The human rights foundations of an EKC with a minimum consumption requirement: theory, implications, and quantitative findings

  • Chris JeffordsEmail author
  • Alexi Thompson
Original Paper


Andreoni and Levinson’s (J Public Econ 80:269–286, 2001) EKC model is modified to include Stone (Econ J 63:511–527, 1954) and Geary (Rev Econ Stud 18(99):65–66, 1950) preferences where the economic agent has a minimum consumption requirement (MCR). We show that at each level of income, an increase in the MCR is associated with higher levels of pollution, and the threshold level of income at which the EKC inverts changes with a change in the MCR. A numerical exercise further supports these findings. We offer a policy discussion within the context of the environmental impacts of meeting a MCR noting that doing so is costly in terms of the impact on pollution and the resources required to mitigate pollution in its presence.


EKC Minimum standard of living Pollution Economic growth 



  1. Andreoni, J., Levinson, A.: The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve. J. Public Econ. 80, 269–286 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Antweiler, W., Copeland, B.R., Taylor, M.S.: Is free trade good for the environment? Am. Econ. Rev. 91, 877–908 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brock, W.A., Taylor, M.S.: The green solow model. J. Econ. Growth 15, 127–153 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carson, R.T.: The environmental Kuznets curve: seeking empirical regularity and theoretical structure. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 4, 3–23 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Egli, H., Steger, T.: A simple dynamic model of the environmental Kuznets curve: turning point and public policy. Environ. Resour. Econ. 36(15), 34 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. Geary, R.: A note on a constant-utility index of the cost of living. Rev. Econ. Stud. 18(99), 65–66 (1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Grossman, G.M., Krueger, A.B.: Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 3914, NBER, Cambridge, MA (1991)Google Scholar
  8. International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. (1966). Accessed 1 Mar 2018
  9. Jeffords, C., Shah, F.: On the natural and economic difficulties to fulfilling the human right to water within a neoclassical economics framework. Rev. Soc. Econ. 71, 65–92 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. John, A., Pecchenino, R.: An overlapping generations model of growth and the environment. Econ. J. 104, 1393–1410 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lieb, C.M.: The environmental Kuznets curve and flow versus stock pollution: the neglect of future damages. Environ. Resour. Econ. 29, 483–506 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lopez, R.: The environment as a factor of production: the effects of economic growth and trade liberalization. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 27, 163–184 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pfaff, A., Chaudhury, S., Nye, H.: Household production and environmental kuznets curves: examining the desirability and feasibility of substitution. Environ. Resour. Econ. 27(2), 187–200 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Selden, T.M., Song, D.: Neoclassical growth, the J curve for abatement, and the inverted U curve for pollution. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 29, 162–168 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Stern, D.I.: The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Dev. 32, 1419–1439 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stokey, N.L.: Are there limits to growth? Int. Econ. Rev. 39, 1–31 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stone, R.: Linear expenditure systems and demand analysis: an application to the pattern of British demand. Econ. J. 63, 511–527 (1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thompson, A.: Specifying the EKC: downstream dependence in water pollution. Theoret. Econ. Lett. 4, 743–747 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsIndiana University of PennsylvaniaIndianaUSA

Personalised recommendations