IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v34y2012i4p930-941.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is energy intensity important for the productivity growth of EET adopters?

Author

Listed:
  • Kounetas, Konstantinos
  • Mourtos, Ioannis
  • Tsekouras, Konstantinos

Abstract

Energy Efficient Technologies (EET) have attracted strong interest because of their role in reducing environmental damage. Their adoption, however, remains rather low, while their impact on productivity is substantial and differentiating with respect to technological characteristics. Energy intensity, being such an obvious characteristic, could be employed to classify EET adopters thus giving rise to two heterogeneous technologies (i.e. those corresponding to firms of low and high energy consumption). Hence, this paper examines the impact of energy intensity on the productivity growth of firms adopting EET in varying time intervals through a metafrontier-based framework, while also decomposing that impact in terms of technical, efficiency and scale-efficiency changes. The analysis is complemented by examining the role of firm-specific characteristics on the productivity growth through linear regression.

Suggested Citation

  • Kounetas, Konstantinos & Mourtos, Ioannis & Tsekouras, Konstantinos, 2012. "Is energy intensity important for the productivity growth of EET adopters?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 930-941.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:4:p:930-941
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2011.05.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988311001113
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laura Power, 1998. "The Missing Link: Technology, Investment, And Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 300-313, May.
    2. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    3. Gale Boyd & George Tolley & Joseph Pang, 2002. "Plant Level Productivity, Efficiency, and Environmental Performance of the Container Glass Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(1), pages 29-43, September.
    4. Geroski, P. A., 2000. "Models of technology diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 603-625, April.
    5. Khanna, Madhu & Damon, Lisa A., 1999. "EPA's Voluntary 33/50 Program: Impact on Toxic Releases and Economic Performance of Firms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Jensen, J Bradford & McGuckin, Robert H, 1997. "Firm Performance and Evolution: Empirical Regularities in the US Microdata," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 25-47.
    7. Kounetas, Kostas & Tsekouras, Kostas, 2008. "The energy efficiency paradox revisited through a partial observability approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2517-2536, September.
    8. Ghemawat, Pankaj & Caves, Richard E, 1986. "Capital Commitment and Profitability: An Empirical Investigation," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(0), pages 94-110, Suppl. No.
    9. DeCanio, Stephen J, 1998. "The efficiency paradox: bureaucratic and organizational barriers to profitable energy-saving investments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 441-454, April.
    10. Rohdin, P. & Thollander, P., 2006. "Barriers to and driving forces for energy efficiency in the non-energy intensive manufacturing industry in Sweden," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 1836-1844.
    11. Bert Balk, 2001. "Scale Efficiency and Productivity Change," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 159-183, May.
    12. Jovanovic, Boyan & Rousseau, Peter L., 2005. "General Purpose Technologies," Handbook of Economic Growth,in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 1181-1224 Elsevier.
    13. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    14. David J. Teece, 2008. "Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 11, pages 265-296 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    15. de Groot, Henri L. F. & Verhoef, Erik T. & Nijkamp, Peter, 2001. "Energy saving by firms: decision-making, barriers and policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 717-740, November.
    16. Caves, Douglas W & Christensen, Laurits R & Diewert, W Erwin, 1982. "The Economic Theory of Index Numbers and the Measurement of Input, Output, and Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1393-1414, November.
    17. Foray, Dominique, 1997. "The dynamic implications of increasing returns: Technological change and path dependent inefficiency," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 733-752, October.
    18. Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 1994. "The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 91-122, May.
    19. Worrell, Ernst & Laitner, John A & Ruth, Michael & Finman, Hodayah, 2003. "Productivity benefits of industrial energy efficiency measures," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 1081-1098.
    20. Boyd, Gale A. & Pang, Joseph X., 2000. "Estimating the linkage between energy efficiency and productivity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 289-296, May.
    21. Jorgenson, Dale W, 1984. "The Role of Energy in Productivity Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 26-30, May.
    22. Ng, Charles K & Seabright, Paul, 2001. "Competition, Privatisation and Productive Efficiency: Evidence from the Airline Industry," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(473), pages 591-619, July.
    23. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    24. Fariborz Damanpour, 1996. "Organizational Complexity and Innovation: Developing and Testing Multiple Contingency Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(5), pages 693-716, May.
    25. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    26. Loof, Hans & Heshmati, Almas, 2002. "Knowledge capital and performance heterogeneity: : A firm-level innovation study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-85, March.
    27. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    28. Kverndokk, Snorre & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2007. "Climate policies and learning by doing: Impacts and timing of technology subsidies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 58-82, January.
    29. Christopher O’Donnell & D. Rao & George Battese, 2008. "Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 231-255, March.
    30. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-583, June.
    31. Zhang, Jianling & Wang, Guoshun, 2008. "Energy saving technologies and productive efficiency in the Chinese iron and steel sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 525-537.
    32. Dale W. Jorgenson, 1984. "The Role of Energy in Productivity Growth," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 11-26.
    33. Dimitris Skuras & Kostas Tsekouras & Efthalia Dimara & Dimitris Tzelepis, 2006. "The Effects of Regional Capital Subsidies on Productivity Growth: A Case Study of the Greek Food and Beverage Manufacturing Industry," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 355-381.
    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. Tsurumi Tetsuya & Managi Shunsuke & Hibiki Akira, 2015. "Do Environmental Regulations Increase Bilateral Trade Flows?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 1549-1577, October.
    2. Nikos Chatzistamoulou & George Diagourtas & Kostas Kounetas, 2017. "Do pollution abatement expenditures lead to higher productivity growth? Evidence from Greek manufacturing industries," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(1), pages 15-34, January.
    3. Sombat Singkharat & Aree Wiboonpongse & Yaovarate Chaovanapoonphol, 2012. "Efficiency of improved peeled longan drying technology in Thailand: A metafrontier approach," The Empirical Econometrics and Quantitative Economics Letters, Faculty of Economics, Chiang Mai University, vol. 1(3), pages 19-32, September.
    4. Tugcu, Can Tansel & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar, 2016. "Does renewable and/or non-renewable energy consumption matter for total factor productivity (TFP) growth? Evidence from the BRICS," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 610-616.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Energy efficient technologies; Productivity growth; Metafrontier;

    JEL classification:

    • D2 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • L6 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing
    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    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:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:4:p:930-941. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.