Question

帮帮忙!!翻译!英译中！

2. LiteratureReview
2.1. “Distribution Hypotheses” andthe Relationship Between Income, Pollution, and Inequality
There areseveral competing and well-known hypotheses about the relationship betweenpollution and income at the local level that can be explored using concepts ofecological distribution. The first may be termed the “trade-off hypothesis.” Inthis view of the world, an individual is confronted with various employment andresidential locations, all of which vary in terms of their job opportunitiesand other amenities, including their pollution level. An individual desiring tolive in an area with a lower pollution level would theoretically “trade off” acertain amount of her income in order to do so. An individual who is not ableor willing to pay that price would then live in the more polluted area with thehigher wage. Individuals would sort themselves according to their preferencefor environmental quality (Cropper andArriaga-Salinas, 1980). Under such a hypothesis, we would expect inequalities inincome and in pollution to be subtractive, rather than additive, as we mightexpect individuals living in cleaner areas to command less income, andindividuals living in more polluted areas to have higher incomes.
The theory ofcompensating wage differentials just described has its roots in Rosen (Rosen, 1979). Rosendeveloped a theoretical model demonstrating that an individual living in a lowamenity area may, in theory, be compensated for the lack of amenities with ahigher income. Although Rosen's theory has been tested for numerous amenities,studies of compensating wage differentials for pollutionspecifically have been few and far between. Bayless (1982) analyzed thesalaries of university professors and concentrations of total suspended particulates(TSP). He found that a one standard deviation increase in TSP was associatedwith a compensating wage variation of between 1 and 2%. Roback (1982) likewisedemonstrates that there is indeed an “implicit price” associated with living ina polluted area — average annual earnings were significantly higher in an areawith higher particulate matter (ceteris paribus). More recently, Cole et al.(2009) find that there is a “positive andsignificant wage premium attached to working in a dirty industry, across arange of pollution exposure measures” (p. 162).
人工翻译，不要机器翻译，谢谢~~~

Answer 1

2. LiteratureReview
2.1。 “分布假设”之间的收入，污染和不平等andthe关系
有areseveral约的关系betweenpollution和收入，在可以使用的概念ofecological分布探索地方层面的竞争和著名的假说。第一，可以称为“折衷的假设。”工作本的世界观，个人面临着不同的就业andresidential位置，所有这些都在不同方面对他们的工作opportunitiesand其他设施，包括其污染水平。为了做到个体具有较低的污染水平渴望呆在哪儿在一个区域理论上将“折衷”，她的收入acertain量。个人谁不ableor愿意付出这个代价会那么生活在thehigher工资空气污染较为严重的区域。个人将根据自己的preferencefor环境质量（克罗珀andArriaga - 萨利纳斯，1980年）整理自己。在这样的假设，我们预计不平等inincome和污染是减法，而不是添加剂，因为我们mightexpect生活在清洁区的个人指挥较少的收入，andindividuals生活在空气污染较为严重的地区有较高的收入。
该理论ofcompensating工资差别只是说明有它的罗森（罗森，1979年）的根。 Rosendeveloped一个理论模型表明个体生活在一个lowamenity区域可能，在理论上，可用于与ahigher收入缺乏设施补偿。尽管罗森的理论已经过测试，许多设施，补偿工资差距pollutionspecifically的研究已经并不多见。贝勒斯（1982）分析了大学教授和总悬浮颗粒物（TSP）浓度的thesalaries。他发现，一个标准偏差增加的TSP是包相关联的1至2％的补偿工资的变化。罗巴克（1982）likewisedemonstrates确实是有一个“隐性价格”与生活伊娜污染区相关的 - 平均年收益均高于显著在areawith更高的颗粒物质（其他条件不变）。最近，科尔等人（2009）发现，有一个“附着在一个肮脏的行业工作积极andsignificant工资溢价，跨越arange污染暴露的措施”（第162页）。
有些单词错误.