ÇEVRESEL İNOVASYONLARIN TOPLAM FAKTÖR VERİMLİLİĞİ ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİ: PANEL ARDL YAKLAŞIMI

Öz

Amaç: Çevresel teknolojilerin, kaynak kullanımındaki maliyetleri azaltması sebebiyle, toplam faktör verimliliği üzerinde olumlu etkilere sahip olduğu yönündeki temel argüman, literatürde son zamanlarda sıklıkla tartışılmaktadır. Buradan hareketle çalışmanın amacı, çevresel inovasyonların toplam faktör verimliliği üzerindeki etkilerinin ortaya konulmasıdır.

Yöntem: Toplam 41 ülkenin 1999-2014 dönemine ait verileri kullanılarak panel veri analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu kapsamda, öncelikle panel birim kök testleri ile panel eşbütünleşme testleri yapılmıştır. Ardından, panel ARDL yaklaşımı takip edilerek, kısa ve uzun dönem katsayıları PMG tahmincisi ile elde edilmiş ve sonrasında ise panel nedensellik testi gerçekleştirilmiştir.

Bulgular: Analizlerden elde edilen bulgular; çevresel inovasyonlar ile toplam faktör verimliliği arasında eşbütünleşme ilişkisi olduğunu, çevresel inovasyonların toplam faktör verimliliği üzerinde anlamlı ve pozitif etkiye sahip olduğunu ve çevresel inovasyonlar ile toplam faktör verimliliği arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisinin varlığını ortaya koymuştur. 

Özgünlük: Literatürdeki mevcut çalışmalardan farklı olarak bu çalışma, yüksek ve orta gelirli ülkelerde çevresel inovasyonlar ile toplam faktör verimliliği arasındaki ilişkinin panel veri analizi ile grup etkisini ortaya koyacak şekilde incelenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevresel İnovasyon
• Toplam Faktör Verimliliği
• Panel ARDL
• Dumitrescu-Hurlin Panel Nedensellik Testi

THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATIONS ON TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY: PANEL ARDL APPROACH

Öz

Purpose: The main argument that environmental technologies which reduces costs in resources usage have positive effects on total factor productivity has been frequently discussed in the literature. The purpose of the paper is to determine the impact of environmental innovations on total factor productivity.

Methodology: Panel data analysis was carried out with data from total of 41 countries for the period 1999-2014. In this context, firstly panel cointegration tests were performed with panel unit root tests. Then, following the panel ARDL approach, short and long-term coefficients were obtained by employing the PMG estimator and then, panel causality test was applied.

Findings: The findings obtained from the analyzes show that there exists cointegration relationship between environmental innovations and total factor productivity, that environmental innovations have a significant and positive effect on total factor productivity and there is a bidirectional causality relationship between environmental innovations and total factor productivity. 

Originality: Different from the existing studies in the literature, this study examines the relationship between environmental innovations and total factor productivity in high and middle-income countries with panel data analysis to reveal the group effect.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Environmental Innovation
• Total Factor Productivity
• Panel ARDL
• Dumitrescu-Hurlin Panel Causality Test
• Dumitrescu-Hurlin Panel Causality Test

Kaynakça

1. Adak, M. (2009). Total Factor Productivity and Economic Growth, İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15, 49-56.
2. Akkoç, G. K., Akkoç, U. & Yücel, Ö. F. (2018). BRICS-T Ülkelerinde Toplam Faktör Verimliliği ve Teknoloji Transferi. UİİİD-IJEAS, 21, 101-118.
3. Alcalá, F. & Ciccone, A. (2001), Trade and Prdoductivity. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 3095 December.
4. Aldieri, L., Kotsemir, M. & Vinci, C.P. (2020). Environmental Innovations and Productivity: Empirical Evidence from Russian Regions, Resources Policy, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.1014.
5. Amri, F., Zaiedb, Y. B. & Lahouel, B.B. (2019). ICT, Total Factor Productivity, and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Tunisia. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 146, 212–217.
6. Arazmuradov, A., Martini, G. & Scotti, D. (2014). Determinants of Total Factor Productivity in Former Soviet Union Economies: A Stochastic Frontier Approach. Economic Systems, 38, 115–135.
7. Ark, B.V. (2014). Total Factor Productivity: Lessons from the Past and Directions for the Future. NBB Working Paper – October.
8. Bastos, F. & Nasir, J. (2004). Productivity and the Investment Climate: What Matters Most?. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3335, June.

9. Baumol, W. J. (1986). Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: What the Long-Run Data Show. The American Economic Review, 76 (5), 1072-1085.
10. Breitung, J. (2000). The Local Power of Some Unit Root Tests for Panel Data. in: Advances in Econometrics, Vol. 15: Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration, and Dynamic Panels, JAI.
11. Cameron, G., Proudman, J. & Redding, S. (2005). Technological Convergence, R&D, Trade and Productivity Growth. European Economic Review, 49(3), 775-807.
12. Cecchini, L. & Lai-Tong, C. (2008). The Links Between Openness and Productivity in Mediterranean Countries. Applied Economics, 40, 685-697.
13. Choi, I. (2001). Unit Root Tests for Panel Data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272.
14. Comin, D. (2017). Total Factor Productivity. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 1-4.
15. Crépon, B., Duguet, E., & Mairesse, J. (1998). Research, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 7(2), 115–158.
16. Cubel, A., Esteve, V., Sanchis, M.T. & Sanchis-Llopis, J.A. (2014). The Effect of Foreign and Domestic Patents on Total Factor Productivity During the Second Half of the 20th Century. Instituto Universitario de Análisis Económico y Social Documento de Trabajo 06/2014, 35 páginas, ISSN: 2172-7856.
17. De Long, J. B. (1988). Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: Comment, American Economic Review, 78 (5), 1138-54.
18. Dickey, D. A. & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1057-1072.
19. Dumitrescu, E. I. & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger Non-Causality in Heterogeneous Panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
20. Fadiran, D. & Akanbi, O. A. (2017). Institutions and Other Determinants of Total Factor Productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa. Economic Research Southern Africa (ERSA), No. 714.
21. Fikirli, Ö. & Çetin, A.K. (2015). Ar-Ge Sermaye Birikiminin Toplam Faktör Verimliliğine Etkisi: Türkiye Örneği. Girişimcilik ve İnovasyon Yönetimi Dergisi, 4(2), 147-166.
22. Gömleksiz, M., Şahbaz, A. & Mercan, B. (2017). Toplam Faktör Verimiliğinin Belirleyicileri Üzerine Ampirik Bir İnceleme: Seçilmiş OECD Ülkeleri Örneği. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(2), 65-82.
23. Hall, B. H., Lotti, F. & Mairesse, J. (2013). Evidence on the Impact of R&D and ICT Investments on Innovation and Productivity in Italian Firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 22(3), 300–328.
24. Han, J. C. & Shen, Y. (2015). Financial Development and Total Factor Productivity Growth: Evidence from China. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 51, 261-274.
25. Hoekman, B.M. Maskus, K.E. & Saggi, K. (2004). Transfer of Technology to Developing Countries: Unilateral and Multilateral Policy Options. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3332, June.
26. Hulten, C. R. (2001). Total Factor Productivity A Short Biography. National Bureau of Economic Research, 8, 1-54.
27. Im, K.S., Pesaran, M.H. & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74.
28. Işık, C. (2016). Türkiye’de Toplam Faktör Verimliliği ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi. Verimlik Dergisi, 2016 (2), 45-56.
29. Jajri, I. (2007). Determinants of Total Factor Productivity Growth in Malaysia. Journal of Economic Cooperation, 28 (3), 41-58.
30. Kaasa, A. (2016). Social Capital, Institutional Quality and Productivity: Evidence from European Regions. Economics and Sociology, 9(4), 11-26. Kao, C. (1999). Spurious Regression and Residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Panel Data. Journal of Econometrics, 90(1), 1-44.
31. Kim, J. & Park, J. (2018). The Role of Total Factor Productivity Growth in Middle-Income Countries. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 54(6),1264-1284.
32. Kim, S., Lim, H. & Park, D. (2007). The Effect of Imports and Exports on Total Factor Productivity in Korea. RIETI Discussion Paper Series 07-E-022.
33. Klenow, P. J. & Rodriguez-Clare, A. (1997). The Neoclassical Revival in Growth Economics: Has It Gone Too Far?, NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 12, 73-103.
34. Ladu, M. G. & Meleddu, M. (2014). Is There any Relationship between Energy and TFP (Total Factor Productivity)? A Panel Cointegration Approach for Italian Regions. Energy, 75, 560-567.
35. Lee, K., & Kang, S. M. (2007). Innovation Types and Productivity Growth: Evidence from Korean Manufacturing Firms. Global Economic Review, 36(4), 343–359.
36. Levin, A. & Lin, C. F. & Chu, C.S.J. (2002). Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1-24.
37. Levine, R. (1997). Financial Development and Economic Growth: Views and Agenda. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(2), 688-726.
38. Liu, J. & Bi, C. (2019). Effects of Higher Education Levels on Total Factor Productivity Growth. Sustainability, 11, 1790; doi:10.3390/su11061790.
39. Maddala, G.S. & Wu, S. (1999). A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(1), 631-652.
40. Miller, S.M. & Upadhyay, M.P. (2000). The Effects of Openness, Trade Orientation, and Human Capital on Total Factor Productivity. Journal of Development Economics, 63(2), 399-423.
41. Naz, A., Ahmet, N.A. & Naveed, A. (2015). Total Factor Productivity and Trade: A Panel Data Analysis. Forman Journal of Economic Studies, 11, 103-128.
42. Özdemir, O. (2019). Türkiye’de Toplam Faktör Verimliliği, Ekonomik Büyüme ve İhracat Arasındaki İlişkinin Nedensellik Analizi. Finans Politik & Ekonomik Yorumlar, 647, 23-63.
43. Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 653-670.
44. Pedroni, P. (2000). Fully modified OLS for Heterogeneous Cointegrated Panels. Advances in Econometrics, (15), 93-130.
45. Pedroni, P. (2001). Purchasing Power Parity Tests in Cointegrated Panels. Review of Economics and Statistics, 83(4), 727-731.
46. Pedroni, P. (2004). Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis. Econometric Theory, 20(03), 597-625.
47. Pietrzak, M.B. & Balcerzak, (2016). Quality of Institutions and Total Factor Productivity in the European Union. Statistics in Transition New Series, 3(17), 497-514.
48. Prescott, E. C. (1998). Needed: A Theory of Total Factor Productivity. International Economic Review, 39: 525-551.
49. Rath, B. N., Akram, V., Bal, D. P. & Mahalik, M. K. (2009). Do Fossil Fuel and Renewable Energy Consumption Affect Total Factor Productivity Growth? Evidence from Cross-Country Data with Policy Insights, Energy Policy, 127, 186–199.
50. Rodriguez, J. & Martinez-Lopez, D. (2017). Looking Beyond the R&D Effects on Innovation: The Contribution of Non-R&D Activities to Total Factor Productivity Growth in the EU. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 40, 37–45.
51. Shackleton, R. (2013). Total Factor Productivity Growth in Historical Perspective. Working Paper Series 2013-01, Congressional Budget Office Washington, D.C.
52. Shen, Y., Yue, S., Sun, S. & Guo, M. (2020). Sustainable Total Factor Productivity Growth: The Case of China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120727.
53. Skorupinska, A., & Torrent-Sellens, J. (2014). ICT, Innovation and Productivity: Evidence from Eastern European Manufacturing Firms. Doctoral Working Paper Series DWP14-003.
54. Solow, R.M. (1957). Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 39(3), 312-320.
55. Tandoğan, D. (2017). Türkiye’de Finansal Gelişimin Toplam Faktör Verimliliğine Etkisi: ARDL Yaklaşımı. Maliye Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(3), 307-317.
56. Tatoğlu, F. Y. (2013). İleri Panel Veri Analizi. Beta Yayınları. İstanbul.
57. Tebaldi, E. (2016). The Dynamics of Total Factor Productivity and Institutions. Journal of Economic Development, 41(4), 1-25.
58. Tuğcu, C. T. & Tiwari, A. K. (2016). Does Renewable and/or Non-Renewable Energy Consumption Matter for Total Factor Productivity (TFP) Growth? Evidence from the BRICS. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 65, 610–616.
59. Uzay, N. & Koçak, E. (2018). Ülke Risk Göstergelerinin Toplam Faktör Verimliliği Üzerindeki Etkisi: Türkiye Üzerine Bulgular, Maliye Dergisi, 175, 70-95.
60. Ünlü, F. & Yıldız, R. (2017). Avrupa Birliği Ülkelerinin Eko-inovasyon Performanslarının Değerlendirilmesi”, iç. Hayriye Atik (Ed.), Küresel Isınma, İklim Değişikliği ve Sosyo-ekonomik Etkileri, Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık, 232-257.
61. Verspagen, B. (1995). R&D and Productivity: A Broad Cross-Section Cross- Country Look. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 6, 119-135.
62. Voutsinas, I. & Tsamadias, C. (2014). Does Research and Development Capital Affect Total factor Productivity? Evidence from Greece. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 23(7), 631-651.
63. Yalçınkaya, Ö. (2017). Toplam Faktör Verimliliğinin Belirleyicileri: G-7 ve Seçilmiş Yükselen Piyasa Ekonomileri Üzerine Bir Uygulama (1992-2013). Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18(3), 41-60.