Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are shocks to copper consumption persistent?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Mineral Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates whether shocks to copper consumption for 37 countries over the period 1967–2010 are transitory or persistent. A variety of time-series unit root tests is first employed. This is followed by several generations of panel data unit root tests. The presence of structural breaks is taken into account while performing those tests. In addition, cross-sectional dependence is detected and effectively controlled when applying some new generations of panel unit root tests. Copper consumption is found to follow a non-stationary process for about 86 % of the countries. There is also overwhelming evidence of a similar process when panel unit root tests are applied. Generally, shocks to copper consumption are found to be persistent.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The forecasts and forecast standard errors tend to differ between stationary and non-stationary series. In particular, forecast standard errors will become very large for more distant forecast periods if the series is non-stationary.

  2. Myers (1946) discusses the various implications of adopting mineral conservation policies especially for the USA.

  3. From the mineral prices perspective, using time-series techniques, Narayan and Lui (2011) inspect the impacts of shocks on ten commodity prices (gold, silver, platinum, copper, aluminium, iron ore, lead, nickel, tin, and zinc). They find shocks to be persistent for gold, silver, platinum, aluminium, and copper.

  4. No single-panel unit root test is devoid of statistical shortcomings in terms of size and power properties. It is hence practical to perform several tests to determine the order of integration of the longitudinal data. It is also a proper means to shed light on the limitations and strengths of each of these tests.

  5. Detailed results of the pairwise correlations are available upon request.

  6. The Chang–Song test statistics for ta c , ta h , ta a , tm c , tm h and tm a are 2.446, −0.422, −0.222, −2.159, −1.363 and −1.799, respectively. Each test statistic can be compared to the 1, 5 and 10 % significance levels with the one-sided critical values of −2.326, −1.645 and −1.282 for the average test while these are −3.402, −2.928 and −2.696 for minimum test (N = 30), respectively. These statistics provide strong evidence of a non-stationarity process.

References

  • Apergis N, Loomis D, Payne JE (2010) Are shocks to natural gas consumption temporary or permanent? Evidence from a panel of US states. Energy Policy 38:4734–4736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee A, Marcellino M, Osbat C (2004) Some cautions on the use of panel methods for integrated series of macro-economic data. Econ J 7:322–340

    Google Scholar 

  • Barhoumi K (2005) Long run exchange rate pass-through into import prices in developing countries: an homogeneous or heterogeneous phenomenon? Econ Bull 6:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Breitung J and Cubadda G (2011) Testing for cointegration in high-dimensional systems. Working paper. http://www.ect.uni-bonn.de/mitarbeiter/joerg-breitung/pctest_rev. Accessed 16 June 2013

  • Caner M, Kilian L (2001) Size distortions of tests of the null hypothesis of stationarity: evidence and implications for the PPP debate. J Int Money Finance 20:639–657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang Y (2002) Nonlinear IV unit root tests in panels with cross-sectional dependency. J Econ 110:261–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang Y, Song W (2009) Testing for unit roots in small panels with short-run and long-run cross-sectional dependencies. Rev Econ Stud 76:903–935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi I (1993) Asymptotic normality of the least-squares estimates for higher order autoregressive integrated processes with some applications. Econ Theory 9:263–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiano LJ (1992) Searching for a break in GNP. J Business Econ Stat 10:237–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1981) Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica 49:1057–1072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher RA (1932) Statistical methods for research workers, 4th edn. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S (2006) Steel consumption and economic growth: evidence from India. Res Policy 31:7–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadri K (2000) Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data. Econ J 3:148–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadri K, Kurozumi E (2012) A simple panel stationarity tests in the presence of cross-sectional dependence. Econ Lett 115:31–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huh K-S (2011) Steel consumption and economic growth in Korea: long-term and short-term evidence. Res Policy 36:107–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Im SK, Pesaran MH, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J Econ 115:53–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Im K, Lee J and Tieslau M (2010) Stationarity of inflation: evidence from panel unit root tests with trend shifts. Working paper. http://apps.olin.wustl.edu/MEGConference/Files/pdf/2010/70.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2013

  • Jaunky VC (2012a) Aluminum consumption and economic growth: evidence from rich countries. Nat Resour Res 21:265–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaunky VC (2012b) Are shocks to aluminium consumption transitory or permanent? Working paper (available upon request).

  • Jaunky VC (2012c) Is there a material Kuznets curve for aluminium? Evidence from rich countries. Res Policy 37:296–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson S, Löthgren M (2000) On the power and interpretation of panel unit root tests. Econ Lett 66:249–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koedijk KG, Tims B, van Dijk MA (2004) Purchasing power parity and the euro area. J Int Money Finance 23:1081–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwiatkowski D, Phillips P, Schmidt P, Shin Y (1992) Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of unit root. J Econ 54:159–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin A, Lin C-F, Chu JC-S (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite sample properties. J Econ 108:1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon JG (1991) Critical values for cointegration tests. In: Engle R, Granger CWJ (Eds) Long Run Relationships: Reading in Cointegration. Oxford University Press, pp. 1–16

  • Maddala GS, Wu S (1999) A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 631–652

  • Mishra V, Sharma S, Smyth R (2009) Are fluctuations in energy consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from a panel of Pacific Island countries. Energy Policy 37:2318–2326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers WM (1946) Principles of mineral conservation. The Pennsylvania State College Bulletin Mineral Industries Experiment Station Circular 25. http://www.libraries.psu.edu/content/dam/psul/up/emsl/documents/circulars/circular25.pdf. Accessed16 June 2013

  • Narayan PK, Liu R (2011) Are shocks to commodity prices persistent? Applied Energy 88:409–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayan PK, Narayan S, Smyth R (2008) Are oil shocks permanent or temporary? Panel data evidence from crude oil and NGL production in 60 countries. Energy Econ 30:919–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayan PK, Popp S (2010) A new unit root test with two structural breaks in level and slope at unknown time. J Appl Stat 37:1425–1438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayan PK, Smyth R (2007) Are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? Evidence from 182 countries. Energy Policy 35:333–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson CR, Plosser CI (1982) Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series: some evidence and implications. J Monet Econ 10:139–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng S, Perron P (2001) Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica 69:1519–1554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell PGJ (1998) The overvaluation of purchasing power parity. J Int Econ 44:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran HM (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ 22:265–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perron P (1989) Great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica 6:1361–1401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips PCB, Perron P (1988) Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika 75:335–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radetzki M, Tilton J (1990) Conceptual and methodological issues. In: Tilton J (ed) World Metal Demand. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Ávila D (2008) A confirmatory analysis of the unit root hypothesis for OECD consumption income ratios. Appl Econ 40:2271–2278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth R (2012) Are fluctuations in energy variables permanent or transitory? A survey of the literature on the integration properties of energy consumption and production. Working paper. http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/eco/research/papers/2012/0412arefluctuationsenergysmyth.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2013

  • Strauss J, Yigit T (2003) Shortfalls of panel unit root testing. Econ Lett 81(3):309–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stürmer M (2013) 150 years of boom and bust—what drives mineral commodity prices? Working paper. http://www.die-gdi.de/CMS-Homepage/openwebcms3.nsf/%28ynDK_contentByKey%29/ANES-966F6X/$FILE/DP%205. 2013.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2013

  • Sul D, Phillips PCB, Choi C-Y (2005) Prewhitening bias in HAC estimation. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 67:517–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor MP, Sarno L (1998) The behavior of real exchange rates during the post-Bretton Woods period. J Int Econ 46:281–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toda HY (1995) Finite sample performance of likelihood ratio tests for cointegrating ranks in vector autoregressions. Econ Theory 11(5):1015–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warell L and Olsson A (2009) Trends and developments in the intensity of steel use: an econometric analysis. http://pure.ltu.se/portal/files/3157773/ Paper.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2013

  • World Bureau of Metal Statistics (2012) Annual metal statistics. Ware. England: World Bureau of Metal Statistics

  • Zivot E, Andrews DWK (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock and the unit root hypothesis. J Business Econ Stat 10:251–270

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Thomas F. Rutherford, Massimo Filippini, Robert Lundmark and two anonymous referees for their comments and suggestions. Errors, if any, are the author's own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden

    Vishal Chandr Jaunky

Authors
  1. Vishal Chandr Jaunky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vishal Chandr Jaunky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jaunky, V.C. Are shocks to copper consumption persistent?. Miner Econ 26, 29–38 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13563-013-0034-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13563-013-0034-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation