Türki Cumhuriyetlerde Elektrik Tüketimi, Reel Gelir ve Dışa Açıklık İlişkisi: Bootstrap-Granger Nedensellik Yaklaşımı

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 73 - 84, 20.10.2017

Ali Acaravcı , Sinan Erdoğan

https://doi.org/10.20979/ueyd.326691

Cited By: 2

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türki Cumhuriyetlerde gelir, elektrik
enerji tüketimi ve dışa açıklık, arasındaki nedensellik ilişkilerini,
yatay-kesit bağımlılığı dikkate ikinci nesil panel veri yöntemleri kullanılarak
1992-2012 dönemi için araştırmaktadır. Yatay kesit bağımlılık test sonuçlarına
göre, tüm değişkenler ve model yatay kesit bağımlıdır. Smith vd. Bootstrap
(2004) birim kök testi sonuçlarına göre kişi başı gelir ve dışa açıklık
değişkenleri düzeyde, elektrik tüketimi değişkeni ise fark durağandır. Bu
nedenle değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli ilişkilerin varlığını test etmeye
yönelik olarak eşbütünleşme testleri uygulanmamıştır. Değişkenler arasındaki
nedensel ilişkiler, yatay kesit bağımlılığı dikkate alan, ülke bazlı sonuçlar
elde etmeye olanak sağlayan ve iki açıklayıcı değişkenin bağımlı değişken
üzerindeki etkisini aynı anda test etmeye olanak sağlayan Konya (2006) panel
nedensellik modeliyle incelenmiştir. Analiz sonuçları şu şekilde özetlenebilir:
i) Elektrik tüketimi ve gelir arasında nedensellik ilişkisi mevcuttur. ii) Dışa
açıklık ve gelir arasında nedensellik ilişkisi mevcuttur. iii) Enerji tüketimi
ve dışa açıklık değişkenleri, gelir üzerinde daha güçlü ortak etkiye sahiptir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Enerji, Elektrik Tüketimi, Dışa Açıklık, Panel Veri

The Relationship between Electricity Consumption, Real Income and Trade Openness in Turkic Republics: Bootstrap-Granger Causality Approach

Öz

This
study explores the causal relationships between electricity consumption, real
income and trade openness in Turkic Republics for 1992-2012 period by using second
generation panel data methods under cross-sectional dependence. According to
cross-sectional dependence tests, all variables and model are cross-sectionally
dependent. According to the Smith et al. (2004) bootstrap unit root test, real
income per capita and trade openness variables are stationary on level. On the
contrary, electricity consumption variable is stationary in first difference.
Therefore, cointegration tests have not been implemented in order to long-run
relationships between variables. Causal relationships between variables have
been examined by using Konya (2006) panel data causality approach which allows
cross-sectional dependence and gives possibility to examine two explanatory
variables’ effects on dependent variable and obtain country-specific results.
The results can be summarized as follows: i) There exist a causal relationship
between electricity consumption and real income. ii) There exist a causal
relationship between trade openness and real income. iii) Electricity
consumption and trade openness variables have more powerful common effects on
real income.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Energy, Electricity Consumption, Trade Openness

Kaynakça

• Acaravci, A. (2010), Structural breaks, electricity consumption and economic growth: Evidence from Turkey. Journal for Economic Forecasting, 2, 140-154.
• Acaravci, A., Ozturk, I. (2012), Electricity consumption and economic growth nexus: A multivariate analysis for Turkey. Amfiteatru Economic, 14(31), 246-257.
• Acaravcı, A., Erdoğan, S. & Akalin G. (2015). The Electricity Consumption, Real Income, Trade Openness and Foreign Direct Investment: The Empirical Evidence from Turkey. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 5 (4), 1050-1057.
• Aktas, C., Yilmaz, V. (2008), Causal relationship between electricity consumption and economic growth in Turkey. Zonguldak Karaelmas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(8), 45-54.
• Altinay, G., Karagol, E. (2005), Electricity consumption and economic growth: Evidence from Turkey. Energy Economics, 27(6), 849-856.
• Aslan, A. (2013), Causality between electricity consumption and economic growth in Turkey: An ARDL bounds testing approach. Energy Sources Part B: Econ Plan Policy, 9(1), 25-31.
• Aslan, A. (2014), Electricity consumption, labor force and GDP in Turkey: Evidence from multivariate Granger causality. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 2, 174-182.
• Dünya Bankası, Dünya Gelişme Göstergeleri Çevrimiçi Veri Tabanı (World Bank World Development Indicators Online Database, http://databank.worldbank.org/data/views/variableSelection/selectvariables.aspx?source=world-development-indicators#) (Erişim Tarihi: 10.12.2015).
• Erbaykal, E. (2008), Disaggregate energy consumption and economic growth: Evidence from Turkey. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 20, 1-8.
• Jumbe, C.B.L. (2004), Cointegration and causality between electricity consumption and GDP: Empirical evidence from Malawi. Energy Economics, 26(1), 61-68.
• Konya, L. (2006). Export and growth: Granger causality analyisis on OECD countries with a panel data approach. Economic Modelling, 23, 978-992.
• Kraft, J., Kraft, A. (1978), On the relationship between energy and GNP. Journal of Energy and Development, 3, 401-403.
• Ibrahiem, D. M. (2015). Renewable electricity consumption, foreign direct investment and economic growth in Egypt: An ARDL approach. Procedia Economics and Finance 30, 313-323.
• International Monetary Fund (2000). Transitition Economies: An IMF Perspective on Progress and Prospects. http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ib/2000/110300.htm (Erişim Tarihi 05.10.2016).
• Iyke, B. N. (2015). Electricty consumption and economic growth in Nigeria: A revisit of the energy-growth debate. Energy Economics, 51, 166-176.
• Murray, D.A., Nan, G.D. (1996), A definition of the gross domestic product electrification interrelationship. Journal of Energy and Development, 19, 275-283.
• Narayan, P.K., Prasad, A. (2008), Electricity consumption–real GDP causality nexus: Evidence from a bootstrapped causality test for 30 OECD countries. Energy Policy, 36(2), 910-918.
• Nazlioglu, S., Kayhan, S., Adiguzel, U. (2014), Electricity consumption and economic growth inTurkey: Cointegration, linear and nonlinear granger causality. Energy Sources Part B: Econ Plan Policy, 9(4), 315-324.
• Pesaran, M. Hasheem (2004). “General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels”. http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/research/repec/cam/pdf/cwpe0435.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.12.2015).
• Pesaran, M. Hasheem; Yamagata, Takashi (2008). “Testing Slope Homogenity in Large Panels”. Journal of Econometrics, 142; 50-98.
• Pempetzoglou, M. (2014), Electricity consumption and economic growth: A linear and nonlinear causality investigation for Turkey. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 4(2), 263-273.
• Salahuddin, M. & Alam K. (2016). Information and Communication Technology, electricity consumption, and economic growth in OECD countries: A panel data analysis. Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 76, 185-193.
• Smith, L. Vanessa; Leybourne, Stephen; Kim, Tae-Hwan; Newbold, Paul (2004). More Powerful Panel Data Unit Root Tests with an Application to Mean Reversion in Real Exchange Rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 19; 147-170
• Soytas, U., Sari, R. (2007), The relationship between energy and production: Evidence from Turkish manufacturing industry. Energy Economics, 29, 1151-1165.