IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/regeco/v61y2022i3d10.1007_s11149-022-09450-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Size control or intensity control: a comparative study of two Common Environmental Regulations

Author

Listed:
  • Hongyu Nian

    (Shanghai Jiao Tong University)

  • Chunhua Wang

    (Shanghai Jiao Tong University)

  • Haitao Yin

    (Shanghai Jiao Tong University)

Abstract

This paper compares two common environmental regulations: size control and intensity control. We compare the impacts of the two environmental regulations on firm competitiveness and market structure. Our findings show that size control and intensity control both improve firm competitiveness but through very different mechanisms. Intensity control motivates firms to innovate and develop cost-saving and environmentally friendly input and product portfolios to reduce pollution and improve competitiveness, which is consistent with the Porter hypothesis. In contrast, size control creates no incentive for surviving firms to innovate or reduce pollution, and it acts as a windfall benefit that grants these firms a less competitive market and thus firm competitiveness, a mechanism that is underexplored by the Porter hypothesis. Intensity control also results in a less competitive market but to a much smaller extent than size control. Therefore, intensity control performs better than size control from the perspective of social welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongyu Nian & Chunhua Wang & Haitao Yin, 2022. "Size control or intensity control: a comparative study of two Common Environmental Regulations," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 169-190, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:regeco:v:61:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11149-022-09450-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11149-022-09450-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11149-022-09450-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11149-022-09450-x?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. 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. Eli Berman & Linda T. M. Bui, 2001. "Environmental Regulation And Productivity: Evidence From Oil Refineries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 498-510, August.
    3. Esther Duflo & Michael Greenstone & Nicholas Ryan, 2013. "Truth-telling by Third-party Auditors and the Response of Polluting Firms: Experimental Evidence from India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(4), pages 1499-1545.
    4. Meredith Fowlie & Mar Reguant & Stephen P. Ryan, 2016. "Market-Based Emissions Regulation and Industry Dynamics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(1), pages 249-302.
    5. Hering, Laura & Poncet, Sandra, 2014. "Environmental policy and exports: Evidence from Chinese cities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 296-318.
    6. Holland, Stephen P., 2012. "Emissions taxes versus intensity standards: Second-best environmental policies with incomplete regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 375-387.
    7. Guojun He & Shaoda Wang & Bing Zhang, 2020. "Watering Down Environmental Regulation in China," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(4), pages 2135-2185.
    8. Helfand, Gloria E, 1991. "Standards versus Standards: The Effects of Different Pollution Restrictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 622-634, June.
    9. Olley, G Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1996. "The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1263-1297, November.
    10. E. Mark Curtis, 2018. "Who Loses under Cap-and-Trade Programs? The Labor Market Effects of the NOx Budget Trading Program," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(1), pages 151-166, March.
    11. Hochman, Eithan & Zilberman, David, 1978. "Examination of Environmental Policies Using Production and Pollution Microparameter Distributions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(4), pages 739-760, July.
    12. W. Reed Walker, 2013. "The Transitional Costs of Sectoral Reallocation: Evidence From the Clean Air Act and the Workforce," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(4), pages 1787-1835.
    13. Brandt, Loren & Van Biesebroeck, Johannes & Zhang, Yifan, 2012. "Creative accounting or creative destruction? Firm-level productivity growth in Chinese manufacturing," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 339-351.
    14. Stephen P. Ryan, 2012. "The Costs of Environmental Regulation in a Concentrated Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 1019-1061, May.
    15. Tombe, Trevor & Winter, Jennifer, 2015. "Environmental policy and misallocation: The productivity effect of intensity standards," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 137-163.
    16. James Levinsohn & Amil Petrin, 2003. "Estimating Production Functions Using Inputs to Control for Unobservables," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(2), pages 317-341.
    17. Bruneau, Joel F., 2005. "Inefficient environmental instruments and the gains from trade," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 536-546, May.
    18. Robert D. Mohr & Shrawantee Saha, 2008. "Distribution of Environmental Costs and Benefits, Additional Distortions, and the Porter Hypothesis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(4), pages 689-700.
    19. 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.
    20. Michael Greenstone, 2002. "The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on Industrial Activity: Evidence from the 1970 and 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments and the Census of Manufactures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(6), pages 1175-1219, December.
    21. David Popp, 2003. "Pollution control innovations and the Clean Air Act of 1990," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 641-660.
    22. Wang, Chunhua & Wu, JunJie & Zhang, Bing, 2018. "Environmental regulation, emissions and productivity: Evidence from Chinese COD-emitting manufacturers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 54-73.
    23. Besanko, David, 1987. "Performance versus design standards in the regulation of pollution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 19-44, October.
    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. Xu Ou & Haiwei Jiang, 2023. "The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Firm Performance: Evidence from the Pulp and Paper Industry in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-18, February.

    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. Mian Yang & Yining Yuan & Fuxia Yang & Dalia Patino-Echeverri, 2021. "Effects of environmental regulation on firm entry and exit and China’s industrial productivity: a new perspective on the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(4), pages 915-944, October.
    2. Lu, Yunguo & Zhang, Lin, 2022. "National mitigation policy and the competitiveness of Chinese firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. Guan, Jin & He, Dongwei & Zhu, Qigui, 2022. "More incentive, less pollution: The influence of official appraisal system reform on environmental enforcement," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Zhang, Ming & Zhao, Yingxue, 2023. "Does environmental regulation spur innovation? Quasi-natural experiment in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    5. Mao, Jie & Wang, Chunhua & Yin, Haitao, 2023. "Corporate responses to air quality regulation: Evidence from a regional environmental policy in China," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    6. Longzhou Wang, 2023. "The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Firms’ Product Quality: Evidence from Chinese Exporters," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 86(3), pages 645-672, November.
    7. Wang, Chunhua & Wu, JunJie & Zhang, Bing, 2018. "Environmental regulation, emissions and productivity: Evidence from Chinese COD-emitting manufacturers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 54-73.
    8. Andersen, Dana C., 2018. "Accounting for loss of variety and factor reallocations in the welfare cost of regulations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 69-94.
    9. Chen, Ying, 2023. "Environmental regulation, local labor market, and skill heterogeneity," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    10. Wang, Qian & Zhu, Linke, 2021. "Environmental regulation, firm heterogeneity, and intra-industry reallocation," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Andersen, Dana C., 2016. "Accounting for Firm Exit and Loss of Variety in the Welfare Cost of Regulations," Working Papers 2016-9, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    12. Wu, JunJie & Segerson, Kathleen & Wang, Chunhua, 2023. "Is environmental regulation the answer to pollution problems in urbanizing economies?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    13. Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2018. "Why Is Pollution from US Manufacturing Declining? The Roles of Environmental Regulation, Productivity, and Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3814-3854, December.
    14. Maogang Tang & Silu Cheng & Wenqing Guo & Weibiao Ma & Fengxia Hu, 2023. "Relationship between carbon emission trading schemes and companies’ total factor productivity: evidence from listed companies in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(10), pages 11735-11767, October.
    15. Curtis, E. Mark, 2020. "Reevaluating the ozone nonattainment standards: Evidence from the 2004 expansion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    16. Christopher Hansman & Jonas Hjort & Gianmarco León, 2015. "Firm's response and unintended health consequences of industrial regulations," Economics Working Papers 1469, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    17. Marin, Giovanni & Vona, Francesco, 2021. "The impact of energy prices on socioeconomic and environmental performance: Evidence from French manufacturing establishments, 1997–2015," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. Jonathan Colmer & Ralf Martin & Mirabelle Muûls & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2020. "Does pricing carbon mitigate climate change? Firm-level evidence from the European Union emissions trading scheme," CEP Discussion Papers dp1728, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    19. Fu, Shihe & Viard, V. Brian & Zhang, Peng, 2022. "Trans-boundary air pollution spillovers: Physical transport and economic costs by distance," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    20. Ann E. Harrison & Ben Hyman & Leslie A. Martin & Shanthi Nataraj, 2015. "When do Firms Go Green? Comparing Price Incentives with Command and Control Regulations in India," Working Papers WR-1133, RAND Corporation.

    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:kap:regeco:v:61:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11149-022-09450-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.