IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/unt/jnapdj/v12y2005i1p109-136.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is liberalization of trade good for the environment? Evidence from India

Author

Listed:
  • Kakali Mukhopadhyay

    (School of Environment, Resources and Development (SERD), Asian Institute of Technology, Pathumthani, Thailand)

  • Debesh Chakraborty

    (Department of Economics, Jadavpur University, Calcutta, India)

Abstract

A policy of trade liberalization is often suggested as a means of stimulating economic growth in developing countries. Given the potential benefits of trade liberalization policies, it is important to examine whether such policies are in fact in conflict with the environment as they accelerate economic growth. Two conflicting hypotheses emerge from the trade-environment debate. The first competing hypothesis states that increasing trade may encourage developing countries with weaker environmental protection to specialize in industries that create more pollution. This is referred to as the pollution haven hypothesis (PHH); the second hypothesis, known as the factor endowment hypothesis (FEH), predicts that trade liberalization will result in trade patterns consistent with the Heckscher- Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) theory of comparative advantage based on factor endowment differentials. The manifestation of PHH is in direct conflict with FEH. The present paper aims at testing both hypotheses, PHH and FEH, for India’s trade with the rest of the world and the European Union (15) during the 1990s when radical economic reforms were introduced. The input-output method is used and suitably modified to test both the hypotheses considering three pollutants, carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide (CO2, SO2 and NOx). It is clear from the results that import-related pollution is much greater than the export-related pollution for India. The findings of the present work challenge the pollution haven hypothesis, arguing that liberalization of trade policy in India has not been associated with pollution-intensive industrial development. On the other hand, the study supports the factor endowment hypothesis thus confirming that the export-oriented labour requirements are much more in weight than its import counterpart. Hence India gains in terms of emissions from trade in both cases. The paper also suggests several policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Kakali Mukhopadhyay & Debesh Chakraborty, 2005. "Is liberalization of trade good for the environment? Evidence from India," Asia-Pacific Development Journal, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), vol. 12(1), pages 109-136, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:unt:jnapdj:v:12:y:2005:i:1:p:109-136
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/apdj12-1-5-kakali.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Javorcik Beata Smarzynska & Wei Shang-Jin, 2003. "Pollution Havens and Foreign Direct Investment: Dirty Secret or Popular Myth?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-34, December.
    2. Grossman, G.M & Krueger, A.B., 1991. "Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement," Papers 158, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Public and International Affairs.
    3. Manfred Lenzen, 2001. "A Generalized Input-Output Multiplier Calculus for Australia," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 65-92.
    4. Hettige, Hemamala & Martin, Paul & Singh, Manjula & Wheeler,David R., 1995. "The industrial pollution projection system," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1431, The World Bank.
    5. Eskeland, Gunnar S. & Harrison, Ann E., 2003. "Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 1-23, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Yuquing Xing & Charles Kolstad, 2002. "Do Lax Environmental Regulations Attract Foreign Investment?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 21(1), pages 1-22, January.
    8. Munksgaard, Jesper & Pedersen, Klaus Alsted, 2001. "CO2 accounts for open economies: producer or consumer responsibility?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 327-334, March.
    9. Proops, John L. R. & Atkinson, Giles & Schlotheim, Burkhard Frhr. v. & Simon, Sandrine, 1999. "International trade and the sustainability footprint: a practical criterion for its assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 75-97, January.
    10. 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.
    11. Brander, James A. & Scott Taylor, M., 1997. "International trade between consumer and conservationist countries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 267-297, November.
    12. Machado, Giovani & Schaeffer, Roberto & Worrell, Ernst, 2001. "Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil: an input-output approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 409-424, December.
    13. Glenn-Marie Lange, 1998. "Applying an Integrated Natural Resource Accounts and Input-Output Model to Development Planning in Indonesia," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 113-134.
    14. Susmita Dasgupta & Ashoka Mody & Subhendu Roy & David Wheeler, 2001. "Environmental Regulation and Development: A Cross-country Empirical Analysis," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 173-187.
    15. Frank Ackerman & Kevin Gallagher, "undated". "Trade Liberalization and Pollution Intensive Industries in Developing Countries: A Partial Equilibrium Approach," GDAE Working Papers 00-03, GDAE, Tufts University.
    16. Pranab Bardhan, 1997. "Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1320-1346, September.
    17. Lancaster, Kelvin, 1980. "Intra-industry trade under perfect monopolistic competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 151-175, May.
    18. Robert E.B. Lucas, 2005. "International Migration and Economic Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3826.
    19. Wyckoff, Andrew W. & Roop, Joseph M., 1994. "The embodiment of carbon in imports of manufactured products : Implications for international agreements on greenhouse gas emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 187-194, March.
    20. Krugman, Paul R, 1981. "Intraindustry Specialization and the Gains from Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 959-973, October.
    21. Nordström, Håkan & Vaughan, Scott, 1999. "Trade and the environment," WTO Special Studies, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division, volume 4, number 4.
    22. Gallagher, Kevin P. & Ackerman, Frank, 2000. "Trade Liberalization and Pollution Intensive Industry in Developing Countries: A Partial Equilibrium Approach," Working Papers 15592, Tufts University, Global Development and Environment Institute.
    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. Saibal Kar & Devleena Majumdar, 2016. "MFN Tariff Rates and Carbon Emission: Evidence from Lower-Middle-Income Countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 493-510, July.
    2. Hiroyuki Taguchi, 2012. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve in Asia: the case of sulphur and carbon emissions," Asia-Pacific Development Journal, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), vol. 19(2), pages 77-92, December.
    3. Jayanthakumaran, Kankesu & Verma, Reetu & Liu, Ying, 2012. "CO2 emissions, energy consumption, trade and income: A comparative analysis of China and India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 450-460.
    4. Al-Amin, Abul Quasem & Jaafar, Abdul Hamid & Siwar, Chamhuri, 2008. "A Computable General Equilibrium Approach To Trade And Environmental Modelling In The Malaysian Economy," MPRA Paper 8772, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Jingxia Chai & Yu Hao & Haitao Wu & Yuemiao Yang, 2021. "Do constraints created by economic growth targets benefit sustainable development? Evidence from China," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 4188-4205, December.
    6. Tariku, Lamessa, 2015. "The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Air Pollution: In Case of Ethiopia," MPRA Paper 84619, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Sacchidananda Mukherjee & Debashis Chakraborty, 2007. "Environment, Human Development and Economic Growth after Liberalisation: An Analysis of Indian States," Working Papers 2007-016, Madras School of Economics,Chennai,India.
    8. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2018. "Growing Potential Business opportunity for Climate Friendly Goods and Technologies in Asia since 1997," MPRA Paper 93238, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2018.
    9. Jaafar, Abdul Hamid & Al-Amin, Abul Quasem & Siwar, Chamhuri, 2008. "A CGE Analysis of the Economic Impact of Output-Specific Carbon Tax on the Malaysian Economy," MPRA Paper 10210, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Taguchi, Hiroyuki & Fujino, Takeshi & Asada, Hidekatsu & Ma, Jui-Jun, 2022. "Environmental Kuznets curve on water pollution in Chinese provinces," MPRA Paper 116468, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2018. "Climate Friendly Goods and Technology Trade: Climate Mitigation Strategy of India," MPRA Paper 93031, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2018.
    12. Amin, Al & Siwar, Chamhuri & Huda, Nurul & Hamid, Abdul, 2009. "Trade, Economic Development and Environment: Malaysian Experience," Bangladesh Development Studies, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), vol. 32(3), pages 19-40, September.
    13. Wang, Zhenyu & Meng, Jing & Zheng, Heran & Shao, Shuai & Wang, Daoping & Mi, Zhifu & Guan, Dabo, 2018. "Temporal change in India’s imbalance of carbon emissions embodied in international trade," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 914-925.
    14. Ghani, Gairuzazmi M., 2012. "Does trade liberalization effect energy consumption?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 285-290.
    15. Alper Yılmaz, 2023. "Carbon emissions effect of trade openness and energy consumption in Sub-Saharan Africa," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 1-28, February.

    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. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2004. "Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 431-455, August.
    2. Umed Temurshoev, 2006. "Pollution Haven Hypothesis or Factor Endowment Hypothesis: Theory and Empirical Examination for the US and China," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp292, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    3. Nicole A. MATHYS & Jaime DE MELO, 2010. "Trade and Climate Change: The Challenges Ahead," Working Papers P14, FERDI.
    4. Moinul Islam & Keiichiro Kanemoto & Shunsuke Managi, 2016. "Impact of Trade Openness and Sector Trade on Embodied Greenhouse Gases Emissions and Air Pollutants," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(3), pages 494-505, June.
    5. Wilson,John S.*Tsunehiro Otsuki*Sewadeh, Mirvat, 2002. "Dirty exports and environmental regulation : do standards matter to trade?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2806, The World Bank.
    6. Rutger Hoekstra & Marco Janssen, 2006. "Environmental responsibility and policy in a two-country dynamic input-output model," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 61-84.
    7. Wen Jun & Muhammad Zakaria & Syed Jawad Hussain Shahzad & Hamid Mahmood, 2018. "Effect of FDI on Pollution in China: New Insights Based on Wavelet Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, October.
    8. He, Jie, 2006. "Pollution haven hypothesis and environmental impacts of foreign direct investment: The case of industrial emission of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in Chinese provinces," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 228-245, November.
    9. Tao Ding & Yadong Ning & Yan Zhang, 2017. "The Contribution of China’s Outward Foreign Direct Investment (OFDI) to the Reduction of Global CO 2 Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-15, May.
    10. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2018. "The impact of trade in environmental goods on pollution: what are we learning from the transition economies’ experience?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(4), pages 785-827, October.
    11. Dellachiesa, Alejandro E. & Myint, Aung P., 2016. "Trade openness and the changing water polluting intensity patterns of ‘dirty’ and ‘clean’ industrial sectors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 143-151.
    12. Anriquez, Gustavo, 2002. "Trade And The Environment: An Economic Literature Survey," Working Papers 28598, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    13. Ghertner, D. Asher & Fripp, Matthias, 2007. "Trading away damage: Quantifying environmental leakage through consumption-based, life-cycle analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 563-577, August.
    14. Guo, Jie & Zou, Le-Le & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2010. "Impact of inter-sectoral trade on national and global CO2 emissions: An empirical analysis of China and US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1389-1397, March.
    15. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Nasreen, Samia & Abbas, Faisal & Anis, Omri, 2015. "Does foreign direct investment impede environmental quality in high-, middle-, and low-income countries?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 275-287.
    16. Monteagudo, Josefina & Rojas, Laura & Stabilito, Augusto & Watanuki, Masakazu, 2004. "The New Challenges of the Regional Trade Agenda for the Andean Countries," Conference papers 331234, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    17. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-542 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. P. Srinivasan & Inder Siddanth Ravindra, 2015. "Causality among Energy Consumption, CO2 Emission, Economic Growth and Trade," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 50(3), pages 168-189, August.
    19. Machado, Giovani & Schaeffer, Roberto & Worrell, Ernst, 2001. "Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil: an input-output approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 409-424, December.
    20. Omri, Anis & Nguyen, Duc Khuong & Rault, Christophe, 2014. "Causal interactions between CO2 emissions, FDI, and economic growth: Evidence from dynamic simultaneous-equation models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 382-389.
    21. 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.

    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:unt:jnapdj:v:12:y:2005:i:1:p:109-136. 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: Macroeconomic Policy and Development Division, ESCAP (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/escapth.html .

    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.