بررسی اثر توسعه تکنولوژی بر رشد اقتصادی و کنترل انتشار آلودگی در بخش کشاورزی (با اجرای قانون هدفمندی یارانه انرژی)

محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی -پژوهشی تحقیقات اقتصاد کشاورزی

فاطمه طایی سمیرمی ¹ , صادق خلیلیان ²

1 - دانشگاه تربیت مدرس- دانشکده کشاورزی
2 - دانشیار- دانشگاه تربیت مدرس- دانشکده کشاورزی

تاریخ دریافت : 1400/02/17 تاریخ پذیرش : 1402/05/15 تاریخ انتشار : 1402/05/01

کلید واژه: بخش کشاورزی, یارانه انرژی, منحنی زیست‌محیطی کوزنتس, مدل خودرگرسیونی ‌برداری توضیحی (ARDL),

چکیده مقاله :

استفاده از فناوری‌های جدید سبب کاهش انتشار آلودگی می‌شود؛ اما، به‌ دلیل وجود اثر بازگشتی نیاز به بررسی بیشتر دارد. هدف از این مطالعه بررسی تاثیر توسعه فناوری (اثر کارایی انرژی و اثر جانشینی) بر میزان آلودگی با بررسی اثرات القایی رشد اقتصادی و آزمون منحنی کوزنتس زیست‌محیطی است. در این مطالعه از اطلاعات سری‌زمانی سالانه 1360 الی 1396 و روش خودرگرسیونی‌ برداری توضیحی استفاده شده است. یافته‌‌های تحقیق دلالت بر این دارد که با افزایش قیمت انرژی ناشی از اجرای قانون هدفمندی یارانه در ایران، فرضیه زیست‌محیطی کوزنتس مورد تأیید قرار نمی‌گیرد. نتایج شبیه‌سازی سناریوی رشد اقتصادی بخش کشاورزی، نشان داد که هر یک درصد افزایش این متغیر به طور متوسط باعث افزایش 31/0 درصدی اثر کارایی انرژی بر کاهش آلودگی و افزایش 92/18 درصدی اثر جانشینی انرژی بر افزایش آلودگی در دوره شبیه‌سازی گردیده است

چکیده انگلیسی:

The use of new technologies reduces the spread of pollution; However, due to the rebound effect (RE), it needs further investigation. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of technology advance (energy efficiency and change of energy type) on pollution by calculating the effect of economic growth and testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) using the annual time series information of Iran's agricultural sector from 1981 to 2017 using the autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) approach. The research findings indicate that with the increase in energy prices due to the implementation of the targeted subsidy law in Iran, the Kuznets environmental hypothesis is not confirmed. The simulation results of the economic growth scenario of the agricultural sector showed that each percentage increase of this variable increased the effect of energy efficiency on pollution reduction by 0.31% on average and the effect of energy substitution on the increase of pollution increased by 18.92% during the simulation period.

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Asgharpourpour H, Behboodi D, & Mohammadi Khaneghahi R. The Effects of Economic and Financial Developments on Environmental Quality; An Empirical Analysis in Selected OPEC Countries. Iranian Energy Economics. 2013;2(6), 1-26.‏ (In Persian)


2. Amirtaimoori S. Study of Financial Development impact on Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the Iranʼs Agricultural Sector. Environmental Researches. 2019; 9(18), 29-36.‏ (In Persion)


3. Abbasi T, & Abbasi SA. Renewable energy sources: Their impact on global warming and pollution. 2011.


4. Ahmad N, Du L, Lu J, Wang J, Li HZ, & Hashmi MZ. Modelling the CO2 emissions and economic growth in Croatia: is there any environmental Kuznets curve?. Energy. 2017; 123, 164-172.


5. Bundschuh J, & Chen G. (Eds.). Sustainable energy solutions in agriculture. CRC Press. 2014.


6. Chen J, Cheng S, & Song M. Changes in energy-related carbon dioxide emissions of the agricultural sector in China from 2005 to 2013. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2018; 94, 748-761.


7. Nahidi Amirkhiz M, Rahimzadeh F, & Shokouhifard S. Study of the Relation among Economic Growth, Energy Using and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Case study: Selected Countries of the OIC). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2020; 22(3), 13-26.‏ (In Persion)


8. Engle RF, Granger CWJ. Cointegration and error correction representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica. 1987; 55, 251–276.


9. Gu W, Zhao X, Yan X, Wang C, & Li Q. Energy technological progress, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions: empirical evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2019; 236, 117-666.‏


10. Grossman GM and Krueger AB. Economic growth and the environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1995; 110(2), 353–377.


11. Johansen S, Juselius K. Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration – with applications to the demand for money. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 1990; 52, 169–210.


12. Johansen S. Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. J. Econ. Dyn. Control. 1988; 12,231–254.


13. Hendry DF. Dynamic econometrics. Oxford University Press on Demand. 1995.


14. Inglesi-Lotz Decomposing the South African CO2 emissions within a BRICS countries context: Signalling potential energy rebound effects. Energy. 2018; 147, 648-654.


15. ‏Kahia M, Jebli M B, & Belloumi M. Analysis of the impact of renewable energy consumption and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in 12 MENA countries. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy. 2019;  21(4), 871-885.‏


16. Khan MK, Khan MI, & Rehan M. The relationship between energy consumption, economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions in Pakistan. Financial Innovation. 2020; 6(1), 1-13.‏


17. Khan D, & Ullah A. Testing the relationship between globalization and carbon dioxide emissions in Pakistan: does environmental Kuznets curve exist?. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2019; 26(15), 15194-15208.‏


18. Lu W C. The impacts of information and communication technology, energy consumption, financial development, and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in 12 Asian countries. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. 2018;  23(8), 1351-1365.‏


19. Lashkarizadeh M, & Eshaghi M. Investigating the impact of nanotechnology on environment. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2017;  19(1), 49-61.‏ (In Persion)


20. Liu Y, Yan B, & Zhou Y. Urbanization, economic growth, and carbon dioxide emissions in China: A panel cointegration and causality analysis. Journal of Geographical Sciences. 2016;  26(2), 131-152.‏


21. Lin B, & Liu X. Dilemma between economic development and energy conservation: Energy rebound effect in China. Energy. 2012;  45(1), 867-873.‏


22. Liobikienė G, & Butkus M. Environmental Kuznets Curve of greenhouse gas emissions including technological progress and substitution effects. Energy. 2017;  135, 237-248.


23. Motafakkerazad MA, & Mohammadi Khaneghahi R. The Impacts of Economic Growth, Energy Consumption and Openness on the Environmental Quality In IR Iran. Iranian Energy Economics. 2012;  1(3), 89-106.‏ (In Persion)


24. Ministry of Energy, EnergyBalances, Macro Planning of Electricity and Energy. 2018. (In Persion)


25. Ministry of Petroleum, Hydrocarbon Balance, International Energy Studies Institute. 2017. (In Persion)


26. Mikayilov J I, Galeotti M, & Hasanov F J. The impact of economic growth on CO2 emissions in Azerbaijan. Journal of cleaner production. 2018;  197, 1558-1572.‏


27. Nahidi Amirkhiz M, Rahimzadeh F, & Shokouhifard S. Study of the Relation among Economic Growth, Energy Using and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Case study: Selected Countries of the OIC). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2020;  22(3), 13-26.‏ (In Persion)


28. Phillips P C B, & Perron P. Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrica. 1988; 75 (2): 335–346. View at Google Scholar| View at Publisher.‏


29. Pesaran MH, Shin Y. An Autoregressive Distributed Lag-Modeling Approaches to Cointegration Analysis. Econometrics and Economics Theory in the 20th Century: The Ragnar Frisch Centennial Symposium. Strom S.-Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1999.


30. Ridzuan NHAM, Marwan NF, Khalid N, Ali MH, & Tseng ML. Effects of agriculture, renewable energy, and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions: Evidence of the environmental Kuznets curve. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2020; 160, 104-879.


31. Sayeh Miri, & Abbas Khani. The effect of information and communication technology on economic growth by meta-analysis method. Scientific Journal of Information Management. 2020; 5 (2), 120-135. (In Persion)


32. Shahnazi R, Hadian E, & Jargani L. An investigation of energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emission in the Iranian economic sectors. Quarterly Journal of Economic Growth and Development Research. 2017;  7(28), 51-70.‏ (In Persion)


33. Sasana H, & Aminata J. Energy subsidy, energy consumption, economic growth, and carbon dioxide emission: Indonesian case studies. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy. 2019;  9(2), 117.‏


34. Tarazkar MH, & Kargar Dehbidi N. The Impact of Elderly Population, Economic Growth, Energy Consumption and Urbanization on CO2 Emissions in the Middle East: Application of Panel Cointegration Approach. Environmental Researches. 2019;  9(18), 37-48.‏ (In Persion)


35. Torabi T, Khajooeipour A, Tarighi S, & Pakravan M. The effect of energy consumption, economic growth and international business on greenhouse gas emission in Iran. Economic Modeling. 2015;  9(29), 63-84.‏ (In Persion)


36. Wang S, Zeng J, & Liu X. Examining the multiple impacts of technological progress on CO2 emissions in China: a panel quantile regression approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2019; 103, 140-150.‏


37. Yang L, & Li Z. Technology advance and the carbon dioxide emission in China–Empirical research based on the rebound effect. Energy Policy. 2017; 101, 150-161.‏


38. Yang X, Lou F, Sun M, Wang R, & Wang Y. Study of the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and the economic growth of Russia based on the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Applied energy. 2017; 193, 162-173.‏


39. ‏ ‏ Zhang YJ, Peng HR, & Su B. Energy rebound effect in China's Industry: An aggregate and disaggregate analysis. Energy Economics. 2017; 61, 199-208.‏


40. Zambrano-Monserrate MA, Valverde-Bajaña I, Aguilar-Bohórquez J, & Mendoza-Jiménez M. Relationship between economic growth and environmental degradation: is there an environmental evidence of kuznets curve for Brazil?. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy. 2016; 6(2), 208-216.‏