Industrial energy prices and export competitiveness: evidence from India

Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - Tập 22 - Trang 1-20 - 2019
Surender Kumar1, Prerna Prabhakar2
1Department of Economics, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, Delhi, India
2National Council of Applied Economic Research, Delhi, India

Tóm tắt

This paper empirically measures the impact of sectoral energy price differential between trading partners on Indian exports. Using dynamic gravity model, we estimate the response of Indian exports for 11 energy-intensive sectors to sectoral-level energy price asymmetry. We observe the absence of the contemporaneous effect of energy price differential on Indian exports, but the presence of persistence effects. We find that a 10% increase in relative energy prices negatively affects Indian sectoral exports by about 1% ranging from 0.9% for chemicals to 1.4% for non-ferrous metals, revealing a larger impact for energy-intensive sectors. These small effects imply that the concerns of carbon leakage are largely overplayed.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Abe K, Ishimura G, Tsurumi T, Managi S, Sumaila UR (2017) Does trade openness reduce a domestic fisheries catch? Fish Sci 83(6):897–906 Aichele R, Felbermayr G (2013) The effect of the Kyoto protocol on carbon emissions. J Policy Anal Manag 32(4):731–757 Aichele R, Felbermayr G (2015) Kyoto and carbon leakage: an empirical analysis of the carbon content of bilateral trade. Rev Econ Stat 97(1):104–115 Aldy JE, Pizer WA (2015) The competitiveness impacts of climate change mitigation policies. J Assoc Environ Resour Econ 2(4):565–595 Anderson JE, Van Wincoop E (2003) Gravity with gravitas: a solution to the border puzzle. Am Econ Rev 93(1):170–192 Antweiler W, Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2001) Is free trade good for the environment? Am Econ Rev 91:877–908 Arellano M, Bover O (1995) Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. J Econometr 68:29–52 Babiker MH (2005) Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage. J Int Econ 65:421–445 Baier S, Bergstrand J (2009) Bonus vetus OLS: a simple method for approximating international trade-cost effects using the gravity equation. J Int Econ 77(1):77–85 Baylis K, Fullerton D, Karney DH (2014) Negative leakage. J Assoc Environ Resour Econ 1:51–73 Bernstein P, William M, Montogmery D, Rutherford TF, Yang G-F (1999) Effects of restrictions on international permit trading: the MS-MRT model. Energy J Special Issue:221–256 Bhattacharya SK, Bhattacharyay B (2007) Gains and losses of India–China trade cooperation—a gravity model impact analysis. CESifo Working Paper Series No 1970 Blundell R, Bond S (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J Econometr 87(1):115–143 Burniaux J, Martins JO (2000) Carbon emission leakages: a general equilibrium view. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 242, OECD publishing Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2004) Trade, growth, and the environment. J Econ Lit 42(1):7–71 Cuñat A, Maffezzoli M (2007) Can comparative advantage explain the growth of us trade? Econ J R Econ Soc 117(520):583–602 Demailly D, Quirion P (2008) European emission trading scheme and competitiveness: a case study on the iron and steel industry. Energy Econ 30(4):2009–2027 Elliott J, Foster I, Kortum S, Munson T, Cervantes FP, Weisbach D (2010) Trade and carbon taxes. Am Econ Rev 100(2):465–469 Felder S, Rutherford TF (1993) Unilateral CO2 reduction and carbon leakage. J Environ Econ Manag 25(2):163–176 Frankel JA (2005) The environment and globalization. In: Weinstein M (ed) Globalization: What’s New. Columbia University Press, New York Gerlagh R, Kuik O (2007) Carbon leakage with international technology spillovers. FEEM Working Paper No 33 Gerlagh R, Mathys NA (2011) Energy abundance, trade and industry location. Nota di Lavoro 003.2011, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Milan Halkos G, Managi S, Tsilika K (2018) Measuring air polluters’ responsibility in transboundary pollution networks. Environ Econ Policy Stud 20(3):619–639 Hanna R (2010) US environmental regulation and FDI: evidence from a panel of us-based multinational firms. Am Econ J Appl Econ 2:158–189 Harris MN, Kónya L, Mátyás L (2002) Modelling the impact of environmental regulations on bilateral trade flows: OECD, 1990–1996. World Econ 25(3):387–405 Kagohashi K, Tsurumi T, Managi S (2015) The effects of international trade on water use. PLoS One 10(7):e0132133. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal Kumar S, Managi S (2009) Energy price-induced and exogenous technological change: assessing the economic and environmental outcomes. Resour Energy Econ 31(4):334–353 Kumar S, Prabhakar P (2016) Negative carbon leakage: evidence from South Asian countries. SANDEE Working Paper Kumar S, Fujii H, Managi S (2015) Substitute or complement? Assessing renewable and non-renewable energy in OECD countries. Appl Econ 47(14):1438–1459 Levinson A, Taylor MS (2008) Unmasking the pollution haven effect. Int Econ Rev 49:223–254 Linn J (2008) Energy prices and the adoption of energy-saving technology. Econ J 118(533):1986–2012 Lovo S, Gasiorek M, Tol R (2014) Investment in second-hand capital goods and energy intensity. GRI Working Papers 163, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment Martínez-Zarzoso I (2013) The log of gravity revisited. Appl Econ 45(3):311–327 Monjon S, Quirion P (2010) How to design a border adjustment for the European Union Emissions Trading System? Energy Policy 38(9):5199–5207 Olivero MP, Yotov YV (2012) Dynamic gravity: endogenous country size and asset accumulation. Can J Econ 45(1):64–92 Santos Silva JMC, Tenreyro S (2006) The log of gravity. Rev Econ Stat 88(4):641–658 Sato M, Dechezleprêtre A (2015) Asymmetric industrial energy prices and international trade. Energy Econ 52:S130–S141 Sato M, Singer G, Dussaux D, Lovo S (2015) International and sectoral variation in energy prices 1995–2011: how does it relate to emissions policy stringency? Grantham working paper Sato M, Kenta K, Managi S (2018) Inclusive wealth, total factor productivity, and sustainability: an empirical analysis. Environ Econ Policy Stud 20(4):741–757 Tripathi S, Leitão NC (2013) India’s trade and gravity model: a static and dynamic panel data. MPRA paper 45502, University Library of Munich, Munich Tsurumi T, Managi S (2014) The effect of trade openness on deforestation: empirical analysis for 142 countries. Environ Econ Policy Stud 16(4):305–324 Tsurumi T, Managi S, Hibiki A (2015) Do environmental regulations increase bilateral trade flows? J Econ Anal Policy 15(4):1549–1577 Van Beers C, Van den Bergh JCJM (1997) An empirical multi-country analysis of the impact of environmental regulations on foreign trade flows. Kyklos 50:29–46 World Bank (2008) International trade and climate change—economic, legal, and institutional perspectives. IBRD/the World Bank, Washington