SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Maliye Dergisi / 2020 / Sayı: 179

The Effect of Government Expenditures on Air Quality by Functional Classification: A Panel Data Analysis for EU Countries

Hizmet Türleri İtibarıyla Kamu Harcamalarının Hava Kalitesi Üzerindeki Etkisi: AB Ülkelerine Yönelik Panel Veri Analizi

Ahmet AYSU
Miraç Fatih İLGÜN
Gökhan ÇOBANOĞULLARI
Pages
118–139
DOI
—
🏛️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 analysis results indicate that per capita total public expenditure has a significantly negative impact on $CO_2$ emissions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of government expenditures on air pollution.
📊
Key Findings & Data:We have studied the effect of government expenditures on air pollution within the framework of functional classifications of governmental expenditure, for 30 countries (27 EU countries and the United Kingdom, Norway and Switzerland) over the period 1995-2017.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The analysis results indicate that per capita total public expenditure has a significantly negative impact on $CO_2$ emissions.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of government expenditures on air pollution. We have studied the effect of government expenditures on air pollution within the framework of functional classifications of governmental expenditure, for 30 countries (27 EU countries and the United Kingdom, Norway and Switzerland) over the period 1995-2017. The analysis results indicate that per capita total public expenditure has a significantly negative impact on $CO_2$ emissions. With regard to functional classification of government expenditures, the results show that the expenditures for economic services, education expenditures and social protection expenditures reduce air pollution and increase environmental quality. On the other hand, health expenditures, environmental protection expenditures and general service expenditures have no significant effect on air pollution.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı kamu harcamalarının tüketim kaynaklı hava kirliliği üzerindeki etkisinin araştırılmasıdır. Kamu harcamalarının hava kirliliği üzerindeki etkileri, kamu harcamalarının fonksiyonel sınıflandırması çerçevesinde, 30 ülkede (27 AB ülkesi ve Birleşik Krallık, Norveç ve İsviçre) 1995-2017 dönemi için dinamik panel veri analiz yöntemi ile incelenmiştir. Analiz sonuçları, kişi başına düşen toplam kamu harcamalarının $CO_2$ emisyonu üzerindeki etkisinin negatif ve anlamlı olduğunu göstermiştir. Kamu harcamalarının fonksiyonel sınıflandırması açısından elde edilen sonuçlar ise, ekonomik hizmetlere yönelik harcamalar, eğitim harcamaları ve sosyal koruma harcamalarının hava kirliliğini azalttığı ve çevresel kaliteyi arttırdığı, sağlık harcamaları, çevre koruma harcamaları ve genel hizmet harcamalarının ise anlamlı bir etkisinin olmadığını göstermiştir

🔖

Cite This Article

AYSU, A., İLGÜN, M. F., ÇOBANOĞULLARI, G. (2020). The Effect of Government Expenditures on Air Quality by Functional Classification: A Panel Data Analysis for EU Countries. Maliye Dergisi, Sayı: 179, 118–139. https://ajindex.com/articles/197869

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Abrams, B.A. (1999), “The Effect of Government Size on the Unemployment Rate”, Public Choice, 99 (3-4), 395-401.
  2. Adewuyi, A.O. (2016), “Effects of Public and Private Expenditures on Environmental Pollution: A Dynamic Heterogeneous Panel Data Analysis”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 65, 489-506.
  3. Altemeyer-Bartscher, M., Rübbelke, D.T. ve Sheshinski, E. (2010), “Environmental Protection and the Private Provision of International Public Goods”, Economica, 77(308), 775-784.
  4. Antweiler, W., Copeland, B.R. ve Taylor, M.S. (2001), “Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?”, American Economic Review, 91(4), 877-908.
  5. Arellano, M. ve Bond, S. (1991), “Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations”, The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277-297.
  6. Arellano, M. ve Bover, O. (1995), “Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error Components Models”, Journal of Econometrics. 68(1), 29-51.
  7. Aysu, A. ve Dökmen, G. (2011), “An Investigation on the Relationship between Government Size and Unemployment Rate: Evidence from OECD Countries”, Sosyo Ekonomi, (2), 180-190.
  8. Bakırtaş, D. ve Aysu, A. (2017), “Talep Yönlü İnovasyon Politikaları Çerçevesinde Kamu Alımları: Teori ve Uygulama Örnekleri”, Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 50(2), 143-189.
  9. Baltagi, B. (2005), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, 3. Edition, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Barro, R.J. (1990), “Government Spending in A Simple Model of Endogeneous Growth”, Journal of Political Economy, 98 (5, Part 2), 103-125.
  10. Bernauer, T. ve Koubi, V. (2006), “States as Providers of Public Goods: How Does Government Size Affect Environmental Quality?”, CIS Working Paper, No:14, Bernauer, T. ve Koubi, V. (2013), “Are Bigger Governments Better Providers of Public Goods? Evidence from Air Pollution”, Public Choice, 156 (3-4), 593-609.
  11. Blundell, R. ve Bond, S. (1998), “Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models”, Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143
  12. Brajer, V., Mead, R.W. ve Xiao, F. (2011), “Searching for an Environmental Kuznets Curve in China’s Air Pollution”, China Economic Review, 22 (3), 383-397
  13. Cole, M.A. (2004), “Trade, the Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: Examining the Linkages”, Ecological Economics, 48(1), 71-81.
  14. Congleton, R.D. (1992), “Political Institutions and Pollution Control”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 74 (3), 412-421.
  15. Coyne, C.J. ve Hall, A.R. (2014), “Perfecting Tyranny: F