Advertisement

Population and Environment

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 283–302 | Cite as

Population, immigration, and air quality in the USA: a spatial panel study

  • Guizhen MaEmail author
  • Erin Trouth Hofmann
Original Paper

Abstract

The role of population size in environmental degradation is a source of both political and academic debate, with the role of immigrant population being particularly salient in developed countries such as the USA. We test the relationship between two population specifications and air quality in the US context, using spatial panel analysis of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Air Quality Index, population, and other explanatory variables for contiguous US counties from 2007 to 2014. We find that both population in general and immigrant population in particular are associated with better, rather than worse air quality. These results are in line with political economy theories arguing that population is not the root cause of environmental problems and coincide with empirical findings of ecologically unequal exchange between core and peripheral countries.

Keywords

Spatial panel model Population Immigration Environment Air quality USA 

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by Utah Agricultural Experiment Station (grant number UTA01269).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Allison, P. D. (2012a). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Allison, P. D. (2012b). Why you probably need more imputations than you think. Statistical Horizons. Available at http://statisticalhorizons.com/more-imputationsal. Cited 14 May 2018.
  3. Angus, I., & Butler, S. (2011). Too many people? Population, immigration, and the environmental crisis. Haymarket Books.Google Scholar
  4. Anselin, L. (1988). Spatial econometrics: methods and models. Dorddrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Atiles, J. H., & Bohon, S. A. (2003). Camas calientes: housing adjustments and barriers to social and economic adaptation among Georgia’s rural Latinos. Southern Rural Sociology, 19(1), 97–122.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, R. (1996). The case against immigration: the moral, economic, social, and environmental reasons for reducing immigration back to traditional levels. New York: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  7. Blumenberg, E., & Shiki, K. (2008). Immigrants and resource sharing: the case of carpooling. Transportation Research Board 87th Annual Meeting, 22. Google Scholar
  8. Bodner, T. E. (2008). What improves with increased missing data imputations? Structural Equation Modeling, 15(4), 651–675.Google Scholar
  9. Bohon, S. A., Stamps, K., & Atiles, J. H. (2008). Transportation and migrant adjustment in Georgia. Population Research and Policy Review, 27(3), 273–291.Google Scholar
  10. Bunker, S. G. (1984). Modes of extraction, unequal exchange, and the progressive underdevelopment of an extreme periphery: the Brazilian Amazon, 1600-1980. The American Journal of Sociology, 89(5), 1017–1064.Google Scholar
  11. Cafaro, P. (2015). How many is too many? The progressive argument for reducing immigration into the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Carter, E. D., Silva, B., & Guzmán, G. (2013). Migration, acculturation, and environmental values: the case of Mexican immigrants in central Iowa. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(1), 129–147.Google Scholar
  13. Chapman, R. L. (2006). Confessions of a Malthusian restrictionist. Ecological Economics, 59(2), 214–219.Google Scholar
  14. Chatman, D. G., & Klein, N. (2009). Immigrants and travel demand in the United States: implications for transportation policy and future research. Public Works Management & Policy, 13(4), 312–327.Google Scholar
  15. Chen, X., Shao, S., Tian, Z., Xie, Z., & Yin, P. (2017). Impacts of air pollution and its spatial spillover effect on public health based on China’s big data sample. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 915–925.Google Scholar
  16. Ciplet, D., Roberts, T., & Khan, M. (2015). Power in a warming world: the new global politics of climate change and the remaking of environmental inequality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Clement, M. T., & York, R. (2017). The asymmetric environmental consequences of population change: an exploratory county-level study of land development in the USA, 2001-2011. Population and Environment, 39(1), 47–68.Google Scholar
  18. Cole, M. A., & Neumayer, E. (2004). Examining the impact of demographic factors on air pollution. Population and Environment, 26(1), 5–21.Google Scholar
  19. Commoner, B. (1972a). The closing circle: confronting the environmental crisis. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
  20. Commoner, B. (1972b). The environmental cost of economic growth. In R. G. Ridker (Ed.), Population Resources and the Environment (pp. 339–363). Washington, DC: GPO.Google Scholar
  21. Cramer, J. C. (1998). Population growth and air quality in California. Demography, 35(1), 45–56.Google Scholar
  22. Cramer, J. C. (2002). Population growth and local air pollution: methods, models, and results. Population and Development Review, 28, 22–52.Google Scholar
  23. Cramer, J. C., & Cheney, R. P. (2000). Lost in the ozone: population growth and ozone in California. Population and Environment, 21(3), 315–337.Google Scholar
  24. Dietz, T., & Rosa, E. A. (1994). Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Human Ecology Review, 1(2), 277–300.Google Scholar
  25. Dietz, T., & Rosa, E. A. (1997). Effects of population and affluence on CO2 emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94(1), 175–179.Google Scholar
  26. Duncan, O. D. (1961). From social system to ecosystem. Sociological Inquiry, 31(2), 140–149.Google Scholar
  27. Duncan, O. D. (1964). Social organization and the ecosystem. In R. E. Faris (Ed.), Handbook of modern sociology (pp. 36–82). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  28. Ehrlich, P. R., & Holdren, J. P. (1971). Impact of population growth. Science, 171, 1212–1217.Google Scholar
  29. Ehrlich, P. R., & Ehrlich, A. H. (1991). The most overpopulated nation. NPG Forum Series, 1–4.Google Scholar
  30. Elhorst, J. P. (2001). Dynamic models in space and time. Geogr Anal, 33(2), 119–140.Google Scholar
  31. Elhorst, J. P. (2012). Dynamic spatial panels: models, methods, and inferences. Journal of Geographical Systems, 14(1), 5–28.Google Scholar
  32. Elhorst, J. P. (2014). Spatial econometrics: from cross-sectional data to spatial panels. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Elliott, J. R., & Clement, M. T. (2015). Developing spatial inequalities in carbon appropriation: a sociological analysis of changing local emissions across the United States. Social Science Research, 51, 119–131.Google Scholar
  34. Enders, C. K. (2010). Applied missing data analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  35. Ewing, W. A. (2004). Missing the forest for the trees: the environmental arguments of immigration restrictionists miss the point. Restrictionist Watch. Available at https://www.shusterman.com/pdf/restrict504.pdf. Cited 1 Jan 2018.
  36. Finkel, S. E. (1995). Causal analysis with panel data (no. 105). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Foster, J. B., Clark, B., & York, R. (2011). The ecological rift: capitalism’s war on the earth. New York, NY: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  38. Pew Research Center, 2015. Modern immigration wave brings 59 million to U.S., driving population growth and change through 2065: views of immigration’s impact on U.S. society mixed. Washington, D.C.: September.Google Scholar
  39. Garling, S. (1998). Immigration policy and the environment: the Washington DC metropolitan area. Population and Environment, 20(1), 23–54.Google Scholar
  40. Graham, J. W., Olchowski, A. E., & Gilreath, T. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory. Prev Sci, 8(3), 206–213.Google Scholar
  41. Harrison, P. (1993). The third revolution. London, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
  42. Havard, S., Deguen, S., Zmirou-Navier, D., Schillinger, C., & Bard, D. (2009). Traffic-related air pollution and socioeconomic status: a spatial autocorrelation study to assess environmental equity on a small-area scale. Epidemiology, 20(2), 223–230.Google Scholar
  43. Hoekstra, R., Michel, B., & Suh, S. (2016). The emission cost of international sourcing: using structural decomposition analysis to calculate the contribution of international sourcing to CO2-emission growth. Economic Systems Research, 28(2), 151–167.Google Scholar
  44. Hultgren, J. (2014). The “nature” of American immigration restrictionism. New Political Science, 36(1), 52–75.Google Scholar
  45. Hunter, L. M. (2000). A comparison of the environmental attitudes, concern, and behaviors of US-born and foreign-born US residents. Population and Environment, 21(6), 565–580.Google Scholar
  46. Jorgenson, A. K., & Clark, B. (2009). Ecologically unequal exchange in comparative perspective: a brief introduction. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 50(3–4), 211–214.Google Scholar
  47. Kraly, E. P. (1995). US immigration and the environment: scientific research and analytic issues. US Commission on Immigration Reform Research Paper. Washington, DC: US Commission on Immigration Reform.Google Scholar
  48. Kraly, E. P. (1998). Immigration and environment: a framework for establishing a possible relationship. Population Research and Policy Review, 17(5), 421–437.Google Scholar
  49. Lankao, P. R., Tribbia, J. L., & Nychka, D. (2009). Testing theories to explore the drivers of cities’ atmospheric emissions. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 38(4), 236–244.Google Scholar
  50. Laureti, T., Montero, J. M., & Fernández-Avilés, G. (2014). A local scale analysis on influencing factors of NOx emissions: evidence from the community of Madrid, Spain. Energy Policy, 74, 557–568.Google Scholar
  51. Laumbach, R. J. (2010). Outdoor air pollutants and patient health. Am Fam Physician, 81(2), 175.Google Scholar
  52. Lee, C. C., Ballinger, T. J., & Domino, N. A. (2012). Utilizing map pattern classification and surface weather typing to relate climate to the Air Quality Index in Cleveland. Ohio Atmospheric environment, 63, 50–59.Google Scholar
  53. Lee, G., You, S., Ritchie, S., Saphores, J. D., Sangkapichai, M., & Jayakrishnan, R. (2009). Environmental impacts of a major freight corridor: a study of I-710 in California. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2123, 119–128.Google Scholar
  54. LeSage, J. P., & Pace, R. K. (2009). Introduction to spatial econometrics. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  55. Ma, G., & Hofmann, E. T. (2018). Immigration and environment in the USA: a spatial study of air quality. The Social Science Journal.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.08.007.
  56. Malthus, T. R. (1798). An essay on the principle of population: the first edition (1798) with introduction and bibliography (the works of Thomas Robert Malthus). W. Pickering.Google Scholar
  57. McCarty, J., & Kaza, N. (2015). Urban form and air quality in the United States. Landsc Urban Plan, 139, 168–179.Google Scholar
  58. Muradian, R. (2006). Immigration and the environment: underlying values and scope of analysis. Ecological Economics, 59(2), 208–213.Google Scholar
  59. National Research Council. (2007). Using the American community survey: benefits and challenges. National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  60. Neumayer, E. (2006). The environment: one more reason to keep immigrants out? Ecological Economics, 59(2), 204–207.Google Scholar
  61. Normandin, S., & Valles, S. A. (2015). How a network of conservationists and population control activists created the contemporary US anti-immigration movement. Endeavour, 39(2), 95–105.Google Scholar
  62. Pan, J., Phillips, J., & Chen, Y. (2008). China’s balance of emissions embodied in trade: approaches to measurement and allocating international responsibility. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 24(2), 354–376.Google Scholar
  63. Park, L. S. H., & Pellow, D. N. (2011). The slums of Aspen: immigrants vs. the environment in America’s Eden. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Pfeffer, M. J., & Stycos, M. J. (2002). Immigrant environmental behaviors in New York City. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 64–68.Google Scholar
  65. Prell, C., & Feng, K. (2016). Unequal carbon exchanges: the environmental and economic impacts of iconic US consumption items. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 20(3), 537–546.Google Scholar
  66. Preston, S. H. (1996). The effect of population growth on environmental quality. Population Research and Policy Review, 15(2), 95–108.Google Scholar
  67. Price, C. E., & Feldmeyer, B. (2012). The environmental impact of immigration: an analysis of the effects of immigrant concentration on air pollution levels. Population Research Policy Review, 31(1), 119–140.Google Scholar
  68. Qiu, S., & Kaza, N. (2017). Evaluating the impacts of the clean cities program. Science of The Total Environment, 579, 254–262.Google Scholar
  69. Rice, J. (2007). Ecological unequal exchange: international trade and uneven utilization of environmental space in the world system. Social Forces, 85(3), 1369–1392.Google Scholar
  70. Rothman, D. S. (1998). Environmental Kuznets curves-real progress or passing the buck? Ecological Economics, 25(2), 177–194.Google Scholar
  71. Roberts, J. T., & Parks, B. C. (2007). Fueling injustice: globalization, ecologically unequal exchange and climate change. Globalizations, 4(2), 193–210.Google Scholar
  72. Roberts, T. D. (2014). Intergenerational transfers in US county-level CO2 emissions 2007. Population and Environment, 35(4), 365–390.Google Scholar
  73. Rubin, D. B. (1996). Multiple imputation after 18+ years. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434), 473–489.Google Scholar
  74. Sato, M. (2014). Embodied carbon in trade: a survey of the empirical literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 28(5), 831–861.Google Scholar
  75. Schnaiberg, A. (1980). The environment: from surplus to scarcity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Shi, A. (2003). The impact of population pressure on global carbon dioxide emissions, 1975–1996: evidence from pooled cross-country data. Ecological Economics, 44(1), 24–42.Google Scholar
  77. Squalli, J. (2009). Immigration and environmental emissions: a U.S. county-level analysis. Population and Environment, 30(6), 247–260.Google Scholar
  78. Squalli, J. (2010). An empirical assessment of U.S. state-level immigration and environmental emissions. Ecological Economics, 69(5), 1170–1175.Google Scholar
  79. Stretesky, P. B., & Lynch, M. J. (2009). A cross-national study of the association between per capita carbon dioxide emissions and exports to the United States. Social Science Research, 38(1), 239–250.Google Scholar
  80. Takahashi, B., Duan, R., & Van Witsen, A. (2018). Hispanics’ behavioral intentions toward energy conservation: the role of sociodemographic, informational, and attitudinal variables. Social Science Quarterly, 99(1), 341–361.Google Scholar
  81. Van Buuren, S., Boshuizen, H. C., & Knook, D. L. (1999). Multiple imputation of missing blood pressure covariates in survival analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 18(6), 681–694.Google Scholar
  82. Weber, C. L., & Matthews, H. S. (2007). Embodied environmental emissions in US international trade, 1997− 2004. Environmental Science & Technology, 41(14), 4875–4881.Google Scholar
  83. White, I. R., & Carlin, J. B. (2010). Bias and efficiency of multiple imputation compared with complete-case analysis for missing covariate values. Statistics in Medicine, 29(28), 2920–2931.Google Scholar
  84. White, I. R., Royston, P., & Wood, A. M. (2011). Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Statistics in Medicine, 30(4), 377–399.Google Scholar
  85. York, R., Rosa, E. A., & Dietz, T. (2003). STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts. Ecological Economics, 46(3), 351–365.Google Scholar
  86. York, R., & Rosa, E. A. (2012). Choking on modernity: a human ecology of air pollution. Social Problems, 59(2), 282–300.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology, Social Work & AnthropologyUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations