Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and not those of IZA. Research published in this series may include views on policy, but IZA takes no institutional policy positions. The IZA research network is committed to the IZA Guiding Principles of Research Integrity. The IZA Institute of Labor Economics is an independent economic research institute that conducts research in labor economics and offers evidence-based policy advice on labor market issues. Supported by the Deutsche Post Foundation, IZA runs the world's largest network of economists, whose research aims to provide answers to the global labor market challenges of our time. Our key objective is to build bridges between academic research, policymakers and society. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author.

No abstract

This paper analyses the relationship between the distribution of income and the carbon dioxide content of household consumption. Household carbon is estimated by linking expenditure data to productive sectors and their carbon intensity derived through input-output analysis. Environmental Engel curves (EECs) are estimated, which describe the relationship between household income and CO 2 in the United States between 1996 and 2009. A second-degree polynomial specification in income is found to approximate well the fit of more flexible nonparametric models. These parametric EECs are used to decompose the within-year household carbon inequality as well as the evolution of household carbon over time. In both cases, household income appears to be a main driver of carbon consumption. A potential "equity-pollution dilemma" is described and a method to quantify it is proposed. Assuming (conditional) homogeneity in preferences, EEC estimates predict that progressive income transfers would raise household carbon by 5.1% at the margin and by about 2.3% under complete income redistribution in 2009.