4.7 Article

The environmental Kuznets curve for Turkish provinces: a spatial panel data approach

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 29, 期 17, 页码 25519-25531

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-17706-w

关键词

Air pollution; Environmental Kuznets curve; Turkey; Spatial econometrics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aims to test the existence of the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Turkish provinces between 2004 and 2019 using SO2 measurements. The results confirm a non-linear link between regional economic prospects and environmental degradation, showing a U-shaped relationship between economic development and SO2 levels, contrary to core expectations of the EKC hypothesis. The findings also highlight the need for a different action plan post-2000 to mitigate the rising impact of environmental degradation in Turkey.
This paper aims to test the existence of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis using SO2 measurements in Turkish provinces between 2004 and 2019. The existing studies concerning the EKC hypothesis for Turkey either use a country-level analysis or panel data techniques covering provincial data that do not account for the spatial dimension. To account for the spatial dependence and overcome the biases resulting from the existence of such spatial spillovers, this paper combines the traditional panel data methodology with the recent advances in spatial econometrics. Our findings confirm the presence of a non-linear link between regional economic prospects and environmental degradation. However, unlike the core expectations of the EKC hypothesis, our results demonstrate a U-shaped relationship between economic development and SO2 levels. Moreover, these findings are robust to the inclusion of a spatial battery which highlights the existence of regional spillovers. Overall, our results show that the post-2000 epoch calls for a different action plan to mitigate the rising impact of environmental degradation in Turkey.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据