Examining the effect of geopolitical risks on renewable energy consumption in OECD countries
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.15(2).2024.08
-
Article InfoVolume 15 2024, Issue #2, pp. 108-117
- 75 Views
-
13 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
As urgent actions are required to accelerate the transition to a more environmentally friendly energy sector and global economy, the rising geopolitical risks defined as any tensions that disrupt the peace of local and international relations pose greater uncertainty to the rapid renewable energy deployment in supporting the carbon-neutrality ambitions. Thus, this paper investigates the influence of geopolitical risks on renewable energy consumption in OECD countries over the period 1970–2022 to address potential estimation biases from ignoring recent events such as COVID-19 and the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. The paper applies a system GMM to a cross-country panel dataset while controlling for per capita income, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, economic globalization, and natural resource rents to deal with all possible sources of endogeneity. The results show that geopolitical risks reduce the consumption of renewable energy, with a magnitude of 0.22 percentage points. In addition, CO2 emissions and natural resource rents adversely affect the amount of renewable energy consumption. However, economic growth and globalization promote the demand for renewable energy. Therefore, the empirical findings suggest that geopolitical risks play a crucial role in the consumption of renewable energy.
Acknowledgement
The financial support from Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) under the project EP/T022930/1 is gratefully acknowledged. Authors would like to thank Prof. David Reiner and the Editor for their constructive comments and suggestions.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)Q21, Q54, C13, C33
-
References34
-
Tables7
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Description of variables
- Table 2. Descriptive statistics
- Table 3. Pairwise correlations
- Table 4. Cross-sectional dependence (CD) tests
- Table 5. CIPS unit root test
- Table 6. Panel cointegration tests
- Table 7. Results from panel system GMM estimations
-
- Alsagr, N., & van Hemmen, S. (2021). The impact of financial development and geopolitical risk on renewable energy consumption: Evidence from emerging markets. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 25906-25919.
- Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29-51.
- Baltagi, B. H., Feng, Q., & Kao, C. (2016). Estimation of heterogeneous panels with structural breaks. Journal of Econometrics, 191(1), 176-195.
- Bilgin, M. H., Gozgor, G., & Karabulut, G. (2020). How do geopolitical risks affect government investment? An empirical investigation. Defence and Peace Economics, 31(5), 550-564.
- Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143.
- Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A.R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-253.
- British Petroleum (BP). (2023). BP Statistical Review of World Energy. London: British Petroleum.
- Caldara, D., & Iacoviello, M. (2022). Measuring geopolitical risk. American Economic Review, 112(4), 1194-1225.
- Cheikh, N. B., & Zaied, Y. B. (2023). Renewable energy deployment and geopolitical conflicts. Journal of Environmental Management, 344, Article 118561.
- Chudik, A., & Pesaran, M. H. (2015). Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. Journal of Econometrics, 188(2), 393-420.
- Flouros, F., Pistikou, V., & Plakandaras, V. (2022). Geopolitical risk as a determinant of renewable energy investments. Energies, 15(4), Article 1498.
- Gozgor, G., Lau, M. C. K., Zeng, Y., Yan, C., & Lin, Z. (2022). The impact of geopolitical risks on tourism supply in developing economies: The moderating role of social globalization. Journal of Travel Research, 61(4), 872-886.
- Gozgor, G., Mahalik, M. K., Demir, E., & Padhan, H. (2020). The impact of economic globalization on renewable energy in the OECD countries. Energy Policy, 139, Article 111365.
- Gygli, S., Haelg, F., Potrafke, N., & Sturm, J. E. (2019). The KOF globalisation index – Revisited. The Review of International Organizations, 14, 543-574.
- Hille, E. (2023). Europe’s energy crisis: Are geopolitical risks in source countries of fossil fuels accelerating the transition to renewable energy? Energy Economics, 127, Article 107061.
- Ji, Q., & Zhang, D. (2019). How much does financial development contribute to renewable energy growth and upgrading of energy structure in China? Energy Policy, 128, 114-124.
- Kao, C. (1999). Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 90(1), 1-44.
- Liu, F., Su, C. W., Qin, M., & Lobonţ, O. R. (2023). Winner or loser? The bidirectional impact between geopolitical risk and energy transition from the renewable energy perspective. Energy, 283, Article 129174.
- Nordhaus, W. (2019). Climate change: The ultimate challenge for economics. American Economic Review, 109(6), 1991-2014.
- Pedroni, P. (2002). Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 653-670.
- Pedroni, P. (2004). Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Econometric Theory, 20(3), 597-625.
- Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
- Pesaran, M. H. (2021). General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. Empirical Economics, 60(1), 13-50.
- Sarafidis, V., & Wansbeek, T. (2012). Cross-sectional dependence in panel data analysis. Econometric Reviews, 31(5), 483-531.
- Sarker, P. K., Bouri, E., & Marco, C. K. L. (2023). Asymmetric effects of climate policy uncertainty, geopolitical risk, and crude oil prices on clean energy prices. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(6), 15797-15807.
- Shang, Y., Han, D., Gozgor, G., Mahalik, M. K., & Sahoo, B. K. (2022). The impact of climate policy uncertainty on renewable and non-renewable energy demand in the United States. Renewable Energy, 197, 654-667.
- Song, Y., Ji, Q., Du, Y. J., & Geng, J. B. (2019). The dynamic dependence of fossil energy, investor sentiment and renewable energy stock markets. Energy Economics, 84, Article 104564.
- Sweidan, O. D. (2021a). Is the geopolitical risk an incentive or obstacle to renewable energy deployment? Evidence from a panel analysis. Renewable Energy, 178, 377-384.
- Sweidan, O. D. (2021b). The geopolitical risk effect on the US renewable energy deployment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 293, Article 126189.
- Wang, K. H., Kan, J. M., Jiang, C. F., & Su, C. W. (2022). Is geopolitical risk powerful enough to affect carbon dioxide emissions? Evidence from China. Sustainability, 14(13), Article 7867.
- Wang, Q., Zhang, C., & Li, R. (2024). Impact of different geopolitical factors on the energy transition: The role of geopolitical threats, geopolitical acts, and geopolitical risks. Journal of Environmental Management, 352, Article 119962.
- Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193-233.
- World Bank. (n.d.). World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.
- Zhao, Z., Gozgor, G., Lau, M. C. K., Mahalik, M. K., Patel, G., & Khalfaoui, R. (2023). The impact of geopolitical risks on renewable energy demand in OECD countries. Energy Economics, 122, Article 106700.