Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is there an inverted U-shaped curve? Empirical analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve in agrochemicals

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the largest contributor to water impairment, agriculture-related pollution has attracted the attention of scientists as well as policy makers, and quantitative information is being sought to focus and advance the policy debate. This study applies the panel unit root, heterogeneous panel cointegration, and panel-based dynamic ordinary least squares to investigate the Environmental Kuznets Curve on environmental issues resulting from use of agricultural synthetic fertilizer, pesticide, and film for 31 provincial economies in mainland China from 1989 to 2009. The empirical results indicate a positive long-run co-integrated relationship between the environmental index and real GDP per capita. This relationship takes on the inverted U-shaped Environmental Kuznets Curve, and the value of the turning point is approximately 10,000–13,000, 85,000–89,000 and over 160,000 CNY, for synthetic fertilizer nitrogen indicator, fertilizer phosphorus indicator and pesticide indicator, respectively. At present, China is subject to tremendous environmental pressure and should assign more importance to special agriculture-related environmental issues.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thorburn P J, Biggs J S, Weier K L, Keating B A. Nitrate in groundwaters of intensive agricultural areas in coastal Northeastern Australia. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2003, 94(1): 49–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. European Environment Agency (EEA). Source apportionment of nitrogen and phosphorus inputs into the aquatic environment (No.7/2005). Copenhagen: EEA, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zhang J, Jorgensen S E. Modeling of point and nonpoint nutrient loadings from a watershed. Environmental Modelling & Software, 2005, 20(5): 561–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kronvang B, Vagstad N, Behrendt H, Bogestrand J, Larsen S E. Phosphorus losses at the catchment scale within Europe: an overview. Soil Use and Management, 2007, 23(Suppl 1): 104–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Mapping the problem: risks of diffuse water pollution from agriculture. London: DEFRA, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  6. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Nitrates in water-the current status in England. London: DEFRA, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  7. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). National water quality inventory. Washington, D C: USEPA. 2009

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chen M, Chen J, Sun F. Estimating nutrient releases from agriculture in China: an extended substance flow analysis framework and a modeling tool. Science of the Total Environment, 2010, 408(21): 5123–5136

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang W, Tian Z, Zhang N, Li X. Nitrate pollution of groundwater in northern China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 1996, 59(3): 223–231

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu Y, Chen S, Zhang Y. Study on Chinese agricultural EKC: evidence from fertilizer. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2009, 16: 263–267 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Grossman G, Krueger A B. Environmental impact of North American Free Trade Agreement. NBER Working Paper, No. 3914, 1991

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Grossman G, Krueger A B. Economic growth and the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1995, 110(2): 353–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Panayotou T. Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development. Working Paper, International Labor Office, Technology and Employment Programme, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dinda S. Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis: a survey. Ecological Economics, 2004, 49(4): 431–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Brock WA, Taylor M S. Economic growth and the environment: a review of theory and empirics. In: Aghion P, Durlauf S, eds. Amsterdam: Handbook of Economic Growth, 2005, 1(28): 1749–1821

    Google Scholar 

  16. Antler J M, Heidebrink G. Environment and development: theory and international evidence. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1995, 43(3): 603–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. McConnell K E. Income and the demand for environmental quality. Environment and Development Economics, 1997, 2(4): 383–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shortle J S, Abler D. Environmental policies for agricultural pollution control. New York: CAB International Publishing, 2001

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Cochard F, Willinger M, Xepapadeas A. Efficiency of nonpoint source pollution instruments: an experimental study. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2005, 30(4): 393–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Aftab A, Hanley N, Baiocchi G. Integrated regulation of non-point pollution: combining managerial controls and economic instruments under multiple environmental targets. Ecological Economics, 2010, 70(1): 24–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Managi S. Are there increasing returns to pollution abatement? Empirical analytics of the Environmental Kuznets Curve in pesticides. Ecological Economics, 2006, 58(3): 617–636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Perman R, Stern D I. Evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests that the Environmental Kuznets Curve does not exist. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 2003, 47(3): 325–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Galeotti M, Manera M, Lanza A. On the robustness of robustness checks of the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2009, 42(4): 551–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stern D I, Common M S. Is there an Environmental Kuznets Curve for sulfur? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2001, 41(2): 162–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Oh W, Lee K. Energy consumption and economic growth in Korea: testing the causality relation. Journal of Policy Modeling, 2004, 26(12): 973–981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Copeland B, Taylor S. Trade, growth and the environment. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004, 42(1): 7–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Unruh G C, Moomaw W R. An alternative analysis of apparent EKC-type transitions. Ecological Economics, 1998, 25(2): 221–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McCoskey S, Kao C. Comparing panel data cointegration tests with an application of the twin deficits problem. Working Paper, Center for Policy Research, Syracuse University, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  29. McCoskey S, Kao C. A Monte Carlo comparison of tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Propagation in Probability and Statistics, 2001, 1(2): 165–198

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mark N, Sul D. Nominal exchange rates and monetary fundamentals: evidence from a small Post-Bretton woods panel. Journal of International Economics, 2001, 53(1): 29–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Andreoni J, Levinson A. The simple analytics of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Journal of Public Economics, 2001, 80(2): 269–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Stokey N L. Are there limits to growth? International Economic Review, 1998, 39(1): 1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jones L E, Manuelli R E. Endogenous policy choice: the case of pollution and growth. Review of Economic Dynamics, 2001, 4(2): 369–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Israel D, Levinson A. Willingness to pay for environmental quality: testable empirical implications of the growth and environment literature. Contributions to Economic Analysis and Policy. Berkeley: Berkeley Electronic Press, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  35. Stern D I. The Environmental Kuznets Curve. International Society for Ecological Economics, Internet Encyclopedia of Ecological Economics, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  36. Stern D I. Between estimates of the emissions-income elasticity. Ecological Economics, 2010, 69(11): 2173–2182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wang S, Peng E, Wu G, Zhang T, Zhang J, Zhang C, Yu Y. Surveys of deposition and distribution pattern of pesticide droplets on crop leaves. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University, 2010, 25(1): 113–117

    Google Scholar 

  38. Yuan P. Environmental economics study on agricultural pollution and its control. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2008 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Engle R F, Granger C W J. Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 1987, 55(2): 251–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ozturk I, Aslan A, Kalyoncu H. Energy consumption and economic growth relationship: Evidence from panel data for low and middle income countries. Energy Policy, 2010, 38(8): 4422–4428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Pedroni P. Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1999, 61(S1): 653–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Li F, Dong S. L X, Liang Q, Yang W. Energy Consumption-Economic Growth Relationship and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in China. Energy Policy, 2011, 39(2): 568–573

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. López-Pueyo C, Barcenilla-Visús S, Sanaú J, International R. D spillovers and manufacturing productivity: a panel data analysis. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 2008, 19(2): 152–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Levin A, Lin C, Chu C. Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 2002, 108(1): 1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Im K S, Pesaran M H, Shin Y. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 2003, 115(1): 53–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Maddala G S, Wu S. Comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1999, 61(s1): 631–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Choi I. Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 2001, 20(2): 249–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Pedroni P. Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests, with an application to the PPP hypothesis: new results. Working Paper in Economics, Indiana University, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  49. Pedroni P. Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Economic Theory, 2004, 20: 597–625

    Google Scholar 

  50. Phillips P C B, Moon H R. Linear regression limits theory for nonstationary panel data. Econometrica, 1999, 67(5): 1057–1111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Pedroni P. Fully modified OLS for heterogeneous cointegrated panels. In: Baltagi B H, ed. Advances in Econometrics. Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration and Dynamic Panels. Amsterdam: JAI Press, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  52. Kao C, Chiang M H. On the estimation and inference of a cointegrated regression in panel data. In: Baltagi B H, ed. Advances in Econometrics. Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration and Dynamic Panels. Amsterdam: JAI Press, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  53. Arrow K, Bolin B, Costanza R, Dasgupta P, Folke C, Holling C S, Jansson B O, Levin S, Mäler K G, Perrings C, Pimentel D. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment. Science, 1995, 268(5210): 520–521

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Cole M A, Rayner A J, Bates J M. The Environmental Kuznets Curve: an empirical analysis. Environment and Development Economics, 1997, 2(4): 401–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Park S, Lee Y. Regional model of EKC for air pollution: Evidence from the Republic of Korea. Energy Policy, 2011, 39(10): 5840–5849

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. de Bruyn S M, van den Bergh J C J M, Opschoor J B. Economic growth and emissions: reconsidering the empirical basis of Environmental Kuznets Curves. Ecological Economics, 1998, 25(2): 161–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Markus P. Technical progress, structural change and the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Ecological Economics, 2002, 2(3): 381–389

    Google Scholar 

  58. Roca J, Padilla E, Farre M, Galletto V. Economic growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: discussing the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis. Ecological Economics, 2001, 39(1): 85–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Magnani E. The Environmental Kuznets Curve: development path or policy results. Environmental Modelling & Software, 2001, 16(2): 157–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Orubu C O, Omotor D G. Environmental quality and economic growth: Searching for Environmental Kuznets Curves for air and water pollutants in Africa. Energy Policy, 2011, 39(7): 4178–4188

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China

    Fei Li & Suocheng Dong

  2. School of Public Policy and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Fujia Li

  3. Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China

    Libiao Yang

Authors
  1. Fei Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Suocheng Dong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fujia Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Libiao Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Libiao Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, F., Dong, S., Li, F. et al. Is there an inverted U-shaped curve? Empirical analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve in agrochemicals. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 10, 276–287 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0700-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0700-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation