Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-06-07T06:31:28.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Decomposing the CO2-income tradeoff: an output distance function approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2008

JON P. REZEK  and
KEVIN ROGERS
JON P. REZEK
Affiliation:
Department of Finance and Economics, Mississippi State University, Box 9590, Mississippi State, MS 39762. Tel: (662) 325-1970. Fax: (662) 325-1977. Email: jrezek@cobilan.msstate.edu
KEVIN ROGERS
Affiliation:
Department of Finance and Economics, Mississippi State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis holds that economic growth leads to increases in pollution in early stages of development, but is a significant driver of environmental improvements as income levels increase. Most empirical applications have focused on estimating a reduced form equation in which the measure of environmental degradation is posited as a non-linear function of income. In this paper we develop a structural production model based on an output distance function to investigate the EKC hypothesis for CO2 in a panel of industrialized countries from 1971 to 2000. This structural approach allows for the decomposition of the observed emission changes into the scale, composition, and productivity effects, thus providing additional insight into the interlinked processes of economic growth and environmental change. The findings from our preferred model indicate that for most countries, the CO2-saving productivity effect is not large enough to offset the CO2-producing scale effect.

Type
Research Article
Information
Environment and Development Economics , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , August 2008 , pp. 457 - 473
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aigner, D.J. and Chu, S.F. 1968, ‘On estimating the industry production function’, American Economic Review 58: 826–839.Google Scholar
Aldy, J.E. 2005, ‘An environmental Kuznets curve analysis of US state-level carbon dioxide emissions’, Journal of Environment and Development 14: 48–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertinelli, L. and Strobl, E. 2005, ‘The environmental Kuznets curve semi-parametrically revisited’, Economics Letters 88: 467–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coggins, J.S. and Swinton, J.R. 1996, ‘The price of pollution: a dual approach to valuing SO2 allowances’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30: 58–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, M.A. 2005, ‘Re-examining the pollution-income relationship: a random coefficients approach’, Economics Bulletin 14: 1–7.Google Scholar
Cole, M.A., Rayner, A.J., and Bates, J.M 1997, ‘The environmental Kuznets curve: an empirical analysis’, Environment and Development Economics 2: 401–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, S., Laplante, B., Wang, H., and Wheeler, D. 2002, ‘Confronting the environmental Kuznets curve’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 16: 147–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Bruyn, S.M. 1997, ‘Explaining the environmental Kuznets curve: structural change and international agreements in reducing sulphur emissions’, Environment and Development Economics 2: 485–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkgraaf, E. and Vollebergh, H.R.J. 2005, ‘A test for parameter homogeneity in CO2 panel EKC estimations’, Environmental and Resource Economics 32: 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekins, P. 1997, ‘The Kuznets curve for the environment and economic growth: examining the evidence’, Environment and Planning A 29: 805–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Lovell, C.A.K., and Yaisawarng, S. 1993, ‘Derivation of shadow prices for undesirable outputs: a distance function approach’, Review of Economics and Statistics 75: 374–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., and Zaim, O. 2004, ‘An environmental Kuznets curve for the OECD countries’, in Färe, R. and Grosskopf, S. (eds), New Directions: Efficiency and Productivity, Dordrecht: Kluwer Adademic Publishers, pp. 77–90.Google Scholar
Farrell, M.J. 1957, ‘The measurement of productive efficiency’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 120, Series A, 253–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedl, B. and Getzner, M. 2003, ‘Determinants of CO2 emissions in a small open economy’, Ecological Economics 45: 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galeotti, M., Lanza, A., and Pauli, F. 2006, ‘Reassessing the environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emissions: a robustness exercise’, Ecological Economics 57: 152–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, G.M. 1995, ‘Pollution and growth: what do we know?’, in Goldin, I. and Winters, A.L. (eds), The Economics of Sustainable Development, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hailu, A. and Veeman, T.S. 2000, ‘Environmentally sensitive productivity analysis of the Canadian pulp and paper industry, 1959–1994: an input distance function approach’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 40: 251–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, C. and Turton, H. 2002, ‘Determinants of emissions growth in OECD countries’, Energy Policy 30: 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heston, A., Summers, R., and Aten, B. 2002, Penn World Table Version 6.1, Center for International Comparisons at the University of Pennsylvania, October 2002.Google Scholar
Holtz-Eakin, D. and Seldon, T.M. 1995, ‘Stoking the fires? CO2 emissions and economic growth’, Journal of Public Economics 57: 86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marquetti, A. 2004, Extended Penn World Tables: Economic Growth Data on 118 Countries, !http://homepage.newschool.edu/~foleyd/epwt/.Google Scholar
Rezek, J.P. and Perrin, R.K. 2004, ‘Environmentally adjusted productivity in the Great Plains’, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 29: 346–369.Google Scholar
Shephard, R.W. 1970, Theory of Cost and Production Functions, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stern, D.I. 2002, ‘Explaining changes in global sulfur emissions: an econometric decomposition approach’, Ecological Economics 42: 201–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, D.I. 2004, ‘The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve’, World Development 32: 1419–1439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank 1992, World Bank Development Report 1992: Development and the Environment, Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
World Bank 2004, World Development Indicators (CD-ROM), Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Zaim, O. and Taskin, F. 2000, ‘Environmental efficiency in carbon dioxide emissions in the OECD: a non-parametric approach’, Journal of Environmental Management 58: 95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar