IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/feemer/162419.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effect of Within-Sector, Upstream and Downstream Energy Taxes on Innovation and Productivity

Author

Listed:
  • Franco, Chiara
  • Marin, Giovanni

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to investigate the effect of environmental stringency on innovation and productivity using a cross-country panel made up of 7 European countries for 13 manufacturing sectors over the years 2001-2007. This research topic goes under the heading of Porter Hypothesis (PH) of which different versions have been tested. We take into consideration both the strong and the weak versions while adding some peculiarities to the analysis. Firstly, we assess the role played by a specific environmental regulation, that is energy taxes, that have rarely been empirically tested as factors that can favour PH hypothesis to be verified. Secondly, we do not consider, within the same framework, only the effect of energy taxes in the same sector (within-sector), but also the role played by energy taxes in upstream and downstream sectors in terms of input-output relationship. Thirdly, we test these relationships also “indirectly” by verifying whether innovation can be one of the channels through which higher sectoral productivity can be reached. The main findings suggest that downstream stringency is the most relevant driver for innovation and that most of the effect of regulation on productivity is direct, while the part of the effect mediated by induced innovation is not statistically significant.

Suggested Citation

  • Franco, Chiara & Marin, Giovanni, 2013. "The Effect of Within-Sector, Upstream and Downstream Energy Taxes on Innovation and Productivity," Energy: Resources and Markets 162419, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:feemer:162419
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.162419
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/162419/files/NDL2013-103.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.162419?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. Ebru Alpay & Joe Kerkvliet & Steven Buccola, 2002. "Productivity Growth and Environmental Regulation in Mexican and U.S. Food Manufacturing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 887-901.
    2. Gray, Wayne B. & Shadbegian, Ronald J., 2003. "Plant vintage, technology, and environmental regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 384-402, November.
    3. Jaffe Adam B. & Stavins Robert N., 1995. "Dynamic Incentives of Environmental Regulations: The Effects of Alternative Policy Instruments on Technology Diffusion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 43-63, November.
    4. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Andrea M. Leiter & Arno Parolini & Hannes Winner, 2009. "Environmental Regulation and Investment: Evidence from European Industries," Working Papers 2009-04, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    6. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    7. Yang, Chih-Hai & Tseng, Yu-Hsuan & Chen, Chiang-Ping, 2012. "Environmental regulations, induced R&D, and productivity: Evidence from Taiwan's manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 514-532.
    8. Leiter, Andrea M. & Parolini, Arno & Winner, Hannes, 2011. "Environmental regulation and investment: Evidence from European industry data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 759-770, February.
    9. Shadbegian, Ronald J. & Gray, Wayne B., 2005. "Pollution abatement expenditures and plant-level productivity: A production function approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 196-208, August.
    10. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Innes, Robert, 2010. "Environmental innovation and environmental performance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 27-42, January.
    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. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Lybbert, Travis J. & Zolas, Nikolas J., 2014. "Getting patents and economic data to speak to each other: An ‘Algorithmic Links with Probabilities’ approach for joint analyses of patenting and economic activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 530-542.
    14. Wayne B. Gray & Ronald J. Shadbegian, 1998. "Environmental Regulation, Investment Timing, and Technology Choice," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 235-256, June.
    15. Greaker, Mads, 2006. "Spillovers in the development of new pollution abatement technology: A new look at the Porter-hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 411-420, July.
    16. Gollop, Frank M & Roberts, Mark J, 1983. "Environmental Regulations and Productivity Growth: The Case of Fossil-Fueled Electric Power Generation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(4), pages 654-674, August.
    17. Hamamoto, Mitsutsugu, 2006. "Environmental regulation and the productivity of Japanese manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 299-312, November.
    18. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00860045 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Popp, David, 2006. "International innovation and diffusion of air pollution control technologies: the effects of NOX and SO2 regulation in the US, Japan, and Germany," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 46-71, January.
    20. Greaker, Mads & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2008. "Environmental policy with upstream pollution abatement technology firms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 246-259, November.
    21. repec:bla:jindec:v:46:y:1998:i:2:p:235-56 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Kneller, Richard & Manderson, Edward, 2012. "Environmental regulations and innovation activity in UK manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 211-235.
    23. Claudia Ghisetti & Francesco Quatraro, 2013. "Beyond the Inducement in Climate Change: Do Environmental Performances Spur Enrivornmental Technologies? A Regional Analysis of Cross-Sectoral Differences," Working Papers 2013112, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    24. Claudia Ghisetti & Francesco Quatraro, 2013. "Beyond inducement in climate change: Does environmental performance spur environmental technologies?," Post-Print hal-00860045, HAL.
    25. Heyes, Anthony & Kapur, Sandeep, 2011. "Regulatory attitudes and environmental innovation in a model combining internal and external R&D," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 327-340, May.
    26. Ghisetti, Claudia & Quatraro, Francesco, 2013. "Beyond inducement in climate change: Does environmental performance spur environmental technologies? A regional analysis of cross-sectoral differences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 99-113.
    27. Brunnermeier, Smita B. & Cohen, Mark A., 2003. "Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 278-293, March.
    28. Nick Johnstone (ed.), 2007. "Environmental Policy and Corporate Behaviour," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12551.
    29. Yuquing Xing & Charles Kolstad, 2002. "Do Lax Environmental Regulations Attract Foreign Investment?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 21(1), pages 1-22, January.
    30. Daniel Hoechle, 2007. "Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 281-312, September.
    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. 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.
    2. Xinfei Li & Baodong Cheng & Qiling Hong & Chang Xu, 2021. "Can a Win–Win Situation of Economy and Environment Be Achieved in Cities by the Government’s Environmental Regulations?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Giovanni Marin & Susanna Mancinelli & Francesco Nicolli, 2015. "Carbon dioxide reducing environmental innovations, sector upstream/downstream integration and policy: evidence from the EU," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 709-735, November.
    4. Xinfei Li & Chang Xu & Baodong Cheng & Jingyang Duan & Yueming Li, 2021. "Does Environmental Regulation Improve the Green Total Factor Productivity of Chinese Cities? A Threshold Effect Analysis Based on the Economic Development Level," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-21, April.
    5. Peng, Jiaying & Xie, Rui & Ma, Chunbo & Fu, Yang, 2021. "Market-based environmental regulation and total factor productivity: Evidence from Chinese enterprises," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 394-407.
    6. Marianna Gilli, 2016. "Towards a low carbon Europe: the role of technological change and environmental policies in European manufacturing sectors," SEEDS Working Papers 0516, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Apr 2016.
    7. Juqiu Deng & Jiayu Yang & Zhenyu Liu & Qingyang Tan, 2023. "Environmental protection tax and green innovation of heavily polluting enterprises: A quasi-natural experiment based on the implementation of China’s environmental protection tax law," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(6), pages 1-19, June.
    8. Wang, Yan & Shen, Neng, 2016. "Environmental regulation and environmental productivity: The case of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 758-766.
    9. Xie, Rong-hui & Yuan, Yi-jun & Huang, Jing-jing, 2017. "Different Types of Environmental Regulations and Heterogeneous Influence on “Green” Productivity: Evidence from China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 104-112.
    10. Lorena D’Agostino, 2015. "How MNEs respond to environmental regulation: integrating the Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(2), pages 245-269, August.

    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. Chiara Franco & Giovanni Marin, 2017. "The Effect of Within-Sector, Upstream and Downstream Environmental Taxes on Innovation and Productivity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(2), pages 261-291, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Wang, Yan & Shen, Neng, 2016. "Environmental regulation and environmental productivity: The case of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 758-766.
    4. Erik Hille & Patrick Möbius, 2019. "Environmental Policy, Innovation, and Productivity Growth: Controlling the Effects of Regulation and Endogeneity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1315-1355, August.
    5. Brian Chi-ang Lin & Siqi Zheng & Nicolò Barbieri & Claudia Ghisetti & Marianna Gilli & Giovanni Marin & Francesco Nicolli, 2016. "A Survey Of The Literature On Environmental Innovation Based On Main Path Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 596-623, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Antonietti, Roberto & Marzucchi, Alberto, 2014. "Green tangible investment strategies and export performance: A firm-level investigation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 150-161.
    8. Roberto Antonietti & Alberto Marzucchi, 2013. "Green Investment Strategies and Export Performance: A Firm-level Investigation," Working Papers 2013.76, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Kneller, Richard & Manderson, Edward, 2012. "Environmental regulations and innovation activity in UK manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 211-235.
    10. Lorena D’Agostino, 2015. "How MNEs respond to environmental regulation: integrating the Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(2), pages 245-269, August.
    11. 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.
    12. Anabel Zárate-Marco & Jaime Vallés-Giménez, 2015. "Environmental tax and productivity in a decentralized context: new findings on the Porter hypothesis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 313-339, October.
    13. Ghisetti, Claudia & Quatraro, Francesco, 2017. "Green Technologies and Environmental Productivity: A Cross-sectoral Analysis of Direct and Indirect Effects in Italian Regions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-13.
    14. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2007. "When and Why Does It Pay To Be Green?," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-20, CIRANO.
    15. Johan Brolund & Robert Lundmark, 2017. "Effect of Environmental Regulation Stringency on the Pulp and Paper Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    16. Dietrich Earnhart & Dylan G. Rassier, 2016. "“Effective regulatory stringency” and firms’ profitability: the effects of effluent limits and government monitoring," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 111-145, October.
    17. Yu Zhang & Jie Wang & Jiakai Chen & Weizhong Liu, 2023. "Does environmental regulation policy help improve business performance of manufacturing enterprises? evidence from China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 4335-4364, May.
    18. Böhringer, Christoph & Moslener, Ulf & Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Clean and productive? Empirical evidence from the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 442-451.
    19. Gianluca ORSATTI, 2019. "Public R&D and green knowledge diffusion:\r\nEvidence from patent citation data," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2019-17, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    20. Claudia Ghisetti & Francesco Quatraro, 2014. "Is green knowledge improving environmental productivity? Sectoral Evidence from Italian Regions," SEEDS Working Papers 1014, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource/Energy Economics and Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • L6 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation

    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:ags:feemer:162419. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    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.