為解決經濟發展過程伴隨的污染問題，常可見到政府和私部門一同投入防治工作，Pearce and Palmer (2001) 發現OECD國家隨著經濟成長，政府逐步提高公共防治支出，而且各個國家私部門的防治投入仍然佔有相當比重。Seldon and Song (1994)、Antle and Heidebrink (1995) 和Komen et al. (1997) 等實證文獻曾提出「倒U字型」EKC成立的原因可能來自環境財為奢侈財，使得經濟成長過程中公共防治投入快速增加，污染才會逐步減少。雖然Pearce and Palmer (2001) 實證OECD國家公共防治投入的所得彈性確實大於1，可是Kriström and Riera (1996) 發現許多國家對環境品質改善之願付價值的所得需求彈性值介於0到1之間，環境品質實為正常財而非奢侈財。鑒於相關實證資料的矛盾，本文從政府公共防治決策過程，了解環境品質所得需求彈性與公共防治投入所得彈性大於1的關聯，以連結環境品質所得需求彈性與EKC成立的關聯。本文證明無需奢侈財的偏好條件，而僅需環境品質偏好為正常財，以及防治技術滿足規模報酬遞增或固定，平均所得提高，消費者對環境品質的主觀願付價格高於客觀代價，模型預期政府將不斷提高防治費率，平均所得水準和防治費率同步增加，公共防治投入的所得彈性必定大於1，污染量終會減少並趨向於零。
實證研究指出並非所有種類污染物的污染水準與平均所得關係，一定呈現「倒U字型」關係，而過去理論模型單從消費者對於環境品質偏好條件，或是單從污染物防治技術是否具備規模報酬遞增，仍不能完全解釋不同污染物與所得關係的差異性。本文強調必須將經濟成長帶動所得分配變化對污染的間接效果納入，有助於釐清不同種類污染物與所得關係的差異性。首先，所得分配固定不變而平均所得提高，只要滿足環境品質偏好為正常財，以及防治技術滿足規模報酬遞增或固定，平均所得對污染的直接效果為「倒U字型」。再則平均所得固定不變時，只要消費者對環境品質的偏好為正常財(而非奢侈財)，所得分配改善，經由多數決投票決定均衡費率反而調降，污染隨之增加。考量高所得國家經濟成長帶動所得分配改善 (即顧志耐曲線存在) 的間接效果，不同污染物面對相同的所得分配變化，唯一的差異僅是防治技術的不同。防治技術之規模報酬遞增並不保證平均所得對污染的淨效果為「倒U字型」，而必須該污染物防治技術之規模報酬指數很高，直接效果大到足以抵銷間接效果，淨效果才可能為「倒U字型」。
另外，本文探討為何世界各國普遍有公私部門同時投入防治的現象，以及研究公共防治支出對私人防治投入產生排擠或排入效果的機制。模型發現無論政府和私部門的防治要素是否為互補要素 (complementary inputs) ，政府和私部門的最適防治投資都不為零。假若私部門增加設備無關乎提升公共防治設備之效能，公共防治增加，將對私人投資產生排擠效果。假若私部門增加設備可以提升公共防治設備之效能，公共防治對私部門防治投資可能產生排擠效果或排入效果，端看該國對於環境品質的重視程度。
政府環境政策制定與私部門防治投資決策的互動息息相關，環境政策的成效實有賴私部門是否願意配合投入防治設備。一旦公共支出對私人投資具排入效果，政府傾向事前宣布較高費率，期望刺激私人投入防治，待事後私人已經投入防治設備，政府則有誘因調降費率。反之，假若公共支出對私人投資具排擠效果，則政府傾向事後再調高費率。只要政府落實事前宣布政策，在符合實證支持的技術條件，污染與平均所得的關係為「倒U字型」的環境顧志耐曲線 (Environmental Kuznets Curve, 以下簡稱EKC) ，若缺乏機制督促政府落實事前宣布政策，且消費者理性預期政府背離意向，當動態一致性 (dynamically consistent) 費率低於事前宣布政策的費率，則執行動態一致性費率所對應的EKC將高於政府確實執行事前政策之EKC；若動態一致性費率高於事前宣布的費率，環境政策的動態不一致反而使得EKC降低。

Andreoni, J., and A. Levinsion, “The simple analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 80, pp.269-286, 2001.
Ansuategi, A., and M. Escapa, “Economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 40, pp.23-37, 2002.
Antle, J., and G. Heidebrink, “Environment and development: theory and international evidence”, Economic Development and Cultural Change,Vol.43, pp.603-625, 1995.
Biglaiser, G., J.K. Horowitz, and J. Quiggin, “Dynamic Pollution Regulation”, Journal of Regulation Economics, Vol. 8, pp.33-44, 1995.
Barro. R.J., “Inequality, growth, and investment”, NBER Working Paper Series, working paper7038, 1999.
Bovenberg, A.L., and S.A. Smulders, “ Environmental quality and pollution-augmenting technological change in two-sector endogenous growth model”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol.57, pp.369-391, 1995.
Bovenberg, A.L., and Smulders, S.A., “Transitional impacts of environmental policy in an endogenous growth model”, International Economic Review, Vol. 37, pp.861-893, 1996.
Burgess, D.F., “Complementarity and the discount rate for public investment”, the Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 103, pp.527-541, 1988.
Ekins, P., “The Kuznets Curve for the environment and economic growth: examining the evidence”, Environmental and Planning A, Vol.29, pp.805-830, 1997.
Ekins, P., “European environmental taxes and charges: recent experience, issues and trends”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 31, pp.39-62, 1999.
Eriksson, C., and J. Persson, “Economic growth, inequality, democratization, and the environment”, Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol.25, pp.1-16, 2003.
Fischer, S., “Dynamic inconsistency , cooperation, and the benevolent dissembling government”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 85, pp.163-190, 1980.
Fraas, A.G., and V.G. Munley, “Municipal wastewater treatment cost”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 11, pp.28-38, 1984.
Franco, D., D. Franco, I. Mannino, and G. Zanetto, “The role of agroforestry networks in landscape socioeconomic process: the potential and limits of the contingent valuation method”, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 55, pp.239-256, 2001.
Fernandez, L., “Estimation of wastewater treatment objectives through maximum entropy”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.32, pp.293-308, 1997.
Gersbach, H., and A. Glazer, “Market and regulatory hold-up problems”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.37, pp.151-164, 1999.
Goldar, B., S. Misra, and B. Mukherji, “Water pollution abatement cost function: methodological issue and an application to small-scale factories in an industrial estate in Indian”, Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 6, pp.103-122, 2001.
Glomm, G., “Whatever happened to the Kuznets Curve? is it really upside down?”, Journal of Income Distribution, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.63-87, 1997.
Grossman, G., and A. Kreuger, “Economic growth and the environment”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 110 (2), pp.353-377, 1995.
Harbaugh, W.T., A. Levinson, and D.M. Wolson, “Reexamining the empirical evidence for an Environmental Kuznets Curve”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 84(3), pp.541-551, 2002.
Heerink, N., A. Mulatu and E. Bulte, “ Income inequality and the environment: aggregation bias in Environmental Kuznets Curves”, Ecological Economics, Vol.38, pp.359-367, 2001.
Hill, R.J., and E. Magnani, “An exploration of the conceptual and empirical basis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve”, Australian Economic Papers, pp. 239-254, 2002.
Holtz-Eakin, D., and T. Selden, “Stoking the fires? CO2 emissions and economic growth”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol.57 (1), pp.85-101, 1995.
Hotelling, H., “Stability in competition”, Economic Journal, Vol.39 (March), pp. 41-57, 1929.
James, A.J., and M.N. Murty, “Water pollution abatement: a taxes-and-standards approach for Indian industry”, Working paper No. E/177/96, 1996.
Jones L.E., and R.E. Manuelli, “Endogenous policy choice of pollution and growth”, Review of Economic Dynamics, Vol.4, pp.369-405, 2001.
John, A., and R. Pecchenino, “An overlapping generation model of growth and the environment”, The Economic Journal, Vol.104, pp.1393-1410, 1994.
John, A., R. Pecchenino, D. Schimmelpfenning, and S. Schreft, “Short-lived agents and the long-lived environment”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol.58, pp.127-141, 1995.
Kahn, M., “Demographic change and the demand for environmental regulation”, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol.21 (1), pp.45-62, 2002.
Kahn, M. and J. Matsusaka, “Environmental demand: evidence from California voting initiatives”, Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 40, pp.137-173, 1997.
Kennedy, P.W., and B. Laplante, “Environmental policy and time consistency: emission taxes and emissions trading”, Environmental Regulation and Market Power: Competition, Time Consistency and International Trade, Petrakis, E., E. Sartzetakis, and A. Xepapadeas eds, pp.116-144, 1999.
Knack, S., and P. Keeler, “Institutions and economic performance: cross country tests using alternative institutional measures”, Economics and Politics, Vol. 7(3), pp.207-227, 1995
Komen, M. H.C, S. Gerking, and H. Folmer, “Income and environmental R&D: empirical evidence for OECD countries”, Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 2, pp.505-515, 1997.
Köhlin, G. , “Contingent valuation in project planning and evaluation: the case of social forestry in Orissa, India”, Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 6, pp.237-258, 2001.
Kriström, B. and P. Riera, “Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one?”, Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol.7, pp.45-55, 1996.
Kuznets, S., “Economic growth and income inequality,” American Economic Review, Vol.45, pp.1-28, 1955.
Lieb, C.M., “The Environmental Kuznets Curve and satiation: a simple static model”, Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 7, pp.429-448, 2002.
Lopez, R., “The environment as a factor of production: the effects of economic growth and trade liberalization”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 27, pp.163-184, 1994.
Lopez, R., and S. Mitra, “Corruption, pollution, and the Kuznets Environment Curve”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 40, pp.137-150, 2000.
Magnani, E., “The Environmental Kuznets Curve, environmental protection policy and income distribution”, Ecological Economics, Vol.32, pp.431-443, 2000.
Marini, G., and P. Scaramozzino, “Overlapping generations and environmental control”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.29, pp64-77, 1995.
Marsiliani, L., and T. I. Renstrim, “Time inconsistency in environmental policy: tax earmarking as a commitment solution”, The Economic Journal, Vol.110 (March), pp.123-138, 1999.
Meade, J.E., “External economies and diseconomies in a competitive situation”, Economic Journal, Vol.62, pp.54-67, 1952.
McConnell, K.E., “Income and the demand for environmental quality”, Environmental and Development Economics, Vol.2, No. 4, pp.383-400, 1997.
McConnell, V.D., and G.S. Schwarz , “The supply and demand for pollution control: Evidence from wastewater treatment”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 23, pp.54-77, 1992.
O’connor, D., “Applying economic instruments in developing countries: from theory to implementation”, Environment and Development Economics, Vol.4, pp.91-110, 1998.
Panayotou, T., “Empirical tests and policy analysis of environmental degradation at different stages of economic development”, Working Paper WP238, Technology and Employment Programme, Geneva: International Labor Office, 1993.
Panayotou, T., “Demystifying the environmental Kuznets curve: turning a black box into a policy tool”, Environment and Development Economics, Vol.2, pp.465-484, 1997.
Pandey, R., “Pollution taxes and industrial water pollution control”, Report, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, New Delhi,1998.
Pearce, D., and C. Palmer, “Public and private spending for environmental protection: a crossing-country policy analysis” , Fiscal Studies, Vol 22, pp.403-456, 2001.
Petrakis, E., and A. Xepapadeas, “Does government precommit promote environmental innovation?”, Environmental Regulation and Market power: Competition, Time Consistency and International Trade, Petrakis, E., E. Sartzetakis, and A. Xepapadeas eds, pp.145-161, 1999.
Ravallion, M., M. Heil, and J. Jalan, “Carbon emissions and income inequality”, Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 52, pp. 651-669, 2000.
Sandmo, A., “Optimal taxation in the presence of externalities”, Swedish Journal of Economics, Vol. 77, pp. 86-98, 1975.
Scruggs, L., “Political and economic inequality and the environment”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 26, pp. 259-275, 1998.
Selden, T.M., and D. Song, “Neoclassical growth, the J curve for abatement, and the inverted U curve for pollution” , Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.29, pp.162-168, 1995.
Selden, T.M., and D. Song, “Environmental quality and development: is there a Kuznets Curve for air pollution emissions?”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 27, pp.147-162, 1994.
Shalfik, N., and S. Bandyopadhyay, “Economic growth and environmental quality: time series and cross-section evidence”, World Bank, Policy research working paper #WPS904, 1992.
Shalfik, N., “Economic development and the environmental quality: an econometric analysis”, Oxford Economic Papers, 1994.
Smith, V.K. , “JEEM and non-market valuation: 1974-1998”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 39, pp.351-374, 2000.
Stern, D.I., and M.S. Common, “Is there an Environmental Kuznets Cure for sulfur?”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 41, pp.162-178, 2001.
Stokey, N.L., “Are there limits to growth?”, International Economic Review, Vol. 39, pp.1-31, 1998.
Torras, M., and J.K. Boyce, “Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the Environmental Kuznets Curve”, Ecological Economics, Vol.25, pp.147-160, 1998.
Yiannaka, A., H. Furtan, and R. Gray, “Implementing the Kyoto Accord in Canada: abatement costs and policy enforcement mechanisms”, Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 49, pp.105-126, 2001.
Zhand, Z., and H. Folner, “Economic modeling approaches to cost estimates for the control of carbon dioxide emissions”, Energy Economics, Vol. 20, pp.101-120, 1998.
Xu, Z., G. Cheng, Z. Zhang, Z. Su, and L. John , “Applying contingent valuation in China to measure the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Ejina region”, Ecological Economics , Vol. 44, pp.345-358, 2003.