The dynamics of delinking in industrial emissions: The role of productivity, trade and R&D

Marin, Giovanni and Mazzanti, Massimiliano (2009): The dynamics of delinking in industrial emissions: The role of productivity, trade and R&D. Published in: Journal of Innovation Economics No. 3 (2009): pp. 91-117.

Abstract

This paper provides new empirical evidence on delinking / Environmental Kuznets Curves (EKC) for greenhouse gases and other air pollutant emissions in Italy. We analysed a panel dataset based on the Italian NAMEA for 1990-2005 with a specific focus on industry. We integrated the emission-income NAMEA with data on trade openness and R&D expenditures. The highly disaggregated dataset provides a large heterogeneity and can help to overcome the shortcomings of the usual approach to EKC based on cross-country data. We use in this paper CO2, SOx, NOx and PM10 as objects of investigation. We use as empirical models of reference both a standard EKC model and a STIRPAT/IPAT model. Our results show that looking at sector evidence, both decupling and then eventually re-coupling trends could emerge along the path of economic development. The analysis of how stagnation periods affect environmental performances is also of interest.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: NAMEA, trade openness, labour productivity, EKC, STIRPAT
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q55 - Technological Innovation; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C2 - Single Equation Models ; Single Variables > C23 - Panel Data Models ; Spatio-temporal Models; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q56 - Environment and Development ; Environment and Trade ; Sustainability ; Environmental Accounts and Accounting ; Environmental Equity ; Population Growth; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O4 - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity > O40 - General

References

ALBEROLA, E., CHEVALLIER, J., and CHÈZE, B. (2009), “The EU Emissions Trading Scheme: Country-Specific Perspectives of the Impacts of Industrial Production on Carbon Prices”, Journal of Policy Modelling, forthcoming.

BERNDT, E. R. and WOOD, D. O. (1979), “Engineering and Econometric Interpretations of Energy-Capital Complementarity”, The American Economic Review, vol. 69, n° 3, p. 342-54.

COLE, M. A. (2003), “Development, Trade and the Environment: How Robust is the Environmental Kuznets Curve?”, Environment and Development Economics, vol. 8, p. 557-80.

COLE, M. A. (2004), “Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages”, Ecological Economics, vol. 48, n° 1, p. 71-81.

COLE, M. A. and ELLIOTT, R. (2002), “Determining the trade-environment composition effect: the role of capital, labor and environmental regulation”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, n° 46, p. 363-83.

COLE, M. A. and NEUMAYER, E. (2004), “Examining the Impact of Demographic Factors on Air Pollution”, Population & Environment, 26 (1), p. 5-21.

COPELAND, B. R. and TAYLOR, M. S. (2004), “Trade, growth and the environment”, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 42, p. 7-71.

DEL RIO GONZALEZ, P. (2008), “Policy implications of potential conflicts between short term and long term efficiency in CO2 emissions abatement”, Ecological economics, vol. 65, n° 2, p. 292-303.

DIETZ, T. and ROSA, E. A. (1994), “Rethinking the Environmental Impacts of Population, Affluence and Technology”, Human Ecology Review, n° 1, p. 277-300.

DIETZENBACHER, E. and MUKHOPADHAY, K. (2006), “An empirical examination of the pollution haven hypothesis for India: towards a green Leontief paradox?”, Environmental & Resource Economics, vol. 36, p. 427-49.

EEA (2004a), “Air Emissions in Europe”, 1990-2000, Copenhagen, European Environment Agency.

EEA (2004b), “Air Pollution and Climate Change Policies in Europe: Exploring Linkages and the Added Value of an Integrated Approach”, EEA Technical report n° 5/2004, Copenhagen, European Environment Agency.

FEMIA, A. and PANFILI, P. (2005), “Analytical applications of the NAMEA”, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Italian Statistics society, Rome.

FRANKEL, J.and ROSE, A. (2005), “Is trade good or bad for the environment?”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 87, n° 1, p. 85-91.

KOETSE, M. J., DE GROOT, H. L. F. and FLORAX, R. J. G. M. (2008), “Capital-energy substitution and shifts in factor demand: A meta analysis”, Energy Economics, vol. 30, p. 2236-51.

LIST, J. A. and GALLET, C. A. (1999), “Does one size fits all?”, Ecological Economics, vol. 31, p. 409-24.

LYON, T. and MAXWELL, J. (2008), “Corporate social responsability and the environment: a theoretical perspective”, Review of environmental economics and policy, vol. 2, p. 261-75.

MARKANDYA, A. and RÜBBELKE, D. T. G. (2003), “Ancillary Benefits of Climate Policy”, Nota di lavoro n° 105, FEEM, Milan (Italy).

MARTINEZ-ZARZOSO, I., BENGOCHEA-MORANCHO, A. and MORALES-LAGE, R. (2007), “The impact of population on CO2 emissions: evidence from European countries”, Environmental and Resource Economics, vol. 38, p. 497-512.

MAZZANTI, M. and ZOBOLI, R. (2009a), “Environmental efficiency and labour productivity: trade-off or joint dynamics?”, Ecological Economics, vol. 38, p. 1182-94.

MAZZANTI, M. and ZOBOLI, R. (2009b), “Embedding Environmental Innovation in Local Production Systems: SME strategies, networking and industrial relations”, International Review of Applied Economics, vol. 23, n° 2, p. 169-95.

MAZZANTI, M. and ZOBOLI, R. (2008), “Complementarity, firm strategies and environmental innovations”, Environmental sciences, vol. 5, n° 1, p. 17-40.

MAZZANTI, M., MONTINI, A. and ZOBOLI, R. (2008), “Environmental Kuznets curve for air pollutant emissions in Italy: evidence from environmental accounts NAMEA panel data”, Economic System Research, vol. 20, n° 3, p. 279-305.

PEARCE, D. (1992), “Secondary Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Control”, CSERGE Working Paper 92-12 (London).

PEARCE, D. (2000), “Policy Framework for the Ancillary Benefits of Climate Change Policies”, Paper Presented at the IPCC Workshop on Assessing the Ancillary Benefits and Costs of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Strategies (Washington DC).

PORTER, M. E. and VAN DER LINDE, C. (1995), “Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship”, Journal of Economic Perspective, vol. 9, n° 4, p. 97-118.

PORTNEY, P. (2008), “The (not so) new corporate social responsability: an empirical perspective”, Review of environmental economics and policy, vol. 2, p. 261-75.

SMITH, S. and SWIERZBINSKI, J. (2007), “Assessing the performance of the UK Emission Trading Scheme”, Environmental and Resource Economics, vol. 37, p. 131-58.

STERN, D. (1998), “Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve?”, Environment and Development Economics, vol. 3, p. 173–96.

STERN, D. (2004), “Elasticities of Substitution and Complementarity”, Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics, n° 20/2004.

UN, EUROSTAT, IMF, OECD, WORLD BANK (2003), “Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting 2003 – Handbook of National Accounting”, Final Draft circulated for information prior to official editing, http:// unstats. un. org/ UNSD/ envaccounting.

WOOLDRIDGE, J. (2005), Introductory Econometrics – A Modern Approach, Mason (Ohio), Thomson South-Western, 2nd edition.

YORK, R., ROSA, E. A. and DIETZ, T. (2003), “STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts”, Ecological Economics, n° 46, p. 351-65.

ZUGRAVU, N., MILLOCK, K. and DUCHENE, G. (2008), “The Factors behind CO2 Emission Reduction in Transition Economies”, Nota di lavoro n° 58, FEEM, Milan (Italy).