Click here to download

Climate change, environmental policies and economic performances: a European analysis
Journal Title: ARGOMENTI 
Author/s: Luigia Di Girolamo, Massimiliano Mazzanti, Francesco Nicolli, Nicola Fogagnolo, Luca Navarro, Marco Antonio Miglietta 
Year:  2014 Issue: 40 Language: Italian 
Pages:  23 Pg. 95-117 FullText PDF:  169 KB
DOI:  10.3280/ARG2014-040005
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


Referring to the IPAT model, and exploiting the new sectorial WIOD dataset, the present work studies the relationship between environmental productivity (carbon dioxide emission divided by value added) and its main economic, commercial and policy drivers. For this purpose an original dataset at sectorial level covering 27 EU countries over the years 1995- 2009 has been created. The empirical analysis shows as labour productivity is not a significant driver of emission reduction, while trade openness is. Interestingly, this result is stronger and more robust in the EU12 subsample with respect to the EU 15 group.
Keywords: IPAT, WIOD, Decoupling, ETS, Trade, Europe
Jel Code: O, Q.

  1. Anderson T.W., Hsiao C. (1982). Formulation and estimation of dynamic models using panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 18: 47-82., 10.1016/0304-4076(82)90095-1DOI: 10.1016/0304-4076(82)90095-1
  2. Apergis N., Eleftheriou S., Payne JE. (2013). The relationship between international financial reporting standards, carbon emissions, and R&D expenditures: Evidence from European manufacturing firms. Ecological Economics, 88: 57-66., 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.12.024DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.12.024
  3. Arellano M., Bond S. (1991). Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations. Review of economic studies, 58: 277-297., 10.2307/2297968DOI: 10.2307/2297968
  4. Blundell R., Bond S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87: 115-143., 10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8DOI: 10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8
  5. Bruno G.S.F. (2004). Approximating the Bias of the LSDV Estimator for Dynamic Unbalanced Panel Data Models. Università Bocconi w.p. 2004-1.
  6. Cole M. A. (2003). Development, Trade, and the Environment: How Robust is the Environmental Kuznets Curve? Environment and Development Economics, 8(4): 557-79., 10.1017/S1355770X0300305DOI: 10.1017/S1355770X0300305
  7. Cole M.A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets Curve: examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48: 71-81., 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.09.007DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.09.007
  8. Costantini V., Mazzanti M. (2013). The Dynamics of Economic and Environmental Systems. Innovation, Policy and Competitiveness. Springer.
  9. Dean J. M. (2002). Does Trade Liberalization Harm the Environment? A New Test. Canadian Journal of Economics, 35(4): 819-842., 10.1111/0008-4085.00155DOI: 10.1111/0008-4085.00155
  10. Edenhofer O., Bauer N., Kriegler E. (2005). The impact of technological changes on climate protection and welfare: insights from the model MIND. Ecological Economics, 54: 277-292., 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.12.030DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.12.030
  11. Gilli M., Mazzanti M., Nicolli F. (2013). Sustainability and competitiveness in evolutionary perspectives: Environmental innovations, structural change and economic dynamics in the EU. Journal of Socio-Economics, 45: 204-215., 10.1016/j.socec.2013.05.008DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2013.05.008
  12. Grossman G.M., Krueger A. (1991). Environmental Impact of a North American Free Trade Agreement. Working paper 3914. National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge, MA.
  13. Gujurati D. (2011). Econometrics by example. UK, Palgrave Macmillan.
  14. Harbaugh WT., Levinson A., Molloy Wilson D. (2002). Reexamining the Empirical Evidence for an Environmental Kuznets Curve. The review of economics and statistics, 84(3): 541-551., 10.1162/003465302320259538DOI: 10.1162/003465302320259538
  15. Kiviet J. (1999). Expectation of Expansions for Estimators in a Dynamic Panel Data Model; Some Results for Weakly Exogenous Regressors. In: Hsiao F. L. C., Lahiri K. and Pesaran M. H. (1999). Analysis of Panels and Limited Dependent Variable Models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  16. Kuznets S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American Economic Review, 45 (1): 1-28.
  17. Marin G., Mazzanti M. (2013). The evolution of environmental and labor productivity dynamics. Sector based evidence from Italy. Journal of evolutionary economics, 1-43., 10.1007/s00191-010-0199-8DOI: 10.1007/s00191-010-0199-8
  18. Mazzanti M., Nicolli F. (2012). Il ruolo sociale ed economico delle imprese e dei settori tra “politiche” globali e locali di sostenibilità: Le strategie europee, l’innovazione ambientale e la produzione di beni pubblici. Economia dei Servizi. Dicembre.
  19. Mazzanti M., Zoboli R (2009). Environmental efficiency and labour productivity: Trade-off or joint dynamics? A theoretical investigation and empirical evidence from Italy using NAMEA. Ecological Economics, 88: 1182-1194., 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.009DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.009
  20. Mazzanti M., Musolesi A. (2013). Carbon Kuznets curves for advanced countries. Applied Economics, i-first (September).
  21. Mazzanti M., Musolesi A., Zoboli R. (2010). A Bayesian Approach to the estimation of EKC for CO2. Applied Economics, 42: 2275-87.
  22. Roca J. (2003). Do Individual Preferences Explain the Environmental Kuznets Curve? Ecological Economics, 45(2): 3-10., 10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00263-XDOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00263-X
  23. The World Input‐Output Database (WIOD): Contents, Sources and Methods. (2012). Seventh Framework Programme. Founded by European Commisson.
  24. Torras M., Boyce J.K. (1998). Income, Inequality, and Pollution: A Reassessment of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Ecological Economics, 25(2): 147-160., 10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00177-8DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00177-8
  25. Yandle B., Bhattarai M., Vijayaraghavan M. (2004). Environmental Kuznets Curves: A Review of Findings, Methods, and Policy Implications. Research Study, 02-1.
  26. Yandle B., Morriss A. (2001). The Technologies of Property Rights: Choice Among Alternative Solutions to Tragedies of the Commons. Ecology Law Quarterly, 28(1): 123-68.
  27. York R., Rosa E.A., Dietz T. (2003). STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts. Ecological Economics, 46: 351- 365., 10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00188-5DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00188-5

Luigia Di Girolamo, Massimiliano Mazzanti, Francesco Nicolli, Nicola Fogagnolo, Luca Navarro, Marco Antonio Miglietta, Climate change, environmental policies and economic performances: a European analysis in "ARGOMENTI" 40/2014, pp. 95-117, DOI:10.3280/ARG2014-040005

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content