IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i4p3649-d1070655.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the Influence of Heterogeneous Environmental Regulation on Green Technology Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Jingjing Liu

    (School of Business Administration, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu 233030, China
    Business School, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

  • Min Zhao

    (Business School, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

  • Chao Zhang

    (School of Management, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China
    School of Finance, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu 233030, China)

  • Fangrong Ren

    (School of Economics and Management, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China)

Abstract

Since its reform and opening up, China’s economy has undergone rapid development and has experienced problems such as the overexploitation of resources and the destruction of the ecological environment. To achieve a balance between economic growth and environmental protection and to follow the sustainable development path, China must implement corresponding environmental regulation policies and vigorously encourage enterprises to pursue green technology innovation. In this paper, environmental regulation is divided into command-and-control, market incentive and voluntary participation. Command-and-control environmental regulation is measured using the entropy method and the logarithm of the pollution discharge fee income in each region is used as the measurement index of market-incentive environmental regulations. At the same time, the logarithm of the number of environmental protection proposals planned by the National People’s Congress and the number of environmental protection proposals planned by the CPPCC is used as the measurement index of voluntary participation in environmental regulations. Based on a regression equation of the effects of environmental regulations on green technology innovation, this paper uses the two-step system GMM method to analyze the panel data of industrial enterprises larger than a designated size in 30 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities in China from 2006 to 2017. Moreover, the paper compares the effects of command-and-control, market-incentive and voluntary participatory environmental regulations on green technology innovation. The empirical results show that command-and-control environmental regulations initially have an inverted U-shaped effect on green technology innovation and market incentive and voluntary participatory environmental regulations have a U-shaped effect on green technology innovation. A comparison of the three environmental regulation policies shows that the effect of command-and-control environmental regulation is more significant.

Suggested Citation

  • Jingjing Liu & Min Zhao & Chao Zhang & Fangrong Ren, 2023. "Analysis of the Influence of Heterogeneous Environmental Regulation on Green Technology Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3649-:d:1070655
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3649/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3649/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Adam B. Jaffe & Karen Palmer, 1997. "Environmental Regulation And Innovation: A Panel Data Study," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 610-619, November.
    4. Sandra Rousseau & Stef Proost, 2005. "Comparing Environmental Policy Instruments in the Presence of Imperfect Compliance – A Case Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(3), pages 337-365, November.
    5. Gray, Wayne B. & Shadbegian, Ronald J., 2003. "Plant vintage, technology, and environmental regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 384-402, November.
    6. Barbera, Anthony J. & McConnell, Virginia D., 1990. "The impact of environmental regulations on industry productivity: Direct and indirect effects," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 50-65, January.
    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. Deqin Lin & Yuetong Zhao, 2023. "The Impact of Environmental Regulations on Enterprises’ Green Innovation: The Mediating Effect of Managers’ Environmental Awareness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-26, July.

    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. Xie, Rong-hui & Yuan, Yi-jun & Huang, Jing-jing, 2017. "Different Types of Environmental Regulations and Heterogeneous Influence on “Green” Productivity: Evidence from China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 104-112.
    2. Nusrate Aziz & Belayet Hossain & Laura Lamb, 2022. "Does green policy pay dividends?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 24(2), pages 147-172, April.
    3. Mian Yang & Yining Yuan & Fuxia Yang & Dalia Patino-Echeverri, 2021. "Effects of environmental regulation on firm entry and exit and China’s industrial productivity: a new perspective on the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(4), pages 915-944, October.
    4. Albrizio, Silvia & Kozluk, Tomasz & Zipperer, Vera, 2017. "Environmental policies and productivity growth: Evidence across industries and firms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 209-226.
    5. He, Yiqing & Ding, Xin & Yang, Chuchu, 2021. "Do environmental regulations and financial constraints stimulate corporate technological innovation? Evidence from China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    6. Themann, Michael & Koch, Nicolas, 2021. "Catching up and falling behind: Cross-country evidence on the impact of the EU ETS on firm productivity," Ruhr Economic Papers 904, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    7. Johan Brolund & Robert Lundmark, 2017. "Effect of Environmental Regulation Stringency on the Pulp and Paper Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Lu, Yunguo & Zhang, Lin, 2022. "National mitigation policy and the competitiveness of Chinese firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    9. Siedschlag, Iulia & Yan, Weijie, 2023. "Do green investments improve firm performance? Empirical evidence from Ireland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    10. Yang, Chih-Hai & Tseng, Yu-Hsuan & Chen, Chiang-Ping, 2012. "Environmental regulations, induced R&D, and productivity: Evidence from Taiwan's manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 514-532.
    11. Dietrich Earnhart & Dylan G. Rassier, 2016. "“Effective regulatory stringency” and firms’ profitability: the effects of effluent limits and government monitoring," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 111-145, October.
    12. Rassier, Dylan G. & Earnhart, Dietrich, 2015. "Effects of environmental regulation on actual and expected profitability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 129-140.
    13. Wang, Yan & Shen, Neng, 2016. "Environmental regulation and environmental productivity: The case of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 758-766.
    14. Bu, Maoliang & Qiao, Zhenzi & Liu, Beibei, 2020. "Voluntary environmental regulation and firm innovation in China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 10-18.
    15. Rubashkina, Yana & Galeotti, Marzio & Verdolini, Elena, 2015. "Environmental regulation and competitiveness: Empirical evidence on the Porter Hypothesis from European manufacturing sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 288-300.
    16. Chen, Zhongfei & Zhang, Xiao & Chen, Fanglin, 2021. "Do carbon emission trading schemes stimulate green innovation in enterprises? Evidence from China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    17. Zhang, Yijun & Song, Yi, 2022. "Tax rebates, technological innovation and sustainable development: Evidence from Chinese micro-level data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Anabel Zárate-Marco & Jaime Vallés-Giménez, 2015. "Environmental tax and productivity in a decentralized context: new findings on the Porter hypothesis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 313-339, October.
    20. Yuhua Ma & Tong Lin & Qifang Xiao, 2022. "The Relationship between Environmental Regulation, Green-Technology Innovation and Green Total-Factor Productivity—Evidence from 279 Cities in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-22, December.

    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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3649-:d:1070655. 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.