A global profusion of coal provides many countries with opportunities for economic growth. The direction of causality between coal consumption and economic growth is useful for policy making, however, existing empirical evidence have failed to reach a consensus. This paper examined the liaison between coal consumption and economic growth for Pakistan over the period 1971–2009. The endogenous two-break LM unit root test, derived in Lee and Strazicich (2003), is used to assess the order of integration of the variables and structural breaks in the data series. Application of the autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) bounds test reveals a cointegrating relationship between real income, real capital stock, labour and coal consumption, and further application of general to specific (GETS), Engle and Granger (EG), Stock Watson's dynamic ordinary least squares (DOLS) and Phillip Hansen's fully modified ordinary least squares (FMOLS) methods show statistical robustness of the estimates. The elasticity with respect to coal consumption is positive and significant. The vector error correction model (VECM) based Granger causality test and innovative accounting procedures (variance decomposition and impulse response functions) are also applied.
ApergisN. and PayneJ.E., 2010. Renewable energy consumption and economic growth: Evidence from a panel of OECD countries. Energy Policy38(1), 1353–1359.
2.
ApergisN. and PayneJ.E., 2009. Coal consumption and economic growth: Evidence from the commonwealth of independent states. Energy Economics31(5), 641–647.
3.
AqeelA. and ButtM.S., 2001. The relationship between energy consumption and economic growth in Pakistan. Asia-Pacific Development Journal8, 101–109.
4.
BeaudreauB., 2005. Engineering and economic growth. Energy Economics16(2), 211–220.
5.
CharyS.R. and BoharaA.K., 2010. Energy consumption in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan: Cointegration analysis. The Journal of Developing Areas44(1), 41–50.
6.
ErdemZ.B., 2010. The assessment of coal's contribution to sustainable energy development in Turkey. Energy Exploration and Exploitation28(2), 117–129.
7.
EwingB.T.SariR. and SoytasU., 2007. Disaggregate energy consumption and industrial output in the United States. Energy Policy35(2), 1274–1281.
8.
FataiK.OxleyL. and ScrimgeourF.G., 2004. Modelling the causal relationship between energy consumption and GDP in New Zealand, Australia, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation64 (3–4), 431–445.
9.
GhaliK.H. and El-SakkaM.I.T., 2004. Energy consumption and output growth in Canada: A multivariate cointegration analysis. Energy Economics26(2), 225–238.
10.
GregoryA.W. and HansenB.E., 1996a. Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. Journal of Econometrics70(1), 99–126.
11.
GregoryA.W. and HansenB.E., 1996b. Tests for cointegration in models with regime and trend shifts. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics58(3), 555–559.
12.
GurgulH. and LachL., 2011. The role of coal consumption in the economic growth of the Polish economy in transition. Energy Policy39(4), 2088–2099.
13.
HuJ.L. and LinC.H., 2008. Disaggregated energy consumption and GDP in Taiwan: A threshold co-integration analysis. Energy Economics30(5), 2342–2358.
14.
JinkeL.HualingS. and DianmingG., 2008. Causality relationship between coal consumption and GDP: Difference of major OECD and non-OECD countries. Applied Energy85(6), 421–429.
15.
JinkeL.Feng-HuaW. and Hua-LingS., 2009. Differences in coal consumption patterns and economic growth between developed and developing countries. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science1(1), 1744–1750.
16.
KhanA.A. and AhmedU., 2009. Energy demand in Pakistan: A disaggregate analysis. The Pakistan Development Review4, 1–27.
17.
KhanM.A. and QayyumA., 2009. The demand for electricity in Pakistan. OPEC Energy Review33(1), 70–96.
18.
KumarS., 2011. Cointegration and demand for energy in Fiji. International Journal of Global Energy Issues35, 85–97.
19.
KumarS.WebberD. and FargherS., 2012a. Wagner's Law revisited: Cointegration and causality tests for New Zealand. Applied Economics44(5), 607–616.
20.
KumarS.WebberD. and FargherS., 2012b. ‘Testing the validity of the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle for Australia. Applied Economics44(5), 599–605.
21.
LeeC.C. and ChangC.P., 2005. Structural breaks, energy consumption and economic growth revisited: Evidence from Taiwan. Energy Economics27(6), 857–872.
22.
LeeC.C. and ChiangC., 2008. Energy consumption and economic growth in Asian countries: A more comprehensive analysis using panel data. Resource and Energy Economics30(1), 50–65.
23.
LeeJ. and StrazicichM.C., 2003. Minimum lagrange multiplier unit root test with two structural breaks. Review of Economics and Statistics85(4), 1082–89.
24.
LeeJ. and StrazicichM.C., 2004. Minimum LM unit root test with one structural break. Manuscript, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University. (Has it not published?? Page???)
25.
LiuW.WuJ.YangK. and HiG., 2009. Econometric analysis to the coal consumption and economic growth in China. Power and Energy Engineering Conference 2009, Wuhan, China.
26.
MasihA.M.M. and MasihR., 1996. Energy consumption, real income and temporal causality: Results from a multi-country study based on cointegration and error-correction modelling techniques. Energy Economics18, 165–183.
27.
OzturkI. and AslanA., 2011. Are fluctuations in energy consumption per capita transitory' Evidence from Turkey. Energy Exploration and Exploitation29(2), 161–169.
PayneJ.E., 2011. US disaggregate fossil fuel consumption and real GDP: An empirical note. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy6(1), 63–68.
30.
PesaranM.H.ShinY. and SmithR.J., 2001. Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics16(3), 289–326.
31.
TodaH.Y. and YamamotoT., 1995. Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated process. Journal of Econometrics66 (1–2), 225–250.
32.
SariR.EwingB.T. and SoytasU., 2008. The relationship between disaggregate energy consumption and industrial production in the United States: An ARDL approach. Energy Economics30(5), 2302–2313.
33.
SariR. and SoytasU., 2004. Disaggregate energy consumption, employment, and income in Turkey. Energy Economics26(3), 335–344.
34.
SariR. and SoytasU., 2007. The growth of income and energy consumption in six developing countries. Energy Policy35(2), 889–898.
35.
SiddiquiR., 2004. Energy and economic growth in Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review43(2), 175–200.
36.
SternD.I., 2000. A multivariate cointegration analysis of the role of energy in the US macroeconomy. Energy Economics22(2), 267–283.
37.
YangH.Y., 2000a. Coal consumption and economic growth in Taiwan. Energy Sources22(2), 109–115.
38.
YangH.Y., 2000b. A note on the causal relationship between energy and GDP in Taiwan. Energy Economics22(3), 309–317.
39.
YooS.H., 2006. Causal relationship between coal consumption and economic growth in Korea. Applied Energy83(11), 1181–1189.
40.
YuanJ.H.KangJ.G.ZhaoC.H. and HuZ.G., 2008. Energy consumption and economic growth: Evidence from China at both aggregated and disaggregated levels. Energy Economics30(6), 3077–3094.
41.
Wolde-RufaelY., 2004. Disaggregated industrial energy consumption and GDP: The case of Shanghai 1952–1999. Energy Economics26(1), 69–75.
42.
Wolde-RufaelY., 2008. The long-run relationship between petroleum imports and economic growth: The case of Cyprus. Resources, Energy and Development5(2), 95–103.
ZahidA., 2008. Energy-GDP relationship: A causal analysis for the five countries of South Asia. Applied Econometrics and International Development8(1), 167–180.
45.
ZhangY. and LiW., 2007. Study on causal relationship between coal consumption and economic growth in China. Resources; Industries9(1), 89–93.
46.
ZirambaE., 2009. Disaggregate energy consumption and industrial production in South Africa. Energy Policy37(6), 2214–2220.
