IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dae/daepap/00-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade Liberalization and Pollution Intensive Industries in Developing Countries: A Partial Equilibrium Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Ackerman
  • Kevin Gallagher

Abstract

Economic theory suggests that liberalization of trade between countries with differing levels of environmental protection could lead pollution-intensive industry to concentrate in the nations where regulations are lax. This effect, often referred to as the "pollution haven" hypothesis, is much discussed in theory, but finds only ambiguous support in empirical research to date. Methodologies used for research on trade and environment differ widely; many are difficult to apply to practical policy questions. We develop a simple, partial equilibrium model explicitly designed to analyze the effects of a change in trade policy. Our model analyzes the relative concentrations of "clean" and "dirty" industries in two nations or regions, before and after the policy change. While lacking the theoretical rigor and mathematical intricacy of other modeling methods, our approach has the advantages of transparency and accessibility to a broad range of analysts and policy makers.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:dae:daepap:00-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bu.edu/eci/files/2020/01/00-03_Pollution.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy J. Bartik, 2010. "Small Business Start-Ups in the United States: Estimates of the Effects of Characteristics of States," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Zolton Acs (ed.),Entrepreneurship and regional Development, pages 155-169, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    2. Dean, Judith M., 1992. "Trade and the environment : a survey of the literature," Policy Research Working Paper Series 966, The World Bank.
    3. Frank Ackerman, 2001. "Still dead after all these years: interpreting the failure of general equilibrium theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 119-139.
    4. 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.
    5. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    6. 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.
    7. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249.
    8. Timothy J. Bartik, 2002. "The Effects of Environmental Regulation on Business Location in the United States," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Wayne B. Gray (ed.),Economic Costs and Consequences of Environmental Regulation, pages 129-151, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    9. Levinson, Arik, 1996. "Environmental regulations and manufacturers' location choices: Evidence from the Census of Manufactures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 5-29, October.
    10. Revesz, Richard L. & Stavins, Robert N., 2007. "Environmental Law," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 499-589, Elsevier.
    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. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    2. Indriya, Soca & Widodo, Tri, 2011. "Do Pollution Havens Exist? Evidence from East Asia," MPRA Paper 79924, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kevin Gallagher, 2001. "Trade Liberalization and Industrial Pollution in Mexico: Lessons for the FTAA"," International Trade 0106003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Grant Ferrier, 2010. "The evolution of the environmental industry in the post-NAFTA era in Mexico," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 147-164, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Kevin P. Gallagher & Frank Ackerman & Luke Ney, "undated". "Economic Analysis in Environmental Reviews of Trade Agreements: Assessing the North American Experience," GDAE Working Papers 02-01, GDAE, Tufts University.
    7. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Simone Borghesi & Chiara Franco & Giovanni Marin, 2020. "Outward Foreign Direct Investment Patterns of Italian Firms in the European Union's Emission Trading Scheme," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(1), pages 219-256, January.
    4. Blackman, Allen & Mathis, Mitchell & Nelson, Peter, 2001. "The Greening of Development Economics: A Survey," Discussion Papers 10662, Resources for the Future.
    5. 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.
    6. Haixiao Huang, Walter C. Labys, 2002. "Environment and trade: a review of issues and methods," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1/2), pages 100-160.
    7. Wayne B. Gray & Ron Shadbegian, 2024. "When Do Firms Shift Production across States to Avoid Environmental Regulation?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 100(3), pages 443-457.
    8. Wallace E. Oates & Wallace E. Oates, 2004. "A Reconsideration of Environmental Federalism," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 7, pages 125-156, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Busse, Matthias, 2004. "Trade, environmental regulations and the World Trade Organization : new empirical evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3361, The World Bank.
    10. William A Pizer & Jhih-Shyang Shih & Richard D Morgenstern, 1997. "Are We Overstating the Economic Costs of Environmental Protection?," Working Papers 97-12, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    11. Wayne B. Gray, 1997. "Manufacturing Plant Location: Does State Pollution Regulation Matter?," NBER Working Papers 5880, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Richard D. Morgenstern & William A. Pizer & Jhih-Shyang Shih, 2001. "The Cost Of Environmental Protection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(4), pages 732-738, November.
    13. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2004. "Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 431-455, August.
    14. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    15. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    16. He, Jie, 2010. "What is the role of openness for China's aggregate industrial SO2 emission?: A structural analysis based on the Divisia decomposition method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 868-886, February.
    17. Na Li Dawson & Kathleen Segerson, 2008. "Voluntary Agreements with Industries: Participation Incentives with Industry-Wide Targets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 97-114.
    18. Sturm, Daniel & Ulph, Alistair, 2002. "Environment, trade, political economy and imperfect information: a survey," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0204, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    19. Gabriela Michalek & Reimund Schwarze, 2015. "Carbon leakage: pollution, trade or politics?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1471-1492, December.
    20. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F4 - International Economics - - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance
    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • O0 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation

    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:dae:daepap:00-03. 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: Abdulshaheed Alqunber (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gdtufus.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.