Karine CONSTANT

This article examines how pollution and its health effects during childhood can affect the dynamics of inequalities among households. In a model in which children’s health is endogenously determined by pollution and the health investments of parents, we show that the economy may exhibit inequality in the long run and be stuck in an inequality trap with steadily increasing disparities, because of pollution. We investigate if an environmental policy, consisting in taxing the polluting production to fund pollution abatement, can address this issue. We find that it can decrease inequality in the long run and enable to escape from the trap if the emission intensity is not too high and if initial disparities are not too wide. Otherwise, we reveal that a policy mix with an additional subsidy to health expenditure may be a better option, at least if parental investment on children’s health is sufficiently efficient.

This paper analyzes the economic implications of an environmental policy when we account for the life expectancy of heterogeneous agents. In a framework in which everyone su ers from pollution but health status also depends on individual human capital, we find that the economy may be stuck in a trap in which inequality rises steadily, especially when the initial pollution intensity of production is too high. We emphasize that such inequality is in the long run costly for the economy in terms of health and growth. Therefore, we study whether a tax on pollution associated with an investment in pollution abatement can be used to address this situation. We show that a stricter environmental policy may allow the economy to escape from the inequality trap while enhancing the long-term growth rate when the initial inequality in human capital is not too large.

In this paper, we consider the unequal distribution of climate change damages in the world and we examine how the underlying costs can spread from a vulnerable to a non-vulnerable country through international trade. To focus on such indirect effects, we treat this topic in a North-South trade overlapping generations model in which the South is vulnerable to the damages entailed by global pollution while the North is not. We show that the impacts of climate change in the South can be sources of welfare loss for northern consumers in both the long and the short run. In the long run, an increase in the South’s vulnerability can reduce the welfare in the North economy even in the case in which it improves the terms of trade of the North. In the short run, the South’s vulnerability can also represent a source of intergenerational inequity in the North. Therefore, we emphasize the strong economic incentives for non-vulnerable - and a fortiori less vulnerable - economies to reduce the climate change damages on more vulnerable countries.

This paper examines the relationship between environmental policy and growth when green preferences are endogenously determined by education and pollution. We consider an environmental policy in which the government implements a tax on pollution and recycles the revenue to fund pollution abatement activities and/or an education subsidy (influencing green behaviors). When the sensitivity of agents' environmental preferences to pollution and human capital is high, the economy can converge to a balanced growth path equilibrium with damped oscillations. We show that this environmental policy can both remove the oscillations, associated with intergenerational inequalities, and enhance the long-term growth rate. However, this solution requires that the revenue from the tax rate must be allocated to education and direct environmental protection simultaneously. We demonstrate that this type of mixed-instrument environment policy is an effective way to address environmental and economic issues in both the short and the long run.

A venir

Résumé non disponible.

Recently, many contributions have focused on the relationship between capital level, growth and population dynamics, introducing fertility choice in macro-dynamic models. In this paper, we go one step further highlighting also the link with pollution. We develop a simple overlapping generations model with paternalistic altruism according to wealth and environmental concerns. One can therefore explain a simultaneous increase in capital intensity, population growth and pollution, namely a polluting industrialization. We show in addition that a permanent productivity shock, possibly associated to technological innovations, promotes such a polluting development process, escaping a trap where the economy is relegated to low levels of capital intensity, population growth and pollution.

This paper analyzes the economic implications of an environmental policy when we account for the life expectancy of heterogeneous agents. In a framework in which everyone su ers from pollution but health status also depends on individual human capital, we find that the economy may be stuck in a trap in which inequality rises steadily, especially when the initial pollution intensity of production is too high. We emphasize that such inequality is in the long run costly for the economy in terms of health and growth. Therefore, we study whether a tax on pollution associated with an investment in pollution abatement can be used to address this situation. We show that a stricter environmental policy may allow the economy to escape from the inequality trap while enhancing the long-term growth rate when the initial inequality in human capital is not too large.

This article examines how pollution and its health effects during childhood can affect the dynamics of inequalities among households. In a model in which children’s health is endogenously determined by pollution and the health investments of parents, we show that the economy may exhibit inequality in the long run and be stuck in an inequality trap with steadily increasing disparities, because of pollution. We investigate if an environmental policy, consisting in taxing the polluting production to fund pollution abatement, can address this issue. We find that it can decrease inequality in the long run and enable to escape from the trap if the emission intensity is not too high and if initial disparities are not too wide. Otherwise, we reveal that a policy mix with an additional subsidy to health expenditure may be a better option, at least if parental investment on children’s health is sufficiently efficient.

In this paper, we consider the unequal distribution of climate change damages in the world and we examine how the underlying costs can spread from a vulnerable to a non-vulnerable country through international trade. To focus on such indirect effects, we treat this topic in a North-South trade overlapping generations model in which the South is vulnerable to the damages entailed by global pollution while the North is not. We show that the impact of climate change in the South can be a source of welfare loss for northern consumers, in both the short and the long run. In the long run, an increase in the South’s vulnerability can reduce the welfare in the North economy even in the case in which it improves its terms of trade. In the short run, the South’s vulnerability can also represent a source of intergenerational inequity in the North. Therefore, we emphasize the strong economic incentives for non-vulnerable - and a fortiori less-vulnerable - economies to reduce the climate change damages on - more - vulnerable countries.

This paper analyzes the economic implications of an environmental policy when we take into account the life expectancy of heterogeneous agents. In a framework where everyone suffers from pollution, but health status depends also on individual human capital, we find that the economy may be stuck in a trap where inequalities persistently grow, when the initial level of pollution is too high. Therefore, we study whether a tax on pollution associated with an investment in pollution abatement can be used to reduce inequalities and to improve endogenous growth. We obtain that a tighter environmental policy may allow the economy to escape the inequality trap and hence to converge to a long-term equilibrium without inequality, while it enhances the long-term growth rate. However, if inequalities or pollution are initially too high, such a result does not hold for reasonable tax rates.

This paper examines the relationship between environmental policy and growth when green preferences are endogenously determined by education and pollution. The government can implement a tax on pollution and recycle the revenue in public pollution abatement and/or education subsidy (influencing green behaviors). When agent's preferences for the environment are highly sensitive to environmental damages, the economy can converge to a balanced growth path equilibrium with damped oscillations. Therefore, we identify two objectives that environmental policy seeks to address: remove oscillations, source of intergenerational inequalities, and enhance the long-term growth rate. We show that a tighter tax allows to achieve both objectives when the tax revenue is well allocated between education and direct environmental protection.

Recently, many contributions have focused on the relationship between capital accumulation, growth and population dynamics, introducing fertility choice in macro-dynamic models. In this paper, we go one step further highlighting also the link with pollution. We develop a simple overlapping generations model with paternalistic altruism according to wealth and environmental concerns. One can therefore explain a simultaneous increase of capital intensity, population growth and pollution, namely a polluting industrialization. We show in addition that a permanent productivity shock, possibly associated to technological innovations, promotes such a polluting development process, escaping a trap where the economy is relegated to a low capital intensity, population growth and pollution.