The causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in India

Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning and Policy

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 111-117

  Heo, J Y ^a   Yoo, S H ^a,b   Kwak, S J ^c  

^a Seoul National University of Science and Technology   (South Korea)

^b Hoseo University   (South Korea)

^c Korea University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

causality; economic growth; India; nuclear energy consumption

Indexed keywords

CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS; CAUSALITY; COINTEGRATION; ECONOMIC GROWTH; ECONOMIC GROWTHS; ERROR CORRECTION MODELS; FEEDBACK EFFECTS; INDIA; NUCLEAR ENERGY CONSUMPTION;

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ENERGY POLICY; ENERGY UTILIZATION; INVESTMENTS; NUCLEAR ENERGY;

ECONOMICS;

EID: 79956361220     PISSN: 15567249     EISSN: 15567257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15567240802533971     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. British Petroleum (BP). 2007. Statistical review of world energy 2007. Available at: http://www.bp.com
2. Engle, R. F., and Granger, C. W. J. 1987. Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica 55:251-276.
3. Geweke, J., Meese, R., and Dent, W. 1983. Comparing alternative tests for causality in temporal systems: analytic results and experimental evidence. J. Econometrics 21:161-194.
4. Ghosh, S. 2006. Future demand of petroleum products in India. Energ. Policy 34:2032-2037.
5. Granger, C. W. J. 1969. Investigating causal relation by econometric and cross-sectional method. Econometrica 37:424-438.
6. Granger, C. W. J., and Newbold, P. 1974. Spurious regressions in econometrics. J. conometrics 2:111-120.
7. Grover, R. B., and Chandra, S. 2006. Scenario for growth of electricity in India. Energ. Policy 34:2834-2847. (Pubitemid 44204061)
8. Guilkey, D. K., and Salemi, M. K. 1982. Small sample properties of the three tests of causality for Granger causal ordering in a bivariate stochastic system. Rev. Econ. Stat. 64:668-680.
9. International Energy Agency. 2004.World energy outlook 2004. Paris: International Energy Agency/ OECD.
10. Johansen, S., and Juselius, K. 1990.Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration with applications to the demand for money. Oxford B. Econ. Stats. 52:169-210.
11. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited. 2007. Annual report 2006-2007. Mumbai, India: Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd.
12. Pantula, S. G., Gonzalez-Farias, G., and Fuller, W. A. 1994. A comparison of unit-root test criteria. J. Busd. Econ. Stat. 12:449-459.
13. Phillips, P. C. B., and Perron, P. 1988. Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika 75:335-346.
14. Toda, H. Y., and Phillips, P. C. B. 1993. Vector autoregressions and causality. Econometrica 61:1367-1393.
15. Toth, F. L., and Rogner, H. H. 2006. Oil and nuclear power: Past, present, and future. Energ. Eco. 28:1-25. (Pubitemid 43056803)
16. World Bank. 2007. World development indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.
17. Yoo, S.-H., and Jung, K.-O. 2005. Nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in Korea. Prog. Nucl. Energ. 46:101-109. (Pubitemid 40556891)
18. Yoo, S.-H., and Kwak, S.-J. 2004. Information technology and economic development in Korea: A causality study. Int. J. Tech. Manage. 27:57-67.