IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/frrfes/277768.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The agro-food industry, public health, and environmental protection: investigating the Porter hypothesis in food regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Giraud-Héraud, Eric
  • Ponssard, Jean-Pierre
  • Sinclair Desgagné, Bernard
  • Soler, Louis-Georges

Abstract

Sustainable food concerns have pushed public authorities to act by means of regulations, standards and other devices, and businesses to innovate in their products and production processes. We argue that the Porter hypothesis—which asserts that properly designed and implemented environmental regulation might be good for society as well as the targeted firms—might well be verified in this context. After reviewing and illustrating the working principles and main criticisms of this hypothesis, we provide a more in-depth discussion of nutritional issues. While the literature generally points to organizational imperfections and market failures to validate the Porter hypothesis, we submit and model another rationale for the agro-food industry, a rationale that is based on consumer behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Giraud-Héraud, Eric & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre & Sinclair Desgagné, Bernard & Soler, Louis-Georges, . "The agro-food industry, public health, and environmental protection: investigating the Porter hypothesis in food regulation," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 97(2).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:frrfes:277768
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.277768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/277768/files/Giraud-H%C3%A9raud2016_Article_TheAgro-foodIndustryPublicHeal.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.277768?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Serge Hercberg & Stacie Chat-Yung & Michel Chauliac, 2008. "The French National Nutrition and Health Program: 2001–2006–2010," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 53(2), pages 68-77, April.
    2. d'Aspremont, Claude & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1133-1137, December.
    3. Henson, Spencer & Masakure, Oliver & Cranfield, John, 2011. "Do Fresh Produce Exporters in Sub-Saharan Africa Benefit from GlobalGAP Certification?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 375-386, March.
    4. Aghion, Ph. & Dewatripont, M. & Rey, P., 1997. "Corporate governance, competition policy and industrial policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 797-805, April.
    5. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Vincent Réquillart & Louis-Georges Soler, 2014. "Is the reduction of chronic diseases related to food consumption in the hands of the food industry?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 41(3), pages 375-403.
    7. Christos Constantatos & Markus Herrmann, 2011. "Market Inertia and the Introduction of Green Products: Can Strategic Effects Justify the Porter Hypothesis?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 267-284, October.
    8. Minten, Bart & Randrianarison, Lalaina & Swinnen, Johan F.M., 2009. "Global Retail Chains and Poor Farmers: Evidence from Madagascar," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 1728-1741, November.
    9. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    10. 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.
    11. Morrow, David & Rondinelli, Dennis, 2002. "Adopting Corporate Environmental Management Systems:: Motivations and Results of ISO 14001 and EMAS Certification," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 159-171, April.
    12. Douadia Bougherara & Pierre Combris, 2009. "Eco-labelled food products: what are consumers paying for?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 36(3), pages 321-341, September.
    13. Patrick Bolton & Mathias Dewatripont, 1994. "The Firm as a Communication Network," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(4), pages 809-839.
    14. Solomon Asfaw & Dagmar Mithöfer & Hermann Waibel, 2010. "Agrifood supply chain, private‐sector standards, and farmers' health: evidence from Kenya," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(3‐4), pages 251-263, May.
    15. 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.
    16. Eric Giraud‐Héraud & Abdelhakim Hammoudi & Ruben Hoffmann & Louis‐Georges Soler, 2012. "Joint Private Safety Standards and Vertical Relationships in Food Retailing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 179-212, March.
    17. Maertens, Miet & Swinnen, Johan F.M., 2009. "Trade, Standards, and Poverty: Evidence from Senegal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 161-178, January.
    18. Sinclair-Desgagne, Bernard & Gabel, H. Landis, 1997. "Environmental Auditing in Management Systems and Public Policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 331-346, July.
    19. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2002. "A theoretical foundation of the Porter hypothesis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 355-360, May.
    20. Pierre Blanchard & Jean-Pierre Huiban & Antonio Musolesi & Patrick Sevestre, 2013. "Where there is a will, there is a way? Assessing the impact of obstacles to innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 679-710, June.
    21. Subervie, Julie & Vagneron, Isabelle, 2013. "A Drop of Water in the Indian Ocean? The Impact of GlobalGap Certification on Lychee Farmers in Madagascar," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 57-73.
    22. Popp, David, 2006. "International innovation and diffusion of air pollution control technologies: the effects of NOX and SO2 regulation in the US, Japan, and Germany," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 46-71, January.
    23. 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.
    24. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    25. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Hirshleifer, David & Welch, Ivo, 1992. "A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change in Informational Cascades," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 992-1026, October.
    26. Traill, W. Bruce & Bech-Larsen, Tino & Gennaro, Laura & Koziol‐Kozakowska, Agnieszka & Kuhn, Sofia & Wills, Jo, 2012. "Reformulation for healthier food: a qualitative assessment of alternative approaches," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123511, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    27. Christine Moorman & Rosellina Ferraro & Joel Huber, 2012. "Unintended Nutrition Consequences: Firm Responses to the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 717-737, September.
    28. Stefan Ouma, 2010. "Global Standards, Local Realities: Private Agrifood Governance and the Restructuring of the Kenyan Horticulture Industry," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 86(2), pages 197-222, April.
    29. Sah, Raaj Kumar & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1986. "The Architecture of Economic Systems: Hierarchies and Polyarchies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 716-727, September.
    30. W. Bruce Traill, 2012. "Economic Perspectives on Nutrition Policy Evaluation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 505-527, September.
    31. Nakamura, Masao & Takahashi, Takuya & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2001. "Why Japanese Firms Choose to Certify: A Study of Managerial Responses to Environmental Issues," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 23-52, July.
    32. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    33. Andr, Francisco J. & Gonzlez, Paula & Porteiro, Nicols, 2009. "Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 182-194, March.
    34. Johnstone, Nick & Labonne, Julien, 2009. "Why do manufacturing facilities introduce environmental management systems? Improving and/or signaling performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 719-730, January.
    35. Sinclair-Desgagne, Bernard, 1999. "How to Restore Higher-Powered Incentives in Multitask Agencies," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 418-433, July.
    36. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1991. "Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 24-52, Special I.
    37. Stefan Ouma, 2010. "Global Standards, Local Realities: Private Agrifood Governance and the Restructuring of the Kenyan Horticulture Industry," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 86(2), pages 197-222, April.
    38. Michael Hanemann, 2009. "The Role of Emission Trading in Domestic Climate Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I).
    39. Greaker, Mads, 2006. "Spillovers in the development of new pollution abatement technology: A new look at the Porter-hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 411-420, July.
    40. Jean Pierre Huiban & Antonio Musolesi, 2012. "Augmenting the production function with knowledge capital to test the Porter hypothesis: the case of French food industries," Working Papers hal-02804599, HAL.
    41. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. André, Francisco J., 2015. "Strategic Effects and the Porter Hypothesis," MPRA Paper 62237, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Erik Hille & Patrick Möbius, 2019. "Environmental Policy, Innovation, and Productivity Growth: Controlling the Effects of Regulation and Endogeneity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1315-1355, August.
    4. Chakraborty, Pavel & Chatterjee, Chirantan, 2017. "Does environmental regulation indirectly induce upstream innovation? New evidence from India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 939-955.
    5. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2005. "Quand la réglementation environmentale profite aux polleurs. Survol des fondements théoriques de l'hypothèse de Porter," Cahiers de recherche 0504, GREEN.
    6. Jean Pierre Huiban & Camille Mastromarco & Antonio Musolesi & Michel Simioni, 2016. "The impact of pollution abatement investments on production technology: new insights from frontier analysis," Working Papers hal-01512154, HAL.
    7. Teemu Makkonen & Sari Repka, 2016. "The innovation inducement impact of environmental regulations on maritime transport: a literature review," International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 69-86.
    8. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2009. "Performance environnementale et économique de l'entreprise," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(4), pages 71-94.
    9. 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.
    10. Luca Lambertini & Giuseppe Pignataro & Alessandro Tampieri, 2022. "Competition among coalitions in a cournot industry: a validation of the porter hypothesis," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 679-713, October.
    11. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    12. Qiu, Larry D. & Zhou, Mohan & Wei, Xu, 2018. "Regulation, innovation, and firm selection: The porter hypothesis under monopolistic competition," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 638-658.
    13. Jean Pierre Huiban & Camilla Mastromarco & Antonio Musolesi & Michel Simioni, 2018. "The impact of pollution abatement investments on production technology: a nonparametric approach," SEEDS Working Papers 0918, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Sep 2018.
    14. Böhringer, Christoph & Moslener, Ulf & Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Clean and productive? Empirical evidence from the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 442-451.
    15. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2007. "When and Why Does It Pay To Be Green?," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-20, CIRANO.
    16. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2001. "Productivité et réglementation environnementale: une analyse de l'hypothèse de Porter," Cahiers de recherche 0107, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    17. Spyros Arvanitis & Michael Peneder & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2016. "Competitiveness and ecological impacts of green energy technologies: firm-level evidence for the DACH region," KOF Working papers 16-420, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    18. Gonseth, Camille & Cadot, Olivier & Mathys, Nicole A. & Thalmann, Philippe, 2015. "Energy-tax changes and competitiveness: The role of adaptive capacity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 127-135.
    19. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Bengochea-Morancho, Aurelia & Morales-Lage, Rafael, 2019. "Does environmental policy stringency foster innovation and productivity in OECD countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Indrani Roy Chowdhury & Sandwip K. Das, 2011. "Environmental regulation, green R&D and the Porter hypothesis," Indian Growth and Development Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 4(2), pages 142-152, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:frrfes:277768. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inrapfr.html .

    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.