SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Enderun / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN AGRICULTURE: ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES

TARIMDA SÜRDÜRÜLEBILIR KALKINMA: ÇEVRESEL VE EKONOMIK PERSPEKTIFLER

Ahmet Kasap(TOKAT GAZİOSMANPAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7231-2693
Journal
Enderun
Pages
24–43
Publication Date
2025-03-12
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study also suggests that Turkey should focus on environmental policies for sustainable management of water resources and reduction of methane emissions from agriculture.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study compares certain environmental and economic indicators at Turkey, European Union (EU), OECD countries and global level in the context of sustainable development.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study analyses sustainability differences between countries by examining indicators such as CO₂ emissions, renewable energy consumption, GDP growth rate, methane emissions from agriculture and freshwater withdrawal.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study also suggests that Turkey should focus on environmental policies for sustainable management of water resources and reduction of methane emissions from agriculture.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma · Karbon Emisyonları · Ekonomik Sürdürülebilirlik

Abstract

This study compares certain environmental and economic indicators at Turkey, European Union (EU), OECD countries and global level in the context of sustainable development. The study analyses sustainability differences between countries by examining indicators such as CO₂ emissions, renewable energy consumption, GDP growth rate, methane emissions from agriculture and freshwater withdrawal. The findings show that Turkey is at higher levels in terms of carbon emissions compared to OECD and EU countries, while it lags behind developed countries in renewable energy consumption. In order to eliminate these differences in Turkey's sustainable development performance, there is a need to increase the use of renewable energy resources and environmentally friendly policies to reduce carbon emissions. The study also suggests that Turkey should focus on environmental policies for sustainable management of water resources and reduction of methane emissions from agriculture.

Özet

Bu çalışma, sürdürülebilir kalkınma bağlamında Türkiye, Avrupa Birliği (AB), OECD ülkeleri ve küresel düzeyde belirli çevresel ve ekonomik göstergelerin karşılaştırmasını yapmaktadır. Çalışmada CO₂ emisyonları, yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi, GSYH büyüme oranı, tarım kaynaklı metan emisyonları ve tatlı su çekimi gibi göstergeler incelenerek ülkeler arasındaki sürdürülebilirlik farklılıkları analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, Türkiye’nin karbon emisyonları açısından OECD ve AB ülkelerine kıyasla daha yüksek seviyelerde olduğunu, yenilenebilir enerji tüketiminde ise gelişmiş ülkelerin gerisinde kaldığını göstermektedir. Türkiye’nin sürdürülebilir kalkınma performansında bu farklılıkların giderilmesi için yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarının kullanımının artırılması ve karbon emisyonlarını azaltmaya yönelik çevre dostu politikalara ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Çalışma, ayrıca Türkiye’nin su kaynaklarının sürdürülebilir yönetimi ve tarım kaynaklı metan emisyonlarının azaltılması için çevresel politikalara odaklanması gerektiğini önermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kasap, A. (2025). SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN AGRICULTURE: ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES. Enderun, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1, 24–43. https://doi.org/10.59274/enderun.1612424

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (29)

  1. Almaraz, M., Bai, E., Wang, C., Trousdell, J., Conley, S., Faloona, I., and Houlton, B. Z. (2018). Agriculture is a major source of NOx pollution in California. Science Advances, 4(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao3477.
  2. Alvarado, R., Ortiz, C., Jiménez, N., Ochoa-Jiménez, D., and Tillaguango, B. (2021). Ecological footprint, air quality and research and development: The role of agriculture and international trade. Journal of Cleaner Production, (288), 1-13. 125589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125589S.
  3. Aneja, V. P., Schlesinger, W. H., and Erisman, J. W. (2009). Effects of agriculture upon the air quality and climate: Research, policy, and regulations. Environmental Science & Technology, 43(12), 4234-4240. https://doi.org/10.1021/es8024403
  4. Aziz, G., Sarwar, S., Waheed, R., and Khan, M. S. (2023). The significance of renewable energy, globalization, and agriculture on sustainable economic growth and green environment: Metaphorically, a two-sided blade. Natural Resources Forum, 48(3), 763-783. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12326
  5. Bauer, S. E., Tsigaridis, K., and Miller, R. (2016). Significant atmospheric aerosol pollution caused by world food cultivation. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(10), 5394-5400. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL068354
  6. Baz, K., Xu, D., Ampofo, G. M. K., Ali, I., Khan, I., and Cheng, J. (2019). Energy consumption and economic growth nexus: New evidence from Pakistan using asymmetric analysis. Energy, (189), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116254
  7. Brunekreef, B., Harrison, R. M., Künzli, N., Querol, X., Sutton, M. A., Heederik, D. J. J., and Sigsgaard, T. (2015). Reducing the health effects of particles from agriculture. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 3(11), 831-832. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(15)00413-0
  8. Çakmak, E. E., and Acar, S. (2022). The nexus between economic growth, renewable energy, and ecological footprint: An empirical evidence from most oil-producing countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, (352), 1-8. 131548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131548
  9. Charfeddine, L. (2017). The impact of energy consumption and economic development on Ecological Footprint and CO₂ emissions: Evidence from a Markov Switching Equilibrium Correction Model. Energy Economics, (65), 355-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.05.009
  10. Espoir, D. K., Sunge, R., Nchofoung, T., and Alola, A. A. (2024). Analyzing the drivers of ecological footprint in Africa with machine learning algorithm. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, (104), 1-14. 107332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107332
  11. Giannadaki, D., Giannakis, E., Pozzer, A., and Lelieveld, J. (2018). Estimating health and economic benefits of reductions in air pollution from agriculture. Science of the Total Environment, 1304–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.064
  12. Giannakis, E., Kushta, J., Giannadaki, D., Georgiou, G. K., Bruggeman, A., and Lelieveld, J. (2019). Exploring the economy-wide effects of agriculture on air quality and health: Evidence from Europe. Science of the Total Environment, 663, 889–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.410
  13. Harizanova. B. H., and Stoyanova, Z. (2018). Impact of agriculture on air pollution. CBU International Conference on Innovations in Science and Education, Prague, 1071-1076. https://doi.org/10.12955/cbup.v6.1296
  14. He, Y., Wang, S., ve Chen, N. (2024). Mineral rents, natural resources depletion, and ecological footprint nexus in high emitting countries: Panel GLM analysis. Resources Policy, (89), 1-10. 104472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104472
  15. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators.
  16. Kara, M. A., Aksu, T., and Tanış, Ş. (2024). Türkiye ekonomisinde tarım ve sanayi ihraç ürünlerinin ekonomik büyümeye katkısı. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 23(2), 615-632.
  17. Karaer, F., and Gürlük, S. (2003). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerde tarım-çevre-ekonomi etkileşimi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 4(2), 197-206.
  18. Khan, S. A. R., Yu, Z., Belhadi, A., and Mardani, A. (2020). Investigating the effects of renewable energy on international trade and environmental quality. Journal of Environmental Management, (272), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111089
  19. Kızılgöl, Ö., and Öndes, H. (2022). Factors affecting the ecological footprint: A study on the OECD countries. Science of the Total Environment, (849), 1-13. 157757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.157757
  20. Nagendran, R. (2011). Agricultural Waste and Pollution. In Waste: A Handbook for Management, (24),341-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-381475-3.10024-5
  21. Okumuş, İ. (2020). Türkiye’de Yenilenebilir Enerji Tüketimi, Tarım ve CO2 Emisyonu İlişkisi. Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Yenilik Dergisi, 6(1), 21-34.
  22. Qureshi, M. I., Awan, U., Arshad, Z., Rasli, A. M., and Zaman, K. (2016). Dynamic linkages among energy consumption, air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and agricultural production in Pakistan: sustainable agriculture key to policy success. Natural Hazards, 84(2), 367-381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2423-9
  23. Sandalcılar, A. R. (2012). Türkiye’de tarımsal ihracat, tarım dışı ihracat ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkinin nedensellik analizi. Finans Politik & Ekonomik Yorumlar, 49(570), 65-76.
  24. Savci, S. (2012). An agricultural pollutant: Chemical fertilizer. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 3(1), 77-80.
  25. Singh, S., Balasubramanian, S., and Kavassalis, S. C. (2023). Complex linkages between agriculture and air pollution pose a major threat to food security in India. Environmental Research Letters,18, 1-6. (121001). Doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ad0682
  26. Spash, C. L. (2002). Assessing the economic benefits to agriculture from air pollution control. Journal of Economic Surveys, 11(1), 47-70. Doi:10.1111/1467-6419.00023
  27. Turan, Z. (2018). Tarımsal mal ticaretinin ve hayvancılığın ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi (1990-2014). International Journal of Disciplines Economics & Administrative Sciences Studies, 4(8), 200-209.
  28. Yağış, O. (2024). Tarım sektörünün ekonomik büyümeye etkileri: Türkiye için ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 33(2),334-348.
  29. Zhou, R., Abbasi, K. R., Salem, S., Almulhim, A. I., and Alvarado, R. (2022). Do natural resources, economic growth, human capital, and urbanization affect the ecological footprint? A modified dynamic ARDL and KRLS approach. Resources Policy, 78, 1-13. 102782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102782