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.