SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ekonomi Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3

Testing Stationarity of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Low-Income Countries: Nonlinear Unit Root Analysis

Düşük Gelirli Ülkelerde Kişi Başına Karbondioksit Emisyonu Durağanlığının Test Edilmesi: Doğrusal Olmayan Birim Kök Analizi

Nurgün TOPALLI
Pages
608–626
Publication Date
2021-12-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

All findings provide environmental economic consequences for policy makers.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions have been viewed as the main cause of climate change.
📊
Key Findings & Data:An increasing number of studies investigate the stationarity and unit root properties of CO2 emissions series per capita using different techniques.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:All findings provide environmental economic consequences for policy makers.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2003 Verileri
⚙️Variables:CO2 Emisyonu · Düşük Gelirli Ülkeler · Doğrusal Olmayan Birim Kök Testleri

Abstract

CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions have been viewed as the main cause of climate change. An increasing number of studies investigate the stationarity and unit root properties of CO2 emissions series per capita using different techniques. In this study, the stationarity of CO2 emissions per capita in low-income countries is analyzed using structural breaks and nonlinear unit root tests. Zivot-Andrews (1992), Lumsdaine and Papell (1997), Lee and Strazicich (2003, 2004) (LM) unit root tests were applied for the period 1960-2016. Since the CO2 emissions series per capita showed nonlinearity condition, the analysis was performed by using Leybourne, Newbold and Vougas (1998) (LNV), Harvey and Mills (2002) (HM), Kapetanios, Shin and Snell (2003) (KSS), Sollis (2009), Kruse (2011), Hepsag (2019) methods. According to both Zivot-Andrews (1992), Lumsdaine and Papell (1997), Lee and Strazicich (2003, 2004) (LM) unit root tests with structural breaks and nonlinear Leybourne et al. (1998) (LNV), Harvey and Mills (2002) (HM), Kapetanios et al. (2003) (KSS), Sollis (2009), Kruse (2011), Hepsag (2019) unit root tests, mixed findings were obtained on the stationarity of CO2 emissions per capita. All findings provide environmental economic consequences for policy makers.

Özet

CO2 (karbondioksit) emisyonu, iklim değişikliğinin ana nedeni olarak görülmektedir. Artan sayıda çalışmada kişi başına düşen CO2 emisyon serilerinin durağanlığı ve birim kök özellikleri, farklı teknikler kullanılarak araştırılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada düşük-gelirli ülkelerde kişi başına düşen CO2 emisyonunun durağanlığı yapısal kırılmalı ve doğrusal olmayan birim kök testleri ile analiz edilmiştir. 1960-2016 dönemi için yapısal kırılmalı Zivot-Andrews (1992), Lumsdaine ve Papell (1997), Lee ve Strazicich (2003, 2004) (LM) birim kök testleri uygulanmıştır. Kişi başına CO2 emisyon serisi doğrusal olmama durumu gösterdiği için, analiz Leybourne, Newbold ve Vougas (1998) (LNV), Harvey ve Mills (2002) (HM), Kapetanios, Shin ve Snell (2003) (KSS), Sollis (2009), Kruse (2011), Hepsağ (2019) yöntemleri kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Hem yapısal kırılmalı Zivot-Andrews (1992), Lumsdaine ve Papell (1997), Lee ve Strazicich (2003, 2004) (LM) birim kök testlerine göre hem de doğrusal olmayan Leybourne vd. (1998) (LNV), Harvey ve Mills (2002) (HM), Kapetanios vd. (2003), Sollis (2009), Kruse (2011), Hepsağ (2019) birim kök testlerine göre kişi başına CO2 emisyonunun durağanlığı konusunda karma bulgular elde edilmiştir. Tüm bulgular, politika yapıcılar için çevresel ekonomik sonuçlar sağlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

TOPALLI, N. (2021). Testing Stationarity of Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Low-Income Countries: Nonlinear Unit Root Analysis. Ekonomi Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3, 608–626. https://ajindex.com/articles/383515

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Adhikari, D. and Chen, Y. (2013). Energy consumption and economic growth: A panel cointegration analysis for developing countries. Review of Economics & Finance, 3(2), 68-80. Retrieved from http://www.bapress.ca/
  2. Akadiri, S. S. and Akadiri, A. C. (2020). Interaction between CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in the Middle East: Panel causality evidence. International Journal of Energy Technology and Policy, 16(2), 105-118. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJETP.2020.105507
  3. Ang, J. (2008). Economic development, pollutant emissions and energy consumption in Malaysia. Journal of Policy Modelling, (30), 271-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.04.010
  4. Apergis, N. and Payne, J. (2009). Energy consumption and economic growth in Central America: Evidence from a panel cointegration and error correction model. Energy Economics, 31(2), 211-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2008.09.002
  5. Asafu-Adjaye, J. (2000). The relationship between energy consumption, energy prices and economic growth: Time series evidence from Asian developing countries. Energy Economics, 22, 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-9883(00)00050-5
  6. Breitung, J. (2000). The local power of some unit root tests for panel data. In B. H. Baltagi (Ed.), Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration and dynamic panels (pp. 161–177). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Cevik, E. I., Yıldırım, D. Ç. and Dibooglu, S. (2020) Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth in the US: A Markov-Switching VAR analysis. Energy & Environment, 1-23. doi:10.1177/0958305X20944035 Chaudhry, I., Sadfar, N. and Farooq, F. (2012). Energy consumption and economic growth: Empirical evidence from Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 32(2), 371-382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9468-3
  7. Choi, I. (2001). Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5606(00)00048-6
  8. Demirel, Y. (2012). Energy: Production, conversion, storage, conservation, and coupling (Green energy and technology). London: Springer-Verlag. Dogan, E. and Seker, F. (2016). Determinants of CO2 emissions in the European Union: The role of renewable and non-renewable energy. Renewable Energy, 94, 429-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.03.078
  9. Dumitrescu, E. and Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 1450-1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
  10. Fatai, B. O. (2014). Energy consumptio