Environmental Kuznets curves—real progress or passing the buck ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

190 D.S. Rothman / Ecological Economics 25 (1998) 177–194 Fig. 7. Ecological footprints vs. real GDP per capita (Wackernagel et al., 1997). if everybody were to live at current North American standards, would require three times the existing global stock of ecologically productive cropland, pasture and forest land. Kranendonk and Bringezu (1993) calculate that annual consumption of orange juice in western Germany requires more than three times the total domestic fruit growing area of the region. McLaren (1996) estimates that the UK will need to reduce consumption of timber, cement, pig-iron, aluminum and chlorine by 64, 69, 83, 84 and 100%, respectively, to reach sustainable levels. As an example of how one can use these new measures to test the EKC hypothesis, Fig. 7 shows data for the ecological footprints of 52 nations estimated by Wackernagel et al. (1997) plotted against GDP per capita. This measure estimates the land and water area required to sustainably provide for the average per capita consumption in each nation. It includes food consumption, wood consumption, direct and embodied energy and built area. Table 2 shows the results for four alternative specifications relating the ecological footprints per capita to GDP per capita. Linear and log-log specifications fit the data equally well. Adding a quadratic term, following the EKC hypothesis, does not represent an improvement in either case. Even if it were accepted, the estimated turning point of almost $22000 for the quadratic specification is outside the range of the empirical data and the logquadratic specification results in no turning point at all. 6. Conclusions Have we been growing out of our environmental problems? Since it has been argued that we have yet to appropriately address this question, the answer would have to be that we really cannot say. On examination of the evidence, however, the answer is no. Can we do so? Hopefully. In fact, it can be argued that we need to work on finding ways to help richer nations reduce their impact and poorer nations ‘tunnel’ through or ‘leapfrog’
D.S. Rothman / Ecological Economics 25 (1998) 177–194 191 Table 2 Various fits to ecological footprint data Functional Fitted equation a Adjusted r 2 Turning point b form Linear 0.896 (5.4)+3.77×10 −4 (12.0) (GDP/capita) 0.7379 Quadratic 0.626 (2.8)+5.60×10 −4 (5.3) (GDP/capita)−1.30×10 −8 (1.8) (GDP/cap- 0.7496 21 587 Log-linear −4.193 (9.2)+0.619 (11.9) ln(GDP/capita) 0.7322 ita) 2 Log-quadratic −0.046 (0.0)−0.398 (0.5) ln(GDP/capita)+0.061 (1.3) (ln(GDP/capita)) 2 0.7364 a Equations fitted to data provided by Wackernagel et al. (1997). Values in italic parentheses are absolute values of the t-statistics for the coefficients. Due to heteroskedasticity, weighted regressions were used for the linear and quadratic forms. b Turning points only calculated for quadratic equations with negative coefficients on the quadratic term. past the periods of increasing environmental impact and resource use, so as to avoid increasing their impacts in the first place (Goldemberg et al., 1988; Pearson, 1994; Munasinghe, 1995; Ferguson et al., 1996; Karr and Thomas, 1996; Schindler, 1996). This leaves us with the question of what needs to be done to ensure that the answer to the second question above is yes, which requires, in part, a better examination of the first question. This task requires a number of parallel efforts. First, we must more carefully analyze the relationship between economic activity and environmental impact. We must understand that solving environmental problems means more than handing them off, i.e., passing the buck to people in other places or in other times. It must be understood what we mean by growth, i.e. that we make a clear distinction between economic growth and growth in human well-being. For all of these, we need to link analyses of this issue to other areas of research that are providing important insights, particularly that on industrial ecology and dematerialization, the definition and measurement of indicators of economic, human and environmental well-being and the relationships between trade and the environment. From a policy perspective, it is imperative to recognize that the necessary changes are possible, but not inevitable. This has been expressed explicitly in almost all of the work on the EKC to date. As Radetzki (1992) states, even if one does buy the basics of the EKC hypothesis, the changes that have occurred and will occur ‘‘will not be the result of environmental laissez-faire. Many of the behavioral adaptations, sometimes quite painful, have been prompted by social mandates overriding the freedom of unregulated markets’’. However, the opinion of Beckerman (1992), among others, that economies react appropriately without policy intervention and that the surest way to achieve environmental quality is to get rich are still around and do carry weight in policy circles. Thus, it is important that, as researchers, we not only improve the substance of our analyses, but that we also improve the communication of our results and the assumptions behind these. Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Sander de Bruyn, Thomas Selden and an anonymous reviewer for their insightful comments on earlier versions of this paper. The paper is much improved as a result, with all remaining errors and opacity being the sole responsibility of the author. Also, the data underlying the analyses presented are available from the author upon request. References Adriaanse, A., Bringezu, S., Hammond, A., Moriguchi, Y., Rodenburg, E., Rogich, D., Schütz, H., 1997. Resource Flows: The Material Basis of Industrial Economies. World Resources Institute, Wuppertal Institute, The Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Washington, DC, April.
Page 1 and 2: Ecological Economics 25 (1998) 177-
Page 3 and 4: D.S. Rothman / Ecological Economics
Page 13: D.S. Rothman / Ecological Economics

Environmental Kuznets curves—real progress or passing the buck ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?