Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 36, pp 36589–36603 | Cite as

The impact of economic growth, energy consumption, trade openness, and financial development on carbon emissions: empirical evidence from Turkey

  • Murat Cetin
  • Eyyup Ecevit
  • Ali Gokhan Yucel
Research Article
  • 133 Downloads

Abstract

This study examines the impact of economic growth, energy consumption, trade openness, financial development on carbon emissions for the case of Turkey by using annual time series data for the period of 1960–2013. The Lee and Strazicich test suggests that the variables are suitable for applying the bounds testing approach to cointegration. The cointegration analysis reveals that there exists a long-run relationship between the per capita real income, per capita energy consumption, trade openness, financial development, and per capita carbon emissions in the presence of structural breaks. The results show that in the long run, carbon emissions are mainly determined by economic growth, energy consumption, trade openness, and financial development. The VECM Granger causality analysis indicates a long-run unidirectional causality running from economic growth, energy consumption, trade openness, and financial development to carbon emissions. The findings also show that the EKC hypothesis is valid for Turkey both in the long run and short run. The study provides some implications for policy makers to decrease carbon emissions in Turkey.

Keywords

Carbon emissions EKC hypothesis Structural breaks ARDL bounds test VECM granger causality 

References

  1. Abid M (2016) Impact of economic, financial, and institutional factors on CO2 emissions: evidence from sub-Saharan Africa economies. Util Policy 41:85–94Google Scholar
  2. Acaravci A, Ozturk I (2010) On the relationship between energy consumption, CO2 emissions and economic growth in Europe. Energy 35:5412–5420Google Scholar
  3. Akbostanci E, Turut-Asik S, Tunc GI (2009) The relationship between income and environment in Turkey: is there an environmental Kuznets curve? Energy Policy 37:861–867Google Scholar
  4. Alkhathlan K, Javid M (2013) Energy consumption, carbon emissions and economic growth in Saudi Arabia: an aggregate and disaggregate analysis. Energy Policy 62:1525–1532Google Scholar
  5. Al-mulali U (2012) Factors affecting CO2 emission in the Middle East: a panel data analysis. Energy 44:564–569Google Scholar
  6. Al-mulali U, Solarin SA, Ozturk I (2016) Investigating the presence of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis in Kenya: an autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) approach. Nat Hazards 80(3):1729–1747Google Scholar
  7. Ang JB (2009) Financial development and the FDI-growth nexus: the Malaysian experience. Appl Econ 41:1595–1601Google Scholar
  8. Antweiler W, Copeland B, Taylor S (2001) Is free trade good for the environment? Am Econ Rev 91:877–908Google Scholar
  9. Anwar S, Robert W, Alexander J (2016) Pollution, energy use, GDP and trade: estimating the long-run relationship for Vietnam. Appl Econ 48(53):5221–5232Google Scholar
  10. Apergis N (2016) Environmental Kuznets curves: new evidence on both panel and country-level CO2 emissions. Energy Econ 54:263–271Google Scholar
  11. Apergis N, Payne JE (2009) Energy consumption and economic growth: evidence from the commonwealth of independent states. Energy Econ 31:641–647Google Scholar
  12. Aricanlı T, Rodrik D (1990) The political economy of Turkey: debt, adjustment and sustainability. Palgrave Mcmillan, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Arouri MEH, Youssef AB, M’henni H, Rault C (2012) Energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emissions in Middle East and north African countries. Energy Policy 45:342–349Google Scholar
  14. Baek J, Kim HS (2013) Is economic growth good or bad for the environment? Empirical evidence from Korea. Energy Econ 36:744–749Google Scholar
  15. Baumol WJ, Oates WE (1988) The theory of environmental policy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Birdsall N, Wheeler D (1993) Trade policy and industrial pollution in Latin America: where are the pollution havens? J Environ Dev 2:137–149Google Scholar
  17. Boluk G, Mert M (2015) The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: an ARDL approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:587–595Google Scholar
  18. Boutabba MA (2014) The impact of financial development, income, energy and trade on carbon emissions: evidence from the Indian economy. Econ Model 40:33–41Google Scholar
  19. Brown RL, Durbin J, Evans JM (1975) Techniques for testing the constancy of regression relations over time. J R Stat Soc Ser B 37:149–163Google Scholar
  20. Cetin M, Ecevit E, Yucel AG (2018) Structural breaks, urbanization and CO2 emissions: evidence from Turkey. J Appl Econ Bus Re 8(2):122–139Google Scholar
  21. Coondoo D, Dinda S (2002) Causality between income and emission: a country group-specific econometric analysis. Ecol Econ 40:351–367Google Scholar
  22. DeJong DN, Nankervis JC, Savin NE, Whiteman CH (1992) Integration versus trend stationarity in time series. Econometrica 60:423–433Google Scholar
  23. Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1979) Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J Am Stat Assoc 74:427–431Google Scholar
  24. Dogan E, Seker F (2016) The influence of real output, renewable and non-renewable energy, trade and financial development on carbon emissions in the top renewable energy countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 60:1074–1085Google Scholar
  25. Easterbrook G (2006) Case closed: the debate about global warming is over. Issues Gov Stud 3:1–14Google Scholar
  26. Ekins P (1997) The Kuznets curve for the environment and economic growth: examining the evidence. Environ Plan A 29:805–830Google Scholar
  27. Engle RF, Granger CWJ (1987) Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55:251–276Google Scholar
  28. Ertugrul HM, Cetin M, Seker F, Dogan E (2016) The impact of trade openness on global carbon dioxide emissions: evidence from the top ten emitters among developing countries. Ecol Indic 67:543–555Google Scholar
  29. Farhani S, Chaibi A, Rault C (2014) CO2 emissions, output, energy consumption, and trade in Tunisia. Econ Model 38:426–434Google Scholar
  30. Frankel J, Rose A (2002) An estimate of the effect of common currencies on trade and income. Q J Econ 117(2):437–466Google Scholar
  31. Gokmenoglu K, Taspinar N (2016) The relationship between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth and FDI: the case of Turkey. J Int Trade Econ Dev 25(5):706–723Google Scholar
  32. Grossman G, Krueger A (1995) Economic growth and the environment. Q J Econ 110:353–377Google Scholar
  33. Halicioglu F (2009) An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy 37:1156–1164Google Scholar
  34. Hamit-Haggar M (2012) Greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption and economic growth: a panel cointegration analysis from Canadian industrial sector perspective. Energy Econ 34:358–364Google Scholar
  35. He J (2006) Pollution haven hypothesis and environmental impacts of foreign direct investment: the case of industrial emission of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in Chinese provinces. Ecol Econ 60:228–245Google Scholar
  36. Hossain MS (2011) Panel estimation for CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and urbanization of newly industrialized countries. Energy Policy 39:6991–6999Google Scholar
  37. IMF (2016) World economic outlook: too slow for too long. International Monetary Fund, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  38. IPCC (2014) Intergovernmental panel on climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Jalil A, Feridun M (2011) The impact of growth, energy and financial development on the environment in China: a cointegration analysis. Energy Econ 33:284–291Google Scholar
  40. Jalil A, Mahmud SF (2009) Environment Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: a cointegration analysis for China. Energy Policy 37:5167–5172Google Scholar
  41. Jaunky VC (2011) The CO2 emissions-income nexus: evidence from rich countries. Energy Policy 39(3):1228–1240Google Scholar
  42. Jayanthakumaran K, Verma R, Liu Y (2012) CO2 emissions, energy consumption, trade and income: a comparative analysis of China and India. Energy Policy 42:450–460Google Scholar
  43. Jensen V (1996) The pollution haven hypothesis and the industrial flight hypothesis: Some perspectives on theory and empirics. Working Paper No.5, Centre for Development and the Environment, University of OsloGoogle Scholar
  44. Jobert T, Karanfil K (2007) Sectoral energy consumption by source and economic growth in Turkey. Energy Policy 35:5447–5456Google Scholar
  45. Johansen S, Juselies K (1990) Maximum likelihood estimation and inferences on cointegration. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 52:169–210Google Scholar
  46. Kais S, Sami H (2016) An econometric study of the impact of economic growth and energy use on carbon emissions: panel data evidence from fifty eight countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 59:1101–1110Google Scholar
  47. Kang YK, Zhao T, Yang YY (2016) Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions in China: a spatial panel data approach. Ecol Indic 63:231–239Google Scholar
  48. Kanjilal K, Ghosh S (2013) Environmental Kuznet’s curve for India: evidence from tests for cointegration with unknown structural breaks. Energy Policy 56:509–515Google Scholar
  49. Katircioğlu ST, Taspinar N (2017) Testing the moderating role of financial development in an environmental Kuznets curve: empirical evidence from Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 68:572–586Google Scholar
  50. Kearsley A, Riddel M (2010) A further inquiry into the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecol Econ 69:905–919Google Scholar
  51. Lau LS, Choong CK, Eng YK (2014) Investigation of the environmental Kuznets curve for carbon emissions in Malaysia: do foreign direct investment and trade matter? Energy Policy 68:490–497Google Scholar
  52. Le TH (2016) Dynamics between energy, output, openness and financial development in sub-Saharan African countries. Appl Econ 48(10):914–933Google Scholar
  53. Lee CC, Lee JD (2009) Income and CO2 emissions: evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests. Energy Policy 37:413–423Google Scholar
  54. Lee J, Strazicich MC (2004) Minimum LM unit root test with one structural break. Working paper. Available at: http://econ.appstate.edu/RePEc/pdf/wp0417.pdf
  55. Lee J, Strazicich MC (2013) Minimum LM unit root test with one structural break. Econ Bull 33(4):2483–2492Google Scholar
  56. Li T, Wang Y, Zhao D (2016) Environmental Kuznets curve in China: new evidence from dynamic panel analysis. Energy Policy 91:138–147Google Scholar
  57. Lise W (2006) Decomposition of CO2 emissions over 1980-2003 in Turkey. Energy Policy 34:1841–1852Google Scholar
  58. Mudakkar SR, Zaman K, Shakir H, Arif M, Naseen I, Naz L (2013) Determinants of energy consumption function in SAARC countries: balancing the odds. Renew Sust Energ Rev 28:566–574Google Scholar
  59. Narayan PK (2005) The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests. Appl Econ 37:1979–1990Google Scholar
  60. Narayan PK, Narayan S (2010) Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy Policy 38:661–666Google Scholar
  61. Narayan PK, Smith R (2008) Energy consumption and real GDP in G7 countries: new evidence from panel cointegration with structural breaks. Energy Econ 30(5):2331–2341Google Scholar
  62. Ng S, Perron P (2001) Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica 69(6):1519–1554Google Scholar
  63. Omri A (2013) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth nexus in MENA countries: evidence from simultaneous equations models. Energy Econ 40:657–664Google Scholar
  64. Ozcan B (2013) The nexus between carbon emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Middle East countries: a panel data analysis. Energy Policy 62:1138–1147Google Scholar
  65. Ozturk I (2010) A literature survey on energy-growth nexus. Energy Policy 38(1):340–349Google Scholar
  66. Ozturk I, Acaravci A (2010) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 14:3220–3225Google Scholar
  67. Ozturk I, Acaravci A (2013) The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy Econ 36:262–267Google Scholar
  68. Pao HT, Tsai CM (2010) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in BRIC countries. Energy Policy 38:7850–7860Google Scholar
  69. Pao HT, Tsai CM (2011) Multivariate granger causality between CO2 emissions, energy consumption, FDI and GDP: evidence from a panel of BRIC (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, and China) countries. Energy 36:685–693Google Scholar
  70. Pao HT, Yu HC, Yang YH (2011) Modeling the CO2 emissions, energy use, and economic growth in Russia. Energy 36(8):5094–5100Google Scholar
  71. Perron P (1989) The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica 57:1361–1401Google Scholar
  72. Perroni C, Wigle RM (1994) International trade and environmental quality: how important the linkages? Can J Econ 27(3):551–567Google Scholar
  73. Pesaran MH, Shin Y (1999) An autoregressive distributed-lag modelling approach to cointegration analysis. In Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century. The Ragnar Frisch Centennial Symposium, ed. Steinar Strom. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  74. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16:289–326Google Scholar
  75. Phillips PC, Perron P (1988) Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika 75(2):335–346Google Scholar
  76. Ren S, Yuan B, Ma X, Chen X (2014) International trade, FDI and embodied CO2 emissions: a case study of China’s industrial sectors. China Econ Rev 28:123–134Google Scholar
  77. Saboori B, Sulaiman J (2013) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries: a cointegration approach. Energy 55:813–822Google Scholar
  78. Saboori B, Sapri M, bin Baba M (2014) Economic growth, energy consumption and CO2 emissions in OECD’s transport sector: a fully modified bi-directional relationship approach. Energy 66:150–161Google Scholar
  79. Sadorsky P (2011) Financial development and energy consumption in central and eastern European frontier economies. Energy Policy 39:999–1006Google Scholar
  80. Salahuddin M, Gow J, Ozturk I (2015) Is the long-run relationship between economic growth, electricity consumption, carbon dioxide emissions and financial development in gulf cooperation council countries robust? Renew Sust Energ Rev 51:317–326Google Scholar
  81. Seker F, Ertugrul HM, Cetin M (2015) The impact of foreign direct investment on environmental quality: a bounds testing and causality analysis for Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:347–356Google Scholar
  82. Selden T, Song D (1994) Environmental quality and development: is there a Kuznet’s curve for air pollution emissions? J Environ Econ Manag 27(2):147–162Google Scholar
  83. Shafik N (1994) Economic development and environmental quality: an econometric analysis. Oxf Econ Pap 46:757–773Google Scholar
  84. Shahbaz M (2013) Does financial instability increase environmental degradation? Fresh evidence from Pakistan. Econ Model 33:537–544Google Scholar
  85. Shahbaz M, Lean HH (2012) Does financial development increase energy consumption? The role of industrialization and urbanization in Tunisia. Energy Policy 40:473–479Google Scholar
  86. Shahbaz M, Adnan Hye QM, Tiwari AK, Leitão NC (2013a) Economic growth, energy consumption, financial development, international trade and CO2 emissions in Indonesia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 25:109–121Google Scholar
  87. Shahbaz M, Solarin SA, Mahmooda H, Arouri M (2013b) Does financial development reduce CO2 emissions in Malaysian economy? A time series analysis. Econ Model 35:145–152Google Scholar
  88. Shahbaz M, Ozturk I, Afza T, Ali A (2013c) Revisiting the environmental Kuznets curve in a global economy. Renew Sust Energ Rev 25:494–502Google Scholar
  89. Shahbaz M, Tiwari AK, Nasir M (2013d) The effects of financial development, economic growth, coal consumption and trade openness on CO2 emissions in South Africa. Energy Policy 61:1452–1459Google Scholar
  90. Shahbaz M, Mutascu M, Azim P (2013e) Environmental Kuznets curve in Romania and the role of energy consumption. Renew Sust Energ Rev 18:165–173Google Scholar
  91. Shahbaz M, Khraief N, Uddin GS, Ozturk I (2014) Environmental Kuznets curve in an open economy: a bounds testing and causality analysis for Tunisia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 34:325–336Google Scholar
  92. Shahbaz M, Solarin SA, Sbia R, Bibi S (2015) Does energy intensity contribute to CO2 emissions? A trivariate analysis in selected African countries. Ecol Indic 50:215–224Google Scholar
  93. Shahbaz M, Mahalik MK, Shah H, Sato JR (2016) Time-varying analysis of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, and economic growth nexus: statistical experience in next 11 countries. Energy Policy 98:33–48Google Scholar
  94. Sharma SS (2011) Determinants of carbon dioxide emissions: empirical evidence from 69 countries. Appl Energy 88:376–382Google Scholar
  95. Siebert H (1992) Economics of the environment. Springer Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  96. Solarin SA, Al-Mulali U (2018) Influence of foreign direct investment on indicators of environmental degradation. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:24845–24859Google Scholar
  97. Solarin SA, Al-Mulali U, Musah I, Ozturk I (2017a) Investigating the pollution haven hypothesis in Ghana: an empirical investigation. Energy 124:706–719Google Scholar
  98. Solarin SA, Al-Mulali U, Sahu PK (2017b) Globalisation and its effect on pollution in Malaysia: the role of trans-Pacific partnership (TPP) agreement. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(29):23096–23113Google Scholar
  99. Solarin SA, Al-Mulali U, Ozturk I (2017c) Validating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in India and China: the role of hydroelectricity consumption. Renew Sust Energ Rev 80:1578–1587Google Scholar
  100. Soytas U, Sari R (2009) Energy consumption, economic growth, and carbon emissions: challenges faced by an EU candidate member. Ecol Econ 68:1667–1675Google Scholar
  101. Soytas U, Sari R, Ewing BT (2007) Energy consumption, income, and carbon emissions in the United States. Ecol Econ 62:482–489Google Scholar
  102. Stern DI (1997) Limits to substitution and irreversibility in production and consumption: a neoclassical interpretation of ecological economics. Ecol Econ 21:197–215Google Scholar
  103. Stern DI (2000) Multivariate cointegration analysis of the role of energy in the U.S. macroeconomy macroeconomy. Energy Econ 22:267–283Google Scholar
  104. Stern DI, Common MS (2001) Is there an environmental Kuznets curve for sulfur? J Environ Econ Manage 41:162–178Google Scholar
  105. Stern DI, Common MS, Barbier EB (1996) Economic growth and environmental degradation: the environmental Kuznets curve and sustainable development. World Dev 24:1151–1160Google Scholar
  106. Tamazian A, Chousaa JP, Vadlamannatia KC (2009) Does higher economic and financial development lead to environmental degradation: evidence from BRIC countries. Energy Policy 37(1):246–253Google Scholar
  107. Tiwari AK, Shahbaz M, Adnan Hye QM (2013) The environmental Kuznets curve and the role of coal consumption in India: cointegration and causality analysis in an open economy. Renew Sust Energ Rev 18:519–527Google Scholar
  108. Tsai P-L (1999) Is trade liberalization harmful to the environment? An alternative view. J Econ Stud 26(3):201–209Google Scholar
  109. TSIa (2016) Turkish statistical institute, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, 2014, http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21582
  110. TSIb (2016) Turkish statistical institute, Foreign trade by months and years, 1986–2016. http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21803
  111. Ulucak R, Lin D (2017) Persistence of policy shocks to ecological footprint of the USA. Ecol Indic 80:337–343Google Scholar
  112. UNFCCC (2012) National greenhouse gas inventory data for the period 1990—2010. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2012/sbi/eng/31.pdf
  113. US Energy Information Administration (2013) Turkey Report 2013. http://www.eia.gov/countries /analysisbriefs/Turkey/turkey.pdf
  114. Wang K-M (2012) Modelling the nonlinear relationship between CO2 emissions from oil and economic growth. Econ Model 29(5:1537–1547Google Scholar
  115. Wang SS, Zhou DQ, Zhou P, Wang QW (2011) CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in China: a panel data analysis. Energy Policy 39(9):4870–4875Google Scholar
  116. World Bank World Development Indicators Database (2016) http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators
  117. WRI (2014) World resources institute, climate analysis indicators tool (CAIT) 2.0: WRI’s climate data explorer. Accessed May 2015. http://cait.wri.org
  118. WTO (2012) Trade Policy Review: Turkey. Accessed January 2017. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp359_e.htm
  119. Yuxiang K, Chen Z (2010) Financial development and environmental performance: evidence from China. Environ Dev Econ 16:1–19Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative SciencesNamik Kemal UniversityTekirdagTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative SciencesErciyes UniversityKayseriTurkey

Personalised recommendations