欧元区的环境监管和生产力增长:检验波特假说

IF 5.5 3区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Pub Date : 2024-05-04 DOI:10.1016/j.jeem.2024.102995
Nicola Benatti , Martin Groiss , Petra Kelly , Paloma Lopez-Garcia
{"title":"欧元区的环境监管和生产力增长:检验波特假说","authors":"Nicola Benatti ,&nbsp;Martin Groiss ,&nbsp;Petra Kelly ,&nbsp;Paloma Lopez-Garcia","doi":"10.1016/j.jeem.2024.102995","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper examines the impact of changes in the stringency of environmental regulations on productivity growth. We exploit several data sources, including the OECD Environmental Policy Stringency Index and balance sheet information from ORBIS and iBACH, to test the Porter hypothesis, according to which firms’ productivity can benefit from more stringent environmental policies. We estimate the regulatory impact over a five-year horizon using panel local projections. To identify the direction of the effects, we estimate <span><math><msub><mrow><mi>CO</mi></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msub></math></span> equivalent emissions for all firms in our sample using a machine learning algorithm. As suggested by the country-level analysis and confirmed by the firm-level analysis, policy tightening negatively affects productivity growth of high-polluting firms and to a larger extent than that of their low-polluting peers. Hence, we do not find support for the Porter hypothesis in general. However, not all policies have the same impact – non-market based policies are the most detrimental to productivity growth – and not all highly polluting firms are affected in the same way – the negative impact is mitigated for large firms, which may benefit from easier access to finance and greater innovativeness.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15763,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","volume":"126 ","pages":"Article 102995"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental regulation and productivity growth in the euro area: Testing the porter hypothesis\",\"authors\":\"Nicola Benatti ,&nbsp;Martin Groiss ,&nbsp;Petra Kelly ,&nbsp;Paloma Lopez-Garcia\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeem.2024.102995\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper examines the impact of changes in the stringency of environmental regulations on productivity growth. We exploit several data sources, including the OECD Environmental Policy Stringency Index and balance sheet information from ORBIS and iBACH, to test the Porter hypothesis, according to which firms’ productivity can benefit from more stringent environmental policies. We estimate the regulatory impact over a five-year horizon using panel local projections. To identify the direction of the effects, we estimate <span><math><msub><mrow><mi>CO</mi></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msub></math></span> equivalent emissions for all firms in our sample using a machine learning algorithm. As suggested by the country-level analysis and confirmed by the firm-level analysis, policy tightening negatively affects productivity growth of high-polluting firms and to a larger extent than that of their low-polluting peers. Hence, we do not find support for the Porter hypothesis in general. However, not all policies have the same impact – non-market based policies are the most detrimental to productivity growth – and not all highly polluting firms are affected in the same way – the negative impact is mitigated for large firms, which may benefit from easier access to finance and greater innovativeness.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management\",\"volume\":\"126 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102995\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009506962400069X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009506962400069X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了环境法规严格程度的变化对生产率增长的影响。我们利用多个数据来源(包括经合组织环境政策严格指数以及 ORBIS 和 iBACH 的资产负债表信息)来检验波特假说,根据波特假说,企业的生产率可从更严格的环境政策中获益。我们利用面板本地预测估算了五年内的监管影响。为了确定影响的方向,我们使用机器学习算法估算了样本中所有企业的二氧化碳排放当量。正如国家层面的分析和企业层面的分析所证实的那样,政策收紧对高污染企业的生产率增长产生了负面影响,且影响程度大于低污染企业。因此,我们没有发现波特假说在总体上得到支持。然而,并非所有政策都会产生同样的影响--非市场政策对生产率增长最为不利--也并非所有高污染企业都会受到同样的影响--大型企业的负面影响会有所缓解,因为它们可能受益于更容易获得资金和更高的创新能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Environmental regulation and productivity growth in the euro area: Testing the porter hypothesis

This paper examines the impact of changes in the stringency of environmental regulations on productivity growth. We exploit several data sources, including the OECD Environmental Policy Stringency Index and balance sheet information from ORBIS and iBACH, to test the Porter hypothesis, according to which firms’ productivity can benefit from more stringent environmental policies. We estimate the regulatory impact over a five-year horizon using panel local projections. To identify the direction of the effects, we estimate CO2 equivalent emissions for all firms in our sample using a machine learning algorithm. As suggested by the country-level analysis and confirmed by the firm-level analysis, policy tightening negatively affects productivity growth of high-polluting firms and to a larger extent than that of their low-polluting peers. Hence, we do not find support for the Porter hypothesis in general. However, not all policies have the same impact – non-market based policies are the most detrimental to productivity growth – and not all highly polluting firms are affected in the same way – the negative impact is mitigated for large firms, which may benefit from easier access to finance and greater innovativeness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: The Journal of Environmental Economics and Management publishes theoretical and empirical papers devoted to specific natural resources and environmental issues. For consideration, papers should (1) contain a substantial element embodying the linkage between economic systems and environmental and natural resources systems or (2) be of substantial importance in understanding the management and/or social control of the economy in its relations with the natural environment. Although the general orientation of the journal is toward economics, interdisciplinary papers by researchers in other fields of interest to resource and environmental economists will be welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Clean innovation, heterogeneous financing costs, and the optimal climate policy mix Blowin’ in the wind: Long-term downwind exposure to air pollution from power plants and adult mortality Unintended environmental consequences of anti-corruption strategies Labor market impacts of eco-development initiatives in protected areas Combining private and common property management: The impact of a hybrid ownership structure on grassland conservation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1