九州大学学術情報リポジトリ

Kyushu University Institutional Repository

The Link Between Renewable Energy Use and

Energy Poverty: Panel Estimation For South
Asian Region
Md. Matiar Rahman
International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research (WPI-I2CNER), Kyushu University

Hosan, Shahadat
International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research (WPI-I2CNER), Kyushu University

Shamal Chandra Karmaker

International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research (WPI-I2CNER), Kyushu University

Abu Zar Md. Shafiullah

Department of Statistics, University of Dhaka

[Link]

出版情報：Proceedings of International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering &

Sciences (IEICES). 7, pp.198-203, 2021-10-21. 九州大学大学院総合理工学府
バージョン：
権利関係：
 Proceeding of International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences (IEICES) 7 (2021)

The Link Between Renewable Energy Use and Energy Poverty: Panel Estimation For
South Asian Region
Md. Matiar Rahman1,3, Shahadat Hosan1,2, Shamal Chandra Karmaker1,2,3, Abu Zar Md. Shafiullah3 and Bidyut Baran
Saha1,2*
1
International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research (WPI-I2CNER), Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku,
Fukuoka-shi, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan
2
Mechanical Engineering Department, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka-shi, Fukuoka 819-0395,
Japan
3
Department of Statistics, University of Dhaka, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh
*
Corresponding author email: [Link].213@[Link]

Abstract: The incapability of people to have sufficient access to energy sources is known as energy poverty. It is a multi-
faceted and complex problem. This research looks into how renewable energy use, economic growth, urbanization,
employment, and the consumer price index are all linked to energy poverty in South Asian nations. The relationship between
the analyzed factors in this region has not been thoroughly investigated so far. As a result, the goal of this research is to
look at the dynamic relationships between these variables in the most energy-intensive countries of South Asia using
advanced econometric methods for the years 2000 to 2020. This analysis imply that renewable energy reduces energy
poverty. Furthermore, energy poverty is inversely correlated with economic growth and employment, but positively
associated with urbanization. The findings provide a foundation for energy policymakers that would help them to achieve
the objective of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Keywords: CCEMG; Energy poverty; Panel cointegration; Renewable energy; South Asia

1. INTRODUCTION France [10], Ireland [11], Greece [12–14], Germany [15],

Energy poverty has a significant impact on both the New Zealand [16], Austria [17], Denmark [18], Spain
global and local levels, and it is still a relatively new topic [19], and Italy [20] have all investigated energy poverty
on the international arena. Because of its strong links to on a national, regional, and local level.
absolute poverty, climate change, gender inequality, and The integration of renewable energy into electrical
economic progress, energy poverty is becoming an systems, according to energy poverty experts, alleviates
emerging issue [1]. Energy poverty has been defined as a energy poverty. For example, a number of studies in
“state of inability to actualize critical capacities due to a Southeast Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa have looked into
lack of appropriate access to affordable, effective, the environmental and social effects of using renewable
adequate, quality, and secure energy services” (ibid)[2]. energy to electrify rural communities [21–23].
According to Sen et al. [3], poverty is defined as the lack Furthermore, there is no panel analysis of the relationship
of possibilities for living a basic human life. Different across energy poverty, renewable energy consumption,
sources, such as González-Eguino [4] and the European economic growth, employment, urbanization, and the
Poverty Observatory [5], include crucial individual consumer price index. These studies all agree that
requirements such as food, warmth, livelihoods, health, expanding renewable energy consumption will help to
and education, among others. alleviate energy poverty while also reducing potential
Many researchers have highlighted the prevalence of greenhouse gas emissions.
energy poverty in specific nations with low economic To fill this knowledge vacuum, we are doing a study in
growth [6]. Boardman [7] was the first to propose the South Asia to see how renewable energy usage is linked
phrase “energy poverty”, claiming that a household is to energy poverty, considering economic growth,
“energy-poor” if its energy expenditure exceeds 10% of employment, demographic implications (i.e.,
its annual income. Energy poverty has since been linked urbanization), and the consumer price index as a control
to limited fuel access and the security of affordable and variable. This ‘renewable energy use-energy poverty-
accessible heat in affluent countries, according to growth’ nexuses were studied utilizing a panel
subsequent studies. The impact of renewable energy cointegration approach based on common correlated
resources in easing energy poverty in Palestine was effects mean group (CCEMG) approaches, which boost
investigated by Hamed et al. [1]. They discovered that in statistical power substantially. The CCEMG findings
Palestine, poverty and energy poverty are linked. show that renewable energy consumption has a negative
Ssennono et al. [2] used a multidimensional energy influence on energy poverty, indicating that as renewable
poverty index to investigate energy poverty in Uganda. energy use rises, energy poverty reduces in the long-run,
The M-Gamma method demonstrates considerable and the association is statistically significant at the 10%
disparity distribution by gender, regional location, and level of significance.
residence, indicating that energy poverty does not follow
a uniform distribution. Rahman et al. [8] investigated the 2. MODEL USED AND DATA
impact of remittance on energy consumption in South 2.1 Econometric model
Asian nations using panel analysis and observed that
Using the aforementioned context and literature, we
remittance had a considerable beneficial impact on
apply the following model to analyze the relationship
energy consumption. For a panel data analysis of
between energy poverty and renewable energy use, with
developing nations, Nicholas et al. [9] examined on
economic growth, urbanization, employment, and the
energy poverty and education. Education, they
consumer price index as control variables. We used
discovered, has a detrimental impact on energy poverty.
198
 Proceeding of International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences (IEICES) 7 (2021)

principal component analysis (PCA) to develop an

energy poverty index. Equation (1) describes the model's
function:
EPit = f ( REit , EGit , EMPit ,UPit , CPIit ) (1)
EP stands for energy poverty index, which is calculated
using principal component analysis that includes access
to electricity as well as clean fuels and cooking
technologies; RE stands for renewable energy use; EG
stands for economic growth, EMP for employment, UP
for urbanization, and CPI stands for consumer price
index. The link across variables of interest is discovered
using a basic multivariate framework. Except for the
major component scores of energy poverty, we smooth Fig. 1. Scree plot of the eigenvalues for the PCA of
the data by converting all series to their natural logarithm energy poverty.
(EP). In comparison to a basic linear technique, this
conversion helps to reduce autocorrelation and
heteroscedasticity concerns while also offering more Table 1. Summary of the variables and data.
accurate and dependable findings. The model is shown in Variable and Measure Data
log-linear form in Equation (2): notations sources
EPit =  0 + 1 ln REit +  2 ln EGit +  3 ln EMPit
(2) GDP per Current US$ WDI
+  4 ln UPit + 5 ln CPI it + uit capita (EG)
Cross-sections (nations) and time (year) are represented Renewable Consumption of renewable WDI
by i (1……, N), and t (1……, T), respectively.  0 energy use energy (% of total final
indicates the intercept of the model, 1 are the (RE) energy consumption)
Energy Electricity access (E- WDI
coefficients of the renewable energy use. The poverty (EP) access) (% of total
coefficients 2 , 3 ........., 5 represent for economic (PCA score) population)
growth, employment, urbanization, and consumer price Clean fuels and WDI
index, respectively. uit is the random error term in the technologies used in
model. The coefficients 1 , i.e., the relationship cooking (Cook-access) (%
of total population)
between energy poverty and renewable energy use, are at
Employment Population employment WDI
the core of our work.
(EMP) ratio, 15+, total (%)
Urban % of population in urban WDI
2.2 Data sources
population area
For five South Asian countries, annual panel data was
(UP)
collected from 2000 to 2020. Bangladesh, India, Sri
Consumer Consumer price index WDI
Lanka, Nepal, and Pakistan are among the most energy
price index taking 2010 as 100
use countries. The variables used in this study are per
(CPI)
capita gross domestic product (GDP) as an indicator of
economic growth, and energy poverty (EP) is measured WDI: World development indicators
using a PCA score based on access to electricity and
clean fuels and cooking technology. Figure 1 shows the Table 2. Descriptive measurement of the variables
eigenvalues of the energy poverty index. The variable RE Variable Obs. Mean Std. Min Max
denotes the amount of renewable energy consumed. The Dev
variable employment represents the employment-to- E-access 105 71.55 17.65 24.6 100.0
population ratio, 15+, total; urbanization is the Cook- 105 25.45 10.05 7.24 47.26
percentage of the population who lives in a city, and access
finally used consumer price index considering 2010 as a RE 105 55.28 17.79 32.12 91.31
base year. EG 105 1270 950.2 229.4 4076
The five nations in South Asia included in this study were UP 105 26.37 7.78 13.39 38.17
chosen based on the availability of data for all variables. EMP 105 57.94 12.00 43.00 84.25
In this study, N*T = 105 observations were examined, CPI 105 106.0 45.40 36.48 200.0
with N=5 and T=21. The World Bank published the
World Development Indicators (WDI), which provided 3. METHODOLOGY
data of all variables [24]. Since renewable energy use Advanced econometric approaches are employed in this
data for all countries were available up to the year 2015 work to investigate the long-run and dynamic causality
in the WDI, the data for this variable of the years 2016- connecting energy poverty, renewable energy
2020 was taken from national level energy poverty consumption, economic growth, urbanization,
reports. Notation of the variables with data sources are employment, and the consumer price index. The steps in
presented in Table 1. The descriptive statistics for the the methodologies are as follows: 1) a test of cross-
variable in this study are shown in Table 2. sectional dependency 2) CIPS and CADF, which are
second-generation panel unit root tests. 3) panel
cointegration tests, such as the Kao, Pedroni, and
199
 Proceeding of International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences (IEICES) 7 (2021)

Westerlund methods. 4) parameter estimation with As shown in Equation 7, the tests outlined above are
common correlated effects means group (CCEMG). based on residuals computed from the long-run model:
m
yit =  i +  i t +   ji x jit + uit (7)
j =1
3.1 Cross-sectional dependence tests
The cross-sectional dependency problem in panel data In Eq. 7, the cross-section units, number of predictors,
could be triggered by the relationship and dependence and number of cases are represented by i (1, 2,….N); j
across countries as a result of globalization and economic (1,2,….m) and t (1,2,…..,T). y and x are regarded to be
interaction [25]. The study conclusions from such first order integrated. The coefficients  i ,  i , and  ji
approaches may be skewed if the existence of cross-
expressed as trend effect, intercept, and slope,
section dependency is not taken into account in the panel
respectively, and uit is the random errors. Eq. (8) can be
[26–28]. As a result, in order to address this issue in the
research, we performed cross-sectional dependence (CD) used to show the estimated residuals:
tests. The cross-section dependence is determined using  it = i uit −1 + it (8)
Breusch and Pagan's [29] LM test and Pesaran's [30] CD
test. Cross-sectional units are assumed to be independent The null hypothesis in the preceding test is Ho: ρi = 1,
in the null hypothesis, but cross-sectional units are which implies that there is no cointegration, as opposed
assumed to be dependent in the alternative hypothesis. to the alternative (H1: ρi < 1), which specifies that all
The following equation is used to determine the Breusch panels are cointegrated.
and Pagan LM test results:
N −1 N 3.4 Estimation of long run coefficient
LM BP = T 
i =1 j =i +1
ˆ 2
ij (3) Long-run parameters must be estimated after confirming
that the variables are cointegrated. CCEMG (common
correlated effects mean group) [38] can be used to
If the value of T is relatively large, the LM test is
measure long-run characteristics. The CCEMG estimator
ineffective. Pesaran suggests the following CD test as an
is resistant to structural breaks and unobserved non-
alternative to solving this problem:
stationary common components. As a result, in this work,
 N −1 N 

2T the CCEMG technique is used to estimate the parameters
CDP =  ˆij2  (4)
N ( N − 1)  i =1 j =i +1  of the examined relationships. The CCEMG use the
 
following method for estimating:
Where T denotes the year, N is the number of countries,
and rˆij indicates the relationship between the error in Eq.
2
yit = i + i xit + i yit +  i xit + i ft +  it (9)
(3) and Eq. (4). The dependent variable is yit, the independent
variable is xit, the slope of the exogenous component is
3.2 Unit root tests βi, the group fixed effects are αi, the unobserved common
To establish the order of data, unit root analysis is used factor is ft, and the residual is εit. As seen below, the
[28,31]. This method detects if a series is stationary or CCEMG estimator is developed by taking the average of
not (unit root). CIPS and CADF, the second-generation each coefficient over each individual regression:
panel unit root tests, are used to solve cross-sectional N
dependency and produce the most flawless and consistent
findings. According to Pesaran [32], cross-section
CCEMG = 1
N 
i =1
i (10)
augmented Dickey-Fuller (CADF) analysis is defined as
Where i is the expected value of i from Eq.(9).
follows:

Zit = Ai + Bi Zi ,t −1 + Ci Zt −1 + Ci Zt + uit (5) 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

All findings based on indicated methodological
approaches are reported in this section. In addition, Table
Where Z measures the target variable,  indicates the 3 shows the cross-section dependence test results.
difference operator, and uit is the residual term. Using
CADF, Pesaran established the cross-section augmented Table 3. The results of cross-section dependency.
IPS (CIPS) test: Variables LM test CD test
N Test Statistic Test Statistic
N
CIPS = 1 CADF i (6) EP 7261.351*** 88.267***
***
i =1 lnRE 5356.254 64.351***
***
The null hypothesis states that each the variable has a unit lnEG 4567.253 85.362**
root, as opposed to the alternative hypothesis, which lnEMP 3651.985*** 29.364**
states that all panel within a variable are not unit root. lnUP 3516.354*** 46.182**
***
lnCPI 3641.124 18.364**
3.3 Panel cointegration test
If the unit root tests show that the series is non-stationary, Using the associated p-values of LM and CD test
a panel cointegration test is used to determine the long- statistics in table 3, the null hypothesis of cross-sectional
term connection between the variables [33]. The independence can be rejected for energy poverty,
cointegration methods employed in the study include renewable energy use, economic growth, employment,
Pedroni [34,35], Kao [36], and Westerlund [37]. urbanization, and consumer price index. As a result,

200
 Proceeding of International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences (IEICES) 7 (2021)

cross-section dependence exists for all variables in our poverty falls, and the association is statistically
study. significant at the 10% level of significance. The finding
of the study is desired. Other control variables, such as
Before analyzing cointegration, it is crucial to identify economic growth and employment, have a negative
whether or not the data are non-stationary. The CIPS and impact on energy poverty, implying that as GDP and the
CADF tests were utilized in this work to detect unit roots number of employees rise, so does energy poverty. On
in the variables under investigation. The results of these the other hand, urbanization has a positive and
two tests are summarized in Table 4. statistically significant impact on energy poverty,
indicating that urbanization and energy poverty are
Table 4. the results of panel unit root test. proportionally related. This method also reveals that a
Variable CIPS CADF country's consumer price index and energy poverty have
Level 1st diff. Level 1st diff. a reciprocal relationship.
EP -3.536 -6.264*** -3.573 -5.106**
lnRE -3.053 -3.367*** -6.26** -8.36*** Fig. 2 depicts the long-run causalities of the variables
**
lnEG -3.815 -4.337** -2.556 -3.287** studied.
*
lnEMP -1.181 -4.801** -2.185 -4.531**

Renewable
lnUP -1.650 -2.831* -2.477 -4.200*

Energy
lnCPI -4.090* -2.690** -8.034 -9.795**
Significant at (* 10% ** 5%, *** 1%) level.

According to the hypothesis, the variables are non-

stationary, as shown by the results in Table 4. The
hypothesis is not rejected at the level in both cases, but
the first difference demonstrates significance at the 1%
level. As a result, according to the CIPS and CADF tests, Consumer Energy
all of the variables have a unit root at the level; however, price index
Poverty
GDP
none of the variables have a unit root at the first
difference, which is of degree one I. (1).
Because all of the variables in Eq. (5) were in the I (1)
process, the panel cointegration approach was utilized to
determine the long-run linkages between them. The Urbanization Employment
results of Pedroni [34,35] and Westerlund [37] are shown
in Table 5.

Table 5. Results of panel cointegration tests. Fig. 2. The long-run causality among studied variables.
Approaches t-value
Pedroni (1999, 2004) The findings of the CCEMG investigation showed long-
Modified Phill-Perron t 5.3654** run relationships, with implications for researchers and
Phill-Perron t -5.2351** policymakers on how to effectively realize the prospects
Aug. D-Fuller t -2.2541*** to eliminate energy poverty by utilizing renewable
Westerlund (2005) energy in the energy sector to increase economic
Variance ratio 3.2654** performance in the digital economy era.
Significance level ( 10% 5%, *** 1%).
* **
5. CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY
In these tests, the null hypothesis is that there is no IMPLICATIONS
cointegration in the panel. Table 5 reveals that the This study discusses at the link between renewable
variables studied have a long-term relationship, rejecting energy use and energy poverty in South Asian countries
the null hypothesis with a 5% significance level. This taking data from 2000 to 2020, considering economic
finding explains why all of the variables in the study are growth, employment, urbanization, and the consumer
cointegrated. The CCEMG approach is used to estimate price index as a control variable. To diagnose the causal
the long-run coefficients in this study, and the results are relationship between underlying variables, we used
shown in Table 6. second generation unit root tests, the Westerlund
cointegration technique, and the CCEMG estimation in
Table 6. Estimation of coefficients of CCEMG method. this research. Renewable energy consumption, economic
variables coefficients Std. error p-value growth, and employment all appear to have a negative
lnRE -0.2249* 0.2041 0.085 impact on energy poverty, according to the data.
lnEG -0.0765* 0.1627 0.077 Urbanization, on the other hand, exacerbates energy
lnEMP -1.0051* 0.7390 0.086 poverty in Southeast Asian nations.
lnUP 3.698** 1.9607 0.045 Access to sustainable energy is the key component of
lnCPI -0.0294 0.3298 0.226 economic growth, according to policy guidelines for
Significant at * 10% ** 5%, *** 1% level. Southeast Asian nations, and access to renewable and
modern forms of energy is an “important precondition”
The CCEMG findings show that renewable energy in combating energy poverty, promoting economic
consumption has a negative influence on energy poverty, growth, enhancing employment opportunities, and
indicating that as renewable energy use rises, energy
201
 Proceeding of International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences (IEICES) 7 (2021)

supporting foundational social services. Focusing on planning: Insights from Greece, Energy Policy.
South Asian economies' policy instruments is critical for 91 (2016) 174–188.
lowering obstacles to renewable energy adoption, and it [Link]
is the golden thread that will bind economic growth, [14] M. Santamouris, J.A. Paravantis, D. Founda, D.
development, and environmental sustainability together. Kolokotsa, P. Michalakakou, A.M.
Papadopoulos, N. Kontoulis, A. Tzavali, E.K.
Stigka, Z. Ioannidis, A. Mehilli, A. Matthiessen,
E. Servou, Financial crisis and energy
consumption: A household survey in Greece,
6. REFERENCES
Energy Build. 65 (2013) 477–487.
[1] T.A. Hamed, K. Peric, The role of renewable
[Link]
energy resources in alleviating energy poverty in
[15] M.S. Gmbh, Measuring Fuel Poverty: General
Palestine, Renew. Energy Focus. 35 (2020) 97–
Considerations and Application to German
107. [Link]
Household Data, FinanzArchiv. 71 (2015) 178.
[2] V. Fred, J.M. Ntayi, F. Buyinza, F. Wasswa, M.
[Link]
Aarakit, C. Ndatira, Energy poverty in Uganda :
7593.
Evidence from a multidimensional approach,
[16] R. Lawson, J. Williams, B. Wooliscroft,
Energy Econ. 101 (2021) 105445.
Contrasting approaches to fuel poverty in New
[Link]
Zealand, Energy Policy. 81 (2015) 38–42.
[3] A. Sen, Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to
[Link]
Measurement, Econometrica. 44 (1976) 219.
[17] K.M. Brunner, M. Spitzer, A. Christanell,
[Link]
Experiencing fuel poverty. Coping strategies of
[4] M. González-Eguino, Energy poverty: An
low-income households in Vienna/Austria,
overview, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 47 (2015)
Energy Policy. 49 (2012) 53–59.
377–385.
[Link]
[Link]
[18] S.C.A. Nierop, Energy Poverty in Denmark?,
[5] S. Bouzarovski, H. Thomson, M. Cornelis,
(2014) 52.
Confronting energy poverty in europe: A
[19] E. Phimister, E. Vera-Toscano, D. Roberts, The
research and policy agenda, Energies. 14 (2021)
dynamics of energy poverty: Evidence from
1–19. [Link]
Spain, Econ. Energy Environ. Policy. 4 (2015)
[6] H.U.R. Khan, K. Zaman, S.U. Yousaf, A.M.
153–166. [Link]
Shoukry, S. Gani, M.A. Sharkawy, Socio-
[Link].
economic and environmental factors influenced
[20] R. Miniaci, C. Scarpa, P. Valbonesi, Energy
pro-poor growth process: new development
affordability and the benefits system in Italy,
triangle, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26 (2019)
Energy Policy. 75 (2014) 289–300.
29157–29172. [Link]
[Link]
019-06065-2.
[21] D. Roberts, E. Vera-Toscano, E. Phimister, Fuel
[7] B. Brenda, Fuel poverty: from cold homes to
poverty in the UK: Is there a difference between
affordable warmth, Printer Pub Limited, 1991.
rural and urban areas?, Energy Policy. 87 (2015)
[8] M.M. Rahman, S. Hosan, S.C. Karmaker, A.J.
216–223.
Chapman, B.B. Saha, The effect of remittance on
[Link]
energy consumption: Panel cointegration and
[22] G.D. Kamalapur, R.Y. Udaykumar, Rural
dynamic causality analysis for South Asian
electrification in India and feasibility of
countries, Energy. 220 (2021) 119684.
Photovoltaic Solar Home Systems, Int. J. Electr.
[Link]
Power Energy Syst. 33 (2011) 594–599.
[9] L. Yijing, Y. Su, Y. Lin, L. He, L. Wu, X. Hou,
[Link]
C. Zheng, Energy Poverty and Education: Fresh
[23] D. Palit, Solar energy programs for rural
Evidence from a Panel of Developing Countries,
electrification: Experiences and lessons from
Build. Environ. 184 (2020) 107229.
South Asia, Energy Sustain. Dev. 17 (2013) 270–
[Link]
279. [Link]
[10] B. Legendre, O. Ricci, Measuring fuel poverty in
[24] B. World, Data Bank: World Development
France: Which households are the most fuel
Indicators, (2019).
vulnerable?, Energy Econ. 49 (2014) 620–628.
[25] S.C. Karmaker, S. Hosan, B.B. Saha, Does
[Link]
biomass energy consumption improve human
[11] J.D. Healy, J. Peter Clinch, Fuel poverty, thermal
development? Evidence from South Asian
comfort and occupancy: Results of a national
countries, Int. Energy J. 21 (2021) 81–92.
household - survey in Ireland, Appl. Energy. 73
[26] M. Aydin, The effect of biomass energy
(2002) 329–343. [Link]
consumption on economic growth in BRICS
2619(02)00115-0.
countries: A country-specific panel data analysis,
[12] L. Papada, D. Kaliampakos, Measuring energy
Renew. Energy. 138 (2019) 620–627.
poverty in Greece, Energy Policy. 94 (2016)
[Link]
157–165.
[27] Z. Wang, Q. Bui, B. Zhang, The relationship
[Link]
between biomass energy consumption and
[13] N.M. Katsoulakos, D.C. Kaliampakos,
human development: Empirical evidence from
Mountainous areas and decentralized energy
BRICS countries, Energy. 194 (2020) 116906.
202
 Proceeding of International Exchange and Innovation Conference on Engineering & Sciences (IEICES) 7 (2021)

[Link] Development: Evidence from Asian Countries,

[28] S. Chandra Karmaker, S. Hosan, A.J. Chapman, Proc. Int. Exch. Innov. Conf. Eng. Sci. 6 (2020)
B.B. Saha, The role of environmental taxes on 204–211. [Link]
technological innovation, Energy. 232 (2021) [34] P. Pedroni, Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and
121052. finite sample properties of pooled time series
[Link] tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis,
[29] T.S. Breusch, A.R. Pagan, The Lagrange Econom. Theory. 20 (2004) 597–625.
Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model [Link]
Specification in Econometrics, Rev. Econ. Stud. [35] P. Pedroni, Critical Values for Cointegration
47 (1980) 239. [Link] Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple
[30] M.H. Pesaran, General Diagnostic Tests for Regressors, Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 61 (1999)
Cross Section Dependence in Panels, Univ. 653–670. [Link]
Cambridge USC. 3 (2004) Working Paper 0084.61.s1.14.
No.0435, June 2004. [36] C. Kao, Spurious regression and residual-based
[31] S. Hosan, Md. Matiar Rahman, Shamal Chandra tests for cointegration in panel data, J. Econom.
Karmaker, Bidyut Baran Saha, The Effect of 90 (1999) 1–44. [Link]
Technological Innovation on Environmental 4076(98)00023-2.
Quality: Accounting Ecological Footprint [37] J. Westerlund, New simple tests for panel
Indicators for Asian Countries, Proc. Int. Exch. cointegration, Econom. Rev. 24 (2005) 297–316.
Innov. Conf. Eng. Sci. 6 (2020) 198–203. [Link]
[Link] [38] M.H. Pesaran, Estimation and inference in large
[32] M.H. Pesaran, A simple panel unit root test in the heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error
presence of cross-section dependence, J. Appl. structure, Econometrica. 74 (2006) 967–1012.
Econom. 22 (2007) 265–312. [Link]
[Link] 0262.2006.00692.x.
[33] Shamal Chandra Karmaker, Md. Matiar Rahman,
S. Hosan, Bidyut Baran Saha, The Impact of
Biomass Energy Consumption on Human

203