Kapsayıcı Büyüme Karbon Emisyonu İlişkisi: Türkiye Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 1991-2021 döneminde, Türkiye’de kapsayıcı büyüme ile karbon emisyonu arasındaki ilişkiyi analiz etmektir. Kapsayıcı büyümeyi ölçmek için kapsayıcı büyüme endeksi oluşturulmuş ve oluşturulan bu endeks kapsayıcı büyüme göstergesi olarak kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada, seriler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisinin tespiti için Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi, eşbütünleşme ilişkisinin tespiti için Gregory-Hansen eşbütünleşme testi uygulanmış, uzun dönem katsayılarının tahmini için FMOLS, DOLS ve CCR yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre, karbon emisyonundan kapsayıcı büyümeye doğru bir nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilmiş ancak kapsayıcı büyümeden karbon emisyonuna doğru bir nedensellik ilişkisi olmadığı görülmüştür. Gregory-Hansen eşbütünleşme testi sonucuna göre, değişkenler arasında eşbütünleşme ilişkisi olduğu tespit edilmiş, uzun dönemde kapsayıcı büyüme ile karbon emisyonu arasında pozitif bir ilişki olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. FMOLS, DOLS ve CCR test sonuçlarına göre, karbon emisyonunda meydana gelen %1’lik bir artış kapsayıcı büyümeyi ortalama olarak %0,17 artırırken, kapsayıcı büyümede meydana gelen %1’lik bir artış karbon emisyonunu ortalama olarak %4,38 artırmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kapsayıcı Büyüme
• Karbon Emisyonu
• Kapsayıcı Büyüme Endeksi

The Relationship between Inclusive Growth and Carbon Emission: The Case of Türkiye

Öz

The aim of the study is to analyze the relationship between inclusive growth and carbon emissions in Türkiye for 1991-2021 period. In order to measure inclusive growth, an inclusive growth index is created, and this index is used as an indicator of inclusive growth. In the study, Toda-Yamamoto causality test is applied to determine the causality relationship between the series, Gregory-Hansen cointegration test is applied to determine the cointegration relationship, and FMOLS, DOLS and CCR methods are used to estimate the long-run coefficients. According to the results of the Toda-Yamamoto causality test, a causality relationship is found from carbon emissions to inclusive growth, but there is no causality relationship from inclusive growth to carbon emissions. According to the results of the Gregory-Hansen cointegration test, it is found that there is a cointegration relationship between the series and there is a positive relationship between inclusive growth and carbon emissions in the long run. According to FMOLS, DOLS and CCR test results, a 1% increase in carbon emissions increases inclusive growth by 0.17% on average, while a 1% increase in inclusive growth increases carbon emissions by 4.38% on average.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Inclusive Growth
• Carbon Emission
• Inclusive Growth Index

Kaynakça

1. Albagoury, S. (2016). Inclusive green growth in Africa: Ethiopia case study. Institute of African Research and Studies, Cairo University.
2. Ali, I. ve Son, H. H. (2007). Measuring inclusive growth. Asian Development Review, 11-31.
3. Al-Mulali, U. ve Sab, C. N. (2018). Electricity consumption, CO2 emission, and economic growth in the Middle East. Energy Sources, 1-7.
4. Amara, D. B. ve Qiao, J. (2023). From economic growth to inclusive green growth: How do carbon emissions, eco-innovation and international collaboration develop economic growth and tackle climate change? Journal of Cleaner Production, 425, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138986
5. Annor, L. D., Robaina, M. ve Vieira, E. (2023). Financial development, inclusive growth, and environmental quality: emerging markets perspective. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04198-6
6. Arrow, K., Dasgupta, P., Goulder, L., Daily, G., Ehrlich, P., Heal, G., Levin, S., Maler, K., Schneider, S. ve Starrett, D. (2004). Are we consuming too much? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(3), 147-172.
7. Asongu, S. A. ve Odhiambo, N. M. (2020). Governance, CO2 emissions and inclusive human development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 38(1), 18-36.
8. Atgür, M. (2021). Ekonomik büyüme, enerji tüketimi ve karbon emisyonları ilişkisi: Çin örneği. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23(1), 172-186.

9. Batmaz, T., Bayraç, H. N. ve Güllü, M. (2019). Türkiye’de yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarının büyüme ve karbon emisyonu ilişkisi. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(3), 645-658.
10. Bouma, J. ve Berkhout, E. (2015). Inclusive green growth. The Hague/Bilthoven: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
11. Bouznit, M. ve P. Pablo-Romero, M. D. (2016). CO2 emission and economic growth in Algeria. Energy Policy, 93-104.
12. Chakrabartty, S. (2017). Composite index: methods and properties. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 12(2), 31-41.
13. Chaudhary, M. ve Sadaf, R. (2014). Poverty, income inequality and inclusive growth in Pakistan. Economics, Political Science.
14. Chen, J.-H. ve Huang, Y.-F. (2013). The study of the relationship between carbon dioxide (CO2) emission and economic growth. Journal of International and Global Economic Studies, 6(2), 45-61.
15. Corrado, G., ve Corrado, L. (2017). Inclusive finance for inclusive growth and development. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, (24), 19–23.
16. Çoban, O. ve Şahbaz Kılınç, N. (2015). Yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi ve karbon emisyonu ilişkisi: TR örneği. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(38), 195-208.
17. Dasgupta, P., Levin, S. ve Lubchenco, J. (2000). Economic pathways to ecological sustainability: challenges for the new millennium. BioScience, 50(4), 339-345.
18. Dickey, D. ve Fuller, W. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of The American Statistical Association, 427-431.
19. Dinda, S. (2013). Inclusive green growth and sustainable development through productive consumption. Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
20. Dünya Bankası. (2012). Inclusive green growth: the pathway to sustainable development. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
21. Dünya Ekonomik Forumu. (2017). The inclusive growth and development report 2017. World Economic Forum.
22. Ghouse, G., Aslam, A. ve Bhatti, M. I. (2022). The impact of the environment, digital–social inclusion, and institutions on inclusive growth: A conceptual and empirical analysis. Energies, (15), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15197098
23. Granger, C. ve Newbold, P. (1974). Spurious regressions in econometrics. Journal of Econometrics, 111-120.
24. Gregory, A. ve Hansen, B. (1996). Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. Journal of Econometrics, 70(1), 99-126.
25. Güllü, M. ve Yakışık, H. (2017). Karbon emisyonu ve enerji tüketiminin büyüme üzerindeki etkileri: MIST Ülkeleri Karşılaştırması. Sosyoekonomi, 25(32), 239-253.
26. Gülmez, A. (2015). OECD ülkelerinde ekonomik büyüme ve hava kirliliği ilişkisi: panel veri analizi. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (9), 18-30.
27. Hakimian, H. (2013). The search for inclusive growth in North Africa: a comparative approach. African Development Bank-AfDB.
28. Joo, J., Kim, C. S. ve Yoo, S.-H. (2015). Energy consumption, CO2 emission, and economic growth: evidence from Chile. International Journal of Green Energy, 543-550.
29. Kahia, M., Omri, A. ve Jarraya, B. (2021). Green energy, economic growth and environmental quality nexus in Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 13(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031264
30. Kamah, M., Riti, J. S. ve Bin, P. (2021). Inclusive growth and environmental sustainability: The role of ınstitutional quality in Sub-Saharan Africa. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-17.
31. Khan, A., Khan, G., Safdar, S., Munır, S. ve Andleeb, Z. (2016). Measurement and determinants of inclusive growth: case study of Pakistan (1990-2012). The Pakistan Development Review, 55(4), 455–466.
32. Kiani, A. ve Ullah, S. (2015). The inclusive growth index: a new measurement of Pakistan's development. HEC 3rd International Social Science Conference Proceedings (s. 163-169).
33. Kolawole, B. (2016). Government spending and inclusive-growth relationship in Nigeria: an empirical investigation. Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business, 19(2), 33-56.
34. Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P., SchMidt, P. ve Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationary against the altarnative of a unit root: how sure are we that economic time series have a unit root? Journal of Econometrics, 159-178.
35. Lee, N., ve Sissons, P. (2016). Inclusive growth? The relationship between economic growth and poverty in British cities. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 48(11), 2317-2339.
36. Maji, I. (2019). Impact of clean energy and inclusive development on CO2 emissions in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Cleaner Production, 1-6.
37. Manga, M. ve Gümüş Akar, P. (2020). Ekonomik büyüme, karbon emisyonu ve insani gelişmişlik arasındaki ilişki: seçilmiş Akdeniz ülkeleri. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 405-419.
38. McKinley, T. (2010). Inclusive growth criteria and indicators: an inclusive growth index for diagnosis of country progress. ADB Sustainable Development Working Paper Series, Asian Development Bank.
39. Mohammed, E. Y., Wang, S. ve Kawaguchi, G. (2013). Making growth green and inclusive: the case of Cambodia. OECD Green Growth Papers. Paris: OECD.
40. Nketia, E. B., Kong, Y., Mensah, I. A., Ampon-Wireko, S. ve Anfom, K. (2022). Inclusive growth and the sophisticated influence of carbon emissions, renewable energy, and financial development: An introspective analysis of Africa. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 17(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2022.2099038
41. OECD. (2011). Towards green growth. OECD.
42. OECD. (2012). Inclusive green growth: for the future we want. OECD.
43. OECD. (2018). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. OECD.
44. OECD. (2021). Inclusive green growth: for the future we want. https://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/futurewewant.htm adresinden 7 Aralık 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
45. OECD. (2021). Inclusive growth. https://www.oecd.org/inclusive-growth/#introduction adresinden 7 Aralık 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
46. Pala, A. (2018). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerde enerji tüketimi, karbon emisyonu ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisinin ARDL yaklaşımı ile incelenmesi. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 14, 1-29.
47. Park, J. (1992). Canonical cointegrating regressions. Econometrica, 60(1), 119-143.
48. Pata, U., Yurtkuran, S. ve Kalça, A. (2016). Türkiye'de enerji tüketimi ve ekonomik büyüme: ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 38(2), 255-271.
49. Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica, 57(6), 1361-1401.
50. Perron, P. (1997). Further evidence on breaking trend functions in macroeconomic variables. Journal of Econometrics, 80(2), 355-385.
51. Phillips, P. ve Hansen, B. (1990). Statistical inference in instrumental variables regression with I(1) processes. The Review of Economic Studies, 99-125.
52. Phillips, P. ve Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346.
53. Saikkonen, P. (1992). Estimation and testing of cointegrated systems by an autoregressive approximation. Econometric Theory, 8(1), 1-27.
54. Samans, R., Blanke, J., Corrigan, G. ve Drzeniek, M. (2015). Benchmarking inclusive growth and development discussion paper. World Economic Forum.
55. Spratt, S. ve Griffith-Jones, S. (2013). Mobilising investment for inclusive green growth in low-income countries. BMZ-Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development.
56. Stock, J. ve Watson, M. (1993). A simple estimator of cointegrating vectors in higher order integrated systems. Econometrica, 61(4), 783-820.
57. Taşkın, T. (2014). GDP growth in Turkey: Inclusive or not. Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası.
58. Toda, H. Y. ve Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics, 225-250.
59. United Nations Economic and Social Council. (2005). The 5th Ministerial conference on environment and development in Asia and The Pacific. Seoul, ESCAP.
60. Vazquez-Brust, D., Smith, A. ve Sarkis, J. (2014). Managing the transition to critical green growth: The ‘green growth state’. Futures, 64, 38–50.
61. Yan, C., Li, H. ve Li, Z. (2022). Environmental pollution and economic growth: Evidence of SO2 emissions and GDP in China. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.930780
62. Zivot, E. ve Andrews, D. W. (1992). Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.