This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Win-win opportunities & environmental regulation: Testing of porter hypothesis for Indian manufacturing industries

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
M.N. Murthy (Institute of Economic Growth)
Surender Kumar (Institute of Economic Growth)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This paper studies the effect of environmental regulation relating to water pollution by the Indian industry on the productive efficiency of firms. The panel data of 92 water- polluting firms for the three years 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 are used to test the Porter hypothesis of having win-win opportunities for the firms subjected to the regulation. The main empirical result is that the technical efficiency of firms increases with the intensity of environmental regulation and the water conservation efforts there by supporting the Porter hypothesis.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.iegindia.org/dispap/dis25.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, India in its series Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi Discussion Papers with number 25.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 15 pages
Date of creation: Apr 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ind:iegddp:25

Contact details of provider:
Postal: University Enclave, Delhi - 110007
Phone: +91-11-7667-288
Fax: +91-11-7667-410
Email:
Web page: http://www.ieg.nic.in
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Shamprasad M. Pujar).

Related research
Keywords:

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.:

  1. William A Pizer & Jhih-Shyang Shih & Richard D Morgenstern, 1997. "Are We Overstating the Economic Costs of Environmental Protection?," Working Papers 97-12, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau. [Downloadable!]
  2. Wayne B. Gray & Ronald J. Shadbegian, 1995. "Pollution Abatement Costs, Regulation, and Plant-Level Productivity," NBER Working Papers 4994, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Battese, George E. & Coelli, Tim J., 1988. "Prediction of firm-level technical efficiencies with a generalized frontier production function and panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 387-399, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1989. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs Are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 90-98, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Boyd, Gale A. & McClelland, John D., 1999. "The Impact of Environmental Constraints on Productivity Improvement in Integrated Paper Plants," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 121-142, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Palmer, Karen & Oates, Wallace E & Portney, Paul R, 1995. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 119-32, Fall. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Fare, R. & Grosskopf, S. & Pasurka, C., 1986. "Effects on relative efficiency in electric power generation due to environmental controls," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 167-184, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1993. "Derivation of Shadow Prices for Undesirable Outputs: A Distance Function Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(2), pages 374-80, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Murty, M.N. & Kumar, Surender, 2002. "Measuring the cost of environmentally sustainable industrial development in India: a distance function approach," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(03), pages 467-486, July. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Thomas Ziesemer & Peter Michaelis, 2008. "Strategic Environmental Policy and the Accumulation of Knowledge," Discussion Paper Series 301, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics. [Downloadable!]
  2. Kumar, Surender & Gupta, Sreekant, 2004. "Resource use efficiency of US electricity generating plants during the SO2 trading regime: A distance function approach," Working Papers 04/17, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy. [Downloadable!]
  3. Roy Chowdhury, Indrani & Das, Sandwip K., 2006. "Re-visiting the porter hypothesis," Working Papers 06/38, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy. [Downloadable!]
  4. Indrani, Roy Chowdhury, 2006. "Re-visiting the Porter Hypothesis," MPRA Paper 7899, University Library of Munich, Germany. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? It is the publishers that input data about their publications, as there is no staff at RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-21.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.