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

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

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.

  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.

  8. Bodner, T. E. (2008). What improves with increased missing data imputations? Structural Equation Modeling, 15(4), 651–675.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chapman, R. L. (2006). Confessions of a Malthusian restrictionist. Ecological Economics, 59(2), 214–219.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Duncan, O. D. (1961). From social system to ecosystem. Sociological Inquiry, 31(2), 140–149.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ehrlich, P. R., & Ehrlich, A. H. (1991). The most overpopulated nation. NPG Forum Series, 1–4.

  30. Elhorst, J. P. (2001). Dynamic models in space and time. Geogr Anal, 33(2), 119–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Elhorst, J. P. (2012). Dynamic spatial panels: models, methods, and inferences. Journal of Geographical Systems, 14(1), 5–28.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

  39. Garling, S. (1998). Immigration policy and the environment: the Washington DC metropolitan area. Population and Environment, 20(1), 23–54.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hultgren, J. (2014). The “nature” of American immigration restrictionism. New Political Science, 36(1), 52–75.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

  48. Kraly, E. P. (1998). Immigration and environment: a framework for establishing a possible relationship. Population Research and Policy Review, 17(5), 421–437.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

  57. McCarty, J., & Kaza, N. (2015). Urban form and air quality in the United States. Landsc Urban Plan, 139, 168–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Muradian, R. (2006). Immigration and the environment: underlying values and scope of analysis. Ecological Economics, 59(2), 208–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. National Research Council. (2007). Using the American community survey: benefits and challenges. National Academies Press.

  60. Neumayer, E. (2006). The environment: one more reason to keep immigrants out? Ecological Economics, 59(2), 204–207.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Preston, S. H. (1996). The effect of population growth on environmental quality. Population Research and Policy Review, 15(2), 95–108.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Qiu, S., & Kaza, N. (2017). Evaluating the impacts of the clean cities program. Science of The Total Environment, 579, 254–262.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Rothman, D. S. (1998). Environmental Kuznets curves-real progress or passing the buck? Ecological Economics, 25(2), 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Roberts, J. T., & Parks, B. C. (2007). Fueling injustice: globalization, ecologically unequal exchange and climate change. Globalizations, 4(2), 193–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Roberts, T. D. (2014). Intergenerational transfers in US county-level CO2 emissions 2007. Population and Environment, 35(4), 365–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Rubin, D. B. (1996). Multiple imputation after 18+ years. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434), 473–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Sato, M. (2014). Embodied carbon in trade: a survey of the empirical literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 28(5), 831–861.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Squalli, J. (2009). Immigration and environmental emissions: a U.S. county-level analysis. Population and Environment, 30(6), 247–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Squalli, J. (2010). An empirical assessment of U.S. state-level immigration and environmental emissions. Ecological Economics, 69(5), 1170–1175.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. York, R., & Rosa, E. A. (2012). Choking on modernity: a human ecology of air pollution. Social Problems, 59(2), 282–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

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

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guizhen Ma.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Notes

1. This information was learned through communication with Senior Statistician David Mintz of Air Quality Analysis Group at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during February 21 and 23, 2017.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ma, G., Hofmann, E.T. Population, immigration, and air quality in the USA: a spatial panel study. Popul Environ 40, 283–302 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-018-0311-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Spatial panel model
  • Population
  • Immigration
  • Environment
  • Air quality
  • USA