IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v37y2012i3p296-307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is there a material Kuznets curve for aluminium? evidence from rich countries

Author

Listed:
  • Jaunky, Vishal Chandr

Abstract

The paper tests the material Kuznets Curve (MKC) hypothesis with regard to aluminium consumption for 20 high-income countries over the period 1970 to 2009. The test is based on the suggestion of Narayan and Narayan (2010). Various unit root and cointegration tests are applied. The aluminium and GDP series are found to be integrated of order one and cointegrated. Additionally, the Blundell–Bond system generalized methods-of-moments (GMM) is employed to conduct a panel causality test in a vector error-correction mechanism (VECM) setting. Unidirectional causality running from real per capita GDP to the aluminium intensity is uncovered in both the short-run and long-run. While controlling for structural shocks, the MKC hypothesis is found to hold at individual levels for Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Japan, and United Kingdom as well as for the whole panel. A 1% increase in GDP generates an increase of 0.87% in metal intensity in the short-run and a fall of 0.82% in the long-run for the panel.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaunky, Vishal Chandr, 2012. "Is there a material Kuznets curve for aluminium? evidence from rich countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 296-307.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:37:y:2012:i:3:p:296-307
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2012.04.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420712000220
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2012.04.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1054, July.
    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. Docquier, Frédéric & Lodigiani, Elisabetta & Rapoport, Hillel & Schiff, Maurice, 2016. "Emigration and democracy," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 209-223.
    4. Anindya Banerjee & Massimiliano Marcellino & Chiara Osbat, 2004. "Some cautions on the use of panel methods for integrated series of macroeconomic data," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 7(2), pages 322-340, December.
    5. Jaunky, Vishal Chandr, 2011. "The CO2 emissions-income nexus: Evidence from rich countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1228-1240, March.
    6. Pedroni, Peter, 2004. "Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic And Finite Sample Properties Of Pooled Time Series Tests With An Application To The Ppp Hypothesis," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 597-625, June.
    7. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2007. "A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 265-312.
    8. Joakim Westerlund, 2007. "Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 69(6), pages 709-748, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Chang, Yoosoon, 2004. "Bootstrap unit root tests in panels with cross-sectional dependency," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 263-293, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Chang, Yoosoon, 2002. "Nonlinear IV unit root tests in panels with cross-sectional dependency," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 261-292, October.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Antonio Focacci, 2007. "Empirical analysis of the relationship between total consumption‐GDP ratio and per capita income for different metals," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 34(9), pages 612-636, August.
    16. 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.
    17. Antonio Focacci, 2005. "Empirical relationship between total consumption-GDP ratio and per capita income for different metals of a series of industrialised nations," International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(4), pages 347-377.
    18. Elliott, Graham & Rothenberg, Thomas J & Stock, James H, 1996. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 813-836, July.
    19. Paresh Kumar Narayan & Stephan Popp, 2010. "A new unit root test with two structural breaks in level and slope at unknown time," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(9), pages 1425-1438.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.
    22. 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, February.
    23. David Roodman, 2006. "How to Do xtabond2," North American Stata Users' Group Meetings 2006 8, Stata Users Group.
    24. Peter Pedroni, 1999. "Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(S1), pages 653-670, November.
    25. Strauss, Jack & Yigit, Taner, 2003. "Shortfalls of panel unit root testing," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 309-313, December.
    26. Martin Jänicke & Harald Mönch & Thomas Ranneberg & Udo Simonis, 1989. "Structural change and environmental impact," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 24(1), pages 24-35, January.
    27. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Liu, Ruipeng, 2011. "Are shocks to commodity prices persistent?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 409-416, January.
    28. Engle, Robert & Granger, Clive, 2015. "Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 39(3), pages 106-135.
    29. Yoosoon Chang & Wonho Song, 2009. "Testing for Unit Roots in Small Panels with Short-run and Long-run Cross-sectional Dependencies," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(3), pages 903-935.
    30. Lohani, Prem R. & Tilton, John E., 1993. "A cross-section analysis of metal intensity of use in the less developed countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 145-154, June.
    31. Ignacio Guzman, Juan & Nishiyama, Takashi & Tilton, John E., 2005. "Trends in the intensity of copper use in Japan since 1960," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 21-27, March.
    32. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Narayan, Seema, 2010. "Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: Panel data evidence from developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 661-666, January.
    33. Martin Jänicke & Manfred Binder & Harald Mönch, 1997. "‘Dirty industries’: Patterns of change in industrial countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(4), pages 467-491, June.
    34. Peter Pedroni, 2001. "Purchasing Power Parity Tests In Cointegrated Panels," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(4), pages 727-731, November.
    35. 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.
    36. Canas, Angela & Ferrao, Paulo & Conceicao, Pedro, 2003. "A new environmental Kuznets curve? Relationship between direct material input and income per capita: evidence from industrialised countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 217-229, September.
    37. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    38. repec:bla:obuest:v:61:y:1999:i:0:p:653-70 is not listed on IDEAS
    39. de Bruyn, S. M. & Opschoor, J. B., 1997. "Developments in the throughput-income relationship: theoretical and empirical observations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 255-268, March.
    40. 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.
    41. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ulucak, Recep & Koçak, Emrah & Erdoğan, Seyfettin & Kassouri, Yacouba, 2020. "Investigating the non-linear effects of globalization on material consumption in the EU countries: Evidence from PSTR estimation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Kassouri, Yacouba & Alola, Andrew Adewale & Savaş, Savaş, 2021. "The dynamics of material consumption in phases of the economic cycle for selected emerging countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    3. John Baffes & Alain Kabundi & Peter Nagle, 2022. "The role of income and substitution in commodity demand [Modelling OECD industrial energy demand: asymmetric price responses and energy-saving technical change]," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(2), pages 498-522.
    4. Xin, Yongrong & Ajaz, Tahseen & Shahzad, Mohsin & Luo, Jia, 2023. "How productive capacities influence trade-adjusted resources consumption in China: Testing resource-based EKC," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    5. Song, Yi & Cheng, Jinhua & Zhang, Yijun & Dai, Tao & Huang, Jianbai, 2021. "Direct and indirect effects of heterogeneous technical change on metal consumption intensity: Evidence from G7 and BRICS countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Dhar, Subash & Shukla, Priyadarshi R., 2015. "Low carbon scenarios for transport in India: Co-benefits analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 186-198.
    7. Wang, Zhiping & Feng, Chao & Chen, Jinyu & Huang, Jianbai, 2017. "The driving forces of material use in China: An index decomposition analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 336-348.
    8. Razzaq, Asif & Sharif, Arshian & Ozturk, Ilhan & Skare, Marinko, 2022. "Inclusive infrastructure development, green innovation, and sustainable resource management: Evidence from China’s trade-adjusted material footprints," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    9. Dorothée Charlier & Florian Fizaine, 2020. "Does Becoming Richer Lead to a Reduction in Natural Resource Consumption? An Empirical Refutation of the Kuznets Material Curve," Working Papers 2020.05, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    10. Zheng, Lei & Hao, Jia & Ban, Nannan, 2023. "Do recycling and regulations influence trade-adjusted resource consumption? Exploring the role of renewable energy," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    11. Phillip Crowson, 2018. "Intensity of use reexamined," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 31(1), pages 61-70, May.
    12. Zauresh Atakhanova & Peter Howie, 2020. "Metal intensity of use in the era of global value chains," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 33(1), pages 101-113, July.
    13. Pothen, Frank & Welsch, Heinz, 2019. "Economic development and material use. Evidence from international panel data," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 107-119.
    14. Crompton, Paul, 2015. "Explaining variation in steel consumption in the OECD," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 239-246.
    15. Razzaq, Asif & Ajaz, Tahseen & Li, Jing Claire & Irfan, Muhammad & Suksatan, Wanich, 2021. "Investigating the asymmetric linkages between infrastructure development, green innovation, and consumption-based material footprint: Novel empirical estimations from highly resource-consuming economi," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    16. Leitão, João & Ferreira, Joaquim & Santibanez-González, Ernesto, 2022. "New insights into decoupling economic growth, technological progress and carbon dioxide emissions: Evidence from 40 countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    17. Sun, Yunpeng & Ajaz, Tahseen & Razzaq, Asif, 2022. "How infrastructure development and technical efficiency change caused resources consumption in BRICS countries: Analysis based on energy, transport, ICT, and financial infrastructure indices," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    18. Baiardi, Donatella & Bianchi, Carluccio & Lorenzini, Eleonora, 2015. "The price and income elasticities of the top clothing exporters: Evidence from a panel data analysis," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 14-30.
    19. Wårell, Linda, 2014. "Trends and developments in long-term steel demand – The intensity-of-use hypothesis revisited," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 134-143.
    20. Jin, Guangzhu & Huang, Zhenhui, 2023. "Asymmetric influence of China's outward FDI and exports on trade-adjusted resources footprint in belt and road node countries: Moderating role of governance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    21. Frank Pothen & Heinz Welsch, 2017. "Economic Development and Material Use," Working Papers V-399-17, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    22. Fernandez, Viviana, 2018. "Mineral commodity consumption and intensity of use re-assessed," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1-18.
    23. Harimukti Wandebori & Murtyastanto, 2023. "The Implication of Steel-Intensity-of-Use on Economic Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-22, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vishal Jaunky, 2013. "Democracy and economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: a panel data approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 987-1008, October.
    2. Jaunky, Vishal Chandr, 2013. "A cointegration and causality analysis of copper consumption and economic growth in rich countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 628-639.
    3. Jaunky, Vishal Chandr, 2011. "The CO2 emissions-income nexus: Evidence from rich countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1228-1240, March.
    4. Jaunky, Vishal Chandr, 2013. "Are Shocks To Aluminium Consumption Transitory Or Permanent?," Review of Applied Economics, Lincoln University, Department of Financial and Business Systems, vol. 9(1-2), January.
    5. Ogali, Oscar I.O. & Okoro, Emeka E. & Olafuyi, Saburi G., 2023. "Assessing consensus on nexus between natural gas consumption and economic growth," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    6. Breitung, Jörg & Pesaran, Mohammad Hashem, 2005. "Unit roots and cointegration in panels," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2005,42, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    7. Eshagh Mansourkiaee, 2023. "Estimating energy demand elasticities for gas exporting countries: a dynamic panel data approach," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-28, January.
    8. Scott, K. Rebecca, 2011. "Demand and Price Volatility: Rational Habits in International Gasoline Demand," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt2q87432b, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    9. Vishal Chandr Jaunky & Robert Lundmark, 2015. "Are Shocks to Wood Fuel Production Permanent? Evidence from the EU," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-11, November.
    10. Sung, Bongsuk, 2015. "Public policy supports and export performance of bioenergy technologies: A dynamic panel approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 477-495.
    11. Sung, Bongsuk & Song, Woo-Yong, 2014. "How government policies affect the export dynamics of renewable energy technologies: A subsectoral analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 843-859.
    12. Maria Elena Bontempi & Roberto Golinelli, 2012. "The effect of neglecting the slope parameters’ heterogeneity on dynamic models of corporate capital structure," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(11), pages 1733-1751, November.
    13. Gharehgozli, Orkideh, 2021. "An empirical comparison between a regression framework and the Synthetic Control Method," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 70-81.
    14. Sung, Bongsuk & Song, Woo-Yong & Park, Sang-Do, 2018. "How foreign direct investment affects CO2 emission levels in the Chinese manufacturing industry: Evidence from panel data," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 320-331.
    15. Peñasco, Cristina & del Río, Pablo & Romero-Jordán, Desiderio, 2017. "Gas and electricity demand in Spanish manufacturing industries: An analysis using homogeneous and heterogeneous estimators," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 45-60.
    16. Barbara ERMINI & Raffaella SANTOLINI, 2013. "Does globalization matter on fiscal decentralization of OECD?," Working Papers 390, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    17. Karikallio, Hanna, 2015. "Cross-commodity Price Transmission and Integration of the EU Livestock Market of Pork and Beef: Panel Time-series Approach," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211832, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Dimelis, Sophia P. & Papaioannou, Sotiris K., 2011. "ICT growth effects at the industry level: A comparison between the US and the EU," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 37-50, March.
    19. Qaiser Munir & Sook Ching Kok & Kasim Mansur, 2019. "External Shocks, Structural Breaks And Unemployment Hysteresis In Selected Asian Countries," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 64(03), pages 575-600, June.
    20. Sung, Bongsuk & Song, Woo-Yong, 2013. "Causality between public policies and exports of renewable energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 95-104.

    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:jrpoli:v:37:y:2012:i:3:p:296-307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.