IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v40y2007i4p1078-1099.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental performance and equilibrium

Author

Listed:
  • Thierry Bréchet
  • Philippe Michel

Abstract

. In this paper we show why firms' or industries' rankings in terms of environmental performance depend not only on the technology but also on market equilibrium. Between two industries committed to the same environmental constraint, the more eco‐efficient is the one with the higher output level. By comparing industries and firms, we show that the rankings are not robust, for they are affected by market outcome. The role of eco‐efficiency in firms' profitability in equilibrium is also scrutinized. All this shows that the usual eco‐efficiency indicators are inadequate. To tackle this problem, we propose a sound indicator. Dans cet article nous montrons pourquoi les classements de firmes ou d'industries en terme d'éco‐efficacité dépendent non seulement de la technologie, mais aussi de l'équilibre des marchés. Entre deux industries soumises à la même contrainte environnementale, la plus éco‐efficace est celle ayant le niveau de production le plus élevé. En comparant des industries et des firmes, nous montrons que les classements ne sont pas robustes, car ils sont affectés par l'équilibre du marché. Le rôle de l'éco‐efficacité dans la profitabilité de la firme est également analysé. Tout ceci révèle que les indicateurs habituels d'éco‐efficacité sont inadaptés. Pour faire face à ce problème, nous proposons un indicateur robuste.

Suggested Citation

  • Thierry Bréchet & Philippe Michel, 2007. "Environmental performance and equilibrium," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 1078-1099, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:40:y:2007:i:4:p:1078-1099
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.00443.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.00443.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.00443.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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2005. "Can Environmental Regulations be Good for Business? an Assessment of the Porter Hypothesis," Cahiers de recherche 0505, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    2. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    3. P. Michel & P.-A. Jouvet & Gilles Rotillon, 2003. "A theoretical measure of environmental efficiency," THEMA Working Papers 2003-21, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    4. Yotopoulos, Pan A & Lau, Lawrence J, 1973. "A Test for Relative Economic Efficiency: Some Further Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(1), pages 214-223, March.
    5. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. W. Erwin Diewert & Alice O. Nakamura, 1999. "Benchmarking and the measurement of the best practice efficiency: an electricity generation application," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 570-588, April.
    7. Frank Figge & Tobias Hahn, 2005. "The Cost of Sustainability Capital and the Creation of Sustainable Value by Companies," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(4), pages 47-58, October.
    8. Forsund, Finn R & Jansen, Eilev S, 1977. "On Estimating Average and Best Practice Homothetic Production Functions via Cost Functions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 463-476, June.
    9. Zieschang, Kimberly D., 1984. "An extended farrell technical efficiency measure," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 387-396, August.
    10. Werner Antweiler, 2003. "How Effective Is Green Regulatory Threat?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 436-441, May.
    11. Stokey, Nancy L, 1998. "Are There Limits to Growth?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(1), pages 1-31, February.
    12. Pittman, Russell W, 1983. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons with Undesirable Outputs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 93(372), pages 883-891, December.
    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. Thierry Bréchet & Sylvette Ly, 2013. "The many traps of green technology promotion," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(1), pages 73-91, January.
    2. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    3. Thierry Bréchet & Pierre-André Jouvet, 2007. "A note the cost of pollution abatement," EconomiX Working Papers 2007-15, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    4. Bréchet, Thierry & Jouvet, Pierre-André, 2008. "Environmental innovation and the cost of pollution abatement revisited," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 262-265, April.
    5. Ala-Harja, Hanne & Helo, Petri, 2015. "Reprint of “Green supply chain decisions – Case-based performance analysis from the food industry”," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 11-21.
    6. BRECHET, Thierry & TULKENS, Henry, 2006. "From BAT (best available technique) to BCAT (best combination of available techniques)," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2006105, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    7. Ala-Harja, Hanne & Helo, Petri, 2014. "Green supply chain decisions – Case-based performance analysis from the food industry," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 97-107.
    8. Chu, Hsun & Lai, Ching-chong, 2014. "Abatement R&D, market imperfections, and environmental policy in an endogenous growth model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 20-37.
    9. BRECHET, Thierry & LY, Sylvette, 2010. "Technological greening, eco-efficiency, and no-regret strategy," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2010031, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    10. Laforest, Valérie, 2014. "Assessment of emerging and innovative techniques considering best available technique performances," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 11-24.

    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. Jouvet, Pierre-André & Michel, Philippe & Rotillon, Gilles, 2005. "Equilibrium with a market of permits," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 148-163, June.
    2. Thierry Bréchet & Pierre-André Jouvet, 2006. "Why environmental regulation may lead to no-regret pollution abatement?," Working Papers hal-04138872, HAL.
    3. P. Michel & P.-A. Jouvet & Gilles Rotillon, 2003. "A theoretical measure of environmental efficiency," THEMA Working Papers 2003-21, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    4. Bréchet, Thierry & Jouvet, Pierre-André, 2009. "Why environmental management may yield no-regret pollution abatement options," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1770-1777, April.
    5. Kristina Söderholm & Ann-Kristin Bergquist, 2013. "Growing Green and Competitive—A Case Study of a Swedish Pulp Mill," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    7. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2007. "When and Why Does It Pay To Be Green?," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-20, CIRANO.
    8. Everett, Tim & Ishwaran, Mallika & Ansaloni, Gian Paolo & Rubin, Alex, 2010. "Economic growth and the environment," MPRA Paper 23585, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2001. "Productivité et réglementation environnementale: une analyse de l'hypothèse de Porter," Cahiers de recherche 0107, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    10. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2009. "Performance environnementale et économique de l'entreprise," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(4), pages 71-94.
    11. Ken-Ichi Akao & Shunsuke Managi, 2013. "A Tradable Permit System in an Intertemporal Economy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 55(3), pages 309-336, July.
    12. Ma, Hongqi & Zou, Jingxian, 2022. "Impacts of official high-standard scenic spots on environment and growth — Evidence from China's 5A scenic spots at the city level," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    13. Isaksson, Lena Hoglund, 2005. "Abatement costs in response to the Swedish charge on nitrogen oxide emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 102-120, July.
    14. George van Leeuwen & Pierre Mohnen, 2017. "Revisiting the Porter hypothesis: an empirical analysis of Green innovation for the Netherlands," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 63-77, February.
    15. Roger Fouquet, 2012. "Economics of Energy and Climate Change: Origins, Developments and Growth," Working Papers 2012-08, BC3.
    16. P. Michel & P.-A. Jouvet & Gilles Rotillon, 2003. "International market of permits and factor income : free of charge or not ?," THEMA Working Papers 2003-17, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    17. Nicola De Vivo & Giovanni Marin, 2018. "How neutral is the choice of the allocation mechanism in cap-and-trade schemes? Evidence from the EU-ETS," Argomenti, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Department of Economics, Society & Politics, vol. 9(9), pages 1-24, January-A.
    18. Sanz, Nicolas & Schwartz, Sonia, 2013. "Are pollution permit markets harmful for employment?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 374-383.
    19. 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.
    20. Dakpo, K & Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffee, Laure, 2015. "Empirical comparison of pollution generating technologies in nonparametric modelling: The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French sheep meat farming," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211557, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D20 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - General
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    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:wly:canjec:v:40:y:2007:i:4:p:1078-1099. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.