The Validity of the Environmental Kuznets Curve
The validity of the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in relation to developing countries.
The proper use of the environment has become a controversial topic in economics. In both of James Beecher’s lectures during the module, he outlined a critique of mainstrem economics currently governing all our policies, and presented several key thinkers in environmental economics. The huge potential for economic growth through the exploitation of the environment has been undeniable. Vital resources have forever been and continue to be a necessary component of economic growth. But the environment also performs the essential function of supporting life. Needless to say, if humans impair the earth’s ability to sustain life the consequences would be dire. And unfortunately, the very same exploitation that provides us with crucial economic inputs can also be the instrument by which we impair the earth’s ability to support life. Beecher insisted the world would have to shift its focus to a more sustainable branch of economics. One policy proposed by economists is to allow countries to economically grow out of environmentally damaging activity. Looking at countries with already large economies, we see signs of environmental regulation such as emissions standards, extensive recycling programs, and limited timber harvesting. The economists supporting a policy that initially allows for environmental degradation assert that if a country can achieve sufficient economic growth in a short period of time then perhaps environmental damage should be tolerated.
A well-known hypothesis providing support for a policy that emphasizes economic growth at the expense of environmental protection is the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis. It posits that countries in the development process will see their levels of environmental degradation increase until some income threshold is met and then afterwards decrease. If true, economic policies should allow extensive, although not
The proper use of the environment has become a controversial topic in economics. In both of James Beecher’s lectures during the module, he outlined a critique of mainstrem economics currently governing all our policies, and presented several key thinkers in environmental economics. The huge potential for economic growth through the exploitation of the environment has been undeniable. Vital resources have forever been and continue to be a necessary component of economic growth. But the environment also performs the essential function of supporting life. Needless to say, if humans impair the earth’s ability to sustain life the consequences would be dire. And unfortunately, the very same exploitation that provides us with crucial economic inputs can also be the instrument by which we impair the earth’s ability to support life. Beecher insisted the world would have to shift its focus to a more sustainable branch of economics. One policy proposed by economists is to allow countries to economically grow out of environmentally damaging activity. Looking at countries with already large economies, we see signs of environmental regulation such as emissions standards, extensive recycling programs, and limited timber harvesting. The economists supporting a policy that initially allows for environmental degradation assert that if a country can achieve sufficient economic growth in a short period of time then perhaps environmental damage should be tolerated.
A well-known hypothesis providing support for a policy that emphasizes economic growth at the expense of environmental protection is the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis. It posits that countries in the development process will see their levels of environmental degradation increase until some income threshold is met and then afterwards decrease. If true, economic policies should allow extensive, although not
Bibliography: * Cole M., Rayner A., and Bates J., 1997. “The Environmental Kuznets Curve: an Empirical Analysis” from Environment and Development Economics 2. * Grossman G. & Krueger A., 1995. “Economic Growth and the Environment,” from Quarterly Journal of Economics. * Hanley N., Shrogen J., and White B., 2001. Introduction to Environmental Economics. * Heinberg, R., 2011. The End of Growth, Clairview books, Sussex UK. * Meadows, D.H. et al., 1972. The Limits to Growth, Universe Books. * Panayotou P., 1995. “Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development,” from Beyond Rio: The Environmental Crisis and Sustainable Livelihoods in the Third World. [ 3 ]. Nick Hanley, Jason F. Shrogen, and Ben White, 2001. Introduction to Environmental Economics. pg. 187. [ 4 ]. Cole, M., A. Rayner, and J. Bates, 1997. “The Environmental Kuznets Curve: an Empirical Analysis” from Environment and Development Economics 2. pgs 401-416. [ 6 ]. T. Selden and D. Song, 1994. “Environmental Quality and Development: Is There a Kuznets Curve for Air Pollution Emmisions?” from Journal of Environmental Economics and Manangement. Pgs. 147-162. [ 7 ]. G. Grossman and Alan Krueger, 1995. “Economic Growth and the Environment,” from Quarterly Journal of Economics, pgs. 353-377. [ 8 ]. Theodore Panayotou, 1995. “Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development,” from Beyond Rio: The Environmental Crisis and Sustainable Livelihoods in the Third World. [ 9 ]. Cole, M., A. Rayner, and J. Bates, 1997. “The Environmental Kuznets Curve: an Empirical Analysis” from Environment and Development Economics 2. pgs 401-416. [ 10 ]. Nick Hanley, Jason F. Shrogen, and Ben White, 2001. Introduction to Environmental Economics. pg. 132. [ 14 ]. Meadows, D.H. et al., 1972. The Limits to Growth, Universe Books. [ 15 ]. Heinberg, R., 2011. The End of Growth, Clairview books, Sussex UK.