21,176 research outputs found
The Environmental Porter Hypothesis: Theory, Evidence and a Model of Timing of Adoption
The Porter Hypothesis postulates that the costs of compliance with environmental standards may be offset by adoption of innovations they trigger. We model this hypothesis using a game of timing of technology adoption. We show that times of adoption are earlier the higher the non-adoption tax. The environmental tax turns the preemption game with low profits into a game with credible precommitment yielding high profits (pro-Porter). If there is a precommitment game without environmental taxes, the introduction of a tax leads to lower profits (anti-Porter). An evaluation of the empirical literature indicates that the Porter hypothesis holds even for profit-maximizing firms under multiple market imperfections such as imperfect competititon, X-inefficiency, and agency costs. These are more likely to be present in sectors with large firms. In many case studies that we evaluate, though, we detect an element of explicit or implicit subsidies for environmentally friendly behaviour, which is in line with Pigovian policies.Environmental Policy, Strategic Trade Theory, Technology Adoption, Porter Hypothesis
The Environmental Porter Hypothesis as a Technology Adoption Problem?
The Porter Hypothesis postulates that the costs of compliance with environmental standards may be offset by adoption of innovations they trigger. We model this hypothesis using a game of timing of technology adoption. We show that times of adoption are earlier the higher the non-adoption tax. The environmental tax turns the preemption game with low profits into a game with credible precommitment yielding high profits (pro-Porter). If there is a precommitment game without environmental taxes, the introduction of a tax leads to lower profits (anti-Porter).economics of technology ;
Environmental policy without costs? A review of the Porter hypothesis
This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature connected to the so called Porter Hypothesis. That is, to review the literature connected to the discussion about the relation between environmental policy and competitiveness. According to the conventional wisdom environmental policy, aiming for improving the environment through for example emission reductions, do imply costs since scarce resources must be diverted from somewhere else. However, this conventional wisdom has been challenged and questioned recently through what has been denoted the “Porter hypothesis”. Those in the forefront of the Porter hypothesis challenge the conventional wisdom basically on the ground that resources are used inefficiently in the absence of the right kind of environmental regulations, and that the conventional neo-classical view is too static to take inefficiencies into account. The conclusions that can be made from this review is (1) that the theoretical literature can identify the circumstances and mechanisms that must exist for a Porter effect to occur, (2) that these circumstances are rather non-general, hence rejecting the Porter hypothesis in general, (3) that the empirical literature give no general support for the Porter hypothesis. Furthermore, a closer look at the “Swedish case” reveals no support for the Porter hypothesis in spite of the fact that Swedish environmental policy the last 15-20 years seems to be in line the prerequisites stated by the Porter hypothesis concerning environmental policy.Environmental policy; the Porter hypothesis; productivity; profitability
Environmental Regulation and Firm Efficiency: Studying the Porter Hypothesis using a Directional Output Distance Function
The purpose of this paper is to suggest a procedure to empirically test the Porter hypothesis. This hypothesis argues that environmental regulation not only increases environmental quality, but also brings the polluting producers information that makes them more resource efficient, as well as able to develop new technologies. Specifically, the hypothesis tested is whether there is a positive significant correlation between producers’ technical output efficiency and environmental regulation. Efficiency is first estimated using a methodology where the production technology is represented by a directional output distance function, which credits a simultaneous expansion of market goods and contraction of emissions. Then, by regressing the obtained efficiency scores on an index that approximates environmental regulatory intensity, the Porter hypothesis is explicitly tested. The test procedure is applied on 12 Swedish pulp plants during 1983-1990. The result shows no support for the Porter hypothesis.Porter hypothesis; environmental regulation; technical efficiency; parametric directional output distance function
The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?
Twenty years ago, Harvard Business School economist and strategy professor Michael Porter stood conventional wisdom about the impact of environmental regulation on business on its head by declaring that well designed regulation could actually enhance competitiveness. The traditional view of environmental regulation held by virtually all economists until that time was that requiring firms to reduce an externality like pollution necessarily restricted their options and thus by definition reduced their profits. After all, if there are profitable opportunities to reduce pollution, profit maximizing firms would already be taking advantage of those opportunities. Over the past 20 years, much has been written about what has since become known simply as the Porter Hypothesis (“PH”). Yet, even today, there is conflicting evidence, alternative theories that might explain the PH, and oftentimes a misunderstanding of what the PH does and does not say. This paper provides an overview of the key theoretical and empirical insights on the PH to date, draw policy implications from these insights, and sketches out major research themes going forward. Il y a bientôt vingt ans, Michael Porter, économiste et professeur de stratégie de la Harvard Business School, a remis en question le paradigme généralement accepté quant à l’impact des réglementations environnementales sur la performance d’affaires, en affirmant que des politiques environnementales bien conçues pouvaient en fait améliorer la compétitivité des entreprises. Jusqu’alors, le point de vue dominant, accepté par la quasi-totalité des économistes, stipulait que d’imposer aux entreprises de réduire une externalité comme la pollution réduisait nécessairement les options à leur disposition et, par définition, leurs profits. Après tout, s’il y a des opportunités profitables de réduire la pollution, les firmes qui maximisent leurs profits auraient dû les identifier par elles-mêmes. Depuis 20 ans, beaucoup de choses ont été écrites sur ce qu’il est convenu d’appeler l’Hypothèse de Porter. Aujourd’hui, il y a diverses théories pour expliquer l’Hypothèse de Porter. Les résultats empiriques ne sont pas concluants et il subsiste une certaine confusion sur ce que dit et ne dit pas l’Hypothèse de Porter. Ce texte présente un survol des grands enjeux théoriques et empiriques entourant l’Hypothèse de Porter, en tire les grandes implications en termes de politiques publiques et propose des avenues de recherche pour le futur.Porter Hypothesis, environmental policy, innovation, performance , Hypothèse de Porter, politiques environnementales, innovation, performance
Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis
Jaffe and Palmer (1997) present three distinct variants of the so-called Porter Hypothesis. The “weak” version of the hypothesis posits that environmental regulation will stimulate certain kinds of environmental innovations. The “narrow” version of the hypothesis asserts that flexible environmental policy regimes give firms greater incentive to innovate than prescriptive regulations, such as technology-based standards. Finally, the “strong” version posits that properly designed regulation may induce cost-saving innovation that more than compensates for the cost of compliance. In this paper, we test the significance of these different variants of the Porter Hypothesis using data on the four main elements of the hypothesised causality chain (environmental policy, research and development, environmental performance and commercial performance). The analysis is based upon a unique database which includes observations from approximately 4200 facilities in seven OECD countries. In general, we find strong support for the “weak” version, qualified support for the “narrow” version, and qualified support for the “strong” version as well. Jaffe et Palmer (1997) présentent trois variantes distinctes de l’hypothèse de Porter. La version « faible » de l'hypothèse suppose que la réglementation environnementale stimulera l’apparition d’innovations dans le domaine de l’environnement. La version « étroite » de l'hypothèse affirme que les réglementations environnementales flexibles donnent aux firmes une plus grande incitation pour innover que les réglementations rigides, telles que les normes prescrivant une technologie pour une industrie donnée. Enfin, la version « forte » pose qu’une réglementation correctement conçue peut induire davantage de gains en termes d’innovation que de coûts pour se conformer à la règle. Dans cet article, nous examinons la portée de ces différentes variantes de l'hypothèse de Porter en utilisant des données sur les quatre principaux éléments de la chaîne présumée de causalité (politique environnementale, recherche et développement, performance environnementale et performance commerciale). L'analyse est fondée sur une base de données unique qui inclut des observations d'approximativement 4200 établissements dans sept pays de l’OCDE. Nos résultats supportent fortement la version « faible », mais de façon plus mitigée les versions « étroite » et « forte ».Porter hypothesis, environmental policy, innovation, environmental performance, business performance., hypothèse de Porter, politique environnementale, innovation, performance environnementale, performance financière.
The Stringency of Environmental Regulation and the 'Porter Hypothesis'
Most empirical evidence indicates that the costs of environmental regulation represent a minor fraction of total production costs. This finding is at odds with the assumption of stringent environmental regulation of both propo-nents and opponents of the ''Porter Hypothesis''. A possible explanation may be provided by examining the nego-tiation of environmental regulation in a ''political market''. In this market, stakeholder attempt to ensure their pre-ferred level of stringency through influencing political decision makers. In most cases, the equilibrium stringency will require pollution abatement levels that can be met with best available technology (BAT) or predictable ad-vances over BAT. Accordingly, net benefits from environmental regulation as claimed by a ''strong version'' of the ''Porter Hypothesis'' are unlikely to emerge. On the other hand, competitiveness is equally unlikely to suffer. How-ever, compliance may impose disproportionate costs on technological laggards. The argument is illustrated with evidence from a study on the techno-economic consequences of Austrian VOC emission standards.economics of technology ;
Porter, Julius F (Birth, 1902-10-18)
Address: 3717 Spaeth4961/Pg 122/1902/MW/O/O/Dr. S. C. SwartselOriginal record filed in drawer labeled 'PORTER, M- PRATER'
- …
