IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/streco/v19y2008i2p173-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How does Japanese compliance with the Kyoto Protocol affect environmental productivity in China and Japan?

Author

Listed:
  • Kagawa, Shigemi

Abstract

The present paper empirically investigates whether competitive pressures and Japanese compliance with the Kyoto Protocol will turn China into a pollution haven. We also analyze how the bilateral division of commodity production stimulates eco-efficiencies (i.e. environmental productivities) in Japan and China and how eco-efficiencies in the respective countries affect each other. Empirical results revealed that competitive pressure and Japanese compliance with the Kyoto Protocol did not contribute to turning China into a pollution haven. We also find that if we focus on national eco-efficiencies, China and Japan are unable to develop a mutually beneficial relationship between the eco-efficiencies in both countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Kagawa, Shigemi, 2008. "How does Japanese compliance with the Kyoto Protocol affect environmental productivity in China and Japan?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 173-188, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:streco:v:19:y:2008:i:2:p:173-188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954-349X(07)00055-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davis, Donald R. & David E. Weinstein & Scott C. Bradford & Kazushige Shimpo, 1997. "Using International and Japanese Regional Data to Determine When the Factor Abundance Theory of Trade Works," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 421-446, June.
    2. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "An Account of Global Factor Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1423-1453, December.
    3. Thijs ten Raa & Pierre Mohnen, 2009. "The Location of Comparative Advantages on the Basis of Fundamentals Only," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Input–Output Economics: Theory And Applications Featuring Asian Economies, chapter 23, pages 425-446, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Leamer, Edward E, 1980. "The Leontief Paradox, Reconsidered," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(3), pages 495-503, June.
    5. Thijs ten Raa & Pierre Mohnen, 2009. "Neoclassical Growth Accounting and Frontier Analysis: A Synthesis," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Input–Output Economics: Theory And Applications Featuring Asian Economies, chapter 19, pages 347-370, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Baldwin, Robert E, 1971. "Determinants of the Commodity Structure of U.S. Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 126-146, March.
    7. Erik Dietzenbacher & Kakali Mukhopadhyay, 2007. "An Empirical Examination of the Pollution Haven Hypothesis for India: Towards a Green Leontief Paradox?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 427-449, April.
    8. Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Tyteca, Daniel, 1996. "An activity analysis model of the environmental performance of firms--application to fossil-fuel-fired electric utilities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 161-175, August.
    9. Trefler, Daniel, 1993. "International Factor Price Differences: Leontief Was Right!," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 961-987, December.
    10. Faye Duchin, 2005. "A world trade model based on comparative advantage with m regions, n goods, and k factors," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 141-162.
    11. Mette Wier & Line Block Christoffersen & Trine Jensen & Ole Pedersen & Hans Keiding & Jesper Munksgaard, 2005. "Evaluating sustainability of household consumption—Using DEA to assess environmental performance," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 425-447.
    12. Trefler, Daniel, 1995. "The Case of the Missing Trade and Other Mysteries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1029-1046, December.
    13. Hakura, Dalia S., 2001. "Why does HOV fail?: The role of technological differences within the EC," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 361-382, August.
    14. Gregory C. Chow, 1993. "Capital Formation and Economic Growth in China," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 809-842.
    15. Bowen, Harry P & Leamer, Edward E & Sveikauskas, Leo, 1987. "Multicountry, Multifactor Tests of the Factor Abundance Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 791-809, December.
    16. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1989. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs Are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 90-98, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhao, Zhen-yu & Sun, Guang-zheng & Zuo, Jian & Zillante, George, 2013. "The impact of international forces on the Chinese wind power industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 131-141.

    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. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "The Factor Content of Trade," NBER Working Papers 8637, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Andrés Artal & Juana Castillo & Francisco Requena, 2006. "Contrastación empírica del modelo de dotaciones factoriales para el comercio interregional de España," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 30(3), pages 539-576, September.
    3. Assaf Zimring, 2019. "Testing the Heckscher–Ohlin–Vanek theory with a natural experiment," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 58-92, February.
    4. Elhanan Helpman, 1999. "The Structure of Foreign Trade," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 121-144, Spring.
    5. Thijs ten Raa & Pierre Mohnen, 2009. "The Location of Comparative Advantages on the Basis of Fundamentals Only," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Input–Output Economics: Theory And Applications Featuring Asian Economies, chapter 23, pages 425-446, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "An Account of Global Factor Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1423-1453, December.
    7. Beatriz Muriel & Cristina Terra, 2009. "Sources of Comparative Advantages in Brazil," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 15-27, February.
    8. Widell, Lars, 2005. "On Measurements of the Factor Content of Trade: - The Case of Sweden," Working Papers 2005:7, Örebro University, School of Business.
    9. Artal-Tur, Andrés & Castillo-Giménez, Juana & Llano-Verduras, Carlos & Requena-Silvente, Francisco, 2011. "The factor content of regional bilateral trade: The role of technology and demand," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 157-172, April.
    10. Martino Pelli & Jeanne Tschopp, 2014. "Hurricanes Revisited : Comparative Advantage as a Source of Heterogeneity," Cahiers de recherche 14-09, Departement d'Economique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    11. Andrés Artal‐Tur & Carlos Llano‐Verduras & Francisco Requena‐Silvente, 2010. "Factor productivity differences and missing trade problems in a regional HOV model," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(4), pages 759-776, November.
    12. Antoni Estevadeordal & Alan M. Taylor, 2002. "A Century of Missing Trade?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 383-393, March.
    13. Yun-kwong Kwok, 2006. "Global factor trade with differentiated factor prices and factor intensities," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 758-780, August.
    14. Ciaian, Pavel & Kancs, d'Artis & Pokrivcak, Jan, 2011. "Comparative Advantages, Transaction Costs and Factor Content in Agricultural Trade: Empirical Evidence from the CEE - Vantaggi comparati, costi di transazione e contenuto dei fattori nel commercio agr," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 64(1), pages 67-101.
    15. Trefler, Daniel & Zhu, Susan Chun, 2010. "The structure of factor content predictions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 195-207, November.
    16. James R. Markusen, 2021. "Putting per-capita income back into trade theory," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: BROADENING TRADE THEORY Incorporating Market Realities into Traditional Models, chapter 10, pages 187-197, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Peter M. Morrow, 2008. "East is East and West is West: A Ricardian-Heckscher-Ohlin Model of Comparative Advantage," Working Papers 575, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    18. Clément Nedoncelle, 2016. "Trade Costs and Current Accounts," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 1653-1672, October.
    19. Yun‐kwong Kwok, 2006. "Global factor trade with differentiated factor prices and factor intensities," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 758-780, August.
    20. Jäkel, Ina C. & Smolka, Marcel, 2017. "Trade policy preferences and factor abundance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-19.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:streco:v:19:y:2008:i:2:p:173-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/525148 .

    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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/525148 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.