In this paper, we analyze interfuel substitution according to Japanese manufacturing sectors. We examine the impact of environmental regulations and technical changes on fuel choice, and the effects of price on fuel substitution, using pooled data on fuel consumption and purchase price for 58 regions in the period 1980-88. The empirical results, based on the estimation of translog unit fuel cost functions by sector, indicate that (1) substitution possibilities were found for most combinations of fuel types in every sector; and (2) environmental regulations and technical changes significantly impact fuel consumption for most sectors, but their effects on fuel demand differ both across sectors and fuel types.
BerndtE.WoodD. (1975). “Technology, Price and the Derived Demand for Energy.” Review of Economics and Statistics57: 259-268.
2.
BerndtE.SagawaN.SawaT.WoodD. (1986). “Energy Intensity and Productivity in U.S. and Japanese Manufacturing Industries,” paper presented at the Eighth Annual North American Conference of the International Association of Energy Economists. Cambridge, MA, November.
3.
ConsidineT. (1989). “Separability, Functional Form and Regulatory Policy in Models of Interfuel Substitution,” Energy Economics11: 82-94.
4.
FujiiY.MatsukawaI. (1989). “Sectoral Analysis of Energy Substitution in Japanese Manufacturing Industries based on Purchase Prices,” paper presented at the IFAC/IFORS/IAEE Symposium, Tokyo, Japan.
5.
FussM. (1977). “The Demand for Energy in Canadian Manufacturing: An Example of the Estimation of Production Structures with Many Inputs,” Journal of Econometrics5: 89-116.
6.
GollopF.RobertsM. (1983). “Environmental Regulations and Productivity Growth: the Case of Fossil-Fueled Electric Power Generation,” Journal of Political Economy91: 654-674.
7.
GriffinJ.GregoryP., (1976). “An Intercountry Translog Model of Energy Substitution Responses,” American Economic Review66: 845-857.
8.
HoganW. (1989). “A Dynamic Putty-Semi-Putty Model of Aggregate Energy Demand,” Energy Economics11: 53-69.
9.
HudsonE.JorgensonD. (1974). “U.S. Energy Policy and Economic Growth, 1975-2000,” Bell Journal of Economics5: 461-514.
10.
Japan Institute of Energy Economics (1990). An Econometric Analysis of Oil-Substituting Energy, EDMC Energy Model Series No. 5 (in Japanese).
11.
JMITI (various years). Census of Manufacturers, Japan Ministry of International Trade and Industry.
12.
JMITI (various years). Structural Survey of Oil Consumption, Japan Ministry of International Trade and Industry.
13.
KimB.C.LabysW.C. (1988). “Application of the Translog Model of Energy Substitutions to Developing Countries: The Case of Korea.” Energy Economics10: 313-323.
14.
MountainD.StipdonkB.WarrenC. (1989). “Technological Innovation and a Changing Energy Mix: A Parametric and Flexible Approach to Modeling Ontario Manufacturing.” The Energy Journal10(4): 139-158.
15.
NagataY.KumakuraO.FujiiY.MatsukawaI. (1989). “Modeling Interfuel Competition in Japan,” paper presented at the IFAC/IFORS/IAEE Symposium, Tokyo, Japan.
16.
OECD (1989). Economic Instruments for Environmental Protection, Paris.
17.
PindyckR. (1979). “Interfuel Substitution and the Industrial Demand for Energy: An International Comparison,” Review of Economics and Statistics61: 169-179.
18.
SolowR. (1987). “The Capital-Energy Complementarity Debate Revisited,” American Economic Review77: 605-614.
19.
TaylorL.BrownI.BoyleS. (1990). Lessons from Japan: Separating Economic Growth from Energy Demand, Association for the Conservation of Energy, London, UK.
20.
TurnovskyM.DonnellyW. (1984). “Energy Substitution, Separability, and Technical Progress in the Australian Iron and Steel Industry,” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics2: 54-63.
