Are Environmental Sustainability Practices Different in Host Country and Country of Origin? The Case of Ford Automotive

Öz

The study aims to examine the differences in the environmental sustainability approaches of global businesses in the country of origin and host country through the example of Ford Automotive. In this direction, “does environmental sustainability reporting differ in the country of origin and host country? If a difference is detected, what is the source of this difference? Is there a theoretical approach that explains this situation from environmental sustainability theories?” are the focus points of the study. The qualitative research method is adopted in the study, and the environmental sustainability reports of the US-based Ford Automotive company in two countries, hosted by Turkey, are subjected to content analysis. GRI index environmental categories and Treadmill Production Theory environmental categories constitute the two stages of the analysis. The findings show that the host country is more dominant in the environmental compliance category and weaker in the country of origin. However, it is found that the supplier environmental assessment category is structured in detail in the country of origin.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Host Country
• Country of Origin
• Environmental Sustainability
• Treadmill Production Theory
• Ford Automotive

Ev Sahibi ve Köken Ülkede Çevresel Sürdürülebilirlik Uygulamaları Birbirinden Farklı Mı? Ford Otomotiv Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Ford Otomotiv örneği üzerinden küresel işletmelerin köken ve ev sahibi ülkedeki çevresel sürdürülebilirlik yaklaşımlarındaki farklılığı irdelemektir. Bu doğrultuda çevresel sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması köken ülke ve ev sahibi ülkede farklılaşıyor mu? Şayet bir fark tespit ediliyorsa bunun kaynağı nedir? Çevresel sürdürülebilirlik teorilerinden bu durumu açıklayan bir teorik yaklaşım var mıdır? soruları çalışmanın odaklanacağı noktalardır. Çalışmada nitel araştırma yöntemi benimsenerek, Türkiye’nin ev sahipliği yaptığı, ABD kökenli Ford Otomotiv işletmesinin iki ülkedeki çevresel sürdürülebilirlik raporları içerik analizine tabi tutulmuştur. GRI indeksi çevre kategorileri ve Koşu Bandı Üretim Teorisi çevre kategorileri analizin iki aşamasını oluşturmuştur. Bulgular, ev sahibi ülkenin çevresel uyum kategorisinde daha baskın, köken ülkede ise zayıf olduğunu göstermektedir. Ancak köken ülkede tedarikçi çevresel değerlendirme kategorisinin detaylı şekilde yapılandırıldığı tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ev Sahibi Ülke
• Köken Ülke
• Çevresel Sürdürülebilirlik
• Koşu Bandı Üretim Teorisi
• Ford Otomotiv

Kaynakça

1. Adaman, F. ve Arsel, M. (2008). The European Union and Turkey: who defines environmental progress? International Journal of Middle East Studies, 40(4), 541-543. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743808081427
2. Adesanya, A. Yang, B. Iqdara, B. Wanes, F. ve Yang, Y. (2020). Improving sustainability performance through supplier relationship management in the tobacco industry. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 25(4), 413–426. https://doi.org/10.1108/scm-01-2018-0034
3. Afridi, M. A., Kehel, W.S. Naseem ve I. Tahir, M. (2019). Per capita income, trade openness, urbanization, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions: an empirical study on the SAARC region. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06154-2
4. Álvarez, A. I., Lozano, M. B. ve Rodríguez-Rosa, M. (2018). An analysis of the environmental information in international companies according to the new GRI standards. Journal of Cleaner Production, 182, 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.240
5. Atıcı, C. ve Kurt, F. (2007). Türkiye'nin dış ticareti ve çevre kirliliği: Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi Yaklaşımı. Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, 13(1 ve 2), 61-69.
6. Atık Yönetimi. (2019). İstanbul Üniversitesi ders notları. https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/FileHandler2.ashx?f=atik-yonetimi-ders-notlari-(vize).pdf adresinden 10 Eylül 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
7. Baker, S. (2007). Sustainable development as symbolic commitment: Declaratory politics and the seductive appeal of Ecological Modernisation in the European Union. Environmental Politics, 16(2), 297–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010701211874
8. Basiago, A. D. (1198). Economic, social, and environmental sustainability in development theory and urban planning practice. The Environmentalist 19, 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006697118620

9. Bayram, T. Altıkat, A. ve Torun F. (2011). Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye’de çevre politikaları. Iğdır Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech, 1(1), 33-38.
10. Beyhan, G. ve Ünügör, M. (2005). Çağdaş gereksinmeler bağlamında sürdürülebilir turizm ve kimlik modeli. İTÜ Dergisi, 4(2).
11. Boiral, O., Heras-Saizarbitoria, I. ve Brotherton, M. (2019). Improving corporate biodiversity management through employee involvement. Business Strategy and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2273
12. Bontempi, E. (2017). A new approach for evaluating the sustainability of raw materials substitution based on embodied energy and the CO2 footprint. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.028
13. Boubellouta B. ve Brandt S.K., (2021). Cross-country evidence on Environmental Kuznets Curve in waste electrical and electronic equipment for 174 countries. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 25,136-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.08.006
14. Bulus, G. C. ve Koc, S., (2021). The Effects of FDI and government expenditures on environmental pollution in Korea: The pollution haven hypothesis revisited. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(28), 38238–38253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13462-z
15. Bulut, U., Ucler, G. ve Inglesı-Lotz, R. (2021). Does the pollution haven hypothesis prevail in Turkey? Empirical evidence from nonlinear smooth transition models. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 38563–38572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13476-7
16. Buttel, F. H. (2004). The Treadmill of Production: An Appreciation, Assessment, and Agenda for Research. Organization & Environment, 17(3), 323–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026604267938
17. Cole M. A., (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: Examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.09.007
18. Crosby, A. W. (1995). The past and present of environmental history. The American Historical Review, 100(4), 1177–1189. https://doi.org/10.2307/2168206
19. Çevik, O. ve Gülcan, B. (2011). Lojistik faaliyetlerin çevresel sürdürülebilirliği ve Marco Polo programı. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2011(1), 35-44.
20. Çevre, Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı. (2021). Katı atık. https://csb.gov.tr/sss/kati-atik adresinden 10 Kasım 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
21. Çınar, S. Yılmazer, M. ve Fazlılar, T. (2012). Kirlilik yaratan sektörlerin ticareti ve çevre: Gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkeler karşılaştırması. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 13(2), 212- 226.
22. Danish, U. K. ve Ahmad, A. (2021). Testing the pollution haven hypothesis on the pathway of sustainable development: accounting the role of nuclear energy consumption. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 53(8), 2746–2752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2021.02.008
23. Deegan, C. ve Rankin, M. (1997). The materiality of environmental information to users of annual reports. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 10(4), 562–583. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579710367485
24. Deniz, M. (2011). Sanayileşme perspektifinde kentleşme ve çevre ilişkisi. Coğrafya Dergisi, 0(19), 95-105.
25. Dışişleri Bakanlığı. (2021). Türkiye’nin üye olduğu çevre anlaşmaları. https://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/DISPOLITIKA/Anlasmalar.pdf adresinden 5 Mart 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
26. Dil, E. ve Talaş, Z. (2021). Türkiye’de faaliyet gösteren başarılı şirketlerin çevresel sürdürülebilirlik yaklaşımlarına dair bir araştırma. İş Ahlakı Dergisi, 14(2), 201- 241. https://doi.org/10.12711/tjbe.2021.14.2.2714
27. El-Kassar, A. ve Singh, S. K. (2018). Green innovation and organizational performance: the influence of big data and the moderating role of management commitment and HR practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.016
28. Feger, C. ve Mermet, L. (2020). New business models for biodiversity and ecosystem management services: An action research with a large environmental sector company. Organization & Environment. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026620947145
29. Fudge, C. ve Rowe, J. (2001). Ecological Modernisation as a framework for sustainable development: A case study in Sweden. Environment and Planning A, 33(9), 1527–1546. https://doi.org/10.1068/a33153
30. Genç, M., Ekimci, A. ve Sakarya, B. (2021). The impact of output volatility on CO2 emissions in Turkey: Testing EKC hypothesis with Fourier stationarity test. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15448-3
31. Gibbs, D. (2000). Ecological modernisation, regional economic development and regional development agencies. Geoforum, 31(1), 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-7185(99)00040-8
32. Gould K., Pellow, D. ve Schaınberg, A. (2004). Interrogating the treadmill of production. Organization & Environment, 17(3), 296-316. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026604268747
33. Gökmenoğlu, K. K. ve Taşpınar, N. (2018). Testing the agriculture-induced EKC Hypothesis: The case of Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2330-6
34. Guzel, A. E. ve Okumus, İ. (2020). Revisiting the Pollution Haven Hypothesis in ASEAN-5 Countries: New insights from panel data analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(15),18157 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08317-y
35. Gyamfi, B. A., Bein, M. A., Udemba, E. N. ve Bekun, F. V. (2021). Investigating the pollution haven hypothesis in oil and non-oil Sub-Saharan Africa Countries: Evidence from quantile regression technique. Resources Policy, 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102119
36. Hsieh, H. ve Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
37. Hu, D., Xu, K., Yang, J. ve Lıu, T. (2004). Economic development and environmental quality: Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve. Acta Eeologiea Sinica, 24(6), 1259-1266.
38. Huber, J. (2008). pioneer countries and the global diffusion of environmental innovations: Theses from the viewpoint of Ecological Modernisation Theory. Global Environmental Change, 18(3), 0-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.03.004
39. ICCT. (2019). Türkiye’de CO2 emisyonlarının ve yakıt tüketiminin azaltılmasına yardımcı bir politika aracı olarak özel tüketim vergisi. Bilgi Notu. https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Registration_Tax_Turkey_TK_20190429.pdf adresinden 5 Mart 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
40. Işık, C., Ongan, S. ve Özdemir, D. (2019). Testing the EKC Hypothesis for Ten US States: An application of heterogeneous panel estimation method. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04514-6
41. Jackson, T. ve Dixon, J. (2007). The New Zealand resource management act: An exercise in delivering sustainable development through an Ecological Modernisation agenda. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 34(1), 107-120. https://doi.org/10.1068/b32089
42. Jänicke, M. (2008). Ecological modernisation: New perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(5), 557–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.02.011
43. Jensen, C. (2021). Soft and hard aspects of green behaviour: A firm-level study of the pollution haven hypothesis in the Mediterranean Basin. Heliyon, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06578.
44. Kahn, M. E. (2007). Environmental disasters as risk regulation catalysts? The role of Bhopal, Chernobyl, Exxon Valdez, Love Canal, and Three Mile Island in shaping. U.S. Environmental Law, 35(1), 17–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-007-9016-7
45. Kanberoğlu, Z. ve Mollavelioğlu, M. (2013). Sürdürülebilir kalkınmada doğrudan yabancı yatırımların rolünün teorik analizi. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 27(3), 285-304.
46. Karamanos, P. (2001) Voluntary environmental agreements: Evolution and definition of a new environmental policy approach, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 44(1), 67-84, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09640560124364
47. Katip, A., Karaer, F. ve Özengı̇n, N. (2014). Otomotiv sektörünün çevresel açıdan değerlendirilmesi. Uludağ Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 51-65.
48. Kayıhan, K. S. ve Tönük, S. (2011). Sürdürülebilirlik bilincinin inşa edileceği binalar olma yönü ile temel eğitim okulları. Politeknik Dergisi, 14(2), 163-170.
49. Konak, N. (2009). Koşu bandı üretim teorisi ve ekolojik modernleşme teorisi arasındaki temel tartışmalar. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 12(1-2), 469-488.
50. Korkmaz, M. (2019). The importance of hydrogen economics in the automotive sector: Turkey Example. [Master Thesis], Marmara University.
51. Köksal, C. ve Çetin, G. (2021). Türkiye’de kirlilik yaratan sektörlerin dış ticaretinin analizi. Journal of Economic Policy Researches, 8(2), 257-275.
52. Kubaş, A. (2017). Tekirdağ ilinde sanayileşme ve çevre yönetimi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 6(4), 116-121.
53. Kuhlman T. ve Farrington J. (2010). What is sustainability?. Sustainability, 2(11), 3436–3448. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2113436
54. Leppelt, T., Foerstl, K., Reuter, C. ve Hartmann, E. (2013). Sustainability management beyond organizational boundaries–sustainable supplier relationship management in the chemical industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 56, 94-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.011
55. Levins R. ve Cochrane W. (1996). The treadmill revisited. Land Economics, 72(4), 550-553. https://doi.org/10.2307/3146915
56. Lewis, T. L. (2018). Globalizing the Treadmill of Production: A solutions-oriented application to Ecuador. Environmental Sociology, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2018.1514942
57. Liu, J., Qu, J. ve Zhao, K., (2019). Is China's development conforms to the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 234, 787–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.234
58. Long, M. A. Lynch, M. J. ve Stretesky, P. B. (2018). The great recession, the treadmill of production and ecological disorganization: Did the recession decrease toxic releases across US States, 2005–2014?. Ecological Economics, 146, 184-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.10.022
59. Long, M. A., Stretesky, P. B., Lynch, M. J. ve Fenwıck, E. (2012). Crime in the coal industry: Implications for Green criminology and Treadmill of Production. Organization & Environment, 25(3), 328–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026612452266
60. Lynch, M. J. Stretesky, P. B. ve Long, M. A. (2018a). The treadmill of production and the treadmill of law: Propositions for analyzing law, ecological disorganization and crime. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2018.1545241
61. Lynch, M. J., Stretesky P. B. ve Long M. A. (2018b). Green criminology and native peoples: The treadmill of production and the killing of indigenous environmental activists. Theoretical Criminology, 22(3), 318–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480618790982
62. Magee, S. P. ve Ford, W. F. (1972). Environmental pollution, the terms of trade and balance of payments of the United States. Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, 25(1), 101-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.1972.tb02573.x
63. Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü. (2015). Yeni senaryolar ile Türkiye iklim projeksiyonları ve iklim değişikliği. https://mgm.gov.tr/FILES/iklim/iklim-degisikligi-projeksiyon2015.pdf adresinden 5 Nisan 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
64. Mitic, P., Kresoja, M. ve Minovic, J. (2019). A Literature survey of the environmental Kuznets curve. Economic Analysis, 52(1), 109-127.
65. Mol, A. P. J. ve Sonnenfeld, D. A., (2000). Ecological modernisation around the world: An introduction, Environmental Politics, 9(1), 1-14, https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010008414510
66. Mol, A. P. J. ve Spaargaren G. (2005). From additions and withdrawals to environmental flows: Reframing debates in the environmental social sciences. Organization & Environment, 18(1), 91-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026604270459
67. Mol, A. P. J., Spaargaren, G. ve Sonnenfeld, D. A. (2014). Ecological modernisation theory: Where do we stand?. M. Bemmann, B. Metzger ve R. von Detten (Ed.). Ökologische modernisierung - zur geschichte und gegenwart eines konzepts in umweltpolitik und sozialwissenschaften içinde (s. 35-66). Campus Verlag.
68. Moldan, B., Janoušková, S. ve Hák, T. (2012). How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets, Ecological Indicators 17, 4-13.
69. Nadeem, A. M., Ali, T. Khan, M. T. I. ve Guo, Z. (2020). Relationship between inward FDI and environmental degradation for Pakistan: An exploration of Pollution Haven Hypothesis through ARDL approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(13), 15407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08083-x
70. Ortego, A., Valero, A. Valero, A. ve Restrepo, E. (2018). Vehicles and critical raw materials: A sustainability assessment using thermodynamic rarity. Journal of Industrial Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12737
71. Paiano, A., Crovella, T. ve Lagioia, G. (2020). Managing sustainable practices in cruise tourism: The assessment of carbon footprint and waste of water and beverage packaging. Tourism Management, 77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104016
72. Patton, M. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. SAGE Publicatio
73. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri. M. Bütün, S. B. Demir, (Çev.), Pegem Akademi.
74. Rad, S. J. ve Lewis, M. J. (2014). Water utilisation, energy utilisation and waste water management in the dairy industry: A review. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 67(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0307.12096
75. Rodríguez, G. V., Caravaggio, N., Gaspart, F. ve Meyfroidt, P. (2021). Long- and short-run forest dynamics: An empirical assessment of forest transition, environmental Kuznets curve and ecologically unequal exchange theories. Forests, 12, 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12040431
76. Schnaiberg A., Pellow D. ve Weinberg A., (2002). The treadmill of production and the environmental state. Treadmill & Environmental State, 10, 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-1152(02)80004-7
77. Shahbaz, M., Kablan, S., Hammoudeh, S., Nasır, M. A. ve Kontoleon, A. (2020). Environmental ımplications of increased US oil production and liberal growth agenda in post -Paris Agreement Era. Journal of Environmental Management, 271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110785
78. Shahbaz, M., Nasreen, S., Abbas, F. ve Anis, O. (2015). Does foreign direct investment ımpede environmental quality in high, middle and low-income countries?. Energy Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.06.014
79. Shao, Q., Wang, X., Zhou, Q. ve Balogh, L. (2019). Pollution Haven Hypothesis revisited: A comparison of the BRICS and MINT countries based on VECM approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 227, 724–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.206
80. Sinha A., Shahbaz M. ve Balsalobre D. (2017). Exploring the relationship between energy usage segregation and environmental degradation in N-11 countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 1217-1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.071
81. Sinn, H. W. (2016). Yeşil paradoks-küresel ısınmaya arz yanlısı yaklaşım. (1.Baskı). Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.
82. Spindler, E. A. (2013). The history of sustainability the origins and effects of a popular concept. Sustainability in Tourism, 9-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-7043-5_1
83. Stern, D. I. (2015). Reference module in earth systems and the environmental Kuznets curve. Environmental Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.09278-2
84. Stern, D. I., Common, M. S. ve Barbier, E. B. (1996). Economic growth and environmental degradation: The environmental Kuznets curve and sustainable development. World Development, 24, 1151–1160.
85. Stretesky, P. B., Long, M. A. ve Lynch, M. J. (2013). Does environmental enforcement slow The treadmill of production? The relationship between large monetary penalties, ecological disorganization and toxic releases within offending corporations. Journal of Crime and Justice, 36(2), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2012.752254
86. Sumiani, Y., Haslinda, Y. ve Lehman, G. (2007). Environmental reporting in a developing country: a case study on status and implementation in Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(10), 895–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.01.012
87. Sümer, G. (2009). Türkiye'de bilimsel etkinlikler üzerinden "çevre"nin tarihsel yolculuğu: 1960 – 2008 dönemi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2).
88. Şengün, H. (2015). Türkiye’de çevre yönetimi ve çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığının uygulamaları. Strategic Public Management Journal (SPMJ), (1), 109-130.
89. Tirgil, A., Acar, Y. ve Ozgur, O. (2021). Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from Turkey. Environ Dev Sustain, 23, 14585–14604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01259-6
90. UN Global Compact. (2023a). UN Global Compact’in çalışma alanları. https://www.globalcompactturkiye.org/un-global-compact/ adresinden 15 Ocak 2023 tarihinde alınmıştır.
91. UN Global Compact. (2023b). Ford Motor Company-Our participants. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/participants/ adresinden 15 Ocak 2023 tarihinde alınmıştır.
92. Urpelainen, J. ve Graaf, T. (2017). United States non-cooperation and the Paris Agreement. Climate Policy, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1406843
93. WWF. (2015). Türkiye sera gazı emisyonlarını azaltarak da büyümeye devam edebilir. https://www.wwf.org.tr/?4620/Turkiye-sera-gazi-emisyonlarini-azaltarak-da-buyumeye-devam-edebilir adresinden 10 Ekim 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
94. Xu, C., Yiwen, Z., Cheng, B., Li, L. ve Zhang M., (2020). Study on Environmental Kuznets Curve for noise pollution: A Case of 111 Chinese cities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102493
95. Xuejiao, M., Najid, A. ve Pao-Yu, O. (2021). Environmental Kuznets curve in France and Germany: Role of renewable and nonrenewable energy. Renewable Energy, 172, 88-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.014
96. Yapıcı, M. (2003). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma ve eğitim. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi.
97. Yurtkuran, S. (2020). Türkiye’de Kirlilik Sığınağı Hipotezi’nin geçerliliği: Bootstrap ARDL yaklaşımı. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimlerde Güncel Araştırmalar (1. Baskı) Ivpe Cetinje, 220-240.
98. Zafar, M., Mirza, F. M., Zaidi, S. A. H. ve Hou, F. (2019). The nexus of renewable and nonrenewable energy consumption, trade openness, and CO2 emissions in the framework of EKC: Evidence from emerging Economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04912-w
99. Zhang, L., Mol, A. P. J. ve Sonnenfeld, D. A. (2007). The interpretation of Ecological Modernisation in China. Environmental Politics, 16(4), 659–668. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010701419170