Advertisement

Decomposition and decoupling analysis of energy-related carbon emissions in Turkey

  • Etem Karakaya
  • Aziz Bostan
  • Mustafa Özçağ
Research Article

Abstract

This study focuses on CO2 emission trends and its decompositions as well as decoupling performance between CO2 emissions and economic growth of Turkish case for the period of 1990–2016. The drivers of CO2 emission changes are calculated by using an extended Kaya identity and the well-established logarithmic mean Divisia index (LMDI) method. Decomposition results indicate that economic growth and population effects are the main driving forces in increases in carbon emissions in Turkey throughout the whole period, while other technology-based driving factors’ impacts have been rather minimal in reducing the emissions. Decoupling analysis results demonstrate that there is either no decoupling or weak decoupling in most of the years. Moreover, total decoupling effort index suggests that Turkey’s performance has been worsened in recent years as we found no decoupling between CO2 emissions and economic growth over the period of 2013–2016. The overall findings suggest that Turkish economic growth is unsustainable both environmentally and economically. Based on these findings, some policy implications and recommendations are discussed for the possible emission reductions.

Keywords

CO2 emissions Index decomposition analysis LMDI Decoupling effort index Decoupling elasticity Turkey 

Notes

Supplementary material

11356_2019_6359_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (119 kb)
ESM 1 (XLSX 118 kb)

References

  1. Akbostancı E, Tunç Gİ, Türüt-Aşık S (2018) Drivers of fuel based carbon dioxide emissions: the case of Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 81:2599–2608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreoni V, Galmarini S (2016) Drivers in CO2 emissions variation: a decomposition analysis for 33 world countries. Energy 103:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ang BW (2005) The LMDI approach to decomposition analysis: a practical guide. Energy Policy 33:867–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aşıcı AA (2015) On the sustainability of the economic growth path of Turkey: 1995–2009. Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:1731–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aydın L (2018) Effects of increasing indigenous coal share in Turkey’s electricity generation mix on key economic and environmental indicators: an extended input–output analysis. Energy Explor Exploit 36(2):230–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cansino JM, Moreno R (2018) Does forest matter regarding Chilean CO2 international abatement commitments? A multilevel decomposition approach. Carbon Manag 9(1):9–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Climate Action Tracker (2018) Available online: https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/turkey/. Accessed on 25 Dec 2018
  8. Diakoulaki D, Mandaraka M (2007) Decomposition analysis for assessing the progress in decoupling industrial growth from CO2 emissions in the EU manufacturing sector. Energy Econ 29(4):636–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ediger VS, Huvaz O (2006) Examining the sectoral energy use in Turkish economy (1980–2000) with the help of decomposition analysis. Energy Convers Manag 47:732–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Engo J (2018) Decomposing the decoupling of CO2 emissions from economic growth in Cameroon. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(35):35451–35463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Engo J (2019) Decomposition of Cameroon’s CO2 emissions from 2007 to 2014: an extended Kaya identity. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–13Google Scholar
  12. Guevara Z, Rodrigues JF (2016) Structural transitions and energy use: a decomposition analysis of Portugal 1995–2010. Econ Syst Res 28(2):202–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. IEA (2017) Energy policies of IEA countries - Turkey - 2016 review. OECD/IEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  14. IEA (2018) CO2 emissions from fuel combustion 2018. International Energy Agency, ParisGoogle Scholar
  15. IPCC (2018) “Global warming of 1.5°C”, an IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathwaysGoogle Scholar
  16. Karakaya E (2016) Paris İklim Anlaşması: İçeriği ve Türkiye Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 2;3(1):1–12.  https://doi.org/10.30803/adusobed.188842
  17. Karakaya E, Özçağ M (2003) Türkiye Açısından Kyoto Protokolü’nün Değerlendirilmesi ve Ayrıştırma (Decomposition), Yöntemi ile CO2 Emisyonu Belirleyicilerinin Analizi. VII. ODTÜ İktisat Konferansı. AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  18. Karakaya E, Özçağ M (2005) Driving forces of CO2 emissions in Central Asia: a decomposition analysis of air pollution from fossil fuel combustion. Arid Ecosystem 11(26–27):49–57 https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/driving-forces-of-co2-emissions-in-central-asia-a-decomposition-analysis-of-air-pollution-from-fossil-fuel-combustion.pdf Google Scholar
  19. Kim S, Kim SK (2016) Decomposition analysis of the greenhouse gas emissions in Korea’s electricity generation sector. Carbon Manag 7(5–6):249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kolsuz G, Yeldan AE (2017) Economics of climate change and green employment: a general equilibrium investigation for Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 70:1240–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Köne A, Büke T (2019) Factor analysis of projected carbon dioxide emissions according to the IPCC based sustainable emission scenario in Turkey. Renew Energy 133:914–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kumbaroğlu G (2011) A sectoral decomposition analysis of Turkish CO2 emissions over 1990–2007. Energy 36(5):2419–2433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Leal PA, Marques AC, Fuinhas JA (2019) Decoupling economic growth from GHG emissions: decomposition analysis by sectoral factors for Australia. Econ Anal Policy 62:12–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li H, Qin Q (2019) Challenges for China’s carbon emissions peaking in 2030: a decomposition and decoupling analysis. J Clean Prod 207:857–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li YN, Cai M, Wu K, Wei J (2019) Decoupling analysis of carbon emission from construction land in Shanghai. J Clean Prod 210:25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lima F, Nunes ML, Cunha J, Lucena AF (2016) A cross-country assessment of energy-related CO2 emissions: an extended Kaya Index Decomposition Approach. Energy 115:1361–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lise W (2006) Decomposition of CO2 emissions over 1980–2003 in Turkey. Energy Policy 34(14):1841–1852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lu Q, Yang H, Huang X, Chuai X, Wu C (2015) Multi-sectoral decomposition in decoupling industrial growth from carbon emissions in the developed Jiangsu Province, China. Energy 82:414–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ma L, Chong C, Zhang X, Liu P, Li W, Li Z, Ni W (2018) LMDI decomposition of energy-related CO2 emissions based on energy and CO2 allocation Sankey diagrams: the method and an application to China. Sustainability 10(2):344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Madaleno M, Moutinho V (2017) A new LDMI decomposition approach to explain emission development in the EU: individual and set contribution. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(11):10234–10257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Madaleno M, Moutinho V (2018) Effects decomposition: separation of carbon emissions decoupling and decoupling effort in aggregated EU-15. Environ Dev Sustain 20(1):181–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mazlum SC (2009) Turkey’s foreign policy on global atmospheric commons: climate change and ozone depletion. In: Climate Change and Foreign Policy. Routledge, pp 86–102Google Scholar
  33. OECD (2002) Indicators to measure decoupling of environmental pressure from economic growth. Sustainable development SG/SD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  34. OECD (2018) Climate change: OECD DAC external development finance statistics. Available online: http://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-topics/climate-change.htm. Accessed on 15 Dec 2018
  35. Özçağ M, Yılmaz B, Sofuoğlu E (2017) Türkiye’de Sanayi ve Tarım Sektörlerinde Seragazı Emisyonlarının Belirleyicileri: İndeks Ayrıştırma Analizi. International Relations / Uluslararası İlişkiler 14(54):175–195Google Scholar
  36. Peters GP, Andrew RM, Canadell JG, Fuss S, Jackson RB, Korsbakken JI, Le Quéré C, Nakicenovic N (2017) Key indicators to track current progress and future ambition of the Paris Agreement. Nat Clim Chang 7(2):118–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rockström J, Schellnhuber HJ, Hoskins B, Ramanathan V, Schlosser P, Brasseur GP, Gaffney O, Nobre C, Meinshausen M, Rogelj J, Lucht W (2016) The world’s biggest gamble. Earth’s Future 4(10):465–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Roinioti A, Koroneos C (2017) The decomposition of CO2 emissions from energy use in Greece before and during the economic crisis and their decoupling from economic growth. Renew Sust Energ Rev 76:448–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Román-Collado R, Cansino JM, Botia C (2018) How far is Colombia from decoupling? Two-level decomposition analysis of energy consumption changes. Energy 148:687–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shuai C, Chen X, Wu Y, Zhang Y, Tan Y (2019) A three-step strategy for decoupling economic growth from carbon emission: empirical evidences from 133 countries. Sci Total Environ 646:524–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tagliapietra S, Zachmann G (2017) A new strategy for European Union-Turkey energy cooperation (no. 2017/27). Bruegel Policy ContributionGoogle Scholar
  42. Tapio P (2005) Towards a theory of decoupling: degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001. Transp Policy 12(2):137–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tunç GI, Türüt-Aşık S, Akbostancı E (2009) A decomposition analysis of CO2 emissions from energy use: Turkish case. Energy Policy 37(11):4689–4699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Turhan E, Cerit Mazlum S, Şahin Ü, Şorman AH, Cem Gündoğan A (2016) Beyond special circumstances: climate change policy in Turkey 1992–2015. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 7(3):448–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. UNFCCC (2018) COP24 web site. Available online: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/inf2.pdf
  46. UNFCCC (2019) Turkey: 2019 National Inventory Report (NIR). Available online: https://unfccc.int/documents/194819. Accessed on 10 July 2019
  47. Wan L, Wang ZL, Ng JCY (2016) Measurement research on the decoupling effect of industries’ carbon emissions-based on the equipment manufacturing industry in China. Energies 9(11):921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang Q, Zhao M, Li R, Su M (2018) Decomposition and decoupling analysis of carbon emissions from economic growth: a comparative study of China and the United States. J Clean Prod 197:178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wen L, Zhang Z (2019) Probing the affecting factors and decoupling analysis of energy industrial carbon emissions in Liaoning, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–11Google Scholar
  50. World Bank (2018) Country Data. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/country/turkey. 2 Dec 2018
  51. Wu Y, Zhu Q, Zhu B (2018) Decoupling analysis of world economic growth and CO2 emissions: a study comparing developed and developing countries. J Clean Prod 190:94–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Xie P, Gao S, Sun F (2019) An analysis of the decoupling relationship between CO2 emission in power industry and GDP in China based on LMDI method. J Clean Prod 211:598–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yang L, Yang Y, Zhang X, Tang K (2018) Whether China’s industrial sectors make efforts to reduce CO2 emissions from production?-a decomposed decoupling analysis. Energy 160:796–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yeldan E, Voyvoda E (2015) Low carbon development pathways and priorities for Turkey. WWF-Turkey/Istanbul Policy Center-Sabanci University-Stiftung Mercator Initiative, Istanbul, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  55. Yılmaz A, Ürüt-Kelleci S, Bostan A (2016) Türkiye Ekonomisinde Sektörel Enerji Tüketiminin Ayrıştırma Yöntemi ile Analizi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 31(2):1–27Google Scholar
  56. Zhang YJ, Da YB (2015) The decomposition of energy-related carbon emission and its decoupling with economic growth in China. Renew Sust Energ Rev 41:1255–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhang K, Liu X, Yao J (2019) Identifying the driving forces of CO2 emissions of China’s transport sector from temporal and spatial decomposition perspectives. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–24Google Scholar
  58. Zhao X, Zhang X, Li N, Shao S, Geng Y (2017) Decoupling economic growth from carbon dioxide emissions in China: a sectoral factor decomposition analysis. J Clean Prod 142:3500–3516CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AydınTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Economics and Administration SciencesAdnan Menderes UniversityAydınTurkey
  3. 3.Aydın Economics FacultyAdnan Menderes UniversityAydınTurkey

Personalised recommendations