Journals / Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1

The Effects of Economic Growth on Environment for Different Income Group Countries

Ekonomik Büyümenin Çevreye Etkilerinin Farklı Gelişmişlik Düzeyindeki Ülkeler İçin İncelenmesi

Pages
238–255
Publication Date
2020-01-27
DOI
—
🏛️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)

In the high income country group, the coefficient of the Kyoto dummy variable is negative and statistically significant; it has positive sign in lower middle income country group and statistically significant.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study, which aims at investigating economic growth and environmental pollution nexus for groups of countries with different development levels in the context of Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis, is to analyze the relationship between energy consumption, real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, the square of real GDP per capita, urbanization, trade liberalization and CO2 emissions for the period of 1980-2013 for groups of countries with different development levels.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In addition, in order to examine the impact of the Kyoto Protocol which came into force in 2005 on carbon emissions, a dummy variable was used for energy consumption in 2005.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the high income country group, the coefficient of the Kyoto dummy variable is negative and statistically significant; it has positive sign in lower middle income country group and statistically significant.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Sürdürülebilir kalkınma · Ekonomik büyüme · Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi

Abstract

This study, which aims at investigating economic growth and environmental pollution nexus for groups of countries with different development levels in the context of Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis, is to analyze the relationship between energy consumption, real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, the square of real GDP per capita, urbanization, trade liberalization and CO2 emissions for the period of 1980-2013 for groups of countries with different development levels. In addition, in order to examine the impact of the Kyoto Protocol which came into force in 2005 on carbon emissions, a dummy variable was used for energy consumption in 2005. According to the findings, the existence of EKC hypothesis is validated for lower middle income and upper middle income country groups, while the existence of the hypothesis is not validated for low income and high income country groups. In all country groups, the coefficient of energy consumption is positive and statistically significant. An increase in trade liberalization increases carbon dioxide emission levels in lower middle income and low income country groups, whereas an increase in trade liberalization in upper middle income country group reduces the emission level. An increase in urbanization in developed and underdeveloped countries reduces CO2 emissions while increasing CO2 emissions in the upper middle income and lower middle income groups. In the high income country group, the coefficient of the Kyoto dummy variable is negative and statistically significant; it has positive sign in lower middle income country group and statistically significant.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, farklı gelişmişlik düzeyindeki ülke grupları için 1980-2013 yıllarını kapsayan dönemde enerji tüketimi, kişi başı reel gayri safi yurt içi hâsıla (GSYH), kişi başı reel GSYH’nin karesi, kentleşme, ticari serbestleşme ve CO2 emisyonu ilişkisi analiz edilerek, Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi (ÇKE) hipotezi bağlamında farklı gelişmişlik düzeyindeki ülke gruplarında ekonomik büyüme ve çevre kirliliği ilişkisinin incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Ayrıca 2005 yılında yürürlüğe giren Kyoto protokolünün CO2 emisyonu üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi için, 2005 yılı için enerji tüketiminde kukla değişken kullanılmıştır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre yüksek orta gelirli ve düşük orta gelirli ülke gruplarında ÇKE hipotezi geçerliliği doğrulanırken, gelişmiş ve az gelişmiş ülke gruplarında ÇKE hipotezinin geçerliliği doğrulanamamıştır. Tüm ülke gruplarında enerji tüketiminin katsayısı pozitif ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlıdır. Ticari serbestleşmedeki bir artış az gelişmiş ve düşük orta gelirli ülke gruplarında karbon dioksit emisyonunu artırırken, yüksek orta gelirli ülke grubunda karbon dioksit emisyonunu azaltmaktadır. Gelişmiş ve az gelişmiş ülke gruplarında kentleşmedeki bir artış CO2 emisyonunu azaltırken, yüksek orta gelir ve düşük orta gelir grubunda ise CO2 emisyonunu artırmaktadır. Gelişmiş ülke grubunda Kyoto kukla değişkeninin katsayısı negatif işaretli, düşük orta gelir ülke grubunda pozitif işaretli ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlıdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

OKUMUŞ, İ., BOZKURT, C. (2020). The Effects of Economic Growth on Environment for Different Income Group Countries. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1, 238–255. https://ajindex.com/articles/110978

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Al-Mulali, U., Saboori, B. ve Ozturk, I. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Vietnam. Energy Policy, 76, ss.123-131.
  2. Apergis, N. ve Ozturk, I. (2015). Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Asian countries. Ecological Indicators, 52, ss.16-22.
  3. Arı, A. ve Zeren, F. (2011). CO2 Emisyonu ve Ekonomik Büyüme: Panel Veri Analizi. Yönetim ve Ekonomi: Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(2), ss.37-47.
  4. Baltagi, B.H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, England. Basher, S.A. ve Mohsin, M. (2004). PPP Tests in Cointegrated Panels: Evidence From Asian Developing Countries. Applied Economics Letters 2004(11), ss. 163–166.
  5. Campbell, J. Y., & Perron, P. (1991). Pitfalls and opportunities: what macroeconomists should know about unit roots. NBER macroeconomics annual, 6, 141-201.
  6. Chudik, A., & Pesaran, M. H. (2013). Large panel data models with cross-sectional dependence: a survey. CAFE Research Paper, (13.15). Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: a survey. Ecological economics, 49(4), 431-455.
  7. Farhani, S., Chaibi, A. ve Rault, C. (2014b). CO 2 emissions, output, energy consumption, and trade in Tunisia. Economic Modelling, 38, ss.426-434.
  8. Farhani, S., Mrizak, S., Chaibi, A. ve Rault, C. (2014a). The environmental Kuznets curve and sustainability: A panel data analysis. Energy Policy, 71, ss.189-198.
  9. Farhani, S., Shahbaz, M. ve Arouri, M. E. H. (2013). Panel analysis of CO2 emissions, GDP, energy consumption, trade openness and urbanization for MENA countries. Gozgor, G. ve Can, M. (2016). Export product diversification and the environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(21), ss.21594-21603.
  10. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement (No. w3914). National Bureau of Economic Research. Jalil, A., & Mahmud, S. F. (2009). Environment Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: a cointegration analysis for China. Energy policy, 37(12), 5167-5172.
  11. Javid, M. ve Sharif, F. (2016). Environmental Kuznets curve and financial development in Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 54, ss.406-414.
  12. Jebli, M. B. ve Youssef, S. B. (2015). The environmental Kuznets curve, economic growth, renewable and non-renewable energy, and trade in Tunisia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 47, ss.173-185.
  13. Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and inc