The evolution of environmental and labor productivity dynamics: Sector based evidence from Italy

Journal of Evolutionary Economics

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 357-399

  Marin, Giovanni ^a   Mazzanti, Massimiliano ^b,c  

^a IMT SCHOOL FOR ADVANCED STUDIES LUCCA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FERRARA   (Italy)

^c CNR   (Italy)

Author keywords

Delinking; Labor productivity; NAMEA; STIRPAT; Structural breaks; SUR; Trade openness

Indexed keywords

EID: 84876076737     PISSN: 09369937     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00191-010-0199-8     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Alberola E, Chevallier J, Chèze B (2008) Price drivers and structural breaks in European carbon prices 2005-2007. Energy Policy 36(2): 787-797.
2. Alberola E, Chevallier J, Chèze B (2009) Emissions compliances and carbon prices under the EU ETS: a country specific analysis of industrial sectors. J Policy Model 31(3): 446-462.
3. Andreoni J, Levinson A (2001) The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve. J Public Econ 80: 269-286.
4. APAT (2005) Rapporto sull'andamento delle emissioni di gas serra e confronto rispetto a quanto previsto dallo scenario di riferimento-Stime preliminari emissioni 2004. APAT.
5. 10 reductions from policies to meet Kyoto targets using the E3ME model and externe valuations. OECD, Paris.
6. Baum CF (2001) Residual diagnostics for cross-section time series regression models. Stata J 1(1): 101-104.
7. Berndt ER, Wood DO (1979) Engineering and econometric interpretations of energy-capital complementarity. Am Econ Rev 69(3): 342-354.
8. Borghesi S, Vercelli A (2009) Greenhouse gas emissions and the energy system: are current trends sustainable? In: 50th riunione annuale della Società Italiana degli economisti, Rome.
9. Brock W, Taylor S (2004) The green solow model. NBER Working Paper no 10557, NBER, Cambridge.
10. Bruvoll A, Medin H (2003) Factors behind the environmental Kuznets curve. A decomposition of the changes in air pollution. Environ Resour Econ 24(1): 27-48.
11. Cainelli G, Mazzanti M, Zoboli R (2010a) Environmentally-oriented innovative strategies and firm performance in services. Micro-evidence from Italy. Int Rev Appl Econ (in press).
12. Cainelli G, Mazzanti M, Zoboli R (2010b) Complementarity in eco-innovation: concepts and empirical measurement. In: The 16th annual international sustainable development research conference 2010, Hong Kong.
13. Cainelli G, Mazzanti M, Zoboli R (2010c) Structural and dynamic relationships between environmental performances and manufacturing firms' growth. Mimeo.
14. Casler SD, Rose A (1998) Carbon dioxide emissions in the US economy: a structural decomposition analysis. Environ Resour Econ 11(3): 349-363.
15. Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1989) Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D. Econ J 99: 569-596.
16. Cole MA (2003) Development, trade, and the environment: how robust is the environmental Kuznets curve? Environ Dev Econ 8(04): 557-580.
17. Cole MA (2004) Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages. Ecol Econ 48(1): 71-81.
18. Cole M (2005) Re-examining the pollution-income relationship: a random coefficients approach. Econ Bull 14(1): 1-7.
19. Cole MA, Elliott RJR (2003) Determining the trade-environment composition effect: the role of capital, labor and environmental regulations. J Environ Econ Manage 46(3): 363-383.
20. Cole MA, Neumayer E (2003) Examining the impact of demographic factors on air pollution. Labor and demography, EconWPA.
21. Cole MA, Rayner AJ, Bates JM (1997) The environmental Kuznets curve: an empirical analysis. Environ Dev Econ 2(04): 401-416.
22. Cole MA, Elliott RJ, Shimamoto K (2005) Why the grass is not always greener: the competing effects of environmental regulations and factor intensities on US specialization. Ecol Econ 54(1): 95-109.
23. Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2004) Trade, growth, and the environment. J Econ Lit 42(1): 7-71.
24. Costantini V, Mazzanti M, Montini A (2010) Environmental performance and technological interregional spillovers. Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia, 1/2010, University of Ferrara.
25. de Boo A, Bosch P, Gorter CN, Keuning SJ (1993) An environmental module and the complete system of national accounts. In: Franz A, Stahmer C (eds) Approaches to environmental accounting. Physica, Heidelberg.
26. de Haan M (2001) A structural decomposition analysis of pollution in the Netherlands. Econ Syst Res 13(2): 181-196.
27. de Haan M (2004) Accounting for goods and for bads: measuring environmental pressure in a national accounts framework. Statistics Netherlands, Voorburg.
28. de Haan M, Keuning SJ (1996) Taking the environment into account: the NAMEA approach. Rev Income Wealth 42(2): 131-48.
29. Dietz T, Rosa EA (1994) Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Hum Ecol Rev 1: 277-300.
30. Dietzenbacher E, Mukhopadhyay K (2007) An empirical examination of the pollution haven hypothesis for India: towards a green Leontief paradox? Environ Resour Econ 36(4): 427-449.
31. Dinda S (2005) A theoretical basis for the EKC. Ecol Econ 53(3): 403-413.
32. Eaton J, Kortum S (1999) International technology diffusion: theory and measurement. Int Econ Rev 40(3): 537-570.
33. EEA (2004a) Air pollution and climate change policies in Europe: exploring linkages and the added value of an integrated approach. European Environmental Agency, Copenhagen.
34. EEA (2004b) Air pollution in Europe 1990-2000. European Environmental Agency, Copenhagen.
35. Egli H, Steger T (2007) A dynamic model of the environmental Kuznets curve: turning point and public policy. Environ Resour Econ 36(1): 15-34.
36. Femia A, Panfili P (2005) Analytical applications of the NAMEA. Annual Meeting of the Italian Statistics Society, Rome.
37. Femia A, Marra Campanale R (2010) Production-related air emissions: a decomposition analysis for Italy. In: Mazzanti M, Montini A (eds) Environmental efficiency, innovation and economic performance. Routledge, New York.
38. Fischer-Kowalski M, Amann C (2001) Beyond IPAT and Kuznets curves: globalization as a vital factor in analysing the environmental impact of socioeconomic metabolism. Popul Environ 23(1): 7-47.
39. Franco C, Montresor S, Vittucci Marzetti G (2009) On indirect trade-related R & D spillovers: the role of the international trade network. Openloc Working Paper Series, WP 1/2009.
40. Frankel JA, Rose AK (2005) Is trade good or bad for the environment? Sorting out the causality. Rev Econ Stat 87(1): 85-91.
41. Griliches Z (1992) The search for R&D spillovers. Scand J Econ 94: 29-47.
42. Grossman G, Krueger AB (1995) Economic growth and the environment. Q J Econ 110: 353-377.
43. Hendry DF (1995) Dynamic econometrics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
44. 2 emissions and economic growth. J Public Econ 57: 85-101.
45. Hsiao C (2003) Analysis of panel data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
46. Huppes G, de Koning A, Suh S, Heijungs R, van Oers L, Nielsen P, Guinée JB (2006) Environmental impacts of consumption in the European Union: high-resolution input-output tables with detailed environmental extensions. J Ind Ecol 10(3): 129-146.
47. Ike T (1999) A Japanese NAMEA. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 10(1): 123-149.
48. ISPRA (2010) Italian greenhouse gas inventory 1990-2008-National inventory report 2010. ISPRA Rapporti 113/2010.
49. Jacobsen HK (2000) Energy demand, structural change and trade: a decomposition analysis of the Danish manufacturing industry. Econ Syst Res 12(3): 319-343.
50. Jaffe AB (1986) Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms' patents, profits, and market value. Am Econ Rev 76(5): 984-1001.
51. Kagawa S, Inamura H (2001) A structural decomposition of energy consumption based on a hybrid rectangular input-output framework: Japan's case. Econ Syst Res 13(4): 339-363.
52. Kagawa S, Inamura H (2004) A spatial structural decomposition analysis of Chinese and Japanese energy demand: 1985-1990. Econ Syst Res 16(3): 279-299.
53. Keller W (2004) International technology diffusion. J Econ Lit 42: 752-782.
54. Keuning SJ, van Dalen J, de Haan M (1999) The Netherlands' NAMEA; presentation, usage and future extensions. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 10(1): 15-37.
55. Koetse MJ, de Groot HLF, Florax RJGM (2008) Capital-energy substitution and shifts in factor demand: a meta-analysis. Energy Econ 30(5): 2236-2251.
56. Lumenga-Neso O, Olarreaga M, Schiff M (2005) On 'indirect' trade-related research and development spillovers. Eur Econ Rev 49(7): 1785-1898.
57. Managi S, Hibiki A, Tsurimi T (2009) Does trade openness improve environmental quality? J Environ Econ Manage 58: 346-363.
58. Markandya A, Rubbelke DT (2003) Ancillary benefits of climate policy. Working papers, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
59. 2 emissions. EAERE 2009 Conference, Amsterdam.
60. 2 emissions: evidence from European countries. Environ Resour Econ 38(4): 277-301.
61. Martini C (2010) The distributive effects of carbon taxation in Italy. In: Milne J et al (eds) Critical issues in environmental taxation, vol VIII. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
62. Mazzanti M, Zoboli R (2009) Environmental efficiency and labour productivity: trade-off or joint dynamics? A theoretical investigation and empirical evidence from Italy using NAMEA. Ecol Econ 68(4): 1182-1194.
63. Mazzanti M, Montini A, Zoboli R (2008a) Environmental Kuznets curves for air pollutant emissions in Italy: evidence from environmental accounts (NAMEA) panel data. Econ Syst Res 20(3): 277-301.
64. Mazzanti M, Montini A, Zoboli R (2008b) Environmental Kuznets curves for greenhouse gas emissions. Evidence from Italy using national accounts matrix including environmental accounts and provincial panel data. Int J Glob Environ Issues 8(4): 392-424.
65. 2 emission reduction in transition economies. Working papers, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
66. Moll S, Vrgoc M, Watson D, Femia A, Pedersen OG, Villanueva A (2007) Environmental input-output analyses based on NAMEA data. A comparative European study on environmental pressures arising from consumption and production patterns. ETC/RWM working paper 2007/2.
67. Muradian R, O'Connor M, Martinez-Alier J (2002) Embodied pollution in trade: estimating the 'environmental load displacement' of industrialised countries. Ecol Econ 41(1): 51-67.
68. Nakamura S (1999) An interindustry approach to analyzing economic and environmental effects of the recycling of waste. Ecol Econ 28(1): 133-145.
69. Nansai K, Kagawa S, Moriguchi Y (2007) Proposal of a simple indicator for sustainable consumption: classifying goods and services into three types focusing on their optimal consumption levels. J Clean Prod 15(9): 879-885.
70. Pearce D (1992) The secondary benefits of greenhouse control. Working paper 92-12, CSERGE.
71. Pearce D (2000) Policy framework for the ancillary benefits of climate change policies. In: IPCC workshop on assessing the ancillary benefits and costs of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies, Washington DC.
72. Pontoglio S (2010) An early assessment of the influence on eco-innovation of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme-evidence from the Italian paper industry. In: Mazzanti M, Montini A (eds) Environmental efficiency, innovation and economic performance. Routledge, New York.
73. Roca J, Serrano M (2007a) Income growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: an input-output approach. Ecol Econ 63: 230-242.
74. Roca J, Serrano M (2007b) Atmospheric pollution and consumption patterns in Spain: an input-output approach. Working papers, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
75. Shafik N (1994) Economic development and environmental quality: an econometric analysis. Oxf Econ Pap 46: 757-773.
76. Smith S, Swierzbinski J (2007) Assessing the performance of the UK Emissions Trading Scheme. Environ Resour Econ 37(1): 131-158.
77. Spatareanu M (2007) Searching for pollution havens: the impact of environmental regulations on foreign direct investment. J Environ Dev 16: 161-182.
78. Steenge AE (1999) Input-output theory and institutional aspects of environmental policy. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 10(1): 161-176.
79. Stern DI (2004) Elasticities of substitution and complementarity. Rensselaer Working papers in Economics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics.
80. United Nations, European Commission, International Monetary Fund, OECD, World Bank (2003) Integrated environmental and economic accounting 2003. First draft, United Nations, European Commission, International Monetary Fund, OECD, World Bank.
81. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B (1997) Issues in assessing the effect of interindustry R&D Spillovers. Econ Syst Res 9(4): 331-356.
82. Vaze P (1999) A NAMEA for the UK. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 10(1): 99-121.
83. Vollebergh HRJ, Kemfert C (2005) The role of technological change for a sustainable development. Ecol Econ 54(2-3): 133-147.
84. Watson D, Moll S (2008) Environmental benefits and disadvantages of economic specialization within global markets, and implications for SCP monitoring. In: Paper for the SCORE! conference, 10-11 March 2008, Brussels, Belgium.
85. Wier M (1998) Sources of changes in emissions from energy: a structural decomposition analysis. Econ Syst Res 10(2): 99-112.
86. York R, Rosa EA, Dietz T (2003) STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts. Ecol Econ 46(3): 351-365.
87. Zellner A (1962) An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. J Am Stat Assoc 57(298): 348-368.
88. Zellner A (1963) Estimators for seemingly unrelated regression equations: some exact finite sample results. J Am Stat Assoc 58(304): 977-992.
89. Zellner A, Huang DS (1962) Further properties of efficient estimators for seemingly unrelated regression equations. Int Econ Rev 3(3): 300-313.
90. Zoboli R (1996) Technology and changing population structure: environmental implications for the advanced countries. Dynamis-Quaderni 6/96, IDSE CNR, Milan (Italy).