How Substitutable Is Natural Capital?

Anil Markandya, Suzette Pedroso-Galinato

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

48 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

One of the recurring themes in the sustainability literature has been the extent to which a loss of natural capital can be made up for in welfare terms by an increase in other forms of capital. This issue was raised early on in the debate on sustainability by Pearce and has never really been resolved. This paper is an empirical attempt to measure the degree of substitutability between different forms of capital. A nested CES production function is used to allow flexibility in the estimated elasticities of substitution. Also, within this specification, natural resources and other inputs are combined in different levels of the function, thus allowing for different levels of substitutability. Institutional and economic indicators are also incorporated in the production function estimated. Results show that the elasticities derived from functions involving land resources were generally around one or greater, implying a fairly high degree of substitutability. Furthermore, changes in trade openness and private sector investment have a statistically significant and direct relationship on the efficiency of production and hence on income generation. No statistically significant relationship between income and any of the institutional indicators was found.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)297-312
Number of pages16
JournalEnvironmental and Resource Economics
Volume37
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2007

Fingerprint

natural capital
elasticity
sustainability
income
private sector
substitution
natural resource
resource
economics
indicator
Substitutability
Natural capital
Sustainability
Income
loss
land
trade openness

Keywords

  • Capacity (E220)
  • Population Growth (Q560)
  • Environment and Development
  • Environment and Trade
  • Capital
  • Environmental Equity
  • Investment
  • Environmental Accounting
  • Sustainability

Cite this

Markandya, A., & Pedroso-Galinato, S. (2007). How Substitutable Is Natural Capital? Environmental and Resource Economics, 37(1), 297-312.

How Substitutable Is Natural Capital? / Markandya, Anil; Pedroso-Galinato, Suzette.

In: Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2007, p. 297-312.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Markandya, A & Pedroso-Galinato, S 2007, 'How Substitutable Is Natural Capital?', Environmental and Resource Economics, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 297-312.
Markandya A, Pedroso-Galinato S. How Substitutable Is Natural Capital? Environmental and Resource Economics. 2007;37(1):297-312.
Markandya, Anil ; Pedroso-Galinato, Suzette. / How Substitutable Is Natural Capital?. In: Environmental and Resource Economics. 2007 ; Vol. 37, No. 1. pp. 297-312.
@article{61de28b849c24d1bbc587fc0cd8e9ac2,
title = "How Substitutable Is Natural Capital?",
abstract = "One of the recurring themes in the sustainability literature has been the extent to which a loss of natural capital can be made up for in welfare terms by an increase in other forms of capital. This issue was raised early on in the debate on sustainability by Pearce and has never really been resolved. This paper is an empirical attempt to measure the degree of substitutability between different forms of capital. A nested CES production function is used to allow flexibility in the estimated elasticities of substitution. Also, within this specification, natural resources and other inputs are combined in different levels of the function, thus allowing for different levels of substitutability. Institutional and economic indicators are also incorporated in the production function estimated. Results show that the elasticities derived from functions involving land resources were generally around one or greater, implying a fairly high degree of substitutability. Furthermore, changes in trade openness and private sector investment have a statistically significant and direct relationship on the efficiency of production and hence on income generation. No statistically significant relationship between income and any of the institutional indicators was found.",
keywords = "Capacity (E220), Population Growth (Q560), Environment and Development, Environment and Trade, Capital, Environmental Equity, Investment, Environmental Accounting, Sustainability",
author = "Anil Markandya and Suzette Pedroso-Galinato",
year = "2007",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "297--312",
journal = "Environmental and Resource Economics",
issn = "0924-6460",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How Substitutable Is Natural Capital?

AU - Markandya, Anil

AU - Pedroso-Galinato, Suzette

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - One of the recurring themes in the sustainability literature has been the extent to which a loss of natural capital can be made up for in welfare terms by an increase in other forms of capital. This issue was raised early on in the debate on sustainability by Pearce and has never really been resolved. This paper is an empirical attempt to measure the degree of substitutability between different forms of capital. A nested CES production function is used to allow flexibility in the estimated elasticities of substitution. Also, within this specification, natural resources and other inputs are combined in different levels of the function, thus allowing for different levels of substitutability. Institutional and economic indicators are also incorporated in the production function estimated. Results show that the elasticities derived from functions involving land resources were generally around one or greater, implying a fairly high degree of substitutability. Furthermore, changes in trade openness and private sector investment have a statistically significant and direct relationship on the efficiency of production and hence on income generation. No statistically significant relationship between income and any of the institutional indicators was found.

AB - One of the recurring themes in the sustainability literature has been the extent to which a loss of natural capital can be made up for in welfare terms by an increase in other forms of capital. This issue was raised early on in the debate on sustainability by Pearce and has never really been resolved. This paper is an empirical attempt to measure the degree of substitutability between different forms of capital. A nested CES production function is used to allow flexibility in the estimated elasticities of substitution. Also, within this specification, natural resources and other inputs are combined in different levels of the function, thus allowing for different levels of substitutability. Institutional and economic indicators are also incorporated in the production function estimated. Results show that the elasticities derived from functions involving land resources were generally around one or greater, implying a fairly high degree of substitutability. Furthermore, changes in trade openness and private sector investment have a statistically significant and direct relationship on the efficiency of production and hence on income generation. No statistically significant relationship between income and any of the institutional indicators was found.

KW - Capacity (E220)

KW - Population Growth (Q560)

KW - Environment and Development

KW - Environment and Trade

KW - Capital

KW - Environmental Equity

KW - Investment

KW - Environmental Accounting

KW - Sustainability

M3 - Article

VL - 37

SP - 297

EP - 312

JO - Environmental and Resource Economics

JF - Environmental and Resource Economics

SN - 0924-6460

IS - 1

ER -