Volume 24, Issue 1 (2024)
QJER 2024, 24(1): 1-26 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Hekmati Farid S, Havasbeigi F, Moridian A. Dynamics of relationships between electricity consumption, environmental effect and economic growth with the approach of time-varying parameters. QJER 2024; 24 (1) : 1
URL: http://ecor.modares.ac.ir/article-18-67336-en.html
URL: http://ecor.modares.ac.ir/article-18-67336-en.html
1- Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran , s.hekmati@urmia.ac.ir
2- Ph.D. student of urban economics, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
3- Ph.D. student in Econometrics, Department of Economics and Management, Urmia University
2- Ph.D. student of urban economics, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
3- Ph.D. student in Econometrics, Department of Economics and Management, Urmia University
Abstract: (742 Views)
Introduction:
As Stern et al (2019) argued, energy is considered an important determinant of sustainable economic growth. Energy sources meet the needs of various sectors such as industry, modern agriculture, commerce, transportation, etc. Therefore, electricity consumption (energy consumption) is vital for the growth of an economy.
Electricity is the backbone of today's industrial and consumer economies. Its share in the energy mix is increasing due to increasing per capita income, electrification of transportation, use of electronic devices, and demand for consumer and industrial products. However, developed countries are moving towards energy efficiency technology to offset the increasing demand for electricity and its effects (Bildirici et al., 2012). Discussions about the relationship between economic growth, energy consumption and some macroeconomic variables have been high among researchers and policymakers in recent decades (Ehigiamusoe and Lean, 2019; Ehigiamusoe et al., 2020). The aim of our study is to examine the dynamics of the relationship between electricity consumption, ecological footprint and real GDP in Iran by dividing GDP into oil GDP and non-oil GDP. The logic behind this is that Iran's growth model is dependent on oil exports and public sector spending, with no diversification of oil revenues to ensure sustainable development. In fact, although Iran's successive development plans have emphasized the diversification and promotion of the non-oil private sector as a priority goal, today this goal can be achieved by reducing dependence on oil. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive review of energy consumption-environment-GDP dynamics with oil on one hand and energy-environment-GDP non-oil dynamics on the other hand. Therefore, we address the dichotomy between the oil and non-oil sectors and its consequences on the efficiency of energy policies and sustainable development.
Methodology:
This study uses the Vector Auto-Regressive model of time-varying parameters (TVP-VAR) to examine the inter-temporal dynamics between Iran's real GDP (oil, non-oil), electricity consumption and ecological footprint during 1967-2018. The results show that the TVP-VAR model is useful for examining the dynamics of the relationship between electricity consumption, real GDP and ecological footprint.
Results and Discussion:
The results show that the reaction functions of GDP with oil to positive shocks of environmental effect and electricity consumption are significantly different over time. Similar results exist for the impulse responses of the environmental effect to the positive shock of electricity consumption and GDP. We find the positive response of GDP to electricity consumption before 1978, negative between 1979 and 1991 and after 2003. The reactions of domestic gross production to environmental impact shocks between 1979 and 1986 are negative in the 8th and 12th period horizons and positive in other periods.
The shock response of energy consumption to GDP is positive in four periods during 1981 to 2006 and is negative in other years. It is negative in the 8-period horizon between 1976 and 2004, as well as in the 12-period horizon between 1971 and 1999 and positive in other years.
In relation to the response functions of the environmental impact of GDP and energy consumption in the horizon of 4 periods, the effect is positive, but it is positive in the horizon of 8 periods except for the years 1994-2000 and in the horizon of 12 periods except for the years 1979 to 1999 positive effects are observed.
Conclusion:
The results show that regimes with high and low volatility of real GDP (oil and non-oil), electricity consumption and environmental impact shocks have asymmetric effects (positive or negative) on these variables. In particular, the high fluctuations in electricity consumption during 1980s, 2000s, and 2010s likely affect real oil GDP and the environmental effect, negatively, But negatively, it leads to a decrease in real non-oil GDP growth. In the 1981s, 2001s, and 2011s, low volatility of electricity consumption had a negative impact on environmental impact, and low volatility of real oil and non-oil GDP had a positive impact on environmental impact.
In addition, real oil GDP fluctuations in the 1980s and 1990s both have positive effects on electricity consumption. The low real non-oil GDP fluctuations likely have positive effects on environmental effect, and real non-oil GDP fluctuations have positive effects on electricity consumption, but high real non-oil GDP fluctuations have negative effects on environmental status.
As Stern et al (2019) argued, energy is considered an important determinant of sustainable economic growth. Energy sources meet the needs of various sectors such as industry, modern agriculture, commerce, transportation, etc. Therefore, electricity consumption (energy consumption) is vital for the growth of an economy.
Electricity is the backbone of today's industrial and consumer economies. Its share in the energy mix is increasing due to increasing per capita income, electrification of transportation, use of electronic devices, and demand for consumer and industrial products. However, developed countries are moving towards energy efficiency technology to offset the increasing demand for electricity and its effects (Bildirici et al., 2012). Discussions about the relationship between economic growth, energy consumption and some macroeconomic variables have been high among researchers and policymakers in recent decades (Ehigiamusoe and Lean, 2019; Ehigiamusoe et al., 2020). The aim of our study is to examine the dynamics of the relationship between electricity consumption, ecological footprint and real GDP in Iran by dividing GDP into oil GDP and non-oil GDP. The logic behind this is that Iran's growth model is dependent on oil exports and public sector spending, with no diversification of oil revenues to ensure sustainable development. In fact, although Iran's successive development plans have emphasized the diversification and promotion of the non-oil private sector as a priority goal, today this goal can be achieved by reducing dependence on oil. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive review of energy consumption-environment-GDP dynamics with oil on one hand and energy-environment-GDP non-oil dynamics on the other hand. Therefore, we address the dichotomy between the oil and non-oil sectors and its consequences on the efficiency of energy policies and sustainable development.
Methodology:
This study uses the Vector Auto-Regressive model of time-varying parameters (TVP-VAR) to examine the inter-temporal dynamics between Iran's real GDP (oil, non-oil), electricity consumption and ecological footprint during 1967-2018. The results show that the TVP-VAR model is useful for examining the dynamics of the relationship between electricity consumption, real GDP and ecological footprint.
Results and Discussion:
The results show that the reaction functions of GDP with oil to positive shocks of environmental effect and electricity consumption are significantly different over time. Similar results exist for the impulse responses of the environmental effect to the positive shock of electricity consumption and GDP. We find the positive response of GDP to electricity consumption before 1978, negative between 1979 and 1991 and after 2003. The reactions of domestic gross production to environmental impact shocks between 1979 and 1986 are negative in the 8th and 12th period horizons and positive in other periods.
The shock response of energy consumption to GDP is positive in four periods during 1981 to 2006 and is negative in other years. It is negative in the 8-period horizon between 1976 and 2004, as well as in the 12-period horizon between 1971 and 1999 and positive in other years.
In relation to the response functions of the environmental impact of GDP and energy consumption in the horizon of 4 periods, the effect is positive, but it is positive in the horizon of 8 periods except for the years 1994-2000 and in the horizon of 12 periods except for the years 1979 to 1999 positive effects are observed.
Conclusion:
The results show that regimes with high and low volatility of real GDP (oil and non-oil), electricity consumption and environmental impact shocks have asymmetric effects (positive or negative) on these variables. In particular, the high fluctuations in electricity consumption during 1980s, 2000s, and 2010s likely affect real oil GDP and the environmental effect, negatively, But negatively, it leads to a decrease in real non-oil GDP growth. In the 1981s, 2001s, and 2011s, low volatility of electricity consumption had a negative impact on environmental impact, and low volatility of real oil and non-oil GDP had a positive impact on environmental impact.
In addition, real oil GDP fluctuations in the 1980s and 1990s both have positive effects on electricity consumption. The low real non-oil GDP fluctuations likely have positive effects on environmental effect, and real non-oil GDP fluctuations have positive effects on electricity consumption, but high real non-oil GDP fluctuations have negative effects on environmental status.
Article number: 1
Article Type: Original Research |
Subject:
Other Special Topics
Received: 2023/02/6 | Accepted: 2023/03/13 | Published: 2024/03/18
Received: 2023/02/6 | Accepted: 2023/03/13 | Published: 2024/03/18
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |