IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i8p2214-d222285.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Environmental Regulation Flexibility Explain the Porter Hypothesis?—An Empirical Study Based on the Data of China’s Listed Enterprises

Author

Listed:
  • Guichuan Zhou

    () (Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Wendi Liu

    () (Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Liming Zhang

    () (Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Kaiwen She

    () (School of Economics, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

Abstract

Previous studies indicate that the Porter hypothesis (PH) generates controversial and inconsistent conclusions on the impact of environmental regulation (ER) on business performance. As a result, based on the data of China’s A-share listed companies from 2016 to 2018, a moderated mediating effect model is established to examine the relationship between ER, technological innovation and business performance, as well as the moderating effect of environmental regulation flexibility (ERF) on the relationship. Results show that technological innovation has a significant mediating effect on the relationship between ER and business performance. Furthermore, ERF has a negative moderating effect on the mediating effect technological innovation exerted. At a certain degree, the flexible ER could weaken technological innovation’s mediating effects on the relationship between ER and business performance, and further could mitigate the negative impact of ER on both technological innovation and business performance. Also, an inflexible ER intensifies its negative effects on technological innovation and business performance, which is to the disadvantage of enterprises becoming the subject of environmental protection consciously and sustainably.

Suggested Citation

  • Guichuan Zhou & Wendi Liu & Liming Zhang & Kaiwen She, 2019. "Can Environmental Regulation Flexibility Explain the Porter Hypothesis?—An Empirical Study Based on the Data of China’s Listed Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2214-:d:222285
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/8/2214/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/8/2214/
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krysiak, Frank C., 2011. "Environmental regulation, technological diversity, and the dynamics of technological change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 528-544, April.
    2. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:1:p:223-:d:127208 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. 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.
    4. Sascha Rexhäuser & Christian Rammer, 2014. "Environmental Innovations and Firm Profitability: Unmasking the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 145-167, January.
    5. Daniel L. Millimet & Jayjit Roy, 2016. "Empirical Tests of the Pollution Haven Hypothesis When Environmental Regulation is Endogenous," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(4), pages 652-677, June.
    6. repec:eee:jomega:v:75:y:2018:i:c:p:131-138 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Söderholm, Kristina & Söderholm, Patrik & Helenius, Heidi & Pettersson, Maria & Viklund, Roine & Masloboev, Vladimir & Mingaleva, Tatiana & Petrov, Viktor, 2015. "Environmental regulation and competitiveness in the mining industry: Permitting processes with special focus on Finland, Sweden and Russia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 130-142.
    8. Joschka Gerigk & Ian MacKenzie & Markus Ohndorf, 2015. "A Model of Benchmarking Regulation: Revisiting the Efficiency of Environmental Standards," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(1), pages 59-82, September.
    9. Edward I. Altman, 1968. "Financial Ratios, Discriminant Analysis And The Prediction Of Corporate Bankruptcy," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 23(4), pages 589-609, September.
    10. Zhao, S.L. & Cacciolatti, L. & Lee, S.H. & Song, W., 2015. "Regional collaborations and indigenous innovation capabilities in China: A multivariate method for the analysis of regional innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 202-220.
    11. 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.
    12. Michael Greenstone & John A. List & Chad Syverson, 2011. "The Effects of Environmental Regulation on the Competiveness of U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 11-03, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    13. Christainsen, Gregory B. & Haveman, Robert H., 1981. "The contribution of environmental regulations to the slowdown in productivity growth," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 381-390, December.
    14. repec:taf:applec:v:50:y:2018:i:12:p:1378-1394 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. repec:anr:reseco:v:10:y:2018:p:381-404 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. 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.
    17. Vikash Ramiah & Jacopo Pichelli & Imad Moosa, 2015. "The Effects of Environmental Regulation on Corporate Performance: A Chinese Perspective," Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets and Policies (RPBFMP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(04), pages 1-31, December.
    18. Karla M. Johnstone & Jean C. Bedard, 2004. "Audit Firm Portfolio Management Decisions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 659-690, September.
    19. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:1041-:d:139072 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    porter hypothesis; environmental regulation; technological innovation; flexibility; business performance;

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:8:p:2214-:d:222285. 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: (XML Conversion Team). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.