MINT Ülkelerinde Enerji Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Panel Nedensellik Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmada, MINT ülkelerinde enerji tüketimi ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu kapsamda, 1971-2014 dönemine ait yıllık veriler kullanılarak panel veri analizi yapılmıştır. Ampirik analiz kısmında, Emirmahmutoğlu ve Köse (2011) tarafından geliştirilen Granger nedensellik testi uygulanmıştır. Tüm panel için uygulanan nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre, enerji tüketimi ve ekonomik büyüme arasında herhangi nedensellik ilişkisinin olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuçlara göre, MINT ülkelerinde yansızlık hipotezinin geçerli olduğu görülmüştür. Ülkelere özgü nedensellik testi sonuçları ise Meksika’da ekonomik büyümeden enerji tüketimine doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi olduğunu göstermiştir. Ancak Endonezya ve Nijerya ve Türkiye’de herhangi bir nedensellik ilişkisi bulunamamıştır. Bu bulgular ışığında, Meksika’da “koruma hipotezinin”,  diğer ülkelerde ise “yansızlık hipotezinin” geçerli olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Enerji Tüketimi,Ekonomik Büyüme,MINT ülkeleri,Panel Veri Analizi

The Relationship between Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in MINT Countries: Panel Causality Analysis

Öz

In this study, it is aimed to examine the relationship between energy consumption and economic growth in MINT countries. In this context, panel data analysis was carried out using annual data for 1971-2014 period. In the empirical analysis section, the Granger causality test developed by Emirmahmutoğlu and Köse (2011) was applied. According to the results of the causality test applied to the all panel, it is determined that there is no causality relationship between energy consumption and economic growth. According to these results, “neutrality hypothesis” is valid in MINT countries. Country-specific causality test results showed that there is a one way causality relationship from economic growth to energy consumption in Mexico. However, no causality relationship has been found in the Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey. In the light of these findings, it was reached that “conservation hypothesis” is valid in Mexico whereas “neutrality hypothesis” is valid in other countries. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Economic Growth,Energy Consumption,MINT Countries,Panel Data Analysis.

Kaynakça

1. Abosedra, A., Dah, A. ve Ghosh, S. (2009), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth, The Case of Lebanon”, Applied Energy, 86(4), s.429-432.
2. Acaravcı, A. ve Erdoğan, S. (2017), “Türki Cumhuriyetlerde Enerji Tüketimi, Reel Gelir ve Dışa Açıklık İlişkisi: Bootstrap-Granger Nedensellik Yaklaşımı”, Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Yenilik Dergisi, 3(2), s.73-84.
3. Adom, P. K. (2011), “Electricty Consumption-Economic Groth Nexus: The Ghanain Case”, Interntional Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 1(1), s.18-31.
4. Ağır, H. ve Kar, M. (2010), “Türkiye’de Enerji Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Gelişmişlik Düzeyi İlişkisi: Yatay Kesit Analizi”, Sosyoekonomi, s.149-176.
5. Akarca, A. T. ve Long, T. V. (1980), “On the Relationship Between Energy and GNP: A Reexamination”, Journal of Energy and Development, 5, s.326–331.
6. Altınay, G. ve Karagöl, E. (2005), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence from Turkey”, Energy Economics, 27, s.849-856.
7. Aydın, M. (2018), “Enerji Tüketimi ile Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki: Düşük ve Orta Gelirli Ülkeler Örneği”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(1), s.1-15.
8. Aytaç, D. (2010), “Enerji ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisinin Çok Değişkenli VAR Yaklaşımı ile Tahmini”, Maliye Dergisi, 158, s.482-495.

9. Cheng, B.S. (1995). “An investigation of cointegration and causality between energy consumption and economic growth”, Journal of Energy and Development, 21, s.73–84.
10. Ciarreta, A. ve Zarraga, A. (2010), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Spain”, Applied Economic Letters, 17 (14), s.1417-1421.
11. Emirmahmutoğlu, F. ve Kose, N. (2011), “Testing for granger causality in heterogeneous mixed panels”, Economic Modelling, 28(3), s.870–876.
12. Erdal, G., Erdal, H. ve Esengül, K. (2008), “The Causality Between Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in Turkey”, Energy Policy, 36, s.3838-3842.
13. Ergün, S. ve Polat, M. A. (2015), “OECD Ülkelerinde CO2 Emisyonu, Enerji Tüketimi ve Büyüme İlişkisi”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 45, s.115-141.
14. Esso, L. J. (2010), “Threshold Cointegration and Causality Relationship between Energy Use and Growth in Seven African Countries”, Energy Economics, 32(6), s.1383-1391.
15. Financial Times, (2015), “The Mint Economies: Sweet Flavour Can Still Entice”, http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/86158152-61a7-11e5-a28b-50226830d644.pdf, (01.08.2018)
16. Fuinhas, J.A. ve Marques, A.C. (2012), “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth Nexus In Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain and Turkey: An ARDL Bounds Test Approach (1965-2009)”, Energy Economics, 34, 511-517.
17. Ghali, K. H. ve M. I. T. El-Sakka. (2004), “Energy Use and Output Growth in Canada:A Multivariate Cointegration Analysis”. Energy Economics, 26(2), s.225-238.
18. Güvenek, B. ve Alptekin, V. (2010), “ Enerji Tüketimi ve Büyüme İlişkisi: OECD Ülkelerine İlişkin Bir Panel Veri Analizi”, Enerji, Piyasa ve Düzenleme, 1(2), s.172-193.
19. Jumbe, C. B. L. (2004), “Cointegration and Causality between Electricity Consumption and GDP: Empirical Evidence from Malawi”, Energy Economics, 26(1), s.61-68.
20. Karadaş, H.A, Koşaroğlu, Ş.M. ve Salihoğlu, E. (2017), “Enerji Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 18(1), s.129-141.
21. Karanfil, F. (2008), “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth Revisited: Does The Size of Unrecorded Economy Matter?”, Energy Policy, 36, s.3029-3035.
22. Kasman, A. ve Duman, Y.S. (2015), “CO2 Emissions, Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, Trade and Urbanization in New EU Member and Candidate Countries: A Panel Data Analysis”, Economic Modelling, 44, s.97-103.
23. Magazzino, C. (2016) “CO2 Emissions, Economic Growth, and Energy Use In The Middle East Countries: A Panel VAR Approach”, Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 11(10), s.960-968.
24. Mucuk, M. ve Uysal, D. (2009), “Türkiye Ekonomisinde Enerji Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme”, Maliye Dergisi, 157, s.105-115.
25. Odhiambo, N. M. (2009), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in South Africa: A Trivarite Causality Test”, Energy Economics, 31(5), s.635-640.
26. Odhiambo, N. M. (2010), “Energy Consumption, Prices and Economic Growth In Three SSA Countries: A Comparative Study”, Energy Policy, 38, s.2463-2469.
27. Ouedraogo, N.S. (2013), “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence From The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)”, Energy Economics, 36, s.637-647.
28. Pao, H-T. ve Tsai, C-M. (2010), “CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in BRIC Countries”, Energy Policy, 38, s.7850-7860.
29. Paul, S. ve R. N. Bhattacharya. (2004), “Causality between Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in India: A Note on Conflict Results”. Energy Economics, 26, s.977-983.
30. Pesaran, M. H. (2004), “General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels”, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, 435, s.1-39.
31. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A. ve Yamagata, T. (2008), “A Bias-Adjusted LM Test of Error Cross-Section Independence”, Econometrics Journal, 11(1), s.105-127.
32. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). “A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in The Presence of Cross‐Section Dependence”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), s.265-312.
33. Shahbaz, M. ve Feridun, M. (2012), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence From Pakistan”, Quality & Quantity, 46(5), s.1583-1599.
34. Shahbaz, M., Mahalik, M.K., Shah, S.H. ve Sato, J.R. (2016), “Time-Varying Analysis of CO2 Emissions, Energy Consumption, and Economic Growth Nexus: Statistical Experience In Next 11 Countries”, Energy Policy, 98, s.33-48.
35. Shiu, A. ve Lam, P. L. (2004), “Electricity Consumpton and Economic Growth in China”, Energy Policy, 32(1), 47-54.
36. Soytaş, U. ve Sarı, R. (2009), “Energy Consumption, Economic Growth, and Carbon Emissions: Challenges faced By An EU Candidate Member”, Ecological Economies, 68, s.1667-1675.
37. Stern, D. I. (1993). “Energy and Economic Growth in the USA- A Multivariate Approach”, Energy Economics, 15(2), 1993, s.137-150.
38. Şengül, S. ve Tuncer, İ. (2006). “Türkiye’de Enerji Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme: 1960-2000”, İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 21(242), s.69-80.
39. Usta, C. (2016), “Türkiye’de Enerji Tüketimi Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisinin Bölgesel Analizi”, Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Yenilik Dergisi, 2(2), s.181-201.
40. Ünsal, E. M. (2007), İktisadi Büyüme, İmaj Yayıncılık, Ankara.
41. Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2014), “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Transition Countries: A Revisit Using Bootstrap Panel Granger Causality Analysis”, Energy Economics, 44, s.325-330.
42. Yu, E. S. H. ve Choi J. P. (1985), “Causal Relationship Between Energy and GNP: An International Comparison”, Journal of Energy and Development, 10(2), s.249-272.