SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 10 Sayı: 28

An Analysis on The Nexus Between Green Environment and Financial Development of Turkic States

Türki Cumhuriyetlerde Yeşil Çevre ve Finansal Kalkınma Arasındaki Bağlantıya İlişkin Bir Analiz

Aslı Özpolat(GAZİANTEP ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1769-3654
Ferda Nakıpoğlu Özsoy(GAZİANTEP ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-5593-413X
Burak Büyükoğlu(GAZİANTEP ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1174-3112
Pages
776–791
Publication Date
2025-10-31
🏛️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)

According to the results obtained, the environmental Kuznets curve is valid.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to investigate the financial sector's impact on environmental degradation in the Turkic States and Türkiye.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, three separate models were developed in the study to evaluate the impact of financial development on the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation between 1998-2020.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results obtained, the environmental Kuznets curve is valid.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Finansal Gelişim · Ekolojik Ayak İzi · Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the financial sector's impact on environmental degradation in the Turkic States and Türkiye. The financial industry is an important tool in preventing environmental degradation in almost every field in newly developing economies. For this purpose, three separate models were developed in the study to evaluate the impact of financial development on the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation between 1998-2020. In the analysis, the cointegration relationship between the variables was first tested, and then parameter estimates were made with the FMOLS method. According to the results obtained, the environmental Kuznets curve is valid. The ecological footprint and financial development are negatively related. It was seen that the relationship between financial development and growth reduced the ecological footprint; however, there was no connection between financial development and renewable energy. This may mean that the renewable energy sector is not yet effective enough.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı Türki Cumhuriyetleri ve Türkiye’de finans sektörünün çevresel bozulmalar üzerindeki etkisini araştırmaktadır. Finans sektörü yeni gelişen ekonomilerde hemen her alanda olduğu gibi çevresel bozulmaların önlenmesi açısında da önemli bir araç niteliği taşımaktadır. Bu amaçla çalışmada 1998-2020 yılları arasında çevresel bozulmanın göstergesi olarak finansal kalkınmanın ekolojik ayak izine olan etkisini değerlendirmek için üç ayrı model geliştirilmiştir. Analizde öncelikle değişkenler arasındaki eşbütünleşme ilişkisi test edilmiş, ardından FMOLS yöntemi ile parametre tahminleri yapılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre Çevresel Kuznets eğrisi geçerlidir. Ekolojik ayak izi ile finansal kalkınma negatif ilişkilidir. Finansal kalkınma ile büyüme arasındaki ilişkinin ekolojik ayak izini azalttığı görülmüştür; ancak finansal gelişme ile yenilenebilir enerji arasında bir bağlantı yoktu. Bu, yenilenebilir enerji sektörünün henüz yeterince etkili olmadığı anlamına gelebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özpolat, A., Özsoy, F. N., Büyükoğlu, B. (2025). An Analysis on The Nexus Between Green Environment and Financial Development of Turkic States. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 28, 776–791. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.1598529

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (48)

  1. Acar, S., Altıntaş, N., and Haziyev, V. (2023). The effect of financial development and economic growth on ecological footprint in Azerbaijan: an ARDL bound test approach with structural breaks. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 30(1), 41-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10651-022-00551-6
  2. Acheampong, A. O. (2019). Modelling for insight: Does financial development improve environmental quality?. Energy Economics, 83(2019),156–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2019.06.025
  3. Adebayo, T. S., Kartal, M. T., Ağa, M., and Al-Faryan, M. A. S. (2023). Role of country risks and renewable energy consumption on environmental quality: Evidence from MINT countries. Journal of Environmental Management, 327, 116884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116884
  4. Ahmed, Z., Zhang, B., and Cary, M. (2021). Linking economic globalization, economic growth, financial development, and ecological footprint: Evidence from symmetric and asymmetric ARDL. Ecological Indicators, 121, 107060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107060
  5. Akinsola, G. D., Awosusi, A. A., Kirikkaleli, D., Umarbeyli, S., Adeshola, I., and Adebayo, T. S. (2022). Ecological footprint, public-private partnership investment in energy, and financial development in Brazil: a gradual shift causality approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(7), 10077-10090. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15791-5
  6. Alfaro, L., Chanda, A., Kalemli-Ozcan, S., and Sayek, S. (2004). FDI and economic growth: The role of local financial markets. Journal of International Economics, 64(1), 89–112 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(03)00081-3
  7. Ali, Q., Yaseen, M. R., Anwar, S., Makhdum, M. S. A., and Khan, M. T. I. (2021). The impact of tourism, renewable energy, and economic growth on ecological footprint and natural resources: A panel data analysis. Resources Policy, 74, 102365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102365
  8. Al-Mulali, U., and Ilhan O. (2015). The effect of energy consumption, urbanization, trade openness, industrial output, and the political stability on the environmental degradation in the MENA (Middle East and North African) region. Energy 84. 382-389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.03.004
  9. Al-Mulali, U., Weng-Wai, C., Sheau-Ting, L., and Mohammed, A. H. (2015). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis by utilizing the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation. Ecological Indicators, 48, 315-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.08.029
  10. Alola, A. A., Bekun F.V., and Sarkodie S. A. (2019). Dynamic impact of trade policy, economic growth, fertility rate, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on ecological footprint in Europe. Science of the Total Environment, 685 702-709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.139
  11. Breusch, T. S., and 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
  12. Cole, M. A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.09.007
  13. Dada, J. T., Adeiza, A., Ismail, N. A., and Arnaut, M. (2022). Financial development–ecological footprint nexus in Malaysia: the role of institutions. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 33(4), 913-937. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-10-2021-0251
  14. Dada, J. T., Adeiza, A., Ismail, N. A., and Marina, A. (2022). Investigating the link between economic growth, financial development, urbanization, natural resources, human capital, trade openness and ecological footprint: evidence from Nigeria. Journal of Bioeconomics, 24(2), 153-179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10818-021-09323-x
  15. Danish, B. M. A., and Suad, S. (2018). Modeling the impact of transport energy consumption on CO2 emission in Pakistan: evidence from ARDL approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25, 9461-9473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1230-0
  16. Destek, M. A., and Sarkodie, S. A. (2019). Investigation of environmental Kuznets curve for ecological footprint: the role of energy and financial development. Science of the Total Environment, 650, 2483-2489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.017
  17. Destek, M. A., and Sinha, A. (2020). Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 242, 118537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118537
  18. Du, L., Wei, C., and Cai, S. (2012). Economic development and carbon dioxide emissions in China: Provincial panel data analysis. China Economic Review, 23(2), 371-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2012.02.004
  19. Eskeland, G. S., and Harrison, A. E. (2003). Moving to Greener Pastures? Multinationals and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis. Journal of Development Economics, 70(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(02)00084-6
  20. Global Footprint Network (2023, 12 June). Data and Methodology. https://www.footprintnetwork.org/resources/data/
  21. Grossman, G. M., and Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. The quarterly journal of economics, 110(2), 353-377. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118443
  22. Hermes, N., and Lensink, R. (2003). Foreign direct investment, financial development and economic growth. The Journal of Development Studies, 40(1), 142–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380412331293707
  23. Holden, E. (2004). Ecological footprints and sustainable urban form. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 19, 91-109. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOHO.0000017708.98013.cb Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2023, 12 june). https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf.
  24. Javeed, S., Siddique, H. M. A., and Javed, F. (2023). Ecological footprint, globalization, and economic growth: evidence from Asia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(31), 77006-77021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-27754-z
  25. Li, K., Zu, J., Musah, M., Mensah, I. A., Kong, Y., Owusu-Akomeah, M., Shi, S., Jiang, Q., Antwi, S. K., and Agyemang, J. K. (2022). The link between urbanization, energy consumption, foreign direct investments and CO2 emanations: An empirical evidence from the emerging seven (E7) countries. Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 40(2), 477-500. https://doi.org/10.1177/01445987211023854
  26. Majeed, M. T., and Mazhar, M. (2019). Financial development and ecological footprint: a global panel data analysis. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 13(2), 487-514. https://tinyurl.com/y526d34y
  27. Naqvi, S. A. A., Shah, S. A. R., and Mehdi, M. A. (2020). Revealing empirical association among ecological footprints, renewable energy consumption, real income, and financial development: a global perspective. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 42830-42849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09958-9
  28. Nathaniel, S. P., Murshed, M., and Bassim, M. (2021). The nexus between economic growth, energy use, international trade and ecological footprints: the role of environmental regulations in N11 countries. Energy, Ecology and Environment, 6(6), 496-512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-020-00205-y
  29. Ngoc, B. H., and Awan, A. (2022). Does financial development reinforce ecological footprint in Singapore? Evidence from ARDL and Bayesian analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(16), 24219-24233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17565-5
  30. Odugbesan, J. A., and Rjoub, H. (2020). Relationship among economic growth, energy consumption, CO2 emission, and urbanization: Evidence from MINT countries. SAGE Open, 10(2),1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020914648
  31. Panayotou, T. (1993). Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development. ILO Working Papers 992927783402676, International Labour Organization. https://webapps.ilo.org/public/libdoc/ilo/1993/93B09_31_engl.pdf
  32. Pargal, S., and Wheeler, D. (1996). Informal Regulation of Industrial Pollution in Developing Countries: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Political Economy, 104(6), 1314–1327. https://doi.org/10.1086/262061
  33. Pedroni, P. (2000). Fully modified OLS for heterogeneous cointegrated panels. In Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, and dynamic panels (pp. 93-130). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0731-9053(00)15004-2
  34. Pesaran, M. H. (2000). General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. Empirical Economics, 60(1), 13-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01875-7
  35. 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
  36. Shkiotov, S. V., Markin, M. I., Rodina, G. A., Berkovich, M. I., and Korechkov, Y. V. (2025). Spillover Effects of Financial Development and Globalisation on Environmental Quality in EAEU Countries. Sustainability, 17(4), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17041496
  37. Uddin, I., Ullah, A., Saqib, N., Kousar, R., and Usman, M. (2023). Heterogeneous role of energy utilization, financial development, and economic development in ecological footprint: how far away are developing economies from developed ones. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(20), 58378-58398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26584-3
  38. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). (2023, 12 June). United Nations Climate Change COP 21. https://unfccc.int/documents
  39. Usman, M., and Hammar, N. (2021). Dynamic relationship between technological innovations, financial development, renewable energy, and ecological footprint: fresh insights based on the STIRPAT model for Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(12), 15519-15536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11640-z
  40. Usman, M., Kousar, R., Yaseen, M. R., and Makhdum, M. S. A. (2020). An empirical nexus between economic growth, energy utilization, trade policy, and ecological footprint: A continent-wise comparison in upper-middle-income countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 38995-39018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09772-3
  41. Usman, M., Makhdum, M. S. A., and Kousar, R. (2021). Does financial inclusion, renewable and non-renewable energy utilization accelerate ecological footprints and economic growth? Fresh evidence from 15 highest emitting countries. Sustainable Cities and Society, 65, 102590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102590
  42. Wang, Q., Ge, Y., and Li, R. (2025). Does improving economic efficiency reduce ecological footprint? The role of financial development, renewable energy, and industrialization. Energy & Environment, 36(2), 729-755. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X231183914
  43. Wang, W., Rehman, M. A., and Fahad, S. (2022). The dynamic influence of renewable energy, trade openness, and industrialization on the sustainable environment in G-7 economies. Renewable Energy, 198, 484-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.08.067
  44. Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709-748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x
  45. Worldbank (2024, 10 January). World Bank Database. https://data.worldbank.org/
  46. Zakaria, M., and Bibi, S. (2019). Financial development and environment in South Asia: the role of institutional quality. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 7926-7937. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04284-1
  47. Zhang, J. (2007). Does foreign direct investment promote green growth? Evidence from China. Journal of International Economics, 68(2), 325–342. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8020158
  48. Naqvi, S. A. A., Shah, S. A. R., and Mehdi, M. A. (2020). Revealing empirical association among ecological footprints, renewable energy consumption, real income, and financial development: a global perspective. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 42830-42849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09958-9