Skip to main content
Log in

Industry-mix effects at different levels of sectoral disaggregation: a decomposition of inter-country differences in energy costs

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Empirica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article develops a decomposition of inter-country differences of unit energy costs (UEC) of the manufacturing sector. UEC are decomposed into a structural (industry-mix) component and an autonomous component that captures all other effects like, e.g., differences in energy efficiency and energy prices. Based on NACE 3-digit level data from Eurostat’s Structural Business Statistics the industry-mix component can be quantified on different levels of sectoral disaggregation. The results show that not only industry-mix effects on the conventional (typically NACE 2-digit) but also those measurable at higher levels of disaggregation are relevant for comparison of energy costs across countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

(Source: Eurostat Structural Business Statistics, own calculations and presentation)

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

The dataset used in this analysis is available in raw form from Eurostat Structural Business Statistics https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/structural-business-statistics. The data set as used for the analysis as well as a description of the data preparation steps is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Notes

  1. Therefore, as a first data preparation step, one could normalize the data by dividing all defined variables by \({X}_{i}\) and conduct the analysis as described, with identical results. After the normalization we would have \({X}_{i}=1\) and \({E}_{i}={e}_{i}\). This could possibly ease the comparison across countries in the context of the decomposition analysis.

  2. All in all, 17 cases of missing data values, due to, among other things, secrecy regulations, were identified. A description of the steps taken to amend these cases as well as a general description of the data preparation and the data set used for the analysis are available on request.

  3. A recent study of energy costs in Germany and Europe (Kaltenegger et al 2017) defines unit energy costs as the ratio of energy costs to value added. While this approach might have some merits, we chose our definition in analogy to the definition of unit labour costs, which are usually defined as labour costs divided by gross output (see also the OECD Glossary of Statistical Terms, https://stats.oecd.org/glossary/index.htm).

  4. The lower UEC of Italy in comparison with other countries seems to be exclusive to this data source, SBS, as this is not present in other data sources, such as Eurostat supply and use tables. In SBS this property is observed throughout most of 2-digit level industries at least since 2011. Possible explanations, apart from different energy prices and energy efficiency, include institutional settings that influence how energy taxes, supply of renewable energy, definition of energy from own production etc. are captured by the statistical survey which forms the national base for SBS.

  5. Suppose we perform decomposition analyses to decompose differences between A and B, A and C, and B and C, respectively. Then the circularity test fails (in the case of additive decomposition) if adding each component of the decomposition between A and B with the corresponding component of the decomposition of differences between B and C does not provide the same results as the decomposition of changes between A and C. In decomposition analysis over time, failing the circularity test is usually less problematic than in decomposition analysis over cross-section because time has a natural order and usually only a few years are selected for comparison. Cross-section decomposition analysis involves potentially many countries (or other entities) to compare and failing the circularity test forces the researcher to choose between ways to compare between them. In our application this is not so problematic, as Germany is the largest economy of EU-Europe and can therefore be given the privilege of the “hub” for every comparison.

  6. Note that this autonomous effect might still contain industry-mix effects, which one could possibly isolate, if more detailed data on the 4-digit level and beyond were evaluated.

Abbreviations

UEC:

Unit energy cost

NACE:

Nomenclature statistique des activités économiques dans la Communauté européenne

IDA:

Index decomposition analysis

SDA:

Structural decomposition analysis

SBS:

Structural Business Statistics

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Anniversary Fund of the Oesterreichische Nationalbank for supporting the project under project number 17040. The usual disclaimer applies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors have equally contributed to designing the research, data collection and preparation, performing the analysis as well as writing the manuscript. All of the authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wolfgang Koller.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Brigitte Hochmuth.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1: Methodology: decomposition of industry-mix and autonomous effects on 2nd- and 3rd-level

Appendix 1: Methodology: decomposition of industry-mix and autonomous effects on 2nd- and 3rd-level

Both industry-mix effects, \({\Delta }_{{{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}}} e\) and \({\Delta }_{{{\mathbf{\bar{\bar{B}}}}}} e\), can be further decomposed in the following manner. Introducing the matrices \({\bar{\mathbf{B}}}^{j}\) and \({{\bar{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}}}^{m}\), where \(m=1,\dots K\), for which the \(j\)-th respectively the \(m\)-th column corresponds to the respective column in \({\bar{\mathbf{B}}}\) as well as \({{\bar{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}}}\) and all other columns include exclusively zero-values, allows to extend the decomposition model:

$$e = {\mathbf{\bar{e}^{\prime}}} \cdot \left( {{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}^{1} + {\bar{\mathbf{B}}}^{2} } \right) \cdot {\mathbf{b}} = {\mathbf{\bar{\bar{e}}^{\prime}}} \cdot \left( {{\mathbf{\bar{\bar{B}}}}^{1} + \cdots + {\mathbf{\bar{\bar{B}}}}^{K} } \right) \cdot \left( {{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}^{1} + {\bar{\mathbf{B}}}^{2} } \right) \cdot {\mathbf{b}}.$$
(8)

and

$${\Delta }_{{{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}}} e = {\Delta }_{{{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}^{1} }} e + {\Delta }_{{{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}^{2} }} e,\quad {\Delta }_{{{\bar{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}}}} e = {\Delta }_{{{\bar{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}}^{1} }} e + \cdots + {\Delta }_{{{\mathbf{\bar{\bar{B}}}}^{K} }} e.$$
(9)

These decompositions allow distributing industry-mix effects between the energy-intensive and non-energy-intensive industry or attributing it to specific sectors at the NACE 2-digit level. A further modification of the decomposition model allowing to calculate the decomposition given in Eq. (9) as well as a decomposition of the autonomous effect, \({\Delta }_{{{\mathbf{\bar{\bar{e}}}}}} e\), is based on the diagonalisation of \({\mathbf{\bar{\bar{e}}}}\). Let \(\varvec{\bar{\bar{E}}}\) be a matrix with the main diagonal \(\varvec{\bar{\bar{e}}}\) and all other elements being zero. This allows rearranging the decomposition model in Eq. (6) as follows:

$${\tilde{\mathbf{e}}} = {{\bar{\bar{\mathbf{E}}}}} \cdot {{\bar{\bar{\mathbf{B}}}}} \cdot {\bar{\mathbf{B}}} \cdot {\mathbf{b}},$$
(10)

where \(\widetilde{\mathbf{e}}\) is a vector of length \(L\) and sum \(e\) whose m-th element gives the additive contribution of the m-th 3-digit level sector to the overall UEC. Equation (10) would also allow decomposing the industry-mix effects according to the contribution of industries and subindustries. Nevertheless, a more disaggregated decomposition of industry-mix effects than the one available by Eqs. (89) is not possible because the vectors \(\mathbf{b}\), \({\bar{\mathbf{b}}}_{j}\) und \({{\bar{\bar{\mathbf{b}}}}}_{jk}\) are vectors with shares as elements, which must sum up to 1, such that the elements are not independent of each other. Dependent components in decomposition analysis must be treated with caution (cf. Dietzenbacher and Los 2000). This is why Eqs. (89) are used for decomposing the industry-mix effects and only the autonomous effect is decomposed according to the diagonalisation approach given in Eq. (10).

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koller, W., Eder, A. & Mahlberg, B. Industry-mix effects at different levels of sectoral disaggregation: a decomposition of inter-country differences in energy costs. Empirica 50, 883–897 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10663-023-09593-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10663-023-09593-w

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation