IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i3p2438-d1051057.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on the Interaction Effect between the Intensity of Government Low-Carbon Subsidies and the Growth Ability of Green and Low-Carbon Emerging Enterprises

Author

Listed:
  • Lixia Chen

    (School of Marxism, Hefei Normal University, Hefei 230601, China)

  • Jianyuan Huang

    (School of Public Administration, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

Abstract

With the development of science and technology and society, people’s demand for a healthy living environment is increasing, and the expression “low carbon” has become a daily feature of people’s lives. The emergence of a low-carbon economy, the impact on the traditional industrial structure and the formation of a new economic landscape make China, a developing country, eager to seize this opportunity to enhance its international competitiveness. To achieve this, it is necessary to establish a low-carbon concept, to actively restructure industrial and develop low-carbon industries; only in this way can we take advantage of the new round of industrial restructuring and grasp the initiative of development. Therefore, this paper selects data from enterprises in the emerging low-carbon industry, and uses a SVAR model to conduct a dynamic interaction analysis between government subsidy intensity, enterprise profitability, asset growth capacity and enterprise size. The results of the study show that the intensity of government subsidies in the first period has a certain positive effect on a company’s current profitability and asset growth, the improvement being most significant on its profitability. Among the larger companies, asset growth and profitability in the first period had a significant positive impact on current earnings, and the contribution of profitability to the company’s own performance was much larger than the average; among the smaller companies, asset growth and profitability in the first period had a significant positive impact on current earnings, and the contribution of asset growth to the company’s own performance was much larger than the average. The intensity of prior government subsidies in the Highs group has a significant positive relationship with the intensity of current government subsidies, the firm’s asset growth capacity and profitability; the intensity of prior government subsidies in the Lows group only has a significant positive impact on the asset growth capacity in the current period. In addition, the interaction between the three core variables in the Highs group is also significantly higher than that in the Lows group. This indicates that the government should implement differential policies and financial subsidies according to the actual needs of enterprises to maximize the effect of capital use and promote the development and growth of emerging enterprises.

Suggested Citation

  • Lixia Chen & Jianyuan Huang, 2023. "Study on the Interaction Effect between the Intensity of Government Low-Carbon Subsidies and the Growth Ability of Green and Low-Carbon Emerging Enterprises," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:3:p:2438-:d:1051057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/2438/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/2438/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suyu Huang & Hanlian Lin & Yongjunbei Zhou & Haonan Ji & Naiping Zhu, 2022. "The Influence of the Policy of Replacing Environmental Protection Fees with Taxes on Enterprise Green Innovation—Evidence from China’s Heavily Polluting Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-23, June.
    2. Tong Shu & Zhizhen Peng & Shou Chen & Shouyang Wang & Kin Keung Lai & Honglin Yang, 2017. "Government Subsidy for Remanufacturing or Carbon Tax Rebate: Which Is Better for Firms and a Low-Carbon Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Park, Jeong-Il & Lee, Sugie, 2017. "Examining the spatial patterns of green industries and the role of government policies in South Korea: Application of a panel regression model (2006–2012)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 614-623.
    4. Dukangqi Li & Weitao Shen, 2022. "Regional Happiness and Corporate Green Innovation: A Financing Constraints Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-25, February.
    5. Xia, Li & Gao, Shuo & Wei, Jiuchang & Ding, Qiying, 2022. "Government subsidy and corporate green innovation - Does board governance play a role?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Amore, Mario Daniele & Schneider, Cédric & Žaldokas, Alminas, 2013. "Credit supply and corporate innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 835-855.
    7. Pei Wang & Cong Dong & Nan Chen & Ming Qi & Shucheng Yang & Amuji Bridget Nnenna & Wenxin Li, 2021. "Environmental Regulation, Government Subsidies, and Green Technology Innovation—A Provincial Panel Data Analysis from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Shao, Yanmin & Chen, Zhongfei, 2022. "Can government subsidies promote the green technology innovation transformation? Evidence from Chinese listed companies," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 716-727.
    9. Die Hu & Lu Qiu & Maoyan She & Yu Wang, 2021. "Sustaining the sustainable development: How do firms turn government green subsidies into financial performance through green innovation?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2271-2292, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Song, Yang & Zhang, Zhiyuan & Sahut, Jean-Michel & Rubin, Ofir, 2023. "Incentivizing green technology innovation to confront sustainable development," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Huacheng Rao & Dongxu Chen & Feichao Shen & Yangyang Shen, 2022. "Can Green Bonds Stimulate Green Innovation in Enterprises? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Jingpei Ma & Xuejun Sun, 2023. "Green technology licensing: Evaluating government subsidies based on different efficiency levels across competitors," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(4), pages 1920-1934, June.
    4. Ke Mao & Junxin Huang, 2022. "How Does Climate Policy Uncertainty Affect Green Innovation? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, November.
    5. Zhi Li & Qianwen Shao & Jiayun Song, 2023. "The efforts of manufacturing enterprises toward sustainable development under voluntary environmental policy: The roles of external pressure, attraction, and internal attributes," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 2315-2329, September.
    6. Barbara Su, 2023. "Banking practices and borrowing firms’ financial reporting quality: evidence from bank cross-selling," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 201-236, March.
    7. Manuel Ammann & Philipp Horsch & David Oesch, 2016. "Competing with Superstars," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2842-2858, October.
    8. Cowling, Marc & Ughetto, Elisa & Lee, Neil, 2018. "The innovation debt penalty: Cost of debt, loan default, and the effects of a public loan guarantee on high-tech firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 166-176.
    9. Chen, Shenglan & Ma, Hui & Teng, Haimeng & Wu, Qiang, 2022. "Banking liberalization and corporate tax planning: Evidence from natural experiments," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    10. Hou, Qingsong & Hu, May & Yuan, Yuan, 2017. "Corporate innovation and political connections in Chinese listed firms," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 46(PA), pages 158-176.
    11. Çağatay Bircan & Ralph De Haas, 2020. "The Limits of Lending? Banks and Technology Adoption across Russia," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(2), pages 536-609.
    12. Jeffrey J. Burks & Christine Cuny & Joseph Gerakos & João Granja, 2018. "Competition and voluntary disclosure: evidence from deregulation in the banking industry," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1471-1511, December.
    13. Liu, Jiangtao & Zhang, Yi & Kuang, Jia, 2023. "Fintech development and green innovation: Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    14. Barankay, Iwan & Contigiani, Andrea & Hsu, David, 2018. "Trade Secrets and Innovation: Evidence from the “Inevitable Disclosure†Doctrine," CEPR Discussion Papers 13077, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Wang, Mei Ling, 2023. "Effects of the green finance policy on the green innovation efficiency of the manufacturing industry: A difference-in-difference model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Veland Ramadani & Sucheta Agarwal & Andrea Caputo & Vivek Agrawal & Jitendra Kumar Dixit, 2022. "Sustainable competencies of social entrepreneurship for sustainable development: Exploratory analysis from a developing economy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3437-3453, November.
    17. Joel Peress & jim goldman, 2016. "Firm Innovation and Financial Analysis: How Do They Interact?," 2016 Meeting Papers 531, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    18. Shuanglian Chen & Zhehao Huang & Benjamin M. Drakeford & Pierre Failler, 2019. "Lending Interest Rate, Loaning Scale, and Government Subsidy Scale in Green Innovation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-22, November.
    19. Ross Levine & Chen Lin & Lai Wei, 2017. "Insider Trading and Innovation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(4), pages 749-800.
    20. Sumin Hu & Qi Zhu & Xia Zhao & Ziyue Xu, 2023. "Digital Finance and Corporate Sustainability Performance: Promoting or Restricting? Evidence from China’s Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-16, June.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:3:p:2438-:d:1051057. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.