IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa02p076.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trans-boundary pollution and international migration

Author

Listed:
  • Kenji, Kondoh

Abstract

Adopting the basic Ricardian static trade model, Two-country (Home and Foreign), Two-goods (Agricultural and Industrial) and One-factor (labour) model with environmental resource, we extended Copland and Taylor (1999) in three points. Firstly, we assumed pollution should be trans-boundary. Secondly, we considered the technical difference between two countries. Thirdly, we introduced international migration. We assumed that the only difference between two countries is the pollution protecting technology caused by industrial production. There will occur three different situations depending on the strength of demand on industrial good. Firstly, if industrial good is strongly preferred, the country with low technology (country L) will specialize in production of industrial good and another country (country H) will produce both goods. In this case, if trade is permitted, country L will gain while whether country H will gain or not is ambiguous. Moreover, after free trade, there occurs no international migration. Secondary, if both goods are preferred almost equally, then country H (L) will specialize agricultural (industrial) good. Whether free trade is beneficial or not for each country depends on parameters. After trade, there remains wage gap between two countries and therefore international migration from L to H will occur. Thirdly, if industrial good is weakly preferred, then country L produces both goods while country H produces agricultural good only. In this case free trade will reduce the economic welfare of country L while the effects on country H is ambiguous. After free trade, workers will migrate from L to H if permitted. In the second and third cases, migration expands the production of agricultural good but reduces that of industrial good and it will continue until comparative advantage of each country diminishes. If we consider that one of the two goods is non-tradable, there is no possibility of international trade but if international migration is permitted, workers in country L will migrate to country H, which will not end before all of inhabitants in country L quit their home country.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenji, Kondoh, 2002. "Trans-boundary pollution and international migration," ERSA conference papers ersa02p076, European Regional Science Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa02p076
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa02/cd-rom/papers/076.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Copeland, Brian R. & Taylor, M. Scott, 1999. "Trade, spatial separation, and the environment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 137-168, February.
    2. Kenji Kondoh, 1997. "Permanent Migrants And Cross-Border Workers -The Effects On The Host Country-," Departmental Working Papers 1997-01, McGill University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gang Li & Akihiko Yanase, 2022. "Trade, Resource Use and Pollution: A Synthesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 861-901, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:6:y:2007:i:5:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Gökhan Güven & Selim İnançlı, 2023. "The shared renewable resources with pollution under incomplete spatial separation: trade and the use of export tax," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Coxhead, Ian A. & Jayasuriya, Sisira, 2003. "Trade, Liberalization, Resource Degradation and Industrial Pollution in Developing Countries: An Integrated Analysis," Staff Papers 12691, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    4. Yunyun Wu & Xiaochun Li, 2024. "Industrial technological progress, technology spillover, and the environment in a dual agricultural economy," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 20(2), pages 243-266, June.
    5. Kuang-Feng Cheng & Chien-Shu Tsai & Chu-Chuan Hsu & Szu-Chung Lin & Ting-Chung Tsai & Jen-Yao Lee, 2019. "Emission Tax and Compensation Subsidy with Cross-Industry Pollution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Unteroberdoerster, Olaf, 2001. "Trade and Transboundary Pollution: Spatial Separation Reconsidered," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 269-285, May.
    7. Soham Baksi, 2014. "Regional versus Multilateral Trade Liberalization, Environmental Taxation, and Welfare," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 232-249, February.
    8. Baksi, S. & Ray Chaudhuri, A., 2008. "Transboundary Pollution, Trade Liberalization, and Environmental Taxes," Discussion Paper 2008-78, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Zeng, Dao-Zhi & Zhao, Laixun, 2009. "Pollution havens and industrial agglomeration," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 141-153, September.
    10. Horatiu A. Rus, 2006. "Renewable Resources, Pollution and Trade in a Small Open Economy," Working Papers 2006.140, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Toshihiro Okubo & Yuta Watabe & Kaori Furuyama, 2016. "Export of Recyclable Materials: Evidence from Japan," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 134-148, Winter/Sp.
    12. Yao An & Ning Liu & Lin Zhang & Huanhuan Zheng, 2022. "Adapting to climate risks through cross-border investments: industrial vulnerability and smart city resilience," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-29, September.
    13. Zhu, Xueqin & van Ierland, Ekko, 2006. "The enlargement of the European Union: Effects on trade and emissions of greenhouse gases," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 1-14, April.
    14. Rubbelke, Dirk T.G. & Mukherjee, Vivekananda & Sanyal, Tilak, 2008. "Technology Transfer in the Non-traded Sector as a Means to Combat Global Warming," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 44228, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    15. Wu, Haoyi & Guo, Huanxiu & Zhang, Bing & Bu, Maoliang, 2017. "Westward movement of new polluting firms in China: Pollution reduction mandates and location choice," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 119-138.
    16. Batabyal, Amitrajeet & Higano, Yoshiro & Nijkamp, Peter, 2020. "Introduction to "Rural-Urban Dichotomies and Spatial Development in Asia"," MPRA Paper 103916, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 02 Nov 2020.
    17. Dijkstra, Bouwe R. & de Vries, Frans P., 2006. "Location choice by households and polluting firms: An evolutionary approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 425-446, February.
    18. Gori, Giuseppe Francesco & Lambertini, Luca, 2013. "Trade liberalisation between asymmetric countries with environmentally concerned consumers," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 549-560.
    19. Tohru Naito & Tatsuya Omori, 2014. "Can urban pollution shrink rural districts?," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 73-83, July.
    20. Diana Carolina León Torres, 2019. "Un cuento de David y Goliat: Comercio, Tecnología y Crisis Ambiental," Documentos CEDE 17434, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    21. Yuichi Furukawa & Kenji Kondoh & Shigemi Yabuuchi, 2019. "Tourism, Capital and Labor Inflows and Regional Development," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 25(2), pages 221-233, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa02p076. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.