nach oben

Erschienen in:

2015 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

9. Energy Demand Model II

verfasst von : Nabaz T. Khayyat

Erschienen in: Energy Demand in Industry

Verlag: Springer Netherlands

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In this chapter the third group of the econometric model is estimated, namely the energy demand model accounting for risk. The model is constructed as in the previous models in two forms: The Cobb-Douglas and the Translog function to allow for consistency and comparability. The Just and Pop production risk function is applied. To estimate the energy demand incorporating risk, different input factors of production are included.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Energy Demand Model I

Nächstes Kapitel Discussion of the Results and Policy Implications

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Since the model is non-linear in parameters an iterative procedure is used. Convergence will be obtained after repeated iteration process, which is equivalent of using the maximum likelihood estimation method.

Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1979). A simple test for heteroscedasticity and random coefficient variation. Econometrica, 47(5), 1287. doi:10.2307/1911963.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Bunse, K., Vodicka, M., Schönsleben, P., Brülhart, M., & Ernst, F. O. (2011). Integrating energy efficiency performance in production management—gap analysis between industrial needs and scientific literature. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(6–7), 667–679. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.11.011.CrossRef

Gallant, A. R. (2008). Nonlinear statistical models. New York: John.

Greene, W. H. (2008). Econometric analysis (7^th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Harvey, A. C. (1976). Estimating regression-models with multiplicative heteroscedasticity. Econometrica, 44(3), 461–465. doi:10.2307/1913974.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Heshmati, A. (2001). Labour demand and efficiency in Swedish savings banks. Applied Financial Economics, 11(4), 423–433. doi:10.1080/096031001300313983.CrossRef

Just, R. E., & Pope, R. D. (1978). Stochastic specification of production functions and economic implications. Journal of Econometrics, 7(1), 67–86. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(78)90006-4.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Kumbhakar, S. C., & Tveterås, R. (2003). Risk preferences, production risk and firm heterogeneity. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 105(2), 275–293. doi:10.1111/1467-9442.t01-1-00009.CrossRef

Lovell, C. A. K., & Schmidt, P. (1987). A comparison of alternative approaches to the measurement of productive efficiency. In A. Dogramaci & R. Färe (Eds.), Applications of modern production theory: efficiency and productivity (Vol. 9, pp. 3–32). Netherlands: Springer.

Moss, C. B., Erickson, K. W., Ball, V. E., & Mishra, A. K. (2003). A Translog Cost Function Analysis of U.S. Agriculture: A Dynamic Specification. http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:aaea03:22027.

Saha, A., Havenner, A., & Talpaz, H. (1997). Stochastic production function estimation: Small sample properties of ML versus FGLS. Applied Economics, 29(4), 459–469. doi:10.1080/000368497326958.CrossRef

SAS Institute Inc. (1993). SAS/ETS User’s Guide, Version 6, (2^nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.

Tveterås, R. (1997). Econometric Modelling of Production Technology Under Risk: The Case of Norwegian Salmon Aquaculture Industry. (PhD Dissertation), Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Bergen, Norway.

Tveterås, R. (1999). Production risk and productivity growth: Some findings for Norwegian Salmon aquaculture. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 12(2 SRC—GoogleScholar), 161–179.

Tveterås, R. (2000). Flexible panel data models for risky production technologies with an application to Salomon aquaculture. Journal of Econometric Reviews, 19(3 SRC—GoogleScholar), 367–389.

White, H. (1980). A Heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817. doi:10.2307/1912934.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Titel: Energy Demand Model II
verfasst von: Nabaz T. Khayyat
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Buch: Energy Demand in Industry
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9952-2

Electronic ISBN: 978-94-017-9953-9

Copyright-Jahr: 2015
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9953-9_9