Journals / Bor Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2

The Effects of Boron on Energy Security and Environmental Sustainability: The Case of Turkey

Borun Enerji Güvenliği ve Çevresel Sürdürülebilirlik Üzerindeki Etkileri: Türkiye Örneği

Hayriye Taşcı(GAZİANTEP ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SOSYAL BİLİMLER MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0002-6402-3151
Pages
79–95
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️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 the environmental impact of boron exports does not operate through a direct emission-reducing mechanism; rather, it reflects a short-term scale effect associated with increased production and energy demand, which is moderated in the long run by the expansion of renewable energy capacity and technological transformation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The effects of boron exports on energy security and environmental sustainability were analyzed using Fourier-Autoregressive Distributed Lag (FARDL), Error Correction Model, and Toda- Yamamoto causality tests.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study consists of two models: Model 1 examines the effect of boron exports on energy import dependency, while Model 2 analyzes the effects of boron exports, economic growth, and the share of renewable energy on carbon emissions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that the environmental impact of boron exports does not operate through a direct emission-reducing mechanism; rather, it reflects a short-term scale effect associated with increased production and energy demand, which is moderated in the long run by the expansion of renewable energy capacity and technological transformation.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Bor İhracatı · Enerji Güvenliği · Çevresel Sürdürülebilirlik

Abstract

The effects of boron exports on energy security and environmental sustainability were analyzed using Fourier-Autoregressive Distributed Lag (FARDL), Error Correction Model, and Toda- Yamamoto causality tests. The study consists of two models: Model 1 examines the effect of boron exports on energy import dependency, while Model 2 analyzes the effects of boron exports, economic growth, and the share of renewable energy on carbon emissions. Fourier-based unit root tests indicate that most series are integrated at the I(1) level, and Fourier-ARDL results reveal the existence of a long-run cointegration relationship among the variables. The findings indicate that the environmental impact of boron exports does not operate through a direct emission-reducing mechanism; rather, it reflects a short-term scale effect associated with increased production and energy demand, which is moderated in the long run by the expansion of renewable energy capacity and technological transformation. An increase in the share of renewable energy contributes to both strengthening energy security and reducing carbon emissions. Although economic growth leads to higher emissions in the short term, the expansion of renewable energy capacity helps to balance this effect over time. Error correction coefficients suggest that equilibrium is restored more rapidly in the energy security model, whereas the adjustment process is slower in the environmental sustainability model. The Toda- Yamamoto causality test does not detect short-run directional causality among the variables, while long-run relationships are supported by the cointegration results obtained from the Fourier-ARDL framework. Overall, the findings suggest that boron is not only a strategic export commodity but also a complementary policy instrument whose contribution to energy security and green transformation depends on its integration with renewable energy and technology-oriented policies.

Özet

Bor ihracatının enerji güvenliği ve çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerindeki etkileri Fourier- Otoregresif Dağıtılmış Gecikme (FARDL), Hata Düzeltme Modeli ve Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma iki modelden oluşmaktadır: Model 1, bor ihracatının enerji ithalat bağımlılığı üzerindeki etkisini; Model 2 ise bor ihracatı, ekonomik büyüme ve yenilenebilir enerji payının karbon emisyonları üzerindeki etkilerini incelemektedir. Fourier tabanlı birim kök testleri serilerin çoğunun I(1) düzeyinde bütünleşik olduğunu, Fourier-ARDL analizleri ise değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli bir eşbütünleşme ilişkisi bulunduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Bulgular, bor ihracatının çevresel sürdürülebilirlik üzerindeki etkisinin doğrudan bir azaltım mekanizması üzerinden değil, kısa vadede üretim ölçeği ve enerji talebindeki artışla ilişkili bir etki yarattığını; uzun vadede ise bu etkinin yenilenebilir enerji kapasitesindeki genişleme ve teknoloji dönüşümü yoluyla dengelendiğini göstermektedir. Yenilenebilir enerji payındaki artışın hem enerji güvenliğini güçlendirici hem de karbon emisyonlarını azaltıcı yönde etkili olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ekonomik büyüme kısa vadede emisyonları artırsa da yenilenebilir enerji kapasitesindeki artış bu etkinin uzun dönemde dengelenmesini sağlamaktadır. Hata düzeltme katsayıları, enerji güvenliği modelinde dengenin daha hızlı sağlandığını, çevresel sürdürülebilirlik modelinde ise bu sürecin daha yavaş ilerlediğini göstermektedir. Toda-Yamamoto test sonuçları kısa dönemde yönlü bir nedensellik saptamazken, uzun dönem ilişkilerin varlığı Fourier-ARDL eşbütünleşme bulgularıyla desteklenmektedir. Bulgular, borun yalnızca stratejik bir ihracat kalemi değil, aynı zamanda yenilenebilir enerji ve teknoloji politikalarıyla bütünleştiğinde enerji güvenliği ve yeşil dönüşüme katkı sağlayabilecek tamamlayıcı bir politika aracı olduğunu göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Taşcı, H. (2026). The Effects of Boron on Energy Security and Environmental Sustainability: The Case of Turkey. Bor Dergisi, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 79–95. https://doi.org/10.30728/boron.1786507

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (40)

  1. IEA (International Energy Agency). (2023). World Energy Outlook 2023. Paris: OECD/IEA.
  2. Sovacool, B. K. (2021). Energy justice reconsidered: Reflections on global energy transitions. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102027
  3. Dutta, A. (2014). Hydrogen energy: Fundamentals, production, and storage. Springer.
  4. Staffell, I., Scamman, D., Velazquez Abad, A., Balcombe, P., Dodds, P. E., Ekins, P.,. & Ward, K. R. (2019). The role of hydrogen and fuel cells in the global energy system. Energy & Environmental Science, 12(2), 463–491. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8EE01157E
  5. Züttel, A. (2004). Hydrogen storage methods. Materials Today, 6(9), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-7021(03)00922-2
  6. Demirci, U. B., & Miele, P. (2014). Sodium borohydride for hydrogen storage: New perspectives. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 39(20), 10702–10711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.01.038
  7. USGS (United States Geological Survey). (2022). Mineral Commodity Summaries 2022: Boron. Reston, VA: USGS.
  8. World Bank. (2023). World Development Indicators (WDI). Washington DC: World Bank.
  9. UNFCCC. (2021). Nationally Determined Contributions Synthesis Report. Bonn: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
  10. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). (2022). Sixth assessment report: Climate change 2022. Geneva: United Nations.
  11. Republic of Türkiye. (2021). Green Deal Action Plan (Cumhurbaşkanlığı Genelgesi 2021/15). Ankara: Official Gazette [in Turkish].
  12. Schlapbach, L., & Züttel, A. (2001). Hydrogen-storage materials for mobile applications. Nature, 414, 353–358. https://doi.org/10.1038/35104634
  13. Orimo, S., Nakamori, Y., Eliseo, J. R., Züttel, A., & Jensen, C. M. (2007). Complex hydrides for hydrogen storage. Chemical Reviews, 107(10), 4111–4132. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr0501846
  14. Observatory of Economic Complexity. (2024). Cambridge, MA: MIT Media Lab.
  15. Yu, E. S. H., & Hwang, B. K. (1984). The relationship between energy and GNP: Further results. Energy Economics, 6(3), 186–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-9883(84)90015-X
  16. Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2012). The flexible Fourier form and testing for unit roots. Economics Letters, 117(1), 196–199.
  17. Stern, D. I. (2000). A multivariate cointegration analysis of the role of energy in the US macroeconomy. Energy Economics, 22(2), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-9883(99)00028-6
  18. Masih, A. M. M., & Masih, R. (1996). Energy consumption, real income and temporal causality: Results from a multi-country study based on cointegration and error-correction modeling techniques. Energy Economics, 18(3), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-9883(96)00009-6
  19. Soytaş, U., & Sarı, R. (2004). Disaggregate energy consumption, employment and income in Turkey. Energy Economics, 26(3), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2004.04.014
  20. Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER Working Paper No. 3914. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914
  21. Halicioğlu, F. (2009). An econometric study of CO₂ emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy, 37(3), 1156–1164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.11.012
  22. Soytaş, U., Sarı, R., & Ewing, B. T. (2007). Energy consumption, income, and carbon emissions in the United States. Ecological Economics, 62(3–4), 482–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.009
  23. Stock, J. H. (1994). Unit roots, structural breaks and trends. In R. F. Engle & D. L. McFadden (Eds.), Handbook of Econometrics (Vol. 4, pp. 2739–2841). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1573-4412(05)80015-7
  24. 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
  25. Tsong, C. C., Lee, C. F., Tsai, L. J., & Hu, T. C. (2016). The Fourier approximation and testing for cointegration with unknown structural breaks. Empirical Economics, 51(3), 1085–1113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-015-1028-6
  26. Toda, H. Y., & Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics, 66(1–2), 225–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8
  27. Yurtkuran, S. (2021). The impact of renewable energy and globalization on CO₂ emissions in Turkey (1970–2017) [in Turkish]. Energy Policy Studies Journal, 8(2), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.009
  28. Tunçbilek, Ö. F. (2024). Hidrojen enerjisi ve çevresel etkileri üzerine değerlendirmeler. Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15(2), 189–197
  29. Kraft, J., & Kraft, A. (1978). On the relationship between energy and GNP. Journal of Energy and Development, 3(2), 401–403.
  30. Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica, 57(6), 1361–1401. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913712
  31. Pakdel, A., Bando, Y., & Golberg, D. (2014). Nano boron nitride: Recent developments in synthesis, functionalization and applications. Chemical Society Reviews, 43(3), 934–959.
  32. Saad, W., & Taleb, A. (2018). The causal relationship between renewable energy consumption and economic growth: Evidence from Europe. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 20, 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-017-1463-5
  33. Banerjee, A., Dolado, J., & Mestre, R. (1998). Error‐correction mechanism tests for cointegration in a single‐equation framework. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 19(3), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9892.00091
  34. Zapata, H. O., & Rambaldi, A. N. (1997). Monte Carlo evidence on cointegration and causation. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 59(2), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.00065
  35. Eti Maden İşletmeleri Genel Müdürlüğü. (2023). Bor sektörü ve bor ürünleri raporu. Ankara: T.C. Enerji ve Tabii Kaynaklar Bakanlığı.
  36. IEA (International Energy Agency). (2021). Energy Balances of OECD Countries 2021. Paris: OECD/IEA.
  37. United Nations. (2024). UN Comtrade database: International trade statistics. New York: United Nations.
  38. Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası. (2024). Ankara.
  39. International Monetary Fund. (2024). International Financial Statistics (IFS): Exchange rates. Washington, DC.
  40. Staffell, I., Scamman, D., Velazquez Abad, A., Balcombe, P., Dodds, P. E., Ekins, P.,. & Ward, K. R. (2019). The role of hydrogen and fuel cells in the global energy system. Energy & Environmental Science, 12(2), 463–491. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8EE01157E