IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2012.97.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Unbundling Technology Adoption and tfp at the Firm Level. Do Intangibles Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Y.H. Farzin

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California)

  • C.A. Bond

    (RAND Corporation)

Abstract

When it comes to environmental quality preferences, it is popularly believed that Democrats (and more generally, liberals) are “green” while Republicans” (conservatives) are “brown”. Does empirical evidence support this popular belief? We test the hypothesis that regional political identification leads to differences in concentration outcomes for several measures of California air pollution indicators, including CO, NO2, SO2, O3, PM10, and PM2.5 concentrations. We employ two alternative identification strategies on county-level cluster and year panel data that include proxy variables for political party preferences of the local populace, as well as controlling for the political party affiliations at the state-level legislative and executive branches. In general, we do not find a consistent and statistically significant relationship between pollution outcomes and political variables for California. The popular belief is empirically supported only for NO2 and O3, but not for any of the other pollutants, and even in these two cases the relationship only holds at the local regulatory level and not at the state policymaking level. At the state level, for most of the pollutants no significant effect of party affiliation is identified, and in the rare cases where such an effect exists, it is either too weak to be conclusive or is even counter to popular belief.

Suggested Citation

  • Y.H. Farzin & C.A. Bond, 2012. "Unbundling Technology Adoption and tfp at the Firm Level. Do Intangibles Matter?," Working Papers 2012.97, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2012.97
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2012-097.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:adr:anecst:y:2004:i:75-76:p:11 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. B. Mak Arvin & Byron Lew, 2009. "Does democracy affect environmental quality in developing countries?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(9), pages 1151-1160.
    3. Y. H. Farzin, 2004. "Can Stricter Environmental Standards Benefit the Industry and Enhance Welfare," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 75-76, pages 223-255.
    4. Kahn, Matthew E., 2007. "Do greens drive Hummers or hybrids? Environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 129-145, September.
    5. Kahn, Matthew E & Matsusaka, John G, 1997. "Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence from Voting Patterns on California Initiatives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 137-173, April.
    6. Meilanie Buitenzorgy & Arthur P. J. Mol, 2011. "Does Democracy Lead to a Better Environment? Deforestation and the Democratic Transition Peak," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 59-70, January.
    7. Ross McKitrick, 2006. "The politics of pollution: party regimes and air quality in Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 604-620, May.
    8. Farzin, Y H, 2003. "The Effects of Emissions Standards on Industry," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 315-327, November.
    9. Gary S. Becker, 1983. "A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400.
    10. Pashigian, B Peter, 1985. "Environmental Regulation: Whose Self-interests Are Being Protected?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(4), pages 551-584, October.
    11. Farzin, Y. Hossein & Bond, Craig A., 2006. "Democracy and environmental quality," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 213-235, October.
    12. Arellano, Manuel, 2003. "Panel Data Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199245291.
    13. Lopez, Ramon & Mitra, Siddhartha, 2000. "Corruption, Pollution, and the Kuznets Environment Curve," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 137-150, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michaël Aklin & Patrick Bayer & S. Harish & Johannes Urpelainen, 2014. "Who blames corruption for the poor enforcement of environmental laws? Survey evidence from Brazil," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 16(3), pages 241-262, July.
    2. Athanasios Lapatinas & Anastasia Litina & Eftichios Sophocles Sartzetakis, 2019. "Environmental projects in the presence of corruption," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(1), pages 103-144, February.
    3. Danny García Callejas, 2015. "Voting for the environment: the importance of Democracy and education in Latin America," Revista de Economía del Caribe 14782, Universidad del Norte.
    4. Fredriksson, Per G. & List, John A. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2003. "Bureaucratic corruption, environmental policy and inbound US FDI: theory and evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(7-8), pages 1407-1430, August.
    5. Maurizio Lisciandra & Carlo Migliardo, 2017. "An Empirical Study of the Impact of Corruption on Environmental Performance: Evidence from Panel Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(2), pages 297-318, October.
    6. Costantini, Valeria & Monni, Salvatore, 2008. "Environment, human development and economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 867-880, February.
    7. Arminen, Heli & Menegaki, Angeliki N., 2019. "Corruption, climate and the energy-environment-growth nexus," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 621-634.
    8. Lambert Schoonbeek & Frans Vries, 2009. "Environmental taxes and industry monopolization," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 94-106, August.
    9. Athanasios Lapatinas & Anastasia Litina & Eftichios S. Sartzetakis, 2011. "Corruption and Environmental Policy: An Alternative Perspective," Working Papers 2011.23, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    10. Randall S. Kroszner & Philip E. Strahan, 2001. "Obstacles to Optimal Policy: The Interplay of Politics and Economics in Shaping Bank Supervision and Regulation Reforms," NBER Chapters, in: Prudential Supervision: What Works and What Doesn't, pages 233-272, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Introduction to the Political Economy of Environmental Regulations," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-12, Resources for the Future.
    12. Per G. Fredriksson & Eric Neumayer, 2016. "Corruption and Climate Change Policies: Do the Bad Old Days Matter?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(2), pages 451-469, February.
    13. Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "The Political Economy of Environmental Policy," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 1, pages 3-30, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Mohammad Reza Farzanegan & Gunther Markwardt, 2012. "Pollution, Economic Development and Democracy: Evidence from the MENA countries," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201227, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    15. Haiqing Hu & Di Chen & Chun‐Ping Chang & Yin Chu, 2021. "The Political Economy Of Environmental Consequences: A Review Of The Empirical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 250-306, February.
    16. Lv, Zhike & Gao, Zhenya, 2021. "The effect of corruption on environmental performance: Does spatial dependence play a role?," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 45(2).
    17. Fredriksson, Per G. & Neumayer, Eric, 2013. "Democracy and climate change policies: Is history important?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 11-19.
    18. Lisa Gianmoena & Vicente Rios, 2018. "The Determinants of CO2 Emissions Differentials with Cross-Country Interaction Effects: A Dynamic Spatial Panel Data Bayesian Model Averaging Approach," Discussion Papers 2018/234, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    19. Biswas, Amit K. & Farzanegan, Mohammad Reza & Thum, Marcel, 2012. "Pollution, shadow economy and corruption: Theory and evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 114-125.
    20. Sahbi Farhani & Sana Mrizak & Anissa Chaibi & Christophe Rault, 2014. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve and Sustainability: A Panel Data Analysis," CESifo Working Paper Series 4787, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Political Party Affiliation; Environmental Regulation; Air Pollution;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation

    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:fem:femwpa:2012.97. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (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.