PRACA ORYGINALNA
Teoretyczne rekonstrukcje środowiskowej krzywej Kuznetsa
Lech Gruszecki 1  
,  
 
 
Więcej
Ukryj
1
Katedra Zastosowań Matematyki, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
2
Katedra Ekonomii Międzynarodowej, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
AUTOR DO KORESPONDENCJI
Bartosz Jóźwik   

Katedra Ekonomii Międzynarodowej, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II, Al. Racławickie 14, 20-950, Lublin, Polska
Data publikacji: 30-09-2019
Data nadesłania: 07-02-2019
Data ostatniej rewizji: 05-07-2019
Data akceptacji: 10-07-2019
 
Gospodarka Narodowa 2019;299(3):95–117
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
KODY KLASYFIKACJI JEL
STRESZCZENIE ARTYKUŁU
Celem artykułu jest przegląd ekonomicznych modeli środowiskowej krzywej Kuznetsa, które uwzględniają zjawiska konstytutywne dla współczesnej gospodarki. Dokonując przeglądu modeli, odpowiadamy na pytanie, w jaki sposób zmiana poziomu rozwoju gospodarczego mierzonego wartością PKB per capita może wpływać na degradację albo poprawę jakości środowiska oraz jakie inne czynniki – związane pośrednio z poziomem rozwoju gospodarczego – mogą mieć istotny wpływ na omawianą relację? W artykule podjęto próbę wielowymiarowej charakterystyki tego zjawiska, zestawiając różnorodne modele, co umożliwia zdefiniowanie szerszego zakresu badań tej relacji i może się przyczynić do lepszego zrozumienia jej strukturalnych własności. Z przeprowadzonych studiów literatury wiemy, że istotne dla wyniku badań hipotezy środowiskowej krzywej Kuznetsa i ich interpretacji są dokładne charakterystyki: procesu degradacji środowiska (rozróżnienie pomiędzy czynnikami natychmiastowej degradacji środowiska a zanieczyszczeniami kumulującymi się w czasie) oraz kilku czynników związanych z dochodem – PKB per capita (dochodowej elastyczności popytu na jakość środowiska, nierówności społecznych, wzrostu populacji, a także liberalizacji handlu).
 
REFERENCJE (46)
1.
Allard A., Takman J., Uddin G. S., Ahmed A. [2018], The N-shaped environmental Kuznets curve: an empirical evaluation using a panel quantile regression approach, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 25, no. 6: 5848–5861.
 
2.
Alvarez-Herranz A., Balsalobre-Lorente D. [2015], Energy Regulation in the EKC Model with a Dampening Effect, J Environ Anall Chem, vol. 2, no. 3: 1–10.
 
3.
Amri F. [2018], Carbon dioxide emissions, total factor productivity, ICT, trade, financial development, and energy consumption: testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Tunisia, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 25, no. 33: 33691–33701.
 
4.
Andreoni J., Levinson A. [2001], The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve, Journal of Public Economics, vol. 80: 269–286.
 
5.
Antonakakis, N., Chatziantoniou, I., Filis, G. [2017], Energy consumption, CO2 emissions, and economic growth. An ethical dilemma, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, no. 68 (Part 1): 808–824.
 
6.
Beltratti A. [1996], Models of economic growth with environmental assets, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
 
7.
Borghesi S. [2000], Inequality, Growth and the Environment: A Steady-State Analysis of the Kuznets Curve and the Environmental Kuznets Curve, SSRN Electronic Journal, no. 290: 1–29.
 
8.
Boyce J. K. [1994], Inequality as a cause of environmental degradation, Ecological Economics, vol. 11, no. 3: 169–178.
 
9.
Boyce J. K. [2008], Is inequality bad for the environment? w: R. C. Wilkinson, W. R. Freudenburg (red.), Equity and the Environment, Elsevier, London: 267–288.
 
10.
Churchill, S. A., Inekwe, J., Ivanovski, K., Smyth, R. [2018], The Environmental Kuznets Curve in the OECD: 1870–2014, Energy Economics, 75 (C): 389–399.
 
11.
Copeland B. R., Taylor M. S. [2004], Trade, Growth, and the Environment, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 42, no. 1: 7–71.
 
12.
Dinda S. [2006], Globalization and Environment: Can Pollution Haven Hypothesis alone explain the impact of Globalization on Environment? Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
 
13.
Grossman G. M., Krueger A. B. [1991], Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement, NBER Working Paper Series, no. 39.
 
14.
Heidari, H., Katircioglu, S. T., Saeidpour, L. [2015], Economic growth, CO2 emissions, and energy consumption in the five ASEAN countries, Electrical Power and Energy Systems, no. 64: 785–791.
 
15.
Heil, M. T., Selden, T. M. [2001], Carbon emissions and economic development: future trajectories based on historical experience, Environment and Development Economics, no. 6: 63–83.
 
16.
Kaika D., Zervas E. [2013], The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) theory. Part A Concept, causes and the CO2 emissions case, Energy Policy, vol. 62: 1392–1402.
 
17.
Kaika D., Zervas E. [2013], The environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) theory. Part B Critical issues, Energy Policy, vol. 62: 1403–1411.
 
18.
Kais, S., Sami, H. [2016], An econometric study of the impact of economic growth and energy use on carbon emissions. Panel data evidence from fifty eight countries, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, no. 59 (C): 1101–1110.
 
19.
Kasuga H., Takaya M. [2017], Does inequality affect environmental quality? Evidence from major Japanese cities, Journal of Cleaner Production, no. 142: 3689–3701.
 
20.
Khanna N., Plassmann F. [2004], The demand for environmental quality and the environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis, Ecological Economics, vol. 51, no. 3–4: 225–236.
 
21.
Kuznets S. [1955], Economic growth and income inequality, American Economic Review, vol. 45, no. 1: 1–28.
 
22.
Kuznets S. [1963], Quantitative Aspects of the Economic Growth of Nations: VIII. Distribution of Income by Size, Economic Development and Cultural Change, vol. 11, no. 2: 1–80.
 
23.
Kyophilavong P., Shahbaz M., Anwar S., Masood S. [2015], The energy-growth nexus in Thailand: Does trade openness boost up energy consumption? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 46: 265–274.
 
24.
Lau L.‑S., Choong C.‑K., Ng C.‑F., Liew F.‑M., Ching S.‑L. [2018], Is nuclear energy clean? Revisit of Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in OECD countries, Economic Modelling, no. 77: 12–20.
 
25.
Lieb C. M. [2004], The Environmental Kuznets Curve and Flow versus Stock Pollution: The Neglect of Future Damages, Environmental Resource Economics, vol. 29: 483–506.
 
26.
Liu Q., Wang S., Zhang W., Li J., Kong Y. [2018], Examining the effects of income inequality on CO2 emissions Evidence from non-spatial and spatial perspectives, Applied Energy, vol. 236: 163–171.
 
27.
Lopez R. [1994], The Environment as a Factor of Production: The Effects of Economic Growth and Trade Liberalization, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 27: 163–184.
 
28.
Magnani E. [2000], The Environmental Kuznets Curve, environmental protection policy and income distribution, Ecological Economics, vol. 32: 431–443.
 
29.
Martinez-Zarzoso I., Vidovic M., Voicu A. M. [2017], Are the Central East European Countries Pollution Havens? Journal of Environment Development, vol. 26, no. 1: 25–50.
 
30.
McConnell K. E. [1997], Income and the demand for environmental quality, Environment and Development Economics, vol. 2, no. 2: 383–399.
 
31.
Özokcu S., Özdemir Ö. [2017], Economic growth, energy, and environmental Kuznets curve, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 72: 639–647.
 
32.
Pablo-Romero P. M., Sánchez-Braza, A. [2017], Residential energy environmental Kuznets curve in the EU-28, Energy, vol. 125: 44–54.
 
33.
Padhan H., Haouas I., Sahoo B., Heshmati A. [2018], What Matters for Environmental Quality in the Next-11 Countries: Economic Growth or Income Inequality? Discussion Paper Series IZA: 1–26.
 
34.
Panayotou T. [1993], Empirical Tests and Policy Analysis of Environmental Degradation at Different Stages of Economic Development, Working Paper No. 992927783402676, International Labour Organization, Geneva.
 
35.
Roca, J., Padilla, E., Farre, M., Galletto, V. [2001], Economic growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: discussing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis, Ecological Economics, no. 39: 85–99.
 
36.
Saidi K., Ben Mbarek M. [2017], The impact of income, trade, urbanization, and financial development on CO2 emissions in 19 emerging economies, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 24, no. 14: 12 748–12 757.
 
37.
Sarkodie, S. A. [2018], The invisible hand and EKC hypothesis: what are the drivers of environmental degradation and pollution in Africa? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, no. 25: 21 993–22 022.
 
38.
Shafik N., Bandyopadhyay S. [1992], Economic growth and environmental quality: time-series and cross-country evidence, World Bank Publications, vol. 904.
 
39.
Shahbaz M., Nasreen S., Ling C. H., Sbia R. [2014], Causality between trade openness and energy consumption: What causes what in high, middle and low income countries, Energy Policy, vol. 70: 126–143.
 
40.
Shahbaz M., Sinha A. [2018], Environmental Kuznets Curve for CO2 Emission: A Literature Survey, Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
 
41.
Stern D. I. [2004], The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve, World Development, vol. 32, no. 8: 1419–1439.
 
42.
Stern, D. I., Common, M. S. [2001], Is There and Environmental Kuznets Curve for Sulfur? Journal of Economics and Management, no. 41: 162–178.
 
43.
Torras M., Boyce J. K. [1998], Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the environmental Kuznets Curve, Ecological Economics, vol. 25: 147–160.
 
44.
Ulucak, R., Bilgili, F. [2018], A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries, Journal of Cleaner Production, no. 188: 144–157.
 
45.
Wang S. X., Fu Y. B., Zhang Z. G. [2015], Population growth and the environmental Kuznets curve, China Economic Review, vol. 36: 146–165.
 
46.
Zaman, K., Moemen, M. A.‑E. [2017], Energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions and economic development. Evaluating alternative and plausible environmental hypothesis for sustainable growth, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, no. 74: 1119–1130.
 
eISSN:2300-5238
ISSN:0867-0005