THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CO2 EMISSIONS AND GDP IN FRAGILE FIVE COUNTRIES: PANEL BOOTSTRAP CAUSALITY ANALYSIS

Öz

Global warming and climate change in recent years is one of the much-discussed environmental problems. The main reason of this important environmental problem is athropogenic greenhouse gases emissions from human activities. Within greenhouse gas emissions, CO2 emissions takes big share. In this context, aim of the study is to examine the relationships between carbon dioxide emissions and gross domestic product variables in the fragile five (Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, India, Turkey). The study covers the years 1970-2016. Bootstrap Panel Granger Causality Test were used to examine the relationships between variables. The causality test results show that there is a unidirectional causality relationship from gdp per capita to CO2 per capita in Brazil and Indonesia. At the same time there is a unidirectional causality relationship from CO2 per capita to gdpp per capita in South Africa and Turkey. Finally, there is a bidirectional causality relationship between gdp per capita and CO2 emissions per capita in India.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fragile Five,CO2,GDP,Bootstrap Panel Granger Causality Test

KIRILGAN BEŞLİ ÜLKELERİNDE CO2 EMİSYONU VE GSYİH İLİŞKİLERİ: PANEL BOOTSTRAP NEDENSELLİK ANALİZİ

Öz

Küresel ısınma ve iklim değişikliği son yıllarda çok tartışılan çevresel problemlerin başında gelmektedir. Bu önemli çevresel sorununun temel nedeni insan kaynaklı seragazı emisyonlarıdır. Seragazları içinde en büyük payı ise karbondioksit emisyonu almaktadır. Bu çerçevede çalışmanın amacı, Kırılgan Beşli ülkelerinde (Brezilya, Endonezya, Güney Afrika, Hindistan, Türkiye) karbondioksit emisyonu ile gayrisafi yurtiçi hasıla değişkenleri arasındaki ilişkileri incelemektir. Çalışmanın dönemi 1970-2016 yıllarını kapsamaktadır. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkileri incelemek için Bootstrap Panel Granger Nedensellik Testi kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, Brezilya ve Endonezya’da kişi başına düşen gayri safi yurtiçi hasıladan kişi başına karbondioksit emisyonuna doğru, Güney Afrika ve Türkiye’de ise kişi başına karbondioksit emisyonundan kişi başına gayri safi yurtiçi hasılaya doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkileri bulunmaktadır. Hindistan’da ise söz konusu değişkenler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi çift yönlüdür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kırılgan Beşli,CO2,GSYİH

Kaynakça

1. Acaravcı, A. ve Öztürk, İ. (2010) “On the Relationship Between Energy Consumption, CO2 Emissions and Economic Growth in Europe”, Energy 35, ss:5412-5420.Akel, V. (2015) “Kırılgan Beşli Ülkelerinde Hisse Senedi Piyasaları Arasındaki Eşbütünleşme Analizi”, Uluslararası Yönetim, İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, Cil:11, Sayı:24, ss:75-96.
2. Ang, J. (2007) “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption, and Output in France”, Energy Policy, Volume:35, Issue:10, ss:4772-4778.
3. Bölükbaş, M. (2017) “Para ve Maliye Politikalarının Enflasyon Üzerindeki Etkisi: BRIC Ülkeleri ve Türkiye İçin Bir Bootstrap Panel Granger Nedensellik Analizi”, Bankacılar Dergisi, 105:47-62.
4. Breusch, T.S. ve Pagan, A.R. (1980) “The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Modelspecification Tests in Econometrics”, Review of Economic Studies, 47(1):239-53.
5. Ceviş, İ. ve Ceylan, R. (2015) “Kırılgan Beşlide Satınalma Gücü Paritesi (SAGP) Test Edilmesi”, Journal of Yaşar University, 10(37), 6381-6477.
6. Dritsaki, C. ve Dritsaki, M. (2014) “Causal Relationship Between Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and CO2 Emisions: A Dynamic Panel Data Analysis”, International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Vol:4, No:2, ss:125-136.
7. Farhani, S., Shahbaz, M. ve Arouri, M. (2013) “Panel Analysis of CO2 Emissions, GDP, Energy Consumption, Trade Openness and Urbanizaation in MENA Countries”, MPRA Working Paper, No:49258.
8. Grossman, G. ve Krueger, A. (1991) “Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement”, National Bureau of Economics Research Working Paper, Vol. 3194.

9. Halıcıoğlu, F. (2009) “An Econometric Study of CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption, Income and Foreign Trade in Turkey”, Energy Policy 37, 1156-1164.
10. Hatzigeorgiou, E., Polatidis, H., ve Haralambopoulos, D. (2011) “CO2 Emissions, GDP and Energy Intensity: A Multivariate Cointegration and Causality Analysis for Greece, 1977-2007”, Applied Energy, Volume:88, Issue:4, s:1377-1385.
11. Hayaloğlu, P. (2015) “Kırılgan Beşli Ülkelerinde Finansal Gelişme ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Dinamik Panel Veri Analizi”, Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt:11, Sayı:11, No:1, ss:131-144.
12. Hossain, S. (2011) “Panel Estimation for CO2 Emissions, Energy Eonsumption, Economic Growth, Trade Openness and Urbanization of Newly Industrialized Countries”, Energy Policy 39, ss:6991-6999.
13. IMF (2019) Internartional Monetary Found, www.data.imf.org, Erişim:03.05.208
14. İltaş, Y. ve Bulut, Ü. (2017) “Türkiye’de Ar-Ge Harcamaları İle Net Satış Hasılatı Arasındaki İlişki: Bootstrap Panel Nedensellik Testinden Kanıtlar”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, Ocak-Haziran 2017, 49: 45-58.
15. Jalil, A., Mahmud, S.F. (2009) “Environment Kuznets Curve for CO2 Emissions: A Cointegration Analysis for China”, Energy Policy 37, ss:5167-5172.
16. Jayanthakumaran, K., Verma, R., Liu, Y. (2012) “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption, Trade and Income: A comparative Analysis of China and India”, Energy Policy 42, ss:450-460.
17. Kónya, L. (2006) “Exports and Growth: Granger Causality Analysis on OECD Countries with a Panel Data Approach”, Economic Modelling, 23(6), ss:978-992.
18. Kraft J. ve Kraft A. (1978) “On the Relationship Between Energy and GNP”, Journal of Energy and Development, Vol:3, No:2, ss:401-403.
19. Lean, H.H., Smyth, R. (2010) “CO2 Emissions, Electricity Consumption and Output in ASEAN”, Applied Energy 87, ss:1858-1864.
20. Narayan, P. ve Narayan, S. (2010) “Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth: Panel Data Evidence From Developing Countries”, Energy Policy 38, ss:661:666
21. Öztürk, İ. (2010) “A Literature Survey on Energy-Growth Nexus”, Energy Policy, Volume:38, Issue:1, ss:340-349.
22. Öztürk, İ. ve Acaravcı, A. (2010) “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in Turkey”, Reneweable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume:14, Issue:9, ss:3220-3225.
23. Pao, H. ve Tsai, C. (2010) “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in BRIC Countries”, Energy Policy 38, ss:7850-7860.
24. Pesaran, M.H. ve Yamagata, T. (2008) “Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), ss:50-93.
25. Pesaran, M. H. (2004) “General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels”, University of Cambridge Working Papers in Economics No. 0435.
26. Richmond A. ve Kaufman R. (2006) “Is there a Turning Point in the Relationship Between Income and Energy Use and/or Carbon Emissions?”, Ecological Economics, Volume:56, Issue:2, ss:176-189.Saboori ve diğerleri, (2012) “Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in Malaysia: A Cointegration Analysis of the Environmental Cuznets Curve”, Energy Policy, Vol:51, ss:184-191.
27. Saidi, K. Ve Hammami, S. (2015) “The Impact of CO2 Emissions and Economic Growth on Energy Consumption in 58 Countries”, Energy Reports 1, ss:62-70.
28. Souza ve diğerleri (2018) “Determinants of CO2 Emissions in the MERCOSUR: The Role of Economic Growth and Reneweable and Non-Reneweable Energy”, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Volume:25, Issue:21, ss:20769-20781.
29. Soytaş, U. ve Sarı, R. (2009) “Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and Carbon Emissions: Challenges Faced by an EU Candidate Countries”, Ecological Economics, 68, ss:1667-1675.
30. Soytaş, U. ve diğerleri (2007) “Energy Consumption, Income and Carbon Emissions in the United States”, Ecological Economics, Volume:62, Issue:3-4, ss:482-489.Swamy, P. (1970) “Efficient Inference in a Random Coefficient Regression Model”, Econometrica, 38(2), ss:311-323.
31. Tiwari, A. (2011) “A Structural VAR Analysis of Reneweable Energy Consumption, Real GDP and CO2 Emissions: Evidence From India”, Economics Bulletin, Vol:31, No:2, ss:1793-1806.
32. Wang ve diğerleri (2011) “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in China: A Panel Data Analysis”, Energy Policy, Volume:39, Issue:9, ss:4870-4875.
33. Zhang, X. ve Cheng, X. (2009) “Energy Consumption, Carbon Emissions and Economic Growth in China”, Ecological Economics, Volume:68, Issue:10, ss:2706-2712.