Trade, FDI, growth and biodiversity: an empirical analysis for the main OECD countries
Whether the Environmental Kutznets curve relationship holds for biodiversity or not remains an open issue. While there are several studies investigating the EKC relationship for biodiversity, they suffer from some limitations and the empirical evidence is inconclusive. More specifically, with few exceptions, the previous EKC studies for biodiversity looked into the diversity of a particular species or a number of species rather than a broader measure of biodiversity. In addition, these studies do not control for some economic factors that could directly or indirectly affect the biodiversity stock such as trade and foreign direct investments (FDI). International trade, in fact, could influence the biodiversity trough the effects on economic growth, production specialization and technological innovation diffusion. The presence or not of FDI in a country could be of help in assessing the “pollution haven” hypothesis that has obvious feedbacks on biodiversity. The innovative features of this paper are its attempts to estimate a ECK for biodiversity using an overall index of biodiversity terrestrial and marine and the inclusion in the traditional ECK equation of proxies for trade and FDI. According to our estimates for the main OECD countries in the period 1990-2010, the ECK hypothesis is partially verified. Rising incomes are first associated with increasing biodiversity then with decreasing biodiversity and eventually with increasing biodiversity again. This non-monotonic relationship could be explained by the fact that a certain level of income (production) there may be some biodiversity losses that cannot be continuously substituted with environmental-friendly production technology due to ecological threshold and the unique nature of the damage.
|Date of creation:||20 Mar 2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Grossman, Gene M. & Krueger, Alan B., 1996. "The inverted-U: what does it mean?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(01), pages 119-122, February.
- John Asafu-Adjaye, 2003. "Biodiversity Loss and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(2), pages 173-185, 04.
- de santis, roberta, 2011.
"Impact of environmental regulations on trade in the main EU countries: conflict or synergy?,"
37756, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Roberta De Santis, 2012. "Impact of Environmental Regulations on Trade in the Main EU Countries: Conflict or Synergy?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(7), pages 799-815, 07.
- Stern, David I. & Common, Michael S., 2001.
"Is There an Environmental Kuznets Curve for Sulfur?,"
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 162-178, March.
- David I. Stern & Tony Auld & Michael S. Common & Kali K. Sanyal, 1998. "Is there an environmental Kuznets curve for sulfur?," Working Papers in Ecological Economics 9804, Australian National University, Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Ecological Economics Program.
- Stern , David I., 1998. "Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(02), pages 173-196, May.
- 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.
- Susmita Dasgupta & Benoit Laplante & Hua Wang & David Wheeler, 2002. "Confronting the Environmental Kuznets Curve," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 147-168, Winter.
- A Omer & U Pascual & N Russell, 2003. "Agricultural Intensification and Biodiversity Loss: Is There and Agri-EKC?," The School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 0317, Economics, The University of Manchester.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:37730. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.