 

 
  

 

  iomar@qu.edu.sa      
+966506277933 :‫ﺟﻮﺍﻝ‬ +96663800708 :‫ﺕ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ‬
 

  rsol@qu.edu.sa     
+966530437881 :‫ﺟﻮﺍﻝ‬ (3088 ‫ )ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻲ‬+96663800050 :‫ﺕ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ‬
 

 – 

 

  514526633

.148–117 ‫ ﺹ ﺹ‬،2012 ،1 ‫ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﺩ‬،34 ‫ﻠﺪ‬‫ ﺍ‬،‫ ﻛﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺰﻗﺎﺯﻳﻖ‬،‫ﳎﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻮﺙ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺍﳌﻠﺨﺺ‪ :‬ﻫﺪﻓﺖ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﲢﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ‪2009-1980‬م‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻗﺘﺮﺣﻪ ‪ Pesaran‬ﻭﺁﺧﺮﻭﻥ )‪ .(2001‬ﻭﻛﺸﻔﺖ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﳍﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬
‫ﺑﲔ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺃﻇﻬﺮﺕ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﻧﻪ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﲡﺎﻫﲔ ﺑﲔ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﰲ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﲔ ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﻟﻪ ﺗﺪﺍﻋﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﺎﻣﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﳊﻔﺎﻅ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺻﺔﹰ ﻭﺃﻥ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﻭﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻫﻴﺌﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺿﻌﺖ ﺧﻄﻂ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﺗﺴﻌﻰ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﻗﻄﺎﻉ ﺻﻨﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻮﺭﻗﺔ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺗﺪﺍﺑﲑ ﲢﺴﲔ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﻭﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻄﻠﺐ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﱵ ﺻﻤﻤﺖ ﻟﻠﺤﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳍﺪﺭ ﰲ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺗﻘﻠﻴﺺ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻛﻬﺎ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬﻫﺎ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﳍﺎ ﺃﺛﺮ‬
‫ﺳﻠﱯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬
‫ﺗ‪‬ﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺃﺣﺪ ﺃﻫﻢ ﻣﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻠﺒﺸﺮﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃ‪‬ﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻫﻢ ﺍﻷﺳﺲ ﺍﻟﱵ ﻳﺮﺗﻜﺰ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺗﻄﻮﺭ‬ ‫‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﻣﻢ ﻭﺣﻀﺎﺭﺍ‪‬ﺎ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺚ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺴﻬﻢ ﻣﺴﺎﳘﺔ ﺇﳚﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﻛﺒﲑﺓ ﳌﺴﺎﻧﺪﺓ ﻛﺎﻓﺔ ﻗﻄﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ ﻭﺩﻓﻊ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺰﺩﺍﺩ ﺃﳘﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻟﻠﻔﺮﺩ ﺑﺎﺯﺩﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﺩﺧﻠﻪ ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﲟﺪﻯ ﺗﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻭﺗﻄﻮﺭﻩ‪ .‬ﺇﻻ‬
‫ﺃ‪‬ﺎ ﻛﻐﲑﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺗﺘﺼﻒ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺪﺭﺓ‪ ،‬ﻭﳍﺬﺍ ﺳﻴﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﱂ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﰲ ﺗﻮﻓﲑ ﺍﻻﺣﺘﻴﺎﺟﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻣﺔ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺰﺍﻳﺪ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻄﻠﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻟﻌﺪﺓ ﺃﺳﺒﺎﺏ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻤﺮﺓ ﰲ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﺎﻥ ﻭﻣﺎ ﻳﺼﺎﺣﺒﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﰲ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻱ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﺭﺗﻔﺎﻉ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﺧﻮﻝ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻧﻈﺮﺍﹰ ﻷﳘﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻭﺗﺄﺛﲑﻫﺎ ﺍﳌﺒﺎﺷﺮ ﻛﻌﻨﺼﺮ ﺭﺋﻴﺴﻲ ﰲ ﳎﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﳊﻴﺎﺓ ﻛﺎﻓﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﳝﺎﻧﺎﹰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻭﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﳊﻴﻮﻱ ﻭﺍﳌﺆﺛﺮ ﰲ ﺗﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﻛﺎﻓﺔ ﻭﺭﻓﻊ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﳋﺪﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻮﺍﻃﻨﲔ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺣﻀﺎﺭﻳﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺿﺮﻭﺭﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺪ ﺣﺮﺻﺖ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻮﻓﲑ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﳌﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﻋﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺃﻭﻟﺖ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺔ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﺎﹰ ﻛﺒﲑﺍﹰ ﺑﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻭﺿﻌﺘﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻭﻟﻮﻳﺎﺕ ﺧﻄﻄﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻮﻳﺔ ‪‬ﺪﻑ ﺗﻘﺪﱘ‬
‫ﺧﺪﻣﺎﺕ ﻛﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻣﺘﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺭﻓﺎﻫﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﻮﺍﻃﻨﲔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻐﻠﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﻠﺐ ﺍﳌﺘﺰﺍﻳﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﳌﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﳊﻴﻮﻱ‬
‫ﺍﳍﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﺧﻄﺖ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺧﻄﻮﺍﺕ ﺇﳚﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻬﻮﺽ ﺑﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﺃﺻﺒﺢ ﳕﻮﺫﺟﺎﹰ ﳛﺘﺬﻱ ﺑﻪ ﺑﲔ ﺩﻭﻝ‬
‫ﺍﳌﻨﻄﻘﺔ‪ ،‬ﳍﺬﺍ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺗﻀﺎﻋﻒ ﺇﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ﻋﺸﺮﻭﻥ ﺿﻌﻔﺎﹰ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺛﺔ ﺍﳌﺎﺿﻴﺔ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺣﻘﻘﺘﻪ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺣﻴﺚ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻣﻲ‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺇﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻳ‪‬ﻌﺪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮﺍﹰ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻴﺎﹰ ﻟﺪﻋﻢ ﺍﺣﺘﻴﺎﺟﺎﺕ ﳕﻮﻩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﲢﺪﻳﺚ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻮﺳﻊ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﻟﻠﻘﻄﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻮﻳﺔ ﲣﻠﻖ ﺍﺣﺘﻴﺎﺟﺎﺕ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﳑﺎ ﻳﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻮﻃﲏ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﻳﻌﺘﱪ ﺍﻻﺯﺩﻳﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﺎﱐ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺍﳌﻀﻄﺮﺩ ﻭﺍﳔﻔﺎﺽ ﺃﺳﻌﺎﺭﹺ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺳﺒﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﻠﺐ ﺍﳌﺘﺰﺍﻳﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺗﻘﺪﺭ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﳌﻴﺎﻩ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺃﻥ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﲢﺘﺎﺝ ﺇﱃ‬
‫‪ 66.400‬ﻣﻴﺠﺎﻭﺍﺕ ﻣﻦ ﺳﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻟﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪2023‬م‪) ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔﹰ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﺔ ﺍﳊﺎﻟﻴﺔ ‪27.260‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺠﺎﻭﺍﺕ(‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﰎ ﺗﻮﻗﻴﻊ ﺃﻭﻝ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﻧﺪﻣﺎﺟﻲ ﺑﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ‪ 16‬ﻓﱪﺍﻳﺮ ‪2000‬م ﺑﲔ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺷﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﻛﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺳﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺑﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻛﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ "‪ ،"Saudi Electric Company: SEC‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺷﺮﻛﺔ‬
‫ﻗﻄﺎﻉ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺣﻴﺚ ﲤﺘﻠﻚ ﺍﳊﻜﻮﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ‪ ٪50‬ﻣﻦ ﺃﺳﻬﻢﹺ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻛﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﻤﻜﻦ ﻓﺘﺢ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﳌﺸﺎﺭﻛﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻛﺔ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻷﻫﻠﻲ ﺧﺎﺻﺔ ً ﰲ ﺑﻨﺎﺀ ﳏﻄﺎﺕ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﻟﻠﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺑﻨﺎﺀً ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺳﺲ‬
‫‪ ."Build -‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﻤﻦ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﻗﻊ ﺃﻥ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺒﻞ ﺍﳌﻨﺘﺠﲔ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻘﻠﲔ‬ ‫"‪Own Transfer: BOT‬‬ ‫ﻭﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﰐ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﺳﻴﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﲢﺪﻳﺎﺕ ﻛﺒﲑﺓ ﺗﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺑﺄﺳﻌﺎﺭ ﺗﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﳍﻴﻜﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻈﻴﻤﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺸﻐﻴﻠﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﺮﺍﺋﺐ ﻭﺗﻮﻓﲑ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻡ ﻟﻠﺘﺸﻐﻴﻞ‪.‬‬
 ‫ﲢﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﳊﺎﱄ ﻟﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺜﻞ ﻣﻌﻈﻢ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﳋﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺑﻠﺪ ﻧﻔﻄﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ ﻣﻊ ﻗﻄﺎﻉ ﺻﻨﺎﻋﻲ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻣﻲ‪ .‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺍﶈﺮﻭﻗﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺗﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﳌﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ .‬ﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﳌﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻤﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﳌﺘﺠﺪﺩﺓ ﻓﻼ ﲤﺜﻞ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺟﺰﺀ ﺻﻐﲑ ﻣﻦ ﺇﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺣﻴﺚ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺗﺸﻜﻞ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓﹰ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼ ﳝﻜﻦ ﲡﺎﻫﻞ ﺇﺳﻬﺎﻣﺎ‪‬ﺎ ﺍﻻﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻡ‬
‫ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺳﻠﻌﺔ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺃﻳﻀﺎﹰ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻷﻭﱄ ﻟﻠﻌﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺣﺪﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻊ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﻼﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺑﻠﻎ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﺑﺘﺔ ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ 841.18‬ﺃﻟﻒ ﻣﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﺭﻳﺎﻝ ﰲ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪2009‬م‪ ،‬ﻭﳕﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺳﻨﻮﻳﺎﹰ ﲟﻌﺪﻝ ‪ ٪3.8‬ﺑﲔ ﻋﺎﻣﻲ ‪ 2000‬ﻭ ‪ .2009‬ﻭﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻋﻦ ‪ 193‬ﺃﻟﻒ‬
‫ﻣﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﻛﻴﻠﻮﻭﺍﺕ‪/‬ﺳﺎﻋﺔ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪2009‬م‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺑﺔ ‪ %78‬ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺋﻠﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﺎﻗﻲ ﻟﻸﻧﺸﻄﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﻏﺮﺍﺽ ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺑﻠﻐﺖ ﺑﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﻮﻟﺪﺓ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﰲ ‪‬ﺎﻳﺔ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪2009‬م ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ %980‬ﻣﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔ ﺑﻌﺎﻡ‬
‫‪1980‬م‪ ،‬ﻭﺑﻠﻐﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﰲ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻛﲔ ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ ،%554‬ﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺍﺯﺩﺍﺩﺕ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ 17452‬ﺇﱃ ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ 193472‬ﻣﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﻛﻴﻠﻮﻭﺍﺕ‪/‬ﺳﺎﻋﺔ ﺑﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﻗﺪﺭﻫﺎ ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪.%1009‬‬
‫ﻭﻳﻌﺮﺽ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳉﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ (1‬ﻭﺍﻟﺸﻜﻞ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ (1‬ﺗﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‬
‫ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2009-1980‬م‪ .‬ﻭﻣﻨﻪ ﻳﻼﺣﻆ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺛﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﺮﻙ ﰲ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﺑﻠﻎ ﻣﻌﺪﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ ﳍﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺗﻴﺐ‬
‫ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ %1.95 ،%2.24 ،%7.32‬ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻮﺿﺢ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺪﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻓﺎﻕ ﻣﻌﺪﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ ﻟﻠﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺪﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺰﺍﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﻄﻠﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻳﻼﺣﻆ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻞ ﺭﻗﻢ ) ‪ (2‬ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻛﺜﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ‪ Electricity Intensity‬ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ )ﻣﻘﺎﺳﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻟﻠﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ( ﻟﻠﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﻣﻦ ‪ 0.034‬ﺇﱃ ‪ 0.23‬ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺆﻛﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ ) ‪ :(1‬ﻣﻠﺨﺺ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2009 – 1980‬ﻡ‬

‫‪ELEC Cons‬‬ ‫‪GDPCON‬‬ ‫‪INVESCON‬‬

‫)‪(million KWh‬‬ ‫)‪(million‬‬ ‫)‪(million‬‬

‫‪Mean‬‬ ‫‪90139.9‬‬ ‫‪582993.4‬‬ ‫‪111054.2‬‬

‫‪Maximum‬‬ ‫‪193472‬‬ ‫‪841184‬‬ ‫‪206918‬‬

‫‪Minimum‬‬ ‫‪17452‬‬ ‫‪408974‬‬ ‫‪75605.3‬‬

‫‪Std. dev.‬‬ ‫‪50992.9‬‬ ‫‪129101.1‬‬ ‫‪28065.7‬‬

‫‪Skewness‬‬ ‫‪0.455‬‬ ‫‪0.560‬‬ ‫‪1.685‬‬

‫‪Annual Growth Rate (%) 7.32‬‬ ‫‪2.24‬‬ ‫‪1.95‬‬

 ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ :(1‬ﺗﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2009 - 1980‬ﻡ‬

‫‪14‬‬
‫‪Ln‬‬

‫‪13‬‬

‫‪12‬‬

‫‪11‬‬

‫‪Ln Ec Cons‬‬
‫‪10‬‬
‫‪Ln GDPCon‬‬
‫‪Ln InvesCon‬‬
‫‪9‬‬
‫‪80‬‬

‫‪84‬‬

‫‪88‬‬

‫‪92‬‬

‫‪96‬‬

‫‪00‬‬

‫‪04‬‬

‫‪08‬‬
‫‪19‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫‪20‬‬
‫‪19‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫‪20‬‬

‫‪20‬‬
‫‪Years‬‬

‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ :(2‬ﺗﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﺜﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2009 - 1980‬ﻡ‬

‫‪0.25‬‬
‫) ‪Ele ctricity Inte ns ity (k W h/R S‬‬

‫‪Electricity intensity in KSA‬‬

‫‪0.20‬‬

‫‪0.15‬‬

‫‪0.10‬‬

‫‪0.05‬‬

‫‪0.00‬‬
‫‪84‬‬

‫‪92‬‬

‫‪00‬‬

‫‪08‬‬
‫‪80‬‬

‫‪88‬‬

‫‪96‬‬

‫‪04‬‬
‫‪19‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫‪20‬‬

‫‪20‬‬

‫‪20‬‬

‫‪Years‬‬
 ‫‪  ‬‬
‫ﳑﺎ ﻻﺷﻚ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺪﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ ﺃﻣﺮ ﺫﻭ ﺃﳘﻴﺔ ﻛﱪﻯ ﻟﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﻗﻊ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻠﻌﺐ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﹰ ﻫﺎﻣﺎﹰ ﰲ ﲢﻘﻴﻖ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻡ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻛﻌﻨﺼﺮ ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﺃﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻞ‬
‫ﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺗ‪‬ﻌﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﳍﺎﻣﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻀﺮﻭﺭﻳﺔ ﰲ ﺳﻴﺎﻕ ﲢﺮﻳﺮ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﰲ ﻗﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺑﺪﺃ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺧﲑﺓ‪ .‬ﻭ‪‬ﺪﻑ‬
‫ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻮﺭﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺃﻥ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‬
‫ﺗﺴﺘﻬﺪﻑ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﲝﺚ ﺍﻵﺛﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻮﻗﻌﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﶈﺘﻤﻠﺔ ﳍﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺇﺳﻬﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻮﺭﻗﺔ ﰲ‪ :‬ﺃﻭﻻﹰ ﺃﻥ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺗﺒﺤﺚ ﰲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺃﺣﺪ ﻣﻜﻮﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ )ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ( ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ‬
‫)ﻛﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ( ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻫﻮ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﰲ ﺍﻷﺩﺏ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪ .‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺎﹰ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﺰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺑﻘﺪﺭ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﻓﻬﺬﻩ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻭﻝ ﳏﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍ‪‬ﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪  ‬‬
‫ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺪﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﰲ ﲢﻘﻴﻖ ﺃﻫﺪﺍﻓﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻮﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳉﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺮﲰﻴﺔ ﻛﺎﻟﻨﺸﺮﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻘﺎﺭﻳﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺳﻮﺍﺀ ﺍﳌﻨﺸﻮﺭﺓ ﺃﻭ ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﻨﺸﻮﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﺼﺪﺭﻫﺎ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺨﻄﻴﻂ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﰊ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻱ ﻭﻏﲑﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺳﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﺗﻐﻄﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ‬
‫‪2009 - 1980‬ﻡ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺸﻤﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ )ﺑﺎﳌﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﺭﻳﺎﻝ(‪ ،‬ﻭﳘﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﻣﺆﺷﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ )ﺑﺎﳌﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﻛﻴﻠﻮ ﻭﺍﺕ ‪ /‬ﺳﺎﻋﺔ(‪ .‬ﻭﰎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ‬
‫ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺻﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﻏﺎﺭﻳﺘﻢ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﻲ ﳍﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺭﺍﺳﺨﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻷﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻫﺎﻣﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺰﺍﻝ ﻣﺜﲑﺓ ﻟﻠﺠﺪﻝ‪) ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺮﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻳﺆﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻫﻮ ﺍﶈﺮﻙ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ(‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻨﺎﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺣﺎﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ‬
‫ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﺪﺩ ﻗﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺣﺎﻭﻟﺖ ﻓﺤﺺ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﻣﻜﻮﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺑﺎﻷﺧﺺ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻣﻌﻈﻢ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺗﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺣﺪﻳﺜﺎﹰ ﺗﻄﻮﺭﺕ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻗﻄﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺬﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺗﺄﺧﺬ ﰲ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺗﺄﺛﲑ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﻧﺲ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻤﺎﺡ ﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺔ ﳏﺪﺩﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻼﻭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻳﺴﻤﺢ ﻟﻌﺪﺩ ﺃﻛﱪ ﻣﻦ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳊﺮﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﲡﺪﺭ ﺍﻹﺷﺎﺭﺓ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﻈﻢ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﱵ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻗﻄﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻗﺪ ﻃﺒﻘﺖ ﰲ ﳎﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﻮﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ ﻃﺒﻘﺖ ﰲ‬
‫ﳎﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﺪﺃﺕ ﻣﻊ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ ،(Kraft and Kraft 1978‬ﻭﺍﻟﱵ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻠﺖ ﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻣﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ‪ GNP‬ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺪﺓ‪ .‬ﰒ ﺗﻼﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ ﻏﻄﺖ ﻋﺪﺩ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﻭﺃﳌﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻭﺇﻳﻄﺎﻟﻴﺎ ﻭﻛﻨﺪﺍ ﻭﻓﺮﻧﺴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﻴﺎﺑﺎﻥ‬
‫‪ ((Hondroyiannis‬ﻭﰲ‬ ‫)‪et al., 2002‬‬ ‫‪ (Erol and‬ﻭ‬ ‫)‪Yu, 1987‬‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫))‪(Yu and Choi, 1985‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻟﻴﻮﻧﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺣﻘﺔ ﺑﺪﻻﹰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﰎ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭﳕﺎﺫﺝ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﺪﻯ ﺳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻼﻭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ‬
‫)‪ (Stern, 1993‬ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺇﻃﺎﺭ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﻌﺪﺩﺓ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﺘﺠﻪ ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺬﺍﰐ‪ .‬ﻭﺣﺪﻳﺜﺎﹰ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﺪﺩ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳉﻬﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Lin, 2003‬ﻭﺍﻟﱵ ﻏﻄﺖ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2001-1978‬م‪ ،‬ﻭﺧﻠﺼﺖ ﺇﱃ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺲ‪ .‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺃﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ )‪(Shiu and Lam, 2004‬‬

‫ﻭﺍﻟﱵ ﻏﻄﺖ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2000-1971‬م‪ ،‬ﺧﻠﺼﺖ ﺇﱃ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻗﻀﺔ ﻣﻊ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Lin, 2003‬ﺣﻴﺚ‬
‫ﺃﻭﺿﺤﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﹸ ﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﻣﻜﺜﻔﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﲔ ﻻ ﺯﺍﻟﻮﺍ ﻏﲑ ﻗﺎﺩﺭﻳﻦ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺋﻤﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺋﻤﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺰﺍﻝ ﻣﺜﲑﺓ ﻟﻠﺠﺪﻝ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺜﺎﻝ؛ ﰲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺪﺓ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺻﻞ )‪ (Kraft and Kraft, 1978‬ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﳝﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻣﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﻭﺟﺪ )‪ (Akarca and Long, 1979‬ﺃﻥ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﳝﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ‪ ،‬ﺃﻣﺎ )‪ (Yu and Hwang, 1984‬ﻭ )‪ (Soytas and Sari, 2003‬ﻓﻮﺟﺪﻭﺍ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ‬
‫ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺩﻻﻟﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺧﻞ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﻮﺻﻞ ﻛﺬﻟﻚ )‪ (Stern, 2000‬ﻭ )‪ (Lee, 2005‬ﺇﱃ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﺎﳌﺜﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻜﻨﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﻓﻔﻲ ﺣﲔ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻞ )‪ (Soytas and Sari, 2003‬ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻠﲔ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫)‪ (Lee, 2005‬ﻭﺟﺪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﺪﺧﻞ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺗﻮﺻﻠﺖ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﻀﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﺸﺎ‪‬ﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻷﻭﺭﻭﺑﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﳌﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ‬
‫ﺇﻃﺎﺭ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻌﺮ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻧﺎﻥ‬
‫)‪ (Hondroyiannis, et al., 2002‬ﺗﻮﺻﻠﻮﺍ ﺇﱃ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺑﲔ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻭﺟﺪ ‪(Soytas‬‬

‫)‪ and Sari, 2003‬ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﰲ ﻓﺮﻧﺴﺎ ﻭﺃﳌﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻭﺗﺮﻛﻴﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻳﻄﺎﻟﻴﺎ‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻭﺟﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺣﺜﻮﻥ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻻﺛﻨﲔ ﰲ ﺑﻮﻟﻨﺪﺍ ﻭﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺪﺓ‪ ،‬ﺃﻣﺎ )‪ (Lee, 2005‬ﻓﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‬
‫ﰲ ﺑﻠﺠﻴﻜﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮﻟﻨﺪﺍ ﻭﺳﻮﻳﺴﺮﺍ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﻋﻜﺲ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﰲ ﻓﺮﻧﺴﺎ ﻭﺇﻳﻄﺎﻟﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻭﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﰲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻮﻳﺪ ﻭﱂ ﻳﺘﻮﺻﻞ ﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻹﻃﻼﻕ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﻭﺃﳌﺎﻧﻴﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻡ ) ‪Narayan, et. al.‬‬

‫‪ (2008‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﺘﺠﻪ ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﰐ ﺍﳍﻴﻜﻠﻲ )‪ (SVAR‬ﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺍﻟﺼﺪﻣﺎﺕ ﰲ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻌﺔ ‪ .G7‬ﻭﺃﺷﺎﺭ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺜﻨﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺪﺓ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻟﻪ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺇﳚﺎﰊ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻱ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ‪.‬‬

‫ﺃﻣﺎ ﰲ ﺃﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺍﻟﻼﺗﻴﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺗﺒﲔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻸﺭﺟﻨﺘﲔ )‪ ،(Soytas and Saris, 2003‬ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻟﻠﱪﺍﺯﻳﻞ )‪ ،(Cheng, 1997‬ﰲ‬
‫ﺣﲔ ﰎ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻦ ﺻﺤﺔ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﺍﳊﻴﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻜﺴﻴﻚ )‪ (Soytas and Saris, 2003‬ﻭ ‪(Cheng,‬‬

‫)‪ ،1997‬ﻭﺃﻭﺿﺢ )‪ (Squalli, 2007‬ﺇﱃ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻹﳚﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﰲ ﻓﱰﻭﻳﻼ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ )‪ (Apergis and Payne, 2010‬ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬
‫ﻭﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﰲ ﺇﻃﺎﺭ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﻌﺪﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ ﻛﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﻛﻮﺳﺘﺎﺭﻳﻜﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻠﻔﺎﺩﻭﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺍﺗﻴﻤﺎﻻ ﻭﻫﻨﺪﻭﺭﺍﺱ ﻭﻧﻴﻜﺎﺭﺍﺟﻮﺍ ﻭﺑﻨﻤﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺒﲔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﺑﺖ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﰲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ ﻭﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪.‬‬

‫ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻠﺖ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﻀﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﺸﺎ‪‬ﺔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻵﺳﻴﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﻓﺮﻳﻘﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﻭﻝ ﻣﻨﻈﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺃﻭﺑﻚ‪ ،‬ﻓﻔﻲ ﺁﺳﻴﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻠﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Masih and Masih, 1997‬ﺇﱃ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﰲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳍﻨﺪ ﻭﺑﺎﻛﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﻭﺇﻧﺪﻭﻧﻴﺴﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﱂ ﻳﺜﺒﺖ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻟﻜﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺎﻟﻴﺰﻳﺎ ﻭﺳﻨﻐﺎﻓﻮﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻠﺒﲔ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺒﲔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﰲ ﺍﳍﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﰲ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻛﺲ ﰲ‬
‫ﺇﻧﺪﻭﻧﻴﺴﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻇﻬﺮﺕ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﰲ ﺑﺎﻛﺴﺘﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻞ )‪ (Yang, 2000‬ﺇﱃ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻣﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﰲ ﺗﺎﻳﻮﺍﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﻃﺒﻘﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪(Aqeel and Butt, 2001‬‬
‫ﺇﺳﻠﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﺎﻟﺔ ﰲ ﺑﺎﻛﺴﺘﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺠﺖ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻬﻠﻜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻳﻘﻮﺩ ﺃﻳﻀﺎﹰ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﰲ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻂ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﺯ ﻻ ﻳﺆﺛﺮﺍﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻌﻀﻬﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺾ‪ .‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺃﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺑﺎﳍﻨﺪ )‪(Ghosh, 2002‬‬

‫ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺳﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﺗﻐﻄﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪ 1951-1950‬ﺇﱃ ‪1997-1996‬م‪ ،‬ﻛﺸﻔﺖ ﻋﻦ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﺯﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﻣﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺃﻱ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺪﺓ ﺑﻴﻨﻬﻤﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Lam and Shiu, 2004‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻟﻠﺼﲔ ﺧﻼﻝ ‪2000-1971‬م‪ .‬ﻭﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺇﱃ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ‬
‫ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺲ‪ .‬ﺃﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Altinay and Karagol, 2005‬ﻓﺘﻨﺎﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2000-1950‬م ﺑﺘﺮﻛﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﺳﻔﺮﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻋﻦ ﺃﺩﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻗﻮﻳﺔ ﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﺪﺧﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺇﻣﺪﺍﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﳍﺎ ﺃﳘﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﺤﻔﺎﻅ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺭﻛﺰﺕ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ‪(Narayan‬‬
‫)‪ and Smyth, 2005‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﲝﺚ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‬
‫ﻟﺒﻌﺾ ﺩﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﺮﻕ ﺍﻷﻭﺳﻂ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻭﺿﺤﺖ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗﻐﺬﻳﺔ ﻣﺮﺗﺪﺓ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﹰ ﺑﲔ‬
‫ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﳝﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﺘﺤﻔﻴﺰ ﻭﺗﺸﺠﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺧﺎﺻﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﻏﲑ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﻄﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻛﻮﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﺘﻌﺰﻳﺰ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺳﻊ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺳﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺗﻮﺻﻠﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ )‪ (Hoy and Siuzy, 2006‬ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﰲ ﻫﻮﻧﺞ ﻛﻮﻧﺞ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗﻮﺍﺯﻧﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﺪﻓﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Wolde-Rufael, 2006‬ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻱ ﻟﻠﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻱ ﰲ ‪ 17‬ﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﺃﻓﺮﻳﻘﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2001-1971‬م ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺍﳌﻄﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺍﻗﺘﺮﺣﻬﺎ ﺣﺪﻳﺜﺎﹰ ‪ Pesaran‬ﻭﺁﺧﺮﻭﻥ )‪2001‬م(‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻭﺿﺤﺖ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻱ ﻟﻠﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻱ ﰲ ‪ 9‬ﺩﻭﻝ‬
‫ﻓﻘﻂ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻧﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﺒﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻱ ﻟﻠﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﺒﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺙ ﺍﳌﺘﺒﻘﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻡ‬
‫)‪ (Akinlo, 2008‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﰐ ﺫﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﺠﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻮﺯﻋﺔ )‪ (ARDL‬ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﻟﻔﺤﺺ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻷﺣﺪ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺑﻠﺪﺍﹰ ﰲ ﺃﻓﺮﻳﻘﻴﺎ ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻜﱪﻯ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻇﻬﺮﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﱵ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻞ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﲡﺎﻫﲔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻟﻜﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺎﻣﺒﻴﺎ ﻭﻏﺎﻧﺎ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻨﻐﺎﻝ‪ .‬ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﺗﺒﲔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‬
‫ﰲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻧﻐﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻮﺩﺍﻥ ﻭﺯﳝﺒﺎﺑﻮﻱ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﺎﻣﲑﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﻮﺕ ﺩﻳﻔﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺠﲑﻳﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﻴﻨﻴﺎ ﻭﺗﻮﺟﻮ ﻓﻠﻢ‬
‫ﺗﺘﻮﺻﻞ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻱ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻡ )‪ (Odhiambo, 2009‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻟﺘﱰﺍﻧﻴﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻗﺪ ﺳﻌﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Squalli, 2007‬ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺮﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻟﻠﺪﻭﻝ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﻣﻨﻈﻤﺔ ﺃﻭﺑﻚ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻋﻄﺖ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺩﻟﻴﻼﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﻃﻮﻳﻠﺔ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﳉﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺃﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﺍﳌﻨﻈﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺃﻇﻬﺮﺕ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻳﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﰲ ﲬﺴﺔ ﺩﻭﻝ ﺑﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﺃﻗﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﻩ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﰲ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻝ‪ ،‬ﻭﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﻋﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﺩﻭﻝ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ‪ .‬ﻷﻥ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻀﺮﻭﺭﺓ ﺗﺘﺒﻊ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﺛﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺒﺎﻳﻦ ﺑﲔ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻳﺆﻛﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺃﳘﻴﺔ ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺗﻔﺴﲑﺍﺕ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻷﺧﺬ ﺑﻌﲔ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎﺕ ﻛﻞ ﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﺪﺓ ﺑﺪﻻﹰ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻭﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴﲑﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﲨﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻷﻋﻀﺎﺀ ﰲ ﻣﻨﻈﻤﺔ ﺃﻭﺑﻚ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ )‪ (Zachariadis and Pashourtidou, 2007‬ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺯﻣﻨﻴﺔ‬

‫ﻟﻠﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2004-1960‬م ﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﲏ ﻭﻗﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﳋﺪﻣﺎﺕ ﰲ ﻗﱪﺹ ﺑﻜﻞ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﺧﻞ ﻭﺍﻷﺳﻌﺎﺭ ﻭﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﻘﺲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻨﺪﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻟﻌﺪﺩ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺳﺎﻟﻴﺐ ﲢﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺟﺬﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﺣﺪﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻭﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺩﺍﻻﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻀﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻇﻬﺮﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺃﻥ ﻣﺮﻭﻧﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻸﺳﻌﺎﺭ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﺘﺮﺍﻭﺡ ﺑﲔ ‪ ،0.4- : 0.3-‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺃ‪‬ﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺪﺧﻞ ﺃﻛﱪ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‪ .‬ﺃﻣﺎ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ ﻓﺘﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻏﲑ ﻣﺮﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎﹰ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺘﺄﺛﺮ ﺑﺘﻘﻠﺒﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻄﻘﺲ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻛﺪﺕ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﲏ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺪﺧﻞ ﺍﳋﺎﺹ‪ .‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﻱ ﺃﻗﻞ ﻣﺮﻭﻧﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﲏ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺣﺎﻭﻟﺖ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ )‪ (Chontanawat, 2008‬ﻓﺤﺺ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬

‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﰲ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺩﻭﻝ ﺁﺳﻴﺎ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺟﺬﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﺣﺪﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺧﻼﻝ ‪-1970‬‬
‫‪1999‬م‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﻗﺪﻣﺖ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺩﻟﻴﻼﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻣﻴﺔ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗﺒﺎﺩﻟﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻣﻴﺔ ﺑﺂﺳﻴﺎ‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﻌﲏ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ )ﺧﺎﺻﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ( ﳝﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻋﺎﻣﻼﹰ ﳏﺪﺩﺍﹰ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍ‪‬ﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻱ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ )ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﱄ ﺍﻻﻧﺒﻌﺎﺛﺎﺕ( ﺳﻴﻜﻮﻥ ﳍﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﲑﺍ‪‬ﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻣﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺂﺳﻴﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﻗﺎﻡ )‪ (Ouédraogo, 2010‬ﺑﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ‬

‫ﺑﻮﺭﻛﻴﻨﺎ ﻓﺎﺳﻮ ﻟﻠﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2003-1968‬م‪ .‬ﻭﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺑﻮﺭﻛﻴﻨﺎ ﻓﺎﺳﻮ ﻳﻨﻤﻮ ﻣﻊ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻟﺪﺧﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻬﻢ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺩﻟﺖ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‪ ،‬ﻭﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﰎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻛﻤﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺗﺎﺑﻌﺔ‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﺷﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺇﱃ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﹰ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﻣﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ‬
‫ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺃﻳﻀﺎﹰ ﺃﺩﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺇﳚﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﻣﺮﺗﺪﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺛﺮ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻭﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ‬‬

‫ﻳﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﳎﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﺘﻨﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﻭﺃﺳﺎﻟﻴﺐ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﺘﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫‪Unit‬‬‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺟﺬﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﺣﺪﺓ‬
‫‪ ،Root Tests‬ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﻟﻠﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ‪ Bounds Testing Approach to Cointegration‬ﻣﻦ‬
‫‪،The‬‬ ‫)‪Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL‬‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻝ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﰐ ﺫﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﺠﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻮﺯﻋﺔ‬
‫ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺪ )‪ ،Unrestricted Error Correction Model (UECM‬ﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻠﺔ ﺍﻷﺟﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪.Granger Causality Tests‬‬

‫ﻭﻗﺪ ﰎ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪– 1980‬‬
‫‪2009‬م ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﺮﻗﻢ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﻟﻠﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ )ﻣﻜﻤﺶ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ‪ ،(100 = 1999‬ﻛﻤﺎ‬
‫ﰎ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻊ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺻﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﻏﺎﺭﻳﺘﻢ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﻲ ﳍﺎ ‪ ،Ln‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﰎ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻣﻌﺪﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﳉﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﻟﺔ ﺍﻵﺳﻴﺔ ‪ ،Exponential Function‬ﻭﰎ ﲢﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳊﺎﺳﺐ‬
‫ﺍﻵﱄ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﺞ ‪.E-Viewes‬‬

‫ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﺗﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺘﻌﺪﺩﺓ ﺑﺪ ﹰﻻ ﻣﻦ ﺇﺗﺒﺎﻉ ﺍﳌﻨﻬﺞ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻟﻔﺤﺺ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‪ .‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺾ ﺇﻧﻪ ﰲ ﺇﻃﺎﺭ ﺍﳌﻨﻬﺞ ﺫﻭ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﶈﺬﻭﻓﺔ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺆﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺟﺎﺕ ﺧﺎﻃﺌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﰲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺗﻌﺘﱪ ﻣﺘﻐﲑ ﻣﻦ ﺩﺍﻟﺔ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﺎﺝ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻳﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‪ ،‬ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﻭ ‪ /‬ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺃﺩﻟﺔ ﻋﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﺒﺪﺍﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﺑﲔ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻣﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻭﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﲣﻀﻊ ﻟﻠﻨﻘﺎﺵ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﰲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻠﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻣﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺑﺴﺒﺐ‬
‫ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺼﻬﺎ ﻭﻇﺮﻭﻓﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﺻﺔ‪ ،‬ﳝﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺗﻜﻤﻞ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻝ‬
‫)‪ .(Ebohon, 1999‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﻭﺟﺪ )‪ Wolde-Rufael (2009‬ﺃﻧﻪ ﰲ ﺃﺣﺪﻯ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺩﻭﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺑﲔ ﺳﺒﻌﺔ ﻋﺸﺮ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺘﻪ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﺴﻬﻢ ﰲ ﳕﻮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻋﺎﻣﻼﹰ ﻫﺎﻣﺎﹰ‬
‫ﺑﺎﳌﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔ ﻣﻊ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺇﺩﺭﺍﻛﺎﹰ ﻷﳘﻴﺔ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﻳﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﲤﺸﻴﺎﹰ ﻣﻊ )‪ (Narayan and Smyth, 2009‬ﻭ )‪ ،(Lee et al., 2008‬ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺗﺒﺤﺚ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﺞ ﺩﺍﻟﺔ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺑﺈﺩﺧﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻐﲑ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻮﺍﻓﺮ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺗﺴﺎﻗﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﱂ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﻀﻤﲔ ﻣﺘﻐﲑ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ‪ .‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﱵ ﺗﻀﻤﻨﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻲ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ )ﻛﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻟﺮﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ(‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﰎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻛﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻟﺮﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺩﺍﹰ ﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ )‪ (Soytas and Sari, 2006‬ﻭ )‪ (Narayan and Smyth, 2008‬ﻭ )‪(Apergis and Payne, 2009‬‬
‫ﻭ )‪ (Wolde-Rufael, 2009‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﺮﻭﻥ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻭﻓﻘﺎﹰ ﻟﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺇﺳﻠﻮﺏ ﻗﺎﺋﻤﺔ ﺍﳉﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺋﻢ ﻳﻔﺘﺮﺽ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺪﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻹﻫﻼﻙ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﺎﹰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﱄ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺗﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﹰ ﻭﺛﻴﻘﺎﹰ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺭﺻﻴﺪ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﱄ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﻛﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻮﺛﻮﻕ ﺑﻪ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺒﲑ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺭﺻﻴﺪ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻛﺪ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﲔ ﻣﺘﻐﲑﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺃﻧﻪ ﳚﺐ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﰲ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﻗﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻻ ﻳﻮﺿﺢ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺍﻗﺘﺮﺡ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ )‪ Engle and Granger (1987‬ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﴰﻮﻻﹰ ﻳﻌﺮﻑ ﺑﺎﺳﻢ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ‬
‫ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ‪ ،ECM‬ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﻫﻮ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻜﻲ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﺄﺧﺬ ﰲ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺎﻋﻞ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻜﻲ‬
‫)ﺍﳊﺮﻛﻲ( ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ ﻭﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺣﺮﻛﺔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺃﻱ ﻓﺘﺮﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﺠﻮﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﺯﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ‪.‬‬

‫ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻭﻟﻠﺒﺤﺚ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﶈﺘﻤﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﻣﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‬
‫ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺪ ﰎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﻟﻠﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ‪Bounds‬‬

‫‪ Testing Approach to Cointegration‬ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﰐ ﺫﻭ ﺍﻟﻔﺠﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻮﺯﻋﺔ ‪The‬‬

‫)‪ Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﻨﻬﺞ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺍﻗﺘﺮﺣﻪ ‪Pesaran et al.‬‬

‫)‪ ،(2001‬ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﶈﺘﻤﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺪ ﻫﺬﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻷﻧﻪ ﻟﻪ ﺃﻓﻀﻞ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﺻﻐﲑﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﻟﺒﺪﻳﻠﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻼﻭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻣﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻐﺾ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮ ﻋﻦ ﺭﺗﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﻨﻄﻮﻱ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﻟﻠﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻏﲑ ﺍﳌﻘﻴﺪ )‪ Unrestricted Error Correction Model (UECM‬ﺑﺈﺗﺒﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﱄ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ )ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺩﻻﺕ ‪ (3 : 1‬ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺄﰐ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻛﻞ ﻣﺘﻐﲑ ﺑﺪﻭﺭﻩ ﻛﻤﺘﻐﲑ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ‪:‬‬
‫‪n‬‬ ‫‪n‬‬ ‫‪n‬‬
‫‪ ln GDP t   0   b i  ln GDP t i   c i  ln ELECT t i   d i  ln INVES t  i‬‬
‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫)‪(1‬‬
‫‪  1 ln GDP t 1   2 ln ELECT t 1   3 ln INVES t 1   1t‬‬

‫‪n‬‬ ‫‪n‬‬ ‫‪n‬‬

‫‪ ln ELECTt   0   b i  ln ELECTt i   c i  ln GDPt i   d i  ln INVES t i‬‬
‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫‪i 1‬‬
‫)‪(2‬‬
‫‪ 1 ln ELECTt 1   2 ln GDPt 1   3 ln INVES t 1  1t‬‬
 ‫‪n‬‬ ‫‪n‬‬ ‫‪n‬‬
‫‪ ln NVES t   0   b i  ln NVES t i   c i  ln GDPt i   d i  ln ELECTt i‬‬
‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫‪i 1‬‬ ‫)‪(3‬‬
‫‪ 1 ln NVES t 1  2 ln GDPt 1   3 ln ELECTt 1   1t‬‬

‫ﻭﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﰎ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻑ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻛﺔ‬
‫ﳌﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺒﻄﺄﺓ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﻓﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﻡ ‪ H0‬ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﺒﺪﻳﻞ ‪ ،H1‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﻠﻲ‪:‬‬
‫‪H : γ1 = γ2 = γ3 = 0 and H : γ1 ≠ γ2 ≠ γ3 ≠ 0.‬‬
‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪1‬‬

‫ﰒ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺃﺩﻟﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺇﺫﺍ ﰎ ﺭﻓﺾ ﻓﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﺪﻡ ‪ H0‬ﰲ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺍﳌﺬﻛﻮﺭﺓ ﺃﻋﻼﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳊﺎﻟﺔ ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺗﻮﺳﻴﻊ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﻔﺘﺮﺓ ﺗﺄﺧﲑ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ ﳊﺪ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ )‪.(ECTt-1‬‬
‫ﻭﰲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺃﻱ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻳﺘﻢ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻱ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﰲ ﺷﻜﻞ )‪ (VAR‬ﻟﻠﻔﺮﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ‬

‫ﻗﺒﻞ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﻀﺮﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻦ ﺳﻜﻮﻥ ﺳﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻮ‬
‫ﺃﻣﺮ ﻣﻬﻢ ﻟﻠﺤﺼﻮﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﻏﲑ ﻣﺘﺤﻴﺰﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻳﻀﺎﹰ ﻷﻧﻪ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻣﺘﻜﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺗﺒﺔ )ﺻﻔﺮ( ﺃﻭ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ )‪ .I(0) or I(1‬ﻭﻗﺪ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻘﺖ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﻳﻦ ﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺬﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﺣﺪﺓ ﻭﳘﺎ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﻜﻲ‪-‬ﻓﻮﻟﻠﺮ ﺍﳌﻮﺳﻊ ‪Augmented Dickey-‬‬

‫)‪ Fuller Test (ADF‬ﻭﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻴﺒﺲ‪-‬ﺑﲑﻭﻥ )‪ ،Phillips-Perron (PP‬ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺃﻥ ﲨﻴﻊ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺳﺎﻛﻨﺔ )ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮﺓ( ‪ Stationary‬ﺳﻮﺍﺀً ﰲ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻳﺎ‪‬ﺎ ﺃﻭ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ‬
‫ﺇﱃ ﺫﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻳﺘﻢ ﲢﺪﻳﺪ ﻭﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﺳﺒﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ‪Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) or‬‬

‫)‪ .Schwarz Information Criterion (SIC‬ﻭﻃﻮﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﺍﳌﺜﻠﻰ ﻋﻨﺪ ‪ 1‬ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﻘﻠﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﻌﻴﺎﺭﻳﻦ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﺗﺸﲑ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ )‪ (ADF‬ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﺳﺒﺔ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ =‬
‫‪ ،2‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﺴﻠﺘﲔ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻳﲔ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮﺓ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ ﳍﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎﹰ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﺘﱪ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﻜﻲ‪-‬‬
‫ﻓﻮﻟﻠﺮ ﺍﳌﻮﺳﻊ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻏﲑ ﻗﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﳊﻞ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻴﺒﺲ‪-‬ﺑﲑﻭﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﻮﺿﺢ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺭﺩﺓ ﰲ ﺍﳉﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ (2‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺬﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﺣﺪﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺙ ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﲏ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻳﺎ‪‬ﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻧﻪ ﳚﺐ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﻜﻮﻥ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺛﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﺎﻟﻨﻈﺮ ﺇﱃ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻴﺒﺲ‪-‬ﺑﲑﻭﻥ ﻳﺘﻀﺢ ﺃﻥ ﻛﻞ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺜﻼﺛﺔ ﺳﺎﻛﻨﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻭﻕ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ ﳍﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺃ‪‬ﺎ ﻣﺘﻜﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ )‪ I(1‬ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ :(2‬ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺟﺬﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﺣﺪﺓ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‬

‫‪Summary of Unit Root tests‬‬

‫)‪ADF test (trend and constant) PP test (trend and constant‬‬
‫‪Variables‬‬
‫‪Level‬‬ ‫‪1st differences‬‬ ‫‪Level‬‬ ‫‪1st differences‬‬

‫‪Ln ELEC‬‬ ‫‪− 2.893‬‬ ‫‪− 3.244‬‬ ‫‪− 3.151‬‬ ‫‪− 3.857‬‬

‫‪Ln GDP‬‬ ‫‪− 2.850‬‬ ‫‪− 4.705‬‬ ‫‪− 2.856‬‬ ‫‪− 4.843‬‬

‫‪Ln INVES‬‬ ‫‪− 0.934‬‬ ‫‪− 5.487‬‬ ‫‪− 0.720‬‬ ‫‪− 5.597‬‬

‫‪Critical values:‬‬

‫‪1% critical value‬‬ ‫‪− 4.324‬‬

‫‪5% critical value‬‬ ‫‪− 3.581‬‬

‫ﻭ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﳌﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ‪ %5 ، %1‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬

‫‪ H0‬ﰲ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺭﻗﻢ‬ ‫ﻛﻤﺎ ﺳﺒﻖ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﻪ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﻟﻠﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻳﺘﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ‬
‫)‪ ،(1‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﻌﺘﱪ ﻛﻞ ﻣﺘﻐﲑ ﺑﺪﻭﺭﻩ ﻛﻤﺘﻐﲑ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺘﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻭﻃﻮﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﺳﺒﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻻﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻭﻓﻘﺎﹰ ﻟـ )‪ Pesaran et al. (2001‬ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﲬﺴﺔ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺍﳊﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﱃ‪ :‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻊ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺃﻭ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﳊﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ ﻭﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﳊﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﺜﺔ‪ :‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ ﻭﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﳊﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺑﻌﺔ‪ :‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ ﻭﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﳊﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﳋﺎﻣﺴﺔ‪ :‬ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ ﻭﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻏﲑ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ‪.‬‬

‫ﻭﻗﺪ ﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﺳﻴﺘﻢ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﳊﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻭﻫﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ ﻭﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻌﺎﻳﲑ )‪ (AIC) & (SIC‬ﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﻭﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ‬
‫ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﺳﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﲔ ﺃﻥ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﺍﳌﺜﻠﻰ = ‪ .1‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﻀﺢ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳉﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﱄ ﺭﻗﻢ ) ‪:(3‬‬
 ‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ :(3‬ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﲢﺪﻳﺪ ﻭﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﺍﳌﻨﺎﺳﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‬

‫‪VAR Lag Order Selection Criteria‬‬

‫‪Endogenous variables: LNECCON LNGDPCON LNINVESCON‬‬

‫‪Lag‬‬ ‫‪LR‬‬ ‫‪FPE‬‬ ‫‪AIC‬‬ ‫‪SC‬‬ ‫‪HQ‬‬

‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪NA‬‬ ‫‪1.12E-05‬‬ ‫‪-2.890‬‬ ‫‪-2.746‬‬ ‫‪-2.847‬‬
‫‪1‬‬ ‫*‪205.081‬‬ ‫*‪2.93E-09‬‬ ‫*‪-11.140‬‬ ‫*‪-10.564‬‬ ‫*‪-10.969‬‬
‫‪2‬‬ ‫‪10.100‬‬ ‫‪3.55E-09‬‬ ‫‪-10.978‬‬ ‫‪-9.970‬‬ ‫‪-10.678‬‬
‫‪* indicates lag order selected by the criterion‬‬
‫)‪LR: sequential modified LR test statistic (each test at 5% level‬‬
‫‪FPE: Final prediction error‬‬
‫‪AIC: Akaike information criterion‬‬
‫‪SC: Schwarz information criterion‬‬
‫‪HQ: Hannan-Quinn information criterion‬‬

‫ﻭﻳﻮﺿﺢ ﺍﳉﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ (4‬ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﻳﺘﻀﺢ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ )ﻑ( ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ‪ ٪5‬ﻋﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ ﻛﻤﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺗﺎﺑﻌﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻮ‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﻳﺪﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻴﺔ ﰲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳊﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻑ ﺍﶈﺴﻮﺑﺔ ﺃﻛﱪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳊﺪ ﺍﻷﻋﻠﻰ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺍﳊﺮﺟﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ‪ .٪5‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﲏ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﲔ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ‪ .‬ﻭﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﺬﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻠﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺗﻮﺣﻲ ﺑﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻜﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﻻ ﻳﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﳍﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺐ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ :(4‬ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ‪Bound Test‬‬

‫‪Critical Values‬‬ ‫‪Critical Values‬‬

‫‪F-statistics‬‬ ‫‪at 1%‬‬ ‫‪at 5%‬‬
‫)‪(k = 2 and n = 30‬‬
‫)‪I(0‬‬ ‫)‪I(1‬‬ ‫)‪I(0‬‬ ‫)‪I(1‬‬

‫‪3.88‬‬ ‫‪5.30‬‬ ‫‪2.72‬‬ ‫‪3.83‬‬

‫‪FELEC (ELEC GDP, INVES) = 4.132‬‬

‫‪FGDP (GDP ELEC, INVES) = 5.453‬‬

‫‪FINVES (INVES GDP, ELEC) = 3.911‬‬

‫‪Notes: The small sample CVs (Critical Values) for bounds test are derived from‬‬
‫‪Pesaran et al. (2001).‬‬
 ‫ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ‬

‫ﰲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﻓﺈﻥ ﲢﻠﻴﻞ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻟﻠﺘﻐﻴﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻄﻔﻴﻔﺔ ﰲ ﻫﻴﻜﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜﻞ ﺇﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﺣﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﺍﳋﻄﻲ ﰲ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﲑ ﻓﺘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺧﲑ ﻣﻦ ‪ 2‬ﺇﱃ ‪ .3‬ﻭﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﰲ ﻛﺜﲑ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺣﻴﺎﻥ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﻟﻠﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﳌﺘﺤﺼﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺃ‪‬ﺎ ﻗﺪ ﻻ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻠﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ‬
‫)‪ .(Granger and Hyung, 2004) (ECM‬ﺁﺧﺮ ﺟﺬﻭﺭ ﺍﳋﻼﻑ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺄﺣﻴﺎﻧﺎﹰ ﻣﻊ ﻓﺘﺮﺍﺕ ﳐﺘﻠﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻳﺘﻢ ﺍﳊﺼﻮﻝ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻋﻜﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻨﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪LnELEC‬‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮﺍﹰ ﻟﻜﻮﻥ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ )ﻑ( ﺃﺑﺮﺯﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻴﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‬
‫ﻭ ‪ LnGDP‬ﻭ ‪ LnINVES‬ﻛﻤﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺗﺎﺑﻌﺔ ﰲ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ‪ ،ARDL‬ﻳﺘﻢ ﺇﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﺘﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﺘﺠﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ )‪ Vector Error Correction Model (VECM‬ﰲ ﺇﻃﺎﺭ ‪ .ARDL‬ﻭﺗﻈﻬﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺭﺩﺓ ﰲ‬
‫ﺍﳉﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ (5‬ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ ﻭﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺔ )ﻑ( ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺴﲑﻳﺔ ﺍﳌﺒﻄﺄﺓ ﰲ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺸﲑ ﻗﻴﻢ )ﺕ( ﳌﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺣﺪ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﺒﻄﺄﺓ ﺇﱃ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺗﻮﺿﺢ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺭﺩﺓ ﺑﺎﳉﺪﻭﻝ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﲡﺎﻫﲔ ﺑﲔ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﲔ‬
‫ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪.‬‬

‫ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ :(5‬ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ‪Granger Causality F-tests‬‬

‫‪Dependent‬‬ ‫‪ECTt-1‬‬
‫‪ΔLn ELEC‬‬ ‫‪ΔLn GDP‬‬ ‫‪ΔLn INVES‬‬
‫‪variable‬‬ ‫)‪(t-statistic‬‬
‫*‬ ‫**‬ ‫*‬
‫‪5.176‬‬ ‫‪9.805‬‬ ‫‪- 0.124‬‬
‫‪ΔLn ELEC‬‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫)‪(0.053‬‬ ‫)‪(0.008‬‬ ‫)‪(- 2.651‬‬

‫‪2.627‬‬ ‫*‬ ‫**‬

‫‪4.169‬‬ ‫‪- 0.155‬‬
‫‪ΔLn GDP‬‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫)‪(0.146‬‬ ‫)‪(0.047‬‬ ‫)‪(- 3.346‬‬
‫**‬ ‫**‬ ‫**‬
‫‪10.427‬‬ ‫‪6.719‬‬ ‫‪- 0.075‬‬
‫‪ΔLn INVES‬‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫)‪(0.009‬‬ ‫)‪(0.012‬‬ ‫)‪(- 2.948‬‬

‫** ﻭ * ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﳌﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ‪ %5 ، %1‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﲔ ﺍﻷﻗﻮﺍﺱ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻮﻯ ﺍﻻﺣﺘﻤﺎﱄ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﻳﻀﺎﹰ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻼﺣﻆ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳉﺪﻭﻝ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺣﺪ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﺍﳌﺒﻄﺄﺓ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺇﺷﺎﺭﺓ ﺳﺎﻟﺒﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻥ ﻗﻴﻢ‬
‫)ﺕ( ﺍﶈﺴﻮﺑﺔ ﳍﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ‪ ،%1‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺆﻛﺪ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻟﻠﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻻﺷﻚ ﺃﻥ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺩﺍﻟﺔ ﰲ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﺯﻥ ﰲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻠﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﻊ ﻣﺘﻐﲑﻱ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﻌﺒﺎﺭﺓ ﺃﺧﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﻴﺪ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺳﺒﺒﺎﹰ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺗﻌﻤﻞ‬
‫ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺣﺪ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﳋﻄﺄ ﻣﻦ ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪.‬‬

‫ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬

‫ﻣﻦ ﻣﺸﺎﻛﻞ ﳕﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ ﻟﻠﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺍﳌﻌﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻘﺪﺭﺓ ﻗﺪ ﺗﺘﻐﲑ ﻣﻊ ﻣﺮﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻦ‪ .‬ﺍﳌﻌﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻏﲑ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺴﺘﻘﺮﺓ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻏﲑ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻟﻠﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﺫﺍ ﺑﻘﻴﺖ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﺘﺸﻒ ﺗﺆﺩﻱ ﺇﱃ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻴﺰ ﰲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ‪ .‬ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﰎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﻻﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺍﻗﺘﺮﺣﻪ )‪ Pesaran and Pesaran (1997‬ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺸﲑ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ‬
‫ﺍ‪‬ﻤﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻛﻤﻲ ﻟﻠﺒﻮﺍﻗﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﺟﻌﻴﺔ )‪ (CUSUM‬ﻭﻟﻠﻤﺮﺑﻌﺎﺕ )‪ (CUSUMSQ‬ﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻢ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﳌﻌﻠﻤﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﻌﺪ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ‪ OLS‬ﰎ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ‪ ،CUSUMSQ‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻮﺿﺤﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻞ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ (3‬ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﰎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻛﻤﺘﻐﲑ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺸﲑ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻞ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﳌﻌﺎﻣﻼﺕ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺃﻥ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺀﺍﺕ ‪CUSUMSQ‬‬

‫ﺗﻨﺤﺼﺮ ﺿﻤﻦ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﳊﺮﺟﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻯ ‪ ٪5‬ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﳌﻌﻠﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺭﻗﻢ )‪ :(3‬ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺔ ‪ CUSUMSQ‬ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻛﻤﺘﻐﲑ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ‬

‫‪1.6‬‬

‫‪1.2‬‬

‫‪0.8‬‬

‫‪0.4‬‬

‫‪0.0‬‬

‫‪-0.4‬‬
‫‪1985‬‬ ‫‪1990‬‬ ‫‪1995‬‬ ‫‪2000‬‬ ‫‪2005‬‬

‫‪CUSUM of Squares‬‬ ‫‪5% Significance‬‬

 ‫ﺍﳋﺎﲤـﺔ‬
‫ﺗﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓﹰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺴﻬﻢ ﺇﳚﺎﺑﻴﺎﹰ ﰲ‬
‫ﺩﻓﻊ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﺃﻭﻟﺖ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺔ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﺎﹰ ﻛﺒﲑﺍﹰ ﺑﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻭﺿﻌﺘﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻭﻟﻮﻳﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺧﻄﻄﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻮﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﳌﺘﻮﻗﻊ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻠﻌﺐ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﹰ ﻫﺎﻣﺎﹰ ﰲ ﲢﻘﻴﻖ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻡ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻛﻌﻨﺼﺮ ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﺃﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻞ ﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣﻞ‬
‫ﺍﻹﻧﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻯ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺪ ﺷﻬﺪ ﻗﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﺗﻄﻮﺭﺍﹰ ﻣﻠﺤﻮﻇﺎﹰ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﺘﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ‬
‫ﺣﻴﺚ ﺑﻠﻐﺖ ﺑﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺍﳌﻮﻟﺪﺓ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﰲ ‪‬ﺎﻳﺔ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪2009‬م ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ %980‬ﻣﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔ ﺑﻌﺎﻡ‬
‫‪1980‬م‪ ،‬ﻭﺑﻠﻐﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﰲ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻛﲔ ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ ،%554‬ﺃﻣﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺑﻠﻐﺖ‬
‫ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ %1009‬ﺧﻼﻝ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﻠﻎ ﻣﻌﺪﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ ﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪-1980‬‬
‫‪2009‬م ﺣﻮﺍﱄ ‪ ،%7.32‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺒﲔ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻛﺜﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ )ﻣﻘﺎﺳﺔ ﺑﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻟﻠﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ( ﻟﻠﺰﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﻣﻦ ‪ 0.034‬ﺇﱃ ‪ 0 .23‬ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﺍﻷﻣﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺆﻛﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﺑﺎﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻗﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﺪﻓﺖ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﲢﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺑﲔ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻟﻚ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺩﺍﹰ ﺇﱃ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺯﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﺳﻨﻮﻳﺔ ﺗﻐﻄﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ‪2009 - 1980‬ﻡ‪ .‬ﻭﺗﺸﻤﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺃﺱ ﺍﳌﺎﻝ )ﺑﺎﳌﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﺭﻳﺎﻝ(‪ ،‬ﻭﳘﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺆﺷﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ )ﺑﺎﳌﻠﻴﻮﻥ ﻛﻴﻠﻮ ﻭﺍﺕ ‪ /‬ﺳﺎﻋﺔ(‪ .‬ﻭﰎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﳌﺘﻐﲑﺍﺕ ﰲ ﺻﻮﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﻏﺎﺭﻳﺘﻢ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﻲ ﳍﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﳊﺪﻭﺩ ﻟﻠﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺍﻗﺘﺮﺣﻪ ‪ Pesaran‬ﻭﺁﺧﺮﻭﻥ )‪ ،(2001‬ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻻﳓﺪﺍﺭ‬
‫‪ .The‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﰎ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍ‪‬ﻤﻮﻉ‬ ‫)‪Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺬﺍﰐ ﺫﻱ ﺍﻟﻔﺠﻮﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﻮﺯﻋﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻛﻤﻲ ﻟﻠﺒﻮﺍﻗﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﺟﻌﻴﺔ )‪ (CUSUM‬ﻟﺘﻘﻴﻴﻢ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﳌﺸﺘﺮﻙ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻛﺸﻔﺖ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﳍﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﲔ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻭﻫﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﺃﻇﻬﺮﺕ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺟﺮﺍﳒﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﻧﻪ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻻﲡﺎﻩ ﲤ ﺘﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺇﱃ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ .‬ﻭﰲ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﲡﺎﻫﲔ )ﺃﻱ ﻣﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺗﻐﺬﻳﺔ ﻣﺮﺗﺪﺓ( ﺑﲔ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﰲ ﺣﲔ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺳﺒﺒﻴﺔ ﰲ ﺍﲡﺎﻩ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﲔ ﺇﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ‬
‫ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﻭﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﲏ ﺃﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻟﻪ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺇﳚﺎﰊ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻱ ﺇﺣﺼﺎﺋﻴﺎﹰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﰲ ﺍﳌﺪﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﲑ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﳍﺎ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻫﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﳊﻔﺎﻅ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺻﺔﹰ ﻭﺃﻥ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺗﺴﻌﻰ ﺇﱃ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﻭﺗﻄﻮﻳﺮ ﻗﻄﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺻﻨﺎﻋﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ‪ .‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺸﲑ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺗﺪﺍﺑﲑ ﲢﺴﲔ ﺍﻟﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ‬
‫ﻭﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻄﻠﺐ ﻭﺍﻟﱵ ﺻﻤﻤﺖ ﻟﻠﺤﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﳍﺪﺭ ﰲ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻙ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺀ ﻭﺗﻘﻠﻴﺺ ﺍﺳﺘﻬﻼﻛﻬﺎ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬﻫﺎ ﺩﻭﻥ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﳍﺎ ﺃﺛﺮ ﺳﻠﱯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺗﺞ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﲨﺎﱄ ﺍﳊﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﰲ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺸﲑ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺇﱃ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺪﻭﻟﺔ‬
‫ﳝﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﺘﺤﻔﻴﺰ ﻭﺗﺸﺠﻴﻊ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻛﻮﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﺘﻌﺰﻳﺰ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻱ ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺳﻊ ﰲ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﳝﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻟﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺇﳚﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺍﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻬﺮﺑﺎﺋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﺟــﻊ‬
‫ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﲝﺎﺙ‬،‫م‬2010 - ‫ھ‬1429 ،‫ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺮﻳﺮ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺱ ﻭﺍﻷﺭﺑﻌﻮﻥ‬-‫ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﰊ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻱ‬
.‫ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀ‬
،‫ ﺍﻟﺮﻳﺎﺽ‬،‫ ﺍﻹﺻﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺩﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺸﺮﻭﻥ‬،‫ ﺣﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﻭﺃﺭﻗﺎﻡ‬:‫ ﻣﻨﺠﺰﺍﺕ ﺧﻄﻂ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻤﻴﺔ‬-‫ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺨﻄﻴﻂ‬
.‫م‬2009 ،‫ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‬
،‫ ﺍﳌﻤﻠﻜﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮﺩﻳﺔ‬،‫ ﺍﻟﺮﻳﺎﺽ‬،‫ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺋﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻮﻱ‬،‫ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻹﺣﺼﺎﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ‬-‫ﻭﺯﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﳌﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬
.‫ﺃﻋﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺮﻗﺔ‬

Akarca, A.T., Long, T.V., (1979). “Energy and Employment: A Time Series Analysis of the
Causal Relationship”. Resources Energy, Vol. 2, pp. 151–162.

Akinlo, A.E. (2008). “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence from 11 Sub-
Sahara African Countries”. Energy Economics, Vol. 30, pp. 2391-2400.

Altinay, G. and Karagol, E., (2005). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth:
Evidence from Turkey”. Energy Economics, Vol. 27.

Apergis, N. and Payne, J.E., (2010). “Energy Consumption and Growth in South America:
Evidence from a Panel Error Correction Model”. Energy Economics, Vol. 32, pp.1421–
1426.

Aqeel, A. and Butt, M.S., (2001). “The Relationship between Energy Consumption and
Economic Growth in Pakistan”. Asia-Pacific Development Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2.

Cheng, B.S., (1997). “Energy consumption and economic growth in Brazil, Mexico, and
Venezuela: a time series analysis”. Applied Economics Letters, 4, 671–674.

Chontanawat, J., (2008). “Causality between Electricity Consumption and GDP in Asia
Developing Countries”. The 2nd IAEE Asian Conference “Energy Security and
Economic Development under Environmental Constraints in the Asia/Pacific Region”
Perth, Western Australia, 5-7 November.

Ebohon, O.J., (1996). “Energy, Economic Growth and Causality in Developing Countries: a
Case Study of Tanzania and Nigeria”. Energy Policy, Vol. 24, pp. 447–453.

Erol and Yu, E.S.H., (1987). “On the Causal Relationship between Energy and Income for
Industrializing Countries”. Journal of Energy and Development, Vol. 13, pp. 113–122.

Ghosh, S., (2002). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in India”. Energy Policy,
Vol. 30.

Ghosh, S., (2009). “Electricity Supply, Employment and Real GDP in India: Evidence from
Cointegration and Granger-Causality Tests”. Energy Policy, Vol. 37, Issue 8.
Hondroyiannis, G., Sarantis, L. and Evangelia, P., (2002). “Energy Consumption and
Economic Growth: Assessing the Evidence from Greece”. Energy Economics, Vol. 24,
pp. 319–336.

Hoy, C. and Siuzy, K., (2006). “Dynamic Equilibrium of Electricity Consumption and GDP in
Hong Kong: An Empirical Investigation”. Boston University.

Hwang, D. and Gum, B. (1992). “The Causal Relationship Between Energy and GNP: The
Case of Taiwan”. The Journal of Energy and Development, Vol. 17, pp. 219-26.

Jumbe, C.B., (2004). “Cointegration and Causality between Electricity Consumption and
GDP: Empirical Evidence from Malawi”. Energy Economics, Vol. 26.

Kraft, J. and Kraft, A., (1978). “On the Relationship between Energy and GNP”. Journal of
Energy and Development, Vol. 3, pp. 401–403.

Lam, P. and Shiu, A., (2004). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in China”.
Energy Policy, Vol. 32.

Lee, C.C., (2005). “Energy Consumption and GDP in Developing Countries: A Cointegrated
Panel Analysis”. Energy Economics, Vol. 27, PP. 415-427.

Lee, C.C. and Chang, C.P., (2008). “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in Asian
Economies: A more Comprehensive Analysis using Panel Data”. Resource and Energy
Economics, Vol. 30, pp. 50–65.

Lin, Boqiang, (2003). “Structural Change, Efficiency Improvement and Electricity Demand
Forecasting”. Economic Research, Vol. 5, pp. 57–65.

Masih, A.M. and Masih, R., (1997). “On the Temporal Causal Relationship between Energy
Consumption, Real Income, and Prices: Some New Evidence from Asian-Energy
Dependent NICs based on a Multivariate Cointegration Vector Error Correction
Approach”. Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 19, pp. 417– 440.

Narayan, P.K. and Smyth, R., (2005). “Electricity Consumption Employment and Real
Income in Australia: Evidence from Multivariate Granger Causality Tests”. Energy
Policy, Vol. 33.

Narayan, P.K. and Singh, B., (2007). “The Electricity Consumption and GDP Nexus for the
Fiji Islands”. Energy Economics, Vol. 29, Issue 6.

Narayan, P.K., Narayan, S. and Prasad, A., (2008). “A Structural VAR Analysis of Electricity
Consumption and Real GDP: Evidence from the G7 Countries”. Energy Policy, Vol. 36,
Issue 7.

Narayan, P.K. and Smyth, R., (2008). “Energy Consumption and Real GDP in G7 Countries:
New Evidence from Panel Cointegration with Structural Breaks, Energy Economics,
Vol. 30, pp. 2331–2341.
Narayan, P.K. and Smyth, R., (2009). “Multivariate Granger Causality between Electricity
Consumption, Exports and GDP: Evidence from a Panel of Middle Eastern
Countries”. Energy Policy, Vol. 37, Issue 1, pp. 229-236.

Odhiambo, N.M. (2009). “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth Nexus in Tanzania:
An ARDL Bounds Testing Approach”. Energy Policy, Vol. 37, pp. 617-622.

Odhiambo, N.M. (2010). “Energy Consumption, Prices and Economic Growth in three SSA
Countries: A Comparative Study”. Energy Policy, Vol. 38, Issue 5, pp. 2463-2469.

Omotor, D.G., (2008). “Causality Between Energy Consumption and Economic Growth in
Nigeria”. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 5, Issue, 8, pp. 827-835.

Ouédraogo, I.M., (2010). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Burkina Faso:
A Cointegration Analysis ”. Energy Economics, Vol. 32, Issue 3.

Pesaran, M.H. and Pesaran, P., (1997). “Working with Microfit 4.0: Interactive Econometric
Analysis”. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Pesaran, M.H., Shin, Y.C. and Smith, R., (2001). “Bound Testing Approaches to the Analysis
of Level Relationships”. Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 16, pp. 289–326.

Shiu, A. and Lam, P., (2004). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in China”.
Energy Policy, Vol. 32 (1), pp. 47–54.

Soytas, U., Sari, R., (2003). “Energy Consumption and GDP: Causality Relationship in G7
Countries and Emerging Markets”. Energy Economics, Vol. 25, pp. 33– 37.

Soytas, U., Sari, R., (2006). “Energy Consumption and Income in G7 Countries”. Journal of
Policy Modeling, Vol. 28, pp. 739–750.

Squalli, J., (2007). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: Bounds and Causality
Analyses of OPEC Members”. Energy Economics, Vol. 29, Issue 6.

Stern, D.I., (1993). “Energy and Growth in the USA: A Multivariate Approach”. Energy
Economics, Vol. 15, pp. 137–150.

Wolde-Rufael, Y., (2006). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: a Time Series
Experience for 17 African Countries”. Energy Policy, Vol. 34.

Wolde-Rufael, Y., (2009). “Energy Consumption and Economic Growth: The Experience of
African Countries Revisited”. Energy Economics, Vol. 31, pp. 217-224.

Yoo, S. H., (2005). “Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth: Evidence from Korea”.
Energy Policy, Vol. 33, Issue 12.

Yu, E.S.H. and Choi, J.Y., (1985). “The Causal Relationship between Energy and GNP: An
International Comparison”. Journal of Energy and Development, Vol. 10, pp. 249–272.

Yang, H.Y., (2000). “A Note on the Causal Relationship between Energy and GDP in
Taiwan”. Energy Economics, Vol. 22, Issue 3, pp. 309-317.
Yuan, J., Zhao, C., Yu, S., and Hu, Z., (2007). “Electricity Consumption and Economic
Growth in China: Cointegration and co-feature analysis”. Energy Economics, Vol. 29,
Issue 6.

Zachariadis, T. and Pashourtidou, N., (2007). “An Empirical Analysis of Electricity

Consumption in Cyprus”. Energy Economics, Vol. 29.

Zamani, M., 2007. “Energy Consumption and Economic Activities in Iran”. Energy
Economics, Vol. 29, pp. 1135–1140.

Zivot, E., Andrews, D.W.K., 1992. “Further Evidence of the Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock,
and the Unit Root Hypothesis”. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Vol. 10, pp.
251–270.
Causality between Electricity consumption and economic growth
in Saudi Arabia:

Ibrahim S. Al-Omar Ahmed A. El-Rasoul

College of Business and Economics, Al-Qassim University

Abstract:
This study aimed to determining the causal relationship between electricity
consumption and economic growth in KSA during the period 1980-2009, using the
bound testing approach to cointegration proposed by Pesaran et al. (2001). The results
detected a cointegrating relationship between the series studied when electricity
consumption, GDP and investment were considered as the dependent variable. The
study main findings of Granger causality test showed that in the long-run there is
unidirectional causality runs from real GDP and investment to electricity consumption,
while in the short-run there is a bidirectional relationship between electricity
consumption and investment, real GDP and investment. There is also evidence of
unidirectional causality runs from real GDP and electricity consumption.

These results suggest that KSA is a country dependent on electric energy, and that
it is also a country where electricity consumption grows with the income level. Also,
these results has important implications for policies to energy conservation, especially
where the KSA developed future plans seek to regulate the electricity industry in the
Kingdom. Results in this study also indicate that the conservation policies of electricity
through measures of efficiency improving and demand management policies which are
designed to reduce waste in electricity consumption can be implemented without having
a negative impact on investment or real GDP in the Kingdom.

Key Words: Electricity Consumption, The Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL), Bound
test, Unrestricted Error Correction Model, Granger Causality, Cointegration.