Showing 1 - 7 results of 7 for search '"ГРАВИТАЦИОННАЯ МОДЕЛЬ ТОРГОВЛИ"', query time: 1.33s Refine Results
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
    Academic Journal

    Source: Voprosy statistiki; Том 28, № 6 (2021); 69-78 ; Вопросы статистики; Том 28, № 6 (2021); 69-78 ; 2658-5499 ; 2313-6383

    File Description: application/pdf

    Relation: https://voprstat.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/1367/869; Dinda S. Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey. Ecological Economics. 2004. Vol. 49. Iss. 4. P. 431–455.; Frankel J., Rose A. Is trade good or bad for the environment? Sorting out the causality // The Review of Economics and Statistics. 2005. Vol. 85, P. 85–91.; Михалищев С., Раскина Ю. Экологическая кривая Кузнеца: случай России // Европейский университет в Санкт-Петербурге, Факультет экономики. Препринт Ес 03/15, 2015. 34 с.; Aliyu M.A. Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment: Pollution Haven Hypothesis Revisited. Eight Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis. Lübeck, Germany. 2005. June 9–11.; Yoon H.; Heshmati A. Do Environmental Regulations Effect FDI Decisions? The Pollution Haven Hypothesis Revisited. GLO Discussion Paper, No. 86, Global Labor Organization (GLO). Maastricht, 2017.; Merican Y. et al. Foreign Direct Investment and the Pollution in Five ASEAN Nations // International Journal of Economics and Management. 2007. P. 245–261.; Acikgoz B., Yilmazer M. Kirlilik sığınağı hipotezi, doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar ve kamu politikaları // Ege Akademik Bakış (Ege Academic Review). 2009. Vol. 9. Iss. 4. P. 1441.; Prakash A., Potoski M. Racing to the Bottom? Trade, Environmental Governance, and ISO 14001 //American Journal of Political Science. 2006. Vol. 50. Iss.2. P. 350–364.; Gang Guo. Race to the Top or to the Bottom: Globalization and Education Spending in China. Political Science & International Studies. The University of Mississippi, MS 38677-1848 USA.; Porter M.E., van der Linde C. Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship // Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1995. Vol. 9. Iss. 4. P. 97–118.; Wagner M. The Porter Hypothesis Revisited. A Literature Review of Theoretical Model and Empirical Test. Lüneburg: Centre for Sustainability Management. 2003. P. 2.; André F.J. Strategic Effects and the Porter Hypothesis. MPRA Paper No. 62237, 2015.; Petroni G., Bilgiardi B., Galati F. Rethinking the Porter Hypothesis: The Underappreciated Importance of Value Appropriation and Pollution Intensity. Review of policy Research. 2019. Vol. 36. Iss.1. P. 121–140.; Copeland B.R., Taylor M.S. Trade and Transboundary Pollution // The American Economic Review. 1995. Vol. 85. Iss. 4. P. 716–737.; Cole M., Elliott R. Determining the Trade-environment Composition Effect: The Role of Capital, Labour and Environmental Regulations // Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 2003. Vol. 46. P. 363–383.; Tobey J.A. The Effects of Domestic Environmental Policies on Patterns of World Trade: An Empirical Test. Kyklos. 1990. Vol. 43. Iss. 2. P. 191-209.; Antweiler W., Copeland B., Taylor M.S. Is Free Trade Good for the Environment? // American Economic Review. 2001. Vol. 91. P. 877–908.; Frankel J., Rose A. Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality // The Review of Economics and Statistics. 2005.Vol. 85. P. 8591.; Batrakova S., Davies R. Is there an Environmental Benefit to Being an Exporter? Evidence from Firm-level Data // Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer. 2012. Vol. 148. Iss. 3. P. 449–474.; Cui J., Lapan H., Moschini G. Are Exporters More Environmentally Friendly than Non-Exporters? Theory and Evidence. Staff General Research Papers. Iowa State University, Department of Economics 35549. 2012.; Gutierrez E., Teshima K. Import Competition and Environmental Performance: Evidence from Mexican Plant-level and Satellite Imagery Data. Working Papers, Centro de Investigacion Economica. 2011.; Holladay J.H. Exporters and the Environment. Working Papers 2015-03, University of Tennessee, Department of Economics. 2015. 33 p.; Шкиперова Г.Т. Экологическая кривая Кузнеца как инструмент исследования регионального развития // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2013. № 19(322).; Дружинин П.В., Шкиперова Г.Т. Эколого-экономические модели и прогнозы в системе регионального управления // Проблемы прогнозирования. 2012. № 1. С. 88–97.; Дружинин П.В., Шкиперова Г.Т., Поташева О.В. Экологическая кривая Кузнеца: случай России и Финляндии // Экономика: вчера, сегодня, завтра. 2018. Том 8. № 11А. С. 83–97.; Шкиперова Г.Т. Анализ и моделирование взаимосвязи между экономическим ростом и качеством окружающей среды (на примере Республики Карелия) // Актуальные проблемы, направления и механизмы развития производительных Сил Севера. Сыктывкар. 2014. С. 9–16.; Яшалова Н.Н. Применение корреляционного анализа в эколого-экономических исследованиях // Экономика природопользования. 2015. № 6. С. 95–105.; Моделирование влияния развития экономики на окружающую среду. Институт экономики КарНЦ РАН. Под общей ред. П.В. Дружинина. – Петрозаводск: Карельский научный центр РАН, 2009. 96 с.; Sardor A. Trade and Environment: Do Spatial Effects Matter? MPRA Paper No. 73113. 2016.; https://voprstat.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/1367

  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7