IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/ijsepp/v41y2014i11p1110-1130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eco-Innovation – does additional engagement lead to additional rewards?

Author

Listed:
  • Justin Doran
  • Geraldine Ryan

Abstract

Purpose - – Eco-innovation is any form of product, process or organisational innovation that contributes towards sustainable development. Firms can eco-innovate in a variety of ways. The purpose of this paper is to identify nine different eco-innovation activities – including such items as reducing material use per unit of output, reducing energy use per unit of output, reducing carbon dioxide (CO Design/methodology/approach - – Eco-innovation is any form of product, process or organisational innovation that contributes towards sustainable development. Firms can eco-innovate in a variety of ways. In this paper the authors identify nine different eco-innovation activities – including such items as reducing material use per unit of output, reducing energy use per unit of output, reducing CO Findings - – Introducing only one eco-innovation activity has little payoff (in terms of turnover per worker) with only those firms who reduce their CO Practical implications - – The results suggest that firms can maximise their productive capacity by considering specific combinations of eco-innovation. This suggests that firms should plan to introduce eco-innovation which act as complements, thereby, boosting productivity. It also suggests that eco-innovation stimuli, introduced by policy makers, should be targeted at complementary eco-innovations. Originality/value - – The paper analyses whether eco-innovations act as complements or substitutes. While a number of studies have analysed the importance of eco-innovation for firm performance, few have assessed the extent to which diverse types of eco-innovation interact with each other to complement or substitute for one another.

Suggested Citation

  • Justin Doran & Geraldine Ryan, 2014. "Eco-Innovation – does additional engagement lead to additional rewards?," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 41(11), pages 1110-1130, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:ijsepp:v:41:y:2014:i:11:p:1110-1130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/IJSE-07-2013-0169?utm_campaign=RePEc&WT.mc_id=RePEc
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pierre Desrochers, 2008. "Did the Invisible Hand Need a Regulatory Glove to Develop a Green Thumb? Some Historical Perspective on Market Incentives, Win-Win Innovations and the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(4), pages 519-539, December.
    2. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Mairesse, J., 1998. "Research Investment, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 98.15, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    3. Eugenio J. Miravete & José C. Pernías, 2006. "INNOVATION COMPLEMENTARITY AND SCALE OF PRODUCTION -super-," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 1-29, March.
    4. Horbach, Jens & Rammer, Christian & Rennings, Klaus, 2012. "Determinants of eco-innovations by type of environmental impact — The role of regulatory push/pull, technology push and market pull," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 112-122.
    5. Hans Lööf & Almas Heshmati, 2006. "On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 317-344.
    6. Wagner, Marcus, 2007. "On the relationship between environmental management, environmental innovation and patenting: Evidence from German manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1587-1602, December.
    7. Schmiedeberg, Claudia, 2008. "Complementarities of innovation activities: An empirical analysis of the German manufacturing sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1492-1503, October.
    8. Rachel Griffith & Elena Huergo & Jacques Mairesse & Bettina Peters, 2006. "Innovation and Productivity Across Four European Countries," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(4), pages 483-498, Winter.
    9. Roper, Stephen & Du, Jun & Love, James H., 2008. "Modelling the innovation value chain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 961-977, July.
    10. Jennifer Percival & Brian Cozzarin, 2008. "Complementarities Affecting the Returns to Innovation," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 371-392.
    11. Rehfeld, Katharina-Maria & Rennings, Klaus & Ziegler, Andreas, 2007. "Integrated product policy and environmental product innovations: An empirical analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 91-100, February.
    12. 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.
    13. Jun Hou & Pierre Mohnen, 2013. "Complementarity between In-house R&D and Technology Purchasing: Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing Firms," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 343-371, September.
    14. Justin Doran & Eoin O'Leary, 2011. "External Interaction, Innovation and Productivity: An Application of the Innovation Value Chain to Ireland," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 199-222.
    15. Rene Kemp & Vanessa Oltra, 2011. "Research Insights and Challenges on Eco-Innovation Dynamics," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 249-253.
    16. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2011. "Enviromental Innovations, Complementarity and Local/Global Cooperation," Working Papers 201104, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    17. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 1995. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 119-132, Fall.
    19. Stephen Roper & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira & Andrea Fernandez-Ribas, 2010. "Knowledge, Capabilities and Manufacturing Innovation: A USA-Europe Comparison," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(3), pages 253-279.
    20. Travis Gliedt & Paul Parker, 2007. "Green community entrepreneurship: creative destruction in the social economy," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 34(8), pages 538-553, July.
    21. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 511-528, June.
    22. James Love & Mica Ariana Mansury, 2007. "External Linkages, R&D and Innovation Performance in US Business Services," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 477-496.
    23. George Van Leeuwen & Luuk Klomp, 2006. "On the contribution of innovation to multi-factor productivity growth," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 367-390.
    24. Luuk Klomp & George Van Leeuwen, 2001. "Linking Innovation and Firm Performance: A New Approach," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 343-364.
    25. Doran, Justin & Ryan, Geraldine, 2012. "Regulation and Firm Perception, Eco-Innovation and Firm Performance," MPRA Paper 44578, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    26. repec:crs:wpaper:9833 is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Horbach, Jens, 2008. "Determinants of environmental innovation--New evidence from German panel data sources," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 163-173, February.
    28. Dylan Rassier & Dietrich Earnhart, 2010. "Does the Porter Hypothesis Explain Expected Future Financial Performance? The Effect of Clean Water Regulation on Chemical Manufacturing Firms," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 353-377, March.
    29. Kesidou, Effie & Demirel, Pelin, 2012. "On the drivers of eco-innovations: Empirical evidence from the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 862-870.
    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. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3161-:d:167720 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental economics; Productivity;

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation

    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:eme:ijsepp:v:41:y:2014:i:11:p:1110-1130. 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: (Virginia Chapman). General contact details of provider: http://www.emeraldinsight.com .

    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.