ATMOSFERA IFLOSLANISHINING QISHLOQ XO‘JALIGI HOSILDORLIGIGA TA’SIRI: HUDUDIY STATISTIKA ASOSIDAGI PANEL TAHLILI VA METODOLOGIK MUAMMOLAR
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21966472Abstract
O‘zbekiston Respublikasining 13 ta hududi bo‘yicha 2010–2024-yillarni qamrab olgan
balanslashgan panel ma’lumotlar (N = 195) asosida statsionar manbalardan atmosferaga chiqarilgan
ifloslantiruvchi moddalarning dehqonchilik mahsulotlari hajmiga ta’siri baholangan. Ikki tomonlama qat’iy
effektlar modeli, taqsimlangan lag spetsifikatsiyasi hamda birinchi farqlar modeli natijalariga ko‘ra, emissiya
koeffitsiyenti barcha spetsifikatsiyalarda manfiy ishoraga ega bo‘lsa-da, statistik jihatdan noldan sezilarli
darajada farq qilmagan (β = –0,010; hududlar bo‘yicha klasterlangan standart xato = 0,023). Statistik quvvat
tahlili mavjud tanlanmada 80 foizlik statistik quvvat bilan aniqlanishi mumkin bo‘lgan minimal effekt 6,4
foizni tashkil etishini ko‘rsatgan. Bu ko‘rsatkich xalqaro ilmiy adabiyotlarda qayd etilgan hosil yo‘qotishlari
darajasidan sezilarli darajada yuqori. Tapio dekapling tahlili natijalariga ko‘ra, 13 ta hududning 7 tasida
emissiya va dehqonchilik mahsulotlari hajmi o‘rtasida kuchli uzilish, 5 tasida esa kengayuvchi salbiy uzilish
holati aniqlangan. Tadqiqotning ilmiy ahamiyati statistik jihatdan ahamiyatsiz natijaning uchta tizimli sababini
aniqlash bilan belgilanadi: emissiya massasining ta’sir dozasini ifodalovchi zaif proksi ko‘rsatkich ekanligi,
viloyat darajasidagi agregatsiya natijasida ifloslanishning fazoviy gradiyenti yo‘qolishi hamda ishlab chiqarish
hajmining hosildorlikdan farqli ravishda ekin maydonlari siyosatiga bog‘liqligi. Olingan natijalar asosida milliy
ekologik-iqtisodiy monitoring tizimini takomillashtirishga qaratilgan amaliy takliflar ishlab chiqilgan.
Keywords
atmosfera emissiyasi, statsionar manbalar, dehqonchilik mahsulotlari, panel ma’lumotlar, qat’iy effektlar modeli, statistik quvvat, ekologik xatolik, dekapling, yashil iqtisodiyotReferences
1. Ashmore M. R. Assessing the future global impacts of ozone on vegetation // Plant, Cell & Environment. –
2005. – Vol. 28, No. 8. – P. 949–964.
2. Avnery S., Mauzerall D. L., Liu J., Horowitz L. W. Global crop yield reductions due to surface ozone
exposure: 1. Year 2000 crop production losses and economic damage // Atmospheric Environment. –
2011. – Vol. 45, No. 13. – P. 2284–2296. – DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.11.045.
3. Avnery S., Mauzerall D. L., Liu J., Horowitz L. W. Global crop yield reductions due to surface ozone
exposure: 2. Year 2030 potential crop production losses and economic damage under two scenarios of
O3 pollution // Atmospheric Environment. – 2011. – Vol. 45, No. 13. – P. 2297–2309. – DOI: 10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2011.01.002.
4. Burney J., Ramanathan V. Recent climate and air pollution impacts on Indian agriculture // Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences. – 2014. – Vol. 111, No. 46. – P. 16319–16324.
5. Cameron A. C., Miller D. L. A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference // Journal of Human Resources.
– 2015. – Vol. 50, No. 2. – P. 317–372.
6. Chameides W. L., Kasibhatla P. S., Yienger J., Levy H. Growth of continental-scale metro-agro-plexes,
regional ozone pollution, and world food production // Science. – 1994. – Vol. 264, No. 5155. – P. 74–77.
7. Griliches Z., Hausman J. A. Errors in variables in panel data // Journal of Econometrics. – 1986. – Vol. 31,
No. 1. – P. 93–118.
8. Grossman G. M., Krueger A. B. Economic growth and the environment // The Quarterly Journal of
Economics. – 1995. – Vol. 110, No. 2. – P. 353–377.
9. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Milliy statistika qo‘mitasi. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Milliy statistika qo‘mitasi
ochiq ma’lumotlar bazasi [Elektron resurs]. – 2026. – URL: https://stat.uz.
10. Pesaran M. H. General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels // Empirical Economics.
– 2021. – Vol. 60, No. 1. – P. 13–50. – DOI: 10.1007/s00181-020-01875-7.
11. Robinson W. S. Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals // American Sociological Review. –
1950. – Vol. 15, No. 3. – P. 351–357.
12. Shukurov N., Pen-Mouratov S., Steinberger Y. The impact of the Almalyk Industrial Complex on soil
chemical and biological properties // Environmental Pollution. – 2005. – Vol. 136, No. 2. – P. 331–340.
13. Tai A. P. K., Martin M. V., Heald C. L. Threat to future global food security from climate change and ozone
air pollution // Nature Climate Change. – 2014. – Vol. 4. – P. 817–821.
14. Tapio P. Towards a theory of decoupling: Degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic
in Finland between 1970 and 2001 // Transport Policy. – 2005. – Vol. 12, No. 2. – P. 137–151. – DOI:
10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.001.
15. Van Dingenen R., Dentener F. J., Raes F., Krol M. C., Emberson L., Cofala J. The global impact of ozone
on agricultural crop yields under current and future air quality legislation // Atmospheric Environment. –
2009. – Vol. 43, No. 3. – P. 604–618. – DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.10.033.
16. Wooldridge J. M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. – 2nd ed. – Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, 2010.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 GREEN ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
