Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 29, pp 29078–29088 | Cite as

Is the informal economic activity a determinant of environmental quality?

  • Hatice ImamogluEmail author
Research Article


This study aims to investigate whether the size of the informal economic activity is a determinant of the environmental quality in the case of Turkey. First, the MIMIC model approach will be used to estimate the size of the informal economic activity. Second, time series analysis will be conducted for the period from 1970 to 2014, in order to examine the effect of the size of the informal economic activity on the environmental quality by conducting Carrion-i-Silvestre et al. (Economet Theor 25:1754, 2009) unit root tests, Bound test and Maki (Econ Model 29:2011–2015, 2012) cointegration tests that allow structural breaks will be employed prior to the DOLS, FMOLS, and ARDL approaches for long-run and short-run models. The results suggest that informal economic activity is a positively significant determinant on the environmental quality. Moreover, this paper suggests that both formal and informal economies have significant impact on environmental quality. However, formal economy exerts positively higher effects on the environmental quality compared to informal economy. Turkish authorities need to pay more attention on both formal and informal economic activities to prevent environmental degradation in Turkey.


Environmental quality Informal economy MIMIC model approach 

JEL classification

C51 E26 O44 


  1. Al-Mulali U, Weng-Wai C, Sheau-Ting L, Mohammed A-H (2015) Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis by utilizing the ecological footprint as an indicator of environmental degradation. Ecol Indic 48:315–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ang JB (2009) Financial development and the FDI-growth nexus: the Malaysian experience. Appl Econ 41:1595–1601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagachwa MSD, Naho A (1995) Estimating the second economy in Tanzania. World Dev 23(8):1387–1399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baksi S, Bose P (2010) Environmental regulation in the presence of an informal sector, WP 2010-03. The University of Winnipeg, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck T, Demirgüç-Kunt A, Levine R (1999) A new database on the structure and development of the financial sector. World Bank Econ Rev 14:597–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berdiev AN, Saunoris JW (2016) Financial development and the shadow economy: a panel VAR analysis. Econ Model 57:197–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blackburn K, Bose N, Capasso S (2012) Tax evasion, the underground economy and financial development. J Econ Behav Organ 83:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bose N, Capasso S, Wurm M (2012) The impact of banking development on the size of the shadow economy. J Econ Stud 39(6):620–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Capasso S, Jappelli T (2013) Financial development and the underground economy. J Dev Econ 111:167–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carrion-i-Silvestre JL, Kim D, Perron P (2009) Gls-based unit root tests with multiple structural breaks under both the null and the alternative hypotheses. Economet Theor 25:1754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caviglia-Harris JL, Chambers D, Kahn JR (2009) Taking the “U” out of Kuznets a comprehensive analysis of the EKC and environmental degradation. Ecol Econ 68:1149–1159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Charfeddine L, Khediri KB (2016) Financial development and environmental quality in UAE: cointegration with structural breaks. Renew Sust Energ Rev 55:1322–1335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chattopadhyay S, Banerjee S, Millock K (2010) Pollution control instruments in the presence of an informal sector, Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10103, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la SorbonneGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen M-H (2010) The economy, tourism growth and corporate performance in the Taiwanese hotel industry. Tour Manag 31:665–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dabla-Norris E, Gradstein M, Inchauste G (2008) What causes firms to hide output? The determinants of informality. J Dev Econ 85:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dell’ Anno R, Haliciolu F (2010) An ARDL model of recorded and unrecorded economies in Turkey. J Econ Stud 37(6):627–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Elgin C, Oztunali O (2014a) Pollution and informal economy. Econ Syst 38(3):333–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elgin C, Oztunali O (2014b) Environmental Kuznets curve for the informal sector of Turkey: 1950-2009. Panoeconomicus 61(4):471–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Engle RF, Granger CWJ (1987) Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55:251–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Feige EL (1997) Revised estimates of the underground economy: implications of U.S. currency held abroad. In: Lippert O Walker M (eds) The underground economy: global evidences of its size and impact: the Frazer Institute, 151–208. Vancouver, B.CGoogle Scholar
  21. Fethi MD, Fethi S, Katircioglu S (2004) Estimating the underground economy and tax evasion: co integration and causality evidence in the case of Cyprus, 1960-2003. Int J Econ Dev 6(3):120–157Google Scholar
  22. Fethi MD, Fethi S, Katircioglu S (2006) Estimating the size of the Cypriot underground economy: a comparison with European experience. Int J Manpow 27(6):515–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Georgiou GM (2007) Measuring the size of the informal economy: a critical review, Central Bank of Cyprus, Nicosia, Occasional Paper in Economics 7, 3Google Scholar
  24. Global Footprint Network (2014) Ecological footprint. Oakland, USA;
  25. Gregory AW, Hansen BE (1996a) Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. J Econ 70:99–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gregory AW, Hansen BE (1996b) Tests for cointegration in models with regime and trend shifts. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 58:555–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gregory AW, Nason JM, Watt DG (1996) Testing for structural breaks in cointegration relationship. J Econ 71:321–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. In: National Bureau of Economic research working paper 3914. NBER, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  29. Hansen BE, Phillips PCB (1990) Estimation and inference in models of cointegration: a simulation study. Adv Econ 8:225–248Google Scholar
  30. Hatemi-J A (2008) Tests for cointegration with two unknown regime shifts with an application to financial market integration. Empir Econ 35:497–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Imamoglu H (2016) Re-estimation of the size of underground economy in European countries: MIMIC approach. Int J Econ Perspect 10(1):171–193Google Scholar
  32. Imamoğlu H, Katircioğlu S, Payaslioğlu C (2018) Financial services spillover effects on informal economic activity: evidence from a panel of 20 European countries. Serv Ind J in pressGoogle Scholar
  33. Jalil A, Feridun M (2011) The impact of growth, energy and financial development on the environment in China: a cointegration analysis. Energy Econ 33:284–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johansen S (1988) Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. J Econ Dyn Control 12:231–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Karanfil F (2008) Energy consumption and economic growth revisited: does size of underground economy matter? Energy Policy 36:3019–3025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Katircioglu S (2010) Testing the tourism-led growth hypothesis for Singapore – an empirical investigation from bounds test to cointegration and Granger causality tests. Tour Econ 16(4):1095–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Katircioğlu ST (2014) Testing the tourism-induced EKC hypothesis: the case of Singapore. Econ Model 41:383–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Katircioğlu ST, Taşpinar N (2017) Testing the moderating role of financial development in an environmental Kuznets curve: empirical evidence from Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 68:572–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kim D, Perron P (2009) Unit root tests allowing for a break in the trend function at an unknown time under both the null and alternative hypotheses. J Econ 148:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kuznets S (1955) Economic growth and income inequality. Am Econ Rev 49:1–28Google Scholar
  41. Lee J, Strazicich MC (2003) Minimum LM unit root test with two structural breaks. Rev Econ Stat 85:1082–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Levine R, Loayza N, Beck T (2000) Financial intermediation and growth: causality and causes without outliers. J Monet Econ 46(1):31–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maki D (2012) Tests for cointegration allowing for an unknown number of breaks. Econ Model 29:2011–2015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Marinov A (2008) Hidden economy in the rural regions of Bulgaria. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Market 5:71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Masih R, Masih AMM (1996) Stock–Watson dynamic OLS (DOLS) and error-correction modeling approaches to estimating long- and short-run elasticities in a demand function: new evidence and methodological implications from an application to the demand for coal in mainland China. Energy Econ 18:315–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mazhar U, Elgin C (2013) Environmental regulation, pollution and the informal economy. State Bank Pakistan (SBP) Res Bull 9(1):62–81Google Scholar
  47. Narayan PK (2005) The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests’. Appl Econ 37(17):1979–1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ng S, Perron P (2001) Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica 69(6):1519–1554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Öğünç F, Yılmaz G (2000) Estimating the underground economy in Turkey. Research Department, Discussion Paper, September, The Central Bank of the Republic of TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  50. 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 36:262–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pedroni P (2000, 2000) Fully modified OLS for heterogeneous cointegrated panels. In: Non-stationary panels, panel cointegration and dynamic panels, vol 15. Elsevier, pp 93–130Google Scholar
  52. Perron P (1989) The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica 57:1361–1401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pesaran MH, Shin Y, Smith RJ (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J Appl Econ 16:289–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Phillips PCB, Hansen BE (1990) Statistical inference in instrumental variables regression with I(1) processes. Rev Econ Stud 57:99–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schneider F (2006) Shadow economies and corruption all over the world: what do we really know?, (Discussion Paper. 2315). The Institute for the Study of Labour. Retrieved from:
  56. Schneider F, Enste DH (2000) Shadow economies: size, causes, and consequences. J Econ Lit 38(1):77–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schneider F, Savasan F (2007) Dymimic estimates of the size of shadow economies of Turkey and of her neighboring countries. Int Res J Financ Econ 9:126–144Google Scholar
  58. Shahbaz M, Hye QMA, Tiwari AK, Leitão NC (2013) Economic growth, energy consumption, financial development, international trade and CO2 emissions in Indonesia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 25:109–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Smith P (1994) Assessing the size of the underground economy: the Canadian statistical perspectives. Canadian Economic Observer, Catalogue No 11-010, 3.16–33Google Scholar
  60. Stern DI (2004) The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Dev 32(8):1419–1439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stock J, Watson MW (1993) A simple estimator of cointegrating vectors in higher order integrated systems. Econometrica 61(4):783–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Straub S (2005) Informal sector: the credit market channel. J Dev Econ 78:299–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Williams CC (2008) Cross-national variations in undeclared work: results from a survey of 27 European countries. Int J Econ Perspect 2(2):46–63Google Scholar
  64. Williams CC (2010) Evaluating competing theories of the shadow economy: some lessons from an english locality. Int J Econ Perspect 4(2):391–402Google Scholar
  65. Williams CC (2011) Blurring the formal/informal economy divide: beyond a dual economies approach. Int J Econ Perspect 5(4):347–362Google Scholar
  66. Williams CC, Round J (2009) Out of the margins: re-theorizing the role of the informal economy in Ukraine. Int J Econ Perspect 3(1):45–58Google Scholar
  67. World Data Bank (2016) World development indicators (WDI). Accessed 20 Oct 2016
  68. Ziaei SM (2015) Effects of financial development indicators on energy consumption and CO2 emission of European East Asian and Oceania countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 42:752–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zivot E, Andrews DWK (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat 10:251–270Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Banking and FinanceEastern Mediterranean UniversityFamagustaTurkey

Personalised recommendations