SavedAdd your journal

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

The Relationship Between Environmental Taxes as a Regulatory Public Policy Instrument and Carbon Emissions: Empirical Evidence from Türkiye

Düzenleyici Bir Kamu Politika Aracı Olarak Çevre Vergileri ile Karbon Emisyonları Arasındaki İlişki: Türkiye’den Ampirik Kanıtlar

Emrah Kıratoğlu(HARRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1571-081X
Pages
879–895
Publication Date
2026-10-12
🏛️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)

Overall, evidence that environmental taxes alone reduce emissions is limited, suggesting coordination of fiscal policy with industrial policy and energy transformation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to examine the relationship between environmental taxes as a public regulatory instrument and carbon emissions in Türkiye, controlling for industrial production and the clean energy share.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The analysis uses annual data for 1994-2023.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, evidence that environmental taxes alone reduce emissions is limited, suggesting coordination of fiscal policy with industrial policy and energy transformation.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Çevre vergileri · karbon emisyonları · temiz enerji

Abstract

This study aims to examine the relationship between environmental taxes as a public regulatory instrument and carbon emissions in Türkiye, controlling for industrial production and the clean energy share. The analysis uses annual data for 1994-2023. Carbon emissions are the dependent variable, while environmental taxes, the industrial production index, and the share of clean energy production in total energy production are the independent variables. The ARDL bounds testing approach is employed, with DOLS as a complementary long-run estimator. Granger causality analysis examines short-run predictive relationships. The long-run environmental tax coefficient is negative but statistically insignificant in ARDL and significant at the 10% level in DOLS. In the short run, the coefficient on the one-period lagged change in environmental taxes is positive and significant at the 1% level. Industrial production is positively and significantly associated with emissions, whereas the clean energy share is negatively and significantly associated with them. Standard Granger tests suggest bidirectional predictability between environmental taxes and emissions, although the variables’ integration properties require cautious interpretation. Overall, evidence that environmental taxes alone reduce emissions is limited, suggesting coordination of fiscal policy with industrial policy and energy transformation. The negative association between the clean energy share and emissions is more consistent across estimators.

Özet

Bu çalışma, kamusal düzenleme aracı olarak çevre vergilerinin Türkiye’de karbon emisyonlarıyla ilişkisini, sanayi üretimi ve temiz enerji payını kontrol ederek sınamayı amaçlamaktadır. Analizde 1994-2023 dönemine ait yıllık veriler kullanılmıştır. Modelde bağımlı değişken karbon emisyonları, bağımsız değişkenler ise çevre vergileri, sanayi üretim endeksi ve temiz enerji üretiminin toplam enerji üretimi içindeki payıdır. ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı kullanılmış, DOLS tamamlayıcı uzun dönem tahmincisi olarak uygulanmıştır. Granger nedensellik analiziyle kısa dönem öngörü ilişkileri incelenmiştir. Bulgular, çevre vergileri katsayısının uzun dönemde negatif, ARDL tahmininde istatistiksel olarak anlamsız, DOLS tahmininde ise %10 düzeyinde anlamlı olduğunu göstermektedir. Kısa dönemde ise çevre vergilerindeki değişimin bir dönem gecikmeli katsayısı pozitif ve %1 düzeyinde anlamlıdır. Sanayi üretimi karbon emisyonlarıyla pozitif, temiz enerji payı ise negatif ve anlamlı ilişkilidir. Standart Granger testleri çift yönlü öngörü ilişkisine işaret etmekle birlikte, serilerin bütünleşme özellikleri nedeniyle bu bulgu ihtiyatla yorumlanmalıdır. Genel olarak bulgular, Türkiye’de çevre vergilerinin tek başına karbon emisyonlarını azalttığına ilişkin sınırlı kanıt sunmakta ve maliye politikalarının sanayi politikası ve enerji dönüşümüyle eşgüdüm içinde tasarlanmasına işaret etmektedir. Temiz enerji payının emisyonlarla negatif ilişkisi ise tahminciler arasında daha tutarlı bulgularla desteklenmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kıratoğlu, E. (2026). The Relationship Between Environmental Taxes as a Regulatory Public Policy Instrument and Carbon Emissions: Empirical Evidence from Türkiye. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Sayı: 29, 879–895. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.1940632

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (38)

  1. Akçay, F., Yavuz, E., & Kılıç, E. (2023). Karbon emisyonu ile vergileme arasındaki ilişkinin cumhuriyetten günümüze analizi: Kantil eşbütünleşme yaklaşımından kanıtlar. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23(Special Issue), 59-78. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.1310434
  2. Arogundade, S., & Hassan, A. S. (2024). The path to green economy: Do environmental taxes and renewable energy transition matter in OECD countries? World Development Sustainability, 5, Article 100189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wds.2024.100189
  3. Atay Polat, M., & Ergün, S. (2021). Kirlilik emisyonlarının azaltılmasında çevre vergilerinin rolü: AB ülkeleri örneği. İzmir İktisat Dergisi, 36(2), 379-397. https://doi.org/10.24988/ije.202136209
  4. Aydın, C., & Esen, Ö. (2018). Reducing CO2 emissions in the EU member states: Do environmental taxes work?. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 61(13), 2396-2420. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2017.1395731
  5. Bişgin, A. (2025). Türkiye’de çevre vergileri ekolojik ayak izini azaltmada etkin mi? Fourier yaklaşımı. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 14(4), 1557-1569. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.1504481
  6. Dinçel Kıratoğlu, İ. Y. (2025). Türkiye’nin 2030 CO2 emisyon hedefinin Holt-Winters üstel düzeltme modeli ile tahmini. Maliye ve Finans Yazıları, Özel Sayı 3, 109-127. https://doi.org/10.33203/mfy.1834216
  7. Doğan, B., Chu, L. K., Ghosh, S., Truong, H. H. D., & Balsalobre-Lorente, D. (2022). How environmental taxes and carbon emissions are related in the G7 economies? Renewable Energy, 187, 645-656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.077
  8. Du, J., Li, Z., Shi, G., & Wang, B. (2024). Can “environmental protection fee to tax” reduce carbon emissions? Evidence from China. Finance Research Letters, 62, Article 105184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2024.105184
  9. Emirkadı, Ö. (2026). Çevre vergilerinin karbon emisyonları üzerindeki etkisi: Türkiye için eşik ve zamanla değişen bir analiz. Sayıştay Dergisi, 37(141), 411-444. https://doi.org/10.52836/sayistay.1902263
  10. Ertekin, Ş., & Dam, M. (2020). Türkiye’de çevre vergilerinin çevresel etkileri üzerine bir değerlendirme. Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi, 15, 66-87. https://doi.org/10.19168/jyasar.655644
  11. International Energy Agency Database. (2025). Energy statistics data browser. Retrieved December 20, 2025, from https://tinyurl.com/3m4t278j
  12. International Monetary Fund. (2019). Fiscal monitor: How to mitigate climate change. https://www.imf.org/en/publications/fm/issues/2019/09/12/fiscal-monitor-october-2019
  13. International Monetary Fund. (2021). Tax policy and climate change: IMF report for the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors. https://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/2021/040721.pdf
  14. Kaplan Dönmez, N. F. (2026). Policy instruments against climate change: A panel data analysis of carbon taxation and emissions trading in OECD countries. Economies, 14(1), Article 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies14010012
  15. Karşıyakalı, B., Aydın, Ü., & Şanlısoy, S. (2024). The causal relationship between environmental taxes for sustainable development and greenhouse gas emissions (CO2): A case study of Türkiye. Trakya Üniversitesi İİBF e-Dergi, 13(1), 82-100. https://doi.org/10.47934/tife.13.01.06
  16. Liu, Y. (2025). Whether fintech, natural resources, green finance and environmental tax affect CO2 emissions in China? A step towards green initiatives. Energy, 320, Article 135181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.135181
  17. Narayan, P. K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: Evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics, 37(17), 1979-1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840500278103
  18. Oğuz, N. S., & Yıldız, S. (2024). Bir çevre vergisi olarak karbon vergisi. Anadolu University Journal of Faculty of Economics, 6(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.54737/aujfe.1475971
  19. Organ, İ., & Çiftçi, T. E. (2013). Karbon vergisi. Niğde Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 81-95. https://izlik.org/JA99RG55CR
  20. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025a). Environment at a glance: Türkiye. https://tinyurl.com/2rmeywmv
  21. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025b). Methodological guidelines for environmentally related tax revenue accounts. https://doi.org/10.1787/d752d120-en
  22. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025c). Air and GHG emissions. Retrieved December 15, 2025, from https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/air-and-ghg-emissions.html
  23. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025d). Environmentally related tax revenue. Retrieved December 20, 2025, from https://www.oecd.org/
  24. Parry, I. (2019). What is carbon taxation? Finance & Development, 56(2), 54-55. https://www.imf.org/en/publications/fandd/issues/2019/06/what-is-carbon-taxation-basics
  25. 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
  26. Pigou, A. C. (1932). The economics of welfare (4th ed.). Macmillan.
  27. Rabhi, A., Soujaa, I., & Parsons, B. (2024). Do environmental taxes and renewable energy consumption play a role in climate change mitigation? International evidence from developing economies. Research in Globalization, 9, Article 100266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2024.100266
  28. Sakilu, O. B., & Chen, H. (2025). Realizing carbon neutrality in top-emitter countries: Do green technology innovation, renewable energy, financial development, and environmental tax matters? Sustainability, 17(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17010037
  29. Savranlar, B., Ertaş, S. A., & Aslan, A. (2024). The role of environmental tax on the environmental quality in EU counties: Evidence from panel vector autoregression approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31(24), 35769-35778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-33632-z
  30. Silajdzic, S., & Mehic, E. (2018). Do environmental taxes pay off? The impact of energy and transport taxes on CO2 emissions in transition economies. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, 13(2), 126-143. https://doi.org/10.2478/jeb-2018-0016
  31. Sumerli Sarıgül, S., & Altay Topcu, B. (2021). The impact of environmental taxes on carbon dioxide emissions in Turkey. International Journal of Business and Economic Studies, 3(1), 43-54. https://izlik.org/JA68HP64GE
  32. Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat). (2025). İstatistiksel temalar: Sanayi. Retrieved December 20, 2025, from https://veriportali.tuik.gov.tr/tr/statistical-themes?q=sanayi
  33. Ugrinov, S. (2025). The effects of environmental taxes on environmental pollution in the member states of the European Union. Economic Systems, 49(3), Article 101308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2025.101308
  34. Wolde-Rufael, Y., & Mulat-Weldemeskel, E. (2021). Do environmental taxes and environmental stringency policies reduce CO2 emissions? Evidence from 7 emerging economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 22392-22408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11475-8
  35. Wolde-Rufael, Y., & Mulat-Weldemeskel, E. (2023). Effectiveness of environmental taxes and environmental stringent policies on CO2 emissions: The European experience. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(6), 5211-5239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02262-1
  36. World Bank. (2026). Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions excluding LULUCF per capita (t CO2e/capita). Retrieved February 28, 2026, from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.GHG.CO2.PC.CE.AR5?locations=TR
  37. Yang, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, T., & Xu, H. (2024). Environmental taxes promote the synergy between pollution and carbon reduction: Provincial evidence from China. Journal of Environmental Management, 372, Article 123378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123378
  38. Zhu, Y., Taylor, D., & Wang, Z. (2023). The role of environmental taxes on carbon emissions in countries aiming for net-zero carbon emissions: Does renewable energy consumption matter? Renewable Energy, 218, Article 119239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119239