Three empirical investigations in environmental economics

The first paper examines the relationship between environment and development. In particular it explores the possible existence of an environmental Kuznets curve, whereby pollution first increases but later falls with increasing income. Empirical studies have concentrated on a wide spectrum of countries and run into inevitable problems of data comparability and quality. Instead, this paper uses air emissions data from the 50 U.S. states. The results suggest an increase in income is associated with a decline in emissions. This is not just a function of the composition of industry. Within a given industry class, we see some evidence that emissions are lower in richer states, probably due to more effective regulation and better technology. Moreover, even when controlling for differences between states, we found that higher income is associated with lower emission levels. This is somewhat surprising and goes against our intuition that the effect of income is strictly a long-term process.; The second paper examines the costs of motor vehicle air pollution. Motor vehicles have significantly larger health costs than previously reported. Particulates are the most damaging pollutant, while ozone and other pollutants have smaller effects. Diesel vehicles cause more damages per mile than do gasoline vehicles, because of larger particulate emissions. Very fine particles appear more dangerous than larger particles, and combustion particles appear more dangerous than road dust. Ozone may be linked to mortality and chronic illness; effects which are costly and would considerably raise the costs of ozone pollution. Our results suggest that emphasis should be placed on the regulation of particulates.; The third paper examines regulatory decisions surrounding hazardous waste sites in the U.S., to determine to what extent if at all, minority communities receive less effective regulatory protection. The results suggest that sites are less likely to be discovered in communities with more blacks and once discovered the preliminary assessment proceeds more slowly. There does not appear to be any bias in the speed with which the hazard ranking proceeds or with later aspects of the process considered in this analysis.