Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 2, 268 - 283, 30.11.2018

Mehmet Akif Destek

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Akbostancı, E., Türüt-Aşık, S., ve Tunç, G. İ. (2009). The relationship between income and environment in Turkey: is there an environmental Kuznets curve?. Energy policy, 37(3), 861-867.
  • Balibey, M. (2015). Relationships among CO2 emissions, economic growth and foreign direct investment and the EKC hypothesis in Turkey. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 5(4), 1042-1049.
  • Bölük, G., ve Mert, M. (2015). The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: An ARDL approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 587-595.
  • Bozkurt, C., ve Okumuş, İ. (2015). Türkiye’de Ekonomik Büyüme, Enerji Tüketimi, Ticari Serbestleşme ve Nüfus Yoğunluğunun Co2 Emisyonu Üzerindeki Etkileri: Yapısal Kırılmalı Eşbütünleşme Analizi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32).
  • Destek, M. A., ve Ozsoy, F. N. (2015). Relationships between economic growth, energy consumption, globalization, urbanization and environmental degradation in Turkey. International Journal of Energy and Statistics, 3(04), 1550017.
  • Dietz, T., ve Rosa, E. A. (1994). Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Human ecology review, 1(2), 277-300.Ehrlich, P. R., ve Holdren, J. P. (1971). Impact of population growth. Science, 171(3977), 1212-1217.
  • Elgin, C., ve Öztunalı, O. (2014). Environmental Kuznets curve for the informal sector of Turkey (1950-2009). Panoeconomicus, 61(4), 471-485.
  • Gökmenoğlu, K., ve Taspinar, N. (2016). The relationship between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth and FDI: the case of Turkey. The Journal of International Trade ve Economic Development, 25(5), 706-723.
  • Gregory, A. W., ve Hansen, B. E. (1996). Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. Journal of econometrics, 70(1), 99-126.
  • Grossman, G. M., ve Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement (No. w3914). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Halicioglu, F. (2009). An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy, 37(3), 1156-1164.
  • Katircioğlu, S., ve Katircioğlu, S. (2018). Testing the role of urban development in the conventional environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from Turkey. Applied Economics Letters, 25(11), 741-746.
  • Ng, S., ve Perron, P. (2001). Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica, 69(6), 1519-1554.
  • Ozatac, N., Gokmenoglu, K. K., ve Taspinar, N. (2017). Testing the EKC hypothesis by considering trade openness, urbanization, and financial development: the case of Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(20), 16690-16701.
  • Ozturk, I., ve Acaravci, A. (2010). CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(9), 3220-3225.
  • Ozturk, I., ve Acaravci, A. (2013). The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy Economics, 36, 262-267.
  • Panayotou, T. (1993). Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development (No. 992927783402676). International Labour Organization.
  • Pata, U. K. (2018). Renewable energy consumption, urbanization, financial development, income and CO2 emissions in Turkey: Testing EKC hypothesis with structural breaks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 770-779.
  • Pata, U. K. (2018). The effect of urbanization and industrialization on carbon emissions in Turkey: evidence from ARDL bounds testing procedure. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(8), 7740-7747.
  • Pesaran, M. H., ve Shin, Y. (1997). An autoregressive distributed-lag modelling approach to cointegration analysis. Econometric Society Monographs, 31, 371-413.Shafik, N. (1994). Economic development and environmental quality: an econometric analysis. Oxford economic papers, 757-773.
  • Wackernagel, M., ve Rees, W. (1996). Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth (Vol. 9). New Society Publishers.
  • WDI (2018). World Development Indicator, the World Bank.
  • Yavuz, N. Ç. (2014). CO2 emission, energy consumption, and economic growth for Turkey: Evidence from a cointegration test with a structural break. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 9(3), 229-235.
  • Zivot, E., ve Andrews, D. (1992). Further evidence ofthe great crash, the oil-price shock and the unit-root hypothesis. Journal ofBusiness and Economic Statistics 10, 251–270.

ÇEVRESEL KUZNETS EĞRİSİ HİPOTEZİNİN TÜRKİYE İÇİN İNCELENMESİ: STIRPAT MODELİNDEN BULGULAR

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 2, 268 - 283, 30.11.2018

Mehmet Akif Destek

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, ekonomik büyüme ile çevresel bozulma
arasında ters U-şeklinde bir ilişkinin geçerli olduğu görüşüne dayalı olan
Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (EKC) hipotezinin Türkiye için incelenmesi
amaçlanmaktadır. Ayrıca, EKC hipotezinin geçerliliğini inceleyen çalışmalardan
farklı biçimde çevresel bozulma göstergesi olarak ekolojik ayak izi değişkeni
kullanılması ve ampirik model olarak STIRPAT çevre modelinin temel alınması
amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçlar doğrultusunda, reel GSYH, kentleşme düzeyi, enerji yoğunluğu
ve ekolojik ayak izi arasındaki ilişki, 1990-2014 gözlem aralığı için ARDL
sınır testi VECM Granger nedensellik yöntemi aracılığıyla incelenmiştir.
Çalışma sonucunda, hem kısa hem de uzun dönem için EKC hipotezinin geçerli
olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca, kentleşme düzeyindeki ve enerji yoğunluğundaki
artışın Türkiye’de çevresel bozulmayı hızlandırdığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.
Nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre ise uzun dönemde ekonomik büyümeden,
kentleşme düzeyinden ve enerji yoğunluğundan çevresel bozulmaya doğru
nedensellik ilişkilerinin geçerli olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

STIRPAT modeli EKC hipotezi Ekolojik ayak izi

Kaynakça

  • Akbostancı, E., Türüt-Aşık, S., ve Tunç, G. İ. (2009). The relationship between income and environment in Turkey: is there an environmental Kuznets curve?. Energy policy, 37(3), 861-867.
  • Balibey, M. (2015). Relationships among CO2 emissions, economic growth and foreign direct investment and the EKC hypothesis in Turkey. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 5(4), 1042-1049.
  • Bölük, G., ve Mert, M. (2015). The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: An ARDL approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 587-595.
  • Bozkurt, C., ve Okumuş, İ. (2015). Türkiye’de Ekonomik Büyüme, Enerji Tüketimi, Ticari Serbestleşme ve Nüfus Yoğunluğunun Co2 Emisyonu Üzerindeki Etkileri: Yapısal Kırılmalı Eşbütünleşme Analizi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32).
  • Destek, M. A., ve Ozsoy, F. N. (2015). Relationships between economic growth, energy consumption, globalization, urbanization and environmental degradation in Turkey. International Journal of Energy and Statistics, 3(04), 1550017.
  • Dietz, T., ve Rosa, E. A. (1994). Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Human ecology review, 1(2), 277-300.Ehrlich, P. R., ve Holdren, J. P. (1971). Impact of population growth. Science, 171(3977), 1212-1217.
  • Elgin, C., ve Öztunalı, O. (2014). Environmental Kuznets curve for the informal sector of Turkey (1950-2009). Panoeconomicus, 61(4), 471-485.
  • Gökmenoğlu, K., ve Taspinar, N. (2016). The relationship between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth and FDI: the case of Turkey. The Journal of International Trade ve Economic Development, 25(5), 706-723.
  • Gregory, A. W., ve Hansen, B. E. (1996). Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. Journal of econometrics, 70(1), 99-126.
  • Grossman, G. M., ve Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement (No. w3914). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Halicioglu, F. (2009). An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy, 37(3), 1156-1164.
  • Katircioğlu, S., ve Katircioğlu, S. (2018). Testing the role of urban development in the conventional environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from Turkey. Applied Economics Letters, 25(11), 741-746.
  • Ng, S., ve Perron, P. (2001). Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica, 69(6), 1519-1554.
  • Ozatac, N., Gokmenoglu, K. K., ve Taspinar, N. (2017). Testing the EKC hypothesis by considering trade openness, urbanization, and financial development: the case of Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(20), 16690-16701.
  • Ozturk, I., ve Acaravci, A. (2010). CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(9), 3220-3225.
  • Ozturk, I., ve Acaravci, A. (2013). The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy Economics, 36, 262-267.
  • Panayotou, T. (1993). Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development (No. 992927783402676). International Labour Organization.
  • Pata, U. K. (2018). Renewable energy consumption, urbanization, financial development, income and CO2 emissions in Turkey: Testing EKC hypothesis with structural breaks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 770-779.
  • Pata, U. K. (2018). The effect of urbanization and industrialization on carbon emissions in Turkey: evidence from ARDL bounds testing procedure. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(8), 7740-7747.
  • Pesaran, M. H., ve Shin, Y. (1997). An autoregressive distributed-lag modelling approach to cointegration analysis. Econometric Society Monographs, 31, 371-413.Shafik, N. (1994). Economic development and environmental quality: an econometric analysis. Oxford economic papers, 757-773.
  • Wackernagel, M., ve Rees, W. (1996). Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth (Vol. 9). New Society Publishers.
  • WDI (2018). World Development Indicator, the World Bank.
  • Yavuz, N. Ç. (2014). CO2 emission, energy consumption, and economic growth for Turkey: Evidence from a cointegration test with a structural break. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 9(3), 229-235.
  • Zivot, E., ve Andrews, D. (1992). Further evidence ofthe great crash, the oil-price shock and the unit-root hypothesis. Journal ofBusiness and Economic Statistics 10, 251–270.
Toplam 24 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Mehmet Akif Destek 0000-0002-2514-9405

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Kasım 2018
Gönderilme Tarihi 13 Ağustos 2018
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2018Cilt: 19 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Destek, M. A. (2018). ÇEVRESEL KUZNETS EĞRİSİ HİPOTEZİNİN TÜRKİYE İÇİN İNCELENMESİ: STIRPAT MODELİNDEN BULGULAR. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 19(2), 268-283.
 Kapak Resmi İndir

Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi Creative Commons Atıf-GayriTicari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı (CC BY NC) ile lisanslanmıştır.