Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The environmental Porter hypothesis: theory, evidence, and a model of timing of adoption

Contents:

Author Info

  • Ben Kriechel
  • Thomas Ziesemer

Abstract

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 will show that times of adoption will be earlier if the non-adoption tax is higher. The environmental tax will turn the preemption game with low profits into a game with credible precommitment generating higher profits (pro-Porter). If there is a precommitment game without environmental taxes, the introduction of a tax will lead to lower profits (anti-Porter). An evaluation of the empirical literature indicates that the Porter hypothesis will hold even for profit-maximizing firms under multiple market imperfections such as imperfect competition, X-inefficiency, and agency costs. These are more likely to be present in sectors with large firms. In many case studies that we have evaluated, though, we detected an element of explicit or implicit subsidies for environmentally friendly behaviour, which is in line with Pigovian policies.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10438590801943235
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Economics of Innovation and New Technology.

Volume (Year): 18 (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 267-294

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:taf:ecinnt:v:18:y:2009:i:3:p:267-294

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/GEIN20

Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/GEIN20

Related research

Keywords: environmental policy; strategic trade theory; technology adoption; Porter hypothesis;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Popp David, 2005. "Uncertain R&D and the Porter Hypothesis," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-16, June.
  2. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equilization in the Adoption of New Technology," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401, July.
  3. Greaker, Mads, 2003. "Strategic environmental policy; eco-dumping or a green strategy?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 692-707, May.
  4. Roediger-Schluga, Thomas, 2002. "Some micro-evidence on the "Porter Hypothesis" from Austrian VOC emission standards," ERSA conference papers ersa02p290, European Regional Science Association.
  5. 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.
  6. Ebru Alpay & Joe Kerkvliet & Steven Buccola, 2002. "Productivity Growth and Environmental Regulation in Mexican and U.S. Food Manufacturing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 887-901.
  7. 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.
  8. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1987. "Understanding Rent Dissipation: On the Use of Game Theory in Industrial Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 176-83, May.
  9. Xepapadeas, A. & Zeeuw, A.J. de, 1998. "Environmental Policy and Competitiveness: The Porter Hypothesis and the Composition of Capital," Discussion Paper 1998-38, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  10. Smith, V Kerry & Walsh, Randy, 2000. " Do Painless Environmental Policies Exist?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 73-94, July.
  11. Robert Ayres, 1994. "On economic disequilibrium and free lunch," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(5), pages 435-454, October.
  12. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716.
  13. Simpson, R. David & Bradford, Robert III, 1996. "Taxing Variable Cost: Environmental Regulation as Industrial Policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 282-300, May.
  14. Feichtinger, G. & Hartl, R.F. & Kort, P.M. & Veliov, V., 2005. "Environmental policy, the Porter hypothesis and the composition of capital: Effects of learning and technological progress," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-170753, Tilburg University.
  15. Armin Schmutzler, 2001. "Environmental Regulations and Managerial Myopia," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 18(1), pages 87-100, January.
  16. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2005. "Can Environmental Regulations be Good for Business? an Assessment of the Porter Hypothesis," Cahiers de recherche 0505, GREEN.
  17. Abay Mulatu & Raymond J.G.M. Florax & Cees A.A.M. Withagen, 2001. "Environmental Regulation and Competitiveness," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 01-039/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  18. Martin Klein & Jaqueline Rothfels, . "Can Environmental Regulation of X-Ineffecient Firms Create a -Double Dividend-?," IWH Discussion Papers 103, Halle Institute for Economic Research.
  19. Isaksson, Lena Hoglund, 2005. "Abatement costs in response to the Swedish charge on nitrogen oxide emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 102-120, July.
  20. Shunsuke Managi, 2004. "Competitiveness and environmental policies for agriculture: testing the Porter hypothesis," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(3/4), pages 310-324.
  21. Ulph, Alistair, 1996. "Environmental Policy and International Trade when Governments and Producers Act Strategically," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 265-281, May.
  22. Gale Boyd & George Tolley & Joseph Pang, 2002. "Plant Level Productivity, Efficiency, and Environmental Performance of the Container Glass Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(1), pages 29-43, September.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Ambec, Stefan & Cohen, Mark & Elgie, Stewart & Lanoie, Paul, 2010. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," TSE Working Papers 10-215, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  2. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Simone Borghesi, 2012. "The European Emission Trading Scheme and environmental innovation diffusion: Empirical analyses using Italian CIS data," Working Papers 201201, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
  3. Eric Knight & Nicholas Howarth, 2011. "Clean Energy Technology and the Role of Non-Carbon Price Based Policy: an Evolutionary Economics Perspective," CCEP Working Papers 1102, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  4. Georg Licht & Bettina Peters, 2014. "Do Green Innovations stimulate Employment? – Firm-level Evidence From Germany," WWWforEurope Working Papers series 53, WWWforEurope.
  5. Simone Borghesi & Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2012. "Brown Sunsets and Green Dawns in the Industrial Sector: Environmental Innovations, Firm Behavior and the European Emission Trading," Working Papers 2012.03, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  6. Wilfried Ehrenfeld, 2012. "Towards a Theory of Climate Innovation - A Model Framework for Analyzing Drivers and Determinants," IWH Discussion Papers 1, Halle Institute for Economic Research.
  7. Nicholas Howarth, 2011. "Clean Energy Technology and the Role of Non-Carbon Price-Based Policy: An Evolutionary Economics Perspective," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 871-891, October.
  8. Zylicz, Tomasz, 2010. "Goals and Principles of Environmental Policy," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 3(4), pages 299-334, May.
  9. Prabal Roy Chowdhury, 2010. "The Porter Hypothesis and Hyperbolic Discounting," EERI Research Paper Series EERI_RP_2010_42, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
  10. George van Leeuwen & Pierre Mohnen, 2013. "Revisiting the Porter Hypothesis: An Empirical Analysis of Green Innovation for the Netherlands," CIRANO Working Papers 2013s-02, CIRANO.
  11. Howarth, Nicholas A.A. & Rosenow, Jan, 2014. "Banning the bulb: Institutional evolution and the phased ban of incandescent lighting in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 737-746.
  12. 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.
  13. Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm & Kronenberg, Tobias & Hansen, Patrick, 2010. "The social return on investment in the energy efficiency of buildings in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4317-4329, August.
  14. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2011. "Enviromental Innovations, Complementarity and Local/Global Cooperation," Working Papers 201104, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ecinnt:v:18:y:2009:i:3:p:267-294. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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