Telephone penetrations and economic growth: evidence from India

  • Sajal Ghosh
  • Rohit PrasadEmail author


The study probes cointegration and Granger causality between telephone connections and economic activity for India using annual data for the time span 1980–81 to 2006–07. Empirical results fail to establish any cointegrating relationship among the variables. The heterogeneity of penetration within different states of the country and within the time period of analysis may explain the lack of a long term relationship among the variables. The study, however, establishes short-run unidirectional Granger causality running from telephone connections to economic growth signifying the strategic importance of telecommunications for the Indian growth story. It re-enforces the urgency of initiatives aimed at providing universal telephone and data connectivity to the entire population. To study the behavior of variables out of the sample period, generalized impulse response paths due to the various shocks to the system are studied. The findings are that GDP responds positively to a one-time shock in telephone connections but returns to its initial levels after 4 years. The study discusses the possible reasons behind the empirical findings and concludes with a discussion of policy prescriptions to augment telephone connectivity in India.


Cointegration ARDL Telephone penetrations Economic growth India 

JEL Classification

C22 E22 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Akinlo, A.E. (2006). The stability of money demand in Nigeria: an autoregressive distributed lag approach. Journal of Policy Modeling, 28(4), 445–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beil, R., Ford, G., Jackson, J. (2005). On the relationship between telecommunications investment and economic growth in the United States. International Economic Journal, 19(1), 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhattacharya, B.B., Bhanumurthy, N.R., Mallick, H. (2008). Modeling interest rate cycles in India. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(5), 899–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chakraborty, C., & Nandi, B. (2003). Privatization, telecommunications and growth in selected Asian countries: an econometric analysis. Journal of Communications and Strategies, 52(4), 31–47.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chang, T., Fang, W., Wen, L.-F. (2001). Energy consumption, employment, output and temporal causality: evidence from Taiwan based on cointegration and error-correction modelling techniques. Applied Economics, 33, 1045–1056.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chu, N., Oxley, L., Carlaw, K. (2005). ICT and causality in the New Zealand economy. In: Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on simulation and modelling.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cronin, F., Parker, E., Colleran, E., Gold, M. (1991a). Telecommunications infrastructure and economic growth: an analysis of causality. Telecommunications Policy, 15(6), 529–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cronin, F., Parker, E., Colleran, E., Gold, M. (1991b). Telecommunications infrastructure investment and economic development. Telecommunications Policy, 17(6), 415–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Datta, A., & Agarwal, S. (2004). Telecommunications and economic growth: a panel data approach. Applied Economics, 36(15), 1649–1654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Department of Telecommunications (DoT) (2004). Policies, acts and rules on USO fund. Retrieved 29 Sept 2011.
  11. 11.
    Engle, R.F., & Granger, C.W.J. (1987). Co-integration and error-correction: representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Enisan, A.A., & Olufisayo, A.O. (2009). Stock market development and economic growth: evidence from seven sub-Sahara African countries. Journal of Economics and Business, 61(2), 162–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ghosh, S. (2009). Import demand of crude oil and economic growth: evidence from India. Energy Policy, 37(2), 699–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    GSMA Development Fund (2009). Green power for mobile: top ten findings. Retrieved 18 Sept 2012.
  15. 15.
    Halicioglu, F. (2009). An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy, 37(3), 1156–1164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hardy, A.P. (1980). The role of the telephone in economic development. Telecommunications Policy, 4(4), 278–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jensen, R. (2007). The digital provide: information (technology), market performance, and welfare in the South Indian fisheries sector. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 879–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johansen, S., & Juselius, K. (1990). Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration with application to money demand. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 52, 169–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katircioglu, S.T. (2009). Revisiting the tourism-led-growth hypothesis for Turkey using the bounds test and Johansen approach for cointegration. Tourism Management, 30(1), 17–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kathuria, R., Uppal, M., Mamta. (2009). An econometric analysis of the impact of mobile. Vodafone Policy Paper Series, 9. Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kurian, N.J. (2000). Widening regional disparities in India. Economic and Political Weekly, XXV(7), 538–550.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liang, Q., & Cao, H. (2007). Property prices and bank lending in China. Journal of Asian Economics, 18(1), 63–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Madden, G., & Scott, J.S. (1998). CEE telecommunications investment and economic growth. Information Economics and Policy, 10(2), 173–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Narayan, P.K. (2004). Reformulating critical values for the bounds F-statistics approach to cointegration: an application to the tourism demand model for Fiji. In: Department of Economics Discussion Papers N0.02/04. Melbourne, Australia: Monash University.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Narayan, P.K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics, 37, 1979–1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Narayan, P.K., & Smyth, R. (2006). Higher education, real income and real investment in China: evidence from Granger causality tests. Education Economics, 14(1), 107–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Narayana, M.R. (2011). Telecommunications services and economic growth: evidence from India. Telecommunications Policy, 35(2), 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nema, P., Nema, R.K., Rangnekar, S. (2010). Minimization of green house gases emission by using hybrid energy system for telephony base station site application. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14, 1635–1639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Norton, S.W. (1992). Transaction costs, telecommunications, and the microeconomics of macroeconomic growth. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 41(1), 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Perkins, P., Fedderke, J., Luiz, J. (2005). An analysis of economic infrastructure investment in South Africa. South African Journal of Economics, 73(2), 211–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pesaran, M.H., & Shin, Y. (1999). An autoregressive distributed lag modelling approach to cointegration analysis. In: S. Storm (Ed.), Econometrics and economic theory in the 20th century: the Ragnar Frisch centennial symposium (Chapter 11, pp. 1–31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pesaran, M.H., Shin, Y., Smith, R. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16, 289–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pöllänen, O., & Bhebhe, L. (2011). Efficient deployment of large mobile networks. NETNOMICS, 12(2), 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Prasad, R., & Sridhar, V. (2009). Allocative efficiency of the mobile industry in India and its implications for spectrum policy. Telecommunications Policy, 33, 521–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rodini, M., Ward, M.R., Woroch, G.A. (2003). Going mobile: substitutability between fixed and mobile access. Telecommunications Policy, 27, 457–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Röller, L.-H., & Waverman, L. (1996). Telecommunications infrastructure and economic development: A simultaneous approach. Berlin: Social Science Research Centre. Discussion paper.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Röller, L.-H., & Waverman, L. (2001). Telecommunications infrastructure and economic development: a simultaneous approach. American Economic Review, 91(4), 909–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sarin, A., & Jain, R. (2009). A survey of the usage of mobiles in poor urban areas. Vodafone Policy Paper Series, 9.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sridhar, V. (2010). An econometric analysis of mobile services growth across regions of India. NETNOMICS, 11(3), 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sridhar, K.S., & Sridhar, V. (2004). Telecommunications infrastructure and economic growth: Evidence from developing countries. National Institute of Public Finance and Policy Working Paper No.14/2004.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sridhar, K.S., & Sridhar, V. (2005). Telecommunications and growth: causal model, quantitative and qualitative evidence. Economic and Political Weekly, 29, 2611–2619.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stern, D.I. (1993). Energy growth in the USA: a multivariate approach. Energy Economics, 15, 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Stern, D.I. (2000). A multivariate cointegration analysis of the role of energy in the US macroeconomy. Energy Economics, 22, 267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sung, N., & Lee, Y.-H. (2002). Substitution between mobile and fixed telephones in Korea. Review of Industrial Organization, 20, 367–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tang, C.F., & Lean, H.H. (2009). New evidence from the misery index in the crime function. Economics Letters, 102(2), 112–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Torero, M., Chowdhury, S., Bedi, S.A. (2002). Telecommunications infrastructure and economic growth: A cross-country anaysis. Information and communication technology for development and poverty reduction (pp. 21–63). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    TRAI (2005). Recommendations on growth of telecom services in rural India: The way forward. Retrieved 18 Sept 2012.
  48. 48.
    Tripathi, A. (2010). Tower firms go solar to save on diesel & soot, Daily News and Analysis. Retrieved 18 Sept 2012.
  49. 49.
    Uppal, M., & Kathuria, R. (2009). The impact of mobiles in the SME sector. Vodafone Policy Paper Series, 9.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Yoo, S.H., & Kwak, S.J. (2004). Information technology and economic development in Korea: a causality study. International Journal of Technology Management, 27, 57–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2007). Another look at the relationship between telecommunications investment and economic activity in the United States. International Economic Journal, 21(2), 199–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Management Development Institute (MDI)GurgaonIndia

Personalised recommendations