IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v171y2022ics0301421522005092.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on the effect of carbon trading regulation on green innovation and heterogeneity analysis from China

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Ming
  • Shan, Yanfei
  • Li, Yemei

Abstract

China launched seven pilot areas for climate change mitigation before establishing a unified carbon emissions trading system in 2014. To explore the heterogeneous effect of carbon trading regulation on green innovation in China, we constructed evolutionary games with players of governments and enterprises. We then conducted empirical studies with the difference-in-difference model. With the data of listed Chinese A-share companies from 2008 to 2018, we found that implementing carbon trading pilot projects in China significantly increases the green innovation output of enterprises in the pilot regions. Additionally, the sensitivity to carbon trading policies varies across industries and property rights. Regarding the quality of green innovation triggered by the pilot project, firms in the pilot regions prefer high-quality green invention patent innovations over low-quality green utility model patent innovations. In addition, state-owned enterprises tend to apply for high-quality green invention patents, while firms in high-pollution industries prefer to apply for lower-quality green utility model patents. Finally, we put forward policy suggestions. First, China should accelerate the pilot carbon trading regulation and expand its scope. Second, there should be regional and industrial differences in constricting carbon trading regulations. Third, the government should avoid unreasonable regulatory intensity design.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Ming & Shan, Yanfei & Li, Yemei, 2022. "Study on the effect of carbon trading regulation on green innovation and heterogeneity analysis from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:171:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522005092
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421522005092
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113290?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
    ---><---

    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. Gulbrandsen, Lars H. & Stenqvist, Christian, 2013. "The limited effect of EU emissions trading on corporate climate strategies: Comparison of a Swedish and a Norwegian pulp and paper company," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 516-525.
    2. Mark A. Cohen & Adeline Tubb, 2018. "The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Firm and Country Competitiveness: A Meta-analysis of the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(2), pages 371-399.
    3. 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.
    4. Du, Gang & Yu, Meng & Sun, Chuanwang & Han, Zhao, 2021. "Green innovation effect of emission trading policy on pilot areas and neighboring areas: An analysis based on the spatial econometric model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    5. Dayuan Li & Min Huang & Shenggang Ren & Xiaohong Chen & Lutao Ning, 2018. "Environmental Legitimacy, Green Innovation, and Corporate Carbon Disclosure: Evidence from CDP China 100," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 1089-1104, July.
    6. Rubashkina, Yana & Galeotti, Marzio & Verdolini, Elena, 2015. "Environmental regulation and competitiveness: Empirical evidence on the Porter Hypothesis from European manufacturing sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 288-300.
    7. Daniel Friedman, 1998. "On economic applications of evolutionary game theory," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 15-43.
    8. Raphael Calel & Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2016. "Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence from the European Carbon Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 173-191, March.
    9. Chen, Zhongfei & Zhang, Xiao & Chen, Fanglin, 2021. "Do carbon emission trading schemes stimulate green innovation in enterprises? Evidence from China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Borghesi, Simone & Cainelli, Giulio & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2015. "Linking emission trading to environmental innovation: Evidence from the Italian manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 669-683.
    12. Demirel, Pelin & Kesidou, Effie, 2011. "Stimulating different types of eco-innovation in the UK: Government policies and firm motivations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1546-1557, June.
    13. Miao, Cheng-lin & Duan, Meng-meng & Zuo, Yang & Wu, Xin-yu, 2021. "Spatial heterogeneity and evolution trend of regional green innovation efficiency--an empirical study based on panel data of industrial enterprises in China's provinces," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    14. Yemei Li & Yanfei Shan & Ying Chen, 2021. "Analysis of Farmland Abandonment and Government Supervision Traps in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-27, February.
    15. Perino, Grischa & Requate, Till, 2012. "Does more stringent environmental regulation induce or reduce technology adoption? When the rate of technology adoption is inverted U-shaped," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 456-467.
    16. Rogge, Karoline S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2010. "The impact of the EU ETS on the sectoral innovation system for power generation technologies - Findings for Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7639-7652, December.
    17. Wang, Han & Chen, Zhoupeng & Wu, Xingyi & Nie, Xin, 2019. "Can a carbon trading system promote the transformation of a low-carbon economy under the framework of the porter hypothesis? —Empirical analysis based on the PSM-DID method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 930-938.
    18. Liu, Yunqiang & Liu, Sha & Shao, Xiaoyu & He, Yanqiu, 2022. "Policy spillover effect and action mechanism for environmental rights trading on green innovation: Evidence from China's carbon emissions trading policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. Yu, Feifei & Guo, Yue & Le-Nguyen, Khuong & Barnes, Stuart J. & Zhang, Weiting, 2016. "The impact of government subsidies and enterprises’ R&D investment: A panel data study from renewable energy in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 106-113.
    20. Shan Gao & Shuang Ling & Wenhui Liu, 2018. "The Role of Social Media in Promoting Information Disclosure on Environmental Incidents: An Evolutionary Game Theory Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, November.
    21. Sarwar, Suleman & Shahzad, Umer & Chang, Dongfeng & Tang, Biyan, 2019. "Economic and non-economic sector reforms in carbon mitigation: Empirical evidence from Chinese provinces," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 146-154.
    22. Azlan Amran & Zainorfarah Zainuddin & Suhaiza Hanim Mohamad Zailani, 2013. "Carbon Trading in Malaysia: Review of Policies and Practices," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 183-192, May.
    23. Fan, Ying & Wu, Jie & Xia, Yan & Liu, Jing-Yu, 2016. "How will a nationwide carbon market affect regional economies and efficiency of CO2 emission reduction in China?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 151-166.
    24. Shao-Zhou Qi & Chao-Bo Zhou & Kai Li & Si-Yan Tang, 2021. "Influence of a pilot carbon trading policy on enterprises’ low-carbon innovation in China," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 318-336, March.
    25. Hoffmann, Volker H., 2007. "EU ETS and Investment Decisions:: The Case of the German Electricity Industry," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 464-474, December.
    26. Mo, Jian-Lei & Agnolucci, Paolo & Jiang, Mao-Rong & Fan, Ying, 2016. "The impact of Chinese carbon emission trading scheme (ETS) on low carbon energy (LCE) investment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 271-283.
    27. Barry Anderson & Frank Convery & Corrado Di Maria, 2010. "Technological Change And The EU ETS: The Case Of Ireland," Economics Working Papers 10-06, Queen's Management School, Queen's University Belfast.
    28. Chintrakarn, Pandej, 2008. "Environmental regulation and U.S. states' technical inefficiency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 363-365, September.
    29. 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.
    30. Åsa L�fgren & Markus Wr�ke & Tomas Hagberg & Susanna Roth, 2014. "Why the EU ETS needs reforming: an empirical analysis of the impact on company investments," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 537-558, September.
    31. Hu, Guoqiang & Wang, Xiaoqi & Wang, Yu, 2021. "Can the green credit policy stimulate green innovation in heavily polluting enterprises? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    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. Ying Zhang & Yingli Huang, 2023. "Killing Two Birds with One Stone or Missing One of Them? The Synergistic Governance Effect of China’s Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme on Pollution Control and Carbon Emission Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-25, June.
    2. Hong Chen & Haowen Zhu & Tianchen Sun & Xiangyu Chen & Tao Wang & Wenhong Li, 2023. "Does Environmental Regulation Promote Corporate Green Innovation? Empirical Evidence from Chinese Carbon Capture Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Zhichao Ma & Jie Zhang & Huanhuan Wang & Shaochan Gao, 2023. "Optimization of Sustainable Bi-Objective Cold-Chain Logistics Route Considering Carbon Emissions and Customers’ Immediate Demands in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Ke Mao & Junxin Huang, 2022. "How Does Climate Policy Uncertainty Affect Green Innovation? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-14, November.
    5. Yadu Zhang & Yiteng Zhang & Zuoren Sun, 2023. "The Impact of Carbon Emission Trading Policy on Enterprise ESG Performance: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-27, May.

    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. Ren, Shenggang & Hu, Yucai & Zheng, Jingjing & Wang, Yangjie, 2020. "Emissions trading and firm innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Teixidó, Jordi & Verde, Stefano F. & Nicolli, Francesco, 2019. "The impact of the EU Emissions Trading System on low-carbon technological change: The empirical evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Bel, Germà & Joseph, Stephan, 2018. "Policy stringency under the European Union Emission trading system and its impact on technological change in the energy sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 434-444.
    4. Yanhong Feng & Shuanglian Chen & Pierre Failler, 2020. "Productivity Effect Evaluation on Market-Type Environmental Regulation: A Case Study of SO 2 Emission Trading Pilot in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-27, October.
    5. Hu, Jiangfeng & Pan, Xinxin & Huang, Qinghua, 2020. "Quantity or quality? The impacts of environmental regulation on firms’ innovation–Quasi-natural experiment based on China's carbon emissions trading pilot," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    6. Ren, Shenggang & Sun, Helin & Zhang, Tao, 2021. "Do environmental subsidies spur environmental innovation? Empirical evidence from Chinese listed firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    7. Ren, Shenggang & Yang, Xuanyu & Hu, Yucai & Chevallier, Julien, 2022. "Emission trading, induced innovation and firm performance," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    8. Jian Song & Yijing Wang & Jing Wang, 2022. "The Impact of SO 2 Emissions Trading Scheme on Firm’s Environmental Performance: A Channel from Robot Application," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1, December.
    9. Qi, Xiulin & Wu, Zhifang & Xu, Jinqing & Shan, Biaoan, 2023. "Environmental justice and green innovation: A quasi-natural experiment based on the establishment of environmental courts in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    10. Huang, Hongyun & Mbanyele, William & Wang, Fengrong & Song, Malin & Wang, Yuzhang, 2022. "Climbing the quality ladder of green innovation: Does green finance matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Zhang, Wei & Li, Guoxiang & Guo, Fanyong, 2022. "Does carbon emissions trading promote green technology innovation in China?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    12. Fang, Zhenming & Kong, Xiaoran & Sensoy, Ahmet & Cui, Xin & Cheng, Feiyang, 2021. "Government’s awareness of Environmental protection and corporate green innovation: A natural experiment from the new environmental protection law in China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 294-312.
    13. Rammer, Christian & Gottschalk, Sandra & Peneder, Michael & Wörter, Martin & Stucki, Tobias & Arvanitis, Spyros, 2017. "Does energy policy hurt international competitiveness of firms? A comparative study for Germany, Switzerland and Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 154-180.
    14. Kopyrina, Olga & Wu, Kai & Ying, Zhanyu, 2023. "Greening through central inspection: The role of legitimacy pressure and risk-taking," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    15. Jian Song & Jing Wang & Zhe Chen, 2022. "How Low-Carbon Pilots Affect Chinese Urban Energy Efficiency: An Explanation from Technological Progress," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1, November.
    16. Lu Qiu & Die Hu & Yu Wang, 2020. "How do firms achieve sustainability through green innovation under external pressures of environmental regulation and market turbulence?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2695-2714, September.
    17. Shi, Beibei & Feng, Chen & Qiu, Meng & Ekeland, Anders, 2018. "Innovation suppression and migration effect: The unintentional consequences of environmental regulation," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1-23.
    18. Hu, Yucai & Ren, Shenggang & Wang, Yangjie & Chen, Xiaohong, 2020. "Can carbon emission trading scheme achieve energy conservation and emission reduction? Evidence from the industrial sector in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    19. Jin, Chenfei & Tsai, Fu-Sheng & Gu, Qiuyang & Wu, Bao, 2022. "Does the porter hypothesis work well in the emission trading schema pilot? Exploring moderating effects of institutional settings," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    20. Sheng Xu & Wenran Pan & Demei Wen, 2023. "Do Carbon Emission Trading Schemes Promote the Green Transition of Enterprises? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-28, April.

    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:enepol:v:171:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522005092. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.