Summative Assignment

‘It is a mistake to see exclusion and limitation clauses entirely in [a] negative light. They can play an important (and positive) role in the regulation of risk.’ (McKendrick: Text, Cases and Materials)
Discuss

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Summative Assignment

‘It is a mistake to see exclusion and limitation clauses entirely in [a] negative light. They can play an important (and positive) role in the regulation of risk.’ (McKendrick: Text, Cases and Materials)
Discuss

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SUMMATIVE ASSIGNMENT
GDP, ENERGY CONSUMPTION, AND CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS: AN ANALYSIS OF COINTEGRATION AND CAUSALITY
In this assignment you will investigate the short-run and long-run relationships among the GDP, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions for a set of countries, using the econometric models of cointegration, vector error correction (VEC), and Granger causality. Download the annual data on real per capita GDP, energy use (kg of oil equivalent per capita), and CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita) from the World Bank database or equivalent sources, for the following countries: United Kingdom, China, one other developed country of your choice, and one other emerging economy of your choice. Use the longest available time series for each country. Convert all variables in natural logarithms.
1. [5 marks] For each country in your set analyse the sample properties of the three variables: real per capita GDP, energy use, and CO2 emissions. Present the appropriate descriptive statistics and comment on their features as well as their similarities and differences among these countries.
2. [40 marks] For each country, test these three variables for stationarity (use at least two different tests) and cointegration as appropriate (use the Johansen’s procedure), paying special attention to the model specification (i.e. intercept, trend, the number of lags, etc.). Report and discuss the results for each country separately. Discuss any similarities and differences across countries.
3. [40 marks] For each country, test for the evidence of Granger causality among these three variables, using an appropriately specified model (such as the VEC model if the series are cointegrated). Report and discuss the results for each country separately. Discuss any similarities and differences across countries.
4. [15 marks] How do your findings compare to the literature Provide a brief discussion of differences and similarities of your results relative to the results reported in any three relevant academic sources of your choice, such as the journal articles or research papers (discussion papers or working papers).
Overall word limit, 2500 words maximum.

Financial Modelling and Business Forecasting 2016/2017 Masters Programmes
2016/2017 Masters Programmes

© 2017

Page 2

Durham University Business School
The word count should:  Include all the text, including title, preface, introduction, in-text citations, quotations, footnotes and any other item not specifically excluded below.  Exclude diagrams, tables (including tables/lists of contents and figures), equations, executive summary/abstract, acknowledgements, declaration, bibliography/list of references and appendices. However, it is not appropriate to use diagrams or tables merely as a way of circumventing the word limit. If a student uses a table or figure as a means of presenting his/her own words, then this is included in the word count.

Examiners will stop reading once the word limit has been reached, and work beyond this point will not be assessed. Checks of word counts will be carried out on submitted work, including any assignments or dissertations/business projects that appear to be clearly overlength. Checks may take place manually and/or with the aid of the word count provided via an electronic submission. Where a student has intentionally misrepresented their word count, the School may treat this as an offence under Section IV of the General Regulations of the University. Extreme cases may be viewed as dishonest practice under Section IV, 5 (a) (x) of the General Regulations.

Very occasionally it may be appropriate to present, in an appendix, material which does not properly belong in the main body of the assessment but which some students wish to provide for the sake of completeness. Any appendices will not have a role in the assessment – examiners are under no obligation to read appendices and they do not form part of the word count. Material that students wish to be assessed should always be included in the main body of the text