IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ist/ekoist/v31y2019i0p53-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elektrik Tüketimindeki Dalgalanmalar Geçici mi Yoksa Kalıcı mı? Türkiye İçin Amprik Bir Analiz

Author

Listed:
  • Oktay KIZILKAYA

    (Hakkari Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İktisat Bölümü, Hakkari, Türkiye.)

  • Gökhan KONAT

    (İnönü Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Ekonometri Bölümü, Malatya, Türkiye)

Abstract

Elektrik, insan yaşamının her alanında vazgeçilmez bir girdidir. Enerji tüketiminin zaman serisi özelliklerinin araştırılması araştırmacılar ve politika yapıcılar için oldukça önemli bir yere sahiptir. Eğer enerji tüketimi serisi durağanlık özelliği gösteriyor ise enerji tüketimine yönelik şoklar geçici olacaktır. Ancak enerji tüketimi serisi birim kök içeriyorsa, enerji tüketimine gelen şokların kalıcı etkileri olacaktır. Bu çalışmada Türkiye’ye ait 1950-2017 yıllarını kapsayan elektrik tüketimi ve kişi başı elektrik tüketimi verileri kullanılmıştır. Ele alınan serilerin durağanlık özellikleri geleneksel birim kök / durağanlık testleri ve Becker, Enders ve Lee (2006) tarafından önerilen Fourier KPSS (FKPSS) durağanlık testi ile incelenmiştir. Becker Enders ve Lee (2006), yapısal kırılmaların doğasının tam olarak bilinemeyeceğini, birim kök testleri için kırılmaların yeri ve sayısını gösterecek özel bir rehberin bulunmadığını ifade etmektedir. Bu durumdan hareketle Fourier birim kök / durağanlık testleri geliştirilmiştir. Fourier yaklaşımını temel alan birim kök testleri, kırılma tarihlerinin, kırılma sayısının veya kırılma yapılarının bilinmediği durumlarda kullanılabilmektedir. Çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlar Türkiye için elektrik tüketimi serisinin durağan olmadığını ve elektrik tüketimindeki dalgalanmaların kalıcı olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu sonuç elektrik enerjisi piyasalarındaki büyük bir yapısal değişimden sonra enerji tüketiminin orijinal dengesine dönemeyeceğini göstermektedir.

Suggested Citation

  • Oktay KIZILKAYA & Gökhan KONAT, 2019. "Elektrik Tüketimindeki Dalgalanmalar Geçici mi Yoksa Kalıcı mı? Türkiye İçin Amprik Bir Analiz," EKOIST Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 31(0), pages 53-62, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ist:ekoist:v:31:y:2019:i:0:p:53-62
    DOI: 10.26650/ekoist.2019.31.0017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/889221
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ekoist/issue/50720/660596
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26650/ekoist.2019.31.0017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-589 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Kumar Tiwari, Aviral & Ozturk, Ilhan & Farooq, Abdul, 2013. "Are fluctuations in electricity consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from developed and developing economies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 551-554.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Yifei Cai & Cosimo Magazzino, 2019. "Are shocks to natural gas consumption transitory or permanent? A more powerful panel unit root test on the G7 countries," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(2), pages 111-120, May.
    7. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
    8. Dogan, Eyup, 2016. "Are shocks to electricity consumption transitory or permanent? Sub-national evidence from Turkey," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 77-84.
    9. Walter Enders & Junsoo Lee, 2012. "A Unit Root Test Using a Fourier Series to Approximate Smooth Breaks," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 74(4), pages 574-599, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Hasanov, Mübariz & Telatar, Erdinc, 2011. "A re-examination of stationarity of energy consumption: Evidence from new unit root tests," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7726-7738.
    12. 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.
    13. Hsu, Yi-Chung & Lee, Chien-Chiang & Lee, Chi-Chuan, 2008. "Revisited: Are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? New evidence from a panel SURADF approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2314-2330, September.
    14. Ralf Becker & Walter Enders & Junsoo Lee, 2006. "A Stationarity Test in the Presence of an Unknown Number of Smooth Breaks," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 381-409, May.
    15. Nelson, Charles R. & Plosser, Charles I., 1982. "Trends and random walks in macroeconmic time series : Some evidence and implications," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 139-162.
    16. 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.
    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. Erdogan, Sinan & Akalin, Guray & Oypan, Oguz, 2020. "Are shocks to disaggregated energy consumption transitory or permanent in Turkey? New evidence from fourier panel KPSS test," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    2. Oluwasola E Omoju & Jinkai Li & Jin Zhang & Abdul Rauf & Victor Edem Sosoo, 2020. "Implications of shocks in energy consumption for energy policy in sub-Saharan Africa," Energy & Environment, , vol. 31(6), pages 1077-1097, September.
    3. Lin, Boqiang & Omoju, Oluwasola E. & Okonkwo, Jennifer U., 2015. "Will disruptions in OPEC oil supply have permanent impact on the global oil market?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1312-1321.
    4. Ozcan, Burcu & Ozturk, Ilhan, 2016. "A new approach to energy consumption per capita stationarity: Evidence from OECD countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 332-344.
    5. Kassouri, Yacouba, 2022. "Boom-bust cycles in oil consumption: The role of explosive bubbles and asymmetric adjustments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. 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).
    7. 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).
    8. Adewuyi, Adeolu O. & Wahab, Bashir A. & Adeboye, Olusegun S., 2020. "Stationarity of prices of precious and industrial metals using recent unit root methods: Implications for markets’ efficiency," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    9. 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.
    10. Lean, Hooi Hooi & Smyth, Russell, 2014. "Will initiatives to promote hydroelectricity consumption be effective? Evidence from univariate and panel LM unit root tests with structural breaks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 102-115.
    11. Yilanci, Veli & Tunali, Çiğdem Börke, 2014. "Are fluctuations in energy consumption transitory or permanent? Evidence from a Fourier LM unit root test," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 20-25.
    12. Cai, Yifei & Menegaki, Angeliki N., 2019. "Fourier quantile unit root test for the integrational properties of clean energy consumption in emerging economies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 324-334.
    13. Muhammad Shahbaz & Sakiru Adebola Solarin & Hrushikesh Mallick, 2015. "Are Fluctuations in Gas Consumption Per Capita Transitory? Evidence from LM Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks," Bulletin of Energy Economics (BEE), The Economics and Social Development Organization (TESDO), vol. 3(4), pages 203-209, December.
    14. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Omay, Tolga & Roubaud, David, 2019. "Sharp and Smooth Breaks in Unit Root Testing of Renewable Energy Consumption: The Way Forward," MPRA Paper 92176, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 11 Feb 2019.
    15. 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.
    16. Akram, Vaseem & Sahoo, Pradipta Kumar & Jangam, Bhushan Praveen, 2019. "Do shocks to electricity consumption revert to its equilibrium? Evidence from Indian states," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    17. Lean, Hooi Hooi & Smyth, Russell, 2013. "Are fluctuations in US production of renewable energy permanent or transitory?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 483-488.
    18. Solarin, Sakiru Adebola & Lean, Hooi Hooi, 2016. "Are fluctuations in oil consumption permanent or transitory? Evidence from linear and nonlinear unit root tests," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 262-270.
    19. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Kumar Tiwari, Aviral & Ozturk, Ilhan & Farooq, Abdul, 2013. "Are fluctuations in electricity consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from developed and developing economies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 551-554.
    20. Lean, Hooi Hooi & Smyth, Russell, 2014. "Are shocks to disaggregated energy consumption in Malaysia permanent or temporary? Evidence from LM unit root tests with structural breaks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 319-328.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Elektrik tüketimi; durağanlık testi; fourier fonksiyonu; türkiye;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • C50 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - General

    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:ist:ekoist:v:31:y:2019:i:0:p:53-62. 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: Ertugrul YASAR (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifisttr.html .

    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.