رابطه علی بین مصرف انرژی های هسته ای و رشد اقتصادی: تجزیه و تحلیل چند کشور

This paper attempts to investigate the causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth using the data from six countries among 20 countries that have used nuclear energy for more than 20 years until 2005. To this end, time-series techniques including the tests for unit roots, co-integration, and Granger-causality are employed to Argentina, France, Germany, Korea, Pakistan, and Switzerland. The main conclusion is that the causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth is not uniform across countries. In the case of Switzerland, there exists bi-directional causality between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth. This means that an increase in nuclear energy consumption directly affects economic growth and that economic growth also stimulates further nuclear energy consumption. The uni-directional causality runs from economic growth to nuclear energy consumption without any feedback effects in France and Pakistan, and from nuclear energy to economic growth in Korea. However, any causality between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in Argentina and Germany is not detected.

Sustainable electricity supply is one of the driving forces in a nation's economic development because the shortage of power supply can force hundreds of industries to close. One of the sources that play a large role in electricity generation is nuclear energy. Actually, many countries use nuclear energy to generate electricity. According to International Energy Agency (2008), the proportion of nuclear energy in total domestic electricity generation is 79.1%, 46.7%, 46.7%, and 37.0% in France, Sweden, Ukraine, and Korea, respectively in 2006. Moreover, nuclear energy share of worldwide electricity generation has been changed from 3.3% in 1973 to 14.8% in 2006 while the oil share declined from 24.7% to 5.8% and there were no big changes in other fuels such as coal and gas over the same period of time. Nuclear energy is considered as an alternative to cope with the high oil price and reduce the dependence on foreign countries for the energy in some countries. Nuclear power plants are capital-intensive, and nuclear power generating costs are less vulnerable to fuel-price changes than coal or gas fired generation. In addition, uranium resources are abundant and widely distributed around the globe. Therefore, nuclear power plants are most attractive where energy demand growth is rapid, alternative resources are scarce, energy supply security is a priority, and nuclear power is important for reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. One or more of these features characterize China, India, Japan, and Korea, where most current construction is taking place (Toth and Rogner, 2006). Therefore, nuclear energy will continue to hold its position as one of the sources of electricity generation, with regard to the security of energy supply and environmental conservation. Many researchers and policy makers have had interest in the relationship between energy resources and economic growth for the past three decades, and numerous studies have been conducted to examine the relationship between the two. The overall findings show that there is a strong relationship between consumption on energy resources and economic growth. For an overview of previous studies, see Table 1 given in Chiou-Wei et al. (2008). In the case of nuclear energy, Schurr (1983) has detected a positive relationship between nuclear energy abundance and economic growth. However, there have been few studies specifically addressing the causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth. There has been only one study of Yoo and Jung (2005) that found uni-directional causality running from nuclear energy consumption to economic growth in Korea.Generally, the fact that there exists a strong relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth does not necessarily imply a causal relationship.2 The relationship may very well run from nuclear energy consumption to economic growth, and/or from economic growth to nuclear energy consumption. These causality issues, therefore, suggest the need to carry out further investigations. A major question concerning this issue is which variable should take precedence over the other—is nuclear energy consumption a stimulus for economic growth or does economic growth lead to nuclear energy consumption? Evidence on either direction will have a significant bearing upon policy. For example, if there is uni-directional causality running from nuclear energy consumption to economic growth, a reduction in nuclear energy consumption could lead to a fall in economic growth. On the other hand, if uni-directional causality runs from economic growth to nuclear energy consumption, it could imply that policies for reducing nuclear energy consumption may be implemented with little or no adverse effects on economic growth. Lastly, no causality in either direction would indicate that policies for increasing nuclear energy consumption do not affect economic growth. Public policy makers in nuclear energy-using countries have shown a great deal of interest in the role that nuclear energy consumption plays in economic growth. The nuclear infrastructure of them is becoming an increasingly important component of the economy. To proactively cope with the increased demand for nuclear energy that accompanies rapid economic growth, they should endeavor to uncover the causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth and to formulate appropriate nuclear policies. This task has become one of the most important ones for them in the present and in the near future. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the causality between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth using a multi-country analysis based on data from six countries, and to derive policy implications from the results. To this end, we attempt to carefully consider causality issues by applying the time-series techniques of Granger-causality to the countries that have used nuclear energy for more than 20 years until 2005. The methods adopted in the present study are as follows. First, stationarity and co-integration are tested. Then, if co-integration is detected, error-correction models are estimated; otherwise, the standard Granger-causality method is executed. Finally, the F-test is performed to gauge the joint significance levels of causality between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth. In the analysis, suitable information criteria are employed to select the optimum lag in lieu of an arbitrary choice of lag length. The message of this paper is all the more useful, to the best of our knowledge, because this is the first empirical study that explores whether or not the causalities between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth exist in a multi-country setting. The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents an overview of the methodology adopted here. Section 3 explains the data employed and reports the empirical findings. Some concluding remarks are made in the final section.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth for 20 countries that have used nuclear energy for more than 20 years until 2005, and to derive policy implications from the results. To this end, causality tests have been performed using time-series techniques in a framework whereby both traditional and new channels of causality could be exposed. In summary, time-series properties of the data were analyzed by way of unit root and co-integration tests before applying Granger-causality tests. ECMs and Hsiao version of the Granger-causality tests were estimated to test for the direction of Granger-causality. We have tested the stationarity of two time-series, nuclear energy consumption and real GDP for 20 countries. However, only six countries are available to conduct causality analysis between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth. The main conclusion that emerges from the study is that the causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and real GDP is not uniform across countries. The results of the study show that there is a bi-directional causality between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in Switzerland, while uni-directional causality runs from economic growth to nuclear energy consumption without any feedback effects in France and Pakistan and from nuclear energy to economic growth in Korea. However, any causality between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in Argentina and Germany is not detected. The interpretations and implications of the results can be further discussed. First, economic growth stimulates further nuclear energy consumption in France, Pakistan, and Switzerland. Thus, a growth in real GDP is responsible for a high level of nuclear energy consumption. Especially in France, there has been a growth in nuclear energy consumption in various sectors with the advancement of the country's economy. Owing to their increased higher disposal income, households have come to consume progressively more electricity. Economic growth causes expansion in the industrial and commercial sectors where electricity has been used as basic input. As stated above, France derives over 79.1% of its electricity from nuclear energy, so one could reasonably expect that economic growth enhances nuclear energy consumption in the country. Second, a high level of nuclear energy consumption leads to a high level of real GDP in Switzerland and Korea. This implies that a shortage in the infrastructure for nuclear energy consumption may restrain economic growth in these countries. Increasing real GDP requires enormous nuclear energy consumption, though there are many other factors contributing to economic growth, and nuclear energy is only one of such factors. In order not to adversely affect economic growth, efforts must be made to encourage government and industry to increase nuclear energy supply investment and to overcome the constraints on nuclear energy consumption. Because causal linkages between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth this analysis conclusively demonstrates and the implications of the results may be unique for bivariate system of nuclear bivariate Granger-causality might end up with spurious result (Stern, 1993 and Stern, 2000). Thus, the techniques employed in this study need to be readily extended to other multivariate systems where nuclear energy consumption and real income are exposed to be determined by other economic factors such as net fixed capital stock, employment, exports, etc. Furthermore, such an analysis could uncover the structural channels by which nuclear energy consumption and real income are inherently causal.