Dynamic impact of household consumption on its CO2 emissions in Malaysia
- 351 Downloads
This article aims to measure the dynamic impact of household consumption (final household consumption expenditure, LHC) on CO2 emission from household’s energy consumption in Malaysia from 1971 to 2010. The estimation of autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) bounds test confirms a non-monotonic relationship between LHC and residential CO2 emission. In the long run, there is a positive relationship between LHC and CO2 emission as well as a negative relationship between quadratic forms of LHC and CO2 emission which indicates the existence of an inverted U-shaped relationship between these two variables. The analysis also found a similar relationship in both the short and long run. To confirm the non-monotonous relationship, the U test of Sasabuchi–Lind–Mehlum (2010) approach has followed to obtain the sufficient conditions for the existence of inverted U relationship. Moreover, the U test of Sasabuchi–Lind–Mehlum (2010) found that CO2 emission increases with increasing LHC up to 6.5 units, but it declines with an additional increase of LHC which is also found by the ARDL model. However, the existence of environmental Kuznets curve implies that in the long run, household CO2 emission declines with the additional increase of household consumption in the Malaysian economy.
KeywordsHousehold final consumption CO2 emission ARDL bounds test U test Malaysia
The authors are thankful for the research grants ‘Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS)’ under the Ministry of Education, Malaysia (Project Code: FRGS/1/2013/TK07/UKM/02/4) and ‘Research Development Fund/Dana Pembangunan Penyelidikan PTJ’ (DPP-2013-144).
- Banerjee, A., Dolado, J. J., Hendry, D. F., & Smith, G. W. (1986). Exploring equilibrium relationships in econometrics through static models: Some Monte Carlo evidence. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 48(3), 253–277.Google Scholar
- Fosten, J., Morley, B., & Taylor, T. (2012). Dynamic misspecification in the environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from CO2 and SO2 emissions in the United Kingdom. Ecological Economics, 76, 25–33.Google Scholar
- Galeotti, M. (2007). Economic growth and the quality of the environment: Taking stock. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 9(4), 427–454.Google Scholar
- Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement (No. w3914). National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Grossman, G.M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic Growth and the Environment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353–37.Google Scholar
- He, J., & Wang, H. (2012). Economic structure, development policy and environmental quality: An empirical analysis of environmental Kuznets curves with Chinese municipal data. Ecological Economics, 76, 49–59.Google Scholar
- Mankiw, N. G. R. E. G. O. R. Y. (2014). Principles of macroeconomics. Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
- Pesaran, M. H., & Pesaran, B. (1997). Working with Microfit 4.0: Interactive econometric analysis;[Windows version]. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Shafik, N. (1994). Economic development and environmental quality: an econometric analysis. Oxford economic papers, 757–773.Google Scholar