Explain Formally ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY Kuznets Curve Hypothesis Economics Essay

Clearly as countries strive for increased development they attempt to produce greater outcome and logic dictates that with greater outcome, ceteris paribus, there should be greater input and thus a depletion of resources from our environment. Simultaneously greater output leads to better levels of emissions and waste products, thus the holding capacity of the biosphere will be exceeded sooner. Simon Kuznets's Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis claims that 'economic inequality initially boosts, reaches a crucial threshold, and then reduces as the country "develops"' (Economic Development and Income Inequality, 1955). The hypothesis is shown by Figure 1 below.

http://upload. wikimedia. org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Kuznets_curve. png

Figure

It is important to understand the relationship of the EKC shows a correlation between environmental equality and income, not causation. This simply means a craze has been realised between income and financial inequality which says that at first as income rises so will inequality, however at a certain threshold inequality starts to decrease, and the reason for this change is not immediately evident.

The notion that environmental equality is influenced by economic development originated from earlier economic theory, such as many 1970s theoretical literature on pollution and progress, optimal pollution control models have 'inverted U curves' of pollution implicitly inlayed in them (Selden, 1994).

There are two main economical explanations for the Kuznets Curve hypothesis. First of all the environment may very well be a luxury good. Which means that although initially individuals are not eager to trade usage for environmental investment, at a certain degree of income individuals begin to increase their costs on the surroundings to enjoy its benefits. It can therefore be argued that economic development is a way to environmental improvement and so whilst initially the environment will suffer from growth, it will take advantage of the economic prosperity in the long run.

Secondly as countries experience growth and income boosts there are recognized historical structural development stages to the country's current economic climate much like, as Roslow mentioned, the moving from traditional to commercial economies and then to an adult mass consumption economy (The Phases of Economic Development, 1960). For instance, in a Less Developed Country (LDC), a structural transformation from primitive agriculture, through production and into services would primarily utilise the environment efficiently through agricultural trade, with higher income this might transform into developing which is highly dependent on environmental resources and also bears large negative externalities such as pollution. However once more, with further development industry and trade will move towards services which have the least impact on the environment. The analysis by Syrquin in 1989 econometrically ties structural changes to monetary growth which is often used to go over the EKC hypothesis (Grossman, et al. , 1995). It is obvious to conclude that if these developmental periods take place and the transitions between your periods correlate with specific per capita income levels, a relationship where pollution levels initially rise before subsequently slipping, as average earnings increase. Unrah and Moomaw claim that we cannot be certain whether the 'stages of economic progress' are a deterministic process that countries must go through, or simply a explanation of the development background of a particular group of countries through the 19th and 20th decades which could never again happen (An alternative solution analysis of obvious EKC-type transitions, 1998).

We can go through the turning point in the EKC from increasing environmental inequality to diminishing environmental inequality as a change of specific interest from self-interest to cultural interest. However Arrow (2000) highlights that the EKC provides hardly any information about the mechanisms where economic growth affects the environment. For instance, as income rises industry advancements and improvements may have reduced negative externalities on the surroundings. Also with increased nationwide income and riches there is increased demand on the specialists for environmental laws.

There have been several empirical and analytical studies of the EKC hypothesis and whilst some support the conclusions of Kuznets others counter his results. There is however, little debate that many pollution emissions in the developed countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have stabilised or indeed dropped over modern times whilst these same countries per capital earnings have concurrently increased (An alternative analysis of noticeable EKC-type transitions, 1998).

Unrah and Moomaw demonstrate in their 1998 empirical study of France GDP growth against CO2 levels an 'inverted U-shaped curve' is produced which supports Kuznets hypothesis (An alternative analysis of evident EKC-type transitions, 1998).

Image

Figure - France CO2 vs GDP 1950-1992

Grossman and Krueger in 1994 produced a report with an "N-shaped" curve where after a high enough threshold there have been increases in environmental degradation. Grossman also in 1994 found that the making point is quicker for an apparent short-term environmental hazard for the local population (Grossman, et al. , 1995). Arrow in 1995 explained that responsiveness is not immediate so income growth will not spontaneously bring a lowering to environmental degradation. Therefore Arrow concludes that while short-term indications would support Kuznets's hypothesis, permanent indicators would not.

The huge prospect of economic progress through effective utilisation of the surroundings has made effective and socially desired management of environment resources is an integral issue within economics. The environment surrounding each individual economy is definitely important to the performance of economical development. Along with creating financial prosperity the surroundings also performs the fundamental function of promoting life and so managed with care and responsibility. As has been seen through record, exploitation of the environment which includes provided crucial economical inputs can also be the tool which impairs the earth's capability to aid life. For instance, in last decade we've seen the emergence of concern about how economic expansion of the world overall economy is leading to irreparable global destruction (Silbert, 2009). Therefore decisions about the environmental trade-off between financial development and preservation require careful consideration from political government bodies.

Kuznets EKC Hypothesis EKC Research Conclusions

One policy suggested by economists is to allow countries to financially increase out of environmentally damaging activity. Taking a look at countries with already large economies, we see symptoms of environmental rules such as emissions benchmarks, considerable recycling programs, and limited timber harvesting. The economists helping a policy that initially allows for environmental degradation assert that when a country can perform sufficient economic development in a brief period of time then perhaps environmental damage should be tolerated.

A well-known hypothesis providing support for a policy that emphasizes financial growth at the expense of environmental safety is the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis. It posits that countries in the development process will see their levels of environmental degradation increase until some income threshold is fulfilled and then later reduce. If true, economical procedures should allow comprehensive, although not necessarily absolute, use of the surroundings for progress purposes. But undertaking such policies will involve inherent hazards.

If expanding countries decide to overlook environmental safeguard by relying on rising earnings to abate environmental harm the results could be devastating. By far the most pressing danger is the fact additional environmental degradation might lead to some irreversible and significant injury. This could appear before the predicted income threshold is found. The other nervous about counting on incomes to reduce environmental damage is usually that the EKC hypothesis could easily be wrong and relying on its predictions would lead to regularly insufficient safety.

This newspaper evaluates the validity of the EKC hypothesis and argues that it is not a reasonable basis for insurance plan formation and justification with so much on the line. The plan of the newspaper is really as follows. Section II examines the foundation for the EKC hypothesis and conditions under which it could accurately forecast a country's future environmental position. Section III briefly summarizes empirical studies investigating EKCs and looks at the findings of these studies. Section IV recognizes the inherent dangers in deciding environmental policy founded upon the EKC hypothesis. Some concerns are relevant if the hypothesis does not hold and more can be found even if it shows the correct forecaster of environmental quality. Section V concludes with my analysis of how well the hypothesis works as a justification for dubious environmental guidelines.

Section II: The Concept of the Environmental Kuznets Curve

The EKC hypothesis asserts that countries will obviously move from relatively low environmentally degrading activity to highly degrading activity and then, once a certain income threshold is achieved, will check out less degrading activity once more. This assertion allows one to predict the relative degree of environmental harm being caused by a country by looking at GDP per capita. However, this prediction is in accordance with individual countries. Quite simply, each country has its own EKC, based after resource endowment, cultural customs, etc. , from which it progresses along in accordance with its GDP. A graphical model of the hypothesis helps illustrate the inverted "U" shape of the relationship

Environmental Damage

Y*

Income per capita

The y-axis represents the quantity of environmental damage anticipated to monetary activity and the x-axis presents income per capita. Y* presents the threshold income, sometimes known as the "making point". That point indicates the income level at which environmental damage per capita commences to recede.

It is important to note that the theoretical EKC graph does not explicitly point out time as a aspect and because of this the utilization of the EKC hypothesis to justify insurance policy decision - an action that by meaning has time - would appear insufficient. Only by checking two different countries can the inverted "U" formed curve be produced as seen above. However each country owns its own unique EKC and therefore each country's procedures should be sorted out accordingly. In order for the graph to show an EKC, and in that way be valid as policy justification, we must add a time dimensions. We find a time dimension along the x-axis. The EKC hypothesis assumes that changes in income per capita only take place over time. By including this supposition of changes in income inherently signifying time, the graph can now show an EKC for a particular country. The recognition of a country's particular EKC provides a basis for deploying it to influence coverage. Having the theoretical model where the EKC hypothesis is used for economic policy we flip our focus to detailing why the inverted "U" form exists.

There are two primary explanations for the proposed shape of the EKC. The first examines the annals of developed countries and the pathways they took to accomplish development. The second displays the changing choice for environmental quality as incomes rise.

Historically, all developed countries' economies were actually based upon agriculture, a state that produced little environmental damage. Their economies later turned to a more environmentally damaging declare that focused on industry and processing. Finally, upon transitioning from heavy industry to the now-prevalent service-based economies the degrees of environmentally damage fell in most developed countries. Two main factors lead to environmental harm that occurrs during industrialization. First, the harmful by-products of creation damage the environment. High levels of pollution and normal water contaminants accompany the enlargement of industry. The next factor is the increased use of natural resources. The comprehensive over-use of land, deforestation and mining of mountains is a kind of environmental damage in and of itself. A typical conclusion of the development pattern is the fact LDCs must pass through the same phases in order to accomplish economic development. Furthermore, if compelled to stick to strict environmental regulations, LDCs will be at an financial disadvantage compared to the already developed countries. Many LDCs indicate this competitive downside when rejecting global environmental benchmarks. The next stage of development noticed industrial nations transitioning to service-based economies, a trend that all global GDP leaders tend towards. In this stage the income threshold of for the EKCs for several substances may actually have been reached. Service-based economies have the ability to avoid some of the most environmentally damaging financial activities. Also, highly resource-dependant production is lower significantly which reduces the influences of resource type and damaging emissions.

The graph demonstrates the change from an industrial to service-based current economic climate somewhere around point Y*. The decreasing industrial production decreases environmentally friendly damage regardless of the rising GDP associated with the service sector economy.

Environmental impacts also fall consequently of increased technology uncovered in developed countries. In some cases technology causes a more successful use of inputs. Other scientific advancements be able to restrict the harmful results that economic activity have on the environment.

The second reason that a high-income level can reduce environmental harm is by modifying the demand for environmental quality. Referred to as the "income influence", sufficiently high GDP per capita often leads individuals to put environmental quality above additional monetary growth. The aggregation of these individual preferences plays an intrinsic role in deciding the income threshold.

The EKC income threshold aggregates all environmentally damaging agents into an individual numerical value. However, taken independently economists can place money principles on the turning tips of damaging realtors. For instance, in a 1997 newspaper by Cole, Rayner and Bates, the authors found the turning point of CO and NO2 emissions to be around $9, 900 and $14, 700, respectively. Using environmental quality desire as a conclusion, the income threshold signifies the income level per capita at which the desire for environmental quality outweighs the inclination for additional income. This change in choice occurs on the public level, rather than private one. Microeconomic decisions to support more environmentally friendly goods and services cannot account for the income result. The issue is instead a matter of public plan. The changes in environmental benchmarks reflect political pressure on the federal government and state governments. Effective lobbyists have improved the politics and social surroundings to favour one of increased environmental quality.

Despite the 'clean' characteristics of high-income countries it remains problematic for EKC followers to describe certain things - such as the fact that the United States is, probably, the world's most significant greenhouse gas emitter. Defenders of the EKC hypothesis say this is due to the extremely large overall economy of the U. S. and that the seemingly large characters are, proportionate to GDP, much less astonishing as they seem. Really the only other defense to the greenhouse gas emission statistic would be that the income threshold may not have been come to.

According to the EKC hypothesis, changes to evolving economies and the individual inclination for environmental quality incorporate to look for the income threshold. However, whether or not an inverted "U" molded curve exists in any way continues to be up for question.

Section III: Proof For and Contrary to the EKC Hypothesis

Evidence regarding the EKC hypothesis is circumstantial and inconclusive. Most early studies that recognized the hypothesis centered on a single detrimental agent, like a pollutant. Figuring out key characteristics associated with realtors that contain been studied we find that only certain types of agents exhibit an EKC.

Evidence aiding the EKC first began in 1994 when Selden and Song found an EKC for SO2 (Environmental quality and development: Is there a Kuznets curve for polluting of the environment emissions?, 1994). A later test in 1995 by economists Grossman also found SO2 emissions to check out an EKC (Grossman, et al. , 1995). They found a turning point between $4, 000 and $6, 000. Another early on records of EKC support came from Theodore Panayotou who found the turning point of deforestation to be $823.

After the initial studies, other economists began to investigate the validity of the EKC hypothesis and found refuting proof. Inside the 1997 newspaper by Cole, Rayner and Bates, they found no EKC for traffic, nitrates or methane. A different research in 1997 by Horvath evaluated energy use and found no EKC; rather, energy use per capita rose steadily with an increase of income.

Evidence appears to support the EKC hypothesis limited to a limited kind of damaging realtors. The emission SO2 is found in urban throw away areas and is also thereby seen as a its locality. Deforestation also displays a situation regarding a particular location. Damaging providers that have an effect on only a particular site have a tendency to show EKCs. However, a damaging agent such as traffic is plain to see and also impacts certain areas closely. In this case the agent is dominated with a scale result - increased activity brings about increased environmental impact. While traffic-related pollution is normally iterated by inhabitants size, damaging realtors such as energy creation by-products increase with GDP per capita.

Section IV: Problems of the EKC Hypothesis as Plan Justification

There are present many risks in allowing an market to simply develop out of environmentally detrimental activity. Some of these dangers arise because the EKC hypothesis will not hold true in all cases. Others exist even if we presume the hypothesis as an accurate predictor of environmental conditions.

The pursuing is a set of concerns regarding the EKC hypothesis

(I) It remains inconclusive if most detrimental realtors follow the EKC.

(II) The threshold income may be irrelevantly high or the temporary period of increasing environmental harm too long.

(III) The reduction in environmental damage observed in developed countries may represent the creation of "dirty" products abroad and succeeding importation.

(IV) The "absorptive capacity" of our own earth is unfamiliar.

(V) EKCs may only are present in certain politics atmospheres.

A detailed look at the above concerns illustrates the inherent dangers in taking the EKC hypothesis and after deploying it to justify coverage.

As reviewed above, only local and regional damaging realtors show signs or symptoms of EKCs. Other "difficult to identify" real estate agents may simply increase with GDP per capita. This breakthrough leaves available to question whether more agencies than not respond to income raises. If there are present more agents that not react then attempting to grow past these impacts would be impossible.

Many damaging agencies may respond to income levels, however, not until GDP per capita approaches out-of-reach levels. If in a developed country, the turning point for a damaging agent is above, say, $50, 000 then neglecting to respond will create destruction for a considerable amount of time. Over the time it takes to achieve the turning point, the environmental damage may establish more costly than it's worthwhile. Obviously, within an LDC the turning point value needs and then be significantly lower and still have the same undesireable effects. It's important to note that it is unclear if forgoing the opportunity for economic progress may is the right or incorrect decision. Nonetheless, using solely the EKC hypothesis to justify this action remains unwise, as the outcome is as yet not known.

Another factor that issues the EKC facts is that wealthy countries may be importing "dirty" products, therefore adding to environmental degradation; the one difference would be that the degradation is not domestic. The first hypothesis to bring up this opportunity was the Pollution Haven hypothesis. It states that developed countries export their dusty sectors to LDCs whose government authorities have significantly more lax environmental benchmarks. Many economists low priced this hypothesis with strong proof demonstrating that capital moves do not follow environmental laws. However, this does not exclude the possibility of dirty companies existing in LDCs and coincidently exporting their products to rich countries. In cases like this, prosperous countries only started across the downward slope on the EKC by domestically lowering environmental harm. When taken globally their increased ingestion anticipated to income may be increasingly detrimental.

Another danger is the fact leaving the quality of our environment subject to monetary activity, even for only a short period, may be devastating. The power of the planet earth to absorb the damaging real estate agents produced by economic activity, called "absorptive capacity, " is not yet known. A good example is global warming. Increasingly more studies concur that rising global conditions are anticipated at least partly to human being activity. Predictions about the consequences of the change remain being debated. But further activity could thrust the environment's limits to a point that triggers serious repercussions for mankind.

A final matter is the fact that even if expanding countries can perform high levels of income per capita they may not possess a politics atmosphere conducive to environmental security. Let's assume that the aggregate making point is a country reached, that country it is not necessarily heading enact safety. Countries that have got sufficient demand for environmental quality still only achieve it with coverage revisions. Essentially the most successful avenues for obtaining environmental quality are lobbyists. Without a administration that responds to political pressure by these general population groups there is absolutely no reason to believe its regulations will mirror the demand for a cleaner environment. Furthermore point, it also remains to be seen if all ethnicities place similar prices on environmental quality. While constituents of currently developed countries may desire safety, countries in the process of producing may reach a point of comparable income and still not demand environmental quality. Conversely, they could actually demand protection earlier.

Section V: Conclusion

The questions and concerns about the EKC hypothesis that I have examined in this newspaper raise significant uncertainty as to the wisdom of implementing environmental policy founded after the EKC hypothesis. Even supposing its validity, the EKC hypothesis creates considerable doubt concerning its success at balancing monetary growth with environmental coverage. Given these uncertainties regulations must be, at most, based only partially on predictions by the EKC hypothesis.

The appropriate balance between environmental cover and economic expansion continues to be debated. Both of the opposing views present important quarrels. Certainly, having either extreme - either unhindered financial activity or excessively protective environmental steps - can be an inadequate solution. The most significant problem facing the controversy is the lack of knowledge regarding the degree of robustness present in our earth's environment. Still unclear of its ability to offer its resources and soak up our by-products, our only course of action is to, with both needs in mind, tread carefully.

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)