Oil usage, gas consumption and economic growth: Evidence from Poland

Lach, Łukasz (2014): Oil usage, gas consumption and economic growth: Evidence from Poland. Forthcoming in: Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy

Abstract

This paper investigates causal links between economic growth, oil consumption and natural gas usage in Poland on the basis of quarterly data for the period Q1 2000 – Q4 2009. The application of the Toda–Yamamoto procedure, a nonlinear Granger causality test, bootstrap techniques and an analysis of VECM led to the conclusion that both oil and natural gas usage caused GDP growth in the short–term. However, in the long–term causality ran in the opposite direction. Both these findings are believed to be the consequence of the recent transformation of the Polish economy from energy intensive activities towards services, which in general are not energy–consuming.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: cointegration, economic growth, Granger causality, natural gas consumption, nonlinear causality test, oil consumption, residual–based bootstrap, Toda–Yamamoto method
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C3 - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models ; Multiple Variables > C32 - Time-Series Models ; Dynamic Quantile Regressions ; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models ; Diffusion Processes ; State Space Models; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q4 - Energy > Q40 - General; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q4 - Energy > Q43 - Energy and the Macroeconomy; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q4 - Energy > Q48 - Government Policy

References

1. Akarca, A.T. and Long, T. V. 1980. On the relationship between energy and GNP: a reexamination. Journal of Energy and Development 5:326–331.

2. Andrews, D. W. K. and Buchinsky, M. 2000. A Three–Step Method for Choosing the Number of Bootstrap Repetitions. Econometrica 68:23–52.

3. Bowden, N. and Payne, J. E. 2009. The causal relation–ship between U.S. energy consumption and real output: A disaggregated analysis. Journal of Policy Modeling 31:180–188.

4. Brock, W. 1991. Causality, chaos, explanation and prediction in economics and finance. In: Casti, J. and Karlqvist, A. (editors), Beyond Belief: Randomness, Prediction and Explanation in Science. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla pp. 230–279.

5. Chang, T., Fang, W. and 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.

6. Davison, A. C. and Hinkley, D. V. 1999. Bootstrap Methods and Their Application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

7. Diks, C. G. H. and DeGoede, J. 2001. A general nonparametric bootstrap test for Granger causality. In: Broer, H. W., Krauskopf, W. and Vegter, G. (editors), Global analysis of dynamical systems. Institute of Physics Publishing; Bristol, United Kingdom, pp. 391–403.

8. Diks, C. G. H. and Panchenko, V. 2006. A new statistic and practical guidelines for nonparametric Granger causality testing. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 30:1647–1669.

9. Glasure, Y. U. and Lee, A. R. 1997. Cointegration, error–correction, and the relationship between GDP and electricity: the case of South Korea and Singapore. Resource and Energy Economics 20(1):17–25.

10. Granger, C. W. J. 1988. Some recent developments in the concept of causality. Journal of Econometrics 39:199–211.

11. Gurgul, H. and Lach, Ł. 2010. The causal link between Polish stock market and key macroeconomic aggregates. Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung und Praxis 4:367–383.

12. Hacker, R. S. and Hatemi–J, A. 2006. Tests for causality between integrated variables using asymptotic and bootstrap distributions: theory and application. Applied Economics 38:1489–1500.

13. Hiemstra, C. and Jones, J. D. 1994. Testing for linear and nonlinear Granger causality in the stock price–volume relation. Journal of Finance 49:1639–1664.

14. Johansen, S. 1995. Likelihood–based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

15. Keho, Y. 2007. Causal relationship between energy consumption and GDP: An empirical analysis of five West African countries. Journal of Energy and Development 33:23–32.

16. Kraft, J. and Kraft, A. 1978. On the relationship between energy and GNP. Journal of Energy and Development 3:401–403.

17. Lee, C.C. and Chang, C. P. 2005. Structural breaks, energy consumption and economic growth revisited: evidence from Taiwan. Energy Economics 27:857–872.

18. Lütkepohl, H. 1993. Introduction to Multiple Time Series Analysis, 2nd ed. Springer–Verlag, New York.

19. Newey, W.K. and West, K.D. 1987. A Simple Positive Semidefinite, Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix, Econometrica 55:703–708.

20. Oh, W. and Lee, K. 2004. Causal relationship between energy consumption and GDP revisited: the case of Korea 1970–1999. Energy Economics 26:51–59.

21. Soytas, U. and Sari, R. 2003. Energy consumption and GDP: causality relationship in G–7 countries and emerging markets. Energy Economics 26:33–37

22. Toda, H. Y. and Yamamoto, T. 1995. Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics 66:225–250.

23. Yang, H. Y. 2000. A note on the causal relationship between energy and GDP in Taiwan. Energy Economics 22:309–317.

24. Yoo, S–H. 2006. Oil consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence from Korea. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning and Policy 1:235–243.

25. Yu, E. S. H. and Choi, J. Y. 1985. The causal relationship between energy and GNP: an international comparison. Journal of Energy and Development 10:249–272.