IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

A cointegration and causality analysis of copper consumption and economic growth in rich countries

  • Jaunky, Vishal Chandr
Registered author(s):

    The paper examines the copper consumption-economic growth nexus for 16 rich economies from the period 1966 to 2010. Various generations of panel unit root and cointegration tests are applied. Both series are found to be integrated of order one. Evidence of cointegration is found especially when controlling for breaks and long-run cross-sectional dependence. Causality is investigated using a vector error-correction mechanism (VECM) framework. At individual level, unidirectional causality running from economic growth to copper consumption is unraveled for Finland, France and UK in the long-run. Unidirectional causality is also found running from copper consumption to economic growth for Spain. Long-run bi-directionality between economic growth and copper consumption is found for Belgium, Greece, Italy, Japan and South Korea. The neutrality hypothesis holds for Australia, Austria, Canada, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and USA in the long-run. Taken as a whole, panel causality test reveals a long-run unidirectional causality running from economic growth to copper consumption.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420713000822
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Resources Policy.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 4 ()
    Pages: 628-639

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:38:y:2013:i:4:p:628-639
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Perron, P, 1988. "The Great Crash, The Oil Price Shock And The Unit Root Hypothesis," Papers 338, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
    2. David Roodman, 2009. "How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(1), pages 86-136, March.
    3. Francesca Iorio & Stefano Fachin, 2014. "Savings and investments in the OECD: a panel cointegration study with a new bootstrap test," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1271-1300, June.
    4. Westerlund Joakim, 2006. "Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data," Research Memorandum 056, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    5. Taner Yigit, 2002. "Shortfalls of Panel Unit Root Testing," Working Papers 0208, Department of Economics, Bilkent University.
    6. Herwartz, H. & Siedenburg, F., 2008. "Homogenous panel unit root tests under cross sectional dependence: Finite sample modifications and the wild bootstrap," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 137-150, September.
    7. Peter Pedroni, 1999. "Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors," Department of Economics Working Papers 2000-02, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    8. Koedijk, Kees G. & Tims, Ben & van Dijk, Mathijs A., 2004. "Purchasing power parity and the euro area," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 1081-1107.
    9. 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.
    10. 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, 06.
    11. Toda, Hiro Y., 1995. "Finite Sample Performance of Likelihood Ratio Tests for Cointegrating Ranks in Vector Autoregressions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(05), pages 1015-1032, October.
    12. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    13. Foresti, Pasquale, 2006. "Testing for Granger causality between stock prices and economic growth," MPRA Paper 2962, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2007.
    14. Pesaran, M.H., 2003. "A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross Section Dependence," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0346, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    15. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    16. Tilton, John E, 1989. "The New View of Minerals and Economic Growth," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 65(190), pages 265-78, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Huh, Kwang-Sook, 2011. "Steel consumption and economic growth in Korea: Long-term and short-term evidence," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 107-113, June.
    19. David Roodman, 2009. "A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(1), pages 135-158, 02.
    20. Paresh Kumar Narayan & Stephan Popp, 2009. "A New Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks in Level and Slope at Unknown Time," Economics Series 2009_11, Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law, School of Accounting, Economics and Finance.
    21. Ghosh, Sajal, 2006. "Steel consumption and economic growth: Evidence from India," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 7-11, March.
    22. W. Kenn Farr & Richard A. Lord & J. Larry Wolfenbarger, 1998. "Economic Freedom, Political Freedom, and Economic Well-Being: A Causality Analysis," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 18(2), pages 247-262, Fall.
    23. Banerjee, A. & Marcellino, M. & Osbat, C., 2000. "Some Cautions on the Use of Panel Methods for Integrated Series of Macro-economic Data," Economics Working Papers eco2000/20, European University Institute.
    24. Joakim Westerlund & David L. Edgerton, 2008. "A Simple Test for Cointegration in Dependent Panels with Structural Breaks," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(5), pages 665-704, October.
    25. Windmeijer, Frank, 2005. "A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 25-51, May.
    26. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-54, July.
    27. 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.
    28. repec:cto:journl:v:18:y:1998:i:2:p: is not listed on IDEAS
    29. Parker, Cameron & Paparoditis, Efstathios & Politis, Dimitris N., 2006. "Unit root testing via the stationary bootstrap," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 601-638, August.
    30. Roberts, Mark C., 1990. "Predicting metal consumption : The case of US steel," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 56-73, March.
    31. Pasaran, M.H. & Im, K.S. & Shin, Y., 1995. "Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9526, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    32. Labson B. Stephen & Crompton Paul L., 1993. "Common Trends in Economic Activity and Metals Demand: Cointegration and the Intensity of Use Debate," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 147-161, September.
    33. repec:oup:restud:v:76:y:2009:i:3:p:903-935 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:38:y:2013:i:4:p:628-639. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.