SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2025 / Sayı: 72

Impact of fiscal policy on environmental sustainability: empirical findings from Türkiye with fractional Fourier Boostrap ARDL method

Maliye politikasının çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerindeki etkisi: Kesirli Fourier Boostrap ARDL yöntemi ile Türkiye’den ampirik bulgular

Mehmet Aslan(ARTVİN ÇORUH ÜNİVERSİTESİ, YUSUFELİ MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0002-7455-5354
Songül Akyildiz(ARTVİN ÇORUH ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6309-8269
Pages
109–119
Publication Date
2025-12-31
🏛️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 offers an original contribution to the literature as it is one of the pioneering studies examining the relationship between fiscal policy variables and LCF in Türkiye.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study analyzes the effects of public expenditures, public revenues, per capita income, fossil fuel and renewable energy use on environmental sustainability in Türkiye.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, in the study carried out with annual data for 965–2023, the Fourier Bootstrap ARDL (FBARDL) bounds test method was applied to determine the short- and long-term relationships between the variables.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study offers an original contribution to the literature as it is one of the pioneering studies examining the relationship between fiscal policy variables and LCF in Türkiye.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Yük Kapasitesi Faktörü · Kamu Harcamaları · Kamu Gelirleri

Abstract

This study analyzes the effects of public expenditures, public revenues, per capita income, fossil fuel and renewable energy use on environmental sustainability in Türkiye. The Load Capacity Factor (LCF) was used as an indicator of environmental sustainability. The load capacity factor is a value obtained by proportioning the supply side of nature with people’s demand for natural. Since the load capacity factor includes both biocapacity and ecological footprint, environmental analyses can be performed from a broader perspective. In this context, in the study carried out with annual data for 965–2023, the Fourier Bootstrap ARDL (FBARDL) bounds test method was applied to determine the short- and long-term relationships between the variables. The study results revealed that public expenditure has a negative effect on environmental sustainability, while public revenues have a positive effect. In addition, it has been determined that the increase in per capita income negatively affects environmental quality, whereas the growth in renewable energy use supports environmental sustainability. The findings show that public finance policies should be to consider the environment to achieve sustainable development goals in Türkiye. The study offers an original contribution to the literature as it is one of the pioneering studies examining the relationship between fiscal policy variables and LCF in Türkiye.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de kamu harcamaları, kamu gelirleri, kişi başına düşen gelir, fosil yakıt ve yenilenebilir enerji kullanımının çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerindeki etkilerini analiz etmektedir. Çevresel sürdürülebilirlik göstergesi olarak Yük Kapasitesi Faktörü (LCF) kullanılmıştır. Yük kapasitesi faktörü, doğanın arz yönü ile insanların doğal kaynaklara olan talebinin oranlanması ile ulaşılan bir değer olmaktadır. Yük kapasitesi faktörünün hem biyokapasite hem de ekolojik ayak izini içermesi nedeniyle çevresel analizlerin daha geniş bir perspektiften yapılmasına olanak sağlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda 1965–2023 dönemine ait yıllık verilerle gerçekleştirilen analizde, değişkenler arasındaki kısa ve uzun dönemli ilişkileri belirlemek için Fourier Bootstrap ARDL (FBARDL) sınır testi yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Çalışma sonuçları, kamu harcamalarının çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerinde olumsuz, kamu gelirlerinin ise olumlu bir etkiye sahip olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Ayrıca, kişi başına düşen gelir artışının çevre kalitesini olumsuz etkilediği, buna karşın yenilenebilir enerji kullanımındaki artışın çevresel sürdürülebilirliği desteklediği belirlenmiştir. Bulgular, Türkiye’de sürdürülebilir kalkınma hedeflerine ulaşabilmek için kamu maliyesi politikalarının çevreyi dikkate alacak şekilde yeniden yapılandırılması gerektiğini göstermektedir. Çalışma, Türkiye üzerine maliye politikası değişkenleri ile LCF arasındaki ilişkiyi inceleyen öncü çalışmalardan biri olması açısından literatüre özgün bir katkı sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Aslan, M., Akyildiz, S. (2025). Impact of fiscal policy on environmental sustainability: empirical findings from Türkiye with fractional Fourier Boostrap ARDL method. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı: 72, 109–119. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1688860

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (53)

  1. Abbass, K., Song, H., Khan, F., Begum, H., & Asif, M. (2022). Fresh insight through the VAR approach to investigate the effects of fiscal policy on environmental pollution in Pakistan. Environmental science and pollution research, 29(1), 1-14. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11356- 021- 17438-x.
  2. Acar, S., Challe, S., Christopoulos, S., & Christo, G. (2018). Fossil fuel subsidies as a lose-lose: Fiscal and environmental burdens in Turkey. New Perspectives on Turkey, 58, 93–124. https://doi.org/10.1017/npt.2018.7.
  3. Adebayo, T. S., & Samour, A. (2024). Renewable energy, fiscal policy and load capacity factor in BRICS countries: novel findings from panel nonlinear ARDL model. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(2), 4365-4389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02888-1.
  4. Aghayeva, I., & Zortuk, M. (2024). The impact of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on economic growth in Azerbaijan: FB-ARDL and a-ardl cointegration approaches. GE, 2, 119-133. https://doi.org/10.62476/ge22.119.
  5. Akbar, M. W., Yuelan, P., Maqbool, A., Zia, Z., & Saeed, M. (2021). The nexus of sectoral-based CO2 emissions and fiscal policy instruments in the light of belt and road initiative. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 32493-32507. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11356- 021- 13040-3.
  6. Afshan, S. & T. Yaqoob (2023), Unravelling the efficacy of green innovation and taxation in promoting environmental quality: A dual-model assessment of testing the LCC theory in emerging economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 416, 137850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137850.
  7. Aslan, M. (2025). Türkiye’de çevresel sürdürülebilirliği artırmada yenilenemeyen enerji verimliliğinin rolü, EKC ve LCC hipotezleri: Kesirli Fourier ARDL yaklaşımı ile bulgular. Sosyoekonomi, 33(64), 493-518. https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2025.02.21.
  8. Atkinson, A. B., & Stern, N. H. (1974). Pigou, taxation and public goods. The Review of Economic Studies, 41(1), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.2307/2296403.
  9. Awosusi, A. A., Olanrewaju, O. V., Ojekemi, O., Kutlay, K., Kirikkaleli, D., & Sevinç, H. (2022). Impact of economic growth on environmental degradation and energy consumption in South Africa: a cointegration analysis. JOEEP: Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 7(1), 383-394.
  10. Bashir, M. F., Benjiang, M. A., Shahbaz, M., Shahzad, U., & Vo, X. V. (2021). Unveiling the heterogeneous impacts of environmental taxes on energy consumption and energy intensity: empirical evidence from OECD countries. Energy, 226, 120366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120366.
  11. Behera, B., Haldar, A., & Sethi, N. (2024). Agriculture, food security, and climate change in South Asia: A new perspective on sustainable development. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(9), 22319–22344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03552-y.
  12. Çabaş, M. (2024). Türkiye’de fosil yakıt ve yenilenebilir enerjinin yük kapasitesi faktörüne etkisi: Sürdürülebilir çevre için bootstrap fardl yaklaşımı. Eurasian Econometrics Statistics & Emprical Economics Journal, (25), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.17740/eas.stat.2024-V25-04.
  13. Dam, M. M., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2023). Renewable energy consumption, real income, trade openness, and inverted load capacity factor nexus in Turkiye: Revisiting the EKC hypothesis with environmental sustainability. Sustainable Horizons, 8, 100063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.horiz.2023.100063.
  14. Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal Of the American Statistical Association, 74(366a), 427-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1979.10482531.
  15. Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1981), Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root, Econometrica, 49, 1057-72.
  16. Dogan, E., Hodžić, S., & Fatur Šikić, T. (2022). A way forward in reducing carbon emissions in environmentally friendly countries: The role of green growth and environmental taxes. Economic Research-Ekonomska İstraživanja, 35(1), 5879-5894. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2039261.
  17. Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2012). The flexible Fourier form and Dickey–Fuller type unit root tests. Economics Letters, 117(1), 196-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2012.04.081.
  18. Goldstein, J., & Tyfield, D. (2018). Green Keynesianism: Bringing the entrepreneurial state back in (to question)? Science as Culture, 27(1), 74-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2017.1346598.
  19. Güneysu, Y. (2023). Türkiye’de finansal gelişme, küreselleşme ve sanayileşmenin yük kapasite faktörü üzerindeki etkisi. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(3), 934-946. https://doi.org/10.36362/gumus.1294618.
  20. Halkos, G. E., & Paizanos, E. Α. (2016). The effects of fiscal policy on CO2 emissions: evidence from the USA. Energy policy, 88, 317-328. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. enpol. 2015. 10. 035.
  21. IPCC. (2023). Climate change 2023: Synthesis report. Summary for policymakers. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/.
  22. Islam, M. S., & Rahaman, S. H. (2024). Does economic policy impact the environment in South Asia? The role of disaggregated energy consumption in an EKC framework. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02267-3.
  23. Jacobs, B., & De Mooij, R. A. (2015). Pigou meets Mirrlees: On the irrelevance of tax distortions for the second-best Pigouvian tax. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 71, 90-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2015.01.003.
  24. Katircioglu, S., & Katircioglu, S. (2018). Testing the role of fiscal policy in the environmental degradation: the case of Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25, 5616-5630. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-017-0906-1.
  25. Lin, M. C., & Wu, C. F. (2022). Transportation, environmental degradation, and health dynamics in the United States and China: evidence from bootstrap ARDL with a Fourier function. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 907390. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.907390.
  26. López, R., & Galinato, G. I. (2007). Should governments stop subsidies to private goods? Evidence from rural Latin America. Journal of Public Economics, 91(5-6), 1071-1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.10.004.
  27. MacKinnon, J. G. (1996). Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. Journal Of Applied Econometrics, 11(6), 601-618. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1255(199611)11:6%3C601::AID-JAE417%3E3.0.CO;2-T.
  28. Mahmood, H., Adow, A. H., Abbas, M., Iqbal, A., Murshed, M., & Furqan, M. (2022). The fiscal and monetary policies and environment in GCC countries: analysis of territory and consumption-based CO2 emissions. Sustainability, 14(3), 1225. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su140 31225.
  29. McNown, R., Sam, C. Y., & Goh, S. K. (2018). Bootstrapping the autoregressive distributed lag test for cointegration. Applied Economics, 50(13), 1509-1521. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2017.1366643.
  30. Metcalf, G. E. (2003). Environmental levies and distortionary taxation: Pigou, taxation and pollution. Journal of Public Economics, 87(2), 313-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(01)00116-5.
  31. Mohan, P. (2021). Green stimulus: Driving public investments towards a sustainable future for all. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 6(12), 4837–4843. https://doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2021.v06i12.025.
  32. Mukherjee, S., & Chakraborty, D. (2016). Does fiscal policy influence per capita CO2 emission?: A cross country empirical analysis. In Handbook of Research on Climate Change Impact on Health and Environmental Sustainability (pp. 568-592). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4018/ 978-1- 4666- 8814-8. ch028.
  33. Narayan, P. K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics, 37(17), 1979-1990. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036840500278103.
  34. Okumuş, İ. (2019). Türkiye’de yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi, tarım ve CO2 emisyonu ilişkisi. Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Yenilik Dergisi, 6(1), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.20979/ueyd.659092.
  35. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.236.
  36. Pata, U. K., & Yilanci, V. (2020). Financial development, globalization and ecological footprint in G7: further evidence from threshold cointegration and fractional frequency causality tests. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 27(4), 803-825. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10651- 020- 00467-z.
  37. Pata, U. K. (2021). Do renewable energy and health expenditures improve load capacity factor in the USA and Japan? A new approach to environmental issues. The European Journal of Health Economics, 22(9), 1427-1439. https://doi.0rg/10.1007/S10198-02 1-01321-0.
  38. Pata, U. K., & Isik, C. (2021). Determinants of the load capacity factor in China: a novel dynamic ARDL approach for ecological footprint accounting. Resources Policy, 74, 102313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102313.
  39. Pata, U. K., & Samour, A. (2023). Assessing the role of the insurance market and renewable energy in the load capacity factor of OECD countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(16), 48604-48616. https:// doi. org/ 10.1007/s11356-023-25747-6.
  40. Persakis, A. (2024). The impact of climate policy uncertainty on ESG performance, carbon emission intensity and firm performance: Evidence from Fortune 1000 firms. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(24), 24031–24081. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03634-x.
  41. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal Of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289-326. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.616.
  42. Sachs, J. D., Woo, W. T., Yoshino, N., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2019). Why is green finance important? (ADBI Working Paper No. 917). Asian Development Bank Institute. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3327149.
  43. Sam, C. Y., McNown, R., & Goh, S. K. (2019). An augmented autoregressive distributed lag bounds test for cointegration. Economic Modelling, 80, 130–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.11.001
  44. Shang, Y., Razzaq, A., Chupradit, S., An, N. B., & Abdul-Samad, Z. (2022). The role of renewable energy consumption and health expenditures in improving load capacity factor in ASEAN countries: Exploring new paradigm using advance panel models. Renewable Energy, 191, 715-722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.04.013.
  45. Siche, R., Pereira, L., Agostinho, F., & Ortega, E. (2010). Convergence of ecological footprint and emergy analysis as a sustainability indicator of countries: Peru as case study. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 15(10), 3182-3192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2009.10.027.
  46. Tao, R., Umar, M., Naseer, A., & Razi, U. (2021). The dynamic effect of eco-innovation and environmental taxes on carbon neutrality target in emerging seven (E7) economies. Journal of Environmental Management, 299, 113525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113525.
  47. T.C. Çevre Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı. (2024, Ekim 25). Hedef: 2053 net sıfır emisyon! Erişim adresi https://iklim.gov.tr/hedef-2053-net-sifir-emisyon-haber-4337#:~:text=Türkiye'nin%20sera%20gazı%20emisyonlarının,net%20sıfır%20emisyona%20ulaşması%20hedeflenmektedir.
  48. Timilsina, G. R., & Dulal, H. B. (2008). Fiscal policy instruments for reducing congestion and atmospheric emissions in the transport sector: A review. World Bank policy Research Working Paper, (4652). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1149604.
  49. Topalcık, O., & Kirikkaleli, D. (2024). Financial stability and environment degradation in Turkey: evidence from fourier ARDL approach. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1420019. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1420019.
  50. TÜİK. (2024, Haziran 05). Sera gazı emisyon istatistikleri, 1990-2022. Erişim adresi https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Sera-Gazi-Emisyon-Istatistikleri-1990-2022-53701.
  51. TÜİK. (2025, Şubat 06). Adrese dayalı nüfus kayıt sistemi sonuçları, 2024. Erişim adresi https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Adrese-Dayalı-Nüfus-Kayıt-Sistemi-Sonuçları-2024-53783&dil=1.
  52. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development (A/RES/70/1). United Nations. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda
  53. Yilanci, V., Bozoklu, S., & Gorus, M. S. (2020). Are BRICS countries pollution havens? Evidence from a bootstrap ARDL bounds testing approach with a Fourier function. Sustainable Cities and Society, 55, 102035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102035.