SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 17 Sayı: 33

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, GREEN TECHNOLOGIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IN DEVELOPING ASIAN COUNTRIES

GELİŞMEKTE OLAN ASYA ÜLKELERİNDE İNSANİ GELİŞME, YEŞİL TEKNOLOJİLER VE ÇEVRESEL SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİRLİK

Faruk Mike(OSMANİYE KORKUT ATA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, BAHÇE MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0002-9194-1679
Oktay Kızılkaya(Malatya Turgut Özal Üniversitesi)0000-0002-3412-5616
Pages
394–410
Publication Date
2026-06-28
🏛️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 findings indicate that higher levels of human development and increased investments in green technologies significantly reduce the EF in developing Asian economies, thereby contributing positively to environmental sustainability.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study assesses the impacts of the human development index and environmental-related technologies on the ecological footprint (EF) in developing Asian countries using annual observations for the period 2000–2022.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The findings indicate that higher levels of human development and increased investments in green technologies significantly reduce the EF in developing Asian economies, thereby contributing positively to environmental sustainability.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the study highlights that, beyond conventional policy approaches such as reducing fossil fuel consumption and promoting renewable energy, investments in human development and green technologies perform a critical function in achieving environmental sustainability in developing Asian countries.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2000–2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:İnsani gelişme · yeşil teknoloji · çevresel sürdürülebilirlik

Abstract

This study assesses the impacts of the human development index and environmental-related technologies on the ecological footprint (EF) in developing Asian countries using annual observations for the period 2000–2022. The econometric analysis employs robust panel data estimators, including the FGLS approach and the Dumitrescu–Hurlin (DH) causality method. The findings indicate that higher levels of human development and increased investments in green technologies significantly reduce the EF in developing Asian economies, thereby contributing positively to environmental sustainability. In contrast, economic growth is found to exacerbate environmental degradation in the sampled countries. The causality test further reveals a unidirectional causal relation running from the human development index, growth, and urbanization to the EF. Overall, the study highlights that, beyond conventional policy approaches such as reducing fossil fuel consumption and promoting renewable energy, investments in human development and green technologies perform a critical function in achieving environmental sustainability in developing Asian countries.

Özet

Bu çalışma, 2000-2022 dönemine ait yıllık verileri kullanarak, gelişmekte olan Asya ülkelerinde insani gelişme endeksi ve çevreyle ilgili teknolojilerin ekolojik ayak izi üzerindeki etkilerini araştırmaktadır. Analizlerde, Feasible Generalized Least Squares (FGLS) yöntemi ve Dumitrescu-Hurlin (DH) nedensellik yöntemi de dâhil olmak üzere sağlam panel veri tahmincileri kullanılmaktadır. Bulgular, daha yüksek insani gelişme seviyelerinin ve yeşil teknolojilere yapılan yatırımların artmasının, gelişmekte olan Asya ekonomilerinde ekolojik ayak izini önemli ölçüde azalttığını ve böylece çevresel sürdürülebilirliğe olumlu katkıda bulunduğunu göstermektedir. Buna karşılık, ekonomik büyümenin ele alınan ülkelerde çevresel bozulmayı şiddetlendirdiği bulunmuştur. Nedensellik analizi ayrıca, insan gelişme endeksi, ekonomik büyüme ve kentleşmeden ekolojik ayak izine tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisini ortaya koymaktadır. Genel olarak, çalışma, fosil yakıt tüketimini azaltmak ve yenilenebilir enerji kullanımını teşvik etmek gibi geleneksel politika yaklaşımlarının ötesinde, insani gelişme ve yeşil teknolojilere yapılan yatırımların, gelişmekte olan Asya ülkelerinde çevresel sürdürülebilirliğin sağlanmasında kritik bir rol oynadığını vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Mike, F., Kızılkaya, O. (2026). HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, GREEN TECHNOLOGIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IN DEVELOPING ASIAN COUNTRIES. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 33, 394–410. https://doi.org/10.36543/kauiibfd.2026.018

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (56)

  1. Ahmed, Z., & Wang, Z. (2019). Investigating the impact of human capital on the ecological footprint in India: an empirical analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(26), 26782-26796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05911-7
  2. Ahmed, Z., Zafar, M. W., & Ali, S. (2020). Linking urbanization, human capital, and the ecological footprint in G7 countries: an empirical analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society, 55, 102064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102064
  3. Alper, A. E., Alper, F. O., Ozayturk, G., & Mike, F. (2023). Testing the long-run impact of economic growth, energy consumption, and globalization on ecological footprint: new evidence from Fourier bootstrap ARDL and Fourier bootstrap Toda–Yamamoto test results. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(15), 42873-42888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18610-7
  4. Baltagi, B. H., Feng, Q., & Kao, C. (2012). A Lagrange Multiplier test for cross-sectional dependence in a fixed effects panel data model. Journal of Econometrics, 170(1), 164-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2012.04.004
  5. Bano, S., Zhao, Y., Ahmad, A., Wang, S., & Liu, Y. (2018). Identifying the impacts of human capital on carbon emissions in Pakistan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 1082-1092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.008
  6. Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111
  7. Carrión-Flores, C. E., & Innes, R. (2010). Environmental innovation and environmental performance. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 59(1), 27-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2009.05.003
  8. Cetin, M., Ozturk, I., Sumerli Sarigul, S., Murshed, M., & Kilavuz, E. (2025). Nexus between technological innovation and environmental pollution in selected OECD countries. Natural Resources Forum, 49(1), 841–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12458862
  9. Çamkaya, S., Karaaslan, A., & Uçan, F. (2023). Investigation of the effect of human capital on environmental pollution: empirical evidence from Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(9), 23925-23937. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-23923-8
  10. Danish, Hassan, S. T., Baloch, M. A., Mahmood, N., & Zhang, J. (2019). Linking economic growth and ecological footprint through human capital and biocapacity. Sustainable Cities and Society, 47, 101516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101516
  11. Dasgupta, S., Hettige, H., & Wheeler, D. (2000). What improves environmental compliance? Evidence from Mexican industry. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 39(1), 39-66. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1999.1090
  12. Dedeoğlu, M., Koçak, E., & Uucak, Z. Ş. (2021). The impact of immigration on human capital and carbon dioxide emissions in the USA: an empirical investigation. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 14(5), 705-714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-020-00973-w
  13. Ding, Q., Khattak, S. I., & Ahmad, M. (2021). Towards sustainable production and consumption: assessing the impact of energy productivity and eco-innovation on consumption-based carbon dioxide emissions (CCO2) in G-7 nations. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 254-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.11.004
  14. Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
  15. Fakher, H. A., Ahmed, Z., Acheampong, A. O., & Nathaniel, S. P. (2023). Renewable energy, nonrenewable energy, and environmental quality nexus: An investigation of the N-shaped Environmental Kuznets Curve based on six environmental indicators. Energy, 263, 125660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125660
  16. Gouvea, R., Kapelianis, D., & Kassicieh, S. (2018). Assessing the nexus of sustainability and information & communications technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 130, 39-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.023
  17. Guo J, Kubli D, & Saner P (2021). The Economics of climate change: no action not an option. Swiss Re Institute, Zurich.
  18. Hashmi, R., & Alam, K. (2019). Dynamic relationship among environmental regulation, innovation, CO2 emissions, population, and economic growth in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 231, 1100-1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.325
  19. Hassan, S. T., Xia, E., Khan, N. H., & Shah, S. M. A. (2019). Economic growth, natural resources, and ecological footprints: evidence from Pakistan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(3), 2929-2938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3803-3
  20. Hojnik, J., & Ruzzier, M. (2016). What drives eco-innovation? A review of an emerging literature. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 19, 31-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.09.006
  21. Jiang, Y. (2015). Foreign direct investment, pollution, and the environmental quality: a model with empirical evidence from the Chinese regions. The International Trade Journal, 29(3), 212-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853908.2014.1001538
  22. Khan, Z., Ali, S., Umar, M., Kirikkaleli, D., & Jiao, Z. (2020). Consumption-based carbon emissions and international trade in G7 countries: the role of environmental innovation and renewable energy. Science of the Total Environment, 730, 138945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138945
  23. Kirikkaleli, D., & Adebayo, T. S. (2024). Political risk and environmental quality in Brazil: role of green finance and green innovation. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 29(2), 1205-1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2732
  24. Kmenta, J. (1986). Elements of econometrics, New York: Macmillan.
  25. Kongkuah, M., Yao, H., & Yilanci, V. (2022). The relationship between energy consumption, economic growth, and CO2 emissions in China: the role of urbanisation and international trade. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(4), 4684-4708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01628-1
  26. Lan, J., Kakinaka, M., & Huang, X. (2012). Foreign direct investment, human capital and environmental pollution in China. Environmental and Resource Economics, 51(2), 255-275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-011-9498-2
  27. Lee, K. H., & Min, B. (2015). Green R&D for eco-innovation and its impact on carbon emissions and firm performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 534-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.114
  28. Li, P., & Ouyang, Y. (2019). The dynamic impacts of financial development and human capital on CO2 emission intensity in China: an ARDL approach. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20(5), 939-957. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2019.10509
  29. Mahmood, N., Wang, Z., & Hassan, S. T. (2019). Renewable energy, economic growth, human capital, and CO2 emission: an empirical analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(20), 20619-20630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05387-5
  30. Meirun, T., Mihardjo, L. W., Haseeb, M., Khan, S. A. R., & Jermsittiparsert, K. (2021). The dynamics effect of green technology innovation on economic growth and CO2 emission in Singapore: new evidence from bootstrap ARDL approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(4), 4184-4194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10760-w
  31. Mike, F., Kızılkaya, O., & Akyıldız, İ. (2025). İklim değişikliğinin ekonomisi. Ekin Yayınevi, Bursa.
  32. Morgan Stanley Capital International (2025). MSCI Announces Results of the MSCI 2025 MarketClassification Review. https://www.msci.com/indexes/index-resources/market-classification
  33. Oyebanji, M. O., & Kirikkaleli, D. (2023). Green technology, green electricity, and environmental sustainability in Western European countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(13), 38525-38534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24793-w
  34. Opoku, E. E. O., Dogah, K. E., & Aluko, O. A. (2022). The contribution of human development towards environmental sustainability. Energy Economics, 106, 105782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105782
  35. Parks, R. W. (1967). Efficient estimation of a system of regression equations when disturbances are both serially and contemporaneously correlated. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 62(318), 500–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1967.10482923
  36. Pesaran M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. (Working Papers in Economics No. 0435). University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
  37. Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74(4): 967-1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x
  38. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
  39. Sahoo, M., Sethi, N., & Padilla, M. A. E. (2023). Unpacking the dynamics of information and communication technology, control of corruption and sustainability in green development in developing economies: New evidence. Renewable Energy, 216, 119088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119088
  40. Santra, S. (2017). The effect of technological innovation on production-based energy and CO2 emission productivity: evidence from BRICS countries. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 9(5), 503-512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2017.1308069
  41. Sethi, L., Behera, B., & Sethi, N. (2024). Do green finance, green technology innovation, and institutional quality help achieve environmental sustainability? Evidence from the developing economies. Sustainable Development, 32(3), 2709-2723. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2811
  42. Shabir, M., Hussain, I., Işık, Ö., Razzaq, K., & Mehroush, I. (2023). The role of innovation in environmental-related technologies and institutional quality to drive environmental sustainability. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1174827. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1174827
  43. Sharif, A., Saqib, N., Dong, K., & Khan, S. A. R. (2022). Nexus between green technology innovation, green financing, and CO2 emissions in the G7 countries: the moderating role of social globalisation. Sustainable Development, 30(6), 1934-1946. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2360
  44. Teixeira, A. A., & Queirós, A. S. (2016). Economic growth, human capital and structural change: A dynamic panel data analysis. Research Policy, 45(8), 1636-1648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.006
  45. Töbelmann, D., & Wendler, T. (2020). The impact of environmental innovation on carbon dioxide emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 244, 118787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118787
  46. Ulucak, R., & Bilgili, F. (2018). A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188, 144-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.191
  47. United Nations Development Programme (2025). Human Development Index (HDI). http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi (Accessed on 14/12/2025).
  48. United Nations Environment Programme (2021). Emissions Gap Report 2021: The Heat Is On—A World of Climate Promises Not Yet Delivered. Nairobi.
  49. Wang, Q., Zhang, F., & Li, R. (2023). Revisiting the environmental kuznets curve hypothesis in 208 counties: The roles of trade openness, human capital, renewable energy and natural resource rent. Environmental Research, 216, 114637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.114637
  50. Weina, D., Gilli, M., Mazzanti, M., & Nicolli, F. (2016). Green inventions and greenhouse gas emission dynamics: A close examination of provincial Italian data. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 18(2), 247-263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10018-015-0126-1
  51. Yao, Y., Ivanovski, K., Inekwe, J., & Smyth, R. (2020). Human capital and CO2 emissions in the long run. Energy Economics, 91, 104907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104907
  52. Yilanci, V., Candan, G., & Shah, M. I. (2023). Identifying the roles of energy and economic factors on environmental degradation in MINT economies: a hesitant fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(19), 55768-55781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26142-x
  53. Yue, X. G., Liao, Y., Zheng, S., Shao, X., & Gao, J. (2021). The role of green innovation and tourism towards carbon neutrality in Thailand: Evidence from bootstrap ADRL approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 292, 112778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112778
  54. Zafar, M. W., Shahbaz, M., Sinha, A., Sengupta, T., & Qin, Q. (2020). How renewable energy consumption contribute to environmental quality? The role of education in OECD countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 268, 122149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122149
  55. Zhang, Y. J., Peng, Y. L., Ma, C. Q., & Shen, B. (2017). Can environmental innovation facilitate carbon emissions reduction? Evidence from China. Energy Policy, 100, 18-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.10.005
  56. Zhao, J., Shahbaz, M., Dong, X., & Dong, K. (2021). How does financial risk affect global CO2 emissions? The role of technological innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 168, 120751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120751