Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Greenhouse gas emissions–crude oil prices: an empirical investigation in a nonlinear framework

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study examines the relationship between crude oil prices, one of the major inputs, of economic activity and environmental degradation as reflected in the volume of carbon emissions. The nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag cointegration approach was employed to study the intertemporal causal crude oil prices–carbon emissions relationship. Our findings confirm long-run asymmetry in both directions of the relationship studied. In the short run, asymmetric effects are confirmed running only from carbon emissions to the crude oil prices. Furthermore, it is validated that the climate change mitigation policies are effective in the long run, though this is not the case in the short run. The quantification of this relationship outlines the key role of crude oil prices to sustainable economic growth conditional to environmental policies in global terms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Adelman, M. A. (1980). The clumsy cartel. The Energy Journal,1(1), 43–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adelman, M. A. (1982). OPEC as a Cartel. In J. M. Griffin & D. J. Teece (Eds.), OPEC behavior and world oil prices (pp. 37–63). London: George Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apergis, N., & Payne, J. E. (2009). CO2 emissions, energy usage, and output in Central America. Energy Policy,37(8), 3282–3286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apergis, N., & Payne, J. E. (2014). Renewable energy, output, CO2 emissions, and fossil fuel prices in Central America: Evidence from a nonlinear panel smooth transition vector error correction model. Energy Economics,42, 226–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asmelash, Henok B. (2016). Falling oil prices and sustainable energy transition: Towards a multilateral agreement on fossil-fuel subsidies. Working Paper 13. United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER). Helsinki, Finland, pp. 1–22.

  • Awerbuch, S., & Sauter, R. (2006). Exploiting the oil-GDP effect to support renewables deployment. Energy Policy,34(17), 2805–2819.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, J., Dessai, S., & Webber, M. (2004). Will OPEC lose from the Kyoto protocol? Energy Policy,32(18), 2077–2088.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basil, A. (2011). OPEC & its influence on Price of Oil. http://www.greatlakes.edu.in/gurgaon/sites/default/files/OPEC&its_Influence_on_the_Price_of_Oil_Ajit_Basil.pdf. Accessed 6 July 2013.

  • Boyd, R., Krutilla, K., & Viscusi, W. K. (1995). Energy taxation as a policy instrument to reduce CO2 emissions: A net benefit analysis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,29(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brémond, V., Hache, E., & Mignon, V. (2012). Does OPEC still exist as a cartel? An empirical investigation. Energy Economics,34(1), 125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capros, P., Tasios, N., De Vita, A., Mantzos, L., & Paroussos, L. (2012). Model-based analysis of decarbonising the EU economy in the time horizon to 2050. Energy strategy reviews,1(2), 76–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherp, A., et al. (2013). Global energy security under different climate policies, GDP growth rates and fossil resource availabilities. Climatic Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0950-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, S. (2006). Structural change, growth and poverty reduction in Asia: Pathways to inclusive development. Development Policy Review,24(1), 51–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dees, S., Karadeloglou, P., Kaufmann, R., & Sánchez, M. (2004). Does OPEC matter? An econometric analysis of oil prices. The Energy Journal,25(4), 67–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhiman, D. H., & Sahu, N. C. (2010). Correlation and causality between stock market and macro economic variables in India: An Empirical Study 2010 international conference on E-business. In Management economics IPEDR (Vol. 3).

  • Dike, J. C. (2014). Does climate change mitigation activity affect crude oil prices? Evidence from dynamic panel model. Journal of Energy. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/51402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society,55, 251–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerlagh, R., & Liski, M. (2011). Strategic resource dependence. Journal of Economic Theory,146(2), 699–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghanem, S., Lounnas, R., & Brennand, G. (1999). The impact of emissions trading on OPEC. OPEC Review,23(2), 79–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghassan, H. B., & Alhajhoj, H. R. (2015). Long run relationship between IFDI and domestic investment in GCC countries. Journal of Economics and Econometrics, 59(2), 16–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh, S., & Kanjilal, K. (2014). Long-term equilibrium relationship between urbanization, energy consumption and economic activity: Empirical evidence from India. Energy,66, 324–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granger, C. W. (1981). Some properties of time series data and their use in econometric model specification. Journal of econometrics,16(1), 121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granger, C. W., & Yoon, G. (2002). Hidden cointegration. University of California San Diego. Economics working paper series, 2.

  • Hammoudeh, S., Lahiani, A., Nguyen, D. K., & Sousa, R. M. (2015). An empirical analysis of energy cost pass-through to CO2 emission prices. Energy Economics,49, 149–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, O. T., Olekalns, N., & Thong, J. (2004). Do stock market returns predict changes to output? Evidence from a nonlinear panel data model. Empirical Economics,29(3), 527–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernández, D. (2013). Energy insecurity: A framework for understanding energy, the built environment, and health among vulnerable populations in the context of climate change. American Journal of Public Health,103(4), 32–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herring, S. C., Hoerling, M. P., Kossin, J. P., Peterson, T. C., & Stott, P. A. (2015). Explaining extreme events of 2014 from a climate perspective. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society,96(12), S1–S172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoel, M. (2014). Supply-side climate policy and the green paradox. In K. Pittel, R. van der Ploeg, & C. Withagen (Eds.), Climate policy and nonrenewable resources: The green paradox and beyond (pp. 21–42). MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qf9d6.5.

  • Hotelling, H. (1931). The economics of exhaustible resources. Journal of Political Economy,39(2), 137–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA. (2017). World Energy Outlook 2017. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2007). Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, S., Mohlin, K., Pittel, K., & Sterner, T. (2015). An introduction to the green paradox: The unintended consequences of climate policies. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy,9(2), 246–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewell, J., Cherp, A., & Riahi, K. (2014). Energy security under de-carbonization scenarios: An assessment framework and evaluation under different technology and policy choices. Energy Policy,65, 743–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ji, Q., & Fan, Y. (2012). How does oil price volatility affect non-energy commodity markets? Applied Energy,89(1), 273–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of economic dynamics and control,12(2–3), 231–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, S., & Juselius, K. (1990). Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration—With applications to the demand for money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,52(2), 169–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juvenal, L., & Petrella, I. (2015). Speculation in the oil market. Journal of Applied Econometrics,30(4), 621–649.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katrakilidis, C., & Trachanas, E. (2012). What drives housing price dynamics in Greece: New evidence from asymmetric ARDL cointegration. Economic Modelling,29(4), 1064–1069.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, R. K., Dees, S., Karadeloglou, P., & Sanchez, M. (2004). Does OPEC matter? An econometric analysis of oil prices. The Energy Journal,25, 67–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilian, L., & Hicks, B. (2013). Did unexpectedly strong economic growth cause the oil price shock of 2003–2008? Journal of Forecasting,32(5), 385–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, N. R. L., Lo, M. M., Chu, H. H., & Su, H. J. (2015). Does price increases in Chinese stock index cause brent crude oil index? Applying threshold cointegration regression. Journal of Applied Finance & Banking,5(4), 131–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, J. P., Tang, L., Sun, X. L., Yu, L. A., He, W., & Yang, Y. Y. (2012). Country risk forecasting for major oil exporting countries: A decomposition hybrid approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering,63(3), 641–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, J. G. (1996). Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. Journal of applied econometrics,11, 601–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslyuk, S., & Dharmaratna, D. (2013). Impact of shocks on Australian coal mining. In W. Leal Filho & V. Voudouris (Eds.), Global energy policy and security (pp. 231–255). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCollum, D. L., Jewell, J., Krey, V., Bazilian, M., Fay, M., & Riahi, K. (2016). Quantifying uncertainties influencing the long-term impacts of oil prices on energy markets and carbon emissions. Nature Energy,1, 16077.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narayan, P. K., & Narayan, S. (2010). Modelling the impact of oil prices on Vietnam’s stock prices. Applied Energy,87(1), 356–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nasseh, A., & Strauss, J. (2000). Stock prices and domestic and international macroeconomic activity: A cointegration approach. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance,40(2), 229–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozturk, I., & Aslan, A. (2011). Are fluctuations in energy consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from Turkey. Energy Exploration & Exploitation,29(2), 161–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society,56, 1361–1401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pershing, J. (2000). Fossil fuel implications of climate change mitigation responses. In L. Bernsteinand & J. Pan (Eds.), Sectoral and economic costs and benefits of GHG mitigation. Bilthoven: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pethe, A., & Karnik, A. (2000). Do Indian stock markets matter? Stock market indices and macro-economic variables. Economic and Political Weekly,35, 349–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, P. C., & Ouliaris, S. (1988). Testing for cointegration using principal components methods. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control,12(2–3), 205–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittel, K., van der Ploeg, R., & Withagen C. (Eds.) (2014). Climate policy and nonrenewable resources: The green paradox and beyond (pp. 1–18). MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qf9d6.4.

  • Pizer, W. A. (2002). Combining price and quantity controls to mitigate global climate change. Journal of public economics,85(3), 409–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reboredo, F. H., Lidon, F., Pessoa, F., & Ramalho, J. C. (2016). The fall of oil prices and the effects on biofuels. Trends in Biotechnology,34(1), 3–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Richmond, A. K., & Kaufmann, R. K. (2006). Is there a turning point in the relationship between income and energy use and/or carbon emissions? Ecological Economics,56(2), 176–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santoyo-Castelazo, E., & Azapagic, A. (2014). Sustainability assessment of energy systems: Integrating environmental, economic and social aspects. Journal of Cleaner Production,80, 119–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shahbaz, M., Lean, H. H., & Shabbir, M. S. (2012). Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Pakistan: Cointegration and Granger causality. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,16(5), 2947–2953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, Y., Yu, B., & Greenwood-Nimmo, M. (2014). Modelling asymmetric cointegration and dynamic multipliers in a nonlinear ARDL framework. In R. Sickles & W. C. Horrace (Eds.), Festschrift in Honor of Peter Schmidt (pp. 281–314). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A. (2010). Towards a competitive market for electricity and consumer choice in the Indian power sector. Energy Policy,38(8), 4196–4208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinn, H. W. (2008). Public policies against global warming: A supply side approach. International Tax and Public Finance,15(4), 360–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, R., & Narayan, P. K. (2015). Applied econometrics and implications for energy economics research. Energy Economics,50, 351–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Meijden, G., Van der Ploeg, F., & Withagen, C. (2015). International capital markets, oil producers and the green paradox. European Economic Review,76, 275–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogelsang, T. J., & Perron, P. (1998). Additional tests for a unit root allowing for a break in the trend function at an unknown time. International Economic Review,39, 1073–1100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, K., Yu, S., & Zhang, W. (2013). China’s regional energy and environmental efficiency: A DEA window analysis based dynamic evaluation. Mathematical and Computer Modelling,58(5), 1117–1127.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, R. A. (2014). Innovation and the dynamics of global warming. Journal of Environmental Economics and management,68(1), 124–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, L., Li, J., Tang, L., & Wang, S. (2015). Linear and nonlinear Granger causality investigation between carbon market and crude oil market: A multi-scale approach. Energy Economics,51, 300–311.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, Law School Building, Room 201, P.O. Box 213, 54124, Thessaloníki, Greece

    Katrakilidis Constantinos

  2. Department of Agricultural Development, Democritus University of Thrace, 193 Pantazidou str., Orestiada, Greece

    Zafeiriou Eleni

  3. Department of Accounting and Finance, Western Macedonia University of Applied Sciences, Kila, Kozani, 50100, Greece

    Sariannidis Nikolaos & Dimitris Bantis

Authors
  1. Katrakilidis Constantinos
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zafeiriou Eleni
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sariannidis Nikolaos
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dimitris Bantis
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zafeiriou Eleni.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Constantinos, K., Eleni, Z., Nikolaos, S. et al. Greenhouse gas emissions–crude oil prices: an empirical investigation in a nonlinear framework. Environ Dev Sustain 21, 2835–2856 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0163-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0163-6

Keywords