Energy Consumption–Trade Openness – Economic Growth Nexus in G-8 Countries

Abstract

This study aims to examine the relationship between energy consumption-economic growth and energy consumption-international trade (exports and imports) on aggregate level inG-8countries. We use the FMOLS and DOLS and the empirical results show that 1 % increase in economic growth is negatively linked with energy consumption by 0.46-1.22. A 1 % increase in exports and imports increase energy consumption by 0.24-0.32% and 0.13-0.344 % respectively. The unidirectional causality is found running from economic growth, exports and imports to energy consumption.

Keywords

• International trade,Energy consumption,Economic growth

References

1. Aïssa, M. S. B., Jelbi, M. B. And Youssef, S. B. (2014). Output, renewable energy consumption and trade in Africa. Energy Policy, 66, 11–18.
2. Akkemik K. A., Göksal K., 2012. Energy consumption-GDP nexus: Heterogeneous panel causality analysis. Energy Economics 34, 865–873.
3. Apergis, N., Payne, J.E., 2010a. Coal consumption and economic growth: Evidence from a panel of OECD countries, Energy Policy 38, 1353–1359.
4. Apergis, N., Payne, J.E., 2010b. Natural gas consumption and economic growth: A panel investigation of 67 countries. Applied Energy 87, 2759–2763.
5. Awokuse, T. O., 2005a. Exports, economicgrowthandcausality in Korea. AppliedEconomicsLetters12(11), 693-696.
6. Awokuse, T. O., 2005b. Export led growth and the Japanese economy: Evidence from VAR and acyclic graph. Applied Economic Letters 12, 849-858.
7. Baltagi, B.H., Bresson, G., Pirotte, A., 2007. Panel Unit Root Tests and Spatial Dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics 22, 339–360.
8. Bozoklu, S. and Yilanci, V. (2013). Energy consumption and economic growth for selected OECD countries: Further evidence from the Granger causality test in the frequency domain. Energy Policy, 63, 877–881.

9. Chontanawat, J., Hunt, L.C., Pierse, R., 2008. Does energy consumption cause economic growth? Evidence from a systematic study of over 100 countries. Journal of Policy Modeling 30, 209–220.
10. Coers, R., Sanders, M., 2013.The energy–GDP nexus; addressing an old question with new methods. Energy Economics 36, 708–715.
11. Dedeoglu, D.,Kaya,H., 2013. Energy use, exports, imports and GDP: New evidence from the OECD countries. Energy Policy 57, 469-476.
12. Dumitrescu, E.I., Hurlin, C., 2012. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling 29(4), 1450-1460.
13. Ekanayake, E.M., 1999. Exports and Economic Growth in Asian Developing Countries: Cointegration and Error-Correction Models. Journal of Economic Development24(2), 1999.
14. Erkan C., Mucuk M., Uysal D., 2010.The Impact of Energy Consumption on Exports: The Turkish Case, Asian Journal of Business Management 2(1), 17-23.
15. Giles, J. A. and Williams, C. L., 2000a. Export-led growth: a survey of empirical literature and some noncausality results. Part 1, Journal of International Trade and Economic Development 9, 265- 341.
16. Giles, J.A., Williams, C.L., 2000b. Export-led growth: a survey of the empirical literature and some non-causality results: part 2. J. Int. Trade Econ. Dev. 9, 445–470.
17. Halicioglu, F., 2011.A dynamic study of income, energy and exports in Turkey.Energy 36, 3348-3354.
18. Hatemi, J. A., 2002. Export performance and economic growth nexus in Japan: a bootstrap approach, Japan and World Economy 14, 25-33.
19. Hossain, M. S., 2012. Multivariate Granger Causality between Economic Growth, Electricity Consumption, Exports and Remittance for the Panel of Three SAARC Countries. Global Journal of Management and Business Research 12, 40-54.
20. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., 2003. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics 115(1), 53-74.
21. Jalil, A. (2014). Energy–growth conundrum in energy exporting and importing countries: Evidence from heterogeneous panel methods robust to cross-sectional dependence. Energy Economics, 44, 314–324.
22. Jinke, L., Hualing, S., Dianming, G., 2008. Causality relationship between coal consumption and GDP: difference of major OECD and non-OECD countries. Applied Energy, 85, 421-429.
23. Johansen, S., 1988.Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(2-3), 231-254.
24. Johansen, S., 1991.Estimation and Hypothesis Testing of Cointegration Vectors in Gaussian Vector Autoregressive Models.Econometrica 59(6), 1551-1580.
25. Kao, C., 1999. Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics 90(1), 1-44.
26. Katircioglu, S. T. (2013). Interactions between energy and imports in Singapore: Empirical evidence from conditional error correction models. Energy Policy, 63, 514-520.
27. Kocaaslan, O. (2013). The causal link between energy and output growth: Evidence from Markov switching Granger causality. Energy Policy, 63, 1196–1206.
28. Kónya, L., 2004. Export-Led Growth, Growth-Driven Export, Both or None? Granger Causality Analysis on OECD Countries. Applied Econometrics and International Development 4(1), 73-94.
29. Kum, H., Ocal, O., Aslan, A., 2012. Therelationshipamongnaturalgasenergyconsumption, capitalandeconomicgrowth: Bootstrap-correctedcausalitytestsfrom G-7 countries. RenewableandSustainableEnergyReviews 16(5), 2361–2365.
30. Larsson, R.,Lyhagen, J., Lothgren, M., 2001. Likelihood-basedcointegrationtests in heterogeneouspanels. EconometricsJournal, RoyalEconomicSociety 4(1), 41.
31. Lean, H.H., Smyth, R., 2010a. On the dynamics of aggregate output, electricity consumption and exports in Malaysia: Evidence from multivariate Granger causality tests. Applied Energy 87, 1963-1971.
32. Lean, H.H., Smyth, R., 2010b. Multivariate granger causality between electricity generation, exports, prices and GDP in Malaysia.Energy 35, 3640-3648.
33. Lee, C., 2006. The causality relationship between energy consumption and GDP in G-11 countries revisited. Energy Policy 34, 1086-1093.
34. Lee, C., Chien, M., 2010.Dynamic modelling of energy consumption, capital stock, and real income in G-7 countries. Energy Economics 32, 564-581.
35. Lewer, J.J., Van den Berg, H., 2003. How large is International Trade’s Effect on Economic Growth?. Journal of Economic Surveys 17(3), 363-396.
36. Li, L., 2010. An Empirical Analysis of Relationship between Export and Energy Consumption in Shandong Province.International Journal of Business and Management 5(3), 214-216.
37. McCoskey, S., Kao, C., 1998.A residual-based test of the null of cointegration in panel data. Econometric Reviews 17(1), 57-84.
38. Mohammadi, H. and Parvaresh, S. (2014). Energy consumption and output: Evidence from a panel of 14 oil-exporting countries. Energy Economics, 41, 41–46.
39. Narayan P.K., Smyth, R., 2008.Energy consumption and real GDP in G7 countries: New evidence from panel cointegration with structural breaks. Energy Economics 30, 2331–2341.
40. Narayan, P.K., Smyth, R., 2009. Multivariate Granger causality between electricity consumption, exports and GDP: evidence from a panel of Middle Eastern countries. Energy Policy 37, 229–236.
41. Narayan, P.K.,Popp, S., 2012. The energy consumption-real GDP nexus revisited: Empirical evidence from 93 countries. Economic Modelling 29, 303–308.
42. Nasreen, S. and Anwer, S. (2014). Causal relationship between trade openness, economic growth and energy consumption: A panel data analysis of Asian countries.Energy Policy, 69, 82–91.
43. OECD International Trade Statistics http://www.oecd.org/trade/its/45052263.pdf
44. Ozturk, I., 2010. A literature survey on energy-growth nexus. Energy Policy 38 340–349.
45. Payne, J.E., 2009. On the dynamics of energy consumption and employment in Illinois.Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy 39(2), 126-130.
46. Payne, J.E., 2010. Survey of the international evidence on the causal relationship between energy consumption and growth. Journal of Economic Studies 37, 53-95.
47. Pedroni, P., 1999. Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, 6, 653-670.
48. Pedroni, P., 2000. Fully Modified OLS for Heterogeneous Cointegrated Panels, Department of Economics Working Papers 2000-03, Department of Economics, Williams College.
49. Pedroni, P., 2001. Purchasing Power Parity Tests InCointegrated Panels. The Review of Economics and Statistics 83(4), 727-731.
50. Pedroni, P., 2004. Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic And Finite Sample Properties Of Pooled Time Series Tests With An Application To The PPP Hypothesis. Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press 20(03), 597-625.
51. Pesaran, M.H., 2007. A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross-Section Dependence.Joural of Applied Econometrics 22, 265–312.
52. Phillips, P.C.B., Ouliaris, S. 1990. Asymptotic Properties of Residual Based Tests for Cointegration.Econometrica, Econometric Society 58(1), 165-193.
53. Ray, S., 2011.A Causality Analysis on the Empirical Nexus between Export and Economic Growth: Evidence from India. International Affairs and Global Strategy 1, 24-38.
54. Sadorsky, P., 2011. Trade and energy consumption in the Middle East. Energy Economics 33, 739–749
55. Sadorsky, P., 2012. Energy consumption, output and trade in South America. Energy Economics, 34, 476-488.
56. Sadorsky, P., 2013. Do urbanization and industrialization affect energy intensity in developing countries?. Energy Economics 37, 52–59.
57. Samad, A., 2011. Exploring Exports and Economic Growth Causality in Algeria. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies 2(3), 92-96.
58. Sami, J., 2011. Multivariate Cointegration and Causality between Exports, Electricity Consumption and Real Income per Capita: Recent Evidence from Japan. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 1(3), 59-68.
59. Shahbaz M., 2012. Does trade openness affect long run growth? Cointegration, causality and forecast error variance decomposition tests for Pakistan. Economic Modelling 29, 2325–2339.
60. Shahbaz, M., Lean, H. H., Farooq, A., 2013a.Natural Gas Consumption and Economic Growth in Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 18, 87-94.
61. Shahbaz, M.,Saleheen, K., Tahir, M. I., 2013b.The dynamic link between energy consumption, economic growth, financial development and trade in China: fresh evidence from multivariate framework analysis.Energy Economics 40, 8-21.
62. Shahbaz, M., Uddin, G. S., Rehman, I. and Imran, K. (2014a).Industrialization, electricity consumption and CO2 emissions in Bangladesh. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 31, 575–586.
63. Shahbaz, M., Nasreen, S., Ling, C. H. and Sbia, R. (2014b). Causality between trade openness and energy consumption: What causes what in high, middle and low income countries. Energy Policy, 70, 126–143.
64. Soytas, U., Ramazan, S., 2003. Energy consumption and GDP: causality relationship in G-7 countries and emerging markets. Energy Economics 25, 33-37.
65. Soytas, U., Ramazan S., 2006.Energy consumption and income in G-7 countries. Journal of Policy Modeling 28, 739-750.
66. Westerlund, J., 2005. New Simple Tests for Panel Cointegration, Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals 24(3), 297-316.
67. Westerlund, J., 2007. Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data.Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 69(6), 709-748.
68. Johansen, S., and K. Juselius. (1992). Testing Structural Hypotheses in a Multivariate Cointegration Analysis of the PPP and the UIP for UK. Journal of Econometrics, 53(-13), 211-244.
69. Johansen, S., R. Mosconi and B. Nielsen. (2000). Cointegration Analysis in the Presence of Structural Breaks in the Deterministic Trend. Econometric Journal, 3(2), 216-249.
70. Dinda, S. and D. Coondoo. (2006). Income and Emission: a Panel Data-based Cointegration Analysis. Ecological Economics, 57, 167-181.
71. Yıldırım, E., Sukruoglu, D. and Aslan, A. (2014). Energy consumption and economic growth in the next 11 countries: The bootstrapped autoregressive metric causality approach. Energy Economics, 44, 14–21.
72. Zhang, B., Chen, Z.M., Xia, X. H., Xu, X. Y. and Chen, Y. B. (2013). The impact of domestic trade on China's regional energy uses: A multi-regional input–output modelling. Energy Policy, 63, 1169–1181.