IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Innovation stochastique et coût de la réglementation environnementale

Listed author(s):
  • Kennedy, Peter

    (Département d’économique, Université de Victoria)

Registered author(s):

    This paper illustrates that the cost of regulation can be negative when regulation-induced innovation has a stochastic element. There are two aspects to this finding. First, if the firm is risk neutral then regulation necessarily raises expected costs but costs can be lower ex post for some realizations of the innovation process. Whether this cost reduction is most likely for unfavourable or favourable realizations of the stochastic element depends on whether good fortune and research effort are substitutes or complements in the innovation process. The second aspect involves the implications of risk aversion and risk preference. In both cases it is possible for regulation to reduce costs on average because the regulation can induce the firm to undertake a level of research closer to that which minimizes expected cost. Cette étude démontre que le coût de la réglementation peut être négatif quand l’innovation induite par la réglementation a un élément stochastique. Ce résultat comporte deux aspects. Premièrement, si l’entreprise est neutre envers le risque, la réglementation fait nécessairement augmenter les coûts attendus, mais les coûts peuvent être inférieurs ex post pour certaines réalisations du processus d’innovation. Le fait que cette réduction de coûts sera plus probable pour des réalisations favorables ou défavorables de l’élément stochastique dépend de ce que la chance et l’effort de recherche sont des substituts ou des compléments du processus d’innovation. Le second aspect met en cause les implications de l’aversion au risque ou du goût pour le risque. Dans les deux cas, il est possible que la réglementation fasse diminuer les coûts en moyenne puisqu’elle peut inciter la firme à entreprendre un niveau de recherche plus proche de celui qui minimise le coût espéré.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Société Canadienne de Science Economique in its journal L'Actualité économique.

    Volume (Year): 70 (1994)
    Issue (Month): 2 (juin)
    Pages: 199-209

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:70:y:1994:i:2:p:199-209
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. J.B. Smith & W A. Sims, 1985. "The Impact of Pollution Charges on Productivity Growth in Canadian Brewing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(3), pages 410-423, Autumn.
    2. Dale W. Jorgenson & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 1990. "Environmental Regulation and U.S. Economic Growth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(2), pages 314-340, Summer.
    3. Gray, Wayne B, 1987. "The Cost of Regulation: OSHA, EPA and the Productivity Slowdown," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 998-1006, December.
    4. Maloney, Michael T. & Yandle, Bruce, 1984. "Estimation of the cost of air pollution control regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 244-263, September.
    5. Barbera, Anthony J. & McConnell, Virginia D., 1990. "The impact of environmental regulations on industry productivity: Direct and indirect effects," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 50-65, January.
    6. Christainsen, Gregory B & Haveman, Robert H, 1981. "Public Regulations and the Slowdown in Productivity Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 320-325, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:70:y:1994:i:2:p:199-209. 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: (Bruce Shearer)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.