TÜRKİYE’DE VE G7 ÜLKELERİNDE DIŞA AÇIKLIK VE EKOLOJİK AYAK İZİ İLİŞKİSİ: YATAY KESİT BAĞIMLILIĞI ALTINDA PANEL VERİ ANALİZİ

1970’lerin sonunda dış ticarette serbestleştirmeyi teşvik eden politikaların küresel çapta uygulanmasıyla beraber dünya genelinde ekonomik büyüme ve dışa açıklık oranlarında ciddi artışlar meydana gelmiştir. Ancak yine aynı süreçte çevresel bozulmalar görülmüş, bu nedenle sürdürülebilir kalkınma tartışmaları gündemde yerini almıştır. Çevresel bozulmanın göstergelerinin ölçümü, sürdürülebilirliğin ne ölçüde sağlandığının anlaşılması adına önem kazanmıştır. Çevresel bozulmanın önemli bir göstergesi olarak ekolojik ayak izi kavramı ön plana çıkmıştır. Bu bağlamda dışa açıklığın ekolojik ayak izini ne ölçüde ve hangi yönde etkilediğini belirlemek önem kazanmaktadır. Bu çalışmada ekolojik ayak izi ile dışa açıklık arasındaki ilişki G7 ülkeleri ve Türkiye için 1998-2017 döneminde yatay kesit bağımlılığını dikkate alan panel veri analizi yöntemiyle test edilmiştir. Ampirik bulgular, dışa açıklığın ve büyümenin ekolojik ayak izini artırdığını, yenilenebilir enerji tüketiminin ise ekolojik ayak izini azalttığını ortaya koymaktadır. Ulaşılan bu sonuçlardan hareketle G7 ülkeleri ve Türkiye özelinde politika önerileri tartışılmaktadır.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADE OPENNESS AND ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT IN TURKEY AND G7 COUNTRIES: A PANEL DATA ANALYSIS UNDER CROSS-SECTIONAL DEPENDENCE

With the global implementation of policies encouraging liberalization in international trade at the end of the 1970s, significant increases in economic growth and openness have occurred throughout the world. However, environmental degradation was observed in the same period, so the discussions on sustainable development took its place on the agenda. The measurement of indicators of environmental degradation has gained importance to understand to what extent sustainability is achieved. As an important indicator of environmental degradation, ecological footprint has come to the fore. In this context, it is important to determine the impact and direction of openness on the ecological footprint. In this study, the relationship between ecological footprint and openness were tested by using panel data analysis, taking into account the cross-sectional dependence for the G7 countries and Turkey for the period 1998-2017. Empirical findings reveal that openness and growth increase the ecological footprint, while renewable energy consumption decreases the ecological footprint. Based on these results, policy recommendations for G7 countries and Turkey are discussed.

PDF

___

Ahmed, Z., Wang, Z., Mahmood, F., Hafeez, M., & Ali, N. (2019). Does globalization increase the ecological footprint? Empirical evidence from Malaysia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 18565–18582.
Al-Mulali, U., & Ozturk, I. (2015). The effect of energy consumption, urbanization, trade openness, industrial output, and the political stability on the environmental degradation in the MENA (Middle East and North African) region. Energy, 84, 382-389.
Al-Mulali, U., Solarin, S., Sheau-Ting, L., & Ozturk, I. (2016). Does moving towards renewable energy causes water and land inefficiency? An empirical investigation. Energy Policy, 93, 303-314.
Al-Mulali, U., Weng-Wai, C., Sheau-Ting, L., & Mohammed, A. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis by utilizing the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation. Ecological Indicators, 48, 315-323.
Ansari, M. A., Haider, & S., Masood, T. (2021). Do renewable energy and globalization enhance ecological footprint: an analysis of top renewable energy countries? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 6719–6732.
Apaydın, Ş. (2020). Küreselleşmenin ekolojik ayakizi üzerindeki etkileri: Türkiye Örneği, Ekonomi Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(1), 23-42
Apaydin, Ş., Ursavaş, U., & Koç, Ü. (2021). The impact of globalization on the ecological footprint: do convergence clubs matter? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 53379–53393.
Aydin, M., & Turan, Y. E. (2020). The influence of financial openness, trade openness, and energy intensity on ecological footprint: revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 43233–43245.
Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. (1980). The lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-253.
Bucak, Ç. (2022). G8 ülkelerinde ve Türkiye’de ekonomik karmaşıklık ve ekolojik ayak izi ilişkisi: Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi analizi. Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 22(1), 1-16.
Çeştepe, H., & Gençel, H. (2021). Ekonomik Kalkınmada Kurumsal Faktörlerin Rolü: Doğu Asya Ülkelerinden Ampirik Kanıtlar. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 20(4), 1669-1686.
Destek, M. A., Ulucak, R., & Dogan, E. (2018). Analyzing the Environmental Kuznets Curve for the EU countries: The role of ecological footprint. (MPRA Paper No. 106882).
Destek, M., & Sinha, A. (2020). Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries. (MPRA Paper No. 104246)
Dumrul, Y., & Kılıçarslan, Z. (2020). Türkiye’nin uluslararası ticareti ve ekolojik ayak izi. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(3), 1589-1597.
Dünya Bankası. (2021). Dünya Gelişmişlik Göstergeleri. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators (Erişim tarihi: 24.10.2021)
Figgie, L., Oebels, K., & Offermans, A. (2016). The effects of globalization on Ecological Footprints: an empirical analysis. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 19(3), 863-876.
Global Footprint Network . (2021a). Ecological Footprint. https://www.footprintnetwork.org/our-work/ecological-footprint/ (Erişim tarihi: 10.11.2021)
Global Footprint Network. (2017). How ecological footprint accounting helps us recognize that engaging in meaningful climate action is critical for our own success. https://www.footprintnetwork.org/2017/11/09/ecological-footprint-climate-change/ (Erişim tarihi: 06.12.2021)
Global Footprint Network. (2021b). Open Data. https://data.footprintnetwork.org/#/countryTrends?type=BCpc,EFCpc&cn=223 (Erişim tarihi: 24.10.2021)
Godil, D. I., Sharif, A., Rafique, S., & Jermsittiparsert, K. (2020). The asymmetric effect of tourism, financial development and globalization on ecological footprint in Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 40109–40120.
Gülmez, A., Özdilek, E., & Karakaş, D. N. (2021). Ekonomik büyüme, ticari açıklık ve enerji tüketiminin ekolojik ayak izine etkileri: G7 ülkeleri için panel eşbütünleşme analizi. Econder International Academic Journal, 5(2), 329-342.
Güzel, İ., & Oluç, İ. (2022). İhracat ürün çeşitlendirmesinin ekolojik ayak izi üzerindeki etkisi. Akademik Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi, 14(26), 47-58.
İspiroğlu, F. (2021). Yükselen piyasa ekonomilerinde ekonomik karmaşıklık ve ticarî dışa açıklık ilişkisi. BMIJ, 9(3), 1021-1031.
Kahuthu, A. (2006). Economic growth and environmental degradation in a global context. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8, 55-68.
Karasoy, A. (2021). Küreselleşme, sanayileşme ve şehirleşmenin Türkiye’nin ekolojik ayak izine etkisinin genişletilmiş ARDL yöntemiyle incelenmesi. Hitit Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14(1), 208-231.
Kazgan, G. (1985). Ekonomide dışa açık büyüme. İstanbul: Altın Kitaplar Yayınevi.
Keskingöz, H., & Karamelikli, H. (2015). Dış ticaret-enerji tüketimi ve ekonomik büyümenin CO2 emisyonu üzerine etkisi. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 9, 7-17.
Khobai, H., & Roux, P. R. (2017). The relationship between energy consumption, economic growth and carbon dioxide emission: The case of South Africa. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 7(3), 102-109.
Kirikkaleli, D., Adebayo, T. S., Khan, Z., & Ali, S. (2020). Does globalization matter for ecological footprint in Turkey? Evidence from dual adjustment approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 14009-14017. doi:10.1007/s11356-020-11654-7
Kongbuamai, N., Zafar, M. W., Zaidi, S. A., & Liu, Y. (2020). Determinants of the ecological footprint in Thailand: the influences of tourism, trade openness, and population density. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 40171–40186.
Kurnaz, L. (2019). Son buzul erimeden: İklim değişikliği hakkında öğrenmek istediğiniz her şey. İstanbul: Doğan Kitap.
Langnel, Z., & Amegavi, G. B. (2020). Globalization, electricity consumption and ecological footprint: An autoregressive distributive lag (ARDL) approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 63, 102482.
Le, T. H., Chang, Y., & Park, D. (2016). Trade openness and environmental quality: International evidence. Energy Policy, 92, 45-55.
Lu, W. C. (2020). The interplay among ecological footprint, real income, energy consumption, and trade openness in 13 Asian countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 45148–45160.
Mikayilov, J. I., Galeotti, M., & Hasanov, F. J. (2018). The ımpact of economic growth on co2 emissions in Azerbaijan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, 1558-1572. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.269
Oxfam. (2020). Confronting carbon inequality: putting climate justice at the heart of the covıd-19. Oxfam Media.
Ozturk, I., Al-Mulali, U., & Saboori, B. (2016). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: the role of tourism and ecological footprint. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(2), 1916-1928.
Özel, H. A. (2011). İktisadi perspektiften küreselleşme kavramı ve gelişimi. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2, 91-98.
Pata, U. K. (2021). Linking renewable energy, globalization, agriculture, CO2 emissions and ecological footprint in BRIC countries: A sustainability perspective. Renewable Energy, 173, 197-208. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.125
Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. (IZA Discussion Paper 1240). Bonn: IZA
Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A Simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
Sabir, S., & Gorus, M. S. (2019). The impact of globalization on ecological footprint: empirical evidence from the South Asian countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research , 26, 33387–33398.
Shaari, M. S., Hussain, N. E., Abdullah, H., & Kamil, S. (2014). Relationship among foreign direct ınvestment, economic growth and co2 emission: a panel data analysis. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 4(4), 706-715.
Şenses, F. (2004). Neoliberal küreselleşme kalkınma için bir fırsat mı, engel mi? (Working Paper in Economic 04/09). Ankara: Economic Research Center(ERC).
Usman, O., Akadiri, S., Adeshola, & I. (2020). Role of renewable energy and globalization on ecological footprint in the USA: implications for environmental sustainability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 30681–30693. doi:10.1007/s11356-020-09170-9
WWF. (2014). Yaşayan gezegen raporu 2014 özet. World Wide Fund for Nature.
WWF. (2018). Yaşayan gezegen raporu 2018: daha iyiyi hedeflemek özet. Gland: WWF.
WWF. (2020). Yaşayan gezegen raporu 2020 –biyolojik çeşitlilik kaybını tersine çevirmek. Gland: WWF.
Yilanci, V., & Gorus, M. S. (2020). Does economic globalization have predictive power for ecological footprint in MENA counties? A panel causality test with a Fourier function. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(32), 40552-40562.
Yilanci, V., Gorus, M. S., & Solarin, S. (2021). Convergence in per capita carbon footprint and ecological footprint for G7 countries: Evidence from panel Fourier threshold unit root test. Energy & Environment, 33(3), 1-19.
Zambrano-Monserrate, M. A., Ruano, M. A., Candelario, V. O., & Sanchez-Loor, D. (2020). Global ecological footprint and spatial dependence between countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 272, 1-16.