<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>0120-2596</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Lecturas de Economía]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Lect. Econ.]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>0120-2596</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Universidad de Antioquia]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S0120-25962008000200009</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The Environmental Kuznets Curve for Water Quality: An Analysis of its Appropriateness Using Unit Root and Cointegration Tests]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[La curva ambiental de Kuznets para el caso de la calidad del agua: un análisis de su pertinencia utilizando las pruebas de raíz unitaria y de cointegración]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="fr"><![CDATA[La courbe environnementale de Kuznets appliquée à la qualité de l'eau: Une analyse de sa pertinence en utilisant le test de racine unitaire et le test de cointégration]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Granda]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Catalina]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pérez]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Luis Guillermo]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Muñoz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Juan Carlos]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A03"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="A01">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidad de Antioquia Facultad de Ciencias Económicas ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[ ]]></addr-line>
</aff>
<aff id="A02">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidad de Antioquia Facultad de Ciencias Económicas ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Medellín ]]></addr-line>
<country>Colombia</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A03">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidad de Los Andes Centro de Estudios para Desarrollo Económico ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></addr-line>
<country>Colombia</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>12</month>
<year>2008</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>12</month>
<year>2008</year>
</pub-date>
<numero>69</numero>
<fpage>221</fpage>
<lpage>244</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0120-25962008000200009&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S0120-25962008000200009&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S0120-25962008000200009&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="es"><p><![CDATA[La hipótesis de la Curva Ambiental de Kuznets sugiere la existencia una relación en forma de U invertida entre la degradación ambiental y el ingreso. Algunos economistas asumen que el crecimiento económico revertirá los impactos ambientales de las primeras etapas del desarrollo económico. No obstante, Perman y Stern (2003) argumentan que los métodos econométricos empleados en los primeros análisis de la EKC son inapropiados debido a las propiedades temporales de las series. Este artículo analiza la conformidad de la EKC para un panel de 46 países y 21 períodos mediante la implementación de pruebas de raíces unitarias y de cointegración a nivel individual y del panel. También se estima un Vector de Corrección de Errores. Los resultados obtenidos no corroboran la evidencia de una EKC común para el conjunto de países estudiados.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[The Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis suggests the existence of an inverted U-shaped relationship between environmental degradation and income. Several economists assume that the environmental impacts occurred during the first stages of the development process will be reverted as a result of economic growth. Yet Perman and Stern (2003) have argued that the econometric methods used in the earlier analysis of the EKC are inappropriate, given the time properties of the series. This article examines the appropriateness of the EKC for a panel of 46 countries and 21 periods by implementing individual and panel tests for unit roots and cointegration. An error correction model is also estimated. The results do not support evidence of a common EKC for the countries analyzed.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="fr"><p><![CDATA[L'hypothèse de la Courbe Environnementale de Kuznets (CEK) suggère l'existence d'une relation en U inversé entre la dégradation environnementale et le revenu. Plusieurs économistes estiment que les incidences négatives sur l'environnement qui sont produites pendant les premières étapes du processus de développement économique seront corrigées par les effets positifs de la croissance économique. Pourtant, Perman et Stern (2003) ont remis en cause la validité des méthodes économétriques employées dans les premières études de la CEK sur la base des propriétés des séries temporelles. Cet article examine la pertinence de la CEK en utilisant un panel de 46 pays et de 21 périodes et en conduisant des tests de racine unitaire et de cointégration aussi bien par pays que pour l.ensemble du panel. Un modèle à correction d'erreurs est également estimé. Les résultats ne soutiennent pas l.existence d'une CEK commune aux pays considérés dans le panel.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Curva ambiental de Kuznets]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[crecimiento económico]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[pruebas de raíz unitaria]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[cointegración en panel de datos]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Environmental Kuznets curve]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[economic growth]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[unit root]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[cointegration tests in panel data]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="fr"><![CDATA[Courbe Environnementale de Kuznets]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="fr"><![CDATA[croissance économique]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="fr"><![CDATA[racine unitaire et test de cointégration dans des données de panel]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><body><![CDATA[ <p align="left"><font size="4" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>The Environmental Kuznets Curve for Water    Quality: An Analysis of its Appropriateness  Using Unit Root and Cointegration Tests</strong></font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><strong><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">La curva ambiental de Kuznets para el caso de la calidad del agua: un  an&aacute;lisis de su pertinencia utilizando las pruebas de ra&iacute;z unitaria y de  cointegraci&oacute;n</font></strong></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><strong><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">La courbe environnementale de Kuznets appliqu&eacute;e &agrave; la qualit&eacute; de  l'eau : Une analyse de sa pertinence en utilisant le test de racine  unitaire et le test de coint&eacute;gration.</font></strong><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"></font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>*Catalina Granda;**Luis Guillermo P&eacute;rez; ***Juan Carlos Mu&ntilde;oz</strong></font></p>     <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">*PhD student &#8211; Department of Economics, University of Connecticut. Candidate for Assistant Professor &#8211; Facultad de Ciencias Econ&oacute;micas, Universidad de Antioquia. Direcci&oacute;n electr&oacute;nica: catalina.granda_carvajal@uconn.edu &#8211;cgranda@udea.edu.co. Direcci&oacute;n postal: University of Connecticut 341 Mansfield Road Unit 1063, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.</font></p >     <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">** Associate Professor &#8211; Facultad de Ciencias Econ&oacute;micas, Universidad de Antioquia. Direcci&oacute;n electr&oacute;nica: lgperez@udea.edu.co. Direcci&oacute;n postal: A.A.1226, Medell&iacute;n, Colombia.</font></p >     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">*** Research Assistant &#8211; Centro de Estudios para Desarrollo Econ&oacute;mico, Universidad de Los Andes. Direcci&oacute;n postal: jc.munoz135@uniandes.edu.co. Direcci&oacute;n postal: Carrera 1 N&ordm; 18A&#8211;70, Bloque E Oficina 101, Bogot&aacute;, Colombia. </font></p >     <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">This paper received support from a grant by Comit&eacute; para el Desarrollo de la Investigaci&oacute;n at Universidad de Antioquia &#8211;CODI&#8211;.We would like to thank Mauricio Alviar Ram&iacute;rez, Francisco Correa Restrepo and an anonymous referee for helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. Diana Restrepo Ochoa contributed to the analysis of some of the tests developed herein. Nonetheless, opinions stated throughout this paper are the sole responsibility of the authors. </font></p >     <p   align="left" >&nbsp;</p >     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>&#8211;Introduction. &#8211;I. The Environmental Kuznets Curve. &#8211;II. Methodology and results. &#8211;Conclusions. &#8211;Appendix. &#8211;References </strong></font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>       <p>&nbsp;</p>   <hr noshade="noshade" size="1" />       <p align="left"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>Resumen:</strong> La hip&oacute;tesis de la Curva Ambiental de Kuznets sugiere la  existencia una relaci&oacute;n en forma de U invertida entre la degradaci&oacute;n  ambiental y el ingreso. Algunos economistas asumen que el crecimiento  econ&oacute;mico revertir&aacute; los impactos ambientales de las primeras etapas del  desarrollo econ&oacute;mico. No obstante, Perman y Stern (2003) argumentan que  los m&eacute;todos econom&eacute;tricos empleados en los primeros an&aacute;lisis de la EKC  son inapropiados debido a las propiedades temporales de las series.  Este art&iacute;culo analiza la conformidad de la EKC para un panel de 46  pa&iacute;ses y 21 per&iacute;odos mediante la implementaci&oacute;n de pruebas de ra&iacute;ces  unitarias y de cointegraci&oacute;n a nivel individual y del panel. Tambi&eacute;n se  estima un Vector de Correcci&oacute;n de Errores. Los resultados obtenidos no  corroboran la evidencia de una EKC com&uacute;n para el conjunto de pa&iacute;ses  estudiados. </font></p>       <p align="left"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>Palabras claves:</strong> Curva ambiental de Kuznets, crecimiento econ&oacute;mico, pruebas de ra&iacute;z unitaria y cointegraci&oacute;n en panel de datos <strong>Clasificaci&oacute;n JEL:</strong> Q53, Q56, C23 </font></p>   <hr align="left" size="1" noshade="noshade" />       <p align="left">    <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>Abstract:</strong> The Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis suggests the  existence of an inverted U&#8211;shaped relationship between environmental  degradation and income. Several economists assume that the  environmental impacts occurred during the first stages of the  development process will be reverted as a result of economic growth.  Yet Perman and Stern (2003) have argued that the econometric methods  used in the earlier analysis of the EKC are inappropriate, given the  time properties of the series. This article examines the  appropriateness of the EKC for a panel of 46 countries and 21 periods  by implementing individual and panel tests for unit roots and  cointegration. An error correction model is also estimated. The results  do not support evidence of a common EKC for the countries analyzed. </font></p>       <p align="left"> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>Keywords:</strong>  Environmental Kuznets curve, economic growth, unit root and cointegration tests in panel data      <strong>JEL Classification:</strong> Q53, Q56, C23 </font></p>   <hr align="left" size="1" noshade="noshade" />       ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p align="left">    <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>R&eacute;sum&eacute;:</strong> L'hypoth&egrave;se de la Courbe Environnementale de Kuznets (CEK)  sugg&egrave;re l'existence d'une relation en U invers&eacute; entre la d&eacute;gradation  environnementale et le revenu. Plusieurs &eacute;conomistes estiment que les  incidences n&eacute;gatives sur l'environnement qui sont produites pendant les  premi&egrave;res &eacute;tapes du processus de d&eacute;veloppement &eacute;conomique seront  corrig&eacute;es par les effets positifs de la croissance &eacute;conomique.  Pourtant, Perman et Stern (2003) ont remis en cause la validit&eacute; des  m&eacute;thodes &eacute;conom&eacute;triques employ&eacute;es dans les premi&egrave;res &eacute;tudes de la CEK  sur la base des propri&eacute;t&eacute;s des s&eacute;ries temporelles. Cet article examine  la pertinence de la CEK en utilisant un panel de 46 pays et de 21  p&eacute;riodes et en conduisant des tests de racine unitaire et de  coint&eacute;gration aussi bien par pays que pour l.ensemble du panel. Un  mod&egrave;le &agrave; correction d'erreurs est &eacute;galement estim&eacute;. Les r&eacute;sultats ne  soutiennent pas l.existence d'une CEK commune aux pays consid&eacute;r&eacute;s dans  le panel. </font></p>       <p align="left"> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>Mots cl&eacute;s :</strong> Courbe Environnementale de Kuznets, croissance  &eacute;conomique, racine unitaire et test de coint&eacute;gration dans des donn&eacute;es  de panel <strong>Classification JEL:</strong> Q53, Q56, C23 </font></p>   <hr noshade="noshade" size="1" />       <p> </p>       <p>&nbsp;</p>    <font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>Introduction</strong> </font>       <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis posits that there is an inverted U&#8211;shaped relation among various indicators of environmental degradation (pollution or resource depletion) and <i>per capita </i>income. Among the interpretations suggested for this hypothesis is that economic growth gives rise to changes in economic structure and technology, as well as to improvements in regulation and an enhanced environmental awareness that offset the impact of growth on the environment. </font></p >       <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">This hypothesis has brought back interest in the discussion about economic growth&rsquo;s impact on the environment. In that sense, several economists assume that growth itself will lead to revert the environmental impacts made on the first stages of development and to environmental improvements in developed countries. Thus, they have stated that growth, far from being a threat for environmental quality, is necessary for its improvement and conservation. </font></p >     <p align="left"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">Despite the EKC has faced considerable criticism on both theoretical and empirical grounds, it has become one of the &lsquo;stylized facts&rsquo; of environmental and resource economics. However, cointegration analysis may prove useful to test the validity of such stylized facts when the data involved contain stochastic trends(Perman and Stern, 2003). The present study is focused on this alternative.</font></p>        <p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">In order to do that, the EKC hypothesis is studied for Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) with the aim to confirm whether that there is a long&#8211;run relationship between this water pollution indicator and income for every country. The panel studied includes 46 countries from 1980 to 2000. Besides per capita GNP, explanatory variables include a foreign trade intensity coefficient. Contrasts of unit roots and cointegration were individually applied to each country and to the panel data; afterwards, a number of models were adjusted with the introduction of deterministic trends and time dummy variables.</font></p >         <p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"> This paper is made up of four parts. In the first one, some potential explanatory factors for the EKC hypothesis are indicated, the main econometric aspects and the criticism, and studies related to BOD as well. Then the econometric approach used is described. The results obtained are analysed in the third part. To end, some conclusions and suggestions are outlined to feed further research.</font></p >         <p >&nbsp;</p >     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p ><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>I. The Environmental Kuznets Curve </strong></font></p >         <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">The Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis was introduced in the early nineties with Grossman and Krueger&rsquo;s work (1991) about the potential impacts of NAFTA, and with Shafik and Bandyopadhyay&rsquo;s background study for the World Development Report in 1992. These studies showed the existence of an inverted U&#8211;shaped relationship between several pollutants and per capita income; that is, environmental quality initially deteriorates, but once countries reach a given income level, environmental degradation tends to decline. Panayotou (1993) called this relationship EKC because of its similarity with the relationship between income level and inequality in income distribution suggested by Simon Kuznets (1955). Since then, this term has become a reference point in the literature on growth and the environment. </font></p >         <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">In that sense, the EKC hypothesis has been useful to support the general proposition that economic growth will lead to remediate the environmental impacts of the first stages of development and to improve environmental quality in developed countries. Thus, some economists use it to support the statement that economic growth is a remedy to pollution and depletion of natural resources (Beckerman, 1992). Accordingly, they suggest fostering economic growth on the grounds that such an approach will drive the implementation of effective environmental policies (World Bank, 1992). </font></p >         <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">However, this assertion is preliminary due to the lack of unequivocal evidence regarding environmental degradation patterns throughout the determining factors of the EKC. Additionally, there are several aspects impeding to draw clear policy conclusions from this empirical hypothesis, economic development process, as well as to the lack of consensus on the which are mainly related to the EKC appropriateness for several kinds of environmental pressure and for all countries (individually and collectively) (de Bruyn and Heintz, 1999; Dinda, 2004).</font></p >         <p   align="left" >&nbsp;</p >         <p   align="left" ><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><i><strong>A. Some suggested explanations </strong></i></font></p >         <p   align="left" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">According to Barbier (1997), the explanations of the EKC have been focused on several underlying and dissimilar relations, including the effects of changes in the economic structure on the use of the environment, the links between the demand for environmental quality and income, and the types of environmental degradation and ecological processes. Some of the major explanations given to this empirical hypothesis are exposed in the following.</font></p >         <p >&nbsp;</p >     <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><i><font size="2">1. </font></i><font size="2"><i>Scale, composition and technique effects</i></font></font>             <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Economic growth affects the environmental quality through three different       mechanisms, that is, the scale, composition and technique effects (Grossman       and Krueger, 1991). The scale effect is reflected in a positive relation between       environmental degradation and income; hence, environmental quality is       expected to worsen as economic activity increases. However, with the increase       in per capita income, changes in production mix may take place, leading       an economy to less intense polluting sectors (for example, from industry       to services). Similarly, growth may induce the adoption of technologies to       enhance productive efficiency, in that they should use less polluting inputs       per unit of output, or reduce polluting discharges per unit of input.<sup>1</sup> Under       this scenario, environmental quality may suffer from degradation with income       unless the scale effect is offset by a combination of the composition and the       technique effects. </font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>2. The impact of regulation </em></font></p>         ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Grossman and Krueger (1995) interpret the EKC as a sign that environmental     policy is carried out more effectively in a developed economy than in a     developing one, as economic growth fosters demand for environmental quality and provides the resources to perform environmental protection measures     (see also Panayotou, 1997). This explanation is further developed by Dasgupta     et al. (2002), who indicate that evidence available suggests that regulation is the     determining factor to explain pollution reduction as countries grow beyond     the middle income status.</font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <em>3. Foreign trade</em></font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Foreign trade causes contradictory impacts on the environment. As trade     volume increases (especially exports), economy size increases, which damages     environmental quality; however, trade could also lead to environmental     improvements through the effects on the composition of economic activity     and technology, mainly through consequences on the distribution of polluting     industries.</font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Foreign trade benefits the decrease in production of pollution-intensive     goods in one country as this production increases in the other(s). This     composition effect is ascribed to two related hypotheses, namely, the displacement     hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis. The displacement hypothesis refers     to a situation where changes in the developed countries&rsquo; productive structure     are not accompanied by equivalent changes in the consumption structure. In     this case, the EKC would refer to the displacement of dirty industries towards     developing economies (de Bruyn and Heintz, 1999).</font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> On the other hand, the pollution haven hypothesis refers to the possibility     that multinational firms, particularly those carrying out highly polluting     activities, relocate their plants in countries having less stringent environmental     regulations. According to this hypothesis, lower environmental standards     should become a source of comparative advantage and, therefore, of changes     in trade patterns (Stern et al., 1996). This hypothesis suggests primarily that     highly regulated countries will &lsquo;lose&rsquo; all the dirty industries that poor countries     will get (Dinda, 2004).</font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> However, if the validity of these hypotheses is proved, the estimated turning     points of the EKC would be unrealistic since even with an increase in their     income level, developing countries will not have the environmental rewards     available to developed economies because of relocation (Stern, 1998).     </font></p>         <p><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em><strong>B. Econometric aspects and criticisms       </strong></em></font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Most of the EKC analyses use panel data (Stern, 1998). For their       estimation, a statistical reduced-form relation is employed, in which the chosen       environmental degradation indicator is modelled as an inverted U-shaped       function of per capita income, and thus the logarithm of the dependentvariable is associated to the square of the income log.<sup>2</sup> Using this methodology,       the regression model assumes the following static form:</font></p>     <p align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09f1.gif" alt="" align="baseline"/></p >     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">where E refers to environmental degradation, GDP represents the income   level, P is the population level, and ln indicates natural logarithms. Variables are   expressed across a series of countries (i = 1, &hellip;, N) and time periods (t = 1, &hellip;,   T). The first two terms on the right hand side are the intercept parameters, which   change among the various countries i and years t. They allow for specific effects   across countries(&alpha;i ) and through time (&gamma;i ) with the aim to register common   stochastic shocks. Random disturbances &epsilon;it are assumed to be independent across countries, with variances that may differ across each of these. </font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> If the EKC hypothesis is met, then equation (1) has a common form, with  &beta;1&gt; 0 and &beta;2 &lt; 0 for all i, and the income level at the turning point, where   environmental quality is not affected by income, is given by</font></p>     <p align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09f2.gif"/></p >     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Comparing the estimated per capita income level associated to the turning   point with the income levels observed in the data set can indicate whether the   turning point falls in or out of the actual income range. This can shed light on   the reliability of the EKC estimations (Barbier, 1997). </font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Most of the literature on the EKC has shown weak results from the   econometric view. Concerning this, one of the more relevant aspects deals with   the use of a reduced-form statistical relation, which eliminates the need of data   on other variables that could affect the relation between per capita income and   the pollution level, on the grounds that one equation captures the influence of   income on technology, product mix and environmental policy, as well as the   incidence that changes in these factors have on environmental pressure. The use   of a reduced-form model has the advantage of providing a direct estimation of   the net effect of income on environmental pressure (Correa Restrepo, 2004);   however, it does not shed light on the nature of the estimated relation and, in   particular, on coefficients analysis (Grossman and Krueger, 1995). Hence it is purely   descriptive and does not allow observing the influence of growth on pollution patterns (de Bruyn et al., 1998; de Bruyn and Heintz, 1999; Panayotou, 1997).</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Another controversial aspect has to do with the validity that estimated   EKC relations on samples of countries may have for individual nations (de   Bruyn et al., 1998). In that sense, some economists argue that the importance   given to this hypothesis is based on the scarce attention that studies have paid to   the statistical properties of the data, like serial correlation or stochastic trends   in time series, and to the carrying out of model adjustment tests, such as the   possibility of biases due to the omission of variables. Not long ago research   reports having diagnosis statistics on series integration or cointegration among   variables were quite reduced, and thus these are not clear as to what can be   inferred on issues such as the significance of additional variables included in   a reduced-form regression (e.g., economic openness indicators, among others) (Stern, 2004; Perman and Stern, 2003).</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Perman and Stern (2003) find, using diagnosis tests for cointegration   and unit roots in panel data relating sulphur emissions and income, that data   are integrated in the time series dimension, that there are more than one   cointegrating regression, and that these are not commonly of the EKC type for   every country. These authors examine each individual country on the sample   and find out that only some cointegrating relations estimated are consistent   with the EKC hypothesis (typically, relations are U-shaped or monotonically   rising in income). Based on these results, they suggest applying such diagnosis   tests in studies related to other environmental indicators.</font></p>     <p><em><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>C. Empirical evidence and Biochemical Oxygen Demand</strong></font></em></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A number of models including explanatory variables other than income   have been built with the aim to study the effect of underlying or approximate   factors such as &lsquo;political freedom&rsquo; (Torras and Boyce, 1998), economic   structure (Panayotou, 1997; Suri and Chapman, 1998) or trade (Shafik and   Bandyopadhyay, 1992; Suri and Chapman, 1998). Also, population density has   been considered (Selden and Song, 1994) as well as lagged income (Grossman   and Krueger, 1995), among others. The inclusion of these variables is intended<br />   to improve the adjustment of estimations and to provide additional insights on pollutants behaviour as economies develop<sup>3</sup> (de Bruyn and Heintz, 1999).</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The literature on the EKC for water pollution, and particularly for pollution   related to the oxygen regime (dissolved oxygen, Chemical Oxygen Demand,   Biochemical Oxygen Demand), is scant and shows conflicting patterns. As   for BOD, Grossman and Krueger (1995) and Correa Restrepo (2004) reportan EKC, but Shafik and Bandyopadhyay (1992) and Torras and Boyce (1998)   find monotonically decreasing and N-shaped patterns, respectively. Despite   the results are contradictory, all these studies are carried out following similar   methodologies (regressions with panel data using ordinary or generalized least   squares, per capita income measured in terms of purchasing power parity) and neglect the econometric diagnosis statistics.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The present study takes into account the criticisms mentioned in section I.A.   and Perman and Stern&rsquo;s (2003) suggestion concerning the estimation of a regression   relating water pollution by BOD with income, including additionally a variable of   foreign trade intensity. With this, we intend to contribute to a rigorous analysis   of the validity of the EKC for various environmental degradation indicators.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p >&nbsp;</p >     <p><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>II. Methodology and results</strong></font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Static estimations were made for each country; panel data estimations with   fixed and random effects; a dynamic error correction model for each country,   which was additionally adjusted presuming the existence of a single EKC for   all countries. Deterministic trends or time dummy variables were added to the   earlier models. Prior to model estimation, unit root contrasts were made for   each series employing individual and panel data tests, as well as individual and   panel cointegration contrasts. Finally, the proposed models were validated. The software used is EViews 5.1.</font></p> <font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <em><strong>A. The data</strong></em></font>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The sample used was defined under data availability criteria. Annual data for   46 countries in the period 1980-2000 were considered (see descriptive statistics in   Appendix 1). Still, the panel is unbalanced as some data are missing (not more than   two per time series), an unbalance corrected using smoothing methodologies.<sup>4</sup>   The countries considered are classified as high, middle and low income, as we   wanted to comprise a heterogeneous group,<sup>5</sup> which is in accordance with the   estimation method used. The main aspects of the variables used in the model are explained as follows.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <em>1. The dependent variable</em></font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) is the water pollution indicator most   used by regulatory agencies.<sup>6</sup> It measures the oxygen dissolved that micro-organisms require for the decomposition process of organic matter in water   bodies.<sup>7</sup> We use the BOD series featured on the World Development Indicators (World Bank, 2005), which refers to polluting emissions (in kg/day).</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <em>2. The explanatory variables</em></font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> &#8211;Gross Domestic Product per capita</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> As indicated before, income is the (more) relevant explanatory variable in   the EKC hypothesis. This variable is represented by per capita Gross Domestic   Product in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). The series were taken from the World Development Indicators published in 2005 (World Bank 2005).</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> &#8211;Foreign trade intensity</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Trade intensity, defined as the ratio of exports plus imports and GDP,   is a coefficient used to measure openness to foreign trade. Like the previous   variables, the data were taken from the World Development Indicators published   in 2005 (World Bank, 2005). It is worth noting that even though this indicator   has been quite used in the literature on the EKC that considers foreign trade   (Grossman and Krueger, 1991; Shafik and Bandyopadhyay, 1992), it has been   bly criticized as it gives an account of trade policy orientation rather than of observed trade (Stern, 1998; Suri and Chapman, 1998).</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> As the values of the variables to be used are all positive and given the   general functional specification of the EKC (equation (1)), we take the   logarithm of the various variables. For the sake of simplicity, the natural logs   of BOD, GDP per capita and foreign trade intensity are denoted as Y, X and W, respectively. The square of X is called Z.</font></p>     <p><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>B. Econometric Procedures and Analysis of Results</strong></font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <em>1. Unit root tests</em></font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The implementation of unit root tests for both each series and the panel   data is mainly due to the proven fact that individual tests have low power when   they are applied to short series, while panel tests increase the power of contrasts   (Perman and Stern, 1999). However, individual tests are useful to support the results obtained with panel tests.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> &#8211;Individual unit root tests</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Dickey-Fuller (ADF), Phillips-Perron (PP) and Kwiatowski et al. (KPSS)   tests were applied. For that, the optimal lag length was chosen attending to the   Schwarz&rsquo;s information criterion, as well as a consistent estimator of the varianceusing the Newey-West method. Table 1 shows the number of countries for   which the three contrasts used allow to conclude that the series are stationary at five and ten percent levels of significance.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> When a trend is not included in the contrast, ADF and PP tests show   similar results: most series have a unit root. On average, the null hypothesis   has been rejected only for two countries under all variables. Following the same   specification, the null hypothesis of stationarity is more often not rejected on   the KPSS test (for the natural log of BOD, the stationarity hypothesis can not be   rejected in 17 countries). When the tests include an individual trend, ADF and PP   results show more rejections of the unit root null hypothesis (four on average)   compared to the results of the same tests with no trend. The KPSS test shows a   higher number of non rejections for the null hypothesis of stationarity.</font></p>     <p align="center"><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t1.gif" alt="" align="baseline"/></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In sum, the unit root individual tests allow us to state that most series   corresponding to the various countries in the sample are integrated of order one&minus;i.e. I(1). Note that, when analyzing the series in first differences, these proved to be stationary.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">&#8211;Panel unit root tests </font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Two approaches are employed: common (Levin and Lin; Hadri) and individual   (Im, Pesaran and Shin). The individual approach considers heterogeneity among   the panel individuals, while the common approach does not. Following Perman   and Stern (2003), we call Levin and Lin&rsquo;s statistic panel statistic, and Im, Pesaran   and Shin`s statistic group statistic. Hadri&rsquo;s test statistic is considered separately.   Table 2 shows a clear trend on all contrasts to not rejecting the hypothesis of   existence of stochastic trends in all series, except for X and Z, for which the   non-trended panel statistic allows rejecting the null hypothesis.</font></p>     <p align="center"><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t2.gif"/></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In Hadri&rsquo;s stationarity test, the null hypothesis is rejected for all series, which   shows that the series analyzed have a unit root. Thus, there is b evidence   that all the series included in the panel are integrated of order one. Individual   series analysis, besides, helps to validate the insight on the existence of a unit root in the panel. </font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <em>2. Cointegration tests</em></font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The previous results make further tests required in order to find a long-run   relation connecting the series, that is, to ensure that we are not in the presence of a spurious relation.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> &#8211;Individual cointegration tests</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The Engle and Granger procedure is followed. The analysis is applied on   two groups of models. In the first group, we take the variables in deviations   from their transversal means or time dummies, while these are not contained in   the second group. Perman and Stern (1999) indicate that these dummies can be   used as proxies of common effects on time. Their inclusion is meant to eliminate<br />   dependence between country-related errors. </font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Table 3 shows the results obtained for each of the estimated models.   Individually, there is no b evidence supporting the existence of cointegration,   as statistically speaking the higher number of significant long-run relations is   ten. Only two countries (Bolivia and Sri Lanka) show evidence of cointegration   in all the four models at ten percent level of significance.</font></p>     <p align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t3.gif"/></p >     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the following section, the results from some panel cointegration tests are analyzed.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">&#8211;Panel cointegration tests</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Several approaches to prove the existence of a potential cointegration   relation have emerged recently. These approaches are based on the traditional   ones to individual cointegration. In this paper, we follow Pedroni&rsquo;s (1999)   approach, as he takes up again the residuals-based conceptualisation posited   by Engle and Granger, and formulates seven test statistics that allow assuming   heterogeneity in the panel. This author proposes two approaches to contrast   cointegration: panel and group statistics. The panel statistics are made on the   within dimension, that is, fixed effects are presupposed. The group statistics are   made on the between dimension, that is to say, the mean for each individual in the panel is obtained before adding on the N dimension.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The results from Pedroni&rsquo;s cointegration tests are shown in table 4. It   can be seen that the various tests allow rejecting the no-cointegration null   hypothesis. This result is important as, unlike the individual cointegration tests,   it shows a long-run relation among the variables. Note that the no-cointegration   hypothesis is not rejected only in the test with the time non-trended dummies   rho panel statistic. This is evidence supporting the heterogeneity present among the panel individuals.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> These results beg some questions regarding the existence of a long-run   relation of the EKC type common to all countries, which will be discussed in the following section.</font></p>     <p align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t4.gif"/></p >     <p><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. Estimation of models</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The econometric work is primarily based on the estimation of a dynamic   model. However, various static models were adjusted. The static model for each   country has the form</font></p>     <p align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09f3.gif"/></p > <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Where i =1, 2,&hellip;, 46 and t = 1980, 1981, &hellip;, 2000. Each transversal unit/ variable is related to its respective parameter. This model was adjusted with a deterministic trend or with time dummies. The assumptions on the disturbance term are the classical ones. The methodology used was ordinary least squares. Fixed and random effects models are given by</font>     <p align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09f4.gif"/></p >     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Where the disturbance term has the form &epsilon;it=&phi;i+&eta;it. It is assumed that &eta;it is   not correlated with the explanatory variables. &phi;i is called the country&rsquo;s individual   effect i, constant in time. In the fixed effects model &phi;i is considered a parameter,   while it is treated as a random variable in the random effects model. Under the classical   assumptions, the model with fixed effects is estimated by ordinary least squares, whereas generalized least squares is used for estimating the model with random effects. </font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Given that the variables are integrated of order one, previous static relations   being spurious is at risk. Similarly, the model residuals are very likely to be   correlated even though estimations are consistent but biased. The estimations   can be improved using error-correction dynamic models wherein, assuming that   the variables are cointegrated, classical inference is valid. Moreover, since lags   are introduced in the regressors, problems such as correlation of residuals may   possibly be amended. The error-correction model is as follows:</font></p>     <p align="center"><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09f5.gif" alt=""/></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A single lag is used for all variables, as otherwise the number of parameters   would be too large; also, the model is adequate in this situation. This is a very   general model, as all the parameters associated to the distinct variables are   different for each transversal section. &alpha;i is the error-correction coefficient related   to country i, and reports on the speed of adjustment towards equilibrium. To<br /> have a long-run relation, it has to be the case that &minus;1&lt; &alpha;i &lt; 0 .</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">&mu;i is the fixed effects parameter, which varies among the different countries. &eta;t   is the intercept related to year t. With &eta;t , which implies introducing time dummy   variables in the model, we seek to control the common effect associated to time;   thus, by taking into account the presence of &mu;i and the lags in the model, we can   assume that the disturbance terms &epsilon;it are independently distributed through time   and across countries, with zero mean and constant variance per country. We can add a deterministic trend associated to each country to the previous model.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Among the existing possibilities, two models were selected. The first   model includes a deterministic trend within the long-run relation, but no time   dummies; in the second one, the roles of those variables are interchanged. The   second model was estimated after extracting from each datum the transversal   mean of the corresponding year. The estimation of these models, called nonrestricted   models, allows studying in a clearer statistical way whether the EKC   actually exists for every country. Also, it is possible to estimate the average of   each long-run parameter from the average of the corresponding estimates, and   to calculate a common estimate of the turning point for all countries based on that information.<sup>8</sup></font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> One way to study the EKC hypothesis is to subject the previous model,   in both versions, to the restriction &beta;1i = &beta;1, &beta;2i = &beta;2, &beta;3i = &beta;3, i = 1, 2, &hellip;, n,   called a restricted model, and to analyze whether data do not allow to reject   such a restriction. Non rejection of the null hypothesis implies that there exists   a single long-run relation and, therefore, it would validate the EKC hypothesis.   The estimation methodology used was weighted least squares, as it enables one   to take into account the likely heteroscedasticity of the disturbance term in each   country. The basis on which to contrast the EKC hypothesis is the likelihood   ratio, asymptotically chi-square distributed with q degrees of freedom, where q is equal to the number of restrictions.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The static models for each country were adjusted so that one would be   trended and the other would have time but not trended dummy variables.   These models show b correlation problems in residuals (high R-square   and Durbin-Watson statistic close to zero). In the trended model, 26 countriesmeet the EKC hypothesis, while in the other case the models corroborating this   hypothesis amount to 33. Both fixed and random effects models meet the EKC   assumptions, but as the static models, they are not statistically valid. </font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In tables 5 and 6, the main results for the dynamic models are presented. At   the individual level, it can be noticed that there are 30 countries that verify the   EKC hypothesis, which is similar to the results obtained for the static models.   However, these results are invalid, because only 4 countries in the non-dummies   trended model meet all of the necessary hypotheses (speed of adjustment   between -1 and 0 and statistically significant, statistically significant parameters   with appropriate signs). Also, we may conclude that for 11 countries, the longrun   relation is valid. In the model with dummies, 3 countries corroborate all   hypotheses, and 4 show cointegration.</font></p>     <p   align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t5.gif" alt=""/></p > <h3   align="center" ><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t6.gif" alt=""/></h3 >         ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The null hypothesis of existence of a unique EKC for all 46 countries in       both types of models is rejected with a probability value of zero. This allows us       to assert that, for these data, parameters are not homogeneous in the long run       and, therefore, the EKC does not exist for this set of countries. Also, it can be       inferred that the static results, which have traditionally shown fixed or random       effects, are spurious; that is, the results of the two last columns in tables 5 and 6       do not have any statistical validity. </font></p>         <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The results obtained for the income level associated to the turning point     in the restricted models and in the estimations with random and fixed effects     are convincing because of their relative similarity and because they are located     within the set of values of per capita income for all of the countries. However,     individually, income associated to the turning points in the four models     mentioned falls in the range of income for six nations only. As we have said,     these conclusions are void of statistical validity.</font> </p>     <p   align="left" >&nbsp;</p >     <p>   <font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>Conclusions</strong></font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The EKC hypothesis posits the existence of a U-shaped relation between   environmental degradation and per capita income. This hypothesis has been   criticized because several authors have assumed that it entails economic   growth as a precondition to implement environmental effective policies, and   thus to revert the impacts caused to the environment during the first stages of   development (Beckerman, 1992; World Bank, 1992). Besides, the importance   given to the EKC hypothesis is supported by the limited or void attention given   to the econometric diagnosis statistics that studies on the topic usually exhibit   (Stern, 2004). In particular, it is believed that what has been traditionally done   (estimations with panel data on static models with random or fixed effects)   poses specification problems due to the presence of first-order integrated series;   also, because homogeneity is assumed in the parameters for different countries,   which can be incorrect. </font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The results obtained in this study show evidence that all the series   exhibit stochastic trends both on the individual and on the panel level. As for   cointegration, it does not appear among the series for most of the countries   taken individually, though it does appear for the panel data. Nonetheless, the   different estimates show that, even if there is a long-run relation among BOD,   per capita GDP (linear and squared) and foreign trade intensity, this is not an EKC for the set of nations considered.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Even more, models under restrictions and estimates with random and fixed   effects are not statistically valid. This is remarkable given the relative consistency   that these estimates show in favour of the EKC hypothesis and because of theincome levels associated to the turning points obtained. However, individual   results support conceptual criticism on the EKC hypothesis since most of the   countries have not yet achieved the per capita income levels that allow them   improvements in water quality, which contributes to worsen global environmental degradation (Stern et al., 1996; Arrow et al., 1995).</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Following the explanations to the EKC posited on the literature, and since   such hypothesis reports a relation between the income level and environmental   pressure exclusively, an additional variable has been tried in order to consider   the incidence of foreign trade. But such a variable, a foreign trade intensity   coefficient, has turned out to be not very significant from the statistic perspective   and with little relevance for the analysis. This rather confirms the criticism that   the inclusion of this variable has received in some studies on the EKC (Stern,   1998; Suri and Chapman, 1998), and raises the need to include other trade   indicators capable of giving an account of relocation of polluting activities.   This consideration can be generalized as these indicators allow considering other   underlying or proximate factors, thereby providing sound explanations about changes in water quality as economic development unfolds.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The results obtained match up Perman and Stern&rsquo;s (2003) on sulphur   dioxide (an indicator of atmospheric pollution). Then it can be said that, to   make appropriate analyses of the EKC hypothesis, unit root and cointegration   contrasts should be applied at the individual and panel levels. In this sense,   we suggest to continue the use of such procedure when addressing relations between economic growth and environmental quality.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Yet it should be noted that the lack of data, mainly for the time interval   considered, plays down power to the unit root and cointegration tests presented   here. Similarly, hypothesis tests on unit roots and panel cointegration continue   to be incipient. Another limitation has to do with the lack of randomness in the   selection of countries comprising the panel, so inferences can not be made on the basis of actual estimations to countries not included in the sample.</font></p>     <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> In brief, theoretical and econometric criticisms on the EKC, partly supported   by the results achieved throughout this study, suggest the need to reformulate the   relation between economic growth and water degradation and, in general, between   growth and environmental quality. It is obvious that the EKC may be configured   from innumerable possible results derived from economic growth. Therefore,   instead of ascribing the EKC to a single factor, appropriate attention should   be paid to the other elements that make up the system economy-environment.   In this sense, further research needs to give priority to the identification of the   more relevant aspects when explaining such a relation, since this would be the   only way to formulate policies able to influence it.</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif"><strong>References</strong></font></p>     <!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. Alviar Ram&iacute;rez, Mauricio; Granda Carvajal, Catalina; P&eacute;rez Puerta, Luis   Guillermo; Mu&ntilde;oz Mora, Juan Carlos y Restrepo Ochoa, Diana Constanza   (2006). Determinantes de la Curva Ambiental de Kuznets para la Calidad del Agua:   un an&aacute;lisis emp&iacute;rico, Informe de investigaci&oacute;n, Medell&iacute;n, Universidad de Antioquia-Centro de Investigaciones Econ&oacute;micas.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000128&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 2. Arrow, Kenneth; Bolin, Bert; Costanza, Robert; Dasgupta, Partha; Folke,   Carl; Holling, C. S.; Jansson, Bengt-Owe; Levin, Simon; M&auml;ler, Karl-   G&ouml;ran; Perrings, Charles and Pimentel, David (1995). ''Economic Growth,   Carrying Capacity, and the Environment'', Science, Vol. 268, 28 April, pp. 520-521.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000129&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900002&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 3. Baltag i, Badi (2001). Econometric analysis of panel data, Second edition, Chichester, John Wiley &amp; Sons.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000130&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900003&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 4. Barbier, Edward B. (1997). ''Introduction to the environmental Kuznets curve   special issue'', Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 2, No. 4, March, pp. 369-381.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000131&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900004&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 5. Beckerman, Wilfred (1992). ''Economic growth and the environment: whose   growth? Whose environment?'', World Development, Vol. 20, No. 4, April, pp. 481-496.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000132&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900005&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 6. De Bruyn, Sander M. and Heintz, Roebijn J. (1999). ''The environmental Kuznets   curve hypothesis''; in van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M (ed.), Handbook of   Environmental and Resource Economics, Cheltenham and Northampton, Edward Elgar.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000133&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900006&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 7. De Bruyn, S. M.; van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. and Opschoor, J. B. (1998). ''Economic   growth and emissions: reconsidering the empirical basis of environmental Kuznets curves'', Ecological Economics, Vol. 25, No. 2, May, pp. 161-175.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000134&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900007&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 8. Correa Restrepo, Francisco (2004). Crecimiento econ&oacute;mico, desigualdad social y medio   ambiente: evidencia emp&iacute;rica internacional, Tesis de Maestr&iacute;a, Medell&iacute;n, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000135&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900008&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 9. Dasgupta, Susmita; Lap lante, Benoit; Wang, Hua and Wheeler, David (2002).  ''Confronting the Environmental Kuznets Curve'', Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 16, No. 1, Winter, pp.147-168.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000136&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900009&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 10. Dinda, Soumyananda (2004). ''Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey'', Ecological Economics, Vol. 49, No. 4, August, pp. 431-455. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000137&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900010&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">11. Enders, Walter (2004). Applied econometric time series, Second edition, Chichester, John Wiley &amp; Sons.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000138&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900011&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">12. Grossman, Gene M. and Krueger, Alan B. (1995). ''Economic Growth and the   Environment'', Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 110, No. 2, May, pp. 353-   377.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000139&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900012&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 13. Grossman, Gene M. and Krueger, Alan B. (1991). ''Environmental Impacts of   a North American Free Trade Agreement'', NBER Working Paper, No. 3914, Cambridge, National Bureau of Economic Research. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000140&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900013&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">14. Kuznets, Simon (1955). ''Economic growth and income inequality'', American   Economic Review, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 1-28.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000141&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900014&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 15. Mah&iacute;a, Ram&oacute;n (2000). ''An&aacute;lisis de estacionariedad con datos de panel: una   ilustraci&oacute;n para los tipos de cambio, precios y mantenimiento de la PPA en Latinoam&eacute;rica'', Mimeo, Instituto L. R. Klein, junio.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000142&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900015&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 16. Metca lf &amp; Eddy (1995). Ingenier&iacute;a de aguas residuales: tratamiento, vertido y reutilizaci&oacute;n, Vol. 2, Third edition, McGraw Hill Interamericana.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000143&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900016&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 17. Panayotou, Theodore (1997). ''Demystifying the environmental Kuznets curve:   turning a black box into a policy tool'', Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 2, No. 4, March, pp. 465-484.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000144&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900017&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 18. Panayotou, Theodore (1993). ''Empirical tests and policy analysis of   environmental degradation at different stages of economic development'', International Labour Office Discussion Paper 1, Geneva.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000145&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900018&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 19. Pedroni, Peter (2004). ''Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic and Finite Sample   Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis'', Econometric Theory, Vol. 20, No. 3, June, pp. 597-625.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000146&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900019&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 20. Pedroni, Peter (1999). ''Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous   panels with multiple regressors'', Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 61, Special issue, November, pp. 653-670.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000147&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900020&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 21. Perman, Roger and Stern, David I. (2003). ''Evidence from panel unit root   and cointegration tests that the Environmental Kuznets Curve does not   exist'', Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 47, No. 3, September, pp. 325-347.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000148&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900021&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 22. Perman, Roger and Stern, David I. (1999). ''The Environmental Kuznets Curve:   Implications of Non-Stationarity'', Mimeo, June.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000149&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900022&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 23. Pesaran, M. Hashem and Smith, Ron (1995). ''Estimating long-run relationships   from dynamic heterogeneous panels'', Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 68, No. 1, July, pp. 79-773.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000150&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900023&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 24. Pesaran, M. Hashem; Shin, Yongcheol and Smith, Ron (1998). ''Pooled Mean   Group Estimation of Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels'', Mimeo, University of Cambridge.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000151&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900024&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">25. Selden, T. and Song, D. (1994). ''Environmental quality and development: is   there a Kuznets Curve for air pollution emissions?'', Journal of Environmental   Economics and Management, Vol. 27, No. 2, September, pp. 147-162.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000152&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900025&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 26. Shaf ik, Nemat (1994). ''Economic development and environmental quality:   an econometric analysis'', Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 46, Special Issue on Environmental Economics, October, pp. 757-773.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000153&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900026&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 27. Shaf ik, N. and Bandyopa dhyay, S. (1992). ''Economic growth and environmental   quality: time series and cross-country evidence'', Background paper for the World Development Report, Washington, D.C., The World Bank.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000154&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900027&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 28. Stern, David I. (2004). ''The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve'', World Development, Vol. 32, No. 8, August, pp. 1419-1439. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000155&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900028&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">29. Stern, David I. (1998). ''Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve?'',   Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 3, No. 2, March, pp. 173-196.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000156&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900029&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 30. Stern, David I.; Common, Michael S. and Barbier, Edward B. (1996) ''Economic   Growth and Environmental Degradation: The Environmental Kuznets   Curve and Sustainable Development'', World Development, Vol. 24, No. 7, July, pp. 1151-1160.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000157&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900030&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 31. Suri, Vivek and Chap man, Duane (1998). ''Economic growth, trade and energy:   implications for the environmental Kuznets curve'', Ecological Economics, Vol. 25, No. 2, May, pp. 195-208.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000158&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900031&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 32. Torras, Mariano and Boyce, James K. (1998). ''Income, inequality, and pollution:   a reassessment of the environmental Kuznets Curve'', Ecological Economics, Vol. 25, No. 2, May, pp. 147-160.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000159&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900032&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 33. World Bank (2005). World Development Report, Washington, D.C. (CD-ROM).</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000160&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900033&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 34. World Bank (1992). World Development Report, Washington, D.C.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000161&pid=S0120-2596200800020000900034&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><p>&nbsp;</p>       ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>&nbsp;</p>       <p><font size="2"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans&#8211;serif">Primera versi&oacute;n recibida en junio de 2008; versi&oacute;n final aceptada en agosto de 2008</font></font></p>       <p>&nbsp;</p>   <font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notas</strong></font>       <p>&nbsp;</p>       <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1 The adoption of technologies may also be the result of changes in underlying variables related to     economic development, such as more stringent environmental regulation and/or higher educational     level of the population. In a similar way, it may be directed by the market (partly fostered by the benefits     of environmental conservation).</font></p>       <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2 Note that this functional specification does not allow for incorporation of null or negative values of the     environmental degradation indicators. </font></p>       <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3 Compared to the values estimated without their inclusion, such variables capture some part of the     polluting effects associated to income and, as a consequence, can alter the turning points. </font></p>       <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">4 The BOD series were corrected with the non-seasonal Holt-Winter smoothing method, while the series     for economic openness and per capita GDP were corrected through autoregressive processes. </font></p>       <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 5 For each country&rsquo;s descriptive statistics, see Appendix 2. We thank a referee for suggesting us this point.</font></p>       <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> 6 As a matter of fact, developing countries have traditionally started industrial pollution control programs by regulating emissions of this pollutant. </font> </p>       ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">7 There are other indicators of water pollution by organic compounds. One of them is Chemical Oxygen     Demand (COD), which measures the dissolved oxygen required by a chemical oxidant to decompose     the organic material contained both in natural and waste waters.</font></p>       <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">8 Pesaran and Smith (1995) show that the estimator obtained using this procedure (mean group estimator,     MG) consistently estimates the parameter average. </font></p>       <p>&nbsp;</p>       <p><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Appendix</strong></font></p>       <p align="center"><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t7.gif" alt=""/></p>       <p align="center"><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t8.gif" alt=""/></p>       <p align="center"><img src="img/revistas/le/n69/a09t9.gif" alt=""/> </p>      ]]></body><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<label>1</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Alviar Ramírez]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Mauricio]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Granda Carvajal]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Catalina]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pérez Puerta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Luis Guillermo]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Muñoz Mora]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Juan Carlos]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Restrepo Ochoa]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Diana Constanza]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Determinantes de la Curva Ambiental de Kuznets para la Calidad del Agua: un análisis empírico, Informe de investigación]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Medellín ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Universidad de Antioquia-Centro de Investigaciones Económicas]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<label>2</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Arrow]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Kenneth]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bolin]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Bert]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Costanza]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Robert]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Dasgupta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Partha]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Folke]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Carl]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Holling]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C. S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jansson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Bengt-Owe]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Levin]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Simon]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Mäler]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Karl- Göran]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Perrings]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Charles]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pimentel]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[David]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic Growth, Carrying Capacity, and the Environment]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Science]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<volume>268</volume>
<numero>28</numero>
<issue>28</issue>
<page-range>520-521</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<label>3</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Baltag i]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Badi]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Econometric analysis of panel data]]></source>
<year>2001</year>
<edition>Second</edition>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Chichester ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[John Wiley & Sons]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<label>4</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Barbier]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Edward B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Introduction to the environmental Kuznets curve special issue]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Environment and Development Economics]]></source>
<year>1997</year>
<volume>2</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>369-381</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<label>5</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Beckerman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Wilfred]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic growth and the environment: whose growth? Whose environment?]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[World Development]]></source>
<year>1992</year>
<volume>20</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>481-496</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<label>6</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[De Bruyn]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Sander M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Heintz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Roebijn J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[van den Bergh]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Jeroen C. J. M]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Handbook of Environmental and Resource Economics]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<label>7</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[De Bruyn]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S. M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[van den Bergh]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. C. J. M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Opschoor]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J. B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic growth and emissions: reconsidering the empirical basis of environmental Kuznets curves]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Ecological Economics]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<volume>25</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>161-175</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<label>8</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Correa Restrepo]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Francisco]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Crecimiento económico, desigualdad social y medio ambiente: evidencia empírica internacional]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<label>9</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Dasgupta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Susmita]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Lap lante]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Benoit]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Wang]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Hua]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Wheeler]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[David]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Confronting the Environmental Kuznets Curve]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of Economic Perspectives]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>16</volume><volume>1</volume>
<page-range>147-168</page-range><publisher-name><![CDATA[Winter]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<label>10</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Dinda]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Soumyananda]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Ecological Economics]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<volume>49</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>431-455</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<label>11</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Enders]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Walter]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Applied econometric time series]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<edition>Second</edition>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Chichester ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[John Wiley & Sons]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<label>12</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Grossman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Gene M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Krueger]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Alan B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic Growth and the Environment]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Quarterly Journal of Economics]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<volume>110</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>353- 377</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<label>13</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Grossman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Gene M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Krueger]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Alan B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[NBER Working Paper]]></source>
<year>1991</year>
<volume>3914</volume>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cambridge ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[National Bureau of Economic Research]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<label>14</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kuznets]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Simon]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic growth and income inequality]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[American Economic Review]]></source>
<year>1955</year>
<volume>45</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>1-28</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<label>15</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Mahía]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Ramón]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Análisis de estacionariedad con datos de panel: una ilustración para los tipos de cambio, precios y mantenimiento de la PPA en Latinoamérica]]></source>
<year>2000</year>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Mimeo]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<label>16</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Metca lf & Eddy]]></surname>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Ingeniería de aguas residuales: tratamiento, vertido y reutilización]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<volume>2</volume>
<edition>Third</edition>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[McGraw Hill Interamericana]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<label>17</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Panayotou]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Theodore]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Demystifying the environmental Kuznets curve: turning a black box into a policy tool]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Environment and Development Economics]]></source>
<year>1997</year>
<volume>2</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>465-484</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<label>18</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Panayotou]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Theodore]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development]]></source>
<year>1993</year>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<label>19</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pedroni]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Peter]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Econometric Theory]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<volume>20</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>597-625</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<label>20</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pedroni]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Peter]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<volume>61</volume>
<page-range>653-670</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<label>21</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Perman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Roger]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stern]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[David I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests that the Environmental Kuznets Curve does not exist]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics]]></source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>47</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>325-347</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<label>22</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Perman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Roger]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stern]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[David I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[The Environmental Kuznets Curve: Implications of Non-Stationarity]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Mimeo]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23">
<label>23</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pesaran]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. Hashem]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Smith]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Ron]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Estimating long-run relationships from dynamic heterogeneous panels]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of Econometrics]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<volume>68</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>79-773</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B24">
<label>24</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pesaran]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M. Hashem]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Shin]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Yongcheol]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Smith]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Ron]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Pooled Mean Group Estimation of Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Mimeo]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B25">
<label>25</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Selden]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Song]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Environmental quality and development: is there a Kuznets Curve for air pollution emissions?]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of Environmental Economics and Management]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<volume>27</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>147-162</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26">
<label>26</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Shaf ik]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Nemat]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic development and environmental quality: an econometric analysis]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Oxford Economic Papers]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<volume>46</volume>
<page-range>757-773</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B27">
<label>27</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Shaf ik]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bandyopa dhyay]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic growth and environmental quality: time series and cross-country evidence]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Background paper for the World Development Report]]></source>
<year>1992</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Washington ]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B28">
<label>28</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stern]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[David I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[World Development]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<volume>32</volume>
<numero>8</numero>
<issue>8</issue>
<page-range>1419-1439</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B29">
<label>29</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stern]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[David I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve?]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Environment and Development Economics]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<volume>3</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>173-196</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B30">
<label>30</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stern]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[David I]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Common]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Michael S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Barbier]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Edward B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic Growth and Environmental Degradation: The Environmental Kuznets Curve and Sustainable Development]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[World Development]]></source>
<year>1996</year>
<volume>24</volume>
<numero>7</numero>
<issue>7</issue>
<page-range>1151-1160</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B31">
<label>31</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Suri]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Vivek]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Chap man]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Duane]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Economic growth, trade and energy: implications for the environmental Kuznets curve]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Ecological Economics]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<volume>25</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>195-208</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B32">
<label>32</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Torras]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Mariano]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Boyce]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[James K]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the environmental Kuznets Curve]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Ecological Economics]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<volume>25</volume><volume>2</volume>
<page-range>147-160</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B33">
<label>33</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<collab>World Bank</collab>
<source><![CDATA[World Development Report]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Washington^eD.C. D.C.]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B34">
<label>34</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<collab>World Bank</collab>
<source><![CDATA[World Development Report]]></source>
<year>1992</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Washington^eD.C D.C]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
