The global rise in energy consumption makes managing energy demands a priority. Here, the potential of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in controlling energy consumption is still debated. Within this context, the main objective of the current study is to measure the impact of ICT, its potential benefit, and environmental factors on household electricity demand in Taiwan. A panel of data from 20 cities in Taiwan was collected during the period 2004–2018. We adopted PMG estimation and applied the DH-causality test for analysis. The estimation results show that ICT, carbon emissions, and climate change will drive household electricity demand in Taiwan in the long term. However, ICT has a higher potential to reduce electricity demand in the short-term period. In addition, the results of the causality test reveal a two-way interrelationship between ICT and electricity demand. Our study also found that climate change indirectly affects the use of electricity through household appliances. We also presented several policy implications at the end of this paper.
HiltyLBieserJ. Opportunities and risks of digitalization for climate protection in Switzerland. 2017.
2.
LangeSPohlJSantariusT. Digitalization and energy consumption. Does ICT reduce energy demand?Ecol Econ2020; 176: 106760.
3.
MickoleitA. Greener and Smarter. OECD Green Growth Papers 2010/01 2010.
4.
CaglarAEMertMBolukG. Testing the role of information and communication technologies and renewable energy consumption in ecological footprint quality: evidence from world top 10 pollutant footprint countries. J Cleaner Prod2021; 298: 126784.
5.
SalahuddinMAlamK. Internet usage, electricity consumption and economic growth in Australia: a time series evidence. Telemat Inform2015; 32: 862–878.
6.
SalahuddinMAlamK. Information and communication technology, electricity consumption and economic growth in OECD countries: a panel data analysis. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst2016; 76: 185–193.
7.
SadorskyP. Information communication technology and electricity consumption in emerging economies. Energy Policy2012; 48: 130–136.
8.
UsmanAOzturkIHassanA, et al.The effect of ICT on energy consumption and economic growth in south Asian economies: an empirical analysis. Telemat Inform2021; 58: 101537.
9.
PengGC. Green ICT: a strategy for sustainable development of China's electronic information industry. China: An International Journal2013; 11: 68–86.
Yu-ChenYCheng-YihHMuzayyanahS, et al.Decomposition of growth factors in high-tech industries and CO2 emissions: after the world financial crisis in 2008. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy2020; 10: 00.
12.
EDGAR. Emission database for global atmospheric research: global GHG and CO2 emissions. In: ResearchEDfGA (ed.) 1970-2019. Luxembourg: European Comission, 2020.
13.
BOE. Bureau of energy: energy statistical annual reports. Taiwan: Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affairs, 2020.
14.
IshidaH. The effect of ICT development on economic growth and energy consumption in Japan. Telemat Inform2015; 32: 79–88.
15.
HaftuGG. Information communications technology and economic growth in sub-saharan Africa: a panel data approach. Telecomm Policy2019; 43: 88–99.
16.
BelkhirLElmeligiA. Assessing ICT global emissions footprint: trends to 2040 & recommendations. J Cleaner Prod2018; 177: 448–463.
17.
FilippiniMHuntLC. Energy demand and energy efficiency in the OECD countries: a stochastic demand frontier approach. The Energy Journal2011; 32: 59–80.
18.
LeanHSmithR. CO2 Emissions, energy consumption and output in ASEAN. Business and Economics, Development Research Unit Discussion Paper DEVDP 2009: 09–13.
19.
MenyahKWolde-RufaelY. Energy consumption, pollutant emissions and economic growth in South Africa. Energy Economics2010; 32: 1374–1382.
20.
SaidiKHammamiS. The impact of CO2 emissions and economic growth on energy consumption in 58 countries. Energy Reports2015; 1: 62–70.
21.
ShiauY-HYangS-FAdhaR, et al.Modeling industrial energy demand in relation to subsector manufacturing output and climate change: artificial neural network insights. Sustainability2022; 14.
22.
LeeJWBrahmasreneTICT. CO2 Emissions and economic growth: evidence from a panel of ASEAN. Global Economic Review2014; 43: 93–109.
23.
OzcanBApergisN. The impact of internet use on air pollution: evidence from emerging countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research2018; 25: 4174–4189.
24.
Al-MulaliUSheau-TingLOzturkI. The global move toward internet shopping and its influence on pollution: an empirical analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research2015; 22: 9717–9727.
25.
LuW-C. The impacts of information and communication technology, energy consumption, financial development, and economic growth on carbon dioxide emissions in 12 Asian countries. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change2018; 23: 1351–1365.
26.
ZhangCLiuC. The impact of ICT industry on CO2 emissions: a regional analysis in China. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev2015; 44: 12–19.
27.
ZahariaADiaconeasaMCBradL, et al.Factors influencing energy consumption in the context of sustainable development. Sustainability2019; 11: 4147.
28.
AlsalehMAbdul-RahimAS. The pathway toward pollution mitigation in EU28 region: does hydropower growth make a difference?Renewable Energy2022; 185: 291–301.
29.
AlsalehMAbdul-RahimAS. The pathway toward pollution mitigation in EU28 region: does bioenergy growth make a difference?Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal2021; 32: 560–574.
30.
AdhaRHongC-YFirmansyahM, et al.Rebound effect with energy efficiency determinants: a two-stage analysis of residential electricity consumption in Indonesia. Sustainable Production and Consumption2021; 28: 556–565.
31.
AzamARafiqMShafiqueM, et al.An empirical analysis of the non-linear effects of natural gas, nuclear energy, renewable energy and ICT-trade in leading CO2 emitter countries: policy towards CO2 mitigation and economic sustainability. J Environ Manag2021; 286: 112232.
32.
EmirFBekunFV. Energy intensity, carbon emissions, renewable energy, and economic growth nexus: new insights from Romania. Energy & Environment2019; 30: 427–443.
33.
AdhaRHongC-Y. How large the direct rebound effect for residential electricity consumption when the artificial neural network takes on the role? A Taiwan case study of household electricity consumption. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy2021; 11: 354–364.
34.
OtsukaA. Determinants of efficiency in residential electricity demand: stochastic frontier analysis on Japan. Energy Sustain Soc2017; 7: 31.
35.
MajeedMTAyubT. Information and communication technology (ICT) and economic growth nexus: a comparative global analysis. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS)2018; 12: 443–476.
36.
MalmodinJLundénD. The energy and carbon footprint of the global ICT and E&M sectors 2010–2015. Sustainability2018; 10.
37.
AndraeASGEdlerT. On global electricity usage of communication technology: trends to 2030. Challenges2015; 6.
38.
AmasawaEIharaTHanakiK. Role of e-reader adoption in life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of book reading activities. Int J Life Cycle Assess2018; 23: 1874–1887.
39.
MayersKKoomeyJHallR, et al.The carbon footprint of games distribution. J Ind Ecol2015; 19: 402–415.
40.
van LoonPDeketeleLDewaeleJ, et al.A comparative analysis of carbon emissions from online retailing of fast moving consumer goods. J Cleaner Prod2015; 106: 478–486.
41.
KuppusamyMRamanMLeeG. Whose ICT investment matters to economic growth: private or public? The Malaysian perspective. Electron J Inform Syst Dev Countr2009; 37: 1–19.
42.
HofmanAAravenaCAliagaV. Information and communication technologies and their impact in the economic growth of Latin America, 1990–2013. Telecomm Policy2016; 40: 485–501.
43.
JinLDuanKTangX. What is the relationship between technological innovation and energy consumption? Empirical analysis based on provincial panel data from China. Sustainability2018; 10.
44.
YanZShiRYangZ. ICT Development and sustainable energy consumption: a perspective of energy productivity. Sustainability2018; 10.
45.
AlsalehMAbdul-RahimAS. The pathway toward bioenergy growth: does information and communication technology development make a difference in EU economies?Biomass Convers Biorefinery2021.
46.
AndaMTemmenJ. Smart metering for residential energy efficiency: the use of community based social marketing for behavioural change and smart grid introduction. Renew Energ2014; 67: 119–127.
47.
GuerhardtFSilvaTAGamarraFM, et al.A smart grid system for reducing energy consumption and energy cost in buildings in São Paulo, Brazil. Energies2020; 13.
48.
HaseebAXiaESaudS, et al.Does information and communication technologies improve environmental quality in the era of globalization? An empirical analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res2019; 26: 8594–8608.
49.
SchultePWelschHRexhäuserS. ICT And the demand for energy: evidence from OECD countries. Environ Resour Econ2016; 63: 119–146.
50.
Van HeddeghemWLambertSLannooB, et al.Trends in worldwide ICT electricity consumption from 2007 to 2012. Comput Commun2014; 50: 64–76.
51.
FilippiniMHuntLC. US Residential energy demand and energy efficiency: a stochastic demand frontier approach. Energ Econ2012; 34: 1484–1491.
52.
OreaLLlorcaMFilippiniM. A new approach to measuring the rebound effect associated to energy efficiency improvements: an application to the US residential energy demand. Energ Econ2015; 49: 599–609.
53.
BlaschJBoogenNFilippiniM, et al.Explaining electricity demand and the role of energy and investment literacy on end-use efficiency of Swiss households. Energ Econ2017; 68: 89–102.
54.
FilippiniMHuntLC. Measuring persistent and transient energy efficiency in the US. Energy Effic2016; 9: 663–675.
55.
FilippiniMZhangL. Estimation of the energy efficiency in Chinese provinces. Energy Effic2016; 9: 1315–1328.
56.
De HoyosRSarafidisV. Testing for cross-sectional dependence in panel-data models. Stata J2006; 6: 482–496.
57.
PesaranM. General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. England: Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge, 2004.
58.
FriedmanM. The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc1937; 32: 675–701.
PesaranM. A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ2007; 22: 265–312.
61.
PedroniP. Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the ppp hypothesis. Econ Theory2004; 20: 597–625. 2004/06/08.
62.
PedroniP. Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxf Bull Econ Stat1999; 61: 653–670.
63.
KaoC. Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. J Econom1999; 90: 1–44.
64.
WesterlundJ. Testing for error correction in panel data*. Oxf Bull Econ Stat2007; 69: 709–748.
65.
MenegakiAN. The ARDL method in the energy-growth nexus field; best implementation strategies. Economies2019; 7: 05.
66.
OsmanMGachinoGHoqueA. Electricity consumption and economic growth in the GCC countries: panel data analysis. Energy Policy2016; 98: 318–327.
