Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Compelling Evidence of an Environmental Kuznets Curve in the United Kingdom

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to investigate the relationship between per capita emissions (\(\hbox {CO}_{2}\) and \(\hbox {SO}_{2}\)) and economic growth (per capita GDP) in the UK using a long span of data. This paper examines the existence of a non-linear relationship between emissions and economic growth using methods that do not restrict the relationship to be any particular shape. The methodology employs instrumental variables in the place of per capita GDP to deal with potential concerns about errors in variables and endogeneity. The empirical results provide strong support for the environmental Kuznets curve, with estimated turning points in 1966 and 1967 for \(\hbox {CO}_{2}\) and \(\hbox {SO}_{2}\) , respectively. These turning points correspond roughly with the introduction of the Clean Air Act in the UK as well as the reduction in the use of coal as an energy source; and together, they provide a snapshot of the forces driving the turning points. The paper continues by further investigating the temporal behavior of the inverted U-shaped relationship. The findings indicate that if emissions and per capita GDP deviate from their long-run relationship, emissions do the “heavy lifting” to restore the system to equilibrium. This result is intuitively pleasing because mitigation is directly affected by legislation as opposed to declining economic growth.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A simple search of this journal’s articles over the last decade provide dozens of references to article published on the environmental Kuznets curve.

  2. See Wagner (2008) for a relatively recent review. The point at which the environmental Kuznets curve turns is given by the income level at which the derivative of \(\hbox {Y}_\mathrm{t}\) with respect to \(\hbox {X}_\mathrm{t}\) equals zero \((-{\upbeta }_{1}/2{\upbeta }_{2})\).

  3. The decision to use the natural logarithm of the data series follows Fosten et al. (2012), Esteve and Tamarit (2012b), Markandya et al. (2006) and Perman and Stern (2003) among others.

  4. We thank Bruce Morley for providing the data used in their analysis. The following data description is from Fosten et al. (2012, p. 27). The \(\hbox {SO}_{2}\) data is similar to that used by Markandya et al. (2006), who reported evidence of an environmental Kuznets curve for 12 European nations, including the UK.

  5. The first stage regressions run the logarithm of per capita GDP against a constant, a linear trend, and the four economic series. Figure 1 presents the associated levels of per capita GDP taking the exponents of the fitted values.

  6. BBC (December 19, 1956).

  7. See digest of Department of Energy and Climate Change (2009).

  8. Seo (2008) employed 200 bootstrap replications whereas we use 1,000 to simulate the distribution of the test statistic. The CO2 p value is 3.15% while the SO2 p value is close to zero.

  9. Gonzalo and Pitarakis (2006) argue that the traditional VECM representation, usually used within the Johansen and Juselius (1990) approach to cointegration modeling, cannot be derived from a non-linearly cointegrated system because the first-differences of the series need not be stationary. Here, the final model involves an OLS regression on the basis functions based on the transformed regressors, so the Engle–Granger VECM representation can be employed.

  10. The band-TAR model was introduced by Balke and Fomby (1997).

  11. We thank Daiki Maki for providing the GAUSS code required to run the test.

  12. Specifically, we used 1,000 replications for sample sizes 153 and 174 under the null of non-cointegration and tabulated the 1, 5 and 10 % critical values.

References

  • BBC (1956) December 19. Thick fog causes death on roads. Retrieved June 27, 2013 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/19/newsid_3280000/3280473.stm

  • Balke NS, Fomby TB (1997) Threshold cointegration. Int Econ Rev 38(3):627–645

  • Department of Energy and Climate Change (2009) 60th Anniversary digest of the United Kingdom energy statistics. London: HMSO. Retrieved June 2013 from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/digest-of-uk-energy-statistics-dukes-60th-anniversary

  • Elliott G, Rothenberg TJ, Stock JH (1996) Efficient tests for an autoregressive unit root. Econometrica 64(4):813–836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle RF, Granger CWJ (1987) Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55(2):251–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esteve V, Tamarit C (2012b) Threshold cointegration and nonlinear adjustment between CO2 and income: the environmental Kuznets curve in Spain, 1857–2007. Energy Econ 34:2148–2156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fosten J, Morley B, Taylor T (2012) Dynamic misspecification in the environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from \(\text{ CO }_{2}\) and \(\text{ SO }_{2}\) emissions in the United Kingdom. Ecol Econ 76:25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman JH (1991) Multivariate adaptive regression splines. Ann Stat 19(1):1–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalo J, Pitarakis Y (2002) Estimation and model selection based inference in single and multiple threshold models. J Econom 110(2):319–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalo J, Pitarakis Y (2006) Threshold effects in multivariate error correction models. In: Mills TC, Patterson K (eds) Palgrave handbook of econometrics: volume 1 : econometric theory. Palgrave Macmillan, Great Britain, pp 578–609

    Google Scholar 

  • Hills S, Thomas R (2010) The UK recession in context—what do three centuries of data tell us?. Quart Bull. Bank of England, p 277–291

  • Johansen P, Kristrom B (2007) On a clear day you might see an environmental Kuznets curve. Environ Resour Econ 37:77–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansen S, Juselius K (1990) The full information maximum likelihood procedure for inference on cointegration-with applications. Oxf Bull Stat Econ 52(2):169–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwiatkowski D, Phillips PCB, Schmidt P, Shin Y (1992) Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. J Econ 54:91–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CY, Liscow Z (2013) Endogeneity in the environmenal Kuznets curve: an instrumental variables approach. Am J Agric Econ 95(2):268–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddison A (2006) The world economy. Historical statistics, vol 2. OECD Publishing, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maki D, Kitasaka S (2014) Residual-based tests for cointegration in three-regime TAR models. Empir Econ, forthcoming

  • Markandya A, Golub A, Pedroso-Galinato S (2006) Empirical analysis of national income and \(\text{ SO }_{2}\) emissions in selected European countries. Environ Resour Econ 35:221–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perman R, Stern DI (2003) Evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests that the environmental Kuznets curve does not exist. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 47(3):325–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seo MH (2008) Unit root test in a threshold autoregression: asymptotic theory and residual-based block bootstrap. Econom Theory 24(6):1699–1716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sephton PS (1994) Cointegration tests on MARS. Comput Econ 7(1):23–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sephton P, Mann J (2013a) Further evidence of the environmental Kuznets curve in Spain. Energy Econ 36:177–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sephton P, Mann J (2013b) Threshold cointegration: model selection and an xpplication. J Econ Econom 56(2):54–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Smulders S, Bretschger L, Egli H (2011) Economic growth and the diffusion of clean technologies: explaining the environmental Kuznets curves. Environ Resour Econ 49(1):79–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern D (2004) The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Dev 32:1419–1439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner M (2008) The carbon Kuznets curve: a cloudy picture emitted by bad econometrics? Resour Energy Econ 30:388–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yaguchi Y, Sonobe T, Otsuka K (2007) Beyond the environmental Kuznets curve: a comparative study of SO2 and CO2 emissions between Japan and China. Environ Dev Econ 12:445–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Sephton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sephton, P., Mann, J. Compelling Evidence of an Environmental Kuznets Curve in the United Kingdom. Environ Resource Econ 64, 301–315 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-014-9871-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-014-9871-z

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation