# **1. Introduction**

<mark>Environmental conditions, such as those pertaining to natural resources and climate, are intrinsically linked to human development outcomes in numerous ways. For example, exposure to poor air and water quality among populations is linked to birth defects and cognitive deficits in children (Ferguson et al. 2013). Similarly, workers in mining industries are known to have lower life expectancy due to exposure to heavy metals and toxic environmental conditions, and children living in more polluted environments display higher levels of chronic absenteeism (MacNaughton et al. 2017; Bangay and Blum 2010). On the other hand, human development outcomes such as improved educational attainment in turn may be linked to better environmental outcomes through pathways such as increased awareness about environmental issues and improved access to</mark> resources to address them.

<mark>Is there a link between human development outcomes and environmental outcomes? If so, are there ways to establish a causal relationship? What is the impact of schooling on climate actions, including attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes? We answer these questions by first surveying the literature that investigates the impact of environmental changes on human development outcomes. Then, with more focus, we look at the impact of human development on environmental outcomes, while also assessing the strength of such associations. Despite the heightened interest in understanding the linkages between human development outcomes and environmental factors, most studies of this relationship are only theoretical, correlational, or observational, thus lacking causality. We look at causal estimates of the impact of educational interventions on different environmental outcomes. We explore how evidence can be established for policies focusing on human development and environmental outcomes. We find that there are ways to causally estimate</mark> the impact of education on climate outcomes and propose approaches.

<mark>The broader relationships between economic development and environmental outcomes have been a topic of enquiry for researchers for a long time. The seminal paper by Grossman and Krueger (1995) was among the first to study this relationship using a global dataset. Using panel data (19771990) on four environmental indicators (urban air pollution, the state of the oxygen regime in river basins, fecal contamination of river basins, and contamination of river basins by heavy metals), the authors find that environmental outcomes initially worsen with increasing per capita GDP but eventually witness a U-shaped recovery as incomes increase above a critical threshold. The authors suggest that as countries prosper economically, their citizens demand better environmental conditions, thus improving environmental standards. The study validated the presence of the Environmental Kuznets Curve and was followed by further research to replicate and extend the</mark> initial findings (see Goklany 1999; Panayotou 1995).

<mark>A later cross-sectional study by Jha and Murthy (2003) also highlights a similar relationship. The authors construct a composite environmental degradation index (EDI) for 174 countries using six indicators of environmental degradation or pollution and identify its relationship with the Human Development Index (HDI). The study suggests an inverted N-curve that indicates that countries with high levels of development and lower values of HDI rank contribute more to environmental degradation while mid-ranking countries have the least levels of environmental degradation. Similarly, the paper by Dogan and Inglesi-Lotz (2020) considers how changes in economic</mark> <mark>2</mark>