• Energy Research

Energy poverty, or the inability of households to afford adequate access to energy services, is an issue that can have a significant effect on the quality of life and even the state of health of individuals and even the overall development of a nation. Since it was first brought into focus more than two decades ago in the UK, this topic has gradually gained the attention of academics and policy makers all across the EU and beyond. The current paper addresses the topic by providing not only a renewed discussion, but also an improved energy poverty indicator (with clear and relevant results at the EU level): the Compound Energy Poverty Indicator (CEPI). Moreover, knowing that the risk of poverty and social exclusion, efficiency of heating systems, total consumption of energy per household and rising energy prices tend to increase the severity of this problem in some countries, CEPI is then included into an econometric model so as to determine some possible factors that tend to put pressure on an already existing issue of energy poverty. The results of this research are expected to be relevant not only for academics (as it offers insights into the structure and severity of this topic within the European Union), but also for national and EU policymakers who are confronted in the field with the problem of sustainable development.

The purpose of our study is to identify the nature of the link between government spending and economic growth, in order to test the two theories of Wagner and Keynes, in the case of Romania. On the one hand, Keynes argues that public spending is an important tool to stimulate growth. On the other hand, Wagner says that increased public spending is a result of economic growth. We analyzed the long-term dynamics of the two time series through Johansen’s cointegration approach and, in the short term, with the help of Granger’s causality test. The obtained results do not indicate the existence of long-term cointegration vectors, but they support the double causality relation in the short term. Therefore, not only does GDP represent a Granger cause for government spending but also vice versa. Our results validate the liberal criticism of the state’s involvement in supporting economies. As the critics of the monetarist school said, the effect of multiplying government spending on national income is short-term. The long-term effect appears under the action of inflationary macroeconomic bottlenecks.