[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2206.03278.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cointegration and ARDL specification between the Dubai crude oil and the US natural gas market

Author

Listed:
  • Stavros Stavroyiannis
Abstract
This paper examines the relationship between the price of the Dubai crude oil and the price of the US natural gas using an updated monthly dataset from 1992 to 2018, incorporating the latter events in the energy markets. After employing a variety of unit root and cointegration tests, the long-run relationship is examined via the autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) cointegration technique, along with the Toda-Yamamoto (1995) causality test. Our results indicate that there is a long-run relationship with a unidirectional causality running from the Dubai crude oil market to the US natural gas market. A variety of post specification tests indicate that the selected ARDL model is well-specified, and the results of the Toda-Yamamoto approach via impulse response functions, forecast error variance decompositions, and historical decompositions with generalized weights, show that the Dubai crude oil price retains a positive relationship and affects the US natural gas price.

Suggested Citation

  • Stavros Stavroyiannis, 2022. "Cointegration and ARDL specification between the Dubai crude oil and the US natural gas market," Papers 2206.03278, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2206.03278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.03278
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reboredo, Juan C., 2011. "How do crude oil prices co-move?: A copula approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 948-955, September.
    2. Peter R. Hartley & Kenneth B Medlock III & Jennifer E. Rosthal, 2008. "The Relationship of Natural Gas to Oil Prices," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 47-66.
    3. Gregory, Allan W & Hansen, Bruce E, 1996. "Tests for Cointegration in Models with Regime and Trend Shifts," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 58(3), pages 555-560, August.
    4. Batten, Jonathan A. & Ciner, Cetin & Lucey, Brian M., 2017. "The dynamic linkages between crude oil and natural gas markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 155-170.
    5. Jin, Xiaoye & Xiaowen Lin, Sharon & Tamvakis, Michael, 2012. "Volatility transmission and volatility impulse response functions in crude oil markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 2125-2134.
    6. Shawkat M. Hammoudeh & Bradley T. Ewing & Mark A. Thompson, 2008. "Threshold Cointegration Analysis of Crude Oil Benchmarks," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 79-96.
    7. Apostolos Serletis & John Herbert, 2007. "The Message in North American Energy Prices," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Quantitative And Empirical Analysis Of Energy Markets, chapter 13, pages 156-171, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Gregory, Allan W. & Hansen, Bruce E., 1996. "Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 99-126, January.
    9. repec:clg:wpaper:1999-04 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
    11. Paresh Kumar Narayan, 2005. "The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(17), pages 1979-1990.
    12. Vogelsang, Timothy J & Perron, Pierre, 1998. "Additional Tests for a Unit Root Allowing for a Break in the Trend Function at an Unknown Time," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 1073-1100, November.
    13. Ding, Haoyuan & Kim, Hyung-Gun & Park, Sung Y., 2016. "Crude oil and stock markets: Causal relationships in tails?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 58-69.
    14. Gatfaoui, Hayette, 2016. "Linking the gas and oil markets with the stock market: Investigating the U.S. relationship," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 5-16.
    15. Lu, Feng-bin & Hong, Yong-miao & Wang, Shou-yang & Lai, Kin-keung & Liu, John, 2014. "Time-varying Granger causality tests for applications in global crude oil markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 289-298.
    16. M. Hashem Pesaran & Yongcheol Shin & Richard J. Smith, 2001. "Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 289-326.
    17. Granger, C. W. J., 1981. "Some properties of time series data and their use in econometric model specification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 121-130, May.
    18. Nick, Sebastian & Thoenes, Stefan, 2014. "What drives natural gas prices? — A structural VAR approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 517-527.
    19. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-569 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Brigida, Matthew, 2014. "The switching relationship between natural gas and crude oil prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 48-55.
    21. Johansen, Soren, 1991. "Estimation and Hypothesis Testing of Cointegration Vectors in Gaussian Vector Autoregressive Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(6), pages 1551-1580, November.
    22. Granger, C. W. J., 1988. "Some recent development in a concept of causality," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1-2), pages 199-211.
    23. Panagiotidis, Theodore & Rutledge, Emilie, 2007. "Oil and gas markets in the UK: Evidence from a cointegrating approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 329-347, March.
    24. MacKinnon, James G, 1996. "Numerical Distribution Functions for Unit Root and Cointegration Tests," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 601-618, Nov.-Dec..
    25. Kuck, Konstantin & Schweikert, Karsten, 2017. "A Markov regime-switching model of crude oil market integration," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-31.
    26. Johansen, Soren, 1988. "Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 231-254.
    27. Kim, Dukpa & Perron, Pierre, 2009. "Unit root tests allowing for a break in the trend function at an unknown time under both the null and alternative hypotheses," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 1-13, January.
    28. Toda, Hiro Y. & Yamamoto, Taku, 1995. "Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1-2), pages 225-250.
    29. Junsoo Lee & Mark C. Strazicich, 2003. "Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1082-1089, November.
    30. Atil, Ahmed & Lahiani, Amine & Nguyen, Duc Khuong, 2014. "Asymmetric and nonlinear pass-through of crude oil prices to gasoline and natural gas prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 567-573.
    31. Kang, Sang Hoon & Kang, Sang-Mok & Yoon, Seong-Min, 2009. "Forecasting volatility of crude oil markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 119-125, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Md Shahiduzzaman & Allan Layton & Khorshed Alam, 2015. "On the contribution of information and communication technology to productivity growth in Australia," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 281-304, November.
    2. Md. Shahiduzzaman & Khorshed Alam, 2014. "A reassessment of energy and GDP relationship: the case of Australia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 323-344, April.
    3. Brittle, Shane, 2009. "Ricardian Equivalence and the Efficacy of Fiscal Policy in Australia," Economics Working Papers wp09-10, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    4. Chiappini, Raphaël & Jégourel, Yves & Raymond, Paul, 2019. "Towards a worldwide integrated market? New evidence on the dynamics of U.S., European and Asian natural gas prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 545-565.
    5. Chor Foon Tang and Eu Chye Tan, 2012. "Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Portugal: Evidence from a Multivariate Framework Analysis," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    6. Andrade, Philippe & Bruneau, Catherine & Gregoir, Stephane, 2005. "Testing for the cointegration rank when some cointegrating directions are changing," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 269-310, February.
    7. John D. Levendis, 2018. "Time Series Econometrics," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, number 978-3-319-98282-3, June.
    8. Lusine Lusinyan & John Thornton, 2011. "Unit roots, structural breaks and cointegration in the UK public finances, 1750-2004," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(20), pages 2583-2592.
    9. Moutinho, Victor & Bento, João Paulo Cerdeira & Hajko, Vladimír, 2017. "Price relationships between crude oil and transport fuels in the European Union before and after the 2008 financial crisis," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 76-83.
    10. Shahbaz, Muhammad, 2017. "Current Issues in Time-Series Analysis for the Energy-Growth Nexus; Asymmetries and Nonlinearities Case Study: Pakistan," MPRA Paper 82221, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 19 Oct 2017.
    11. Kumar, Suresh & Choudhary, Sangita & Singh, Gurcharan & Singhal, Shelly, 2021. "Crude oil, gold, natural gas, exchange rate and indian stock market: Evidence from the asymmetric nonlinear ARDL model," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    12. Mourad Zmami & Ousama Ben-Salha, 2019. "Does Oil Price Drive World Food Prices? Evidence from Linear and Nonlinear ARDL Modeling," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-18, February.
    13. Gormus, Alper & Nazlioglu, Saban & Soytas, Ugur, 2018. "High-yield bond and energy markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 101-110.
    14. Jerome Geyer‐Klingeberg & Andreas W. Rathgeber, 2021. "Determinants of the WTI‐Brent price spread revisited," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(5), pages 736-757, May.
    15. Adeel Saleem & Maqbool H. Sial & Ahmed Raza Cheema, 2023. "Does an asymmetric nexus exist between exports and economic growth in Pakistan? Recent evidence from a nonlinear ARDL approach," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 297-326, February.
    16. Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel & Bekun, Festus Victor & Etokakpan, Mfonobong Udom & Driha, Oana M., 2019. "A road to enhancements in natural gas use in Iran: A multivariate modelling approach," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    17. Tang, Chor Foon & Tan, Eu Chye, 2013. "Exploring the nexus of electricity consumption, economic growth, energy prices and technology innovation in Malaysia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 297-305.
    18. Batten, Jonathan A. & Ciner, Cetin & Lucey, Brian M., 2017. "The dynamic linkages between crude oil and natural gas markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 155-170.
    19. Bashiri Behmiri, Niaz & Pires Manso, José R., 2012. "Does Portuguese economy support crude oil conservation hypothesis?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 628-634.
    20. Senay ACIKGOZ & Anil AKCAGLAYAN, 2014. "Turkiye’de Cari Islemler Aciginin Surdurulebilirligi," Ege Academic Review, Ege University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 14(1), pages 83-97.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2206.03278. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.