Skip to main content

The economic growth/development and environmental degradation: evidence from the US state-level EKC hypothesis

Environmental Science and Pollution Research volume 26, pages 30772–30781 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

This study investigates the validity of the EKC (environmental Kuznets curve) hypothesis for the 50 US states and a Federal District (Washington, D.C.). To this aim, the common correlated effects (CCE) and the augmented mean group (AMG) estimation procedures are applied between 1980 and 2015. While the CCE estimation does not support EKC hypothesis, the AMG does. The empirical findings of the AMG estimation indicate that only 14 states verify the EKC hypothesis. Additionally, the expected negative impacts of fossil energy consumption on the environment (CO2 emissions) are strongly detected in all states except Texas. However, the expected positive impacts of renewable energy consumption on the CO2 emissions are detected only in 13 states. Furthermore, the expected negative impacts of the population are not detected in some mostly populated states like New York, Texas, and Ohio. The overall findings of this study may help the US state-level policy makers in two ways: first, to understand whether their economic growths are sustainable (eco-friendly); second, to see how their fossil and renewable energy consumptions affect their environments and to review their energy policies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  • Acaravci A, Ozturk I (2010) On the relationship between energy consumption, CO2 emissions and economic growth in Europe. Energy 35(12):5412–5420

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldy JE (2005) An environmental Kuznets curve analysis of US state-level carbon dioxide emissions. J Environ Dev 14(1):48–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Apergis N, Christou C, Gupta R (2017) Are there environmental Kuznets curves for US state-level CO2 emissions? Renew Sust Energ Rev 69:551–558

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Apergis N, Ozturk I (2015) Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in Asian countries. Ecol Indic 52(2015):16–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Atasoy BS (2017) Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis across the US: evidence from panel mean group estimators. Renew Sust Energ Rev 77:731–747

    Google Scholar 

  • Boluk G, Mert M (2015) The renewable energy, growth and environmental Kuznets curve in Turkey: an ARDL approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:587–595

    Google Scholar 

  • Breusch TS, Pagan AR (1980) The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Rev Econ Stud 47:239–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen PY, Chen ST, Hsu CS, Chen CC (2016) Modeling the global relationships among economic growth, energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Renew Sust Energ Rev 65:420–431

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Census (2019). US Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/data.html. Accessed 04/12/2018

  • Destek MA, Ulucak R, Dogan E (2018) Analyzing the environmental Kuznets curve for the EU countries: the role of ecological footprint. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:29387–29396

    Google Scholar 

  • Dogan E, Seker F, Bulbul S (2017) Investigating the impacts of energy consumption, real GDP, tourism and trade on CO2 emissions by accounting for cross-sectional dependence: a panel study of OECD countries. Curr Issue Tour 20(16):1701–1719

    Google Scholar 

  • Dogan E, Turkekul B (2016) CO2 emissions, real output, energy consumption, trade, urbanization and financial development: testing the EKC hypothesis for the USA. Environ Sci Pollut Control Res 23(2):1203–1213

    Google Scholar 

  • Dogan E, Seker F (2016a) Determinants of CO2 emissions in the European Union: the role of renewable and non-renewable energy. Renew Energy 94:429–439

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dogan E, Seker F (2016b) The influence of real output, renewable and non-renewable energy, trade and financial development on carbon emissions in the top renewable energy countries. Renew Sust Energ Rev 60:1074–1085

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhardt M, Bond S (2009) Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: a novel estimator, MPRA Paper 17692. University Library of Munich, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • EIA, (2019). U.S. Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/. Accessed 04/12/2018

  • Esteve V, Tamarit C (2012) Is there an environmental Kuznets curve for Spain? Fresh evidence from old data. Econ Model 29(6):2696–2703

    Google Scholar 

  • Farhani S, Mrizak S, Chaibi A, Rault C (2014) The environmental Kuznets curve and sustainability: a panel data analysis. Energy Policy 71:189–198

    Google Scholar 

  • FED, (2019). (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis). https://research.stlouisfed.org/. Accessed 04/12/2018

  • Franklin RS, Ruth M (2012) Growing up and cleaning up: the environmental Kuznets curve redux. Appl Geogr 32(1):29–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedl B, Getzner M (2003) Determinants of CO2 emissions in a small open economy. Ecol Econ 45(1):133–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, G. M., and Krueger, A. B. (1991). Environmental impact of a North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER Working paper, 3914.

  • Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1995) Economic growth and the environment. Q J Econ 110:353–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Halicioglu F (2009) An econometric study of CO2 emissions, energy consumption, income and foreign trade in Turkey. Energy Policy 37(3):1156–1164

    Google Scholar 

  • He J, Richard P (2010) Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 in Canada. Ecol Econ 69(5):1083–1093

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidari H, Katircioğlu ST, Saeidpour L (2015) Economic growth, CO2 emissions, and energy consumption in the five ASEAN countries. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 64:785–791

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzer D, Vollmer S (2012) Inequality and growth: evidence from panel cointegration. J Econ Inequal 10:489–503

    Google Scholar 

  • Hettige H, Lucas REB, Wheeler D (1992) The toxic intensity of industrial production: global patterns, trends, and trade policy. Am Econ Rev 82:478–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Işik C (2010) Natural gas consumption and economic growth in Turkey: a bound test approach. Energy Syst 1(4), 441–456

    Google Scholar 

  • Işık C, Shahbaz M (2015) Energy consumption and economic growth: a panel data aproach to OECD countries. International Journal of Energy Science 5(1), 1–5

  • Isik C, Kasımatı E, Ongan S (2017) Analyzing the causalities between economic growth, financial development, international trade, tourism expenditure and/on the CO2 emissions in Greece. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 12(7):665–673

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Isik C. Radulescu M (2017) Investigation of the relationship between renewable energy, tourism receipts and economic growth in Europe. Statistika-Statistics and Economy Journal 97(2), 85–94

  • Isik C, Dogru T, Turk ES (2018) A nexus of linear and non‐linear relationships between tourism demand, renewable energy consumption, and economic growth: Theory and evidence. Int J Tour Res 20(1), 38–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Isik C, Ongan S, Ozdemir D (2019) Testing the EKC hypothesis for ten US states: an application of heterogeneous panel estimation method. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:10846–10853 1-8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jobert T, Karanfil F, Tykhonenko A (2014) Estimating country-specific environmental Kuznets curves from panel data: a Bayesian shrinkage approach. Appl Econ 46(13):1449–1464

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuznets S (1955) Economic growth and income inequality. Am Econ Rev 65(1):1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindmark M (2002) An EKC-pattern in historical perspective: carbon dioxide emissions, technology, fuel prices and growth in Sweden 1870–1997. Ecol Econ 42(1):333–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Nasreen S, Anwar S, Ozturk I (2017) Financial stability, energy consumption and environmental quality: evidence from South Asian economies. Renew Sust Energ Rev 67:1105–1122

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Narayan PK, Narayan S (2010) Carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth: panel data evidence from developing countries. Energy Policy 38(1):661–666

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozokcu S, Ozdemir O (2017) Economic growth, energy, and environmental Kuznets curve. Renew Sust Energ Rev 72(2017):639–647

    Google Scholar 

  • Panayotou T (1993) Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development,’ Working Paper WP238, Technology and Employment Programme. International Labor Office, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Panayotou T (1995) Environmental degradation at different stages of economic development. In: Ahmed I, Doeleman JA (eds) Beyond Rio (The environmental crisis and sustainable livelihoods in the third world). International Labor Organization, Macmillan Press Ltd., London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran, M. H (2004). General diagnostic tests for corss section dependence in panels. IZA Discussion Paper, 1240.

  • Pesaran MH (2006) Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica 74(4):967–1012

    Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econ 22:265–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Roca J, Padilla E, Farré M, Galletto V (2001) Economic growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: discussing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. Ecol Econ 39(1):85–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Selden TM, Song D (1994) Environmental quality and development: is there a Kuznets curve for air pollution emissions? J Environ Econ Manag, XXVII 27:147–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern DI, Common MS, Barbier EB (1996) Economic growth and environmental degradation: the environmental Kuznets curve and sustainable development. World Dev 24(7):1151–1160 Great Britain: Elsevier Science Ltd

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincent, J. (1996). Pollution and economic development in natural resources, environment and development, in Malaysia: a economic perspective, by Jeffrey Vincent, Rozali bin Mohamed Ali, and Associates.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Tourism, Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey

    Cem Isik

  2. Department of Economics, St. Mary’s College of Maryland, St. Mary’s City, MD, 20686, USA

    Serdar Ongan

  3. Faculty of Economics, Atatürk University, 25240, Erzurum, Turkey

    Dilek Özdemir

Authors
  1. Cem Isik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Serdar Ongan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dilek Özdemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cem Isik.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Responsible editor: Eyup Dogan

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DTA 51 kb)

ESM 2

(TXT 23 kb)

ESM 3

(XLSX 355 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Isik, C., Ongan, S. & Özdemir, D. The economic growth/development and environmental degradation: evidence from the US state-level EKC hypothesis . Environ Sci Pollut Res 26, 30772–30781 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06276-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06276-7

Keywords

  • Environmental Kuznets curve (EKC)
  • Fossil and renewable energy consumptions
  • Cross-sectional dependence
  • CCE
  • AMG

Jel classification

  • Q00
  • Q2
  • Q3
  • Q5