KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 76

TARIM VE SANAYİ SEKTÖRLERİ KAYNAKLI ÇEVRESEL KUZNETS EĞRİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ: TÜRKİYE İÇİN RALS EŞBÜTÜNLEŞME TESTİ

ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL KUZNETS CURVE ORIGINATING FROM AGRICULTURE AND INDUSTRY SECTORS: RALS COINTEGRATION TEST FOR TURKIYE

Mehmet Ali Orhan(KAHRAMANMARAŞ SÜTÇÜ İMAM ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SOSYAL BİLİMLER MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0001-7818-0433
Ayşe Eryer0000-0002-6556-1605
Arif Selim Eren(KAHRAMANMARAŞ SÜTÇÜ İMAM ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7274-1113
Sayfa
188–204
Yayın Tarihi
2026-09-14
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bu testler, tarımsal katma değerin ve sanayi katma değerin, birincil enerji tüketiminin, GSYİH ve GSYİH2 karesinin ekolojik ayak izini artırdığını göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Ekolojik ayak izi, insan faaliyetlerinin doğal ekosistemler üzerindeki kaynak tüketimi ve atık üretimi bağlamında yarattığı toplam talebin nicel olarak ifade edilmesidir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Kentleşme süreçleri ve değişen tüketim alışkanlıkları, üretim ve sanayi faaliyetleriyle ilişkili ekolojik ayak izinde önemli bir artışa yol açmıştır.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bu testler, tarımsal katma değerin ve sanayi katma değerin, birincil enerji tüketiminin, GSYİH ve GSYİH2 karesinin ekolojik ayak izini artırdığını göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2023 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Ekonomik Büyüme · Tarım ve Sanayi Sektörleri · Ekolojik Ayak İzi

Özet

Ekolojik ayak izi, insan faaliyetlerinin doğal ekosistemler üzerindeki kaynak tüketimi ve atık üretimi bağlamında yarattığı toplam talebin nicel olarak ifade edilmesidir. Kentleşme süreçleri ve değişen tüketim alışkanlıkları, üretim ve sanayi faaliyetleriyle ilişkili ekolojik ayak izinde önemli bir artışa yol açmıştır. Bu çalışmada ekolojik ayak izi, ekonomik büyüme, birincil enerji, tüketimi tarımsal katma değer ve sanayi katma değer arasındaki uzun dönemli ilişki incelenmiştir. Türkiye ekonomisi için 1980-2023 dönemi veri seti kapsamında tarım ve sanayi kaynaklı Çevresel Kuznets Eğirisi hipotezinin varlığı test edilmiştir. Çalışmada değişkenlere ADF ve RALS ADF birim kök test uygulanmış ve durağanlık düzeyleri belirlenmiştir. Seriler arasındaki eşbütünleşme ilişkisi, uzun vadeli bir ilişki ortaya koyan RALS ADL ve RALS EG2 eşbütünleşme testleri kullanılarak belirlenmiştir. Değişkenler arasında uzun dönem ilişki kurulduktan sonra, uzun dönem katsayı tahmin edicileri kullanılmıştır. FMOLS ve DOLS sonuçları benzer sonuçlar vermektedir. Bu testler, tarımsal katma değerin ve sanayi katma değerin, birincil enerji tüketiminin, GSYİH ve GSYİH2 karesinin ekolojik ayak izini artırdığını göstermektedir. Bu bulgular doğrultusunda, Türkiye ekonomisinde tarım ve sanayi faaliyetleri ile enerji tüketiminin ekonomik büyümenin ilk aşamalarında ekolojik ayak izini artırdığı, ancak GSYİH’nın karesinin negatif etkisi dikkate alındığında belirli bir gelir düzeyinden sonra çevresel baskıların azalmaya başladığı ve dolayısıyla incelenen dönem itibarıyla Çevresel Kuznets Eğrisi hipotezinin tarım ve sanayi temelli olarak geçerli olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmaktadır.

Abstract

Ecological footprint is a quantitative expression of the total demand created by human activities on natural ecosystems in terms of resource consumption and waste production. Urbanization processes and changing consumption habits have led to a significant increase in the ecological footprint associated with production and industrial activities. This study examines the long-term relationship between ecological footprint, economic growth, primary energy consumption, agricultural value added, and industrial value added. The existence of the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis, originating from agriculture and industry, was tested within the scope of a dataset for the Turkish economy covering the period 1980-2023. Unit root tests (ADF) and RALS ADF were applied to the variables, and their stationarity levels were determined. Cointegration relationships between the series were determined using RALS ADL and RALS EG2 cointegration tests, which reveal a long-term relationship. After establishing a long-term relationship between the variables, long-term coefficient estimators were used. FMOLS and DOLS results yielded similar findings. These tests show that agricultural and industrial value added, primary energy consumption, GDP, and the square of GDP² increase the ecological footprint. Based on these findings, it can be concluded that in the Turkish economy, agricultural and industrial activities and energy consumption increase the ecological footprint in the initial stages of economic growth, but considering the negative effect of the square of GDP, environmental pressures begin to decrease after a certain income level. Therefore, the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis is valid for agriculture and industry-based activities during the period examined.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Orhan, M. A., Eryer, A., Eren, A. S. (2026). TARIM VE SANAYİ SEKTÖRLERİ KAYNAKLI ÇEVRESEL KUZNETS EĞRİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ: TÜRKİYE İÇİN RALS EŞBÜTÜNLEŞME TESTİ. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı: 76, 188–204. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1756815

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (63)

  1. Agboola, M. O., & Bekun, F. V. (2019). Does agricultural value added induce environmental degradation? Empirical evidence from an agrarian country. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(27), 27660-27676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05943-z
  2. Akın, F., & Akçayır, Ö. (2025). MIST Ülkelerinde Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Ve Yeşil Enerjinin Yeşil Üretime Etkisi. Uluslararası İktisadi Ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, (46), 169-186. https://doi.org/10.18092/ ulikidince.1582864
  3. Akın, F., & Şen, A. (2024). Ekolojik ayak izi ile OECD ülkelerine yönelik çevresel Kuznets eğrisinin araştırılması. İnönü Üniversitesi Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (INIJOSS), 13(2), 307-333. https://doi.org/10.54282/inijoss.1514029
  4. Al-habash, M. A., Buraik, O., Yousef, M., Alali, A. M. F., Al_ Shukri, K. S., & Fraihat, B. A. M. (2023). The Effect of Sustainable Entrepreneurship on Economic Development in Jordan: The Mediating Role of Environmental Performances. Migration Letters, 20(6), 185- 202. https://doi.org/10.59670/ml.v20i6.3472
  5. Amoah, J. O., Alagidede, I. P., & Sare, Y. A. (2024). Industrialization and carbon emission nexus in Sub-Saharan Africa. The moderating role of trade openness. Cogent Economics & amp; Finance, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2024.2360803
  6. Anderson, K. (2022). Agriculture's globalization: Endowments, technologies, tastes and policies. Journal of Economic Surveys, 37(4), 1314-1352. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12529
  7. Anwar, A., Ahmad, N., & Madni, G. R. (2019). Industrialization, freight transport and environmental quality: evidence from belt and road initiative economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(7), 7053-7070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07255-8
  8. Arora, N. K. (2018). Agricultural sustainability and food security. Environmental Sustainability, 1(3), 217-219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-018-00032-2
  9. Asane-Otoo, E. (2015). Carbon footprint and emission determinants in Africa. Energy, 82, 426-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.01.053
  10. Aslam, B., Hu, J., Hafeez, M., Ma, D., AlGarni, T. S., Saeed, M., Abdullah, M. A., & Hussain, S. (2021). Applying environmental Kuznets curve framework to assess the nexus of industry, globalization, and CO2 emission. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 21, 101377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2021.101377
  11. Azam, M., Rehman, Z. U., & Ibrahim, Y. (2022). Causal nexus in industrialization, urbanization, trade openness, and carbon emissions: empirical evidence from OPEC economies. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(12), 13990-14010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-02019-2
  12. Bashir, A., Suhel, A., Azwardi, A., Atiyatna, D. P., Hamidi, I., & Adnan, N. (2019). The causality between agriculture, industry, and economic growth: Evidence from Indonesia. Etikonomi, 18(2), 155-168. http//dx.doi.org/10.15408/etk.v18i2.9428
  13. Burakov, D. 2019. Does agriculture matter for environmental Kuznets Curve in Russia: evidence from the ARDL bounds tests approach. Agris on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, 11(3), 23-34. https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.294162
  14. Cimprich, A., Santillán‐Saldivar, J., Thiel, C. L., Sonnemann, G., & Young, S. B. (2019). Potential for industrial ecology to support healthcare sustainability: scoping review of a fragmented literature and conceptual framework for future research. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 23(6), 1344-1352. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12921
  15. Claire, B. & Widyawati, D. (2023). Impact of industrialization and renewable energy on carbon dioxide emission in 9 ASEAN Countries. Economic Journal of Economic Markets, 15(2),183-195. https://doi.org/10.20885/ejem.vol15.iss2.art6
  16. Demirtaş, C., Soyu Yıldırım, E., & Tuğlu Dur, D. (2023). Do Oil Prices Have an Effects on Food Prices? Fresh Evidences from Türkiye. Journal of Business Research-Turk, 15(1), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2023.1574
  17. Dogan, E., & Turkekul, B. (2016). CO2 emissions, real output, energy consumption, trade, urbanization and financial development: testing the EKC hypothesis for the USA. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(2), 1203-1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5323-8
  18. Du, Y., Li, M. J., & Lin, T. X. (2020). Research on Foreign Trade of Guangdong Province Based on the Emergy Ecological Footprint. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 17, 900-909. https://doi.org/10.37394/23207.2020.17.88
  19. Ebadi, A., Moharram Nejad, N., Rahnamaee, M. T., & Motesadi Zarandi, S. (2016). Determining the ecological footprint of vehicles in Tehran, Iran. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 14(3), 439-450. https://doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1403_439450
  20. Ehigiamusoe, K. U., Ramakrishnan, S., Lean, H. H., & Somasundram, S. (2023). Role of energy consumption on the environmental impact of sectoral growth in Malaysia. Sage Open, 13(3), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231184044
  21. Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251-276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236
  22. Eryer, A. (2025). Akdeniz Ülkelerinde, Turizm ve Yenilenebilir Enerji Tüketiminin İktisadi Büyüme ve Çevresel Kalite Üzerine Etkisi: Panel Veri Analizi, (Ed.Dr. Öğr. Üye Serhat Alpagut), Makro İktisadi Araştırmalar 1, https://doi.org/10.58830/ozgur.pub774.c3211, Francisco: Holden-Day.
  23. Eyüboğlu, K., & Akan, K. (2020). Türkiye’de finansal gelişme ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: RALS-EG eşbütünleşme testi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(4), 974-988. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.627788
  24. Galli, A., Wackernagel, M., Iha, K., & Lazarus, E. (2014). Ecological footprint: implications for biodiversity. Biological Conservation, 173, 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.10.019
  25. Guang‐Wen, Z., Murshed, M., Siddik, A. B., Alam, M. S., Balsalobre‐Lorente, D., & Mahmood, H. (2023). Achieving the objectives of the 2030 sustainable development goals agenda: Causalities between economic growth, environmental sustainability, financial development, and renewable energy consumption. Sustainable Development, 31(2), 680-697. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2411
  26. Gurbuz, I. B., Nesirov, E., & Ozkan, G. (2021). Does agricultural value-added induce environmental degradation? Evidence from Azerbaijan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(18), 23099-23112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-12228-3
  27. Günçavdi, Ö., Küçükçifçi, S., & Bayar, A. A. (2013). Economic development and structural change: The role of the agriculture sector in Turkey. Middle East Development Journal, 5(2), 1350011-1. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793812013500119
  28. He, C. L., Liu, W. L., Wu, X. G., & Luo, W. (2013). Regional Environmental Capacity Study for Jiaxing City. Advanced Materials Research, 610, 961- 964. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.610-613.961
  29. He, M., Wang, Y., & Ma, H. (2023). Ecological effect life cycle assessment of house buildings based on emergy footprint model. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-43501-3
  30. Hepsağ, A., & Akçalı, Y. B. (2019). Finansal zaman serilerinde birim kök hipotezinin test edilmesinde kalıntılarla genişletilmiş en küçük kareler yöntemi yaklaşımı: Rasyonel fiyat köpükleri üzerine bir uygulama. XIII. IBANESS İktisat, İşletme ve Yönetim Bilimleri Kongreler Serisi, 05-06.
  31. Hoekstra, A. Y. (2009). Human appropriation of natural capital: A comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis. Ecological economics, 68(7), 1963- 1974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.021
  32. Im, K. & P. Schmidt. (2008). More efficient estimation under non-normality when higher moments do not depend on the regressors, using residual-augmented least squares. Journal of Econometrics, 144(1), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2008.01.003
  33. Im, K. S., Lee, J., & Tieslau, M. A. (2014). More powerful unit root tests with non-normal errors. In Festschrift in honor of Peter Schmidt: Econometric methods and applications. New York, NY: Springer New York. 315-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-8008-3_10
  34. Ji, X., Chen, J., & Zhang, H. (2024). Agricultural specialization activates the industry chain: Implications for rural entrepreneurship in China. Agribusiness, 40(4), 950- 974. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21868
  35. Jie, H., Khan, I., Alharthi, M., Zafar, M. W., & Saeed, A. (2023). Sustainable energy policy, socio-economic development, and ecological footprint: The economic significance of natural resources, population growth, and industrial development. Utilities Policy, 81, 101490, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2023.101490
  36. Kitzes, J., Galli, A., Bagliani, M., Barrett, J., Dige, G., Ede, S., Erb, K., Giljum, S., Haberl, H., Hails, C., Jolia-Ferrier, L., Jungwirth, S., Lenzen, M., Lewis, K., Loh, J., Marchettini, N., Messinger, H., Milne, K., Moles, R., Monfreda, C., Moran, D., Nakano, K., Pyhälä, A., Rees, W., Simmons, C., Wackernagel, M., Wada, Y., Walsh, C., & Wiedmann, T. (2009). A research agenda for improving national ecological footprint accounts. Ecological Economics, 68(7), 1991-2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.022
  37. Lee, H., Lee, J., & Im, K. (2015). More powerful cointegration tests with non-normal errors. Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, 19(4), 397-413. https://doi.org/10.1515/snde-2013-0060
  38. Li, D. (2024). Study on the Two-Way Promotion Path of Green Financing for SMEs and Green Transformation of Urban Housing Projects in Guangdong Province in the Era of Digital Economy. International Journal for Housing Science and Its Applications, 45, 48-63. https://doi.org/10.70517/ijhsa4535
  39. Li, K., & Lin, B. (2015). Impacts of urbanization and industrialization on energy consumption/CO2 emissions: does the level of development matter?. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 52, 1107-1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.185
  40. Li, Z., & Krafty, R. T. (2019). Adaptive Bayesian time–frequency analysis of multivariate time series. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 114(525), 453-465. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2017.1415908
  41. Liu, Y., Zhou, X., Zhang, Q., Zeng, L., Kang, Y., & Luo, J. (2022). Study on sustainable developments in Guangdong Province from 2013 to 2018 based on an improved ecological footprint model. Scientific reports, 12(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06152-4
  42. Mahmood, H., Alkhateeb, T. T. Y., & Furqan, M. (2020). Industrialization, urbanization and CO2 emissions in Saudi Arabia: Asymmetry analysis. Energy reports, 6, 1553-1560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2020.06.004
  43. Majeed, M.T., & Taguir, A. (2020). Effects of Urbanization, Industrialization, Economic Growth, Energy Consumption and Financial Development on Carbon Emissions: An Extended STIRPAT Model for Heterogeneous Income Groups. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences, 14(3), 652-681.
  44. Munir, K., & Ameer, A. (2020). Nonlinear effect of FDI, economic growth, and industrialization on environmental quality: evidence from Pakistan. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 31(1), 223-234. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-10-2018-0186
  45. Neshcheret, A., Skivko, M., Alamanova, C., Korneeva, E., & Freze, A. (2023). Concepts of sustainable development in ecological and economic systems. In E3S Web of Conferences, 460(03011). 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202346003011
  46. OECD. (2022). Green Growth Indicators 2022. OECD Publishing.
  47. Olowu, G., Bein, M., & Olasehinde-Williams, G. (2018). Examining the relationship between financial development, sustainable economic opportunity and ecological footprint in SADC countries. Applied Ecology & Environmental Research, 16(5), 7171-7190. http://dx.doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1605_71717190
  48. Orcutt, G. H., & Winokur Jr, H. S. (1969). First order autoregression: inference, estimation, and prediction. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1909199
  49. Pata, U. K. (2018). The effect of urbanization and industrialization on carbon emissions in Turkey: evidence from ARDL bounds testing procedure. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(8), 7740-7747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-1088-6
  50. Potts, J., Foster, J., & Straton, A. (2010). An entrepreneurial model of economic and environmental co-evolution. Ecological Economics, 70(2), 375-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.09.009
  51. Raihan, A., & Tuspekova, A. (2022). Dynamic impacts of economic growth, renewable energy use, urbanization, industrialization, tourism, agriculture, and forests on carbon emissions in Turkey. Carbon Research, 1(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44246-022-00019-z
  52. Ren, S., Yuan, B., Ma, X., & Chen, X. (2014). International trade, FDI (foreign direct investment) and embodied CO2 emissions: A case study of Chinas industrial sectors. China economic review, 28, 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2014.01.003
  53. Sahoo, M., Kaushik, S., Gupta, M., Islam, M. K., & Nayak, P. (2024). Powering a sustainable future: Does economic structure influence the ecological footprint?. Sustainable Development, 32(4), 3809-3823. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2874
  54. Shahbaz, M., Uddin, G. S., Rehman, I. U., & Imran, K. (2014). Industrialization, electricity consumption and CO2 emissions in Bangladesh. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 31, 575-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.028
  55. Sundström, J. F., Albihn, A., Boqvist, S., Ljungvall, K., Marstorp, H., Martiin, C., Nyberg, K., Vagsholm, I., Yuen, J., & Magnusson, U. (2014). Future threats to agricultural food production posed by environmental degradation, climate change, and animal and plant diseases–a risk analysis in three economic and climate settings. Food Security, 6(2), 201-215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-014-0331-y
  56. Udemba, E. N. (2020). A sustainable study of economic growth and development amidst ecological footprint: New insight from Nigerian Perspective. Science of the total environment, 732, 139270, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139270
  57. Wackernagel, M. & Rees, W. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact On The Earth (Vol. 9). New Society Publishers.
  58. Wackernagel, M., & Yount, J. D. (1998). The ecological footprint: an indicator of progress toward regional sustainability. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 51(1), 511-529. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006094904277
  59. Waheed, R., Chang, D., Sarwar, S., & Chen, W. (2018). Forest, agriculture, renewable energy, and CO2 emission. Journal of cleaner production, 172, 4231- 4238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.287
  60. Xu, B., & Lin, B. (2015). How industrialization and urbanization process impacts on CO2 emissions in China: evidence from nonparametric additive regression models. Energy economics, 48, 188-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2015.01.005
  61. Xue, C., Tu, Y. T., Ananzeh, M., Aljumah, A. I., Trung, L. M., & Ngo, T. Q. (2022). The role of economic conditions and sustainable rural development on the sustainability of tourism development: evidence from China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(11), 30588-30602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24062-w
  62. Zeynalov, F., & Karacan, S. (2023). Tarımın çevreye ve ekonomik büyümeye etkisi: Türkiye örneği üzerine ekonometrik bir araştırma. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 12, 90-104. https://doi.org/10.58627/dpuiibf.1311185
  63. Zhang, M., Lu, Z. H., Zhu, J. F., & Tan, F. F. (2015). Urban planning in resource-based cities based on ecological footprint and ecological carrying capacity. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 744, 2236-2240. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.744-746.2236