Impact of hard coal usage for metal production on economic growth of Poland

• Autorzy: Lach Ł.

Warianty tytułu

PL

Wpływ zużycia węgla kamiennego w produkcji metali na wzrost gospodarczy Polski

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This study provides an analysis of causal links between GDP and usage of hard coal in production of metals in Poland. In order to assure the correctness of computations a third variable - employment - was included in the dataset. Linear and nonlinear dynamic interactions were investigated for the period 2000-2009 on a quarterly basis. The results suggest that in examined period there was a short-run unidirectional causality from GDP to coal usage. On the other hand, the usage of hard coal in production of metals was found to cause GDP and employment in the long-run. Moreover, the impulse response analysis confirmed that the impact of coal usage on GDP and employment was generally negative. All these findings lead to conclusion that in recent decade the usage of hard coal in production of metals did not have a positive impact on economic growth and employment in Poland.

PL

W pracy przedstawiono wyniki badań nad związkami przyczynowymi między PKB a zużyciem węgla kamiennego w produkcji metali w Polsce. W celu zapewnienia poprawności obliczeń trzecia zmienna - zatrudnienie - została dołączona do zbioru danych. Liniowe i nieliniowe związki przyczynowe zostały zbadane w przypadku okresu 2000-2009 na bazie danych kwartalnych. Wyniki empiryczne potwierdzają, że w rozważanym okresie występowała krótkookresowa jednokierunkowa przyczynowość w kierunku od PKB do zużycia węgla. Z drugiej strony zużycie węgla kamiennego w produkcji metali miało długookresowy wpływ na PKB i zatrudnienie. Ponadto analiza dopowiedzi na impuls potwierdziła, że wpływ zużycia węgla na PKB i zatrudnienie był generalnie negatywny. Wszystkie te fakty prowadzą do wniosku, że w ostatniej dekadzie zużycie węgla kamiennego do produkcji metali nie przyczyniło się istotnie do wzrostu gospodarczego i zwiększania zatrudnienia Polsce.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

economic growth; hard coal usage; linear Granger causality; nonlinear Granger causality; impulse response analysis

PL

wzrost gospodarczy; zużycie węgla kamiennego; liniowa przyczynowość w sensie Grangera; nieliniowa przyczynowość w sensie Grangera; analiza odpowiedzi na impuls

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwa AGH
• Czasopismo: Ekonomia Menedżerska
• Rocznik: 2011
• Tom: nr 9
• Strony: 103--120
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 29 poz., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Lach Ł.

• AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, Department of Applications of Mathematics in Economics,

Bibliografia

• [1] Andrews D.W.K., Buchinsky M., A three-step method for choosieng the number of bootstrap repetitions, “Econometrica” 2000, Vol. 68, pp. 23–52.
• [2] Baek E., Brock W., A general test for Granger causality: bivariate model, Technical Report, Iowa State University and University of Wisconsin, Madison 1992.
• [3] Bowden N., Payne J.E., The causal relationship between U.S. energy consumption and real output: a disaggregated analysis, “Journal of Policy Modeling” 2009, Vol. 31, pp. 180–188.
• [4] Brock W., Causality, chaos, explanation and prediction in economics and finance, in: Casti J., Karlqvist A. (Eds.), Beyond belief: randomness, prediction and explanation in science, 1991, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., pp. 230–279.
• [5] Diks C.G.H., DeGoede J., A general nonparametric bootstrap test for Granger causality, in: Broer H.W., Krauskopf W., Vegter G. (Eds.), Global analysis of dynamical systems, Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol 2001, United Kingdom, pp. 391–403.
• [6] Diks C.G.H., Panchenko V., A note on the Hiemstra–Jones test for Granger non–causality, “Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics” 2005, Vol. 9, No. 2, Article 4.
• [7] Diks C.G.H., Panchenko V., A new statistic and practical guidelines for nonparametric Granger causality testing, “Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control” 2006, Vol. 30, pp. 1647–1669.
• [8] Glasure Y.U., Lee A.R., Cointegration, error–correction, and the relationship between GDP and electricity: the case of South Korea and Singapore, “Resource and Energy Economics” 1997, Vol. 20, pp. 17–25.
• [9] Granger C.W.J., Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross spectral methods, “Econometrica” 1969, Vol. 37, pp. 424–438.
• [10] Granger C.W.J., Some recent developments in the concept of causality, “Journal of Econometrics” 1988, Vol. 39, pp. 199–211.
• [11] Granger C.W.J., Huang B., Yang C., A bivariate causality between stock prices and exchange rates: evidence from recent Asian Flu, “The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance” 2000, Vol. 40, pp. 337–354.
• [12] Granger C.W.J., Newbold P., Spurious regression in econometrics, “Journal of Econometrics” 1974, Vol. 2, pp. 111–120.
• [13] Gurgul H., Lach Ł., Linear versus nonlinear causality of DAX companies, “Operations Research and Decisions” 2009, Vol. 3, pp. 27–46.
• [14] Gurgul H., Lach Ł., The causal link between Polish stock market and key macroeconomic aggregates, “Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung und Praxis” 2010, Vol. 4, pp. 367–383.
• [15] Hacker R.S., Hatemi J.A., Tests for causality between integrated variables using asymptotic and bootstrap distributions: theory and application, “Applied Economics” 2006, Vol. 38, pp. 1489–1500.
• [16] Hiemstra C., Jones J.D., Testing for linear and nonlinear Granger causality in the stock price–volume relation, “Journal of Finance” 1994, Vol. 49, pp. 1639–1664.
• [17] Horowitz J.L., Bootstrap methods in econometrics: theory and numerical performance, in: Kreps D.M., Wallis K.F. (Eds.), Advances in economics and econometrics: theory and applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1995, pp. 188–232.
• [18] Jinke L., Hualing S., Dianming G., Causality relationship between coal consumption and GDP: difference of major OECD and non-OECD countries, “Applied Energy” 2008, Vol. 8, pp. 421–429.
• [19] Johansen S., Likelihood–based inference in cointegrated vector autoregressive models, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1995.
• [20] Keppler J.H., Causality and cointegration between energy consumption and economic growth in developing countries, in: Keppler J.H., Bourbonnais R., Girod J. (Eds.), The econometrics of energy systems, Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2007, pp. 75–97.
• [21] Kraft J., Kraft A., On the relationship between energy and GNP, “The Journal of Energy and Development” 1978, Vol. 3, pp. 401–403.
• [22] Lach Ł., Application of bootstrap methods in investigation of size of the Granger causality test for integrated VAR systems, “Managing Global Transitions” 2010, Vol. 8, pp. 167–186.
• [23] Lütkepohl H., Introduction to multiple time series analysis, second ed., Springer–Verlag, New York 1993.
• [24] Masih A.M.M., Masih R., Energy consumption, real income and temporal causality: results from a multi–country study based on cointegration and error–correction modelling techniques, “Energy Economics” 1996, Vol. 18, pp. 165–183.
• [25] Phillips P.C.B., Understanding the spurious regression in econometrics, “Journal of Econometrics” 1986, Vol. 33, pp. 311–340.
• [26] Skaug H.J., Tjøstheim D., Nonparametric tests of serial independence, in: Subba Rao T. (Ed.), Developments in time series analysis, Chapman and Hall, London 1993, pp. 207–229.
• [27] Soytas U., Sari R., Energy consumption and GDP: causality relationship in G–7 countries and emerging markets, “Energy Economics” 2003, Vol. 26, pp. 33–37.
• [28] Yang H.Y., A note on the causal relationship between energy and GDP in Taiwan, “Energy Economics” 2000, Vol. 22, pp. 309–317.
• [29] Yu E., Choi J., The causal relationship between energy and GDP, an international comparison, “The Journal of Energy and Development” 1985, Vol. 10, pp. 249–272.