Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:56:41.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Energy savings via FDI? Empirical evidence from developing countries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

MICHAEL HÜBLER  and
ANDREAS KELLER
MICHAEL HÜBLER
Affiliation:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy, D-24100 Kiel, Germany. Tel: +49 431 8814 401. Fax: +49 431 8814 500. Email: michael.huebler@ifw-kiel.de
ANDREAS KELLER
Affiliation:
University of Oldenburg, D-26111 Oldenburg, Germany. Tel: +49 441 798 4445. Fax: +49 441 798 4116. Email: andreas.keller@uni-oldenburg.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper we examine the influence of foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows on energy intensities of developing countries empirically. We first replicate a simple ordinary least squares (OLS) estimation, as it is found in the literature, that suggests energy-intensity reductions from FDI inflows. However, the OLS estimation turns out to be spurious and only a starting point for further research. In our regressions we use macro-level panel data on 60 developing countries for the period 1975–2004, including other potential determinants of energy intensities, and carry out robustness checks with more specific data. The results do not confirm the hypothesis that aggregate FDI inflows reduce energy intensity of developing countries. Rather, foreign development aid seems to be related to energy efficiency gains.

Type
Research Article
Information
Environment and Development Economics , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 59 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aitken, B. J. and Harrison, A. E. (1999), ‘Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela’, The American Economic Review 89 (3): 605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antweiler, W., Copeland, B. R., and Taylor, M. S. (2001), ‘Is free trade good for the environment?’ The American Economic Review 91 (4): 877–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, K. J. (1962), ‘The economic implications of learning by doing’, The Review of Economic Studies 29 (3): 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birol, F. and Okogu, B. E. (1997), ‘Purchasing-power-parity (PPP) approach to energy-efficiency measurement: implications for energy and environmental policy’, Energy 22 (1): 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bureau of Economic Analysis (2008), ‘U.S. direct investment abroad’ [online], http://www.bea.gov/international/, accessed on June 28, 2008.Google Scholar
Choi, I. (2001), ‘Unit root tests for panel data’, Journal of International Money and Finance 20: 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, M. A. (2006), ‘Does trade liberalization increase national energy use?’ Economics Letters 92: 108–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, R. D. and Weisberg, S. (1983), ‘Diagnostics for heteroscedasticity in regression’, Biometrica 70: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copeland, B. R. and Taylor, M. S. (2003), Trade and the Environment: Theory and Evidence, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corcos, G., Del Gatto, M., Mion, G., and Ottaviano, G. I. P. (2007), ‘Productivity and firm selection: intra- vs. international trade’, CORE Discussion Paper No. 2007/60, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickey, D. A. and Fuller, W. A. (1979), ‘Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 74: 427–431.Google Scholar
Drukker, D. M. (2003), ‘Testing for serial correlation in linear panel-data models’, Stata Journal 3 (2): 168–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eskeland, G. and Harrison, A. (2003), ‘Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis’, Journal of Development Economics 70 (1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher-Vanden, K., Jefferson, G. H., Liu, H., and Tao, Q. (2004), ‘What is driving China's decline in energy intensity?’ Resource and Energy Economics 26: 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galli, R. (1998), ‘The relationship between energy intensity and income levels: forecasting long term energy demand in Asian emerging countries’, The Energy Journal 19 (4): 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, C. W. J. and Newbold, P. (1974), ‘Spurious regressions in econometrics’, Journal of Econometrics 2: 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, G. and Krueger, A. (1993), ‘Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement’, in Garber, P. (ed.), The U.S.–Mexico Free Trade Agreement, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 13–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heston, A., Summers, R., and Aten, B. (2006), Penn World Table Version 6.2, Philadelphia: Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., and Shin, Y. (2003), ‘Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels’, Journal of Econometrics 115: 53–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Energy Agency (2007), ‘World Energy Statistics and Balances’ [online], http://data.iea.org/ieastore/statslisting.asp, accessed on April 27, 2007.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund (2007a), ‘Balance of Payments Statistics’ [online], http://www.imfstatistics.org/bop/, accessed on April 27, 2007.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund (2007b), ‘International Financial Statistics’ [online], http://www.imfstatistics.org/imf/, accessed on April 27, 2007.Google Scholar
Javorcik, B. S. (2004), ‘Does foreign direct investment increase the productivity of domestic firms? In search of spillovers through backward linkages’, The American Economic Review 94 (3): 605–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Javorcik, B. S. and Spatareanu, M. (2008), ‘To share or not to share: does local participation matter for spillovers from foreign direct investment?’ Journal of Development Economics 85 (1–2): 194–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Justus, D. and Philibert, C. (2005), ‘International energy technology collaboration and climate change mitigation’, Synthesis Report, OECD/IEA, Paris.Google Scholar
Keller, W. (2004), ‘International technology diffusion’, Journal of Economic Literature 42: 752–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, W. and Yeaple, S. R. forthcoming, ‘Multinational enterprises, international trade, and productivity growth: firm-level evidence from the United States’, The Review of Economics and Statistics.Google Scholar
Levin, A., Lin, C. -F., and Chu, C. -S. J. (2001), ‘Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite sample properties’, Journal of Econometrics 108: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddala, G. S. and Wu, S. (1999), ‘A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 61 (1): 631–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzanti, M., Musolesi, A., and Zoboli, R. (2006), ‘A Bayesian approach to the estimation of environmental Kuznets curves for CO2 emissions’, Nota di lavoro 121.06, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Milan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mielnik, O. and Goldemberg, J. (2000), ‘Converging to a common pattern of energy use in developing and industrialized countries’, Energy Policy 28: 503–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mielnik, O. and Goldemberg, J. (2002), ‘Foreign direct investment and decoupling between energy and gross domestic product in developing countries’, Energy Policy 30: 87–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perman, R. and Stern, D. I. (2003), ‘Evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests that the environmental Kuznets curve does not exist’, The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 47 (3): 325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, S. (2008), ‘Greenhouse gas mitigation in developing countries through technology transfer? A survey of empirical evidence’, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 13 (3): 283–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, P. C. B. and Perron, P. (1988), ‘Testing for unit root in time series regression’, Biometrika 75: 335–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saggi, K. (2002), ‘Trade, foreign direct investment, and international technology transfer: a survey’, The World Bank Research Observer 17 (2): 191–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seres, S. (2008), ‘Analysis of technology transfer in CDM projects’, Report Prepared for the UNFCCC Registration and Issuance Unit CDM/SDM, [online], http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Reports/TTreport/TTrep08.pdf, accessed on June 8, 2009.Google Scholar
Siebert, H. (2005), Economics of the Environment – Theory and Policy, 6th ed., Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
Stern, D. I. (2004), ‘The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve’, World Development 32 (8): 1419–1439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szroeter, J. (1978), ‘A class of parametric tests for heteroscedasticity in linear econometric models’, Econometrica 46: 1311–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tybout, J. R. (2003), ‘Plant and firm-level evidence on “New” Trade Theories’, in Choi, E.K. and Harrigan, J. (eds.), Handbook of International Trade, Volume 1, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 388–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNCTAD (2008), ‘FDIstat’ [online], http://stats.unctad.org/FDI/, accessed on May 23, 2008.Google Scholar
UNIDO (2006), ‘INDSTAT3’, Industrial Statistics Database at the three-digit level of ISIC (Revision 2), CD-ROM.Google Scholar
White, H. (1980), ‘A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity’, Econometrica 48: 817–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooldridge, J. M. (2002), Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
World Bank (2007), ‘World Development Indicators’ [online], http://go.worldbank.org/B53SONGPA0, accessed on April 27, 2007.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Hubler supplementary material

Appendix.doc

Download Hubler supplementary material(File)
File 2.2 MB