IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envpol/v8y2007i2p103-141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pollution control agreements in Japan: conditions for their success

Author

Listed:
  • Yu Matsuno

Abstract

A Pollution Control Agreement (PCA) is typically an agreement made between a local government and a business with regard to the environmental measures of the business. It can be regarded as a kind of voluntary approach (VA). In preceding case studies, it was found that PCAs played a larger role in reducing sulfur oxides emissions than other policy instruments. To clarify the actual situations of PCAs, two questionnaire surveys were conducted. Upon analysis, it was found that PCAs were used differently by local governments of different scales and confirmed that traditional industrial pollution problems had been controlled to a large extent by PCAs. It is argued in this article that the difference between voluntary and mandatory instruments is the difference of their introduction process. Furthermore, the features of PCAs are investigated by comparing them with other policy instruments that differ from PCAs in this respect. It is concluded that the main strong points of PCAs are the ability to gain residents’ understanding of new locations and operations of business, the flexibility to adapt regulation to the financial conditions of businesses, and that they stem from their individuality of negotiation, conclusion, and implementation. Finally our study on PCAs is compared with other studies on VAs. There it is found that the incentive scheme to motivate businesses to conclude PCAs is different from what other studies found concerning VAs in other countries. Copyright Springer Japan 2007

Suggested Citation

  • Yu Matsuno, 2007. "Pollution control agreements in Japan: conditions for their success," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(2), pages 103-141, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envpol:v:8:y:2007:i:2:p:103-141
    DOI: 10.1007/BF03353952
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF03353952
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Khanna, Madhu & Damon, Lisa A., 1999. "EPA's Voluntary 33/50 Program: Impact on Toxic Releases and Economic Performance of Firms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1-25, January.
    2. Arora Seema & Cason Timothy N., 1995. "An Experiment in Voluntary Environmental Regulation: Participation in EPA's 33/50 Program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 271-286, May.
    3. Pargal, Sheoli & Wheeler, David, 1996. "Informal Regulation of Industrial Pollution in Developing Countries: Evidence from Indonesia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(6), pages 1314-1327, December.
    4. Maxwell, John W & Lyon, Thomas P & Hackett, Steven C, 2000. "Self-Regulation and Social Welfare: The Political Economy of Corporate Environmentalism," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(2), pages 583-617, October.
    5. Nakamura, Masao & Takahashi, Takuya & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2001. "Why Japanese Firms Choose to Certify: A Study of Managerial Responses to Environmental Issues," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 23-52, July.
    6. Madhu Khanna, 2001. "Non‐Mandatory Approaches to Environmental Protection," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 291-324, July.
    7. Anton, W.R.Q.Wilma Rose Q. & Deltas, George & Khanna, Madhu, 2004. "Incentives for environmental self-regulation and implications for environmental performance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 632-654, July.
    8. Anna Alberini & Kathleen Segerson, 2002. "Assessing Voluntary Programs to Improve Environmental Quality," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 157-184, June.
    9. Seema Arora & Timothy N. Cason, 1996. "Why Do Firms Volunteer to Exceed Environmental Regulations? Understanding Participation in EPA's 33/50 Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(4), pages 413-432.
    10. Dasgupta, Susmita & Hettige, Hemamala & Wheeler, David, 2000. "What Improves Environmental Compliance? Evidence from Mexican Industry," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 39-66, January.
    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. Robert J. R. Elliott & Toshihiro Okubo, 2016. "Ecological Modernization in Japan: The Role of Interest Rate Subsidies and Voluntary Pollution Control Agreements," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 15(3), pages 66-88, Fall.

    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. Wu JunJie & Wirkkala Teresa M., 2009. "Firms' Motivations for Environmental Overcompliance," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 399-433, June.
    2. Eva Horváthová, 2020. "Why Do Firms Voluntarily Adopt Environmental Management Systems? The Case of the Czech Republic," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 68(1), pages 157-168.
    3. Cody Jones, 2013. "Moving Beyond Profit: Expanding Research to Better Understand Business Environmental Management," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 5(6), pages 1-29, June.
    4. R. Bracke & T. Verbeke & V. Dejonckheere, 2007. "What distinguishes EMAS participants? An exploration of company characteristics," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 07/459, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    5. Bracke, Roeland & Verbeke, Tom & Dejonckheere, Veerle, 2007. "What Distinguishes EMAS Participants? An Exploration of Company Characteristics," Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Management Working Papers 9332, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    6. Anton, Wilma Rose Q., 2005. "The Choice of Management Practices: What Determines the Design of an Environmental Management System?," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19503, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Daniel Matisoff, 2015. "Sources of specification errors in the assessment of voluntary environmental programs: understanding program impacts," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(1), pages 109-126, March.
    8. Ziegler, Andreas & Seijas Nogareda, Jazmin, 2009. "Environmental management systems and technological environmental innovations: Exploring the causal relationship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 885-893, June.
    9. Anna Alberini & Kathleen Segerson, 2002. "Assessing Voluntary Programs to Improve Environmental Quality," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 157-184, June.
    10. Madhu Khanna, 2001. "Non‐Mandatory Approaches to Environmental Protection," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 291-324, July.
    11. Sam, Abdoul G., 2009. "Impact of Government-Sponsored Pollution Prevention Practices on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement: Evidence from a Sample of US Manufacturing Facilities," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49306, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Abdoul Sam, 2010. "Impact of government-sponsored pollution prevention practices on environmental compliance and enforcement: evidence from a sample of US manufacturing facilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 266-286, June.
    13. R. Brau & C. Carraro, 2004. "The economic analysis of voluntary approaches to environmental protection. A survey," Working Paper CRENoS 200420, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    14. Kube, Roland & von Graevenitz, Kathrine & Löschel, Andreas & Massier, Philipp, 2019. "Do voluntary environmental programs reduce emissions? EMAS in the German manufacturing sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(S1).
    15. Blackman, Allen & Guerrero, Santiago, 2012. "What drives voluntary eco-certification in Mexico?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 256-268.
    16. Brouhle, Keith & Griffiths, Charles & Wolverton, Ann, 2009. "Evaluating the role of EPA policy levers: An examination of a voluntary program and regulatory threat in the metal-finishing industry," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 166-181, March.
    17. David Ervin & JunJie Wu & Madhu Khanna & Cody Jones & Teresa Wirkkala, 2013. "Motivations and Barriers to Corporate Environmental Management," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6), pages 390-409, September.
    18. Ziegler, Andreas & Schröder, Michael, 2006. "What Determines the Inclusion in a Sustainability Stock Index? A Panel Data Analysis for European Companies," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-041, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Rennings, Klaus & Ziegler, Andreas, 2004. "Determinants of Environmental Innovations in Germany: Do Organizational Measures Matter? A Discrete Choice Analysis at the Firm Level," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-30, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Serdal Ozusaglam & Stéphane Robin & Chee Yew Wong, 2018. "Early and late adopters of ISO 14001-type standards: revisiting the role of firm characteristics and capabilities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1318-1345, October.

    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:spr:envpol:v:8:y:2007:i:2:p:103-141. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.