Türkiye'de Bölgesel Eko-Verimliliğin Ölçülmesi: Veri Zarflama Analizi ile Bir Değerlendirme

Türkiye'de Bölgesel Eko-Verimliliğin Ölçülmesi: Veri Zarfl ama Analizi ile Bir Değerlendirme Eko-verimlilik, ekonomik değer yaratımı süreci ile toplam çevresel etkileri birleştirir. Kavram genel olarak, çevre üzerinde daha az etki ve daha az doğal kaynak kullanımı ile daha fazla mal ve hizmet üretilmesi anlamını taşımakta ve bu nedenle hem ekonomik hem ekolojik konularla ilgilenmektedir. Karar vericilerin eko-verimlilik göstergeleri üzerinden değişimleri izleyebilmeleri nedeniyle yaklaşım, sürdürülebilirlik değerlendirmelerinde bir araç olarak kullanılabilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı Veri Zarfl ama Analizi ile Türkiye için bir bölgesel eko-verimlilik modelinin geliştirilmesidir. İstatistiksel Bölge Birimleri Düzey 2'de yer alan bölgelerin verileri kullanılarak yapılan ampirik çalışmanın sonuçlarına göre, TR10 (İstanbul), TR41 (Bursa, Eskişehir, Bilecik) ve TR51 (Ankara) bölgeleri eko-verimli bölgeler olarak belirlenirken, en düşük eko-verimlilik ise TRC1 (Gaziantep, Adıyaman, Kilis) bölgesinde gerçekleşmiştir. Sonuçlar aynı zamanda, gelir ile eko-verimlilik değerleri arasında pozitif yönlü bir ilişki olduğunu da göstermektedir.

Measuring Regional Eco-Effi ciency in Turkey: A DEA Evaluation

Measuring Regional Eco-EfŞ ciency in Turkey: A DEA EvaluationEco-efŞ ciency combines total value creation with total environmental impacts. Broadly speaking, this concept refers to create more goods and services with less impact on the environment and less consumption of natural resources, thus involving both economic and ecological issues. The approach can be used as a tool for sustainability assessment since decision-makers are able to monitor changes using eco-efŞ ciency indicators. The objective of this paper is to develop a regional eco-efŞ ciency model for Turkey by means of Data Envelopment Analysis. The results of the empirical study using the data of Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics Level 2 regions show that TR10 (İstanbul), TR41 (Bursa, Eskişehir, Bilecik), and TR51 (Ankara) are eco-efŞ cient regions while TRC1 (Gaziantep, Adıyaman, Kilis) is the least eco-efŞ cient region. The results also show that there is a positive relationship between income and eco-efŞ ciency scores.

PDF

___

Adaman, F. ve Arsel M. (2008). The European Union and Turkey: Who defi nes environmental progress? International Journal of Middle East Studies. 40. 541-543.
Barba-Gutiérrez, Y., Adenso-Díaz, B. ve Lozano, S. (2009). Eco-effi ciency of electric and electronic appliances: A Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). Environmental Modeling & Assessment. 14. 439-447.
Bian, Y. ve Yang, F. (2010). Resource and environment effi ciency analysis of provinces in China: A DEA approach based on Shannon's entropy. Energy Policy. 38. 1909-1917.
Can, A. (2006). Investigation of Turkey's carbon dioxide problem by numerical modelling. PhD Thesis. The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences. Middle East Technical University.
Cha, K., Lim, S. ve Hur, T. (2008). Eco-effi ciency approach for global warming in the context of Kyoto Mechanism. Ecological Economics. 67. 274-280.
Charnes, A., Cooper W.A. ve Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the effi ciency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research. 2. 429-444.
Coelli, T.A. (1996). A Guide to DEAP Version 2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis (computer) Program. CEPA Working Paper 96/08. Centre for Effi ciency and Productivity Analysis. University of New England.
De Leeuw, F.A.A.M. (2002). A set of emission indicators for long-range transboundary air pollution. Environmental Science & Policy. 5. 135-145.
EEA (European Environment Agency). (2011a). Individual pollutants and environmental pressure categories. 23 Temmuz 2011 tarihinde www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/ data/eea.../fi leCached adresinden erişildi.
EEA (2011b). Greenhouse gases data viewer. 23 Temmuz 2011 tarihinde http://www.eea. europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/data-viewers/ greenhouse-gases-viewer adresinden erişildi. Ehrenfeld, J.R. (2005). Eco-effi ciency: Philosophy, theory, and tools. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 9. 6-8.
EMEP (European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme) (2011). Emissions are used in EMEP models. 23 Temmuz 2011 tarihinde http://www.ceip.at/emission-data-webdab/ emissions-as-used-in-emep-models/ adresinden erişildi.
Emerson, J.W., Hsu, A., Levy, M.A., de Sherbinin, A., Mara, V.,. Esty, D.C. ve Jaiteh, M. (2012). 2012 Environmental Performance Index and Pilot Trend. Environmental Performance Index. New Haven: Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy. 11 Aralık 2012 tarihinde http://epi.yale.edu adresinden erişildi.
EUROSTAT (2011). Regions in the European Union: Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics NUTS 2010/EU-27. Luxembourg: European Union.
EUROSTAT (2012). 14 Şubat 2012 tarihinde http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/ portal/nuts_nomenclature/introduction adresinden erişildi.
EVI (2004). Environmental Vulnerability Index. 14 Şubat 2012 tarihinde http://www. vulnerabilityindex.net/EVI_Country_Profi - les.htm adresinden erişildi. Golany, B. ve Roll, Y. (1989). An application procedure for DEA. Omega. 17. 237-250.
Gómez-Limón, J.A., Picazo-Tadeo, A.J. ve Reig-Martínez E. (2012). Eco-effi ciency assessment of olive farms in Andalusia. Land Use Policy. 29. 395-406.
Houghton, J.T., Meiro Filho, L.G., Callander, B.A., Harris, N., Kattenburg, A. ve Maskell, K. (1996). Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group I to the 2nd Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Iribarren, D., Hospido, A., Moreira, M.T. ve Feijoo, G. (2011). Benchmarking environmental and operational parameters through eco-ef- fi ciency criteria for dairy farms. Science of the Total Environment. 409. 1786-1798.
Kates, R.W., Parris, T.M. ve Leiserowitz, A.A. (2005). What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development. 47. 8-21.
King, C., Gunton, J., Freebairn, D., Coutts, J. ve Webb, I. (2000). The sustainability indicator industry: Where to from here? A focus group study to explore the potential of farmer participation in the development of indicators. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 40. 631-642.
Kortelainen, M. (2008). Dynamic environmental performance analysis: A Malmquist index approach. Ecological Economics. 64. 701-715.
Li, D.Z., Hui, E.C.M., Leung, B.Y.P., Li, Q.M. ve Xu, X. (2010). A methodology for eco-ef- fi ciency evaluation of residential development at city level. Building and Environment. 45. 566-573.
Lin, J., Li, Y., Wang, W., Cui, S. ve Wei, X. (2010). An eco-effi ciency-based urban sustainability assessment method and its application. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. 17. 356-361.
Liu, Y., Song, Y. ve Arp, H.P. (2012). Examination of the relationship between urban form and urban eco-effi ciency in China. Habitat International. 36. 171-177.
Lozano, S., Adenso-Díaz, B., ve Barba-Gutiérrez Y. (2011). Russell non-radial eco-effi ciency measure and scale elasticity of a sample of electric/electronic products. Journal of the Franklin Institute. 348. 1605-1614.
Michelsen, O., Fet, A.M. ve Dahlsrud, A. (2006). Eco-effi ciency in extended supply chains: A case study of furniture production. Journal of Environmental Management. 79. 290-297.
Mickwitz, P., Melanen, M., Rosenström, U. ve Seppälä, J. (2006). Regional eco-effi ciency indicators: A participatory approach. Journal of Cleaner Production. 14. 1603-1611.
OECD (2008). Environmental Performance Reviews: Turkey 2008. 14 Şubat 2012 tarihinde www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/ book/9789264049161-en adresinden erişildi. Oggioni, G., Riccardi, R. ve Toninelli, R. (2011). Eco-effi ciency of the world cement industry: A data envelopment analysis. Energy Policy. 39. 2842-2854.
Pagan, B. ve Prasad, P. (2007). The Queensland food eco-effi ciency project: Reducing risk and improving competitiveness. Journal of Cleaner Production. 15. 764-771.
Picazo-Tadeo, A.J., Reig-Martínez, E. ve Gó- mez-Limón, J.A. (2011). Assessing farming eco-effi ciency: A data envelopment analysis approach. Journal of Environmental Management. 92. 1154-1164.
Picazo-Tadeo, A.J., Beltrán-Esteve, M. ve Gó- mez-Limón, J.A. (2012). Assessing eco-effi ciency with directional distance functions. European Journal of Operational Research. 220. 798-809.
Ramanathan, R. 2003. An Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Schaltegger, S. ve Sturm, A. (1989). Ökologieinduzierte entscheidungsprobleme des managements. Ansatzpunkte zur ausgestaltung von instrumenten. [Ecology induced management decision support. Starting points for instrument formation.] WWZ-Discussion Paper No. 8914. Basel, Switzerland: WWZ.
Schmindheiny, S. (1992). Changing Course: A Global Business Perspective on Development and the Environment. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Sikdar, S.K. (2003). Sustainable development and sustainability metrics. AIChE Journal. 49. 1928-1932.
TÜİK (2011a). İstatistiksel Bölge Birimleri Sınıfl andırması. 14 Şubat 2012 tarihinde http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/Start.do adresinden erişildi.
TÜİK (2011b). Çevre İstatistikleri. 14 Şubat 2012 tarihinde http://www.tuik.gov.tr/VeriBilgi.do?alt_id=10 adresinden erişildi.
TÜİK (2011c). Bölgesel Gayri Safi Katma De- ğer. 14 Şubat 2012 tarihinde http://www.tuik. gov.tr/ulusalhesapapp/bolgeselgskd.zul adresinden erişildi.
Van Berkel, R. (2007). Eco-effi ciency in the Australian minerals. Journal of Cleaner Production. 15, 772-781.
Van Caneghem, J., Block, C., Cramm, P., Mortier, R. ve Vandecasteele, C. (2010). Improving eco-effi ciency in the steel industry: The ArcelorMittal Gent case. Journal of Cleaner Production. 18. 807-814.
Van Middelaar, C.E., Berentsen, P.B.M., Dolman, M.A., ve de Boer, I.J.M. (2011). Eco-ef- fi ciency in the production chain of Dutch semi-hard cheese. Livestock Science. 139. 91-99.
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wu, H., Du, S., Liang, L. ve Zhou Y. (2013). A DEA-based approach for fair reduction and reallocation of emission permits. Mathematical and Computer Modelling.
Wursthorn, S., Poganietz, W.R. ve Schebek, L. (2011). Economic-environmental monitoring indicators for European countries: A disaggregated sector-based approach for monitoring eco-effi ciency. Ecological Economics. 70, 487-496.
Yadav, V. K., Padhy, N.P. ve Gupta, H.O. (2010). A micro level study of an Indian electric utility for effi ciency enhancement. Energy. 35. 4053-4063.
Yang, F., Li, Y., Liang, L. ve Wu, D. (2011). Modelling undesirable outputs in eco-effi ciency evaluation to paper mills along the Huai River based on Shannon DEA. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development. 10. 36-47.
Yu, Y., Chen, D., Zhu, B. ve Hu, S. (2013). Eco-effi ciency trends in China, 1978-2010: Decoupling environmental pressure from economic growth. Ecological Indicators. 24. 177-184.
Zhao, W., Huppes, G. ve van der Voet, E. (2011). Eco-effi ciency for greenhouse gas emissions mitigation of municipal solid waste management: A case study of Tianjin, China. Waste Management. 31. 1407-1415.
Zhou, P., Ang, B.W. ve Poh K.L. (2008). A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies. European Journal of Operational Research. 189. 1-18.