The environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis (EKC) predicts an inverse U-shaped relationship between environmental pollution and per capita income. The literature with respect to the EKC is vast but far from conclusive. This paper adds firm size to the standard EKC reduced form regression and analyses whether firm size matters once income and composition are controlled for. Results suggest that large firm countries are initially associated with higher levels of environmental damage. However, as economies develop, large firm countries find it easier to adopt more stringent environmental legislation. Once environmental damage starts to decrease, the decrease is much larger in large firm countries.

Empirical research on the characteristics of environmentally responsive companies has focussed on US and Japanese companies. For Europe, which is commonly considered as the greenest of the three major markets, similar research is lacking. This paper seeks to fill this gap by empirically investigating business and financial characteristics, stakeholder pressures and public policies to distinguish companies that have implemented the European Eco-Management and Audit System (EMAS) from a unique firm-level dataset of European publicly quoted companies. We find that the EMAS participation decision is positively influenced by the solvency ratio, the share of non-current liabilities, the average labour cost and the absolute company size as well as the relative size of a company compared to its sector average. The profit margin exerts a negative influence. We further find that companies whose headquarters is located in a country that actively encourages EMAS have a higher probability of participation. Finally, this paper suggests that rather than attracting other kinds of companies, a favourable institutional context succeeds in convincing more of the same kind of companies to participate.The authors thank anonymous referees for providing helpful comments and suggestions on earlier drafts of this paper.

BackgroundSound decisions on control actions for established invasive alien species (IAS) require information on ecological as well as socio-economic impact of the species and of its management. Cost-benefit analysis provides part of this information, yet has received relatively little attention in the scientific literature on IAS.MethodsWe apply a bio-economic model in a cost-benefit analysis framework to greater Canada goose Branta canadensis, an IAS with documented social, economic and ecological impacts in Flanders (northern Belgium). We compared a business as usual (BAU) scenario which involved non-coordinated hunting and egg destruction with an enhanced scenario based on a continuation of these activities but supplemented with coordinated capture of moulting birds. To assess population growth under the BAU scenario we fitted a logistic growth model to the observed pre-moult capture population. Projected damage costs included water eutrophication and damage to cultivated grasslands and were calculated for all scenarios. Management costs of the moult captures were based on a representative average of the actual cost of planning and executing moult captures.ResultsComparing the scenarios with different capture rates, different costs for eutrophication and various discount rates, showed avoided damage costs were in the range of 21.15 M€ to 45.82 M€ under the moult capture scenario. The lowest value for the avoided costs applied to the scenario where we lowered the capture rate by 10%. The highest value occurred in the scenario where we lowered the real discount rate from 4% to 2.5%.DiscussionThe reduction in damage costs always outweighed the additional management costs of moult captures. Therefore, additional coordinated moult captures could be applied to limit the negative economic impact of greater Canada goose at a regional scale. We further discuss the strengths and weaknesses of our approach and its potential application to other IAS.

The empirical environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) literature is vast but far from conclusive.Many authors have analysed the existence of an EKC for various pollutants. Others have used the EKC framework to identify country characteristics that help to explain the incomeenvironment relationship. In this framework environmental degradation is analysed using a second or third order polynomial in income and a limited number of control variables.Some authors question whether this standard framework is appropriate. This paper proposes an alternative to study the specific characteristics of countries that have experienced economic growth and an improving environment at the same time. We estimate a binary response model and find an EKC-like relation between the probability that a country's environment improves with economic growth and per capita GDP. Our evidence further suggests that the level of environmental damage is an important explanatory variable. We also confirm the importance of an open political system. These results indicate that the binary response model could be a valuable alternative to test which country specific characteristics are associated with a negative IER.