Cointegration Vectors in Gaussian Vector Autoregressive Models. Econometrica: Journal Of The Econometric Society, 59, 1551-1580.
59. Joshi, P. ve Beck, K. (2016). Environmental Kuznets Curve for Deforestation: Evidence Using GMM Estimation for OECD and Non-OECD Regions. Ifor. Biogeosci. For., 10(1), 196.
60. Khan, U., Khan, A. M., Khan, M. S., Ahmed, P., Haque, A. ve Parvin, R. A. (2022). Are the Impacts of Renewable Energy Use on Load Capacity Factors Homogeneous for Developed and Developing Nations? Evidence From The G7 And E7 Nations. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser., 30(9), 24629–24640. Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S11356-022- 24002-8
61. Koop, G. ve Tole, L. (1999). Is There an Environmental Kuznets Curve For Deforestation? J. Dev. Econ., 58(1), 231e244.
62. Leblois, A., Damette, O., Wolfersberger, J. (2017). What Has Driven Deforestation in Developing Countries Since The 2000s? Evidence From New Remote-Sensing Data. World Development, 92, 82-102, ISSN 0305-750X, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Worlddev.2016.11.012.
63. Leemans, R. ve De Groot R. S. (2003). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework For Assessment. https://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf
64. Li, B. ve Haneklaus, N. (2021). The Role of Renewable Energy, Fossil Fuel Consumption, Urbanization and Economic Growth on CO2 Emissions in China. Energy Reports, 7, 783-791.
65. Li, R., Wang, Q. ve Li, L. (2023). Does Renewable Energy Reduce Per Capita Carbon Emissions And Per Capita Ecological Footprint? New Evidence From 130 Countries. Energy Strategy Rev., 49, 101121 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2023.101121.
66. Li, R., Wang, X. ve Wang, Q. (2022). Does Renewable Energy Reduce Ecological Footprint at The Expense of Economic Growth? An Empirical Analysis Of 120 Countries. Journal Of Cleaner Production, 346, 131207.
67. Liu, Y., Sadiq, F., Ali, W. ve Kumail, T. (2022). Does Tourism Development, Energy Consumption, Trade Openness and Economic Growth Matters For Ecological Footprint: Testing The Environmental Kuznets Curve and Pollution Haven Hypothesis For Pakistan. Energy, 245, Article 123208.
68. Lopez, R. ve Galinato, G. I. (2005). Trade Policies, Economic Growth, and The Direct Causes of Deforestation. Land Econ., 81(2), 145–169.
69. Lumsdaine, R. L. ve Papell, D. H. (1997). Multiple Trend Breaks and the Unit-Root Hypothesis. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(2), 212-218.
70. Mahalik, M. K., Padhan, H., Patel, G., Mishra, S. ve Chyrmang, R. (2023). The Role of Gender Life Expectancy in Environmental Degradation: New Insights for the BRICS Economies. Environ Dev Sustain, 1–30. Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S10668-023-03097-0.
71. Maji, I. K. (2017). The Link Between Trade Openness and Deforestation for Environmental Quality in Nigeria. Geojournal, 82, 131–138, Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S10708-015-9678-7
72. Mendonca, A., Silva, S. A., Pereira, L. Z., Bornia, A. C., Andrade, D. F. ve Fernandes, L. (2020). Hierarchical Modeling Of the 50 Largest Economies to Verify the Impact of GDP, Population and Renewable Energy Generation in CO2 Emissions. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 22, 58–67.
73. Mirziyoyeva, Z. ve Salahodjaev, R. (2023). Renewable Energy, GDP and CO2 Emissions in High-Globalized Countries. Front. Energy Res., 11. Doi:10.3389/ Fenrg.2023.1123269
74. Mohmmed, A., Li, Z., Olushola, A., Su, H., Deng, X., Najmuddin, O. ve Zhang, Y. (2019). Driving Factors of CO2 Emissions and Nexus with Economic Growth, Development and Human Health in the Top Ten Emitting Countries, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 148, 157–169.
75. Mohsin, M., Kamran, H. W., Nawaz, M. A., Hussain, M. S. ve Dahri, A. S. (2021). Assessing The Impact of Transition From Nonrenewable to Renewable Energy Consumption on Economic Growth-Environmental Nexus From Developing Asian Economies. Journal of Environmental Management, 284, 111999, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Jenvman.2021.111999.
76. Molion, L. C. B. (1975). A Climatonomic Study of the Energy and Moisture Fluxes of Amazonas Basin with Consideration of Deforestation Effects. Ph.D. Thesis, Umversity Ofwinsconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
77. Murshed, M. (2022). Revisiting The Deforestation-Induced EKC Hypothesis: The Role of Democracy in Bangladesh. Geojournal, 87(1), 53–74.
78. Murshed, M., Ferdaus, J., Rashid, S., Tanha, M. M. ve Islam, M. J. (2021). The Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis for Deforestation in Bangladesh: An ARDL Analysis With Multiple Structural Breaks. Energy Ecol. Environ., 6(2), 111–132. Https://Doi.Org/ 10.1007/S40974-020-00188-W.
79. Ng, S. ve Perron, P. (2001). Lag Length Selection and the Const-Ruction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power. Econometrica, 69(6), 1519-1554.
80. OGM (2023). Orman Genel Müdürlüğü, Https://Www.Ogm.Gov.Tr/Tr/Turkiyenin-Yuzyili-Projesi/Milli-Agaclandirma-Gunu.
81. Onafowora, O. A., Owoye, O. (2014). Bounds Testing Approach to Analysis of the Environment Kuznets Curve Hypothesis. Energy Econ., 44, 47–62.
82. OWD, (2025). Our World in Data. Https://Ourworldindata.Org/
83. Panayotou, T. (1993). Empirical Tests and Policy Analysis of Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development. Working Paper WP238, Technology And Employment Programme, International Labour Office. Geneva.
84. Pandey, S., Dogan, E. ve Taskin, D. (2020). Production-Based and Consumption-Based Approaches for The Energy-Growth-Environment Nexus: Evidence From Asian Countries. Sustain. Prod. Consum., 23, 274–281.
85. Park, J. Y. (1992). Canonical Cointegrating Regressions. Econometrica: Journal of The Econometric Society, 60(1), 119-143.
86. Pata, U. K. (2021). Do Renewable Energy and Health Expenditures Improve Load Capacity Factor in The USA and Japan? A New Approach to Environmental Issues. Eur J Health Econ., 22, 1427–1439. Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S10198-021-01321-0.
87. Pata, U. K. ve Çağlar, A. E. (2021). Investigating The EKC Hypothesis with Renewable Energy Consumption, Human Capital, Globalization and Trade Openness For China: Evidence From Augmented ARDL Approach with A Structural Break. Energy, Doi:Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Energy.2020.
88. Pata, U. K. ve Karlilar P. S. (2024b). Determining The Effectiveness of The Forest Load Capacity Factor in Assisting Decarbonization in India. Forest Policy And Economics, 166, 103281.
89. Pata, U. K. ve Karlilar P. S. (2025). Effects of Forest Area, Environmental Patents and Financial Progress on Carbon Emissions in Azerbaijan. BIO Web Of Conferences, 151, 10.1051/Bioconf/202515102003
90. Pata, U. K. ve Karlilar, P. S. (2024a). Do Structural Change and Forest Load Capacity Factor Provide A Reduction in Carbon Emissions in The BRICS Countries?. Air Quality, Atmosphere ve Health, 1-9.
91. Pata, U. K. ve Kartal, M. T. (2024). Investigating the Impacts of Trade Openness and Energy Consumption on Environmental Quality in Azerbaijan: An Analysis Under The Load Capacity Curve Hypothesis. Oppor Chall. Sustain., 3(2), 72-78. Https://Doi.Org/10.56578/Ocs030201.
92. Pata, U. K. ve Samour, A. (2022). Do Renewable and Nuclear Energy Enhance Environmental Quality in France? A New EKC Approach with The Load Capacity Factor. Prog. Nucl. Energy, 149, 104249.
93. Pata, U. K. ve Yurtkuran, S. (2018). Yenilenebilir Enerji Tüketimi, Nüfus Yogunlugu Ve Finansal Gelismenin CO2 Salımına Etkisi: Türkiye Örneği. Uluslararası İktisadi Ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi Prof. Dr. Harun Terzi Ozel Sayısı. 303e318.
94. Pata, U. K. ve Yurtkuran, S. (2023). Is the EKC Hypothesis Valid in The Five Highly Globalized Countries of The European Union? An Empirical Investigation With Smooth Structural Shifts. Environ Monit Assess., 195, Doi.10.1007/S10661-022-10660-1
95. Pata, U. K., Kartal, M. T., Dam, M. M. ve Kaya, F. (2023b). Navigating The Impact of Renewable Energy, Trade Openness, Income, and Globalization on Load Capacity Factor: The Case of Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) Countries. International Journal of Energy Research, 1, 6828781.
96. Pata, U. K., Yurtkuran, S., Ahmed, Z. ve Kartal, M. T. (2023a). Do Life Expectancy and Hydropower Consumption Affect Ecological Footprint? Evidence From Novel Augmented and Dynamic ARDL Approaches. Heliyon, 9(9).
97. Phillips, P. C. ve Hansen, B. E. (1990). Statistical Inference in Instrumental Variables Regression with I (1) Processes. The Review Of Economic Studies, 57(1), 99-125.
98. Ponce, P., Del Río-Rama, M. D. L. C., Álvarez-García, J. ve Oliveira, C. (2021). Forest Conservation and Renewable Energy Consumption: An ARDL Approach. Forests, 12, 255, Https://Www.Mdpi.Com/1999-4907/12/2/255.
99. Ponce, P., Oliveira, C., Álvarez-García, J. ve Del Río-Rama, M. D. L. C. (2020). The Liberalization of The Internal Energy Market in The European Union: Evidence of Its Influence on Reducing Environmental Pollution. Energies, 13, 6116.
100. Qing, L., Usman, M., Radulescu, M. ve Haseeb, M. (2024). Towards the Vision of Going Green in South Asian Region: The Role of Technological Innovations, Renewable Energy and Natural Resources in Ecological Footprint During Globalization Mode. Resources Policy, 88, 104506.
101. Rahman, H., Voumik, L. C., Rahman, Md. M. ve Majumder, S. C. (2024). Scrutinizing the Existence of the Environmental Kuznets Curve in The Context Of Foreign Direct Investment, Trade, and Renewable Energy in Bangladesh: Impending From ARDL Method. Environ Dev Sustain., 26, 12619–12638. Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S10668-023-03940-4
102. Rees, W. E. (1992). Environment and Urbanization Leaves Out. Environ. Urbanization, 4, Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/095624789200400212
103. Sahoo, M. ve Sethi, N. (2022). The Dynamic Impact of Urbanization, Structural Transformation, and Technological Innovation on Ecological Footprint and PM2.5: Evidence From Newly Industrialized Countrie. Environ. Dev. Sustain., 24(3), 4244–4277.
104. Sarkodie, S. A., Adams, S., Owusu, P. A., Leirvik, T. ve Ozturk, I. (2020). Mitigating Degradation and Emissions in China: The Role of Environmental Sustainability, Human Capital and Renewable Energy. Sci Total Environ., 719:137530. Https:// Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Scitotenv.2020.137530.
105. Selden, T. M. ve Song, D. (1994). Environmental Quality and Development: is There A Kuznets Curve For Air Pollution? J Environ Econ Manag., 27(2), 147–62.
106. Sharif, A., Raza, S. A., Ozturk, I. ve Afshan, S. (2019). The Dynamic Relationship of Renewable and Nonrenewable Energy Consumption with Carbon Emission: A Global Study with the Application of Heterogeneous Panel Estimations. Renewable Energy, 133, 685-691.
107. Sharma, R., Sinha, A. ve Kautish, P. (2021). Does Renewable Energy Consumption Reduce Ecological Footprint? Evidence From Eight Developing Countries of Asia. J. Clean. Prod., 285, 124867.
108. Siche R., Pereira, L., Agostinho F., Ortega E. (2010). Convergence of Ecological Footprint and Emergy Analysis As A Sustainability Indicator of Countries: Peru As Case Study. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 15(10), 3182–3192.
109. Sohag, K., Gainetdinova, A. ve Mariev, O. (2023). Economic Growth, Institutional Quality And Deforestation: Evidence From Russia. Forest Policy and Economics, 150, 102949, ISSN 1389-9341, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Forpol.2023.102949.
110. Sun, J. ve Qamruzzaman, M. (2025). Technological Innovation, Trade Openness, Natural Resources, Clean Energy on Environmental Sustainably: A Competitive Assessment Between CO2 Emission, Ecological Footprint, Load Capacity Factor and Inverted Load Capacity Factor in BRICS+T. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 16(19), 8643.
111. Suwal, N., Huang, X., Kuriqi, A., Chen, Y., Pandey, K. P. ve Bhattarai, K. P. (2020). Optimisation of Cascade Reservoir Operation Considering Environmental Flows For Different Environmental Management Classes. Renew. Energy, 158, 453–464.
112. Tanner, A. M. ve Johnston, A. L. (2017). The Impact of Rural Electric Access On Deforestation Rates. World Development, 94,174-185, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Worlddev.2016.12.046.
113. Tsiantikoudis, S., Zafeiriou, E., Kyriakopoulos, G. ve Arabatzis, G. (2019). Revising The Environmental Kuznets Curve For Deforestation: An Empirical Study For Bulgaria. Sustainability, 11(16), 2-16.
114. Türkiye Ormancılar Derneği (2022). Https://Www.Ormancilardernegi.Org/Documents/C30ecb50-46f6-4c6e-B3a1-Bf9ece098466.Pdf
115. United Nations (2023). The Sustainable Development Goals: Report 2023. UN.
116. Voumik, L. C., Ghosh, S., Rashid, M., Das, M. K., Esquivias, M. A. ve Rojas, O. (2024). The Effect of Geopolitical Risk and Green Technology on Load Capacity Factors in BRICS. Utilities Policy, 88, 101757, ISSN 0957-1787, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Jup.2024.101757.
117. Wang Q. ve Li, L. (2021). The Effects of Population Ageing, Life Expectancy, Unemployment Rate, Population Density, Per Capita GDP, Urbanisation On Per Capita Carbon Emissions. Sustain Prod Consum, 28, 760–774. Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Spc.2021.06.029.
118. Wang, Q., Sun, J., Li, R. ve Pata, U. K. (2024). Linking Trade Openness To Load Capacity Factor: The Threshold Effects of Natural Resource Rent And Corruption Control. Gondwana Research, 129, 371-380.
119. Wang, R., Qamruzzaman, M. ve Karim, S. (2024). Unveiling The Power of Education, Political Stability and ICT in Shaping Technological Innovation in BRI Nations. Heliyon, 10(9), Doi:10.1016/J.Heliyon.2024.E30142
120. Wang, S., Zafar, M. W., Vasbieva, D. G. ve Yurtkuran, S. (2024). Economic Growth, Nuclear Energy, Renewable Energy, and Environmental Quality: Investigating The Environmental Kuznets Curve and Load Capacity Curve Hypothesis. Gondwana Research., 129, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Gr.2023.06.009.
121. WDI, (2025). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS.
122. WDI, (2025). World Development Indicators. Https://Databank.Worldbank.Org/Country/.
123. Xie, Q., Adebayo, T. S., Irfan, M. ve Altuntas, M. (2022). Race To Environmental Sustainability: Can Renewable Energy Consumption and Technological Innovation Sustain The Strides For China?, Renew. Energy, 197, 320–330. Https://Doi.Org/ 10.1016/J.Renene.2022.07.138
124. Ximei, K., Javaid, M., Q., Shams, T., Sibt-E-Ali, M. (2024). Information and Communication Technology, Economic Globalization, and Environmental Sustainability in APEC Nations: Insights From LCC And EKC Hypotheses Testing. Willey, Https://Doi.Org/10.1002/Sd.3163.
125. Xu, D., Salem, S., Awosusi, A. A., Abdurakhmanova, G., Altuntas¸, M., Oluwajana, D., Kirikkaleli, D. ve Ojekemi, O. (2022). Load Capacity Factor and Financial Globalization in Brazil: The Role of Renewable Energy and Urbanization. Front. Environ. Sci., 9, Https://Doi.Org/10.3389/Fenvs.2021.823185
126. Yao, S., Zhang, S. ve Zhang, X. (2019). Renewable Energy, Carbon Emission and Economic Growth: A Revised Environmental Kuznets Curve Perspective. J. Clean. Prod., 235, 1338–1352. Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Jclepro.2019.07.069.
127. Yasin, I., Ahmad, N., Amin, S., Sattar, N. ve Hashmat, A. (2024). Does Agriculture, Forests, and Energy Consumption Foster The Carbon Emissions and Ecological Footprint? Fresh Evidence From BRICS Economies. Environ Dev Sustain., Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S10668-023-04456-7.
128. Yuping, L, Ramzan, M., Xincheng, L., Murshed, M., Awosusi, A. A., Bah SI, Adebayo, T. S. (2021). Determinants of Carbon Emissions in Argentina: The Roles of Renewable Energy Consumption and Globalization. Energy Rep., 7, 4747–4760. Doi:Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Egyr.2021.07.065 (Open İn A New Window).
129. Yurtkuran, S. (2020). Türkiye’de Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezi’nin Testi: Temiz Enerji Tüketimi’nin Rolü. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(2), 570-589.
130. Yurtkuran, S. (2021a). The Effect of Agriculture, Renewable Energy Production, and Globalization on CO2 Emissions in Turkey: A Bootstrap ARDL Approach. Renewable Energy, 171, 1236–1245. Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Renene.2021.03.009.
131. Yurtkuran, S. (2021b). Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Hipotezinin Geçerliliği ve Yeşil Lojistik: Türkiye Örneği. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24(45), 171-201.
132. Yurtkuran, S. ve Terzi, H. (2018). Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisinin Ampirik Olarak Analizi: Meksika Örneği. Uluslararası İktisadi Ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, (20), 267-284. Https://Doi.Org/10.18092/Ulikidince.350401
133. Yurtkuran, S., Güneysu, Y. (2023). Financial Inclusion and Environmental Pollution in Türkiye: Fresh Evidence From Load Capacity Curve Using AARDL Method. Environ Sci Pollut Res., 30, 104450–104463. Https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S11356-023-29766-1.
134. Yurtkuran, S., Pata, U. K. (2024). The Effect of Nuclear and Fossil Fuel Energy RveD Expenditures On Environmental Qualities in Canada. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 68, Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.Seta.2024.103872.
135. Zambrano-Monserrate, M. A., Carvajal-Lara, C., Urgil´Es-Sanchez, R., Ruano, M. A. (2018). Deforestation As An Indicator of Environmental Degradation: Analysis of Five European Countries. Ecol. Indic., 90, 1–8.
136. Zhao, L. ve Qamruzzaman M. (2022). Do Urbanization, Remittances, And Globalization Matter For Energy Consumption in Belt And Road Countries: Evidence From Renewable And Non-Renewable Energyconsumption. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 1-20.
137. Zivot, E. ve Andrews, D. W. K. (1992). Further Evidence on The Great Crash, The Oil Price Shock, and The Unit Root Hypothesis. Journal of Business And Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.