Journals / Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 2

Foreign Direct Investment and Pollution Haven Hypothesis

DOĞRUDAN YABANCI YATIRIMLAR VE KİRLİLİK SIĞINAĞI HİPOTEZİ

Pages
99–111
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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 ARDL test results show that increased real GDP and energy consumption leads to increase in environmental pollution.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to investigate the validity of pollution haven hypothesis for the period from 1974 to 2013 in Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, the relationship between CO2 emissions per capita, real GDP per capita, energy consumption per capita and foreign direct investment per capita is examined by using ARDL bounds test approach and VECM Granger causality method.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The ARDL test results show that increased real GDP and energy consumption leads to increase in environmental pollution.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the validity of pollution haven hypothesis for the period from 1974 to 2013 in Turkey. For this purpose, the relationship between CO2 emissions per capita, real GDP per capita, energy consumption per capita and foreign direct investment per capita is examined by using ARDL bounds test approach and VECM Granger causality method. The ARDL test results show that increased real GDP and energy consumption leads to increase in environmental pollution. However, increased foreign direct investment increases the CO2 emissions to a certain point. After this point, environmental pollution decreases with increasing foreign direct investment. In addition, according to the results of VECM Granger causality test, it is concluded that there is bidirectional causal relationship between environmental pollution, real GDP, energy consumption and foreign direct investment in the long run

Özet

Bu çalışma, Türkiye'de kirlilik sığınağı hipotezinin geçerliliğini 1974-2013 dönemi için incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Söz konusu amaç doğrultusunda, kişi başı karbondioksit emisyonu, kişi başı reel GSYH, kişi başı enerji tüketimi ve kişi başı doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar arasındaki ilişki, ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı ve VECM Granger nedensellik yöntemi aracılığıyla incelenmiştir. ARDL testi sonucunda artan reel GSYH ve enerji tüketiminin çevresel kirliliği arttırdığı bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Buna karşın, doğrudan yabancı yatırımlardaki artışın belirli bir düzeye kadar karbondioksit emisyonunu arttırdığı görülmüştür. Belirli bir düzeyden sonra ise doğrudan yatırımlardaki artış çevre kirliliğini azaltmaktadır. Ayrıca, VECM Granger nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre, uzun dönemde çevre kirliliği, reel GSYH, enerji tüketimi ve doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisinin geçerli olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZSOY, F. N., DESTEK, M. A., YILDIRIM, M. (2022). Foreign Direct Investment and Pollution Haven Hypothesis. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 2, 99–111. https://ajindex.com/articles/480664

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. ALIYU, Mohammed A., (2005), “Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment: Pollution Haven Hypothesis Revisited”, Eight Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis, Lübeck, Germany BAEK, Jungho, (2016), “A New Look at the FDI-Income, Energy-Environment Nexus: Dynamic Panel Data Analysis of ASEAN”, Energy Policy 91, 22- 27 BAKHSH, Khuda; Sabia ROSE; Muhammed Faisal ALI; NAJID Ahmad ve Muhammad SHAHBAZ, (2017), “Economic Growth, CO2 Emissions, Renewable Waste and FDI Relation in Pakistan: New Evidences from 3SLS”, Journal of Environmental Management 196, 627-632
  2. BAO, Qun; Yuanyuan CHEN ve Ligang SONG (2011). “Foreign Direct Investment and Environmental Pollution in China: A Simultaneous Equations Estimation”. Environment and Development Economics, 16.1: 71-92.
  3. COLE, Matthew A. (2004). “Trade, The Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: Examining the Linkages”. Ecological Economics, 48.1: 71-81.
  4. COLE, Matthew A. ve Per G. FREDRIKSSON. (2009). “Institutionalized Pollution Havens”. Ecological Economics, 68.4: 1239-1256.
  5. COLE, Matheww A., Robert.J ELLIOTT, ve Jing ZHANG. (2009), “Growth, Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment: Evidence from Chinese Cities”, Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Frankfurt, No. 41 COPELAND, Brian R ve Scott. M. TAYLOR (2004). “Trade, Growth, and the Environment” Journal of Economic literature, 42.1: 7-71.
  6. DEAN, Judith M.; Mary LOVELY. ve Hua WANG (2009). “Are Foreign Investors Attracted to Weak Environmental Regulations? Evaluating the Evidence from China.” Journal of Development Economics, 90.1: 1-13.
  7. SILVA, Emilson CD, ve Xie ZHU. (2009). "Emissions Trading of Global and Local Pollutants, Pollution Havens and Free Riding." Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58.2 (2009): 169-182.
  8. ESKELAND, Gunnar S., ve Ann E. HARRISON. (1997). "Moving to Greener Pastures? Multinationals and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis." Policy Research Working Paper 1744, The World Bank, Washington, DC FRANKEL, Jeffrey A., ve David ROMER. (1999). "Does Trade Cause Growth?." American Economic Review 89:379-399.
  9. HALICIOGLU, Ferda ve Natalya KETENCI. (2016). "The Impact of International Trade on Environmental Quality: The Case of Transition Countries." Energy 109: 1130-1138.
  10. KIM, Myeong Hwan, ve Nodir ADILOV. (2012). "The Lesser of Two Evils: An Empirical Investigation of Foreign Direct Investment-Pollution Tradeoff." Applied Economics 44: 2597-2606.
  11. LEE, Junsoo, ve Mark C. STRAZICICH. (2003