Energy Efficiency in Europe; Stochastic-Convergent and Non-Convergent Countries

  • Angeliki MenegakiEmail author
  • Aviral K. Tiwari
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)


Energy efficiency emerges as one of the most important pillars for consumer-centered clean energy transition in Europe. Based on commitments of the European Commission announced in December 2016, Europe prioritizes effort sharing among countries and each country is responsible for finding ways of implementation. This chapter examines the integration properties of primary and final energy efficiency convergence as well as energy productivity convergence (as a proxy for energy efficiency) in 35 European countries over the period 1995–2014. Besides the conventional unit root tests, we apply some of the most recently developed Lagrange multiplier (LM) tests that account for structural breaks, autocorrelation, and cross-sectional dependence which is typically expected to permeate economic unions. Results show there is convergence in energy efficiency despite the economic crisis and the different accession dates of the countries in the European Union as well as the shocks injected into the system by the issuance of the various energy directives so far. Most breaks take place within the period of 1995–2003. The strongest evidence for convergence applies for Finland and Romania (which also happens to belong to the same convergence club for primary energy), while the weakest applies for Ukraine and the UK (which also belongs to the same convergent club for primary energy).


Club convergence Energy efficiency Europe Nonlinearities Structural breaks 


  1. 1.
    Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory (2016) What is energy efficiency? Available from: Accessed on 27 Apr 2016
  2. 2.
    International Energy Agency (2016) Capturing the multiple benefits of energy efficiency. Available from: Accessed on 27 Apr 2016
  3. 3.
    European Commission (2015) Assessment of the progress made by member states towards the national energy efficiency targets for 2020 and towards the implementation of the Energy Efficiency Directive 2012/27/EU as required by Article 24 (3) of Energy Efficiency Directive 2012/27/EU. Available from: Accessed on 03 June 2017
  4. 4.
    European Commission (2016) Energy efficiency. Available from: Accessed on 28 Apr 2016
  5. 5.
    American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (2014) Executive summary the 2014 international energy efficiency scorecard, July 2014. Available from: Accessed on 28 Apr 2016
  6. 6.
    Wesselink B, Harmsen R, Eichhammer W (2010) Energy savings 2020—how to triple the impact of energy saving policies in Europe. Available from: Accessed on 28 Apr 2016
  7. 7.
    Bergamaschi L, Holmes I, Lawson R (2014) Making sense of the numbers: what does the commission’s 30% energy efficiency target by 2030 mean and is it enough? Available from: Accessed on 28 Apr 2016. Briefing paper, Sept 2014
  8. 8.
    Odysse-Mure (2015) Synthesis: energy efficiency trends and policies in the EU. Available from: Accessed on 29 Apr 2016
  9. 9.
    Nilsson LJ (1993) Energy intensity trends in 31 industrial and developing countries 1950–1988. Energy 18(4):309–322. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goldemberg J (1996) Communication: a note on the energy intensity of developing countries. Energy Policy 24(8):759–761. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smyth R (2013) Are fluctuations in energy variables permanent or transitory? A survey of the literature on the integration properties of energy consumption and production (review). Appl Energy 104:371–378. Scholar
  12. 12.
    Narayan PK, Smyth R (2007) Are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? Evidence from 182 countries. Energy Policy 35(1):333–341. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ozcan B (2013) Are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? the case of 17 Middle East countries. Energy Explor Exploit 31(4):589–605. Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsu YC, Lee CC (2008) Revisited: are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? New evidence from a panel SURADF approach. Energy Econ 30(5):2314–2330. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chen PF, Lee CC (2007) Is energy consumption per capita broken stationary? New evidence from regional-based panels. Energy Policy 35(6):3526–3540. Scholar
  16. 16.
    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(6):2318–2326. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ozturk I, Aslan A (2011) Are fluctuations in energy consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from Turkey. Energy Explor Exploit 29(2):161–167. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Narayan PK, Smyth R (2005) The residential demand for electricity in Australia: an application of the bounds testing approach to cointegration. Energy Policy 33(4):467–474. Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aslan A, Kum H (2011) The stationary of energy consumption for Turkish disaggregate data by employing linear and nonlinear unit root tests. Energy 36(7):4256–4258. Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hasanov M, Telatar E (2011) A re-examination of stationarity of energy consumption: evidence from new unit root tests. Energy Policy 39(12):7726–7738. Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kum H (2012) Are fluctuations in energy consumption transitory or permanent? Evidence from a panel of East Asia & Pacific countries. Int J Energy Econ Policy 2(3):92–96Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yilanci V, Tunali ÇB (2014) Are fluctuations in energy consumption transitory or permanent? Evidence from a Fourier LM unit root test. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 36:20–25. Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhu H, Guo P (2016) Are shocks to nuclear energy consumption per capita permanent or temporary? A global perspective. Prog Nucl Energy 88:156–164. Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lean HH, Smyth R (2014) Are shocks to disaggregated energy consumption in Malaysia permanent or temporary? Evidence from LM unit root tests with structural breaks. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 31:319–328. Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kula F, Aslan A, Ozturk I (2012) Is per capita electricity consumption stationary? Time series evidence from OECD countries. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(1):501–503. Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kula F (2014) Is per capita electricity consumption non-stationary? A long-span study for Turkey. Energy Sources Part B 9(2):161–164. Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lean HH, Smyth R (2009) Long memory in US disaggregated petroleum consumption: evidence from univariate and multivariate LM tests for fractional integration. Energy Policy 37(8):3205–3211. Scholar
  28. 28.
    Apergis N, Loomis D, Payne JE (2010) Are fluctuations in coal consumption transitory or permanent? Evidence from a panel of US states. Appl Energy 87(7):2424–2426. Scholar
  29. 29.
    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(8):4734–4736. Scholar
  30. 30.
    Apergis N, Payne JE (2010) Structural breaks and petroleum consumption in US states: are shocks transitory or permanent? Energy Policy 38(10):6375–6378. Scholar
  31. 31.
    Aslan A (2011) Does natural gas consumption follow a nonlinear path over time? Evidence from 50 US states. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 15(9):4466–4469. Scholar
  32. 32.
    Barros CP, Gil-Alana LA, Payne JE (2012) Evidence of long memory behavior in US renewable energy consumption. Energy Policy 41:822–826. Scholar
  33. 33.
    Barros CP, Gil-Alana LA, Payne JE (2013) Evidence of long memory behavior in US nuclear electricity net generation. Energy Syst 4(1):99–107. Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gil-Alana LA, Loomis D, Payne JE (2010) Does energy consumption by the US electric power sector exhibit long memory behavior? Energy Policy 38(11):7512–7518. Scholar
  35. 35.
    Apergis N, Tsoumas C (2012) Long memory and disaggregated energy consumption: evidence from fossils, coal and electricity retail in the US. Energy Econ 34(4):1082–1087. Scholar
  36. 36.
    Apergis N, Tsoumas C (2011) Integration properties of disaggregated solar, geothermal and biomass energy consumption in the US. Energy Policy 39(9):5474–5479. Scholar
  37. 37.
    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(3):919–936. Scholar
  38. 38.
    Borozan D, Borozan L (2015) The stationarity of per capita electricity consumption in Croatia allowing for structural break(s). In: Proceedings of the 13th international symposium on operational research, SOR 2015, pp 337–342Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wang Y, Li L, Kubota J, Zhu X, Lu G (2016) Are fluctuations in Japan’s consumption of non-fossil energy permanent or transitory? Appl Energy 169:187–196. Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wesley Burnett J, Madariaga J (2017) The convergence of US state-level energy intensity. Energy Econ 62:357–370. Scholar
  41. 41.
    Herrerias MJ, Aller C, Ordóñez J (2017) Residential energy consumption: a convergence analysis across Chinese regions. Energy Econ 62:371–381. Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mishra V, Smyth R (2017) Conditional convergence in Australia’s energy consumption at the sector level. Energy Econ 62:396–403. Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lee J, Strazicich MC (2003) Minimum Lagrange multiplier unit root test with two structural breaks. Rev Econ Stat 85(4):1082–1089. Scholar
  44. 44.
    Schmidt P, Phillips P (1992) LM tests for a unit root in the presence of deterministic trends. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 54:257–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Im KS, Pesaran MH, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J Econom 115:53–74MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Breuer JB, McNown R, Wallace MS (2001) Misleading inferences from panel unit-root tests with an illustration from purchasing power parity. Rev Int Econ 9(3):482–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Carrion-i-Silvestre JL, del Barrio-Castro T, Lopez-Bazo E (2005) Breaking the panels: an application to GDP per capita. Econ J 8:159–175MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kapetanios G, Shin Y, Snell A (2003) Testing for a unit root in the nonlinear STAR framework. J Econ 112(2):359–379. Scholar
  49. 49.
    Sollis R (2004) Asymmetric adjustment and smooth transitions: a combination of some unit root tests. J Time Ser Anal 25(3):409–417. Scholar
  50. 50.
    Nielsen MØ (2005) Multivariate Lagrange multiplier tests for fractional integration. J Finan Econ 3(3):372–398. Scholar
  51. 51.
    del Barrio Castro T (2006) On the performance of the DHF tests against nonstationary alternatives. Stat Probab Lett 76:291–297MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Westerlund J (2005) A panel unit root test with multivariate endogenous breaks. Technical report, Lund UniversityGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Narayan PK, Popp S (2011) An application of a new seasonal unit root test to inflation. Int Rev Econ Finan 20:707–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Enders W, Lee J (2012) A unit root test using a fourier series to approximate smooth breaks. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 74(4):574–599. Scholar
  55. 55.
    Borozan D (2017) Testing for convergence in electricity consumption across Croatian regions at the consumer’s sectoral level. Energy Policy 102:145–153. Scholar
  56. 56.
    Dickey DA, Fuller WA (1979) Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J Am Stat Assoc 74:427–431MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Moon HR, Perron B (2004) Testing for a unit root in panels with dynamic factors. J Econ 122(1):81–126. Scholar
  58. 58.
    Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ 22(2):265–312. Scholar
  59. 59.
    Chang Y (2002) Nonlinear IV unit root tests in panels with cross-sectional dependency (conference paper). J Econ 110(2):261–292. Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ucar N, Omay T (2009) Testing for unit root in nonlinear heterogeneous panels. Econ Lett 104(1):5–8. Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hansen BE (1995) Rethinking the univariate approach to unit root testing: using covariates to increase power. Econ Theory 11:1148–1171MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Constantini M, Lupi C (2013) A simple panel-CADF test for unit roots. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 75(2):276–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Zivot E, Andrews DWK (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat 10(3):251–270. Scholar
  64. 64.
    Perron P (1997) Further evidence on breaking trend functions in macroeconomic variables. J Econ 80(2):355–385MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Im KSO, Lee J, Tieslau M (2005) Panel LM unit-root tests with level shifts (Review). Oxf Bull Econ Stat 67(3):393–419. Scholar
  66. 66.
    Hadri K (2000) Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data. Econ J 3:148–161MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Hadri K, Rao Y (2008) Panel stationarity test with structural breaks. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 70(2):245–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Holmes MJ, Otero J, Panagiotidis T (2011) PPP in OECD countries: an analysis of real exchange rate stationarity cross sectional dependency and structural breaks. Available from: Accessed on 26 May 2016
  69. 69.
    Arezki R, Hadri K, Loungani P, Rao Y (2013) Testing the Prebisch-Singer hypothesis since 1650: evidence from panel techniques that allow for multiple breaks. IMF working paper, WP/13/180Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Phillips PCB, Sul D (2007) Transition modeling and econometric convergence tests. Econometrica 75(6):1771–1855. Scholar
  71. 71.
    Demetrescu M, Hassler U (2007) Effect of neglected deterministic seasonality on unit root tests. Stat Pap 48:385–402MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics and Management of Tourist BusinessesAgricultural University of AthensAmfissaGreece
  2. 2.Montpellier Business SchoolMontpellierFrance
  3. 3.Cyprus Open UniversityNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations