24 OECD 1960~2002 CO 2 GDP 43% GDP EKC 2007 [16] GDP U GDP 1996 U N GDP Musolesi e al [17] Brock and Taylor 2010 [1] ~ 2001 CO 2

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "24 OECD 1960~2002 CO 2 GDP 43% GDP EKC 2007 [16] GDP U GDP 1996 U N GDP Musolesi e al [17] Brock and Taylor 2010 [1] ~ 2001 CO 2"

昶田
5 years ago
Views:

1 Joumal of Shanxi Finance and Economics Universiy Apr Vol.36 No ~ F205 [ ] A [ ] The Influence of Economic Growh o Environmenal Polluion and Regional Heerogeneiy ---- Evidence from Provincial Dynamic Panel Daa Model WANG Fei-cheng, GUO Qi-you School of Economics, Xiamen Universiy, Xiamen , China Absrac: This paper empirically invesigaes he influence of economic growh o environmenal polluion and regional heerogeneiy. We also discuss he influence of oher facors o environmenal polluion, including abaemen invesmen, echnology, populaion, saving rae, indusrial srucure and rade openness. Empirical resuls sugges ha he effec of economic growh o environmenal polluion copes wih he Environmenal Kuznes Curve from he perspecive of he whole naion, laying on he righ downward par of he invered-u curve. From regional perspecive, here also exiss invered-u shaped curve in he easern and middle regions while in he wesern region he relaionship appears o be N shaped. Meanwhile, he influence of oher facors displays disinc characerisics. Key Words: economic growh; environmenal polluion; panel daa model 1986~

2 24 OECD 1960~2002 CO 2 GDP 43% GDP EKC 2007 [16] GDP U GDP 1996 U N GDP Musolesi e al [17] Brock and Taylor 2010 [1] ~ 2001 CO 2 CO 2 GDP N 2007 Auffhammer and Carson U 2008 [16,18] Brock Taylor [1,2] 2004 [19] 2005 [20] 2006 [21] EKC 1 U U N N EKC 2009 [25] 1998~ Bruyn and Heinz 2002 [3] EKC Granger Grossman Krueger 1991 [4] Shafik Bandyopad [26] 2000~2010 hyay 1992 [5] Panayoou 1993 [6] Selden Song 1994 [7] Coondoo 2002 [8] Llorca Meunié 2009 [9] GDP N 2007 [22] 2010 [23] 2010 [24] EKC Jalil Mahmud 2009 [10] EKC EKC Perman Sern [11,12] Sern 2004 [13] Aslanidis Iranzo 2009 [14] EKC U Brock Taylor [1,2,27] Galeoi e al [15] 15

3 γ Z= I i T i P i SR i S i TR i ' SR i S i TR i Brock Taylor [1,2] Green Solow Model 4 i ~ ~ Principal Componen Analysis 2011 SYS-GMM GDP GDP GDP GDP LSDV ~ ~2012 GDP GDP GDP i =c+α i +β 1 i-1 +β 2 y i +β 3 y 2 +ε i i 1 i =c+α i +β 1 i-1 +β 2 y i +β 3 y 2 +β i 4y 3 +ε i i 2 i i y i c α i β 1 β 2 β 3 β 4 ε i 1 β 2 >0 β 3 <0 U β 2 <0 β 3 >0 U 2 β 2 >0 β 3 <0 β 4 >0 N β 2 <0 β 3 >0 β 4 <0 N 4 29 GMM 1 2 i-1 IWW ISD IS ID 2 ISD saa12 pca 1 i =c+α i +β 1 i-1 +β 2 y i +β 3 y 2 i +γ'z+u i 3 i =c+α i +β 1 i-1 +β 2 y i +β 3 y 2 i +β 4y 3 i +γ'z+u i 4 16 T i P i u i 3 λ % % I i

4 Fied values GDP Fied values Fied values GDP 1 m 85% % % i GDP y i % 2 Fied values m GDP GDP 1 I i % E 1 =0.26 IWW sd ISD sd IS sd GDP ID sd ISW sd E 2 =0.65 IWW sd ISD sd IS sd ID sd ISW sd IWW ISD IS ID ISW U N N T i P i SR i GDP / % IWW sd ISD sd IS sd ID sd ISW sd S i % GDP TR i % GDP E =59.43% E % E 2 Max-Min 0~ 1. 1 = [E -min(e )]/[max(e )-min(e )] LLC Harris-Tzavalis Bre- iung IPS Fisher-ADF Fisher-PP N>T GDP LLC HT Breiung IPS N<T LLC Breiung U Fisher-ADF Fisher-PP GDP LLC HT Breiung 17

5 IPS Fisher-ADF 4 Fisher-PP LLC HT z 4 Breiung λ IPS LLC Breiung λ Fisher-ADF z Fisher-PP z **** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** y *** y 2 y *** y *** *** *** *** *** *** y y *** *** 3 LLC Breiung λ *** *** Fisher-ADF z Fisher-PP z *** *** *** *** *** *** LLC Breiung λ *** *** * 0.10 Fisher-ADF z *** *** *** Fisher-PP z *** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** y *** *** 7.18 y 2 y y *** y y *** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** * *** *** *** *** p * ** *** 10% 5% 1% y Granger y 2 y 3 Kao Pedroni Pedroni 7 4 Panel-v y y 2 y 3 Panel-rho Panel-PP Panel-ADF 3 Group-rho 2. Group-PP Group-ADF Johansen race Pedroni Johansen Engle

6 5 Pedroni Panel-ADF Group-PP Group-ADF 6 Jonhansen Panel-v Panel-rho Panel-PP Panel-ADF Group-rho Group-PP * *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** * *** *** *** Schwarz Eviews Arellano Bond 1991 [29] GMM GMM Group-ADF *** *** *** *** p * ** *** 10% 5% 1% Panel- v i =β 1 i,-1 +β 2 y i +β 3 y 2 +γ i 1 I i +γ 2 T i +γ 3 P i, +γ 4 SR i +γ 5 S i +γ 6 TR i + u i 5 6 Johansen i =β 1 i,-1 +β 2 y i +β 3 y 2 +β i 4 y 3 +γ i 1 I i +γ 2 T i +γ 3 P i, +γ 4 SR i +γ 5 S i +γ 6 TR i + u i *** *** i,-1 = i,-1 - i,-2 u i =u i -u i, *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** i,-1 u i i,-1 u i i-2 i-1 i-2 i-1 u i Arellano Bover 1995 [30] Blundell Bond 1998 [31] Arellano Bond 1991 SYS-GMM i-2 i-1 i-2 i-1 AR Sargan AR p * ** *** 10% 5% 1% Sargan Eviews6.0 GMM 5 Pedroni GMM 7 Sargan Panel-PP Two-Sage SYS-GMM Panel -ADF Group -PP GMM Group-ADF Pedroni Mone Carlo F Panel-ADF Hausman Group-ADF Panel-PP Group-PP Pe- LSDV droni 1997 [28] Panel-PP 1 19

7 2 1 7~ i *** y i *** 3.33 y 2 i y 3 i *** *** *** ** *** I i * *** *** *** * T i *** *** *** *** *** 5.30 P i *** * * *** SR i *** * *** * S i *** ** ** *** * TR i ** ** *** *** * ** E AR(1) AR(2) Sargan *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** GMM i- 2 i- 2 * ** *** 10% 5% 1% AR(1) AR(2) Sargan p Saa12 EKC 5 1 i-1 U GDP GDP ~ % y i y 2 i U 20

8 EKC GDP 2009 [32] Brock Taylor 2004 GDP 2010 [1,2] 5 8~ y i *** 6.20 y 2 i y 3 i *** *** *** I i *** *** *** *** 2.83 T i *** *** *** P i ** *** *** *** ** 2.32 SR i *** *** ** ** ** 2.53 S i *** ** *** *** *** *** *** 4.01 TR i *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** E R R F * ** *** 10% 5% 1% 1 2 y i *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

9 9 y 2 i y 3 i y i ** y 2 i y 3 i *** ** * ** ** ** ** ** 2.22 I i ** ** ** T i ** ** ** P i ** ** ** SR i ** ** ** S i ** ** ** ** * 1.86 TR i ** * *** I i ** * *** * 1.81 T i *** ** *** * *** 3.84 P i ** *** * *** SR i * ** *** * *** S i ** *** ** *** TR i * -8.42*** *** *** *** *** *** *** E R R F * ** *** 10% 5% 1% ** R

10 10 R F * ** *** 10% 5% 1% 2012 [26] y i y 2 i U y i y GDP i U N GDP GDP y i y 2 i y3 i N GDP GDP GDP GDP 2010 [33] 2006 [34,35] 2013 [36] 2013 [37] 2013 [38] 4 000~ GDP % 1996~2002 GDP GDP Sock and Taylor 2010 [1] 2 GDP GDP T i 23

11 3 1992~ EKC U 10% EKC N S i 6 TR i scale effecs composiion effecs echnique effecs Grossman and Krueger,1991 [4] 70% 24

12 1 U 2 E 觶 /E=g E +αsk α-1 (1-θ)-α(δ+n+g B )= 准 (k)-[α(δ+n+g B )-g E ] g E =g B +n-g A E 觶 /E g E α Cobb-Douglas s k θ δ n g A g B 3 29 [39] 4 5 GDP 1 Brock W A, Taylor M S. The Green Solow Model. Journal of Economic Growh, : Brock W A, Taylor M S. The Green Solow Model R. NBER Working Paper, No , De Bruyn S M, Heinz R J. The Environmenal Kuznes Curve Hypohesis M. Handbook of Environmenal and Resource Economics, Oxford: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2002: Grossman G M, Krueger A B. Environmenal Impacs of a Norh American Free Trade Agreemen R. NBER Working Paper, No.3914, Shafik N, Bandyopadhyay S. Economic Growh and Environmenal Qualiy: Time Series and Cross-counry Evidence R. Washingon, DC.: World Bank, Panayoou T. Empirical Tess and Policy Analysis of Environmenal Degradaion a Differen Sages of Economic Developmen R. Geneva, Selden T M, Song D. Environmenal Qualiy and Developmen: Is There a Kuznes Curve for Air Polluion Emissions. Journal of Environmenal Economics and Managemen. 1994, 27 2 : Coondoo D, Dinda S. Causaliy beween Income and Emission: A Counry Group-specific Economeric Analysis. Ecological Economics, 2002, 40 3 : Llorca M, Meunie A. SO2 Emissions and he Environmenal Kuznes Curve: he Case of Chinese Provinces. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Sudies, 2009, 7 1 : Jalil A, Mahmud S. Environmen Kuznes Curve for CO 2 Emissions: A Coinegraion Analysis for China. Energy Policy, 2009, : Perman R, Sern D I. The Environmenal Kuznes Curve: Implicaions of Non-Saionariy R. Working papers in Ecological Economics, Perman R, Sern D I. Evidence from Panel Uni Roo and Coinegraion Tess ha he Environmenal Kuznes Curve Does No Exis. Ausralian Journal of Agriculural and Resource Economics, 2003, 47 3 : Sern D I. The Rise and Fall of he Environmenal Kuznes Curve. World Developmen, 2004, 8 32 : Aslanidis N, Iranzo S. Environmen and Developmen: Is There a Kuznes Curve for CO 2 Emissions. Applied Economics, 2009, 41 6 : Galeoi M, Manera M, Lanza A. On he Robusness of Robusness Checks of he Environmenal Kuznes Curve Hypohesis 25

13 . Environmenal and Resource Economics, 2009, 42 4 : CO : Musolesi A, Mazzani M, Zoboli R. A Panel Daa Heerogeneous Bayesian Esimaion of Environmenal Kuznes Curves for CO 2 Emissions. Applied Economics, 2010, : Auffhammer M, Carson R T. Forecasing he Pah of China s CO 2 Emissions Using Province-level Informaion. Journal of Environmenal Economics and Managemen, 2008, 55 3 : : : : : : : : : : Brock W A, Taylor M S. The Kindergaren Rule of Susainable Growh R. NBER Working Paper, No. 9597, Pedroni, P.Panel Coinegraion: Asympoic and Finie Sample Properies of Pooled Time Series Tess wih an Applicaion o he PPP Hypohesis: New Resuls R. Indiana Universiy Working Paper in Economics, Arellano M, Bond S. Some Tess of Specificaion for Panel Daa: Mone Carlo Evidence and an Applicaion o Employmen Equaions. Review of Economic Sudies, 1991, 58 2 : Arellano M, Bover O. Anoher Look a he Insrumenal Variable Esimaion of Error-Componens Models. Journal of E- conomerics, 1995, 68 1 : Blundell R, Bond S. Iniial Condiions and Momen Resricions in Dynamic Panel Daa Models. Journal of Economerics, 1998, 87 1 : : : : : :

《金融评论》投稿封面

《金融评论》投稿封面 The Choice of he Inermediae Targe of Moneary Policy in China 968 993 5 0073 85957073683550599 yqzhang@cass.org.cn MM 994Q-008Q4 VECM M M GDPCPI M M M 007 VECM JEL E5C3E58 The Choice of he Inermediae Targe