This study examines the impact of economic globalization on the patterns of energy consumption for 24 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) economies from 1995 to 2015. We employ Westerlund cointegration, which shows a long-run association between economic globalization and energy consumption patterns. Furthermore, cross-sectional autoregressive distributed lag models (CS-ARDL) results explain the short-run and long-run relationship between the series. The results further explain that economic globalization reduces oil and coal consumption while accelerating gas consumption in OECD economies. We additionally employ the Eberhardt augmented mean group test to verify consistency with CS-ARDL results. The empirical evidence of this study suggests that OECD economies’ policymakers should prioritize economic globalization in framing policies related to energy consumption. Furthermore, allocating funds for better technology related to high polluting fuels should be one of the crucial considerations arising from this study. Finally, we recommend economic globalization as an important indicator to address the issues related to OECD economics’ environmental and ecological footprints.
GozgorGRanjanP. Globalisation, inequality and redistribution: theory and evidence. World Econ2017; 40: 2704–2751.
2.
DreherA. Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Appl Econ2006; 38: 1091–1110.
3.
ShahbazMMallickHMahalikMK, et al.The role of globalization on the recent evolution of energy demand in India: implications for sustainable development. Energy Econ2016; 55: 52–68.
4.
WesterlundJ. Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxf Bull Econ Stat2007; 69: 709–748.
5.
ChudikAPesaranMH. Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. J Econom2015; 188: 393–420.
6.
EberhardtM. Estimating panel time-series models with heterogeneous slopes. Stata J2012; 12: 61–71.
7.
SorrellS. Reducing energy demand: a review of issues, challenges and approaches. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2015; 47: 74–82.
8.
FotisPKarkalakosSAsteriouD. The relationship between energy demand and real GDP growth rate: the role of price asymmetries and spatial externalities within 34 countries across the globe. Energy Econ2017; 66: 69–84.
9.
CarforaAPansiniRScandurraG. The causal relationship between energy consumption, energy prices, and economic growth in Asian developing countries: a replication. Energy Strategy Rev2019; 23: 81–85.
10.
LabandeiraXLabeagaJMLopez-OteroX. A meta-analysis on the price elasticity of energy demand. Energy Policy2017; 102: 549–568.
11.
ShahbazMGozgorGHammoudehS. Human capital and export diversification as new determinants of energy demand in the United States. Energy Econ2019; 78: 335–349.
12.
CopelandBRTaylorMS. Trade, growth, and the environment. J Econ Lit2004; 42: 7–71.
13.
EskelandGSHarrisonAE. Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis. J Dev Econ2003; 70: 1–23.
14.
BuMLinCTZhangB. Globalization and climate change: new empirical panel data evidence. J Econ Surv2016; 30: 577–595.
15.
ParamatiSRBhattacharyaMOzturkI, et al.Determinants of energy demand in African frontier market economies: an empirical investigation. Energy2018; 148: 123–133.
16.
GozgorGMahalikMKDemirE, et al.The impact of economic globalization on renewable energy in the OECD countries. Energy Policy2020; 139: 111365.
17.
WolframCShelefOGertlerP. How will energy demand develop in the developing world?J Econ Perspect2012; 26: 119–138.
18.
ReddyAKNSubramanianDK. The design of rural energy centres. In Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, 1979; 2(3): 395–416. Springer India.
19.
ReddyAKN. Rural energy consumption patterns—a field study. Biomass1982; 2: 255–280.
20.
RamakumarRHughesWL. Renewable energy sources and rural development in developing countries. IEEE Trans Educ1981; 24: 242–251.
21.
RamakumarR. Renewable energy sources and developing countries. IEEE Trans Power Appar Syst1983; 2: 502–510.
22.
RavindranathNHChanakyaHN. Biomass based energy system for a South Indian village. Biomass1986; 9: 215–233.
23.
RamachandraTVSubramanianDKJoshiNV, et al.Domestic energy consumption patterns in uttara kannada district, Karnataka state, India. Energy Convers Manage2000; 41: 775–831.
24.
RavindraKKaur-SidhuMMorS, et al.Trend in household energy consumption pattern in India: a case study on the influence of socio-cultural factors for the choice of clean fuel use. J Cleaner Prod2019; 213: 1024–1034.
25.
AlvaradoRPoncePAlvaradoR, et al.Sustainable and non-sustainable energy and output in Latin America: a cointegration and causality approach with panel data. Energy Strategy Rev2019; 26: 100369.
26.
CevikEIYıldırımDÇDiboogluS. Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth in the US: a Markov-switching VAR analysis. Energy Environ2021; 32(3): 519–541.
27.
KoengkanMFuinhasJA. Does the overweight epidemic cause energy consumption? A piece of empirical evidence from the European region. Energy2021; 216: 119297.
28.
PattersonMG. Estimation of the quality of energy sources and uses. Energy Policy1983; 11: 346–359.
29.
PattersonMG. Approaches to energy quality in energy analysis. Int J Glob Energy Issues1993; 5: 19–28.
30.
PattersonMG. What is energy efficiency?: concepts, indicators and methodological issues. Energy Policy1996; 24: 377–390.
31.
CharnesACooperWWRhodesE. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res1978; 2: 429–444.
32.
BoydGAPangJX. Estimating the linkage between energy efficiency and productivity. Energy Policy2000; 28: 289–296.
33.
RamanathanR. An analysis of energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions in countries of the Middle East and north Africa. Energy2005; 30: 2831–2842.
34.
MukherjeeK. Energy use efficiency in US manufacturing: a nonparametric analysis. Energy Econ2008; 30: 76–96.
35.
SahuSNarayananK. Determinants of energy intensity in Indian manufacturing industries: a firm level analysis,MPRA Paper 21646, University Library of Munich, Germany.
36.
SahuSKNarayananK. Decomposition of industrial energy consumption in Indian manufacturing: the energy intensity approach. J Environ Manag Tour ; 2010; 1(1): 22–38.
37.
MandalSK. Do undesirable output and environmental regulation matter in energy efficiency analysis? Evidence from Indian cement industry. Energy Policy2010; 38: 6076–6083.
38.
MandalSKMadheswaranS. Energy use efficiency of Indian cement companies: a data envelopment analysis. Energy Effic2011; 4: 57–73.
39.
SahuSKSharmaH. Productivity, energy intensity and output: a unit level analysis of the Indian manufacturing sector. J Quant Econ2016; 14: 283–300.
40.
ShafieiSSalimRA. Non-renewable and renewable energy consumption and CO2 emissions in OECD countries: a comparative analysis. Energy Policy2014; 66: 547–556.
41.
Al-MulaliUOzturkISolarinSA. Investigating the environmental kuznets curve hypothesis in seven regions: the role of renewable energy. Ecol Indic2016; 67: 267–282.
42.
BilgiliFKoçakEBulutÜ. The dynamic impact of renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions: a revisited environmental kuznets curve approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2016; 54: 838–845.
43.
ZhangBWangBWangZ. Role of renewable energy and non-renewable energy consumption on EKC: evidence from Pakistan. J Cleaner Prod2017; 156: 855–864.
44.
PadhanHHaouasISahooB, et al.What matters for environmental quality in the next eleven countries: economic growth or income inequality?Environ Sci Pollut Res2019; 26: 23129–23148.
45.
LealPHMarquesAC. The environmental impacts of globalisation and corruption: evidence from a set of African countries. Environ Sci Policy2021; 115: 116–124.
46.
GarrettG. The causes of globalization. Comp Polit Stud2000; 33: 941–991.
47.
FrankelJ. Globalization of the economy for governance in a globalizing world. In: NyeJ (ed.) Visions of governance project jeffrey frankel. Harpel Professor, 2000.
48.
BhallaSS. Imagine there’s no country: poverty, inequality, and growth in the era of globalization. Peterson Institute, 2002.
49.
LiQReuvenyR. Economic globalization and democracy: an empirical analysis. Br J Polit Sci2003; 33: 29–54.
50.
LiQSchaubD. Economic globalization and transnational terrorism: a pooled time-series analysis. J Conflict Resolut2004; 48: 230–258.
51.
GozgorG. Robustness of the KOF index of economic globalisation. World Econ2018; 41: 414–430.
52.
GozgorGLauCKMLuZ. Energy consumption and economic growth: new evidence from the OECD countries. Energy2018; 153: 27–34.
53.
GygliSHaelgFPotrafkeN, et al.The KOF globalisation index–revisited. Rev Int Organ2019; 14: 543–574.
54.
EtokakpanMUAdedoyinFFVedatY, et al.Does globalization in turkey induce increased energy consumption: insights into its environmental pros and cons. Environ Sci Pollut Res2020; 27: 26125–26140.
55.
KhanMBSaleemHShabbirMS, et al.The effects of globalization, energy consumption and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in South Asian countries. Energy Environ2021. 0958305X20986896.
56.
LanePRMilesi-FerrettiGM. The drivers of financial globalization. Am Econ Rev2008; 98: 327–332.
57.
KoseMAPrasadERogoffK, et al.Financial globalization: a reappraisal. IMF Staff Pap2009; 56: 8–62.
58.
JaumotteFLallSPapageorgiouC. Rising income inequality: technology, or trade and financial globalization?IMF Econ Rev2013; 61: 271–309.
59.
CopelandBR. Policy endogeneity and the effects of trade on the environment. Agric Res Econ Rev2005; 34: 1–15.
60.
ColeMA. Does trade liberalization increase national energy use?Econ Lett2006; 92: 108–112.
61.
AntweilerWCopelandBRTaylorMS. Is free trade good for the environment?Am Econ Rev2001; 91: 877–908.
62.
DollarDKraayA. Trade, growth, and poverty. Econ J2004; 114: F22–F49.
63.
ShahbazMLahianiAAbosedraS, et al.The role of globalization in energy consumption: a quantile cointegrating regression approach. Energy Econ2018a; 71: 161–170.
64.
SternDI. The effect of NAFTA on energy and environmental efficiency in mexico. Policy Stud J2007; 35: 291–322.
65.
CopelandBRTaylorMS. North-south trade and the environment. Q J Econ1994; 109: 755–787.
66.
BaekJChoYKooWW. The environmental consequences of globalization: a country-specific time-series analysis. Ecol Econ2009; 68: 2255–2264.
67.
LeanHHSmythR. Multivariate granger causality between electricity generation, exports, prices and GDP in Malaysia. Energy2010; 35: 3640–3648.
68.
OzturkIAcaravciA. The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and financial development on carbon emissions in turkey. Energy Econ2013; 36: 262–267.
69.
NarayanPKSmythR. Multivariate granger causality between electricity consumption, exports and GDP: evidence from a panel of Middle Eastern countries. Energy Policy2009; 37: 229–236.
70.
AïssaMSBJebliMBYoussefSB. Output, renewable energy consumption and trade in Africa. Energy Policy2014; 66: 11–18.
71.
SadorskyP. Trade and energy consumption in the Middle EastEnergy Econ2011; 33: 739–749.
72.
SadorskyP. Energy consumption, output and trade in South America. Energy Econ2012; 34: 476–488.
73.
DedeoğluDKayaH. Energy use, exports, imports and GDP: new evidence from the OECD countries. Energy Policy2013; 57: 469–476.
74.
ShahbazMNasreenSLingCH, et al.Causality between trade openness and energy consumption: what causes what in high, middle and low income countries. Energy Policy2014; 70: 126–143.
75.
DestekMA. Investigation on the role of economic, social, and political globalization on environment: evidence from CEECs. Environ Sci Pollut Res2020; 27: 33601–33614.
76.
LawCHSekSK. Panel evidence of the dynamics between energy consumption and trade openness in ASEAN and East Asia. Energy Environ2021, 0958305X211007596.
77.
Saint AkadiriSLasisiTTUzunerG, etal. Examining the impact of globalization in the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: The case of tourist destination states. Environ Sci Pollut Res2019;26:12605–12615.
78.
Saint AkadiriSAlolaAAAkadiriAC, et al. Renewable energy consumption in EU-28 countries: policy toward pollution mitigation and economic sustainability. Energy Policy2019;132:803–810.
79.
AlvaradoRDengQTillaguangoB, et al.Do economic development and human capital decrease non-renewable energy consumption? Evidence for OECD countries. Energy2021; 215: 119147.
80.
ShahbazMShahzadSJHMahalikMK, et al.How strong is the causal relationship between globalization and energy consumption in developed economies? A country-specific time-series and panel analysis. Appl Econ2018b; 50: 1479–1494.
81.
AkarcaATLongTVII. Energy and employment: a time-series analysis of the causal relationship. Res Energy1979; 2: 151–162.
82.
OzturkI. A literature survey on energy–growth nexus. Energy Policy2010; 38: 340–349.
83.
ChengBSLaiTW. An investigation of co-integration and causality between energy consumption and economic activity in taiwan. Energy Econ1997; 19: 435–444.
84.
YuESChoiJY. The causal relationship between energy and GNP: an international comparison. J Energy Develop1985; 249–272.
85.
SoytasUSariR. Energy consumption and GDP: causality relationship in G-7 countries and emerging markets. Energy Econ2003; 25: 33–37.
86.
ChengBS. An investigation of cointegration and causality between energy consumption and economic growth. J Energy Develop1995; 21: 73–84.
87.
SternDI. A multivariate cointegration analysis of the role of energy in the US macroeconomy. Energy Econ2000; 22: 267–283.
88.
OzcanBTzeremesPGTzeremesNG. Energy consumption, economic growth and environmental degradation in OECD countries. Econ Model2020; 84: 203–213.
89.
OmriANguyenDKRaultC. Causal interactions between CO2 emissions, FDI, and economic growth: evidence from dynamic simultaneous-equation models. Econ Model2014; 42: 382–389.
90.
JebliMBYoussefSB. The environmental kuznets curve, economic growth, renewable and non-renewable energy, and trade in Tunisia. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2015; 47: 173–185.
91.
ShahbazMVan HoangTHMahalikMK, et al.Energy consumption, financial development and economic growth in India: new evidence from a nonlinear and asymmetric analysis. Energy Econ2017; 63: 199–212.
