SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 29

Determinants of Environmental Degradation in the Russian Economy: The ARDL Bounds Test Approach

Rusya Ekonomisinde Çevresel Bozulmanın Belirleyicileri: ARDL Sınır Testi Yaklaşımı

Selin Dinçer(Kırıkkale Ünversitesi)0000-0003-3233-493X
Pages
157–174
Publication Date
2026-03-04
🏛️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)

Furthermore, the findings indicate that energy consumption has a positive and statistically significant long-run effect on environmental degradation, while economic growth and trade openness have a negative and significant effect on environmental degradation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to examine the environmental impacts of economic growth (GDP), energy consumption (EC), and trade openness (TO) in the Russian economy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:ARDL bounds tests and Toda-Yamamoto causality methods were applied in the analysis covering the period 1992-2023.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Furthermore, the findings indicate that energy consumption has a positive and statistically significant long-run effect on environmental degradation, while economic growth and trade openness have a negative and significant effect on environmental degradation.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Ekonomik Büyüme · Enerji · Çevre

Abstract

This study aims to examine the environmental impacts of economic growth (GDP), energy consumption (EC), and trade openness (TO) in the Russian economy. Carbon emissions (CO₂) are used as a proxy for the environment. ARDL bounds tests and Toda-Yamamoto causality methods were applied in the analysis covering the period 1992-2023. The ARDL bounds test results reveal the existence of a long-run cointegration relationship among the variables included in the analysis. Furthermore, the findings indicate that energy consumption has a positive and statistically significant long-run effect on environmental degradation, while economic growth and trade openness have a negative and significant effect on environmental degradation. According to the findings, energy consumption increases environmental pollution, while economic growth and trade openness improve environmental quality in the long run. These results suggest that energy consumption is one of the main determinants of environmental degradation in the Russian economy, while economic growth and openness support environmentally friendly policies. The Toda-Yamamoto Causality test findings indicate a bidirectional causal relationship between GDP and CO₂, EC and CO₂, TO and CO₂, and EC and GDP. Therefore, strengthening energy and trade policies aligned with sustainable growth targets in the future could further improve Russia's environmental performance.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Rusya ekonomisinde ekonomik büyüme (GDP), enerji tüketimi (EC) ve ticari açıklığın (TO) çevresel etkilerini incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada çevreyi temsilen karbon emisyonları (CO₂) değişkeni kullanılmıştır. 1992-2023 dönemini kapsayan analizde ARDL sınır testi ve Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik yöntemleri uygulanmıştır. ARDL sınır testi sonuçları, analizde yer alan değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli bir eşbütünleşme ilişkisinin varlığını ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca elde edilen bulgular, enerji tüketiminin çevresel bozulma üzerinde uzun vadede pozitif ve istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olduğunu, ekonomik büyüme ve ticari açıklığın ise çevresel bozulma üzerinde negatif ve anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Bulgulara göre, enerji tüketimi çevre kirliliğini artırırken, ekonomik büyüme ve ticari açıklık çevre kalitesini uzun vadede iyileştirmektedir. Bu sonuçlar, Rusya ekonomisinde enerji tüketiminin çevresel bozulmanın temel belirleyicilerinden biri olduğunu, buna karşın ekonomik büyüme ve ticari açıklığın çevre dostu politikaları desteklediğini ortaya koymaktadır. Toda-Yamamoto Nedensellik testi bulguları ise GDP ile CO₂, EC ile CO₂, TO ile CO₂ ve EC ile GDP değişkenleri arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi bulunduğunu göstermektedir. Bu doğrultuda, gelecekte sürdürülebilir büyüme hedefleriyle uyumlu enerji ve ticaret politikalarının güçlendirilmesi, Rusya’nın çevresel performansını daha da iyileştirebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Dinçer, S. (2026). Determinants of Environmental Degradation in the Russian Economy: The ARDL Bounds Test Approach. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Sayı: 29, 157–174. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.1814836

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (62)

  1. A’yun, I. Q. ve Khasanah, U. (2022). The impact of economic growth and trade openness on environmental degradation: Evidence from a panel of ASEAN countries. Jurnal Ekonomi & Studi Pembangunan, 23(1), 81‑92. https://doi.org/10.18196/jesp.v23i1.13881
  2. Acaravci, A. ve Öztürk, İ. (2010). On the relationship between energy consumption, CO₂ emissions and economic growth in Europe. Energy, 35(12), 5412‑5420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.07.009
  3. Adnan, Z. Chowdhury, M. ve Mallik, G. (2020). Determinants of total factor productivity in Pakistan: A time series analysis using ARDL approach. International Review of Applied Economics, 34(6), 807‑820. https://doi.org/10.1080/02692171.2020.1792420
  4. Adriana, D. (2014). Revisiting the relationship between unemployment rates and shadow economy. A Toda-Yamamoto approach for the case of Romania. Procedia Economics and Finance, 10, 227-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00297-4
  5. Ahmed, M., Shuai, C. ve Ahmed, M. (2023). Analysis of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions trend in China, India, the USA, and Russia. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 20(3), 2683‑2698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04159-y
  6. Akadiri, S. S., Bekun, F. V., Taheri, E. ve Akadiri, A. C. (2019). Carbon emissions, energy consumption and economic growth: A causality evidence. International Journal of Energy Technology and Policy, 15(2–3), 320‑336. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJETP.2019.098956
  7. Alam, M., Murad, W., Noman, A. H. ve Öztürk, İ. (2016). Relationships among carbon emissions, economic growth, energy consumption and population growth: Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Brazil, China, India and Indonesia. Ecological Indicators, 70, 466‑479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.06.043
  8. Ang, J. (2007). CO₂ emissions, energy consumption, and output in France. Energy Policy, 35(10), 4772‑4778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.03.032
  9. Bloch, H., Rafiq, S. ve Salim, R. (2012). Coal consumption, CO₂ emission and economic growth in China: Empirical evidence and policy responses. Energy Economics, 34(2), 518‑528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2011.07.014
  10. Chandio, A. A., Jiang, Y., Rauf, A., Ahmad, F., Amin, W. ve Shehzad, K. (2020). Assessment of formal credit and climate change impact on agricultural production in Pakistan: A time series ARDL modeling approach. Sustainability, 12(13), 5241. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135241
  11. Chang, N. (2012). The empirical relationship between openness and environmental pollution in China. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 55(6), 783‑796. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.628087
  12. Chaudhry, A. ve Reetu, R. (2025). A systematic review of trade and environment linkages. Discover Environment, 3(1), 1‑17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44274-025-00368-7
  13. Dickey, D. A. ve Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica, 49(4), 1057-1072. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912517
  14. Dinçer, S. (2025). Alternative renewable energy sources in the context of global energy crises and sustainable environment. Kapanaltı Dergisi, 7, 19‑30. https://doi.org/10.62080/kmfed.1642736
  15. Dong, K., Sun, R., Jiang, H. ve Zeng, X. (2018). CO₂ emissions, economic growth, and the environmental Kuznets curve in China: What roles can nuclear energy and renewable energy play? Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 51‑63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.271
  16. Ekwebe, A. O. A. ve Angelus, E. F. (2025). Moderating effect of environmental quality on the relationship between trade openness and health expenditure in Sub‑Saharan African countries. Finance & Economics Review, 7(1), 42‑51. https://doi.org/10.38157/fer.v7i1.669
  17. Engle, R. F. ve Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Cointegration and error correction: Representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251‑276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236
  18. Esso, L. J. ve Keho, Y. (2016). Energy consumption, economic growth and carbon emissions: Cointegration and causality evidence from selected African countries. Energy, 114, 492‑497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.010
  19. Grossman, G. M. ve Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement (NBER Working Paper No. 3914). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w3914
  20. Gujarati, D. N. ve Porter, D. C. (2009). Basic econometrics. McGraw‑Hill. https://cbpbu.ac.in/userfiles/file/2020/STUDY_MAT/ECO/1.pdf
  21. Hamdi, H. (2013). Testing export-led growth in Tunisia and Morocco: New evidence using the Toda and Yamamoto procedure. Economics Bulletin, 1(33),677-686. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/65072/
  22. Honma, S. (2015). Does international trade improve environmental efficiency? An application of a super slacks‑based measure of efficiency. Journal of Economic Structures, 4(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-015-0023-6
  23. Imarcgroup (2024, 15 Eylül). Russia renewable energy market size, share, trends and forecast by type, end user, and region, 2025‑2033. https://www.imarcgroup.com/russia-renewable-energy-market
  24. International Energy Agency (2025, 10 Mart). Russia countries & regions. https://www.iea.org/countries/russia
  25. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2025, 2 Eylül). Data and statistics. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics
  26. International Renewable Energy Agency (2017, 15 Eylül). Russia can nearly quadruple share of renewable energy by 2030. https://tinyurl.com/686avcxn
  27. Johansen, S. ve Juselius, K. (1990). Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration with appucations to the demand for money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 52(2), 169-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.1990.mp52002003.x
  28. Khan, M. K., Khan, M. I. ve Rehan, M. (2020). The relationship between energy consumption, economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions in Pakistan. Financial Innovation, 6(1), 1‑13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-019-0162-0
  29. Koc, S. ve Bulus, G. C. (2020). Testing validity of the EKC hypothesis in South Korea: Role of renewable energy and trade openness. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 29043‑29054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09172-7
  30. Korkmaz, Ö. (2022). Do oil, coal, and natural gas consumption and rents impact economic growth? An empirical analysis of the Russian Federation. Resources Policy, 77, 1‑6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102739
  31. Lean, H. H. ve Smyth, R. (2010). CO₂ emissions, electricity consumption and output in ASEAN. Applied Energy, 87(6), 1858‑1864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.02.003
  32. Managi, S., Hibiki, A. ve Tsurumi, T. (2009). Does trade openness improve environmental quality? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 58(3), 346‑363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2009.04.008
  33. Menegaki, A. N. (2019). The ARDL method in the energy‑growth nexus field: Best implementation strategies. Economies, 7(4), 1‑16. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies7040105
  34. Mitrova, T. ve Melnikov, Y. (2019). Energy transition in Russia. Energy Transitions, 3(1), 73-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41825-019-00016-8
  35. Nkoro, E. ve Uko, A. K. (2016). Autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) cointegration technique: Application and interpretation. Journal of Statistical and Econometric Methods, 5(4), 63‑91. https://www.scienpress.com/Upload/JSEM/Vol%205_4_3.pdf
  36. Omer, A. M. (2008). Energy, environment and sustainable development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(9), 2265‑2300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.05.001
  37. Our World in Data. (2025, Mart 10). Fossil fuels. https://ourworldindata.org/search?topics=Fossil+Fuels&resultType=all
  38. Özgün, F. ve Akın, F. (2024). İnternet kullanımının ekolojik ayak izi üzerindeki etkisi: Türkiye örneği. Dicle Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 36, 186‑206. https://doi.org/10.15182/diclesosbed.1416047
  39. Pao, H. T., Yu, H. C. ve Yang, Y. H. (2011). Modeling the CO₂ emissions, energy use, and economic growth in Russia. Energy, 36(8), 5094‑5100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.004
  40. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), http://doi.org/10.1002/jae.616
  41. Pham, D. T. T. ve Nguyen, H. T. (2024). Effects of trade openness on environmental quality: Evidence from developing countries. Journal of Applied Economics, 27(1), 2339610. http://doi.org/10.1080/15140326.2024.2339610
  42. Phillips, P. C. ve Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/75.2.335
  43. Raihan, A. ve Tuspekova, A. (2022a). Dynamic impacts of economic growth, renewable energy use, urbanization, industrialization, tourism, agriculture, and forests on carbon emissions in Turkey. Carbon Research, 1(20), 1‑14. http://doi.org/10.1007/s44246-022-00019-z
  44. Raihan, A. ve Tuspekova, A. (2022b). The nexus between economic growth, renewable energy use, agricultural land expansion, and carbon emissions: New insights from Peru. Energy Nexus, 6, 1‑12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexus.2022.100067
  45. Russia Renewable Energy Development Association (2025, 15 Eylül). Russia's climate package 2023. https://rreda.ru/en/reports/annual%E2%80%91reports/1520/
  46. Rüstemoğlu, H. ve Rodríguez Andrés, A. (2016). Determinants of CO₂ emissions in Brazil and Russia between 1992 and 2011: A decomposition analysis. Environmental Science & Policy, 58, 95‑106. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.012
  47. Sarkodie, S. A. ve Strezov, V. (2019). Effect of foreign direct investments, economic development and energy consumption on greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries. Science of the Total Environment, 646, 862‑871. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.365
  48. Saunders, P. J. (2024). Russia's global energy role: war, sanctions, and the energy transition, Energy Innovation Reform Project. https://tinyurl.com/473x58wf
  49. Tang, C. F. ve Tan, B. V. (2015). The impact of energy consumption, income and foreign direct investment on carbon dioxide emissions in Vietnam. Energy, 79, 447‑454. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.11.033
  50. Tenaw, D. ve Beyene, A. D. (2021). Environmental sustainability and economic development in Sub‑Saharan Africa: A modified EKC hypothesis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 143, 1‑10. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110897
  51. Tiba, S. ve Omri, A. (2007). Literature survey on the relationships between energy, environment and economic growth. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 69, 1129‑1146. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.113
  52. Toda, H. Y. ve 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
  53. Twerefou, D. K., Akpalu, W. ve Mensah, A. C. E. (2019). Trade‑induced environmental quality: the role of factor endowment and environmental regulation in Africa. Climate and Development, 11(9), 786‑798. http://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2018.1562868
  54. Usta, C. ve Berber, M. (2017). Türkiye’de enerji tüketimi ekonomik büyüme ilişkisinin sektörel analizi. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 13(1), 173‑187. https://izlik.org/JA77GC25DE
  55. Vidyarthi, H. (2013). Energy consumption, carbon emissions and economic growth in India. Technology and Sustainable Development, 10(4), 278‑287. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJSTSD-07-2013-0024
  56. Vo, A. T., Vo, D. H. ve Lee, Q. T. (2019). CO₂ emissions, energy consumption, and economic growth: New evidence in the ASEAN countries. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 12(3), 1‑20. http://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm12030145
  57. Wang, Y., Chen, L. ve Kubota, J. (2016). The relationship between urbanization, energy use and carbon emissions: Evidence from a panel of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 1368‑1374. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.041
  58. World Bank. (2025, 2 Eylül). World development indicators. https://databank.worldbank.org/
  59. Yang, X., Lou, F., Sun, M., Wang, R. ve Wang, Y. (2017). Study of the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and the economic growth of Russia based on the environmental Kuznets curve. Applied Energy, 193, 162‑173. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.02.034
  60. Zeraibi, A., Radulescu, M., Dembińska, I. ve Çoban, M. N. (2024). The impact of China’s booming tech sector on environmental sustainability: An analysis through comprehensive CS‑ARDL approach. Gondwana Research, 134, 245‑261.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2024.06.020
  61. Zhu, H., Duan, L., Guo, Y. ve Yu, K. (2016). The effects of FDI, economic growth and energy consumption on carbon emissions in ASEAN‑5: Evidence from panel quantile regression. Economic Modelling, 58, 237‑248. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2016.05.003
  62. Zivot, E. ve Wang, J. (2006). Modelling financial time series with S‑PLUS. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-32348-0