Yeşil Finansman, Yeşil Getiri Olmadan Mı? Karbon Uyumu, Üretim Ölçeği ve Avrupa Çelik Sektörünün İhracat Rekabet Gücü
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20963926Anahtar Kelimeler:
Yeşil Finansman, Yeşil Tahviller, Çelik İhracatı, Panel Kantil Regresyon, İhracat Rekabet Gücü, Karbon YoğunluğuÖzet
Amaç – Bu çalışma, yeşil tahvil ihraçlarıyla ölçülen ülke düzeyindeki yeşil finansmanın, AB'nin gelişen iklim düzenleyici mimarisi kapsamında en karbon yoğun ve ticarete açık sektörlerden biri olan Avrupa çelik sektörünün ihracat performansında ölçülebilir iyileşmelere dönüşüp dönüşmediğini incelemektedir.
Tasarım/Veri/Yöntem – Analiz, 2015–2024 döneminde 17 Avrupa ekonomisini kapsamaktadır (N = 170, dengeli panel). Panel Kantil Regresyonu (PQR), en zayıf ihracatçılardan en rekabetçi olanlara kadar ihracat performansının tüm dağılımındaki heterojenliği yakalamak amacıyla kullanılmaktadır.
Bulgular – Yeşil tahvil ihraçları, yapısal bir zamansal uyumsuzluk hipotezi çerçevesinde yorumlandığında, hiçbir kantilde çelik ihracatı üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki göstermemektedir.. Üretim kapasitesi, Q10'da 2,33'ten Q90'da 0,75'e monoton biçimde azalan bir esneklikle baskın ihracat belirleyicisi olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Karbon yoğunluğu ihracatı sürekli olarak baskılamakta olup Q90'da keskin biçimde güçlenen bir etki gözlemlenmektedir. Ortalamaya dayalı EKK tahmin edicileri üretim-ihracat ilişkisinin işaretini tersine çevirmekte ve kantil regresyonunun yapısal olarak heterojen panellerde metodolojik bir zorunluluk olduğunu doğrulamaktadır.
Özgünlük/Değer – Bu çalışma, sürdürülebilir finans, ticaret ekonomisi ve sanayi politikasının kesişimindeki bir boşluğu ele alarak büyük bir enerji yoğun sektörde yeşil finansman ile ihracat rekabet gücü arasındaki ilişkiye yönelik özgün kantil panel kanıtları sunmaktadır. Zamansal uyumsuzluk mekanizmasının teorileştirilmesi, belgelenen EKK işaret terselmesi ve farklılaştırılmış kantile dayalı politika önerileri, hem yeşil finansman literatürüne hem de AB karbon piyasası mimarisinin ekonomisine katkı sağlamaktadır.
Referanslar
Algers, J., Ahman, M., & Nilsson, L. J. (2025). Steel decarbonization - from optimization to transformation. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 50, 433–454. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-111523-101851
Bassanini, A., Scarpetta, S., & Hemmings, P. (2015). Economic growth and export dynamics: Revisiting the production–export relationship. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 43(2), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11123-014-0385-8
Berman, N., Martin, P., & Mayer, T. (2012). How do different exporters react to exchange-rate changes? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(1), 437–492. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjr057
Björnsdóttir, K., Lindroos, T., Moe, I., & Sørgard, L. (2025). EU's carbon border adjustment mechanism -industrial effects. Climate Policy. Early acces. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2025.2557236
Bradford, A. (2020). The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World. ISBN: 978-0190088583, Oxford University Press.
Climate Bonds Initiative (2022). A green future for steel. Climate Bonds Initiative. https://www.climatebonds.net/files/documents/publications/A-Green-Future-for-Steel.pdf
Costantini, V., & Mazzanti, M. (2012). On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports. Research Policy, 41(1), 132–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.08.004
Davidson, R., & MacKinnon, J. G. (2000). Bootstrap tests: How many bootstraps? Econometric Reviews, 19(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474930008800459
De Haas, R., Martin, R., Muûls, M., & Schweiger, H. (2024). Managerial and financial barriers to the green transition. Management Science. 71(4), 2851-3136. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.00772
Dechezleprêtre, A., Nachtigall, D., & Venmans, F. (2023). The joint impact of the European Union emissions trading system on carbon emissions and economic performance. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 118, 102758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2023.102758
Di Foggia, G., & Beccarello, M. (2024). Decarbonization in the European steel industry: Strategies, risks, and commitments. Environmental Challenges, 16, 100988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2024.100988
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993). An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429246593
ElBannan, M. A., & Löffler, G. (2024). How effectively do green bonds help the environment? Journal of Banking and Finance, 158, 107051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2023.107051
European Commission (2025). Informal Expert Group on the CBAM - 2nd Meeting. Brussels: European Commission. https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu (consulted on December 2025).
European Commission (2023). Regulation (EU) 2023/956 establishing a carbon border adjustment mechanism. OJ L 130. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R0956
Fatica, S., & Panzica, R. (2021). Green bonds as a tool against climate change? Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(5), 2688–2701. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2757
Fatica, S., Panzica, R., & Rancan, M. (2021). The pricing of green bonds: Are financial institutions special? Journal of Financial Stability, 54, 100873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2021.100873
Flammer, C. (2021). Corporate green bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 499–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfinec.2021.01.010
Flori, A., Borghesi, S., & Marin, G. (2024). The environmental–financial performance nexus of EU ETS firms: A quantile regression approach. Energy Economics, 131, 107328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107328
Hunjra, A. I. (2025). The green intentions of capital: How green finance is changing the boundaries of corporate sustainability strategies. Journal of Environmental Management, 390, 126362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.126362
IEA (2020). Iron and Steel Technology Roadmap. Paris: International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/reports/iron-and-steel-technology-roadmap
Johnson, C., Åhman, M., Nilsson, L., & Li, X. (2025). Emerging green steel markets surrounding the EU emissions trading system and carbon border adjustment mechanism. Nature Communications, 16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-64440-9
Júnior, G., Fialho, A., & Gabriel, M. P. (2015). On bootstrap inference for quantile regression panel data: A Monte Carlo study. Econometrics, 3(3), 654–666. https://doi.org/10.3390/econometrics3030654
Kim, J., Sovacool, B. K., Bazilian, M., Griffiths, S., Lee, J., Yang, M., & Lee, J. (2022). Decarbonizing the iron and steel industry: A systematic review of sociotechnical systems, technological innovations, and policy options. Energy Research & Social Science, 89, 102565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102565
Koenker, R. (2004). Quantile regression for longitudinal data. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 91(1), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmva.2004.05.006
Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. Jr. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913643
Lamarche, C. (2010). Robust penalized quantile regression estimation for panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 157(2), 396–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2010.03.042
Maihaiti, Z., Hunjra, A. I., Alharbi, S. S., & Zhao, G. (2025). Climate-resilient cities for green innovation in enterprises: New perspective based on fintech. International Review of Economics and Finance, 101, 104251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.104251
Martin, R., Muûls, M., de Preux, L. B., & Wagner, U. J. (2014). Industry compensation under relocation risk: A firm-level analysis of the EU emissions trading scheme. American Economic Review, 104(8), 2482–2508. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.8.2482
Martins, P. S., & Yang, Y. (2009). The impact of exporting on firm productivity: A meta-analysis of the learning-by-exporting hypothesis. Review of World Economics, 145(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-009-0021-6
Nilsson, A. E., Söderström, S., Åhman, M., Johansson, D. J. A., & Andersson, F. N. G. (2025). Emerging green steel markets surrounding the EU emissions trading system and carbon border adjustment mechanism. Nature Communications, 16, 9328. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-64440-9
OECD (2024). Addressing steel decarbonization challenges for industry and policy. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 171. https://doi.org/10.1787/e6cb2f3c-en
OECD (2025). OECD Steel Outlook. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/28b61a5e-en
Ordonez-Borrallo, A., Llena-Macarulla, F., & Portillo-Tarragona, P. (2024). Green bonds and environmental performance: The effect of management attention. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(4), 3225–3246. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2858
Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment–competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118. http://doi.org/10.125/jep.9.4.97
Rinaldi, L., Russo, M., Padella, M., Rocco, M. V., Bani, C., & Colombo, E. (2024). Assessing environmental and market implications of steel decarbonization strategies: A hybrid input-output model for the European Union. Environmental Research Letters, 19(7), 074059. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad5bf1
Shuai, J., Wang, W., Liu, H., et al. (2024). The impact of the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism on the global iron and steel trade and emission reduction. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31, 21524–21544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-32528-2
Tang, D. Y., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Do shareholders benefit from green bonds? Journal of Corporate Finance, 61, 101427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2018.12.001
Zerbib, O. D. (2019). The effect of pro-environmental preferences on bond prices: Evidence from green bonds in the secondary market. Journal of Banking and Finance, 98, 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.10.012
Yayınlanmış
Nasıl Atıf Yapılır
Sayı
Bölüm
Kategori
Lisans
Telif Hakkı (c) 2026 Souria Hammache
Bu çalışma Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ile lisanslanmıştır.