Integrating socioeconomic considerations into the air quality standard revisions: Evidence from policy review and meta-analysis

Air quality standards continue to tighten globally, yet their revision is shaped not only by scientific evidence but also by economic capacity and institutional readiness. This study integrates an Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) assessment, cross-national policy review, and a meta-analysis of 57 empirical studies to evaluate how socioeconomic factors influence PM 2.5 standard-setting and pollution control outcomes. We find that most economies begin strengthening standards once per capita GDP exceeds USD 20,000, suggesting a transition from growth-driven pollution to regulation-driven improvement. Case comparisons suggest that revising PM 2.5 standards is a multi-dimensional decision that balances public-health benefits with compliance cost, industrial restructuring needs, employment concerns, and global competitiveness. Economies with well-developed institutions handle these trade-offs more effectively, maintaining policy continuity and demonstrating higher regulatory resilience. Meta-analysis further shows that air pollution policies generally increase GDP, whereas the evidence on employment is mixed, with negative estimates being more prevalent. Market-based instruments are more likely to deliver simultaneous economic and labor benefits. These findings together highlight the need for embedding socioeconomic evaluation within standard-setting, particularly in developing countries where regulation must accompany industrial restructuring and institutional capacity building. The study offers evidence-based insights for designing cleaner-air pathways that are economically viable and socially adaptive.