IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eaa/aeinde/v23y2023i1_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Shocks To Electricity Consumption Permanent Or Transitory? Evidence From A Panel Stationarity Test With Gradual Structural Breaks For 25 Oecd Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Jamal G. HUSEIN
  • S. Murat KARA

Abstract

This study re-examines the stationarity properties of per capita electricity consumption for 25 OECD countries during the 1960-2014 period. We apply a newly developed panel stationarity test that models structural shifts as a gradual process via a Fourier function. This Fourier panel stationarity test takes cross-sectional dependence into account and allows heterogeneity across cross-sections in the panel. However, rather than assuming the presence of a structural shift or a nonlinear deterministic component, we formally test the linearity hypothesis of each time-series utilizing a novel test. Moreover, for robustness check, we apply a panel stationarity test incorporating abrupt structural breaks and employ several new panel stationarity tests that complement the Fourier panel test. For the period of study, we find strong empirical evidence supporting stationarity of per capita electricity consumption for the 25 OECD countries. Therefore, shocks to electricity consumption will have a transitory effect as per capita electricity consumption will, after a shock, return to its long-run trend path.

Suggested Citation

  • Jamal G. HUSEIN & S. Murat KARA, 2023. "Are Shocks To Electricity Consumption Permanent Or Transitory? Evidence From A Panel Stationarity Test With Gradual Structural Breaks For 25 Oecd Countries," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 23(1), pages 57-76.
    • Handle: RePEc:eaa:aeinde:v:23:y:2023:i:1_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.usc.es/~economet/reviews/aeid2313.pdf
    Download Restriction: No
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smyth, Russell, 2013. "Are fluctuations in energy variables permanent or transitory? A survey of the literature on the integration properties of energy consumption and production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 371-378.
    2. Pierre Perron & Mototsugu Shintani & Tomoyoshi Yabu, 2017. "Testing for Flexible Nonlinear Trends with an Integrated or Stationary Noise Component," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 79(5), pages 822-850, October.
    3. Kumar Narayan, Paresh & Smyth, Russell, 2007. "Are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? Evidence from 182 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 333-341, January.
    4. Baltagi, Badi H. & Feng, Qu & Kao, Chihwa, 2012. "A Lagrange Multiplier test for cross-sectional dependence in a fixed effects panel data model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 170(1), pages 164-177.
    5. Breitung, Jörg & Pesaran, Mohammad Hashem, 2005. "Unit roots and cointegration in panels," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2005,42, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    6. Kapetanios, George & Shin, Yongcheol & Snell, Andy, 2003. "Testing for a unit root in the nonlinear STAR framework," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 359-379, February.
    7. Kaddour Hadri, 2000. "Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 3(2), pages 148-161.
    8. Lean, Hooi Hooi & Smyth, Russell, 2013. "Will policies to promote renewable electricity generation be effective? Evidence from panel stationarity and unit root tests for 115 countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 371-379.
    9. Kwiatkowski, Denis & Phillips, Peter C. B. & Schmidt, Peter & Shin, Yongcheol, 1992. "Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root : How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1-3), pages 159-178.
    10. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2007. "A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 265-312.
    11. Junsoo Lee & Mark C. Strazicich, 2013. "Minimum LM unit root test with one structural break," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 33(4), pages 2483-2492.
    12. Sollis, Robert, 2009. "A simple unit root test against asymmetric STAR nonlinearity with an application to real exchange rates in Nordic countries," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 118-125, January.
    13. Breuer, Janice Boucher & McNown, Robert & Wallace, Myles S, 2001. "Misleading Inferences from Panel Unit-Root Tests with an Illustration from Purchasing Power Parity," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 482-493, August.
    14. Nazlioglu, Saban & Payne, James E. & Lee, Junsoo & Rayos-Velazquez, Marco & Karul, Cagin, 2021. "Convergence in OPEC carbon dioxide emissions: Evidence from new panel stationarity tests with factors and breaks," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    15. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
    16. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2021. "General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 13-50, January.
    17. Josep Carrion-i-Silvestre & Andreu Sansó, 2006. "A guide to the computation of stationarity tests," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 433-448, June.
    18. Robinson Kruse, 2011. "A new unit root test against ESTAR based on a class of modified statistics," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 71-85, February.
    19. Nazlioglu, Saban & Karul, Cagin, 2017. "A panel stationarity test with gradual structural shifts: Re-investigate the international commodity price shocks," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 181-192.
    20. Chi-Young Choi & Young-Kyu Moh, 2007. "How useful are tests for unit-root in distinguishing unit-root processes from stationary but non-linear processes?," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 10(1), pages 82-112, March.
    21. M. Hashem Pesaran & Yongcheol Shin & Richard J. Smith, 2001. "Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 289-326.
    22. Helmut Herwartz & Simone Maxand & Yabibal M. Walle, 2019. "Heteroskedasticity‐Robust Unit Root Testing for Trending Panels," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(5), pages 649-664, September.
    23. George Kapetanios, 2005. "Unit‐root testing against the alternative hypothesis of up to m structural breaks," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 123-133, January.
    24. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    25. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2015. "Testing Weak Cross-Sectional Dependence in Large Panels," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(6-10), pages 1089-1117, December.
    26. Donggyu Sul & Peter C. B. Phillips & Chi‐Young Choi, 2005. "Prewhitening Bias in HAC Estimation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 67(4), pages 517-546, August.
    27. Perron, Pierre & Yabu, Tomoyoshi, 2009. "Testing for Shifts in Trend With an Integrated or Stationary Noise Component," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 27(3), pages 369-396.
    28. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Prasad, Arti, 2008. "Electricity consumption-real GDP causality nexus: Evidence from a bootstrapped causality test for 30 OECD countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 910-918, February.
    29. Hadri, Kaddour & Kurozumi, Eiji, 2011. "A Locally Optimal Test for No Unit Root in Cross-sectionally Dependent Panel Data," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 52(2), pages 165-184, December.
    30. Enders, Walter & Lee, Junsoo, 2012. "The flexible Fourier form and Dickey–Fuller type unit root tests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 196-199.
    31. Choi, In, 2001. "Unit root tests for panel data," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 249-272, April.
    32. Perron, Pierre, 1990. "Testing for a Unit Root in a Time Series with a Changing Mean," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 8(2), pages 153-162, April.
    33. Prodan, Ruxandra, 2008. "Potential Pitfalls in Determining Multiple Structural Changes With an Application to Purchasing Power Parity," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 26, pages 50-65, January.
    34. Janice Boucher Breuer & Robert McNown & Myles S. Wallace, 2001. "Misleading Inferences from Panel Unit‐Root Tests with an Illustration from Purchasing Power Parity," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 482-493, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tiwari, Aviral Kumar & Albulescu, Claudiu Tiberiu, 2016. "Renewable-to-total electricity consumption ratio: Estimating the permanent or transitory fluctuations based on flexible Fourier stationarity and unit root tests," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1409-1427.
    2. Schneider, Nicolas & Strielkowski, Wadim, 2023. "Modelling the unit root properties of electricity data—A general note on time-domain applications," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 618(C).
    3. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Khraief, Naceur & Mahalik, Mantu Kumar & Zaman, Khair Uz, 2014. "Are fluctuations in natural gas consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from time series and panel unit root tests," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 183-195.
    4. Omay, Tolga & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Stewart, Chris, 2021. "Is There Really Hysteresis in OECD Countries’ Unemployment Rates? New Evidence Using a Fourier Panel Unit Root Test," MPRA Paper 107691, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 May 2021.
    5. Smyth, Russell, 2013. "Are fluctuations in energy variables permanent or transitory? A survey of the literature on the integration properties of energy consumption and production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 371-378.
    6. Tolga Omay & Muhammad Shahbaz & Chris Stewart, 2021. "Is there really hysteresis in the OECD unemployment rates? New evidence using a Fourier panel unit root test," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 48(4), pages 875-901, November.
    7. Durusu-Ciftci, Dilek & Ispir, M. Serdar & Kok, Dundar, 2019. "Do stock markets follow a random walk? New evidence for an old question," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 165-175.
    8. Lee, Chien-Chiang & Ranjbar, Omid & Lee, Chi-Chuan, 2021. "Testing the persistence of shocks on renewable energy consumption: Evidence from a quantile unit-root test with smooth breaks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PB).
    9. James E Payne & Junsoo Lee, 2024. "Global perspective on the permanent or transitory nature of shocks to tourist arrivals: Evidence from new unit root tests with structural breaks and factors," Tourism Economics, , vol. 30(1), pages 67-103, February.
    10. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Khraief, Naceur & Hammoudeh, Shawkat, 2019. "How Do Carbon Emissions Respond to Economic Shocks? Evidence from Low-, Middle- and High-Income Countries," MPRA Paper 93976, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 May 2019.
    11. Nazlioglu, Saban & Karul, Cagin, 2017. "A panel stationarity test with gradual structural shifts: Re-investigate the international commodity price shocks," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 181-192.
    12. Muhammad Shahbaz & Aviral Kumar Tiwari & Saleheen Khan, 2016. "Is energy consumption per capita stationary? Evidence from first and second generation panel unit root tests," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(3), pages 1656-1669.
    13. Khraief, Naceur & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Heshmati, Almas & Azam, Muhammad, 2020. "Are unemployment rates in OECD countries stationary? Evidence from univariate and panel unit root tests," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    14. Sakiru Adebola SOLARIN, 2017. "The Stationarity of Consumption-Income Ratios: Nonlinear Evidence in ASEAN Countries," Journal for Economic Forecasting, Institute for Economic Forecasting, vol. 0(2), pages 109-123, June.
    15. Muhammad Shafiullah & Luke Emeka Okafor & Usman Khalid, 2019. "Determinants of international tourism demand: Evidence from Australian states and territories," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(2), pages 274-296, March.
    16. Martin B. Schmidt, 2021. "On the evolution of athlete anthropometric measurements: racial integration, expansion, and steroids," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(6), pages 3419-3443, December.
    17. Mishra, Vinod & Sharma, Susan & Smyth, Russell, 2009. "Are fluctuations in energy consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from a panel of Pacific Island countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2318-2326, June.
    18. Le, Thai-Ha & Chang, Youngho & Park, Donghyun, 2017. "Energy demand convergence in APEC: An empirical analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 32-41.
    19. Syed A. Basher & Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre, 2007. "Another Look at the Null of Stationary RealExchange Rates. Panel Data with Structural Breaks and Cross-section Dependence," IREA Working Papers 200710, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised May 2007.
    20. Juan Carlos Cuestas & Karsten Staehr, 2013. "Fiscal shocks and budget balance persistence in the EU countries from Central and Eastern Europe," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(22), pages 3211-3219, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Electricity consumption; OECD; Structural breaks; Fourier approximation; Panel stationarity tests;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C20 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - General
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy
    • O53 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Asia including Middle East
    • O55 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Africa

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eaa:aeinde:v:23:y:2023:i:1_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: M. Carmen Guisan (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.usc.es/economet/eaa.htm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.