IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v30y2008i3p919-936.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are oil shocks permanent or temporary? Panel data evidence from crude oil and NGL production in 60 countries

Author

Listed:
  • Narayan, Paresh Kumar
  • Narayan, Seema
  • Smyth, Russell

Abstract

This paper examines the unit root properties of crude oil production for 60 countries employing a range of panel data unit root tests for the period 1971 to 2003. The study first employs a number of panel data tests that do not accommodate structural breaks and then proceeds to apply the Lagrange Multiplier (LM) panel unit root test with one structural break. The results of the panel data tests without a structural break are inconclusive with at best mixed support for joint stationarity. The findings from the LM panel unit root test with a structural break, however, are conclusive, suggesting that for a world panel and smaller regional-based panels, crude oil and NGL production are jointly stationary.

Suggested Citation

  • Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Narayan, Seema & Smyth, Russell, 2008. "Are oil shocks permanent or temporary? Panel data evidence from crude oil and NGL production in 60 countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 919-936, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:30:y:2008:i:3:p:919-936
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140-9883(07)00086-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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. Joyeux, Roselyne & Ripple, Ronald D., 2007. "Household energy consumption versus income and relative standard of living: A panel approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 50-60, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Regnier, Eva, 2007. "Oil and energy price volatility," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 405-427, May.
    5. Finn, Mary G, 2000. "Perfect Competition and the Effects of Energy Price Increases on Economic Activity," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 32(3), pages 400-416, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Karlsson, Sune & Lothgren, Mickael, 2000. "On the power and interpretation of panel unit root tests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 249-255, March.
    8. Panagiotidis, Theodore & Rutledge, Emilie, 2007. "Oil and gas markets in the UK: Evidence from a cointegrating approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 329-347, March.
    9. Rotemberg, Julio J & Woodford, Michael, 1996. "Imperfect Competition and the Effects of Energy Price Increases on Economic Activity," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 28(4), pages 550-577, November.
    10. Hamilton, James D., 2003. "What is an oil shock?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 363-398, April.
    11. Mark Strazicich & John List, 2003. "Are CO 2 Emission Levels Converging Among Industrial Countries?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(3), pages 263-271, March.
    12. Junsoo Lee & Mark C. Strazicich, 2003. "Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1082-1089, November.
    13. Jushan Bai & Pierre Perron, 1998. "Estimating and Testing Linear Models with Multiple Structural Changes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(1), pages 47-78, January.
    14. PareshKumar Narayan & Russell Smyth, 2005. "Structural Breaks And Unit Roots In Australian Macroeconomic Time Series," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(4), pages 421-437, December.
    15. Christophe Hurlin & Valérie Mignon, 2007. "Second Generation Panel Unit Root Tests," Working Papers halshs-00159842, HAL.
    16. Kim, In-Moo & Loungani, Prakash, 1992. "The role of energy in real business cycle models," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 173-189, April.
    17. Hooker, Mark A., 1996. "This is what happened to the oil price-macroeconomy relationship: Reply," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 221-222, October.
    18. Kaddour Hadri, 2000. "Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 3(2), pages 148-161.
    19. Roger Perman & David I. Stern, 2003. "Evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests that the Environmental Kuznets Curve does not exist," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(3), pages 325-347, September.
    20. Caporale, Tony & Grier, Kevin B, 2000. "Political Regime Change and the Real Interest Rate," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 32(3), pages 320-334, August.
    21. Jaroslava Hlouskova & Martin Wagner, 2006. "The Performance of Panel Unit Root and Stationarity Tests: Results from a Large Scale Simulation Study," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 85-116.
    22. Davis, Steven J. & Haltiwanger, John, 2001. "Sectoral job creation and destruction responses to oil price changes," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 465-512, December.
    23. David F. Hendry & Katarina Juselius, 2001. "Explaining Cointegration Analysis: Part II," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 75-120.
    24. Joshua Linn, 2009. "Why Do Energy Prices Matter? The Role Of Interindustry Linkages In U.S. Manufacturing," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 47(3), pages 549-567, July.
    25. Kyung-So Im & Junsoo Lee & Margie Tieslau, 2005. "Panel LM Unit-root Tests with Level Shifts," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 67(3), pages 393-419, June.
    26. 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.
    27. Jörg Breitung & Bertrand Candelon, 2005. "Purchasing Power Parity during Currency Crises: A Panel Unit Root Test under Structural Breaks," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 141(1), pages 124-140, April.
    28. Lardic, Sandrine & Mignon, Valérie, 2008. "Oil prices and economic activity: An asymmetric cointegration approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 847-855, May.
    29. Papell, David H., 1997. "Searching for stationarity: Purchasing power parity under the current float," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3-4), pages 313-332, November.
    30. Lutz Kilian, 2008. "Exogenous Oil Supply Shocks: How Big Are They and How Much Do They Matter for the U.S. Economy?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(2), pages 216-240, May.
    31. Tauchmann, H., 2006. "Firing the furnace? An econometric analysis of utilities' fuel choice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3898-3909, December.
    32. Luintel, Kul B, 2001. "Heterogeneous Panel Unit Root Tests and Purchasing Power Parity," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 69(0), pages 42-56, Supplemen.
    33. Robin L. Lumsdaine & David H. Papell, 1997. "Multiple Trend Breaks And The Unit-Root Hypothesis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(2), pages 212-218, May.
    34. 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.
    35. Postali, Fernando A.S. & Picchetti, Paulo, 2006. "Geometric Brownian Motion and structural breaks in oil prices: A quantitative analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 506-522, July.
    36. Muellbauer, John & Nunziata, Luca, 2001. "Credit, the Stock Market and Oil: Forecasting US GDP," CEPR Discussion Papers 2906, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    37. Lee, Chien-Chiang, 2006. "The causality relationship between energy consumption and GDP in G-11 countries revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1086-1093, June.
    38. Hooker, Mark A., 1996. "What happened to the oil price-macroeconomy relationship?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 195-213, October.
    39. Song, Frank M & Wu, Yangru, 1997. "Hysteresis in Unemployment: Evidence from 48 U.S. States," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 35(2), pages 235-243, April.
    40. Chen, Shiu-Sheng & Chen, Hung-Chyn, 2007. "Oil prices and real exchange rates," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 390-404, May.
    41. Paresh Kumar Narayan, 2006. "Are bilateral real exchange rates stationary? Evidence from Lagrange multiplier unit root tests for India," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 63-70.
    42. Kilian, Lutz, 2005. "The Effects of Exogenous Oil Supply Shocks on Output and Inflation: Evidence from the G7 Countries," CEPR Discussion Papers 5404, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    43. Mark Holmes, 2002. "Panel data evidence on inflation convergence in the European Union," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 155-158.
    44. Altinay, Galip & Karagol, Erdal, 2004. "Structural break, unit root, and the causality between energy consumption and GDP in Turkey," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 985-994, November.
    45. Levin, Andrew & Lin, Chien-Fu & James Chu, Chia-Shang, 2002. "Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 1-24, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:eee:eneeco:v:30:y:2008:i:3:p:919-936. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.