IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v24y2007i3p219-238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects of Liberalism on the Terrestrial Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Quan Li

    (Department of Political Science The Pennsylvania State University University Park, Pennsylvania, USA, quanli@psu.edu)

  • Rafael Reuveny

    (School of Public and Environmental Affairs Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana, USA)

Abstract

In recent decades, many countries have adopted, to various degrees, the ideologies of commercial and republican liberalism. One salient aspect of the spread of commercial liberalism in the world has been the growth in international trade. The spread of republican liberalism has manifested itself by the rise in the level of democracy in countries over time. What are the implications of trade and democracy for the terrestrial environment? Two bodies of literature are relevant to this question: one studies the effect of trade on the environment, while a second body focuses on the effect of democracy on the environment. The effects of both forces on the environment are debated theoretically and empirically. The two bodies of literature have generally developed separately, and the effects of trade and democracy have not been evaluated in the same model. This paper discusses the theoretical effects of trade and democracy on the environment, and develops a statistical model to study these effects on the terrestrial environment in the areas of deforestation and land degradation. The results indicate that a rise in trade openness reduces deforestation in autocracy and increases deforestation in democracy, and the effect is similar for the less developed countries (LDCs) and the developed countries (DCs). A rise in trade openness reduces land degradation, but the effect is not robust and does not depend on regime type. A rise in democracy increases deforestation and reduces land degradation, but these effects are weaker in LDCs than in DCs. In addition, the effect of democracy on deforestation is stronger when trade openness is high. The effect of democracy on land degradation does not depend on trade openness. The paper concludes with an examination of the implications of these results for public policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Quan Li & Rafael Reuveny, 2007. "The Effects of Liberalism on the Terrestrial Environment," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(3), pages 219-238, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:24:y:2007:i:3:p:219-238
    DOI: 10.1080/07388940701468492
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/07388940701468492
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/07388940701468492?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judith M. Dean, 2002. "Does trade liberalization harm the environment? A new test," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 819-842, November.
    2. Eric Neumayer, 2002. "Do Democracies Exhibit Stronger International Environmental Commitment? A Cross-country Analysis," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 39(2), pages 139-164, March.
    3. William T. Harbaugh & Arik Levinson & David Molloy Wilson, 2002. "Reexamining The Empirical Evidence For An Environmental Kuznets Curve," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 541-551, August.
    4. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Daniel C. Esty & Diana Orejas, 2000. "NAFTA and the Environment: Seven Years Later," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number pa61, October.
    5. Werner Antweiler & Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2001. "Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 877-908, September.
    6. Dixon, William J., 1994. "Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 14-32, March.
    7. Morrow, James D. & Siverson, Randolph M. & Tabares, Tressa E., 1998. "The Political Determinants of International Trade: The Major Powers, 1907–1990," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(3), pages 649-661, September.
    8. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    9. Suri, Vivek & Chapman, Duane, 1998. "Economic growth, trade and energy: implications for the environmental Kuznets curve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 195-208, May.
    10. Stern , David I., 1998. "Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 173-196, May.
    11. Scruggs, Lyle A., 1998. "Political and economic inequality and the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 259-275, September.
    12. Bhagwati, Jagdish, 2000. "On thinking clearly about the linkage between trade and the environment," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 483-529, October.
    13. Bulte, Erwin H. & van Soest, Daan P., 2001. "Environmental degradation in developing countries: households and the (reverse) Environmental Kuznets Curve," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 225-235, June.
    14. Torras, Mariano & Boyce, James K., 1998. "Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the environmental Kuznets Curve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 147-160, May.
    15. Edward B. Barbier, 2001. "The Economics of Tropical Deforestation and Land Use: An Introduction to the Special Issue," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(2), pages 155-171.
    16. Lucas, Robert E.B. & Wheeler, David & Hettige, Hemamala, 1992. "Economic development, environmental regulation, and the international migration of toxic industrial pollution : 1960-88," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1062, The World Bank.
    17. Snidal, Duncan, 1991. "Relative Gains and the Pattern of International Cooperation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(3), pages 701-726, September.
    18. Congleton, Roger D, 1992. "Political Institutions and Pollution Control," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(3), pages 412-421, August.
    19. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2004. "Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 431-455, August.
    20. Barrett, Scott & Graddy, Kathryn, 2000. "Freedom, growth, and the environment," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 433-456, October.
    21. Olson, Mancur, 1993. "Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 567-576, September.
    22. Gowa, Joanne & Mansfield, Edward D., 1993. "Power Politics and International Trade," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 408-420, June.
    23. Gasiorowski, Mark J., 1995. "Economic Crisis and Political Regime Change: An Event History Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 882-897, December.
    24. Li, Quan & Reuveny, Rafael, 2003. "Economic Globalization and Democracy: An Empirical Analysis," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 29-54, January.
    25. Jeffrey A. Frankel, 2003. "The Environment and Globalization," NBER Working Papers 10090, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Halkos, George E. & Tzeremes, Nickolaos G., 2013. "Carbon dioxide emissions and governance: A nonparametric analysis for the G-20," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 110-118.
    2. Jie He, 2007. "Is the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis valid for developing countries? A survey," Cahiers de recherche 07-03, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    3. Mohammad Reza Farzanegan & Gunther Markwardt, 2012. "Pollution, Economic Development and Democracy: Evidence from the MENA countries," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201227, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    4. Fredriksson, Per G. & Neumayer, Eric, 2013. "Democracy and climate change policies: Is history important?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 11-19.
    5. Jeffrey A. Frankel, 2003. "The Environment and Globalization," NBER Working Papers 10090, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Pandelis Mitsis, 2012. "Is there an Environmental Kuznets Curve in the Carbon Dioxide Emissions?," University of Cyprus Working Papers in Economics 16-2012, University of Cyprus Department of Economics.
    7. Frankel, Jeffrey A., 2009. "Environmental Effects of International Trade," Scholarly Articles 4481652, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    8. Jie HE, 2005. "Economic Determinants for China’s Industrial SO2 Emission: Reduced vs. Structural form and the role of international trade," Working Papers 200505, CERDI.
    9. James Boyce, 2003. "Inequality and Environmental Protection," Working Papers wp52, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    10. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.
    11. Kammerlander, Andreas & Schulze, Günther G., 2020. "Are Democracies Cleaner?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    12. Astghik Mavisakalyan & Vladimir Otrachshenko & Olga Popova, 2023. "Does democracy protect the environment? The role of the Arctic Council," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(5), pages 1-21, May.
    13. Saeed Ghodrati & Javad Harati & Azim Nazari, 2018. "The Democracy and Environment Quality in Selected Countries: An Application of Panel Data," Iranian Economic Review (IER), Faculty of Economics,University of Tehran.Tehran,Iran, vol. 22(1), pages 21-49, Winter.
    14. Farzanegan, Mohammad Reza & Markwardt, Gunther, 2018. "Development and pollution in the Middle East and North Africa: Democracy matters," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 350-374.
    15. Bernauer, Thomas & Koubi, Vally, 2009. "Effects of political institutions on air quality," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1355-1365, March.
    16. Dong-Hyeon Kim & Yi-Chen Wu & Shu-Chin Lin, 2022. "Carbon dioxide emissions, financial development and political institutions," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 837-874, May.
    17. Stepping, Katharina M. K. & Banholzer, Lilli, 2017. "Autocratic angels? Democratic demons? The impact of regime type, state capacity and economic development on reaching environmental targets," IDOS Discussion Papers 26/2017, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    18. Frankel, Jeffrey, 2008. "Global Environmental Policy and Global Trade Policy," Working Paper Series rwp08-058, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    19. Robert T. Deacon & Catherine S. Norman, 2006. "Does the Environmental Kuznets Curve Describe How Individual Countries Behave?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(2), pages 291-315.
    20. Anders Rydning Gaarder & Krishna C Vadlamannati, 2017. "Does democracy guarantee (de)forestation? An empirical analysis," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 20(2), pages 97-121, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:24:y:2007:i:3:p:219-238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.