Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması

Halil ALTINTAŞ, (Erciyes Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İktisat Bölümü, Kayseri, Türkiye)
Mehmet MERCAN (Hakkari Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Ekonomi ve Finans Bölümü, Hakkari, Türkiye)
TİSK Akademi
6 1
Yıl: 2015 Cilt: 10 Sayı: 20 Sayfa Aralığı: 318 - 347 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması

Öz:
Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması Elektrik enerji girdisinin sürdürülebilir ekonomik büyüme ve endüstriyel kalkınma için önemi sıklıkla vurgulanmaktadır. Endüstriyel kalkınma ve yüksek yaşam standartları isteği elektrik talebini artırmaktadır. Literatürde, elektrik tüketimi-ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi sıklıkla incelenmiş olsa da ilişkinin yönü konusunda farklı görüşler öne sürülmüştür. Bu çalışmada, 1980-2011 dönemi için OECD üyesi G-11 ülkeleri örneğinde, elektrik tüketimi ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişki Cobb-Douglass üretim fonksiyonu yardımıyla, sermaye birikimi ve işgücü değişkenleri de kullanılarak panel eşbütünleşme yardımıyla test edilmiştir. Nedenselliğin yönünü tespit etmek için Panel Granger nedensellik testi uygulanmıştır. Ampirik bulgulara göre; elektrik tüketimi, sermaye birikimi ve işgücü değişkenlerinin ekonomik büyümeyi teorik beklentilerimizle uyumlu olarak pozitif yönde etkilediği görülmüştür. Nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre ise, uzun dönemde elektrik tüketimi ve ekonomik büyüme arasında çift yönlü nedenselliğin olduğu bulgusu elde edilmiştir.
Anahtar Kelime:

The Relationship between Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: Co-integration and Causality Application in the Case of G-11 Countries

Öz:
The importance of electrical energy input for sustainable economic growth and industrial development is often highlighted. The desire for industrial development and high living standards has increased the demand for electricity. Although the relationship between electricity consumption and economic growth has been often examined, different views have been argued about the direction of this relationship. In this study, in the case of G11 countries of OECD during the period 1980-2011, the relationship between electricity consumption and economic growth through Cobb-Douglass production function and the relationship between capital accumulation and labor force variables through panel co-integration were tested. Panel Granger causality test was applied to determining the direction of the causality. According to empirical findings, the positive impact of electricity consumption, capital accumulation and labor force on economic growth were observed in accordance with our theoretical expectations. Morever, the results of causality test in the long-run reveal that there is a bi- directional causality relationship between electricity consumption and economic growth.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abbas, F. ve Choudhury, N. (2013). Electricity Consumption-Economic Growth Nexus: An Aggregated and Disaggregated Causality Analysis in India and Pakistan, Journal of Policy Modeling, 35, 538–553
  • Acaravci, A ve Özturk, İ. (2010) Electricity Consumption-Growth Nexus: Evidence From Panel Data for Transition Countries, Energy Economics, 32, 604–608.
  • Ahamad, M.G. ve Islam, A. K. (2011). Electricity Consumption And Economic Growth Nexus in Bangladesh: Revisited Evidences, Energy Policy, 39, 6145-6150. Akinlo, A.E. (2009). Electricity Consumpti- on And Economic Growth in Nigeria: Evidence from Cointegration and Co-Feature Analysis, Journal of Policy Modeling, 31, 681–693.
  • Altınay,, G. ve Karagöl, E. (2005). Electricity Consumption And Economic Growth: Evidence from Turkey, Energy Economics, 27, 849–856.
  • Altıntaş, H. ve Koçbulut, Ö. (2014). Türkiye’de Elektrik Tüketiminin Dinamikleri Ve Ekonomik Büyüme: Sınır Testi Ve Nedensellik Analizi, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadive İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 43, 37- 65.
  • Apergis, N. ve Payne J.E.(2011). A Dynamic Panel Study Of Economic Development and The Electricity Consumption-Growth Nexus, Energy Economics, 33, 770-781.
  • Apergis, N., Payne, J.E., (2009). Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence from The Commonwealth of Independent States, Energy Economics, 31, 641-647.
  • Asafu-Adjaye, J.(2000). The Relationship Between Energy Consumption, Energy Prices And Economic Growth: Time Series Evidence from Asian Developing Countries”, Energy Economics, 22( 6), 615–625.
  • Bai, J. ve Ng, S. (2004). A Panic Attack on Unit Roots and Cointegration, Econometrica, 72(4), 1127-1178.
  • Basher, S. A. ve Westerlund, J. (2009). Panel Cointegration and the Monetary Exchange Rate Model, Economic Modelling, 26, 506-513.
  • Behmiri, N. B. ve Manso J. R. P. (2012). Crude Oil Conservation Policy Hypothesis an OECD (Organisation For Economic Co-operation and Development) Countries: A Multivariate Panel Granger Causality Test, Energy, 43, 253-260.
  • Belaid, F. ve Abderrahmani, F. (2013). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Algeria: A Multivariate Causality Analysis in The Presence of Structural Change, Energy Policy, 55, 286-295.
  • Beyaert, A.ve Camacho, M. (2008), TAR Panel Unit Root Tests and Real Convergence, Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, 12(3), 668-681.
  • Bildirici, Melike E. ve Kayıkçı, F. (2012). Economic Growth and Electricity Consumption in Former Soviet Republics, Energy Economics, 34, 747-753.
  • Breitung, J. (2005). A Parametric Approach to the Estimation of Cointegrating Vectors in Panel Data, Econometric Reviews, 24(2), 151-173.
  • Breuer, B., Mcnown, R. ve Wallace, M. (2002). Series-Specific Unit Root Test with Panel Data, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 64(5), 527-546.
  • Breusch, T. S. ve Pagan, A. R. (1980) The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Model Specification Tests in Econometrics, Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-53.
  • Cameron, S. (1994). A Review of The Econometric Evidence on the Effects of Capital Punishment, Journal of Socio-Economics23, 197-214.
  • Campbell, J.Y. ve Perron, P.,(1991). Pitfalls and Opportunities: What Macroeconomics Should Know about Unit Roots. In: Blanchard, O.J., Fisher,S. (Eds.), NBER Macroeconomics Annual, Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Carrion-I-Silvestre, J. L., Barrio-Castro, T.D. ve Lopez-Bazo, E. (2005). Breaking the Panels: An Application to the GDP Per Capita, Econometrics Journal, 8,159-175.
  • Chandran, V.G.R., Sharma, S. ve Madhavan K. (2010). Electricity Consumption-Growth Nexus: The Case of Malaysia, Energy Poli- cy, 38, 606–612.
  • Chang, T., Fang, W. ve Wen, L.F., (2001). Energy Consumption, Employment, Output And Temporal Causality: Evidence From Taiwan Based on Cointegration and Error- Correction Modelling Techniques, Applied Economics 33, 1045-1056.
  • Charemza, Wojciech W. ve Deadman, Derek F. (1997). New Directions in Econometric Practice: General to Specific Modelling, Cointegration and Vector Autoregression, Second Edition, Edward Elgar Publishing, Chelthenham, UK.
  • Chen, S.T., Kuo, Hsiao-I. ve Chen, Chi- Chung (2007). The Relationship Between GDP and Electricity Consumption in 10 Asian Countries, Energy Policy, 35, 2611- 2621.
  • Choi, I, (2001). Unit Roots Tests for Panel Data, Journal of International Money and Finance, 20, 229-272.
  • Ciarreta A. ve Zarraga, A. (2010). Economic Growth-Electricity Consumption Causality in 12 European Countries: A Dynamic Panel Data, Approach Energy Policy, 38, 3790- 3796.
  • Eberhardt, M. ve Bond, S, (2009), Crosssection Dependence in Nonstationary Panel Models: A Novel Estimator, MPRA (Munich Personal RePEc Archive), Paper No: 17692. 01.08.2014 tarihinde http://mpra.ub.uni-mu-enchen.de/17692/ adresinden erişildi
  • Esso, L. J. (2010). Threshold Cointegration And Causality Relationship Between Energy Use and Growth in Seven African Countries, Energy Economics, 32, 1383 – 1391.
  • Ghosh, S. (2002). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in India, Energy Policy, 30(2), 125-129.
  • Gregorio J. D., Landerretche, O. ve Neilson, C. (2007). Another Pass-Through Bites the Dust? Oil Prices and Inflation, Working Paper, Central Bank of Chile.
  • Güloğlu, B. and İvrendi, M. (2010). Output Fluctuations: Transitory or Permanent? The Case of Latin America, Applied Economics Letters, 17:4, 381-386,
  • Hadri, K. (2000). Testing For Stationarity in Heterogenous Panels, Econometrics Journal, 3, 148-161.
  • Heston, A., Summers R. ve Bettına A. (2014), Penn World Table Version 8.0, Center for International Comparisions at the University of Pennsylvania (CICUP).
  • Ho C.Y. ve Siu K. W. A. (2007). Dynamic Equilibrium Of Electricity Consumption and GDP in Hong Kong: An Empirical Investigation, Energy Policy, 35, 2507-2513.
  • IEA, (2014). US Energy Information Administration. 11.02.2014 tarihinde http://www. eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfmtid=50&pid=76&aid=3&cid=CG5,&syid=1994&eyid=2011&freq=M&unit=TBPD internet adresinden alındı.
  • Im, K., Pesaran, H. ve Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogenous Panels, Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74.
  • Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical Analysis of Cointegration Vectors, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(2 - 3), 231 – 254.
  • Katircioglu, S.T., Sertoglu, K., Candemir, M. and Mercan, M. (2015). Oil price movements and macroeconomic performance:Evidence from twenty-six OECD countries, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 44, 257–270.
  • Kónya, L. (2006). Exports and growth: Granger Causality Analysis On OECD Countries With A Panel Data Approach, Economic Modelling, 23, 978 – 992.
  • Kouakou, A. K. (2011). Economic Growth And Electricity Consumption In Cote D’ivoire: Evidence From Time Series Analysis, Energy Policy, 39, 3638 – 3644.
  • Kraft, J. ve Kraft, A. (1978). On the Relationship between Energy and GDP, Journal of Energy Development, 3, 401- 403.
  • Layson, S. (1983). Homicide and deterrence: Another View of the Canadian Time Series Evidence, Canadian Journal of Economics, 16, 52-73
  • Lean H. H., ve Smyth R. (2010). On the Dynamics of Aggregate Output, Electricity Consumption and Exports In Malaysia: Evidence From Multivariate Granger Causality Tests, Applied Energy, 87, 1963 – 1971.
  • Levin, A., Lin, C. F. ve Chu, C. S. J. (2002). Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties, Journal of Econometrics, 108, 1-24.
  • Maddala, G. S. ve Wu, S. (1999). A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 61, 631-652.
  • Masih, A.M.M. ve Masih, R. (1997). On The Temporal Causal Relationship between Energy Consumption, Real Income and Price: Some New Evidence from Asian NICs Based on A Multivariate Cointegration Vector Error-Correction Approach, Journal of Policy Modeling, 19, 417-440.
  • Masih, A.M.M. ve Masih, R. (1996). Energy Cosumption, Real Income and Temporal Causality, Results from a Multi-Country Study Based on Cointegration and Error Correctiom Modeling Techniques, Energy Economics, 18,165-183.
  • Mozumder, P. ve Marathe, A., (2007). Causality Relationship Between Electricity Consumption and GDP in Bangladesh, EnergyPolicy, 35, 395-402
  • Narayan, P. K. ve Prasad, A. (2008). Electricity Consumption–Real GDP Causality Nexus: Evidence From A Bootstrapped Causality Test for 30 OECD Countries”, Energy Policy, 36, 910-918
  • Narayan, P. K. ve 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.
  • Narayan, P. K., Narayan, S. ve Popp, S. (2010). Does Electricity Consumption Panel Granger Cause GDP? A New Global Evidence, Applied Energy, 87, 3294-3298.
  • Narayan, P.K., Smyth, R., (2005). Electricity Consumption, Employment and Real Income in Australia: Evidence From Multivariate Granger Causality Tests, Energy Policy, 33, 1109–1116.
  • Narayan, P.K. ve Smyth, R., (2008). Energy Consumption And Real GDP in G7 Countries: New Evidence from Panel Cointegration with Structural Breaks, Energy Economics, 30, 2331-2341.
  • Odhiambo, Nicholas M. E. (2009). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in South Africa: A Trivariate Causality Test, Energy Economics, 31, 635-640.
  • OECD (1988). OECD Economic Outlook, 44, December.
  • OECD (2005). OECD Economic Outlook, 2(78), December.
  • OECD (2014). Annual National Account 2014, Gross Domestic Product. 11.02.2014 tarihinde http://stats.oecd.org/ adresinden erişildi.
  • Ouédraogo, Idrissa M. (2010). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Bur- kina Faso: A Cointegration Analysis, Energy Economics, 32, 524-531.
  • Payne J. E. (2010) A Survey of The Electricity Consumption-Growth Literature, Applied Energy; 87, 723 – 31.
  • Perron, P. (1991). Test Consistency with Varying Sampling Frequency, Econometric Theory, 7, 341-368.
  • Pesaran, M. Hashem ve Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels, Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93.
  • Pesaran, M. Hashem, (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, 435.
  • Pesaran, M. Hashem, Ullah, A. ve Yamagata, T. (2008). A Bias-Adjusted LM Test of Error Cross-Section Independence, Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127.
  • Peseran, M. Hashem, (2007). A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in The Presence of Cross- Section Dependence, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265-312.
  • Peseran, M. Hashem, (2006). Estimation and Inference in Large Heterogeneous Pa- nels with a Multifactor Error Structure, Econometrica, 74(4), 967-1012.
  • 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.
  • Shahbaz M., Zeshan, M. ve Afza, T. (2012). Is Energy Consumption Effective to Spur Economic Growth in Pakistan? New Evidence from Bounds Test to Level Relationships and Granger Causality Tests, Economic Modelling ,29, 2310-2319.
  • Shahbaz, M. ve Lean, H. H. (2012). The Dynamics of Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: A Revisit Study of Their Causality in Pakistan, Energy, 39, 146-153.
  • Shiu, A. ve Lam, P., (2004). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in China.Energy Policy, 32, 47-54.
  • Squalli, J., (2007). Electricity Consumption And Economic Growth: Bounds and Causality Analyses for OPEC Members, Energy Economics, 29, 1192-1205.
  • Stern, D.I. (1993). Energy Growth in the USA: A Multivariate Approach, Energy Economics, 15, 137–150.
  • Stern, D. I. (2000). A Multivariate Cointegration Analysis of The Role of Energy in The US Macroeconomy”, Energy Economics, 22, 267–283.
  • Swamy, P.A.V.B. (1970). Efficient Interfence in a Random Coefficient Regrassion Model, Econometrica, 38(2), 311-323.
  • Tang, C. F. ve Tan, E. C. (2013). Exploring the Nexus of Electricity Consumption, Economic Growth, Energy Prices And Techno logy Innovation in Malaysia. Applied Energy, 104, 297-305.
  • Tang, C. F. (2008). A Re-Examination ofThe Relationship between Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Malay-sia, Energy Policy 36, 3077-3085.
  • Tatlıgil, H., Çemrek, F. ve Şen, H. (2009),Cointegration Relationship among Energy Consumption GDP and Electricity Price Variables in Turkey, Selçuk Ün. İİBF Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 11(17), 439-451.
  • Taylor, John B. (2000). Low Inflation, PassThrough, and The Pricing Power of Firms, European Economic Review, 44 (7), 1389–1408.
  • Taylor, M. ve Sarno, L. (1998). The Behaviour of Real Exchange Rates during the Post-Bretton Woods Period, Journal of International Economics, 46, 281-312.
  • Wolde-Rufael, Y.(2006). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: A Time Series Experience For 17 African Countries, Energy Policy, 34,1106–1114.
  • Worldbank, (2014). World Development In-dicators 2014. 11.02.2014 tarihinde http:// databank.worldbank.org/data/views/ vari-ableSelection /selectvariables.aspx?source=world-development-indicators# adresinden erişildi.
  • Yoo, S., (2005). Electricity Consumption And Economic Growth: Evidence From Korea, Energy Policy 33, 1627-1632.
  • Yoo, S.-H. ve Kwak S.-Y. (2010). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Seven South American Countries, Energy Policy, 38, 181-188.
  • Yuan, J., Zhao, C., Yu, S. ve Hu, Z., (2007). Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in China: Cointegration and Co-fea-ture Analysis, Energy Economics, 29, 1179-1191.
  • Zaman, K., Khan, M. M., Ahmad M., ve Rustam, R. (2012), Determinants of Electri- city Consumption Function in Pakistan: Old Wine in a New Bottle, Energy Policy, 50, 623-634.
APA ALTINTAŞ H, MERCAN M (2015). Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. , 318 - 347.
Chicago ALTINTAŞ Halil,MERCAN Mehmet Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. (2015): 318 - 347.
MLA ALTINTAŞ Halil,MERCAN Mehmet Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. , 2015, ss.318 - 347.
AMA ALTINTAŞ H,MERCAN M Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. . 2015; 318 - 347.
Vancouver ALTINTAŞ H,MERCAN M Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. . 2015; 318 - 347.
IEEE ALTINTAŞ H,MERCAN M "Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması." , ss.318 - 347, 2015.
ISNAD ALTINTAŞ, Halil - MERCAN, Mehmet. "Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması". (2015), 318-347.
APA ALTINTAŞ H, MERCAN M (2015). Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. TİSK Akademi, 10(20), 318 - 347.
Chicago ALTINTAŞ Halil,MERCAN Mehmet Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. TİSK Akademi 10, no.20 (2015): 318 - 347.
MLA ALTINTAŞ Halil,MERCAN Mehmet Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. TİSK Akademi, vol.10, no.20, 2015, ss.318 - 347.
AMA ALTINTAŞ H,MERCAN M Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. TİSK Akademi. 2015; 10(20): 318 - 347.
Vancouver ALTINTAŞ H,MERCAN M Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması. TİSK Akademi. 2015; 10(20): 318 - 347.
IEEE ALTINTAŞ H,MERCAN M "Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması." TİSK Akademi, 10, ss.318 - 347, 2015.
ISNAD ALTINTAŞ, Halil - MERCAN, Mehmet. "Elektrik Tüketimi ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: G-11 Ülkeleri Örneğinde Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Uygulaması". TİSK Akademi 10/20 (2015), 318-347.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
17-04-2024 4:12

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları