IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v92y2014icp179-189.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Squandered profit opportunities? Some historical perspective on industrial waste and the Porter Hypothesis

Author

Listed:
  • Desrochers, Pierre
  • Haight, Colleen E.

Abstract

Despite numerous studies, the ‘Porter Hypothesis’ (PH), which states well-designed regulations can compel manufacturers to develop innovations with both economic and environmental benefits, remains unsettled. We examine two significant cases for which PH claims were once made: the British alkali industry and the (Tennessee) Copper Basin smelting operations. Our conclusions are: (1) the PH is based on a flawed understanding of how ‘win win’ innovations spontaneously emerge in competitive settings, (2) regulatory pressures were only one (and typically minor) factor, and (3) “strict and well designed” environmental regulations are unlikely to deliver superior outcomes to traditional property rights-based approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Desrochers, Pierre & Haight, Colleen E., 2014. "Squandered profit opportunities? Some historical perspective on industrial waste and the Porter Hypothesis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 179-189.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:92:y:2014:i:c:p:179-189
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.07.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344914001359
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.07.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Lanoie & Michel Patry & Richard Lajeunesse, 2008. "Environmental regulation and productivity: testing the porter hypothesis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 121-128, October.
    2. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    3. Pierre Desrochers & Samuli Leppälä, 2010. "Industrial Symbiosis: Old Wine in Recycled Bottles? Some Perspective from the History of Economic and Geographical Thought," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 33(3), pages 338-361, July.
    4. Desrochers, Pierre, 2007. "How did the Invisible Hand Handle Industrial Waste? By-product Development before the Modern Environmental Era," Enterprise & Society, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 348-374, June.
    5. Böhringer, Christoph & Moslener, Ulf & Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Clean and productive? Empirical evidence from the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 442-451.
    6. Antonioli, Davide & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2013. "Is environmental innovation embedded within high-performance organisational changes? The role of human resource management and complementarity in green business strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 975-988.
    7. Costantini, Valeria & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2012. "On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 132-153.
    8. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    9. Andr, Francisco J. & Gonzlez, Paula & Porteiro, Nicols, 2009. "Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 182-194, March.
    10. Mohr, Robert D., 2002. "Technical Change, External Economies, and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 158-168, January.
    11. Desrochers, Pierre, 2009. "Victorian Pioneers of Corporate Sustainability," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(4), pages 703-729, January.
    12. Don Fullerton & Robert Stavins, 1998. "How economists see the environment," Nature, Nature, vol. 395(6701), pages 433-434, October.
    13. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    14. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    15. A. E. Dingle, 1982. "‘The Monster Nuisance of All’: Landowners, Alkali Manufacturers, and Air Pollution, 1828–64," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 35(4), pages 529-548, November.
    16. Henk Folmer & H. L. Gabel (ed.), 2000. "Principles of Environmental and Resource Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1605.
    17. Kesidou, Effie & Demirel, Pelin, 2012. "On the drivers of eco-innovations: Empirical evidence from the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 862-870.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jianfeng Guo & Xiaotong Ou & Yan Li & Kecheng Liu, 2024. "Can the Carbon Emissions Trading Pilot Policy Improve the Ecological Well-Being Performance of Cities in China?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Che, Shuai & Wang, Jun & Chen, Honghang, 2023. "Can China's decentralized energy governance reduce carbon emissions? Evidence from new energy demonstration cities," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).
    3. Jin, Chenfei & Tsai, Fu-Sheng & Gu, Qiuyang & Wu, Bao, 2022. "Does the porter hypothesis work well in the emission trading schema pilot? Exploring moderating effects of institutional settings," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    4. Wu, Bao & Fang, Hanqing & Jacoby, Gady & Li, Geling & Wu, Zhenyu, 2022. "Environmental regulations and innovation for sustainability? Moderating effect of political connections," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    5. Xin Nie & Jianxian Wu & Han Wang & Lihua Li & Chengdao Huang & Weijuan Li & Zhuxia Wei, 2022. "Booster or Stumbling Block? The Role of Environmental Regulation in the Coupling Path of Regional Innovation under the Porter Hypothesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    6. Haiyan Yu & Shan Li & Yiyuan Liu & Qiuping Liu & Yuxin Lu, 2023. "Do International Trade Frictions Influence the Competitiveness of Entity Enterprises? Evidence from the Perspective of Financialization," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ren, Shenggang & Hu, Yucai & Zheng, Jingjing & Wang, Yangjie, 2020. "Emissions trading and firm innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Davide Antonioli & Grazia Cecere & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2018. "Information communication technologies and environmental innovations in firms: joint adoptions and productivity effects," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(11), pages 1905-1933, September.
    3. Nicolò Barbieri & Claudia Ghisetti & Marianna Gilli & Giovanni Marin & Francesco Nicolli, 2016. "A Survey Of The Literature On Environmental Innovation Based On Main Path Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 596-623, July.
    4. Siedschlag, Iulia & Yan, Weijie, 2023. "Do green investments improve firm performance? Empirical evidence from Ireland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    5. He, Wenjian & Cheng, Yu & Lin, Ying & Zhang, Hongxiao, 2022. "Microeconomic effects of designating National Forest Cities: Evidence from China's publicly traded manufacturing companies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    6. Pierre Desrochers, 2008. "Did the Invisible Hand Need a Regulatory Glove to Develop a Green Thumb? Some Historical Perspective on Market Incentives, Win-Win Innovations and the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(4), pages 519-539, December.
    7. Lorena D’Agostino, 2015. "How MNEs respond to environmental regulation: integrating the Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(2), pages 245-269, August.
    8. Sen, Suphi, 2015. "Corporate governance, environmental regulations, and technological change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 36-61.
    9. Pinget, Amandine, 2016. "Spécificités des déterminants des innovations environnementales : une approche appliquée aux PME [Specificities of determinants for environmental innovation : an approach applied to SMEs]," MPRA Paper 80108, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Erik Hille & Patrick Möbius, 2019. "Environmental Policy, Innovation, and Productivity Growth: Controlling the Effects of Regulation and Endogeneity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1315-1355, August.
    11. Antonietti, Roberto & Marzucchi, Alberto, 2014. "Green tangible investment strategies and export performance: A firm-level investigation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 150-161.
    12. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    13. Dominique Bianco & Evens Salies, 2017. "The Strong Porter Hypothesis in an Endogenous Growth Model with Satisficing Managers," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(4), pages 2641-2654.
    14. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    15. Dominique Bianco & Evens Salies, 2017. "The Strong Porter Hypothesis in an Endogenous Growth Model with Satisficing Managers," Post-Print hal-02177939, HAL.
    16. Teemu Makkonen & Sari Repka, 2016. "The innovation inducement impact of environmental regulations on maritime transport: a literature review," International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 69-86.
    17. Patricia Laurens & Christian Le Bas & Stéphane Lhuillery & Antoine Schoen, 2017. "The determinants of cleaner energy innovations of the world’s largest firms: the impact of firm learning and knowledge capital," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 311-333, May.
    18. De Santis, R. & Esposito, P. & Lasinio, C. Jona, 2021. "Environmental regulation and productivity growth: Main policy challenges," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 264-277.
    19. Tariq, Adeel & Badir, Yuosre F. & Tariq, Waqas & Bhutta, Umair Saeed, 2017. "Drivers and consequences of green product and process innovation: A systematic review, conceptual framework, and future outlook," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 8-23.
    20. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Bengochea-Morancho, Aurelia & Morales-Lage, Rafael, 2019. "Does environmental policy stringency foster innovation and productivity in OECD countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:92:y:2014:i:c:p:179-189. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kai Meng (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources-conservation-and-recycling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.